I believe he was already in the beginning stages of dementia and his handlers wouldn't let him be seen by anyone - that's why it was over closed circuit tv
________________________________ From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodle...@mail.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 2:43 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > And another batch--it's 61 now. I didn't count them up, > but it looks to me as though most of the new ones are > negative. Tsk, the governors aren't pulling their weight. In the UK if someone gets an article published it goes out on the gov's email list so loads of positive comments can be put out before the cynics get find it. It really backfired in the Guardian once when one of the regular commenters noticed that all the positive remarks were from people who joined within an hour or so of the article appearing. Made me laugh as I knew everyone and found it quite sweet that they had all got the hang of modern PR methods as they were usually not the most tech- nically minded people I'd ever met. So it's good that the NYT have posted negative stuff too as some of it is rather interesting. But the most interesting bit for me is that MMY didn't actually appear in person on the millionaires courses. I didn't know that, the big attraction for everyone of course was the personal intuition, but via TV! Very odd behaviour, and they kept it quiet very well. But what did the CPs think? I guess if you've handed over that much dosh to who knows where you must be used to the TMO way of operating. I would be well hacked off of course, but then I wouldn't have given them the cash in the first place so it's probably self selecting who gets disappointed with the misleading course details.
