[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those beliefs are based on the person who thinks that appearing to be at the center of the universe, too. :-) Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart of the position of the planets. For other people, it's tarot cards. For still others, reading tea leaves. None of the trickster mechanisms do anything or mean anything; they're all equally bogus. *But*, if they allow someone to get past their own disbelief and trick them- selves into utilizing previously-unused abilities, they work like gangbusters. Basically, I see astrology and all other "predic- tive technologies" as the Dumbo's feathers of the universe. Remember Dumbo, from the Disney cartoon? When he held the feather in his trunk, he could fly. The feather didn't do diddleysquat; Dumbo's belief that it did was all that mattered. IMO, that's the only reason that astrology appears to "work." For that matter, that might be the same reason why *any* technique of Self realization appears to "work." Self has always been present; all that the techniques do is trick the seeker into real- izing what has always been present.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Malaria
You're wasting your breath, Bob, telling people on this forum about the plight of poor people dying from malaria. One of the people responsible for 10s of millions of those deaths -- Rachel Carson -- is a hero to many on this forum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0707/feature1/ > > "We live on a malarious planet. It may not seem that way from the > vantage point of a wealthy country, where malaria is sometimes > thought of, if it is thought of at all, as a problem that has mostly > been solved, like smallpox or polio. In truth, malaria now affects > more people than ever before. It's endemic to 106 nations, > threatening half the world's population. In recent years, the > parasite has grown so entrenched and has developed resistance to so > many drugs that the most potent strains can scarcely be controlled. > This year malaria will strike up to a half billion people. At least a > million will die, most of them under age five, the vast majority > living in Africa. That's more than twice the annual toll a generation > ago. > > The outcry over this epidemic, until recently, has been muted. > Malaria is a plague of the poor, easy to overlook. The most > unfortunate fact about malaria, some researchers believe, is that > prosperous nations got rid of it. In the meantime, several distinctly > unprosperous regions have reached the brink of total malarial > collapse, virtually ruled by swarms of buzzing, flying syringes > > To witness the full force of malaria's stranglehold on Zambia, it's > essential to leave the capital city, Lusaka. Drive north, across the > verdant plains, past the banana plantations and the copper mines > copper is Zambia's primary exportand into the forested region tucked > between the borders of Angola and the Democratic Republic of the > Congo. This is the North-Western Province. It is almost entirely > rural; many villages can be reached only by thin footpaths worn into > the beet-red soil. A nationwide health survey in 2005 concluded that > for every thousand children under age five living in the North- > Western Province, there were 1,353 cases of malaria. An annual rate > of more than 100 percent seems impossible, a typo. It is not. What it > means is that many children are infected with malaria more than once > a year. >
[FairfieldLife] Gypsii?
Benefon/GeoSentric upcoming(??) website: http://www.gypsii.com/
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote: > > > > > I have read about Swami G long before this exchange here. Someone at > > > ATM, > > *Tanmay: what is ATM? Swami G also has the first name Ganga- occasionally people mix > it up but I think the responses would have been similar anyway > > John Manning, brought her up once and actually mixed her up with > > > Gangaji. He the posted some exchange he had and the general response > > > was very positive. I also had a positive impression, she seemed to be > > > somewhat conservative, traditional, but not really unusual in what she > > > said. I still find the same now. The same person, John, who endorsed > > > her at the time at ATM, is here on this board and had a totally > > > opposite reaction now. > > Tanmay: That happens both with sadakas and those that never took initiation- It is not a > surprise. Maybe the closer one is to the goal, there can be more grounding reducing the > 100% faith based relationship because one is resting in a significant glimpse. > > However, it also appears one can have a very significant glimpse and even rest in samaghi, > Nivakalpa samadhi, then the mind reroots. These people can possibly create havoc with > procaliming their enlightenement and leading others. > > They may not hear a word when it is recomended that they should be with their Guru until > the Guru has pronounced them enlightened and then assigned them to be a Guru, should > that be a part of their dharma- this stuff I just told you is a general thing coming from > Swami G, I also have seen a lot of what I just spoke of this past year > > > > > This is the post, 4 years ago: > > http://groups.google.de/group/alt.meditation.transcendental/msg/ac6976 2b9c80733c > > Also read the thread, as a nmber of people, like Judy, commented in a > > more or less positive way. Compare post# 141576 (Judy) and # 141475 > > (John, I think) > > > Tanmay: Regarding the Om Mantra, I leave that for anyone interested to ask swami G > about it or I can forward questions as there is a lot to it. But I can tell a short experience > where I told TM er about it and he was like oh , you will see- you know like I am > supposed to loose my money. Profits in business like doubled, but funny enough, this guy > was off the beat and track even by most in TM, even though he lives in the vlodrop area. > They took over a million from one guy, then without his permission, spent hunreds of > thossands on Yagyas for their business, each leased expensive cars. The company and this > guy are broke, one of them left the country, the other probably will have to also. > > Aside from that, I think the explaination is flow ( refered to as life in acordance with > natural law in TM) has all to do with the mind not getting in the way. Whatever it is that > brings this about, this is what has life actually in flow- mind out of the way. > > I had this unquestionable flow while in TM, so looking at it in reverse, the only way this > can be the case is if the mind is not obstructing. My experience is thoughts are still here, > yet I hear about a totally stilled mind. My experience is also that even with thoughts- ( was > the case in TM) , there was flow. Now here, again, thoughts are still there, but there is still > flow. There is more flow now than there was before, but I am told that with a totally stilled > mind, it is even more. I can't understand this from hearing about it as it has to be > experienced, but I can understand the flow now, and see what is taking place and compare > this flow from what was while doing TM. > > In both cases though, even though the thoughts were there, it was to varios degrees not > impeding the flow. > > Now , about the promotion again- This group here has disciples from many gurus, I > would guess if someone comes here to talk about their Guru, whoever it is , there may be > a few or more interested. If someone came here and they had comments that Mother > Meera said for example, I would be interested. I am not reading most of the posts here > but do look over some of the topics since I just came back here. So, it is not a problem, > people not interested in this thread can skip over it, so there shouldn't be too much - um, > whatever about all this. > > Now about the Maharishi bashing- I am coming from a different perspective than Swami G > and maybe it looks like it got mixed up just as you said Swami G is coming to Klauses. My > perspective is coming from being in TM since 1978, taking all the advanced courses and > TTC like many. My experiences were good, the past is something which reddies one for > what is going on now in their life. The proper spiritual behavior is to honor all that has > benifitted one in their journey.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Today is Curtis' Birthday
Happy Birthday, Curtis!! gf --- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > His pals, such as Barry and Judy, are allowed to > exceed their posting limit > to wish him a happy one! > > > > > > > > Rick Archer > President > > SearchSummit > HYPERLINK > "http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=1108+S.+B+St.&csz=Fairfield% > 2C+IA+52556-3805&country=us" \n1108 S. B St. > Fairfield, IA 52556-3805 > > > HYPERLINK "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > tel: > fax: > Skype ID: > > HYPERLINK > "http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?src=jj_signature&To=641-472-9336&Email=r > [EMAIL PROTECTED]" \n641-472-9336 > 914-470-9336 > Rick_Archer > > > > > HYPERLINK > "https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=25769982909&v0=356483&k0=1251699766&v1=35648 > 4&k1=804482755&src=client_sig_212_1_card_join&invite=1" > \nAlways have my > latest info > > HYPERLINK > "http://www.plaxo.com/signature?src=client_sig_212_1_card_sig"; > \nWant a signature like this? > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.12/878 - > Release Date: 6/28/2007 > 5:57 PM > > > Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
Still thing you should have listened to Mother Meeras advice and gotten a normal job. I have always worked this life but very extended time of for years at a time has been part of it. In TM, there are probably plenty of others that have done the same- we all do what we got to do. I am just reponding in this case but I am not sure that either the comment or response is that interesting- we can shoot the shit about all sorts of stuff I suppose. I have read all your comments in the threads I started but have not been on FFL for like the last 3 years, plus I may not pay close attention to some of the screen names sometimes. Yes, I am aware the one behind Nabulous is not in favor of what I have written. No one will appeal to everyone so that's life. If many here met in person, maybe there would be a whole different thing and people would hava a laugh together- however there may be underlining thoughts like you know that pumpkineater2183- he thinks like this and that- ho could he. I guess you meet and it is like Hi, I am nebulous. Oh yes, how are you, I am sidha7001, soon to be swami sidha7001. Anyway, someone just wrote in today with a post- they appear to have had a spontaneous kundalini awakening, and he has had no guidance and has found no relief. Will possibly keep the group here posted on what takes place now, as it looks like He may have found what he is looking for to get help. I think if he follows through on what is given, he will see a big turnaround as did one in our group who came in with a similar intensity or even worse and is now doing very well: Here is the post: Hello I just discovered this site - I suppose timming is everything. I do have a Kundalini Blockage. It is very painfull - the invoulintary movements of Kryias - Invounlitary Dancing when I hear the sound of music (as if an entity took over my body) I get very little sleep - the muscle spasm from krias keep me awake. I have been to Reiki Masters and have taken Reiki I training. also have been to an actupuncturist for grounding issues and "the Blockage" - still no relief of the blockage. This started about five years ago while sitting in a chair. Out of the Blue a huge force went thru me and felt like it hit my tail bone and "Threw me out of the chair" there have also been times I have been thrown on the ground due to the unexpected nature of this disease. No doctors in my area are helpfull and at this point I am just so "TIRED". Although I do have many Mystical experiences - that seem to be synchronized with God or the Universe. Sounds Crazy - Although I know them when I see them and they only apply to me. Any suggestions as what I can do to get more sleep? the slepp deprivaion and Krias or invoulitary moments are fierce and keep me awake and irritable! - I do meditate daily although Kundalini seems to rule my body when it wants too. Any suggestions would be kindly appreaciated. Thanks much - Peace.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Intellectual Treason of Vedic "Science"
On Jun 29, 2007, at 9:26 PM, emptybill wrote: Rather I'd prefer to explore something that might get a little deeper – like why penetration of the gap between thoughts is not the same as transcendence in meditation. We already tried to talk about that. Dr. Pete was the only one who got it, to the rest it was either heresy or incomprehensible. The rest would be better elsewhere.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
Didn't have a chance to read FFL yesterday so I missed the party. Oh well, it's probably still going on. Your comment about an Oreo cookie mala a while ago made me think this girl would be invited to your party: http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=597756 or maybe she was wearing this: http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=630474 Happy Birthday Curtis. Thanks for the music, for your thoughtfulness, humor, insights and self-reflections and you (near) endless patience! Your posts are always a treat and one of the reasons to keep coming back to FFL (even though I rarely post myself. Since you and Honeyboy Edwards have birthdays on consecutive days, maybe you should get together and party. May You still be playing just as strongly when you are his age! Play on Curtis! Happy Birthday. hd
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 6/28/07 7:57:13 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > > > noozguru@ writes: > > > > > > At least it's not > > > > Republicans or conservatives that want to shut down free > > political speech. > > > > > > > Oh really? So Trent Lott who recently called for a shutdown of > the > > > internet and talk radio is not a Republican. What is he then? > Have any > > > other facts to fabricate for us? > > > > > > > > > > > > In fairness to Trent Lott, he never said, to my knowledge, > anything > > about > > > shutting down the Internet or talk radio. Would you like to quote > > him? Perhaps > > > you would like to fabricate one to support your accusation. > > > > This is what Lott said: > > > > "Talk radio is running America," Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) recently > told > > the New York Times. "We have to deal with that problem." > > > > http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/15/sen-trent-lott-r-ms/ > > > > > > Trent Lott is also considered a racist: > > > > Tremendous political controversy ensued following remarks Lott made > on > > December 5, 2002 at the 100th birthday party of Sen. Strom Thurmond > of > > South Carolina. Thurmond ran for President of the United States in > > 1948 on the Dixiecrat (or States' Rights) ticket. Lott said: > > > > "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're > > proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, > we > > wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either" > > > > Thurmond had based his presidential campaign on an explicit racial > > segregation platform. Many political commentators inferred that > > because Lott supported Thurmond's campaign, Lott also supported > racial > > segregation. Lott had attracted controversy before in issues > relating > > to civil rights. As a Congressman, he voted against renewal of the > > Voting Rights Act, voted against the continuation of the Civil > Rights > > Act and opposed the Martin Luther King Holiday. Lott also maintained > > an affiliation with the Council of Conservative Citizens, which is > > described as a hate group by the Anti-Defamation League and the > > National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Lott > > > So Lott is kinda like Al Gore, Senior... Ah. The somebody else did it too card - so Trent Lott isn't so bad after all. Albert Gore Sr is dead. He died almost 10 years ago at the age of 90. Trent lott is alive and well and is *currently* a Senator. But it doesn't matter that Trent Lott is a racist because Albert Gore Sr. was too. Right wing think is lovely.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
I do meditate daily although Kundalini seems to rule my > body when it wants too. Any suggestions would be kindly > appreaciated. Thanks much - Peace. Is this a question to the FFL readers ?
[FairfieldLife] TM-Free Blog: Why was the KGB interested in TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi?
HYPERLINK "http://tmfree.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-was-kgb-interested-in-tm-and.html"ht tp://tmfree.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-was-kgb-interested-in-tm-and.html No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/880 - Release Date: 6/29/2007 2:15 PM
[FairfieldLife] What Do We Create?
DOES EVERYONE REALLY CREATE THEIR OWN REALITY? William Bloom - Cygnus Magazine Over the years it has been an honor for me to advance and defend new age and holistic spirituality. I love its open-mindedness, its embrace of metaphysics and the way it combines spiritual work with healthcare. But I have also despaired at times about its apparent lack of morality and compassion when faced with the realities of people's suffering. This coldness is often explained away with half-baked ideas about how energies, karma and the laws of attraction work. This often reach a peak of disturbing smugness when a new age 'philosopher' faced with cruel suffering says authoritatively: 'People create their own reality' or 'Their soul chose it - its their karma' or 'Everything is perfect in God's Plan - you just need to perceive it differently'. People who say such things seem to have no idea how smug and nasty they sound. Nor of the hurt they cause. Fourteen years ago I had a lower back crisis in which three disks herniated and a tendon tore. The pain was as high on the scale as it can go. I was bed-ridden, then on sticks and it took seven years to recover. Early on, as I hobbled awkwardly on sticks, a new age woman came up to me, poked her face in mine and loudly stated, 'You know what Louise Hay says about lower back crises, don't you!' She was typical of many. A friend recently had a severe heart crisis, was suddenly taken to hospital and told that his life was at risk. He told me that what really frightened him was the thought of informing his spiritual friends, because they would use it as an opportunity to be self-righteous and tell him what he was getting wrong in his life. Of course in both my and his case there were good lessons to be learned, but our life or mobility were threatened and we deserved compassionate friendliness. Isn't spiritual development about increasing compassion and love? It does not help to have someone chiming, 'You asked for it. Told you so.' Even if we did create those illnesses, kindness and support are needed so that we can begin to understand the process.. These minor examples of personal distress are nothing compared to the more dramatic tragedies being endured on the world stage. What follows is recent testimony from a woman at the centre of the Darfur crisis (New Internationalist, June 2007): 'My baby boy was thrown on the fire in front of me. My daughter was older. They thought she was a boy so they slaughtered her too - they snapped her neck like a chicken. Some of the children they threw down a well ∑. After they raped the women they cut off their breasts to make them suffer. They used those of us who were left as donkeys.' Her experience is not unique. Recently too there has been the incident of the little girl kidnapped in Portugal, the tip of an iceberg of the sexual abuse faced by hundreds of thousands of children every day, not to mention the thirty thousand children who daily die of starvation. In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart. Anne Frank. Surely all this suffering can only be approached with stillness, humility and wisdom of the heart. Not with half-baked metaphysics and denial. It is pure ignorance, shameful and cold-hearted emotional cruelty to suggest that these women and children asked for this destiny, deserved it, chose it or created their own reality. It completely misunderstands karma and the laws of attraction. There is a frequent error of assuming that souls have complete control and choice over their incarnations. New souls entering for the first time, for example, may simply be drawn to where there is a newly conceived fetus. They may have no choice but to participate in the collective rhythm and cycle. There are more dynamics in incarnation than simple choice. Equally we do not create our lives in isolation. We pass through collective historical and karmic events over which we may have little individual power. We are participants as souls and as biological creatures in a constellation of relationships that includes our species, our gender, our family, our ancestors, our ethnicity and faith. Our parents and children, for example, are within us, as we are also within them. We are not just individual souls creating our own individual lives and futures. We are also subjects of the group soul and our histories and futures are entwined. As a species we have created a shared karma of suffering, and it is as a collective that we experience, redeem and heal it. The collective affects even the most forceful individual. The redemption of all this lies in the fact that each of us has the freedom and power to adopt our own inner attitude regardless of circumstances. I am inspired, for example, by the Catholic priests who chose the way of self-sacrifice and walked with their Jewish parishioners into the Nazi gas chambers. „The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.‰ Edmund Burke It
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
In a message dated 6/30/07 9:51:46 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But it doesn't matter that Trent Lott is a racist because Albert Gore Sr. was too. You really haven't proven Trent Lott is a Racist. The excuse you use is lame at best since he was honoring an old, mind you, very old colleague on his birthday. It did take some"mind reading" to assume what was assumed by those who took offense. Plus a high percentage of blacks vote for Lott each time he runs. A racist wouldn't have apologized let alone apologized multiple times even on BET for any offense taken. Let me ask you, is Robert Byrd a racist or Joe Beiden or were they just misunderstood when their "slips of the tongue" were much more direct and to the point? So for you to assume Trent Lott is a racist without any more proof than what you have sited make you prejudice. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Post from one with a spontaneous kundalini awakening and response
Note: * = Poster , G = Swami G In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "jimraypgh"wrote: * Hello G Namaste and Great Day - * I just discovered this site - I suppose timming is > everything. I do have a Kundalini Blockage. It is very painfull - > the invoulintary movements of Kryias - Invounlitary Dancing when I > hear the sound of music (as if an entity took over my body) G Relax there is no entity - nothing has taken over your body - the Kriyas come to connect pathways --- this is simply a part of the process. * I get very little sleep - the muscle spasm from krias keep me awake. > I have been to Reiki Masters and have taken Reiki I training. G this can make things worse - it takes having energy work done by one in 0 Point Blance - by one in Stilled mind rather by one attempting to manipulate things by visualizing symbols. You can't gain balance by being worked on by someone who is still out of balance themselves, Especially when quite open within a Kundalini Awakening. * also have been to an actupuncturist for grounding issues and "the Blockage" - still no relief of the blockage. G first off quit focusing on the mindset of having some *blockage*. It is more have struggling and having a *resistance* to the process rather than blockages. One goes through states of awareness and the body repsonds. But it is little about the body in the end. * This started about five years ago while sitting in a chair. Out of the Blue a huge > force went thru me and felt like it hit my tail bone and "Threw me > out of the chair" there have also been times I have been thrown on > the ground due to the unexpected nature of this disease. G ok - here is the problem again - this isn't a *disease* it is Rather an Opportunity to transition out of suffering once and for all. So what appears to be taking place number one is simply in not understanding the process you have gone into resistence and fear mode and are fighting it rather than Honoring it and giving it the space to do what is needed to Aide you in going forward to Truth and Liberation. * No doctors in my area are helpfull and at this point I am just so "TIRED". G Doctors are absolutely Useless as this is something totally outside their realm of experience and knowledge. Medications for the most part only make the body toxic on top of it and do nothing to help. The only medication that i can say Will aide in some small manner is Clonazapam as it can take the edge off of things when it gets' very intense. But i don't recommend any take this drug in an ongoing basis but Solely as Needed when the most intense symptomololgies are being transited. * Although I do have many Mystical experiences - that seem to be > synchronized with God or the Universe. Sounds Crazy - Although I > know them when I see them and they only apply to me. G again this is typical - nothing that sounds crazy at all. It is only crazy to those who have not navigated this journey. * Any suggestions as what I can do to get more sleep? G in this process Sleep is Extremely Important. - Don't do activites that keep the mental nonsence going. Start to wind down in the early evening. Take a walk --- Do the balanced Breathe - This is NUMBER 1 of First Importance to begin with. Then Go to bed BY 10 PM latest. after that you won't get enough sleep. You can try taking a glass of warm milk with a little bit of sugar and butter in it as well before resting. * the slepp deprivaion and Krias or invoulitary moments are fierce and keep me awake and irritable! - G this will pass - but another reason to get to bed by 10 PM latest is the Kundalini energy typically will awaken you between 3 - 4 AM and this is when more Kriyas and energy will run. When this takes place you just relax into the Kriyas - do the balanced breath and let them flow and do what is beneficial. Honor the energy as it is your Friend and not your enemy nor a disease. It is working to take you eventually past all Dis-Ease into Clarity and Truth. * I do meditate daily although Kundalini seems to rule my body when it wants too. G Don't do 3rd eye meditations - For now JUST do the Balanced breath and start doing also the I AM THAT I AM and the OM THAT I AM practices. Start to develop RESPECT for and HONOR the Kundalini process and opportunity to get beyond delusion and self bondage. The practices are explained on Youtube. Any suggestions would be kindly appreaciated. Thanks much - Peace. Again Number ONE recognise that Kundalini - that Ma Shakti - Ma Kali may be your best friend and aide to entering into Liberation and going beyond the fears that drive persona and ego. You may read through the site and will find that all are transiting through the same type of journey. You are not alone - and nothing you have said is out of the ordinary of the journey. You simply have been seeking in the wrong places and don't as yet have wisdom knowledge in place to understand How to navigat
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 6/30/07 9:51:46 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > But it > doesn't matter that Trent Lott is a racist because Albert Gore Sr. was > too. > > > > You really haven't proven Trent Lott is a Racist. The excuse you use is lame > at best since he was honoring an old, mind you, very old colleague on his > birthday. Then why did Lott apologize if he hadn't expressed his racist views? > It did take some"mind reading" to assume what was assumed by those > who took offense. Plus a high percentage of blacks vote for Lott each time he > runs. Call for references for this "high percentage of black votes". A racist wouldn't have apologized let alone apologized multiple times > even on BET for any offense taken. Sure they would, especially if it's politically expedient. > Let me ask you, is Robert Byrd a racist or > Joe Beiden or were they just misunderstood when their "slips of the tongue" > were much more direct and to the point? So for you to assume Trent Lott is a > racist without any more proof than what you have sited make you prejudice. Again, any other person's racism doesn't exonerate Trent Lott.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Free Blog: Why was the KGB interested in TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > KGB was very much interested indeed. Maharishi "tricked" them by not giving them any of the knowledge saying they would misuse it. That why this campaign now from disgruntled KGB agents.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
In a message dated 6/30/07 11:08:04 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Call for references for this "high percentage of black votes". A racist wouldn't have apologized let alone apologized multiple times > even on BET for any offense taken. Sure they would, especially if it's politically expedient. > Let me ask you, is Robert Byrd a racist or > Joe Beiden or were they just misunderstood when their "slips of the tongue" > were much more direct and to the point? So for you to assume Trent Lott is a > racist without any more proof than what you have sited make you prejudice. Again, any other person's racism doesn't exonerate Trent Lott I'll provide a source in the near future but I had heard he had received about 25% of the black vote. Quite high for a Republican. You still haven't said what Lott said that was racist. You only assume that because he spoke kindly of a Strom Thurmond at his birthday party that he was racist. You assumed that when he said "had Thurmond been elected we wouldn't have had all these problems" was directed specifically towards race when Thurmond was a strong proponent of law and order, avid anti-communist and fiscal conservative . You never answered my question, is Robert Byrd or Joe Beiden a racist? ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 1408
bob_brigante wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> bob_brigante wrote: >> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: >>> >>> This year's Steven King treat is in the theaters (they're > usually > >>> on >>> >>> TV). I saw this film yesterday and if you are into Steven King > and > these kind of thrillers you'll like the this film. It's kind of > a > >>> one >>> >>> man tour de force by John Cusack and well written and directed. One of the trailers at this showing was "I am Legend" which is a >>> remake >>> >>> of "The Last Man on Earth" by Richard Matheson and starring Will >>> Smith >>> >>> that looks promising. It will be in theaters in December. >>> >>> Tomorrow I'll probably catch "Sicko." >>> > > > > > >>> ** >>> >>> You're aware that it's online for free: >>> http://digg.com/movies/Watch_Michael_Moore_s_Sicko_Online_Now >>> >>> >> Yes, but I'd rather give the filmmaker my financial support and see >> > it > >> in a good theater where it is playing locally (though not up the >> > hill in > >> digital). >> > > * > > http://tinyurl.com/34dnfg > Financially, Moore's in good shape: > > "Thanks to a lucrative contract negotiated with the Weinstein Co. by > his talent agent, Endeavor's Ari Emanuel, Michael Moore is in line to > receive 50% of "Sicko's" gross profits — arguably one of the most > lucrative deals on Hollywood's books, richer even than that enjoyed > by the likes of Tom Cruise, Julia Roberts and director Peter Jackson. > After theater owners have taken their cut, in other words, "Sicko's" > profits will be split in half between Moore and Harvey and Bob > Weinstein, whose Weinstein Co. is releasing the film nationally today. I'm thinking more in terms of patronizing the theaters so they continue to book these kinds of films. In the extras on the DVD of "The Corporation" Moore explains why someone like the guy who has MGM would distribute his films even though they are counter to his political philosophy is because they make money. That's what I learned in the entertainment business was that "good content is that which makes money." 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 visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > wrote: > > > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. > > It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying > that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or > that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those > beliefs are based on the person who thinks that > appearing to be at the center of the universe, > too. :-) > > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > of the position of the planets. > > For other people, it's tarot cards. For still > others, reading tea leaves. None of the trickster > mechanisms do anything or mean anything; they're > all equally bogus. *But*, if they allow someone > to get past their own disbelief and trick them- > selves into utilizing previously-unused abilities, > they work like gangbusters. Interesting idea, I'm sure the unconscious mind knows far more about what's going on than our "higher" faculties ever could. And with good reason, there has to be a filter between them or we would be so swamped with information we couldn't get anything done. Maybe these ancient ideas like tarot or the I-ching with their evocative imagery speaking directly to our symbolic deeper selves could maybe side-step logic and get to our real awareness, which would be where the intuition comes from. Carl Jung said that if he had his life again he would devote it to the study of the I-ching, he thought it opened a conduit to the collective unconscious. He obviously had more luck with it than I did! > Basically, I see astrology and all other "predic- > tive technologies" as the Dumbo's feathers of the > universe. Remember Dumbo, from the Disney cartoon? > When he held the feather in his trunk, he could > fly. The feather didn't do diddleysquat; Dumbo's > belief that it did was all that mattered. IMO, > that's the only reason that astrology appears > to "work." > > For that matter, that might be the same reason > why *any* technique of Self realization appears > to "work." Self has always been present; all that > the techniques do is trick the seeker into real- > izing what has always been present. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Intellectual Treason of Vedic "Science"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Intellectual Treason > > by Meera Nanda Jan 07, 05 > > Meera Nanda uncovers an extraordinary coalition that is undermining > science > Your're posting good stuff here Vaj. This article is particularly relevant to the TMO as I found out the other day that pupils at the Maharishi schools study Jyotish and SCI as part of the curriculum. Needless to say I was shocked as I don't believe we have the right to teach children things that are untestable, unprovable and which are demonstrably flawed. These are effectively religious concepts dressed up in a thin veneer of scientific respectability. Church and state should be kept seperate, this "religion by the back door" is worrying.
[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > wrote: > > > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. > > It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying > that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or > that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those > beliefs are based on the person who thinks that > appearing to be at the center of the universe, > too. :-) For the record, since the time of Copernicus (1473-1543), astrologers have known that retrograde motion is only apparent. Sorry, but they don't "believe" that planets actually turn around and move backward. They're also well aware that the earth revolves around the sun. And retrograde motion never did have anything to do with "maths." You don't need "maths" to detect retrograde motion, just careful observation of the night sky. > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > of the position of the planets. > > For other people, it's tarot cards. For still > others, reading tea leaves. Interesting. Here's what I said back in May of last year (I'm sure Barry didn't, you know, read it or anything): "My guess: Any sufficiently complex system of correspondences, such as astrology (any flavor), works as a tool for focusing the intuition-- i.e., collecting and integrating all one's little intuitional inputs into a coherent whole so that a prediction can be generated from it. The system's correspondences themselves don't 'mean' anything at all, they're just a framework to hang the intuition on and organize what the intuition knows. "Tea leaves, in other words, could work just as well as astrology for anyone with a highly developed intuition." Oh, heck. As long as I'm quoting myself... I had a vague memory of a post I'd made years ago on alt.m.t on astrology and went looking for it. It was in response to someone (not Barry) who was dissing astrology as primitive superstitious nonsense: Consider the magnitude of the realization, way back in prehistory, that while the pattern of the stars overhead changed from month to month, they always came back to the *same* positions at harvest time each year; they were always in the same positions at planting time. What a stunning discovery, that their positions were correlated with the seasons! And then there were the "wandering" stars--their positions were not at first at all predictable. Why should a few of the stars not follow the pattern? Think also about how significant the stars must have seemed to primitive humans. We take them for granted, but just imagine what a hunter camping on the plain must have thought as he looked at the night sky. The stars were a much more major feature of the environment than they are to us, and infinitely more mysterious and awe-inspiring. It's not at all surprising they were thought to be divine. So when humankind had progressed to the point where it could accurately chart the stars' motions, it was natural to assume they were a guidance system given to humans by the gods. The "wanderers" took on special significance, because they moved through the "fixed" constellations and were constantly forming different patterns with them. But even *their* motions, although much more complex, were regular and could be predicted. And obviously the sun and moon were the overlords of the heavens, playing different but complementary roles. What gives me the shivers is that if you wanted to *design* a system for divination for human beings on earth, you could hardly do better than the sun, the moon, and the planets in the constellations. The system seems tailor-made for that purpose. It's also no surprise that astrology was the earliest "pure" science, in the sense of observing and charting nature's regularities just for the joy of ferreting out her secrets. What a magnificent vehicle the night sky is for inspiring scientific curiosity! We tend to look down our noses at these primitive, superstitious magi who spent all their time gazing at the heavens, but that's totally unwarranted. The impulse that motivated them to wrest regularity from an otherwise chaotic environment over which they had little control was precisely the same as the one that motivates modern scientists, and it took just as much energy and intellect and sophistication. The first ephemeris was as much of an accomplishment as the Human Genome Project.
[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > > wrote: > > > > > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > > > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > > > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. > > > > It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying > > that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or > > that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those > > beliefs are based on the person who thinks that > > appearing to be at the center of the universe, > > too. :-) > > > > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > > of the position of the planets. > > > > For other people, it's tarot cards. For still > > others, reading tea leaves. None of the trickster > > mechanisms do anything or mean anything; they're > > all equally bogus. *But*, if they allow someone > > to get past their own disbelief and trick them- > > selves into utilizing previously-unused abilities, > > they work like gangbusters. > > Interesting idea. I think so. It explains phenomena that seem to occur with regard to "seeing" -- whether seeing deeper into the character and back- ground and history of the person coming to you for a "reading," or into the future -- without relying on believing in the under- lying techniques that supposedly facilitated that seeing. I've had enough experiences of seeing myself to know that the phenomenon exists, at least as far as I am concerned. But I remain uncon- vinced that the technologies that some folks use to "trigger" seeing have that much to do with the seeing itself. > I'm sure the unconscious mind knows far more about what's > going on than our "higher" faculties ever could. Yup. Reason is the natural adversary of intuition. They can coexist peaceably in the same individual, but as far as I can tell, you can rely on only one at a time. :-) > And with good reason, there has to be a filter between them > or we would be so swamped with information we couldn't get > anything done. That's it exactly. There is a wonderful story by Ray Bradbury, part of his book "The Martian Chron- icles," that describes the potentially overwhelming nature of seeing fairly well in my opinion. The setting is Mars, and two of the first colonists to Mars are out working in their fields, farming. Across the field towards them comes their son, look- ing just as he did a few years ago, just before he died. The wife, who has been so distraught over her son's death, is so overjoyed to see him again that she just hugs him and takes him back to the house, taking their life together up again as if it has never paused. The husband knows that this isn't really his son, but allows the masquerade to go on because it's the first time he's seen his wife alive again since their real son's death. Over time he confronts the "son," and finds that he is one of the last surviving native Martians. The Martian explains that he is empathic, and when he encounters anyone of any species, his body and his mannerisms just "adapt" to what the other being wants to see. Thus he has become their son, because the wife's desire for her son was so strong. He means no harm, and so the farmer lets him stay. Everything goes well until they take a trip into town. Walking down the crowded city street, the Martian is literally torn apart by the longings and the desires around him, which he -- by nature -- cannot help but "hear" and that he *has* to try to adapt to. When you start picking up on thoughts or emotions or flashes of the past or future from other folks, it can be almost this overwhelming for a while. I honestly think that one of the reasons a lot of people who do seeing for a living *have* a tech- nology such as astrology or tarot or tea leaves is to take their customers' focus off of them- selves, and focus it on the technology. > Maybe these ancient ideas like tarot or the I-ching with > their evocative imagery speaking directly to our symbolic > deeper selves could maybe side-step logic and get to our > real awareness, which would be where the intuition comes > from. I think it's possible. > Carl Jung said that if he had his life again he would > devote it to the study of the I-ching, he thought it > opened a conduit to the collective unconscious. He > obviously had more luck with it than I did! Another science fiction author, Philip K. Dick, once wrote a novel in which the I Ching figured prominently in the plot. The hidden secret of the book, that he revealed at a sci-fi conference I once attended, was that the I Ching wrote the book. He just started writing, with no fixed ending in mind,
[FairfieldLife] some facts re Byrd & Lott
Senator Byrd was a paid up mbr. in the past of the KKK. I note also I note Re: Lott it was his mer attendance @ the BDay party & words of praise 4 Thermond that engendered criticism. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Intellectual Treason of Vedic "Science"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > Intellectual Treason > > > > by Meera Nanda Jan 07, 05 > > > > Meera Nanda uncovers an extraordinary coalition that is > undermining > > science > > > > > Your're posting good stuff here Vaj. > > This article is particularly relevant to the TMO as I found out the > other day that pupils at the Maharishi schools study Jyotish and SCI > as part of the curriculum. Needless to say I was shocked as I don't > believe we have the right to teach children things that are > untestable, unprovable and which are demonstrably flawed. These are > effectively religious concepts dressed up in a thin veneer of > scientific respectability. Church and state should be kept seperate, > this "religion by the back door" is worrying. Since when does the state run Maharishi schools? As far as I know, Maharishi schools are private (i.e., not run and financed by the government), and as such, can teach any ooga-booga woo-woo they want. Same goes for private Christian schools that teach Creationism instead of Evolution. At least, that's the situation in the USA. I see that you're in the UK, and maybe things are different there.
[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > > > > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > > > > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. > > > > > > It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying > > > that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or > > > that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those > > > beliefs are based on the person who thinks that > > > appearing to be at the center of the universe, > > > too. :-) > > > > > > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > > > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > > > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > > > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > > > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > > > of the position of the planets. > > > > > > For other people, it's tarot cards. For still > > > others, reading tea leaves. None of the trickster > > > mechanisms do anything or mean anything; they're > > > all equally bogus. *But*, if they allow someone > > > to get past their own disbelief and trick them- > > > selves into utilizing previously-unused abilities, > > > they work like gangbusters. > > > > Interesting idea. > > I think so. It explains phenomena that seem > to occur with regard to "seeing" -- whether > seeing deeper into the character and back- > ground and history of the person coming to > you for a "reading," or into the future -- > without relying on believing in the under- > lying techniques that supposedly facilitated > that seeing. Just as a followup, I visited Nostradamus' house not long ago. It's been turned into a fairly cheezy tourist museum, but it had some fun things in it nonetheless. Among them were some of his original writings, in his own hand. It was fun to read through them to get a glimpse into the personality, as opposed to the myth. He was a born scholar, born into a family of scholars, and studied all of the arts available at his time. Of course, that included astrology and other forms of divination. But interestingly, in his own writings he often referred to them *as* a "trigger" to his seeing, which he seemed to consider not completely related to them.
RE: [FairfieldLife] some facts re Byrd & Lott
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:09 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] some facts re Byrd & Lott Senator Byrd was a paid up mbr. in the past of the KKK. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/18/AR2005061801 105.html I note also I note Re: Lott it was his mer attendance @ the BDay party & words of praise 4 Thermond that engendered criticism. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/880 - Release Date: 6/29/2007 2:15 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann's defense
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you've been one of the people on this forum writing negative > things about Coulter, you owe it to "The Fairness Doctrine" to > read her latest column -- reproduced here -- in which she > explains why she made the dead-son-bumpersticker remark and the > wishing-a-terrorist-kills-Edwards remark. > > After you're done reading this, I will be very surprised if you > still feel that Coulter is guilty of what the media suggests she > is guilty of. I will be even more surprised if you feel that > Edwards isn't one of the most sleaziest politicians around. Let's have a look at some of Ann Coulter's sleaze from this very column: > That Was No Lady -- That Was My Husband > > Jun 28 03:11 PM US/Eastern > By Ann Coulter > > The Edwards campaign is apparently still running low on > donations, so this week they went back to their top > fundraiser: me. > > I doubled the ratings of the lowest-rated cable news show > on Tuesday No, she didn't "double the ratings"; they were about the same as usual. Nor is the show is the "lowest-rated" cable news show, either. > For the first time in recorded history, the show's host did not > interrupt a guest, but let Elizabeth Edwards ramble on and on, > allowing her to browbeat me for being mean to her husband. Actually, the longest Edwards spoke at a stretch without being interrupted by either Matthews or Coulter was 40 seconds. Most of the time Edwards was speaking, Coulter was trying to drown her out by talking over her. Watch it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6BBDcZqSF0 > I think I may have tuned out at some point, so I can only speak to > the first 45 minutes of Elizabeth Edwards' harangue Actually the portion of the show in which Edwards participated was about 4 minutes long, and much of that was Coulter or Matthews talking. From the transcript, the total number of words from each: Edwards 375 Coulter 301 Matthews 218 (And a good hunk of Edwards's word count was her having to repeat because Coulter had been talking over her.) , but it mostly > consisted of utterly dishonest renditions of things I had said > on my "Good Morning America" interview this week and a column I > wrote four years ago. (You can't rush Edwards' "rapid response > team"!) She claimed I had launched unprovoked attacks on the > Edwards' dead son and called for a terrorist attack on her > husband. No, she didn't. She mentioned the "bumper sticker" remark (which Coulter herself quotes below in her column), but she never said it had constituted an "unprovoked attack" on her dead son; and she said nothing at all about the "terrorist attack" crack. > Here is my full sentence on "Good Morning America," which the > media deceptively truncated, referring to a joke I told about > Edwards six months ago that made liberals cry: "But about the > same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he > wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack -- > so I've learned my lesson: If I'm going to say anything about > John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed > in a terrorist assassination plot." In fact, that is *not* what Bill Maher said. Asked if he agreed with a commenter on HuffingtonPost.com who said he wished Cheney had been killed in an attack on the Green Zone in Iraq during Cheney's visit, Maher said: "I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow I'm just saying that if he did die--other people-- more people would live. That's a fact." He did not say he agreed with the commenter. > If you want points for not using your son's death politically, > don't you have to take down all those "Ask me about my son's > death in a horrific car accident" bumper stickers? There are no such bumper stickers. In the exchange with Edwards, Coulter claimed: "You're asking me to stop speaking, stop writing columns, stop writing your books." Edwards asked no such thing. She asked Coulter to stop making personal attacks and debate the issues instead. A transcript of the exchange is here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19460016/ (You can't tell from the transcript where Coulter is speaking over Edwards; you'll need to watch the video for that.) > So for those of you who haven't read any of my five best-selling > books: Liberals are driven by Satan and lie constantly. Actually, as the above makes quite clear, the one who lies constantly is Ann Coulter herself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You mentioned you had a blog, any adress you would like to > > share ? I gather you are reffering to Mother Meera in your > > writings. Never met her, but Roberto, my buddy, described > > looking into her eyes as "looking into infinity" > > Yes, of course I am. http://hanumandaz.livejournal.com Michael, I went to have a look at your site and had kind of an interesting experience looking at the photos of her. Usually photos of saints don't do anything for me, and her photos don't either (I like the way she looks, but that's as far as it goes). Then when I looked at the one taken in 2007, I did get a distinct "hit" from it. But you were somehow very much a part of it--what I was getting, it seemed to me, was a strong wave of your devotion to her.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Intellectual Treason of Vedic "Science"
On Jun 30, 2007, at 1:45 PM, hugheshugo wrote: Your're posting good stuff here Vaj. This article is particularly relevant to the TMO as I found out the other day that pupils at the Maharishi schools study Jyotish and SCI as part of the curriculum. Needless to say I was shocked as I don't believe we have the right to teach children things that are untestable, unprovable and which are demonstrably flawed. These are effectively religious concepts dressed up in a thin veneer of scientific respectability. Church and state should be kept seperate, this "religion by the back door" is worrying. I always wondered what TMO principles were imprinted on these kids. They no doubt are also taught various elements of pseudoscience and programmed to believe certain research claims which are highly questionable.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
TurquoiseB wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the >> ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be >> the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. >> > > It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying > that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or > that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those > beliefs are based on the person who thinks that > appearing to be at the center of the universe, > too. :-) > > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > of the position of the planets. > > And you came to this conclusion by learning astrology and studying hundreds of charts? Or as I suspect this is just your gut reaction and a cracker barrel opinion. :) Astrology has been around a long time and has stuck to the wall. It will probably be here long after present day "science" has evaporated. Of course I have learned astrology and *have* looked at lots of charts and know there is something to it. It just isn't as precise as a lot of jyotishis would like to believe nor is it as loose as fools like the Amazing Randi believe. Except for the sun and moon I don't think the planets themselves have any effect on our lives. The sun and moon definitely have an effect upon our lives and environment and in fact Indian astrology is primarily lunar based. They recognized the lunar cycles and most Indians use the Panchang to select optimal times for doing things. Astrology using the planets was pretty much the domain of the kings and rulers who had court astrologers in their employ who kept astronomers fed. The common folk couldn't afford it. Here again I think the ancients were using the planets as markers to identify grander cycles such as the 12 year economic cycles which might have something to do with recurring cycles in nature for growing crops. Jupiter takes 12 years to transit the ecliptic so it made an excellent marker. But it isn't that exact either. Some of that has to do with the "apparent" retrograde which is not given much if any credence in Indian astrology but more in western. An astronomer had to know when a planet would be retrograde or his calculations of daily motion would be way off. I am also following an observation with ascendants. First off I find a lot of charts of family and friends depending on the time of day they were born reflect whether they are a night or morning person or somewhere in between. I was born around 2 AM and am definitely a night person. But I find people that were born near or after sunrise often like to rise with the birds something that has always been difficult for me. Ascendants may also be tied to the seasons you enter into from the date you were born. They became marked by the stars on the horizon and hence your rising sign. I have found ascendants very accurate at showing what career tendencies people may have as well as what failures they may have when they go against them. The problem is that many people want to take astrology too seriously or precisely. Jyotish is "the science of light" and planetary periods tend to crossfade from one to the other so there are these junctures between one dasha and the next where the effect will be vague just as there is this area around 5 degrees of a sign or house where the effect gets vague. That's because it is a blend of both dashas or both signs. Astrologers thus labeled these infancy (the first 5 degrees) and old age (the last 5 degrees). But you still get astrologers who think there is a solid line drawn which is ignorance. The bottom line is you use astrology to get a hint at what is in store for the future not an exact roadmap. The hint is an abstraction but far too accurate to be just a guess. You can do this too with intuition if it is well honed. It is also wonderful when for no apparent reason things seem to be going bad which may well be indicated by a bad transit or planetary period because that means it too shall pass and life will return to normal. > For that matter, that might be the same reason > why *any* technique of Self realization appears > to "work." Self has always been present; all that > the techniques do is trick the seeker into real- > izing what has always been present. > The bottom line of "self realization" is utilizing a technique to quiet the mind so one can ascertain what is really going on. You can't see the Self if the mind is too noisy.
[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > wrote: > > > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. > > It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying > that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or > that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those > beliefs are based on the person who thinks that > appearing to be at the center of the universe, > too. :-) > > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > of the position of the planets. Barry, it is understandable why some people have questions about the validity of jyotish or western astrology. But, one cannot deny the power of the Sun. If the Sun were to flame out, life on Earth would die as well. If the Moon was not in its orbit, I'm sure there would be changes in the Earth environment as well. For example, the tidal system of the oceans would not be the same as we know it. Through practical observations, the ancient rishis have found these gross and subtle effects that the planets, or "grahas", have on people's lives. For example, there are certain planetary combinations in a person's chart that can show a person's potential for wealth, health, marriage, and spiritual path. I believe this jyotish knowledge has value in that it guides people in what steps to do at certain points in their lives. Yes, intuition has its value and understandably so. It is a resource that can make jyotish even more effective. When I took up the study of jyotish, I tried to explain the value of jyotish to my coworkers by stating that jyotish is the most advanced technology for determining the future. Why? Because the human brain is the most advanced biological computer that Nature can provide. At the present time (perhaps, even for the life of the universe) there is no man made computer that can match the brain's power. In other words, jyotish is the software for the human brain to use for predicting the future.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 6/30/07 11:08:04 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Call for references for this "high percentage of black votes". > > A racist wouldn't have apologized let alone apologized multiple times > > even on BET for any offense taken. > > Sure they would, especially if it's politically expedient. > > > Let me ask you, is Robert Byrd a racist or > > Joe Beiden or were they just misunderstood when their "slips of the > tongue" > > were much more direct and to the point? So for you to assume Trent > Lott is a > > racist without any more proof than what you have sited make you > prejudice. > > Again, any other person's racism doesn't exonerate Trent Lott > > > I'll provide a source in the near future but I had heard he had received > about 25% of the black vote. Here's what I found: "Lott neglects to mention his 2000 re-election, when he got 11 percent of the black ballots." http://www.reason.com/news/show/33261.html I don't know about subsequent elections, but I doubt it improved much. > Quite high for a Republican. You still haven't said > what Lott said that was racist. What did Lott apologize for? > You only assume that because he spoke kindly > of a Strom Thurmond at his birthday party that he was racist. You assumed > that when he said "had Thurmond been elected we wouldn't have had all these > problems" was directed specifically towards race when Thurmond was a strong > proponent of law and order, avid anti-communist and fiscal conservative . You > never answered my question, is Robert Byrd or Joe Beiden a racist? Your attempt to bring other's possible racism into the discussion is a typical ploy of right wingers to distract attention from themselves. Anyone elses possible guilt for racism doesn't exonerate Trent Lott.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Free Blog: Why was the KGB interested in TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi?
nablusoss1008 wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > KGB was very much interested indeed. Maharishi "tricked" them by not > giving them any of the knowledge saying they would misuse it. That why > this campaign now from disgruntled KGB agents. > > > I don't know about that but after watching that segment of the video I got a hunch that the "KGB" agent was a bit of blowhard and probably really went to see MMY to learn meditation (so he could be a better KGB agent). He's made the rest up in hindsight throwing in some Soviet political philosophy. However on my TTC I started thinking about how Maharishi was distracting a lot of young folks who would have otherwise become world or community leaders. Some were there because they wanted to be leaders and felt that TM would help them be better at it. I like to credit MMY with inventing "yuppies" because so many wanted to spend more time with MMY and figured that the only folks who were able to do so were those wealthy kids (with trust funds) so they needed to become "financially independent." Remember when that was an important phrase among teachers? So many got into businesses, multi-level marketing schemes and along the way forgot about TM, became less into spirituality and more into materiality. Alan Watt who is a frequent guest on many alternative talk shows even believes the Freemasons behind the scenes engineered MMY's success just for the purpose of distracting and controlling youth with TM being a blend of Christianity and Hinduism. Sometimes I wonder if Watt was a TM teacher but never has admitted to it though he seems to have a lot of knowledge of the movement. The guy has a lot of MP3 files on his site of his "blurbs" about the history of man and how the elite like to engineer the culture to control the common folks.Some is a bit far fetched but interesting nonetheless. I would recommend first downloading the files where he is a guess and thus asked to provide an overview of his philosophy. http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
Furthermore on this topic I recalled that Newt Gingrich had said there is too much freedom of speech on the Internet. Here's the article: "Former House Speaker and presumptive 2008 Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich addressed a freedom-of-speech awards dinner in New Hampshire last night and said the problem with the Internet in an age of terrorism is that it allows too damn much freedom of speech." the rest is here: http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/9383
[FairfieldLife] Re: What Do We Create?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > DOES EVERYONE REALLY CREATE THEIR OWN REALITY? > William Bloom - Cygnus Magazine > > Over the years it has been an honor for me to advance and defend new age > and holistic spirituality. I love its open-mindedness, its embrace of > metaphysics and the way it combines spiritual work with healthcare. But I > have also despaired at times about its apparent lack of morality and > compassion when faced with the realities of people's suffering. > > This coldness is often explained away with half-baked ideas about how > energies, karma and the laws of attraction work. This often reach a peak > of disturbing smugness when a new age 'philosopher' faced with cruel > suffering says authoritatively: 'People create their own reality' or > 'Their soul chose it - its their karma' or 'Everything is perfect in God's > Plan - you just need to perceive it differently'. People who say such > things seem to have no idea how smug and nasty they sound. Nor of the hurt > they cause. When people discuss such things, yes, it can most certainly come off as smug and nasty...to paraphrase Steve Martin: karma is not pretty. But the realities of karma may very well be that people do, indeed, create their own reality. However, in discussing such subjects, how can one NOT come off as cold and uncaring, especially if the listener is not of the same mind. I think the author has more problems with the way it is discussed than with the reality of the subject. > > Fourteen years ago I had a lower back crisis in which three disks > herniated and a tendon tore. The pain was as high on the scale as it can > go. I was bed-ridden, then on sticks and it took seven years to recover. > Early on, as I hobbled awkwardly on sticks, a new age woman came up to me, > poked her face in mine and loudly stated, 'You know what Louise Hay says > about lower back crises, don't you!' She was typical of many. > > A friend recently had a severe heart crisis, was suddenly taken to > hospital and told that his life was at risk. He told me that what really > frightened him was the thought of informing his spiritual friends, because > they would use it as an opportunity to be self-righteous and tell him what > he was getting wrong in his life. Well, then, they're pricks...insensitive pricks. > > Of course in both my and his case there were good lessons to be learned, > but our life or mobility were threatened and we deserved compassionate > friendliness. Isn't spiritual development about increasing compassion and > love? It does not help to have someone chiming, 'You asked for it. Told > you so.' Even if we did create those illnesses, kindness and support are > needed so that we can begin to understand the process.. > > These minor examples of personal distress are nothing compared to the more > dramatic tragedies being endured on the world stage. What follows is > recent testimony from a woman at the centre of the Darfur crisis (New > Internationalist, June 2007): > > 'My baby boy was thrown on the fire in front of me. My daughter was older. > They thought she was a boy so they slaughtered her too - they snapped her > neck like a chicken. Some of the children they threw down a well â`. After > they raped the women they cut off their breasts to make them suffer. They > used those of us who were left as donkeys.' > > Her experience is not unique. Recently too there has been the incident of > the little girl kidnapped in Portugal, the tip of an iceberg of the sexual > abuse faced by hundreds of thousands of children every day, not to mention > the thirty thousand children who daily die of starvation. > > In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at > heart. Anne Frank. > > Surely all this suffering can only be approached with stillness, humility > and wisdom of the heart. Not with half-baked metaphysics and denial. It is > pure ignorance, shameful and cold-hearted emotional cruelty to suggest > that these women and children asked for this destiny, deserved it, chose > it or created their own reality. It completely misunderstands karma and > the laws of attraction. I don't think it is a case of either understanding or misunderstanding the laws of karma but of tactlessness in the art of speaking. > > There is a frequent error of assuming that souls have complete control and > choice over their incarnations. New souls entering for the first time, for > example, may simply be drawn to where there is a newly conceived fetus. And on what authority does Mr. Bloom say this? It sounds like the same unnamed or unproven authority that those that he complains about relies upon. In other words: conjecture on all of their parts. > They may have no choice but to participate in the collective rhythm and > cycle. There are more dynamics in incarnation than simple choice. > > Equally we do
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann's defense
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > wrote: > [snip] > Actually, as the above makes quite clear, > the one who lies constantly is Ann Coulter > herself. > Gee, well Ann Coulter would fit right in here on FFL because pretty much EVERYONE from Barry to me to Rick Archer have been accused of being liers by Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Using Judy Stein's standard...
...we must call Al Gore a "liar". --- Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article June 30, 2007 BY JAMES M. TAYLOR In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical political posturing as the central focus of public discourse. If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming. A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open and honest regarding the science. Global warming threats ought to be studied and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated as a means of building support for a desired political position. Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims. For example, Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, "Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame." Gore claims the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine." Gore claims global warming is causing more tornadoes. Yet the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated in February that there has been no scientific link established between global warming and tornadoes. Gore claims global warming is causing more frequent and severe hurricanes. However, hurricane expert Chris Landsea published a study on May 1 documenting that hurricane activity is no higher now than in decades past. Hurricane expert William Gray reported just a few days earlier, on April 27, that the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. Atlantic coast has declined in the past 40 years. Hurricane scientists reported in the April 18 Geophysical Research Letters that global warming enhances wind shear, which will prevent a significant increase in future hurricane activity. Gore claims global warming is causing an expansion of African deserts. However, the Sept. 16, 2002, issue of New Scientist reports, "Africa's deserts are in 'spectacular' retreat . . . making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa." Gore argues Greenland is in rapid meltdown, and that this threatens to raise sea levels by 20 feet. But according to a 2005 study in the Journal of Glaciology, "the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins and growing inland, with a small overall mass gain." In late 2006, researchers at the Danish Meteorological Institute reported that the past two decades were the coldest for Greenland since the 1910s. Gore claims the Antarctic ice sheet is melting because of global warming. Yet the Jan. 14, 2002, issue of Nature magazine reported Antarctica as a whole has been dramatically cooling for decades. More recently, scientists reported in the September 2006 issue of the British journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series A: Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, that satellite measurements of the Antarctic ice sheet showed significant growth between 1992 and 2003. And the U.N. Climate Change panel reported in February 2007 that Antarctica is unlikely to lose any ice mass during the remainder of the century. Each of these cases provides an opportunity for Gore to lead by example in his call for an end to the distortion of science. Will he rise to the occasion? Only time will tell. James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at the Heartland Institute.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Using Judy Stein's standard...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ...we must call Al Gore a "liar". > > --- > > Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny > > http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT- REF30b.article > > June 30, 2007 > BY JAMES M. TAYLOR > James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at the > Heartland Institute. The Heartland Institute is heavily funded by ExxonMobil and the tobacco industry. 'Nuff said.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Malaria
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You're wasting your breath, Bob, telling people on this forum about > the plight of poor people dying from malaria. > > One of the people responsible for 10s of millions of those > deaths -- Rachel Carson -- is a hero to many on this forum. Rachel Carson's birthday bashing The right has revved up its claim that the environmental pioneer who criticized DDT was responsible for the spread of malaria that killed millions. The facts say otherwise. By Kirsten Weir http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/06/29/rachel_carson/
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Intellectual Treason of Vedic "Science"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since this list has a long history of independent thought, some > here (most?) might enjoy it. Since Vedic Creationism figures > prominently in the TM mythos It does?? I've never heard of it. Where does it figure so prominently? > Creation science, sometimes the Christian > version, sometimes the Vedic one, I've never heard anything in the TM context that even remotely resembles Christian creation "science." You wouldn't be trying to establish guilt by association, now, would you, Vaj?
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Judy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Remember our discussions in the past regarding affirmative action and > how I felt you were a racist for supporting it? Yes, I do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 6/28/07 1:34:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > MDixon wrote: > > > >>> IS the venom of the left so natural to you that you don't even recognize > >>> it when it is spewed? > >>> > >>> > > Bhairitu wrote: > > > >> You are the pot calling the kettle black. > >> > >> > > Yes, the venom is so natural that Bharat2 didn't even mention Bill Maher's > > hate speech, or even acknowledge it, yet Bharat2 is a Bill Maher watcher. > > So, I'd say that rather than Dixon being the pot, that Bharat2 is both pot > > and kettle, since it was Ann and Bill that made the comments, not Dixon. > I was commenting on Dixon's comment not Maher or Coulter. > > > Right Nooz, and my comment was too Sal who had asked," Let's see you provide > an example. Notice that they never do-they just speak in vague > generalities.They can't, which is why they don't." So put my question to Sal in context. > Surely she isn't so blind or uninformed that she doesn't > hear or read the venom constantly poured out by the left > or either it is acceptable in her eyes. The "venom" of the left is warm milk compared to that of the right. > What is good for the goose is good for the gander. There seems > to be a number of people in this forum that think the left can > do no wrong and are justified in anything they say Nobody here ever said that. > yet if somebody from the right makes an equally > offensive remark back, that crosses the line If the right only made remarks that were equally as offensive as those of the left, nobody would be complaining. But the remarks of the right, since before Clinton, have been not only vastly more offensive but vastly more frequent. and isn't very nice. BTW I gave Sal the > example she challenged me for and so did Shemp. It would be strange indeed if *some* prominent lefty hadn't made an offensive remark somewhere along the line. But your examples were ludicrous. You named a movie star and Bill Maher--and Bill Maher never made the comment you attributed to him. Here's a little list: Ann Coulter Rush Limbaugh Charlie Savage Glenn Beck Sean Hannity Bill O'Reilly Those are just six of the most prominent right wingers. Want to challenge me to find offensive remarks from each of them?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Malaria
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You're wasting your breath, Bob, telling people on this forum about > the plight of poor people dying from malaria. > > One of the people responsible for 10s of millions of those deaths -- > Rachel Carson -- is a hero to many on this forum. > > *** The elimination of DDT is not very consequential in the malaria story, because the rapid turnover of generations of mosquitoes ensures that selection for resistance to DDT happens quickly (there are always a few outliers in the mosquito population who have some resistance to DDT): http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2005/july/ddtinsects.htm > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante > wrote: > > > > http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0707/feature1/ > > > > "We live on a malarious planet. It may not seem that way from the > > vantage point of a wealthy country, where malaria is sometimes > > thought of, if it is thought of at all, as a problem that has > mostly > > been solved, like smallpox or polio. In truth, malaria now affects > > more people than ever before. It's endemic to 106 nations, > > threatening half the world's population. In recent years, the > > parasite has grown so entrenched and has developed resistance to so > > many drugs that the most potent strains can scarcely be controlled. > > This year malaria will strike up to a half billion people. At least > a > > million will die, most of them under age five, the vast majority > > living in Africa. That's more than twice the annual toll a > generation > > ago. > > > > The outcry over this epidemic, until recently, has been muted. > > Malaria is a plague of the poor, easy to overlook. The most > > unfortunate fact about malaria, some researchers believe, is that > > prosperous nations got rid of it. In the meantime, several > distinctly > > unprosperous regions have reached the brink of total malarial > > collapse, virtually ruled by swarms of buzzing, flying syringes > > > > To witness the full force of malaria's stranglehold on Zambia, it's > > essential to leave the capital city, Lusaka. Drive north, across > the > > verdant plains, past the banana plantations and the copper mines > > copper is Zambia's primary exportand into the forested region > tucked > > between the borders of Angola and the Democratic Republic of the > > Congo. This is the North-Western Province. It is almost entirely > > rural; many villages can be reached only by thin footpaths worn > into > > the beet-red soil. A nationwide health survey in 2005 concluded > that > > for every thousand children under age five living in the North- > > Western Province, there were 1,353 cases of malaria. An annual rate > > of more than 100 percent seems impossible, a typo. It is not. What > it > > means is that many children are infected with malaria more than > once > > a year. > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: What Ann Coulter really said (unedited by Edwards)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 6/28/07 7:24:55 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > _http://www.breitbarhttp://wwwhttp://ww_ > (http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2258.html) > > Well well, that does change the context in what Ann said, > doesn't it? I was right when I thought it had something > to do with what Bill Mahr had said earlier about Cheney > should have died in a terrorist attack. Except that he never said that. She lied. Usually Ann has a > way of taking outrageous things liberals say and turning it back on them to see > how they like it, at which time they squeal like pigs. She used the same > strategy by suggesting we conquer Islamic nations and convert them to > Christianity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What Ann Coulter really said (unedited by Edwards)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 6/28/07 9:28:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them > to Christianity.t > > -Ann Coulter on Muslims > _http://www.nationalhttp://www.http://www.natiohttp:_ > (http://www.nationalreview.com/coulter/coulter.shtml) > > Thanks for the article! I loved it! Ann does it again, > dishing back to others what they force on everybody else. > Don't you know that is exactly what Islam has done to > other countries and cultures since it's inception? Gosh, but I thought we were *better* than that. Guess not, huh?
[FairfieldLife] Supplement to "A Hermit in the house"
For personal stories of our dear Maharishi, there's nothing like than the charming and powerful book written by Helena Olson about Maharishi's first days in the United States. The book first came out in 1967 as A Hermit in the House, then in the 80's daughter Theresa re-published it as Maharishi at 433. The latest version came out in 2001, with some fascinating additions, and titled His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi: A Living Saint for the New Millennium. Mrs. Olson, with a degree in theater, skillfully tells of the comings and goings in the house during the several months that Maharishi stayed there. She paints a vivid portrait of Maharishi, fresh from India and knowing little of the West, yet most skillfully organizing, what would soon be a worldwide movement. It includes intimate question and answer sessions with the earliest meditators, very sincere and well-educated seekers, on religion and other fascinating topics. She also describes Maharishi personally teaching Transcendental Meditation to many stars and celebrities including a truly memorable account of Maharishi's initiation of a certain very distinguished "Mr. H," who Tina Olsen later revealed to an MUM audience to have been the wise and famous novelist on eastern philosophy, Herman Hesse. Mother Olsen's book is really worth reading. [You can buy it at: http://www.mumpress.com/p_c14.html ] The second and third editions of the book include everything in the original without compromise, except for the deletion of one powerful experience of Mrs. Olson's, an experience so startling that she did not fit it into the book proper, but rather included it as a "supplement" at the end. Here it is: ~ Supplement to A Hermit in the House by Helena Olson "In January of 1959, I witnessed a phenomena for which I have no explanation. I do not care to discuss all phases of it, but wish to mention briefly that for two hours in the middle of the day, the sky above our home was filled with rainbows and masses of clouds which were shot with vibrant colors as they floated over our garden. We had no rain for days previously, nor was that day cloudy except for the two hours; even so, the sun shone so brilliantly that often I had to turn my head away from it, although clouds were near it. For one hour a lady friend who was staying with us, observed it with me. We both became fatigued from looking up. She retired to her room and I took a pillow, climbed to the roof of a small house in our garden, lay down and watched the display for one more hour from there. At one time, the display became so overpowering I called on the Name of God to be able to breathe. The moment it was over, it seemed as though the sun had left the sky, although actually it was still shining. All nature had been glorified. For about three days I felt unable to nor had any desire to speak. I told my family about it, and we were surprised it was never mentioned in the newspapers as many, many people must have seen it. I prayed to know more about it, and one day I mentioned it briefly to Maharishi. I could not resist saying to him, "Maharishi, did you come with the clouds?" He did not answer. Only smiled." ~~ Looking back on it, Mrs. Olson said she feels this experience was a Heaven-sent omen. [Maharishi arrived at her house about 2 weeks later.] Jai Guru Dev - Alles was der Gesundheit und Entspannung dient.BE A BETTER MEDIZINMANN!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Using Judy Stein's standard...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > wrote: > > > > ...we must call Al Gore a "liar". > > > > --- > > > > Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny > > > > http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT- > REF30b.article > > > > June 30, 2007 > > BY JAMES M. TAYLOR > > > James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at the > > Heartland Institute. > > The Heartland Institute is heavily funded by > ExxonMobil and the tobacco industry. > > 'Nuff said. ...and the federal government funds billions of dollars of global warming research every year. 'nuff said.
[FairfieldLife] Raquy and the Cavemen in Iowa City July 17th
For all you bellydancers and Middle Eastern hand drummers in Fairfield a great drummer and her band is going to be in Iowa City on July 17th. She's givng a doumbek workshop before the concert. I've seen her several times and taken several workshops with her when she's come through Florida. Not to be missed. For more info go to: www.raquy.com -Peter Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz
[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is a lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with a smile.
[FairfieldLife] Chutzpah: a definition
http://www.haroldbloomfield.com/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Using Judy Stein's standard...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > wrote: > > > > ...we must call Al Gore a "liar". > > > > --- > > > > Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny > > > > http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT- > REF30b.article > > > > June 30, 2007 > > BY JAMES M. TAYLOR > > > James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at the > > Heartland Institute. > > The Heartland Institute is heavily funded by > ExxonMobil and the tobacco industry. > > 'Nuff said. > Non sequitor. The article is primarily the author CITING OTHER WORKS THAT APPEARED IN SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS in order to refute Al Gore. Were all those journals funded by ExxonMobil and the Tobacco industry?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Using Judy Stein's standard...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > > wrote: > > > > > > ...we must call Al Gore a "liar". > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny > > > > > > http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT- > > REF30b.article > > > > > > June 30, 2007 > > > BY JAMES M. TAYLOR > > > > > James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at the > > > Heartland Institute. > > > > The Heartland Institute is heavily funded by > > ExxonMobil and the tobacco industry. > > > > 'Nuff said. > > > ...and the federal government funds billions of dollars of global > warming research every year. Call for references. > > 'nuff said. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] TERRORISM IS BACK/PLUTO CONJUNCT THE GALACTIC CENTER
In a message dated 6/30/2007 5:10:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > About six months ago I started to discuss Pluto conjunct the galactic center and the response was as usual "sarcastic". On today's news a terrorist attack was made at a Scottland airport and they believe it is linked with the possible attacks in London that were caught. President Bush has declared the state of emergency for Texas and Oklahoma as the rainfall continues for 17 days straight in Oklahoma. Lake Tahoe in California has been experiencing a massive fire. AMERICA INVINCIBILITY IS LOOKING LIKE A JOKE. MMY should be pulling in the over three hundred sidha's that have been told to leave the dome. We need all of the meditators and sidha's from ALL SPIRITUAL ORGANIZTIONS to be joining in the process of stabilizing world consciousness. The exact dates for the Pluto conjunction are July 16 and 17th as well as its final conjunction on October 28th. Therefore, the rest of this year is vulnerable to unstable energy that is trying to balance itself out. For more information on the summer months of 2007 and my personal feelings about the TMO go to _Astrological Varieties_ (http://www.yogavisionaries.com/) and click on "Seasonal Newsletter" summer of 2007. I will be making a residential move to Fairfield by July 10th and look forward to forming relationships with many of the spiritual groups in Fairfield. I will be attending a yagya by SSRS on July 8th in PA. Love and Light. Jai Guru Dev. Jai Maha Lakshmi. Lsoma. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote: > > > > You mentioned you had a blog, any adress you would like to > > > share ? I gather you are reffering to Mother Meera in your > > > writings. Never met her, but Roberto, my buddy, described > > > looking into her eyes as "looking into infinity" > > > > Yes, of course I am. http://hanumandaz.livejournal.com > > Michael, I went to have a look at your site and > had kind of an interesting experience looking at > the photos of her. > > Usually photos of saints don't do anything for me, > and her photos don't either (I like the way she > looks, but that's as far as it goes). > > Then when I looked at the one taken in 2007, I > did get a distinct "hit" from it. But you were > somehow very much a part of it--what I was getting, > it seemed to me, was a strong wave of your devotion > to her. > Wow, I don't know what to say to this. It is sometimes very hard for myself to distinguish what is coming from where even for me. Where does the energy (of devotion in this case) originate? Whom does it belong to? The photo was taken by a friend in January this year in the afternoon at a 'childrens Darshan' at one of the oldest Ashrams in Tiruvannamalai. This was the first time she was in Tiru I think. This was all very shortly organized, just about 4 days before we knew that we would go there, and Mother to give Darshan. With such a short preparation time, we were completely astonished that 600 people, mostly westerners, showed up at he public Darshan, which was the night before. We had rented a smaller hall of 200, but the people were queuing up on the street. Luckily the same house had a hall for 600, which filled up. This was near the main temple. http://arunachalagrace.blogspot.com/2007/02/mother-meera.html http://mrreddy.org/gal/img047.jpeg.html
[FairfieldLife] Does anyone know a foreign language?
Hello, In this youtube video, I asked this guy a question but I knew I was going to get some wild response, having just got through with his brother who declares himself to be the only Guru in the west, and only his words are atman, others will not last.He deleted challenges to what he said but all is saved. So sure enough, the guy answered me in Greek, so I responded in Swedish. Anyone wishing to comment, it would be interesting, suggest it be different foreign languages, Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=LwGB1tHYoCI if you translate my Swedish, I think I told him something like I was expecting a nonsense answer and sure enough, there it is. Then I said that I am sure If I asked him what he was eating, it would be Braman, but to all the other Gurus and saints in the world, it would be rice, but they are just ignorant since you and your brother are the only saviors of the world. Swami G suggested that is might actually be Jesus that he is eating. He is from the same tree- His brother was proclaiming Jesus as the only God
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote: > > > > > > You mentioned you had a blog, any adress you would like to > > > > share ? I gather you are reffering to Mother Meera in your > > > > writings. Never met her, but Roberto, my buddy, described > > > > looking into her eyes as "looking into infinity" > > > > > > Yes, of course I am. http://hanumandaz.livejournal.com > > > > Michael, I went to have a look at your site and > > had kind of an interesting experience looking at > > the photos of her. > > > > Usually photos of saints don't do anything for me, > > and her photos don't either (I like the way she > > looks, but that's as far as it goes). > > > > Then when I looked at the one taken in 2007, I > > did get a distinct "hit" from it. But you were > > somehow very much a part of it--what I was getting, > > it seemed to me, was a strong wave of your devotion > > to her. > > > Wow, I don't know what to say to this. It is sometimes very hard for > myself to distinguish what is coming from where even for me. Where > does the energy (of devotion in this case) originate? Whom does it > belong to? I haven't a clue. All I know is I got a "hit," and energy that I identified as yours seemed to be strongly present in it. I have almost no experience of this sort of thing, so I really can't shed any more light on it. It wasn't dramatic, just distinct. I wasn't expecting it at all! > The photo was taken by a friend in January this year in the > afternoon at a 'childrens Darshan' at one of the oldest Ashrams > in Tiruvannamalai. How do children respond to her? This was the first time she was in Tiru I think. This > was all very shortly organized, just about 4 days before we knew that > we would go there, and Mother to give Darshan. With such a short > preparation time, we were completely astonished that 600 people, > mostly westerners, showed up at he public Darshan, which was the night > before. We had rented a smaller hall of 200, but the people were > queuing up on the street. Luckily the same house had a hall for 600, > which filled up. This was near the main temple. > > http://arunachalagrace.blogspot.com/2007/02/mother-meera.html > http://mrreddy.org/gal/img047.jpeg.html >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
In a message dated 6/30/07 2:16:37 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: don't know about subsequent elections, but I doubt it improved much. > Quite high for a Republican. You still haven't said > what Lott said that was racist. What did Lott apologize for? _Kevin L. Martin_ (http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/9/30/170651) , government and political affairs director of the _African American Republican Leadership Council_ (http://www.aarlc.com/about/advisory.shtml) , said people were overreacting to the remarks. "By no means was he endorsing segregation or anything like that. It was lighthearted, it was humorous." Martin said Lott captures 25 percent of the black vote in Mississippi, which he said couldn't happen if Lott were a racist. Lott apologized for the misunderstanding which was fanned by the media. You still haven't answered my question which you keep dodging. Is Robert Byrd or Joe Beiden racist? ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Judy is a different story. There is no way that I can get her off > the view that I am a devious person telling deliberate untruths for > some nefarious end. To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the preservation and/or promotion of your self-image. An example of same is the way you have phrased your characterization of my view above.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
In a message dated 6/30/07 2:56:03 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Former House Speaker and presumptive 2008 Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich addressed a freedom-of-speech awards dinner in New Hampshire last night and said the problem with the Internet in an age of terrorism is that it allows too damn much freedom of speech." Naturally you would like for Terrorists to be able to use the Internet freely so they can plan their acts of terrorism. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Malaria
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > wrote: > > > > You're wasting your breath, Bob, telling people on this forum about > > the plight of poor people dying from malaria. > > > > One of the people responsible for 10s of millions of those deaths -- > > > Rachel Carson -- is a hero to many on this forum. > > > > > > *** > > The elimination of DDT is not very consequential in the malaria > story, because the rapid turnover of generations of mosquitoes > ensures that selection for resistance to DDT happens quickly (there > are always a few outliers in the mosquito population who have some > resistance to DDT): > > http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2005/july/ddtinsects.htm > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante > > wrote: > > > > > > http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0707/feature1/ > > > > > > "We live on a malarious planet. It may not seem that way from the > > > vantage point of a wealthy country, where malaria is sometimes > > > thought of, if it is thought of at all, as a problem that has > > mostly > > > been solved, like smallpox or polio. In truth, malaria now > affects > > > more people than ever before. It's endemic to 106 nations, > > > threatening half the world's population. In recent years, the > > > parasite has grown so entrenched and has developed resistance to > so > > > many drugs that the most potent strains can scarcely be > controlled. > > > This year malaria will strike up to a half billion people. At > least > > a > > > million will die, most of them under age five, the vast majority > > > living in Africa. That's more than twice the annual toll a > > generation > > > ago. > > > > > > The outcry over this epidemic, until recently, has been muted. > > > Malaria is a plague of the poor, easy to overlook. The most > > > unfortunate fact about malaria, some researchers believe, is that > > > prosperous nations got rid of it. In the meantime, several > > distinctly > > > unprosperous regions have reached the brink of total malarial > > > collapse, virtually ruled by swarms of buzzing, flying > syringes > > > > > > To witness the full force of malaria's stranglehold on Zambia, > it's > > > essential to leave the capital city, Lusaka. Drive north, across > > the > > > verdant plains, past the banana plantations and the copper mines > > > copper is Zambia's primary exportand into the forested region > > tucked > > > between the borders of Angola and the Democratic Republic of the > > > Congo. This is the North-Western Province. It is almost entirely > > > rural; many villages can be reached only by thin footpaths worn > > into > > > the beet-red soil. A nationwide health survey in 2005 concluded > > that > > > for every thousand children under age five living in the North- > > > Western Province, there were 1,353 cases of malaria. An annual > rate > > > of more than 100 percent seems impossible, a typo. It is not. > What > > it > > > means is that many children are infected with malaria more than > > once > > > a year. > > > > >I thought that no one knew for sure why the US does not have Malaria anymnore. I thought I read in "A shot in the Dark" and other anti-immunization books that diseases may have some unknown cycle and that we have not really erradicated them. Those who created vaccinations claimed that they elimiated disease but did not consider that diseases have cycles. We do not vaccinate against Malaria here and yet it disappeared. Why did it go away? My daughter is in Kenya now, where Malaria is a common illness. She purchased anti-malaria pills in the US but found that the treatment and preventative medicines in Africa were really cheap. (for us) I am sure that most of the people in Africa cannot afford it though. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 6/30/07 2:16:37 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > don't know about subsequent elections, but I doubt it improved much. > > > Quite high for a Republican. You still haven't said > > what Lott said that was racist. > > What did Lott apologize for? > > > > _Kevin L. Martin_ > (http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/9/30/170651) , government and political affairs director of the _African American > Republican Leadership Council_ (http://www.aarlc.com/about/advisory.shtml) , > said people were overreacting to the remarks. "By no means was he endorsing > segregation or anything like that. It was lighthearted, it was humorous." Martin > said Lott captures 25 percent of the black vote in Mississippi, which he > said couldn't happen if Lott were a racist. I'd like to see a different objective source for that since Kevin L. Martin is government and political affairs director of the African American Republican Leadership Council and the article appeared in the right wing rag, Newsmax. And BTW, only 25% of the black vote, if it's true, is quite pathetic and telling all by itself. > Lott apologized for the misunderstanding which was fanned > by the media. You still haven't answered my question which you keep dodging. > Is Robert Byrd or Joe Beiden racist? Whether they are or not has no bearing on Trent Lott. Right wingers like to play the "somebody else is a scumbag like our guy" card and try to make it a partisan issue. As if that somehow justifies or exonerates the actual person being discussed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 6/30/07 2:16:37 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > don't know about subsequent elections, but I doubt it improved much. > > > Quite high for a Republican. You still haven't said > > what Lott said that was racist. > > What did Lott apologize for? > > > > _Kevin L. Martin_ > (http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/9/30/170651) , government and political affairs director of the _African American > Republican Leadership Council_ (http://www.aarlc.com/about/advisory.shtml) , > said people were overreacting to the remarks. "By no means was he endorsing > segregation or anything like that. It was lighthearted, it was humorous." Martin > said Lott captures 25 percent of the black vote in Mississippi, which he > said couldn't happen if Lott were a racist. Like I said, I'd like to see an objective answer. I answered your other questions in a previous post. > Lott apologized for the misunderstanding which was fanned > by the media. You still haven't answered my question which you keep dodging. > Is Robert Byrd or Joe Beiden racist?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ann Coulter on John Edwards' dead son
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 6/30/07 2:56:03 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > "Former House Speaker and presumptive 2008 Republican presidential > candidate Newt Gingrich addressed a freedom-of-speech awards dinner in > New Hampshire last night and said the problem with the Internet in an > age of terrorism is that it allows too damn much freedom of speech." > > > > Naturally you would like for Terrorists to be able to use the Internet > freely so they can plan their acts of terrorism. There you go again, obfuscating the point. The point is that he complained about "too much freedom of speech." IOW, he is for restraining freedom of speech which is something we cannot tolerate.
[FairfieldLife] Re: YouTube - We Are Theo - Chapter 1
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote: > > my wife and I both caught your son's > movie on YouTube, and were *very* impressed. > I can't remember when I've > seen more powerfully artistic > cinematography. How old is your son? Thanks for the encouragement, Rory. Jeremy made his most recent movie, "Marguerite," when he was 15, inspired by the motifs and lighting of noir cinema.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is a lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with a smile. That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
"> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." Form Wikipedia: Intellectual dishonesty: "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > Judy is a different story. There is no way that I can get her off > > the view that I am a devious person telling deliberate untruths for > > some nefarious end. > > To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image. > > An example of same is the way you have phrased your > characterization of my view above. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
On Jun 30, 2007, at 9:47 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: "> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." Form Wikipedia: Intellectual dishonesty: "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. And also why I use the word "obfuscation" in regards to Judy's style (or lack thereof). She's the great obfuscator.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. > > The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is a > > lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with > > a smile. > > That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) > > Sal I must have missed that Hallmark birthday greeting in the 50's section Sal! Thanks for the heads up. I'll stay heavily medicated from here on out! >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann's defense
I don't particularly like labels, nor name calling, nor gender slander. But for Ann I will make a special exception. She is the one person for whom I think the C word was reserved for. In God's Dictionary, Ann's picture shows up under the C word. And under the heading Total C. But its ALL perfect and this is the way it went down, so its all good, and life is bliss, nothing to do, nothing to change, its all frigfin perfect, even Ann. (thats satire for the humor impaired). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > wrote: > > > > If you've been one of the people on this forum writing negative > > things about Coulter, you owe it to "The Fairness Doctrine" to > > read her latest column -- reproduced here -- in which she > > explains why she made the dead-son-bumpersticker remark and the > > wishing-a-terrorist-kills-Edwards remark. > > > > After you're done reading this, I will be very surprised if you > > still feel that Coulter is guilty of what the media suggests she > > is guilty of. I will be even more surprised if you feel that > > Edwards isn't one of the most sleaziest politicians around. > > Let's have a look at some of Ann Coulter's sleaze > from this very column: > > > That Was No Lady -- That Was My Husband > > > > Jun 28 03:11 PM US/Eastern > > By Ann Coulter > > > > The Edwards campaign is apparently still running low on > > donations, so this week they went back to their top > > fundraiser: me. > > > > I doubled the ratings of the lowest-rated cable news show > > on Tuesday > > No, she didn't "double the ratings"; they were > about the same as usual. Nor is the show is the > "lowest-rated" cable news show, either. > > > > For the first time in recorded history, the show's host did not > > interrupt a guest, but let Elizabeth Edwards ramble on and on, > > allowing her to browbeat me for being mean to her husband. > > Actually, the longest Edwards spoke at a stretch > without being interrupted by either Matthews or > Coulter was 40 seconds. Most of the time Edwards > was speaking, Coulter was trying to drown her out > by talking over her. > > Watch it: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6BBDcZqSF0 > > > > I think I may have tuned out at some point, so I can only speak to > > the first 45 minutes of Elizabeth Edwards' harangue > > Actually the portion of the show in which Edwards > participated was about 4 minutes long, and much of > that was Coulter or Matthews talking. From the > transcript, the total number of words from each: > > Edwards 375 > Coulter 301 > Matthews 218 > > (And a good hunk of Edwards's word count was > her having to repeat because Coulter had been > talking over her.) > > , but it mostly > > consisted of utterly dishonest renditions of things I had said > > on my "Good Morning America" interview this week and a column I > > wrote four years ago. (You can't rush Edwards' "rapid response > > team"!) She claimed I had launched unprovoked attacks on the > > Edwards' dead son and called for a terrorist attack on her > > husband. > > No, she didn't. She mentioned the "bumper > sticker" remark (which Coulter herself quotes > below in her column), but she never said it had > constituted an "unprovoked attack" on her dead > son; and she said nothing at all about the > "terrorist attack" crack. > > > Here is my full sentence on "Good Morning America," which the > > media deceptively truncated, referring to a joke I told about > > Edwards six months ago that made liberals cry: "But about the > > same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he > > wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack -- > > so I've learned my lesson: If I'm going to say anything about > > John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed > > in a terrorist assassination plot." > > In fact, that is *not* what Bill Maher said. > Asked if he agreed with a commenter on > HuffingtonPost.com who said he wished Cheney had > been killed in an attack on the Green Zone in Iraq > during Cheney's visit, Maher said: > > "I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in > power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow > I'm just saying that if he did die--other people-- > more people would live. That's a fact." > > He did not say he agreed with the commenter. > > > > If you want points for not using your son's death politically, > > don't you have to take down all those "Ask me about my son's > > death in a horrific car accident" bumper stickers? > > There are no such bumper stickers. > > In the exchange with Edwards, Coulter claimed: > > "You're asking me to stop speaking, stop writing > columns, stop writing your books." > > Edwards asked no such thing. She asked > Coulter to stop making personal attacks and > debate the issues instead. > > A transcript of the exchange is here: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19460016/ >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine > wrote: > > > > On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > > > Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. > > > The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is a > > > lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with > > > a smile. > > > > That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) > > > > Sal > > I must have missed that Hallmark birthday greeting in the 50's section > Sal! Thanks for the heads up. I'll stay heavily medicated from here > on out! \ I have a special feed to Wimbledon and with the remote directional mike I heard Maria Sharapova say, after her win today, "Curtis, you are THE one that Inpsires me, This win is for YOU, babe, I long for you, you are IT. CALL me." Sh*t, and I said DIBS.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Malaria
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, m2smart4u2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I thought I read in "A shot in the Dark" and other > anti-immunization books that diseases may have some unknown cycle > and that we have not really erradicated them. Those who created > vaccinations claimed that they elimiated disease but did not > consider that diseases have cycles. And this hypothesis is based on what studies?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jun 30, 2007, at 9:47 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > "> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > > > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > > > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > > > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." > > > > Form Wikipedia: > > > > Intellectual dishonesty: > > > > "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are > > often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably > > frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to > > say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on > > conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." > > > > Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. > > > And also why I use the word "obfuscation" in regards to Judy's style > (or lack thereof). She's the great obfuscator. Not in my reading of things. Judy often, not always IMO, cuts to the chase. to the key thing. Other times she is off fighting old wars which amuses me, as a reflection of the human condition and its obscure and hidden, deep motivations. But she does not, generally -- I am sure there are exceptions -- obfuscate. She slams the point home. From my view, the V factor obfuscates far more than the J factor.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. > > The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is a > > lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with > > a smile. > > That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) > > Sal > Yeah, should we list the sh*t he will probably face this decade, or leave it as a surprise for him to go OMG! :) (But its ALL perfect, Its all so blissful)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." > > Form Wikipedia: > > Intellectual dishonesty: > > "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are > often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably > frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to > say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on > conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." > > Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. > Curtis, the B-day celebrations must truly be over. Judy's back. (Loved her heart-felt Birthday greetings to you.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann's defense
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you've been one of the people on this forum writing negative > things about Coulter, you owe it to "The Fairness Doctrine" to read > her latest column -- reproduced here -- in which she explains why she > made the dead-son-bumpersticker remark and the wishing-a-terrorist- > kills-Edwards remark. > > After you're done reading this, I will be very surprised if you still > feel that Coulter is guilty of what the media suggests she is guilty > of. I will be even more surprised if you feel that Edwards isn't one > of the most sleaziest politicians around. Perhaps this is so: like attracts like... If this is true, then Edwards is mocking the political system, the same as Ann mocks everything, that comes out of her mouth. It's the mocking part, that has become so much a part of our culture: No one believes anything the government says... Most of the entertainment that sells now, whether on TV, or radio, or or politics, is usually an excersize in mocking something or someone. So, I feel that if you align yourself with this mocking cynical energy for too long, you begin to be possessed by it, and it only serves to strenthen the ego. Like pride comes before the fall, type of thing. > > -- > > That Was No Lady -- That Was My Husband > > Jun 28 03:11 PM US/Eastern > By Ann Coulter > > The Edwards campaign is apparently still running low on donations, so > this week they went back to their top fundraiser: me. > > I doubled the ratings of the lowest-rated cable news show on Tuesday > by agreeing to go on for a full hour to promote my new paperback > version of "Godless" -- a mistake I won't make again. As I was > walking to the set, minutes before airtime, it was casually mentioned > to me that Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic presidential > candidate, John Edwards, might call in. > > For the first time in recorded history, the show's host did not > interrupt a guest, but let Elizabeth Edwards ramble on and on, > allowing her to browbeat me for being mean to her husband. (This > delicate flower is very sensitive to rough words, having hired the > Edwards' campaign staffer who wrote this: "What if Mary had taken > Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy > Spirit"?) > > Say, did any TV host ever surprise Al Franken, Bill Maher or Arianna > Huffington with a call by the wife of someone they've made nasty > remarks about? How about a call to John Edwards from the wife of a > doctor he bankrupted with his junk-science lawsuits? > > I think I may have tuned out at some point, so I can only speak to > the first 45 minutes of Elizabeth Edwards' harangue, but it mostly > consisted of utterly dishonest renditions of things I had said on > my "Good Morning America" interview this week and a column I wrote > four years ago. (You can't rush Edwards' "rapid response team"!) She > claimed I had launched unprovoked attacks on the Edwards' dead son > and called for a terrorist attack on her husband. > > These are bald-faced lies, and the mainstream media knows they are > lies. Yet they were repeated ad nauseam on Wednesday by The > Associated Press, the AOL pop-up window, CNN, NBC and -- stunningly -- > the host of the lowest-rated cable show himself, who personally told > me he knew the truth. > > So for those of you who haven't read any of my five best-selling > books: Liberals are driven by Satan and lie constantly. > > Here is my full sentence on "Good Morning America," which the media > deceptively truncated, referring to a joke I told about Edwards six > months ago that made liberals cry: "But about the same time, you > know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had > been killed in a terrorist attack -- so I've learned my lesson: If > I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just > wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot." > > The usual nut Web sites posted a zillion denunciations of my > appearance on "Good Morning America" immediately after I appeared > Monday morning. But it didn't occur to any of them to simply lie > about what I had said. No, it took them nearly 36 hours to concoct a > version of that quote that included the Edwards part, but not the > Maher part, or what English language speakers call: "the point." > > By tomorrow it will be: "Ann Coulter tried to kill John Edwards > on 'Good Morning America'!" > > Judging by his fundraising efforts so far, I gather most of you don't > know who John Edwards is -- unless you're an overpriced hair dresser. > He's the trial lawyer who pretended in court to channel the spirit of > a handicapped fetus in front of illiterate jurors to scam tens of > millions of dollars off of innocent doctors. According to The New > York Times, Edwards told one jury: "She speaks to you through me ... > An
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." > > Form Wikipedia: > > Intellectual dishonesty: > > "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are > often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably > frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to > say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on > conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." > > Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. Hilarious. An intellectually dishonest definition of intellectual dishonesty. I'd guess the writer of that paragraph has been on the receiving end of accusations of intellectual dishonesty. It was intellectually dishonest of you to pretend this paragraph was the substance of the Wikipedia entry. Here's the first paragraph: Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. Rhetoric is used to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence. If a person is aware of the evidence and the conclusion it portends, yet holds a contradictory view, it is intellectual dishonesty. If the person is unaware of the evidence, their position is ignorance, even if in agreement with the scientific conclusion. (It doesn't have to be "in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence." It can be used just to gain a bit of advantage in an argument.) "Intellectual dishonesty" is a perfectly legitimate label for a particular type of tactics in a debate or argument. It has nothing to do with stupidity or ignorance, of course; a person can be brilliant and yet intellectually dishonest. And it's not "obfuscatory," it's clarificatory, because it makes a clear distinction between lying (knowing misstatement of fact) and an argument that pretends to be logical but is actually fallacious. Nor is it merely a "rhetorical device," although it does frame the person so accused in a negative light. By itself, the accusation doesn't mean much; in that case it *is* just a rhetorical device. But I never use it in a vacuum; I always specify what it is about an argument that is intellectually dishonest and why. Well, you've certainly proved my point, Curtis. Thank you. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > Judy is a different story. There is no way that I can > > > get her off the view that I am a devious person telling > > > deliberate untruths for some nefarious end. > > > > To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image. > > > > An example of same is the way you have phrased your > > characterization of my view above.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jun 30, 2007, at 9:47 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > "> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > > > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > > > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > > > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." > > > > Form Wikipedia: > > > > Intellectual dishonesty: > > > > "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are > > often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably > > frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to > > say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on > > conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." > > > > Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. > > And also why I use the word "obfuscation" in regards to > Judy's style (or lack thereof). She's the great obfuscator. Translation: Vaj's definition of "obfuscation"-- exposing dishonesty (especially his).
[FairfieldLife] Re: This post not approved by TM friends Yahoo group
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote: > > > > > > You mentioned you had a blog, any adress you would like to > > > > share ? I gather you are reffering to Mother Meera in your > > > > writings. Never met her, but Roberto, my buddy, described > > > > looking into her eyes as "looking into infinity" > > > > > > Yes, of course I am. http://hanumandaz.livejournal.com > > > > Michael, I went to have a look at your site and > > had kind of an interesting experience looking at > > the photos of her. > > > > Usually photos of saints don't do anything for me, > > and her photos don't either (I like the way she > > looks, but that's as far as it goes). > > Michael/ Trinity, I would enjoy some discussion of your experiences with MM, how you met her, and about her. If you can share. For example, I was surprised that she is married -- per recent post. Whatever you can share. I ask sincerely, not to find faults. As you may remember from past posts, some years ago, I bought one of her books, with her picture. I was absorbed in it for 4 + hours, transfixed by her picture. Given that experience I have always felt connected to her.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
Hey Geezer, Check out this site for the guy who built my new cigar box guitar! The thing is so Delta and primitive I am loving life. Tuned to open G on 4 strings. This is the old, old school! http://homepage.mac.com/bjagitsch/PhotoAlbum63.html If you scroll down you can see a video of him playing one. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > > > "> To clarify: My view is that when you tell deliberate > > > untruths, or (more often) simply engage in intellectual > > > dishonesty, the "nefarious ends" in question are the > > > preservation and/or promotion of your self-image." > > > > Form Wikipedia: > > > > Intellectual dishonesty: > > > > "The terms intellectually dishonest and intellectual dishonesty are > > often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably > > frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an obfuscatory way to > > say "you're lying" or "you're stupid", and has a cooling effect on > > conversations similar to accusations of ignorance." > > > > Me: Yeah, that about sums it up. > > > > Curtis, the B-day celebrations must truly be over. Judy's back. (Loved her heart-felt > Birthday greetings to you.) >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Photos of Yogis
On Jun 30, 2007, at 10:05 PM, authfriend wrote: Well, you've certainly proved my point, Curtis. Your point being that Curtis is obviously very nice, is willing to put up with an enormous amount of crap, and always tries to answer truthfully and clearly? Thank you. Don't thank me, Judy--always glad to help out. :) Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
On Jun 30, 2007, at 9:27 PM, new.morning wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is a lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with a smile. That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) Sal Yeah, should we list the sh*t he will probably face this decade, or leave it as a surprise for him to go OMG! :) (But its ALL perfect, Its all so blissful) LOL...really brings to mind all the times I heard that from people who were obviously experienced mood-makers--much better than I ever was (not for lack of trying, however...) Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
On Jun 30, 2007, at 8:57 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: >> >>> Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic day. >>> The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. There is >>> a >>> lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this new decade with >>> a smile. >> >> That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) >> >> Sal > > I must have missed that Hallmark birthday greeting in the 50's section > Sal! They were there, Curtis--next time don't forget the bifocals. :) > Thanks for the heads up. I'll stay heavily medicated from here > on out!
[FairfieldLife] Wikipedia in The Times
*Superb* long article on Wikipedia in the NYTimes magazine: http://tinyurl.com/2ofc4h The writer, Jonathan Dee (a novelist as well as a contributor to the magazine), has managed to combine a great deal of solid information about Wikipedia with a wonderful feel for its ethos and what the people are like who do the bulk of the work. Lots of telling anecdotes, a good bit of humor. I practically worship journalism like this. This article is a work of art, but it's so compusively readable you may not realize it until you take a step back and realize what Dee has accomplished.
[FairfieldLife] Comment about Mother Meera and G explains Christ the persona
Hello, Hey, I also want to comment about Mother Meera. A good feeling there, deeply commited for those seeking help. She shifts people around in the positions so that the ego is not promoted . I saw her secretary in the capacity as a mechant collecting the money for the incents, her husband was the door checker. I read all of her books. Among the comments that i never forgot was something to the effect- The problem is everyone thinks they are special, the reality is no one is special and you are not chosen. she also referred to large spiritual organizations and said that sometimes the ego goes the other way than what is usefull. I think this is to do with competing for positions, gaining titles, etc. I would like to reread her books one day when I find the time. Because of the post limit, may as well use this also for a post from Swami G talking which is as clear a light possible for the Jesus folks that hold his, the persona as God: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Namaste This is a wonderfully put together offering that clears the air for those who Preach Jesus - While Christ was an absolutely Perfect Prophet he always pointed mankind towards God - Truth - and beyond fear. Yeshua Ben Joseph never pointed any towards himself He even said - why call me good ? as there are none good save God the Father. Why was this done ? as he was not preaching attach to this persona but Recognise the ONE - When he said i and the Father are ONE - if you have seen me you have seen the Father that sent me - this means that he is speaking from Truth that there is no separation. This is not an affirmation of taking the persona to be god. Maha Shanti OM Now onto this wonderful offering. http://www.submission.org/savior.html "Let there be no compulsion in religion: truth stands out clear from error." Quran 2:256 "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32 We have been receiving many e-mails from our Christian brothers and sisters in which they preach to us that Jesus Christ is the Savior and the way. With due respect to them, we cannot accept their notion as it contradicts every known divine scripture including the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Final Testament (Quran). Any sincere student of the scripture will find out that the ONE and ONLY Savior and Redeemer is the One God , the Almighty, the God of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed. In the NEW TESTAMENT we see that the idea of every one responsible for his own deed were expressed in Galatians 6:4-7, which states "Each man should look to his conduct; if he has reason to boast of anything, it will be because the achievement is his and not another's. . A man will REAP ONLY what he SOWS." Galatians 6:4 - 7 "Each of us shall give an account of himself to God." Romans 14:12 "Each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor." 1Corinthians 3:8 "Also to you O Lord, belong mercy; for you render to each one according to his work." Psalms 62:12 "And will he not render to each man according to his deeds?" Proverbs 24:12 "The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." Ezekiel 18:20 If each man reaps what he sows, how can Jesus be the savior ? How could he have taken on the sins of mankind and negated them ? Only the One who accepts repentance and wipes out sins can do that. Indeed throughout the Old Testament, God ALONE is referred to as the SAVIOR. See , 2 Samuel 22:1-3 , and Isaiah 43:3-11 In Isaiah, God Himself speaks, saying clearly that He ALONE is the SAVIOR: "For I am the Lord, your God, the Holy One of Israel, your SAVIORIt is I, the Lord; there is NO SAVIOR BUT ME..." Isaiah 43:3 &11 HE repeats this categorical statement in Hosea: "I am the Lord, your God, since the land of Egypt; You know no God besides me, and there is NO SAVIOR but me." Hosea 13:4 There is also a related concept, the idea of a "REDEEMER". This word has also been exclusively used for God in the Old Testament, e.g. Isaiah 44:24 and Isaiah 60:16 "You shall know that I, the Lord am your SAVIOR, your REDEEMER, the mighty one of Jacob." Isaiah 60:16 The created idea of Jesus being the Savior can only be witnessed in the New Testament where the alteration has been highly suspected because of its complete contradiction to the Old Testament that came from the same God. God does not change His mind. God does not call Himself the ONLY SAVIOR then decides to change that and call Jesus the Savior. This term describing Jesus as the Savior was used only twice in the N.T. This is noted in Lk.ii 11 and in Jn. iv 42. Besides these two occurrences , the only other occurrence in the Gospels clearly refers to God, not Jesus : "Then Mary said: "My being proclaims the greatness of the Lord. My spirit finds joy in God , MY SAVIOR, For He has looked upon his servant in her lowliness..." Luke 1: 46-48 W
[FairfieldLife] Re: YouTube - We Are Theo - Chapter 1
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote: > > > > my wife and I both caught your son's > > movie on YouTube, and were *very* impressed. > > I can't remember when I've > > seen more powerfully artistic > > cinematography. How old is your son? > > Thanks for the encouragement, Rory. Jeremy > made his most recent movie, "Marguerite," > when he was 15, inspired by the motifs and > lighting of noir cinema. Very nice indeed. I hadn't gotten a chance to view the film until today. As you say, he captured the "look and feel" of French film noir in color very well, and also its trade- mark "sparse storytelling." We are told very little about the events we don't see onscreen that led up to the encounter we see onscreen, but we are given just enough to imagine the rest -- *our* "rest." Please pass along the congratulations and encouragement of a lifetime film freak (moi) to your son, and let us know when there are others to be viewed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Today is Curtis' Birthday
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:27 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > Thanks to everyone whose birthday blessings made it a fantastic > > day. The big five-O! All the good vibes were much appreciated. > > There is a lot of warmth here on FFL and it helped me start this > > new decade with a smile. > > That's good, Curtis...cause it's all downhill from here. :) Having passed my big five-o some time ago, I should point out that "all downhill from here" is a drawback only if you've forgotten how to skateboard. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ann's defense
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't particularly like labels, nor name calling, nor gender > slander. But for Ann I will make a special exception. She is > the one person for whom I think the C word was reserved for. In > God's Dictionary, Ann's picture shows up under the C word. And > under the heading Total C. I've always felt that the C word was reserved for women who are so abrasive that they have been unable to use theirs for some time. It's been so long since they've had sex that they come to mistake the little oooh and aaah sounds they make at the keyboard when trashing someone -- anyone -- with orgasm. I'm actually fairly serious. I seem to remember one TV interview with Ann Coulter in which the right-wing interviewer asked her which she preferred more -- sex or writing her trademark slams against Democrats. She replied something like, "Sex pales in comparison." They both had a big laugh about that. In other words, we call C's C's for the same reason we call some guys dicks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Wikipedia in The Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > *Superb* long article on Wikipedia in the > NYTimes magazine: > > http://tinyurl.com/2ofc4h > > The writer, Jonathan Dee (a novelist as > well as a contributor to the magazine), has > managed to combine a great deal of solid > information about Wikipedia with a wonderful > feel for its ethos and what the people are > like who do the bulk of the work. Lots of > telling anecdotes, a good bit of humor. > > I practically worship journalism like this. > This article is a work of art, but it's so > compusively readable you may not realize it > until you take a step back and realize what > Dee has accomplished. > Just occurred to me, the word 'wiki' *might* be (an?) adaptation of English 'quick' into Hawaiian (morpho?)phonology...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Wikipedia in The Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" > wrote: > > > > *Superb* long article on Wikipedia in the > > NYTimes magazine: > > > > http://tinyurl.com/2ofc4h > > > > The writer, Jonathan Dee (a novelist as > > well as a contributor to the magazine), has > > managed to combine a great deal of solid > > information about Wikipedia with a wonderful > > feel for its ethos and what the people are > > like who do the bulk of the work. Lots of > > telling anecdotes, a good bit of humor. > > > > I practically worship journalism like this. > > This article is a work of art, but it's so > > compusively readable you may not realize it > > until you take a step back and realize what > > Dee has accomplished. > > > > Just occurred to me, the word 'wiki' *might* > be (an?) adaptation of English 'quick' into Hawaiian > (morpho?)phonology... > ** Wiki wiki is the Hawaiian pidgin word for English "quick," but funnily enough the genuine Hawaiian (Hawaiian as part of the Austronesian family of languages, not pidgin) word for quick is "awiwi," so there could have been some interplay between adapting wiki wiki as the pidgin word for English quick along with the indigenous word for quick: http://tinyurl.com/2hko2y
[FairfieldLife] Is astrology just a feather? (was Re: Saturn transgressing to Leo...)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > Personally I think that astrology is hogwash, > > *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people > > whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present > > but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing > > their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart > > of the position of the planets. > > > > For other people, it's tarot cards. For still > > others, reading tea leaves. > > Interesting. Here's what I said back in May > of last year (I'm sure Barry didn't, you know, > read it or anything): > > "My guess: Any sufficiently complex system of > correspondences, such as astrology (any flavor), > works as a tool for focusing the intuition-- > i.e., collecting and integrating all one's > little intuitional inputs into a coherent whole > so that a prediction can be generated from it. > The system's correspondences themselves don't > 'mean' anything at all, they're just a framework > to hang the intuition on and organize what the > intuition knows. > > "Tea leaves, in other words, could work just as > well as astrology for anyone with a highly > developed intuition." I wish to congratulate Judy for having discovered, in May of last year, a way of looking at astrology that we California hippies used to laugh about over joints back in 1966. It shows real progress on her part. As for the well-crafted implication that I somehow lifted her ideas, I might suggest that this comes from a badly-aspected birth chart that indicates Head Up Uranus syndrome. :-) The debilitating and malefic effects of Head Up Uranus syndrome have been documented by astrologers for centuries. In some extreme cases it can cause someone who has just spent a long, supposedly relax- ing and rejuvenating weekend away to come back home and fire off 15 posts to the Internet in less than twelve hours, 11 of which include putdowns of other people. It reminds me of the classic astrological advice that Nostradamus gave to his patron Catherine de Medici: "My Queen, whenever you find yourself looking at the world and seeing nothing but shit, that's Uranus."
