|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 2:54:10 GMT
Hi Interested Bob, I received that information when I first became a member of ECKANKAR. It is probably written in a book, but I can't remember anything else about the matter. I don't know how it can be verified, so you will just have to do your own ferretting. SORRY!!! I believe it to be true as I had a similar experience, but mine was an out of the body experience, whereas PT's was a normal physical experience. It was immediately after I became a member and before I knew of that incident. I found myself on a ship heading for America, when a huge arm came out of the sky and handed me a book, I then found myself on another part of the deck and then the Captain came by and shook my hand, welcoming me onboard. The book represented spiritual enlightenment and the Captain ofcourse was the present Spiritual Leader and he was welcoming me as a new member of ECKANKAR. This is one of the ways that we ECKists communicate with each other. So it's just a story, with no evidence, then, Scottish Lassie. As the late Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". That's a pretty extraordinary claim, and if you can't supply any evidence at all, it means absolutely nothing. It's not really up to me to 'do my own ferretting', although in fact I have already done it and found absolutely no reference to that alleged incident. If someone makes a claim, as you have, it's up to them to provide the evidence for that claim. You have provided no evidence whatsoever, so as far as I'm concerned it's just a far fetched tale with no basis in fact, unless you can show otherwise. As I have said several times in the past, I have no doubt whatsoever that you are totally honest and truthful, and I'm sure you genuinely believe that what you are saying is the absolute truth, but believing something is true does not make it a fact. You are free to believe what you like, of course, but if you state extremely unlikely or incredible things as facts, don't be too surprised if people refuse to accept them. Hi Interested Bob, I am not on these forums to prove anything, but just to converse with people, joining in giving my viewpoint to the various topics, which mostly I am enjoying, until someone misconstrues something that you have said, and then the situation isn't so nice. I care about people, so have no wish to deliberately try to upset anyone, but it does happen, so just have to take it on the chin with as much good grace as you can muster up. Don't you think? What about the people who were in the cars behind Paul Twitchell when the incident happened, surely someone must have reported it. Maybe it is written up in some newspaper somewhere. Perhaps if you knew when it happened then it might be possible to find out. Anyway, I'm not able to provide any assistance, so we will have to just forget that it happened. I was just replying to Anna's post about someone else's statement about Geeks. Have you found out if that is true? I'm unable to use the link so I don't know what it is all about.
|
|
|
Post by interestedbob on Aug 14, 2015 9:52:16 GMT
Scottish Lassie, the page that ♫anna♫ linked to is simply speculation about how we might be part of a simulation of life in 2015, taking place on a computer in 2050, so while it's probably impossible to prove the point either way, the likelihood of it being true is extremely low. Such a thing might be possible at some point in the future, of course, but right now that report appears to be simply filling space because nothing else interesting in the field of Science has happened in the last few days. As you can see from that quote, it is total speculation. The implication is that all pysicists are making that claim, when in fact only a small handfull are saying it might be possible. The whole thrust of the article is flawed anyway, in my opinion, because even if what we see isn't what is really there, the Universe in some form must exist, or we wouldn't exist to see anything at all, even as part of a computer simulation.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 9:57:02 GMT
Hi Men an Tol, That is exactly what I am asserting. There will always be someone who doesn't want their belief to change so will be willing to even kill a person in order to achieve their aim. I think it was either in France or Spain When he had finished speaking about the beliefs of ECKANKAR, someone handed him a cool fruit drink, which he drank. Sometime later he became very ill, so that was the end of the talks. He almost died, but his willpower and no doubt with God's help, he struggled on in order to finalise his writings. He then died soon after. ECKANKAR is a religion based on Divine Love and as such, would never wish to harm anyone but has everyone,s best interests at heart No one on this earth is perfect so neither was PT, but he was the one chosen by the Holy Spirit to be the messenger. It was his mission in life to bring the word of God to all, despite what anyone may think. By the way you must be aware of some so called adverse information or you wouldn't think that it would cause me consternation if you were to disclose it. It certainly doesn't bother any ECKist as it is the Holy Spirit that leads and when a person is ready to receive the truth of ECKANKAR, then it will happen. Every ECKist knows this. Of the things you have stated over many posts Scottish Lassie, here is something than could be proved or disproved to the satisfaction of all, that is was that drink poisoned or not. It is a relatively simple procedure to pump a stomach and analyze the contents. His illness may have been no more than an upset stomach or, food poisoning without human intent, or any number of things. What you are relating is a conclusion that is 'not' backed with any evidence at all. More over, even if someone did intentionally give him poison, the assumed motivation that it was to end his description of his religion is not proved. If there was human intent it could just as easily have been due to a competing splinter religion getting rid of the competition or it could just as easily have been someone within his own organization in a power grab. My point here is that no one knows if the drink was poisoned and if it was poisoned no one knows why. You do yourself and position no favors by confidently asserting that is was to silence his words. To further say that it was diminishing his freedom of speech is a bridge too far. That is, that is an act of the State and that is not only not proven but there is no proof that the States cared about him (and his religion) one way or another. Hi Men an tol, I wouldn't like to live in your head, you give the impression that you distrust everything that anyone says, which makes me think that you are constantly suspicious of everyone. I certainly wouldn't want to live that way
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 10:27:21 GMT
Scottish Lassie, the page that ♫anna♫ linked to is simply speculation about how we might be part of a simulation of life in 2015, taking place on a computer in 2050, so while it's probably impossible to prove the point either way, the likelihood of it being true is extremely low. Such a thing might be possible at some point in the future, of course, but right now that report appears to be simply filling space because nothing else interesting in the field of Science has happened in the last few days. As you can see from that quote, it is total speculation. The implication is that all pysicists are making that claim, when in fact only a small handfull are saying it might be possible. The whole thrust of the article is flawed anyway, in my opinion, because even if what we see isn't what is really there, the Universe in some form must exist, or we wouldn't exist to see anything at all, even as part of a computer simulation. Hi Interested Bob, The physicists believe that different dimensions exist, we in ECKANKAR know that they ixist, because we travel to them when having an out of the body experience ( Soul travel ) We also believe that when the brain goes to sleep, Soul leaves the body every time this happens, that is true for everyone. They usually go to the dimension just up from the physical dimension. That is where people get their ideas from, they are actually tuning into the other dimension. Human beings could be emulating what these ' Geeks ' are doing.,with our virtual reality games. They might be playing with us, like we are playing with these games, maybe all that we are: are advanced robots. Who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 10:48:01 GMT
Hi Scottish Lassie I'll print out the link when I get home after work. I can't do much with my cell phone here. Hi Anna. I hope you have seen InterestedBob's post He has provided the link for me. Thanks for everything.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 12:21:26 GMT
Of the things you have stated over many posts Scottish Lassie, here is something than could be proved or disproved to the satisfaction of all, that is was that drink poisoned or not. It is a relatively simple procedure to pump a stomach and analyze the contents. His illness may have been no more than an upset stomach or, food poisoning without human intent, or any number of things. What you are relating is a conclusion that is 'not' backed with any evidence at all. More over, even if someone did intentionally give him poison, the assumed motivation that it was to end his description of his religion is not proved. If there was human intent it could just as easily have been due to a competing splinter religion getting rid of the competition or it could just as easily have been someone within his own organization in a power grab. My point here is that no one knows if the drink was poisoned and if it was poisoned no one knows why. You do yourself and position no favors by confidently asserting that is was to silence his words. To further say that it was diminishing his freedom of speech is a bridge too far. That is, that is an act of the State and that is not only not proven but there is no proof that the States cared about him (and his religion) one way or another. Hi Men an tol, I wouldn't like to live in your head, you give the impression that you distrust everything that anyone says, which makes me think that you are constantly suspicious of everyone. I certainly wouldn't want to live that way Well Scottish Lassie for someone who professes love for others as a main way of looking at life (or words to that affect) it seems that you are describing yourself. Your leader becomes ill and subsequently dies. It couldn't be some natural circumstance but rather the result of 'others' (unnamed) who were intent on silencing him and his message. No proof, no real evidence, just a belief that he was persecuted and intentionally killed. Now that would seem to be evidence of people who distrust others and are suspicious. You are right, living that way must be terrible. All I did was ask for evidence of those working to take away his 'freedom of speech.' As of yet, no such evidence. There is no evidence provided that 'others' outside of the movement even cared what he was saying. To me it is a serious accusation to make the claim that others were taking away his right of free speech and so I asked reasonable questions because I would like to know who those others are. The only ones who seem to be really upset with him are former members of the movement and I have no way of knowing the veracity of their stated concerns. Personally, I have no care about Paul Twitchell or his religious movement. To me he is simply one of many such people and movements which come into being with most disappearing without a trace. A few become successful (in terms of existing) to one degree or another. There is nothing new about that as such has occurred throughout known history. That some people find things in those movements that are of value to their lives is also neither here nor there to me. Am I a skeptic? Of course, as I am a human and that is a normal and healthy attribute of our species.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Aug 14, 2015 14:09:40 GMT
What is fake? Anything we can imagine has some form of existence. Even the most absurd things has something corresponding in our imagination giving them an existence.
The only concept I can't imagine is absolute nothingness. A black empty vacuum is not nothingness.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 14:58:48 GMT
Hi Anna, Anything is possible, Paul Twitchel was driving his car very fast once and when turning a corner lost control.it was about to turn over and crash, when a huge arm came out of the sky and set the car upright preventing a crash. The occupants of the cars following behind, saw this take place, so were witnesses to this incident. So maybe we are not as big as we think we are compared to what else is out there. Is there any documented evidence that that ever happened, Scottish Lassie , and if so, where can it be found? Hi Interested Bob, I think I have remembered some more about the incident, that will change things somewhat. The people that saw the incident, may not have seen an arm descend out of the heavens at all. I think what really happened, when Paul Twitchell lost control of the car and it was in the process of turning over, he had an out of the body experience and soul was above the car, that is when he saw a huge arm reach down and grab the car turning it upright and therefore preventing an accident, then he was back in his body again. This can happen by itself, as has happened to me. Or the person can instigate it themselves if they have the know how. No doubt it will still sound unbelievable, but it did happen, but it will explain why perhaps there were no reports about the incident to be found.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 15:16:14 GMT
Hi Men an tol, I wouldn't like to live in your head, you give the impression that you distrust everything that anyone says, which makes me think that you are constantly suspicious of everyone. I certainly wouldn't want to live that way Well Scottish Lassie for someone who professes love for others as a main way of looking at life (or words to that affect) it seems that you are describing yourself. Your leader becomes ill and subsequently dies. It couldn't be some natural circumstance but rather the result of 'others' (unnamed) who were intent on silencing him and his message. No proof, no real evidence, just a belief that he was persecuted and intentionally killed. Now that would seem to be evidence of people who distrust others and are suspicious. You are right, living that way must be terrible. All I did was ask for evidence of those working to take away his 'freedom of speech.' As of yet, no such evidence.There is no evidence provided that 'others' outside of the movement even cared what he was saying. To me it is a serious accusation to make the claim that others were taking away his right of free speech and so I asked reasonable questions because I would like to know who those others are. The only ones who seem to be really upset with him are former members of the movement and I have no way of knowing the veracity of their stated concerns. Personally, I have no care about Paul Twitchell or his religious movement. To me he is simply one of many such people and movements which come into being with most disappearing without a trace. A few become successful (in terms of existing) to one degree or another. There is nothing new about that as such has occurred throughout known history. That some people find things in those movements that are of value to their lives is also neither here nor there to me. Am I a skeptic? Of course, as I am a human and that is a normal and healthy attribute of our species. Not in my book Men an tol, It seems very distrustful to me, with all your suggestions as to what happened. Don't you think if he was ill that he wouldn't have been hospitalised? And don't you think that the medical staff would have investigated as to the reason for his illness and ofcourse have discovered that he had been poisoned. You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say?
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 16:04:26 GMT
What is fake? Anything we can imagine has some form of existence. Even the most absurd things has something corresponding in our imagination giving them an existence.
The only concept I can't imagine is absolute nothingness. A black empty vacuum is not nothingness. Hi Anna, Because of the out of the body experiences that I have had, I know there is life after the demise of the human body. I have even travelled up the tunnel that so many people have spoken about. Another experience that I had which might correspond with the Geek post. I awoke in the middle of the night and suddenly saw a whole lot of writing moving quickly past my vision. It made me feel as if information was being pumped into my brain as If I was a robot, and maybe that is what we are. We humans are doing that also, creating robots and using computers to animate them. Perhaps that is what an advanced race of people have done to us. That would indeed be very funny if it turned out to be true. We live in a strange universe that's for sure!!!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 16:08:13 GMT
Well Scottish Lassie for someone who professes love for others as a main way of looking at life (or words to that affect) it seems that you are describing yourself. Your leader becomes ill and subsequently dies. It couldn't be some natural circumstance but rather the result of 'others' (unnamed) who were intent on silencing him and his message. No proof, no real evidence, just a belief that he was persecuted and intentionally killed. Now that would seem to be evidence of people who distrust others and are suspicious. You are right, living that way must be terrible. All I did was ask for evidence of those working to take away his 'freedom of speech.' As of yet, no such evidence.There is no evidence provided that 'others' outside of the movement even cared what he was saying. To me it is a serious accusation to make the claim that others were taking away his right of free speech and so I asked reasonable questions because I would like to know who those others are. The only ones who seem to be really upset with him are former members of the movement and I have no way of knowing the veracity of their stated concerns. Personally, I have no care about Paul Twitchell or his religious movement. To me he is simply one of many such people and movements which come into being with most disappearing without a trace. A few become successful (in terms of existing) to one degree or another. There is nothing new about that as such has occurred throughout known history. That some people find things in those movements that are of value to their lives is also neither here nor there to me. Am I a skeptic? Of course, as I am a human and that is a normal and healthy attribute of our species. Not in my book Men an tol, It seems very distrustful to me, with all your suggestions as to what happened. Don't you think if he was ill that he wouldn't have been hospitalised? And don't you think that the medical staff would have investigated as to the reason for his illness and ofcourse have discovered that he had been poisoned. You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say? That is really twisting things Scottish Lassie. You are the one who brought up the assertion that your leader, your group, is having their freedom of speech taken away from them. To me that is serious and I was wondering where that might be going on and who was doing it. I wasn't questioning the veracity of your assertion. Then you replied with, describing this event where your leader was speaking and got ill and died due to that poisoning. More over you are the one who asserted that his illness came from a drink someone (unnamed) gave him and then asserted that this drink was poisoned. These are very serious allegations. If he went to a hospital, and if they pumped his stomach, and if they analyzed the contents, and if the contents proved to be poison, then the police would have been called by the hospital and there were be official reports. I have yet to find any official records describing anything that you have described. From “Dialogue in the Age of Criticism”, Chap. 4, by Doug Marman: “ . . . How could Paul have been poisoned to death in Spain or Czechoslovakia, and no one be quite sure? I’ve never heard that one before. Yes, it is true that not a lot has been said about Paul's trip to Spain where he was poisoned, still the fact remains that he returned alive and lived for more than a year after this until his passing in Cincinnati on September 17, 1971. So, obviously, Paul wasn't poisoned to death. . . . “ Paul Twitchell died September 17, 1971, of a heart attack in Cincinnati, Ohio while attending an Eckankar seminar. Now, I could go into more as it is easy to find things about his death, but that is not and never has been my point, rather, I wanted to see defined the acts of taking away freedom of speech and who was doing it. As of yet there is no real reply to that question. My offering of possible causes of his poisoning were merely to emphasize that it is open and undefined. In fact, that since there was apparently a year between the alleged poisoning event and his death a reasonable assumption (emphasize it is only an assumption) that his death is not connected to the poisoning. Your comment (question), referring to me, “ . . . You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say? . . . “ is far removed from reality. Our challenge in communication is that I deal in provable realities of evidence that are reachable by our senses and you deal in misty unreachable beliefs only understandable by those (apparently such as yourself) who have the special power to see (feel) them. When asked to provide empirical evidence you generally retreat into some mythical position that only the initiated can really understand or become defense, but straight foreword answers are missing. Here with this asserted poisoning event that barrier could be crossed as actual evidence should be available, but even here you respond with innuendo and assumptions and then retreat into a defensive posture. Personally I don't care what position you take, but as I have stated, I do have an interest when freedoms are attacked and in this case freedom of speech. As near as I can tell, neither your leaders nor the organization have suffered any reduction of freedom and certainly no reduction in speech.
|
|
|
Post by interestedbob on Aug 14, 2015 16:41:29 GMT
So nobody actually saw the huge arm come out of the sky and stop the car from crashing, after all, Scottish Lassie? Paul Twitchell is the only person who saw it at all, and he saw it in a dream. This thread is about an article based on pure speculation, and you provide 'evidence' from somebody else's dream to support it. This whole conversation must be in the running to win the "Most Totally Pointless Conversation Ever" title. I'm not surprised the word 'Gullible' is to be removed from the Dictionary.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 16:53:37 GMT
Not in my book Men an tol, It seems very distrustful to me, with all your suggestions as to what happened. Don't you think if he was ill that he wouldn't have been hospitalised? And don't you think that the medical staff would have investigated as to the reason for his illness and ofcourse have discovered that he had been poisoned. You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say? That is really twisting things Scottish Lassie. You are the one who brought up the assertion that your leader, your group, is having their freedom of speech taken away from them. To me that is serious and I was wondering where that might be going on and who was doing it. I wasn't questioning the veracity of your assertion. Then you replied with, describing this event where your leader was speaking and got ill and died due to that poisoning. More over you are the one who asserted that his illness came from a drink someone (unnamed) gave him and then asserted that this drink was poisoned. These are very serious allegations. If he went to a hospital, and if they pumped his stomach, and if they analyzed the contents, and if the contents proved to be poison, then the police would have been called by the hospital and there were be official reports. I have yet to find any official records describing anything that you have described. From “Dialogue in the Age of Criticism”, Chap. 4, by Doug Marman: “ . . . How could Paul have been poisoned to death in Spain or Czechoslovakia, and no one be quite sure? I’ve never heard that one before. Yes, it is true that not a lot has been said about Paul's trip to Spain where he was poisoned, still the fact remains that he returned alive and lived for more than a year after this until his passing in Cincinnati on September 17, 1971. So, obviously, Paul wasn't poisoned to death. . . . “ Paul Twitchell died September 17, 1971, of a heart attack in Cincinnati, Ohio while attending an Eckankar seminar. Now, I could go into more as it is easy to find things about his death, but that is not and never has been my point, rather, I wanted to see defined the acts of taking away freedom of speech and who was doing it. As of yet there is no real reply to that question. My offering of possible causes of his poisoning were merely to emphasize that it is open and undefined. In fact, that since there was apparently a year between the alleged poisoning event and his death a reasonable assumption (emphasize it is only an assumption) that his death is not connected to the poisoning. Your comment (question), referring to me, “ . . . You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say? . . . “ is far removed from reality. Our challenge in communication is that I deal in provable realities of evidence that are reachable by our senses and you deal in misty unreachable beliefs only understandable by those (apparently such as yourself) who have the special power to see (feel) them. When asked to provide empirical evidence you generally retreat into some mythical position that only the initiated can really understand or become defense, but straight foreword answers are missing. Here with this asserted poisoning event that barrier could be crossed as actual evidence should be available, but even here you respond with innuendo and assumptions and then retreat into a defensive posture. Personally I don't care what position you take, but as I have stated, I do have an interest when freedoms are attacked and in this case freedom of speech. As near as I can tell, neither your leaders nor the organization have suffered any reduction of freedom and certainly no reduction in speech.
|
|
|
Post by interestedbob on Aug 14, 2015 17:13:15 GMT
?
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 17:35:26 GMT
So nobody actually saw the huge arm come out of the sky and stop the car from crashing, after all, Scottish Lassie? Paul Twitchell is the only person who saw it at all, and he saw it in a dream. This thread is about an article based on pure speculation, and you provide 'evidence' from somebody else's dream to support it. This whole conversation must be in the running to win the "Most Totally Pointless Conversation Ever" title. I'm not surprised the word 'Gullible' is to be removed from the Dictionary. Who said it was a dream? Interested Bob, I told you that Paul Twitchell was driving his car at great speed, lost control, and left his body. Many people have found themselves looking down on a scene, then found themselves back in their body again. You just refuse to believe it. He was driving a metal car in a physical body, what's the matter with you? I'm trying to explain a true happening. And you believe it to be a dream. You can be sure that it certainly wasn't a dream to Paul Twitchell. What you and others consider to be a dream, is actually Soul having an out of the body experience. He was able to leave his body and was looking down on the scene and in doing so, saw the car being straightened up, thus preventing a crash. As you and others apparently are not aware of what goes on in other dimensions, you will always be sceptical, there is nothing I can do about that. There are different ways of communication that takes place in ECKANKAR. You can choose to laugh if you so wish, but really the laugh is on those who try to ridicule everything just because they don't have any real understanding of what can happen in ECKANKAR.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 18:34:55 GMT
Scottish Lassie, no one (that I am aware of) is trying to change your beliefs, and your are correct that people who have never had such an experience will have a difficult time believing it (more likely impossible). So you can expect all sorts of reactions to your words short of belief.
Making some descriptive statement followed by something like, “you just refuse to believe it” is, from the point of view of those living in the world of senses, comments of someone living in a world of make believe and refusing to accept reality.
There are explanations from the temporal world for all that you have described relative to the world you believe in. I suspect that you reject that position but whether you do or don't reject it makes no difference. That you refuse to believe in the temporal world is your heavy load and not a challenge of those who live (successfully) in this temporal world.
|
|
|
Post by interestedbob on Aug 14, 2015 20:31:11 GMT
You call it an out of body experience, a phenomenon for which there is no concrete evidence, Scottish Lassie. I call it a dream, a phenomenon which can at least be shown to exist in some form, by brain scan changes. Many people CLAIM to have found themselves looking down on a scene, then found themselves back in their body again. As far as I'm aware, no-one has yet proved it. Once again, we have only Paul Twitchell's report of what he claimed to have seen. That may be evidence of a kind, but it's certainly far from being proof of anything. In the specific case we're discussing, a temporary blackout could in fact be a reasonably logical explanation for the car righting itself. A car being driven at high speed, with the driver attempting too tight a turn, is bound to begin to turn over, but easing the steering wheel to allow a shallower rate of turn is likely to allow the car to stabilise itself. Releasing the steering wheel temporarily, as might happen in a brief blackout, perhaps caused by fear or panic, is one way that could happen, and could explain both the car righting itself, and the dream image of an out of body experience. I'm not saying that's the only possible explanation, but it's infinitely more likely than a giant arm appearing out of the sky and being seen by a disembodied soul, while it's having an out of body experience. I don't "try to ridicule everything just because I don't have any real understanding of what can happen in ECKANKAR". Quite honestly I'm fed up hearing about ECKANKAR, and having done quite a lot of research on the subject, I think I already have quite enough understanding of it to form my own opinion about it, which I will keep to myself. I simply don't automatically believe everything I'm told about anything, not just ECKANKAR, especially if what I'm being told appears to be totally illogical, impossible, or in some cases just plain silly.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Aug 14, 2015 20:36:29 GMT
I think there are a lot of things that though they're strange are possible.
Certainly I've had a lot of strange experiences in my life and in particularly the hauntings which were also witnessed by other people and which continued even after we'd left the house.
But ultimately it's one thing to say I know what I experienced and so do those who experienced it with me and others who've had the same experiences since.
But it's basically a case where no amount of evidence will convince a sceptic any more than any lack of evidence will convince a believer.
So what it is, Chris, is not that you believe what you believe but that you confuse your beliefs with knowledge.
It's just not the same thing at all.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 21:09:49 GMT
Not in my book Men an tol, It seems very distrustful to me, with all your suggestions as to what happened. Don't you think if he was ill that he wouldn't have been hospitalised? And don't you think that the medical staff would have investigated as to the reason for his illness and ofcourse have discovered that he had been poisoned. You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say? That is really twisting things Scottish Lassie. You are the one who brought up the assertion that your leader, your group, is having their freedom of speech taken away from them. To me that is serious and I was wondering where that might be going on and who was doing it. I wasn't questioning the veracity of your assertion. Then you replied with, describing this event where your leader was speaking and got ill and died due to that poisoning. More over you are the one who asserted that his illness came from a drink someone (unnamed) gave him and then asserted that this drink was poisoned. These are very serious allegations. If he went to a hospital, and if they pumped his stomach, and if they analyzed the contents, and if the contents proved to be poison, then the police would have been called by the hospital and there were be official reports. I have yet to find any official records describing anything that you have described. From “Dialogue in the Age of Criticism”, Chap. 4, by Doug Marman: “ . . . How could Paul have been poisoned to death in Spain or Czechoslovakia, and no one be quite sure? I’ve never heard that one before. Yes, it is true that not a lot has been said about Paul's trip to Spain where he was poisoned, still the fact remains that he returned alive and lived for more than a year after this until his passing in Cincinnati on September 17, 1971. So, obviously, Paul wasn't poisoned to death. . . . “ Paul Twitchell died September 17, 1971, of a heart attack in Cincinnati, Ohio while attending an Eckankar seminar. Now, I could go into more as it is easy to find things about his death, but that is not and never has been my point, rather, I wanted to see defined the acts of taking away freedom of speech and who was doing it. As of yet there is no real reply to that question. My offering of possible causes of his poisoning were merely to emphasize that it is open and undefined. In fact, that since there was apparently a year between the alleged poisoning event and his death a reasonable assumption (emphasize it is only an assumption) that his death is not connected to the poisoning. Your comment (question), referring to me, “ . . . You seem to go out of your way to try and sabotage anything that I have to say? . . . “ is far removed from reality. Our challenge in communication is that I deal in provable realities of evidence that are reachable by our senses and you deal in misty unreachable beliefs only understandable by those (apparently such as yourself) who have the special power to see (feel) them. When asked to provide empirical evidence you generally retreat into some mythical position that only the initiated can really understand or become defense, but straight foreword answers are missing. Here with this asserted poisoning event that barrier could be crossed as actual evidence should be available, but even here you respond with innuendo and assumptions and then retreat into a defensive posture. Personally I don't care what position you take, but as I have stated, I do have an interest when freedoms are attacked and in this case freedom of speech. As near as I can tell, neither your leaders nor the organization have suffered any reduction of freedom and certainly no reduction in speech. Hi Men an tol, In talking about freedom of speech I was talking about today's obsession with that need due to the furore over what happened in France to do with the Prophet of Islam and the cartoonists. I then said that freedom of speech was not evident when Paul Twitchell was in Spain giving talks on.Soul travel etc. He WAS poisoned. His retinue, members of ECKANKAR, who were with him would know exactly what happened and they say that he was poisoned. I choose to believe what they have to say. He was a healthy man so there was nothing that could have harmed him. but the drink. When the body is fighting off the effects of poison, ofcourse the heart is affected.
|
|
|
Post by blc on Aug 14, 2015 21:20:41 GMT
So nobody actually saw the huge arm come out of the sky and stop the car from crashing, after all, Scottish Lassie? Paul Twitchell is the only person who saw it at all, and he saw it in a dream. This thread is about an article based on pure speculation, and you provide 'evidence' from somebody else's dream to support it. This whole conversation must be in the running to win the "Most Totally Pointless Conversation Ever" title. I'm not surprised the word 'Gullible' is to be removed from the Dictionary. Looks like cults and brainwashing are alive and well. Looks like cults and brainwashing are alive and well.
|
|