Con men and their embrace

Tang Huyen

unread,

Jun 24, 2016, 9:08:31 PM6/24/16

to

Previously, on 21 July, 2012, I wrote on the results
of motivational speaker Tony Robbins who encouraged
participants in his talk to walk on hot coals in
San Jose.

<http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_21125630/san-jose-21-people-treated-burns-after-tony-robbins-firewalk>

<<At least 21 people were treated for burn injuries
after taking part in the crowning event of the first
day of a Tony Robbins function downtown, including
at least three who went to the hospital, a San Jose
fire captain said.

The people who suffered various second- and
third-degree burn injuries were among more than
6,000 who attended the motivational speaker's event
at the San Jose Convention Center called "Unleash
the Power Within.">>

Now he has repeated the same treatment with the
same results -- on the people who attended his
talk -- and he probably got the same money or
thereabout. Again he named his seminar "Unleash
the Power Within."

<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/24/dozens-burned-walking-on-hot-coals-at-motivational-tony-robbins-seminar/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_mm-coals-224pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory>

<<But Thursday night's coal walk in Dallas didn't
go so well for dozens of seminar attendees: Five
people were taken to the hospital and about 30 to
40 were evaluated after sustaining "burn injuries
to their feet and lower extremities" after
attempting to walk across hot coals in front of
the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center, said
Dallas Fire and Rescue spokesman Jason Evans.>>

It is true that some yogi in India and the Far East
can walk on hot coals without damage, but they
have plenty of training under their belt. The
participants in Robbins' seminars evidently had
none, other than what he told them after they
walked in. But they could have run a search on the
Internet and found out what to expect from total
newbies like them.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_a_sucker_born_every_minute>

<<"There's a sucker born every minute">> <<appeared
in print in the 1885 biography of confidence man
Hungry Joe.>>

<http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/the-unbelievable-tale-of-jesus-wife/485573/>

In 2012, Karen King, a professor of theology
holding one of the oldest endowed chairs at
Harvard, proclaimed at the Vatican a small
papyrus as evidence of "the Wife of Jesus", and
kicked off a storm of controversy. A reporter at
The Atlantic, Ariel Sabar, was present at her
initial presentation and pursued an investigation
into the provenance of the papyrus, which none of
the academics bothered to do. He found a con man
in Florida of German birth, Walter Fritz. His
article is worth perusing, both for showing how
Fritz fooled King, and how Fritz and his wife
engaged in pornography of the "hotwife" type. His
wife wrote in a website of hers about "the
Perfection of Sluthood". (Tantric, eh?)

<<"He paid a lot of attention — how would I say
this? — to what other people thought of him,"
Christian E. Loeben, an Egyptologist who had
worked for Munro and considered Fritz a friend,
recalled when I visited his office at the August
Kestner Museum, in Hannover. "He would wait to
see what his counterpart expected," and then
turn himself into that person's "little
darling.">>

By now (earlier this week) King has admitted
being fooled, but she and her academic colleagues
had some years to do the research that Sabar did.

The famous self-taught writer Eric Hoffer,
author of "The True Believer", said: "Faith in
a holy cause is to a considerable extent a
substitute for the loss of faith in ourselves."

In front of us, Trump has tapped into some
primal drives of a considerable part of the
American electorate, reflected them back to them,
and created a mass movement which is nothing to
sneer at. Of course he has his massive ego to
help him, but the main reason for his success is,
to me, his ability to tune into the fears and
frustrations of some working-class whites who are
less educated and fortunate than the followers of
his main rivals, Hillary and Bernie, and to feed
them back to them, so that his followers and he
can feed off one another in mutual confirmation,
in a circle of mutual stroking. Say what you want
of him, but he is not delusional.

There are different types of con men and
different types of how they fool their targets,
and the above only tries to present some
(presumable) evidence.

Tang Huyen

Ray Of Heaven the Son of Man the first Reaper

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 12:50:34 AM6/25/16

to

I've often wondered what's practical about walking over hot coals. If
someone wants to impress me, try helping the poor.

liaM

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 6:54:38 AM6/25/16

to

pi

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 8:46:52 AM6/25/16

to

Anger management.

pi

liaM

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 9:01:15 AM6/25/16

to

fish less

djinn

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 9:25:56 AM6/25/16

to

"Ray Of Heaven the Son of Man the first Reaper" wrote in message
news:nkl2io$o75$1...@dont-email.me...

but it does help the poor because the poor work
in coal mines and this helps pay their wages.

oxtail

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 10:06:30 AM6/25/16

to

Tang Huyen wrote:

> ....

>
> In front of us, Trump has tapped into some primal drives of a
> considerable part of the American electorate, reflected them back to
> them,
> and created a mass movement which is nothing to sneer at. Of course he
> has his massive ego to help him, but the main reason for his success is,
> to me, his ability to tune into the fears and frustrations of some
> working-class whites who are less educated and fortunate than the
> followers of his main rivals, Hillary and Bernie, and to feed them back
> to them, so that his followers and he can feed off one another in mutual
> confirmation,
> in a circle of mutual stroking. Say what you want of him, but he is not
> delusional.
>

> ....

He thinks he knows what he is doing in his world.
But in my world, he is simply clueless and dangerous.
I should do more than laughing at him
with heavy heart and fear.

pi

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 1:30:52 PM6/25/16

to

You know I am not particularly bright, liaM. What did you mean?

pi

liaM

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 5:18:52 PM6/25/16

to

You first. Why "Anger management" ?

pi

unread,

Jun 25, 2016, 5:35:27 PM6/25/16

to

Pass.

pi

noname

unread,

> Realist,
> literalist, and dualistic in the extreme:

I'd agree with that, for some values of each of those words; everything is
either real or illusory, exactly what one says it is or some lie made up to
achieve an objective, and one is either acting as his true self or not...
that's just been expressed in as dualistic a fashion as I can easily
manage.

> "Those who are not with us are against us."

There is no "us", that's a fiction of convenience for those who would use
it as a club, "do what the rest of US do" is bullshit.

> You apparently have not heard of multiple
> points of view *complementing* each other.

You apparently cannot read English and think that everything that I
consider or question is a deeply-held belief.

The unity point of view is useless, period; without dualism there is no
change, no before/after and no truth/falsity, that is the draw of unity for
people who wish only to use others as tools, or for those too weak of
mind/spirit to recognize the bullshit factor. UNITY is the war-cry of
those who wish to be Special and con others into believing they are "one
with the cosmic all" to satisfy the agendas of their desire.

> You have apparently not known that in East
> Asia, people can be Confucianist, Buddhist,
> Daoist, animist, etc., without encumbrance.

That's a pleasant theory, it accounts for the long East Asian history of
zero conflict and no warfare; believe what your desires give you to believe
if you so choose. Or recognize desire as a liar within. Your choice, no
matter to me what others do.

> Such religions are *partial* religions, not
> "mono", not exclusive. Daoism itself is
> packed with multiple points of view on the
> same topic, negating each other and
> affirming each other, until finally, all
> such points of view are abandoned.

...and you have nothing left but a puddle of cum and your dick in your hand
for all your fucking around with theories.

> More
> specifically, there is a whole, and there
> are parts,

That is dualism you have just expressed.

> and they do not contradict each
> other, but complement each other, and the
> whole is what saves the parts, though the
> parts still exist like before.

The soteriology of "saving" the parts from themselves is paternalistic
Christianity bullshit.

> To the sage,
> only his views and opinions are abandoned,
> but everything else is intact.

The sage abandons nothing, he simply carries no baggage; everything is at
hand when it is needed.

> You apparently adopt a "win-lose" template,
> a "mono" paradigm: only one thing wins,
> everything else must lose.

No, I adopt a true/bullshit template; what is not true is bullshit.
Period. What you think is true, even believe to your very core is true,
has nothing to do with what is true. What can you build on a foundation of
bullshit that will last through one season of rain?

There is nothing to win and nobody to win it from, there is only me and
not-me, me and the world. To me, you are a face of the world, what is
not-me. I am often slow but seldom stupid enough to take on the entire
world in some attempt to conquer it for the benefit of I know not what.

> In Daoism, as
> I understand it,

Look at you Tang, spewing yet more false humility. It's bullshit my
friend, plain and simple. Leave off or piss off.

> all things and points of
> view tolerate each other and fortify each
> other, even if the whole expresses itself
> into the parts and yet reabsorbs them into
> itself, round and round, so that they all
> enrich each other. One hand washes the
> other.

That sounds like good conservative politics.

> Perhaps the conflictual, adversarial nature
> of the US legal system has influenced your
> thought,

The US was founded by a few, but it has grown to many and changed along the
way.

> but in Europe, judges try to
> embrace various parties and resolve their
> conflicts. Former French President Sarkosy
> and his then wife were represented in their
> divorce by the same lawyer, who was a
> friend of both.
>
> Tang Huyen
>

Try setting your agendas aside, Tang.

--
noname.123...@gmail.com

Tang Huyen

unread,

Jun 28, 2016, 6:51:11 PM6/28/16

to

On 6/28/2016 2:57 PM, {:-]))) wrote:

> Some parts are beyond saving.

Are you insinuating that I am beyond
salvation? You sneaky you, I am going
to cast a few ninja stars into your
mind, assuming that it had any room
for anything at all.

Tang Huyen