Better a clown than a loud-mouth who preaches intolerance!

Better a clown than a loud-mouth who preaches intolerance!
Re: Hey, it's Jonx the Clown! -- Jim	Top of thread		Forum

Posted by:
jonx ^®

07/29/2005, 05:47:38
Author Profile

Edit
Alert Moderators

Come on mate, stop the stonewalling. The point I make that you and your lads fail to acknowledge is that the concept of “surrender” was open to interpretation. You know as well as I people were surrendering to all manner of things and ideas back in the good ol’ days. You cannot with all honesty tell me you didn’t know people who were somewhat bent out of shape because they adopted an interpretation of surrender that was entirely un-tempered by common sense. Those people were obvious cases of imbalance, but to some degree we were all subject to this phenomenon.

For example, there were the Mahatmas. There were some who came to the West with fire in their bellies and a void of common sense. Many premies thought theirs was the interpretation of surrender they had to follow. As this brand of surrender began to crack and people started clueing into the possibility surrender wasn’t like that, some people were left with an emptiness, and they freaked, while others merely modified their previous interpretation and carried on. For the latter, there was often relief at being able to finally give up a pretence that was not working for them.

Now, what I’ve stated above is what happened mate. For you to discard it in your typically arrogant and bellicose way only highlights your own void in the common sense department. But as I’ve said all along, it is this lack of common sense that is what fuels the ex-premie cause.

Recommend Current page

Replies to this message

You sound like a Hitler apologist --- Jim ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 10:00:59 ) ( 432 bytes ) +1

What a ridiculous claim! --- jonx ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 10:57:21 ) ( 1823 bytes ) +5

Mate --- Marshall ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 11:40:06 ) ( 173 bytes )
sweet dreams --- dant ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 14:35:07 ) ( 1637 bytes ) +1

Re: sweet dreams --- jonx ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 14:47:47 ) ( 92 bytes ) +1

um, excuse me? --- dant ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 15:24:17 ) ( 1350 bytes ) +1

No, excuse me! --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 01:22:32 ) ( 125 bytes ) +1

Re: No, excuse me! --- dant ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 01:37:42 ) ( 225 bytes ) +1

Re: No, excuse me! --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 01:54:17 ) ( 538 bytes ) +1

integrity --- dant ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 05:11:30 ) ( 897 bytes ) +3

Now what could surrender mean --- Jethro ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 05:44:13 ) ( 465 bytes )
Re: integrity --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 09:14:23 ) ( 1586 bytes ) +2

dant being very serious now --- dant ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 11:55:17 ) ( 2712 bytes )
Checkmate again, Jonx! LOL!!!!!!!!! (I love it!) --- Jim ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 16:00:47 ) ( 787 bytes ) +1

What a perfectly lame argument! --- jonx ( Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 05:28:48 ) ( 441 bytes ) img +1

So what if you were an instructor? You lose, MATIE! --- Jim ( Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 10:57:58 ) ( 448 bytes ) +1

Re: So what if you were an instructor? You lose, MATIE! --- jonx ( Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 01:07:52 ) ( 1040 bytes ) img

pointless --- Toby ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 09:53:22 ) ( 545 bytes ) +1

Re: pointless --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 11:11:45 ) ( 362 bytes )

OK, Jonx, mate, why don't YOU tell us what "surrender" meant? --- Jim ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 15:00:53 ) ( 213 bytes )
Problem solved r.e. the meaning of surrender --- Steve ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 19:34:38 ) ( 5968 bytes ) link
Re: What a ridiculous claim! --- Hilltop ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 00:48:54 ) ( 123 bytes ) file img +1

Re: What a ridiculous claim! --- Hilltop ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 01:12:21 ) ( 344 bytes ) file img +1

Re: What a ridiculous claim! --- Hilltop ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 01:29:02 ) ( 112 bytes ) file img

Re: Better a clown than a loud-mouth who preaches intolerance! --- songster ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 10:02:46 ) ( 391 bytes ) +1

Whoa there matey! --- jonx ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 11:03:45 ) ( 204 bytes ) +1

Hey there matey mate mate mate - mate this! --- songster ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 13:00:21 ) ( 1726 bytes ) +2

Re: Hey there matey mate mate mate - mate this! --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 04:37:37 ) ( 508 bytes )
Re: Hey there matey mate mate mate - mate this! --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 04:48:33 ) ( 270 bytes )

So THIS is an example of ..... --- Danny ( Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 17:04:37 ) ( 2135 bytes ) +1

Re: So THIS is an example of ..... --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 01:47:21 ) ( 1246 bytes ) +3

Laughable --- Danny ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 07:31:02 ) ( 5558 bytes ) +1

Okay, I'll respond to your whole post this time --- jonx ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 09:53:16 ) ( 4196 bytes ) +2

Jon, show me where Maharaji clarified "surrender" --- JHB ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 18:02:34 ) ( 614 bytes ) +2

Hurray for the calm light of reason. You are my hero JHB! (no text) --- songster ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 20:01:57 ) ( 0 bytes )
Re: Jon, show me where Maharaji clarified "surrender" --- jonx ( Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 01:11:14 ) ( 264 bytes ) img +1

This is just a cheap insult and in no way a substantive or meaningful response (no text) --- songster ( Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 10:20:54 ) ( 0 bytes )

Glad you did ..but you failed to understand --- Danny ( Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 03:21:37 ) ( 4093 bytes )

Re: So THIS is an example of ..... --- Danny ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 07:34:21 ) ( 47 bytes )
Re: So THIS is an example of ..... --- songster ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 10:50:30 ) ( 1177 bytes )

jonx, answer a few questions please --- Steve ( Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 18:37:41 ) ( 1227 bytes ) link