>
> > >
> > > In scandal control,
> > > The New TM Org Standing Committee of TM that is representing and in
> > > control of Transcendental Meditation since the passing of Maharishi has
> > > missed every opportunity to come out saying "no we are not that, we are
> > > this..." The escapades of Girish Varma recently is another one of those
> > > opportunities for anyone on the Standing Committee of TM to come out
> > > front and declare who they are morally now and what they are doing going
> > > forward with the New TM Org. Their vacuum and inability to do this is
> > > deafening. They as a result are being defined by their scandal. This is
> > > not good for the future of Transcendental Meditation. Someone with some
> > > courage needs to step forward and re-define themselves. Someone like
> > > that TM priest from Latin America who can speak with some moral
> > > authority. The others have abdicated their chances at it.
> > > -Buck in the Dome
> > >
>
> In our movement's Scandal Control,
> Actually Hagelin is in a good position to do this now. Hagelin could do it.
> Just asserting from his position, Saying "We are not that", be transparent
> hence forth and move forward. Just keep saying "we are not that", "This is
> what we are doing..", "This is who we are in character.." , "..we could use
> your help", and move on. Over and over again.. We need this leadership now
> a whole lot more actually.
> -Buck
>
Hagelin? It would take a form or leadership that as an academic may be he is
not used to or inclined to do. However older and wiser he is married now to a
really good partner and an involved step-dad with their son in the school
community here. He is older. Does not have nearly the blood-stains on his
hands from old and long administrative melees like may be Bevan does. He's a
pretty regular guy in spite of being a physicist who could be seen to shoot
straight by a lot of people. He could pretty easily come out front and declare
who they are now and what they are doing morally going forward with the New TM
Org.
-Buck
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The whole TM movement could take a page from political advisers
> > > > consulting about the rehabilitation of public figures who mis-stepped.
> > > > Come out saying repeatedly you are sorry, that you are not that, ask
> > > > for forgiveness, and move on. Like the guy coming back from stupid
> > > > scandal running for Mayor of New York now.
> > > >
> >
> > In Scandal Control;
> > Or Mark Sanford also as example advised to say he is sorry, over and over
> > again, and asking to give him a second chance...
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sanford
> >
> > http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/03/20/mark-sanford-hopes-for-second-chance-after-argentina-affair-derailed-his/
> >
> >
> > > > Scandal is defined as "loss of or damage to reputation caused by actual
> > > > or apparent violation of morality or propriety." Scandal is not the
> > > > same as controversy, which implies two differing points of view, or
> > > > unpopularity.
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_sex_scandals_in_the_United_States
> > > >
> > > > -Buck, the TM-running-dog of FFL
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" <richard@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > feste37:
> > > > > > No deal. I have no anger toward you. I just
> > > > > > think it's pathetic to use this forum to
> > > > > > accuse others of sexual immorality. You
> > > > > > admit it's just gossip. You don't even know
> > > > > > the man. An accusation like that makes you
> > > > > > look bad, far more so than your intended
> > > > > > target. It makes you look petty and vicious
> > > > > > and self-righteous. Are you without sin,
> > > > > > Duveyoung? If not, STFU about others.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Well, we don't know much about Edg's private
> > > > > sex life, if he has one. But, I don't see how
> > > > > a guy that's been working for free for the TMO
> > > > > 'for 29' years would have any money to defend
> > > > > himself, if he were sued for slander.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is adultery even illegal in Iowa?
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey, let me double down: I say it's
> > > > > > > absolutely true that he was an adulterer.
> > > > > > > THERE, now let him sue me. I got the money
> > > > > > > and the time to rake him over the coals.
> > > > > > > I bet I could get hundreds of witnesses.
> > > > > > > It would be spectacular!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And Fester, you gotta look at your anger
> > > > > > > towards me as much as I have to look at my
> > > > > > > anger toward Heggy.....deal?
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
