[FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Buck, reflect a minute. What makes you think I "stalk"?

You mean, other than the fact that you're doing it right now?  :-)

When you go out of your way to write a post dumping on the person you've
been dumping on consistently for nearly twenty years, about whom you've
written literally thousands of posts dumping on him, you're stalking.
Get over your self-delusions, honey...you're a stalker

You even stalked Curtis recently when one of your former minions said he
liked him, and he hasn't been here since August:

  "Curtis, in stark contrast, went to considerable lengths to hide his
emotional duplicity."

"To be a little more specific, if I may: Curtis pretended to  be
"comfortable" with who he was, as Barry puts it. But that was a 
carefully constructed facade, and it took very little in the way of 
chipping to expose the real Curtis underneath. "

Stalking is just what you DO, Judy. Everyone here knows this but you.

>  I'll tell you: Because that's what Barry has said that I do, over and
over. He claims I've "stalked him from forum to forum." That is
factually untrue. Of the four forums we've been on together, one
(alt.m.t) I joined before I had ever encountered him; two I joined
before he did; and the fourth, FFL, he Invited me to join, along with
other members of alt.m.t.
>
>  So what does that  make Barry, Buck?
>
>  I could go on and on listing the things Barry has said about me (and
others) that were simply factually false, and that he knows were false.
Literally hundreds of things.
>
>  And he's not the only one, he's just the worst.
>
>  If all you do is take little peeks here and there, you really do not
have a clear idea of what goes on here. Neither does Rick, for that
matter.
>
>  "Error of thought, a weak mind, or some natural vagueness in
conversation" is not what I'm referring to by "lying." I mean deliberate
and malicious misstatements of fact.
>
>  I'll tell you something else. It is *vanishingly* unlikely that Yahoo
is going to storm in here and shut FFL down because of some squabbling.
Yahoo doesn't have the time or the interest to monitor millions of
groups for "ad hominem" or "unkindness." Or lying, for that matter. If
you're genuinely concerned that might happen, you can stop worrying.
Yahoo is not going to enforce the "guidelines." They're not much more
than a gesture, a formality. They can use the guidelines if they need to
dump someone who is *really* seriously misbehaving in a way nobody on
FFL even comes close to doing, *including* Barry, obnoxious and vicious
as he is. But even that is unlikely.
>
>  And Rick has time only to handle the worst infractions of the actual
FFL *rules*--about pornography and outing the identity of members who
wish to remain anonymous. That's why Ravi was dumped this time around
(and the time before that); he outed someone the first time and
threatened to do so the second time. Not because he was "unkind."
>
>  Feste's "critique" was nonsense, by the way. You apparently read it
but not my response. He was trying to protect someone he likes who has a
propensity to be untruthful, IMO.
>
>  What I *wish* were the case here is that people would not be so
tolerant of deliberate dishonesty, that they would express strong
disapproval of anyone who engages in it. Social sanctions of that sort,
if consistent, would do more for the tone of this forum than all your
bombast, Buck. Malicious dishonesty breeds disrespect of others
generally. If telling deliberate falsehoods about other people is OK,
then what isn't OK? To expect people to be kind to a person who attacks
them repeatedly with falsehoods and lies is a little too much to expect.
We aren't saints here.
>
>  I appreciate your willingness to speak to me for a change, Buck. But
from what you say, I don't think you have anything more than a very
superficial impression of the interpersonal dynamics of FFL. I can't
hope to give you an in-depth course to catch you up on what you've
missed. You'd have to decide to start paying close attention to the
traffic here.
>
>  I wrote:
>
>  How about the lying? You never mention the lying, Buck. Does that
mean you think it's OK to lie?
>
>  Buck wrote:
>
>  Buck's interest is more narrowly the endurance and survival of FFL as
a community given these newer Yahoo-groups management guidelines that
clearly supersede Rick's “almost anything goes” FFL
guidelines. That old FFL guideline is the rot-in-ist damn pin holding
FFL to be the unkind place it has become from the moment Rick tried it.
>  I have not been following your attempt at equivalence other than the
message view of posts. Feste a while back had a fair critique of it.
Like as Rick in skipping posts from you and others as soon as they show
themselves just to be personal bickering between you and others I save
time too. You have over a hundred posts so far this week and I don't
have much of a clue what you write other than in message view or what
shows up in othe

[FairfieldLife] Poju

[cardemaister]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poju_Zabludowicz 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poju_Zabludowicz 
 

 I believe Poju's (~ paw-you: [(poor) little] boy) father came to Finland
 after WWII and made a fortune by "selling" Tampella's grenade throwers
 to Israel!
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampella http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampella

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[cardemaister]

 Just heard a claim on TV, that Jimi asked Dick Dale to teach him play
 the Strat!
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Dale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Dale

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pretty Stunning

[TurquoiseB]

For the record, here she is stalking Feste, trying to 1) demonize him in
the eyes of others, and 2) taunt him as a strategy to lure him into a
protracted argument so she can do even more of it.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> My first send of this response never made it...
>
> Feste blustered (h, tough):
>
>  > Oh auth, as an editor yourself, you surely realize the importance
of getting a book title exactly right. We are not talking about
searching for a title or whose error was the more significant one.
>
>  That's what you were talking about. You were practically wetting your
pants with eagerness to "get Judy." But the only thing you could come up
with was pathetically insignificant.
>
>  Me, I was concerned with the ability to locate a copy of the book
from the title (if you'll recall, Richard had recommended it--with the
wrong title--to Ann). I was not writing a Ph.D. dissertation or
copyediting the reference list of the ms. for somebody's scholarly book.
>
>  > Those questions are not relevant to what I was pointing out. It's
that simple, hon.
>
>  Tootsie, I was pointing out that what you were pointing out wasn't
relevant to being able to find the book from the title. Sorry if that's
too complex for you to grasp.
>
>  Unless I missed it, Richard never thanked me for correcting his
whopping error. Did I make a big fuss about that?
>
>  BTW, have I asked you whether you saw the post I directed to your
attention yesterday?
>
>  Why, yes, I have. Twice already, in fact. You seem to have some
difficulty responding. Gee, I wonder why.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[TurquoiseB]

And here she is stalking Share, barging into a conversation she was not
a part of, trying to make fun of Share and portray her as being at a
kindergarten level, *again* for the purpose of trying to taunt her into
replying, so she could stalk her some more.

Remember the dozens of times she referred to Sal Sunshine as "Stupid
Sal?" Same ploy, and same stalking. She was trying to lure Sal into a
head-to-head argument with her, so she could (in her deranged mind,
anyway) "win."

Fortunately, Share seems to be catching on to these tactics, and just
blowing Judy off as the lonely old stalker sitting alone in a tiny
apartment in New Jersey trying to start an argument -- any argument --
she is.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Share announced:
>
>  > Richard, today I've been in airports, making my way back to FF. Two
hour delay at BWI which lead to a 4 hour delay at Detroit. But I
meditated at Detroit's Religious Reflections Room! Now I'm here and
sometimes watching people. Keep up the good work (-:
> Ann commented:
>  > This is, perhaps, a step up from the menu listing of past dinners
recently ingested. Thank God for small mercies.
>
> I think I'm ready for a little more intellectual stimulation myself.
Visited any good kindergarten classes recently? Show 'n' Tell can be
fun.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pretty Stunning

[TurquoiseB]

More stalking. Feste catches her in a simple mistake, and she wants to
make him PAY for it.

Note the gratuitous insults and taunts (bolded below) and names like
"sweetie" and "toots" inserted to make it clear how much "lower" and
inconsequential he is than she is. Note the appeal to other people
trying to "sell" them on the idea that there is something "wrong" with
Feste, just because 1) he's standing up to her, and 2) he pointed out a
simple mistake on her part. Note the constant attempts to lure him into
arguing with her.

This is stalking.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Feste blustered:
>   >
>  > No, auth, I do not have a problem. The title you posted was
incorrect. There is no article before "Art of Living." Now that's not so
hard to understand, is it? If you are going to correct someone who has
made a mistake on a book title, the least you can do is get it right
yourself. And then, when your error is pointed out, you could just say,
"Yes, you're right, thanks for pointing that out," rather than try to
wriggle out of it and dig yourself in deeper.
>
>  No wiggling, no digging, sweetie. None needed. And you obviously do
have a problem, a bigger one than I realized.
>
>  You don't seem to have answered my question: Which do you think would
be a bigger hindrance to looking up the book by its title, an extra
"the" or a reversal of the order of the main words? IOW, which
correction is important, and which is just Feste determined to "get
Judy" on something insignificant?
>
>  Yes, you're right, there isn't a second "the" in the title. Thank
you, thank you, thank you for pointing out such an awful error. Feel
better now?
>
>  And you didn't answer my other question, about whether you'd seen the
post I directed to your attention yesterday.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Personhood for Chimps

[TurquoiseB]

More stalking, this one a perfect example of Judy declaring that she
"knows" things that other people don't, and that her "knowing" cannot be
refuted. Note that she's still claiming to "know" that Salyavin didn't
read the article that she posted a link to (the Mortal Sin Of Not
Reading Everything Judy Stein Writes Or Points Out). Note that she
cannot even conceive of the possibility that he read the article and
came to a different conclusion about it than she did. Note her attempt
to jumpstart an argument she wanted to have that no one was interested
in.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> I was sorry Salyavin didn't read the article I linked to but simply
dismissed the idea of according "personhood" to chimps without knowing
what was actually involved. I thought there might be an interesting
discussion about the potential legal rights of chimps.
>
>  Trying again...here are a couple of quotes that frame the issue in
more detail:
>
>  "With testimonials from experts like Jane Goodall, Wise makes the
case that chimpanzees have qualities that allow them to have the very
basic legal right not to be imprisoned. It’s not that chimpanzees
are the legal equivalent of human beings. Rather, the court
filing...argues that chimpanzees are enslaved, and that the courts
already recognize that slavery is wrong:
>
>  "'This petition asks this court to issue a writ recognizing that
Tommy is not a legal thing to be possessed by respondents, but rather is
a cognitively complex autonomous legal person with the fundamental legal
right not to be imprisoned.'"
>
> 
http://science.time.com/2013/12/02/chimps-human-rights-lawsuit/#ixzz2mWf\
W8tZD >
>
>  "Wise isn’t arguing that chimpanzees should be given the full
rights of humans, and that’s where this lawsuit begins to make
sense. Whatever you think of the cognitive abilities and emotions of
chimps, I think we can all agree that they are different from, say,
chairs. They’re different from cars. Treating these animals as
mere property is simply wrong.
>
>  "We do, of course, have a class of persons in this country who
don’t have maximum rights but are more than mere property.
They’re called 'children,' and most of them have considerably
less intelligence than a chimpanzee. So there is precedent for extending
legal protection to 'human-like' creatures who throw poop and change the
channel during the last two minutes of a football game."
>
>  http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/lawsuit-of-the-apes/
http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/lawsuit-of-the-apes/
>
>  I wrote:
>
>  Tell ya what, Salyavin, read the article and get back to us, OK?
>
> Salyavin wrote:
>
>  > Before you give rights to chimps you should work out if they are
capable of understanding what is being offered. Anthropomorphism isn't
any way to go about helping wildlife.
>
>  Chimps aren't people, they are chimps and they can't fit into our
world in the same way we couldn't fit into theirs. They aren't as "like
us" as a lot of people think. We should only extend personhood to people
as they are capable of learning a language and communicating their needs
themselves, with obvious exceptions.
>
>
>  ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@ wrote:
>
>  We're getting there.
>
> 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/science/rights-group-sues-to-have-chim\
p-recognized-as-legal-person.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: The South Was Never Defeated

[Michael Jackson]

most have been taken down in one way or another - we had a big broo-ha over the 
thing for years here in South Carolina - it was really a hoot to watch all the 
bullshitters bullshitting about it on both sides - the "compromise" that was 
reached made no one happy but at least the damn thing isn't flying above the 
state house dome anymore (Its flying in a "place of honor" on the Statehouse 
grounds - and even that much of a compromise cost then governor David Beasley 
his job

On Thu, 12/5/13, jr_...@yahoo.com  wrote:

 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: The South Was Never Defeated
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Thursday, December 5, 2013, 6:53 AM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Mike,
 I
 would think this David Miller will encourage the Southern
 states, at the very least, to raise the Confederate flag in
 their state buildings if they have not done so in the
 past.
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!

[Michael Jackson]

it is a great lecture, no question - too bad he was such a liar and scam artist 
and by the way, the state of the world today and the behavior of a vast 
majority of the world's population is proof positive that one of his core 
tenants and that which he bases much of his "proof" that meditation is so 
valid, i.e. that "the nature of the mind is to go to a field of greater 
happiness" is patently absurd and not true.

On Thu, 12/5/13, Richard J. Williams  wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Thursday, December 5, 2013, 2:24 AM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   
   
   
 This has got to
 be the most spot-on
   lecture MMY ever gave! I was there at Jones Hall and
 it was just
   absolutely amazing - you could have heard a pin drop
 in that hall
   and everyone was hanging on his every word; the
 audience was
   spell-bound with the whole scene. I have this lecture
 on VHS tape
   and have watched it numerous times over the years.
 Incredible
   lecture!
 
   
 
   A must see for every TMer:
 
   
 
   'Maharishi - A Promise for the Family of Man'
 
   Historic Lecture at Jones Hall, Houston, TX
 
   http://youtu.be/k3swI5n_mW0
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   On 12/4/2013 7:20 PM, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com
 wrote:
 
 
 
    
   
   
 Thanks,
 that
   is wonderful to hear again [the
 Youtube clip in
   your post]. I honor how 'on
 message' he was
   throughout his life. Teaching. He gave
 a lecture
   very like this one
   of 1972 even within a few months of
 his death.
   Remarkably on
   message. He was a remarkable sat guru,
 guru on the
   roadways of the world. Of Life
   in the body a promise for the family
 of humankind.
 
 
 I
   miss him, 
 
 -Buck
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
   
   
   
   
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: What I Did Today

[awoelflebater]

 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 And here she is stalking Share, barging into a conversation she was not
 a part of, trying to make fun of Share and portray her as being at a
 kindergarten level, *again* for the purpose of trying to taunt her into
 replying, so she could stalk her some more.
 
 Remember the dozens of times she referred to Sal Sunshine as "Stupid
 Sal?" Same ploy, and same stalking. She was trying to lure Sal into a
 head-to-head argument with her, so she could (in her deranged mind,
 anyway) "win."
 
 Fortunately, Share seems to be catching on to these tactics, and just
 blowing Judy off as the lonely old stalker sitting alone in a tiny
 apartment in New Jersey trying to start an argument -- any argument --
 she is.
 

 Hee, hee, Bawwy, you cwack me up. I love how you follow every nuance of every 
thing that Judy does or doesn't do. Have you sought some help for this? You're 
driving yourself cwazy! Now just welax in your retirement in Leiden and focus 
on something like what you had for dinner or all the kinds of beer they have at 
the bar down the street or something. Hey! Take some pictures for us and post 
them. Maybe that'll take what passes for your mind off that New Jersey thorn in 
your side.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > Share announced:
 >
 > > Richard, today I've been in airports, making my way back to FF. Two
 hour delay at BWI which lead to a 4 hour delay at Detroit. But I
 meditated at Detroit's Religious Reflections Room! Now I'm here and
 sometimes watching people. Keep up the good work (-:
 > Ann commented:
 > > This is, perhaps, a step up from the menu listing of past dinners
 recently ingested. Thank God for small mercies.
 >
 > I think I'm ready for a little more intellectual stimulation myself.
 Visited any good kindergarten classes recently? Show 'n' Tell can be
 fun.
 > 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Pretty Stunning

[awoelflebater]

 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 More stalking. Feste catches her in a simple mistake, and she wants to make 
him PAY for it.

Note the gratuitous insults and taunts (bolded below) and names like "sweetie" 
and "toots" inserted to make it clear how much "lower" and inconsequential he 
is than she is. Note the appeal to other people trying to "sell" them on the 
idea that there is something "wrong" with Feste, just because 1) he's standing 
up to her, and 2) he pointed out a simple mistake on her part. Note the 
constant attempts to lure him into arguing with her.

This is stalking. 
 

 And this is obsession Bawwy. Take a break, go for a walk, eat some quinoa, 
read a biography on Jim Morrison. You'll feel much, much better. For a guy who 
shuns the ego and attachment you seem so terribly subjectively imprisoned 
somehow.

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> Feste blustered: 
> >
> > No, auth, I do not have a problem. The title you posted was incorrect. 
> > There is no article before "Art of Living." Now that's not so hard to 
> > understand, is it? If you are going to correct someone who has made a 
> > mistake on a book title, the least you can do is get it right yourself. And 
> > then, when your error is pointed out, you could just say, "Yes, you're 
> > right, thanks for pointing that out," rather than try to wriggle out of it 
> > and dig yourself in deeper. 
> 
> No wiggling, no digging, sweetie. None needed. And you obviously do have a 
> problem, a bigger one than I realized. 
> 
> You don't seem to have answered my question: Which do you think would be a 
> bigger hindrance to looking up the book by its title, an extra "the" or a 
> reversal of the order of the main words? IOW, which correction is important, 
> and which is just Feste determined to "get Judy" on something insignificant? 
> 
> Yes, you're right, there isn't a second "the" in the title. Thank you, thank 
> you, thank you for pointing out such an awful error. Feel better now? 
> 
> And you didn't answer my other question, about whether you'd seen the post I 
> directed to your attention yesterday.
>
 
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Personhood for Chimps

[authfriend]

Here's Barry stalking Judy just as he has for almost 20 years.
 

 Barry baby, you have lost it. You didn't bother to read Salyavin's comment. He 
had obviously not read the article, because his comment made no sense in terms 
of what was in the article. Anybody who read the article and read his comment 
(i.e., not you) would know that.
 

 That's OK; if he isn't interested, fine. But I do get to be disappointed, 
because I thought he (and others here who care about animal welfare) might have 
some thoughts on the issue. It has a lot of pros and cons, and I'd like to hear 
what folks think. I'm not entirely sure what I think.
 

 You need to come out of this make-believe world where you imagine every post 
of mine is looking for an argument. That isn't the case and never was. That's 
just Barry's Fantasy Image of Judy, an attempt at mind-reading on a grand 
scale, one of your many stalking tactics.
 

 And remember, according to you, you don't read my posts. I'm totally unworthy 
of your notice, and you have determined long since to ignore me and never 
interact with me.
 

 You make such an utter fool of yourself.
 

 
Barry fantasized:

 > More stalking, this one a perfect example of Judy declaring that she "knows" 
 > things that other people don't, and that her "knowing" cannot be refuted. 
 > Note that she's still claiming to "know" that Salyavin didn't read the 
 > article that she posted a link to (the Mortal Sin Of Not Reading Everything 
 > Judy Stein Writes Or Points Out). Note that she cannot even conceive of the 
 > possibility that he read the article and came to a different conclusion 
 > about it than she did. Note her attempt to jumpstart an argument she wanted 
 > to have that no one was interested in. 

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> I was sorry Salyavin didn't read the article I linked to but simply dismissed 
> the idea of according "personhood" to chimps without knowing what was 
> actually involved. I thought there might be an interesting discussion about 
> the potential legal rights of chimps. 
> 
> Trying again...here are a couple of quotes that frame the issue in more 
> detail: 
> 
> "With testimonials from experts like Jane Goodall, Wise makes the case that 
> chimpanzees have qualities that allow them to have the very basic legal right 
> not to be imprisoned. It’s not that chimpanzees are the legal equivalent of 
> human beings. Rather, the court filing...argues that chimpanzees are 
> enslaved, and that the courts already recognize that slavery is wrong: 
> 
> "'This petition asks this court to issue a writ recognizing that Tommy is not 
> a legal thing to be possessed by respondents, but rather is a cognitively 
> complex autonomous legal person with the fundamental legal right not to be 
> imprisoned.'" 
> 
> http://science.time.com/2013/12/02/chimps-human-rights-lawsuit/#ixzz2mWfW8tZD 
> > 
> 
> "Wise isn’t arguing that chimpanzees should be given the full rights of 
> humans, and that’s where this lawsuit begins to make sense. Whatever you 
> think of the cognitive abilities and emotions of chimps, I think we can all 
> agree that they are different from, say, chairs. They’re different from 
> cars. Treating these animals as mere property is simply wrong. 
> 
> "We do, of course, have a class of persons in this country who don’t have 
> maximum rights but are more than mere property. They’re called 'children,' 
> and most of them have considerably less intelligence than a chimpanzee. So 
> there is precedent for extending legal protection to 'human-like' creatures 
> who throw poop and change the channel during the last two minutes of a 
> football game." 
> 
> http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/lawsuit-of-the-apes/ 
> http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/lawsuit-of-the-apes/ 
> 
> I wrote: 
> 
> Tell ya what, Salyavin, read the article and get back to us, OK? 
> 
> Salyavin wrote: 
> 
> > Before you give rights to chimps you should work out if they are capable of 
> > understanding what is being offered. Anthropomorphism isn't any way to go 
> > about helping wildlife. 
> 
> Chimps aren't people, they are chimps and they can't fit into our world in 
> the same way we couldn't fit into theirs. They aren't as "like us" as a lot 
> of people think. We should only extend personhood to people as they are 
> capable of learning a language and communicating their needs themselves, with 
> obvious exceptions. 
> 
> 
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@ wrote: 
> 
> We're getting there. 
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/science/rights-group-sues-to-have-chimp-recognized-as-legal-person.
>
 

[FairfieldLife] Global-Warming 'proof' is evaporating-sorry Rick.

[wgm4u]

Global-warming ‘proof’ is evaporating 
http://nypost.com/2013/12/05/global-warming-proof-is-evaporating/ By Michael 
Fumento http://nypost.com/author/michael-fumento/
 December 5, 2013 | 12:14am
  
 
 Photo: HO


 The 2013 hurricane season just ended as one of the five quietest years since 
1960. But don’t expect anyone who pointed to last year’s hurricanes as “proof” 
of the need to act against global warming to apologize; the warmists don’t work 
that way.
 Warmist claims of a severe increase in hurricane activity go back to 2005 and 
Hurricane Katrina. The cover of Al Gore’s 2009 book, “Our Choice: A Plan to 
Solve the Climate Crisis,” even features a satellite image of the globe with 
four major hurricanes superimposed.
 Yet the evidence to the contrary was there all along. Back in 2005 I and 
others reviewed the entire hurricane record, which goes back over a century, 
and found no increase of any kind. Yes, we sometimes get bad storms — but no 
more frequently now than in the past. The advocates simply ignored that 
evidence — then repeated their false claims after Hurricane Sandy last year.
 And the media play along. For example, it somehow wasn’t front-page news that 
committed believers in man-made global warming recently admitted there’s been 
no surface global warming for well over a decade and maybe none for decades 
more. Nor did we see warmists conceding that their explanation is essentially a 
confession that the previous warming may not have been man-made at all.
 That admission came in a new paper by prominent warmists in the peer-reviewed 
journal Climate Dynamics. They not only conceded that average global surface 
temperatures stopped warming a full 15 years ago, but that this “pause” could 
extend into the 2030s.
 Mind you, the term “pause” is misleading in the extreme: Unless and until it 
resumes again, it’s just a “stop.” You don’t say a bullet-ridden body “paused” 
breathing.
 Remarkably, that stoppage has practically been a state secret. Just five years 
ago, the head of the International Panel on Climate Change, the group most 
associated with “proving” that global warming is man-made and has horrific 
potential consequences, told Congress that Earth is running a “fever” that’s 
“apt to get much worse.” Yet he and IPCC knew the warming had stopped a decade 
earlier.
 Those who pointed this out, including yours truly, were labeled “denialists.” 
Yet the IPCC itself finally admitted the “pause” in its latest report.
 The single most damning aspect of the “pause” is that, because it has occurred 
when “greenhouse gases” have been pouring into the atmosphere at record levels, 
it shows at the very least that something natural is at play here. The warmists 
suggest that natural factors have “suppressed” the warming temporarily, but 
that’s just a guess: The fact is, they have nothing like the understanding of 
the climate that they claimed (and their many models that all showed future 
warming mean nothing, since they all used essentially the same false 
information).
 If Ma Nature caused the “pause,” can’t this same lady be responsible for the 
warming observed earlier? You bet! Fact is, the earth was cooling and warming 
long before so-called GHGs could have been a factor. A warm spell ushered in 
the Viking Age, and many scientists believe recent warming was merely a 
recovery from what’s called “the Little Ice Age” that began around 1300.
 Yet none of this unsettles the rush to kill debate. The Los Angeles Times has 
even announced that it will no longer print letters to the editor questioning 
man-made global warming. Had the Times been printing before Columbus, perhaps 
it would have banned letters saying the Earth was round.
 Meanwhile, the Obama administration continues to push to reduce supposed 
global-warming emissions. Last month, the president even signed an executive 
order establishing a Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience that could 
dramatically expand government bureaucrats’ ability to restrict Americans’ use 
of their property, water and energy to reduce so-called “greenhouse gas 
emissions.”
 Such attempted reductions in other countries have proved incredibly expensive, 
while barely reducing emissions. But damn the stubbornly weak economy, says 
President Obama, full speed ahead!
 This, even as new data show that last year the US median wage hit its lowest 
level since 1998 and long-term unemployment is almost the highest ever.
 People have a right to religious and cult beliefs within reason. But the 
warmists have been proved wrong time and again, each time reacting with little 
more than pictures of forlorn polar bears on ice floes and trying to shut down 
the opposition. (More bad timing: Arctic ice increased by almost a third this 
past year, while that at the South Pole was thicker and wider than it’s been in 
35 years.)
 In war and in science, the bloodiest conflicts always seem to be the religious 
ones. Time for the American public to say it’s n

[FairfieldLife] RE: Personhood for Chimps

[awoelflebater]

 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 More stalking, this one a perfect example of Judy declaring that she "knows" 
things that other people don't, and that her "knowing" cannot be refuted. Note 
that she's still claiming to "know" that Salyavin didn't read the article that 
she posted a link to (the Mortal Sin Of Not Reading Everything Judy Stein 
Writes Or Points Out). Note that she cannot even conceive of the possibility 
that he read the article and came to a different conclusion about it than she 
did. Note her attempt to jumpstart an argument she wanted to have that no one 
was interested in. 
 

 You just can't stop. No one else gives a poop Bawwy. Your obsessive/compulsive 
disorder appears to be spiking today. Take a break from FFL, even for a couple 
of days. Surely you have something else you can be doing. Have you set up any 
dinosaur dioramas lately? Go surf the Messy Nessy Chic blog. Your attempts to 
ignite more controversy over here are so transparent.

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> I was sorry Salyavin didn't read the article I linked to but simply dismissed 
> the idea of according "personhood" to chimps without knowing what was 
> actually involved. I thought there might be an interesting discussion about 
> the potential legal rights of chimps. 
> 
> Trying again...here are a couple of quotes that frame the issue in more 
> detail: 
> 
> "With testimonials from experts like Jane Goodall, Wise makes the case that 
> chimpanzees have qualities that allow them to have the very basic legal right 
> not to be imprisoned. It’s not that chimpanzees are the legal equivalent of 
> human beings. Rather, the court filing...argues that chimpanzees are 
> enslaved, and that the courts already recognize that slavery is wrong: 
> 
> "'This petition asks this court to issue a writ recognizing that Tommy is not 
> a legal thing to be possessed by respondents, but rather is a cognitively 
> complex autonomous legal person with the fundamental legal right not to be 
> imprisoned.'" 
> 
> http://science.time.com/2013/12/02/chimps-human-rights-lawsuit/#ixzz2mWfW8tZD 
> > 
> 
> "Wise isn’t arguing that chimpanzees should be given the full rights of 
> humans, and that’s where this lawsuit begins to make sense. Whatever you 
> think of the cognitive abilities and emotions of chimps, I think we can all 
> agree that they are different from, say, chairs. They’re different from 
> cars. Treating these animals as mere property is simply wrong. 
> 
> "We do, of course, have a class of persons in this country who don’t have 
> maximum rights but are more than mere property. They’re called 'children,' 
> and most of them have considerably less intelligence than a chimpanzee. So 
> there is precedent for extending legal protection to 'human-like' creatures 
> who throw poop and change the channel during the last two minutes of a 
> football game." 
> 
> http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/lawsuit-of-the-apes/ 
> http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/lawsuit-of-the-apes/ 
> 
> I wrote: 
> 
> Tell ya what, Salyavin, read the article and get back to us, OK? 
> 
> Salyavin wrote: 
> 
> > Before you give rights to chimps you should work out if they are capable of 
> > understanding what is being offered. Anthropomorphism isn't any way to go 
> > about helping wildlife. 
> 
> Chimps aren't people, they are chimps and they can't fit into our world in 
> the same way we couldn't fit into theirs. They aren't as "like us" as a lot 
> of people think. We should only extend personhood to people as they are 
> capable of learning a language and communicating their needs themselves, with 
> obvious exceptions. 
> 
> 
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@ wrote: 
> 
> We're getting there. 
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/science/rights-group-sues-to-have-chimp-recognized-as-legal-person.
>
 
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Black Hats and White Hats

[Richard Williams]

Massive Hacker Attack!

According to SpiderLabs, "...'123456’ was the most widely used password and
‘password’, ‘123,’ and ‘11’ were also among the top entries. Three of
the most used passwords are 'password', 'sex' and 'god', not particularly
in that order. Admins love to use 'god' as their password- it gives them a
feeling of power.

So, let's review some password protocols:

1. Do not use the same password for all your online activities.
2. Use a seven word combination of letters, numbers, and symbols for your
password with at least one letter in caps.
3. Do NOT write down your password down on a Post-it note and affix it  to
your computer monitor.
4. Never reveal your password to anyone, including your significant other.
5. Change you password frequently - at least once a month, in order to be
on the safe side.
6. DO IT NOW - don't wait until tomorrow to change your password.

"Two million passwords for social media and email accounts have been
released online by hackers, IT security experts have discovered."

Metro UK:
http://metro.co.uk/two-million-facebook-gmail-and-twitter-passwords-stolen


On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Richard Williams wrote:

> The programmer is God and Hackers are the prophets of Information
> Technology.
>
> So, if you are a hacker, it would be evil to not share your data and your
> code with the rest of the world, to save mankind from ignorance - a moral
> imperative for the hacker. The hacker's world view is libertarian- they
> believe that powerful individuals are taking over the Internet and
> controlling our thoughts through the media, violating our privacy. All the
> while posting reams of information about themselves. Go figure.
>
> "Because he knows the power of the technology he has mastered, he knows
> how distressingly fragile the barrier is between freedom and
> censorship—it’s a simple matter of who writes the code. Underlying it all
> was the hacker belief that the world could be perfected if enough of us
> tapped society’s vast reserves of knowledge and put it to proper use."
>
> Read more:
>
> 'So Open It Hurts'
> What the Internet did to Aaron Swartz
> New Republic:
> http://preview.tinyurl.com/ala5v77
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Richard Williams wrote:
>
>> Reuters - A computer hacker was sentenced on Monday to three years and
>> five months in prison for stealing the personal data of about 120,000 Apple
>> Inc iPad users, including big-city mayors, a TV network news anchor and a
>> Hollywood movie mogul...
>>
>> 'U.S. computer hacker gets three-and-a-half years for stealing iPad user
>> data'
>> http://tinyurl.com/c72z58j
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Richard Williams 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "On Thursday, the 21-year old San Antonio native will enter La Tuna
>>> Federal Correction Institute in Anthony, TX to begin a one-year and one day
>>> sentence for breaching Sony Pictures Entertainment in May 2011 as a member
>>> of Anonymous offshoot, LulzSec."
>>>
>>> 'The $600,000 Joyride'
>>> San Antonio Current:
>>> http://sacurrent.com/news/the-600-000-joyride
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Richard Williams 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Let's see, on the one hand we have the personal privacy advocates, like
 Edward Snowden and Wikileak's Julian Assange, and the Electronic Frontier
 Foundation.

 And, on the other hand we have social networking sites like Mark
 Zuckerberg's Facebook and micro blogging sites like Evan Williams's
 Twitter.

 And, in the middle we've got the FBI, IRS, CIA, NSA, ATF and the HS.

 And, you got your black hats and your white hats; you got your hackers
 and pirates; and you've got your worms and trojan horses. There's a PC on
 every desk, all running Microsoft Windows software.

 So, now Obama wants you to log on to a government site and enter all
 your personal data. Go figure.

 "It also represents a dangerous normalization of ‘governing in the
 dark,’ where decisions with enormous public impact occur without any public
 input."

 'Snowden Says He Took No Secret Files to Russia'
 New York Times:
 http://www.nytimes.com/snowden

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[Richard J. Williams]

It's not about Jim, it's all about the music.

On 12/4/2013 10:24 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
Ol' Jim was doomed from the start. He was a loser. He died a wasted 
man having lived a wasted life. He is not someone who seemed able to 
choose well for himself - a man of voracious appetite and no concept 
of moderation. It takes a lot of self abuse to "off"oneself in the 
prime of one's life by the kind of overindulgence he engaged in. I 
quite revile the guy.

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@ wrote:
> >
>  > And here she is stalking Share, barging into a conversation she was
not
>  > a part of, trying to make fun of Share and portray her as being at
a
>  > kindergarten level, *again* for the purpose of trying to taunt her
into
>  > replying, so she could stalk her some more.
>
> >  Remember the dozens of times she referred to Sal Sunshine as
"Stupid
>  > Sal?" Same ploy, and same stalking. She was trying to lure Sal into
a
>  > head-to-head argument with her, so she could (in her deranged mind,
>  >  anyway) "win."
>>
> >  Fortunately, Share seems to be catching on to these tactics, and
just
>  > blowing Judy off as the lonely old stalker sitting alone in a tiny
>  > apartment in New Jersey trying to start an argument -- any argument
--
>  > she is.
>
>
>  Hee, hee, Bawwy, you cwack me up. I love how you follow every nuance
of every thing that Judy does or doesn't do. Have you sought some help
for this? You're driving yourself cwazy! Now just welax in your
retirement in Leiden and focus on something like what you had for dinner
or all the kinds of beer they have at the bar down the street or
something. Hey! Take some pictures for us and post them. Maybe that'll
take what passes for your mind off that New Jersey thorn in your side.


Good doggie. I'm sure Mummy will give you a dog biscuit when she logs on
again. :-)

I'm just having a little fun with Judy's ludicrous claim that she is NOT
a stalker, and her even more ludicrous attempt to redefine that word in
terms of having followed someone from forum to forum in pursuit of them.

Cyberstalking is about the pursuit, period, with the intent to harass
and do damage to another person. And that's been Judy's M.O. for close
to 20 years now.

Just run a search on the number of times Judy has referenced her "known
enemies" on FFL since 2005. She's found occasion to mention me in over
8,600 posts. She has written 3,000 posts each to or about Vaj and
Curtis. In the short time Share has been here, Judy has written to or
about her over 1,700 times now.

I don't think that there is a single person on this forum who doesn't
know what the *tone* and *intent* of most of these posts were. They were
harassment, pure and simple.

And they *were* stalking. Judy is the most consistent and egregious
stalker this forum has ever seen. The fact that she can be so out of it
as to deny this is the scariest part.

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[awoelflebater]

Thanks Bawwy, I'm really, really impatient for that stroking and cookie. When 
do you think she'll get on this damn forum and give me the accolades I'm so 
desperately seeking? Soon, Bawwy, will it be soon 'cause I can hardly stand it. 
Pant, pant, pant...

[FairfieldLife] RE: fate of Obamacare

[wgm4u]

Nice one Yif-Yep Judy we do wish!  This fiasco is so typical of touchy-feely 
liberals who are incompetent dreamers, their idea for America is nothing but a 
'field of dreams'.
  
 Everything the democrats have passed is going broke, SSI, Medicare, you name 
it! And mind you, the Republicans had alternative proposals on the table on 
most of these. But democrats pander the best, therefore get the most 
votes..gads!
  
 Now we are going to need a dictator to get us out of this mess
 

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

 Yifuzero wrote:
 
 > http://discoverhistorictravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Lusitania-0021.jpg
 >  
 > http://discoverhistorictravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Lusitania-0021.jpg
 
 

 You (and the GOP) wish.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

Richard, here is just his voice without the band.  Lyrically, well...to each 
his own. 
 

 
http://www.openculture.com/2013/08/the-lost-paris-tapes-preserves-jim-morrisons-final-poetry-recordings-from-1971.html
 
http://www.openculture.com/2013/08/the-lost-paris-tapes-preserves-jim-morrisons-final-poetry-recordings-from-1971.html

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: MUM and the Tree of Knowledge

[Richard Williams]

The dome at Radiance, Texas, located at the TM Ideal Village, was built in
1983 and is a smaller version of the Fairfield dome. It has been in
continuous use as a meditation facility since that time. The Maharishi
Golden Dome of Pure Knowledge, is a 70 foot diameter section of a sphere.

[image: Inline image 1]

The current entry structure including the ‘little dome’, entry foyer,
restrooms, etc. were completed in 1985 and inaugurated by a delegation from
the international TM organization including Brahmachari Nandkishore, Dr.
Bevan Morris, and Neil Patterson in October of that year.

"In the late Seventies, when Austin was still clinging to its small-town
roots, a youthful group of visionaries decided it would be cool to box up
their households and start a new community in the hills southwest of the
city..."

Read more:

'Matter Over Mind'
By Bob Curran and Amy Smith
Austin Chronicle, September 21, 2001
http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2001-09-21/83033/


On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:41 PM,  wrote:

>
>
> R, The Texas Radiance community meditation hall? Here is that TM
> community hemispherical (yidam) form again.Did you ever hear
> Maharishi reflect about this form?   Meditation, Saraswati, hemispherical..
>
>
>
>
> [image: Inline image 2]
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Form Follows Faith: The Influence of Belief on the Architecture and Crafts
> of American Communal Societies
>
> OCTOBER 9-11, 2014
> *Amana, Iowa*
>
> Deadline for Submission of Paper and Session Proposals: April 30, 2014
>
>
>
> RW writes:
>
>
> Most of the TMers in Fairfield are aligned with the Yidam represented by
> the Patanjali Golden Dome, a Yantra based on Buddhist principles.
>
> So, let's review the principles of Buddhist edifice architecture:
>
> The Golden Dome of Pure Knowledge at Fairfield, IA (not to be confused
> with the Maharishi Golden Dome of Pure Knowledge at Radience, TX) is a sort
> of Buddhist stupa or a hollow tope, surmounted by a kalasa, supported by
> the amalaka in which the akasha, symbolizing dimensionless space, is
> supported by the linga, with an eight-angled cintamani vajra, an 8-sided
> prototypic harmika with a rail, surrounding the hypaethral pavilion,
> constituting a veritible chaitya-garbha pradakshina with a nice fence
> around it!
>
> Everyone knows that a hemispherical shape for edifice architecture is
> favored by devotees of Tara and Saraswati, the Hindu Goddess of Knowledge.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupa
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> Great Stupa at Sarnath, India
>
>
>  ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> *Vedamerlin? I see in the FFL photos section the artwork for the Global
> Country emblem and flag. Also the tree of agriculture. Vedamerlin posted
> both. I'd like to be able to share them with some folks studying this kind
> of artwork but can't copy them out of the FFL photos section and people
> have to be FFL members to peek. Veda, can you send them in the body of an
> e-mail post to FFL so they can be seen by everyone? I would appreciate that
> and I think they would be appreciated by others if they could be seen.*
>
> *-Buck in the Dome*
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
> wrote:
>
> Anybody have an image of the "Wish-yielding Tree" from the brochure to
> look at?
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
> wrote:
>
>  *the "wish-yielding tree" that symbolizes the effortless ability to
> fulfill desires from the level of Natural Law." On the cover of a textbook
> for the Ideal Girls School: "The cover, designed by Heather Hartnett,
> depicts the Kalp Vriksha,*
>
>
>
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
> wrote:
>
> *One lapel pin I'd like to have is the Global Country of World Peace pin,
> the one with the graphic of the rising sun with its Golden rays. A little
> bit before LB Shriver passed away he gave me his SRM lapel pin, the
> intricate one with the face of Guru Dev Brahmananda Saraswati embossed on
> it and the words “In God Consciousness Peace Energy Happiness Jai Guru Dev
> SRM . I wear it along with my National Network to Freedom pin on my Quaker
> vest lapel. I'd add the Global Country pin if I had one.*
>
> *-Buck*
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
> wrote:
>
> Zoar [Ohio] prospered for 80 years.
>
> A seven pointed star of Bethlehem was chosen as the emblem and the acorn
> from which the mighty oak grows was their symbol of strength.
>
> The emblem of the separatists, a huge star in red, white and yellow.
> Members wore similar emblems on their shoulders to distinguish themselves
> from strangers visiting the village. [The emblem was really cool and
> obviously had a lot of symbolism in it. I looked all around the gift shop
> and bookstore to try to buy one or get a picture or postcard and there was
> none to be had as I recently visited Zoar.]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
> wrote:
>
>
> SHAKER TREE OF LIFE
>
> This Shaker drawing, known as the "Tree of Life," is the mos

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!

[dhamiltony2k5]

MJ, did you miss that this was a spiritual revival movement in a muddy world 
filled with vasana? I feel you are being too hard on how he did it and what all 
we did.  Like, was Christ perfect in everything?  Never stubbed his toe?  We 
could surely use some help changing the world to a better place. Give up this 
negativistic POV and come back to meditation with us. -Buck   
 

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

 it is a great lecture, no question - too bad he was such a liar and scam 
artist and by the way, the state of the world today and the behavior of a vast 
majority of the world's population is proof positive that one of his core 
tenants and that which he bases much of his "proof" that meditation is so 
valid, i.e. that "the nature of the mind is to go to a field of greater 
happiness" is patently absurd and not true.
 
 On Thu, 12/5/13, Richard J. Williams mailto:punditster@...> 
wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Thursday, December 5, 2013, 2:24 AM
 
 

 This has got to
 be the most spot-on
 lecture MMY ever gave! I was there at Jones Hall and
 it was just
 absolutely amazing - you could have heard a pin drop
 in that hall
 and everyone was hanging on his every word; the
 audience was
 spell-bound with the whole scene. I have this lecture
 on VHS tape
 and have watched it numerous times over the years.
 Incredible
 lecture!
 
 
 
 A must see for every TMer:
 
 
 
 'Maharishi - A Promise for the Family of Man'
 
 Historic Lecture at Jones Hall, Houston, TX
 
 http://youtu.be/k3swI5n_mW0 http://youtu.be/k3swI5n_mW0
 
 

 
 On 12/4/2013 7:20 PM, Buck
 wrote:

 
 Thanks,
 that
 is wonderful to hear again [the
 Youtube clip in
 your post]. I honor how 'on
 message' he was
 throughout his life. Teaching. He gave
 a lecture
 very like this one
 of 1972 even within a few months of
 his death.
 Remarkably on
 message. He was a remarkable sat guru,
 guru on the
 roadways of the world. Of Life
 in the body a promise for the family
 of humankind.

 I
 miss him, 
 
 -Buck 

[FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[authfriend]

See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk. Nothing new here; move 
along, folks.
 

 I wrote:
 > Buck, reflect a minute. What makes you think I "stalk"? 
 

 Barry replied:
 

 > You mean, other than the fact that you're doing it right now?  :-)
 

 > When you go out of your way to write a post dumping on the person you've 
 > been dumping on consistently for nearly twenty years, about whom you've 
 > written literally thousands of posts dumping on him, you're stalking.
 

 You mean, the way you've gone out of your way to write posts dumping on me and 
have done relentlessly for nearly twenty years over thousands of posts, and are 
doing right now? That's what you mean by "stalking," what you've been spending 
most of your time on the Web doing to me and many others ever since I've known 
you?
 

 > Get over your self-delusions, honey...you're a stalker.
 

 Well, that's an interesting definition. Trouble is, it applies to you far more 
than it does to me. You da talker-in-chief, sweet cheeks.
 

 I didn't "go out of my way" to write the post, BTW. As you know, I was 
responding to Buck.
 

 If I'm a "stalker" according to your new definition, at least I'm an honest 
stalker. You are a viciously malicious, profoundly and consistently dishonest 
stalker. That was (as you know) my point to Buck. We'll see a demonstration in 
the very next paragraphs:
 

 > You even stalked Curtis recently when one of your former minions said he 
 > liked him, and he hasn't been here since August:
 

 You mean, after Dr. Dumbass responded to one of your long dump-on-Judy rants 
that fawned over Curtis? In which he said he liked Curtis but found him 
"emotionally duplicitous," and I agreed? Because that's the post of mine you're 
quoting, along with my follow-up:
 

 "Curtis, in stark contrast, went to considerable lengths to hide his emotional 
duplicity."
 

 "To be a little more specific, if I may: Curtis pretended to be "comfortable" 
with who he was, as Barry puts it. But that was a carefully constructed facade, 
and it took very little in the way of chipping to expose the real Curtis 
underneath. "
 

 You went on to stalk Dr. Dumbass for what he had said about Curtis, and in 
that post added Robin to your list of stalkees for the day--Robin, who hadn't 
been here since early April.
 

 Did you think I wasn't going to provide the context you dishonestly left out? 
(And it was obviously deliberate dishonesty, folks, since he had actually 
looked up the posts in question.)
 

 If anybody would like to verify what I just wrote, let me know and I'll 
provide the URLs to the posts.
 

 As I said in a post a couple of days ago, Barry doesn't have the wherewithal 
to make an honest case. He'd have to refrain from stalking if he had to be 
honest, because he'd have nothing to say.
 

 > Stalking is just what you DO, Judy. Everyone here knows this but you.
 

 Says the Master Stalker of FFL.
 

 Your hypocrisy is unparalleled. It's stupefying. And that's giving you the 
benefit of the doubt, because if you really believe what you're saying, you're 
insane, completely out of touch with reality.
 

 Now, how do you explain your claim that I have "stalked you from forum to 
forum"?
 

 (See, Barry has switched definitions. Before, he meant "stalking" in the 
standard sense of following someone around, as in his claim above. But now he's 
using it as a synonym for "dumping on.")
 

 How about explaining the fact that you were "stalking" me on FFL before I even 
arrived here?
 

 I can find the URLs for those posts as well if anyone is interested.
 

 I swear to God, interacting with Barry is like being in a hall of funhouse 
mirrors. Everything he says is warped, twisted, turned inside-out and 
upside-down. And the older he becomes, the worse it gets. It's hard to imagine 
that he genuinely thinks anybody believes him, but it's even harder to 
understand why he would constantly spout such obviously dishonest crap if he 
didn't.
 

 I wrote to Buck:
 > I'll tell you: Because that's what Barry has said that I do, over and over. 
 > He claims I've "stalked him from forum to forum." That is factually untrue. 
 > Of the four forums we've been on together, one (alt.m.t) I joined before I 
 > had ever encountered him; two I joined before he did; and the fourth, FFL, 
 > he Invited me to join, along with other members of alt.m.t. 
 > 
 > So what does that make Barry, Buck? 
 > 
 > I could go on and on listing the things Barry has said about me (and others) 
 > that were simply factually false, and that he knows were false. Literally 
 > hundreds of things. 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!

[Richard J. Williams]

This message has all the earmarks of someone who got booted off the 
campus and likes sour grapes. MMY can't hold a candle to all your 
accomplishments! Never let an opportunity pass to blame others for one's 
failures in life.


Complain; shift blame; be bitter.

Go figure.

On 12/5/2013 6:47 AM, Michael Jackson wrote:


it is a great lecture, no question - too bad he was such a liar and 
scam artist and by the way, the state of the world today and the 
behavior of a vast majority of the world's population is proof 
positive that one of his core tenants and that which he bases much of 
his "proof" that meditation is so valid, i.e. that "the nature of the 
mind is to go to a field of greater happiness" is patently absurd and 
not true.

[FairfieldLife] RE: "sweet truth" a fundamental misunderstanding

[dhamiltony2k5]

Paul, you may appreciate the dissonances in the TM Saha Nav hymn too. 
Cardmeister worked that over in translation too. See these, 
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/342542 
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/342542 
  
 this link to the Saha Nav post by Cardemaister fra Finland about the more 
proper translation of the TM Saha Nav 
hymn:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302944 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302944  
 
 


 
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 
 This verse is from the Manu Smriti (4.138):
 
 Original translation:
 
 satyaM brUyAt priyaM brUyAt   speak the truth, speak sweetly
 na brUyAt satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth that is unpleasant
 priyaM ca nAnRRitaM brUyAt   don't speak untruth that is pleasant
 eSha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||  this is the eternal law
 
 the Literal translation is:
 
 truth speak, lovingly speak
 don't speak truth unloving
 lovingly untruth don't speak
 this is law eternal
 
 My "enhanced" translation"
 
 satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
 na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving way
 priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a pleasant way
 esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law
 
 I'm certain that the shloka is talking about how to speak the truth not the 
quality of the truth itself.  That is, it's not the truth that is to be sweet 
or not, truth is truth.. but it is HOW you say it that is the rule.
 
 the key word you in the first three lines is "priyam"
 this is derived from the word "prem" which means love, so I feel it is 
appropriate to translate "priyam" as "lovingly", although "sweetly", 
"pleasantly" are not far off.
 
 But I have to emphasize that this shloka doesn't not say that one should, 
under any circumstances, not tell the truth, but it is guiding one to say the 
truth in a pleasant way.  The truth must be told ("satyam eva jayate" truth 
alone triumphs)
 
 "ca" means "and" (used very differently in Sanskrit than English / not a 
connective word)
 "ritam" is another word for "truth"
 "nan" negation "no" or "not"
 "bruyat" means "speak" or "say"
 
 priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak a pleasant untruth
 
 The word "ca" echoes the repetitive logic from earlier line (meaning "don't")
 "nanritam" means "untrurth"
 
 "priyam" is used here to describe a way of speaking, not nature of the truth.
 Therefore it should mean "lovingly"
 
 
 The reason I think this is a fundamental issue is that people may feel that 
you should never tell someone something they don't want to hear.  But that is 
not what it says.  You can tell your friend that he didn't win the election or 
you can rub his nose in it and call him a loser.  The fact (or truth) is the 
same but the way you say it is different.
 
 If you only tell people what they want to hear, you create "bubble mentality". 
 People will live in a bubble they create because they only want to hear what 
they want to hear.  That is NOT speaking the sweet truth as defined in the Manu 
Smriti.
 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[emilymaenot]

Look Barry, this is ridiculous.  You are obsessed with "enemies" and 
"stalking." Clearly your mind is not trending towards natural joy.  Why don't 
you conduct a test?  Stop mentioning Judy, either by name or by reference, in 
all posts for the next two weeks.  No commenting on any of her posts either. 
Nada. Zip. Then, count up how many times she "harasses" and "does damage" to 
*you* and only *you* (as you can't speak for anyone else) and post it.

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[authfriend]

Barry stalks Judy:
 

 > I'm just having a little fun with Judy's ludicrous claim that she is NOT
 a stalker, and her even more ludicrous attempt to redefine that word in
 terms of having followed someone from forum to forum in pursuit of them.
 

 Funhouse mirror time again, kiddies. This is how Barry used the
 term. He's now redefined "stalking" to mean "dumping on," to try
 to cover up his lie about how I had "stalked him from forum to 
 forum." And is pretending I'm the one who redefined it.
 

 Given his unrelieved "stalking" of moi in four different forums for the
 past 18 years, and of many others in whatever forum he happens to be
 in, the hypocrisy of his complaining about anyone else's "stalking" is
 monumental.
 
> Cyberstalking is about the pursuit, period, with the intent to harass
 and do damage to another person. And that's been Judy's M.O. for close
 to 20 years now.
 
And Barry has never engaged in stalking. See? Just look in that mirror 
 over there.
 

 > Just run a search on the number of times Judy has referenced her "known
 enemies" on FFL since 2005. She's found occasion to mention me in over
 8,600 posts. She has written 3,000 posts each to or about Vaj and
 Curtis. In the short time Share has been here, Judy has written to or
 about her over 1,700 times now.
 

 As just about everybody here knows, Barry's use of numbers obtained
 from Search are thoroughly bogus. You can't do what he pretends to do
 with Search, for reasons I've explained a number of times. You'd have to go
 through every bloody post on the Search hit list and read it to weed out
 the instances of a name or term that was a quote rather than from an
 original post.
 

 Oh, and he tends to avoid referring to his stalkees by name in an attempt
 to diminish his own counts.
 

 It's just one more of Barry's dishonest "stalking" tactics. He's accumulated
 a shitload of 'em by now. He would have nothing to say if he had to be honest.
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk.

Here's a better idea.

Let's watch Judy react to me supplying a few numbers and facts about
*her* stalking behavior by obsessing on this for the next few weeks and
flooding the forum with posts ragging on me and the other people
mentioned.

How *many* posts ragging on Barry will she make?

How *many* posts ragging on Share will she make?

How *many* posts ragging on Feste will she make?

It's really not a question of "whether" she'll make these posts. The
only question is how many.

The other thing to note is how *few* posts she'll be able to make about
anything else. That's the problem with obsession...the people in the
grip of an overpowering obsession don't realize that they're obsessed.

:-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pretty Stunning

[authfriend]

For the record, Barry didn't bother to read the demonization I've been 
responding to from Feste. As long as we're making free with the term 
"stalking," Feste's been stalking me for the past week, entirely gratuitously.
 
Barry wrote, stalking Judy:

 > For the record, here she is stalking Feste, trying to 1) demonize him in
 the eyes of others, and 2) taunt him as a strategy to lure him into a
 protracted argument so she can do even more of it.
 

 Nope, sorry. That argument is so over. Feste won't own up to it. And
 you won't own up to it either, of course. You were included in the
 post I directed to Feste's attention. You both crashed and burned.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > My first send of this response never made it...
 >
 > Feste blustered (h, tough):
 >
 > > Oh auth, as an editor yourself, you surely realize the importance
 of getting a book title exactly right. We are not talking about
 searching for a title or whose error was the more significant one.
 >
 > That's what you were talking about. You were practically wetting your
 pants with eagerness to "get Judy." But the only thing you could come up
 with was pathetically insignificant.
 >
 > Me, I was concerned with the ability to locate a copy of the book
 from the title (if you'll recall, Richard had recommended it--with the
 wrong title--to Ann). I was not writing a Ph.D. dissertation or
 copyediting the reference list of the ms. for somebody's scholarly book.
 >
 > > Those questions are not relevant to what I was pointing out. It's
 that simple, hon.
 >
 > Tootsie, I was pointing out that what you were pointing out wasn't
 relevant to being able to find the book from the title. Sorry if that's
 too complex for you to grasp.
 >
 > Unless I missed it, Richard never thanked me for correcting his
 whopping error. Did I make a big fuss about that?
 >
 > BTW, have I asked you whether you saw the post I directed to your
 attention yesterday?
 >
 > Why, yes, I have. Twice already, in fact. You seem to have some
 difficulty responding. Gee, I wonder why.
 > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[authfriend]

Barry stalks Judy some more:
 

 > And here she is stalking Share
 

 "SHUT THE FUCK UP."--Barry Wright in an "Open Letter to Share"
 

 'Nuff said.
 

[FairfieldLife] BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[TurquoiseB]

I stumbled upon it the other day when looking for a photo of some
supposedly Atlantean priest, and out of curiosity downloaded the first
episode. I won't be watching the second.

It's GHASTLY HORRIBLE, seemingly written for 12-year-olds by people not
emotionally or intellectually much older who seem to think that if a
series is about exotic places and is full of people in costumes swinging
swords, it'll be as big a hit as "Game Of Thrones."

Truly disappointing. Worst UK TV production I've seen in years...

[FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[emilymaenot]

Testing...comments below.
 

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk.
 
 Here's a better idea.
 
 Let's watch Judy react to me supplying a few numbers and facts about
 *her* stalking behavior by obsessing on this for the next few weeks and
 flooding the forum with posts ragging on me and the other people
 mentioned.
 

 You mean "ragging on" is now stalking?  Oh oh, it's all different perception.  
Personally, I translate a whole lot of it as humor, but that's just me. Oh 
dear.  More to work on.  
 
 How *many* posts ragging on Barry will she make?
 
 How *many* posts ragging on Share will she make?
 
 How *many* posts ragging on Feste will she make?
 
 It's really not a question of "whether" she'll make these posts. The
 only question is how many.
 
 The other thing to note is how *few* posts she'll be able to make about
 anything else. That's the problem with obsession...the people in the
 grip of an overpowering obsession don't realize that they're obsessed.
 
 :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[emilymaenot]

Testing..comment at bottom
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Barry stalks Judy some more:
 

 > And here she is stalking Share
 
 
 "SHUT THE FUCK UP."--Barry Wright in an "Open Letter to Share"
 

 'Nuff said.
 

 Barry, is Share like a sister to you?  Maybe a half-sister?  A quarter-sister? 
 
 


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pretty Stunning

[authfriend]

And more Judy-stalking from Barry:
 
 > More stalking. Feste catches her in a simple mistake, and she wants to make 
 > him PAY for it.
 

 Feste (as noted) was doing his damndest to "get Judy" by citing a totally 
insignificant mistake
 I made in the course of correcting a whopping error of Richard's (in which he 
made the same mistake in addition to the big one).

> Note the gratuitous insults and taunts (bolded below) and names like 
> "sweetie" and "toots" inserted to make it clear how much "lower" and 
> inconsequential he is than she is. Note the appeal to other people trying to 
> "sell" them on the idea that there is something "wrong" with Feste, just 
> because 1) he's standing up to her, and 2) he pointed out a simple mistake on 
> her part.
 

 Anybody see the "appeal to other people" Barry refers to?
 

 > Note the constant attempts to lure him into arguing with her.
 

 Actually, I've been attempting to close out his argument with me. He's been 
trying (ineffectually, IMO) to beat me up for the past week because I've been 
calling Share on her falsehoods, and he feels she needs protection so she 
doesn't have to own up to them. If you think that means there's "something 
wrong" with Feste, that's your call, not mine.
 
> This is stalking. 
 

 Jeez, Barry, you are so transparent.

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> Feste blustered: 
> >
> > No, auth, I do not have a problem. The title you posted was incorrect. 
> > There is no article before "Art of Living." Now that's not so hard to 
> > understand, is it? If you are going to correct someone who has made a 
> > mistake on a book title, the least you can do is get it right yourself. And 
> > then, when your error is pointed out, you could just say, "Yes, you're 
> > right, thanks for pointing that out," rather than try to wriggle out of it 
> > and dig yourself in deeper. 
> 
> No wiggling, no digging, sweetie. None needed. And you obviously do have a 
> problem, a bigger one than I realized. 
> 
> You don't seem to have answered my question: Which do you think would be a 
> bigger hindrance to looking up the book by its title, an extra "the" or a 
> reversal of the order of the main words? IOW, which correction is important, 
> and which is just Feste determined to "get Judy" on something insignificant? 
> 
> Yes, you're right, there isn't a second "the" in the title. Thank you, thank 
> you, thank you for pointing out such an awful error. Feel better now? 
> 
> And you didn't answer my other question, about whether you'd seen the post I 
> directed to your attention yesterday.
>
 

[FairfieldLife] Fred Davis: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 12/05/2013

[Rick Archer]

 


blog updates from


Buddha at the Gas Pump


   
If you are not doing so already, please consider donating a minimum of $1 or $2 
per month to help offset basic monthly expenses associated with hosting, 
MailChimp, etc. Of course, larger donations for other expenses are very much 
appreciated and needed. Donate button on http://batgap.com 

 . 


published 12/05/2013


208. Fred Davis 

 

Dec 04, 2013 09:13 am | Rick

Fred Davis studied and practiced Eastern wisdom for twenty-five years prior to 
2006, when his seeking ended, and his true awakening commenced. He is the 
creator and editor of Awakening Clarity Now and the founder of The Living 
Method of … Continue reading  

 →

The post 208. Fred Davis 

  appeared first on Buddha at the Gas Pump 

 .

comments 

  | read more 

 

 





 

   
Elsewhere

*  

 Visit My Blog

*  

 Share This with a friend

*  

 Follow me on Twitter

*  

 RSS feed

   


view email in a browser 

  | 


Regular announcement of new interviews posted at http://batgap.com.

Buddha at the Gas Pump

1108 South B Street

Fairfield, Iowa 52556


Add us to your address book 

 

Copyright (C) 2013 Buddha at the Gas Pump All rights reserved.

 

 

  

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[authfriend]

Emily's idea is best of all:
 

 "Why don't you conduct a test?  Stop mentioning Judy, either by name or by 
reference, in all posts for the next two weeks.  No commenting on any of her 
posts either. Nada. Zip. Then, count up how many times she 'harasses' and 'does 
damage' to *you* and only *you* (as you can't speak for anyone else) and post 
it."

 

 How about it, Barry? Think you can manage it? Think you can refrain from 
stalking me for two weeks? If so, it'll be a first.
 

 > See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk.
 
 > Here's a better idea.
 
> Let's watch Judy react to me supplying a few numbers and facts about
 *her* stalking behavior by obsessing on this for the next few weeks and
 flooding the forum with posts ragging on me and the other people
 mentioned.
 
> How *many* posts ragging on Barry will she make?
 
> How *many* posts ragging on Share will she make?
 
> How *many* posts ragging on Feste will she make?
 
> It's really not a question of "whether" she'll make these posts. The
 only question is how many.
 
> The other thing to note is how *few* posts she'll be able to make about
 anything else. That's the problem with obsession...the people in the
 grip of an overpowering obsession don't realize that they're obsessed.
 
 :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[awoelflebater]

 

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

 It's not about Jim, it's all about the music.
 
Not for me it isn't. His presence is very much in evidence for lots of reasons 
and although the other elements of the band are outstanding all I can feel is 
Jim's darkness and twistedness. On one level I pity the guy and on another I 
simply don't like exposure to him. It's just me, I have  trouble getting past 
his vibe.
 On 12/4/2013 10:24 PM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... wrote:
 
 Ol' Jim was doomed from the start. He was a loser. He died a wasted man having 
lived a wasted life. He is not someone who seemed able to choose well for 
himself - a man of voracious appetite and no concept of moderation. It takes a 
lot of self abuse to "off"oneself in the prime of one's life by the kind of 
overindulgence he engaged in. I quite revile the guy. 
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[awoelflebater]

 

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

 See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk. Nothing new here; move 
along, folks.
 

 I wrote:
 > Buck, reflect a minute. What makes you think I "stalk"? 
 

 Barry replied:
 

 > You mean, other than the fact that you're doing it right now?  :-)
 

 > When you go out of your way to write a post dumping on the person you've 
 > been dumping on consistently for nearly twenty years, about whom you've 
 > written literally thousands of posts dumping on him, you're stalking.
 
 
 You mean, the way you've gone out of your way to write posts dumping on me and 
have done relentlessly for nearly twenty years over thousands of posts, and are 
doing right now? That's what you mean by "stalking," what you've been spending 
most of your time on the Web doing to me and many others ever since I've known 
you?
 

 > Get over your self-delusions, honey...you're a stalker.
 
 
 Well, that's an interesting definition. Trouble is, it applies to you far more 
than it does to me. You da talker-in-chief, sweet cheeks.
 

 I didn't "go out of my way" to write the post, BTW. As you know, I was 
responding to Buck.
 

 If I'm a "stalker" according to your new definition, at least I'm an honest 
stalker. You are a viciously malicious, profoundly and consistently dishonest 
stalker. That was (as you know) my point to Buck. We'll see a demonstration in 
the very next paragraphs:
 

 > You even stalked Curtis recently when one of your former minions said he 
 > liked him, and he hasn't been here since August:
 
 
 You mean, after Dr. Dumbass responded to one of your long dump-on-Judy rants 
that fawned over Curtis? In which he said he liked Curtis but found him 
"emotionally duplicitous," and I agreed? Because that's the post of mine you're 
quoting, along with my follow-up:
 

 "Curtis, in stark contrast, went to considerable lengths to hide his emotional 
duplicity."
 

 "To be a little more specific, if I may: Curtis pretended to be "comfortable" 
with who he was, as Barry puts it. But that was a carefully constructed facade, 
and it took very little in the way of chipping to expose the real Curtis 
underneath. "
 

 You went on to stalk Dr. Dumbass for what he had said about Curtis, and in 
that post added Robin to your list of stalkees for the day--Robin, who hadn't 
been here since early April.
 

 Did you think I wasn't going to provide the context you dishonestly left out? 
(And it was obviously deliberate dishonesty, folks, since he had actually 
looked up the posts in question.)
 

 If anybody would like to verify what I just wrote, let me know and I'll 
provide the URLs to the posts.
 

 As I said in a post a couple of days ago, Barry doesn't have the wherewithal 
to make an honest case. He'd have to refrain from stalking if he had to be 
honest, because he'd have nothing to say.
 

 > Stalking is just what you DO, Judy. Everyone here knows this but you.
 
 
 Says the Master Stalker of FFL.
 

 Your hypocrisy is unparalleled. It's stupefying. And that's giving you the 
benefit of the doubt, because if you really believe what you're saying, you're 
insane, completely out of touch with reality.
 

 Now, how do you explain your claim that I have "stalked you from forum to 
forum"?
 

 (See, Barry has switched definitions. Before, he meant "stalking" in the 
standard sense of following someone around, as in his claim above. But now he's 
using it as a synonym for "dumping on.")
 

 How about explaining the fact that you were "stalking" me on FFL before I even 
arrived here?
 

 I can find the URLs for those posts as well if anyone is interested.
 

 I swear to God, interacting with Barry is like being in a hall of funhouse 
mirrors. Everything he says is warped, twisted, turned inside-out and 
upside-down. And the older he becomes, the worse it gets. It's hard to imagine 
that he genuinely thinks anybody believes him, but it's even harder to 
understand why he would constantly spout such obviously dishonest crap if he 
didn't.
 

 Like I said once before and I still stand by it, "Barry is a freak of nature."
 

 I wrote to Buck:
 > I'll tell you: Because that's what Barry has said that I do, over and over. 
 > He claims I've "stalked him from forum to forum." That is factually untrue. 
 > Of the four forums we've been on together, one (alt.m.t) I joined before I 
 > had ever encountered him; two I joined before he did; and the fourth, FFL, 
 > he Invited me to join, along with other members of alt.m.t. 
 > 
 > So what does that make Barry, Buck? 
 > 
 > I could go on and on listing the things Barry has said about me (and others) 
 > that were simply factually false, and that he knows were false. Literally 
 > hundreds of things. 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Bhairitu]

I haven't seen but then I don't get cable anymore and it may trundle 
over to Hulu.  But I just finished up the 5 episode series "Line of 
Duty" with Lennie James on Hulu.  That was really great.  I've also 
started watching "Braquo" which you recommended which is on Hulu.


A film definitely not for many here is Paul Schrader's "The Canyons" 
with Lindsay Lohan.  Written by Brett Ellis ("American Psycho") it is a 
tale of a bunch of Hollywood folks and their interaction with a producer 
of a movie.  It also seems to be a metaphor for Hollywood itself.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2292959/

On 12/05/2013 07:53 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


I stumbled upon it the other day when looking for a photo of some
supposedly Atlantean priest, and out of curiosity downloaded the first
episode. I won't be watching the second.

It's GHASTLY HORRIBLE, seemingly written for 12-year-olds by people not
emotionally or intellectually much older who seem to think that if a
series is about exotic places and is full of people in costumes swinging
swords, it'll be as big a hit as "Game Of Thrones."

Truly disappointing. Worst UK TV production I've seen in years...

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: JR, Got Snowshoes?

[Bhairitu]

Probably not today though. ;-)

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Record-low-temps-hit-Bay-Area-5037740.php

Enjoying the new ice age?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/24/scientists-wonder-what-the-weakest-solar-cycle-in-50-years-means-for-eath/

Currently 34 degrees here.


On 12/01/2013 04:09 PM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote:


Still walking on the beach without a jacket - wouldn't mind rain, or 
snow, though.




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

According to the Weather Channel it's supposed to rain in the Bay Area
on Tuesday. AND temps are supposed to be in the high 20s overnight (at
least around here). That could lead to snow and funny thing is the
other night I had a dream about driving in SF in the snow (like Seattle
gets). That would be a real mess. Fortunately the Weather Channel's
forecasts aren't alway that good.

Much of the US is getting record low temperatures due to the flow of
arctic air. Even in the Bay Area we are getting some low over night
temps which means that we are getting 4 seasons in one day because it
can warm up by late morning. In fact I wore shorts and a t-shirt to the
waterfront park and skipped putting on a jacket.

In spite of warming up the parking on the street downtown was fairly
empty as was the farmer's market. Maybe buying food was the last thing
on folks mind after the Thursday gorge.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: JR, Got Snowshoes?

[emilymaenot]

Currently 24 degrees where I am.  Think I'll go try and start the car.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Jesuit Trained Pope Trashes Capitalism in Call for Worldwide Socialism

[Jason]

You don't understand. It's called the barbell strategy. You
create a system which has some positives and drawbacks. You
again create another reverse mirror image system. The two
systems balance each other out.

A 'socialistic political system' will balance out a
'capitalistic economic system'.

Political subsidies for political parties will ease the
pressure off the parties and prevent them from playing to
the gallery.  They will stop worrying about funds and start
focussing on real policies for growth.

It also prevents crony capitalism and promotes real
pro-market capitalism.


---   wrote:
>
> Re "At least, 3% of the total budget should be allocated to political
parties as subsidies.":
>
>
>  WTF! I don't want one cent of my money to go to a political party.
Let them pay for their own propaganda.
>  Extremist parties wouldn't arise if mainstream parties actually
pursued policies that were in the interests of the voters. How hard can
it be?
>
>
> > > ---   wrote:
> > >
> > > Re "Capitalist governments shouldn't be bailing anybody out . . .
If
> > > the government takes the risk out of the equation by offering a
bailout,
> > > any fool could run a business and risk everyone's investments in
it with
> > > no lessons learned.:"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Precisely my point. You can argue that we should move towards a
more
> > > Ayn Rand set-up and get governments off our backs. It's states
offering
> > > bailouts that has encouraged the banks to take idiotic risks.
> > >
> > >
> > > You could argue the opposite though - financial institutions
should
> > > come under more strenuous oversight from financial regulators with
the
> > > state limiting bonuses and having a veto on risky investments.
> > >
> > >
> >  > It's the current mixed-economy model that isn't fit for purpose.
> > > "Bankers socialism" pisses off everyone.
> > >
> > >
> > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> >
> > The 'capitalistic political system' is the greatest dogma of
> > the 20th century.
> >
> > The 'socialistic economic system' is the second greatest
> > dogma of the 20th century.
> >
> > A 'capitalistic political system' is tantamount to
> > 'corporate dictatorship'.
> >
> > Atleast, 3% percent of the total budget money should be
> > allocated to political parties as political subsidies.
> > These political subsidies should be distributed to parties
> > on vote proportion basis.  This will force political parties
> > to take a more centrist position and prevent extreme fringe
> > ideologies from arising.
> >

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Jesuit Trained Pope Trashes Capitalism in Call for Worldwide Socialism

[Share Long]

I think we got a barbell situation right here on FFL!





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 12:02 PM, Jason  wrote:
 
  

You don't understand. It's called the barbell strategy. You 
create a system which has some positives and drawbacks. You 
again create another reverse mirror image system. The two 
systems balance each other out.

A 'socialistic political system' will balance out a 
'capitalistic economic system'.

Political subsidies for political parties will ease the 
pressure off the parties and prevent them from playing to 
the gallery.  They will stop worrying about funds and start 
focussing on real policies for growth.

It also prevents crony capitalism and promotes real 
pro-market capitalism.


---   wrote:
>
> Re "At least, 3% of the total budget should be allocated to political parties 
> as subsidies.":
>  
> 
>  WTF! I don't want one cent of my money to go to a political party. Let them 
>pay for their own propaganda. 
>  Extremist parties wouldn't arise if mainstream parties actually pursued 
>policies that were in the interests of the voters. How hard can it be?
>
>
> > > ---   wrote:
> > > 
> > > Re "Capitalist governments shouldn't be bailing anybody out . . . If
> > > the government takes the risk out of the equation by offering a bailout,
> > > any fool could run a business and risk everyone's investments in it with
> > > no lessons learned.:"
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Precisely my point. You can argue that we should move towards a more
> > > Ayn Rand set-up and get governments off our backs. It's states offering
> > > bailouts that has encouraged the banks to take idiotic risks.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > You could argue the opposite though - financial institutions should
> > > come under more strenuous oversight from financial regulators with the
> > > state limiting bonuses and having a veto on risky investments.
> > > 
> > > 
> >  > It's the current mixed-economy model that isn't fit for purpose.
> > > "Bankers socialism" pisses off everyone.
> > > 
> > > 
> > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > 
> > The 'capitalistic political system' is the greatest dogma of
> > the 20th century.
> > 
> > The 'socialistic economic system' is the second greatest
> > dogma of the 20th century.
> >
> > A 'capitalistic political system' is tantamount to
> > 'corporate dictatorship'.
> > 
> > Atleast, 3% percent of the total budget money should be
> > allocated to political parties as political subsidies.
> > These political subsidies should be distributed to parties
> > on vote proportion basis.  This will force political parties
> > to take a more centrist position and prevent extreme fringe
> > ideologies from arising.
> > 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: JR, Got Snowshoes?

[Share Long]

18 degrees F in Fairfield. It was supposed to be 66 in Annapolis which I left 
yesterday. I must be bonkers (-:





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 11:23 AM, Bhairitu  wrote:
 
  
Probably not today though. ;-) 

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Record-low-temps-hit-Bay-Area-5037740.php

Enjoying the new ice age?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/24/scientists-wonder-what-the-weakest-solar-cycle-in-50-years-means-for-eath/

Currently 34 degrees here.


On 12/01/2013 04:09 PM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote:

  
>Still walking on the beach without a jacket - wouldn't mind rain, or snow, 
>though.  
>
>
>
>---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
>
>According to the Weather Channel it's supposed to rain in the Bay Area 
>on Tuesday. AND temps are supposed to be in the high 20s
overnight (at 
>least around here). That could lead to snow and funny
thing is the 
>other night I had a dream about driving in SF in the
snow (like Seattle 
>gets). That would be a real mess. Fortunately the
Weather Channel's 
>forecasts aren't alway that good.
>
>Much of the US is getting record low temperatures due to
the flow of 
>arctic air. Even in the Bay Area we are getting some low
over night 
>temps which means that we are getting 4 seasons in one
day because it 
>can warm up by late morning. In fact I wore shorts and a
t-shirt to the 
>waterfront park and skipped putting on a jacket.
>
>In spite of warming up the parking on the street
downtown was fairly 
>empty as was the farmer's market. Maybe buying food was
the last thing 
>on folks mind after the Thursday gorge.

[FairfieldLife] RE: What I Did Today

[sharelong60]

HI Steve, thanks for sharing a bit of your family celebration. Sounds yummy and 
wonderful. Is Number One son back to school? My godson nephew was home from his 
first semester of college. He seems to like it but I think he misses his 
girlfriend. His older brother is graduating in a couple of weeks and already 
has a job. Yep, everybody is getting older!

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Pretty Stunning

[Richard J. Williams]

The problem is that Barry and Judy are living in the past - Barry posted 
a challenge to Judy to come over here to continue their debate, which 
was for the most part a battle of egos. Where in the world did they get 
the idea that anyone over here cared what they say? Go figure.


I mean, it's not as if either one has posted very many enlightening 
messages to the group lately.


They're both pretty smart people and both are professionals working out 
of a home office. But, they both seem to have got stuck believing their 
own ideology - it seems like years since either one has changed much 
since 1995 - they're still posting the same old stuff, day in and day out.


The only difference I can see, is that if Judy is for it, then Barry is 
against it. Barry used to be a TM defender, but he's turned into an 
obsessive teaser of sorts and Judy seems to have turned into caviler, 
obsessed with minute details of relative truth telling.


On 12/5/2013 8:49 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
And this is obsession Bawwy. Take a break, go for a walk, eat some 
quinoa, read a biography on Jim Morrison. You'll feel much, much 
better. For a guy who shuns the ego and attachment you seem so 
terribly subjectively imprisoned somehow.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: What I Did Today

[sharelong60]

Richard, I don't think it's such a tough crowd once a newbie knows what to 
expect and has a strategy in place.
There's lots of good stuff on FFL, good humor, good knowledge, interesting 
info. Hey, thanks for info about latest Neo glitch. I thought it was my 
computer and or my Mom's network acting up. Go figure!

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Pretty Stunning

[Share Long]

Richard, I think turq posts a lot of very interesting stuff, especially when he 
has time and gets on a roll. Interesting that he was once pro TM. I enjoy when 
Judy makes up verbs. But she's gotten very repetitive of late. 

I predict that none of us will change. Best to proceed accordingly, enjoy what 
you can, leave the rest. I have a nice, little folder for posts I might read 
later (-:





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 12:25 PM, Richard J. Williams 
 wrote:
 
  
The problem is that Barry and Judy are living in the past - Barry posted a 
challenge to Judy to come over here to continue their debate, which was for the 
most part a battle of egos. Where in the world did they get the idea that 
anyone over here cared what they say? Go figure.

I mean, it's not as if either one has posted very many
  enlightening messages to the group lately. 

They're both pretty smart people and both are professionals
  working out of a home office. But, they both seem to have got
  stuck believing their own ideology - it seems like years since
  either one has changed much since 1995 - they're still posting the
  same old stuff, day in and day out. 

The only difference I can see, is that if Judy is for it, then
  Barry is against it. Barry used to be a TM defender, but he's
  turned into an obsessive teaser of sorts and Judy seems to have
  turned into caviler, obsessed with minute details of relative
  truth telling.

On 12/5/2013 8:49 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:

And this is obsession Bawwy. Take a break, go for a walk, eat some quinoa, read 
a biography on Jim Morrison. You'll feel much, much better. For a guy who shuns 
the ego and attachment you seem so terribly subjectively imprisoned somehow.

[FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[TurquoiseB]

Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's
future.

http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-2013\
0715
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[Richard J. Williams]

Thanks for the link, it's very interesting in its own right. But, I was 
never a big fan of Jim Morrison, but I like his baritone voice. The 
Doors were a pretty good band as far as rock music goes, and most of the 
Doors songs are pretty good. Jim was really screwed up in a lot of ways, 
fer sure. For the most part, I'm not into the personalities behind the 
masks - for example, John Lennon was a dickhead, in my opinion, but he 
was a damn good singer.


On 12/5/2013 9:12 AM, emilymae...@yahoo.com wrote:


Richard, here is just his voice without the band.  Lyrically, 
well...to each his own.



http://www.openculture.com/2013/08/the-lost-paris-tapes-preserves-jim-morrisons-final-poetry-recordings-from-1971.html

[FairfieldLife] Seeing the Future and the Past

[jr_esq]

The narrator in this video tells how.  In TM-speak, it comes down to awareness 
of one's thoughts at the finest level.  At the higher levels of consciousness, 
one can see and remember dreams more vividly.  It is through dreams, IMO, that 
past lives and future events are seen either in vivid images or symbols. 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WliXXJe6YZE 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WliXXJe6YZE
 
 

 MMY had been saying this when he was alive.  That is, most human beings are 
not aware of their unique potential.  He wanted to wake up humanity to the fact 
that everything in the universe is based in consciousness.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Seeing the Future and the Past

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> The narrator in this video tells how.  In TM-speak, it comes down to
awareness of one's thoughts at the finest level.  At the higher levels
of consciousness, one can see and remember dreams more vividly.  It is
through dreams, IMO, that past lives and future events are seen either
in vivid images or symbols.
>
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WliXXJe6YZE
>
>  MMY had been saying this when he was alive.  That is, most human
beings are not aware of their unique potential.  He wanted to wake up
humanity to the fact that everything in the universe is based in
consciousness.


And that consciousness costs money. Lots of money.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: JR, Got Snowshoes?

[jr_esq]

Hey ya'll,
 

 It's sunny out here in SF and is currently 45 degrees at 11:01 AM PST.  I'll 
go out for a walk later when it gets warmer.  Over and out.

Re: [FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[Bhairitu]

The future of the world unless the people rise up and take back the 
money that the ultra rich have stolen from us.  I was thinking on my 
walk: "what if those hackers who stole the passwords from places 
including Yahoo, had instead drained the rich of their funds and 
redistributed it to the poor?"  Mike would not approve however.


On 12/05/2013 10:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's 
future.


http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-20130715

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Bhairitu]

However if anyone else wants to check it out the first episode is 
available on the BBCAmerica.com web site.


On 12/05/2013 10:57 AM, waspaligap wrote:


Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.


But am very much enjoying this Spanish historical romp about Isabel 
1st and Ferdinand 2nd:


http://www.sky.com/tv/show/isabel


It's a Spanish produced historical fiction television series filmed in 
Spain, directed by Jordi Frades and produced for national broadcaster 
Televisión Española.



Can you get it?


In our household we are 16th century all-things-Tudor fans (save "The 
Tudors" LOL). Henry VIII's wife Catherine of Aragon was Isabel 1's 
daughter, so it gives a different perspective (relative to our neck of 
the woods).



Perhaps we need her ilk to be reborn: "She reorganized the 
governmental system, brought the crime rate to the lowest it had been 
in years, and unburdened the kingdom of the enormous debt her brother 
had left behind" [Wiki}



(Delivered under NEO sufferance & torture)

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: JR, Got Snowshoes?

[Bhairitu]

I got back from my morning walk about a half hour ago and had a lite 
breakfast.  Wuus! :-D


On 12/05/2013 11:02 AM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:


Hey ya'll,


It's sunny out here in SF and is currently 45 degrees at 11:01 AM PST. 
 I'll go out for a walk later when it gets warmer.  Over and out.

[FairfieldLife] RE: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[waspaligap]

Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.
 

 But am very much enjoying this Spanish historical romp about Isabel 1st and 
Ferdinand 2nd:
 http://www.sky.com/tv/show/isabel http://www.sky.com/tv/show/isabel

 

 It's a Spanish produced historical fiction television series filmed in Spain, 
directed by Jordi Frades and produced for national broadcaster Televisión 
Española.
 

 Can you get it?
 

 In our household we are 16th century all-things-Tudor fans (save "The Tudors" 
LOL). Henry VIII's wife Catherine of Aragon was Isabel 1's daughter, so it 
gives a different perspective (relative to our neck of the woods). 
 

 Perhaps we need her ilk to be reborn: "She reorganized the governmental 
system, brought the crime rate to the lowest it had been in years, and 
unburdened the kingdom of the enormous debt her brother had left behind" [Wiki}
 

 (Delivered under NEO sufferance & torture)
 

 

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, waspaligap  wrote:
>
> Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.

I wouldn't go that far. I quite enjoyed two previous BBC America series,
"Ripper Street" and "Copper." That's why I gave this one a shot.

>  But am very much enjoying this Spanish historical romp about Isabel
1st and Ferdinand 2nd:
>  http://www.sky.com/tv/show/isabel
>
>  It's a Spanish produced historical fiction television series filmed
in Spain, directed by Jordi Frades and produced for national broadcaster
Televisión Española.
>
>  Can you get it?

Argh. That's the sound of a foiled pirate. :-) I can find versions
in Castaellano and Catalan, but not English yet. I'll keep searching.
There is an amazing underground out there in the pirate 'verse that
specializes in providing subtitles in various languages to good movies
that are not yet available with them. Some of the translations are good,
some are not, but they're *there*. And you really can't complain about
the quality because the people who put them *there* did it for free, out
of a love for movies, and a sense of community. I'm currently watching
the second season of "Bron-Broen (The Bridge)," with pretty acceptable
pirate subtitles, because the official English version isn't out yet.

>  In our household we are 16th century all-things-Tudor fans (save "The
Tudors" LOL). Henry VIII's wife Catherine of Aragon was Isabel 1's
daughter, so it gives a different perspective (relative to our neck of
the woods).

It sounds great, and as you probably suspected, right up my alley.
Thanks for mentioning it...I will definitely track it down. Can't wait.

>  Perhaps we need her ilk to be reborn: "She reorganized the
governmental system, brought the crime rate to the lowest it had been in
years, and unburdened the kingdom of the enormous debt her brother had
left behind" [Wiki}

Indeed. Some of them old monarchs had them some style.

Up next in my TV queue after "Bron-Broen 2" is "Orange Is The New 
Black." I've been hearing good things about it from people I trust. It's
by the same people who created "Weeds."

>  (Delivered under NEO sufferance & torture)

My condolences, and appreciation for how readable it turned out. I've
still been spared from the Neobeast, both in France and in the
Netherlands. Go figure. Just good karma, I guess.  :-)

RE: [FairfieldLife] Global-Warming 'proof' is evaporating-sorry Rick.

[Rick Archer]

Ah, the New York Post. My favorite peer-reviewed scientific journal.

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of wgm4u
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 8:52 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Global-Warming 'proof' is evaporating-sorry Rick.

 

  


  
Global-warming ‘proof’ is evaporating


By   Michael Fumento

December 5, 2013 | 12:14am

 

  

 

Photo: HO

The 2013 hurricane season just ended as one of the five quietest years since 
1960. But don’t expect anyone who pointed to last year’s hurricanes as “proof” 
of the need to act against global warming to apologize; the warmists don’t work 
that way.

Warmist claims of a severe increase in hurricane activity go back to 2005 and 
Hurricane Katrina. The cover of Al Gore’s 2009 book, “Our Choice: A Plan to 
Solve the Climate Crisis,” even features a satellite image of the globe with 
four major hurricanes superimposed.

Yet the evidence to the contrary was there all along. Back in 2005 I and others 
reviewed the entire hurricane record, which goes back over a century, and found 
no increase of any kind. Yes, we sometimes get bad storms — but no more 
frequently now than in the past. The advocates simply ignored that evidence — 
then repeated their false claims after Hurricane Sandy last year.

And the media play along. For example, it somehow wasn’t front-page news that 
committed believers in man-made global warming recently admitted there’s been 
no surface global warming for well over a decade and maybe none for decades 
more. Nor did we see warmists conceding that their explanation is essentially a 
confession that the previous warming may not have been man-made at all.

That admission came in a new paper by prominent warmists in the peer-reviewed 
journal Climate Dynamics. They not only conceded that average global surface 
temperatures stopped warming a full 15 years ago, but that this “pause” could 
extend into the 2030s.

Mind you, the term “pause” is misleading in the extreme: Unless and until it 
resumes again, it’s just a “stop.” You don’t say a bullet-ridden body “paused” 
breathing.

Remarkably, that stoppage has practically been a state secret. Just five years 
ago, the head of the International Panel on Climate Change, the group most 
associated with “proving” that global warming is man-made and has horrific 
potential consequences, told Congress that Earth is running a “fever” that’s 
“apt to get much worse.” Yet he and IPCC knew the warming had stopped a decade 
earlier.

Those who pointed this out, including yours truly, were labeled “denialists.” 
Yet the IPCC itself finally admitted the “pause” in its latest report.

The single most damning aspect of the “pause” is that, because it has occurred 
when “greenhouse gases” have been pouring into the atmosphere at record levels, 
it shows at the very least that something natural is at play here. The warmists 
suggest that natural factors have “suppressed” the warming temporarily, but 
that’s just a guess: The fact is, they have nothing like the understanding of 
the climate that they claimed (and their many models that all showed future 
warming mean nothing, since they all used essentially the same false 
information).

If Ma Nature caused the “pause,” can’t this same lady be responsible for the 
warming observed earlier? You bet! Fact is, the earth was cooling and warming 
long before so-called GHGs could have been a factor. A warm spell ushered in 
the Viking Age, and many scientists believe recent warming was merely a 
recovery from what’s called “the Little Ice Age” that began around 1300.

Yet none of this unsettles the rush to kill debate. The Los Angeles Times has 
even announced that it will no longer print letters to the editor questioning 
man-made global warming. Had the Times been printing before Columbus, perhaps 
it would have banned letters saying the Earth was round.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration continues to push to reduce supposed 
global-warming emissions. Last month, the president even signed an executive 
order establishing a Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience that could 
dramatically expand government bureaucrats’ ability to restrict Americans’ use 
of their property, water and energy to reduce so-called “greenhouse gas 
emissions.”

Such attempted reductions in other countries have proved incredibly expensive, 
while barely reducing emissions. But damn the stubbornly weak economy, says 
President Obama, full speed ahead!

This, even as new data show that last year the US median wage hit its lowest 
level since 1998 and long-term unemployment is almost the highest ever.

People have a right to religious and cult beliefs within reason. But the 
warmists have been proved wrong time and a

[FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[TurquoiseB]

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, waspaligap  wrote:
>
> Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.

It was like watching "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure In Atlantis."

Characters named Jason and Pythagorus and Hercules. I was waiting for
So-crates to appear.  :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Share Long]

No females?! Now wonder it sank beneath the waves!





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 1:34 PM, TurquoiseB  wrote:
 
  
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, waspaligap  wrote:
>
> Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.

It was like watching "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure In Atlantis."

Characters named Jason and Pythagorus and Hercules. I was waiting for
So-crates to appear.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[waspaligap]

Barry wrote:
 >. I'm currently watching the second season of "Bron-Broen (The Bridge)," with 
 >pretty
 >  acceptable pirate subtitles, because the official English version isn't out 
 > yet.
 

 I most certainly *will* be looking forward to that. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Share Long]

Our library has The Tudors and as much as I like Rhys Meyers, I kind of creeped 
out by Henry VIII. However have thoroughly enjoyed Phillippa Gregory's novels 
about the various wives.





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 12:57 PM, waspaligap  
wrote:
 
  
Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.

But am very much enjoying this Spanish historical romp about Isabel 1st and 
Ferdinand 2nd:
http://www.sky.com/tv/show/isabel


It's a Spanish produced historical fiction television series filmed in Spain, 
directed by Jordi Frades and produced for national broadcaster Televisión 
Española.

Can you get it?

In our household we are 16th century all-things-Tudor fans (save "The Tudors" 
LOL). Henry VIII's wife Catherine of Aragon was Isabel 1's daughter, so it 
gives a different perspective (relative to our neck of the woods). 

Perhaps we need her ilk to be reborn: "She reorganized the governmental system, 
brought the crime rate to the 
lowest it had been in years, and unburdened the kingdom of the enormous 
debt her brother had left behind" [Wiki}

(Delivered under NEO sufferance & torture)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Bhairitu]

On 12/05/2013 11:16 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:



Up next in my TV queue after "Bron-Broen 2" is "Orange Is The New
Black." I've been hearing good things about it from people I trust. It's
by the same people who created "Weeds."



I watched maybe 6-8 episodes of "Orange Is the New Black" but that was 
back in the summer when I started having problems getting an HD stream 
out of Netflix which is no longer a problem now that I use Chromecast.  
I also thought Kenji was milking the storyline a bit much to deliver the 
number episodes Netflix wanted.  I still like the 6-8 episode model that 
foreign networks use.  Most US showrunners start creating filler 
episodes to get to 13.


Netflix also release a trailer for the second season of Lilyhammer.

Funny thing, after cutting the cable I have more to watch than I had 
before cutting it.

[FairfieldLife] Sigh...I'm leaving Paris just in time

[TurquoiseB]

Wistro, the cutely-named company that supplies "Free Wifi" to a number
of Paris cafes, has finally gotten hip. I don't blame them...it's a wise
thing to do from their point of view, because it doubles their sources
of income. But it's still a sad "sign of the times."

In Wistro-equipped cafes, you used to be able to log on with the
password your waiter gave you, look at a photo of the place you were
sitting in and possibly a short, written blurb about its charms, but
then you had free access to the Net for as long as you sat there.

Now when you log in they've found a way to force you to watch a short ad
video. Your Wifi isn't really connected until *after* you watch it.

Sigh. End of an era, for the cafes who went for Wistro, and weren't hip
enough to figure out how to do it themselves for cheaper. Now the Wistro
folks get to charge not only the cafes, but the advertisers.

But it works, and I can gripe about it on the Net, for free. Not such a
bad deal, really. And all I had to do was watch a commercial for some
product I don't remember while scantily-clad babes danced around
carrying bags of some candy I don't remember. I mainly tuned it out, and
it didn't really affect me at all.

H. I wonder if they sell Skittles here? I should ask my waiter.  :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[Richard Williams]

"Last night I dreamed of Detroit City."

We were in Detroit last year to visit Rita's sister - they are both from
Detroit, both born and grew up there. Rita's sister is an opera singer at
St. Marks. We flew out on Delta on a non-stop flight from San Antonio. For
me, it was like going to Mecca, since I'm an auto buff and love cars. We
spent six hours touring the Henry Ford Museum and the nearby Greenfield
Village. I also checked out several used car lots around town just to
compare prices with what's available down here. But, you have to watch out
for the rust on used cars up there.

[image: Inline image 1]

Heading for downtown in Chris' Acura Ti - GM building

To me it was fascinating to see the old Fisher body plant and the old
Chrysler factory. There are still some parts of Ford's River Rouge plant
there to see. Detroit is surrounded by the Great Lakes and there's a river
running right through town. It was fun driving on the Davidson Expressway,
the first freeway is the U.S. It was also a gas (no pun intended) seeing
Edsel Ford's mansion and what was left of the Dodge Mansion.

And, don't forget Tiger Stadium, the Detroit Pistons and the Detroit Lions!
Detroit is the only spot in the U.S.A. where you get to Canada by driving
south. Seagrams of Canada is just a few miles away across the Detroit
River. We say a huge, famous mural by Diego Rivera and Rodin's "Thinker" in
front of the Detroit Institute of Art. Go figure.

Which is not to say there's some very deserted and derelict places there
now. There's actually what they call a "doughnut" ring in Detroit -
downtown is still pretty nice, and the suburbs out past Ten Mile Road are
nice too - it's the double doughnut ring that has all the earmarks of
dereliction. It's really strange to see those old houses standing empty and
abandoned, while right around the corner in the Indian Village community,
there are well-kept mansions and nice stores.

[image: Inline image 2]

Abandoned office building in Detroit

Millionaires still live at Grosse Pointe out by the Yaght Club and they've
opened a Whole Foods Market downtown. Greek Town has a big Casino and hotel
complex now and there are three other large casinos in town too. There's a
great museum downtown and of course there's Wayne State U. downtown. We
drove by the old Motown recording studio. There is the new Ren-Cen downtown
where GM has it's headquarters. The Fox Theater is fully restored.

[image: Inline image 3]

Body by Fisher - old Fisher body headquarters

The problem with Detroit, other than the auto industry going overseas - is
the local government, or lack of it. The ex-Mayor is in jail now for
bribery and stuff. Detroit didn't get diverse, business wise, like some
other cities, and now they're paying the price.

We are going back there next year to take part in the Woodward Avenue
"Dream Cruise" classic car parade that they have there every year. Sweet!


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:40 PM, TurquoiseB  wrote:

>
>
> Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's
> future.
>
>
> http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-20130715
>
>
>  
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Bhairitu]

The 1961 movie "Atlantis, the Lost Continent" was a warning about 
technology going out of control. I don't know if that is the tract this 
version will go down.


On 12/05/2013 11:36 AM, Share Long wrote:

No females?! Now wonder it sank beneath the waves!



On Thursday, December 5, 2013 1:34 PM, TurquoiseB 
 wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, waspaligap wrote:
>
> Spot on. Awful! I can hardly watch anything BBC these days.

It was like watching "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure In Atlantis."

Characters named Jason and Pythagorus and Hercules. I was waiting for
So-crates to appear. :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[Richard Williams]

They don't call you the commie prophet of doom for nothing!


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Bhairitu  wrote:

>
>
> The future of the world unless the people rise up and take back the money
> that the ultra rich have stolen from us.  I was thinking on my walk: "what
> if those hackers who stole the passwords from places including Yahoo, had
> instead drained the rich of their funds and redistributed it to the poor?"
> Mike would not approve however.
>
>
> On 12/05/2013 10:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
>
>
> Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's
> future.
>
>
> http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-20130715
>
>
>
>  
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[Toby Walker]

Oh this is great! lol!


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:49 AM,  wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk. Nothing new here;
> move along, folks.
>
>
> I wrote:
>
> > Buck, reflect a minute. What makes you think I "stalk"?
>
>
> Barry replied:
>
>
> > You mean, other than the fact that you're doing it right now?  :-)
>
>
> > When you go out of your way to write a post dumping on the person you've
> been dumping on consistently for nearly twenty years, about whom you've
> written literally thousands of posts dumping on him, you're stalking.
>
>
> You mean, the way you've gone out of your way to write posts dumping on me
> and have done relentlessly for nearly twenty years over thousands of posts,
> and are doing right now? That's what you mean by "stalking," what you've
> been spending most of your time on the Web doing to me and many others ever
> since I've known you?
>
>
> > Get over your self-delusions, honey...you're a stalker.
>
>
> Well, that's an interesting definition. Trouble is, it applies to you far
> more than it does to me. You da talker-in-chief, sweet cheeks.
>
>
> I didn't "go out of my way" to write the post, BTW. As you know, I was
> responding to Buck.
>
>
> If I'm a "stalker" according to your new definition, at least I'm an
> honest stalker. You are a viciously malicious, profoundly and consistently
> dishonest stalker. That was (as you know) my point to Buck. We'll see a
> demonstration in the very next paragraphs:
>
>
> > You even stalked Curtis recently when one of your former minions said he
> liked him, and he hasn't been here since August:
>
>
> You mean, after Dr. Dumbass responded to one of your long dump-on-Judy
> rants that fawned over Curtis? In which he said he liked Curtis but found
> him "emotionally duplicitous," and I agreed? Because that's the post of
> mine you're quoting, along with my follow-up:
>
>
> "Curtis, in stark contrast, went to considerable lengths to hide his
> emotional duplicity."
>
>
> "To be a little more specific, if I may: Curtis pretended to be
> "comfortable" with who he was, as Barry puts it. But that was a carefully
> constructed facade, and it took very little in the way of chipping to
> expose the real Curtis underneath. "
>
>
> *You went on to stalk Dr. Dumbass for what he had said about Curtis, and
> in that post added Robin to your list of stalkees for the day--Robin, who
> hadn't been here since early April.*
>
>
> *Did you think I wasn't going to provide the context you dishonestly left
> out? (And it was obviously deliberate dishonesty, folks, since he had
> actually looked up the posts in question.)*
>
>
> *If anybody would like to verify what I just wrote, let me know and I'll
> provide the URLs to the posts.*
>
>
> *As I said in a post a couple of days ago, Barry doesn't have the
> wherewithal to make an honest case. He'd have to refrain from stalking if
> he had to be honest, because he'd have nothing to say.*
>
>
> > Stalking is just what you DO, Judy. Everyone here knows this but you.
>
>
> *Says the Master Stalker of FFL.*
>
>
> *Your hypocrisy is unparalleled. It's stupefying. And that's giving you
> the benefit of the doubt, because if you really believe what you're saying,
> you're insane, completely out of touch with reality.*
>
>
> *Now, how do you explain your claim that I have "stalked you from forum to
> forum"?*
>
>
> *(See, Barry has switched definitions. Before, he meant "stalking" in the
> standard sense of following someone around, as in his claim above. But now
> he's using it as a synonym for "dumping on.")*
>
>
> *How about explaining the fact that you were "stalking" me on FFL before I
> even arrived here?*
>
>
> *I can find the URLs for those posts as well if anyone is interested.*
>
>
> *I swear to God, interacting with Barry is like being in a hall of
> funhouse mirrors. Everything he says is warped, twisted, turned inside-out
> and upside-down. And the older he becomes, the worse it gets. It's hard to
> imagine that he genuinely thinks anybody believes him, but it's even harder
> to understand why he would constantly spout such obviously dishonest crap
> if he didn't.*
>
>
>  Like I said once before and I still stand by it, "Barry is a freak of
> nature."
>
>
> *I wrote to Buck:*
>
> > I'll tell you: Because that's what Barry has said that I do, over and
> over. He claims I've "stalked him from forum to forum." That is factually
> untrue. Of the four forums we've been on together, one (alt.m.t) I joined
> before I had ever encountered him; two I joined before he did; and the
> fourth, FFL, he Invited me to join, along with other members of alt.m.t.
>
> >
>
> > So what does that make Barry, Buck?
>
> >
>
> > I could go on and on listing the things Barry has said about me (and
> others) that were simply factually false, and that he knows were false.
> Literally hundreds of things.
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Seeing the Future and the Past

[jr_esq]

Barry,
 

 It goes to show knowledge and information are valuable.  At this time, 
scientists are getting paid big time through government grants to come up with 
the correct theory of how the universe began and to find the higher spacial 
dimensions in multi-million dollar machines like the Large Hadron Collider in 
Switzerland.
 

 IMO, little do they know that the human brain is the best machine to prove 
that everything is based in consciousness.  IOW, MMY was a scientist and a guru 
who was trying to prove that the space-time continuum is based in 
consciousness.  Thus, he came up with TM's yogic flying program to support his 
theory.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BTW, don't bother with BBC America's Atlantis

[Share Long]

It seems that all *great* civilizations are doomed to collapse. Maybe the 
Chinese will be the exception to that!





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 1:56 PM, Bhairitu  wrote:
 
  
The 1961 movie "Atlantis, the Lost Continent" was a warning about technology 
going out of control.   I don't know if that is the tract this version will go 
down.  

On 12/05/2013 11:36 AM, Share Long wrote:

  
>No females?! Now wonder it sank beneath the waves!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Thursday, December 5, 2013 1:34 PM, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> 
>  
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, waspaligap wrote:
>>
>> Spot on. Awful! I can hardly
  watch anything BBC these days.
>
>It was like watching "Bill and Ted's
  Excellent Adventure In Atlantis."
>
>Characters named Jason and Pythagorus
  and Hercules. I was waiting for
>So-crates to appear. :-)
>
>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Seeing the Future and the Past

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  jr-esq wrote:
>
> Barry,
>
>  It goes to show knowledge and information are valuable.  At this
time, scientists are getting paid big time through government grants to
come up with the correct theory of how the universe began and to find
the higher spacial dimensions in multi-million dollar machines like the
Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland.
>
>  IMO, little do they know that the human brain is the best machine to
prove that everything is based in consciousness.  IOW, MMY was a
scientist and a guru who was trying to prove that the space-time
continuum is based in consciousness.  Thus, he came up with TM's yogic
flying program to support his theory.


That would also make him the first scientist who managed to charge
people a million dollars just to be part of his inner circle. And to
have people pay it.  :-)

Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] The Rent is Too Damn High!

[Richard Williams]

In September our water bill was $90; so we cut back; then in October the
bill was $40.

[image: Inline image 1]

We tried to use less water by:

1. Only doing full loads of wash using cold water once a week.
2. Filling the sink with water for dish washing, instead of leaving the
water running.
3. Taking quick showers and low tub fills for bathing.
4. Stopped watering the front lawn and half of the back yard.

Then, the November water bill came in at $110. This is just outrageous!!!

Who are you going to call? So, I called the San Antonio Water System (SAWS)
to complain, to no avail. The water company is a monopoly! One guy's bill
was over $500 for one month, and he was out of town for ten days. Go
figure. They found a leak at his place - in the concrete foundation pipe!

So, I've started to monitor the water meter. Do they actually read those
meters, or is it just a guestimate?

The rent is too damned high!

[image: Inline image 2]


On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Richard Williams wrote:

> The rent is too damn high!
>
> Now we're going to have to pay higher taxes in order to get heath
> insurance. You can't keep your plan or your doctor and you can't sign up at
> the exchange. And now I'm finding out  there's a marriage penalty.It's just
> outrageous!
>
> The rent is too damn high!
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:26 PM,  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Not only has it already been passed long since, it's survived a Supreme
>> Court challenge. The Republicans--a minority of the most
>> conservative--aren't trying to keep it from passing, they're trying to get
>> it repealed, defunded. It's just insane. That's why the government is shut
>> down and why the debt limit increase is in jeopardy, threatening default.
>> This small group of House members is holding the country hostage.
>>
>>
>> Once Obamacare is fully in effect, unless things go badly wrong somehow,
>> a lot of people will change their tune. Folks are bellyaching, generally
>> speaking, because they're either misinformed (by the Republicans) or
>> uninformed.
>>
>>
>> Somebody took a poll the other day asking people if they approved of
>> Obamacare; then asking them if they approved of the Affordable Care Act. A
>> sizeable percentage approved of the latter but not the former. In fact,
>> Obamacare IS the Affordable Care Act. Just different ways of referring to
>> the same exact thing.
>>
>>
>> The new government Web site where people can find out about and apply for
>> Obamacare has been mobbed the past few days. That's the good news. The bad
>> news is that it wasn't prepared for such a huge onslaught and has been
>> malfunctioning rather seriously. You just want to tear your hair out.
>>
>>
>> Ann wrote:
>> I gotta tell you I do not, for the life of me, understand why Americans
>> are belly aching about a new health care set up in the US. Nothing could be
>> any more expensive and out of reach for the average American than it is
>> now. I think if the damn thing ever passes all this fear-mongering and
>> whining will prove unjustified. Christ, I hear some people are even afraid
>> the US will become a (gasp) socialistic society as a result. I've got news
>> for you guys, you already are.
>>
>>  
>>
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Sigh...I'm leaving Paris just in time

[Bhairitu]

What bugs me is sometime you get a 30 second ad on a 20 second video 
clip with no skip.  The news outlets are doing this.  And it's all 
things I have absolutely no interest in.


Watching an episode of a TV series on Hulu I got the same ad every break 
for a pharmaceutical for arthritis that was 60 seconds long that had a 
15 second endorsement by a golf pro and 35 seconds of warnings for use.  
Who the hell would want to take that?  Hulu for the moment only has one 
or two ads depending on what you are watching.  Their movies have none 
(except for web only).  Some of the ads are nothing more than PSAs which 
are often no longer than 15 seconds.  Tolerable but I bet that at some 
time in the future more advertisers will jump on board and those will 
expand to 2-3 minutes breaks. Ugh!


When I am at Starbucks I need to remember to turn off wifi on my Android 
phone because it wants to use Starbucks wifi.  However my phone data 
account is just as good at those locations and more secure.  Downtown 
there is the also the choice of Starbucks wifi or free city wifi.


Someone said the other day that France is reliving 1788.

On 12/05/2013 11:52 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Wistro, the cutely-named company that supplies "Free Wifi" to a number
of Paris cafes, has finally gotten hip. I don't blame them...it's a wise
thing to do from their point of view, because it doubles their sources
of income. But it's still a sad "sign of the times."

In Wistro-equipped cafes, you used to be able to log on with the
password your waiter gave you, look at a photo of the place you were
sitting in and possibly a short, written blurb about its charms, but
then you had free access to the Net for as long as you sat there.

Now when you log in they've found a way to force you to watch a short ad
video. Your Wifi isn't really connected until *after* you watch it.

Sigh. End of an era, for the cafes who went for Wistro, and weren't hip
enough to figure out how to do it themselves for cheaper. Now the Wistro
folks get to charge not only the cafes, but the advertisers.

But it works, and I can gripe about it on the Net, for free. Not such a
bad deal, really. And all I had to do was watch a commercial for some
product I don't remember while scantily-clad babes danced around
carrying bags of some candy I don't remember. I mainly tuned it out, and
it didn't really affect me at all.

H. I wonder if they sell Skittles here? I should ask my waiter. :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[Share Long]

Thanks for the interesting post and fun photos, Richard. The Detroit airport is 
wonderful too.





On Thursday, December 5, 2013 2:02 PM, Richard Williams  
wrote:
 
  
"Last night I dreamed of Detroit City."

We were in Detroit last year to visit Rita's sister - they are both from 
Detroit, both born and grew up there. Rita's sister is an opera singer at St. 
Marks. We flew out on Delta on a non-stop flight from San Antonio. For me, it 
was like going to Mecca, since I'm an auto buff and love cars. We spent six 
hours touring the Henry Ford Museum and the nearby Greenfield Village. I also 
checked out several used car lots around town just to compare prices with 
what's available down here. But, you have to watch out for the rust on used 
cars up there.


Heading for downtown in Chris' Acura Ti - GM building

To me it was fascinating to see the old Fisher body plant and the old Chrysler 
factory. There are still some parts of Ford's River Rouge plant there to see. 
Detroit is surrounded by the Great Lakes and there's a river running right 
through town. It was fun driving on the Davidson Expressway, the first freeway 
is the U.S. It was also a gas (no pun intended) seeing Edsel Ford's mansion and 
what was left of the Dodge Mansion.

And, don't forget Tiger Stadium, the Detroit Pistons and the Detroit Lions! 
Detroit is the only spot in the U.S.A. where you get to Canada by driving 
south. Seagrams of Canada is just a few miles away across the Detroit River. We 
say a huge, famous mural by Diego Rivera and Rodin's "Thinker" in front of the 
Detroit Institute of Art. Go figure.

Which is not to say there's some very deserted and derelict places there now. 
There's actually what they call a "doughnut" ring in Detroit - downtown is 
still pretty nice, and the suburbs out past Ten Mile Road are nice too - it's 
the double doughnut ring that has all the earmarks of dereliction. It's really 
strange to see those old houses standing empty and abandoned, while right 
around the corner in the Indian Village community, there are well-kept mansions 
and nice stores.



Abandoned office building in Detroit

Millionaires still live at Grosse Pointe out by the Yaght Club and they've 
opened a Whole Foods Market downtown. Greek Town has a big Casino and hotel 
complex now and there are three other large casinos in town too. There's a 
great museum downtown and of course there's Wayne State U. downtown. We drove 
by the old Motown recording studio. There is the new Ren-Cen downtown where GM 
has it's headquarters. The Fox Theater is fully restored.



Body by Fisher - old Fisher body headquarters

The problem with Detroit, other than the auto industry going overseas - is the 
local government, or lack of it. The ex-Mayor is in jail now for bribery and 
stuff. Detroit didn't get diverse, business wise, like some other cities, and 
now they're paying the price. 

We are going back there next year to take part in the Woodward Avenue "Dream 
Cruise" classic car parade that they have there every year. Sweet!



On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:40 PM, TurquoiseB  wrote:

 
>  
>Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's future.
>
>http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-20130715
> 
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[Richard J. Williams]

You idiot - you're using Yahoo and Android which are owned by 
millionaires. Go figure.


On 12/5/2013 1:07 PM, Bhairitu wrote:


The future of the world unless the people rise up and take back the 
money that the ultra rich have stolen from us.  I was thinking on my 
walk: "what if those hackers who stole the passwords from places 
including Yahoo, had instead drained the rich of their funds and 
redistributed it to the poor?"  Mike would not approve however.


On 12/05/2013 10:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's 
future.


http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-20130715

Re: [FairfieldLife] An American Pompeii

[Bhairitu]

Doesn't mean we should kiss their asses or give them all our money.  
These days when you walk into a bank you get held up, from the other 
side of the teller's cage.


On 12/05/2013 12:30 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:


You idiot - you're using Yahoo and Android which are owned by 
millionaires. Go figure.


On 12/5/2013 1:07 PM, Bhairitu wrote:


The future of the world unless the people rise up and take back the 
money that the ultra rich have stolen from us.  I was thinking on my 
walk: "what if those hackers who stole the passwords from places 
including Yahoo, had instead drained the rich of their funds and 
redistributed it to the poor?"  Mike would not approve however.


On 12/05/2013 10:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Spooky photos of Detroit's present, and possibly much of the world's 
future.


http://www.weather.com/travel/modern-ruins-abandoned-detroit-photos-20130715

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[s3raphita]

Re "All I can feel is Jim's darkness and twistedness":
 

 I suspect it's possible for both men and women to be *too* good-looking. Jim 
did look like a Greek Adonis and pride comes before a fall. 
 William S Burroughs was one of those who always found the death of Jim from a 
heroin overdose very suspect. Pamela Courson, Morrison’s long-time girlfriend, 
who found him dead had some pretty dodgy "friends" and wasn't the most reliable 
witness to his last hours being a smack-head and all-round degenerate herself.
 

 Re "John Lennon was a dickhead, in my opinion":
 

 I think he was more naive, maybe. And boy, was he naive.
 

 This site has artists' impressions of what dead rock stars would look like if 
they'd made it though to the present day (includes Lennon and Morrison).:
 

 http://tinyurl.com/m87y2xc http://tinyurl.com/m87y2xc

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

The artist impression of Jim Morrison has him looking like Kenny Rogers, IMO.  

[FairfieldLife] Are The Americans Nuts ?

[nablusoss1008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA

[FairfieldLife] Post Count Fri 06-Dec-13 00:15:05 UTC

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): 11/30/13 00:00:00
End Date (UTC): 12/07/13 00:00:00
789 messages as of (UTC) 12/05/13 23:57:28

124 authfriend
105 Richard J. Williams 
 66 awoelflebater
 65 emilymaenot
 47 Share Long 
 42 TurquoiseB 
 38 s3raphita
 37 Bhairitu 
 35 dhamiltony2k5
 35 Richard Williams 
 27 jr_esq
 22 feste37 
 22 emptybill
 19 salyavin808 
 14 doctordumbass
 13 Mike Dixon 
 11 wgm4u 
 11 sharelong60
 10 cardemaister
  7 steve.sundur
  6 yifuxero
  5 anartaxius
  5 Toby Walker 
  5 Michael Jackson 
  4 Jason 
  3 Rick Archer 
  2 waspaligap 
  2 merudanda 
  1 nablusoss1008 
  1 martin.quickman
  1 dmevans365
  1 bhairitu 
  1 Paul Simdars 
  1 FairfieldLife
  1 Dick Mays 
Posters: 35
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 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[Richard J. Williams]

Are you the famous Toby Walker?

On 12/5/2013 2:08 PM, Toby Walker wrote:

Oh this is great! lol!


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:49 AM, > wrote:





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

See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk. Nothing new
here; move along, folks.


I wrote:

> Buck, reflect a minute. What makes you think I "stalk"?


Barry replied:


> You mean, other than the fact that you're doing it right now?  :-)


> When you go out of your way to write a post dumping on the
person you've been dumping on consistently for nearly twenty
years, about whom you've written literally thousands of posts
dumping on him, you're stalking.


You mean, the way you've gone out of your way to write posts
dumping on me and have done relentlessly for nearly twenty years
over thousands of posts, and are doing right now? That's what you
mean by "stalking," what you've been spending most of your time on
the Web doing to me and many others ever since I've known you?


> Get over your self-delusions, honey...you're a stalker.


Well, that's an interesting definition. Trouble is, it applies to
you far more than it does to me. You da talker-in-chief, sweet cheeks.


I didn't "go out of my way" to write the post, BTW. As you know, I
was responding to Buck.


If I'm a "stalker" according to your new definition, at least I'm
an honest stalker. You are a viciously malicious, profoundly and
consistently dishonest stalker. That was (as you know) my point to
Buck. We'll see a demonstration in the very next paragraphs:


> You even stalked Curtis recently when one of your former minions
said he liked him, and he hasn't been here since August:


You mean, after Dr. Dumbass responded to one of your long
dump-on-Judy rants that fawned over Curtis? In which he said he
liked Curtis but found him "emotionally duplicitous," and I
agreed? Because that's the post of mine you're quoting, along with
my follow-up:


"Curtis, in stark contrast, went to considerable lengths to hide
his emotional duplicity."


"To be a little more specific, if I may: Curtis pretended to be
"comfortable" with who he was, as Barry puts it. But that was a
carefully constructed facade, and it took very little in the way
of chipping to expose the real Curtis underneath. "


*You went on to stalk Dr. Dumbass for what he had said about
Curtis, and in that post added Robin to your list of stalkees for
the day--Robin, who hadn't been here since early April.*

*
*

*Did you think I wasn't going to provide the context you
dishonestly left out? (And it was obviously deliberate dishonesty,
folks, since he had actually looked up the posts in question.)*

*
*

*If anybody would like to verify what I just wrote, let me know
and I'll provide the URLs to the posts.*

*
*

*As I said in a post a couple of days ago, Barry doesn't have the
wherewithal to make an honest case. He'd have to refrain from
stalking if he had to be honest, because he'd have nothing to say.*


> Stalking is just what you DO, Judy. Everyone here knows this but
you.


*Says the Master Stalker of FFL.*

*
*

*Your hypocrisy is unparalleled. It's stupefying. And that's
giving you the benefit of the doubt, because if you really believe
what you're saying, you're insane, completely out of touch with
reality.*

*
*

*Now, how do you explain your claim that I have "stalked you from
forum to forum"?*

*
*

*(See, Barry has switched definitions. Before, he meant "stalking"
in the standard sense of following someone around, as in his claim
above. But now he's using it as a synonym for "dumping on.")*

*
*

*How about explaining the fact that you were "stalking" me on FFL
before I even arrived here?*

*
*

*I can find the URLs for those posts as well if anyone is interested.*

*
*

*I swear to God, interacting with Barry is like being in a hall of
funhouse mirrors. Everything he says is warped, twisted, turned
inside-out and upside-down. And the older he becomes, the worse it
gets. It's hard to imagine that he genuinely thinks anybody
believes him, but it's even harder to understand why he would
constantly spout such obviously dishonest crap if he didn't.*

*
*

Like I said once before and I still stand by it, "Barry is a freak
of nature."

*
*

*I wrote to Buck:*

> I'll tell you: Because that's what Barry has said that I do,
over and over. He claims I've "stalked him from forum to forum."
That is factually untrue. Of the four forums we've been on
together, one (alt.m.t) I joined before I had ever encountered
him; two I joined before

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[s3raphita]

I reckon that if Jim had lived he would have turned to writing and film and 
left music to the up-and-coming generation. He did experiment with poetry and 
film studies.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS-af9Q-zvQ 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS-af9Q-zvQ

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!

[Share Long]

Thanks, Richard, wonderful tape. A little pure knowledge goes a long way, 
that's for sure. Takes me back to 1991-92 school year when I was doing the MA 
in SCI at MIU. I especially like when Maharishi comments that every person has 
so many points of love, so many areas of happiness. 





On Wednesday, December 4, 2013 8:24 PM, Richard J. Williams 
 wrote:
 
  
This has got to be the most spot-on lecture MMY ever gave! I was there at Jones 
Hall and it was just absolutely amazing - you could have heard a pin drop in 
that hall and everyone was hanging on his every word; the audience was 
spell-bound with the whole scene. I have this lecture on VHS tape and have 
watched it numerous times over the years. Incredible lecture!

A must see for every TMer:

'Maharishi - A Promise for the Family of Man'
Historic Lecture at Jones Hall, Houston, TX
http://youtu.be/k3swI5n_mW0 



On 12/4/2013 7:20 PM, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com wrote:

  
>Thanks,
that is wonderful to hear again [the Youtube clip in your post]. I honor how 
'on message' he was throughout his life. Teaching. He gave a lecture very like 
this one of 1972 even within a few months of his death. Remarkably on message. 
He was a remarkable sat guru, guru on the roadways of the world. Of Life in the 
body a promise for the family of humankind.  
>I miss him,  
>-Buck  
>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

Yes, I always liked this one. According to the description, it was inspired by 
this song:  "Ghost Riders in the Sky".
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o5Xw7PR2O0   
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o5Xw7PR2O0 

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[s3raphita]

Re "[Jim] was an alcoholic/drug addict and he died of it.":

 

 The puzzling question is why? Most people "lead lives of quiet desperation and 
go to the grave with the song still in them". We dream of having it all - 
critical and popular acclaim; devoted, attractive lovers; money no problem; . . 
.  Alas we don't make the grade - but we do cling to the dream. And, after all, 
we just *might* win the lottery; have cosmetic surgery; discover our own genius 
. . .
 

 Could it be the case that people who *do* make it discover that it's not what 
it's cracked up to be and so is not fulfilling? They realise with crystal-clear 
clarity that we've all been hoodwinked into chasing a chimera. Perhaps those 
who reach that point then have no other option but to reach for the bottle and 
the syringe to escape the emptiness that gnaws at their soul.
 

 And what's the root cause? Surely the point is that we are looking for 
something that will gratify the self. But the self doesn't exist! It's an 
illusion. What doesn't exist obviously can't be gratified hence the escalating 
desperation of our hedonistic culture.
 

 

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: The Vivid and Present Threat of Hooliganism on Fairfield Life.

[Toby Walker]

maybe?


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:

>
>
> Are you the famous Toby Walker?
>
>
> On 12/5/2013 2:08 PM, Toby Walker wrote:
>
>
> Oh this is great! lol!
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:49 AM,  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>>
>>   See Barry. See Barry stalk Judy. Stalk, stalk, stalk. Nothing new
>> here; move along, folks.
>>
>>
>>  I wrote:
>>
>> > Buck, reflect a minute. What makes you think I "stalk"?
>>
>>
>>  Barry replied:
>>
>>
>>   > You mean, other than the fact that you're doing it right now?  :-)
>>
>>
>>  > When you go out of your way to write a post dumping on the person
>> you've been dumping on consistently for nearly twenty years, about whom
>> you've written literally thousands of posts dumping on him, you're stalking.
>>
>>
>>  You mean, the way you've gone out of your way to write posts dumping on
>> me and have done relentlessly for nearly twenty years over thousands of
>> posts, and are doing right now? That's what you mean by "stalking," what
>> you've been spending most of your time on the Web doing to me and many
>> others ever since I've known you?
>>
>>
>>   > Get over your self-delusions, honey...you're a stalker.
>>
>>
>>  Well, that's an interesting definition. Trouble is, it applies to you
>> far more than it does to me. You da talker-in-chief, sweet cheeks.
>>
>>
>>  I didn't "go out of my way" to write the post, BTW. As you know, I was
>> responding to Buck.
>>
>>
>>  If I'm a "stalker" according to your new definition, at least I'm an
>> honest stalker. You are a viciously malicious, profoundly and consistently
>> dishonest stalker. That was (as you know) my point to Buck. We'll see a
>> demonstration in the very next paragraphs:
>>
>>
>>   > You even stalked Curtis recently when one of your former minions
>> said he liked him, and he hasn't been here since August:
>>
>>
>>  You mean, after Dr. Dumbass responded to one of your long dump-on-Judy
>> rants that fawned over Curtis? In which he said he liked Curtis but found
>> him "emotionally duplicitous," and I agreed? Because that's the post of
>> mine you're quoting, along with my follow-up:
>>
>>
>>  "Curtis, in stark contrast, went to considerable lengths to hide his
>> emotional duplicity."
>>
>>
>>  "To be a little more specific, if I may: Curtis pretended to be
>> "comfortable" with who he was, as Barry puts it. But that was a carefully
>> constructed facade, and it took very little in the way of chipping to
>> expose the real Curtis underneath. "
>>
>>
>>  *You went on to stalk Dr. Dumbass for what he had said about Curtis,
>> and in that post added Robin to your list of stalkees for the day--Robin,
>> who hadn't been here since early April.*
>>
>>
>>  *Did you think I wasn't going to provide the context you dishonestly
>> left out? (And it was obviously deliberate dishonesty, folks, since he had
>> actually looked up the posts in question.)*
>>
>>
>>  *If anybody would like to verify what I just wrote, let me know and
>> I'll provide the URLs to the posts.*
>>
>>
>>  *As I said in a post a couple of days ago, Barry doesn't have the
>> wherewithal to make an honest case. He'd have to refrain from stalking if
>> he had to be honest, because he'd have nothing to say.*
>>
>>
>>   > Stalking is just what you DO, Judy. Everyone here knows this but you.
>>
>>
>>  *Says the Master Stalker of FFL.*
>>
>>
>>  *Your hypocrisy is unparalleled. It's stupefying. And that's giving you
>> the benefit of the doubt, because if you really believe what you're saying,
>> you're insane, completely out of touch with reality.*
>>
>>
>>  *Now, how do you explain your claim that I have "stalked you from forum
>> to forum"?*
>>
>>
>>  *(See, Barry has switched definitions. Before, he meant "stalking" in
>> the standard sense of following someone around, as in his claim above. But
>> now he's using it as a synonym for "dumping on.")*
>>
>>
>>  *How about explaining the fact that you were "stalking" me on FFL
>> before I even arrived here?*
>>
>>
>>  *I can find the URLs for those posts as well if anyone is interested.*
>>
>>
>>  *I swear to God, interacting with Barry is like being in a hall of
>> funhouse mirrors. Everything he says is warped, twisted, turned inside-out
>> and upside-down. And the older he becomes, the worse it gets. It's hard to
>> imagine that he genuinely thinks anybody believes him, but it's even harder
>> to understand why he would constantly spout such obviously dishonest crap
>> if he didn't.*
>>
>>
>>   Like I said once before and I still stand by it, "Barry is a freak of
>> nature."
>>
>>
>>  *I wrote to Buck:*
>>
>> > I'll tell you: Because that's what Barry has said that I do, over and
>> over. He claims I've "stalked him from forum to forum." That is factually
>> untrue. Of the four forums we've been on together, one (alt.m.t) I joined
>> before I had ever encountered him; two I joined before he did; and the
>> fourth, FFL, he Invited me to joi

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

Addiction is addiction is addiction.  It doesn't respond to the word "why", 
does it?  At least not if you believe it has a genetic component. I don't know 
that all people lives lives of "quiet desperation."  I have never dreamed of 
having it all.  I did work to achieve the "American dream" for my kids and 
probably to prove I could do it and "make the grade" on some level, but I care 
nothing for that now.  I have wanted to win the lottery, but keep forgetting to 
buy tickets. Smile.  I think many who achieve fame.  I don't think most people 
reach for the bottle or syringe to escape, unless they are alcoholics, of 
course.  If they are feeling an emptiness, perhaps they might work installing 
well's in Africa or something, or with youth, or get involved with their church 
serving up meals to homeless people, etc., etc., etc.  I'm not sure how you are 
defining the self, but I exist to me.  

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[s3raphita]

No one responded to my post about The Paris Sisters' version of Dream Lover. I 
claimed there was something almost perverted about the Phil Spector production 
- love *sickness* as pathology. Underground film-maker Kenneth Anger clearly 
agreed as he used it for a 3-minute clip Kustom Kar Kommandos. (Part of the 
reason could be that, being English, such music has an "exotic"appeal to me 
that you Yanks might not register. Another reason could be that I like the 
Decadent movement.)

 

 Here's another song that mines the same territory: April Stevens and Nino 
Tempo's Deep Purple. (Note how the production is clearly influenced by Phil 
Spector.)
 

 When the deep purple falls 
 over sleepy garden walls 
 And the stars begin to twinkle in the night 
 In the mist of a memory 
 you wander back to me 
 Breathing my name with a sigh

 

 The song has a long history and is a typical lament in which a man or woman 
recalls a lover from the past. Previous versions are suitably sentimental. When 
April Stevens and Nino Tempo first tried recording the song as a demo, Tempo 
forgot the words, and Stevens spoke the lyrics to remind him. The producers 
thought Stevens' spoken contribution was "cute" and should be included on the 
finished product. That gave their version a unique angle. But what really 
strikes me is that when April speaks she sounds almost ecstatically happy. It's 
almost as though she *prefers* her nocturnal memories to the past reality of a 
warm-blooded man. It's positively necrophiliac.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkVqCS64joo 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkVqCS64joo

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

Whoops, I forgot to include the end of a sentence - I was interrupted while 
trying to write this.  Corrected below along with the grammar. unless it 
disappears.  And, I have to figure out how to post back without losing the 
thing I'm replying to.  Maybe by interleaving/interweaving comments.
 

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

 Addiction is addiction is addiction.  It doesn't respond to the word "why", 
does it?  At least not if you believe it has a genetic component. I don't know 
that all people lead lives of "quiet desperation."  I have never dreamed of 
having it all.  I did work to achieve the "American dream" for my kids and 
probably to prove I could do it and "make the grade" on some level, but I care 
nothing for that now.  I have wanted to win the lottery, but keep forgetting to 
buy tickets. Smile.  Actors who achieve fame sacrifice their privacy, or pay 
heavily to keep it, and, for me, that would be too big a price to pay. I like 
to walk around anonymously. I don't think most people reach for the bottle or 
syringe to escape, unless they are alcoholics, of course.  If they are feeling 
an emptiness, perhaps they might work installing wells in Africa or something, 
or with youth, or get involved with their church serving up meals to homeless 
people, etc., etc., etc.  I'm not sure how you are defining the self, but I 
exist to me.  

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[s3raphita]

A ghoulish footnote: April Stevens and Nino Tempo's Deep Purple was Number 1 in 
the charts when President Kennedy was assassinated 50 years ago.

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[s3raphita]

Re "Actors who achieve fame sacrifice their privacy . . . for me, that would be 
too big a price to pay. I like to walk around anonymously.":
 

 Emily - we are twin souls. I'd hate not being able to wander around a 
bookstore lazily browsing the latest titles without having everyone whispering 
to each other: "Good Lord! That's Seraphita isn't it?" That really is my idea 
of hell.
 

 Re "I'm not sure how you are defining the self, but I exist to me.":
 

 You poor deluded child. 

 

 

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

 

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

 Re "Actors who achieve fame sacrifice their privacy . . . for me, that would 
be too big a price to pay. I like to walk around anonymously.":
 

 Emily - we are twin souls. I'd hate not being able to wander around a 
bookstore lazily browsing the latest titles without having everyone whispering 
to each other: "Good Lord! That's Seraphita isn't it?" That really is my idea 
of hell.
 

 Re "I'm not sure how you are defining the self, but I exist to me.":
 

 You poor deluded child. 

 

 Yes, I just don't understand that concept when talking about the *reality* of 
life here on planet earth.  My soul lives in a body. There is an "I", I 
identify with. My body lives in a house.  My house has a mortgage.  I have 
children.  It feels kind of real to me; there is illusion associated with my 
mind and how it perceives things and perhaps, in the larger picture, it is all 
an illusion, but that has no bearing on my day to day existence.  
 

 

[FairfieldLife] Inside China: Nuclear submarines capable of widespread attack on U.S.

[emptybill]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/inside-china-nuclear-submarines-capable-of-widespr/?page=1
 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/inside-china-nuclear-submarines-capable-of-widespr/?page=1
 

 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/inside-china-nuclear-submarines-capable-of-widespr/?page=1

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

Re: "But what really strikes me is that when April speaks she sounds almost 
ecstatically happy. It's almost as though she *prefers* her nocturnal memories 
to the past reality of a warm-blooded man. It's positively necrophiliac."
 

 Seraphita, have you ever thought of writing reviews?  Or maybe you do?  This 
is quite creative.  

[FairfieldLife] RE: 100 Great Rock Artists

[emilymaenot]

Testing
 

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

 No one responded to my post about The Paris Sisters' version of Dream Lover.
 

  I claimed there was something almost perverted about the Phil Spector 
production - love *sickness* as pathology. Underground film-maker Kenneth Anger 
clearly agreed as he used it for a 3-minute clip Kustom Kar Kommandos. (Part of 
the reason could be that, being English, such music has an "exotic"appeal to me 
that you Yanks might not register. Another reason could be that I like the 
Decadent movement.)

 

 Here's another song that mines the same territory: April Stevens and Nino 
Tempo's Deep Purple. (Note how the production is clearly influenced by Phil 
Spector.)
 

 When the deep purple falls 
 over sleepy garden walls 
 And the stars begin to twinkle in the night 
 In the mist of a memory 
 you wander back to me 
 Breathing my name with a sigh

 

 The song has a long history and is a typical lament in which a man or woman 
recalls a lover from the past. Previous versions are suitably sentimental. When 
April Stevens and Nino Tempo first tried recording the song as a demo, Tempo 
forgot the words, and Stevens spoke the lyrics to remind him. The producers 
thought Stevens' spoken contribution was "cute" and should be included on the 
finished product. That gave their version a unique angle. But what really 
strikes me is that when April speaks she sounds almost ecstatically happy. It's 
almost as though she *prefers* her nocturnal memories to the past reality of a 
warm-blooded man. It's positively necrophiliac.
 

 Seraphita, have you ever thought of writing reviews?  Or maybe you do?  This 
is quite creative.  And morbid. :)  

 


 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkVqCS64joo 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkVqCS64joo

[FairfieldLife] RE: "sweet truth" a fundamental misunderstanding

[dhamiltony2k5]

May be Yahoo could adapt this in to their yahoo-groups guidelines:
 satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving way
priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a pleasant way
esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law 
 


 Paul, you may appreciate the dissonances in the TM Saha Nav hymn too. 
Cardmeister worked that over in translation too. See these, 
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/342542 
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/342542 
  
 this link to the Saha Nav post by Cardemaister fra Finland about the more 
proper translation of the TM Saha Nav 
hymn:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302944 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302944  
 
 

 
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 
 This verse is from the Manu Smriti (4.138):
 
 Original translation:
 
 satyaM brUyAt priyaM brUyAt   speak the truth, speak sweetly
 na brUyAt satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth that is unpleasant
 priyaM ca nAnRRitaM brUyAt   don't speak untruth that is pleasant
 eSha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||  this is the eternal law
 
 the Literal translation is:
 
 truth speak, lovingly speak
 don't speak truth unloving
 lovingly untruth don't speak
 this is law eternal
 
 My "enhanced" translation"
 
 satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
 na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving way
 priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a pleasant way
 esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law
 
 I'm certain that the shloka is talking about how to speak the truth not the 
quality of the truth itself.  That is, it's not the truth that is to be sweet 
or not, truth is truth.. but it is HOW you say it that is the rule.
 
 the key word you in the first three lines is "priyam"
 this is derived from the word "prem" which means love, so I feel it is 
appropriate to translate "priyam" as "lovingly", although "sweetly", 
"pleasantly" are not far off.
 
 But I have to emphasize that this shloka doesn't not say that one should, 
under any circumstances, not tell the truth, but it is guiding one to say the 
truth in a pleasant way.  The truth must be told ("satyam eva jayate" truth 
alone triumphs)
 
 "ca" means "and" (used very differently in Sanskrit than English / not a 
connective word)
 "ritam" is another word for "truth"
 "nan" negation "no" or "not"
 "bruyat" means "speak" or "say"
 
 priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak a pleasant untruth
 
 The word "ca" echoes the repetitive logic from earlier line (meaning "don't")
 "nanritam" means "untrurth"
 
 "priyam" is used here to describe a way of speaking, not nature of the truth.
 Therefore it should mean "lovingly"
 
 
 The reason I think this is a fundamental issue is that people may feel that 
you should never tell someone something they don't want to hear.  But that is 
not what it says.  You can tell your friend that he didn't win the election or 
you can rub his nose in it and call him a loser.  The fact (or truth) is the 
same but the way you say it is different.
 
 If you only tell people what they want to hear, you create "bubble mentality". 
 People will live in a bubble they create because they only want to hear what 
they want to hear.  That is NOT speaking the sweet truth as defined in the Manu 
Smriti.
 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: "sweet truth" a fundamental misunderstanding

[dhamiltony2k5]

This “Speak the Sweet-truth” thing is real interesting to look back at. Like 
the bending in our TM translation and repeating of the Saha Nav hymn to a 
cultural end. Cardmeister worked that over a while ago here. It was kind of 
shocking seeing the translation then to discover a manipulation in what was a 
scriptural hymn. Seems to explain a lot about the old culture of TM inside. 
That culture now seems to be changing as TM gets run more openly by committee 
processes based more practically on merit and less by an authoritarianism in 
theocratic feelings about people and things. In watching it seems the Prime 
Minister of the Global Country is still proly the most powerful authoritarian 
left of the old guard. Saha Nav, -Buck
 


 May be Yahoo could adapt this in to their yahoo-groups guidelines:
 satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving way
priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a pleasant way
esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law 
 


 Paul, you may appreciate the dissonances in the TM Saha Nav hymn too. 
Cardmeister worked that over in translation too. See these, 
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/342542 
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/342542 
  
 this link to the Saha Nav post by Cardemaister fra Finland about the more 
proper translation of the TM Saha Nav 
hymn:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302944 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302944  
 
 

 
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 
 This verse is from the Manu Smriti (4.138):
 
 Original translation:
 
 satyaM brUyAt priyaM brUyAt   speak the truth, speak sweetly
 na brUyAt satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth that is unpleasant
 priyaM ca nAnRRitaM brUyAt   don't speak untruth that is pleasant
 eSha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||  this is the eternal law
 
 the Literal translation is:
 
 truth speak, lovingly speak
 don't speak truth unloving
 lovingly untruth don't speak
 this is law eternal
 
 My "enhanced" translation"
 
 satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
 na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving way
 priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a pleasant way
 esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law
 
 I'm certain that the shloka is talking about how to speak the truth not the 
quality of the truth itself.  That is, it's not the truth that is to be sweet 
or not, truth is truth.. but it is HOW you say it that is the rule.
 
 the key word you in the first three lines is "priyam"
 this is derived from the word "prem" which means love, so I feel it is 
appropriate to translate "priyam" as "lovingly", although "sweetly", 
"pleasantly" are not far off.
 
 But I have to emphasize that this shloka doesn't not say that one should, 
under any circumstances, not tell the truth, but it is guiding one to say the 
truth in a pleasant way.  The truth must be told ("satyam eva jayate" truth 
alone triumphs)
 
 "ca" means "and" (used very differently in Sanskrit than English / not a 
connective word)
 "ritam" is another word for "truth"
 "nan" negation "no" or "not"
 "bruyat" means "speak" or "say"
 
 priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak a pleasant untruth
 
 The word "ca" echoes the repetitive logic from earlier line (meaning "don't")
 "nanritam" means "untrurth"
 
 "priyam" is used here to describe a way of speaking, not nature of the truth.
 Therefore it should mean "lovingly"
 
 
 The reason I think this is a fundamental issue is that people may feel that 
you should never tell someone something they don't want to hear.  But that is 
not what it says.  You can tell your friend that he didn't win the election or 
you can rub his nose in it and call him a loser.  The fact (or truth) is the 
same but the way you say it is different.
 
 If you only tell people what they want to hear, you create "bubble mentality". 
 People will live in a bubble they create because they only want to hear what 
they want to hear.  That is NOT speaking the sweet truth as defined in the Manu 
Smriti.
 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!

[Michael Jackson]

I know that there is still the mind set that no matter what M may have done 
that wasn't ethical, the effect of TM and TMSP is so good and so powerful, it 
is best to ignore or rationalize that the negative or dark side of M and the 
Movement is outweighed by the vast positive benefit to the individual and the 
world.

I know there is that mind set but I don't agree with it. I do not see any 
evidence the group practice of TMSP is having any kind of effect of offsetting 
the "negative" energy around the world. If you take the current state of the 
world as evidence of Marshy effect then it is clear the Marshy Effect is either 
non-existent or a colossal failure. 

I have come to feel that TM itself seems to work well for a couple years and 
then for some reason the positive benefits seem to fade away. I mean even old 
timers like Rick don't just strictly do TM - they do other stuff. If TM is so 
fabulous, people would not step away from it.

There have been too many suicides, too many mental breakdowns and too many high 
ups in the Movement whose behavior is the opposite of what you would expect 
from folks practicing daily the royal technique for enlightenment. That last is 
of great importance to me. I don't feel you can make the grandiose claims for a 
mental technique and have the actual results be totally off base or totally 
different than what is promised and still legitimately believe the technique 
will do what is claimed for it.

When the people who have been doing TMSP the longest behave in the arrogant, 
elitist, unethical manner I have seen in people like Hagelin, Morris, Greg 
Wilson, Susan Humphries, Chris Crowell, Neal Patterson, Bill Sands, Reed Martin 
and so on and so forth I see that the TMSP has had the OPPOSITE effect on their 
behavior that it should have had. 

So while I admire your desire to change the world, it won't change through 
folks doing TM and TMSP - if it was going to do so, it would already have done 
it. 

The state to the world today is a testament to Marshy's monumental failure to 
make significant changes in world consciousness through his programs. Of 
course, I believe his real program was to make himself into a demigod in 
people's minds, make tons of money for himself and his family and get laid a 
whole bunch while he was still young enough to enjoy it, so he actually did 
have the effect he wanted to have, it just wasn't the effect he promoted in 
public.

On Thu, 12/5/13, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com  wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Thursday, December 5, 2013, 3:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   MJ,
 did you miss that this was a spiritual revival movement in a
 muddy
 world filled with vasana?  I feel you are being too hard on
 how he
 did it and what all we did.  Like, was Christ perfect
 in everything?  Never stubbed his toe?  We could
 surely use some help changing
 the world to a better place.  Give up this negativistic POV
 and come
 back to meditation with us.  -Buck
  
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 wrote:
 
 it is a great
 lecture, no question - too bad he was such a liar and scam
 artist and by the way, the state of the world today and the
 behavior of a vast majority of the world's population is
 proof positive that one of his core tenants and that which
 he bases much of his "proof" that meditation is so
 valid, i.e. that "the nature of the mind is to go to a
 field of greater happiness" is patently absurd and not
 true.
 
 
 
  On Thu, 12/5/13, Richard J.
 Williams 
 wrote:
 
 
 
  Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Go Out and Radiate!
 
  To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
  Date: Thursday, December 5, 2013, 2:24 AM
 
  
 
  
 
 
  This has got to
 
  be the most spot-on
 
lecture MMY ever gave! I was there at Jones Hall and
 
  it was just
 
absolutely amazing - you could have heard a pin drop
 
  in that hall
 
and everyone was hanging on his every word; the
 
  audience was
 
spell-bound with the whole scene. I have this
 lecture
 
  on VHS tape
 
and have watched it numerous times over the years.
 
  Incredible
 
lecture!
 
  
 

 
  
 
A must see for every TMer:
 
  
 

 
  
 
'Maharishi - A Promise for the Family of
 Man'
 
  
 
Historic Lecture at Jones Hall, Houston, TX
 
  
 
http://youtu.be/k3swI5n_mW0
 

 
  
 
 
  
 
On 12/4/2013 7:20 PM, Buck
 
  wrote:
 
 

 
  Thanks,
 
  that
 
is wonderful to hear again [the
 
  Youtube clip in
 
your post]. I honor how 'on
 
  message' he was
 
throughout his life. Teaching. He
 gave
 
  a lecture
 
very like this one
 
of 197

[FairfieldLife] RE: What I Did Today

[steve.sundur]

Yes, number one son in the midst of his junior year, trying to get his bearings 
to some extent.  But this year he has had to take on a job to help meet his 
living expenses.  I think, that was part of the problem last year - too much 
time on his hands.  
  
 Wife and number two son are in Milwaukee right now visiting some colleges.  He 
was not accepted into Madison, but there are other colleges in the area he is 
considering.  Not that he would have gone to Madison.  There were many other 
considerations, not the least of which was financial and the large size of the 
university.
  
 But about those lobster tails.  I had been wanting lobster tails for about the 
last five years, (at least), but never could bring myself to shell out the 
cheddar for them.  But on Saturday, I had it in my mind that was what I was 
going to get.  As I was going through the menu, and seeing the ultra high 
prices on things, I said to myself, (before I got to the lobster tails), that 
as long as they were in the $40.00 range, I would get them.  Well, turns out 
they were $50.00 and some odd cents, and I got them anyway, and thoroughly 
enjoyed them.
  
 But you know what's bad?  Now I want them again!  So much for impressions.  
  
 Cold and snowy here!