Why should I bother to reply to a fucking retard like you?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.ravi@...> wrote:
>
> You clearly have no interest because you are spewing deceptive garbage and
> getting called on it by Judy.
>
> This is what you said in the first post Judy posted, in a nutshell - "I
> would say: Stuff happens. Get used to it.". It's not like you absolved
> Robin of anything - just that you exhorted others to not get stuck in a
> victim mode. So what opinion/judgement have you changed now - that people
> should be stuck in a perpetual victim mode? Or are you are on a whole
> different tack now similar to Share - that Robin is still the same old
> manipulator because you certainly didn't express that back in August - do
> you have any new information you are withholding from us. Can we expect
> Share styled attacks that amount to nothing - a few clues to start off,
> back biting friends, personal emails and then more?
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:06 PM, feste37 <feste37@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I have zero interest in whether what I say makes any sense to you. I have
> > nothing to prove or defend.
> >
> > Thanks for "retweeting" some of my old posts. I enjoyed reading them
> > again.
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sounds pretty unlikely to me. I would need to see documentary
> > > > > > evidence that this laughter did in fact take place. And do you
> > > > > > think anyone will believe for a moment that you just "came
> > > > > > across" this post of mine when you were actually "looking for
> > > > > > something else"? Now THAT is definitely making ME laugh!
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm sorry if it's deflating to your ego, feste, to learn
> > > > > that I wasn't after one of your posts but was looking for
> > > > > somebody else's. I had completely forgotten that you had
> > > > > been so effusively supportive of Robin back in August,
> > > > > right after Lordknows had appeared to denounce Robin and
> > > > > turn FFL into a War Crimes Tribunal.
> > > > >
> > > > > You do know Lordknows and Bill Howell, author of "Cult,"
> > > > > are very close friends, right? They're allies in this
> > > > > effort to "get" Robin.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's what made me laugh about this second post of yours
> > > > > from August that I turned up: it's anti-Lordknows and pro-
> > > > > Robin, whereas your current ugly posts are anti-Robin and
> > > > > pro-Howell. Quite a 180.
> > > > >
> > > > > I understand why you don't want to explain yourself. I
> > > > > think we all know what caused the turnaround, and you
> > > > > don't want to look any more foolish than you already do.
> > > >
> > > > All opinions and judgments are subject to revision based on
> > > > new information. It would be foolish not to do so.
> > >
> > > Right. But that isn't why you did that 180.
> > >
> > > In any case, one would have to question your judgment in
> > > reversing your spontaneously positive opinion, which was
> > > based on current information, as a result of encountering
> > > old information from 25-plus years ago. The current
> > > information, you see, is the same as it was when you
> > > formed your first opinion. And the current information
> > > actually *includes* all that old information--not in the
> > > same detail, but in no less condemnatory terms, even more
> > > condemnatory in some cases. *Self*-condemnatory.
> > >
> > > If you held a positive opinion of the person who had
> > > revealed to you the damage he had done a quarter of a
> > > century ago, what would be the basis for taking the
> > > opposite opinion after encountering the same information
> > > revealed by somebody else?
> > >
> > > It doesn't really make much sense, feste.
> > >
> > > This time I actually did go looking for your posts, feste.
> > > Found these, among others:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been enjoying your posts because of the intense intellectual,
> > spiritual,
> > > and emotional drama they reveal going on at what sounds like a very
> > exalted
> > > level of experience. I find these accounts quite remarkable, worthy of a
> > > Nietzsche or a William Blake, both of whom lived vast inner lives, and
> > very
> > > dramatic ones, too, where few could follow. It cannot be easy.
> > >
> > > I also found it very interesting, indeed unique from what I know of, to
> > read of
> > > someone who consciously removed himself from unity consciousness and
> > > reestablished his identity as a personal, individual self that stands in
> > a
> > > subordinate relationship to a divine Other.
> > >
> > > <snip long description of personal experiences of God>
> > >
> > > Once again, I have enjoyed your posts, MZ, which are written with such
> > grace and
> > > conviction and ruthless honesty. I think you are on an amazing journey.
> > >
> > > --feste37, July 2, 2011
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/281378
> > >
> > >
> > > You're a beguiling guy, MZ, a seducer, a lover, a Minotaur, no less,
> > luring the
> > > unsuspecting into your labyrinth of delicious words. It was post no.
> > 281584 you
> > > recall. Reading your posts just after your arrival here stimulated me
> > actually
> > > to write something thoughtful that was longer than two sentences. No, I
> > do not
> > > see you as dogmatic but as someone who rides gigantic tidal waves of
> > "feeling
> > > intellect" (the phrase is not mine but Wordsworth's) wherever they
> > happen to go
> > > and then proclaims the truth as it appears to you from whatever
> > metaphysical
> > > beachhead you find yourself newly occupying. Before the next tidal wave
> > comes .
> > > . . "Old men should be explorers," wrote Yeats, and, although we are
> > surely not
> > > yet old, Yeats was also, surely, right.
> > >
> > > --feste37, January 12, 2012
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/301619
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't have time to read more than a small part of what gets posted
> > here, but
> > > I do want to say that I like Robin Carlsen. I think his views and
> > experiences
> > > are interesting. I don't think it's necessary to be steeped in knowledge
> > of MMY
> > > to understand what Robin is saying (as someone has suggested). It's a
> > modern
> > > take on the age-old East-West division: Christianity insists that
> > creature and
> > > creator remain separate, even when in close communion, while the East
> > emphasizes
> > > the unity of atman and Brahman (or however they express it). Someone
> > said, in
> > > the 1960s I think, that the road to Canterbury (or Rome for that matter)
> > was now
> > > via Benares, and this is surely the road Robin has traveled. I think he
> > > expresses his point of view with passion and conviction and an
> > uncompromising
> > > dedication to the truth. Add to that a graceful wit, a willingness to
> > engage
> > > fully with those who disagree with him, great verbal dexterity and
> > ingenuity,
> > > and a civilized demeanor, maintained even while under vicious, sneering
> > attacks
> > > from certain people, and we have an FFL contributor who is to be
> > admired, in my
> > > opinion, even if I may not agree with all his views.
> > >
> > > --feste37, July 19, 2012
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/314850
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
