Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:44 PM, seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.comwrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: snip Weren't things like these attributed to support of nature? And I think you mean does it not 'indicate' the existence of a higher power. It necessitates the existence if we want them to be reinstated, given a reprieve, allowed to go over the limit once in a while and be pardoned. I, for one, wish both could post this week. Ann, I think I could do a better job of more clearly making my points. But, having said that. no, necessitate* is* the right word. (-: Here Judy got so carried away with this petty accusation, that she up and overposted herself. That is what I call instant karma. And if you believe in karma, then I think a higher power can't be far behind. I often like Judy's points, but this gloating thing, with its subsequent posts, seemed so off base, that I felt it was poetic justice that things worked out the way they did. And I can't help feel the same about Michael with his tireless campaign to denigrate all things TMO. But since that isn't likely Steve, you better be extra entertaining, interesting, brilliant and funny to make up for the absence of both MJ and Authfriend. Agreed? Ann, you have my word as a former cub scout, that I will do my best to FFL and my country to be entertaining, and brilliant and funny, so help me higher power. (-: But, just in case, can you ask Ravi to help out with the brilliant part. And any help with the funny part, I can leave with you. Stick to the strengths baby, friendly and supportive - yes, loving - yes, quick funny retorts - yes, analyzing people's motives - NO.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A New Lord of the Rings Film Saga
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:30 AM, nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.comwrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: I say a second chance. Only because this post was s mediocre. I mean if it had a morsel of creativity, then it may have been worth it. But a yawner like this. naw. You must try to see what is the best for MJ. If he for a whole week doesn't spend most of his time posting here he would have more time on his hands next time he's in town to collect food-stamps, thus increasing the possebility for him seeking professional help ! Oh this was very touching Nabby, MJ knows food stamps only buy food for physical health and not psychological health but he will definitely appreciate your sentiment which I believe represents the majority opinion here.
[FairfieldLife] Paynin' S's as!
navaguptavaamatantra (nava-gupta-vaama-tantra): http://www.flickr.com/photos/66867356@N02/8581321067/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/66867356@N02/8582421316/in/photostream/ OT Anyone know, does Yahoo pay something to Nokia for using their maps??
[FairfieldLife] Re: Girish Varma accused of sexual harassment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: Susan, as to your question I think you will like this. Of bullies and pig-heads and Looking for Ambercrombie... It is a funny serendipity how things get put in to your hands at times. I walked by a bookshelf today, pulled a book opening it to a page and read: I turned in disgust, and my associates followed -the Colonel's question was not answered. We then went to the Lieutenant-colonel and told our story. He said, I am not in command of this regiment. We then went to the Major, and when we had finished he said, The dn fool. We then went to the Adjutant, a little, lean, brainy, sensible young man, and told our story. He said: I cannot act; if you have got anything to say, put it in writing; file your charges. I have often wondered how the officers of that period got such bad cases of swell-head. It was perhaps because they were no-bodies when they went in. Men must get acclimated to power or they will handle it foolishly. Power, unless it comes slowly, spoils its possessor. Men and families must become acclimated to power the same as to wealth, or it will make fools of them, or lead them to disgrace. Here it was in our regiment, that the field officers could not listen to and redress a flagrant military wrong. They could not do the right and proper thing. They were alive only to the subjects of their own separate importances. They could not get down low enough to do a private soldier justice. Grant could, and Sherman could, and Thomas could and so could other great generals. Our field officers were not Grants, Shermans, Thomases and hence we never have since heard of them, and their names do not appear in history, and ought not to.. We were disgusted. Somebody must have told General Lyon. Probably he got it from the people of Boonville. Nobody knows; we never knew. The records of the War Department show the following: George Spreaper, absent in arrest in Keokuk since July 1, 1861. The above sentence is on the August muster-rolls of the regiment. It is probable that he was put onto a steamboat and hustled off. There was a rumor afteerwards that Streaper go into a Missouri militia regiment, as Second Lieutenant, and quit in January, 1862, after three month's service, to go South and join the Confederacy... All at once the First Lieutenant, Abercrombie, asserted himself. He had sort of been in the background. He had been handicapped by the jealousy, envy and dislike of the Captain. The Captain had been snubbing him, and keeping him dormant. He now announced that he was in command of the company; he restored all the corporals. We began to get care and attention. The boys began to appreciate him, and no company in the service had a better commander. That he afterwards became one of the famous Iowa colonels was a natural sequence. He was kindly and was very brave, and shirked nothing. Good-by Streaper; you were one of the thousands of worthless officers whom we had to unload before we could put down the rebellion. page 145 -The Lyon Campaign and History of the 1st Iowa Infantry, 1861. 1991 reprint by Camp Pope Bookshop From the title page: War is the schooling of the nations -Buck in the Dome --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: In the New TM Movement the leadership coming next will tell us all a lot about which direction it [the SBS Trust] will go in response to everything that Girish raises with this. We'll see if they can assert themselves with upright control over Girish and his people now. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: You should know that this guy is MMY's nephew. In India, due to their belief in reincarnation, nepotism is the norm and is usually celebrated as the proper way things get done. The first Prime Minister of India was named Jawaharlal Nehru. Coincidentally, Indira Ghandi was his granddaughter, and Rajiv Ghandi was his great-grandson. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_India#Prime_Ministers The swami named in the will to succeed Gurudev was Gurudev's nephew, it turns out. Indians just assume that their relatives are the best person for the job because the cosmos chose them for it by causing them to be born as relatives of the person in power. That said, I've heard the rumors of the nephews of MMY being bad people for years. But those same rumors say that TM doesn't work, that all the research is bogus and so on. It wouldn't be surprising if some of the rumors were true. It also wouldn't be surprising
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@... wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Using TMSP nr. 6 (at least in my set) that should be peace of cake??
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Using TMSP nr. 6 (at least in my set) that should be peace of cake?? BTW, it seems to me in Russia they are much more familiar with that kinda stuff, because they have shamans of Siberian (mostly Uralic) people like Hanti's and Mansi's to consult?? That's prolly where the Aryans learned the supernatural stuff, because it's much more useful in Northern Siberian climactic and other conditions than e.g. in India.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A New Lord of the Rings Film Saga
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Excellent! Thanks so much Doc, but you were supposed to answer in the *old* posting week, now my agent found a new channeler. To answer in the new posting week doesn't count. ;-) And for you, navashok I grant the exclusive privilege of being my lap dog - after all, every granny needs one. Now would you like kibbles, or bits, you cuddly little thing? (and please stop licking your butt when guests are over). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: MJ, Although I applaud your pending epic, and in spite of its posting causing you to pass to 'the other side' for seven days, I must insist on one of two roles, either Gandalf's white horse, OR, one of those man flesh eating ugly fuckers in black on the other side. If neither possible, would consider a non-speaking role as a huge statuary in the river, or a walking Ent. Sincerely, Doctor Dumbass, MD, Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (KBE) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@ wrote: Michael Jackson Productions announces a stunning new version of the mighty Lord of the Rings saga, where the casting accurately depicts the energy and nature of J.R.R. Tolkien's immortal characters. The producers were fortunate to find the individuals whose personalities accurately embody the essence of each of the characters they play. The casting in this new film series will create a dynamic realism unmatched in movie making history. The Lord of the Rings Film Saga: Staring: Girish Varma as Sauron (the perfect choice would of course have been Marshy but he is dead) Feste as the Mouth of Sauron Merlin as Shagrat of Cirith Ungol Wgm4u as Gorbag of Minas Morgul Ravi playing a dual role as Gollum and Grima Wormtongue Judy Authfriend playing a dual role as Shelob and Lobelia Sackville-Baggins Since authfriend is knocked out for one week, I suggest that her grandmother will substitute her. Doct. Jimbo has already agreed that he will channel her. Obbajeeba as Ugluk, Captain of the Uruk-Hai Nablussos as Grishnakh (although if Ravi is drunk or anything on the movie set, Nabby can easily stand in as Gollum or Grima Wormtongue) Seventh Ray as Saruman (in his decline) Dr. Dumbass playing a dual role as Bill Ferny and Ted Sandyman Rick as Frodo Buck in the Dome as Samwise Gamgee Salyavin as Galadriel Duveyoung playing a dual role as Elladan and Elrohir Xeno as Eomer Spairag as Barliman Butterbur Alex Stanley as Aragorn Barry as Farmer Maggott Bhairitu as Gandalf Navashok as Radagast the Brown I'm completely satisfied with my role, but I will need some time to grow my hair that long, especially at the top of my head. Curtis as Elrond Ann as Eowyn Richard J. Williams as a more than slightly crazed Gaffer Gamgee And Michael Jackson, of course, as Treebeard Share has a bit part as the old gossipy woman who gives Aragorn a ration of shit for not doing as she thinks he ought to in the Houses of Healing in Gondor.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Using TMSP nr. 6 (at least in my set) that should be peace of cake?? BTW, it seems to me in Russia they are much more familiar with that kinda stuff, because they have shamans of Siberian (mostly Uralic) people like Hanti's and Mansi's to consult?? Ooopsie, that should be Khanty in English. Furthermore, *Samoyedic* peoples were prolly even more shamanic?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samoyedic_peoples That's prolly where the Aryans learned the supernatural stuff, because it's much more useful in Northern Siberian climactic and other conditions than e.g. in India.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Was a good lecture. Extremely well spoken story of his [LB's] lifetime with FF and TM and his really nice resolution. Looked at as a FF communitarian it was proly unfortunate that it was heard by only a small subset of the larger community. Nothing was said that could not have been heard by and been helpful to a lot more people. I probably would have enjoyed it, and I hope it was recorded. But, with my life so completely focused on Vedic purity, I was in bed by 9pm and unable to attend. 9PM is truly impressive, a goal I could never achieve even on Purusha now using living in a city as a lame excuse. When then do you rise ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Using TMSP nr. 6 (at least in my set) that should be peace of cake?? BTW, it seems to me in Russia they are much more familiar with that kinda stuff, because they have shamans of Siberian (mostly Uralic) people like Hanti's and Mansi's to consult?? Ooopsie, that should be Khanty in English. Furthermore, *Samoyedic* peoples were prolly even more shamanic?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samoyedic_peoples That's prolly where the Aryans learned the supernatural stuff, because it's much more useful in Northern Siberian climactic and other conditions than e.g. in India. One more thing that I'd not heard before: Name Due to a false etymology,[1] the name Samoyed entered the Russian language as a corruption of the self-reference Saamod, Saamid (the Samoyedic suffix -d denotes plurality). It is the same as Saami (formerly Lapps or Lapons) in Finland, and Suomi, the Finnish name of Finland. In Russian ethnographic literature of the 19th century, they were also called #1057;#1072;#1084;#1086;#1103;#1076;#1100;, #1057;#1072;#1084;#1086;#1076;#1100;, (samoyad', samod', samodijtsy, samodijskie narody) which was often transliterated into English as Samodi.
[FairfieldLife] Why were Sun and Fire so important for Aryans?
Why were Sun and Fire so important for Aryans? Perhaps because in their IE Urheimat way up North, Sun (suurya, savitri, etc.) was below horizon for several weeks during winter time?? And it's quite self evident that Fire (agni; cf. Russian 'agon' [uh-gone], plural: ogni [aw-gnee]*) was very important especially in cold Siberian climate?? * For the change of vowels: mouse - mice, LOL!
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Unified Field Prayer
hey Buck, I really like the prayer to the Cosmic Birther, thank you. As for the Zach Waldner quote below from another post, perhaps if he had had a practice like TM that cleanses the lens of perception, he wouldn't be so against sensory enjoyment. It's my experience that as we develop, the senses are a means to coming closer to fuller, richer development and God rather than a hindrance to that. What say you? Also according to wiki it was St. Augustine who originated the concept of felix culpa, happy or fortunate fall. It appears in the liturgy of the Easter vigil, almost upon us. One interpretation is that if Adam and Eve had not fallen, laughinggull are you paying attention?, if Adam and Eve had not fallen, then Jesus would not have incarnated. Of a true Spiritual Discipline, friends; We want to avoid temptation and everything like that... What the eyes see and what the flesh wants, that is what we want to avoid, says the minister at Maple Grove, Zach Waldner. If you see it then you will probably be lost forever, just like it happened with our first parents Adam and Eve. They looked too much, they saw it was nice and it looked good, but it was their downfall. From: Buck dhamiltony...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 7:19 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Unified Field Prayer O Cosmic Birther of all radiance and vibration. Soften the Ground of our Being and carve out a space within us where Your presence can abide. Fill us with Your Creativity so that we may be empowered to bear the fruit of Your Mission. Let each of our actions bear fruit in accordance with our desires. Endow us with the Wisdom to produce and share what each being needs to grow and flourish. Untie the tangled threads of destiny that bind us, as we release others from the entanglements of past mistakes. Do not let us be seduced by that which would divert us from our True Purpose, but illuminate the opportunities of the Present Moment. For You are the Ground and the Fruitful Vision, the Birth, Power and Fulfillment, as All is gathered and made Whole once again. JAI AMEN
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC to men
During my stint as a grad student in Film and Television I read at least one article about the popular media's portrayal of family men as bumblers and buffoons, loveable but ineffective and even trouble causing. Of course there were also shows like Father Knows Best, but they seemed to be giving way to shows like The Simpsons, in which the husband father bread winner is literally a cartoon character. I was grateful to become more aware of this trend and to see the arrival and growth of, for example, the work of Robert Bly and his Iron Man movement which honors men as they struggle with modern times and ever changing expectations. So kudos to Steve and Doc and seeklib and Buck and all the other FFL men who are successfully figuring out how to be both powerful AND gentle. You guys are awesome and inspiring. From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 10:57 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: snip Weren't things like these attributed to support of nature? And I think you mean does it not 'indicate' the existence of a higher power. It necessitates the existence if we want them to be reinstated, given a reprieve, allowed to go over the limit once in a while and be pardoned. I, for one, wish both could post this week. Ann, I think I could do a better job of more clearly making my points. Yes, dear Steve, you are a bit of a bumbler, but a very loveable one. I picture you the guy I would want as my neighbour, my boss, the one who would be there if I tripped on the street, fell down and hurt myself. As exasperating as you can be at times you are a good guy, a kind man but I admit, you can be a bit of a doofus. But, having said that. no, necessitate is the right word. (-: Here Judy got so carried away with this petty accusation, that she up and overposted herself. That is what I call instant karma. That is if you think it was a bad thing or something she is unhappy about and you feel she deserves to be unhappy having overposted. Maybe she has booked a ticket for a small, intimate cruise on the French Riviera with stops in Cannes, Antibes and NIce. And if you believe in karma, then I think a higher power can't be far behind. I often like Judy's points, but this gloating thing, with its subsequent posts, seemed so off base, that I felt it was poetic justice that things worked out the way they did. Not sure about the poetry part but what is done is done. She'll no doubt be dancing cheek to cheek with some debonaire Frenchman and sipping Dom Perignon. And I can't help feel the same about Michael with his tireless campaign to denigrate all things TMO. He's on a healing mission. But since that isn't likely Steve, you better be extra entertaining, interesting, brilliant and funny to make up for the absence of both MJ and Authfriend. Agreed? Ann, you have my word as a former cub scout, that I will do my best to FFL and my country to be entertaining, and brilliant and funny, so help me higher power. (-: You'll do fine. But, just in case, can you ask Ravi to help out with the brilliant part. And any help with the funny part, I can leave with you. Oh, I'm funny alright.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:44 PM, seventhray27 steve.sundur@...wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: snip Weren't things like these attributed to support of nature? And I think you mean does it not 'indicate' the existence of a higher power. It necessitates the existence if we want them to be reinstated, given a reprieve, allowed to go over the limit once in a while and be pardoned. I, for one, wish both could post this week. Ann, I think I could do a better job of more clearly making my points. But, having said that. no, necessitate* is* the right word. (-: Here Judy got so carried away with this petty accusation, that she up and overposted herself. That is what I call instant karma. And if you believe in karma, then I think a higher power can't be far behind. I often like Judy's points, but this gloating thing, with its subsequent posts, seemed so off base, that I felt it was poetic justice that things worked out the way they did. And I can't help feel the same about Michael with his tireless campaign to denigrate all things TMO. But since that isn't likely Steve, you better be extra entertaining, interesting, brilliant and funny to make up for the absence of both MJ and Authfriend. Agreed? Ann, you have my word as a former cub scout, that I will do my best to FFL and my country to be entertaining, and brilliant and funny, so help me higher power. (-: But, just in case, can you ask Ravi to help out with the brilliant part. And any help with the funny part, I can leave with you. Stick to the strengths baby, friendly and supportive - yes, loving - yes, quick funny retorts - yes, analyzing people's motives - NO. Yesssir Mr. Ravi. Whatever you say Mr. Ravi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Was a good lecture. Extremely well spoken story of his [LB's] lifetime with FF and TM and his really nice resolution. Looked at as a FF communitarian it was proly unfortunate that it was heard by only a small subset of the larger community. Nothing was said that could not have been heard by and been helpful to a lot more people. I probably would have enjoyed it, and I hope it was recorded. But, with my life so completely focused on Vedic purity, I was in bed by 9pm and unable to attend. 9PM is truly impressive, a goal I could never achieve even on Purusha now using living in a city as a lame excuse. When then do you rise ? Depends on how quickly I fall asleep and whether my sleep is interrupted during the night. In a perfect night, I sleep ~7 hours straight. So, if I fall quickly to sleep and don't wake up during the night, I'll get up between 4 and 5 am. Most of the time, I get up between 5 and 6 am. On crappy sleep nights, I get up at 7 am; regardless of how little or crappy my sleep is, my body won't really sleep beyond 7 am. Needless to say, this isn't a TM/Vedic thing for me. I'm a naturally hard-wired morning person, and going to bed early greatly improves my quality of life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation Dear Seek, Thanks, good post chronicling historic late 20th Century Fairfield sociology. Good insight. Yeah, Richard in an earlier post had a good observation about this. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: According to Lifton, cults are a form of 'totalism' and coercive 'thought reform'. evidently it still is alive in Fairfield. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
MKP is the new Sterling in FF: http://mankindproject.org/ Notice how the original invite referred to LB as a warrior? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@... wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
I was trying to see a picture of the guy. Here is a link: http://www.sterling-institute.com/sterling-institute-justin.php --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation Dear Seek, Thanks, good post chronicling historic late 20th Century Fairfield sociology. Good insight. Yeah, Richard in an earlier post had a good observation about this. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: According to Lifton, cults are a form of 'totalism' and coercive 'thought reform'. evidently it still is alive in Fairfield. Fairfield is a veritable breeding ground for these kinds of things. What is it about the soil and climate, Buck, that encourages such vegetative flourishing (bad metaphor)? I would love to see a comprehensive list of all the 'teachers', spiritual guides, leaders of healing movements, healers themselves, enablers, channels, talkers, enlightened folk, celestial city constructors, seers, prophesizers, pundits, avatars and whatever else there might be that lurk in the back alleys off the town square. Anyone care to make a list? Share? I want to be ready when I come for a visit to book my first week's itinerary and make sure I cover at least 10% of what there is to offer there. (Now all you FF dwellers, this was meant as a JOKE. Feste, let's meet at the Carnegie Library, the one that still stands upright when I arrive and then perhaps a tea at Cafe Paradiso?) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation Dear Seek, Thanks, good post chronicling historic late 20th Century Fairfield sociology. Good insight. Yeah, Richard in an earlier post had a good observation about this. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: According to Lifton, cults are a form of 'totalism' and coercive 'thought reform'. evidently it still is alive in Fairfield. Fairfield is a veritable breeding ground for these kinds of things. What is it about the soil and climate, Buck, that encourages such vegetative flourishing (bad metaphor)? I would love to see a comprehensive list of all the 'teachers', spiritual guides, leaders of healing movements, healers themselves, enablers, channels, talkers, enlightened folk, celestial city constructors, seers, prophesizers, pundits, avatars and whatever else there might be that lurk in the back alleys off the town square. Anyone care to make a list? It's in the spiritual experience of the place. If not spiritual then you wouldn't appreciate it. If spiritual then this place is Mecca. Awoe, you should view the Fairfield Weekly Reader this week. There's an incredible number of spiritual people advertised for meetings and consults coming up in the next few weeks. There has been a Fairfield Directory of Active Spiritual Practice Groups but I don't think the Men back in those days ever made it in to it. -Buck in the Dome Share? I want to be ready when I come for a visit to book my first week's itinerary and make sure I cover at least 10% of what there is to offer there. (Now all you FF dwellers, this was meant as a JOKE. Feste, let's meet at the Carnegie Library, the one that still stands upright when I arrive and then perhaps a tea at Cafe Paradiso?) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
When I was doing the MA in SCI, a classmate and I both noticed a big difference going to bed at 9:15 rather than 9:30. So we asked our Sanskrit prof Tom Egenes about it and he said that there's something in the Vedic literature about every 15 min before 10 pm being the equivalent of an hour of sleep. And does anyone remember the famous quote attributed to Triguna: that if we all went to bed at 8:30 we wouldn't even need ayurveda? I have 2 acqaintenances who did this for a while and they both looked radiant. I've done it when I've felt an illness coming on and it seems to nip it in the bud. I'm an early riser no matter what time I go to bed and I tend to wake up at least once during the night. So early bedtime is a good habit for me though I realize it's not even necessary for others much less preferred. This past year I read a fascinating article about sleep habits and our cave people ancestors. That they went to bed early, woke in the middle of the night and did stuff, then went back to bed for another chunk of sleeping time. So it might be hardwired into us. Knowing this made me a lot more relaxed about my sleep habits. From: Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 8:18 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Men only, --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Was a good lecture. Extremely well spoken story of his [LB's] lifetime with FF and TM and his really nice resolution. Looked at as a FF communitarian it was proly unfortunate that it was heard by only a small subset of the larger community. Nothing was said that could not have been heard by and been helpful to a lot more people. I probably would have enjoyed it, and I hope it was recorded. But, with my life so completely focused on Vedic purity, I was in bed by 9pm and unable to attend. 9PM is truly impressive, a goal I could never achieve even on Purusha now using living in a city as a lame excuse. When then do you rise ? Depends on how quickly I fall asleep and whether my sleep is interrupted during the night. In a perfect night, I sleep ~7 hours straight. So, if I fall quickly to sleep and don't wake up during the night, I'll get up between 4 and 5 am. Most of the time, I get up between 5 and 6 am. On crappy sleep nights, I get up at 7 am; regardless of how little or crappy my sleep is, my body won't really sleep beyond 7 am. Needless to say, this isn't a TM/Vedic thing for me. I'm a naturally hard-wired morning person, and going to bed early greatly improves my quality of life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: I was trying to see a picture of the guy. Here is a link: http://www.sterling-institute.com/sterling-institute-justin.php This is the point at which I just have to roll my eyes. I'm sorry (and no offence intended to those who went for this stuff and felt that they gained something from it), but to me this is just eye-roll city. It's like when I read FFL and see all these long-term TMers so focused on their health problems and their healers and talking about them non-stop and I have to think, WTF? *These* are people who claim that TM produces 'perfect health?' Well, when I read about people who need a fuckin' seminar to figure out what it is to be a man or a woman I have a similar reaction. I liked Robert Bly as a poet, but his whole Man thang just left me completely cold and struck me as whining back when I first heard about it, decades ago -- a bunch of men sitting around a campfire pounding drums to get over their Daddy issues. The whole concept *still* strikes me as ludicrous. WHO, ferchrissakes, needs to be told by some seminar leader *making money from it* how to be a man or a woman, and what that entails? The very *concept* is IMO designed for those who have been trained over the years to pay for *everything* associated with self discovery or fulfillment. These are seminars offered by someone *promoting* duality, and making their money from the idea that men and women are so fundamentally different that they can't communicate without external help. As the bumper sticker says so well, Men are from Earth, women are from Earth...get over it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind ..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind�..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind�..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
I think you're referring to a recent New Yorker article about how sleep habits have changed. But the reference in that article was to 18th century America not cave people. So it wasn't that long ago. I'm thinking of trying it: going to bed at 8:30 or so, sleeping till 1, then getting up and doing stuff till about 3, then going back to bed until 6. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: When I was doing the MA in SCI, a classmate and I both noticed a big difference going to bed at 9:15 rather than 9:30. So we asked our Sanskrit prof Tom Egenes about it and he said that there's something in the Vedic literature about every 15 min before 10 pm being the equivalent of an hour of sleep. And does anyone remember the famous quote attributed to Triguna: that if we all went to bed at 8:30 we wouldn't even need ayurveda? I have 2 acqaintenances who did this for a while and they both looked radiant. I've done it when I've felt an illness coming on and it seems to nip it in the bud. I'm an early riser no matter what time I go to bed and I tend to wake up at least once during the night. So early bedtime is a good habit for me though I realize it's not even necessary for others much less preferred. This past year I read a fascinating article about sleep habits and our cave people ancestors. That they went to bed early, woke in the middle of the night and did stuff, then went back to bed for another chunk of sleeping time. So it might be hardwired into us. Knowing this made me a lot more relaxed about my sleep habits. From: Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 8:18 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Was a good lecture. Extremely well spoken story of his [LB's] lifetime with FF and TM and his really nice resolution. Looked at as a FF communitarian it was proly unfortunate that it was heard by only a small subset of the larger community. Nothing was said that could not have been heard by and been helpful to a lot more people. I probably would have enjoyed it, and I hope it was recorded. But, with my life so completely focused on Vedic purity, I was in bed by 9pm and unable to attend. 9PM is truly impressive, a goal I could never achieve even on Purusha now using living in a city as a lame excuse. When then do you rise ? Depends on how quickly I fall asleep and whether my sleep is interrupted during the night. In a perfect night, I sleep ~7 hours straight. So, if I fall quickly to sleep and don't wake up during the night, I'll get up between 4 and 5 am. Most of the time, I get up between 5 and 6 am. On crappy sleep nights, I get up at 7 am; regardless of how little or crappy my sleep is, my body won't really sleep beyond 7 am. Needless to say, this isn't a TM/Vedic thing for me. I'm a naturally hard-wired morning person, and going to bed early greatly improves my quality of life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind�..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC to men
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: During my stint as a grad student in Film and Television I read at least one article about the popular media's portrayal of family men as bumblers and buffoons, loveable but ineffective and even trouble causing. Of course there were also shows like Father Knows Best, but they seemed to be giving way to shows like The Simpsons, in which the husband father bread winner is literally a cartoon character. I was grateful to become more aware of this trend and to see the arrival and growth of, for example, the work of Robert Bly and his Iron Man movement which honors men as they struggle with modern times and ever changing expectations. So kudos to Steve and Doc and seeklib and Buck and all the other FFL men who are successfully figuring out how to be both powerful AND gentle. You guys are awesome and inspiring. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 10:57 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: snip Weren't things like these attributed to support of nature? And I think you mean does it not 'indicate' the existence of a higher power. It necessitates the existence if we want them to be reinstated, given a reprieve, allowed to go over the limit once in a while and be pardoned. I, for one, wish both could post this week. Ann, I think I could do a better job of more clearly making my points. Yes, dear Steve, you are a bit of a bumbler, but a very loveable one. I picture you the guy I would want as my neighbour, my boss, the one who would be there if I tripped on the street, fell down and hurt myself. As exasperating as you can be at times you are a good guy, a kind man but I admit, you can be a bit of a doofus. But, having said that. no, necessitate is the right word. (-: Here Judy got so carried away with this petty accusation, that she up and overposted herself. That is what I call instant karma. That is if you think it was a bad thing or something she is unhappy about and you feel she deserves to be unhappy having overposted. Maybe she has booked a ticket for a small, intimate cruise on the French Riviera with stops in Cannes, Antibes and NIce. And if you believe in karma, then I think a higher power can't be far behind. I often like Judy's points, but this gloating thing, with its subsequent posts, seemed so off base, that I felt it was poetic justice that things worked out the way they did. Not sure about the poetry part but what is done is done. She'll no doubt be dancing cheek to cheek with some debonaire Frenchman and sipping Dom Perignon. And I can't help feel the same about Michael with his tireless campaign to denigrate all things TMO. He's on a healing mission. But since that isn't likely Steve, you better be extra entertaining, interesting, brilliant and funny to make up for the absence of both MJ and Authfriend. Agreed? Ann, you have my word as a former cub scout, that I will do my best to FFL and my country to be entertaining, and brilliant and funny, so help me higher power. (-: You'll do fine. But, just in case, can you ask Ravi to help out with the brilliant part. And any help with the funny part, I can leave with you. Oh, I'm funny alright.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why were Sun and Fire so important for Aryans?
card: Why were Sun and Fire so important for Aryans? It's all a matter of placement. Controlled fire was the very first use of human geomancy, 50,000 BCE, in relation to a human dwelling, was the controlled use of fire sticks. Contrary to popular opinion, it is quite possible that ancient man invented human geomancy through the ritual use and placement of flame in his dwelling. Apparently, the first use of fire by man was not for warmth, nor for cooking his food, but instead, fire was placed in the 'hearth' as a fetish or symbolic geomantic gadget to be meditated upon via herbal tonics and various mental energetics, in which the Pan Man sought to impress the Old Hag. Since you apparently don't have a Hag, old or otherwise, we can only assume that playing with fire sticks is an experiment on your part. Around here we play with fire sticks every day, but be careful - fire burns. Go figure. The fact that the Aryan migration predates by far even the compilation of the earliest Vedas gives ample weight to the belief that the pre-historic fire cults have their roots in and developed from an earth based shamanic practice. An argument sustained by surviving present day shamanic practices in Central Asia and ceremonies within Tibetan and Japanese Tantric Buddhism wherein fire ritual, mountain worship, communion with deities and unseen forces and asceticism still walk hand in hand according to Tom Binder, in 'Mental Energetics'). (See Yanabushi). However, it is doubtful that 'Aryans' were ever a distinct race of people. The words 'Aryan' comes from Iranian as a 'self-identifier', meaning the speakers of Iranian languages. The word Aryan thus means Iranian from 'Iran'. Apparently there is no evidence that the word 'Aryan' existed prior to the Aryan language into Persia. The name Iran, Iranian is itself equivalent to Aryan, where Iran means land of the Aryans. Aryan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan Works cited: Oxford English Dictionary: Aryan from Sanskrit Arya 'Noble'. The History of Fire Ritual in Asia: http://tinyurl.com/cz8q7ez Further reading: 'Shamanism' - Mircea Eliade, Princeton University Press, 1964 'The Catalpa Bow' - Carmen Blacker, George Allen Unwin, 1975
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Still the best commentary ever on the Man's Movement (or at least one aspect of it), as delivered by Tom Cruise (hey, I know you don't like him, but he *has* done good work, and he was nominated for an Oscar for this performance, possibly for doing little more than acting like the asshole he is in real life), in Magnolia. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n2IVF9a2IA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCEYxs7kWmQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-q__knBahs --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind�..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to sell something. My friend and I were at my house and the FF guy was doing his thing on the phone. But then, as now, I didn't care to get recruited to a new group. And truthfully, I still have resentment for that guy for his blatant manipulation. He just wouldn't take no for an answer. Who knows, maybe I could have benefited from it.
[FairfieldLife] For Buck
Buck, you recently lost your partner and beautiful Icelandic stallion Sorli. For those who are not familiar with the breed here are some photos of this hearty, strong little horses. These ponies have unusual gaits. Not the normal walk, trot and canter most horses employ. These 'trotters' are doing the tolt, for those who haven't seen it. I am not that familiar either with the breed but for being so small they sure have a lot of go. That Buck must have been flying around the countryside there in FF. Go Buck! http://www.google.ca/url?sa=irct=jq=photo+icelandic+toltsource=image\ scd=docid=3vQXG61FaqQPDMtbnid=NgPclmMP2kFS2M:ved=0CAUQjRwurl=http%3\ A%2F%2Fwww.ansi.okstate.edu%2Fbreeds%2Fhorses%2Ficelandic%2Findex.htmei\ =NcpNUYK5GuK0iwKKk4HwDQbvm=bv.44158598,d.cGEpsig=AFQjCNG20IApcumyMc0d6\ e-alA1udt1eLQust=1364138911360250
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judy author
obbajeeba: Since over the limit count takes penalties to through the next week, I thought we can play a game here with Judy. So, it's all about Judy. Obba, with Judy away for a week there's hardly anything worth reading from you dweebs, much less commenting on. Your post is a case in point. LoL! Card is apparently on fire and Barry is still at the same smoky café since Monday - while Judy takes a vacation from posting and contemplates the Atlantic Ocean from her window. So, I'm thinking Judy comes out on top again - that's my take on Judy today. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind�..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good friends from here in St. Louis to recruit me, or invite me to participate or something. It was awkward for him, and it was awkward for me. But the Fairfield guy employed all the high pressure tactics you use to
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC to Ann
I like him way better with Diane Lane, Nights in Rodanthe, a weak story saved by 2 good performers with good chemistry together. And horses play a key role in the movie. Don't miss them at the end of the tailor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7EiRScYVzw PS to Ann: Buck posted a list of spiritual groups in FF some months ago. You and I and others had some back and forth about it as you called them snake oil salesman or something like that and the list included the Liberal Catholic Church, yoga classes, etc. From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 10:15 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC to men --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: During my stint as a grad student in Film and Television I read at least one article about the popular media's portrayal of family men as bumblers and buffoons, loveable but ineffective and even trouble causing. Of course there were also shows like Father Knows Best, but they seemed to be giving way to shows like The Simpsons, in which the husband father bread winner is literally a cartoon character. I was grateful to become more aware of this trend and to see the arrival and growth of, for example, the work of Robert Bly and his Iron Man movement which honors men as they struggle with modern times and ever changing expectations. So kudos to Steve and Doc and seeklib and Buck and all the other FFL men who are successfully figuring out how to be both powerful AND gentle. You guys are awesome and inspiring. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 10:57 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Sat 23-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: snip Weren't things like these attributed to support of nature? And I think you mean does it not 'indicate' the existence of a higher power. It necessitates the existence if we want them to be reinstated, given a reprieve, allowed to go over the limit once in a while and be pardoned. I, for one, wish both could post this week. Ann, I think I could do a better job of more clearly making my points. Yes, dear Steve, you are a bit of a bumbler, but a very loveable one. I picture you the guy I would want as my neighbour, my boss, the one who would be there if I tripped on the street, fell down and hurt myself. As exasperating as you can be at times you are a good guy, a kind man but I admit, you can be a bit of a doofus. But, having said that. no, necessitate is the right word. (-: Here Judy got so carried away with this petty accusation, that she up and overposted herself. That is what I call instant karma. That is if you think it was a bad thing or something she is unhappy about and you feel she deserves to be unhappy having overposted. Maybe she has booked a ticket for a small, intimate cruise on the French Riviera with stops in Cannes, Antibes and NIce. And if you believe in karma, then I think a higher power can't be far behind. I often like Judy's points, but this gloating thing, with its subsequent posts, seemed so off base, that I felt it was poetic justice that things worked out the way they did. Not sure about the poetry part but what is done is done. She'll no doubt be dancing cheek to cheek with some debonaire Frenchman and sipping Dom Perignon. And I can't help feel the same about Michael with his tireless campaign to denigrate all things TMO. He's on a healing mission. But since that isn't likely Steve, you better be extra entertaining, interesting, brilliant and funny to make up for the absence of both MJ and Authfriend. Agreed? Ann, you have my word as a former cub scout, that I will do my best to FFL and my country to be entertaining, and brilliant and funny, so help me higher power. (-: You'll do fine. But, just in case, can you ask Ravi to help out with the brilliant part. And any help with the funny part, I can leave with you. Oh, I'm funny alright.
[FairfieldLife] Austerity Plan
'Biden's One-Night Paris Hotel Tab: $585,000.50!' http://tinyurl.com/d7l4e84 'Chicago Says It Will Close 54 Public Schools' http://tinyurl.com/bv68abq
[FairfieldLife] What is Nothing?
Physicists do not appear to agree with the answer. Why? http://news.yahoo.com/nothing-physicists-debate-132817357.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Ah, Barry's old ask for an explanation in an attempt to seem rational -- not that he ever responds to them... What feste37 meant was that you have been exposed to spiritual traditions often enough to understand their basis, but your actual experience has never matched up. Result? A lot of pressure on you to conform your actions to match those in spiritual traditions you respect. Trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. The conflict it causes within you, has made you a natural asshole. Get it? Everyone else on here does. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: It's like when I read FFL and see all these long-term TMers so focused on their health problems and their healers and talking about them non-stop and I have to think, WTF? *These* are people who claim that TM produces 'perfect health?' Well, when I read about people who need a fuckin' seminar to figure out what it is to be a man or a woman I have a similar reaction. I liked Robert Bly as a poet, but his whole Man thang just left me completely cold and struck me as whining back when I first heard about it, decades ago -- a bunch of men sitting around a campfire pounding drums to get over their Daddy issues. The whole concept *still* strikes me as ludicrous. I agree that a lot of the rituals that some of these groups use are nothing more than mood-making rituals rather than the actual experience that enables individuals to get past whatever issues they have. However, after reading some works of Robert Bly and viewing my own experiences in life combined with what I experienced at the Sterling Men's weekend, I do agree that some education or view of problems with boys/men in America needs to be pointed out. But the process of dealing with whatever boundaries someone has towards becoming a mature adult is too personal for group practice to accomodate, IMHO. WHO, ferchrissakes, needs to be told by some seminar leader *making money from it* how to be a man or a woman, and what that entails? The very *concept* is IMO designed for those who have been trained over the years to pay for *everything* associated with self discovery or fulfillment. That was another reason myself and another member of the whole 'Sterling' institute left. We saw a real Ponzi scheme going on. We pay $500 to go there for a weekend, then we work tirelessly at recruiting more people to go there. We put forth all the effort, and someone else is making all the money. Damn that's clever! Or maybe it's not clever; they're just doing what people always do. But on the other hand, I still maintain the stance that what is taught at that weekend is necessary for 'some' young men these days. And I wouldn't say it's all 'daddy' issues, or overcoming emotional pain from upbringing (although that comes up). It's a bit more of a clear look at what a mature self-sufficent man should be, and a reality check at how much we (or at least some men) really suck at it these days. But i've met a lot of men that simply DON'T need that experience or to have these problems pointed out. Yet for some reason the stance of Sterling Institute is that you should relentlessly try to recruit everyone. It's literally worse than being a Christian Evangelist. These are seminars offered by someone *promoting* duality, and making their money from the idea that men and women are so fundamentally different that they can't communicate without external help. As the bumper sticker says so well, Men are from Earth, women are from Earth...get over it. That reminds me of a conversation I had with someone when I was at the 'weekend'. There was a lot of talk regarding differences between men and women. There was also the implication that men were simply NOT capable of certain things, which myself and the other guy disagreed with. But at the same time, America has moved into a rather strange social era where becoming a mature and self-sufficient man is not only decreasing among our populace, but it is often discouraged. I don't think there is any way we can deny this, but you can offer a different POV if you like. The whole point of some of these seminars is to address this disturbing issue. They are effective to some extent, albeit they end up going astray very quickly and get caught up in a lot of bullshit that I think is manufactured and effective for only a small percentage of participants. In the end, my conclusion is that there is something critical missing from boys and young men's lives that is preventing them from becoming a man. At least there is 'something' out there trying to address it. The only alternative is to ignore it and let it get worse. But then again, i've always said that anytime you create an organization, the moment the organization is created it eventually begins to establish patterns of thought and behaviour that are contradictory to the original intentions of the organization in the first place. That's why I felt reading a book or attending a weekend is not a bad idea, provided someone needs it. But the whole group/social club thing, I saw serious problems with it. That whole Sterling group in FF had an entire thought-process that was identical from one man to the next. Eventually, nobody seemed to be able to think independantly at all. It was pretty bad, and that's why I wanted nothing to do with it. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
[FairfieldLife] Re: A New Lord of the Rings Film Saga
Could be, but you've still got bad breath.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: Excellent! Thanks so much Doc, but you were supposed to answer in the *old* posting week, now my agent found a new channeler. To answer in the new posting week doesn't count. ;-) And for you, navashok I grant the exclusive privilege of being my lap dog - after all, every granny needs one. Now would you like kibbles, or bits, you cuddly little thing? (and please stop licking your butt when guests are over). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: MJ, Although I applaud your pending epic, and in spite of its posting causing you to pass to 'the other side' for seven days, I must insist on one of two roles, either Gandalf's white horse, OR, one of those man flesh eating ugly fuckers in black on the other side. If neither possible, would consider a non-speaking role as a huge statuary in the river, or a walking Ent. Sincerely, Doctor Dumbass, MD, Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (KBE) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@ wrote: Michael Jackson Productions announces a stunning new version of the mighty Lord of the Rings saga, where the casting accurately depicts the energy and nature of J.R.R. Tolkien's immortal characters. The producers were fortunate to find the individuals whose personalities accurately embody the essence of each of the characters they play. The casting in this new film series will create a dynamic realism unmatched in movie making history. The Lord of the Rings Film Saga: Staring: Girish Varma as Sauron (the perfect choice would of course have been Marshy but he is dead) Feste as the Mouth of Sauron Merlin as Shagrat of Cirith Ungol Wgm4u as Gorbag of Minas Morgul Ravi playing a dual role as Gollum and Grima Wormtongue Judy Authfriend playing a dual role as Shelob and Lobelia Sackville-Baggins Since authfriend is knocked out for one week, I suggest that her grandmother will substitute her. Doct. Jimbo has already agreed that he will channel her. Obbajeeba as Ugluk, Captain of the Uruk-Hai Nablussos as Grishnakh (although if Ravi is drunk or anything on the movie set, Nabby can easily stand in as Gollum or Grima Wormtongue) Seventh Ray as Saruman (in his decline) Dr. Dumbass playing a dual role as Bill Ferny and Ted Sandyman Rick as Frodo Buck in the Dome as Samwise Gamgee Salyavin as Galadriel Duveyoung playing a dual role as Elladan and Elrohir Xeno as Eomer Spairag as Barliman Butterbur Alex Stanley as Aragorn Barry as Farmer Maggott Bhairitu as Gandalf Navashok as Radagast the Brown I'm completely satisfied with my role, but I will need some time to grow my hair that long, especially at the top of my head. Curtis as Elrond Ann as Eowyn Richard J. Williams as a more than slightly crazed Gaffer Gamgee And Michael Jackson, of course, as Treebeard Share has a bit part as the old gossipy woman who gives Aragorn a ration of shit for not doing as she thinks he ought to in the Houses of Healing in Gondor.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action here constituting his posts on FFL). In this sense: His subjectivity is entirely in the service of producing the particular effect he is seeking in those readers whom he knows are the innocent registrars of their experience--this is, as I have stipulated, likely to be unconscious or subconscious. For everyone else but BW has to bear the consequences of their deeds as they enact them. Not BW. Not
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Using TMSP nr. 6 (at least in my set) that should be peace of cake?? BTW, it seems to me in Russia they are much more familiar with that kinda stuff, because they have shamans of Siberian (mostly Uralic) people like Hanti's and Mansi's to consult?? That's prolly where the Aryans learned the supernatural stuff, because it's much more useful in Northern Siberian climactic and other conditions than e.g. in India. Card, Based on this video, the military and the CIA are using remote viewing or clairvoyance for some of their operations. If they could methodically teach this skill to soldiers, then the casualty of American soldiers should be reduced and should enhance their ability to apprehend terrorists or insurgents in future battles.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
If you notice in the media too, all of the articles that tell you how to: Lose Weight, Get A Better Job, How To Manage Your Money And Avoid Scams, etc. are all written from a victim's perspective. Constantly reinforcing the idea, the fear, that the world is overwhelming and we better step it up and learn from the experts. Even the values adopted by the so called outlaws like Barry - jaywalking, stealing movies, railing about cults, are all pathetic and impotent moves within the social slavery they supposedly confront. The only way to true freedom is through self awareness. The world is as you are. Live unbounded awareness - Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: It's like when I read FFL and see all these long-term TMers so focused on their health problems and their healers and talking about them non-stop and I have to think, WTF? *These* are people who claim that TM produces 'perfect health?' Well, when I read about people who need a fuckin' seminar to figure out what it is to be a man or a woman I have a similar reaction. I liked Robert Bly as a poet, but his whole Man thang just left me completely cold and struck me as whining back when I first heard about it, decades ago -- a bunch of men sitting around a campfire pounding drums to get over their Daddy issues. The whole concept *still* strikes me as ludicrous. I agree that a lot of the rituals that some of these groups use are nothing more than mood-making rituals rather than the actual experience that enables individuals to get past whatever issues they have. However, after reading some works of Robert Bly and viewing my own experiences in life combined with what I experienced at the Sterling Men's weekend, I do agree that some education or view of problems with boys/men in America needs to be pointed out. But the process of dealing with whatever boundaries someone has towards becoming a mature adult is too personal for group practice to accomodate, IMHO. WHO, ferchrissakes, needs to be told by some seminar leader *making money from it* how to be a man or a woman, and what that entails? The very *concept* is IMO designed for those who have been trained over the years to pay for *everything* associated with self discovery or fulfillment. That was another reason myself and another member of the whole 'Sterling' institute left. We saw a real Ponzi scheme going on. We pay $500 to go there for a weekend, then we work tirelessly at recruiting more people to go there. We put forth all the effort, and someone else is making all the money. Damn that's clever! Or maybe it's not clever; they're just doing what people always do. But on the other hand, I still maintain the stance that what is taught at that weekend is necessary for 'some' young men these days. And I wouldn't say it's all 'daddy' issues, or overcoming emotional pain from upbringing (although that comes up). It's a bit more of a clear look at what a mature self-sufficent man should be, and a reality check at how much we (or at least some men) really suck at it these days. But i've met a lot of men that simply DON'T need that experience or to have these problems pointed out. Yet for some reason the stance of Sterling Institute is that you should relentlessly try to recruit everyone. It's literally worse than being a Christian Evangelist. These are seminars offered by someone *promoting* duality, and making their money from the idea that men and women are so fundamentally different that they can't communicate without external help. As the bumper sticker says so well, Men are from Earth, women are from Earth...get over it. That reminds me of a conversation I had with someone when I was at the 'weekend'. There was a lot of talk regarding differences between men and women. There was also the implication that men were simply NOT capable of certain things, which myself and the other guy disagreed with. But at the same time, America has moved into a rather strange social era where becoming a mature and self-sufficient man is not only decreasing among our populace, but it is often discouraged. I don't think there is any way we can deny this, but you can offer a different POV if you like. The whole point of some of these seminars is to address this disturbing issue. They are effective to some extent, albeit they end up going astray very quickly and get caught up in a lot of bullshit that I think is manufactured and effective for only a small percentage of participants. In the end, my conclusion is that there is something critical missing from boys and young men's lives that is preventing them from becoming a man. At least there is 'something' out there trying to address it. The
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
turquoiseb: These are seminars offered by someone *promoting* duality, and making their money from the idea that men and women are so fundamentally different that they can't communicate without external help. Thanks for this information, but you used to love paying for seminars and paying to go on TTCs and CPs with Rama - what happened? Are you still paying to keep that Rama site up? Go figure. Excerpt: Interviewer: Why did you decide to write a book? Uncle Tantra: I had nothing better to do that day. http://www.ramalila.com/ Uncle Tantra: Sasquatch takes pictures of him. He ran a marathon because it was on his way. He can share insider jokes to with total strangers. He is the most interesting man on the planet! As the bumper sticker says so well, Men are from Earth, women are from Earth...get over it. P.S. Actually neither men nor women are from Earth, since we're all made out of stardust, everything on the planet is from somewhere else in the universe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. Alex, Yes, indeed. There is also an organization that is using remote viewing to determine if there is intelligent life on Mars, and to see if some of the structures on Mars are artificially made. You should be able to find the video clip on YouTube which is next to the video clip I've attached. JR
Re: [FairfieldLife] Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
laughing and not making this up. The first image that came to my mind was a round metal meshy collander approx 6 inches in diameter with a long black handle. But then I thought maybe that was because I had seen one yesterday. But now I don't know where that would have been. Is there such a thing as a remote viewer with a bad memory?! From: John jr_...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 10:37 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Remote Viewing Test for Everyone In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
I can sum up BW's secret in two words, Robin: Control freak. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action here constituting his posts on FFL). In this sense: His subjectivity is entirely in the service of producing the particular effect he is seeking in those readers whom he knows
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR
Re: [FairfieldLife] For Buck
The mane is so beautiful. From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 8:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] For Buck Buck, you recently lost your partner and beautiful Icelandic stallion Sorli. For those who are not familiar with the breed here are some photos of this hearty, strong little horses. These ponies have unusual gaits. Not the normal walk, trot and canter most horses employ. These 'trotters' are doing the tolt, for those who haven't seen it. I am not that familiar either with the breed but for being so small they sure have a lot of go. That Buck must have been flying around the countryside there in FF. Go Buck!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Robin Carlsen: Here is BW's secret... So, it's all about Barry. Uncle Tantra (UT) is suffering from acute Narcissism. Because he dropped-out of both TM and Rama's program he needs to rewrite history and trash religious groups that he once belonged to. Yet at the same time he needs to show-off to current followers and write spiritual essays of the same teachers he trashes in private. By engaging in this neurotic contradiction any personal failures are covered-up by UT's dual positions. Uncle Tantra's ego can instead present to others the image he clings to: a great writer, an advanced spiritual seeker that has gone into Samadhi, and the hip 60's Jungian wise-old man persona that he so pathetically attempts to cultivate in his ramblings and even through his name 'Uncle Tantra'... Read more: Subject: Trashing Rama - An analysis Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Author: Garuda Date: Wed, May 7 2003 3:39 pm http://tinyurl.com/2edw8k
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
Share, It's an interesting idea to have the power for remote viewing isn't it? There's a lady on YouTube who says that anyone can develop this ability through practice. She also stated that she was able to remote view some scenes on Mars. If you're interested, the video clip should be next to the clip I've attached at the website. JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: laughing and not making this up. The first image that came to my mind was a round metal meshy collander approx 6 inches in diameter with a long black handle. But then I thought maybe that was because I had seen one yesterday. But now I don't know where that would have been. Is there such a thing as a remote viewer with a bad memory?! From: John jr_esq@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 10:37 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Remote Viewing Test for Everyone  In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. The digs aside (slovenly? insincerely?) I don't believe he sees any reason to share anything with people he does not like or respect. He just calls it as he sees it and moves on. His blasts are not an opening for a dialogue, they are just projections of his POV, more writing exercise than conversation. If you look at the list of people who have received such attention they often have some similar traits that Barry is outspoken about not respecting or liking. I have a very good idea of his POV from his pieces contrary to your perspective. If a new poster showed up here today I could probably predict with good accuracy how Barry would react to them. It was easy to predict that you were not gunna be friends. So your statements probably do apply to you. You may not have the ability to see where he is coming from and he seems hidden from you. Do you see Judy as any more vulnerable and interested in really interacting with a person when she is doing her Judy thing? Are you or me for that matter? Once we size someone up as not being worth the trouble, or that they are openly hostile toward us, we all shut down the two way conversation and might say something with no intention to be open to that person. I see him just fine. And with me it is a two way street of giving each other space to express our opinions even if we differ. So we get along based on liking each other and trusting that the other person is not gunna send out some version of what you just wrote. I've received enough of them myself from you to know that me writing this is not going to enter your consciousness beyond your reflexive attack mode. Or you can prove me wrong. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to
[FairfieldLife] Alex will enjoy this
Since I run Linux and Ubuntu I decided that I'd better update to Ubuntu 12.04 LTS (Long Term Support) before the month runs out because support for 10.04 which I currently run will end. So I click on the upgrade and it looked like everything went smooth. Rebooted and got a screen saying the system couldn't find the boot partition. Argh! So since I have another computer in the room I ran it to search for answers. Most of the problems had to do with old software and dependencies for those. This was not going to be an easy fix. What had happened is that the upgrade didn't actually complete though it acted like it did. So I gave up BUT of course I had made an image backup of the 10.04 boot partition with Clonezilla and copied it back. Reboot and back to 10.04. This afternoon I'll try again this time uninstalling the one particular program that was the culprit before running the upgrade. Before Winders users feel smug I've seen similar problems doing Winders upgrades. And before someone recommends Linux Mint which I run off of pen drives on other computers I would love to do that but apparently the Android emulators only can run in GPU mode on Ubuntu and I need that for testing super high density devices like 5 phones with 1080x1920 displays.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Was a good lecture. Extremely well spoken story of his [LB's] lifetime with FF and TM and his really nice resolution. Looked at as a FF communitarian it was proly unfortunate that it was heard by only a small subset of the larger community. Nothing was said that could not have been heard by and been helpful to a lot more people. I probably would have enjoyed it, and I hope it was recorded. But, with my life so completely focused on Vedic purity, I was in bed by 9pm and unable to attend. 9PM is truly impressive, a goal I could never achieve even on Purusha now using living in a city as a lame excuse. When then do you rise ? Depends on how quickly I fall asleep and whether my sleep is interrupted during the night. In a perfect night, I sleep ~7 hours straight. So, if I fall quickly to sleep and don't wake up during the night, I'll get up between 4 and 5 am. Most of the time, I get up between 5 and 6 am. On crappy sleep nights, I get up at 7 am; regardless of how little or crappy my sleep is, my body won't really sleep beyond 7 am. Needless to say, this isn't a TM/Vedic thing for me. I'm a naturally hard-wired morning person, and going to bed early greatly improves my quality of life. For me obviously it's both :-) Getting up at 5AM is a true blessing. Last time in Paris I hit the streets at 5.30 every day just when the cafees had their only hourly break for cleening. For natural reasons the Turq never experienced this, but the cafe life from 6AM is unique, those that stay open that is. Since they don't have the cleening hour at the same time you'll have plenty cafees open with regulars coming in for morning coffee and those who stayed up all night partying or just flirting sitting side by side giving you an interesting view of the different lives. And the light obviously has a completely different and more glorious quality than later in the day, no matter where you are on the globe. And if you travel with a woman who likes to sleep late, viola !, you have several hours by yourself free to do as you please and free from shopping !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Wow, Ethel*, you really know Fred well. Figures, you're married to him... *Murtz, from the I Love Lucy show. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. The digs aside (slovenly? insincerely?) I don't believe he sees any reason to share anything with people he does not like or respect. He just calls it as he sees it and moves on. His blasts are not an opening for a dialogue, they are just projections of his POV, more writing exercise than conversation. If you look at the list of people who have received such attention they often have some similar traits that Barry is outspoken about not respecting or liking. I have a very good idea of his POV from his pieces contrary to your perspective. If a new poster showed up here today I could probably predict with good accuracy how Barry would react to them. It was easy to predict that you were not gunna be friends. So your statements probably do apply to you. You may not have the ability to see where he is coming from and he seems hidden from you. Do you see Judy as any more vulnerable and interested in really interacting with a person when she is doing her Judy thing? Are you or me for that matter? Once we size someone up as not being worth the trouble, or that they are openly hostile toward us, we all shut down the two way conversation and might say something with no intention to be open to that person. I see him just fine. And with me it is a two way street of giving each other space to express our opinions even if we differ. So we get along based on liking each other and trusting that the other person is not gunna send out some version of what you just wrote. I've received enough of them myself from you to know that me writing this is not going to enter your consciousness beyond your reflexive attack mode. Or you can prove me wrong. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Buck
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: The mane is so beautiful.   Yep, nice pictures of a great horse. Thanks. He was a warhorse. They are special when you run in to them in life. This is the best picture I like of the old Sorli Fra Bulandi: George Washington rode up and sat his horse quietly beside the bridge. Private Howland wrote, The noble horse of Gen. Washington stood with his breast pressed close against the end of the west rail of the bridge, and the firm, composed and majestic countenance... inspired confidence and assurance in a moment so important and critical. In this passage across the bridge it was my fortune to be next the west rail, and arriving at the west end of the bridge I was pressed against the shoulder of the end of the general's horse and in contact with the general's boot. The horse stood firm as the rider, and seemed to understand that he was not to quit his post and station. Again the men spoke of his composure in a critical moment, and the army rallied to his quiet leadership. Nearly all the Americans got safely across the creek. Howland wrote that the bridge was narrow and our platoons in passing it were crowded into a dense and solid mass, in the rear of which, the enemy were making their best efforts. Every man who crossed the bridge passed close by him. The horse stood firm as the rider, and seemed to understand that he was not to quit his post and station. Again the men spoke of his composure in a critical moment, and the army rallied to his quiet leadership. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 8:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] For Buck  Buck, you recently lost your partner and beautiful Icelandic stallion Sorli. For those who are not familiar with the breed here are some photos of this hearty, strong little horses. These ponies have unusual gaits. Not the normal walk, trot and canter most horses employ. These 'trotters' are doing the tolt, for those who haven't seen it. I am not that familiar either with the breed but for being so small they sure have a lot of go. That Buck must have been flying around the countryside there in FF. Go Buck!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. That's not quite correct. Robin struck me from Day One as someone so uninteresting that I couldn't force myself to plow through his bloviated language. He still does. I clicked on this post of his by hitting Next on the previous one, read no more than the first 10 words and realized who it was from the shitty writing, and only then looked up at the top to confirm the sender. At that point, I hit Next again. I do not and will not apologize for this. Life's too short to waste on pissants, especially wordy ones. :-) So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. This is more correct, although to be accurate, I would say, a person he barely acknowledges the existence of. :-) BTW, I *expected* him to make a reappearance about now. The combination of you being present and his primary devotee and groupie not being present this week was too tempting for him to resist. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Just pushing your buttons, Turq. Looks like it worked! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: ahhh, the whole sterling men's group cult that started back in the 90's. I remember that whole thing (I think it's still going). I ended up going to the 'weekend seminar' that is the basis of the whole group. It's actually valuable if you've been raised like a modern american male (irresponsible, immature, unable to transition from boyhood to manhood, etc...). The whole weekend is about a lot of things, but primarily what I got out of it is a view of how weak and pathetic men are becoming decade after decade in America. It was a kind of eye-opening experience for me, and i'm thankful for it. Othwerwise, I do believe I would've continued in life with a lot of perpetual abandonment of responsibility and growth that is often justified by modern American males to avoid altogether. However, the whole sterling men's group turned into a 'cult within a cult'. Not only were the men from Fairfield mostly meditators, but now they're a part of another new 'paradigm-shifting' group. I found that a lot of the men in that group were doing a lot of superficial things that were just NOT a part of their character. It was usually to display some masculinity or manliness. There were so many of them that would all of a sudden try acting tough, though they never were tough their entire life. The intensity of their recruiting efforts was borderline psychotic. I honestly believe that only a sociopath could remain in that group without any serious conflict with others. Many men who were part of it eventually drifted away due to the same perceptions that I had of it. However, we all agreed it (the weekend seminar) changed our lives for the better. The funny part about it is that eventually the Head Honcho of all nationwide Sterling groups (Justin Sterling) made an executive decision to disband the group from Fairfield from being an official representation of the 'Sterling Men's Group'. I'm not sure why, but I think that the leader of the whole gig felt that something was seriously wrong with the men's group from Fairfield in comparison to other groups in the rest of the nation. He was probably right. A lot of these men were fanatics about TM, or some other form of spirituality or new-agism. And if you take someone like that and latch them onto another belief system, it's like the fanatacism goes through the roof. All that being said, I do agree that the weekend has changed some people's lives, but I would strongly recommend avoiding the group activities that come afterward (unless you really enjoy it). It was a major pain in the ass when I announced to the group that I didn't want anything to do with them anymore. It's worse than trying to tell a military recruiter that you changed your mind�..literally. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I am guessing that this is carry over from the Mens movement thing from some time ago. Was it Sterling, or something? I guess I could look it up. But I remember someone from Fairfield, put one of my good
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
I had never considered the points you make, Curtis. I feel better about Barry now--and may I say this? I wish I had not written that analysis. Little did I imagine it could be refuted so straightforwardly, so effectively. I like how you smash against reality--your metaphysical punch here has caused the kind of intellectual concussion it was meant to deliver. So, I was wrong about Barry. In hindsight I think my reaction to Barry was entirely based on the sense I had that, as you pointed out, he didn't like me much. Right from the beginning. That stung, and I had thought (forgetting about your moral firepower) to get my revenge here. I have been answered, and now everyone can contemplate the fact: How was it that Robin's post was addressed with such devastating truthfulness as Curtis has now done, and left Robin to writhe in his embarrassment? For having given evidence of simple projection. A very good post, Curtis: your sincerity and honesty in sticking up for Barry trumps--entirely trumps--the avowed sincerity and honesty of my post about Barry. I never thought you would have the guts to stand up for Barry. And that I could sneakily deceive all FFL readers into believing what I knew, right from the start, was pure resentment and pique. What is marvellous is the impression I get that your post, it cannot be faulted. Magic. But I am glad you were moved by the profound sense of what you deemed the critical implications for yourself, about leaving my BW post unanswered. Your pride exceeds my love of what is true. Our standoff here, it makes me sense the justification of death (assuming as I do it will deal with this controversy-among other things). No one can figure out what you just did, Curtis. (But you will understand the psychological need I had to respond like this.) Subjective ex cathedra. Oh, and by the way: everything I said about Barry Wright is true, and your post underscores this. Kidding. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. The digs aside (slovenly? insincerely?) I don't believe he sees any reason to share anything with people he does not like or respect. He just calls it as he sees it and moves on. His blasts are not an opening for a dialogue, they are just projections of his POV, more writing exercise than conversation. If you look at the list of people who have received such attention they often have some similar traits that Barry is outspoken about not respecting or liking. I have a very good idea of his POV from his pieces contrary to your perspective. If a new poster showed up here today I could probably predict with good accuracy how Barry would react to them. It was easy to predict that you were not gunna be friends. So your statements probably do apply to you. You may not have the ability to see where he is coming from and he seems hidden from you. Do you see Judy as any more vulnerable and interested in really interacting with a person when she is doing her Judy thing? Are you or me for that matter? Once we size someone up as not being worth the trouble, or that they are openly hostile toward us, we all shut down the two way conversation and might say something with no intention to be open to that person. I see him just fine. And with me it is a two way street of giving each other space to express our opinions even if we differ. So we get along based on liking each other and trusting that the other person is not gunna send out some version of what you just wrote. I've received enough of them myself from you to know that me writing this is not going to enter your consciousness beyond your reflexive attack mode. Or you can prove me wrong. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Buck
Lookie what I found: http://www.hestakaup.com. All the videos are very nice. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: Buck, you recently lost your partner and beautiful Icelandic stallion Sorli. For those who are not familiar with the breed here are some photos of this hearty, strong little horses. These ponies have unusual gaits. Not the normal walk, trot and canter most horses employ. These 'trotters' are doing the tolt, for those who haven't seen it. I am not that familiar either with the breed but for being so small they sure have a lot of go. That Buck must have been flying around the countryside there in FF. Go Buck! http://www.google.ca/url?sa=irct=jq=photo+icelandic+toltsource=image\ scd=docid=3vQXG61FaqQPDMtbnid=NgPclmMP2kFS2M:ved=0CAUQjRwurl=http%3\ A%2F%2Fwww.ansi.okstate.edu%2Fbreeds%2Fhorses%2Ficelandic%2Findex.htmei\ =NcpNUYK5GuK0iwKKk4HwDQbvm=bv.44158598,d.cGEpsig=AFQjCNG20IApcumyMc0d6\ e-alA1udt1eLQust=1364138911360250
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. That's not quite correct. Robin struck me from Day One as someone so uninteresting that I couldn't force myself to plow through his bloviated language. He still does. I clicked on this post of his by hitting Next on the previous one, read no more than the first 10 words and realized who it was from the shitty writing, and only then looked up at the top to confirm the sender. At that point, I hit Next again. I do not and will not apologize for this. Life's too short to waste on pissants, especially wordy ones. :-) You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. This is more correct, although to be accurate, I would say, a person he barely acknowledges the existence of. :-) BTW, I *expected* him to make a reappearance about now. The combination of you being present and his primary devotee and groupie not being present this week was too tempting for him to resist. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: No one can figure out what you just did, Curtis. Only you, right? I know the drill. Anyhoo I am working on a premise that we are all working in a more similar than different way here. We have different styles of expressing it. You are gunna be more rope a dope with some people, Jim and Judy more aggressive. But basically we have each sized each other up and there will be very little openness between certain people, no matter how it appears at first. I am trying to go post by post mirroring the openness or hostility. It does not work with Judy, has worked a bit with Jim in the past. It has actually worked best with Richard who I have shifted my view about, knowing full well that he may let me have it in the next post. Ravi too actually, and certainly Ann and Buck who vacillate in how they relate to me. I am trying to let every post stand on its own without giving the highest weight to the history. With my strong views about the value of the spiritual path I am always gunna get some version of disapproval from many poster here from time to time, and I can accept that and even still like them, while believing they are wrong. Most of them just blow me off unless we are on a non spiritual topic and I understand that. I little of me on that topic goes a long way. I have never gotten back to a trusting sincere space with you. It's funny, I was looking at some old posts from our beginning run and there was a comment you made that at the time I think I took completely the wrong way. You were saying that the one thing I must never do is question your enlightenment in the past. I realized now that I thought you were being snarky and self-effacing, making a joke about insisting that I take that seriously, you know wink, wink, nudge, nudge style. I thought it meant that you were beyond taking that part of your life seriously. In retrospect I suspect a lot of our initial rapport was based on this kind of misread. And perhaps the same for you. Maybe you read my denouncing spirituality as more tongue in cheek than I meant it. Perhaps when you found out I really don't believe in enlightenment in the way you do it was a shock too. You know I wasn't punching you with my analysis of your take on Barry. I wasn't even denying that it was true for you. My point was that your subjective take was not more than that. And there are other perceptual positions that might also be valid for that person. None of us is seeing the other clearly, we all have our choices of interaction embedded in our history of communications here. I wasn't just sticking up for Barry, that is irrelevant. I was sharing my perspective which was different from yours. We are both entitled to our own views, we earned them. I had never considered the points you make, Curtis. I feel better about Barry now--and may I say this? I wish I had not written that analysis. Little did I imagine it could be refuted so straightforwardly, so effectively. I like how you smash against reality--your metaphysical punch here has caused the kind of intellectual concussion it was meant to deliver. So, I was wrong about Barry. In hindsight I think my reaction to Barry was entirely based on the sense I had that, as you pointed out, he didn't like me much. Right from the beginning. That stung, and I had thought (forgetting about your moral firepower) to get my revenge here. I have been answered, and now everyone can contemplate the fact: How was it that Robin's post was addressed with such devastating truthfulness as Curtis has now done, and left Robin to writhe in his embarrassment? For having given evidence of simple projection. A very good post, Curtis: your sincerity and honesty in sticking up for Barry trumps--entirely trumps--the avowed sincerity and honesty of my post about Barry. I never thought you would have the guts to stand up for Barry. And that I could sneakily deceive all FFL readers into believing what I knew, right from the start, was pure resentment and pique. What is marvellous is the impression I get that your post, it cannot be faulted. Magic. But I am glad you were moved by the profound sense of what you deemed the critical implications for yourself, about leaving my BW post unanswered. Your pride exceeds my love of what is true. Our standoff here, it makes me sense the justification of death (assuming as I do it will deal with this controversy-among other things). No one can figure out what you just did, Curtis. (But you will understand the psychological need I had to respond like this.) Subjective ex cathedra. Oh, and by the way: everything I said about Barry Wright is true, and your post underscores this. Kidding. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Welcome back, MZ! Where have you been? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action here constituting his posts on FFL). In this sense: His subjectivity is entirely in the service of producing the particular effect he is seeking in those readers whom he knows are the innocent
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government. Isn't this what the movie Men Who Stare at Goats with George Clooney and Ewan McGregor was all about?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
If Barry approves of this, I do. You must realize, though, Curtis, that not all of us can aspire to such saintly disinterestedness and impartiality as you do (as evidenced in this post). You attempted one approach; now you proffer another one. We are all different; we each have our own personal and unavoidable (and uncorrectable) point of view. I can't help but being prejudiced and biased against Barry; he, the same vis-a-vis me. We are all doing our very best. Why not recognize that these issues can never been adjudicated objectively, decisively? I get it now. I was fighting for something unwinnable. And I am sorry. Now, that is; after reading this second mood post. If Barry will pretend to like me, I promise I will not try to strike back at him. How did those women ever resist you, Curtis? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: No one can figure out what you just did, Curtis. Only you, right? I know the drill. Anyhoo I am working on a premise that we are all working in a more similar than different way here. We have different styles of expressing it. You are gunna be more rope a dope with some people, Jim and Judy more aggressive. But basically we have each sized each other up and there will be very little openness between certain people, no matter how it appears at first. I am trying to go post by post mirroring the openness or hostility. It does not work with Judy, has worked a bit with Jim in the past. It has actually worked best with Richard who I have shifted my view about, knowing full well that he may let me have it in the next post. Ravi too actually, and certainly Ann and Buck who vacillate in how they relate to me. I am trying to let every post stand on its own without giving the highest weight to the history. With my strong views about the value of the spiritual path I am always gunna get some version of disapproval from many poster here from time to time, and I can accept that and even still like them, while believing they are wrong. Most of them just blow me off unless we are on a non spiritual topic and I understand that. I little of me on that topic goes a long way. I have never gotten back to a trusting sincere space with you. It's funny, I was looking at some old posts from our beginning run and there was a comment you made that at the time I think I took completely the wrong way. You were saying that the one thing I must never do is question your enlightenment in the past. I realized now that I thought you were being snarky and self-effacing, making a joke about insisting that I take that seriously, you know wink, wink, nudge, nudge style. I thought it meant that you were beyond taking that part of your life seriously. In retrospect I suspect a lot of our initial rapport was based on this kind of misread. And perhaps the same for you. Maybe you read my denouncing spirituality as more tongue in cheek than I meant it. Perhaps when you found out I really don't believe in enlightenment in the way you do it was a shock too. You know I wasn't punching you with my analysis of your take on Barry. I wasn't even denying that it was true for you. My point was that your subjective take was not more than that. And there are other perceptual positions that might also be valid for that person. None of us is seeing the other clearly, we all have our choices of interaction embedded in our history of communications here. I wasn't just sticking up for Barry, that is irrelevant. I was sharing my perspective which was different from yours. We are both entitled to our own views, we earned them. I had never considered the points you make, Curtis. I feel better about Barry now--and may I say this? I wish I had not written that analysis. Little did I imagine it could be refuted so straightforwardly, so effectively. I like how you smash against reality--your metaphysical punch here has caused the kind of intellectual concussion it was meant to deliver. So, I was wrong about Barry. In hindsight I think my reaction to Barry was entirely based on the sense I had that, as you pointed out, he didn't like me much. Right from the beginning. That stung, and I had thought (forgetting about your moral firepower) to get my revenge here. I have been answered, and now everyone can contemplate the fact: How was it that Robin's post was addressed with such devastating truthfulness as Curtis has now done, and left Robin to writhe in his embarrassment? For having given evidence of simple projection. A very good post, Curtis: your sincerity and honesty in sticking up for Barry trumps--entirely trumps--the avowed sincerity and honesty of my post about Barry. I never thought you would have
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government. Isn't this what the movie Men Who Stare at Goats with George Clooney and Ewan McGregor was all about? Yes, and it's true that the CIA used to have a remote viewing team. But this was disbanded some years ago for a very good reason. Remote viewing doesn't work. This didn't stop the CIA trained viewers from hitting the new age scene and making a fortune out of it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: Welcome back, MZ! Where have you been? You can lurk but you can never leave --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action
[FairfieldLife] MGF Chat 20 March 2013 - The Maharishi Vedic Pandit Programme
Maharishi’s Global Family Chat March 20, 2013 The Maharishi Vedic Pandit Programme: Bringing fulfillment to the goals of every religion and culture through the enlivenment of Total Natural Law. ~ In this Maharishi Global Family Chat, Dr. Chris Crowell, Minister of Religion and Culture for the Global Country of World Peace, presented the understanding of how the knowledge and application of Maharishi Yoga and Maharishi Yagya can systematically create a more heavenly time of peace and progress for all mankind. The presentation began with a short video clip of Maharishi beautifully describing the Vedic Pandits and their ability to transform the trends of life. He explained how these Vedic Experts experience and function from the Unified Field of Nature’s intelligence, utilizing the reverberations of Natural Law—the sounds of the Veda—to neutralize negative influences for individuals and nations. Using charts from modern science, and animation, Dr. Crowell then illustrated the mechanics of Vedic technologies that maintain the connection of the vast infinite range of diversity of life with that holistic value of Total Natural Law, harmonizing differences between religions and cultures. Yoga and Yagya: Maharishi Vedic Pandits, established in the Atma, the field of pure consciousness, are able to enliven the supreme governing intelligence of Natural Law so that a universal influence of peace is created for the people of every tradition in every land. Dr. Crowell explained that many cultures around the world have traditions of sound and ceremony to enliven Natural Law in specific ways. But it is only with Maharishi’s restoration of Vedic technologies to deepen the experience of the performance from a more fundamental level of life, to awaken individual and collective consciousness, that these ceremonies and recitations can regain their alliance with Natural Law and produce the desired results of abundance, progress and peace. * The presentation ended with a slide show of the history of the Maharishi Vedic Pandit programme from the first global Mahayagya performance in modern times, organized by Maharishi’s Guru Dev, Brahmananda Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math, in February 1944, through the inauguration in June 1982 of the education wing of the Movement that specifically trains Maharishi Vedic Pandits, to the expansion of the first large groups of Yogic Flying Vedic Pandits in the mid to late 1980s, to finally, the present establishment of the Global Capital of Raam Raj in the Brahmasthan of India. A Historic Vision of the Maharishi Vedic Pandit Programme: Decade after decade, the world’s greatest peace-creating group has guided the trends of time. Dr. Crowell ended by thanking all those well-wishers throughout our world family, from every religion and culture, who have contributed to the preservation and expansion of the Maharishi Vedic Pandit Programme for World Peace. “One really feels the great purity of the life of the Maharishi Vedic Pandits who have been trained to safeguard the destiny of the world. Thank you very much to every single individual around the globe who is supporting this historic peace initiative.” ** Four Levels of Speech: In a short video, Dr. John Hagelin described the necessity for Vedic Pandits to perform from all four levels of speech—from the expressed sound, through mental and feeling levels to the transcendental level—must be engaged in order to enliven the total potential of Natural Law and produce the desired effect from any distance. _ ~~~ To Support the Maharishi Vedic Pandit Group in India, please visit: www.vedicpandits.org © 2013 Global Country of World Peace
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judy author
Thank you, Dick Williams. As I squeal victim to you pointing out the obvious, if you had any feelings in your heart, you would have noticed my sincere admiration for Author, which is exactly why I posted the post about her. Thus being a boring board without her, your post makes this week no more brighter than a cowboy ladden with horse semen. You are a stupid man, Dick. Long live Author Judy and may she post forever on FFL! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams richard@... wrote: obbajeeba: Since over the limit count takes penalties to through the next week, I thought we can play a game here with Judy. So, it's all about Judy. Obba, with Judy away for a week there's hardly anything worth reading from you dweebs, much less commenting on. Your post is a case in point. LoL! Card is apparently on fire and Barry is still at the same smoky café since Monday - while Judy takes a vacation from posting and contemplates the Atlantic Ocean from her window. So, I'm thinking Judy comes out on top again - that's my take on Judy today. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: Welcome back, MZ! Where have you been? With God. Trying to get him to make my subjectivity purely objective--i.e. truthful to reality. [This would mean being able to trust implicitly in the deliverances of my first person ontology--that they are in agreement with the way things really are.] It's very hard, feste--as you can see from my intemperate and irrational outburst against BW. I am trying to find the self that is better than the Self. And, as you know, I am a very humble man. But Christ! it ain't easy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Buck
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: The mane is so beautiful. Â Â Yep, nice pictures of a great horse. Thanks. He was a warhorse. They are special when you run in to them in life. This is the best picture I like of the old Sorli Fra Bulandi: George Washington rode up and sat his horse quietly beside the bridge. Private Howland wrote, The noble horse of Gen. Washington stood with his breast pressed close against the end of the west rail of the bridge, and the firm, composed and majestic countenance... inspired confidence and assurance in a moment so important and critical. In this passage across the bridge it was my fortune to be next the west rail, and arriving at the west end of the bridge I was pressed against the shoulder of the end of the general's horse and in contact with the general's boot. The horse stood firm as the rider, and seemed to understand that he was not to quit his post and station. Again the men spoke of his composure in a critical moment, and the army rallied to his quiet leadership. Nearly all the Americans got safely across the creek. Howland wrote that the bridge was narrow and our platoons in passing it were crowded into a dense and solid mass, in the rear of which, the enemy were making their best efforts. Every man who crossed the bridge passed close by him. The horse stood firm as the rider, and seemed to understand that he was not to quit his post and station. Again the men spoke of his composure in a critical moment, and the army rallied to his quiet leadership. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YcTaflDPFk
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
On 03/23/2013 09:39 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government. Yes, I'm aware of the early experiments, Targ's work, etc.
[FairfieldLife] For the americans
I say Tomahto, you say exploitation. http://rajpatel.org/2013/03/22/i-say-tomahto-you-say-exploitation/ By Raj http://rajpatel.org/author/raj/ on 03/22/2013 in featured http://rajpatel.org/category/featured/ , Uncategorized http://rajpatel.org/category/uncategorized/ with No Comments http://rajpatel.org/2013/03/22/i-say-tomahto-you-say-exploitation/#comm\ ents From the Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raj-patel/post_4534_b_2918014.html . What's the quickest way to get thrown out of a Publix supermarket? Is it a) to run naked through the aisles, b) to point and yell `horsemeat!' at the deli counter or c) to query the manager about whether workers picking tomatoes are treated as well as she'd like. In my case, it was option c). As soon as I broached the question, I was told to leave immediately or security would be called. I was swiftly ushered out. I wondered whether, perhaps, I'd committed a faux-pas. I speak English with a British accent, and feared that `tom-ah-to' might mean something horrible and offensive in Florida. Further investigation suggests that I'd have been kicked to the curb whether I'd said tomahto or tomayto. There are some things one just isn't allowed to do in a Publix supermarket. Asking politely about tomato farmworker justice is one of them. Yet there's good reason to wonder. Farmworkers have long faced brutal working conditions http://grist.org/industrial-agriculture/2011-04-01-bon-appetit-report-s\ hines-light-on-farm-labor-conditions/ . Rampant violations of minimum wage laws, below-poverty annual incomes, pesticide exposure, sexual harassment http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/15/us-sexual-violence-harassment-immigr\ ant-farmworkers , long days without overtime pay, and retaliation for reporting abuses aren't just plot points from a Steinbeck novel. They're a common part of agricultural labor today. Agricultural and food corporations have successfully lobbied for farmworkers to be stripped of the workplace laws that protect most other Americans, and there's little enforcement of the few legal protections that farmworkers are meant to enjoy. The result has led to actual cases of `modern-day slavery' in which farmworkers have been threatened, chained, beaten, and held against their will in debt bondage. There is, however, change in the fields. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW http://www.ciw-online.org/ ) is an internationally renowned farmworker organization based in SW Florida where most of the winter U.S. tomato crop is harvested. They've worked with some of Florida's growers to develop a `Fair Food Program.' Workers and growers collaborate, under the eyes of third-party monitors, to make sure that rights for everything from overtime to bathroom breaks are respected. Buyers reward those growers who uphold the rights with business and withhold business from the growers who fail to. Sound like some hippie plot? Hardly. Currently, 90 percent of the Florida tomato industry and 11 major food corporations, including McDonald's, Subway, and Whole Foods, are currently part of the Fair Food Program http://www.ciw-online.org/FFP_FAQ.html . Few would consider McDonald's a refuge for the great unwashed. Publix's polished advertisements laud their deep concern for their community. But if you're a Floridian who picks tomatoes for a living, you're clearly not part of that community. And if you're a customer wanting to ask about this, it seems Publix don't want you around either. Yet here's the irony. The Fair Food Program is all about building community. It enshrines the rights of farmworkers never before seen in the agricultural industry in partnership with buyers and grower. Publix refuses to join http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/coalition-of-immokalee-workers\ -publix-fast_n_1321907.html the program, claiming that the Fair Food Program is a labor dispute and that the company will not get involved. Yet the Fair Food Program is a growing partnership that brings together various levels of the supply chain to overturn decades of sub-poverty wages and abuses that were, until recently, the norm. In fact, the Washington Post recently dubbed http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-09-02/opinions/35494934_1_flori\ da-tomato-growers-tomato-industry-immokalee-workers the Fair Food Program, one of the great human rights success stories of our day. Why then does Publix still refuse to join some of the leading food retailers in making life better for the worst paid people in America? Publix spokesperson Dwaine Stevens provided a surprisingly frank answer http://www.ciw-online.org/acceptable_atrocities.html after a protest at a Publix in Alabama saying, If there are some atrocities going on, it's not our business In other words, Publix maintains the ability to buy from farms even if human rights abuses are rampant, no questions asked. It appears, the Publix solution to human rights abuses is to plug their fingers firmly in their ears. Workers rights will come
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government. Isn't this what the movie Men Who Stare at Goats with George Clooney and Ewan McGregor was all about? LG, I haven't seen the movie. I'll have to check that one out. JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government. Isn't this what the movie Men Who Stare at Goats with George Clooney and Ewan McGregor was all about? LG, I haven't seen the movie. I'll have to check that one out. Better still, read the book: http://www.jonronson.com/goats_04.html JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 03/23/2013 09:16 AM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: In this video, the narrator will ask you to determine what is in his bag. Can you guess what it is? Please don't cheat and tell us if you got it right or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH5_Xcq8EnM PS You don't have to watch the entire video clip. You can go directly to the end of the video to find out. The most important message in this video is that you are completely relaxed in your mind and then see what is the shape or texture of the object is. That image that you see is more likely the correct answer. It's important that you draw the image on a piece of paper for confirmation of your remote viewing. Interesting... I was in bed, reading this post last night on my iPad, and while I didn't watch any of the video last night, I did have the thought that there was a doughnut in the bag. You just needed a night time snack. I don't think anyone guessed what was in the bag; when he revealed the object I wouldn't know what to call it anyway other than some brass ornament of some God or other. What DO you call that thing? And while I was quickly fast forwarding to find the spot I realized the speaker was s boring, just his body language made me want to doze off or give him a cattle prod. He even had to sit down by the end of it he bored himself so much. (Actually, to be fair I barely listened to anything the guy said.) Ann, Remote viewing may be the untapped power of the human brain. IMO, it's available to everyone who wants to use it. If you're good at it, you could avoid dangers before they happen. Or, maybe find love ones if they're lost or in trouble. And even for science, you can remote view the landscape of Mars or any exoplanets to determine if there is intelligent life there. JR Back in the late 1990s I ordered the VHS tape that Major Ed Dames who was in charge of the remote viewing program for the military. I didn't get any response for a while so called and actually in was Dames himself who answered the phone and said the tapes were in production and would be shipped shortly. The tape was interesting and had some tests with it. Dames has been on Coast to Coast a number of times making predictions most of which did not come to pass. Bhairitu, Remote viewing is supposed to be part of the byproduct of some principle in physics that scientists are now exploring. The narrator himself on the clip is a scientist who have done research for Stanford and the government. Isn't this what the movie Men Who Stare at Goats with George Clooney and Ewan McGregor was all about? Yes, and it's true that the CIA used to have a remote viewing team. But this was disbanded some years ago for a very good reason. Remote viewing doesn't work. This didn't stop the CIA trained viewers from hitting the new age scene and making a fortune out of it. Salyavin, Remote viewing is a siddhi, just like yogic flying and others. Saints in the Roman Catholic Church were documented to have levitated in the air. Some of them could bilocate also which is similar to remote viewing. JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Ha-Ha! You are quite obsessed with Robin, Barry. You never fail to describe his writing style and his ideas. Kinda like the whole Message View crap you tried to pull here. Like that old joke: How can you tell Barry is bullshitting? His fingers are typing.:-) Face it dude. You are just an ordinary guy, with some premature exposure to spiritual concepts you have no business dabbling in. Yeah, you were a TM Technician, and paid big bucks to a suicidal rapist. Other than that, same old, same old. The only thing unique about you is your lack of self awareness. But then, of course you know that. So continue with your falsehoods and trickery and know that most of us have your number, except for your girlfriend, Curtis. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. That's not quite correct. Robin struck me from Day One as someone so uninteresting that I couldn't force myself to plow through his bloviated language. He still does. I clicked on this post of his by hitting Next on the previous one, read no more than the first 10 words and realized who it was from the shitty writing, and only then looked up at the top to confirm the sender. At that point, I hit Next again. I do not and will not apologize for this. Life's too short to waste on pissants, especially wordy ones. :-) So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. This is more correct, although to be accurate, I would say, a person he barely acknowledges the existence of. :-) BTW, I *expected* him to make a reappearance about now. The combination of you being present and his primary devotee and groupie not being present this week was too tempting for him to resist. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action here constituting his posts on FFL). In this sense: His subjectivity is entirely in the service of producing the particular effect he is seeking in those readers whom he knows are the innocent registrars of their experience--this is, as I have stipulated, likely to be unconscious or subconscious. For everyone else but BW has to bear the consequences of their deeds as they enact them. Not BW. Not only does he vaccinate himself against any feedback from others, but he vaccinates himself against any feedback from himself. This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. Thus deprives the reader of a constituent element in reading what someone writes which that reader's unconscious has always assumed is there. It is not, and this is the negative vertigo that is created in the quasi-objective and impartial FFL reader. And it is why BW is able to remain inside of himself as if he is the only person in the universe and he has been posting only to himself. As if this were the case, since he has removed himself from the context of 1. his own self-experience 2. the experience of the reader 3. the interactive fact of BW in relationship to reality and what abstractly even might be the actual truth of the matter about which he is writing. BW's game goes unnoticed. But it is critic-proof. The more agitated or scornful or ironic or commonsensical or reasonable someone is in attempting to challenge what BW has written, to the extent to which this represents a real intention inside the other person, is the extent to which that intention--and the writing of a counter-post--will end up in empty space--No one is there. BW has delighted himself by becoming dead to
[FairfieldLife] The Secret of the Mantras
One of the more interesting books about the Movement I've come across. http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Mantras-Richard-Blakely/dp/061574026X/ref=sr_1_ 4?s=books http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Mantras-Richard-Blakely/dp/061574026X/ref=sr_1 _4?s=booksie=UTF8qid=1364039331sr=1-4keywords=richard+blakely ie=UTF8qid=1364039331sr=1-4keywords=richard+blakely
[FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Viewing Test for Everyone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: Isn't this what the movie Men Who Stare at Goats with George Clooney and Ewan McGregor was all about? Yes, and it's true that the CIA used to have a remote viewing team. But this was disbanded some years ago for a very good reason. Remote viewing doesn't work. This didn't stop the CIA trained viewers from hitting the new age scene and making a fortune out of it. Salyavin, Remote viewing is a siddhi, just like yogic flying and others. And it's about as effective. Saints in the Roman Catholic Church were documented to have levitated in the air. If only the plural of anecdote was data. Some of them could bilocate also which is similar to remote viewing. Tell you what, if anyone in the TMO starts levitating I will not only take it all back, I will move to FF and join you in the dome and we can all rewrite the laws of physics together! JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Ah, I like that. With God, not one with God. Very Christian. And yea, too, for the self that is better than the Self, because who can match any one of us in our exquisite uniqueness -- not the Self, surely, which is boringly the same yesterday, today, and forever! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Welcome back, MZ! Where have you been? With God. Trying to get him to make my subjectivity purely objective--i.e. truthful to reality. [This would mean being able to trust implicitly in the deliverances of my first person ontology--that they are in agreement with the way things really are.] It's very hard, feste--as you can see from my intemperate and irrational outburst against BW. I am trying to find the self that is better than the Self. And, as you know, I am a very humble man. But Christ! it ain't easy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Wow. Some guys get mean when their fag hag is away. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Ha-Ha! You are quite obsessed with Robin, Barry. You never fail to describe his writing style and his ideas. Kinda like the whole Message View crap you tried to pull here. Like that old joke: How can you tell Barry is bullshitting? His fingers are typing.:-) Face it dude. You are just an ordinary guy, with some premature exposure to spiritual concepts you have no business dabbling in. Yeah, you were a TM Technician, and paid big bucks to a suicidal rapist. Other than that, same old, same old. The only thing unique about you is your lack of self awareness. But then, of course you know that. So continue with your falsehoods and trickery and know that most of us have your number, except for your girlfriend, Curtis. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. That's not quite correct. Robin struck me from Day One as someone so uninteresting that I couldn't force myself to plow through his bloviated language. He still does. I clicked on this post of his by hitting Next on the previous one, read no more than the first 10 words and realized who it was from the shitty writing, and only then looked up at the top to confirm the sender. At that point, I hit Next again. I do not and will not apologize for this. Life's too short to waste on pissants, especially wordy ones. :-) So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. This is more correct, although to be accurate, I would say, a person he barely acknowledges the existence of. :-) BTW, I *expected* him to make a reappearance about now. The combination of you being present and his primary devotee and groupie not being present this week was too tempting for him to resist. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: Ah, I like that. With God, not one with God. Very Christian. And yea, too, for the self that is better than the Self, because who can match any one of us in our exquisite uniqueness -- not the Self, surely, which is boringly the same yesterday, today, and forever! Magna secessione a tumultu rerum labentium, mihi crede, opus est, ut non duritia, non audacia, non cupiditate inanis gloriae, non superstitiosa credulitate fiat in homine nihil timere. Hine enim fit illud etiam solidum guadium nullis omnino laetitiis ulla ex particula conferendum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Welcome back, MZ! Where have you been? With God. Trying to get him to make my subjectivity purely objective--i.e. truthful to reality. [This would mean being able to trust implicitly in the deliverances of my first person ontology--that they are in agreement with the way things really are.] It's very hard, feste--as you can see from my intemperate and irrational outburst against BW. I am trying to find the self that is better than the Self. And, as you know, I am a very humble man. But Christ! it ain't easy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Ha-Ha! You are quite obsessed with Robin, Barry. You never fail to describe his writing style and his ideas. Kinda like the whole Message View crap you tried to pull here. Like that old joke: How can you tell Barry is bullshitting? His fingers are typing.:-) Face it dude. You are just an ordinary guy, with some premature exposure to spiritual concepts you have no business dabbling in. Yeah, you were a TM Technician, and paid big bucks to a suicidal rapist. Other than that, same old, same old. The only thing unique about you is your lack of self awareness. But then, of course you know that. So continue with your falsehoods and trickery and know that most of us have your number, except for your girlfriend, Curtis. So let just understand how you are intending this as an insult to me Jim. Are you implying that Barry and I have a gay relationship and that this would somehow be an insult because of your negative views of gay people? Or are you saying that I am a female and therefor worthy of contempt because I am really an inferior woman rather than a man? In your anger you always reveal your hidden cards Jim. You are a very unpleasant person underneath the I am enlightened, no really , I am really enlightened, no really I am rap. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. That's not quite correct. Robin struck me from Day One as someone so uninteresting that I couldn't force myself to plow through his bloviated language. He still does. I clicked on this post of his by hitting Next on the previous one, read no more than the first 10 words and realized who it was from the shitty writing, and only then looked up at the top to confirm the sender. At that point, I hit Next again. I do not and will not apologize for this. Life's too short to waste on pissants, especially wordy ones. :-) So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. This is more correct, although to be accurate, I would say, a person he barely acknowledges the existence of. :-) BTW, I *expected* him to make a reappearance about now. The combination of you being present and his primary devotee and groupie not being present this week was too tempting for him to resist. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an object?
The thing about TM isn't that it is described as effortless, but that it was tught in a way that facilitted effortlessness. A lot of samatha meditation practices are described pretty much the way TM is, but the teachers explain how they were in terms of focused attention, impart the instructions willy-nilly without regard for the fact that too much information all at once will tend to make the practice effortful just because of how it was taught, etc. In fact, recent research on samatha practices shows that, over time, alpha power goes down during the practice, while gamma power goes up, just as you would expect from concentration, effortless, or not. Since these are seen as concentrative techniques in the first place, regardless of whether or not they are effortful, no-one reporting this factoid in the research literature notices the contradiction. TM, on the other hand, is taught with an eyedropper full of info at first, then with a teaspoon, and then with a tablespoon, and this careful rationing of intellectual understanding is reflected by the fact that 50 year meditators show higher alpha and lower gamma both during and outside of meditation, just as beginners do -it is rest, plain and simple. Here's MMY explaining TM instruction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRSvW9Ml9DQ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: It turns out that the EEG pattern of long-term TMers during TM remains the same as the EEG pattern found in short-term TMers: it's simple relaxation, no matter how long you have been doing it. Pure Consciousness is just the same pattern in its most extreme form. In every other meditation technique with published research, you see a shift away from simple relaxation towards something different, as you become more experienced. In other words, I wouldn't trust the words of a non-TM teacher with regards to your TM practice. They literally don't understand where you are at and can only attempt to transform your practice into their practice. L And conversely, a TM teacher may not have any understanding of what happens with other forms of meditation. Now the ones I have been familiar with all had basically the same kind of minimal effortless kind of instruction as TM; none were overtly of the concentration type. But awareness does shift in a different way with these other meditations. The misunderstanding goes both ways.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judy author
Dear Richard, I am sorry to type the below post.. YOU are correct. -obba --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@... wrote: Thank you, Dick Williams. As I squeal victim to you pointing out the obvious, if you had any feelings in your heart, you would have noticed my sincere admiration for Author, which is exactly why I posted the post about her. Thus being a boring board without her, your post makes this week no more brighter than a cowboy ladden with horse semen. You are a stupid man, Dick. Long live Author Judy and may she post forever on FFL! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams richard@ wrote: obbajeeba: Since over the limit count takes penalties to through the next week, I thought we can play a game here with Judy. So, it's all about Judy. Obba, with Judy away for a week there's hardly anything worth reading from you dweebs, much less commenting on. Your post is a case in point. LoL! Card is apparently on fire and Barry is still at the same smoky café since Monday - while Judy takes a vacation from posting and contemplates the Atlantic Ocean from her window. So, I'm thinking Judy comes out on top again - that's my take on Judy today. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an object?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@... wrote: The thing about TM isn't that it is described as effortless, but that it was tught in a way that facilitted effortlessness. taught Assume all other typos and misspellings are also corrected here. L
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Exactly. That Augustine certainly knew a thing or two. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Ah, I like that. With God, not one with God. Very Christian. And yea, too, for the self that is better than the Self, because who can match any one of us in our exquisite uniqueness -- not the Self, surely, which is boringly the same yesterday, today, and forever! Magna secessione a tumultu rerum labentium, mihi crede, opus est, ut non duritia, non audacia, non cupiditate inanis gloriae, non superstitiosa credulitate fiat in homine nihil timere. Hine enim fit illud etiam solidum guadium nullis omnino laetitiis ulla ex particula conferendum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Welcome back, MZ! Where have you been? With God. Trying to get him to make my subjectivity purely objective--i.e. truthful to reality. [This would mean being able to trust implicitly in the deliverances of my first person ontology--that they are in agreement with the way things really are.] It's very hard, feste--as you can see from my intemperate and irrational outburst against BW. I am trying to find the self that is better than the Self. And, as you know, I am a very humble man. But Christ! it ain't easy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I remember talking to one woman whose boyfriend took a Sterling course in Fairfield. She said that before the course he was a perfectly normal, pleasant guy, but after the course he became a complete asshole. Color me not surprised. :-) Like men need TRAINING to be assholes? Well, in your case, no. Obviously. It comes naturally to you. But it seems that others have to work on it. You seem to be doing just fine without the training. :-) Seriously dude, are you still smarting because I called you on acting like a cultist? You were. You still are. You didn't challenge anything I said, you didn't explain WHY you felt the need to deliver an insult, you just played Shoot the messenger. How cultist can one get? Just sayin'... If you disagree with something I said, try explaining WHY, or try dealing with the content you disagreed with, or do something more like a...dare I say it?...man would do. Just slinging insults as if you were still carrying a grudge over something that real men would have gotten over within five minutes and wouldn't remember after ten minutes is not really working well for you. IMO, of course. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of
[FairfieldLife] New Monsanto Protection Act Gives Monsanto Power Over US Government
[Quantcast] New `Monsanto Protection Act' Gives Monsanto Power Over US Government http://naturalsociety.com/new-monsanto-protection-act-gives-monsanto-po\ wer-over-us-government/ [English: Hugh Grant, head of Monsanto] http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hugh_Grant_Monsanto.jpg English: Hugh Grant, head of Monsanto (Photo credit: Wikipedia) There truly is no rest for the wicked, and Monsanto is at war once again against health conscious consumers with the latest `Monsanto Protection Act`, managing to sneak wording into the latest Senate legislation that would give them blanket immunity from any USDA http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=38.887939,-77.030033spn=0.01,0.\ 01q=38.887939,-77.030033 (United%20States%20Department%20of%20Agriculture)t=h action regarding the potential dangers of their genetically modified creations while under review. The USDA would be unable to act against any and all new GMO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism crops that were suspected to be wreaking havoc on either human health or the environment. It's a legislative weapon that could be passed as early as next week if we don't gather enough support to force our Senators to eliminate the section. It all started in the late hours of Monday night, when lobbyists working for the Monsanto-fronted biotechnology industry managed to slide a `rider' (through the deceptively worded Farmer Assurance Provision, Sec. 735) into the Senate Continuing Resolution spending bill that is currently on the table of the Senate. A massive petition http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/stop_the_monsanto_protection_ac\ t_today_senate to stop what has been labeled as the `Monsanto Protection Act' has been launched by Food Democracy Now http://www.fooddemocracynow.org/ , detailing what could come if the legislation is signed into law within the coming days or weeks: If approved, the Monsanto Protection Act would force the USDA to allow continued planting of any GMO crop under court review, essentially giving backdoor approval for any new genetically engineered crops that could be potentially harmful to human health or the environment. Monsanto Protection Act Trumps US Government Federal courts would be powerless to regulate the sale and even cultivation of illegal and dangerous GMO crops, succumbing instead to the power of the biotech industry and Monsanto. The same threat we faced last summer during the initial emergence of this act. During that time, we saw major groups http://naturalsociety.com/new-monsanto-protection-act-gives-monsanto-po\ wer-over-us-government/Groups%20ranging%20from%20the%20Center%20for%20Fo\ od%20Safety%20and%20the%20National%20Family%20Farm%20Coalition%20to%20th\ e%20American%20Civil%20Liberties%20Union,%20the%20Sierra%20Club,%20and%2\ 0the%20Union%20of%20Concerned%20Scientists%20are%20all%20opposing%20the%\ 20provision.%20Food%20Democracy%20Now%21,%20an%20online%20grassroots%20c\ ommunity,%20is%20calling%20it%20the%20%E2%80%9CMonsanto%20Protection%20A\ ct%E2%80%9D%20and%20has%20collected%20over%20300,000%20signatures%20oppo\ sing%20the%20provision. assemble against the act, from national farm institutions to food safety titans. The Center for Food Safety http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Food_Safety , the National Family Farm Coalition, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU http://www.aclu.org/ ), the Sierra Club http://www.sierraclub.org/ , and the Union of Concerned Scientists http://www.ucsusa.org/ all came together to speak out against the incognito bombshell slipped into the 2012 Farm Bill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_U.S._Farm_Bill and the 2013 Agriculture Appropriations Bill. And now Monsanto is back at it. Thus, it is imperative that we peacefully kick Monsanto out of the Senate and back into the alleyways of Washington D.C., and let it be known that any politician who sides with Big Biotech will not be staying in the Senate for much longer. http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/stop_the_monsanto_protection_ac\ t_today_senate Source: http://naturalsociety.com/new-monsanto-protection-act-gives-monsanto-pow\ er-over-us-government/ http://naturalsociety.com/new-monsanto-protection-act-gives-monsanto-po\ wer-over-us-government/
[FairfieldLife] The 20 Best Small Towns to Visit in 2013
From the blues to the big top, we've picked the most intriguing small towns to enjoy arts and smarts Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/The-20-Best-Small-Towns-to-Visit-in-2013-196855051.html#ixzz2OOnoXoFH Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitterhttp://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/The-20-Best-Small-Towns-to-Visit-in-2013-196855051.html?c=ypage=8navigation=next#IMAGES
[FairfieldLife] Yup, it's all there.....
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5mP573cb5cY/UU2CwygkBeI/EcE/1hDe6r7Iu\ VM/s1600/VDOIN0.B.png
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM and its Rock Stars to Judy
Another good point, in case you're reading posts. I just saw that Fox News revealed the victim's name after promising not to reveal the names of the perps. The victim has already received 2 death threats! BTW, I liked your joke about the Two Years Before the Mast hunk (-: From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:08 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM and its Rock Stars to Judy --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, I appreciate your take on this, that they were emphasizing how bad the consequences were going to be for the boys. Something I hadn't thought of. BTW, when I said in another post something about the whole report not being seen, I was referring to the clip which excluded the last part of the exchange between Crowley and Harlow, which you provided as transcript. Thanks again for that. Oh, I see. I was confused because you said you thought CNN had omitted it from the report. While I'm at it, another point that occurred to me is that CNN had been covering the whole mess, including the trial, all along. On Sunday morning, the only thing that would have been new to CNN viewers was the verdict, so the breaking-news segment would naturally have focused on that and its consequences for the perps.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM and its Rock Stars to Judy
Share - wasn't just Fox news - the name was outed as part of a vid clip that was aired by CNN, Fox, MSNBC according a google search of mine just now. The word perp stands for perpetrator, so that second sentence doesn't make any sense. The release of her name has nothing to do with who sent her death threats. Apparently, it was teenage girls who sent the death threats - everyone in town and in the high school, and all of their respective families and friends, at the very, very least know who the girl is. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM and its Rock Stars to Judy Another good point, in case you're reading posts. I just saw that Fox News revealed the victim's name after promising not to reveal the names of the perps. The victim has already received 2 death threats! BTW, I liked your joke about the Two Years Before the Mast hunk (-: From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:08 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM and its Rock Stars to Judy --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, I appreciate your take on this, that they were emphasizing how bad the consequences were going to be for the boys. Something I hadn't thought of. BTW, when I said in another post something about the whole report not being seen, I was referring to the clip which excluded the last part of the exchange between Crowley and Harlow, which you provided as transcript. Thanks again for that. Oh, I see. I was confused because you said you thought CNN had omitted it from the report. While I'm at it, another point that occurred to me is that CNN had been covering the whole mess, including the trial, all along. On Sunday morning, the only thing that would have been new to CNN viewers was the verdict, so the breaking-news segment would naturally have focused on that and its consequences for the perps.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Men only,
Richard, you made a funny! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams richard@... wrote: Sasquatch takes pictures of him. He ran a marathon because it was on his way. He can share insider jokes to with total strangers. He is the most interesting man on the planet!
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Sun 24-Mar-13 00:15:02 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 03/23/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 03/30/13 00:00:00 131 messages as of (UTC) 03/23/13 22:52:19 15 seventhray27 11 obbajeeba 10 Ann 9 John 8 feste37 8 Robin Carlsen 7 doctordumbass 6 turquoiseb 6 nablusoss1008 6 card 6 Share Long 6 Buck 5 salyavin808 5 Richard J. Williams 4 curtisdeltablues 3 Bhairitu 3 Alex Stanley 2 sparaig 2 seekliberation 2 laughinggull108 2 Ravi Chivukula 2 Emily Reyn 1 navashok 1 merlin 1 Rick Archer Posters: 25 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: Men only,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: Wow. Some guys get mean when their fag hag is away. Take a moment. Be still. Have a look. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: Ha-Ha! You are quite obsessed with Robin, Barry. You never fail to describe his writing style and his ideas. Kinda like the whole Message View crap you tried to pull here. Like that old joke: How can you tell Barry is bullshitting? His fingers are typing.:-) Face it dude. You are just an ordinary guy, with some premature exposure to spiritual concepts you have no business dabbling in. Yeah, you were a TM Technician, and paid big bucks to a suicidal rapist. Other than that, same old, same old. The only thing unique about you is your lack of self awareness. But then, of course you know that. So continue with your falsehoods and trickery and know that most of us have your number, except for your girlfriend, Curtis. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Your analysis might apply to people he does not like. He is not open to being vulnerable to people who he does not like. Sometimes this is people who attack him, but not always. He didn't like you right off. That's not quite correct. Robin struck me from Day One as someone so uninteresting that I couldn't force myself to plow through his bloviated language. He still does. I clicked on this post of his by hitting Next on the previous one, read no more than the first 10 words and realized who it was from the shitty writing, and only then looked up at the top to confirm the sender. At that point, I hit Next again. I do not and will not apologize for this. Life's too short to waste on pissants, especially wordy ones. :-) So you only see the version of Barry that applies to you, a person he does not respect. This is more correct, although to be accurate, I would say, a person he barely acknowledges the existence of. :-) BTW, I *expected* him to make a reappearance about now. The combination of you being present and his primary devotee and groupie not being present this week was too tempting for him to resist. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Blessed are platitude puking Gurus !!! To all interested.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: So true and don't either of you forget it! From now on, you have to go through me to get to my sweet innocent Baby Krishna Ravi. If you wish to respond to Him, you must ask me first. I'll then consult with Him in due time to see if He would like to even pursue your line of discussion. If He chooses not to, then no reason to even post your comments in the first place. A very efficient and effective use of His precious time. And please try to remember... I understand that you, Laughinggull, are now manning the ticket counter access to His Presence the Magisterial Royal Mahaswami Ravi Chivukula Guruji Mahatmaraja, beneath whom I am not fit to sweep even His Toe Nail Clippings. Pray tell upon what condition His Infiniteness might deign to drop a few crumbs of His Holy and Benign Darshan in my unworthy direction. Perhaps in a moment of His most offhand attention He would feel it barely tolerable to pass a kernel of His Most High Wisdom through you to us most thirsty and groveling, sycophantic worshipers of His Greatness. Perhaps you could collect a few grains left over from one of His Chapatis, that we could build a shrine to house them and perpetuate their Divine and most Humble power. Scenario: A beat up saffron-colored Ford Ranger mini-pickup truck with a rickety wooden camper shell parked beside a clear-flowing river with a flashing neon sign hooked up to a 12-volt battery that reads Water for Sale. Leaning against the camper shell on the tailgate in his much too tight, yet dapper, Shivaratri-best dhoti is our Laughing Protector of His Holiness Raviji who appears to be either in samadhi or nodding off. (The latter is probably the case since LPHHR's head occasionally drops suddenly then quickly comes back up with a jerking motion.) Seeker Xeno warily approaches while seekers Share and Steve maintain a relatively safe distance about 50 yards away hidden in the lush vegetation growing along the river on which seeker Share is busily munching and making soft cooing sounds. Seeker Steve's eyes are focused on seeker Share, with an occasional glance towards seeker Xeno, ever ready to jump in at a moment's notice should the slightest danger present itself. A dry twig snaps loudly under seeker Xeno's sandal-covered foot to which LPHHR awakens with a start muttering ...yes...mmm...yes...hare Ravi...mmm... as if caught between an erotic dream and waking reality. Seeker Xeno is the first to speak: Oh Laughing Protector and manner of the Ticket Counter, I and my two seeker companions hiding back there in the bushes have traveled long and far along this clear-flowing river and are most thirsty for water. More importantly, and I can't speak for my two seeker companions hiding back there in the bushes, I approach as a groveling, sycophantic worshiper of His Greatness whose name is revered far and wide throughout these lands of FFL, and desire greatly for just a few crumbs of His Holy and Benign Darshan or maybe just a kernel of His Most High Wisdom passed through you to me...uh, I mean us. Hey, seekers Share and Steve, if you wanna get in on this, you better get up here now... Slightly disheveled seekers Share and Steve, with sheepish grins on their glistening faces, emerge from the bushes. Fully-awakened (but not in the spiritual sense) LPHHR recognizing that he has some shills...uh...potential clients speaks: Yes indeedy...step right up...step right up all ye sincere seekers of transitory...uh...I mean permanent RR. First things first however. Cool, clear, thirst-quenching water is $2 per cup or I can let you have an entire quart for $10. So what will it be my most parched and sincere seekers? After a brief consultation among the three seeker companions from whom can be heard seeker Xeno ...the cups are cheaper and seeker Share in her most pouty voice ...but I want the quart!, seeker Xeno approaches and says: We'll take two quarts. And by the way, what's RR? The scene fades to black as the first strains of Amazing Grace play softly in the background. [to be continued...] Scene fades in as the final strains of the gospel Just As I Am fade out softly in the background. Laughing Jelly Bean, formerly known as LPHHR, with a blissful smile on his pudgy yet somewhat handsome face, slips a slightly fatter wallet into the folds of his patched dhoti while the three seeker companions, seated on heavily worn straw mats for a very, very reasonable $1 per mat per half hour,
