Reincarnation and change of laws
Barbara Schwarz
evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
again.
That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
don't get his possessions.
What will very much change are the penal laws.
Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
body?
And what about the death penality? Imagine a monster like Timothy
McVeigh. He is executed and picks up a new body within the next nine
month. A decade later he would be already able to commit the next
horrendous crime.
It could be that a family becomes victim of the same killer within
just a few years. They execute the killer, he is free to go for a new
baby body, and, as his character has not changed, will continue the
crime spree in his next lifetime.
Death penality sets criminals free. They rather should do hard time
prison labor and have to work on bettering their characters.
Barbara Schwarz
Kim P
Barbara Schwarz wrote:
If there is reincarnation prove it - it should be easy enough - to
document and PROVE that there is such a thing as past lives.
No silly hubbard spewage about engrams and past lives - real scientific
proof - like - a name, a birth date, a death date and burial place
all of which can be verified. Otherwise the belief in past lives
is nothing more than a belief and you are welcome to it - I have never
yet met anyone who believed in past lives who was not some regal and
special person (suppposedly) but I have yet to meet anyone who would
even be willing to try and prove that there is such a thing.
I believe in ONE lifetime - here and now - and then OVER - what ever
happens after death is irrelevent to this lifetime - there is no proof
of any after life of any kind. If I choose to believe in an afterlife
than I do so knowing that I can not prove such a thing exists - this is
FAITH not truth.
Whatever Hubabrd may or may not have believed he proved nothing but that
he was a liar and a cheat - a wife abuser and bigot. Most of his
so-called exploits were made up in his head and never happened
and his so-called heroism during the war another myth of epic
proportions.
Grow up you say ?" Why don't you look at what your life has become
and ask yourself why is it this way? Ask yourself how you got to
where you are and whether or not your delusions of ear implants
and Nazi's everywhere have made your life better or not. I am grown up
and I see what I see - and what ever happened to "if its true for you"
or is that only for the not so great dead L ROn Hubbard?
Kim P
Pedantus
Please, will someone tell me this person is joking...:)?
Thanks,
"Barbara Schwarz" <Stilllov...@myway.com> wrote in message
news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com...
Rich.Andrews
news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com:
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
>
Popular belief has nothing to do with the truth.
> That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
I have my father's tools and some other items that he left when he died.
As soon as he asks for them and can show proof of identity, he can have
them back.
r
--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.
spaceman
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
>
> That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
>
> What will very much change are the penal laws.
>
> Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
> body?
>
this very idea also.
Rumor has it that David has devised a new golden age of infant
auditing which requires new born babies to submit to sec checks, just
to be sure.
Glad you're on top of these things.
Lots of love,
Spaceman
Kwantem Mekanik
Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote:
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
>
Why would the Nazi mind controllers allow this?
> That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
>
> What will very much change are the penal laws.
>
> Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
> body?
>
> And what about the death penality? Imagine a monster like Timothy
> McVeigh. He is executed and picks up a new body within the next nine
> month. A decade later he would be already able to commit the next
> horrendous crime.
Interesting. Here is a thought experiment for everyone. You are enjoying
your breakfast one morning, when you hear an angry knock at your door.
You open it, and there are police there with a warrant for your arrest.
The charge -- you were convicted of murder in a past life, and you still
owe the state 400 years.
Let's say you have no memory of this past life -- those who believe in
reincarnation often say they can't remember all their lives. Or perhaps
you do, so in this life, you have been a law-abiding citizen, and you
have never gotten so much as a traffic ticket. Yet the state insists you
still owe time on your sentence, so it's off to jail for you.
Is this fair?
Stefano MacGregor
> Death penality sets criminals free. They rather should do hard time
> prison labor and have to work on bettering their characters.
There is no reincarnation. You only go around once in life, so you
have to get it right the first time.
--
Stefano
Acid Pooh
Uh, that's what karma is for. Tim McVeigh now my pet slug, and I salt
him gently every night.
'cid 'ooh
dudalb
"You are enjoying
your breakfast one morning, when you hear an angry knock at your door.
You open it, and there are police there with a warrant for your arrest.
The charge -- you were convicted of murder in a past life, and you still
owe the state 400 years."
Damn it, Kwantem, I think you have a hell of a good idea for a Science
Fiction novel there.....
But how about if L.Rom Hubbard came back and claimed all of the Church of
$cientology's money....
Jake
news:J7fPc.82832$yd5....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> Unnerving....:|
> Please, will someone tell me this person is joking...:)?
>
> Thanks,
Sadly, she is a crackpot and truly believes this horseshit.
Pedantus
"Jake" <Jake...@moscow.com> wrote in message
news:cekut4$2msu$1...@news.fsr.net...
> "Pedantus" <peda...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:J7fPc.82832$yd5....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > Unnerving....:|
> > Please, will someone tell me this person is joking...:)?
> >
> > Thanks,
>
>
> Sadly, she is a crackpot and truly believes this horseshit.
>
>
It seems impossible that anyone could forget that they are just making up
nonsense for the sake of drawing attention to themselves, but I guess it
happens.
>
> > "Barbara Schwarz" <Stilllov...@myway.com> wrote in message
> > news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com...
> > > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> > > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > > again.
> > >
< snip >
Gordon Burditt
>evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
>that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
>again.
>
>That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
>will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
>that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
>don't get his possessions.
How is it possible to leave your property to yourself? Are you claiming
that people can KNOW IN ADVANCE who they will be reincarnated as?
Or if he's supposed to come claim it, how does he prove his claim?
>What will very much change are the penal laws.
>
>Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
>in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
>body?
As far as holding people responsible for crimes in past lives, how
does a *COURT* determine that I am, for example, the reincarnation
of L. Ron Hubbard or Adolph Hitler (whether *I* believe it or not
is not relevant, since I wouldn't admit it).
Gordon L. Burditt
wbarwell
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
Its rather unlikely its true, even more unlikely it will be 'proven'.
Since the mid-1800s with the advent of the Spirit churches and
fake mediums and other silliness, numerous parapsychology
organizations have come and gone trying to prove life after death,
reincarnation, psychic abilities and other phenomenon.
Nothing at all has been achieved after 150 years of these efforts
excep that a surprising amount of fraud has accompanied
claims of psychic abilities over these times.
The last big public splash with reincarnation in America was
the book The Hunt For Bridey Murphy in the early 60's
Hardly science.
Psychic research lost almost all scientific credibilty
after the embarressing demise of Targ and Puthoff's
experiments at SRI were shredded by critics.
Very little real work goes on now that can really be
called scientific. Much less anything to do with
reincarnation. Most Christians and Moslems
do not believe in reincarnation, but heaven. That leaves
you with Hindus and Buddhists.
> That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
And just how do you expect somebody is going to
prove that they were reincarnated and deserve the possesion
of the late Mr. X?
...........
--
Senator Waxman's searchable database of iraq war lies.
www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
A good portal to more lies and Bush stupidity is to be found at
www.failureisimpossible.com - Go to the index and go to
"L" for lies. All you need to know about Bush when you
step into the voting booth. Bush is a liar and surrounds
himself with fellow liars.
Cheerful Charlie
wbarwell
> Unnerving....:|
> Please, will someone tell me this person is joking...:)?
No. What you see is what you get.
Barbara was a Scientologist, and reincarnation
is a core dogma of Scientology, bodies are very temporary,
The real you is a thetan, the Scientology equivalent of a soul.
In Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard claimed that after 'dropping
the body' the thetan goes out and finds a zygote to obtain a
new body. Animal bodies, including humans have a low grade
sort of soul, the Genetic Entity, The "GE" that a thetan bumps
aside, stealing control of the human fetus from the GE.
According to Hubbard we all 47 trillion, trillion, trillion years
old and many of us have been reincarnated, many, many times,
not all of these lives on this podunk planet, either.
From here on out it gets stranger.....
Cheerful Charlie
--
wbarwell
Hubbard pointedly claims that reincarnation Hubbard style could
be proven, that under auditing, one would be able to remember
details from past lives that would be amenable to proof, church records,
tombstones and other materials from the past could be used to
establish evidence that claims of past lives were true.
He even collected a book of past life claims, "Have You Loved Before
this Life?" full of ludicrous nonsense that has to be read to be
disbelieved.
Arthur L. Rubin
>
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
>
> That means of course that laws are being changed.
They aren't being changed NOW....perhaps if there were
scientific evidence (mainstream or not), they might be.
> People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves.
Hmmm. That would require significant change of laws, especially
since, in most theories, reincarnation can be delayed for some
time after death. The law, quite reasonably, requires that heirs
be identified as of the time of death. People COULD leave money
to a trust which identify the "future life" of the individual, and
leave the money to them -- but that's not much different from
leaving it to Alcor.
Chris Leithiser
>
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream.
Wrong with your first word, it think. Your second is also in error.
Barbara Schwarz
> In article <bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com>,
> Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote:
>
> > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > again.
I read through 15 - 16 response postings in this thread and I can just
say this: As more kindcontrolled people are, as more they robotically
repeat the hate communication by their psychiatric case officers.
I saw the old version of the Manchurian Candidate last weekend and
that is what is happening to your unspiritual guys. They control your
thinking. You guys think in the box, despite that you guys think you
don't know.
And another word: If L. Ron Hubbard would be the man you misled people
think he is, if Scientology would be the religion that you poor remote
controlled robots think it is, I never would have become one. What you
actually describe is the system that runs your guys through your ear
implants.
> >
>
> Why would the Nazi mind controllers allow this?
Now I respond to Kwantem. That is exactly the point. No, the Nazi
mindcontrollers don't allow it. That is why the universities and most
others did not acknowledge yet that past lives are a scientific fact.
And that is why the many fools who jumped in this thread don't get it.
The dear professors are mindcontrolled, they are no free thinker, that
is why only once in a while a voice comes up with evidence to past
lives and soon is ridiculed. The Nazi psych mindcontrollers think that
you guys are better controlled not knowing about your past lives.
I bet the top SEGNPMSS case officers know exactly what everyone was in
his or her lifetime, but they are not telling. Only they have a right
to know. I am sure they can measure who you were via their implants. I
am convinced they can ask you subconsiously questions that you answer
subconciously, without knowing that they asked you those questions and
all prints out on their computer screens.
>
> > That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> > will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> > that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> > don't get his possessions.
> >
> > What will very much change are the penal laws.
> >
> > Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> > in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
> > body?
> >
> > And what about the death penality? Imagine a monster like Timothy
> > McVeigh. He is executed and picks up a new body within the next nine
> > month. A decade later he would be already able to commit the next
> > horrendous crime.
>
> Interesting. Here is a thought experiment for everyone. You are enjoying
> your breakfast one morning, when you hear an angry knock at your door.
> You open it, and there are police there with a warrant for your arrest.
> The charge -- you were convicted of murder in a past life, and you still
> owe the state 400 years.
Exactly, that is why it is better not to kill anybody, Kwantem, don't
you agree? If you don't murder anybody, they have no reason to come
after you in this or any future life.
>
> Let's say you have no memory of this past life -- those who believe in
> reincarnation often say they can't remember all their lives.
There are ways to determine that this person and nobody else is the
killer. It is possible to measure the electrical electrical field and
the field of throughts. When you have murdered a person, it will stay
with you like a tatoo on the thetan, the spirit, the soul.
Or perhaps
> you do, so in this life, you have been a law-abiding citizen, and you
> have never gotten so much as a traffic ticket. Yet the state insists you
> still owe time on your sentence, so it's off to jail for you.
>
> Is this fair?
It is necessary and I tell you also why.
A killer likely does the same things again. If you think that Tim
McVeigh or some other kind of criminal of this kind sits in his future
life times in his garden and does not do anything else than watching
the roses grow, you are very much mistaken.
A icecold killer will not be a good person in his next lifetime, as he
has the same personality, he *is* the same personality. He was not
corrected by anybody, he never learned to develop feelings and decency
towards other people, all he did was committing murder and died.
You rather want the police knowing at your neighbors door arresting
the killer instead this new born and never changed killer living
there, trust me on that.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
> Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote in
> news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com:
>
> > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > again.
> >
>
> Popular belief has nothing to do with the truth.
Who says there is no scientific truth to it? Did you ever hear that
people suddenly spoke in other languages, languages that they never
learned in this lifetime?
>
>
> > That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> > will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> > that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> > don't get his possessions.
>
> I have my father's tools and some other items that he left when he died.
> As soon as he asks for them and can show proof of identity, he can have
> them back.
Did your father ever say to you to turn your music down as you would
ruin your nerves? Do you have a teenager in your basement turning up
the music and ruining your nerves? It could be your dad. Now, give him
his tools back. :)
Barbara Schwarz
>
>
> r
Barbara Schwarz
Sounds a lot like David Rice. I knew that he could not live like a
hermit in a remote cottage in the woods without Internet access.
No baby needs to be sec checked, except you maybe. :)
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
From what I have read in your posting, Stefano, you don't get it
right.
You have to make it right in each lifetime, as if you goof and mess
around in this one, it will have severe influence on your future
lifetimes.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
Ron will be back, but he was never interested in money. He was
interested in a better world for everyone. That he was interested in
money is one of the rotten SEGNPMSS fabrications. Psychs are money
oriented.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
> >It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> >evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> >that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> >again.
> >
> >That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> >will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> >that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> >don't get his possessions.
>
> How is it possible to leave your property to yourself?
If it becomes mainstream knowledge that people live more than once,
they will leave their money to themselves. Do you think that the old
man who married Nicole Smith would have left the money to her if he
would have known that he is in 18 years a young and vital guy?
> Are you claiming
> that people can KNOW IN ADVANCE who they will be reincarnated as?
I knew exactly what kind of body I would take. I think you can plan
for that.
For example, you give tips to your family where to pick you up, or you
go for a baby body in that family. I also believe that there will be
places in future where you can go to find out who you are, and then
you can re-unite with your former family and pick up your property.
> Or if he's supposed to come claim it, how does he prove his claim?
Can be measured by checking his mental energy. He has stored the truth
in himself.
>
> >What will very much change are the penal laws.
> >
> >Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> >in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
> >body?
>
> As far as holding people responsible for crimes in past lives, how
> does a *COURT* determine that I am, for example, the reincarnation
> of L. Ron Hubbard or Adolph Hitler (whether *I* believe it or not
> is not relevant, since I wouldn't admit it).
>
> Gordon L. Burditt
You are definitely not L. Ron Hubbard. I however also doubt that you
are Hitler. Even if you will not tell, just similar as with a lie
detector, it can be measured who you really are. Your own energy is
the confession. Don't panic, because I showed you a glimse in the
future. Just be good and nothing bad will happen to you.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
> Barbara Schwarz wrote:
> >
> > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > again.
> >
> > That means of course that laws are being changed.
>
> They aren't being changed NOW....perhaps if there were
> scientific evidence (mainstream or not), they might be.
They will be changed. I posted before in another thread that you can
see the spirit leaving the body when one dies. Do you know of those
cameras in hotels that spot dirt and sperm spots? With those you can
also see bodyless spirits, thetans, soul, actually people without
bodies. How do you know that it is not a sperm spot? Simple, they are
MOVING, and the sperm spot thanks heaven does not.
>
> > People who die today
> > will leave their property to themselves.
>
> Hmmm. That would require significant change of laws, especially
> since, in most theories, reincarnation can be delayed for some
> time after death.
That is correct. A person might not pick up a body right away, as the
one he wants is not available, but usually, those bodyless people are
in one big rush to get a new body. They come back rather quickly.
> The law, quite reasonably, requires that heirs
> be identified as of the time of death. People COULD leave money
> to a trust which identify the "future life" of the individual, and
> leave the money to them -- but that's not much different from
> leaving it to Alcor.
Your family, if you were nice to them, goes out of their ways to find
you again with your new body. Alcor does not look for you. If you are
unlucky, they freeze the spirit in, and the spirit thinks he can't
leave, which means that he is subjected to ice cold prison time for
hundred or years, till the electricity goes out and all the popsicles
are melt.
Barbara Schwarz
Zinj
Stilllov...@myway.com says...
<snip>
> Your family, if you were nice to them, goes out of their ways to find
> you again with your new body. Alcor does not look for you. If you are
> unlucky, they freeze the spirit in, and the spirit thinks he can't
> leave, which means that he is subjected to ice cold prison time for
> hundred or years, till the electricity goes out and all the popsicles
> are melt.
>
> Barbara Schwarz
The correct term is 'corpsicle'; not popsicle®, which is a registered
trademark of Popsicle Industries of Englewood, New Jersey.
Zinj
--
You can lead a Clam to Reason, but you Can't Make him Think
realpch
<snip>
> Interesting. Here is a thought experiment for everyone. You are enjoying
> your breakfast one morning, when you hear an angry knock at your door.
> You open it, and there are police there with a warrant for your arrest.
> The charge -- you were convicted of murder in a past life, and you still
> owe the state 400 years.
>
> Let's say you have no memory of this past life -- those who believe in
> reincarnation often say they can't remember all their lives. Or perhaps
> you do, so in this life, you have been a law-abiding citizen, and you
> have never gotten so much as a traffic ticket. Yet the state insists you
> still owe time on your sentence, so it's off to jail for you.
>
> Is this fair?
I either saw a sci-fi show on tv or read a short story where the plot
was that a woman somehow arrives in a future time and can remember her
past lives. She uncovers a "conspiracy" to make the general population
forget THEIR past lives. Finally, she runs up against the folks who
manage the general forgetting, and they tell her that they didn't always
make people forget, but it seemed that life was really hard for anyone
who had been either Jesus or Hitler in their past life.
: )
Peach
Arthur L. Rubin
>
> "Rich.Andrews" <spm...@ylhoo.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9538D6A5E319Am...@10.232.1.1>...
> > Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote in
> > news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com:
> >
> > > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> > > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > > again.
> > >
> >
> > Popular belief has nothing to do with the truth.
>
> Who says there is no scientific truth to it? Did you ever hear that
> people suddenly spoke in other languages, languages that they never
> learned in this lifetime?
No.
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
<ronni...@sprintmail.com> in misc.legal, wrote the following:
FWIW, she's referring to the phenomena known as 'xenoglossy' [defined as
the alleged speaking or writing in a language entirely unknown to the
speaker], and as far as I can tell, there's been no authenticated case
of actual xenoglossy upheld.
For how claims of xenoglossy work, see
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000410.html
which covers the present-day claims of Ian Stevenson, the most
well-known modern proponent of xenoglossy.
One of the first claims of xenoglossy was by F. H. Wood, who wrote
several books in the 1930's, claiming that a girl named "Rosemary" was
able to spak ancient Egyptian. The best review of these claims was made
by
Griffiths, J. Gwyn 1986. Some Claims of Xenoglossy in the Ancient
Languages. Numen, Leiden 33 (1986): 141-169.
Griffiths examined the claims of Wood and Hulme over the xenoglossy of a
psychic called "Rosemary" (Ivy C. Beaumont), which was written over
three works:
Wood, A. J. and Wood, F. 1935. _The Nona-Rosemary Language-Tests in
AncientEgyptian._ London: International Institute for Psychical
Research. (8 p. pamphlet).
Hulme, A. J. and Wood, F. 1937. _Ancient Egypt Speaks: A Miracle of
"Tongues." [A recording of unseen intelligences - a voice from the
XV111th Dynasty.] _. London: Rider.
Wood, F. 1939. _This Egyptian Miracle, Or The Restoration of the Lost
Speech of Ancient Egypt by Supernormal Means [recorded and ed. by
Frederic H. Wood]_. London: The Psychic Book Club.
Griffiths' article is a detailed examination of the claim made by
Frederic H. Wood in the various works, above, and especially in 'The
Speech of Ancient Egypt', an unpublished B.M. typescript, that the
medium Rosemary (Miss Ivy C. Beaumont) used colloquial Egyptian of the
NK while in a state of trance.
He concluded from the review that lexically the records include some
Egyptian, but that syntactically they go much astray, with the
suggestion that Wood himself was responsible, after learning some of the
language, for those elements.
HTH.
Regards --
--
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
Oriental Institute
Oriental Studies Doctoral Program [Egyptology]
University of Oxford
Oxford, United Kingdom
Poker Joker
news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com...
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream.
I got news for you. There are millions of records of people
living in the past. Certainly you didn't think your history
class was fictional literature, did you? And certainly there
are generations to come? I don't believe we need anymore
scientific evidence.
> I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
Well, I know some born-again christians.
> That means of course that laws are being changed.
That doesn't neccessarily follow, but I agree that congress
is always doing just that.
> People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
I hate those stinking probate lawyers. Always taking the loot.
> What will very much change are the penal laws.
I doubt it, 'cause congress is mostly lawyers themselves and
they stick up for their own. Even the probate lawyers.
> Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> in front of him.
You mean we should kill 'em but blame his health or maybe the authorities?
What will we get outa doing this?
>Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new body?
You mean you think I want to let him go 'cause he has that fancy
shampoo?
> And what about the death penality? Imagine a monster like Timothy
> McVeigh. He is executed and picks up a new body within the next nine
> month. A decade later he would be already able to commit the next
> horrendous crime.
Well of course, shampoo or not, we should keep him locked up.
> It could be that a family becomes victim of the same killer within
> just a few years.
Wow. I always wondered about those people coming back from
the grave and going after the bad guy. Or better yet, say their souls
somehow could go inside bodies of newborns. In that case
they might be happy someone killed 'em. Hey?
> They execute the killer, he is free to go for a new
> baby body, and, as his character has not changed, will continue the
> crime spree in his next lifetime.
No, no, no. You don't understand. I said the victims might get new,
fresh, healthy bodies and be happy. Plus they can come back and
get revenge. It might actually be better for them if we just let the
killers go free so the victims can come back and git 'em.
> Death penality sets criminals free.
No, no, no. That's not the way. Just don't even arrest 'em.
Just let the victims come back to take care of business.
This is soooo coool.
> They rather should do hard time
> prison labor and have to work on bettering their characters.
Naw, too easy on 'em.
Faxhor
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
>
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
>
>
> body?
>
> McVeigh. He is executed and picks up a new body within the next nine
> month. A decade later he would be already able to commit the next
> horrendous crime.
>
> baby body, and, as his character has not changed, will continue the
> crime spree in his next lifetime.
>
> prison labor and have to work on bettering their characters.
>
The Tibetan bhuddists did it. They had a method for finding the
Dalai Lama after he returns as a child. There is even a movie
about it.
Faxhor
Gordon Burditt
>> >evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
>> >that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
>> >again.
>> >
>> >That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
>> >will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
>> >that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
>> >don't get his possessions.
>>
>> How is it possible to leave your property to yourself?
>
>If it becomes mainstream knowledge that people live more than once,
>they will leave their money to themselves.
This assumes that it is *POSSIBLE* and *LEGAL* to leave their money
to themselves. There are several problems with this. The current
law has rules about being specific about who you leave the money
to. (Trusts are a possible way around that, but there's a "law
against perpetuities" which limits the time you have to show up and
claim the money). There is also the very real problem with scammers
claiming the money before the real person shows up. And, if there's
going to be a lot of property lying around unused for a long time,
politicians are likely to tax the heck out of it. Assuming for the
moment that you leave yourself a house and it takes 20 years for
you to figure out who you are and claim it, is there anything left
after 20 years of property taxes and upkeep on the house? (to say
nothing of inheritance taxes).
I think "leaving the money to yourself", when it may involve leaving
a lot of property idle for decades (when there are all those homeless
out there), is likely to be viewed as a problem to be solved by
preventing it. Now, if you can leave it to a younger relative who
agrees to hold it for you, and not squander it, you really could
"leave it to yourself", but can a large amount of money really be
left with someone else for 20 years?
>Do you think that the old
>man who married Nicole Smith would have left the money to her if he
>would have known that he is in 18 years a young and vital guy?
There are also laws that you cannot disinherit a spouse completely.
Not being allowed to take all your money with you and leave your
spouse broke serves a useful purpose for society.
>> Are you claiming
>> that people can KNOW IN ADVANCE who they will be reincarnated as?
>
>I knew exactly what kind of body I would take. I think you can plan
>for that.
Are you claiming that people HAVE A CHOICE in what kind of body they
take? How do you know this? Got any proof?
>For example, you give tips to your family where to pick you up, or you
>go for a baby body in that family. I also believe that there will be
>places in future where you can go to find out who you are, and then
>you can re-unite with your former family and pick up your property.
And you think scammers won't have beaten you to it?
>> Or if he's supposed to come claim it, how does he prove his claim?
>
>Can be measured by checking his mental energy. He has stored the truth
>in himself.
Is this method accurate enough to distinguish one among billions of
people? (There's at least as many souls as there are people alive today).
>> >What will very much change are the penal laws.
Now this, I have a big problem with. It's one thing for YOU to know
about your past lives. It's quite another for others to know about
your past lives even if you choose to lie about it (since if you're
a reborn killer, living in a society that punishes such people, you're
going to avoid voluntarily taking any test that would prove it).
>> >Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
>> >in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
>> >body?
Legally, what is your probable cause for "checking the mental energy"
of some person who might have been a killer in a past life? Legally,
you don't get to do things like get a DNA sample from everyone on
earth just to find one rapist. Also, you've got the problem that
unless you start saving "mental energy fingerprints" of criminals,
you haven't got anything to match against.
It takes a lot of effort and proof to get courts to accept something
like a "mental energy fingerprint". Regular fingerprints and DNA
weren't always accepted. Even now there's disputes over how much
similarity is needed for a match. And regular fingerprints and DNA
actually have something you can test against: you can easily make
fingerprints from the same or different fingers for the purpose of
testing. It takes a lot more effort and convincing to take mental
energy fingerprints of the same soul in different bodies and verify
that there is a reliable match that doesn't match other souls.
>> As far as holding people responsible for crimes in past lives, how
>> does a *COURT* determine that I am, for example, the reincarnation
>> of L. Ron Hubbard or Adolph Hitler (whether *I* believe it or not
>> is not relevant, since I wouldn't admit it).
>>
>> Gordon L. Burditt
>
>You are definitely not L. Ron Hubbard. I however also doubt that you
>are Hitler. Even if you will not tell, just similar as with a lie
>detector, it can be measured who you really are. Your own energy is
>the confession.
You measured Adolph Hitler's energy while he was alive so you can
compare it with mine? Really? Also, how do you get me to take the
test? (I know, you sucker me into claiming "my inheritance" left to
me by my former reincarnation, which requires that I have the test
done, then use it against me. What if I don't bite on that? What's
your probable cause for compelling the test?)
>Don't panic, because I showed you a glimse in the
>future. Just be good and nothing bad will happen to you.
Are you prepared to demonstrate that a "mental energy fingerprint"
of the same soul in the same body reliably stays the same, and that
the "mental energy fingerprint" is reliably different for other
souls in other bodies? Leaving aside the "same soul in a different
body" part, that would be a pretty neat technology for identifying
bodies in their CURRENT incarnation. Got proof that it works?
Remember, it has to reliably produce different readings for billions
of different people, and it can't be affected by things like
state of health, age, different conditions of measurement, etc.
Gordon L. Burditt
Matt Giwer
> It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> again.
> That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> don't get his possessions.
> What will very much change are the penal laws.
> Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
> body?
> And what about the death penality? Imagine a monster like Timothy
> McVeigh. He is executed and picks up a new body within the next nine
> month. A decade later he would be already able to commit the next
> horrendous crime.
> It could be that a family becomes victim of the same killer within
> just a few years. They execute the killer, he is free to go for a new
> baby body, and, as his character has not changed, will continue the
> crime spree in his next lifetime.
> Death penality sets criminals free. They rather should do hard time
> prison labor and have to work on bettering their characters.
Even worse. A person dies in debt. Should he escape that debt simply
because of death? And should not the parents of the reincarnated
infant be responsible for those debts? Should not the IRS be first in
line to collect?
But if they died rich should they not be able to reclaim their property?
--
Were the US to cease support, Israel would
become a tail in search of a dog.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3201
Barbara Schwarz
> On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 17:00:42 -0700, "Arthur L. Rubin"
> <ronni...@sprintmail.com> in misc.legal, wrote the following:
>
> >Barbara Schwarz wrote:
> >>
> >> "Rich.Andrews" <spm...@ylhoo.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9538D6A5E319Am...@10.232.1.1>...
> >> > Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote in
> >> > news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com:
> >> >
> >> > > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> >> > > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> >> > > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> >> > > again.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Popular belief has nothing to do with the truth.
> >>
> >> Who says there is no scientific truth to it? Did you ever hear that
> >> people suddenly spoke in other languages, languages that they never
> >> learned in this lifetime?
> >
> >No.
>
> FWIW, she's referring to the phenomena known as 'xenoglossy' [defined as
> the alleged speaking or writing in a language entirely unknown to the
> speaker], and as far as I can tell, there's been no authenticated case
> of actual xenoglossy upheld.
I am not referring to stupid psychiatric hypnosis, Katherine. There
are other ways to re-visit past lives. I never would agree to
hypnosis, and it is not necessary to use hypnosis to go back.
Psychiatry is a junk science trying to "cure" the mind with chemicals,
electro-schocks, hypnosis and lobotomy. Stevenson's citations don't
sound very scientific to me either. He is just assuming it is a trick
and that is his "science".
But forget the language for a moment. Many people recall past lives
but don't get their former language back. There were also people who
received skills back, e.g. were able to play a music instrument that
they did not learn in this live.
Most people live through past lives and don't bring anything back,
except the knowledge that they lived before.
I just wonder what makes you such an expert on past lives? Did you
ever try to go back yourself?
Katherine, did you ever hear what Voltaire said to this subject? He
said that the probablity of that people are born twice is just as high
as just being born once.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
There you go. Or better, there you come back. :)
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
The best would be not to make any debts. But if you made them, you
certainly should pay them back. But the parents should not pay those
debts. The infant has to grow up before he is asked to pay.
But what is your problem with paying debts back, Matt? Be reminded,
you have then a new healthy and strong body. Paying the debts back is
a piece of cake for you in that condition.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
> "Barbara Schwarz" <Stilllov...@myway.com> wrote in message
> news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com...
> > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream.
>
> I got news for you. There are millions of records of people
> living in the past. Certainly you didn't think your history
> class was fictional literature, did you? And certainly there
> are generations to come? I don't believe we need anymore
> scientific evidence.
Re-calling past lives means not living in the past. You probably
understand your present life problems better by going back and check
when they actually started.
>
> > I read somewhere
> > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > again.
>
> Well, I know some born-again christians.
That is not what I mean, however, I know that 500 BC the Christians
leaders came together and they took the christian belief into past
lives out of the Christians statutes. Did you know that, Katherine?
They figured that they can control people better if they would not
know that they are being born again. That also means that Jesus
believed in past lives.
>
> > That means of course that laws are being changed.
>
> That doesn't neccessarily follow, but I agree that congress
> is always doing just that.
>
> > People who die today
> > will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> > that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> > don't get his possessions.
>
> I hate those stinking probate lawyers. Always taking the loot.
>
> > What will very much change are the penal laws.
>
> I doubt it, 'cause congress is mostly lawyers themselves and
> they stick up for their own. Even the probate lawyers.
>
> > Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> > in front of him.
>
> You mean we should kill 'em but blame his health or maybe the authorities?
> What will we get outa doing this?
I don't preach violence, Poker Joker.
Barbara Schwarz
Barb Knox
Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote:
[snip]
> I know that 500 BC the Christians leaders came together
That's not really possible, unless you also believe in physical
time-travel.
>and they took the christian belief into past
>lives out of the Christians statutes.
That's also not credible, since we have manuscripts of the NT from
before 500 CE.
> Did you know that, Katherine?
I hope she didn't, because it's clearly not true.
>They figured that they can control people better if they would not
>know that they are being born again.
Interesting. The Hindu and Buddhist and CoS leaders have found it easy
enough to control people by *using* a belief in reincarnation, rather
than denying it.
>That also means that Jesus believed in past lives.
There is at least one passage in the gospels that can be reasonably
interpreted in that light. But that doesn't make the rest of what you
wrote any less wrong.
[snip]
--
---------------------------
| BBB b \ Barbara at LivingHistory stop co stop uk
| B B aa rrr b |
| BBB a a r bbb |
| B B a a r b b |
| BBB aa a r bbb |
-----------------------------
Barbara Schwarz
> >> >It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> >> >evidence of past and future lives into mainstream. I read somewhere
> >> >that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> >> >again.
> >> >
> >> >That means of course that laws are being changed. People who die today
> >> >will leave their property to themselves. The good thing about that is
> >> >that greedy relatives will not kill grandpa anymore, as they anyway
> >> >don't get his possessions.
> >>
> >> How is it possible to leave your property to yourself?
> >
> >If it becomes mainstream knowledge that people live more than once,
> >they will leave their money to themselves.
>
> This assumes that it is *POSSIBLE* and *LEGAL* to leave their money
> to themselves. There are several problems with this. The current
> law has rules about being specific about who you leave the money
> to. (Trusts are a possible way around that, but there's a "law
> against perpetuities" which limits the time you have to show up and
> claim the money). There is also the very real problem with scammers
> claiming the money before the real person shows up. And, if there's
> going to be a lot of property lying around unused for a long time,
> politicians are likely to tax the heck out of it. Assuming for the
> moment that you leave yourself a house and it takes 20 years for
> you to figure out who you are and claim it, is there anything left
> after 20 years of property taxes and upkeep on the house? (to say
> nothing of inheritance taxes).
Inheritance taxes can't apply if you leave the money for yourself. You
are right, Gordon, that there can be problems, but one day there will
be companies that earn their money with relocating the alleged
deceased in his new body.
The best chance to find you in a new body, is letting your family look
for you, as they love you (hopefully) and want you back (hopefully).
Otherwise, your money (or debts) will be frozen till you report
yourself back.
>
> I think "leaving the money to yourself", when it may involve leaving
> a lot of property idle for decades (when there are all those homeless
> out there), is likely to be viewed as a problem to be solved by
> preventing it. Now, if you can leave it to a younger relative who
> agrees to hold it for you, and not squander it, you really could
> "leave it to yourself", but can a large amount of money really be
> left with someone else for 20 years?
I wrote a short story about that. It is in on the hard drive of my
computer which broke down short after I wrote the story The guy hired
a law firm, told them where he would pick up his new body and the
attorneys should approach him after 18 years. They did. The young man
did not believe them in the beginning, but in his former identity he
thought he has to give the attorneys as much details as possible about
his life to convince him as young man without memory that he is indeed
the guy. He investigates his own past live them and indeed comes to
the conclusion that the former old guy is him. He even gets his past
live wife back. She too has a new body.
>
>
> >Do you think that the old
> >man who married Nicole Smith would have left the money to her if he
> >would have known that he is in 18 years a young and vital guy?
>
> There are also laws that you cannot disinherit a spouse completely.
> Not being allowed to take all your money with you and leave your
> spouse broke serves a useful purpose for society.
Alright, alright. Leave your spouse as much as you want. I don't have
a problem with it. You can leave her everything. But I still doubt
that the old guy would have, if he would have known that he comes
back, is 18, needs money and Nicole is having it all.
>
> >> Are you claiming
> >> that people can KNOW IN ADVANCE who they will be reincarnated as?
> >
> >I knew exactly what kind of body I would take. I think you can plan
> >for that.
>
> Are you claiming that people HAVE A CHOICE in what kind of body they
> take? How do you know this? Got any proof?
Nothing easier than that. It is no free world, Gordon, also the
afterlife so to speak is mindcontrolled, but a free spirit floats
around and he can see the gender of a baby body. You know the
difference between those two kind of bodies, don't you? You just dive
and grab on the kind of body that you want. That is the entire secret
of getting the kind of body that you want to have.
>
> >For example, you give tips to your family where to pick you up, or you
> >go for a baby body in that family. I also believe that there will be
> >places in future where you can go to find out who you are, and then
> >you can re-unite with your former family and pick up your property.
>
> And you think scammers won't have beaten you to it?
Sure, they will be around, but we all have to work on bettering the
moral of people. But you should be able to trust your family at least,
don't you? You you have somebody in your family who would want you
around for future life times?
>
> >> Or if he's supposed to come claim it, how does he prove his claim?
> >
> >Can be measured by checking his mental energy. He has stored the truth
> >in himself.
>
> Is this method accurate enough to distinguish one among billions of
> people? (There's at least as many souls as there are people alive today).
Originial Scientology technology is. Nobody is just like the other.
Just your life fingerprints is that mental energy your very own.
>
> >> >What will very much change are the penal laws.
>
> Now this, I have a big problem with. It's one thing for YOU to know
> about your past lives. It's quite another for others to know about
> your past lives even if you choose to lie about it (since if you're
> a reborn killer, living in a society that punishes such people, you're
> going to avoid voluntarily taking any test that would prove it).
There are ways to determine the innocence or the guilt of a person
even if she does not know or is lying.
>
> >> >Lets say a killer dies in custody and has still many years of sentence
> >> >in front of him. Is it okay to just let him go because he has a new
> >> >body?
>
> Legally, what is your probable cause for "checking the mental energy"
> of some person who might have been a killer in a past life? Legally,
> you don't get to do things like get a DNA sample from everyone on
> earth just to find one rapist. Also, you've got the problem that
> unless you start saving "mental energy fingerprints" of criminals,
> you haven't got anything to match against.
I don't know if you understand you. I past life killer will not be a
nice child. He probably will be in all kinds of troubles with the law
and will attack others already in his childhood. You don't go after
normal and good kids, but you should check the criminal kids out.
DNA sample will not more help when the killer has a new body. The
mental energy that surrounds him will give the clue.
>
> It takes a lot of effort and proof to get courts to accept something
> like a "mental energy fingerprint". Regular fingerprints and DNA
> weren't always accepted. Even now there's disputes over how much
> similarity is needed for a match. And regular fingerprints and DNA
> actually have something you can test against: you can easily make
> fingerprints from the same or different fingers for the purpose of
> testing. It takes a lot more effort and convincing to take mental
> energy fingerprints of the same soul in different bodies and verify
> that there is a reliable match that doesn't match other souls.
They are now something like the brain "fingerprints", they can measure
the brains and activities of people in all details. With this kind of
technology, you must make sure that it is not used to control people,
it should be just used to determine innocent and guilt. The peaceful
person should be not controlled and bothered by that. The technology
to all of that exist already, Gordon. Go to www.datafilter.com/mc/
>
> >> As far as holding people responsible for crimes in past lives, how
> >> does a *COURT* determine that I am, for example, the reincarnation
> >> of L. Ron Hubbard or Adolph Hitler (whether *I* believe it or not
> >> is not relevant, since I wouldn't admit it).
> >>
> >> Gordon L. Burditt
> >
> >You are definitely not L. Ron Hubbard. I however also doubt that you
> >are Hitler. Even if you will not tell, just similar as with a lie
> >detector, it can be measured who you really are. Your own energy is
> >the confession.
>
> You measured Adolph Hitler's energy while he was alive so you can
> compare it with mine? Really? Also, how do you get me to take the
> test?
It is not necessary to measure Hitlers energy of that past life. You
just ask him in his new body with his new identity, if he was Hitler.
He will most likely lie, but his mental energy will tell the truth.
> (I know, you sucker me into claiming "my inheritance" left to
> me by my former reincarnation, which requires that I have the test
> done, then use it against me. What if I don't bite on that? What's
> your probable cause for compelling the test?)
As I said, you can leave it to your family. That is how I would do it.
They will recognize you of you come back. If you tell them to look for
you, they will do it too. Your family is the best bet to get back what
once belonged to you. We are talking constantly about money and
possessions, but the best would be to be reunited with the people you
love, right?
>
> >Don't panic, because I showed you a glimse in the
> >future. Just be good and nothing bad will happen to you.
>
> Are you prepared to demonstrate that a "mental energy fingerprint"
> of the same soul in the same body reliably stays the same, and that
> the "mental energy fingerprint" is reliably different for other
> souls in other bodies?
I could, if I would have money to set up such an operation.
> Leaving aside the "same soul in a different
> body" part, that would be a pretty neat technology for identifying
> bodies in their CURRENT incarnation. Got proof that it works?
In their CURRENT incarnation? Why is that? You mean to identify people
who got plastic surgery to run from the law? Yes, you could identify
them, but I am not thinking about them. I rather think about the good
guys, who should get back what once belonged to them.
> Remember, it has to reliably produce different readings for billions
> of different people, and it can't be affected by things like
> state of health, age, different conditions of measurement, etc.
Exactly. Original Dianetcis and Scientology technology by L. Ron
Hubbard and work with the e-meter was able to determine that very
specific mental energy. But in meantime others are catching on too. It
is able to make a blueprint from the soul, the spirit, the thetan, and
none is like the other. And that is how you can find anybody again,
besides that it is possible on your own to remember past lives.
Barbara Schwarz
>
> Gordon L. Burditt
Barbara Schwarz
How nice of you to clear that up. Do you have also a plan to corpsicle
your body in a popsicle? You are very close to Keith Henson? Any plans
to be frozen in Keith's container fridge? You guys could hold yourself
warm and cozy in those millions of ice cold nights....
Barbara Schwarz
Arthur L. Rubin
>
> "Poker Joker" <Po...@wi.rr.com> wrote in message news:<KGDPc.8528$ju6....@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>...
> > "Barbara Schwarz" <Stilllov...@myway.com> wrote in message
> > news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com...
> > > I read somewhere
> > > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > > again.
> >
> > Well, I know some born-again christians.
> That is not what I mean, however, I know that 500 BC the Christians
> leaders came together and they took the christian belief into past
> lives out of the Christians statutes.
Cite?
Acid Pooh
Why would they want money if they could control minds? They would
never need to pay people, since they can--by hypothesis--control their
minds. They could live in luxury for free, by simply convincing
people who have what they want to give it up.
Was Ron a Nazi SEGNPMSS Psych controller too? Are you sure they
haven't gotten to you, too?
'cid 'ooh
Gordon Burditt
>> of the same soul in the same body reliably stays the same, and that
>> the "mental energy fingerprint" is reliably different for other
>> souls in other bodies?
>
>I could, if I would have money to set up such an operation.
I'm suggesting that this is the only way to get courts to accept
reincarnation and any method you have of proving who is a reincarnation
of who. Without that, they'll never buy the idea of holding the
next incarnation of criminals responsible for their crimes in the
previous incarnation. This requires a heck of a lot of proof. It
will probably require decades, even if things go well. Even then,
DNA has the "identical twin" problem.
>> Leaving aside the "same soul in a different
>> body" part, that would be a pretty neat technology for identifying
>> bodies in their CURRENT incarnation. Got proof that it works?
>
>In their CURRENT incarnation? Why is that?
To perform a controlled experiment and prove it works, at least for
the current body. It's a start. It gives some credibility to
"mental energy fingerprints". And if it actually works reliably,
you could make a lot of money selling security systems. It would
make "leaving the money to yourself" easier. If you can open the
lock (without trying to break in) using your "mental energy
fingerprint", it's your money.
If you can't get it to work (with the same bodies), it pretty much
blows the theory that you can identify reincarnated people using
the same method.
>You mean to identify people
>who got plastic surgery to run from the law?
And people who have amnesia.
And people who are in comas (or would that work?)
And lost children who can't communicate.
It wouldn't work on dead bodies, would it?
And maybe even use "mental energy fingerprints" to open locks and
security doors and retrieve e-mail instead of access cards or
passwords. (Using the "mental energy fingerprint", and an enterprising
ISP setting up special email accounts, you could even send email
to your next incarnation!)
>Yes, you could identify
>them, but I am not thinking about them. I rather think about the good
>guys, who should get back what once belonged to them.
First you've got to convince the courts of reincarnation.
It probably took centuries to convince them that footprints are
reliable evidence.
>> Remember, it has to reliably produce different readings for billions
>> of different people, and it can't be affected by things like
>> state of health, age, different conditions of measurement, etc.
>
>Exactly. Original Dianetcis and Scientology technology by L. Ron
>Hubbard and work with the e-meter was able to determine that very
>specific mental energy. But in meantime others are catching on too. It
>is able to make a blueprint from the soul, the spirit, the thetan, and
>none is like the other. And that is how you can find anybody again,
>besides that it is possible on your own to remember past lives.
I challenge you to a double-blind experiment. Take 100 people.
Separate experts take their fingerprints, DNA, and "mental energy
fingerprints", with each of these identified by a code number.
Repeat the same experiment a year later (using the same people,
with possibly a couple of dropouts and a couple of new additions)
with a different set of experts from the first set. Now, using
only the "mental energy fingerprints" from the first set and from
the second set, and a third expert in "mental energy fingerprints",
match up the first set with the second set, CORRECTLY. Just to
make things harder, throw in a couple of extra tests run on a few
people twice. If there are disagreements, use how the people
identify themselves, the fingerprints, and the DNA samples to verify
that none of the test subjects pulled a fast one.
For that matter, doing the same tests on the same day, still using
different experts, and getting the matchup correct would be a pretty
impressive result. The experts are not, to the extent possible,
given an opportunity to record details about the people (sex, race,
height, weight, voice characteristics, etc.) and this is the reason
for using different experts. The test subjects are adults. They
aren't given enough time to die and show up in a different adult
body.
Courts will probably want more evidence, like a much larger sample
(e.g. 100,000) and cross-match all pairs, demostrating there are
no false matches. How big a sample was necessary to convince
courts that DNA was reliable?
After you get courts to accept "mental energy fingerprints", then
you can start introducing evidence that reincarnated people have
the same fingerprint as their previous incarnation (BUT, a person
can't be an incarnation of another if their lifetimes overlap, so
discovering one of these matches would be a problem).
Incidentally, it is not true that you can't have inheritance taxes
on money you leave to yourself. (Politicians can tax anything.)
Current law does not recognize reincarnation, so you can't possibly
(from the point of view of the law) leave it to yourself. In
practice, you leave it with family and it gets taxed like you left
it to family. But there's nothing preventing politicians thinking
that the concentration of wealth is getting too high (and the
government isn't getting its share of death taxes), and taxing
"leaving it to yourself" at DOUBLE the rate for leaving it to a
stranger.
Gordon L. Burditt
Acid Pooh
> > "Barbara Schwarz" <Stilllov...@myway.com> wrote in message
> > news:bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com...
> > > It think we are only more a heart beat away from getting scientific
> > > evidence of past and future lives into mainstream.
> >
> > I got news for you. There are millions of records of people
> > living in the past. Certainly you didn't think your history
> > class was fictional literature, did you? And certainly there
> > are generations to come? I don't believe we need anymore
> > scientific evidence.
>
> Re-calling past lives means not living in the past. You probably
> understand your present life problems better by going back and check
> when they actually started.
> >
> > > I read somewhere
> > > that most people on earth anyway believe that they are being born
> > > again.
> >
> > Well, I know some born-again christians.
> That is not what I mean, however, I know that 500 BC the Christians
> leaders came together and they took the christian belief into past
> lives out of the Christians statutes. Did you know that, Katherine?
> They figured that they can control people better if they would not
> know that they are being born again. That also means that Jesus
> believed in past lives.
Uhh... 500 BC? There weren't any Christian leaders in 500 BC because
C came 500 years later. Sheesh, that was retarded.
'cid 'ooh
Matt Giwer
I have no problem with paying debts but I was just warming up.
Consider your marriage vows to me in our last lives. I want to sue
you for representing yourself as unmarried as in the life before you
were married to someone else. As you recall I only said my previous
wife had died.
In any event and despite my distaste, I wish to continue to exercise
my conjugal rights. And don't give me any of that married crap or I
will have you charged as a bigamistress.
See you in divorce court if you refuse my conjugal rights. I'll take
you for all you are worth in this life and all your lives to come.
Lord knows my last 231 wives took me for enough. Thank god writing
hadn't been invented any earlier.
--
When the Nuremberg Laws were passed in Germany, Blacks in
America would have embraced such laws as in improvement
in their legal condition.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3210
Still_lying_about_Marty
For more information on my brilliance:
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/7089-Woman_pursues_Oregon_public_records_-_lots_of_them.html
>
> Barbara Schwarz
Gerald Montagna
family. My father's side were uneducated peasants in Sicily. An
elderly woman in the family was on her deathbed and the priest was
there. With her last energy shell started talking words nobody could
understand, and they asked the priest what was happening. The priest,
being educated, understood the language: he told them she is speaking
Greek. This was an ignorant peasant, who could speak nothing but
Sicilian. The story has been passed down in our family history for
generations.
Chris Leithiser
> Who says there is no scientific truth to it? Did you ever hear that
> people suddenly spoke in other languages, languages that they never
> learned in this lifetime?
I'm pretty sure you learned Gibberish in _this_ lifetime.
Guess who?
Foregoing posting is not made by Barbara Schwarz but is another
forgery by slimy pus-filled maggot Garry Lynn Scarff.
Read him in his own dangerous words: "You're very lucky there's 2000
miles between us, Beebe. You'd either be dead or in ICU."
Postings with e-mail address Barbara...@emailaccount.com and
identities "Barbara_Schwarz", "the real Barbara Schwarz de Rothschild"
and "Truth Speaker 2" are not done by me. I also don't post with ID
Still_lying_about_Marty.
Those postings are forgeries of criminal, Aids infected, gay lunatic
Garry Lynn Scarff who is a fanatical Dave Touretzky defender. Scarff
is nobody on his own and also stole the identity of Mark Rathbun Marty
Rathbun (mrat...@scientology.org). I believe there is something like
the gay Mafia, and Scarff belongs it it. He constantly posts my home
address on the net in hope I come to harm or that I am being murdered
by those that find the address, if he can't make himself to my town to
kill me.
Scarff persecutes me from thread to thread often using my name as
identity for those crimes (!) and verbally assaults me, threatens me,
harasses me, sexually harasses me, tries to intimidate me, libels,
insults and lies about me. He also posts with identity "Dicktop Stud"
and "Papa Boner". He furthermore lied that he spoke to a roomate of
mine in the Utah mental health hospital. I never was in that hospital,
but he probably escaped from one. It is also striking that especially
the worst and most lawless guys, as Scarff, promote junk science
psychiatry.
Scarff is active member of the gay WeHo "church", that according to
Scarff applaudes Scarff's lawless behavior against me. An ex-WeHo
member wrote me that this "church" sanctions and promotes dishonorable
behavior and that he and his friends were raped and drugged by one of
their active members, and that one of their active members murdered
others under the guise of "drug overdose". The ex-WeHo wrote that the
gay men make sexual innuendo during sermon and "church" leadership, as
their "Pastor" Terry Brewer, don't see what's wrong with that.
And below is a list of other anti-religious extremists, or psychiatric
trolls, how I call them.
----------------------------------------------
Gerald Armstrong
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/armstrong1.html
Jim Beebe
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/beebej1.html
Graham Berry
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/berry.html
David Bird
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/birdd1.html
Tory Christman
http://religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/christmant4.html
Ursula Caberta
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/caberta.html
Ida Camburn
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/camburn1.html
Joe Cisar
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/cisarj1.html
Robert Clark
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/clark1.html
Elizabeth Ann Cox
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/coxea1.html
Mark Dallara
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/dallara1.html
Alexander Dvorkin
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/dvorkin1.html
Valerie Emanuel
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/emanuelv1.html
Steven Fishman
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/fishman1.html
Vickki Ford Cook
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/fordv1.html
Phil Georgi
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/jacobsen6.html
Scott Goehring
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/goehrings1.html
Roger Gonnet
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/gonnet1.html
Barbara Graham
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/graham1.html
Patricia Greenway
http://religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/greenwayp1.html
Gregg Hagglund
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/hagglund1.html
Steve Hassan
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/false_exp/hassan1.html
Tilman Hausherr
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/hauser1.html
Andreas Heldal-Lund
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/lund1.html
Keith Henson
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/henson1.html
Deana Holmes
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/holmes1.html
Jeff Jacobsen
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/jacobsen1.html
Charlotte Kates
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/katesc1.html
Steven Kent
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/false_exp/kent1.html
Mike Krotz
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/krotz1.html
Arnie Lerma
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/lerma1.html
Pamela Lichtenwalner
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/lichtenwalner01.html
Joe Lynn
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/lynn1.html
Ted Mayett
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/mayett1.html
Frank Oliver
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/oliver.html
Kady O'Malley
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/omalley1.html
Zenon Panoussis
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/panoussis1.html
Ted Patrick
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/false_exp/patrick1.html
Michael Pattinson
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/pattinsonm1.html
Bruce/Kathleen Pettycrew
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/pettycrew.html
Jesse Prince
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/prince1.html
Roland Rashleigh-Berry
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/rashleighb1.html
David Rice
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/riced.html
Fred Rice
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/ricef.html
Rick Ross
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/false_exp/rossr1.html
Karin Spaink
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/spaink1.html
David Touretzky
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/touretzky1.html
Alan Walter
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/walter1.html
Johan Wevers
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/weversj1.html
Hana/Jerry Whitfield
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/false_exp/whitfield1.html
Larry Wollersheim
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/wollersheim1.html
--
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org
--
Jack Dominey
gordon...@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
>>For example, you give tips to your family where to pick you up, or you
>>go for a baby body in that family. I also believe that there will be
>>places in future where you can go to find out who you are, and then
>>you can re-unite with your former family and pick up your property.
>
>And you think scammers won't have beaten you to it?
What's interesting is Barbara's implicit assumption that one
incarnation is valid and the subsequent one is merely a different body
for the same person. Although she talks about previous lives, she
never explains why they're not as important as this one. In the
example above, who is "your family"? If the current incarnation is x,
then why is the family of generation x-1 more important than the
family of x? And x-2 and so on?
Oh, she also seems to assume that thetans know "what kind of body" an
infant will grow into, although she hasn't been explicit about it. a
Hey, while we're at it, if a thetan can perceive the material world
and interact with it - both of which would be required in order to "go
for" a particular body - then why bother incarnating at all? Surely
the spirit world (or whatever Scientologists call the realm that
nekkid thetans inhabit) isn't so horribly boring that the first thing
a thetan wants to do is leave it.
-
Jack Dominey "Apparently I'm insane. But I'm one of the happy kinds!"
jack_dominey(at)email(dot)com
Happy to be labeled a "spinic" by Edmond Wollman.
Kwantem Mekanik
Jack Dominey <lo...@my.sig> wrote:
>
> Hey, while we're at it, if a thetan can perceive the material world
> and interact with it - both of which would be required in order to "go
> for" a particular body - then why bother incarnating at all? Surely
> the spirit world (or whatever Scientologists call the realm that
> nekkid thetans inhabit) isn't so horribly boring that the first thing
> a thetan wants to do is leave it.
>
I predict Barbara's answer: thetans are mind-controlled.
(except for the thetan that is Barbara, of course)
Rich.Andrews
news:4e8ae673.04080...@posting.google.com:
Are you sure he didn't say something like "I don't know. It's all greek to
me."
r
--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.
Michael Gray
wrote:
I have done the sums on my Tandy Existential® calculator
Probabilty that the story is true: 95.4%
Probability that the priest was lying about the woman's incoherent and
embarrassing babblings, in a flash of inspiration designed to make
everyone feel better: 99.98%
Probability that a nearly dead illiterate isolated peasant woman could
suddenly learn Greek, and wish to speak it to her family who she
plainly knew wouldn't understand a word of it: 0.00000000000000074%
Jake
"Michael Gray" <fle...@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in message
news:o1s3h0l9qld9f6m85...@4ax.com...
I think your first figure is probably way to high. The rest of your
calculations look accurate. Keep up the good work.
Michael Gray
Thankyou for pointing that out,
but don't blame me, blame these cheap Korean "Everleady®" AA cells.
I have put fresh batteries in, and recalculated the lot.
In order, they come out as:
1) 31.01% +- .02%
2) 101.096% (to 3 dec places)
3) -17.801%
Barbara Schwarz
> >> Are you prepared to demonstrate that a "mental energy fingerprint"
> >> of the same soul in the same body reliably stays the same, and that
> >> the "mental energy fingerprint" is reliably different for other
> >> souls in other bodies?
> >
> >I could, if I would have money to set up such an operation.
>
> I'm suggesting that this is the only way to get courts to accept
> reincarnation and any method you have of proving who is a reincarnation
> of who. Without that, they'll never buy the idea of holding the
> next incarnation of criminals responsible for their crimes in the
> previous incarnation. This requires a heck of a lot of proof. It
> will probably require decades, even if things go well. Even then,
> DNA has the "identical twin" problem.
Yes, it needs scientific demonstration on governmental and Congress
level, but I am sure it will not take decades. Too bad that the
millions that Ron left me are thanks to the SEGNPMSS (you remember
those don't you?) not in my hand, as we would be already there.
>
> >> Leaving aside the "same soul in a different
> >> body" part, that would be a pretty neat technology for identifying
> >> bodies in their CURRENT incarnation. Got proof that it works?
> >
> >In their CURRENT incarnation? Why is that?
>
> To perform a controlled experiment and prove it works, at least for
> the current body. It's a start. It gives some credibility to
> "mental energy fingerprints". And if it actually works reliably,
> you could make a lot of money selling security systems. It would
> make "leaving the money to yourself" easier. If you can open the
> lock (without trying to break in) using your "mental energy
> fingerprint", it's your money.
I don't want to make money with it. I am interested in providing the
scientific proof of past lives and getting rights for the spirit or
soul (thetan) when he has no body.
>
> If you can't get it to work (with the same bodies), it pretty much
> blows the theory that you can identify reincarnated people using
> the same method.
From my studies in Scientology, I know that you can measure electrical
energy of a person, and it is not just the body electricity, but the
energy of the thoughts. You can very precisely measure also the
knowledge the thoughts, the feelings, the emotions that a person has
from her former live times.
>
> >You mean to identify people
> >who got plastic surgery to run from the law?
>And people who have amnesia.
That is right.
>And people who are in comas (or would that work?)
They could be woken up by talking to their subconcious mind to get out
of coma. Mindcontrollers can hold people in coma by playing tapes into
their minds to stay in coma.
>And lost children who can't communicate.
>It wouldn't work on dead bodies, would it?
Dead people? You mean the popsicles or corpsicles at Alcore? If
somebody has left the body, he left it as he thinks that body is to
ruined to be further in it. If somebody is gone, it is highly unlikely
that he wants his old body back, except weird Keith Henson and the
likes. You rather go for a new fresh body, a baby body.
> And maybe even use "mental energy fingerprints" to open locks and
> security doors and retrieve e-mail instead of access cards or
> passwords. (Using the "mental energy fingerprint", and an enterprising
> ISP setting up special email accounts, you could even send email
> to your next incarnation!)
I don not want to become a roboter, Gordon. People should know of
their past lives and being able to create a new good one, but not
becomming an artificial life form.
>
> >Yes, you could identify
> >them, but I am not thinking about them. I rather think about the good
> >guys, who should get back what once belonged to them.
>
> First you've got to convince the courts of reincarnation.
> It probably took centuries to convince them that footprints are
> reliable evidence.
Judges are dumb, I know. Meet several of those.
Tax Offices tax everything, but they hardly can call it inheritance
taxes anymore if you leave your money to yourself, they probably would
call it reincarnation tax. However, the IRS will be soon abolished and
we'll get a flat tax. I just was thinking if the government would
remove all the taxes and do pledge drives like PBS, making nice music
and asking us to please donate taxes. :)
Anyway, back to your proposed tests. I think I am getting the idea
what you are trying to prove. He is more: you need one of those
special cameras that fine hotels are having to spot hidden dirt. When
grandpa dies, you film him and you will see a golfball size milky
claud emerging from his body the moment he is pronounced dead. That is
grandpa. The thetan (spirit, soul, the personality) usually does not
move fast, you will have no problem to follow him around. You will see
that he looks for pregnant women and dives in the belly of one of
those and grabs onto the baby body inside of her. Usually, they like
to stay in the family, e.g. if a daughter or grandaughter or niece is
pregnant, it is a sure bet that he will go for that body. Then grandpa
comes again, and soon he will be the obnoxious teenager that was
ruining his nerves when he was old.
You could run all kinds of tests on old grandpa and the new guy on the
block and you will see that they are identical and the same person.
Scientology auditors have additional ways to prove existance of past
lives with e-meters in auditing.
Barbara Schwarz
> In article <bf456302.04080...@posting.google.com>,
> Stilllov...@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > I know that 500 BC the Christians leaders came together
>
> That's not really possible, unless you also believe in physical
> time-travel.
That was a typo, Barb, get over it.
>
> >and they took the christian belief into past
> >lives out of the Christians statutes.
>
> That's also not credible, since we have manuscripts of the NT from
> before 500 CE.
It was 500 after Christi and even christian scholars acknowledge that
early Christians believed in past lives.
>
> > Did you know that, Katherine?
>
> I hope she didn't, because it's clearly not true.
Now I have to ask you that also: where is your scientific evidence
that it is not true?
>
> >They figured that they can control people better if they would not
> >know that they are being born again.
>
> Interesting. The Hindu and Buddhist and CoS leaders have found it easy
> enough to control people by *using* a belief in reincarnation, rather
> than denying it.
Not the leaders of the Christians 500 years after Christi. They
thought that if people think they go to hell after one lifetime, they
would spend more money to the priests and their sins forgiven.
>
> >That also means that Jesus believed in past lives.
>
> There is at least one passage in the gospels that can be reasonably
> interpreted in that light. But that doesn't make the rest of what you
> wrote any less wrong.
I would not want to listen to the crap that you preach to your flock.
Who says that your gospel is an orginal and was not altered during the
time?
Barbara Schwarz
>
> [snip]
Barbara Schwarz
I was not married to you, Matt, trust me on that. But I have no doubt
that you were married to other women in this and former life times,
and you were sleeping through the entire ceremonies, as the ceremony
goes: "...till death do us part." Remember a foggy little bit now?
>
> In any event and despite my distaste, I wish to continue to exercise
> my conjugal rights. And don't give me any of that married crap or I
> will have you charged as a bigamistress.
No luck to get in my bed, Matt.
>
> See you in divorce court if you refuse my conjugal rights. I'll take
> you for all you are worth in this life and all your lives to come.
> Lord knows my last 231 wives took me for enough. Thank god writing
> hadn't been invented any earlier.
Very funny. Some of your 231 wives might have been the same person,
the unlucky girl that married you in several life times, which means
that your case would be thrown out on technicalities as it might boils
down to that you married 231 times, but actually just 11 different
women.
As soon past lives are proven as a scientific fact, we will see all
kinds of new lawsuits, I suppose, but remember, that the women might
get you on the same grounds. If you claim you married your 1246 wife
for eternity and not until death do you part, and accuse her of
bigamy, she can do same, as something is telling me that you had other
women since year 1246.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
For the ARS posters, does xenoglossy not remind everyone of
xenuglossy?
This is an interesting story, Gerald.
I know from an old man who was on his death bed and he said to his
wife: "You look just like my wife from my last life time." People
basically know that they are born again. And it is the only thing that
is obvicious. People die and babies are born again. The spirit, the
personality, the soul does not dissolve when the body dies. It goes on
and comes again.
Universities ignore the existance of past lives usually, as they are
not really independent. And the few of their researches who do,
usually mess around with hypnosis and other psychiatric crap. I don't
think at all past lives are so difficult to prove. It is just that
many people who should and could take research hereto seriously are
too dumb and biased to take it up.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
> In sci.skeptic, <cen58r$2...@library1.airnews.net>,
> gordon...@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
>
> >>For example, you give tips to your family where to pick you up, or you
> >>go for a baby body in that family. I also believe that there will be
> >>places in future where you can go to find out who you are, and then
> >>you can re-unite with your former family and pick up your property.
> >
> >And you think scammers won't have beaten you to it?
>
> What's interesting is Barbara's implicit assumption that one
> incarnation is valid and the subsequent one is merely a different body
> for the same person. Although she talks about previous lives, she
> never explains why they're not as important as this one. In the
> example above, who is "your family"? If the current incarnation is x,
> then why is the family of generation x-1 more important than the
> family of x? And x-2 and so on?
The most important life time is always that in which you currently
life, but furture life times should be very important to you because
you have to better the world in this life time as you will inherit it
again with all the problems that you left behind. Past lives are
interesting as they prove future life times and you also need to know
what you did and what happened to you to understand your reactions and
solutions and activities of this life time.
I never said that one life time is more important than the other,
Jack, you assumed me and it could be something in your past lives that
made you think so. :) Actually, when you leave this body, you try to
find a new body within your old family because you want to stay with
them.
>
> Oh, she also seems to assume that thetans know "what kind of body" an
> infant will grow into, although she hasn't been explicit about it. a
A person with a male identity usually will pick a boy body and a
person with a female time track will usually pick a girl's body. Is
that explicit enough? Ask yourself, do you want to be a woman? (I
assume you are a man.) My guess is that you will not. Same if you ask
me or other women. We want to marry a hunk but not become one.
>
> Hey, while we're at it, if a thetan can perceive the material world
> and interact with it - both of which would be required in order to "go
> for" a particular body - then why bother incarnating at all?
That differs. I think there are thetans (spirits and souls) around who
have no bodies. But thetans come back as they want to be together with
the families they just left. The family does not see them anymore,
don;t communicate with them anymore, they became people without
bodies, nobodys, and they are lonely. Moreover, people lost their
spiritual abilities to interact with the material world.
The thetans without body that I have seen through a special camera,
can't do much. They have to get their spiritial abilities back. They
are observing, slowly moving, they are more crawling than flying, they
are like toddlers and feel lost and lonely. Thetans that play exciting
influencial games without bodies are absolutely rare. The ordinary
thetan thinks he can't. If you would catch him in a bottle, he
probably would not even find his way out, despite he as a spitit can
go through walls.
Surely
> the spirit world (or whatever Scientologists call the realm that
> nekkid thetans inhabit) isn't so horribly boring that the first thing
> a thetan wants to do is leave it.
I just explained it. And how do you know how it is? Remember a past
life, a life between life times?
Barbara Schwarz
Mike Combs
> suddenly learn Greek, and wish to speak it to her family who she
> plainly knew wouldn't understand a word of it: 0.00000000000000074%
But take note of comment, "The story has been passed down in our family
history for generations". So you need to derive a factor for incremental
improvements to the story with subsequent re-tellings.
--
Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the National Non-sequitur Society. We may not make
much sense, but we do like pizza.
Gordon Burditt
>> reincarnation and any method you have of proving who is a reincarnation
>> of who. Without that, they'll never buy the idea of holding the
>> next incarnation of criminals responsible for their crimes in the
>> previous incarnation. This requires a heck of a lot of proof. It
>> will probably require decades, even if things go well. Even then,
>> DNA has the "identical twin" problem.
>
>Yes, it needs scientific demonstration on governmental and Congress
>level, but I am sure it will not take decades.
I'm sure it will. Other types of evidence did. And things like
fingerprints are a little bit less fantastic to believe than
reincarnation. However, I notice that courts have, in the last
decade, held hearings on the validity of "footwear impressions" as
evidence. It seems even that isn't entirely settled.
>Too bad that the
>millions that Ron left me are thanks to the SEGNPMSS (you remember
>those don't you?) not in my hand, as we would be already there.
I have no idea what you are referring to here.
>From my studies in Scientology, I know that you can measure electrical
>energy of a person, and it is not just the body electricity, but the
>energy of the thoughts. You can very precisely measure also the
>knowledge the thoughts, the feelings, the emotions that a person has
>from her former live times.
But in order to hold a person responsible for crimes or debts in past
lives, you need to be able to reliably associate the person with
their past identity. You need to prove:
1. Reincarnation exists.
2. It is possible to measure a "mental energy fingerprint" that is
as unique as physical fingerprints. (There are at least billions
of souls (the currently living ones, at minimum). Therefore there
must be billions of possible "mental energy fingerprints". Voltmeters
accurate to 9 digits are very expensive and it is difficult to take
a reading that accurate without introducing noise. Any reading made
on a body will vary a lot more than that simply due to variations in
perspiration or nearby power lines.
3. The "mental energy fingerprint" does not change through life
(of one body).
4. The "mental energy fingerprint" does not change through the process
of reincarnation (changing bodies).
5. The "mental energy fingerprint" cannot be changed by deliberate attempts
to fake it, either to force a match or force a mismatch, without it
being obvious that such an attempt was made. (e.g. with fingerprints,
you can burn them off or cut off your fingers, but it's obvious that
you have done this.)
6. The "mental energy fingerprint", as measured by experts in the field
using appropriate equipment, is unique or has a very low (and measurable)
rate of false positives or false negatives matching people.
I'm not sure that #1 is even the hardest part to prove here.
And proving #1 doesn't get you very far with the others.
>>It wouldn't work on dead bodies, would it?
>
>Dead people? You mean the popsicles or corpsicles at Alcore? If
No, I was thinking of the latest unidentified dead body found by
the police (a) pulled out of a river, (b) found buried in someone's
back yard, or (c) found in the rubble of a collapsed building after
a storm, flood, earthquake, or terrorist attack. A "mental energy
fingerprint" might be more useful than dental records here, but if
the mind is not active in the body any more, you couldn't use it.
Right?
>> And maybe even use "mental energy fingerprints" to open locks and
>> security doors and retrieve e-mail instead of access cards or
>> passwords. (Using the "mental energy fingerprint", and an enterprising
>> ISP setting up special email accounts, you could even send email
>> to your next incarnation!)
>
>I don not want to become a roboter, Gordon. People should know of
>their past lives and being able to create a new good one, but not
>becomming an artificial life form.
A safe can require one to know a combination to open it. One does
not have to BECOME the combination.
A safe can require a specific fingerprint, retinal eye pattern, or
other biometric measurement to open it. (These exist now.) One
does not have to BECOME a fingerprint.
It does not seem beyond the reach of possibility that one could
build a safe that measures the "mental energy fingerprint" of the
person attempting to open it and will open only if it sees the right
"mental energy fingerprint". This does not in any way require the
person (or thetan) to BECOME the mechanism of the safe. Nor does
it require that the safe is alive.
Such a safe could presumably allow someone to "leave the money to
themselves" because it won't open for the wrong person. A "mental
energy fingerprint" could also be used as an address: you go to
the company storing the messages, let them take your "mental energy
fingerprint", and they tell you if there are any messages for that
fingerprint and give them to you since you've proved your identity.
This is not by any stretch of the imagination BECOMING a machine.
It's much more like using your "mental energy fingerprint" as a
Social Security number or other ID card to claim your messages or
your property.
>> >Yes, you could identify
>> >them, but I am not thinking about them. I rather think about the good
>> >guys, who should get back what once belonged to them.
>>
>> First you've got to convince the courts of reincarnation.
>> It probably took centuries to convince them that footprints are
>> reliable evidence.
>
>Judges are dumb, I know. Meet several of those.
Judges can and should require a lot of proof before accepting a new
type of evidence. "Everyone knows" no two snowflakes are alike.
But is that really true enough that you can use an identical snowflake
match to convict someone of murder? Anything claiming to have a
unique signature for a person, like fingerprints, DNA, or "mental
energy fingerprints" should have to meet high standards of proof.
(And I'm not really convinced that current standards (how many
matches, etc.) for DNA matching meet that standard of proof.)
If it passes by will due to the death of a body, they can still
call it an inheritance tax. Side note: Congress passed something
called the "Patriot Act", but every time I hear about provisions
of it, it sounds like it should have been called the "Traitor to
Democracy Act", as it seems to set up a police state.
>Anyway, back to your proposed tests. I think I am getting the idea
>what you are trying to prove. He is more: you need one of those
>special cameras that fine hotels are having to spot hidden dirt. When
>grandpa dies, you film him and you will see a golfball size milky
>claud emerging from his body the moment he is pronounced dead. That is
>grandpa. The thetan (spirit, soul, the personality) usually does not
>move fast, you will have no problem to follow him around. You will see
>that he looks for pregnant women and dives in the belly of one of
>those and grabs onto the baby body inside of her.
If you can actually track the thetan and later measure the "mental
energy fingerprint" of the baby, and match it to that of the
now-deceased person, that would be pretty convincing *AFTER* you've
established that "mental energy fingerprints" are unique among
living people at a given time. It's not so convincing if there are
probably 20 matching "mental energy fingerprints" in the nearest
large city.
>Usually, they like
>to stay in the family, e.g. if a daughter or grandaughter or niece is
>pregnant, it is a sure bet that he will go for that body. Then grandpa
>comes again, and soon he will be the obnoxious teenager that was
>ruining his nerves when he was old.
Wait a minute: How could grandpa and this obnoxious teenager be alive
AT THE SAME TIME (necessary for one to "ruin the nerves" of the other)
and one be the reincarnation of another?
>You could run all kinds of tests on old grandpa and the new guy on the
>block and you will see that they are identical and the same person.
>Scientology auditors have additional ways to prove existance of past
>lives with e-meters in auditing.
I still question whether the meters have sufficient accuracy to
distinguish between billions of people, and that the results for
a given person are unchanging.
Gordon L. Burditt
Arthur L. Rubin
>
> Kwantem Mekanik <kwa...@nospam.net> wrote in message news:<kwantem-2EA473...@news.isp.giganews.com>...
...
> And another word: If L. Ron Hubbard would be the man you misled people
> think he is, if Scientology would be the religion that you poor remote
> controlled robots think it is, I never would have become one.
How would you know? The claim of Scientology opponents ("mind
controlled",
or not) is that Scientology uses mind control techniques. As far as I
can tell, that claim predates the claim of Scientology that others
are "mind controlled", as opposed to merely having their memory
suppressed.
...
> > Interesting. Here is a thought experiment for everyone. You are enjoying
> > your breakfast one morning, when you hear an angry knock at your door.
> > You open it, and there are police there with a warrant for your arrest.
> > The charge -- you were convicted of murder in a past life, and you still
> > owe the state 400 years.
>
> Exactly, that is why it is better not to kill anybody, Kwantem, don't
> you agree? If you don't murder anybody, they have no reason to come
> after you in this or any future life.
How can you defend yourself against the (probably false) claim
of identity. And, for that matter, you could demand that the
prosecution locate the reincarnation of the victims to see if
they could disidentify you, thereby allowing an appeal on the
grounds of factual innocence.
Jake
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronni...@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
news:4117A0FE...@sprintmail.com...
> Barbara Schwarz wrote:
> >
> > Kwantem Mekanik <kwa...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:<kwantem-2EA473...@news.isp.giganews.com>...
ROFL!
By the way, I'm starting a service that people can use to leave their
possessions to themselves. You simply supply a password which you later reveal
in another lifetime and claim all your money and other stuff...
What do you think? It would be insured and bonded, of course.
Barbara Schwarz
> >> I'm suggesting that this is the only way to get courts to accept
> >> reincarnation and any method you have of proving who is a reincarnation
> >> of who. Without that, they'll never buy the idea of holding the
> >> next incarnation of criminals responsible for their crimes in the
> >> previous incarnation. This requires a heck of a lot of proof. It
> >> will probably require decades, even if things go well. Even then,
> >> DNA has the "identical twin" problem.
> >
> >Yes, it needs scientific demonstration on governmental and Congress
> >level, but I am sure it will not take decades.
>
> I'm sure it will. Other types of evidence did. And things like
> fingerprints are a little bit less fantastic to believe than
> reincarnation. However, I notice that courts have, in the last
> decade, held hearings on the validity of "footwear impressions" as
> evidence. It seems even that isn't entirely settled.
that a person is born again and should get back what she had once
before. You have to prove past lives the scientific way and not just
that, you have to prove that e.g. Elvis Presley is today Willy Meier.
easier to forge a fingerprint than the mental images that each person
can claim her own. And the good thing is that those images are not
just from this but many lifetimes.
I don't think that number one is that hard to prove after all. The
problem are biased governments and universities who don't think
independently enough to investigate. The problems are also
psychiatrists, who think they know the human spirit, by not kowing the
subject at all. Psychs make people believe that man is his body, and
there is not much else than a bunch of nerves, but they are dead
wrong. However, whenever there is a project to prove the former
lifetime of a person, they butt in and sabotage it or make sure that
the project is not taken up in the first place.
>
>
> >>It wouldn't work on dead bodies, would it?
> >
> >Dead people? You mean the popsicles or corpsicles at Alcore? If
>
> No, I was thinking of the latest unidentified dead body found by
> the police (a) pulled out of a river, (b) found buried in someone's
> back yard, or (c) found in the rubble of a collapsed building after
> a storm, flood, earthquake, or terrorist attack. A "mental energy
> fingerprint" might be more useful than dental records here, but if
> the mind is not active in the body any more, you couldn't use it.
> Right?
The soul left the body, but you could try to find the victim in her
new body and she sure can tell us who the killer is. She has forgotten
it as she has a new mind, but there are ways she can remember or ways
the mental images can be checked. But it must be done real scientific.
It is a horrendous crime to lock up an innocent person.
>
> >> And maybe even use "mental energy fingerprints" to open locks and
> >> security doors and retrieve e-mail instead of access cards or
> >> passwords. (Using the "mental energy fingerprint", and an enterprising
> >> ISP setting up special email accounts, you could even send email
> >> to your next incarnation!)
> >
> >I don not want to become a roboter, Gordon. People should know of
> >their past lives and being able to create a new good one, but not
> >becomming an artificial life form.
>
> A safe can require one to know a combination to open it. One does
> not have to BECOME the combination.
Guess you are right, but keep always in mind that there are people who
have in mind to control people and abuse systems.
>
> A safe can require a specific fingerprint, retinal eye pattern, or
> other biometric measurement to open it. (These exist now.) One
> does not have to BECOME a fingerprint.
Alright.
>
> It does not seem beyond the reach of possibility that one could
> build a safe that measures the "mental energy fingerprint" of the
> person attempting to open it and will open only if it sees the right
> "mental energy fingerprint". This does not in any way require the
> person (or thetan) to BECOME the mechanism of the safe. Nor does
> it require that the safe is alive.
I get it.
>
> Such a safe could presumably allow someone to "leave the money to
> themselves" because it won't open for the wrong person. A "mental
> energy fingerprint" could also be used as an address: you go to
> the company storing the messages, let them take your "mental energy
> fingerprint", and they tell you if there are any messages for that
> fingerprint and give them to you since you've proved your identity.
> This is not by any stretch of the imagination BECOMING a machine.
> It's much more like using your "mental energy fingerprint" as a
> Social Security number or other ID card to claim your messages or
> your property.
You don't trust your relatives much, right? Did you read that posting
of Moscow Jake in this thread? He wants to open a company to whom
people can leave their belongings and with a code word they can pick
the money up when they come back. The problem is only that we live in
a world that spies on others. When Harry dies it could be that others
hear it and when Harry is back as Johnny, his money is gone. I rather
have my family in here. I know they will give back to me what was once
mine. And as far as I know myself, I am not even very interested in
money. Being back together with those that I love and not stuffed to
an abusive family under horrendous condition, is what I rather want to
get out of the adventure to come back in a new body.
>
>
> >> >Yes, you could identify
> >> >them, but I am not thinking about them. I rather think about the good
> >> >guys, who should get back what once belonged to them.
> >>
> >> First you've got to convince the courts of reincarnation.
> >> It probably took centuries to convince them that footprints are
> >> reliable evidence.
> >
> >Judges are dumb, I know. Meet several of those.
>
> Judges can and should require a lot of proof before accepting a new
> type of evidence. "Everyone knows" no two snowflakes are alike.
> But is that really true enough that you can use an identical snowflake
> match to convict someone of murder? Anything claiming to have a
> unique signature for a person, like fingerprints, DNA, or "mental
> energy fingerprints" should have to meet high standards of proof.
> (And I'm not really convinced that current standards (how many
> matches, etc.) for DNA matching meet that standard of proof.)
Judges are so superficial, really. It is a shame. I don't trust them
at all.
Let's hope that Congress gets rid of the IRS. There are some plans
hereto, I heard. As far as the police state is concerned, indeed, USA
has to watch out here, as there is a force who tries to make that out
of American.
>
> >Anyway, back to your proposed tests. I think I am getting the idea
> >what you are trying to prove. He is more: you need one of those
> >special cameras that fine hotels are having to spot hidden dirt. When
> >grandpa dies, you film him and you will see a golfball size milky
> >claud emerging from his body the moment he is pronounced dead. That is
> >grandpa. The thetan (spirit, soul, the personality) usually does not
> >move fast, you will have no problem to follow him around. You will see
> >that he looks for pregnant women and dives in the belly of one of
> >those and grabs onto the baby body inside of her.
>
> If you can actually track the thetan and later measure the "mental
> energy fingerprint" of the baby, and match it to that of the
> now-deceased person, that would be pretty convincing *AFTER* you've
> established that "mental energy fingerprints" are unique among
> living people at a given time. It's not so convincing if there are
> probably 20 matching "mental energy fingerprints" in the nearest
> large city.
If you die today, Gordon, and somebody would follow your existance in
between lifetimes and you taking a new baby body, everybody would know
it is you. But lets say you are being lost for a time. All we know is
that you once lived but we want to find you again, we could check
mental images in other people that were born after you left your
former body as to that it is you and nobody else. You lived this life
time as Gordon Burditt, and nobody will have the same mental reactions
to stations of your life as you will in your new body. You will not be
mixed up with others. It can be determined exactly that it is you and
not 20 others.
>
> >Usually, they like
> >to stay in the family, e.g. if a daughter or grandaughter or niece is
> >pregnant, it is a sure bet that he will go for that body. Then grandpa
> >comes again, and soon he will be the obnoxious teenager that was
> >ruining his nerves when he was old.
>
> Wait a minute: How could grandpa and this obnoxious teenager be alive
> AT THE SAME TIME (necessary for one to "ruin the nerves" of the other)
> and one be the reincarnation of another?
They are not alive at the same time. That is a misunderstanding.
Grandpa, who hated loud music died, grandkid (former grandpa comes
again as new reinarnation) is born, grandkid loves loud music. (A
matter of age and nerves, I suppose.)
>
> >You could run all kinds of tests on old grandpa and the new guy on the
> >block and you will see that they are identical and the same person.
> >Scientology auditors have additional ways to prove existance of past
> >lives with e-meters in auditing.
>
> I still question whether the meters have sufficient accuracy to
> distinguish between billions of people, and that the results for
> a given person are unchanging.
>
> Gordon L. Burditt
You should find an experienced Scientology auditor (at least a class
IV auditor)in your area to explain and show it to you. Don't worry,
they don't bite. Just ask him what you want to know and ask him to
demonstrate it for you at his e-meter. I bet he does not charge you
for it and gives you the demonstration you are looking for and then
you can think about it and make your mind up. I bet you will be
suprised about how much mental energy there is, very uniquely your
own, and not just the energy of one life time.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
It might be a profitable business one day. Although, your biggest
competition would be family members, as it is them who usually want
the relative back, unless the deceased was a monster, and it will be
the family who likely will take over the money till the dead guy is
born again.
But for those that can't trust their relatives, and those that do not
want to pay inheritance taxes, you might have discovered a goldmine.
(Thanks to my inspiration, but I don't want any money from your
millions of fees that you make in future, just name one of your
daughters after me, and we are even.)
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
> >
> > Kwantem Mekanik <kwa...@nospam.net> wrote in message news:<kwantem-2EA473...@news.isp.giganews.com>...
>
>
> ...
>
> > And another word: If L. Ron Hubbard would be the man you misled people
> > think he is, if Scientology would be the religion that you poor remote
> > controlled robots think it is, I never would have become one.
>
> How would you know? The claim of Scientology opponents ("mind
> controlled",
> or not) is that Scientology uses mind control techniques.
It's crap. Scientology does not control minds. There are some
infiltrators in the orgs trying to alter it and destroy it form the
inside out, but there is absolutely no mindcontrol in SCN. It is
absolutely anti-mindcontrol. The opponents are psychiatric trolls and
agents and making that stuff up.
As far as I
> can tell, that claim predates the claim of Scientology that others
> are "mind controlled", as opposed to merely having their memory
> suppressed.
That propaganda is born in Germany from Nazis and their kids.
>
> ...
>
> > > Interesting. Here is a thought experiment for everyone. You are enjoying
> > > your breakfast one morning, when you hear an angry knock at your door.
> > > You open it, and there are police there with a warrant for your arrest.
> > > The charge -- you were convicted of murder in a past life, and you still
> > > owe the state 400 years.
> >
> > Exactly, that is why it is better not to kill anybody, Kwantem, don't
> > you agree? If you don't murder anybody, they have no reason to come
> > after you in this or any future life.
>
> How can you defend yourself against the (probably false) claim
> of identity.
Nobody is like you. If your mental images, your mental energy is being
checked, nobody will mix you up with anybody else. Nobody has the same
kind of reactions to questions addressed to you by measuring your
energy.
Barbara Schwarz
Falky foo
LET US KNOW WHEN YOU'VE GOT IT.
"Barbara Schwarz" <Stilllov...@myway.com> wrote in message
news:bf456302.0408...@posting.google.com...
Falky foo
Scientific American!! What better way to foist doped-up Elron Hubbards
LSD-inspired views on the world!!
> > Popular belief has nothing to do with the truth.
>
> Who says there is no scientific truth to it? Did you ever hear that
> people suddenly spoke in other languages, languages that they never
> learned in this lifetime?
> > I have my father's tools and some other items that he left when he died.
> > As soon as he asks for them and can show proof of identity, he can have
> > them back.
>
> Did your father ever say to you to turn your music down as you would
> ruin your nerves? Do you have a teenager in your basement turning up
> the music and ruining your nerves? It could be your dad. Now, give him
> his tools back. :)
>
>
> Barbara Schwarz
> >
> >
> > r
>
Arthur L. Rubin
>
> Wow what an excellent scientific argument Babs.. You should be writing for
> Scientific American!! What better way to foist doped-up Elron Hubbards
> LSD-inspired views on the world!!
I don't think they were LSD-inspired -- he *was* a fair SF
writer before he created (discovered? whatever) Scientology.
Acid Pooh
> Wow what an excellent scientific argument Babs.. You should be writing for
> Scientific American!! What better way to foist doped-up Elron Hubbards
> LSD-inspired views on the world!!
>
Don't blame LSD for this. L.Ron just fed people what these people wanted to hear.
'cid 'ooh
Falky foo
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/OTIII/bts-or-dts.txt
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronni...@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
news:41195B50...@sprintmail.com...
Barbara Schwarz
Indeed, L. Ron Hubbard took no drugs. His imposter, Jack Marshall died
with Vistarin in his body.
He discovered Scientology, and orginial Scientology rocks.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz
Dave Touretzky who webbed lies and defamation and false reports by
others on this with tax payers money sponsored website.
Read Dave Touretzky in his own cheap words.
www.religiousfreedomwatch.org
DAVID TOURETZKY
David Touretzky's Discrimination
David Touretzky is employed by Carnegie Mellon University as a
research scientist. In addition to his participation in numerous other
hate activities, Touretzky spends an inordinate amount of time
engaging in religious and racial discrimination as part of his
on-going hate activities on the Internet. Below are quotes culled from
hundreds of hours of Touretzky's chat room writings (the culling is
still ongoing).
It appears that David Touretzky hides behind, and abuses, the policy
on academic freedom at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). He seems to
believe that his position entitles him to unrestrained discrimination
against African Americans, and other ethnic groups, in addition to the
other derogatory information he spreads via his CMU website.
As you will see from the quotes beneath, David Touretzky is not a
person who makes the occasional discriminatory remark out of
ignorance. Quite the contrary, he spends several hours a day on a hate
channel engaged in a dedicated attack on religions and races while "at
work". The number of hours that Touretzky has dedicated to this
pursuit exceeds 300 hours in less than a year (more hours are being
calculated for the remaining years). We presume that Touretzky was
paid full salary while he spent those 300 hours spreading hate on the
internet, a fact that we assume should be of concern to his employers
at CMU as well as those government and private institutions that fund
Touretzky's considerable research grants.
Religious Freedom Watch does not tolerate racial discrimination and
the type of hate speech propagated by David Touretzky. We respect
Carnegie Mellon University and it is our opinion that Touretzky's
action is damaging CMU's reputation. We invite you to read the
statements Touretzky has made and decide for yourself whether or not
Touretzky should be allowed to continue his activities at the expense
of the taxpayer, and whether or not he should be considered a social
"expert" of any kind.
Technical Information:
Touretzky's postings to Usenet show that the organization he is
posting from is Carnegie Mellon University.
The chat logs that have been made available to Religious Freedom Watch
show that most of the time Touretzky logs into the chat room from
CMU.EDU.
Here is some of the technical information, directly from the chat
logs:
d...@370af11b.2486bca.CS.CMU.EDU
d...@307615a5.1a358005.CS.CMU.EDU
d...@Hidden-SP-1728.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-679.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_9333.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP_22147.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
d...@Hidden-SP-22245.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_22358.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_22326.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_22211.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_22456.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-22309.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-22049.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-22196.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-22260.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-22294.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-3480.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP_31739.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP_39344.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP_5338.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
d...@Hidden-SP-5339.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP-5346.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_5366.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP_5382.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
d...@Hidden-SP.5410.CMU.EDU
d...@Hidden-SP-5418.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_5482.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden_SP_5554.NET.CS.CMU.EDU
dst@Hidden-SP_5618.CMU.EDU
DST = David Stuart Touretzky.
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST AFRICAN AMERICANS:
Part I
David Touretzky: "There should be a video game where you can beat
Rodney King."
Part II
David Touretzky: "Don't quote that scumbag Jesse Jackson, Tory, or
I'll puke in your lap."
Part III
David Touretzky: "I think we need a project to kick Oprah's ass."
Part IV
Rob Clark: "Senator Diane Watson, California State Senate."
David Touretzky: "Oh, she's a *state* senator. Did she get elected to
congress after that statement was made? So now she's their whore in
Washington?"
Rob Clark: "dst, no, now she's a congresscritter."
David Touretzky: "She is the former ambassador to Micronesia! and
she's black. I should have known. What are all the really st00000pid
congresswomen black?"
Part V
David Touretzky: "Washington DC is more disgusting than Harlem."
[Name Deleted]: "How and why is Harlem disgusting."
David Touretzky: "Disgusting as in rates of illegitimacy, drug abuse,
domestic abuse, shootings, prostitution, welfare culture. I think
Harlem has gotten better the last few years, but DC has not. White men
don't walk in Harlem at night."
[Name Deleted]: "Yes they do it is not and never was 'disgusting'.
What's disgusting is you, dst, for even calling it 'disgusting'. Some
of the greatest art and science in this country came from Harlem."
David Touretzky: "I know that Harlem was once a major cultural
center."
[[Name Deleted]: "I resent you saying Harlem is 'disgusting' dst and
you should be ashamed. Not was once still is, always was. I just think
it's wrong."
David Touretzky: "The great Harlem theaters and clubs have closed
although the Apollo is still around."
[Name Deleted]: "Why do you say Harlem is 'disgusting'."
David Touretzky: "For the same reason DC is disgusting."
[Name Deleted]: "And that is???"
David Touretzky: "If you wanna buy crack cocaine, go to Harlem or DC,
not Wall Street."
[Name Deleted]: "dst, cut to the quick here you [are] what's
disgusting?"
David Touretzky: "Doesn't DC has the highest murder rate in the
country? Or is it only second highest now?"
[Name Deleted]: "These are like the little racist pop-ups you see on
Neo nazi channels."
David Touretzky: "[name deleted] objects to my stating opinions, and
even more to my citing statistics."
[Name Deleted]: "dst, do the good one about how the niggers are
killing everyone. You have all those in pop-ups when you're on those
other channels, don't you? You know, the neo-nazi ones the white
supremacists ones you go on, dst, the niggers are just a problem."
David Touretzky: "Although, [name deleted], your remark about
'niggers' reminds me of an incident I'd been meaning to tell you
about. This happened quite a few years ago now."
[Name Deleted]: "Harlem is not disgusting."
David Touretzky: "Back before we were all posting on Usenet, we had a
local bulletin board system here at CMU. And one of those boards was
dedicated to no-holds-barred discussion."
[Name Deleted]: "That's racist dribble and frankly, I won't continue."
David Touretzky: "I asked on this board why we had no term that was
the black equivalent of 'white trash'. Because, you know, the N-word
was totally unsuitable. We needed some other term. A term that would
show that the speaker drew a deliberate distinction between people of
a certain skin color who behaved decently (as in 'decent white folk')
and those who behave badly (as in 'white trash')."
Rob Clark: "I have an equivalent as offensive as n-word term for black
trash. 'clarence thomas'."
David Touretzky: "So why don't we have equivalent terms for blacks?"
[Name Deleted]: "We do, dst."
David Touretzky: "And what would those terms be?"
[Name Deleted]: "You just don't know them. Human beings. It's really
deep in there, dst, maybe one day you'll get over it."
David Touretzky: "Living in trailers is a white thing.
Drive-by-shootings are a black thing etc. Anyway, here's the
interesting part of my story. A colleague of mine, from Texas, took
grave offense at my inquiry. He said that the reason people say 'WHITE
trash' is to distinguish it from ordinary trash, which is ASSUMED to
be black. So even "white trash" is an anti-black term. Personally, I
think we need a term for 'black trash' so that people can express
disapproval of a subculture without appearing to denounce an entire
ethnic group. I also think 'white trash' is a useful and appropriate
term."
Part VI
David Touretzky: "... we have a high infant mortality rate for a
developed country, but it's not because middle class people's babies
are dying. It's because of crack whores giving birth to high risk
premies."
[Name Deleted]: "dst, why do you use language like that?"
David Touretzky: "I'm just telling the truth."
[Name Deleted]: "the truth you are telling is that, despite all your
great intelligence and capacity and humor, you are, so it seems, under
it all and hateful racist."
David Touretzky: "maybe [you] know something about crack whores that I
don't. ... but if you want to talk about race.... infant mortality in
the US is much higher for blacks than for whites. I have no idea what
the racial breakdown of crack whores is."
[Name Deleted]: "there are no "crack babies" first of all that term is
a misnomer and medically incorrect."
David Touretzky: "I'm sure that blacks are over-represented in that
profession, but in terms of absolute numbers, I don't know."
[Name Deleted]: "so, it's about class then."
[Name Deleted]: "dst, you really take yourself down when you use
language like that. classism IS a form of racism."
David Touretzky: "it's your right to not like my language."
[Name Deleted]: "dst, it's not that I don't like it. It's what it says
about you that I find, well, very disappointing. I guess I'd expect
more from you."
David Touretzky: "I'm not creepy. I'm just impatient with people who
run down this country."
[Name Deleted]: "... but using language like that is inflammatory it
invites rebuke demands it."
David Touretzky: "you wanna defend crack whores?"
[Name Deleted]: "yup."
David Touretzky: "Go ahead. I'm listening."
[Name Deleted]: "they are saints. first, they are sex workers women
who are living, trying to make a way in a brutal world they are people
responding to conditions that are totally out of their control
sometimes and come from long stading problems, often going back to
home life lack there of many are victims of abuse they are all human
beings and they find themselves in this place and someone introduces
them to the idea of being a prostitute. So this name calling of "crack
whores" is first and foremost a cry of pain, sort of like road rage
and this langue of "crack whores, crack babies (which don't exist),
welfare queens" it's not just classist, but it's also racist one is
contained in the other."
David Touretzky: "Why do you say crck babies don't exist?"
[Name Deleted]: "it's my understanding that more recent research
disproves the original ideas of what was a "crack baby."
David Touretzky: "disproves it how? The stats on premature birth are
pretty clear."
[Name Deleted]: "the addictive properties of the drug are not passed
along from Mother to Child as they were thought when the original term
was put forward. it's not premature so "crack baby" is not a valid
term."
David Touretzky: "a baby who is born not-premature or underweight, and
not addicted to any drug, would not result in high medical costs."
David Touretzky: "but there are babies who run up $500,000 in hospital
costs because of their medical problems, which they wouldn't have if
their mother wasn't a crack whore."
[Name Deleted]: "it's a racist term. get it f***ing straight crack
babies and crack whores is racist crap bullshit and I will rebuke that
kind of racist hate speech as long as I live."
David Touretzky: "you should listen to kady [O'Malley]. I'm not
racist, I'm classist. And they're NOT equivalent."
[Name Deleted]: "YES bullshit, dst that is such crap since Class is
based on race don't run that specious line, dst. come to terms with
your own hate and racist heart."
David Touretzky: "that URL you posted was an article from 1992. And
it's just an AP piece, not a serious scientific article."
[Name Deleted]: "so what? read the lasttest info for youself. that's
HOW long that term went out of style -- dst, you're still in bell
bottoms, highwaters, that's yesterdays racist stuff."
David Touretzky: "well for one thing, the article looks only at babies
who survive long enough to make it out of the hospital."
[Name Deleted]: "the dead ones dont' matter, do they."
David Touretzky: "if they die after spending a month in NICU, they
cost hundreds of thousands."
[Name Deleted]: "under it all is the economic, on that agree, but
keeping it that way involves, indisputably, racist practices like it
or not, not just racist, but always racist and that dst's speech is
both classist, which is seems strnagly proud of, and racists."
David Touretzky: "Larry Elder says blacks are more racist than whites.
... Well yelling "racist" doesn't advance your argument."
[Name Deleted]: "ok, so then were shall I start to just show you how
creapy and hatful you are. Hateful as in "crack whores who are running
everything."
David Touretzky: "I mean, who cares if a crack whore's kid is retarded
because of alocohol abuse instead of cocaine abuse? The kid is still
fucked. ... there are more whites than blacks on welfare in this
country."
[Name Deleted]: "oh so what, dst. drop it ok."
David Touretzky: "I don't think you're calling me a hateful racist
because of some minor detail."
[Name Deleted]: "dst, that you do not know shows only the depths of
your ignorance and need to think really deeply about this."
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE SALVATION ARMY:
"... the Salvation Army ... buncha fuckheads."
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HISPANICS:
"Man, Hispanics are fucked up, which is why they're still working
class. Dipshits."
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CHINESE:
"It would be cheaper to just buy your replacement organs from executed
Chinese."
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MUSLIMS:
David Touretzky knows no boundaries when it comes to religious
discrimination, bigotry and hatred. Touretzky's following comments
about Muslims say it all:
Chris Owen: "Saddam is seen as the oppressor of the Iraqi people, but
the us is seen as the oppressor of all Muslims."
David Touretzky: "fuck the muslims."
...
David Touretzky: "check out the bloody muslims .. jeez what loons."
CONCERNING ABORTION & INFANTICIDE:
David Touretzky: "Maybe they'll ban partial birth abortion though. Not
that I think they should. Hell, I'm for post-partum abortion!
Retro-active abortion! Up until, say, the age of six months."
[ Page 1 ] [ Page 2 ] [ Page 3 ] [ Page 4 ] [ Page 5 ] [ Page 6 ] [
Page 7 ] [ Page 8 ] [ Page 9 ] [ Page 10 ]
Home | Anti-Religious Extremists | Hate Groups | Influence of
Hate | Experts | False Experts? | Hate Crimes & The Law |
Whistleblowers | Articles | Combating Hate | Weblog
For the truth about religion:
Buddhism, Christianity, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism,
Scientology, What is Scientology?, Scientology Theology General