LAURA KNIGHT-JADCZYK AND JOE QUINN
Since the 9/11 attacks, no book has provided a satisfactory answer as to WHY the attacks occurred and who was ultimately responsible for carrying them out - until now.
Thanks. Yes, I have noticed this a lot. I work in a city well-known as a mecca for alternative, progressive, new age stuff. I find lots of posturing but very little authenticity. And, mean as heck. My first time at a new studio that has a very "spiritual" focus, I walked by an instructor who was gossiping about another student to two students in the most grossly demeaning way. I was appalled. Then, the instructor for my class appeared to be more interested in picking out her chant from a notebook while we all held poses for an extensive period of time than she was in actually helping people in need of help with the poses.
Biggest group of inauthentic, falsely "enlightened" people I have met. Very, very different from when I was starting with all this 20 years ago. Really a shame as these practices can and should be, as you point out, very deeply connecting for us.
Nothing at all to do with Love...
parzival said...
"Ego. Nothing at all to do with Love..."
Nonsense. That's just you being "cultural", and a good example of what I was talking about. Without an ego, you're pretty vacant which has "nothing to do with love", a bit like your president who is little more than a walking Obama T-shirt.
If you're going to do yoga - do yoga. No need to make a cult of yourself.
Some of them are into yoga.
I've met them in my church.
I've heard them talk on the bus.
Have you seen them on TV? Do they remind you of any entertainment shows or movies you've watched recently? How about teachers in school?
I see it as a culture that is being pushed down on us, and has been for a long time. We "took a break" from it during and following the Vietnam War. But it never died.
It's a state of mind, a level of awareness, an emotional tone. And I personally think it sucks. But we're going to have to do more than complain about it if we really want to handle it. Knowledge is power.
HFLute, This is for you.
"But I'm complaining about you right now, l_e_cox, 'cause you're one of them."
What do you base that statement on?
What makes you say to Parzival that "his" ("your") "president who is little more than a walking Obama T-shirt." (I wrote in Ron Paul in 08 and didn't vote this year. Does that make that recently supposedly reelected sorry murdering puppet/scumbag "mine?") Guessing you're from the UK, your country has more caught pedophiles getting free, at least recently and per the press, (for what that's worth) - though what's any of that that got to do with what Parzival said?
I've previously written that what I call SOTT-Folk are those here whose primary attributes include:
(1) Recognition of their humanity;
(2) Ongoing searches for the truth and wisdom; and,
(3) A common goal of bettering this good Earth's lot via honest communication.
Do you believe anything you've written above indicates the presence of any of those attributes in you? If so, how?
True commentary speaks for itself about the issue; or it doesn't because it isn't really commentary. In that latter case, it's usually some form of distraction, whether intentional or subconscious.
I dare say that i.e. cox's comments - both here and previously - indicate he's of the that "SOTT-Folk" description. Yours, however, are accusatory without basis, and seem intended to cause dissention and/or distraction and perhaps even as a part of some "divide and conquer" program. If you maintain that's not the case, I'm curious to read what you have to say - and I little doubt you will find some verbiage to insert. I hope it amounts to more than your words above.
Cheap shots are so easy, intelligent commentary far tougher. It seems the former is your specialty. Why?
Finally, your first comment is "Spiritual culture. What an anachronism." It seems clear that you meant "What an oxymoron" which your next comment seems to re-confirm. That's just an FYI towards the goal of better communication and please note I HAVEN'T used that in some cheap shot* against you.
R.C.
* To say "easy cheap shot" would be redundant.
RC
is a coin with two sides.
I like to do yoga with my eyes closed.
...and in Memphis, they're at Whole Foods. The people you see shopping there are the rudest and most high-and-mighty snobs in the whole city, but at the same time they seem to radiate self-loathing. Let me assure you, if you're a citizen of Memphis, Tn, you have absolutely nothing to feel uppity about. On the other hand, self-loathing suits you.
It looks like the practice of yoga is quite nearly like writing for the Huffington Post.
Who, tell me, would read that rag?
I surely don't.
Kind of reminds me of a.........YOGA CLASS!
I'm out!
Geez.all this bickering! But Why?
Yeah... But Why? Your comments generally seem on point - and consistent with your given name. I do agree bickering exists above - it was there when I added my still unanswered questions - but why and who started it? I dare say THAT'S obvious.
And why did they? So you or others might waste time on easy and obvious comments? So you'd waste your time? (As I felt compelled to, not having the opportunity to deal with x face to face, while at the same time KNOWING that truth and fairness required someone to speak up for all those who x was taking "cheap" shots at.)
If I ever happen to notice you receiving such an off point cheap shot, I'll likely waste some time noting/correcting it. I'd like to believe it's in your nature to do the same.
Meanwhile, the silence of x grows louder.
R.C.
no talking allowed, just lots of sweat.
"HFLute, This is for you.
"But I'm complaining about you right now, l_e_cox, 'cause you're one of them."
"What do you base that statement on?"
Years of reading the l_e_cox "dawn chorus" of chronic scientology identification spew crap.
"What makes you say to Parzival that "his" ("your") "president who is little more than a walking Obama T-shirt." (I wrote in Ron Paul in 08 and didn't vote this year. Does that make that recently supposedly reelected sorry murdering puppet/scumbag "mine?")"
What "makes me say it?" Grandma, what a manipulative turn of phrase you have.
It was a para on "my president is black" a phrase that had much currency at the time of the first Obama's election. If the T-shirt-empty-vessel analogy is lost on you, you're obviously a person of very low intelligence.
"Guessing you're from the UK, your country has more caught pedophiles getting free, at least recently and per the press, (for what that's worth) - though what's any of that that got to do with what Parzival said?"
And what has that confused and confusing sentence got to do with anything?
"what's any of that that got to do with what Parzival said?"
Read Parzival's comment again with pretty vacant/T-shirt analogy in mind.
"I've previously written that what I call SOTT-Folk are those here whose primary attributes include:
(1) Recognition of their humanity;
(2) Ongoing searches for the truth and wisdom; and,
(3) A common goal of bettering this good Earth's lot via honest communication.
Do you believe anything you've written above indicates the presence of any of those attributes in you? If so, how?"
I am not going to be subject to your ridiculous "SOTT-Folk" criteria, nor the "test" that goes with it..
"True commentary speaks for itself about the issue; or it doesn't because it isn't really commentary. In that latter case, it's usually some form of distraction, whether intentional or subconscious."
Funny you should say that, because you haven't spoken about the issue once. Instead, you've brought forth a lot of meandering and poorly formed distractions, false criteria for who "belongs" here and who doesn't, and "tests". The issue here is about false spirituality and identification, something you're obviously mired in, otherwise you wouldn't have had such a negative reaction to my posts.
"I dare say that i.e. cox's comments - both here and previously - indicate he's of the that "SOTT-Folk" description."
i_e_cox is a sleep-walking scientologist nut-job. Is that your idea of someone who "belongs" here?
"Yours, however, are accusatory without basis, and seem intended to cause dissention and/or distraction and perhaps even as a part of some "divide and conquer" program".
Sometimes my intent is to disrupt fake unities that are based on identification and lies. I don't give a crap about your bogus ideas about "SOTT folk".
"If you maintain that's not the case, I'm curious to read what you have to say - and I little doubt you will find some verbiage to insert. I hope it amounts to more than your words above."
Cheap shots are so easy, intelligent commentary far tougher. It seems the former is your specialty. Why?"
Manipulation: In order for me to answer that question, I have to first admit that "my speciality is cheap shots". Obviously, I'm not going to answer that question, nor be subject to your bumbling headmaster routine. You might think it's honest communication. I do not.
that when something acquires mass appeal, it reaches a tipping point where its original message or purpose becomes distorted by
irrelevant banalities.