Introduction


Presented in reverse chronology, this history stretches from the present back to the Fellowship's 1970 founding, and beyond.
(See "Blog Archive" in the sidebar below.) It draws from many sources, including The Fellowship of Friends - Living Presence Discussion, the Internet Archive, the former Fellowship of Friends wiki project, cult education and awareness sites, news archives, and from the editor's own 13-year experience in the Fellowship.

The portrait that emerges stands in stark contrast to sanitized versions presented on the Fellowship's array of
alluring websites, and on derivative sites created by Burton's now-estranged
disciple, Asaf Braverman.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

"Daily Cardiac", defending the realm

[ed. - I have posted much of this discussion, as it's a fascinating example of the Fellowship's duly-assigned foil engaging the ex-Fellowship bloggers. It offers a clear example of the teaching's dogma, and the frustration and anger it provokes. Daily Cardiac was identified by one blogger as the Fellowship's Linda Kaplan. It is conceivable, however, that Cardiac is not a Fellowship member, but a former member conducting a "false flag operation."]

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 1, 2008:
I don’t discount however the method of a valid teacher using sex to dissolve an aspirant’s ego/imaginary picture/aversions, as sex is one of man’s chief identifications. But this would not be done in a sadistic, humiliating or demeaning way.

And for a culture sprung from puritan origins sex is a major taboo. In schools it is a common occurrence for many taboos to be pierced.
 
"Draco" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 1, 2008:
Here we go again. DC ["Daily Cardiac"], Robert himself doesn’t claim that he is teaching his students when he has sex with them. He usually appeals to C Influence. “C Influence want you to have sex with me.” And if the “student” doesn’t want to have sex with the “teacher,” “you’re being a denying force to C Influence.”

Sometimes he makes a more specific justification: “You give me energy so I can give the School energy.”
Sometimes he makes comments like “I am very grateful for all the men who have been my lovers; it has really eased my suffering”.

"Ellen" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 1, 2008:
#15, Daily Cardiac [above]
I don’t discount however the method of a valid teacher using sex to dissolve an aspirant’s ego/imaginary picture/aversions, as sex is one of man’s chief identifications.
And how would you determine the difference between a valid and an invalid teacher using sex to dissolve an aspirant’s ego, etc…? What qualities would you look for in the teacher wielding such a “tool”? Selflessness? Lack of personal interest or reward from the encounter? Objectivity? Openness to both males and females? Regardless of age or personal attraction?
But this would not be done in a sadistic, humiliating or demeaning way.
Excuse me? How would you assess what is sadistic, humiliating or demeaning? Are there objective standards? Are such standards at all related to who a person really is (in essence)? Or to the acquisition of the two year old (the personality)? Does essence decide one’s sexual orientation? Does essence gladly urinate on another person? Does essence naturally defecate on another person? Does essence force itself upon another? And does an enlightened teacher possess intimate knowledge of all the skeletons in every aspirant’s closet so as to avoid confusing his own self interests with those of his student’s?

Just asking how you understand the terms that you use here.

"Wouldn't You Like To Know" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 1, 2008:
But this would not be done in a sadistic, humiliating or demeaning way. [quoting "Daily Cardiac", above]
Dear Daily Heart Failure ["Daily Cardiac"],

Besides reinforcing these words:
‘You either have no idea what is going on, or you are a complete idiot, or both…’ ~20. Panorea [blogger]
I would go on to tell you that there are many, yet untold here on the blog, true stories of ‘sadistic, humiliating or demeaning’ actions taken by both Robert Earl Burton, personally, and his band of flying monkeys, generally, that would demonstrate the depth and breadth of these institutionalized (read: formatory) patterns of the Fellowship of Friends, over many years and decades, that make it clear just how sick a cult it can be. Your statement is directly proportional to the extent of your ignorance. (And, I am sure you have heard it said, ‘Ignorance is bliss.’) Or, you show just how much you are playing a shill game by being the front person for the Fellowship of Friends’ cruise on the river in North Africa that flows in the opposite direction of most major rivers on the planet, called denial (the Nile). Or, maybe you are just a liar.

The writer of this post could tell some of these stories, from personal experience, that extended well beyond the realm of this hot button topic of ‘kinky sex,’ so that there would be no mistake that the Fellowship of Friends embodies those characteristics of Robert Earl Burton’s being, and callousness, that would best be described, in polite company, as sadomasochistic. The extent to which the queen can behave in a polished and refined manner publicly, does, likewise, the complete opposite in a less revealed manner (hidden and/or private) behind the scenes. Perhaps, you, and your friends, have not been tested yet, personally?

Want to try me on this subject matter, Daily Card Trick? That is a simple enough question, to which you could simply answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to.

"Vena" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 1, 2008:
[Quoting "Panorea":]
“Also, never, but never in a Prospective Student Meeting there has been any mentioning of Sex used as a Tool. It is not one of the WORK I’s, all conservative members of the FOF (and it is full of them!) close eyes and ears in the idea of Robert having Sex with his students. And what kind of sex? It is so pathetic and humiliating when you see them all walking into the Galleria and avoid raising their faces to look at the erased phallus on the ceiling.”
The energy of the group of young men, Robert’s harem, that sits around him during receptions is one of the most alarming and telling representations of all that is sick and depraved in the Fellowship. These men are like zombies. They are full of shame and almost catatonic from depression and self loathing and to make it worse Robert sits there among them gloating and smiling. I believe he actually enjoys their misery. It must give him some perverse sense of power over them. If this is not insensitive and sadistic I don’t know what is. It is one of the final images that took me out of the madness. No one who really sees this situation could possibly stay.
Perhaps circulating a compilation of personal and graphic descriptions of sex with Robert written by the unfortunate victims would finally make people like Daily Cardiac see the absurd and ludicrious nature of their reasoning.

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 2, 2008:
Ellen – 19:
“Take care to keep open house: because in this way some have had angels as their guests, without being conscious of it.” - The Bible
Ellen –
“And how would you determine the difference between a valid and an invalid teacher using sex to dissolve an aspirant’s ego, etc…? What qualities would you look for in the teacher wielding such a “tool”?”
In one word, Results. Results that indicate consciousness.
How did the inn keeper distinguish Angels in disguise from beggars?
For one thing you have to “Keep Open” to the other side of the ledger, which you don’t seem to be including in your equation of RB.
You see one one side which prompted you to go and you appear to be unaware of the side others have seen which prompts them to stay. I am aware of the side you see but I’ve determined it is of a different scale and in comparison to what is given is inconsequential.
In short I know what I’ve received; it is what I came for. I can’t speak for you or anyone else, and whether you know it or not you cannot speak for me; you cannot determine what another has received. If you think you can you are deluding yourself.
If you are content with your choices that is all you have, and it should be all you need. You do not have outside proof of your beliefs as I don’t have of mine. We will all know the whole story of RB and the FoF in due time.
My position is clear and is contained in my posts from page 41 up to now. In short I have contended that the FoF is a real school of awakening, with RB as its enlightened teacher. I also contend that when individuals cease taking/valuing the school’s one and only commodity, presence, the school in turn ceases to make sense to them and they have to leave.
There is nothing odd or difficult to follow in this reasoning. I believe you are judging incorrectly based on appearances. As a poster said recently “if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it’s probably a duck.” That is based on seeing from the outside in. That works 9 out of 10 times, or 99 out of 100, but the one time appearances fail will be the time you mistake an angel for a beggar.
Turn on the lights in the house and the monstrous shapes all become regular household items; like a shirt tossed over a lamp shade.
You do not see my position as plausible.
Your position is that the FoF is a destructive cult run by a sex crazed sociopath. Even if we go by appearances only that is not very plausible.
A sex crazed sociopath gathers a dozed or so ex-hippies and moves to the wilderness of Oregon House, and parlays that into a multimillion dollar world wide organization that attracts good householders from every walk of life and every major country (about 17,000 so far) as well as attracting world class musicians/recording artists and singers to perform concerts for them.
As well as carving out a world class estate winery, where manzanita bushes once grew, that has won the most prestigious gold medal in existence [ed. - quite an exaggeration!]. As well as an olive oil that was awarded the designation of best in North America and one of the 10 best in the world.(the first American one to break into the world’s ten best ever) Not to mention one of the most beautiful classical European gardens in America. An organization has existed and developed for nearly 40 years. That has co-existed harmoniously with its neighbors all this time. I could go on and on.
Just going by appearances your position is not very plausible. Have you ever been in the presence of a convicted sociopath? If you had you would see well the implausibility of your position.
But I am not going by appearances; I am judging the FoF by what I have received internally, on a spiritual level. That is why I stay.

"Ellen" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 2, 2008:
I’ve read your response to my query of #19 to define your terms, and I must confess my stupefication. Leroy, you did not answer my questions, but rather proceeded to put words into my mouth which you then went on to refute! Nice soapbox, my friend, so your agenda to propagandize is pretty clear. But the readers here will certainly able to put two and two together (to make four, not five, six or ten). Once again, because you have done this to my posts before, I plead not-guilty. Please, get it straight.
Instead, I repeat:
And how would you determine the difference between a valid and an invalid teacher using sex to dissolve an aspirant’s ego, etc…
and
How would you assess what is sadistic, humiliating or demeaning? Are there objective standards (i.e., relating to essence and personality)?
*******************************
Leroy, the reason your answer of the simple word “results” is an unacceptable response is only because both valid and invalid teachers can produce “states of consciousness” in their students. (Find out for yourself.) Both valid and invalid teachers can found spiritual communities. (Find out for yourself.) Both valid and invalid teachers can spawn all sorts of projects, businesses and/or publications. (Find out for yourself.) So, my question was an invitation to dig deeper. I threw no mudballs. For the record, I continue to protest.
D.C.: “I also contend that when individuals cease taking/valuing the school’s one and only commodity, presence, the school in turn ceases to make sense to them and they have to leave.”
Excuse me??? How could you possibly know??? As Crouching Tiger just pointed out, you continue to insist on the validity of your own experience in relation to presence as your only guide (and I won’t refute or deny it), while you simultaneously use that same guide to judge others! What kind of presence is that? Seems to me you are mixing yours (and mine!) beloved presence with some heavy-duty programming. Leroy, check your bucket…

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 3, 2008:
Ellen – 83:
“The Lewis Carroll School had to become a Charter School because the Fellowship children hated it and moved out of it as soon as they were old enough to say NO MORE to their brainwashed parents.”
I hated the schools I went to also. A lot of children hate going to school period.The high school aged children naturally wanted to go somewhere where there were more than 10 students in their class. That’s understandable.

The charter school is a win win proposition; the community (not only FoF children) benefit greatly. This would not have happened without the Lewis Carroll School. The LCS begot the Charter school.

By the way; the LCS still exists as a pre-school open to all local residents.

The winery has become more of an elite operation as it downsized. The recent writeups by experts like Mat Kramer and Parker rave about the wines. With wine making less is often more. Think Lafitte Rothschild vs. Gallo.

It was Robert who decided to start a vineyard as well as an olive grove.I believe his intent all along was other students besides himself would actually make the wine and olive oil.

Bruce – 63:
“I don’t have any experience with the olive oil, but while the winery produced a few notable wines they also produced some utter crap. I remember seeing a large number of half bottles of a botrytis wine being sold for $9.00. It was the flattest desert wine ever made. Also the red “ink” as it was known when we were all but forced to buy it because nobody wanted it “out there”.”
The “Ink” (circa 1980 – 84 during it’s heyday as the wine poured at lunch for free and at the wine bar for dinner for about .50 a glass), as it was affectionately known to students was selling for over $200 a magnum in L A in the mid nineties before it sold out.
That’s typical of great wines; they just get better with age.
[ed. - "Ink" = Callaway 1975 Petite Sirah. "Son of Ink" = Callaway 1976 Petite Sirah. Although these labels were also casually applied to early RVW product blended with Petite Sirah. After departing Callaway, "Winemaster" Karl Werner was offered the remaining inventory of these wines, as Callaway management had decided the red wine program had been a failed experiment and would in the future focus on whites. Recollections are that the wines were purchased for $2/750ml. Both 750ml and 1.5L formats were purchased. The wine poured "at lunch for free" was a blended version, since the "Ink", by itself, was nearly unpalatable.]

"elena" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 3, 2008:
Daily Cardiac,
Even Girard would cry if he heard you lying like that about the winery that Robert destroyed like everything else that was potentially good in the Fellowship. The decadence of the winery is a reflection of the decadence of the “grapevine” and the esoteric principle that inspired people to work.
In the winery, like in the Arts and the Lewis Carroll School together with anything Robert Burton touched, the lack of aim and consistency is so obvious that they are all failed enterprises. The fact that they never functioned with coherence and never connected to “life” successfully reveals how misconstrued they were. Many wonderful people worked in each one of these projects trying to give them a North of their own because Robert’s vision never moved beyond puritanical mannerisms without strength which in the long run consumed their personal effort as much as the enterprise.
The Lewis Carroll School had to become a Charter School because the Fellowship children hated it and moved out of it as soon as they were old enough to say NO MORE to their brainwashed parents. The winery has been decadent since the beginning. It couldn’t sell its wines even with all the prizes it received. It was a bastard child of the Arc of Corruption that was always disconnected from “the Work” and “Life”. Robert made them to make money, not meaning and they all functioned like pieces of Fellowship that had nothing to do with it in reality: Just an excuse to get people to keep busy and believe that they were building an Arc for humanity! The Olive Oil seems to be making a few houses for private students.
It is not surprising that in the end they served to make a bunch of alcoholics and workaholics who keep ever so busy so as to never have enough time to realize that they are as good as dead.
Now those enterprises survive on those who are trying to get some cash out of them convinced that they can still get a few cents from the enormous amounts of money that thousands of people put into building an Arc. They are the living vultures that feed on the decadence of the Fellowship and keep it running in the hope that they’ll still manage to shear another bunch of innocent lambs alive. Their attitude is that they can steal as much as they want while it lasts. They are mining the Fellowship with the same greed that Robert raped the believers, but they don’t realize that no one can’t drink that much water without drowning.

"elena" continued:
Yes, and it was also Robert’s idea to destroy it and they started tearing it apart until they found out the land was worth millions more with the vineyard on it. But the winery is dead like the School and the Lewis Carroll School, you’re just a bunch of ghosts living in imagination about an ideal that never existed. Make the best of it though, as I said before, the likes of you make slaves everywhere you go, when you start starving you might still find a few grapes to survive on.

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 4, 2008:
Dick Moron – 121:
“So now RVW provides a nice side hobby with perks for Gi_eon Beanstalk while he runs his own private winery business. As for the Apollo Olive Oil Company, this is a private venture that apparently feeds off of FOF free labor and resources for the gain of certain individuals like Steven Dumb_ck.”
If the serfs and peasants don’t rebel against this exploitation, I guess things will keep on keeping on until the money runs out.”
Several medals, including gold, at Vinexpo (the Oscars for wine awards), and the first American olive oil to make the the top ten in all the world speaks for itself – quite a coup for a destructive cult’s hobby.
[ed. - with 100s of equally prestigious competitions each year, "several medals, including gold, at Vinexpo", is fairly insignificant in the industry, save in the producer's minds.]

"Draco" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 4, 2008:
Frank [blogger] must be a current FOFer. He’s doing the passive-aggressive thing which other members have done before. Insult everyone and then sit back and tell us that he’s shown us what we are when we get angry. I don’t particularly like Bruce’s insults, but Bruce has regularly participated in the discussions. If Frank doesn’t post a piece of discussion of argument or experience he should be banned. Trolling isn’t acceptable.
As for RVW and Apollo Olive Oil: both are high-quality products. AOO continued to employ someone after he left the FOF, which is a move towards basic decency and minimum standards of business practice. RVW would collapse if Gideon pulled out. REB would only drink French wine for years (gifts of wine from students were sold off) and can’t drink much wine now because of his increased intake of antidepressants. I remember Robert at a dinner commenting,
“We’re producing delicious fine wines which are going to be guzzled by greedy people in life who don’t know what they’re tasting.”
The LCS worked well enough for younger children but didn’t provide an adequate level of education for the older ones. The older children were all very happy to leave the LCS and go to schools in Marysville and Grass Valley. It’s another Fellowship white elephant and, even though it’s now a charter school, it would need to develop considerably to avoid going under.
Daily Cardiac again: Walter had personal experiences of Robert repeating himself and forgetting what he had told his students to do. I suppose you may well argue that this doesn’t intrinsically have any connection to consciousness or lack of the same. But what has Meher Baba to do with this? By plowing through the lives of “conscious beings” you can justify just about anything–rape, murder, betrayal, persecution, you name it. But it You post very little of your own experience with Robert.
Robert’s approach to self-remembering makes everything else seem valueless, hence your shrugging off of the coercive sex, shunning, money-laundering, greed, etc.
Your valuation

"Draco" continues:
I didn’t feel that I quite expressed what I wanted to say in my last post. Basically. DC’s responses to criticisms of Robert say “so what?” If that doesn’t work, then he adopts the FOF equivalent of holocaust denial, “I don’t believe it.” Does Robert coerce heterosexual men into sex with him? So what? Did that involve anal fisting? I don’t believe it. So what? I don’t believe it. So what? I don’t believe it. So what? I don’t believe it. So what? I don’t believe it. Endless repeated to block any possibility of genuine feeling or compassion.

"Draco"' continues some more
I heard that in the 1990s Robert was sending potential sexual partners off to have AIDS tests before he had sex with them. MG was responsible for organising this. Can anyone confirm this?

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Disccusion blog, December 4, 2008:
WR ["WhaleRider"] – “I would argue that your associations about “being present” when gazing at said palm tree only serve to put you into a different form of imagination…the illusion that you are now more “awake” when before you were not and that you are part of some elite group of people imagining you have an exclusive connection to God.”
There is presence and there is imagination. They are not the same; they occupy different planes. Water cannot be both hot and cold. It can be luke warm, but not both hot and cold at the same time.
Your examples are not valid. What you are doing is putting words into my virtual “mouth.”
Of course one can be in imagination thinking one is present. But one can also BE present, or not be present.
Your earlier post about squares was one long attempt to devalue a tool for consciousness when it’s obvious you don’t value it enough to actually put it to the test. You immediately judge anything about RB or the FoF deficient because your mind has been closed to all but criticism. You are predisposed to think in a certain way about RB/FoF because you have already rejected him/it.
If you understood RB or the FoF you would still be a member.
A person cannot understand a conscious school and leave it.
It would like deciding to stop breathing. You cannot do it naturally, you need aids like a rope around your neck.
People decide to leave schools because they don’t understand them. Or because they find they do not want to make the payment necessary to become more awake. It’s always about payment, an invisible law, much like F D. Everyone wants to be awake, but not everyone wants to pay for it. They want consciousness and the status quo, but they cannot have both at the same time; they cannot be both hot and cold at the same time.
“Everyone wants to be Hercules, but without the Labors”
You can “prove” anything with words, or “disprove” anything. Yet in reality proof has little to do with words. Solomon devised a way to go beyond words. And we all have a Solomon in us if we are honest enough to look into truth.
I’m the only one on the blog honest enough to make the claim that nothing here can be proved or disproved.
If that distinguishes me it is only because you have handed me that title by virtue of your own self deception. Don’t confuse your position with truth. It may contain elements of truth and it may contain elements of falsehood. You need to sort out one form the other. With consciousness there are different scales. A person can be aware of his dreams and still not be in the third state. Public speakers/actors/politicians have trained themselves to be aware of what their hands are doing or the inflection in their voice much more than others, but that does not mean their states are higher.

"Draco" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 5, 2008:
DC 193 ["Daily Cardiac", post 193]
“I don’t think salvation has anything to do with up to date teaching payments at the time of death.
I also don’t think that people become any smarter or more enlightened (graduate) once they make their last teaching payment.
Salvation depends on how much a person has followed the true path of presence.”
DRACO: Well I’d like to remind you about what you wrote earlier on this page,
DC 165
“If you understood RB or the FoF you would still be a member.
A person cannot understand a conscious school and leave it.
It would like deciding to stop breathing. You cannot do it naturally, you need aids like a rope around your neck.
People decide to leave schools because they don’t understand them. Or because they find they do not want to make the payment necessary to become more awake. It’s always about payment, an invisible law, much like F D.
Everyone wants to be awake, but not everyone wants to pay for it. They want consciousness and the status quo, but they cannot have both at the same time; they cannot be both hot and cold at the same time. ”
You are saying that people who leave the FOF are not following the “truth path of presence”, (from whence cometh salvation). This is exactly the same as saying that being up to date with teaching payments guarantees salvation. If you don’t make your TPs, you are out. If you are out you didn’t understand the FOF or weren’t willing to make the payment. So you aren’t following the “true path of presence”. So you won’t be saved when you die. In specific FOF terms this means that you will go the moon or to the end of the consciousness queue or into eternal recurrence, rather than having your soul received by angels when you die, placed for 10,000 years in Limbo (which resembles the cellars of Chateau Lafit) and then put into another lifetime until you eventually get put into the Celestial City of Paradise where you can read the lost works of Sophocles.

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 6, 2008:
Draco – 208 [above]:
DC -“I don’t think salvation has anything to do with up to date teaching payments at the time of death.
I also don’t think that people become any smarter or more enlightened (graduate) once they make their last teaching payment.
Salvation depends on how much a person has followed the true path of presence.”
Draco – “You are saying that people who leave the FOF are not following the “truth path of presence”, (from whence cometh salvation). This is exactly the same as saying that being up to date with teaching payments guarantees salvation. If you don’t make your TPs, you are out. If you are out you didn’t understand the FOF or weren’t willing to make the payment. So you aren’t following the “true path of presence”. So you won’t be saved when you die.
One problem encountered when you read my posts is that you are starting out by seeing how you can deconstruct them, trying to find the inconsistencies in my thinking instead of just reading what is written and evaluating it based on that.
What I said was simple and you needn’t add conditions to it.
What you are engaging in is called an Ad Hominem argument. It happens so much on the blog that I hardly recall when it does not happen. And People are brazen about engaging in it.
Salvation depends on how much a person has followed the true path of presence. This is what I believe.
Obviously I feel the FoF provides me with the environment that puts me in the best position to carry this out. But my writing out a TP check does not change me. The efforts to be present, to transform friction, to accept what I cannot change; all these things contribute to whatever salvation is in store for me.

"Draco" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 6, 2008:
DC ["Daily Cardiac"], my comments were not ad hominem, but yes I certainly deconstruct your arguments. Robert’s view of salvation is well known–die in good standing the FOF. What I am saying is that this view (and orthodox FOF views in general) lies behind the arguments that you present, but you avoid presenting this directly, so you skirt around beliefs that are unacceptable to those outside of the FOF and use a framework of spurious logic to work around these awkward aspects. And that’s why I deconstruct your posts.

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 6, 2008:
Draco – 266: “you skirt around beliefs that are unacceptable to those outside of the FOF and use a framework of spurious logic to work around these awkward aspects. And that’s why I deconstruct your posts.”

You may be giving yourself too much credit; it remains to be proved whether you succeed in deconstructing anything. What I said was this –
“you are starting out by seeing how you can deconstruct them, trying to find the inconsistencies in my thinking instead of just reading what is written and evaluating it based on that.”
It is proved (by yourself) that deconstruction is your aim. And what prey tell absolves you from ad hominem? Your mere stating that you are not engaging in it? If anyone is being spurious it’s you. You refuse to acknowledge that your views are at best just as subjective as mine. 

"Daily Cardiac" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 6, 2008:
dick moron – 277 [blogger and post number]: “Do you consider C influence to be a group of individual angels with distinct personalities who speak in words directly to Robert Burton?”
They do not have vocal cords, or any kind of cellular traits. But they are master communicators.
“Do [you] consider C influence to be a group of individual angels with distinct personalities who speak in words directly to Robert Burton?”
I do.
“Do you believe that Leonardo da Vinci rides around on Burton’s shoulder like Burton has claimed?”
Metaphorically yes. I do believe Influence C has the ability to make Hansbrough miss ten open lay ups in a row. After all they invented the patten for Hansbrough.

"dick moron" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 6, 2008:
Daily Cardiac:
I do believe Influence C has the ability to make Hansbrough miss ten open lay ups in a row. After all they invented the patten for Hansbrough.
That’s funny! But it won’t happen. But N.C. State did beat the Phi Slamma Jamma Houston team with Olaijawon and Drexler to win it all in 1983. Ask Bob, he watched with me and he was pretty pissed at the outcome.

"Draco" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 7, 2008:
DC, 267, “And what prey tell absolves you from ad hominem? Your mere stating that you are not engaging in it?”
And what makes it Ad Hominem apart from you asserting that it is? All I know of you is what you write in your posts and that you are a Fellowship member. Your FOF membership gives a context to the text of your messages. (And incidentally I agree with the Sheikh that trying to reveal the identity of contributors is unaccaptable.) I deconstruct your arguments because your arguments depend on the structure that you give them. This is specific to your messages. I don’t bother deconstructing Frank’s messages because they don’t rely on misleading pseudologic for their effect.
“If anyone is being spurious it’s you. You refuse to acknowledge that your views are at best just as subjective as mine.”
This is just a red herring. You use the notion of subjectivity as a bludgeon to flatten other people’s point of view. Your posts indicate that you do not see us all as equally subjective (an approach that is difficult for anyone to maintain) , but that your FOF membership gives you an outlook that is absolutely superior to that of ex-members–just like Robert tells you.

"WhaleRider" wrote on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, December 13, 2008:

Daily Challenge ["Daily Cardiac", blogger]:
“As far as I know Robert has not done any of the above.”
Burton has hissy fits over cuff links, gave Troy herpes, and sent Richard the hairdresser to die a lonely death of AIDS in Hawaii.
I’ll say it again, your ignorance is appalling! You spend so much time in the “divine present” that you wear blinders about the past. How blissful for you!
“Enlightened beings are in the direct service of higher forces/God/Angels/ C Influence, whatever you want to call the spirit world.”
So by your defintion that would make George W. Bush by his own assertion an enlightened being, too.
“..because if he is…”
That’s a big “if” partner. By the same token, what if Burton is a fraud? It boils down to belief, not verification.
Christ said – “I come not for peace, but with a sword.”
Funny, I said the same about posting on this blog. I’ll remember that one next time, thanks.
“Enlightened beings, like everyone else, are playing a role. The only difference is they are aware that it’s a role, and they play it better than most others would play it”… for themselves.
You are right. The trouble is, totally indoctrinated followers like you don’t realize that you are projecting the role of your inner guru onto Burton who is exploiting this weakness and having a gay ole’ time on your dime.
In the same manner that the hard core followers have totally given their responsibility over to Burton, they are so indoctrinated that the responsibility for actually waking them up now lies in the hands of the ex-followers whom have awakened. So be it.
“The masses idolize Christ or the Buddha, but if those worshipers were in the presence of their human forms for one minute they would jump out their own skin trying to get away.”
And you know this because you were there…?
I’ll tell you a true story about Mother Teresa. A famous person contacted her once asking if they could travel to India to study with her and help the poor. Mother Teresa said, “if you really want to help the poor, take the money you would’ve spent on the airline ticket and give it to the poor in your neighborhood.”
Enlightened beings actually help people in need without exploiting them. That’s how the role is played well.
Let your conscience be your guide.
Ouch, my head hurts! But hey, in time the Berlin Wall eventually came down, too.

No comments:

Post a Comment