Incompetent? A victim of his surroundings? That's absurd, Andries
Re: Re: Unfinished indeed -- you never answered me -- Andries	Top of thread		Forum

Posted by: Jim ® 02/21/2005, 14:28:31 Author Profile Edit Alert Moderators

But in the case of Maharaji I still think there is a chance that he is not a disgusting charlatan but merely incompetent or a victim of his surroundings. You've seen Rawat's obvious disinformation campaign denying his past and trying to characterize anyone who'd expose it as uncredible for all sorts of reasons.  You've seen how clearly destructive and oppressive he was in the past through all sorts of things he said and did then.  You've seen how he's carefully manipulated all this subterfuge to amass a great fortune without ever once owning up to anything he's ever done. And you have the audacity to suggest that maybe he was just "incompetent" or, funnier still, a "victim of his surroundings"?!

Previous

Recommend Current page

Next

Replies to this message

Re: Incompetent? A victim of his surroundings? That's absurd, Andries --- Andries ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 14:46:53 ) ( 1016 bytes ) +1 Andries, what the hell is wrong with you? --- Jim ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:05:47 ) ( 1602 bytes ) +1 Re: Andries, what the hell is wrong with you? --- Andries ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:37:06 ) ( 310 bytes ) +1 What stupid stuff are you saying NOW, Andries? --- Jim ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 16:55:35 ) ( 656 bytes ) +3 Re: Andries' stuff is not stupid! --- paddy ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 22:26:43 ) ( 717 bytes ) Re: Let's make a fund for Maharaji enabling him to quit --- Andries ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 02:35:22 ) ( 455 bytes ) +2 Uh, excuse me, Andries -- but I think that we already did! --- Jim ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:25:13 ) ( 44 bytes ) The appalling truth is... --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:36:10 ) ( 185 bytes ) He did say a breakthrough sentence James. --- bill ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:00:29 ) ( 177 bytes ) +1 I think Andries qualifies as an expremie now! --- bill ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:08:07 ) ( 479 bytes ) +1 Is that a joke Bill? --- Bunny ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 04:30:11 ) ( 552 bytes ) +2 Re: Is that a joke Bill? --- Cynthia ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 05:16:16 ) ( 3415 bytes ) +1 He is an ---ex lover-- of a guru ! .......an ex- premie ! --- bill ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 09:05:53 ) ( 1031 bytes ) +2 Make that --sanfording-- (no text) --- bill ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 09:09:30 ) ( 0 bytes ) Re: He is an ---ex lover-- of a guru ! .......an ex- premie ! --- Cynthia ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 12:22:05 ) ( 337 bytes ) Re: Why do you think I edit those guru and cult articles in Wikipedia? --- Andries ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 06:27:14 ) ( 321 bytes ) +1 I did think you cared Andries --- Bunny ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 07:08:25 ) ( 763 bytes ) Incompetent? A victim of his surroundings? Devil's Advocate --- NikW ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:00:48 ) ( 851 bytes ) +2 Re: Incompetent? A victim of his surroundings? Devil's Advocate --- Andries ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:05:15 ) ( 116 bytes ) +3 What?!?!! --- Cynthia ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:20:52 ) ( 1260 bytes ) +2 Re: What?!?!! okay, okay Cynthia I am sorry and wrong --- Andries ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:25:18 ) ( 75 bytes ) +1 Re: What?!?!! okay, okay Cynthia I am sorry and wrong --- Cynthia ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:26:48 ) ( 166 bytes ) Re: Cynthia what is the DECA project? (it is not in EPO's glossary) (no text) --- Andries ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:40:35 ) ( 0 bytes ) +1 Re: Cynthia what is the DECA project? (it is not in EPO's glossary) --- Cynthia ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 16:13:32 ) ( 1072 bytes ) Maharaji is responsible for this actions --- Mike Finch ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:53:08 ) ( 1692 bytes ) +1 Re: Maharaji is responsible for this actions --- paddy ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 22:35:41 ) ( 404 bytes ) +1 Satpal --- Mike Finch ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 03:12:52 ) ( 718 bytes ) +1 Re; "Never Deviated" --- Joe ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 13:31:22 ) ( 544 bytes ) +2 M quitting as satguru? I don't think so --- Mike Finch ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:29:05 ) ( 1147 bytes ) +2 Yes, that's what I would have bet on -- mercurial, grossly inconsistent --- Jim ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:44:18 ) ( 248 bytes ) Fear that Mata Ji was Right --- Joe ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:50:29 ) ( 940 bytes ) I know about 2 "deviations".... --- la-ex ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 16:52:48 ) ( 1254 bytes ) +1 Disfunctional co-dependancy or conspirital collusion? --- Bunny ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 05:44:57 ) ( 861 bytes ) +1 Spot on, Goddess (no text) --- Neville B ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 11:31:39 ) ( 0 bytes ) Andries, Prem Rawat IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL PILOT! --- Cynthia ( Fri, Feb 25, 2005, 05:40:21 ) ( 1153 bytes ) They're not 'outsiders' in that sense when they've seen the evidence --- Jim ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:08:41 ) ( 220 bytes ) +1 Re: Hitler was not forced to be the leader and partially crazy unlike Rawat --- Andries ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 15:46:35 ) ( 383 bytes ) +5 I think Rawat believes his delusions --- JHB ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 16:37:02 ) ( 696 bytes ) What is this "black and white thinking" you keep dissing? --- Jim ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 16:46:11 ) ( 138 bytes ) Ludicrous. Hitler was a Corrupt Politician, Rawat's a Corrupt Businessman --- Jonathan ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 17:08:28 ) ( 949 bytes ) +1 Re: Ludicrous. Hitler was a Corrupt Politician, Rawat's a Corrupt Businessman --- Songster ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 22:09:24 ) ( 860 bytes ) Hi, Andries --- Neville B ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 17:28:13 ) ( 690 bytes ) +3 Hi, Neville --- Jonathan ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 17:40:47 ) ( 476 bytes ) +3 Re: Hi,Jonathan --- Cynthia ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 18:21:53 ) ( 208 bytes ) Hi, Jonathan --- Neville B ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 18:39:53 ) ( 445 bytes ) +1 Hi, Cynthia & Neville! --- Jonathan ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 20:34:01 ) ( 1870 bytes ) link +1 Two interesting questions about M --- Mike Finch ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 02:54:42 ) ( 2781 bytes ) +3 Re: Two interesting questions about M --- NikW ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 04:52:42 ) ( 769 bytes ) Very Eloquent Response, Mike. It's a BEST OF! --- Jonathan ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:15:28 ) ( 501 bytes ) Re: Two interesting questions about M --- paddy ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 13:51:05 ) ( 1526 bytes ) +1 Maharaji's inner feelings --- Mike Finch ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:57:57 ) ( 1184 bytes ) +2 Re: Maharaji's inner feelings --- Cynthia ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 15:38:56 ) ( 364 bytes ) Isn't that expulsion into the true l;ight? (no text) --- paddy ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 00:33:13 ) ( 0 bytes ) Re: Hi, Neville --- Andries ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 03:01:53 ) ( 135 bytes ) Re: Hi, Andries --- Cynthia ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 18:31:56 ) ( 546 bytes ) +1 Cult apologism --- NikW ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 05:14:10 ) ( 1490 bytes ) +2 Re: Cult apologism --- dant ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 05:43:56 ) ( 1743 bytes ) +3 Arggh! You guys got there first--and said it better than I did (no text) --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 06:08:23 ) ( 0 bytes ) Re: Outdated references --- Andries ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 13:45:22 ) ( 233 bytes ) Re: Vivisection doesn't warrant human sacrifice --- paddy ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:01:50 ) ( 357 bytes ) Re: Great post (no text) --- paddy ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 13:57:51 ) ( 0 bytes ) Here's why Andries is irritating --- Jim ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 21:54:38 ) ( 2200 bytes ) +1 You call it irritating; I call it useful --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 06:03:46 ) ( 1745 bytes ) +4 Re: You call it irritating; I call it useful --- Cynthia ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 07:44:09 ) ( 6204 bytes ) +2 Well if you put it that way --- dant ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:05:05 ) ( 433 bytes ) Re: Very little of what you write about me is true --- Andries ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:30:34 ) ( 1389 bytes ) +1 Re: Very little of what you write about me is true (amended) --- Cynthia ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 09:26:07 ) ( 2252 bytes ) +1 Re: (OT) Cynthia and others, could you please sign the petition? --- Andries ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 10:15:11 ) ( 159 bytes ) +2 You've got it Andries. --- Cynthia ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 11:25:29 ) ( 523 bytes ) Done! (no text) --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 12:06:13 ) ( 0 bytes ) You call it useful; I call it useless --- Jonathan ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:39:37 ) ( 1206 bytes ) +1 Re:Untrue and unfair --- Andries ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:41:58 ) ( 188 bytes ) +1 Schnabelism. Are You A Schnabelist? lol --- Jonathan ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 08:50:15 ) ( 380 bytes ) What the hell is this "black and white thinking"? --- Jim ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 11:45:02 ) ( 4458 bytes ) +1 Re: What the hell is this "black and white thinking"? - A visual a... --- cq ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 12:48:59 ) ( 365 bytes ) file img shades of grey or fuzzy thinking? --- lesley ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:17:45 ) ( 1286 bytes ) +2 Black and white or just too lazy for complexity? --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:32:23 ) ( 266 bytes ) +2 Again, what is the "B&W thinking" we should be avoiding?! --- Jim ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 14:50:57 ) ( 435 bytes ) +1 What a difference two inverted commas make --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 15:38:22 ) ( 820 bytes ) +3 why not? --- dant ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 15:47:25 ) ( 73 bytes ) Re: What a difference two inverted commas make --- Cynthia ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 15:54:07 ) ( 1430 bytes ) +1 Hang on a minute, Cynthia --- Neville B ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 18:29:31 ) ( 933 bytes ) +1 Re: Hang on a minute, Cynthia (edited with correction) --- Cynthia ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 20:02:26 ) ( 4967 bytes ) +3 Thank You Cynthia! --- Hilltop ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 23:12:37 ) ( 1103 bytes ) +1 Re: The reason is that I am in the middle of a propaganda war --- Andries ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 05:07:42 ) ( 1202 bytes ) +1 Re: The reason is that I am in the middle of a propaganda war (OT) (Edited) --- Cynthia ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 06:38:42 ) ( 6258 bytes ) A couple of points, Cynthia --- Neville B ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 04:05:52 ) ( 780 bytes ) +2 Re: Andries' agenda, see my post to Hilltop (NT) --- Andries ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 05:28:10 ) ( 0 bytes ) link Re: A couple of points, Cynthia --- Cynthia ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 06:56:38 ) ( 75 bytes ) Excellent Reply, Cynthia! ANDRIES, PLEASE READ IT! (nt) --- Jonathan ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 05:59:35 ) ( 13 bytes ) +2 Re: (OT) I NEVER wrote or suggested that I have a PhD + forum guidelines --- Andries ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 06:30:24 ) ( 456 bytes ) Jonathan...(OT) --- Cynthia ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 07:31:57 ) ( 304 bytes ) +1 Cynthia...(OT) --- Jonathan ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 09:05:54 ) ( 82 bytes ) Here's what happened re Geaves --- Jim ( Tue, Feb 22, 2005, 15:55:04 ) ( 2281 bytes ) are you equating black and white with simplistic thinking? --- lesley ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 14:28:27 ) ( 590 bytes ) +1 Re: are you equating black and white with simplistic thinking? --- Andries ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 15:07:43 ) ( 360 bytes ) +2 Come on, Andries is full of s**t! This post here proves it! --- Jim ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 15:25:40 ) ( 1313 bytes ) +2 Re: Come on, Andries is full of s**t! This post here proves it! --- Andries ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 15:32:42 ) ( 743 bytes ) +4 No, you're wrong, clueless and evasive to boot --- Jim ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 15:38:50 ) ( 996 bytes ) +1 Re: No, you're wrong, clueless and evasive to boot --- Cynthia ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 16:26:46 ) ( 384 bytes ) Responding to your additonal text now --- Jim ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 16:30:27 ) ( 1529 bytes ) +1 "So enough with the insults already". --- cq ( Sat, Feb 26, 2005, 11:38:52 ) ( 22 bytes ) I agree with you about half --- Joe ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 16:47:22 ) ( 2100 bytes ) Your Tautologies are Incorrect --- Jonathan ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 17:05:43 ) ( 1381 bytes ) You might disagree with Andries, but why insult him? --- cq ( Sat, Feb 26, 2005, 11:36:31 ) ( 111 bytes ) +1 Good question. I've been wondering the same (no text) --- Neville B ( Sun, Feb 27, 2005, 03:59:10 ) ( 0 bytes ) "right to exercise freedom of religion" --- Bunny ( Wed, Feb 23, 2005, 17:19:30 ) ( 1036 bytes ) you mean one judgement fits all circumstances? --- cq ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 03:14:37 ) ( 487 bytes ) +1 You're not getting it, Chris --- Jim ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 10:48:35 ) ( 151 bytes ) +2 Thank you Jim --- lesley ( Thu, Feb 24, 2005, 14:15:48 ) ( 450 bytes ) +1 you didn't answer the question. --- cq ( Fri, Feb 25, 2005, 13:14:40 ) ( 680 bytes ) +1 I did not answer because --- lesley ( Fri, Feb 25, 2005, 15:43:47 ) ( 2683 bytes ) +1 Thanks for trying to explain, Lesley --- cq ( Sat, Feb 26, 2005, 11:33:17 ) ( 544 bytes ) Getting what, Jim? Your attempt to obfuscate speaks volumes --- cq ( Fri, Feb 25, 2005, 13:32:03 ) ( 619 bytes ) +1 Oh yeah, Chris, you got me good! Great eye there, fella! LOL! --- Jim ( Fri, Feb 25, 2005, 14:21:49 ) ( 403 bytes ) +1 I'm confused? So give us that practical example then! (no text) --- cq ( Sat, Feb 26, 2005, 07:51:11 ) ( 0 bytes ) Re: Hitler was not forced to be the leader and partially crazy unlike Rawat --- NikW ( Mon, Feb 21, 2005, 17:46:47 ) ( 1449 bytes )