Incompetent? A victim of his surroundings? Devil's Advocate
Re: Incompetent? A victim of his surroundings? That's absurd, Andries -- Jim	Top of thread		Forum

Posted by: NikW ® 02/21/2005, 15:00:48 Author Profile Edit Alert Moderators

While it is very frustrating for exs who have a clear picture of Rawat as a disembling fraud, driven by his own greed and need for adoration, to have to address other explanations of what Rawatism is based on - for 'outsiders' those explantions can seem very plausible. Incompetence certainly does explain large elements of the DLM/EV story, and although there is no evidence for it - one could argue that Rawat has simply been the prisoner of a series of ambitious cultists who have used their position as 'God's' advisors to advance their own interests. As the issue of corrupt 'gurus' becomes generalised into a discussion about the validity of 'Guruism', I think we probably have to be prepared for explanations of the failures of both individual gurus, and of the system of 'Guruism' to encompass a number of hypotheses.

Previous

Recommend Current page

Next

Replies to this message

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 )