[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > You know, Rick, you really should include on the home
> > page that this "spiritual" forum welcomes liars and
> > that honesty is not held as a value.
> 
> I agree, Rick. Please include in the rap that
> such liars are welcome to comment on films 
> they have never seen,

See below about Barry's comments on Inland Empire.

 and to call the creator
> of a film they have never seen a "bigot." That
> certainly shows a devotion to honesty.

It's not necessary to see "Apocalypto" to know that
Gibson is a Christian bigot. It's pretty widely
acknowledged and has been since long before he made
that film.

> > Damn right I didn't "review" the movie, as the post
> > in question clearly shows. For Barry to believe he can
> > actually reproduce the post *and still claim that I
> > "reviewed" it* is a truly massive exercise in solipsism.
> 
> In ALL of the subsequent discussion of this gaffe,
> Judy has studiously avoided the real issue, which
> is that she commented on a film she has never seen,
> going so far as to call the filmmaker a "Christian
> bigot."

No, Barry's lying again. There was no "gaffe," and I
certainly didn't avoid the "issue" that I had commented
on a film I hadn't seen or called Gibson a Christian
bigot (which I stand by). That's what the subsequent
discussion was *about*, of course, and I addressed 
both "issues" in detail, as Barry knows.

I have no problem with someone saying I *commented*
on the film. They were very brief comments and were
based on a Mayan expert's analysis of the film's
historical accuracy, which analysis there is no
reason to doubt (among other reasons because he
was hardly the only person to mention them, as I
documented in the original discussion).

What I did was very different, as Barry and Vaj
are well aware, from "reviewing" the film. Words
*do* have meanings. You'd think Barry, who fondly
thinks of himself as a writer, would know that.

Barry might also want to remember that he branded 
Lynch's "Inland Empire" a "stupid movie" without ever
having seen it, in a post that he subsequently
*deleted*, cowardly hypocrite that he is--but
unfortunately for him, not before I'd seen it.

The "gaffes" in the discussion of "Apocalypto" were,
in fact, all Barry's, and were too numerous to
mention. If anybody's interested, the main threads
were titled "Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot" and
"Finally saw 'Apocalypto.'" Barry brought it up in
other threads, despite having made an utter fool of
himself in the main ones, as he's doing here; just
do a search for "Apocalypto" to find the posts.


> Judy, do you *still* believe that Mel Gibson is
> a "Christian bigot" (your term) for making the
> film "Apocalypto?"

Not for making the film, but for what he put in
the film.

 Please cite examples from the
> film you've never seen to illustrate.

Just refer to the original post.

 (The orig-
> inal author of the piece you quoted and believed
> without seeing the movie got several of his
> examples *wrong*, so I wouldn't use them if I
> were you.)

No, Barry, it was you who got things wrong,
including your utterly ludicrous notion that it was
fundamentally intended as a "love story," something
Gibson would find hilarious. You made a bunch of
other howling bloopers as well.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>

> We'll wait.
> 
> Oh, by the way, is "The Love Guru" demeaning to
> Hindus? We know that it hasn't been released
> yet, but since you feel free to comment on other
> films you've never seen, that shouldn't stop you.
> 

I wonder where the "Pitka" came from. In Google "pitka"
results to hits that refer almost exclusively to Finnish
"pitkä", which means 'long'.

http://www.google.fi/search?hl=fi&q=pitka&btnG=Google-haku&meta=

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > You know, Rick, you really should include on the home
> > > page that this "spiritual" forum welcomes liars and
> > > that honesty is not held as a value.
> > 
> > I agree, Rick. Please include in the rap that
> > such liars are welcome to comment on films 
> > they have never seen,
> 
> See below about Barry's comments on Inland Empire.
> 
> > and to call the creator
> > of a film they have never seen a "bigot." That
> > certainly shows a devotion to honesty.
> 
> It's not necessary to see "Apocalypto" to know that
> Gibson is a Christian bigot. It's pretty widely
> acknowledged and has been since long before he made
> that film.

It seems to me, Judith, that your relationship
to this film is the same as your relationship 
with enlightenment and your willingness to 
debate its fine points. That is, you've never 
actually *experienced* either, but you know 
what's what because other people have talked 
about both, and you've read what they've said. :-)

> > > Damn right I didn't "review" the movie, as the post
> > > in question clearly shows. For Barry to believe he can
> > > actually reproduce the post *and still claim that I
> > > "reviewed" it* is a truly massive exercise in solipsism.
> > 
> > In ALL of the subsequent discussion of this gaffe,
> > Judy has studiously avoided the real issue, which
> > is that she commented on a film she has never seen,
> > going so far as to call the filmmaker a "Christian
> > bigot."
> 
> No, Barry's lying again. There was no "gaffe,"...

Yeah, right. And Hillary just won the nomination. :-)

> ...and I
> certainly didn't avoid the "issue" that I had commented
> on a film I hadn't seen or called Gibson a Christian
> bigot (which I stand by). 

Let me get this straight -- you stand on calling
Mel Gibson a Christian bigot and the film that
you've never seen an example of bigotry, is 
that right?

> That's what the subsequent
> discussion was *about*, of course, and I addressed 
> both "issues" in detail, as Barry knows.

You did not. You quibbled over the word "reviewed,"
and called people liars for using it, as you are
still doing. 

Let's settle it. Did you or did you not make rather
scathing comments about a filmmaker and his film,
which you had never seen?

Answering this question with a "Yes" would be not
avoiding the issue. Any other answer is avoiding
the issue.

> I have no problem with someone saying I *commented*
> on the film. They were very brief comments and were
> based on a Mayan expert's analysis of the film's
> historical accuracy...

In other words, they were based on believing what
someone else said, rather than going to the source.

Excuse me, but isn't that the SAME thing you have
been berating people for over the things they say
about Hillary Clinton?

Why is it that forming an opinion about Hillary
Clinton based on what many writers have said about
her is not acceptable to you, but *you* forming an
opinion based upon what one writer said about Mel
Gibson's movie is acceptable?

Aren't you proposing a bit of a double standard
here? It's fine when you do it, but not when anyone
else does it?

> ...which analysis there is no
> reason to doubt (among other reasons because he
> was hardly the only person to mention them, as I
> documented in the original discussion).

There is very little reason for me to doubt what
*hundreds* of columnists have written about Hillary
Clinton, her lack of ethics, and her abrasive per-
sonality. I've even got numbers on my side, because
more columnists -- some of whom know her personally
and have for years -- have said these things than
have said more positive things about her.

So why is this bad when I or someone else who thinks
Hillary Clinton is a joke whose fifteen minutes of
fame expired some months ago does it, but it's OK
when you do it with regard to a movie you've never
seen? I'll wait.

> What I did was very different, as Barry and Vaj
> are well aware, from "reviewing" the film. Words
> *do* have meanings. You'd think Barry, who fondly
> thinks of himself as a writer, would know that.

Word nitpicking again. In this post, as *you said
you had no problem with* above, I am suggesting that
you *commented* on this film, and commented by 
calling Mel Gibson a "Christian bigot." Is this not
true? In your *comment*, you said, "Gibson has 
slandered the Maya and mangled history for the 
purpose of exalting the purported superiority 
of Christianity," did you not? That sounds a lot
to me as if you are commenting on the *substance*
of the film. Did you see the film?

> Barry might also want to remember that he branded 
> Lynch's "Inland Empire" a "stupid movie" without ever
> having seen it, in a post that he subsequently
> *deleted*, cowardly hypocrite that he is--but
> unfortunately for him, not before I

[FairfieldLife] Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[TurquoiseB]

[ Compare and contrast Hillary's reaction to having
been soundly trounced by Obama to Judy Stein's con-
tinuing denials that she slandered Mel Gibson and
his movie without ever having seen it. Two peas in
a pod, and with the same amount of credibility. 
Emphasis below (**) is mine, because these state-
ments really deserve to be emphasized; comments in
brackets [] are mine as well, because those lines
need to be commented on. ]

Obama's first test: Handling Hillary 
Roger Simon 
Wed Jun 4, 12:14 AM ET
 
Barack Obama would like to remind you of something: He won 
and she didn't. It's about him now and not her. **He has 
made history, and she is history.** 

Not that Hillary Clinton admitted to any of that in her 
nonconcession concession speech Tuesday night, after Obama 
attained the delegate votes he needs for the Democratic 
presidential nomination

**For someone giving indications she would like to be Obama's 
running mate, Clinton was surprisingly ungracious. In fact, 
if you had just awakened from a (blissful) 17-month sleep, 
you would have thought she had won.**

"Because of you, we won together the swing states necessary 
to get to 270 electoral votes," she told the crowd in New 
York City. "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted 
for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be 
invisible."

But her fighting words only increased the need for Obama to 
show that he can be strong, tough and in charge. Clinton's 
unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased 
the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a 
doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a 
way of doing that. 

[ Personally, I think that Obama should graciously offer 
Hillary Clinton a post as ambassador to Iran. Let her try 
her "approach any situation like a stiff dick" act *there*. :-) ]

It has been a hard-fought and sometimes bitter campaign, but 
Obama is not, one of his senior advisers assured me Tuesday 
night, going to spend a lot of time in the next few months 
wooing Clinton supporters whose feelings may be hurting.

"I think there are always immediate feelings of disappointment 
and anger," Anita Dunn said. "But in the months ahead, he 
must appeal not just to the constituency groups who favored 
her in the primaries, but those he wants in the general 
election, and that includes independents and Republicans."

Another Obama adviser, who asked not to be identified, said 
that he was not worried that Clinton supporters would stay 
angry. 

[ I would add, *of course* some of them will stay angry. 
As with Judy Stein, their *nature* is to be angry and stay 
angry. Why is that relevant to anything but their desire
to poison their own minds and bodies and as much of the
environment around them as possible? ]

"Look at how many switched today to Obama," he said. "Look 
at the Clinton supporters, look at Maxine Waters (the 
congresswoman from California who endorsed Hillary Clinton 
in late January but switched to Obama on Tuesday), who were 
passionate advocates for Hillary, but who switched to Obama."

[ And, lest we forget, Hillary promised to campaign strongly
for Obama if he won the nomination. My guess is that if she 
said the same thing today, she'd play Judylike word games 
and say, "I will campaign for him as soon as *I* admit that 
he won the nomination. And that is likely to happen the same
cold day in Hell that Judy Stein admits that she slandered
Mel Gibson and his movie without ever having seen it. ]

"At the end of the day," he went on, "Hillary supporters will 
look at John McCain and decide they are not going to vote for 
a man who will put judges on the Supreme Court who would 
overturn Roe v. Wade."

**The easiest way, the Obama campaign has decided, to turn the 
page away from Clinton is to go at McCain full bore, start 
the general election campaign immediately and ignore the 
media chatter about what Hillary does or does not want.**

[ Exactly. Ignore her silly ass, as if she were no longer
relevant. She IS no longer relevant. The media will attempt 
to still make her relevant, but as the author says so well, 
she's history. She is as relevant to the rest of the campaign 
as another media darling, Britney Spears. And as popular. ]

"Now is the appropriate moment to begin the general election 
discussion," Dunn said. "That is why Sen. Obama chose Minnesota 
(the site of the Republican convention in September) for his 
speech."

And while Obama spent a few moments praising Clinton in his 
speech in St. Paul, he spent most of his time attacking McCain, 
raising the issue he so effectively used against Clinton: the 
need for change.

"Change is a foreign policy that doesn't begin and end with a 
war that should've never been authorized and never been waged," 
Obama said. He used that argument against Clinton, it worked, 
and now he is going to use it against McCain again and again.

[ And people like Judy will continue to claim that Hillary's
vote for the war 

[FairfieldLife] MSC!

[cardemaister]

http://www.worldwidehealthcenter.net/articles-329.html

Methylselenocysteine: The Super Selenium
27th Oct 2004


by James South, M.A.

Selenium is an essential trace mineral, with a recently set RDA
(Recommended Dietary Allowance) of 55 mcg.1 Selenium is known to be
essential to activate various key enzymes, such as the antioxidant
glutathione peroxidase, the metabolic enzyme thioredoxin reductase,
and the thyroid-hormone-activating enzyme iodothyronine deiodinase.2

Although selenium is essential for life and health, it is also a
potentially toxic mineral. Selenium expert Dr. R. Passwater notes
“…organic forms of selenium [such as selenomethionine] are toxic at
levels in the vicinity of 3,500 micrograms (3.5 milligrams) daily.
Inorganic forms of selenium [such as sodium selenite/selenate] may be
toxic at one-third that level.”3 Passwater notes, however, that many
Japanese average 600 mcg daily from their diet, and Greenlanders may
ingest as much as 1,300 mcg daily, without apparent ill effects.3

Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[Louis McKenzie]

Judy is the same age as Hillary

TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  [ Compare and contrast Hillary's 
reaction to having
been soundly trounced by Obama to Judy Stein's con-
tinuing denials that she slandered Mel Gibson and
his movie without ever having seen it. Two peas in
a pod, and with the same amount of credibility. 
Emphasis below (**) is mine, because these state-
ments really deserve to be emphasized; comments in
brackets [] are mine as well, because those lines
need to be commented on. ]

Obama's first test: Handling Hillary 
Roger Simon 
Wed Jun 4, 12:14 AM ET

Barack Obama would like to remind you of something: He won 
and she didn't. It's about him now and not her. **He has 
made history, and she is history.** 

Not that Hillary Clinton admitted to any of that in her 
nonconcession concession speech Tuesday night, after Obama 
attained the delegate votes he needs for the Democratic 
presidential nomination

**For someone giving indications she would like to be Obama's 
running mate, Clinton was surprisingly ungracious. In fact, 
if you had just awakened from a (blissful) 17-month sleep, 
you would have thought she had won.**

"Because of you, we won together the swing states necessary 
to get to 270 electoral votes," she told the crowd in New 
York City. "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted 
for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be 
invisible."

But her fighting words only increased the need for Obama to 
show that he can be strong, tough and in charge. Clinton's 
unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased 
the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a 
doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a 
way of doing that. 

[ Personally, I think that Obama should graciously offer 
Hillary Clinton a post as ambassador to Iran. Let her try 
her "approach any situation like a stiff dick" act *there*. :-) ]

It has been a hard-fought and sometimes bitter campaign, but 
Obama is not, one of his senior advisers assured me Tuesday 
night, going to spend a lot of time in the next few months 
wooing Clinton supporters whose feelings may be hurting.

"I think there are always immediate feelings of disappointment 
and anger," Anita Dunn said. "But in the months ahead, he 
must appeal not just to the constituency groups who favored 
her in the primaries, but those he wants in the general 
election, and that includes independents and Republicans."

Another Obama adviser, who asked not to be identified, said 
that he was not worried that Clinton supporters would stay 
angry. 

[ I would add, *of course* some of them will stay angry. 
As with Judy Stein, their *nature* is to be angry and stay 
angry. Why is that relevant to anything but their desire
to poison their own minds and bodies and as much of the
environment around them as possible? ]

"Look at how many switched today to Obama," he said. "Look 
at the Clinton supporters, look at Maxine Waters (the 
congresswoman from California who endorsed Hillary Clinton 
in late January but switched to Obama on Tuesday), who were 
passionate advocates for Hillary, but who switched to Obama."

[ And, lest we forget, Hillary promised to campaign strongly
for Obama if he won the nomination. My guess is that if she 
said the same thing today, she'd play Judylike word games 
and say, "I will campaign for him as soon as *I* admit that 
he won the nomination. And that is likely to happen the same
cold day in Hell that Judy Stein admits that she slandered
Mel Gibson and his movie without ever having seen it. ]

"At the end of the day," he went on, "Hillary supporters will 
look at John McCain and decide they are not going to vote for 
a man who will put judges on the Supreme Court who would 
overturn Roe v. Wade."

**The easiest way, the Obama campaign has decided, to turn the 
page away from Clinton is to go at McCain full bore, start 
the general election campaign immediately and ignore the 
media chatter about what Hillary does or does not want.**

[ Exactly. Ignore her silly ass, as if she were no longer
relevant. She IS no longer relevant. The media will attempt 
to still make her relevant, but as the author says so well, 
she's history. She is as relevant to the rest of the campaign 
as another media darling, Britney Spears. And as popular. ]

"Now is the appropriate moment to begin the general election 
discussion," Dunn said. "That is why Sen. Obama chose Minnesota 
(the site of the Republican convention in September) for his 
speech."

And while Obama spent a few moments praising Clinton in his 
speech in St. Paul, he spent most of his time attacking McCain, 
raising the issue he so effectively used against Clinton: the 
need for change.

"Change is a foreign policy that doesn't begin and end with a 
war that should've never been authorized and never been waged," 
Obama said. He used that argument against Clinton, it worked, 
and now he is going to use it against McCain again and again.

[FairfieldLife] 'The City of the Children'

[michael]

Invincibility for Brazil being created from 'The City of the Children'

Global Good News   3 June 2008

Raja Jose Luis Alvarez, Raja of Latin America for the Global Country of World 
Peace, recently spoke on Maharishi Global Family Chat about the many students 
learning Transcendental Meditation in Brazil. 

Raja Jose Luis said that a very efficient group of 20 Teachers of 
Transcendental Meditation are in the midst of teaching a few thousand students. 
These teachers are very focussed, and include the young new teachers who 
recently completed their Transcendental Meditation Teacher Training Course. 
Together they are teaching about 1,000 students every week. 

This is creating a great wave of coherence in the schools and also is having a 
large impact, because in some places five teachers are there teaching, 'so the 
whole day and night, it's round-the-clock creation of a new basis for the 
invincibility of the country,' said Raja Jose Luis. 

Raja Jose Luis said that one of the schools is called the 'City of the 
Children', which is more like a boarding school, with 5,000 students, 1,500 of 
whom live permanently at the school. These students are all starting the 
practice of Transcendental Meditation, and all the Transcendental Meditation 
Teachers are saying that the students' experience is so refined, 'they are 
teaching angels, getting them ready for creating the effect [of invincibility] 
for the country', Raja Jose Luis said. 

(Once the students have learnt Transcendental Meditation, within a few months 
they are eligible to learn the advanced Transcendental Meditation Sidhi 
Programme, including Yogic Flying, the group practice of which has an even more 
powerful effect of creating coherence and harmony in collective consciousness.) 

Raja Jose Luis also reported that in the summer, world-renowned filmmaker Dr 
David Lynch and singer Donovan will be visiting Brazil to promote 
Consciousness-Based Education. One of the events, under the leadership of Dr 
Lynch, will be in big theatre in that school where they will be on national 
television all practising Transcendental Meditation together. 

They will also be listening to songs by Donovan and the most famous singer of 
Brazil, who will be with them. The event 'will create quite a stir in the 
nation, [showing] the effect of silent administration happening—children 
creating this effect of invincibility in their schools' from the deep silence 
of their own Transcendental Consciousness, said Raja Jose Luis. 

© Copyright 2008 Global Good News® 




  __
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail.
Dem pfiffigeren Posteingang.
http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com

[FairfieldLife] Samskara? was Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Judy is the same age as Hillary
> 
> TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  [ Compare and contrast
Hillary's reaction to having
> been soundly trounced by Obama to Judy Stein's con-
> tinuing denials that she slandered Mel Gibson and
> his movie without ever having seen it. 
...

 And that is likely to happen the same
> cold day in Hell that Judy Stein admits that she slandered
> Mel Gibson and his movie without ever having seen it. ]


Samskara?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You know, Rick, you really should include on the home
> > > > page that this "spiritual" forum welcomes liars and
> > > > that honesty is not held as a value.
> > > 
> > > I agree, Rick. Please include in the rap that
> > > such liars are welcome to comment on films 
> > > they have never seen,
> > 
> > See below about Barry's comments on Inland Empire.
> > 
> > > and to call the creator
> > > of a film they have never seen a "bigot." That
> > > certainly shows a devotion to honesty.
> > 
> > It's not necessary to see "Apocalypto" to know that
> > Gibson is a Christian bigot. It's pretty widely
> > acknowledged and has been since long before he made
> > that film.
> 
> It seems to me, Judith, that your relationship
> to this film is the same as your relationship 
> with enlightenment and your willingness to 
> debate its fine points. That is, you've never 
> actually *experienced* either, but you know 
> what's what because other people have talked 
> about both, and you've read what they've said. :-)

Well, you don't know what I have or haven't
experienced, so this sure is a moot point, not
to mention a non sequitur.


> > > In ALL of the subsequent discussion of this gaffe,
> > > Judy has studiously avoided the real issue, which
> > > is that she commented on a film she has never seen,
> > > going so far as to call the filmmaker a "Christian
> > > bigot."
> > 
> > No, Barry's lying again. There was no "gaffe,"...
> 
> Yeah, right. And Hillary just won the nomination. :-)

Did somebody say Hillary had won the nomination, or
did you make that up?

> > ...and I
> > certainly didn't avoid the "issue" that I had commented
> > on a film I hadn't seen or called Gibson a Christian
> > bigot (which I stand by). 
> 
> Let me get this straight -- you stand on calling
> Mel Gibson a Christian bigot and the film that
> you've never seen an example of bigotry, is 
> that right?
> 
> > That's what the subsequent
> > discussion was *about*, of course, and I addressed 
> > both "issues" in detail, as Barry knows.
> 
> You did not.

I most certainly did. You're lying.

 You quibbled over the word "reviewed,"
> and called people liars for using it, as you are
> still doing.

They're still lying, and it isn't a quibble. There's
a big difference between commenting and reviewing.

> Let's settle it. Did you or did you not make rather
> scathing comments about a filmmaker and his film,
> which you had never seen?

There's nothing to "settle," Barry. This was never
in dispute, and it's a lie for you to suggest it was.

> Answering this question with a "Yes" would be not
> avoiding the issue. Any other answer is avoiding
> the issue.

It was never in dispute, sorry.

> > I have no problem with someone saying I *commented*
> > on the film. They were very brief comments and were
> > based on a Mayan expert's analysis of the film's
> > historical accuracy...
> 
> In other words, they were based on believing what
> someone else said, rather than going to the source.

Non sequitur. Please document that anything the
expert said was inaccurate, either about Mayan
history or about the film.

> Excuse me, but isn't that the SAME thing you have
> been berating people for over the things they say
> about Hillary Clinton?

No.

> Why is it that forming an opinion about Hillary
> Clinton based on what many writers have said about
> her is not acceptable to you, but *you* forming an
> opinion based upon what one writer said about Mel
> Gibson's movie is acceptable?

Please document where I ever said that forming an
opinion about Clinton based on what many writers
have said about her is "not acceptable" to me.

> Aren't you proposing a bit of a double standard
> here? It's fine when you do it, but not when anyone
> else does it?

Uh, no, that's about as bogus an analogy as I've
ever seen.


> So why is this bad when I or someone else who thinks
> Hillary Clinton is a joke whose fifteen minutes of
> fame expired some months ago does it

Hillary Clinton's "fifteen minutes of fame"?? That
would be from, let's see, 1992 through 2008, right?


> > What I did was very different, as Barry and Vaj
> > are well aware, from "reviewing" the film. Words
> > *do* have meanings. You'd think Barry, who fondly
> > thinks of himself as a writer, would know that.
> 
> Word nitpicking again. In this post, as *you said
> you had no problem with* above, I am suggesting that
> you *commented* on this film, and commented by 
> calling Mel Gibson a "Christian bigot." Is this not
> true? In your *comment*, you said, "Gibson has 
> slandered the Maya and mangled history for the 
> purpose of exalting the purported superiority 
> of Christianity," did you not? That sounds a lot
> to

[FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Jun 3, 2008, at 9:46 PM, marciohal wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> >
> > I am tm-sidhis practitioner and am practicing to 17 years , I would
> > like to know what is the advanced technique number 6    somebody
> > would know to inform ?  believe that the sequence that is published in
> > trancenet.org this wrong , somebody could inform what is the technique
> > number 6 correct ?
> 
> Hi Marcelo,
> The 6th advanced technique?  I'm think it was "ka-ching!"
> or something very similar. :)
> 
> Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 3, 2008, at 9:46 PM, marciohal wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I am tm-sidhis practitioner and am practicing to 17 years , I would
> > > like to know what is the advanced technique number 6    somebody
> > > would know to inform ?  believe that the sequence that is
published in
> > > trancenet.org this wrong , somebody could inform what is the
technique
> > > number 6 correct ?
> > 
> > Hi Marcelo,
> > The 6th advanced technique?  I'm think it was "ka-ching!"
> > or something very similar. :)
> > 
> > Sal


< LOL >

[FairfieldLife] Fairfield 1st Fridays Art Walk

[Rick Archer]

 



 
 Fairfield 1st Fridays Art Walk



Fairfield 1st Fridays Art Walk

An Iowa Tourism Event of the Year - Iowa Tourism Office




According to several recent surveys, 
what is the #1 Reason people say they love
1st Fridays Art Walk? 

 


 1st Fridays Art Walk - Kids and Flowers
  1st Fridays Art Walk - Gazebo
  1st Fridays Art Walk - Stimpson
 

 

 Because it brings the entire community together!





Fairfield 1st Fridays Art Walk has provided our community with an inclusive,
culturally diverse celebration of the arts for over 5 years,  month after
consecutive month,  rain, snow, and shine.  The Iowa Department of Cultural
Affairs considers 1st Fridays Art Walk unique among Midwest arts festivals
because of our reliable frequency and the depth and breadth of our cultural
offerings to a wide spectrum of our population.  The Iowa Tourism Office
named us Tourism Event of the Year in 2005 - which was before the recent
record crowds we've enjoyed the last 3 years!

 

Please don't wait! We depend on you to create each 1st Fridays Art Walk.
Support our awarding winning, community supported and celebrated 1st Fridays
Art Walk by becoming a Member Today!  

1st Fridays Art Walk is a community-supported, non-profit event
administrated almost entirely by volunteers and with the financial
assistance of culture-loving citizens such as yourself.   Although our
cultural resources are endless, our financial resources are still
developing.  We are asking everyone that enjoys 1st Fridays Art Walk to
become a member in order to sustain and grow our award-winning celebration
of all the arts. 

Supporting Fairfield 1st Fridays Art Walk 
Through Membership is as Easy as 1-2-3:

Please support 1st Fridays Art Walk today with a tax deductible donation of
your choosing:

 

1Friends of 1st Fridays Art Walk - $25 Individual and $45 Family.  If
every person who attended 1st Fridays Art Walk became a member, our budget
would be fulfilled!  Become a member and receive our car window decal to
show your support!

 

2Very Good Friends of 1st Fridays Art Walk - $100 to $499 annual
donation.  Receive our car window decal and our 100% cotton art walk t-shirt
emblazoned with an original John Preston oil painting.

 

3Best Friends Forever of 1st Fridays Art Walk (or "BFF's"  - ask your
kids) - $500 and above annual donation. .  Receive our car window decal, our
100% cotton art walk t-shirt emblazoned with an original John Preston Oil
painting, and an annual pass to any of our auxiliary events which have a
$2-3 fee, and one workshop.  (Annual Pass is non-transferable except within
your immediate family, some events do not apply)

 

Supporting 1st Fridays Art Walk is an investment in building a more vibrant,
creative, and economically sound arts community for the enrichment and
enjoyment of all!

 

Please donate today! Make checks payable to:  1st Fridays Art Walk, and mail
to 1st Fridays Art Walk, P.O. Box 632, Fairfield, IA 52556. 

 

All donations are Tax-Deductible 

 

Frequently Asked Questions about 1st Fridays Art Walk's Fund Raising: 

 

Q:  Art Walk has run without my donation for 5 years. What's different now?
A:  1st Fridays Art Walk has outgrown its ability to be 100% volunteer-run,
and now employs an Executive Director and a part time Administrative
Assistant.  They are the critically necessary "glue" that keeps the event
running smoothly, month after month, all year long.  They organize all the
Co-Partners who help create special, "enhanced" months of 1st Fridays Art
Walk, plus all the hundreds of volunteers who create each month's
activities.

 

Q:  Isn't Art Walk paid for by the city?
A:  No and Yes. Until now, AW has enjoyed much in kind support from the city
of Fairfield, but no actual funds.  Starting July 2008, the city has
budgeted $12,000 to help AW administrate the 12 Art Walks each year.  This
money comes from the Local Option Sales tax revenue, allotted for "Community
Betterment."  The $12,000 will cover 17% of the annual $100,000 AW budget.
The other 83% must be raised through other means.

 

Q:  Wow.  That seems like a lot of money.   
A:  It may seem like a lot until you compare AW with other Iowa festivals of
much shorter duration than the twelve 2-day art walks we enjoy.  We are
expert at squeezing maximum value out of every dollar donated to us!  

 

Other Iowa Festival Budgets:
Burlington Snake Alley Arts Festival - $25,000 for a one day event
Decorah Nordic Fest - $80,000 for a 2 day event
Pella Tulip Festival - $100,000 for a 3 day event
Mt. Pleasant Old Th

[FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[Hugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marciohal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
> 
> I am tm-sidhis practitioner and am practicing to 17 years , I would
> like to know what is the advanced technique number 6    somebody
> would know to inform ?  believe that the sequence that is published in
> trancenet.org this wrong , somebody could inform what is the technique
> number 6 correct ?
> 
> Thanx
> 
> Marcelo
>

If you don't already have the night-technique you will get
that one next, however many advanced techs you may have.

[FairfieldLife] The other shoe has dropped: Obama in 2009

[sandiego108]

Very pleased that Obama is the expected nominee for the presidential 
race. His speech last night was inspiring as usual. At this point it 
is his election to lose. 

I didn't have much against Hillary, except for the RFK comment and the 
entitlement issue, but mostly that her approach to change needed was 
too conservative. However, if there hadn't been Barack, I would've 
gladly voted for her over McCain.

I look forward to seeing what the Republicans throw at Obama, and his 
debates with McCain. He has a wonderful ability to use the silence 
within himself against his opponents when necessary. A great time for 
the US. 

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [ Compare and contrast Hillary's reaction to having
> been soundly trounced by Obama to Judy Stein's con-
> tinuing denials that she slandered Mel Gibson and
> his movie without ever having seen it. Two peas in
> a pod, and with the same amount of credibility. 
> Emphasis below (**) is mine, because these state-
> ments really deserve to be emphasized; comments in
> brackets [] are mine as well, because those lines
> need to be commented on. ]
> 
> Obama's first test: Handling Hillary 
> Roger Simon 
> Wed Jun 4, 12:14 AM ET

> **For someone giving indications she would like to be Obama's 
> running mate, Clinton was surprisingly ungracious. In fact, 
> if you had just awakened from a (blissful) 17-month sleep, 
> you would have thought she had won.**

First, it's not at all clear that she's given any
such indications. Her campaign has denied it. And
the Obama campaign has excellent motivation for
putting out the story that she has.

Second, what was *astonishingly* ungracious was for
Obama to arrange for his superdelegates to put him
over the top yesterday, instead of waiting a couple
of days to make his victory speech. Last night
*should* have been Clinton's exclusively, and it
would have done him no harm whatsoever to let her
have it. But he deliberately stepped on it. His
words of glowing praise for her in his victory
speech ring exceedingly hollow in the context of
such blatant, deliberate disrespect.

> "Because of you, we won together the swing states necessary 
> to get to 270 electoral votes," she told the crowd in New 
> York City. "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted 
> for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be 
> invisible."
> 
> But her fighting words only increased the need for Obama to 
> show that he can be strong, tough and in charge. Clinton's 
> unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased 
> the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a 
> doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a 
> way of doing that.

This is what I alluded to above, Obama'ss motivation
for circulating the very possibly false story that she
had expressed a desire for the VP spot.

Why does he believe his delegate-count victory is
threatened by her lack of acknowledgment? If anything
makes him look weak and insecure, it's the entirely
unnecessary chest-beating. He isn't acting presidential,
he's acting like somebody who's afraid people will
think he's a doormat.
 

> Another Obama adviser, who asked not to be identified, said 
> that he was not worried that Clinton supporters would stay 
> angry. 
> 
> [ I would add, *of course* some of them will stay angry. 
> As with Judy Stein, their *nature* is to be angry and stay 
> angry. Why is that relevant to anything but their desire
> to poison their own minds and bodies and as much of the
> environment around them as possible? ]

 This is coming from a person who was so angry
at the United States that he left the country for good
and delivers himself repeatedly of tirades against it
and its inhabitants.

The notion that Hillary's supporters shouldn't stay
angry when what has *made* them angry hasn't changed
is strange indeed. By the same token, Barry should be
dumping on those who are still angry at Bush for
stealing two elections and using them to bring the
country to the brink of disaster.


> [ And, lest we forget, Hillary promised to campaign strongly
> for Obama if he won the nomination. My guess is that if she 
> said the same thing today, she'd play Judylike word games 
> and say, "I will campaign for him as soon as *I* admit that 
> he won the nomination.

He won't have "won" the nomination until a majority
of delegates cast their votes for him at the convention
in August. At this point, he's still only the
*presumptive* nominee. Delegates may change their
minds at any time.

Hillary is still deciding what she'll do from now until
then. Depending on how you count, she either has almost
as much of the popular vote as Obama, or more of it; and
numerous analyses of the demographics appear to show
that she would have a better shot at an electoral-vote
majority in the general. She may decide to try to make
the case to Obama's superdelegates, based on these facts,
that they should switch their support to her, and she
has every right to do so.

This has been one of the closest primary races, if not
*the* closest, in history. There was no landslide for
Obama, no overwhelming mandate, only a numerical edge
in delegates; and most people agree that the current
method for awarding delegates is badly broken. So that's
another part of her case: the mechanics of the process
that gave Obama the numerical delegate edge are shaky
and by no means fully representative of the will of the
people.


> [ Exactly. Ignore her silly ass, as if she were no longer
> relevant. She IS no longer relevant. The media will attempt 
> to still make h

[FairfieldLife] Yes, parents do have a heart. Stop Abortion (touching)

[mukesh bhatia]

Dear moderators please don't be cruel pass this message to others, I don't have 
any personal benefits by sending this email, all I want is awareness among all 
of us to stop the innocent killings prevailing in the society




   Dear Mommy, 
  I am in Heaven now... I so wanted to be your little girl. I don't quite 
understand what has happened. I was so excited when I began realizing my 
existence. I was in a dark, yet comfortable place. I saw I had fingers and 
toes. I was pretty far along in my developing, yet not near ready to leave my 
surroundings. I spent most of my time thinking or sleeping. Even from my 
earliest days, I felt a special bonding between you and me. 

 Sometimes I heard you crying and I cried with you. Sometimes you would yell or 
scream, then cry. I heard Daddy yelling back. I was sad, and hoped you would be 
better soon. I wondered why you cried so much. One day you cried almost all of 
the day. I hurt for you. I couldn't imagine why you were so unhappy. 
  That same day, the most horrible thing happened. A very mean monster came 
into that warm, comfortable place I was in. I was so scared, I began screaming, 
but you never once tried to help me. Maybe you never heard me. The monster got 
closer and closer as I was screaming and screaming, "Mommy, Mommy, help me 
please; Mommy, help me." Complete terror is all I felt. I screamed and screamed 
until I thought I couldn't anymore. Then the monster started ripping my arms 
off. It hurt so bad; the pain I can never explain. It didn't stop. 
 Oh, how I begged it to stop. I screamed in horror as it ripped my leg off.
 
 Though I was in such complete pain, I was dying. I knew I would never see your 
face or hear you say how much you love me. I wanted to make all your tears go 
away. I had so many plans to make you happy. Now I couldn't; all my dreams were 
shattered. Though I was in utter pain and horror, I felt the pain of my heart 
breaking, above all. I wanted more than anything to be your daughter. No use 
now, for I was dying a painful death. I could only imagine the terrible things 
that they had done to you. I wanted to tell you that I love you before I was 
gone, but I didn't know the words you could understand. 

 And soon, I no longer had the breath to say them; I was dead. I felt myself 
rising. I was being carried by a huge angel into a big beautiful place. I was 
still crying, but the physical pain was gone. The angel took me away to a 
wonderful place... Then I was happy. I asked the angel what was the thing was 
that killed me. He answered, "Abortion". I am sorry, for I know how it feels." 
I don't know what abortion is; I guess that's the name of the monster. I'm 
writing to say that I love you and to tell you how much I wanted to be your 
little girl. I tried very hard to live. I wanted to live. I had the will, but I 
couldn't; the monster was too powerful. It sucked my arms and legs off and 
finally got all of me. It was impossible to live. I just wanted you to know I 
tried to stay with you. I didn't want to die. Also, Mommy, please watch out for 
that abortion monster. Mommy, I love you and I would hate for you to go through 
the kind of pain I did. Please be careful. 
  Love,
 Your Baby Girl
 
  DO YOU THINK THESE BABIES CHOSE TO DIE???
 

 would you do this to your baby?
 
  This Is Dedicated To The Memory Of All The Aborted Babies Throughout The 
World. Please pass this on to as many people as u can... if u have a heart u 
will... I post it to here, coz i know u have a heart n will post it to others, 
so that they will know what happens to their child and all the pain the baby 
goes through when they abortion their baby (do not forward, copy paste & 
compose a new mail to avoid spammers get a list of emails)
   

Re: [FairfieldLife] Yes,I have a choice&heart. encourage Abortionof fetus

[WLeed3]

 
In a message dated 6/4/2008 12:07:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Dear moderators please don't be cruel pass  this message to others, I don't 
have any personal benefits by sending this  email, all I want is awareness 
among all of us to stop the innocent killings  prevailing in the society

 (http://img383.imageshack.us/my.php?image=babygirlqi0.jpg) 


Dear  Mommy, 
I am in  Heaven now... I so wanted to be your little girl. I don't quite 
understand  what has happened. I was so excited when I began realizing my 
existence. I was  in a dark, yet comfortable place. I saw I had fingers and 
toes. I 
was pretty  far along in my developing, yet not near ready to leave my 
surroundings. I  spent most of my time thinking or sleeping. Even from my 
earliest 
days, I felt  a special bonding between you and me. 

Sometimes  I heard you crying and I cried with you. Sometimes you would yell 
or scream,  then cry. I heard Daddy yelling back. I was sad, and hoped you 
would be better  soon. I wondered why you cried so much. One day you cried 
almost 
all of the  day. I hurt for you. I couldn't imagine why you were so unhappy.  
That  same day, the most horrible thing happened. A very mean monster came 
into that  warm, comfortable place I was in. I was so scared, I began 
screaming, 
but you  never once tried to help me. Maybe you never heard me. The monster 
got closer  and closer as I was screaming and screaming, "Mommy, Mommy, help me 
please;  Mommy, help me." Complete terror is all I felt. I screamed and 
screamed until  I thought I couldn't anymore. Then the monster started ripping 
my 
arms off. It  hurt so bad; the pain I can never explain. It didn't stop. 
Oh, how I  begged it to stop. I screamed in horror as it ripped my leg off.

Though  I was in such complete pain, I was dying. I knew I would never see 
your face  or hear you say how much you love me. I wanted to make all your 
tears 
go away.  I had so many plans to make you happy. Now I couldn't; all my 
dreams were  shattered. Though I was in utter pain and horror, I felt the pain 
of 
my heart  breaking, above all. I wanted more than anything to be your daughter. 
No use  now, for I was dying a painful death. I could only imagine the 
terrible things  that they had done to you. I wanted to tell you that I love 
you 
before I was  gone, but I didn't know the words you could understand. 

And  soon, I no longer had the breath to say them; I was dead. I felt myself  
rising. I was being carried by a huge angel into a big beautiful place. I was 
 still crying, but the physical pain was gone. The angel took me away to a  
wonderful place... Then I was happy. I asked the angel what was the thing was  
that killed me. He answered, "Abortion". I am sorry, for I know how it feels." 
 I don't know what abortion is; I guess that's the name of the monster. I'm  
writing to say that I love you and to tell you how much I wanted to be your  
little girl. I tried very hard to live. I wanted to live. I had the will, but  
I couldn't; the monster was too powerful. It sucked my arms and legs off and  
finally got all of me. It was impossible to live. I just wanted you to know I  
tried to stay with you. I didn't want to die. Also, Mommy, please watch out  
for that abortion monster. Mommy, I love you and I would hate for you to go  
through the kind of pain I did. Please be careful. 
Love,
Your  Baby Girl

DO  YOU THINK THESE BABIES CHOSE TO DIE???


would  you do this to your baby?

This  Is Dedicated To The Memory Of All The Aborted Babies Throughout The 
World.  Please pass this on to as many people as u can... if u have a heart u 
will...  I post it to here, coz i know u have a heart n will post it to others, 
so that  they will know what happens to their child and all the pain the baby 
goes  through when they abortion their baby (do not forward, copy paste &  
compose a new mail to avoid spammers get a list of emails)  
 




**Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with 
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.  
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod000302)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[feste37]

I find this an odd judgment, Judy. I saw nothing ungracious in Obama,
and I thought his tribute to Clinton was excellent (far more gracious,
and detailed, than her brief acknowledgement of him). You write that
"last night should have been Clinton's exclusively." Why? Why should
he cede the limelight to a defeated opponent? How were his
actions "disrespectful" to Clinton? It would have been odd had he not
made the speech he did. He has, after all, just won the Democratic
nomination, an amazing, historic achievement. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Second, what was *astonishingly* ungracious was for
> Obama to arrange for his superdelegates to put him
> over the top yesterday, instead of waiting a couple
> of days to make his victory speech. Last night
> *should* have been Clinton's exclusively, and it
> would have done him no harm whatsoever to let her
> have it. But he deliberately stepped on it. His
> words of glowing praise for her in his victory
> speech ring exceedingly hollow in the context of
> such blatant, deliberate disrespect.
> 
> > "Because of you, we won together the swing states necessary 
> > to get to 270 electoral votes," she told the crowd in New 
> > York City. "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted 
> > for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be 
> > invisible."
> > 
> > But her fighting words only increased the need for Obama to 
> > show that he can be strong, tough and in charge. Clinton's 
> > unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased 
> > the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a 
> > doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a 
> > way of doing that.
> 
> This is what I alluded to above, Obama'ss motivation
> for circulating the very possibly false story that she
> had expressed a desire for the VP spot.
> 
> Why does he believe his delegate-count victory is
> threatened by her lack of acknowledgment? If anything
> makes him look weak and insecure, it's the entirely
> unnecessary chest-beating. He isn't acting presidential,
> he's acting like somebody who's afraid people will
> think he's a doormat.
>  
> 
> > Another Obama adviser, who asked not to be identified, said 
> > that he was not worried that Clinton supporters would stay 
> > angry. 
> > 
> > [ I would add, *of course* some of them will stay angry. 
> > As with Judy Stein, their *nature* is to be angry and stay 
> > angry. Why is that relevant to anything but their desire
> > to poison their own minds and bodies and as much of the
> > environment around them as possible? ]
> 
>  This is coming from a person who was so angry
> at the United States that he left the country for good
> and delivers himself repeatedly of tirades against it
> and its inhabitants.
> 
> The notion that Hillary's supporters shouldn't stay
> angry when what has *made* them angry hasn't changed
> is strange indeed. By the same token, Barry should be
> dumping on those who are still angry at Bush for
> stealing two elections and using them to bring the
> country to the brink of disaster.
> 
> 
> > [ And, lest we forget, Hillary promised to campaign strongly
> > for Obama if he won the nomination. My guess is that if she 
> > said the same thing today, she'd play Judylike word games 
> > and say, "I will campaign for him as soon as *I* admit that 
> > he won the nomination.
> 
> He won't have "won" the nomination until a majority
> of delegates cast their votes for him at the convention
> in August. At this point, he's still only the
> *presumptive* nominee. Delegates may change their
> minds at any time.
> 
> Hillary is still deciding what she'll do from now until
> then. Depending on how you count, she either has almost
> as much of the popular vote as Obama, or more of it; and
> numerous analyses of the demographics appear to show
> that she would have a better shot at an electoral-vote
> majority in the general. She may decide to try to make
> the case to Obama's superdelegates, based on these facts,
> that they should switch their support to her, and she
> has every right to do so.
> 
> This has been one of the closest primary races, if not
> *the* closest, in history. There was no landslide for
> Obama, no overwhelming mandate, only a numerical edge
> in delegates; and most people agree that the current
> method for awarding delegates is badly broken. So that's
> another part of her case: the mechanics of the process
> that gave Obama the numerical delegate edge are shaky
> and by no means fully representative of the will of the
> people.
> 
> 
> > [ Exactly. Ignore her silly ass, as if she were no longer
> > relevant. She IS no longer relevant. The media will attempt 
> > to still make her relevant, but as the author says so well, 
> > she's history. She is as relevant to the rest of the campaign 
> > as another media darling, Britney Spears. And as popular. ]
> 
> Note that it isn't Hillary who is being so cavalie

[FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> I think that's what some website says, but my sixth advanced had the
middle part repeated. I got a single 'namah' at the end for  my first
advanced and never got more than the one 'namah'.
> 
> --- On Tue, 6/3/08, marciohal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > From: marciohal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, June 3, 2008, 11:41 PM
> > Ok gullible
> > 
> > Right ,  technique of number 5 that I there are is the
> > "'acts of
> > enlightenment techniques'  I believe that the technique
> > number 6 is
> > one more namah (Sri Sri xxx namah NAMAH) 

Perhapst teh rulez of sandhi are not strictly applied 
in the case of mantras, but that should be "namo namaH".
(Before a *voiced* consonant teh ending -aH changes to
-o; cf. e.g. gurur *devo* maheshvaraH.)




 which is its
> > technique
> > number 6 ?
> > 
> > Good luck
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Marcelo, it seems to vary. For me, I believe my fifth
> > advanced
> > technique was what was given out to teachers in the early
> > days as the
> > 'age of enlightenment techniques' and the sixth
> > advanced technique was
> > another elongated mantra. When I applied for a seventh
> > advanced
> > technique, I was told by the teacher, after the puja of
> > course, that I
> > already had the most I could get (I rushed back from a
> > one-day round
> > trip from Boston to NJ to stand in line for nothing -
> > typical
> > movement). If I had not received the primordial sound
> > technique from
> > Chopra, I would have received a seventh advanced technique
> > right then.
> > If I had recently become a teacher, I would have been
> > eligible for a
> > seventh advanced technique that only teachers can get.
> > However, if I
> > had been a teacher way back in the early days and received
> > the age of
> > enlightenment techniques back then, then my fifth advanced
> > techniques
> > would have likely been the elongated mantra I received for
> > my sixth
> > advanced
> > >  technique and the technique that only teachers could
> > get would have
> > been my sixtha dvanced technique.
> > > 
> > > So, I topped out at only six, but if I had been a
> > teacher who had
> > not received the age of enlightenment techniques and I had
> > not paid
> > Chopra 700 dollars for a mis-pronounced phrase I could have
> > received
> > in advanced technique form for 400 dollars (again, typical
> > movement),
> > I could have had eight advanced techniques.
> > > 
> > > --- On Tue, 6/3/08, marciohal  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: marciohal 
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] ADVANCED TECNIQUES
> > NUNBER 6
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Date: Tuesday, June 3, 2008, 10:46 PM
> > > > Hi
> > > > 
> > > > I am tm-sidhis practitioner and am practicing to
> > 17 years ,
> > > > I would
> > > > like to know what is the advanced technique
> > number 6   
> > > > somebody
> > > > would know to inform ?  believe that the sequence
> > that is
> > > > published in
> > > > trancenet.org this wrong , somebody could inform
> > what is
> > > > the technique
> > > > number 6 correct ?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanx
> > > > 
> > > > Marcelo
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > To subscribe, send a message to:
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > 
> > > > Or go to: 
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups
> > Links
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > To subscribe, send a message to:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > Or go to: 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find this an odd judgment, Judy. I saw nothing ungracious in Obama,
> and I thought his tribute to Clinton was excellent (far more 
gracious,
> and detailed, than her brief acknowledgement of him). You write that
> "last night should have been Clinton's exclusively." Why? Why should
> he cede the limelight to a defeated opponent? How were his
> actions "disrespectful" to Clinton? It would have been odd had he not
> made the speech he did. He has, after all, just won the Democratic
> nomination, an amazing, historic achievement. 
> 
I agree-- what he did was in the best interests of the country and the 
party. I can appreciate that she wants to plan her next moves, given 
that it was a close contest, but we need to move on. Obama and Clinton 
definitely should be talking about how to bring everyone together for 
the common goal of defeating McCain, and what her "reward" should be 
for doing the great job that she has. I don't think though that she 
belongs as VP on the ticket, or that she wants that. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 4, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Hugo wrote:



If you don't already have the night-technique you will get
that one next, however many advanced techs you may have.


Doesn't that have something to do with eating carrots, Hugo?

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find this an odd judgment, Judy. I saw nothing ungracious in
> Obama, and I thought his tribute to Clinton was excellent (far
> more gracious, and detailed, than her brief acknowledgement of
> him). You write that "last night should have been Clinton's 
> exclusively." Why? Why should he cede the limelight to a
> defeated opponent?

Because this was the last primary contest, the last
such victory she will have, almost certainly her
last chance for this kind of limelight. It isn't
as though he crushed her; he just barely defeated her.
As I said earlier, it's been one of the closest primary
races, if not *the* closest, in history.

If he truly meant what he said in that speech--"I am a
better candidate for having had the honor to compete
with Hillary Rodham Clinton"--he should have been
willing to allow her to celebrate her campaign with her
supporters without distraction.

 How were his
> actions "disrespectful" to Clinton? It would have been odd
> had he not made the speech he did.

I'm not talking about the speech, but its timing.

 He has, after all, just won the Democratic
> nomination, an amazing, historic achievement.

He didn't (presumptively) win the nomination on
the basis of yesterday's primaries. He won it because
he got enough undeclared superdelegates to endorse
him yesterday to put him over the top. He could
easily have asked them to wait a couple of days to
announce their endorsements.

He could have had the limelight all to himself to
declare his victory on Thursday or Friday or even
the following week without in the slightest
detracting from his historic achievement. It
wouldn't have cost him a thing.

Instead, as I said, he decided he had to step on
her celebration of her campaign. It was meanspirited,
petty, and vengeful; and, as I said, it makes him
look insecure and weak, not to mention insincere in
his praise for her campaign.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[boo_lives]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find this an odd judgment, Judy. I saw nothing ungracious in Obama,
> and I thought his tribute to Clinton was excellent (far more gracious,
> and detailed, than her brief acknowledgement of him). You write that
> "last night should have been Clinton's exclusively." Why? Why should
> he cede the limelight to a defeated opponent? How were his
> actions "disrespectful" to Clinton? It would have been odd had he not
> made the speech he did. He has, after all, just won the Democratic
> nomination, an amazing, historic achievement. 

The superdelegates been wanting to declare for him for weeks but
afraid of clintons' wrath and revenge if they came out prior to the
primaries being over.  All reports from insiders talking to them say
this, plus it's obvious from the trend.  If Obama had control he would
have had them declare weeks ago and saved all this nonsense.  The
supers held out on behalf on Clintons, but then did what they had to
for the good of the party.  I've talked to a number of people today
involved in politics and they're all talking about Clinton's lack of
propriety - on the day Obama secures the nomination she refuses to
praise him or even acknowledge his victory.  What sort of narcisstic
child thinks last nite was supposed to be all about Hillary?  The past
month has been all about Hillary, letting her go on till the end
despite it all being over already to anyone who understands the
process, everyone in the party walking on eggshells to not insult her,
obama going easy on her and all the while her camp continuing to
attack and divide the party.  Judy thinks Obama was to skip making a
critical speech on a critical night with full TV coverage to kickstart
the general campaign because last night was to continue to be all
about hillary?  It's not a thought I've heard anyone with a basic
understanding of how politics works could conceive of. 

The usually mellow and neutral James Fallows at the Atlantic puts it
right: "You HAVE LOST the nomination. There are NO MORE primaries. And
you're urging your supporters to nurse their bitter feelings on your
web site, and keep selling their bikes to give you money that you'll
spend on... what? The unseemliness -- and, yes, destructiveness -- of
this is too obvious to mention, though perhaps not obvious enough to
have occurred to you.  This is a new low."

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/way_to_unify_the_party_hrc.php


> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Second, what was *astonishingly* ungracious was for
> > Obama to arrange for his superdelegates to put him
> > over the top yesterday, instead of waiting a couple
> > of days to make his victory speech. Last night
> > *should* have been Clinton's exclusively, and it
> > would have done him no harm whatsoever to let her
> > have it. But he deliberately stepped on it. His
> > words of glowing praise for her in his victory
> > speech ring exceedingly hollow in the context of
> > such blatant, deliberate disrespect.
> > 
> > > "Because of you, we won together the swing states necessary 
> > > to get to 270 electoral votes," she told the crowd in New 
> > > York City. "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted 
> > > for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be 
> > > invisible."
> > > 
> > > But her fighting words only increased the need for Obama to 
> > > show that he can be strong, tough and in charge. Clinton's 
> > > unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased 
> > > the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a 
> > > doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a 
> > > way of doing that.
> > 
> > This is what I alluded to above, Obama'ss motivation
> > for circulating the very possibly false story that she
> > had expressed a desire for the VP spot.
> > 
> > Why does he believe his delegate-count victory is
> > threatened by her lack of acknowledgment? If anything
> > makes him look weak and insecure, it's the entirely
> > unnecessary chest-beating. He isn't acting presidential,
> > he's acting like somebody who's afraid people will
> > think he's a doormat.
> >  
> > 
> > > Another Obama adviser, who asked not to be identified, said 
> > > that he was not worried that Clinton supporters would stay 
> > > angry. 
> > > 
> > > [ I would add, *of course* some of them will stay angry. 
> > > As with Judy Stein, their *nature* is to be angry and stay 
> > > angry. Why is that relevant to anything but their desire
> > > to poison their own minds and bodies and as much of the
> > > environment around them as possible? ]
> > 
> >  This is coming from a person who was so angry
> > at the United States that he left the country for good
> > and delivers himself repeatedly of tirades against it
> > and its inhabitants.
> > 
> > The notion that Hillary's supporters shouldn't stay
> > angry when what has *made* them angry h

[FairfieldLife] Re: A reason Why?

[Tom]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Barack Obama is now faced with many challenges.  One of those challenges is 
> in 
choosing people who will maintain respect for him in hard times and good times.
> 
> The dynamics of white and black are such that a white guy will always have a 
> thought 
that he has entitlement.   Example:  I once lived in Land O Lakes Florida I was 
buying a 
restaurant in Dade City Florida.  While working to get the restaurant open I 
met many 
people of various backgrounds the conversations were always interesting but the 
general 
rule was that if there was a white guy working with me the people always 
assumed he was 
the owner.   
> 
> As commander and chief this could be a problem.   The difference between Joe 
> Biden 
and Hillary Clinton is that Hillary has walked the road with Obama.  She has 
been a big 
sister she has whipped his ass and made him tough, she has maybe even made him 
cry at 
times but you know she made him the nominee, she brought him to his greatness.  
 
> 
> She has been his PUSH she has allowed him to unfold himself to the world. 
> 
> I applaud Hillary Clinton God and Nature for the beauty of how she works..
> 
> I endorse Hillary Clinton for Democratic Nominee for Vice President of the 
> United States 
of America..
>

How long can you last 'till the call of that bong becomes
irresistible Louis? If you think Hillary's lying ass has conceded
you are sorely mistaken. She is a viper with no soul who would 
take the party down in flames if it would mean she could get the
nomination. She has not conceded. She will not concede if there is 
any chance whatsoever of putting a knife in Barack's back.
   
 

[FairfieldLife] In Defeat, Clinton Graciously Pretends to Win

[Tom]

Once again Judy, either your judgement or honesty 
is quite lacking. 

"*astonishingly* ungracious" ? 

Yes, Hillary certainly is.


http://tinyurl.com/3uaelm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303568_pf.html

In Defeat, Clinton Graciously Pretends to Win
By Dana Milbank
Wednesday, June 4, 2008; A03

NEW YORK "What does Hillary want?"

Hillary Clinton put the question to her supporters here Tuesday night, moments 
after her 
opponent, Barack Obama, clinched the Democratic presidential nomination.

What Hillary did not want to do was to concede defeat. "I want the nearly 18 
million 
Americans who voted for me to be respected, to be heard," she told her fans, 
who 
answered with cheers of "Denver! Denver!" and "Yes she will!"

The campaign was over, and Obama had locked up the nomination after a flood of 
more 
than 40 superdelegates announced their support for him throughout the day. But 
in the 
Baruch College gymnasium here (the "Bearcat Den"), Clinton spoke as if she were 
the 
victor.

She and her husband and daughter took the stage, smiling, clapping and bopping 
to the 
beat. She said nothing about losing the nomination, instead thanking South 
Dakota for 
giving her a victory in Tuesday's balloting: "You had the last word in this 
primary season!" 
This, she said, confirmed that she had won "more votes than any primary 
candidate in 
history."

Clinton congratulated Obama -- not for winning the nomination, but for running 
an 
"extraordinary race." She recognized Obama and his supporters "for all they 
accomplished."

It was an extraordinary performance by a woman who had been counted out of the 
race 
even when she still had a legitimate chance. Now she had been mathematically 
eliminated 
-- and she spoke as if she had won.

Though some might think her remarks self-delusional, Clinton wasn't kidding 
herself; 
earlier in the day, Clinton had told lawmakers privately that the race was over 
and she 
would consider being Obama's vice president. Her public defiance reflected a 
shift in the 
balance of power that came with Obama's victory. Now that he had won the race, 
he 
would need to woo Clinton if he wanted to prevail in November.

"Obama has work to do," the outspoken Clinton adviser Lanny Davis told 
reporters in the 
hallway outside the gymnasium here. "Senator Clinton can't do it for him."

Obama's aides had done their best throughout the day to build excitement for 
his 
clinching of the nomination. "Obama needs 41 delegates to secure the Democratic 
nomination," Obama spokesman Dan Pfeiffer announced in an e-mail he sent out at 
6:56 
a.m.

It was the beginning of a day-long water torture for Clinton, as Obama aimed, 
by day's 
end, to reach the 2,118 delegates needed to clinch the nomination.

For Obama, however, it wasn't a pretty way to clinch. He had won only six of 
the last 14 
contests, and Tuesday night he lost South Dakota, too, where he had been 
heavily 
favored. Now that the party had partially accepted results from the Florida and 
Michigan 
primaries, Clinton could claim with some justification that she had received 
more votes 
than Obama.

And so the limping nominee needed to be carried across the finish line by the 
superdelegates whose support Pfeiffer announced throughout the day: a Michigan 
congresswoman, a Massachusetts superdelegate, one from Mississippi, two from 
Michigan, one from the District of Columbia, two from California, one from 
Florida, three 
from Delaware. "Twelve delegates from the nomination," Pfeiffer announced. Then 
11, 
then 10.

The rush of the opportunistic superdelegates toward the inevitable nominee only 
worsened what was certain to be an unhappy day for the Clintons, who had 
arrived at 
their Westchester home at about 3 a.m. after an awkward last day of campaigning 
in 
South Dakota. Bill Clinton had flown into a rage and called a reporter a 
"scumbag." At her 
last event in South Dakota, Hillary had lost her voice in a coughing fit. 
Somebody had 
seen fit to play an inappropriate John Fogerty tune before she took the stage: 
"It ain't me, 
it ain't me. I ain't no fortunate one."

On Tuesday evening, the crowd began to assemble at Baruch College in Manhattan 
for 
Clinton's non-concession speech. The scene was made to look festive: The 
Clinton 
campaign ordered 70 boxes of Domino's pizza for the press corps, and set up a 
cash bar 
for its fundraisers, or "honored guests." The honored guests were not in a 
partying mood, 
however. One older woman pointed at a reporter accusingly and said: "He is the 
one who 
destroyed our heroine!"

A crew from "The Daily Show" joined the party, and, hoping to keep Clinton in 
the race, 
struck up a cheer of "Four more months!"

Such an outlandish thing seemed almost plausible among the Clinton backers in 
the 
hermetically sealed Baruch gym. Below ground level, there was no cellphone or 
BlackBerry 
reception, and there was no television playing in the room. That 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> The superdelegates been wanting to declare for him for weeks
> but afraid of clintons' wrath and revenge if they came out
> prior to the primaries being over.

If so, they could just as easily have waited another
couple of days.

  All reports from insiders talking to them say
> this, plus it's obvious from the trend.  If Obama had control
> he would have had them declare weeks ago and saved all this 
> nonsense.

He didn't have control to make them declare before
the primaries were over, but he certainly had control
after the primaries were over to get them to hold off
on declaring.


> I've talked to a number of people today
> involved in politics and they're all talking about Clinton's
> lack of propriety - on the day Obama secures the nomination

That would be the day enough superdelegates declared
to put him over the top. The primaries didn't do that.
The timing of the last primaries was engraved in stone;
that of the declarations of the superdelegates was not.
"The day Obama secures the nomination" was up to him;
it wasn't decreed by God or even the party.


> Judy thinks Obama was to skip making a
> critical speech on a critical night with full TV coverage
> to kickstart the general campaign because last night was to
> continue to be all about hillary?

Not "skip," just postpone the "critical night" for
a few days. The timing was up to him, as noted. Last
night was Hillary's final night. Given the closeness
of the race, why shouldn't she get to go out in a
blaze of glory? It's not as if he'd trampled her in
the dust; he just barely edged her out. She deserved
a big celebration for the fight she put up, and it
would have been zero skin off his nose to let her
have it.

[FairfieldLife] Solidarity In Sitges

[TurquoiseB]

I just got back from walking my dogs, and noticed
while walking down "Sin Street" that the biggest
gay bar in town, frequented by a number of gay and
lesbian English-speaking ex-pats, is throwing a big 
party tonight. The poster says:

COME CELEBRATE THE CLOSEST 
ONE OF OUR OWN HAS EVER COME
TO BEING PRESIDENT OF THE USA

Cracked me right up. What do they know that the
mainstream media don't?

I might go. Sounds like it would be fun...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[Tom]

Go back and read a few of Ms. Stein's recent posts concerning
this matter feste. Note the number of times she uses the word
*should* regarding Obama and *deserve* regarding Mrs. 
Clinton. 

You are very close to one of authfriend's trademark rants implying
your dishonesty or calling you a liar. I have come to the opinion 
that she can't help herself. Opinions colored differently than that
which will resonate with her POV seem to be immediately seen as a 
treat to her carefully guarded version of reality, causing her to sink to 
hurling insults and "editing" quotes of her perceived opponent. It used 
to bug me. Now I just laugh.
 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find this an odd judgment, Judy. I saw nothing ungracious in Obama,
> and I thought his tribute to Clinton was excellent (far more gracious,
> and detailed, than her brief acknowledgement of him). You write that
> "last night should have been Clinton's exclusively." Why? Why should
> he cede the limelight to a defeated opponent? How were his
> actions "disrespectful" to Clinton? It would have been odd had he not
> made the speech he did. He has, after all, just won the Democratic
> nomination, an amazing, historic achievement. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Second, what was *astonishingly* ungracious was for
> > Obama to arrange for his superdelegates to put him
> > over the top yesterday, instead of waiting a couple
> > of days to make his victory speech. Last night
> > *should* have been Clinton's exclusively, and it
> > would have done him no harm whatsoever to let her
> > have it. But he deliberately stepped on it. His
> > words of glowing praise for her in his victory
> > speech ring exceedingly hollow in the context of
> > such blatant, deliberate disrespect.
> > 
> > > "Because of you, we won together the swing states necessary 
> > > to get to 270 electoral votes," she told the crowd in New 
> > > York City. "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted 
> > > for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be 
> > > invisible."
> > > 
> > > But her fighting words only increased the need for Obama to 
> > > show that he can be strong, tough and in charge. Clinton's 
> > > unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased 
> > > the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a 
> > > doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a 
> > > way of doing that.
> > 
> > This is what I alluded to above, Obama'ss motivation
> > for circulating the very possibly false story that she
> > had expressed a desire for the VP spot.
> > 
> > Why does he believe his delegate-count victory is
> > threatened by her lack of acknowledgment? If anything
> > makes him look weak and insecure, it's the entirely
> > unnecessary chest-beating. He isn't acting presidential,
> > he's acting like somebody who's afraid people will
> > think he's a doormat.
> >  
> > 
> > > Another Obama adviser, who asked not to be identified, said 
> > > that he was not worried that Clinton supporters would stay 
> > > angry. 
> > > 
> > > [ I would add, *of course* some of them will stay angry. 
> > > As with Judy Stein, their *nature* is to be angry and stay 
> > > angry. Why is that relevant to anything but their desire
> > > to poison their own minds and bodies and as much of the
> > > environment around them as possible? ]
> > 
> >  This is coming from a person who was so angry
> > at the United States that he left the country for good
> > and delivers himself repeatedly of tirades against it
> > and its inhabitants.
> > 
> > The notion that Hillary's supporters shouldn't stay
> > angry when what has *made* them angry hasn't changed
> > is strange indeed. By the same token, Barry should be
> > dumping on those who are still angry at Bush for
> > stealing two elections and using them to bring the
> > country to the brink of disaster.
> > 
> > 
> > > [ And, lest we forget, Hillary promised to campaign strongly
> > > for Obama if he won the nomination. My guess is that if she 
> > > said the same thing today, she'd play Judylike word games 
> > > and say, "I will campaign for him as soon as *I* admit that 
> > > he won the nomination.
> > 
> > He won't have "won" the nomination until a majority
> > of delegates cast their votes for him at the convention
> > in August. At this point, he's still only the
> > *presumptive* nominee. Delegates may change their
> > minds at any time.
> > 
> > Hillary is still deciding what she'll do from now until
> > then. Depending on how you count, she either has almost
> > as much of the popular vote as Obama, or more of it; and
> > numerous analyses of the demographics appear to show
> > that she would have a better shot at an electoral-vote
> > majority in the general. She may decide to try to make
> > the case to Obama's superdelegates, based on these facts,
> > that they should switch their support to her, and s

[FairfieldLife] Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[do.rflex]

Senator Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe assures Jon Stewart that
Hillary is going to the White House.

Watch via: http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10535

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Instead, as I said, he decided he had to step on
> her celebration of her campaign. It was meanspirited,
> petty, and vengeful; and, as I said, it makes him
> look insecure and weak, not to mention insincere in
> his praise for her campaign.
>

On this point, we seem to be watching entirely different events. I see
nothing remotely "meanspirited, petty, and vengeful," either in
Obama's speech or its timing. I don't think he looks insecure and
weak. Quite the opposite. And if anyone is being ungracious, it is
Clinton, who talked last night as if she had won. For some reason, she
cannot bring herself to ackknowledge that she has lost this contest. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Go back and read a few of Ms. Stein's recent posts concerning
> this matter feste. Note the number of times she uses the word
> *should* regarding Obama and *deserve* regarding Mrs. 
> Clinton.

"Deserve" = 2 times in the past month regarding Sen. Clinton.
"Deserve" = 2 times in the past month regarding Sen. Obama.

I'm not going to bother to look up "should" because
it's such a common word, but I'd be willing to bet
I've used it about equally regarding each of them
as well.

If Tom would like to expand on whatever point he
thinks he's making, he's certainly welcome. But I
won't hold my breath.

> You are very close to one of authfriend's trademark rants
> implying your dishonesty or calling you a liar.

Who, Feste?? Boy, are you paranoid.

 I have come to the opinion 
> that she can't help herself. Opinions colored differently than
> that which will resonate with her POV seem to be immediately
> seen as a treat

(I think Tom means "threat"; he's just a little
overexcited.)

> to her carefully guarded version of reality, causing her to
> sink to hurling insults and "editing" quotes of her perceived
> opponent. It used to bug me. Now I just laugh.

The interesting thing about Tom is that he makes
all these dark charges but never, *ever* cites any
specifics.

Gee, I wonder why not?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[Richard J. Williams]

TurquoiseB wrote:
> "Change is a foreign policy that doesn't 
> begin and end with a war that should've 
> never been authorized and never been waged," 
> Obama said. 
>
What war? Is the United States in a war? If
so, then Obama must come up with a strategy
to win it. If not, he will be voted out of
office and Hillary will run in the next
election and probably win the nomination
by a landslide.

That's assuming that Obama can win the next
election over McCain, which he probably
cannot, since Obama has no strategy for 
winning the war.

"Every installment of this saga reveals 
Obama to be a deeply opportunistic politician, 
ready to beat a hasty retreat from yesterday's 
statement of cherished principle in order to 
fight another day. Each installment of the 
saga also reveals the organs of the mainstream 
media to be Obama's handmaidens. 

>From March 18 forward they have cheered on 
Obama's every step, even when Obama's 
succeeding steps proved them fools.

In the aftermath of this saga, it should begin 
to dawn on attentive observers that Barack 
Obama represents a type that flourishes on 
many college campuses. The technical term 
that applies to Obama is b.s. artist. Obama 
is an overaged example of the phenomenon, 
but his skills in the art have brought him 
great success and he's not giving it up now."

Read more:

'Get me from the church on time'
Posted by Scott Johnson: 
Powerline, June 1, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/57doe5

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Senator Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe assures Jon Stewart that
> Hillary is going to the White House.
> 
> Watch via: http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10535

John, you have outdone yourself. This is 
one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
I just can't *wait* for Judy to spin this one.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[authfriend]

This is 50 for me. See youse in a few days.

(Comment below.)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > Instead, as I said, he decided he had to step on
> > her celebration of her campaign. It was meanspirited,
> > petty, and vengeful; and, as I said, it makes him
> > look insecure and weak, not to mention insincere in
> > his praise for her campaign.
> 
> On this point, we seem to be watching entirely different
> events. I see nothing remotely "meanspirited, petty, and
> vengeful," either in Obama's speech or its timing. I don't
> think he looks insecure and weak. Quite the opposite. And
> if anyone is being ungracious, it is Clinton, who talked
> last night as if she had won. For some reason, she cannot
> bring herself to ackknowledge that she has lost this contest.

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. But I'm a
little surprised that you can't even seem to see
the basis of my POV after I went to some length
to explain it, even if you end up not agreeing.
You haven't addressed what I wrote at all, you've
just contradicted it without saying why.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I see what you are saying and I understand the distress
> > > > someone might feel when discussing bad stuff in their life
> > > > and thinking they may leave therapy as a result. So yes,
> > > > sometimes saying something forbidden out loud can be a
> > > > positive step.  But it isn't always good to revisit the
> > > > bad stuff.  The bad feelings may be reinforced.
> > >
> > > That's why the TM version of the process, if it's
> > > valid, might have a big advantage over therapy.
> > > MMY disliked the idea of psychotherapy for exactly
> > > the reason you stated (albeit he certainly had no
> > > expert knowledge thereof).
> >
> > I think of therapy as work, as  an action plan to learn to
> > ways to identify bad thinking patters and learning coping
> > strategies to help deal with problematic symptoms as they
> > arise.  Homework is often required.  Practicing relaxation
> > may be part of the homework if you suffer from anxiety.
> > What MMY may have learned about therapy may have been based
> > on therapies that have been discredited or do not work.
> > Taking a psychotic person and asking them to talk about their
> > problems doesn't make any sense and a psychotic break has
> > nothing good happening, only bad.  Instead, they need Risperdal.
>
> My guess is that he was thinking of whatever he'd
> heard or learned about Freudian-type psychoanalysis,
> which certainly isn't as popular as it used to be,
> but I'm not sure one could say it's been "discredited."
> Some of its ideas surely have been, but not all, and
> not necessarily the overall approach.
>
> I don't think I've ever heard anybody suggest, in any
> context, "taking a psychotic person and asking them to
> talk about their problems" as a valid form of therapy,
> at least not prior to the psychosis being controlled
> by medication, so I'm not sure where that came from.

It was just part of the discussion of therapies that do not work for
some people, but once were thought of as helpful.  I was again
reinforcing the idea that   "something good is happening" may not be the
case when people are feeling strong emotions.  We are, and it is
primarily my doing as I explore my thoughts,  moving around several
different topics:  What is unstressing?  What are similar theories to
unstressing? Where did MMY's ideas about unstressing come from?  Where
did his ideas about therapy come from? What is therapy?  What place does
therapy and medical intervention have in hard core TM?
>
> > One thing I originally believed about TM was that it was
> > a partner with science, not an opponent.  If there was a
> > good medical therapy for a medical problem, you used it.
> > If there was a psychological problem, and there is a good
> > therapy, you should use that as well.  Over the years it
> > became apparent to me that TM was more in opposition to
> > science than I originally thought.
>
> Yeah, I don't think you can base that case on MMY's
> dislike of psychotherapy, or even include it in such
> a case (and it's a little odd that you'd do that when
> you've just expressed a dislike for exactly those
> features of psychotherapy that MMY was opposed to!).

And it is a little odd that emotions expressed in therapy may be
considered analogous to the TM idea of unstressing as MMY didn't  think
much of therapy. ;-)  MMY seemed to paint psychotherapy with a pretty
broad brush.  Also, I think many TMers have the feeling that TM cures
ills, especially psychological ills.  After all, you did suggest "That's
why the TM version of the process, if it'svalid, might have a big
advantage over therapy."And others here have mentioned people being
in a bad state but getting better while doing TM.  Of course, we don't
know cause and effect.  On big reason for  improvement of psychological
problems is simply the passage of time.

He also was pretty secretive about medical issues concerning himself. 
This probably did not help the TM rumor mill where some seemed close to
believing he was immortal and did not suffer from ordinary human
illnesses.  How many of you out there know TB's who think that
meditation will cure medical problems like cancer, diabetes, and heart
disease?   If MMY was more upfront about his illnesses, this kind of
magical thinking wouldn't be happening.
>
> To make your case, you'd need to show that MMY was
> opposed to aspects of science that have unequivocally
> been demonstrated to be beneficial.

But what is my case?  My case simply is that TM is more in opposition to
science than I originally thought.  To be clear, I mean TM as MMY, the
techniques, and everything else promoted by MMY and the TMO.  The
dislike of psychotherapy is one 

[FairfieldLife] Jellyfish supplement fights brain aging

[Terton Zeno]

Note: forwarded message attached.
   --- Begin Message ---
Pro football legend and world champion puts a face on protecting brain  cells 
and fighting the diseases of aging.
Milwaukee, WI,  June 2, 2008 – Until recently the best thing to protect a 
football player’s head  was his helmet.  But recently, with the  growing 
popularity of a new product called Prevagen™ (www.prevagen.com), there is 
an option to help protect  the brain off the field also.
 
 
Given the commonality between hard hits  on the football field and the aging 
process it is understandable that many  retired professional athletes are now 
protecting their brains past the  days when they donned helmets for glory.   
One such athlete is Santana Dotson, former Green Bay Packer that played  for 10 
years in the NFL.  Seeking to  preserve optimal brain health, Dotson started 
taking Prevagen in the fall of  2007, and recently has signed on as a 
spokesperson for the product, lending both  his name and story to help others 
see a new way to fight the aging process and  keep brain cells alive.
There are about 6 million Americans  currently afflicted with Alzheimer’s 
disease and that number continues to  increase rapidly as the population in the 
United States  continues to age.
"While playing 10 years in the National  Football League I went to great 
lengths to take care of my body and make sure I  could always give it my all 
each and every Sunday,” said Dotson.  “That type of care helped me 
win a Super Bowl  and create some lasting memories.  I am very excited to now 
be working with  Prevagen to help take care of my body and mind."
Santana Dotson played in two Super Bowls  for the Green Bay Packers including 
their World Championship season in  1996.  Off the field, he is just as  
determined to be proactive in taking care of his mind and body while 
encouraging  others to do the same.  By utilizing the  platform that his status 
allows, Santana is able to help share about the  benefits of protecting the 
brain including members of his health clubs.
 
 
“This technology holds much promise for  the baby boomers in general, not 
to mention ex-NFL players,” says Mark  Underwood, President of Quincy 
Bioscience.
 
 
Success means far more to Santana than  stellar statistics on the football 
field, it is also about bringing this same  level of energy and enthusiasm to 
helping those around him.  Already Santana has helped the lives of many  
through the Santana Dotson Foundation (www.santanadotson.org), he is now able 
to help  others through his example and encouragement in the fight against the 
cognitive  effects of aging.
 
About Prevagen
 
Prevagen™ is a novel and  patent-pending dietary supplement designed to 
fight aging. The only supplement  from a jellyfish, Prevagen has demonstrated 
the ability to keep cells alive  longer. Prevagen was developed by Quincy 
Bioscience in conjunction with the  University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee. 
Rooted in true biotechnology science  Prevagen is the first supplement to fight 
the aging process through powerful  molecules called calcium-binding proteins.
Calcium-binding proteins are found  naturally all throughout the body. They are 
responsible for keeping cells  healthy and for keeping the aging process at 
bay. They work by buffering ions  that could cause cellular damage, age and 
even cell death. Unfortunately, over  time we lose the ability to make these 
valuable, age-fighting proteins at the  same rate we did when we were young. 
This explains the cognitive differences  seen in the aging process.
In our younger years a healthy  person is able to manage calcium due to an 
ample amount of this type of protein.  Prevagen fights aging by protecting the 
cell from an unhealthy amount of  intracellular calcium. As you age you need to 
replace these depleted  proteins.  Prevagen uses a safe and  natural protein 
from jellyfish to assist with healthy aging.
Jellyfish are essentially a floating  nervous system. One thing jellyfish are 
very good at is managing calcium within  their bodies. What does a jellyfish 
have to do with human health? The answer is;  jellyfish are loaded with 
protective, age-fighting proteins that are very  similar to the proteins people 
lose as we age.
 
About Quincy Bioscience
  
 Quincy Bioscience (www.quincybioscience.com), headquartered in the  University 
Research Park  in Madison, Wisconsin, is a biopharmaceutical company  focused 
on the discovery, development and commercialization of novel medicines  to 
treat the diseases of aging. The company's products focus on alleviating the  
consequences of impaired calcium homeostasis - the imbalance of calcium ions  
commonly thought to be related to neurodegenerative diseases such as 
Alzheimer's  and Parkinson's diseases. Quincy Bioscience is set apart by its 
cutting-edge  applications of the calcium-binding protein aequorin, which is 
breaking new  ground in the fight against neuronal degeneration.
* The above stat

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[sandiego108]

Listening to Obama I get the sense of someone who is consumately 
aware of what he is facing as President, and how to handle it, 
something the current administration has proven woefully inept at, 
both in scope and execution.

I look forward to Obama handling his detractors with assurance and 
finality in the coming months. If you've noticed, he is quite an 
effectve and subtle street fighter.

As for the war we have started, it is the definitive statement on 
our impotence and incoherence as a country, to blindly kill others 
in lieu of working out our global differences another way. I think 
the best way to win this war is to withdraw, and begin serious 
negotiations with our enemies. Nothing facile and naive, but 
something with teeth. We still have access to, and control a lot of 
this planet's wealth. Surely we can use this as leverage against 
others, vs. attempting to bomb and blast them into submission.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> TurquoiseB wrote:
> > "Change is a foreign policy that doesn't 
> > begin and end with a war that should've 
> > never been authorized and never been waged," 
> > Obama said. 
> >
> What war? Is the United States in a war? If
> so, then Obama must come up with a strategy
> to win it. If not, he will be voted out of
> office and Hillary will run in the next
> election and probably win the nomination
> by a landslide.
> 
> That's assuming that Obama can win the next
> election over McCain, which he probably
> cannot, since Obama has no strategy for 
> winning the war.
> 
> "Every installment of this saga reveals 
> Obama to be a deeply opportunistic politician, 
> ready to beat a hasty retreat from yesterday's 
> statement of cherished principle in order to 
> fight another day. Each installment of the 
> saga also reveals the organs of the mainstream 
> media to be Obama's handmaidens. 
> 
> From March 18 forward they have cheered on 
> Obama's every step, even when Obama's 
> succeeding steps proved them fools.
> 
> In the aftermath of this saga, it should begin 
> to dawn on attentive observers that Barack 
> Obama represents a type that flourishes on 
> many college campuses. The technical term 
> that applies to Obama is b.s. artist. Obama 
> is an overaged example of the phenomenon, 
> but his skills in the art have brought him 
> great success and he's not giving it up now."
> 
> Read more:
> 
> 'Get me from the church on time'
> Posted by Scott Johnson: 
> Powerline, June 1, 2008
> http://tinyurl.com/57doe5
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[Richard J. Williams]

> I would like to know what is the advanced 
> technique number 6 
>
The sixth 'Advanced Technique' is sometimes 
called the 'Night Technique' - all others up 
to the sixth are just fertilizer on the 
first. There is only one single bija mantra 
given out in TM practice - the others are 
just words from Hindi. 

The Night Technique was originally taught 
by Gaudapadacharya, the guru of Shankara's 
guru. 

Here is a brief outline:

Most TMers only repeat the bija portion of 
their mantra when they are asleep. However, 
according to Bramhacharya Satyanand, in 
dreams the entire mantra may be repeated. 

When I practice Marshy's secret Night 
Technique I often fall asleep with the 
bija portion of my mantra still in conscious 
awareness. When practicing the Night 
Technique, Satyanand advised me to be 
aware of the area just above my abdomen, 
and to put the bija there and let it rest. 

Then, all you have to do is babysit your 
bija, right on your navel chakra. Just set 
it, and forget it.

By resting your bija at the navel chakra, 
the subtle currents from your Istadevata 
will permeate your entire being. For example, 
my Istadevata is Saraswati, the 'Goddess of 
Learning'. 

By resting the bija portion of her name, 
that is, 'sring', at the navel chakra, my 
intelligence will grow by leaps and bounds, 
right while I'm sleeping. Then, when I awake 
in the morning I will feel refreshed and 
full of knowledge. 

It's that simple! 

It is recommended by Marshy that one continues 
to receive advanced techniques regularly every 
18 months. 

Note: Apparently the Marshy's 'Night Technique' 
is no longer available. Anyone wanting 
instruction is this technique should be 
contacting me privately for free instruction. 

The 'Night Technique' is really a night-time 
siddhi float: 

My initiation with Satyanand took place at a 
three-day residence course with Jerry Jarvis 
at SIMS in Berkeley in 1968. The entire course 
was truly inspiring as I recall, and the 
initiation included a very deep five minute 
meditation led by Satyanand and concluded with 
one of the best Guru Dev TM pujas that I 
have ever personally attended. 

As for the technique per se, and after much 
practice, analysis, and reflection on its 
meaning, I have concluded that this 'Night 
Technique' is the *perfect* compliment to TM. 

Why so?

This one siddha yoga technique, if performed 
correctly, will provide many of the benefits 
of TM, 20x2, while one sleeps! Therefore, it 
is an intelligent way to realization. 

It should be obvious to any aspiring yogi that 
what one does during the hours of sleep are 
of the utmost importance. If one ascribes to 
the concept of karma and kala, that is, 
action and time, there is so much to do, and 
yet so little time to be doing it in. It is 
unfortunate that many people virtually waste 
over twelve hours a day in unconscious torpor, 
if not real stupor. 

However, this is one of the most subtle and 
esoteric of the siddha yoga techniques. A yoga 
so subtle, and so secret that, unless one is 
initiated by a genuine guru, and receives the 
proper instruction, mis-information can lead 
to many lonely sleepless nights, not to 
mention bad dreams devoid of any erotica 
whatsoever. 

Read more:

Subject: Good Night Sweetheart
Author: Willytex
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Date: Wed, Nov 20 2002
http://tinyurl.com/5o6sjz

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[Marcelo]

Hi Sal



Where you learnt that the technical number 6 is "ka-ching!" ?

You practices MMY's Transcndental  Meditation  ?

Good luck



  - Original Message - 
  From: do.rflex 
  To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 3:42 PM
  Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6


  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  wrote:
  >
  > On Jun 3, 2008, at 9:46 PM, marciohal wrote:
  > 
  > > Hi
  > >
  > > I am tm-sidhis practitioner and am practicing to 17 years , I would
  > > like to know what is the advanced technique number 6  somebody
  > > would know to inform ? believe that the sequence that is published in
  > > trancenet.org this wrong , somebody could inform what is the technique
  > > number 6 correct ?
  > 
  > Hi Marcelo,
  > The 6th advanced technique? I'm think it was "ka-ching!"
  > or something very similar. :)
  > 
  > Sal



   

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 4, 2008, at 1:39 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Senator Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe assures Jon Stewart that
Hillary is going to the White House.

Watch via: http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10535


John, you have outdone yourself. This is
one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
I just can't *wait* for Judy to spin this one.


I get the feeling he was kidding, but what do I know.
He was funny though.

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Yes, parents do have a heart. Stop Abortion (touching)

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 4, 2008, at 11:06 AM, mukesh bhatia wrote:


Dear moderators


Spam alert, Rick.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] 'Barack Reassures The Tribes of Israel'

[Robert]

WASHINGTON -- One day after clinching his party's presidential nomination, 
Democrat Barack Obama reached out to two groups that have concerns about his 
candidacy: Jewish Americans and supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Speaking to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Obama won applause 
with a promise to "do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a 
nuclear weapon." He also assailed his Republican opponent, John McCain, for 
"willful mischaracterization" of his call for diplomatic outreach to the 
Iranian regime and said he "has no interest in sitting down with our 
adversaries just for the sake of talking."

 But as president, Obama said, "I would be willing to lead tough and 
principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place 
and my choosing -- if and only if it can advance the interests of the United 
States."

Calling the threat posed by Iran "grave," Obama said that "as president I will 
never compromise when it comes to Israel's security." He pledged $30 billion in 
assistance to Israel over the next decade to "ensure that Israel can defend 
itself from any threat -- from Gaza to Tehran." To a standing ovation, he said, 
"I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear 
weapon -- everything."

The presumed Democratic nominee took a shot at President Bush for delaying 
peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. "I won't wait until the 
waning days of my presidency," he said. "I will take an active role and make a 
personal commitment to do all I can to advance the cause of peace from the 
start of my administration."



.votechart { 
font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;
list-style-type: none;
float: left;
clear: left;
}
.votechart * {
margin: 0; 
padding: 0; 
}
.votechart a { 
color: #007AAA; 
text-decoration: none; 
font-size: 14px;
font-weight: bold; 
}
.votechart a:hover { 
color: #333; 
}
.chartlist { 
float: left; 
border-top: 1px solid #EEE;
width: 240px; 
}
.chartlist li { 
position: relative;
display: block; 
border-bottom: 1px solid #EEE; 
_zoom: 1;
padding-bottom: 0px;
}
.chartlist li a { 
display: block; 
padding: 5px 80px 5px 8px;
position: relative; 
z-index: 2; 
margin-botton: -2px;
}
.chartlist .count { 
display: block; 
position: absolute; 
top: 0; 
right: 0; 
margin: 0 8px; 
text-align: right; 
color: #999; 
font-weight: bold; 
font-size: 16px; 
line-height: 26px; 
}
.chartlist .index { 
display: block; 
position: absolute; 
top: 0; 
left: 0; 
height: 100%; 
text-indent: -px; 
overflow: hidden; 
line-height: 26px;
}
.chartlist #clinton {background: #d9e1e5;}
.chartlist #obama {background: #e7ecef;}
.chartlist li:hover { 
background: #F3F3F3; 
}
.votechart-topper {
margin:2px 2px 2px;
}
.votechart-hede {
color:#33;
display:inline;
font-size:12px;
font-weight:bold;
padding-left: 2.5px;
padding-right: 5px;
text-transform:uppercase; 
}
.votechart-metadata {
clear:both;
font-size: 9px;
text-align:right;
color: #99;
display:inline;
}
.votechart-footer {
clear:both;
font-size:9px;
text-align:right;
padding-left:3px;
padding-right:3px;
color: #99;
display:block;
}








South Dakota primary


document.write("Clinton" + clintonSD + "(" + clintonSD + ")Obama" + obamaSD 
+"(" + obamaSD +")" + timestampSD + " | " + precinctsSD + " of precincts 
Source: AP");




Clinton55.3%(55.3%)
Obama44.7%(44.7%)
1:28 AM | 100.0% of precincts Source: AP

Montana primary


document.write("Clinton" + clintonMT + "(" + clintonMT + ")Obama" + obamaMT 
+"(" + obamaMT +")" + timestampMT + " | " + precinctsMT + " of precincts 
Source: AP");




Clinton41.2%(41.2%)
Obama56.4%(56.4%)
1:28 AM | 97.9% of precincts Source: AP
Saying that Palestinians "need a state that is contiguous and cohesive," Obama 
said any agreement "must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state, with 
secure, recognized and defensible borders" and with Jerusalem the capital of an 
undivided country.

The Illinois senator sought to dispel concerns in the Jewish community, 
circulating on the Internet, that he is a Muslim and is allied with critics of 
Israel. Obama is a Christian. "If anyone has been confused by these e-mails," 
he said, "I want you to know that today I'll be speaking from my heart, and as 
a true friend of Israel."

And he reminded the audience that African Americans and Jewish Americans had 
stood together during the civil rights era. "They took buses down South 
together," Obama said. "They marched together. They bled together. And Jewish 
Americans like Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were willing to die 
alongside a black man -- James Chaney -- on behalf of freedom of equality." 
Calling the legacy of the three slain civil rights workers "our inheritance," 
Obama said, "We must not allow the relationship between Jews and African 
Americans to suffer."

As he began his speech, Obama acknowledged Clinton for "the outstanding race 
that she has run." Calling the New York senator "a true friend of Israel" a

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Jun 4, 2008, at 1:39 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >>
> >> Senator Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe assures Jon Stewart that
> >> Hillary is going to the White House.
> >>
> >> Watch via: http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10535
> >
> > John, you have outdone yourself. This is
> > one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
> > I just can't *wait* for Judy to spin this one.
> 
> I get the feeling he was kidding, but what do I know.
> He was funny though.
> 
> Sal


McAuliffe doesn't appear to me to be connecting with reality.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 4, 2008, at 4:31 PM, do.rflex wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:


On Jun 4, 2008, at 1:39 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:


Senator Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe assures Jon Stewart  
that

Hillary is going to the White House.

Watch via: http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10535


John, you have outdone yourself. This is
one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
I just can't *wait* for Judy to spin this one.


I get the feeling he was kidding, but what do I know.
He was funny though.

Sal



McAuliffe doesn't appear to me to be connecting with reality.


flex, Hillary's whole campaign hasn't been connecting
with reality for months now, one more day won't hurt.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[Richard J. Williams]

Jim wrote:
> Listening to Obama I get the sense of 
> someone who is consumately aware of what
> he is facing as President, and how to 
> handle it...
>
Actually he sounds pretty confused to me.
He just left his church and denounced his
own pastor. Then backed down on talking
to the terrorists without preconditions.

Now he's talking about making going to war 
with Iran and making Jerusalem the 
capital of Israel with a cement wall
around it. I always thought Tel Aviv was 
the capital of Israel.
 
> As for the war we have started...
>
So, what do you think Obama will do about 
the Palestinian problem? Or Darfur? Or 
Somalia?

> it is the definitive statement on our 
> impotence and incoherence as a country, 
>
Maybe the definitive statement on our
impotence was when we retreated from Somalia
on a United Nations mission when a single
Black Hawk went down.

> to blindly kill others in lieu of working 
> out our global differences another way. 
>
Are you suggesting that the U.S. 'can work' 
something out with Osama bin Laden?

> I think the best way to win this war is 
> to withdraw, 
>
Are you suggesting that we withdraw U.S.
forces from Afghanistan and NATO? That does
not make any sense, Jim. We are NATO allies.

> and begin serious negotiations with our 
> enemies.
>
So, you think the United States has enemies.
We should never negotiate with terrorists. 
Even Obama is not advocating that.

> Nothing facile and naive, but something 
> with teeth. 
>
Like what? Give up our support for Israel?
Obama does not advocate that either.

> We still have access to, and control a lot 
> of this planet's wealth. 
>
Maybe we could buy Burma with our wealth. But 
would you be willing to pay for it? 

> Surely we can use this as leverage against 
> others, vs. attempting to bomb and blast 
> them into submission.
>
Maybe we could buy Darfur.
 
"Speaking today to the American Israel Public 
Affairs Committee, Obama won applause with a 
promise to "do everything in my power to 
prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

Read more:

'Obama seeks to reassure Jewish Americans'
By Johanna Neuman
Los Angeles Times, June 5, 2008 
http://tinyurl.com/5rsnf2

RAMALLAH, West Bank - Palestinian President 
Mahmoud Abbas rejected Barack Obama's call on 
Wednesday for Jerusalem to be the undivided 
capital of Israel and repeated his demand for 
a Palestinian capital in the city.

'Abbas slams Obama Jerusalem comment'
Reuters, June 4, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/3no2xg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Jun 4, 2008, at 4:31 PM, do.rflex wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jun 4, 2008, at 1:39 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >>
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> 
>  Senator Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe assures Jon Stewart  
>  that
>  Hillary is going to the White House.
> 
>  Watch via: http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10535
> >>>
> >>> John, you have outdone yourself. This is
> >>> one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
> >>> I just can't *wait* for Judy to spin this one.
> >>
> >> I get the feeling he was kidding, but what do I know.
> >> He was funny though.
> >>
> >> Sal
> >
> >
> > McAuliffe doesn't appear to me to be connecting with reality.
> 
> flex, Hillary's whole campaign hasn't been connecting
> with reality for months now, one more day won't hurt.
> 
> Sal


It seems that many in the Hillary camp are not willing to accept her
defeat [including herself] - even though it's clearly obvious. It's
like they're in an alternate world.

Also, the statements that Hillary wants to 'negotiate' for VP are
totally inappropriate in my view. Obama won the nomination. He holds
all the cards and the earned right to make a choice for VP. To suggest
otherwise as if HC has some kind of entitlement to the position, or
that Obama 'need's' her as a running-mate to win, is insulting. It's
*totally* Obama's call. From all I've seen I personally don't think
he'll want Hillary on the ticket.

Hill and Bill have really turned me off this time around.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 4, 2008, at 5:16 PM, do.rflex wrote:


It seems that many in the Hillary camp are not willing to accept her
defeat [including herself] - even though it's clearly obvious. It's
like they're in an alternate world.

Also, the statements that Hillary wants to 'negotiate' for VP are
totally inappropriate in my view.



Obama won the nomination. He holds
all the cards and the earned right to make a choice for VP. To suggest
otherwise as if HC has some kind of entitlement to the position, or
that Obama 'need's' her as a running-mate to win, is insulting. It's
*totally* Obama's call. From all I've seen I personally don't think
he'll want Hillary on the ticket.


Agreed with all of the above. It's like she has a bag of
tricks with no end, and her campaign will just go on and on.



Hill and Bill have really turned me off this time around.


Which is really too bad, since Bill's legacy was always pretty good,
but in light of the past 7 years looked positively sterling--until this.
8 years of peace and prosperity before all the nonstop disasters that
followed (and also in light of all the harassment he took) is something.

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Post Count

[Bhairitu]

Except for Judy (maxed out) and Barry, everyone else still has a lot of 
headroom.

Yahoo Groups Post Counter
=
Start Date (UTC): Sat May 31 00:00:00 2008
End Date (UTC): Sat Jun  7 00:00:00 2008
-- Searching...

448 messages as of (UTC) Wed Jun  4 22:38:37 2008
Member   Posts

"authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  50
TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>42
"Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   28
"sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>28
off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  25
Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   23
"shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 21
"curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  20
Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>18
"Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>18
bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  14
Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 11
cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  10
Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10
Louis McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>9
ruthsimplicity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>9
"yifuxero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  9
"dhamiltony2k5" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>8
"mrfishey2001" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  8
"do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  7
sgrayatlarge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  6
gullible fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 5
"boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>5
"Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 4
"Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>4
Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>4
"tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  4
"feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>4
"amarnath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   3
"artkonrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>3
"new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 3
"BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  3
"marciohal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>3
nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com2
"Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>2
"sriswamijisadhaka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>2
yermama472 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>2
"Brian Horsfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  1
"R.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
Dick Mays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   1
"wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
"seekliberation" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  1
okpeachman2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
"lurkernomore20002000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  1
"Richard M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1
"george_deforest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
"John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
"Zoran Krneta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  1
"Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   1
"Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
"pranamoocher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   1
michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
mukesh bhatia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   1
Marcelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>1
Terton Zeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   1
posters: 57

[FairfieldLife] Breaking: Hillary Clinton To Suspend Campaign on Friday

[do.rflex]

MSNBC is reporting that Senator Hillary Clinton will be suspending her
campaign and plans to endorse the presumptive Democratic Presidential
nominee, Senator Barack Obama, on Friday. More from the New York Times:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is moving to suspend her campaign
and endorse Senator Barack Obama on Friday after Democratic members of
Congress urged her Wednesday to leave the race and allow the party to
coalesce around Mr. Obama, according to a senior adviser to Mrs. Clinton.

Mrs. Clinton is likely to make the announcement in New York City,
an aide said, though no final venue has been chosen.

Her decision came after a day of telephone conversations with
supporters on Capitol Hill about what she should do now that Mr. Obama
had claimed enough delegates to be able to clinch the nomination. Mrs.
Clinton had initially said she wanted to wait before making any
decision, but her aides said that in conversations, some of her
closest supporters said it was urgent that she step aside. 

Read on… NYT: http://tinyurl.com/6ycq9e

MSNBC Video report here: http://tinyurl.com/3kc3q4

[FairfieldLife] Re: Daily Show - Bizarre Interview with Clinton Spokesperson Terry McAuliffe

[Richard J. Williams]

> > Hillary is going to the White House.
> > 
TurquoiseB wrote:
> I just can't *wait* for Judy to spin this one.
>
This is an Obamination!

Coming to a church near you. 

Kill whitey!

"Whitey cut folks off Medicaid?
Whitey let New Orleans drown?
Whitey do nothing about Jena?
Whitey put us in Iraq for no reason?"

'Michelle Obama Tape'
by Jim Geraghty
NRO, Monday, June 02, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/6odrcz

A video recording of Michelle Obama saying 
"whitey." The cast of characters rumored 
to join her in this video include Jeremiah 
Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Malcolm X and 
W.E. B. Du Bois. 

"The videotape purports to show Michelle 
Obama sitting on a panel with Louis Farrakhan 
at the then Jeremiah Wright-helmed Trinity 
United Church of Christ making racist 
remarks about white Americans, liberally 
employing the derogatory term `whitey' 
while doing so."

Read more: 

'The Michelle Obama "Whitey" Tape'
No Bull Zone June 3, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/6hsfek

"In February a tape surfaced of Mrs Obama 
telling supporters that her husband's 
presidential success means that 'for the 
first time in my adult life I am proud of 
my country'."

'Michelle, the asset to Barack Obama that 
may become a liability'
By Tim Shipman
Telegraph, May 6, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/4lbfrm 

I'm gonna get me a shotgun and kill all 
the whities I see,
I'm gonna get me a shotgun and kill all 
the whities I see.
When I kill all the whities I see, then 
whitey he won't bother me,
I'm gonna get me a shotgun and kill all 
the whities I see.
Then I'll get a white woman who's wearing 
a navy blue sweater

Read more:

'`Whitey' Tape Will Finally Ruin Obama'
Wonkette, June 3, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/4q47de 
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Barack Reassures The Tribes of Israel'

[Richard J. Williams]

Robert wrote:
> 'Barack Reassures The Tribes of Israel'
>
RAMALLAH, West Bank - Palestinian President 
Mahmoud Abbas rejected Barack Obama's call 
on Wednesday for Jerusalem to be the 
undivided capital of Israel and repeated 
his demand for a Palestinian capital in 
the city.

Read more:

'Abbas slams Obama Jerusalem comment'
Reuters, June 4, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/3no2xg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Breaking: Hillary Clinton To Suspend Campaign on Friday

[Richard J. Williams]

John wrote:
> Breaking: Hillary Clinton To Suspend 
> Campaign on Friday
> 
"But if you can't separate the two, then 
there's only one way to prove you're not 
a sexist: You have to support Hillary. Yet 
her opponent is an African American. Does 
that mean you have to choose between racism 
and sexism?"

Read more:

'Sexism, Racism, and Reality: Healing From 
A Hard Campaign'
Posted by R.J. Eskow
Huffington Post, May 19, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/3qusqn

[FairfieldLife] newspaper articles on Yogananda

[yifuxero]

from a Radhaswami website:

Newspaper Articles on Yogananda

--

Los Angeles Times, Wednesday, October 25, 1939:

SWAMI SOUGHT IN DAMAGE SUIT

Determined that he shall not become a vanishing Hindu, process 
servers were conducting a far-flung search yesterday for Swami 
Yogananda, Indian cultist accused in a sensational $500,000 damage 
suit, of amazing goings on with feminine followers.

Aiding in the search was the plaintiff, Nirad Ranjan Chowdbury, also 
known as Sir Nerode, former associate of Yogananda, who maintains a 
palatial abode on Mount Washington and also boasts a high class 
hideaway at Encinitas.

Chowdbury's charges took on a spice not generally associated with the 
spiritual repose of Yogism as the swami was sought by minions of the 
plaintiffs attorneys, Harold E. Krowech and Theodorn E. Bowen. 

PREACHES HE IS GOD

After pointing out that Yogananda teaches that he is God, or 
Paramahansa, Chowdbury, Calcutta-born, Harvard educated student of 
East Indian religious philosophy, alleged that the swami has been for 
the past year trying to break up the marriage between the plaintiff 
and his wife, and that Yogananda prevented the plaintiff's wife from 
having proper care during the pregnancy of her child.

Moreover, Chowdbury alleges that the swami teaches that: The members 
of the congregation must not get married because their first love 
must be to God through Swami Yogananda and that if they should be 
married that their first loyalties are to Swami Yogananda and not to 
their spouse.

IRREGULAR PRACTICES 
Picturing highly irregular practices in the cult quarters on Mount 
Washington, the plaintiff declared that the swami has young girls in 
the immediate vicinity of his room going in and out all hours of the 
night.

The younger girls are kept segregated from older women, Chowdbury 
charges, adding: 

Young girls have free access to the rooms of said Swami Yognanda and 
that said Swami Yogananda forbids said young girls who attend him 
from going out with other men and forbids them to go out at all 
except with him.

At his Encinitas palace, Chowdbury charges, Yogananda maintains caves 
and rooms for meditation that are not in keeping with the standard of 
religious meditation...and that the places of mediation are too 
secretive and ornate of construction to be used for the purpose of 
spiritual mediation, all of which is contrary to spiritual practices, 
contrary to Hindu philosophy and contrary to the purposes and 
objectives of the partnership.

ROMANTIC TO MERCENARY 
Changing from the romantic to the mercenary tack, Chowdbury declared 
that the swami has used contributions from his cultists to foster his 
ambitious and private ends. The plaintiff accused the swami of using 
the teachings of Yogoda and Hindu Philosophy for the sole purpose of 
creating a personalized interpretation of defendant Swami Yogananda 
as a divinity...so as to force upon the members of the congregation 
and others the interpretations that God talks only through Swami 
Yogananda.

Chowdbury said yesterday that while a graduate student at Harvard he 
met Yogananda, who then was lecturing in the East, became interested 
in the swami's teachings, and was made a partner with the swami in 
the cult only to be frozen out last January, after the long-haired 
cult leader had transferred his interests from the East to Los 
Angeles, where he is said to have attracted as followers scores of 
Los Angeles women and girls.

PURELY COMMERCIAL 
After the freeze out, Chowdbury said he became convinced that Swami 
Yogananda was engaged at all times in a purely commercial venture for 
the purpose of his own personal gain, and that his activities had no 
connection with the true Hindu Self-realization philosophy.

At the cult headquarters, a crisp young woman attache reported that 
the swami is due back today. He lectured in San Diego Monday night, 
she said.



entheogenesis Lieutenant Commander Posts: 7 (2/9/04 10:14 pm) Reply 
Re: Newspaper Articles on Yogananda --
-- 
[Newspaper clipping from another Los Angeles newspaper.]

Wednesday, October 25th, 1939

Headline: SWAMI CALLS ACCUSER 'CHISELER'

Even the benign and almost imperturbable calm of a swami has its 
limits. Last night as Swami Yogananda returned here to find himself 
facing a $500,000 damage suit filed by Rihad Ranjan Chowdhury [Sri 
Nerode], who claims a partnership in this Mount Washington cult of 
Self Realization headed by the swami, that limit was reached.

The dirty chiseler, the swami exploded. The Hindu mystic who returned 
here from a lecture engagement in San Diego where he had expounded 
the benefits of self denial and self control, regained some of his 
composure and went on.

The charges made against me are scurrilous and without foundation, 
the result of an underhand attempt to discredit me in the eyes of my 
followers, h

[FairfieldLife] Local paper article on my show

[curtisdeltablues]

http://tinyurl.com/4mze55

My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
over Virginia tomorrow!

Very nice writer.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's first test: Handling Hillary

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jim wrote:
> > Listening to Obama I get the sense of 
> > someone who is consumately aware of what
> > he is facing as President, and how to 
> > handle it...
> >
> Actually he sounds pretty confused to me.
> He just left his church and denounced his
> own pastor. Then backed down on talking
> to the terrorists without preconditions.

Political expediency-- Let's remember that this is a Presidential 
contest, the ultimate job interview if you will, and creating a good 
first impression is key to landing the job. His message must be both 
unique, positive and appeal to the largest number of voters, while 
at the same time he must maintain his personal identity.
 
> Now he's talking about making going to war 
> with Iran and making Jerusalem the 
> capital of Israel with a cement wall
> around it. I always thought Tel Aviv was 
> the capital of Israel.

Not in his major speeches he hasn't. You may be misintepreting him.
>  
> > As for the war we have started...
> >
> So, what do you think Obama will do about 
> the Palestinian problem? Or Darfur? Or 
> Somalia?

The right thing. The silence that he carries with him allows him 
unlimited creativity. I think predicting how he acts on this or that 
creates limitations to his options.
 
> > it is the definitive statement on our 
> > impotence and incoherence as a country, 
> >
> Maybe the definitive statement on our
> impotence was when we retreated from Somalia
> on a United Nations mission when a single
> Black Hawk went down.

Yes, and our incoherence with regard to foreign policy-- we had no 
clear mission going in to Somalia, so we couldn't sustain it once we 
ran into trouble. Incoherence can't escalate itself; not enough 
precision and focus.
 
> > to blindly kill others in lieu of working 
> > out our global differences another way. 
> >
> Are you suggesting that the U.S. 'can work' 
> something out with Osama bin Laden?

Not at all, though Bin Laden is dependent on nation states for his 
supplies and influence, and we can apply pressure on them. 
 
> > I think the best way to win this war is 
> > to withdraw, 
> >
> Are you suggesting that we withdraw U.S.
> forces from Afghanistan and NATO? That does
> not make any sense, Jim. We are NATO allies.

Yes, I am suggesting we withdraw. believe me, with all the lawyers 
working for the government, we can justify it, NATO alliance or not.
 
> > and begin serious negotiations with our 
> > enemies.
> >
> So, you think the United States has enemies.
> We should never negotiate with terrorists. 
> Even Obama is not advocating that.

There is no point negotiating with terrorists; they are symptomatic 
of larger geopolitical problems that need attention first, before 
they will lose their influence.
 
> > Nothing facile and naive, but something 
> > with teeth. 
> >
> Like what? Give up our support for Israel?
> Obama does not advocate that either.

Again, I don't know, however if the collective consciousness of this 
country is shown that firm dealing, diplomatically and economically, 
with our enemies can be successful, the current non-option of always 
attacking with weapons will lose its appeal. We have a defense 
budget twice that of the rest of the world. we need other options to 
avoid causing serious harm to the planet and everyone on it.
 
> > We still have access to, and control a lot 
> > of this planet's wealth. 
> >
> Maybe we could buy Burma with our wealth. But 
> would you be willing to pay for it? 

What would the US want Burma for?
 
> > Surely we can use this as leverage against 
> > others, vs. attempting to bomb and blast 
> > them into submission.
> >
> Maybe we could buy Darfur.

See my Burma answer. Both Burma and Darfur are minor players 
geopolitically. An economic aid plan conditionally tied to some key 
concessions may work. Or we find out who is pulling the strings for  
those countries and begin dealing with them.
  
> "Speaking today to the American Israel Public 
> Affairs Committee, Obama won applause with a 
> promise to "do everything in my power to 
> prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

Iran is doing nothing more than engaging in an arms race to keep the 
world's strongest military power from invading or attacking them. 
Pulling out from Iraq is the best way we can turn down the heat and 
prevent Iran from accelerating their nuclear program.
 
> Read more:
> 
> 'Obama seeks to reassure Jewish Americans'
> By Johanna Neuman
> Los Angeles Times, June 5, 2008 
> http://tinyurl.com/5rsnf2
> 
> RAMALLAH, West Bank - Palestinian President 
> Mahmoud Abbas rejected Barack Obama's call on 
> Wednesday for Jerusalem to be the undivided 
> capital of Israel and repeated his demand for 
> a Palestinian capital in the city.
> 
> 'Abbas slams Obama Jerusalem comment'
> Reuters, June 4, 2008
> http://tinyurl.com/3no2xg
>

[FairfieldLife] Maharishi Mehi Paramahansa on the Sounds of creation

[yifuxero]

Subsequently, the sounds of the centers of the upper Realms are 
subtler than the sounds of the lower realms. Therefore, the sound 
originated from the center of the above realm and is sequentially 
grasped from the realm immediately under it. For example, the sound 
of the Subtle Realm can be grasped from the center or core of the 
Gross Realm; the sound of the Causal Realm can be grasped from the 
center or core of the Subtle Realm. The sequence progresses until the 
Divine Sound which originated from the center of the Realm of Pure 
Consciousness or the Supreme Sovereign will be grasped from the 
center of the Supra-Causal Realm. The consciousness drawn by the 
sound will meet with the Supreme Sovereign and after becoming one 
will lose its existence. This is the culmination of the spiritual 
journey, the journey of seeking direct knowledge of the Supreme 
Sovereign. 

The Original Divine Sound, which originated from the Supreme 
Sovereign, continuously without break reverberates throughout the 
hearts of the entire macrocosm and microcosm. The Sound will 
inherently go on for the duration of creation because the evolution 
of creation depends upon the existence of sound. Should the Sound 
cease so would creation. The ancient sages call this Original Supra-
Cosmic Sound Om. The literature of Indian saints speaks of the 
Original Sound as the Nirguna Ram Nam (Unqualified All Pervading 
Sound), Satya-nam (the Eternal Sound), Adi-nam (Eternal Word, the 
Name or Sound of the beginning) and Sar Shabd (the Quintessential 
Sound). It is therefore useless to search the streams of the 
spiritual sounds outside oneself. This task of holding sounds will be 
accomplished through following the internal spiritual path under the 
guidance of a spiritual master. 

Through the practice of meditation one can progressively move the 
consciousness inward within oneself. In the beginning the practice of 
subtle meditation is difficult to accomplish owing to its 
unfamiliarity. Through the initial practice of Manas jap (repetition 
of mantra [simran]), the mind begins to focus. Then one progresses to 
the subtler practice of Manas dhyan (dhyan, the form of deity) and 
prepares for the subtle meditation. Subsequently, through Drshti Yoga 
[Yoga of Inner Light] one practices one-pointedness. Finally, through 
the practice of Surat-Shabd-Yoga (the Yoga of Sound) the transcending 
of all the Realms is achieved. 

-- Maharishi Mehi Paramahansa Ji, The Philosophy of Liberation 
(Moksha-Darsan)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[sandiego108]

You da man!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4mze55
> 
> My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
> over Virginia tomorrow!
> 
> Very nice writer.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> You da man!

Thanks Jim!


> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/4mze55
> > 
> > My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
> > over Virginia tomorrow!
> > 
> > Very nice writer.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Breaking: Hillary Clinton To Suspend Campaign on Friday

[sandiego108]

Awesome-- big bonus points for Hillary.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> MSNBC is reporting that Senator Hillary Clinton will be suspending 
her
> campaign and plans to endorse the presumptive Democratic 
Presidential
> nominee, Senator Barack Obama, on Friday. More from the New York 
Times:
> 
> Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is moving to suspend her 
campaign
> and endorse Senator Barack Obama on Friday after Democratic 
members of
> Congress urged her Wednesday to leave the race and allow the party 
to
> coalesce around Mr. Obama, according to a senior adviser to Mrs. 
Clinton.
> 
> Mrs. Clinton is likely to make the announcement in New York 
City,
> an aide said, though no final venue has been chosen.
> 
> Her decision came after a day of telephone conversations with
> supporters on Capitol Hill about what she should do now that Mr. 
Obama
> had claimed enough delegates to be able to clinch the nomination. 
Mrs.
> Clinton had initially said she wanted to wait before making any
> decision, but her aides said that in conversations, some of her
> closest supporters said it was urgent that she step aside. 
> 
> Read on… NYT: http://tinyurl.com/6ycq9e
> 
> MSNBC Video report here: http://tinyurl.com/3kc3q4
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" 
> wrote:
> >
> > You da man!
> 
> Thanks Jim!
> 
Lightnin' Hopkins, Yo! Party on!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[Marek Reavis]

Excellent, Curtis.  When does the new CD come out?

**

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4mze55
> 
> My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
> over Virginia tomorrow!
> 
> Very nice writer.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Excellent, Curtis.  When does the new CD come out?

Thanks Marek.  You can hear it here, it is out!

http://cdbaby.com/cd/curtisblues2




> 
> **
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/4mze55
> > 
> > My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
> > over Virginia tomorrow!
> > 
> > Very nice writer.
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[gullible fool]

 
Marcelo, Sal did not receive ka-ching! as a mantra. That word is a slang 
expression for the sound a cash register makes and is meant as a slur against 
the TM organization for having it's main reason for existence to bleed its 
followers out of as much of their money and their parents' money as possible. 
 
Sal, if you have changed your mantra to  ka-ching! and the money is 
rolling in, please let us know!
 
--- On Wed, 6/4/08, Marcelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: Marcelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, June 4, 2008, 12:02 PM




Hi Sal
 
Where you learnt that the technical number 6 is "ka-ching!" ?
You practices MMY's Transcndental  Meditation  ?
Good luck
 
 

- Original Message - 
From: do.rflex 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 3:42 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6



--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Sal Sunshine 
wrote:
>
> On Jun 3, 2008, at 9:46 PM, marciohal wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> >
> > I am tm-sidhis practitioner and am practicing to 17 years , I would
> > like to know what is the advanced technique number 6  somebody
> > would know to inform ? believe that the sequence that is published in
> > trancenet.org this wrong , somebody could inform what is the technique
> > number 6 correct ?
> 
> Hi Marcelo,
> The 6th advanced technique? I'm think it was "ka-ching!"
> or something very similar. :)
> 
> Sal

 


  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Breaking: Hillary Clinton To Suspend Campaign on Friday

[Marek Reavis]

To lose, and to lose so closely after having poured all her 
attention and all her energy into this campaign that came as the 
culmination of an entire life's ambition and well-intentioned work 
must be an extraordinary blow to absorb.  And I feel that Senator 
Clinton truly understood that she embodied and carried the hopes and 
ambitions in this campaign for millions of people who felt *she* was 
the one to be president; to relinquish that collective ambition must 
be unimaginably difficult; it's certainly not anything I can imagine.

There was a comment following a blog on the HuffingtonPost that I 
particularly appreciated and I've copied it below.  The blog 
preceding it was more than a little derisive of Clinton and chided 
her for making Obama's presumptive victory still "all about her".  
The comment was posted by an ardent Clinton supporter and I was 
impressed with the graciousness and magnanimity and insight it 
provided.  

**

"As I've said earlier, in her pre-concession speech last night 
Hillary was preparing her supporters for the transition from 
activism on her campaign's behalf to refocusing on the ultimate 
goal - taking back the White House. In the fervor surrounding this 
very long campaign, most of us lost sight of what values truly make 
ours the big tent party. It's not atypical to any campaign season, 
but both the length and strength of conviction of supporters for 
both candidates personalized politics in a way which has long been 
absent from our party.

I, for one, am greatly encouraged by this historic opportunity to 
redress the many issues which seemed to stagnate in the 1970's.

More importantly, as a Hillary supporter, I've already made my 
concession. I would ask that those decrying Hillary's speech last 
night as another betrayal to please try and look at it from our 
perspective. Millions of us poured our entire beings into her 
campaign, not out of some ill-will towards fellow progressives, but 
because we truly believed in her candidacy. In delaying concession 
until the weekend, Hillary has given her supporters time to absorb 
their disappointment and regain perspective. You might not 
understand how deeply we were committed to seeing Hillary in the 
White House, but these passions cannot be converted to support for 
Obama overnight. With a little time, our side will come around to 
see that Obama is not only our candidate, he's also our future, and 
what a good thing that is!"

**

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> MSNBC is reporting that Senator Hillary Clinton will be suspending 
her
> campaign and plans to endorse the presumptive Democratic 
Presidential
> nominee, Senator Barack Obama, on Friday. More from the New York 
Times:
> 
> Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is moving to suspend her 
campaign
> and endorse Senator Barack Obama on Friday after Democratic 
members of
> Congress urged her Wednesday to leave the race and allow the party 
to
> coalesce around Mr. Obama, according to a senior adviser to Mrs. 
Clinton.
> 
> Mrs. Clinton is likely to make the announcement in New York 
City,
> an aide said, though no final venue has been chosen.
> 
> Her decision came after a day of telephone conversations with
> supporters on Capitol Hill about what she should do now that Mr. 
Obama
> had claimed enough delegates to be able to clinch the nomination. 
Mrs.
> Clinton had initially said she wanted to wait before making any
> decision, but her aides said that in conversations, some of her
> closest supporters said it was urgent that she step aside. 
> 
> Read on… NYT: http://tinyurl.com/6ycq9e
> 
> MSNBC Video report here: http://tinyurl.com/3kc3q4
>

[FairfieldLife] Shri Shahi Swamiji Maharaj on the Domain of Light and Sound

[yifuxero]

"When our sight becomes fixed, the World or Domain of Light opens up, 
spotless Sun is seen. And, thus, "rain andheree mit gayee, baajai 
anahad toor" (The dark night has come to an end, and countless 
varieties of enchanting sounds are heard reverberating.), as 
described by Sant Kabir, is realized in practice. The art to this 
practice is secret (has to be learnt from an adept master or Guru). 
However, obstinacy won't help here (It is to be noted here that 
obstinacy is distinct from tenacity of purpose – Translator). For 
this, one has to begin with `Maanas Jap' (also, Manas Jap) – 
reciting, with full concentration, the holy mantra given by the Guru –
 and then has to internally visualize the gross form of the Guru 
(known as `Maanas Dhyaan' or Manas Dhyan). Maanas Jap puts a brake on 
the restlessness, flirtatiousness or naughtiness of the mind, whereas 
Maanas Dhyaan orients the mind in one particular direction, and, 
thus, one becomes introverted. `Drishti Saadhan'  or Drishti Sadhan 
(The Yoga of Light, which has to be practiced after Maanas Dhyaan) 
helps accomplishing the single – mindedness and one can testify to 
the veracity of the sants' claim "Vindu me tanh naad bolai" (Naad or 
Sound reverberates in the Light or Vindu). `Naad Dhyaan' enables to 
realize the Supreme Sovereign Soul. This is what Sants and Great 
Souls teach.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[Marek Reavis]

Listened to the first 3 tracks and put my order in; can't wait to 
listen to the whole thing.  If anything, it's as good (maybe 
better?) than your first CD.  It must be wonderful to feel that 
music come through you like that.

**  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Excellent, Curtis.  When does the new CD come out?
> 
> Thanks Marek.  You can hear it here, it is out!
> 
> http://cdbaby.com/cd/curtisblues2
> 
> 
> 
>
> > 
> > **
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/4mze55
> > > 
> > > My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax 
Times all
> > > over Virginia tomorrow!
> > > 
> > > Very nice writer.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: ADVANCED TECNIQUES NUNBER 6

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 4, 2008, at 10:34 PM, gullible fool wrote:

Marcelo, Sal did not receive ka-ching! as a mantra. That word is a  
slang expression for the sound a cash register makes and is meant  
as a slur against the TM organization for having it's main reason  
for existence to bleed its followers out of as much of their money  
and their parents' money as possible.




Sal, if you have changed your mantra to  ka-ching! and the money is  
rolling in, please let us know!



LOL...well, I wasn't going to say anything, gull.  You know, purity
of the knowledge and all that...:)

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Shanti Shanti - the Sanskrit Rock Group - Incredible - Wonderful TM family

[artkonrad]

Thank you SanDiego108: 

Thank you Patricia,

I neglected to mention you can see several great videos of Shanti 
Shanti at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUF81hGPPLA

Also, at their website:  www.ShantiShanti.com you can sign up for 
their email notices of performances in your area.  I can tell you 
they go to San Diego area a lot.  In Fact, July 11, 12 and 13 they 
are going to be in Encinitas and Pacific Palisades.  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "artkonrad"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Fairfield Life:  I was surprised to see that no one here has 
> ever 
> > posted anything about the TM group Shanti Shanti, the world's 
only 
> > Sanskrit Rock band. 
> 
> 
> Art, thanks for the tip off-- some of their stuff sounds great-- I 
> will end up buying at least east meets south. Great find!
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Local paper article on my show

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of curtisdeltablues
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:03 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Local paper article on my show

 

http://tinyurl.com/4mze55

My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
over Virginia tomorrow!

Very nice writer.

Way to go Curtis. So when are you coming to Fairfield to perform? I thought
we were going to have a FFL get-together sometime soon. You have to come
over the 1st Friday of some warm month, when a couple thousand folks will
come out and mill around the square, having fun and watching performing
artists. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Local paper article on my show

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4mze55
> 
> My face will be getting thrown in driveways in the Fairfax Times all
> over Virginia tomorrow!
> 
> Very nice writer.

Way to go, dude. I can hardly wait to hear
the new album.

[FairfieldLife] 'Hillary to Endorese Obama for Pres.'

[Robert]

Clinton to End Bid and Endorse Obama







New York Times - 
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JEFF ZELENY Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will endorse 
Senator Barack Obama on Saturday, bringing to a close her 17-month campaign for 
the White House, aides said.
 

 



  

[FairfieldLife] 'Hillary Gets Gracious says: Obama for Pres.'

[Robert]

Clinton to End Bid and Endorse Obama







New York Times - 
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JEFF ZELENY Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will endorse 
Senator Barack Obama on Saturday, bringing to a close her 17-month campaign for 
the White House, aides said.