Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Wikileaks lawyer runs into Atty General Eric Holder at Sundance

[Emily Reyn]

I subscribe to The Sun magazine, which included an interview this month with 
Richard Wolff, economist and critic of the structural problems with current 
capitalist system.  In this particular interview, he discusses capitalism in 
the context of today's economic reality, the OWS movement, and historical 
events, policies, laws, etc. that led up to where we are.  The Sun website 
doesn't post current issues to preserve interest in their subscriptions, I am 
assuming, but the interviewer (David Barsamian) asked a couple of questions 
that speak to Obama's administration and its decisions that I have subjectively 
excerpted below.

Wolff is, I'm sure. called a "marxist or communist"  but he makes a lot of 
interesting points and has ideas that could be implemented in a democracy.  
Personally, I would love a government job at a living wage at this point in my 
life for a variety of reasons.  

"Barsamian:  What practical steps could the Obama administration take to 
address the inequalities that the protesters (OWS) are pointing out? (as in the 
economic inequality being furthered by both the Republican and Democratic 
parties, as represented by their financial backers)

Wolff:  It might be too late for that.  Obama had many chances and took none of 
them.  He repeatedly compromises with the Right and ignores or throws minor 
concessions to his core constituents.  Nothing short of a major reversal of 
everything his administration has done would convert him into an ally of OWS.

Barsamian:  So who is most to blame for the mess we're in?

Wolff:  We should be beyond blaming the poor or the rich.  Everybody did his or 
her part to contribute to this crisis.  The bankers did what bankers do; the 
working people did what working people do.  Everyone tried to make this system 
work for them.  Workers couldn't pay back their debts for understandable 
reasons. Employers stopped raising wages (which have stagnated since the 1970's 
for the "middle class") because the system allowed them to do it.

When a system has everybody playing more or less by the rules and achieves the 
level of dysfunction that we have now, it's time to stop looking for scapegoats 
and understand that the problem is the system itself.  It's driving everyone in 
it - corporations, individuals, banks, businesses on Main Street, whomever - to 
act in ways that are bad for the economy as a whole.

Barsamian:  What immediate steps would you recommend? (in terms of fixing the 
current system)

Wolff:  I would focus on one short-term step that ought to be taken 
immediately, and one intermediate step that will be harder to take.

...We ought to have a national jobs program to put our unemployed back to work 
(yes, back to the 30's), and end the plan that has now failed for four and a 
half years, the plan of Presidents Bush and Obama, which is to provide 
incentives for the private sector to hire people.  Unemployment is as high now 
as it was three years ago.  It is unconscionable and unethical to stick with a 
policy of proven failure.

Two and a half years ago President Obama designed a stimulus program that was 
supposed to put people back to work.  It offered incentives of various kinds: 
tax cuts and subsidies that would hopefully lead the private sector to hire 
more people. It cost roughly $800 billion and was passed by Congress.  It 
didn't solve the problem.  In September 2011 President Obama went on television 
again to propose yet another stimulus, only this package was half the size of 
the one before it.  Obviously, if the first one failed, this one cannot work 
either.

The solution is for the government to hire people directly.  Use every dollar 
of the program to create government jobs, not to provide incentives, some of 
which will end up in the hands of executives or shareholders.  You want to put 
people to work?  Hire them and pay them a decent salary.  We could be building 
public transportationetc., etc..

More important than that, and a bit more far-reaching, is the need to 
democratize our enterprises..Right now, all the decisions are made by a 
tiny group of people.  In most corporations that group is the board of 
directors: 15 to 20 people who decide what to produce, how and where to produce 
it, and what to do with the profits.  And who selects these people?  The major 
shareholders, another group of 15 to 20 people.  The vast majority of working 
people have no voice.  What if the employees  themselves ran these enterprises? 
 How would that work?...

Barsamian: Can the government pay for the sort of jobs programs you recommend 
without more deficit spending?  

Wolff:  The reason the U.S. government takes in less than it spends is because 
it chooses not to tax corporations and the rich at the rates applied to them in 
the 1950's and 1960's.  Then they turn around and borrow moneyetc. (Both 
sides have voted for unbalanced budgets for the last 50 years.  He believes 
that the rising deficits are a 

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy, since you did enlighten me to the fact that I hadn't quite followed 
> > > the conversation correctly, I think I may volunteer to be the first of 
> > > your mind *less* followers. But, I reserve the right to abdicate at any 
> > > time the mind *ful* part of my being and brain take over.  In the 
> > > meantime, I throw flower petals at your pinky toe.  
> > > 
> > Crusher of illusion, buster of balls, behold the Supreme
> > power of Sri Sri Judymataji:
> > 
> > http://youtu.be/bHnEWmS1BNc
> 
> ROARRR
> 
> (Takes me forever to get that red crap off my tongue
> every night. But if that's what it takes to maintain
> my awesome power over you all...it's worth it.)
>

Lay off the betel leaf.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1332436/the_tradition_of_chewing_paan/

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[marekreavis]

[Tangential to the thread (below): Great chant, big vibes. Love the exuberance 
of Hinduism. Thanks for the vid.]

***

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > Judy, since you did enlighten me to the fact that I hadn't quite followed 
> > the conversation correctly, I think I may volunteer to be the first of your 
> > mind *less* followers. But, I reserve the right to abdicate at any time the 
> > mind *ful* part of my being and brain take over.  In the meantime, I throw 
> > flower petals at your pinky toe. Â
> > 
> >
> 
> Crusher of illusion, buster of balls, behold the Supreme power of Sri Sri 
> Judymataji:
> 
> http://youtu.be/bHnEWmS1BNc
>  
> > 
> >  From: Emily Reyn 
> > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > Judy, "O Supreme True Believer"...who are your mindless followers on this 
> > forum?  I need help with this.   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: authfriend 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:51 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing 
> > > and cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by Judy? > You are affording 
> > > her an unbelievable amount of power, with
> > > this accusation. And, of course, you are assuming the rest of
> > > us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or stay
> > > *at all* objective.
> > 
> > Emily, to be fair, "brainwashing" was the term *I* used to
> > describe Curtis's theory that I influenced others to see
> > Vaj as untrustworthy. Curtis objected to my use of the term,
> > saying it was an "absurdly false" characterization of what
> > he had said. And now he's using it to describe my
> > characterization of his arguments as deceptive and
> > sophistical to get back at me.
> > 
> > But what he said originally *did* imply what you say--that
> > the folks who agree with me about Vaj weren't thinking for
> > themselves but following my lead because of my "forceful
> > personality."
> > 
> > When one argues with Curtis, things tend to get very
> > convoluted.
> > 
> > In any case, the term "brainwashing" is commonly used as
> > I did, to refer simply to persuasion rather than coercive
> > mind control per se. Curtis appears to believe that all I
> > have to do is accuse Vaj of untruthfulness, and all my
> > "followers" are instantly persuaded to step smartly into
> > line.
> > 
> >  
> > > 
> > > I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my 
> > > irony glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really 
> > > is pretty humorous.  
> > > 
> > > From Wikipedia: 
> > > 
> > > Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive 
> > > persuasion, mind abuse, thought control, or thought reform) 
> > > refers to a process in which a group or individual "systematically uses 
> > > unethically manipulative methods to persuade others to conform to 
> > > the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to the detriment of the person 
> > > being manipulated".[1] 
> > > 
> > > The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or 
> > > otherwise, which can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of 
> > > control over their own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision 
> > > making. InPropaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques 
> > > Ellul sustains that the "principal aims of these psychological methods 
> > > is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, space, hours, milieu, and so 
> > > on."[2]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
> > > explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in 
> > > systematically indoctrinating prisoners of war through 
> > > propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later 
> > > expanded and modified to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially 
> > > conversions to new religious movements(NRMs).
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > From: curtisdeltablues 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > > > quotes, of course)
> > > > 
> > > > Actually C

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > Judy, since you did enlighten me to the fact that I hadn't quite followed 
> > the conversation correctly, I think I may volunteer to be the first of your 
> > mind *less* followers. But, I reserve the right to abdicate at any time the 
> > mind *ful* part of my being and brain take over.  In the meantime, I throw 
> > flower petals at your pinky toe.  
> > 
> Crusher of illusion, buster of balls, behold the Supreme
> power of Sri Sri Judymataji:
> 
> http://youtu.be/bHnEWmS1BNc

ROARRR

(Takes me forever to get that red crap off my tongue
every night. But if that's what it takes to maintain
my awesome power over you all...it's worth it.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Wikileaks lawyer runs into Atty General Eric Holder at Sundance

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> And takes the opportunity to ask him a few questions. Excellent
> article/film review/reminder of what America's priorities really
> are.

That would be, of course, not what *America's* priorities
are, but what *the Obama administration's* priorities are.

Priorities that Obama did not reveal during the campaign.
Not only did he not reveal them, in fact, he explicitly
claimed his priorities were the opposite.

Barry bought the claim and viciously attacked those of us
who were skeptical.

But now that he knows we were right and he was wrong, he
has to characterize Obama's real priorities as those of
"America" rather than Obama.

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Judy, since you did enlighten me to the fact that I hadn't quite followed the 
> conversation correctly, I think I may volunteer to be the first of your mind 
> *less* followers. But, I reserve the right to abdicate at any time the mind 
> *ful* part of my being and brain take over.  In the meantime, I throw flower 
> petals at your pinky toe.  
> 
>

Crusher of illusion, buster of balls, behold the Supreme power of Sri Sri 
Judymataji:

http://youtu.be/bHnEWmS1BNc
 
> 
>  From: Emily Reyn 
> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
>  
> 
>   
> Judy, "O Supreme True Believer"...who are your mindless followers on this 
> forum?  I need help with this.   
> 
> 
> 
>  From: authfriend 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:51 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
>  
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing 
> > and cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by Judy? > You are affording her 
> > an unbelievable amount of power, with
> > this accusation. And, of course, you are assuming the rest of
> > us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or stay
> > *at all* objective.
> 
> Emily, to be fair, "brainwashing" was the term *I* used to
> describe Curtis's theory that I influenced others to see
> Vaj as untrustworthy. Curtis objected to my use of the term,
> saying it was an "absurdly false" characterization of what
> he had said. And now he's using it to describe my
> characterization of his arguments as deceptive and
> sophistical to get back at me.
> 
> But what he said originally *did* imply what you say--that
> the folks who agree with me about Vaj weren't thinking for
> themselves but following my lead because of my "forceful
> personality."
> 
> When one argues with Curtis, things tend to get very
> convoluted.
> 
> In any case, the term "brainwashing" is commonly used as
> I did, to refer simply to persuasion rather than coercive
> mind control per se. Curtis appears to believe that all I
> have to do is accuse Vaj of untruthfulness, and all my
> "followers" are instantly persuaded to step smartly into
> line.
> 
>  
> > 
> > I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my 
> > irony glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is 
> > pretty humorous.  
> > 
> > From Wikipedia: 
> > 
> > Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive 
> > persuasion, mind abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers 
> > to a process in which a group or individual "systematically uses 
> > unethically manipulative methods to persuade others to conform to the 
> > wishes of the manipulator(s), often to the detriment of the person being 
> > manipulated".[1] 
> > 
> > The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, 
> > which can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their 
> > own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The 
> > Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the 
> > "principal aims of these psychological methods is to destroy a man's 
> > habitual patterns, space, hours, milieu, and so on."[2]
> > 
> > 
> > Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
> > explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in 
> > systematically indoctrinating prisoners of war through 
> > propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later 
> > expanded and modified to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially 
> > conversions to new religious movements(NRMs).
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From: curtisdeltablues 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > > quotes, of course)
> > > 
> > > Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> > > were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> > > it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> > > and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> > > sophistry themselves take.
> > 
> > Up to your brainwashing again, eh?
> > 
> > >
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Fwd: Signs of the times

[wleed3]

--- Begin Message ---


Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Lois Kaufman" 
> Date: January 31, 2012 3:58:29 PM EST
> To: "Lois Kaufman" 
> Subject: Signs of the times
> Reply-To: 
> 
>  
>  
> From: Judith Kaufman [mailto:jkauf2...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:41 AM
> To: Adam Kaufman; Philip Kaufman; Jen Kaufman; Rita Rauzin; Linda Levine; 
> Anita Blanco; Lois Weil Kaufman; Ronne Mickey; Arline Rogel; Reva Ceader; 
> Dick Reuben
> Subject: Signs of the times
>  
> Got to love the creativity of small business owners!
> Sign over a Gynecologist's Office:
> "Dr. Jones, at your cervix."
> **
> In a Podiatrist's office:
> "Time wounds all heels."
> **
> On a Septic Tank Truck:
> “Yesterday's Meals on Wheels”
> **
> At a Proctologist's door:
> "To expedite your visit, please back in."
> **
> On a Plumber's truck:
> "We repair what your husband fixed."
> **
> On another Plumber's truck:
> "Don't sleep with a drip. Call your plumber."
> **
> On a Church's Billboard:
> "7 days without God makes one weak."
> **
> At a Tire Shop in Milwaukee:
> "Invite us to your next blowout."
> **
> At a Towing company:
> "We don't charge an arm and a leg. We want tows."
> **
> On an Electrician's truck:
> "Let us remove your shorts.."
> **
> In a Nonsmoking Area:
> "If we see smoke, we will assume you are on fire and take appropriate action."
> **
> On a Maternity Room door:
> "Push. Push. Push."
> **
> At an Optometrist's Office:
> "If you don't see what you're looking for, you've come to the right place."
> **
> On a Taxidermist's window:
> "We really know our stuff."
> **
> On a Fence:
> "Salesmen welcome! Dog food is expensive!"
> **
> At a Car Dealership:
> "The best way to get back on your feet - miss a car payment."
> **
> Outside a Muffler Shop:
> "No appointment necessary. We hear you coming."
> **
> In a Veterinarian's waiting room:
> "Be back in 5 minutes. Sit! Stay!"
> **
> At the Electric Company :
> "We would be delighted if you send in your payment. However, if you don't, 
> you will be."
> **
> In a Restaurant window:
> "Don't stand there and be hungry; come on in and get fed up."
> **
> In the front yard of a Funeral Home:
> "Drive carefully. We'll wait."
> **
> At a Propane Filling Station:
> "Thank heaven for little grills."
> **
> And don't forget the sign at a CHICAGO RADIATOR SHOP:
> "Best place in town to take a leak."
> **
> Sign on the back of another Septic Tank Truck:
> "Caution - This Truck is full of Political Promises"
>  
>  

--- End Message ---

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > 
> > > > Hey Steve, how come we haven't heard from Vaj? Just when he 
> > > > had an opportunity to come clean and mop up the details of his 
> > > > messy business with Robin, he went MIA. We haven't heard a 
> > > > peep out of him ever since Ann assured him that if a tape 
> > > > existed of Robin hitting someone between 1983-1986 she would 
> > > > have known about it. 
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302767
> > > 
> > > Raunchy, I don't think you're clear on this "playing by 
> > > the rules" thang that Steve referred to above. If what
> > > you're hoping to achieve is to restart the tired olde
> > > "Vaj is a liar" routine that you and Judy can't let go
> > > of
> > 
> > And that Barry and Curtis are desperate to flush down
> > the memory hole because it was never resolved, and they
> > want to keep it that way. Robin and Ann have both made
> > themselves accountable; Vaj has not.
> 
> What are you accusing me of?  Being desperate to flush WHAT
> down a memory hole? What contrived BS.

You having trouble with reading comprehension, Curtis?
Try reading what Barry said before reading my comment.

> Robin copped to doing it, we don't need a tape. That routine
> is over with his admission. He didn't cop to calling Vaj a
> liar when he knew it was true.  He did the parsing dance.

As Robin said, he didn't deny anything he knew to be true.
He denied what he was being accused of. And the issue of
whether Vaj lied about other aspects of this is still wide
open.

> Vaj has reasons not to play this out online with people he 
> considers hostile and some he considers unstable.

Maybe he shouldn't have started playing it at all online,
then, don't you think?

What exactly do you think Vaj accomplished, Curtis? How
does what he did benefit any of us?

> With people who don't attack him the way you do, he communicates
> offline, as he invited Robin to do.

Robin didn't attack Vaj?? Ooopsie!

> Robin chose not to knowing
> that to preserve his anonymity here, Vaj would be at a
> disadvantage to defend himself.

Seems you aren't above a little mind-reading yourself, eh?

If I wanted to maintain my privacy, Vaj is the *last*
person I'd want to have access to my email address.

> He could have taken it all offline as Vaj suggested.  With my
> last little run in with he who will not be named, I completely
> understand Vaj's reasons for not providing more details, all
> of which are now unnecessary since the big confession. Vaj
> could have seen it all in a dream, it doesn't matter now.  He
> was vindicated by the source himself.

Only Vaj's very last version of his striking-students
claim was vindicated, as I pointed out to you in my
response to your attack on Robin. By that time he'd
walked it back so it wasn't in such conflict with what
Robin admitted to. In that post Vaj even labeled one of
the early versions of his claim as a false rumor that
had been propagated *by TM TBs*.

> Isn't it interesting that the two people who do communicate
> with Vaj offline are most confident that he is being honest
> about his participation in TM.  I wonder why that is 

Easier to be brainwashed in friendly private communications,
I'd say.

[FairfieldLife] Who will care for the Movement Now?

[Buck]

> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> >
> > Utopian's Mortality:
> > 
> > "Why I am so weak and weary with FFL?
> > See how faint my heated breath,
> > All around me seems darkness.
> > Tell me, comrades, is this death?
> > Ah! How well I know your answer,
> > It's just a POV.
> > To my fate I meekly bow.
> > If you'll only tell me truly,
> > Who will care for the Movement now? 
> > > 
> > > Chorus:
> > > Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> > > With bright laurels on my brow,
> > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > 
> > > > Who will comfort the Movement in sorrow?
> > > > Who will dry the falling tear?
> > > > Gently smooth its wrinkled forehead?
> > > > Who will whisper words of cheer?
> > > > Even now I think I see it
> > > > Kneeling, praying for me! How
> > > > Can I leave it in anguish?
> > > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Chorus...
> > > > > Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> > > > > With bright laurels on my brow,
> > > > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Let this backjack be my pillow,
> > > > > > And my mantle be the sky;
> > > > > > hasten, comrades on to meditation,
> > > > > > I like a good meditator will transition on.
> > > > > > Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
> > > > > > With Bright laurels on my brow;
> > > > > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > > > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields 
> > > > > > > of consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  
> > > > > > > Hear Ye!
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Buck for President! 
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Friends, members of FFL,
> > > > > > > > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > > > > > > > if nominated I will not run,
> > > > > > > > if elected I will not serve.
> > > > > > > > However, if appointed by
> > > > > > > > Rick Archer to be President
> > > > > > > > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > > > > > > > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > However,
> > > > > > > > I am not bucking for the job
> > > > > > > > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > > > > > > > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > > > > > > > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > > > > > > > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > > > > > > > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > > > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the 
> > > > > > > > > > TMmovement?
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before 
> > > > > > > > > > several times.  The last time I enumerated it was in this 
> > > > > > > > > > post:
> > > > > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > > > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
>
> Utopian's Mortality:
> 
> "Why I am so weak and weary with FFL?
> See how faint my heated breath,
> All around me seems darkness.
> Tell me, comrades, is this death?
> Ah! How well I know your answer,
> It's just a POV.
> To my fate I meekly bow.
> If you'll only tell me truly,
> Who will care for the Movement now? 
> > 
> > Chorus:
> > Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> > With bright laurels on my brow,
> > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > 
> > > Who will comfort the Movement in sorrow?
> > > Who will dry the falling tear?
> > > Gently smooth its wrinkled forehead?
> > > Who will whisper words of cheer?
> > > Even now I think I see it
> > > Kneeling, praying for me! How
> > > Can I leave it in anguish?
> > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > 
> > > > Chorus...
> > > > Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> > > > With bright laurels on my brow,
> > > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Let this backjack be my pillow,
> > > > > And my mantle be the sky;
> > > > > hasten, comrades on to meditation,
> > > > > I like a good meditator will transition on.
> > > > > Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
> > > > > With Bright laurels on my brow;
> > > > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > > 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
> > > > > > consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear 
> > > > > > Ye!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Buck for President! 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Friends, members of FFL,
> > > > > > > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > > > > > > if nominated I will not run,
> > > > > > > if elected I will not serve.
> > > > > > > However, if appointed by
> > > > > > > Rick Archer to be President
> > > > > > > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > > > > > > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > However,
> > > > > > > I am not bucking for the job
> > > > > > > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > > > > > > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > > > > > > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > > > > > > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > > > > > > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the 
> > > > > > > > > TMmovement?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several 
> > > > > > > > > times.  The last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

"Why I am so weak and weary with FFL?
See how faint my heated breath,
All around me seems darkness.
Tell me, comrades, is this death?
Ah! How well I know your answer,
It's just a POV.
To my fate I meekly bow.
If you'll only tell me truly,
Who will care for the Movement now? 
> 
> Chorus:
> Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> With bright laurels on my brow,
> I have for my Movement fallen,
> Who will care for the Movement now?
> > 
> > Who will comfort the Movement in sorrow?
> > Who will dry the falling tear?
> > Gently smooth its wrinkled forehead?
> > Who will whisper words of cheer?
> > Even now I think I see it
> > Kneeling, praying for me! How
> > Can I leave it in anguish?
> > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > 
> > > Chorus...
> > > Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> > > With bright laurels on my brow,
> > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > 
> > > > Let this backjack be my pillow,
> > > > And my mantle be the sky;
> > > > hasten, comrades on to meditation,
> > > > I like a good meditator will transition on.
> > > > Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
> > > > With Bright laurels on my brow;
> > > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
> > > > > consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear Ye!
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Buck for President! 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Friends, members of FFL,
> > > > > > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > > > > > if nominated I will not run,
> > > > > > if elected I will not serve.
> > > > > > However, if appointed by
> > > > > > Rick Archer to be President
> > > > > > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > > > > > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > However,
> > > > > > I am not bucking for the job
> > > > > > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > > > > > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > > > > > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > > > > > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > > > > > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the 
> > > > > > > > TMmovement?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several 
> > > > > > > > times.  The last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

Chorus:
Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
With bright laurels on my brow,
I have for my Movement fallen,
Who will care for the Movement now?
> 
> Who will comfort the Movement in sorrow?
> Who will dry the falling tear?
> Gently smooth its wrinkled forehead?
> Who will whisper words of cheer?
> Even now I think I see it
> Kneeling, praying for me! How
> Can I leave it in anguish?
> Who will care for the Movement now?
> > 
> > Chorus...
> > Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> > With bright laurels on my brow,
> > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > 
> > > Let this backjack be my pillow,
> > > And my mantle be the sky;
> > > hasten, comrades on to meditation,
> > > I like a good meditator will transition on.
> > > Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
> > > With Bright laurels on my brow;
> > > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
> > > > consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear Ye!
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Buck for President! 
> > > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > Friends, members of FFL,
> > > > > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > > > > if nominated I will not run,
> > > > > if elected I will not serve.
> > > > > However, if appointed by
> > > > > Rick Archer to be President
> > > > > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > > > > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > > > > 
> > > > > However,
> > > > > I am not bucking for the job
> > > > > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > > > > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > > > > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > > > > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > > > > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >  
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the 
> > > > > > > TMmovement?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several 
> > > > > > > times.  The last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

Who will comfort the Movement in sorrow?
Who will dry the falling tear?
Gently smooth its wrinkled forehead?
Who will whisper words of cheer?
Even now I think I see it
Kneeling, praying for me! How
Can I leave it in anguish?
Who will care for the Movement now?
> 
> Chorus...
> Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
> With bright laurels on my brow,
> I have for my Movement fallen,
> Who will care for the Movement now?
> > 
> > Let this backjack be my pillow,
> > And my mantle be the sky;
> > hasten, comrades on to meditation,
> > I like a good meditator will transition on.
> > Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
> > With Bright laurels on my brow;
> > I have for my Movement fallen,
> > Who will care for the Movement now?
> > 
> > >
> > > President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
> > > consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear Ye!
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > Buck for President! 
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Friends, members of FFL,
> > > > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > > > if nominated I will not run,
> > > > if elected I will not serve.
> > > > However, if appointed by
> > > > Rick Archer to be President
> > > > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > > > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > > > 
> > > > However,
> > > > I am not bucking for the job
> > > > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > > > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > > > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > > > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > > > 
> > > > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > > > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times. 
> > > > > >  The last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

Chorus...
Soon with angels I'll be leaving,
With bright laurels on my brow,
I have for my Movement fallen,
Who will care for the Movement now?
> 
> Let this backjack be my pillow,
> And my mantle be the sky;
> hasten, comrades on to meditation,
> I like a good meditator will transition on.
> Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
> With Bright laurels on my brow;
> I have for my Movement fallen,
> Who will care for the Movement now?
> 
> >
> > President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
> > consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear Ye!
> > 
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > Buck for President! 
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Friends, members of FFL,
> > > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > > if nominated I will not run,
> > > if elected I will not serve.
> > > However, if appointed by
> > > Rick Archer to be President
> > > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > > 
> > > However,
> > > I am not bucking for the job
> > > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > > 
> > > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > > -Buck in FF
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
> > > > > 
> > > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times.  
> > > > > The last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > > -Buck in FF
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

Let this backjack be my pillow,
And my mantle be the sky;
hasten, comrades on to meditation,
I like a good meditator will transition on.
Soon with angels I'll be meditating,
With Bright laurels on my brow;
I have for my Movement fallen,
Who will care for the Movement now?

>
> President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
> consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear Ye!
> 
> > 
> > >
> > > Buck for President! 
> > >
> > 
> > Friends, members of FFL,
> > I appreciate the honor you do me;
> > if nominated I will not run,
> > if elected I will not serve.
> > However, if appointed by
> > Rick Archer to be President
> > of FFL I might do so if also asked
> > to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> > 
> > However,
> > I am not bucking for the job
> > and I do not expect to be here long.
> > It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> > to take to the fields working.  I don't
> > expect to be here long on FFL.
> > 
> > Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> > YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> > -Buck in FF
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
> > > > 
> > > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times.  
> > > > The last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > > -Buck in FF
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[obbajeeba]

President of your existence!  President, of the presiding fields of 
consciousness, and the fields of flowing flowers!  Hear Ye!  Hear Ye!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
> >
> > Buck for President! 
> >
> 
> Friends, members of FFL,
> I appreciate the honor you do me;
> if nominated I will not run,
> if elected I will not serve.
> However, if appointed by
> Rick Archer to be President
> of FFL I might do so if also asked
> to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  
> 
> However,
> I am not bucking for the job
> and I do not expect to be here long.
> It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
> to take to the fields working.  I don't
> expect to be here long on FFL.
> 
> Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
> YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
> -Buck in FF
> 
> 
> 
>  
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > >
> > > People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
> > > 
> > > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times.  The 
> > > last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > > -Buck in FF
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Jan 28 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Feb 04 00:00:00 2012
364 messages as of (UTC) Wed Feb 01 00:04:12 2012

51 "futur.musik" 
37 authfriend 
37 Buck 
28 Emily Reyn 
24 curtisdeltablues 
23 turquoiseb 
23 nablusoss1008 
22 marekreavis 
17 merudanda 
13 Bhairitu 
10 raunchydog 
10 obbajeeba 
 9 seventhray1 
 8 cardemaister 
 7 John 
 5 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 5 PaliGap 
 5 Duveyoung 
 4 feste37 
 4 Rick Archer 
 4 "Richard J. Williams" 
 3 Susan 
 2 wgm4u 
 2 martyboi 
 2 Yifu 
 2 wle...@aol.com
 1 ynorthr 
 1 wleed3 
 1 merlin 
 1 jpgillam 
 1 Sweta Kurtzkova 
 1 Carol 
 1 Alex Stanley 

Posters: 33
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
> Buck for President! 
>

Friends, members of FFL,
I appreciate the honor you do me;
if nominated I will not run,
if elected I will not serve.
However, if appointed by
Rick Archer to be President
of FFL I might do so if also asked
to be his Regent. I desire no crown.  

However,
I am not bucking for the job
and I do not expect to be here long.
It is coming planting season now and shortly I expect
to take to the fields working.  I don't
expect to be here long on FFL.

Most Faithfully & Your Kind Servant,
YogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*. 
-Buck in FF



 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> >
> > People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
> > 
> > My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times.  The 
> > last time I enumerated it was in this post:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> > -Buck in FF
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[obbajeeba]

I second that!  : )




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > Judy, "O Supreme True Believer"...who are your mindless
> > followers on this forum?  I need help with this.
> 
> Well, you for one. Also Ravi, Robin, futur_musik, Raunchy,
> Nabby, Willytex, obbajeeba, merudanda. If you include those
> who don't find Vaj credible: Xeno, Feste (I think),
> do.rflex (he hasn't been here in a while), BillyG (wgm4u),
> Alex, emptybill, and several others I'm forgetting.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Judy, since you did enlighten me to the fact that I hadn't
> quite followed the conversation correctly, I think I may
> volunteer to be the first of your mind *less* followers.

Oh, I thought you already were! Shoot. Well, better late
than never, I suppose. How have you managed to resist for
so long?

> But, I reserve the right to abdicate at any time the mind *ful*
> part of my being and brain take over.  In the meantime, I
> throw flower petals at your pinky toe.

Blessings upon you, my child. Your reward is in the works.
But think *carefully* before you decide to reengage your
being and brain. That may have some unpleasant consequences
you'd prefer to avoid. It's so much easier just to, you 
know, go along.

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Judy, "O Supreme True Believer"...who are your mindless
> followers on this forum?  I need help with this.

Well, you for one. Also Ravi, Robin, futur_musik, Raunchy,
Nabby, Willytex, obbajeeba, merudanda. If you include those
who don't find Vaj credible: Xeno, Feste (I think),
do.rflex (he hasn't been here in a while), BillyG (wgm4u),
Alex, emptybill, and several others I'm forgetting.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[Emily Reyn]

Judy, since you did enlighten me to the fact that I hadn't quite followed the 
conversation correctly, I think I may volunteer to be the first of your mind 
*less* followers. But, I reserve the right to abdicate at any time the mind 
*ful* part of my being and brain take over.  In the meantime, I throw flower 
petals at your pinky toe.  



 From: Emily Reyn 
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
 

  
Judy, "O Supreme True Believer"...who are your mindless followers on this 
forum?  I need help with this.   



 From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:51 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by Judy? > You are affording her an 
> unbelievable amount of power, with
> this accusation. And, of course, you are assuming the rest of
> us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or stay
> *at all* objective.

Emily, to be fair, "brainwashing" was the term *I* used to
describe Curtis's theory that I influenced others to see
Vaj as untrustworthy. Curtis objected to my use of the term,
saying it was an "absurdly false" characterization of what
he had said. And now he's using it to describe my
characterization of his arguments as deceptive and
sophistical to get back at me.

But what he said originally *did* imply what you say--that
the folks who agree with me about Vaj weren't thinking for
themselves but following my lead because of my "forceful
personality."

When one argues with Curtis, things tend to get very
convoluted.

In any case, the term "brainwashing" is commonly used as
I did, to refer simply to persuasion rather than coercive
mind control per se. Curtis appears to believe that all I
have to do is accuse Vaj of untruthfulness, and all my
"followers" are instantly persuaded to step smartly into
line.

 
> 
> I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my 
> irony glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is 
> pretty humorous.  
> 
> From Wikipedia: 
> 
> Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind 
> abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers to a process in which a 
> group or individual "systematically uses unethically manipulative methods 
> to persuade others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to 
> the detriment of the person being manipulated".[1] 
> 
> The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which 
> can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their 
> own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The 
> Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the "principal 
> aims of these psychological methods is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, 
> space, hours, milieu, and so on."[2]
> 
> 
> Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
> explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in systematically 
> indoctrinating prisoners of war through 
> propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later expanded and 
> modified to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially conversions 
> to new religious movements(NRMs).
> 
> 
> 
> From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > 
> > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > quotes, of course)
> > 
> > Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> > were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> > it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> > and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> > sophistry themselves take.
> 
> Up to your brainwashing again, eh?
> 
> >
> 
> 
>   
>




 

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> > cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by 
> > Judy? 
> 
> What leads you to believe that there is a difference?
> 
> When it comes to the brainwashing mentality, who is the
> more dangerous -- those who work for some spiritual org
> or teacher and serve as constant apologists for them,
> because they have a vested financial or organizational
> interest in doing so, or those who do it for free, 
> because they're True Believers? Seems to me that the 
> latter -- especially if they have been apologizing for 
> the antics of their cult or cult leader for decades and 
> at the same time systematically cyberstalking those who 
> criticize them -- are a tad more to be feared.

Note that Barry uses the term "apologist" to mean "one
who apologizes." Actually it means "one who speaks or
writes in defense of someone or something."

Anyone who reads my posts knows I defend some things
about TM/MMY/the TMO and criticize others.

It's unclear what he means by "systematically
cyberstalking." He used to claim that I had followed
him from forum to forum, which he knew was blatantly
false. These days he's less specific, but he hopes
others will infer his original claim.

To the extent that one could conceivably expand the
definition of "cyberstalking" to include what I do
with regard to Barry, the term would also apply to
what he's been doing with regard to me for some 16
years now. The biggest difference between us is the
degree of truthfulness in our posts criticizing each
other.

Barry has often claimed that I go after him and Vaj
and Curtis because they're TM critics. That's also
knowingly false, as is obvious from the fact that I
don't go after those who make sincere, honest
criticisms (I have many myself). (Robin is the
ultimate counterexample, of course, given his
wholesale rejection of TM and MMY and his teaching.)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[Emily Reyn]

Judy, "O Supreme True Believer"...who are your mindless followers on this 
forum?  I need help with this.   



 From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:51 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by Judy? > You are affording her an 
> unbelievable amount of power, with
> this accusation. And, of course, you are assuming the rest of
> us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or stay
> *at all* objective.

Emily, to be fair, "brainwashing" was the term *I* used to
describe Curtis's theory that I influenced others to see
Vaj as untrustworthy. Curtis objected to my use of the term,
saying it was an "absurdly false" characterization of what
he had said. And now he's using it to describe my
characterization of his arguments as deceptive and
sophistical to get back at me.

But what he said originally *did* imply what you say--that
the folks who agree with me about Vaj weren't thinking for
themselves but following my lead because of my "forceful
personality."

When one argues with Curtis, things tend to get very
convoluted.

In any case, the term "brainwashing" is commonly used as
I did, to refer simply to persuasion rather than coercive
mind control per se. Curtis appears to believe that all I
have to do is accuse Vaj of untruthfulness, and all my
"followers" are instantly persuaded to step smartly into
line.

 
> 
> I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my 
> irony glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is 
> pretty humorous.  
> 
> From Wikipedia: 
> 
> Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind 
> abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers to a process in which a 
> group or individual "systematically uses unethically manipulative methods 
> to persuade others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to 
> the detriment of the person being manipulated".[1] 
> 
> The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which 
> can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their 
> own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The 
> Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the "principal 
> aims of these psychological methods is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, 
> space, hours, milieu, and so on."[2]
> 
> 
> Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
> explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in systematically 
> indoctrinating prisoners of war through 
> propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later expanded and 
> modified to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially conversions 
> to new religious movements(NRMs).
> 
> 
> 
> From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > 
> > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > quotes, of course)
> > 
> > Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> > were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> > it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> > and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> > sophistry themselves take.
> 
> Up to your brainwashing again, eh?
> 
> >
> 
> 
>   
>


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[Emily Reyn]

Ha ha ha...see how funny it all is?



 From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:51 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by Judy? > You are affording her an 
> unbelievable amount of power, with
> this accusation. And, of course, you are assuming the rest of
> us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or stay
> *at all* objective.

Emily, to be fair, "brainwashing" was the term *I* used to
describe Curtis's theory that I influenced others to see
Vaj as untrustworthy. Curtis objected to my use of the term,
saying it was an "absurdly false" characterization of what
he had said. And now he's using it to describe my
characterization of his arguments as deceptive and
sophistical to get back at me.

But what he said originally *did* imply what you say--that
the folks who agree with me about Vaj weren't thinking for
themselves but following my lead because of my "forceful
personality."

When one argues with Curtis, things tend to get very
convoluted.

In any case, the term "brainwashing" is commonly used as
I did, to refer simply to persuasion rather than coercive
mind control per se. Curtis appears to believe that all I
have to do is accuse Vaj of untruthfulness, and all my
"followers" are instantly persuaded to step smartly into
line.

 
> 
> I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my 
> irony glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is 
> pretty humorous.  
> 
> From Wikipedia: 
> 
> Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind 
> abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers to a process in which a 
> group or individual "systematically uses unethically manipulative methods 
> to persuade others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to 
> the detriment of the person being manipulated".[1] 
> 
> The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which 
> can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their 
> own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The 
> Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the "principal 
> aims of these psychological methods is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, 
> space, hours, milieu, and so on."[2]
> 
> 
> Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
> explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in systematically 
> indoctrinating prisoners of war through 
> propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later expanded and 
> modified to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially conversions 
> to new religious movements(NRMs).
> 
> 
> 
> From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > 
> > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > quotes, of course)
> > 
> > Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> > were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> > it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> > and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> > sophistry themselves take.
> 
> Up to your brainwashing again, eh?
> 
> >
> 
> 
>   
>


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[Emily Reyn]

I think it's just you. Are you saying Judy is a True Believer, as different 
from Buck, for example, who might fall into your definition in the first part 
of the post?  I don't actually know how you define TB, or Judy's background, 
nor have I noticed her "apologizing for the antics of their cult or cult leader 
for decades and 
at the same time systematically cyberstalking those who criticize them."  

I don't have the history or context of you, Judy, Curtis, Vaj and Robin to make 
such calls in the relatively short time I've been here.  This is why I find 
much of it pretty humorous, objectively.  



From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:31 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by 
> Judy? 

What leads you to believe that there is a difference?

When it comes to the brainwashing mentality, who is the
more dangerous -- those who work for some spiritual org
or teacher and serve as constant apologists for them,
because they have a vested financial or organizational
interest in doing so, or those who do it for free, 
because they're True Believers? Seems to me that the 
latter -- especially if they have been apologizing for 
the antics of their cult or cult leader for decades and 
at the same time systematically cyberstalking those who 
criticize them -- are a tad more to be feared. 

But that could just be me. Your call.


   

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by Judy? > You are affording her an 
> unbelievable amount of power, with
> this accusation. And, of course, you are assuming the rest of
> us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or stay
> *at all* objective.

Emily, to be fair, "brainwashing" was the term *I* used to
describe Curtis's theory that I influenced others to see
Vaj as untrustworthy. Curtis objected to my use of the term,
saying it was an "absurdly false" characterization of what
he had said. And now he's using it to describe my
characterization of his arguments as deceptive and
sophistical to get back at me.

But what he said originally *did* imply what you say--that
the folks who agree with me about Vaj weren't thinking for
themselves but following my lead because of my "forceful
personality."

When one argues with Curtis, things tend to get very
convoluted.

In any case, the term "brainwashing" is commonly used as
I did, to refer simply to persuasion rather than coercive
mind control per se. Curtis appears to believe that all I
have to do is accuse Vaj of untruthfulness, and all my
"followers" are instantly persuaded to step smartly into
line.






 
> 
> I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my 
> irony glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is 
> pretty humorous.  
> 
> From Wikipedia: 
> 
> Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind 
> abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers to a process in which a 
> group or individual "systematically uses unethically manipulative methods 
> to persuade others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to 
> the detriment of the person being manipulated".[1] 
> 
> The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which 
> can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their 
> own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The 
> Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the "principal 
> aims of these psychological methods is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, 
> space, hours, milieu, and so on."[2]
> 
> 
> Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
> explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in systematically 
> indoctrinating prisoners of war through 
> propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later expanded and 
> modified to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially conversions 
> to new religious movements(NRMs).
> 
> 
> 
> From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > 
> > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > quotes, of course)
> > 
> > Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> > were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> > it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> > and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> > sophistry themselves take.
> 
> Up to your brainwashing again, eh?
> 
> >
> 
> 
>   
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?" > Brainwashing and 
> cult mentality, maybe. "Brainwashing" by 
> Judy? 

What leads you to believe that there is a difference?

When it comes to the brainwashing mentality, who is the
more dangerous -- those who work for some spiritual org
or teacher and serve as constant apologists for them,
because they have a vested financial or organizational
interest in doing so, or those who do it for free, 
because they're True Believers? Seems to me that the 
latter -- especially if they have been apologizing for 
the antics of their cult or cult leader for decades and 
at the same time systematically cyberstalking those who 
criticize them -- are a tad more to be feared. 

But that could just be me. Your call.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[Emily Reyn]

Whoops...I mean "think for ourselves."  Please attribute this to the 
brainwashing...I'm in complete denial.



 From: Emily Reyn 
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?
 

  
What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?"  Brainwashing and cult 
mentality, maybe.  "Brainwashing" by Judy?  You are affording her an 
unbelievable amount of power, with this accusation.  And, of course, you are 
assuming the rest of us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or 
stay *at all* objective. 

I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my irony 
glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is pretty 
humorous.  

>From Wikipedia: 

Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind 
abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers to a process in which a group 
or individual "systematically uses unethically manipulative methods to
 persuade others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to the 
detriment of the person being manipulated".[1] 

The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which can 
be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their own thinking, 
behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The Formation of Men's 
Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the "principal aims of these 
psychological methods is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, space, hours, 
milieu, and so on."[2]


Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in systematically 
indoctrinating prisoners of war through propaganda and torture techniques. 
These theories were later expanded and modified to explain a wider range of 
phenomena, especially conversions to new religious movements(NRMs).



From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> 
> > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > quotes, of course)
> 
> Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> and sophistry Curtis uses than the
 deception and
> sophistry themselves take.

Up to your brainwashing again, eh?

>



  
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[Emily Reyn]

What is this continued focus on Judy and "brainwashing?"  Brainwashing and cult 
mentality, maybe.  "Brainwashing" by Judy?  You are affording her an 
unbelievable amount of power, with this accusation.  And, of course, you are 
assuming the rest of us to be dumb clucks, unable to think for themselves or 
stay *at all* objective. 

I will say, that having read all of the recent exchanges, if I put on my irony 
glasses, they are a real hoot.  Sorry for laughingit really is pretty 
humorous.  

>From Wikipedia: 

Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind 
abuse, thought control, or thought reform) refers to a process in which a group 
or individual "systematically uses unethically manipulative methods to persuade 
others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s), often to the detriment 
of the person being manipulated".[1] 

The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which can 
be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their own thinking, 
behavior, emotions or decision making. InPropaganda: The Formation of Men's 
Attitudes, Jacques Ellul sustains that the "principal aims of these 
psychological methods is to destroy a man's habitual patterns, space, hours, 
milieu, and so on."[2]


Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to 
explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed in systematically 
indoctrinating prisoners of war through propaganda and torture techniques. 
These theories were later expanded and modified to explain a wider range of 
phenomena, especially conversions to new religious movements(NRMs).



From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:42 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> 
> > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > quotes, of course)
> 
> Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> sophistry themselves take.

Up to your brainwashing again, eh?

>


   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Comebacks

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Someone used this term recently on this forum. It got me 
> to thinking about the term itself.
> 
> Naturally, because as you know I have a certain occult 
> way of looking at interpersonal relationships, one that 
> involves the term "attention vampires," I kinda got to 
> trippin' on the term itself. 
> 
> "Comebacks," in modern parlance, usually refers to 
> someone making a snappy, witty, or just plain nasty 
> response to something someone else has said. In fencing, 
> this would be called a riposte. 
> 
> But I got to thinking about another way to view such a 
> compulsion to profer "comebacks," if in fact a compulsion 
> it has become. What if we did a Maharishi-like deconstruction 
> of the word and split it into its component syllables? What 
> do we get?
> 
> "Come back."
> 
> The "please" at the end is silent.
> 
> Comebacks are used to prolong arguments, not to settle them. 
> It's a way of saying, "I don't know about you, but I'm really 
> having fun ripping you a new asshole. Don't you dare go away."

The reason Barry doesn't say where he saw "comeback" is
that it was in a post of mine, and the comebacks I was
referring to were Curtis's:

"It's really amusing that every single one of your comebacks
here is an example of what you're being accused of: Curtis's
Guide to Reframing and Appropriating Context."

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts

[Emily Reyn]

I was teased by ignorant louts in grammar school for my hair as well.  I always 
wanted curly hair and the curlier the better :)



 From: feste37 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:34 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
 

  


That's OK. People here seem to think I am a girl. MZ did, and I had to tell him 
that I ain't no girl. Which reminds me. When I was much, much younger, I had 
extremely curly hair, which was, I have to tell you, a marvel to behold, but at 
school I was teased by the ignorant louts who composed a large percentage of 
the class that I was unfortunate enough to be a member of. To their puny, 
stunted minds such a glory seemed too much "like a girl." (As you can guess, I 
did not enjoy school.)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Yes, very witty actually...the second Feste post in particular.  Spelled it 
> out for me. :)  I always think he is a she..probably because I knew a woman 
> in highschool with the last name of Feste and I translated his last post to 
> Robin as coming from a female.  Ha. Sorry Feste, I've gotten the gender 
> thing wrong here a couple of times. 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: authfriend 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 9:29 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> 
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > I love the cello...almost posted a Philip Glass cello piece
> > last night, but it was long...and depressing :) This fellow
> > is wonderful and thank you for posting.
> > 
> > So, did I get the joke...was it the repetitive nature of the
> > song that prompted Feste? Am I living in another too literal
> > world altogether?
> 
> Feste's quip was actually very witty. Glass is known for
> pieces that repeat and repeat, but then introduce a little
> bit of variation, then repeat and repeat that, then
> go back to the original repetition, then introduce another
> little bit of variation and repeat that, and so on, just
> like Feste's first response. It's a style that's usually
> called "minimalism." This was in his earlier days, though;
> he's writing different kinds of music now.
> 
> > Are not chants repetitious? Are not bhajans repetitious? I
> > love repetition when done to certain musical themes; it is 
> > mesmerizing and transports.
> 
> Sure. That's what Glass intends, to provoke a sort of
> hypnotic state that then gets shaped by the little
> variations. Nothing wrong with it at all, but for some it
> may be an acquired taste (one I haven't acquired). I don't
> think Feste meant it as a criticism. He was just mimicking
> that style in words.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: merudanda 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:39 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > knock -knock- sneak- sneak
> > 
> > Schubert  one of the least "intellectual-smart" of composers may help 
> > 
> > leaving behind lucid dreamy night
> > 
> > kiss the sunshine in the morning bright
> > knowing the game
> > so let us play  play again 
> > 
> > and again and again
> > 
> > together
> > leaving the lucid night
> > this posting Trio taking each the instrument of
> > choice 
> > saha vÄ«ryaá¹Æ'karav�vahai(May this light strengthen  our 
> > friendship )
> > tejasvin�vadhītamastu m� vidviṣ�vahai (May our life be 
> > brilliant, may we never
> > misunderstand)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFcGgmWStnM
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I'm not one of the smarter meditators here, but I'm humble on that 
> > > point.  I actually liked it and haven't been privy to him - this joke 
> > > goes over my head as well, unless you are pointing out that repetition is 
> > > his gig in a lot of the music he composes.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 12:22 PM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It may not have been apparent, but I was in fact making a very feeble 
> > > Philip Glass joke. Here's another one:
> > > 
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Philip Glass. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You are welcome.  I got the reference to Philip Glass from the 
> > > > video telling the story of the Bhagavad Gita that Buck sent. 
> > > >  He was on of the speakers and is

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > 
> > > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > > quotes, of course)
> > 
> > Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> > were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> > it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> > and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> > sophistry themselves take.
> 
> Up to your brainwashing again, eh?

(I'm brainwashing Barry??)

All anybody has to do to see your deception and sophistry
is read the exchange.

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> 
> > If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> > Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> > reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> > quotes, of course)
> 
> Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
> were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
> it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
> and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
> sophistry themselves take.

Up to your brainwashing again, eh?





>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Political Funnies

[Bhairitu]

On 01/31/2012 09:28 AM, raunchydog wrote:
> INTERESTING  OBSERVATION
>
> 1. The sport of choice for the urban poor is   BASKETBALL .
>
> 2 The sport  of choice for maintenance level employees is   BOWLING .
>
> 3 The sport  of choice for front-line workers is   FOOTBALL .
>
> 4 The sport  of choice for supervisors is   BASEBALL .
>
> 5 The sport  of choice for middle management is   TENNIS .
>
> And
>
> 6  The sport of choice for corporate executives and officers is   GOLF .
>
> THE AMAZING CONCLUSION:
>
> The higher  you go in the corporate structure, the smaller your balls become.
>
> There  must be a ton of people in DC playing marbles!

Interesting exception to the rule: back in the 1970s the owner of an 
auto parts chain asked if I would sub for him at a party for his 
company.  He played drums in a band of executives.  The other two were a 
VP of a major bank and the other had a real estate empire.  They told me 
they preferred to play music to golf.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Why i care

[Bhairitu]

On 01/30/2012 08:02 PM, Buck wrote:
> People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
>
> My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times.  The last 
> time I enumerated it was in this post:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> -Buck in FF

And probably why some of us here are happy we don't live in Fairfield 
though I am a little envious of your high speed broadband.  AT&T and 
Comcast are too greedy to provide such to urban areas.  I think rural 
Sebastopol about 50 miles away has high speed (1 gbps) fiber by Sonic.  
The dummies who run this town should have done that rather than giving 
AT&T cart blanche to lay fiber.  So much of Sonoma and Marin county 
towns are old hippie hangouts with lots of Indiaphiles living there.  
Fairfield is like Sonoma in the cornfields.

[FairfieldLife] Comebacks

[turquoiseb]

Someone used this term recently on this forum. It got me 
to thinking about the term itself.

Naturally, because as you know I have a certain occult 
way of looking at interpersonal relationships, one that 
involves the term "attention vampires," I kinda got to 
trippin' on the term itself. 

"Comebacks," in modern parlance, usually refers to 
someone making a snappy, witty, or just plain nasty 
response to something someone else has said. In fencing, 
this would be called a riposte. 

But I got to thinking about another way to view such a 
compulsion to profer "comebacks," if in fact a compulsion 
it has become. What if we did a Maharishi-like deconstruction 
of the word and split it into its component syllables? What 
do we get?

"Come back."

The "please" at the end is silent.

Comebacks are used to prolong arguments, not to settle them. 
It's a way of saying, "I don't know about you, but I'm really 
having fun ripping you a new asshole. Don't you dare go away."

Again, the "please" at the end is silent.

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:

> If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
> Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
> reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
> quotes, of course)

Actually Curtis and I split it roughly in half. There
were somewhat more words of mine than of Curtis's, but
it *takes* more words to unravel the kind of deception
and sophistry Curtis uses than the deception and
sophistry themselves take.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: : Trump Explains ............

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wleed3  wrote:
> 
> > Let me get this straight . . ..We're going to be "gifted" with a health care
> > plan we areforced to purchaseandfinedif we don't. Which purportedly covers 
> > at leastten million more people,
> > without addinga single new doctor,
> > but provides for16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman
> > says hedoesn't understand it,passedby a Congressthat didn't readit 
> > butexemptedthemselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President whosmokes, 
> > withfundingadministered by a treasury chief whodidn't pay his taxes, for 
> > which we'll betaxed for four years before any
> > benefits take effect, by a government which hasalready bankrupted Social 
> > Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general
> > who isobese, andfinancedby a country that'sbroke!
> > 'What the hell couldpossiblygo wrong?'
> 
> 
> This is so crammed with garbage I'm just going to pick
> one item to rebut:
> 
> Q: Will the IRS hire 16,500 new agents to enforce the health
> care law?
> 
> A: No. The law requires the IRS mostly to hand out tax credits,
> not collect penalties. The claim of 16,500 new agents stems
> from a partisan analysis based on guesswork and false
> assumptions, and compounded by outright misrepresentation.
> 
> http://factcheck.org/2010/03/irs-expansion/

P.S.: The details of the guesswork, false assumptions, and
outright misrepresentations are found at the link above.

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Raunchy, I don't think you're clear on this "playing by 
> the rules" thang that Steve referred to above. If what
> you're hoping to achieve is to restart the tired olde
> "Vaj is a liar" routine that you and Judy can't let go
> of, the accepted way to do this on Fairfield Life is to 
> write five posts directly to Vaj, each of them at least 
> 1000 to 2000 words long. In these posts you should go 
> through each of the points that you demand he address, 
> while pointing out his lack of integrity if he doesn't 
> address them. Adopting a firm but hysterical tone (see
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=drama%20queen)
> in your writing may help. 
> 
> Just saying, essentially, "Steve, help me out here. I 
> can't get anyone to talk about the 'Vaj is a liar' meme
> the way I want them to. Won't you be a good little boy
> and pile on so that at the very least the two of us can
> talk about it?" is a tad transparent and wussy, doncha
> think? Not to mention lazy.
> 
> We want the Full Robin treatment on this one. If you 
> have characters whom you feel you have to assassinate, 
> *put some fuckin' effort into it*. Leave Steve out of
> it. Let's see your own 10,000 words on the subject. :-)

If you require instruction in how to do this properly,
Raunchy, you need look no further than Judy's most recent
reply to Curtis. It took her 4,564 words (including Curtis'
quotes, of course) to say "No, I'm not a poopy pants, YOU
are a poopy pants." Now THAT is following in the Great
Robin's footsteps. I expect no less of you.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: : Trump Explains ............

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wleed3  wrote:

> Let me get this straight . . ..We're going to be "gifted" with a health care
> plan we areforced to purchaseandfinedif we don't. Which purportedly covers at 
> leastten million more people,
> without addinga single new doctor,
> but provides for16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman
> says hedoesn't understand it,passedby a Congressthat didn't readit 
> butexemptedthemselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President whosmokes, 
> withfundingadministered by a treasury chief whodidn't pay his taxes, for 
> which we'll betaxed for four years before any
> benefits take effect, by a government which hasalready bankrupted Social 
> Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general
> who isobese, andfinancedby a country that'sbroke!
> 'What the hell couldpossiblygo wrong?'


This is so crammed with garbage I'm just going to pick
one item to rebut:

Q: Will the IRS hire 16,500 new agents to enforce the health
care law?

A: No. The law requires the IRS mostly to hand out tax credits,
not collect penalties. The claim of 16,500 new agents stems
from a partisan analysis based on guesswork and false
assumptions, and compounded by outright misrepresentation.

http://factcheck.org/2010/03/irs-expansion/

[FairfieldLife] Fwd: : Trump Explains ............

[wleed3]

--- Begin Message ---

-Original Message-
From: JOSEPH TATAR [mailto:joska3...@broadstripe.net]
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 09:59 AM
To: grandm...@wordsofwimsey.com
Subject: Fwd: Trump Explains 



-- Forwarded message --
From: JOSEPH TATAR
Date: Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:58 AM
Subject: Fwd: Trump Explains 
To: rsbaum...@q.com




-- Forwarded message --
From: JOSEPH TATAR
Date: Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:58 AM
Subject: Fwd: Trump Explains 
To: icbar...@comcast.net




-- Forwarded message --
From: Doris Dougherty
Date: Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 6:46 PM
Subject: Trump Explains 
To: Veronica 















Trump Explains Dumbo Care




No one can sum it up better
than Trump






Let me get this straight . . ..We're going to be "gifted" with a health care
plan we areforced to purchaseandfinedif we don't. Which purportedly covers at 
leastten million more people,
without addinga single new doctor,
but provides for16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman
says hedoesn't understand it,passedby a Congressthat didn't readit 
butexemptedthemselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President whosmokes, 
withfundingadministered by a treasury chief whodidn't pay his taxes, for which 
we'll betaxed for four years before any
benefits take effect, by a government which hasalready bankrupted Social 
Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general
who isobese, andfinancedby a country that'sbroke!
'What the hell couldpossiblygo wrong?'






























<>--- End Message ---

[FairfieldLife] Think what you say jokingly on the Net has no consequences?

[turquoiseb]

Think again. This is an article on the UK version of HuffPost about a
couple who were detained by US Homeland Security and sent home for
making a joke on Twitter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/30/leigh-van-bryan-and-emily-bun\
ting-banned-from-entering-us-after-twitter-joke-about-destroying-america\
_n_1241104.html?ref=mostpopular
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts

[feste37]

That's OK. People here seem to think I am a girl. MZ did, and I had to tell him 
that I ain't no girl. Which reminds me. When I was much, much younger, I had 
extremely curly hair, which was, I have to tell you, a marvel to behold, but at 
school I was teased by the ignorant louts who composed a large percentage of 
the class that I was unfortunate enough to be a member of. To their puny, 
stunted minds such a glory seemed too much "like a girl." (As you can guess, I 
did not enjoy school.)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Yes, very witty actually...the second Feste post in particular.  Spelled it 
> out for me. :)  I always think he is a she..probably because I knew a woman 
> in highschool with the last name of Feste and I translated his last post to 
> Robin as coming from a female.  Ha. Sorry Feste, I've gotten the gender 
> thing wrong here a couple of times. 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: authfriend 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 9:29 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
>  
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > I love the cello...almost posted a Philip Glass cello piece
> > last night, but it was long...and depressing :) This fellow
> > is wonderful and thank you for posting.
> > 
> > So, did I get the joke...was it the repetitive nature of the
> > song that prompted Feste? Am I living in another too literal
> > world altogether?
> 
> Feste's quip was actually very witty. Glass is known for
> pieces that repeat and repeat, but then introduce a little
> bit of variation, then repeat and repeat that, then
> go back to the original repetition, then introduce another
> little bit of variation and repeat that, and so on, just
> like Feste's first response. It's a style that's usually
> called "minimalism." This was in his earlier days, though;
> he's writing different kinds of music now.
> 
> > Are not chants repetitious? Are not bhajans repetitious? I
> > love repetition when done to certain musical themes; it is 
> > mesmerizing and transports.
> 
> Sure. That's what Glass intends, to provoke a sort of
> hypnotic state that then gets shaped by the little
> variations. Nothing wrong with it at all, but for some it
> may be an acquired taste (one I haven't acquired). I don't
> think Feste meant it as a criticism. He was just mimicking
> that style in words.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: merudanda 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:39 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > knock -knock- sneak- sneak
> > 
> > Schubert  one of the least "intellectual-smart" of composers may help 
> > 
> > leaving behind lucid dreamy night
> > 
> > kiss the sunshine in the morning bright
> > knowing the game
> > so let us play  play again 
> > 
> > and again and again
> > 
> > together
> > leaving the lucid night
> > this posting Trio taking each the instrument of
> > choice 
> > saha vÄ«ryaá¹Æ'karav�vahai(May this light strengthen  our 
> > friendship )
> > tejasvin�vadhītamastu m� vidviṣ�vahai (May our life be 
> > brilliant, may we never
> > misunderstand)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFcGgmWStnM
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I'm not one of the smarter meditators here, but I'm humble on that 
> > > point.  I actually liked it and haven't been privy to him - this joke 
> > > goes over my head as well, unless you are pointing out that repetition is 
> > > his gig in a lot of the music he composes.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 12:22 PM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It may not have been apparent, but I was in fact making a very feeble 
> > > Philip Glass joke. Here's another one:
> > > 
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Philip Glass. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You are welcome.  I got the reference to Philip Glass from the 
> > > > video telling the story of the Bhagavad Gita that Buck sent. 
> > > >  He was on of the speakers and is also a composer.  He 
> > > > did the score for the movie The Hours, which I never saw, but may now. 
> > > >  You may already know this :).
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Monday, Janua

[FairfieldLife] Re: No-phone can't be that good!?

[Richard J. Williams]

cardemaister: 
> Who the fvck keeps really writing these reviews??
> 
Somebody from Texas?

"The Windows Marketplace is already better than the 
Android market, maybe a bit smaller but feels more 
secure and better looking. The Bing voice command 
search is right up there with Siri from Apple. The 
best part has to be the 4g speed and simplicity of 
the home screen." 

TMobile:
http://tinyurl.com/7zk9fcr

It looks like the Nokia 900 and Microsoft Phone are 
ready to take over the entire planet! The Nokia 
Lumia 900 Windows Phone could debut for just $99 
when it launches on AT&T on March 18, according to 
a (and believable) new report:

ZDNet:
http://tinyurl.com/7bh6qtk

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Wikileaks lawyer runs into Atty General Eric Holder at Sundance

[turquoiseb]

Speaking of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange...

I just love that he's going to do a TV show. See the last paragraph.
Julian Assange To Star In Landmark Simpsons Episode [Simpsons]

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is set to appear in the landmark  500th
episode of the Simpsons, after producers heard he was keen to  appear on
the show.
Simpsons executive producer Al Jean told Entertainment Weekly
 
that series creator Matt Groening had wanted to find out if the rumour
was true.

"So we asked our casting director Bonnie Pietila — who had been able
to unearth Thomas Pynchon and got Tony Blair to do the show — to
find Mr  Assange. And she did," he said.

In the episode, due to be screened in May in the UK, Homer and Marge 
discover that the other residents of Springfield are conspiring to get 
them kicked out of the town for all the trouble they have caused over 
the years.

"The Simpsons go off the grid to this very rugged place where they meet
[Assange]," Jean said.

Assange is currently under house arrest in the UK awaiting his final
extradition trial on Wednesday
 . He is wanted for questioning in
Sweden over accusations that he sexually assaulted two women there.

He is also set to appear on the TV screens soon in person, hosting  ten
weekly half-hour programmes featuring "in-depth conversations with  key
political players, thinkers and revolutionaries" from around the  world.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts

[feste37]

authfriend is right, as usual. I like Glass's work a lot. In fact, I think that 
Satyagraha, the opera Emily alluded to, is one of the finest operas written in 
the 20th century. It stretches the genre beyond what one might have thought 
possible -- an opera with basically no plot and sung entirely in Sanskrit. Who 
could have imagined such a thing? And yet he pulls it off, and much of it is 
extremely moving. I'm thinking particularly of the last scene in which Gandhi, 
alone on stage, sings the words of Krishna about how he manifests himself 
whenever unrighteous rules, and comes to restore balance. (It's the Gita, 
chapter 4 verses 5-8.) Saw the opera in the live telecast from the Met late 
last year. Fabulous experience that reminded me of why I am alive -- to 
experience something through literature or music that is quite beyond the 
common run of day-to-day feelings and helps me to remember the depths of 
things. I'm noticing that it's not as easy to discover such things as it was 
when I was younger, so when something like this turns up, I treasure it. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > I love the cello...almost posted a Philip Glass cello piece
> > last night, but it was long...and depressing :) This fellow
> > is wonderful and thank you for posting.
> > 
> > So, did I get the joke...was it the repetitive nature of the
> > song that prompted Feste? Am I living in another too literal
> > world altogether?
> 
> Feste's quip was actually very witty. Glass is known for
> pieces that repeat and repeat, but then introduce a little
> bit of variation, then repeat and repeat that, then
> go back to the original repetition, then introduce another
> little bit of variation and repeat that, and so on, just
> like Feste's first response. It's a style that's usually
> called "minimalism." This was in his earlier days, though;
> he's writing different kinds of music now.
> 
> > Are not chants repetitious? Are not bhajans repetitious? I
> > love repetition when done to certain musical themes; it is 
> > mesmerizing and transports.
> 
> Sure. That's what Glass intends, to provoke a sort of
> hypnotic state that then gets shaped by the little
> variations. Nothing wrong with it at all, but for some it
> may be an acquired taste (one I haven't acquired). I don't
> think Feste meant it as a criticism. He was just mimicking
> that style in words.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: merudanda 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:39 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > knock -knock- sneak- sneak
> > 
> > Schubert  one of the least "intellectual-smart" of composers may help 
> > 
> > leaving behind lucid dreamy night
> > 
> > kiss the sunshine in the morning bright
> > knowing the game
> > so let us play  play again 
> > 
> > and again and again
> > 
> > together
> > leaving the lucid night
> > this posting Trio taking each the instrument of
> > choice 
> > saha vīryaṃkaravāvahai(May this light strengthen  our friendship )
> > tejasvināvadhītamastu mā vidviṣāvahai (May our life be brilliant, may 
> > we never
> > misunderstand)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFcGgmWStnM
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I'm not one of the smarter meditators here, but I'm humble on that 
> > > point.  I actually liked it and haven't been privy to him - this joke 
> > > goes over my head as well, unless you are pointing out that repetition is 
> > > his gig in a lot of the music he composes.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 12:22 PM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It may not have been apparent, but I was in fact making a very feeble 
> > > Philip Glass joke. Here's another one:
> > > 
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Knock, knock.
> > > Who's there?
> > > Philip Glass. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You are welcome.  I got the reference to Philip Glass from the video 
> > > > telling the story of the Bhagavad Gita that Buck sent.  He was on of 
> > > > the speakers and is also a composer.  He did the score for the movie 
> > > > The Hours, which I never saw, but may now.  You may already know 
> > > > this :).
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 5:39 AM
> > > > Subject: [Fair

[FairfieldLife] Re: Levels of Evolution

[martyboi]

http://www.arunachala-ramana.org/forum/index.php?topic=6313.0

[FairfieldLife] Re: Levels of Evolution

[martyboi]

http://tiny.cc/xl2r2

[FairfieldLife] No-phone can't be that good!?

[cardemaister]

Who the fvck keeps really writing these reviews??

http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/Phones/cell-phone-detail.aspx?cell-phone=Nokia-Lumia-710-Black&tab=reviews

[FairfieldLife] Alyssa talking backwards

[PaliGap]

http://youtu.be/4O0ubiI

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts

[Emily Reyn]

Yes, very witty actually...the second Feste post in particular.  Spelled it out 
for me. :)  I always think he is a she..probably because I knew a woman in 
highschool with the last name of Feste and I translated his last post to Robin 
as coming from a female.  Ha. Sorry Feste, I've gotten the gender thing wrong 
here a couple of times. 



 From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 9:29 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> I love the cello...almost posted a Philip Glass cello piece
> last night, but it was long...and depressing :) This fellow
> is wonderful and thank you for posting.
> 
> So, did I get the joke...was it the repetitive nature of the
> song that prompted Feste? Am I living in another too literal
> world altogether?

Feste's quip was actually very witty. Glass is known for
pieces that repeat and repeat, but then introduce a little
bit of variation, then repeat and repeat that, then
go back to the original repetition, then introduce another
little bit of variation and repeat that, and so on, just
like Feste's first response. It's a style that's usually
called "minimalism." This was in his earlier days, though;
he's writing different kinds of music now.

> Are not chants repetitious? Are not bhajans repetitious? I
> love repetition when done to certain musical themes; it is 
> mesmerizing and transports.

Sure. That's what Glass intends, to provoke a sort of
hypnotic state that then gets shaped by the little
variations. Nothing wrong with it at all, but for some it
may be an acquired taste (one I haven't acquired). I don't
think Feste meant it as a criticism. He was just mimicking
that style in words.

> 
> 
> 
>  From: merudanda 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:39 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> 
> 
>   
> knock -knock- sneak- sneak
> 
> Schubert  one of the least "intellectual-smart" of composers may help 
> 
> leaving behind lucid dreamy night
> 
> kiss the sunshine in the morning bright
> knowing the game
> so let us play  play again 
> 
> and again and again
> 
> together
> leaving the lucid night
> this posting Trio taking each the instrument of
> choice 
> saha vīryaṃkarav�vahai(May this light strengthen  our friendship )
> tejasvin�vadhītamastu m� vidviṣ�vahai (May our life be brilliant, may 
> we never
> misunderstand)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFcGgmWStnM
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I'm not one of the smarter meditators here, but I'm humble on that 
> > point.  I actually liked it and haven't been privy to him - this joke goes 
> > over my head as well, unless you are pointing out that repetition is his 
> > gig in a lot of the music he composes.  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 12:22 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > It may not have been apparent, but I was in fact making a very feeble 
> > Philip Glass joke. Here's another one:
> > 
> > Knock, knock.
> > Who's there?
> > Knock, knock.
> > Who's there?
> > Knock, knock.
> > Who's there?
> > Knock, knock.
> > Who's there?
> > Knock, knock.
> > Who's there?
> > Knock, knock.
> > Who's there?
> > Philip Glass. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> > >
> > > You are welcome.  I got the reference to Philip Glass from the video 
> > > telling the story of the Bhagavad Gita that Buck sent.  He was on of 
> > > the speakers and is also a composer.  He did the score for the movie 
> > > The Hours, which I never saw, but may now.  You may already know this 
> > > :).
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: feste37 feste37@
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 5:39 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Philip Glass - The Poet Acts
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > I like it. I like it. I like it. I like it very much, very much. I like 
> > > it. I like it. I like it a lot . A lot. A lot. I like it. I like it. Very 
> > > much. Very much. I like it. I like it. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fca2oXLe9g4&feature=related
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Political Funnies

[raunchydog]

More funnies:

http://youtu.be/vBzPsY3D58k

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> INTERESTING  OBSERVATION
> 
> 1. The sport of choice for the urban poor is   BASKETBALL .
> 
> 2 The sport  of choice for maintenance level employees is   BOWLING .
> 
> 3 The sport  of choice for front-line workers is   FOOTBALL .
> 
> 4 The sport  of choice for supervisors is   BASEBALL .
> 
> 5 The sport  of choice for middle management is   TENNIS .
> 
> And
> 
> 6  The sport of choice for corporate executives and officers is   GOLF .
> 
> THE AMAZING CONCLUSION:
> 
> The higher  you go in the corporate structure, the smaller your balls become.
> 
> There  must be a ton of people in DC playing marbles!
>

[FairfieldLife] Political Funnies

[raunchydog]

INTERESTING  OBSERVATION

1. The sport of choice for the urban poor is   BASKETBALL .

2 The sport  of choice for maintenance level employees is   BOWLING .

3 The sport  of choice for front-line workers is   FOOTBALL .

4 The sport  of choice for supervisors is   BASEBALL .

5 The sport  of choice for middle management is   TENNIS .

And

6  The sport of choice for corporate executives and officers is   GOLF .

THE AMAZING CONCLUSION:

The higher  you go in the corporate structure, the smaller your balls become.

There  must be a ton of people in DC playing marbles!   

[FairfieldLife] The llama at the gas pump

[Bhairitu]

Jean-Luc Goddard's "Film Socialisme" is sort of a visual poem shot 
mostly on a tourist liner and with different kinds of video.  It is a 
critically acclaimed film that some folks will have trouble watching.  
It's available on Netflix WI and yes there is a llama at a gas pump in 
it which I think wanted to eat the book the woman was reading.
http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Film_Socialisme/70139529

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1438535/

I've also been revisiting the 2005 Canadian TV series "Charlie Jade" 
which is also available on Netflix WI.  This series was thought to be 
"too smart" for US viewers and after the first couple of episodes on 
Sci-Fi (now Syfy) they moved it to around 1 AM.  And I am now wondering 
if Sci-Fi had it recut as I recall too much flash cutting (popular with 
rock videos) which aren't in these NF episodes rending it more coherent. 
After all it the series had a strong anti-corporate message and possibly 
something that powers at be didn't want the 18 to 34 year old 
demographic of Sci-Fi to see.

http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Charlie_Jade_Season_1_Sand/70211598

[FairfieldLife] Levels of Evolution

[Rick Archer]

I'm told that the Yoga Vasishtha outlines 16 levels of evolution. At Estes
Park Maharishi spoke of 16 kalas. Maybe he was referring to the same thing.
As I recall, he said that humans occupy several of them in the middle of
that range, and Krishna is the 16th, but that was 40+ years ago. Does anyone
know anything more about this?

 

[FairfieldLife] A Wikileaks lawyer runs into Atty General Eric Holder at Sundance

[turquoiseb]

And takes the opportunity to ask him a few questions. Excellent
article/film review/reminder of what America's priorities really are.

When a WikiLeaks lawyer runs into Eric Holder
During a chance encounter at
Sundance, I pressed the attorney general about his plans for Assange --
and his legacy  By Jennifer Robinson

     
"Slavery by Another Name," a documentary based on the 2009 
Pulitzer Prize-winning book by Douglas Blackmon, premiered this year at 
the Sundance Film Festival
 . 
The story was new to me: Between the Emancipation Proclamation and the 
beginning of World War II, tens of thousands of African-Americans were 
arrested on phony charges, slapped with massive fines they could not 
pay, and then sold into labor to some of the biggest industries in the 
country to work off their debt. I didn't expect to learn that
slavery  essentially continued for decades after the Civil War. And I
also didn't  expect – on vacation from my legal work advising
WikiLeaks and Julian  Assange — to bump into Attorney General Eric
Holder. Having spent the  week before Christmas at Fort Meade, Md.,
attending the Pvt. Bradley  Manning hearing – Manning is charged
with passing classified material to  WikiLeaks — I knew what I had
to ask him.
As  the last of the audience settled into their seats, the woman in
front  of me turned and took photos of people behind me. It was subtle,
but  others looked their way and smiled, nodding in acknowledgment. Not 
subtle enough. I turned too. I noticed a smiling, handsome 
African-American couple two rows back. On many occasions, I've been 
asked in interviews to respond to Holder's public statements about
the  U.S. government's criminal investigation into Assange and
WikiLeaks. But  there he was, in person, just steps away. I could not
pass up this  opportunity.

In November 2010, Holder announced
   a full criminal investigation into WikiLeaks, aimed at
prosecuting  Assange over the release of thousands of cables that
embarrassed the  U.S. government by revealing candid discussions among
diplomats and  corruption and human rights abuse around the world. Since
that time, we  learned of a secret grand jury investigation in Virginia.
WikiLeaks  supporters' Twitter accounts have been subpoenaed
 . Media reports have long
speculated about Assange's imminent indictment in the U.S., possibly
under the Espionage Act
 . (Assange is currently under house arrest
   in the U.K. pending his appeal of a
decision that he be extradited to  Sweden to face sexual assault
charges.) A key concern is the threat of  onward extradition from Sweden
to the U.S. where Assange – based on  Holder's earlier
announcements – risks being prosecuted for his work as  editor and
publisher of WikiLeaks, activity that we believe is protected  by the
First Amendment.

Holder has refrained from making public  comments about WikiLeaks of
late, leading many to believe the U.S. might  not prosecute Assange. But
it was apparent during the Manning hearing  that concerns about the U.S.
seeking Assange's extradition are  justified. Repeated references
were made to the relationship between the  Manning proceedings and the
Justice Department's ongoing criminal  investigation into Assange
and WikiLeaks. Manning's defense counsel  stated explicitly that the
Justice Department had an interest in  plea-bargaining with Manning in
order to get him to implicate Assange,  and argued that the number of
charges against Manning (particularly  those carrying life imprisonment)
was designed to pressure him into  making a deal. Government officials
seated behind the prosecution were  suspected of involvement in the
grand jury process, but refused to  identify themselves to us or to
journalists. One was later identified as  the Justice Department lawyer
responsible for the WikiLeaks-related  Twitter subpoenas.

The grand jury is secret. Government lawyers at  the Manning proceedings
– a public hearing – refused to identify  themselves or state
their interest. Our appeals
   to military courts for full access to the Manning
proceedings, the  court documents and the evidence have been denied. 
The Australian  government claims to have no information from the U.S.
as to whether  they will prosecute Assange and seek his extradition, but
it does not  appear to have asked for that i

[FairfieldLife] Re: The TM hymn on Negativity

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "futur.musik"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > So if someone appears dishonest, or contrary or fearful
> > > > > > to us, it is merely a difference in awareness, and no 
> > > > > > deliberate attempt at deception or obfuscation.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't think I buy that with regard to honesty. Surely
> > > > > differences in awareness account for whether a person
> > > > > believes there is *justification* for saying something
> > > > > they know to be false, but you really can't make much
> > > > > of a case that nobody ever attempts to deceive others.
> > > > 
> > > > So true:
> > > > 
> > > > Judy:(In a post where she repeatedly accused me of being
> > > > unethical!)
> > > > 
> > > > The only ploy Curtis has to
> > > > > rebut this uncomfortable fact is the claim, which he's
> > > > > made in other posts, that I brainwashed all of them into
> > > > > concurring with me, >
> > > > 
> > > > Definitely more of a consciously lying thing than just a
> > > > difference in awareness.
> > > 
> > > Right. I think you were consciously attempting to deceive
> > > and believed it was justified (just as Barry does when *he*
> > > attempts to perpetrate that deception):
> > > 
> > > "I agree that Judy has set the agenda for this angle and I
> > > have to give credit for her forceful personality that so
> > > many have taken up this perspective. (And yes I know it is
> > > possible that everyone just came to this conclusion 
> > > independently, but I don't find this as likely.)"
> > > 
> > > That's Curtis, responding to a post in which Barry said:
> > > 
> > >  *No one else* ever had
> > > > any doubts about Vaj's TM "pedigree" until she started
> > > > her "Gotta find a way to demonize Vaj so no one will
> > > > believe him when he makes valid points" campaign.
> > > 
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302040
> > 
> > Well I think it is big of you to cop to your bulls especially
> > in light of your post about how this would be a better place with 
> > less deception.  As you have proven with this quote, your
> > statement that I had accused you of "brainwashing" anyone was 
> > absurdly false and appreciate your coming clean providing the 
> > evidence for me.
> 
> Oh, so it's a matter of quibbling over words, is it?

Let me just play the tape of your answer to the many here who have tried that 
route with you.  Let's just say it didn't go well for them, and yes, we are 
discussing the meaning of the words we are using in this written communication.

> 
> "Brainwashing" is an attempt on my part to deceive, but
> it's entirely truthful that my being such a "forceful
> personality" that if others express a perspective similar
> to mine, it's most likely they adopted it from me rather
> than having come to it independently?
> 
> Isn't that a bit, er, "Clintonesque"?

Judy: (quoted from above)
 rebut this uncomfortable fact is the claim, which he's
>  made in other posts, that I brainwashed all of them into
> concurring with me, >

I never made that claim, you weren't just being Clintonesque, you were being 
Clinton on the TV pointing his finger. Brainwashing was your attempt to 
misquote me directly, stating that it was something I said, knowing it would 
seem more foolish than what I actually said.  I called you on it and you 
produced the proof that I never said that.  We'll get into the pesky meaning 
issue below.

You want to argue with being characterized as a forceful personality here.  
Realy?  On what grounds exactly? There is a specific context of who I was 
talking about which you are going to attempt to distort.  We can deal with that 
below too.

> 
> Sorta like it would have been "absurdly false" to contend
> that Clinton had sex with Lewinsky when all that had taken
> place was blowjobs?

You know my delicate sensibilities are offended by such references.  

> 
> > So the question is, why would you make such an absurd claim
> > knowing that that actual quotes would come out eventually?
> > Can you actually read the quote you gave, and state that it
> > is proof of your statement that I have claimed that you
> > brainwashed people here?
> 
> Given that one of the two dictionary definitions of
> "brainwashing" is "persuasion by propaganda or
> salesmanship," yes, I do believe so. And we can check
> the definition of "salesmanship" too: "ability or
> effectiveness in selling or in presenting persuasively."

So it would be perfectly acceptable in your view for me to say something like: 
"Maharishi brainwashed his followers to believe that bouncing on their butts 
was the first stage of flying rather than the last stage of bouncing on their 
butts"?  Or perhaps: "Maharishi, a well known expert brainwasher, was 
especially persuasive 
and effective in selling his TM" ?

We bo

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> 
> > > Hey Steve, how come we haven't heard from Vaj? Just when he 
> > > had an opportunity to come clean and mop up the details of his 
> > > messy business with Robin, he went MIA. We haven't heard a 
> > > peep out of him ever since Ann assured him that if a tape 
> > > existed of Robin hitting someone between 1983-1986 she would 
> > > have known about it. 
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302767
> > 
> > Raunchy, I don't think you're clear on this "playing by 
> > the rules" thang that Steve referred to above. If what
> > you're hoping to achieve is to restart the tired olde
> > "Vaj is a liar" routine that you and Judy can't let go
> > of
> 
> And that Barry and Curtis are desperate to flush down
> the memory hole because it was never resolved, and they
> want to keep it that way. Robin and Ann have both made
> themselves accountable; Vaj has not.


What are you accusing me of?  Being desperate to flush WHAT down a memory hole? 
What contrived BS.

Robin copped to doing it, we don't need a tape. That routine is over with his 
admission. He didn't cop to calling Vaj a liar when he knew it was true.  He 
did the parsing dance.

Vaj has reasons not to play this out online with people he considers hostile 
and some he considers unstable.  With people who don't attack him the way you 
do, he communicates offline, as he invited Robin to do.  Robin chose not to 
knowing that to preserve his anonymity here, Vaj would be at a disadvantage to 
defend himself.  He could have taken it all offline as Vaj suggested.  With my 
last little run in with he who will not be named, I completely understand Vaj's 
reasons for not providing more details, all of which are now unnecessary since 
the big confession. Vaj could have seen it all in a dream, it doesn't matter 
now.  He was vindicated by the source himself. 

Isn't it interesting that the two people who do communicate with Vaj offline 
are most confident that he is being honest about his participation in TM.  I 
wonder why that is 







>

[FairfieldLife] TM Poster Boy's commercial praising the ecstasy of...coffee

[turquoiseb]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/30/david-lynch-second-coffee-commercial_n_1241812.html?ref=culture

[FairfieldLife] Fwd: Obama Presidency in One Cartoon

[WLeed3]

 
  

 From: eb7...@dejazzd.com
To: maccar...@aol.com, mastanav...@yahoo.com,  gfeast...@verizon.net, 
nl...@dejazzd.com, juhulshi...@comcast.net
CC:  bgbg4...@gmail.com, wle...@aol.com, rbg...@ptd.net, 
bebe...@eberlypoultry.com,  finkc...@aol.com, sueb31...@earthlink.net, 
cmz...@verizon.net
Sent:  1/30/2012 2:39:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: Fwd: Obama Presidency in  One Cartoon






Begin forwarded message:


From:  <_jcee@ptd.net_ (mailto:j...@ptd.net) >

Date:  January  30, 2012 1:30:25 PM EST

To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;"@proxyz14.mailnet.ptd.net>

Subject:  Fw:  Obama Presidency in One Cartoon




 



From: _elainez2@juno.com_ (mailto:elain...@juno.com)  
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 12:45 PM
To: _heilman101@comcast.net_ (mailto:heilman...@comcast.net)  
Subject: Fw: Obama Presidency in One Cartoon







The Entire Obama Presidency in One Cartoon
 



  
 
 




 









_57 Year Old  Looks 27
Local Woman Reveals  Wrinkle Secret That Has Doctors Angry.
_ (http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/4f26d7735c2b2899bacst01vuc) 
_TheSmartStyleLiving.com_ 
(http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/4f26d7735c2b2899bacst01vuc) 



=
<>

[FairfieldLife] A cartoon for cat owners...

[turquoiseb]

...to help explain why your attempts to instill a sense of religion in
your cats have been a dismal failure. :-)

 
[https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/403290_10150509762\
711299_69132076298_9074701_381625563_n.jpg]

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:

> > Hey Steve, how come we haven't heard from Vaj? Just when he 
> > had an opportunity to come clean and mop up the details of his 
> > messy business with Robin, he went MIA. We haven't heard a 
> > peep out of him ever since Ann assured him that if a tape 
> > existed of Robin hitting someone between 1983-1986 she would 
> > have known about it. 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302767
> 
> Raunchy, I don't think you're clear on this "playing by 
> the rules" thang that Steve referred to above. If what
> you're hoping to achieve is to restart the tired olde
> "Vaj is a liar" routine that you and Judy can't let go
> of

And that Barry and Curtis are desperate to flush down
the memory hole because it was never resolved, and they
want to keep it that way. Robin and Ann have both made
themselves accountable; Vaj has not.

[FairfieldLife] From the toilet

[authfriend]

>From the NYTimes Bits blog:


The Rise of the Toilet Texter
By QUENTIN HARDY

We know where some of you are reading this.

A recently released survey of the mobile phone habits of Americans, going where 
few other surveys care to go, has found that 75 percent of the populace have 
used their mobile devices while on the toilet. Among those aged 28 to 35, the 
figure is 91 percent.

The survey of 1,000 people by the marketing agency 11mark found that private 
contemplation has given way to toilet-time talking, texting, shopping, using 
apps, or just surfing the Web, by both sexes and most ages. Among those 65 and 
older, however, only 47 percent have used their mobile devices on the toilet.

Chip Litherland for The New York TimesTexting, though, is fine.It gets weirder. 
One-quarter of Americans say they will not go to the bathroom without their 
devices. While 63 percent have answered calls, 41 percent have called someone 
else while enthroned. Sixteen percent in the 28-to-35 group, the youngest 
sample surveyed, have made purchases there. A mere 8 percent of the oldest 
group have felt such retail urgency. Understandably, given their infrequent 
chances at privacy, people with children are more likely to talk on the phone 
than are the childless. Single people are far more likely than the mated to 
text.

Hope you are sitting down for this: 20 percent of males have at one time joined 
a conference call from the toilet. Thirteen percent of American women have 
participated in meetings from the john. That is every fifth male co-worker, and 
every eighth female colleague. Be grateful that location-based tracking is not 
yet so prevalent. Be worried about the rise of video on mobile devices. Ignore 
all background noises. Really.

This is, in a sense, a testimony to our collective passion for communication 
and contact over all other needs, and a lesson in how quickly ideas of decorum 
adjust to the times. It is also a decent read on brand-related habits. If 
someone is making or taking calls while on the toilet, they are most likely 
using a BlackBerry. Using an app or playing on Facebook most often is done on 
an iPhone. And in general, Android owners are more likely than owners of other 
phones to use them on the toilet.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/the-rise-of-the-toilet-texter/

[FairfieldLife] Discerning truth from bullshit (was Re: The problem Atheists have)

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > Just as a followup, Susan, there are experiences I've had
> > > that are MUCH weirder than any I ever had while in Rama's
> > > presence, and thus of another order entirely. There is one
> > > experience that happened when I was thousands of miles away
> > > from him, had nothing to do with him, but was pretty amazing.
> > > 
> > > Why it's fascinating to me is that I was with someone else
> > > who saw exactly the same thing I did, and who to this day
> > > describes it exactly as I do. There was no "setup" for 
> > > having this experience, no expectation of having it, nada.
> > > It just happened. So the two of us (my best friend and I)
> > > have only each other to rely on when it comes to describing
> > > it. Most of the time we don't, because it's much more
> > > unbelievable in a way than having seen "deities." The 
> > > only thing we know is THAT we saw it. How we saw it, or
> > > whether it really existed and could have been photographed
> > > or whether we were seeing into some alternate reality...that 
> > > stuff we can't really talk about, because neither of us has 
> > > any clue as to the "how" or actual "what" involved. I'll 
> > > refrain from going into more detail at this point, because 
> > > it would just become fodder for those who live to dump on 
> > > me already. I suspect you understand. :-)
> > 
> > I do understand. And I hope to hear the story some day. Thank 
> > for your replies. I am at work and cannot give them the time 
> > and consideration they deserve. Thanks again - your experiences 
> > get to the crux of the whole issue, imo
> 
> Well, in that case, I'll dive once more into the "whole
> issue." I have nothing to lose, since the attacks started
> even before I told the story. :-)
> 
> This is your opportunity ( and the opportunity equally 
> afforded to lurkers ) to determine whether Barry is 
> bullsitting you ( some of us are not afraid of words, and
> thus less prone to asteriskize them :-) or telling you the
> absolute truth, as he experienced it and remembers it. I 
> do not tell this story often, or lightly, for what will 
> become apparent reasons. Tell someone you had a vision of
> Jzus, or Krishna, or even a ghost or a UFO, and most 
> people will cut you some slack. Tell them you saw certain
> other things, not so much. 
> 
> The story ( which will be a little long, because I'm going
> to do my best with the telling of it ) dates from a period 
> of time in which I was studying with Rama, but was not with 
> him. We were living in New York at the time, and many of us 
> were missing the Southwest Big Time. Perceiving this, he had 
> scheduled a big group Road Trip. We would fly into Phoenix
> and then spend a week and a half traveling to various power
> places in that area, just to meditate and have adventures
> there. My cuppa tea. 
> 
> So my girlfriend ( who also studied with Rama at that time ) 
> and I made arrangements to go on this trip. We booked vacation
> time away from work, the full tamale. And then Rama got a burr 
> up his butt about something ( I honestly don't remember what )
> and cancelled the trip. He gave all of us students a big "Fuck
> you!" for what we'd done or hadn't done. Drama queen...what
> can I say?  :-)
> 
> My girlfriend and I looked at each other and replied mentally
> with a big, New York "No, fuck you!" and decided to go anyway.
> So we did. We flew into Phoenix and I rented a big, campable
> 4WD vehicle, and we set off to see places like the Grand 
> Canyon, Chaco Canyon, Canyon de Chelly, Bandelier, and other
> just scorchin' power places in that area. We hiked and medi-
> tated there and then moved on to the next place. The weird
> story comes from one of those "moving on's."
> 
> We'd spent the day -- the Summer Solstice if I remember 
> correctly -- hiking and meditating and grooving on Monument
> Valley. Even if you've never been there, you have seen the
> place in hundreds of movies. It's one of the most spectacular
> places on earth, and IMO one of its most powerful. We watched
> the sun set while watching Navajo dancers and musicians play
> in the parking lot of the National Park, and it was WAY 
> magical, up there in my Top Ten Sunsets Ever.
> 
> Then we hopped into the car and drove down to the only motel
> in the area, expecting to find a room there, as I always 
> had in the past. Bad idea. Motel booked. So we could either
> backtrack into the dreary motel town 30 miles in the opposite
> direction that we were heading, or we could just say "What 
> the fuck" and drive North. We drove North.
> 
> That drive followed maps that...ahem...failed to convey
> the steepness and looking-over-the-edge-of-a-high-precipice-
> seeing-your-death-at-every-turn-of-the-gravel-road of the
> route I chose. Hey...mea culpa. I'm the one

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> >
> > I agree.  Despite some of the sharp differences here, I think 
> > everyone pretty much plays by the rules.  So if you are going 
> > to participate in a discussion, in which you have some insight, 
> > why not be a little more forthcoming about it. These are event 
> > which took place 25 years ago. No one is asking for confidences 
> > to be violated.  Just provide a little something in the way of 
> > bonofides.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree Steve, based on what Vaj has said I can't tell exactly 
> > > when he was with Robin. Particularly, a time that Ann could 
> > > corroborate. Ann has been quite clear describing the time 
> > > frame of her involvement with Robin's seminars. Just as a 
> > > matter of fairness to Ann and to everyone who has been trying 
> > > to sort through Vaj's vague and often contradictory
> > > statements about his involvement with Robin, he could at the 
> > > very least be as forthcoming as Ann. I'd like to give Vaj 
> > > the benefit of the doubt, but just as he has been slippery 
> > > saying anything specific that would lend credibility to his 
> > > claim that he was TM teacher, I'm sorry to say, his vagueness 
> > > about being with Robin, seems like more of the same old
> > > slip and slide from the details.
> 
> Hey Steve, how come we haven't heard from Vaj? Just when he 
> had an opportunity to come clean and mop up the details of his 
> messy business with Robin, he went MIA. We haven't heard a 
> peep out of him ever since Ann assured him that if a tape 
> existed of Robin hitting someone between 1983-1986 she would 
> have known about it. 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302767

Raunchy, I don't think you're clear on this "playing by 
the rules" thang that Steve referred to above. If what
you're hoping to achieve is to restart the tired olde
"Vaj is a liar" routine that you and Judy can't let go
of, the accepted way to do this on Fairfield Life is to 
write five posts directly to Vaj, each of them at least 
1000 to 2000 words long. In these posts you should go 
through each of the points that you demand he address, 
while pointing out his lack of integrity if he doesn't 
address them. Adopting a firm but hysterical tone (see
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=drama%20queen)
in your writing may help. 

Just saying, essentially, "Steve, help me out here. I 
can't get anyone to talk about the 'Vaj is a liar' meme
the way I want them to. Won't you be a good little boy
and pile on so that at the very least the two of us can
talk about it?" is a tad transparent and wussy, doncha
think? Not to mention lazy.

We want the Full Robin treatment on this one. If you 
have characters whom you feel you have to assassinate, 
*put some fuckin' effort into it*. Leave Steve out of
it. Let's see your own 10,000 words on the subject. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: can I be simple here?

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" 
wrote:
> Hey Steve, how come we haven't heard from Vaj? Just when he had an
opportunity to come clean and mop up the details of his messy business
with Robin, he went MIA. We haven't heard a peep out of him ever since
Ann assured him that if a tape existed of Robin hitting someone between
1983-1986 she would have known about it.
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302767
>
I'm glad you mentioned it.  I was accused of being "played" by bringing
up the issue again.  But in my mind the arrival of Ann was a game
changer.  Suddenly there was an opportunity for some of puzzle pieces to
be put into place.  I'm disappointed Vaj didn't see fit to fill in some
of those blanks.  After all, why not.  To my mind it wouldn't have been
much different than the banter Curtis had with Ann, sharing some of the
where and when during their time at MIU.

But I must say that I'm a little disppointed that Robin has also gone
MIA.  He did offer some clarification in I guesss what was a final post,
but I felt there was room for him to elaborate on some of the details.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Why i care

[obbajeeba]

Buck for President! 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> People often ask me why I care about these things of the TMmovement?
> 
> My interest and care is simple.  I've said it before several times.  The last 
> time I enumerated it was in this post:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/298163
> -Buck in FF
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The TM hymn on Negativity

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister 
wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" 
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Om Jeezus X-mas, they've been chanting it wrong all this time!
> > > > Well then, no wonder.
> > > >
> > > > saha nau avatu .
> > > > saha nau bhunaktu .
> > > > saha viiryaM karavaavahai .
> > > > tejasvi nau;
> > > > adhiitam astu maa vidviSaavahai .
> > > >
> > >
>
> Just for "fun", 'karavaavahai' - if we got it right - seems
> to be the 1st person *dual* (the two of us) aatmanepada (~
intransitive?) subjunctive mode form from the root 'kR' (karma,
shaM-kara, yogasthaH *kuru karmaaNi*, etc.).
>
>  According to Whitney, subjunctive was rather common
> in the Vedic Sanskrit, but became rare in the later Classical
>  Sanskrit, and was mainly used as the so called first person
> imperative form (let's?).
>

Some more fun:
The verb 'dviS' (and its prefixed forms, like 'vi-dviS') *might* be
related to the numeral 'dvi' (two), despitethat different kind of
sibilant (s = dental, S = retroflex):
  1 dviS2 (nom. {dvi3T}) f. hatred, concr. hater, enemy (also m.); adj.
--- = seq.
2 dvis adv. twice ({*ahvas, ahvA}, or {ahvi} twice a day).
3 dviS, dveSTi, dviSTe1 ({dviSati} & {-te}), pp. {dviSTa} (q.v.) [[,]]
hate, be hostile or a rival (w. acc., r. dat. or gen.). -- {pra}
dislike, hate, show enmity against (acc.). {vi} A.M. the same; M. also
hate each other mutually, be hostile towards one another. -- Cf.
{dviSa3nt, vidviSant, vidviSANa, vidviSTa}.