Robin, Has it ocurred to you that Vaj has built his case, (if you want to call it a case) on specific details. Your response has been to declare that it is all a lie. Now, if there were a bench of 12 jurors listening to the evidence, on the issue of "Did this Vajradhatu know or meet this Robin Wordworth Carlson", what would be the verdict? Now Judy may say, well, you haven't presented any person who can identify this Vajrahatu at the scene, and because of this technicality, the case could be thrown out. But short of this standard, it seems to me that Vaj has presented credible, seemingly first person evidence. I am sorry to have to come to this conclusion since it seems to bother you so much, and because I like you.
On the other hand, what is so wrong with simply dealing with these events that happened 25 or 30 years ago, and then moving on? Or at least trying to move on. It appears that Vaj is going to continue to confront you with these past events, and that is certainly his perogative. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: > > RESPONSE: Somebody tell me that I am a sap. Somebody tell me that this is all made up. Because Steve's responses sound credible to me. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > Robin, > > > > I am willing to look like a fool for the purposes of trying to sort things out. > > > > Vaj replies to several points with regards to your career in specific detail. He tells me directly that on several occassions he met you, or saw you in person. > > > > On the other hand he said he had a video showing you hitting someone, and then he seemed to say he didn't have such a video, or that if he did, he would not share it out of the respect for the privacy of the persons in it. Nor would he share it with a third party. So, that sounds a lot like lying. > > > > He tell Emily that you "took the bait" when you replied to some of his accusations. I took that to mean that you could not resist replying to what he posted. I did not take it mean that he made up things and you couldn't resist replying to them. > > > > He told me in no uncertain terms that he, on at least this one ocassion, saw you coming out of the courthouse in Jefferson County, or Fairfield or some such venue. > > > > As far as certain details he describes, the impression I got was that he was not going to third party to find out what really happened in these instances. The impression I got was that he was pulling these out of his own memory. > > > > Now maybe I am being played by Vaj, but to me he has sounded credible in much of what he said. And since no one else who hasn't already assigned Vaj to the "liar" bin, or to the Vaj "speaks the truth" bin has chimed in, I'm sort of left on my own to sort it out. > > > > I guess it would really be nice, if someoone who knew you from that time from that time would come in and put the matter to rest. Certainly Vaj would appear to have been somewhat of an insider to your activities. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, that's an unambiguous reply. Thanks. > > > > > > RESPONSE: You're doing it again Stevo! This reply of Vaj's actually did not satisfy you at all; however, you suddenly felt that it might serve your purposes to deny this experience and go with another one: that Vaj had exhibited the virtue of being unambiguous, even if, as it happens, you did not get any satisfaction or clarification at all from Vaj's reply. > > > > > > Vaj has never even seen me in the flesh. He has never come near a seminar I have given (in my notorious past). He has never spoken to me. You have a disturbingly perverse need to twist things (inside your undeniable friendliness), and it undermines in a very subtle way you pretensions to be sincere. Sincere you no doubt are; but there is this tic you have; and it means you don't really ever want to know the Truth. Yeah, that's right, Steve. > > > > > > Did you hear that rumour that Christ and Judas actually made up before Christ had his heart attack? (He didn't get crucified—at least I don't think he did; he died from cardiac arrest: he was scared shitless when they hammered those nails into his hands and feet. Caiaphus told me this, and, call me a sap, but his response sounded credible to me.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 27, 2011, at 8:41 PM, seventhray1 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I do have one question, Vaj, if you're listening. You are on record > > > > saying that you were not allowed to attend MIU by your parents. But > > > > evidently you were in Fairfield to witness certain events in RWC saga. > > > > Do I have this right? Thanks for a reply if you are so inclined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that's exactly correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
