[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, scienceofabundance no_re...@... wrote: [snip] To get a visual of the ruling class in the TM organization currently, have a look at this YouTube video uploaded in January 10, 2010: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw Having been closely involved with the TM organization for 15 years, I see many similarities in the way it attempts to present itself as normal and the reality behind the scenes. The video clip reveals an incredibly embarrassing clownish display of disconnected-from-the-practical-realities-of-human-life cartoonish buffoons babbling loads of meaningless horseshit. SOA
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
TurquoiseB: ...the TM belief system involves paying little brown boys to chant to gods Not all Hindus have 'brown skin', Turq. Most Hindus are Caucasian just like you. It's sad to see somone of your education spouting racist statements like that, just so you can win a debate on an internet discussion forum.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: TurquoiseB: ...the TM belief system involves paying little brown boys to chant to gods Not all Hindus have 'brown skin', Turq. Most Hindus are Caucasian just like you. You've made this point many times here Richard and sometimes to me. But although you are genetically correct in our common lineage for the Indians who migrated into India from farther West, Turq's visual description is accurate. I was in North India where they have the lightest skin and I can assure you I didn't see a single person who had European light skin. There melanin changed in their migration. Nat Geo did a fascinating genetic background show which brought out some fascinating details of how ridiculous our current race thoery is. They grouped people according to their genes and it often came out that some people with very dark skin had more genetically in common with people with very light skin. We are all African. But we have traveled far. Some of us acquired very light skin to allow us to live in lands with less sun. But the people of India are brown skinned in comparison. That is not racist, it is a visual fact. It's sad to see somone of your education spouting racist statements like that, just so you can win a debate on an internet discussion forum.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
...the TM belief system involves paying little brown boys to chant to gods Not all Hindus have 'brown skin', Turq. Most Hindus are Caucasian just like you. snip But the people of India are brown skinned in comparison. That is not racist, it is a visual fact... The skin color of the boys isn't relevant to a belief system, Curtis, and Turq would probably agree. If it was relevant, what would that make you and Turq? We all have belief systems, but it's not because of the color of your skin.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfr...@... wrote: Today's NY Times has a very fascinating article on Scientology. Read it carefully and ask yourself if any of this reminds you of the time you spent at or near the power center of the TMO. I didn't know they had Ideal Cities. What if a Vedic City and a Scientology Ideal City were next to each other and had an issue they didn't agree on. Would a holy wara jihad, start?? Of course. But the big question is...who would win? The Scientologists would be going around putting live rattlesnakes in the mailboxes of the Vedic City houses and the VC folks would probably never notice because they'd be so busy repeating the buzzphrase invincible that they'd space out forget to check the mail. :-) All in all I'd be bettin' on the Scientologists to win because their belief system involves doing their own dirty work whereas the TM belief system involves paying little brown boys to chant to gods who are then supposed to arrange the hit against their enemies in exchange for chanting, rice, ghee, and lots of cash. Given a real-life person wielding a heavy hardback copy of Dianetics as a deadly weapon vs. a made-up mythical being wielding an equally made-up, mythical weapon, I'm gonna have go with the guy with the heavy book as the odds-on favorite.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfreak@ wrote: Today's NY Times has a very fascinating article on Scientology. Read it carefully and ask yourself if any of this reminds you of the time you spent at or near the power center of the TMO. I didn't know they had Ideal Cities. What if a Vedic City and a Scientology Ideal City were next to each other and had an issue they didn't agree on. Would a holy wara jihad, start?? Of course. But the big question is...who would win? The Scientologists would be going around putting live rattlesnakes in the mailboxes of the Vedic City houses and the VC folks would probably never notice because they'd be so busy repeating the buzzphrase invincible that they'd space out forget to check the mail. :-) All in all I'd be bettin' on the Scientologists to win because their belief system involves doing their own dirty work whereas the TM belief system involves paying little brown boys to chant to gods who are then supposed to arrange the hit against their enemies in exchange for chanting, rice, ghee, and lots of cash. Given a real-life person wielding a heavy hardback copy of Dianetics as a deadly weapon vs. a made-up mythical being wielding an equally made-up, mythical weapon, I'm gonna have go with the guy with the heavy book as the odds-on favorite. Even if the war came down to a battle of the celebrity spokespersons, as it might because TMers are fond of war myths in which having one famous guy like Krishna on your side makes all the difference, I'm gonna go with the Scientologists. I mean, who are the TMer's going to trot out on their side? Paul McCartney? David Lynch? Clint is almost 80, so what's he going to do...sneer at the enemy? Heather Graham could flash the enemy and distract them, but for how long? Compare and contrast to John Travolta and Tom Cruise, both of whom have kicked major butt on the silver screen and look fit enough to do a little of it in real life. And Kirstie Alley takes a lot of shit for packin' on the pounds, but I'd bet that heft would come in handy when swinging a heavy weapon. She'd take out Heather in a heartbeat. If the war came down to a battle of the champions, meaning the real leaders of the orgs in question as opposed to their celebrity mouthpieces, I still think Scientology has the edge. David Miscavige vs. King Tony? Give me a break. Miscavige has a history of physically beating people up who disagree with him, and Da King can't even speak harshly to anyone who disagrees with him, because he's not allowed to speak. What's King Tony gonna do...silence Miscavige by making pranam gestures at him? Even if the leaders were able to choose a voiceover person to do all their talking (and in this case, fighting) for them, King Tony has only Raja Hagelin to speak for him and Scientology has Nancy Cartwright, the voice of Bart Simpson. Hagelin vs. Bart Simpson? No contest. Hagelin would try to talk some shit about quantum mechanics and Bart would say Eat my shorts. And if King Tony chose Bevan instead of Hagelin as his stand-in, Bart could just look at him and say, Don't have a cow, man...or eat another one, as it appears you already did at lunch.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
Dear Geez, responding to this as a conservative meditator I don't git the similarity. Theirs (scientology) is based on a gizmo and TM is self-evident scientific experiential. Their auditing is the gizmo and therapy, TM's is simply checking meditation, which is experiential. TM's got nothing like the gizmo audit of scientology. Only thing close to the gizmo audit is when meditators would apply to TM course administrators to go on TM organization courses. Yeah, the TM movement keeps files. Okay, the file-making is similar. Okay, the administrators bare a resemblance. The architecture too. But compare the peer-review science. Scientology don't hold a candle compared to TM. You been checked? If you can't see the spiritual difference with Scientology, may be you should go get your meditation checked. A good old fashioned group meditation at a Peace Palace just might serve in place of an individual checking. It might be real good for you to come back and meditate in a group. Have that experience again. You live in California? The silent group meditations at the SRF facilities are open to sit in with. That could be a good substitute for TM Peace Palace meditations that way if for some reason you can't find your way in to a TM Peace Palace. JGD, -Buck in FF --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfr...@... wrote: Today's NY Times has a very fascinating article on Scientology. Read it carefully and ask yourself if any of this reminds you of the time you spent at or near the power center of the TMO. I didn't know they had Ideal Cities. What if a Vedic City and a Scientology Ideal City were next to each other and had an issue they didn't agree on. Would a holy wara jihad, start?? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/us/07scientology.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Scientology article in todays NY Times.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony...@... wrote: Dear Geez, responding to this as a conservative meditator I don't git the similarity. Here is a reasonable comment on the NYT Scientology article that a reader meant. One cannot comment on everything in one comment, but I think this commenter makes a good point: Comment #239 at time of writing: _ Anyone remember the transcendental meditation organization which reached its greatest popularity in the United States in the mid-1970's? [Numbers starting TM dropped precipitously around 1977-78 and never recovered.] Instruction in TM begins with a free introductory talk, and the general publicity was TM releases stress and is practiced twice per day for 20 minutes and does not involve any belief or change in beliefs. Recall this sentence from the article: Scientology is an esoteric religion in which the faith is revealed gradually to those who invest their time and money to master Mr. Hubbard's teachings. Scientologists believe that human beings are impeded by negative memories from past lives, and that by applying Mr. Hubbard's technology, they can reach a state known as clear. How the transcendental meditation organization really operates can best be described by replacing a few words in the above description: Transcendental meditation is an esoteric religion in which the faith is revealed gradually to those who invest their time and money to master Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's teachings. People who choose TM as their religion (something that no-one intricately involved in TM would ever say - religion is a no-no word in the TM organization) believe that human beings are impeded by negative memories from past lives, and that by applying Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's technology, they can reach a state known as enlightenment. To get a visual of the ruling class in the TM organization currently, have a look at this YouTube video uploaded in January 10, 2010: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw Having been closely involved with the TM organization for 15 years, I see many similarities in the way it attempts to present itself as normal and the reality behind the scenes. SOA
