Sunday, May 4, 2008

Multiple Sclerosis Purple Bracrlet

You and I have been

by Lisa S.
The following are excerpts from post of Rear View Mirror Blog English appeared in the last days

It amazes me that there are still many who feel the need to defend their past in the FOF, or their past student of the ideas of Fourth Way. This is typical of ex-members of a sect (including myself) who do not want to face the pain of having made a mistake. This indicates that we are still mired in the same thought patterns that we learned in Fof and that we are not yet healed. We did a mistake to go in that sect, as well as to stay, realizing it takes time.
way: it is a cult, a sect, a sect. The fact that you question it shows that we have not freed from the "sectarian thinking." It is not a group. It is not an organization. It is a cult. And you and I've been there.


However, I want to say that I'm gradually realizing that the most serious mistake of my life has been 1) to enter the sect, 2) stay there so long, but 3) the most important and positive step in my activity was left.
cha think is right not to look at anything in our lives as a "waste", but I think it's interesting that most of us who have been in FoF - as well as those who entered in the other seven - are extremely difficult to use words like WASTE or error, as well as many, many other words. The word cult, for example, falls into this series. No words can describe this better than the nature of the FOF. It is simply too painful for us to admit - or rather, sometimes it is.
For the most part, we realize, but we do not want to admit it either to ourselves or others, to be entered into a cult. And you know what? - This is a deep, profound reason for which is been so difficult to leave, and a deep reason why it is difficult for our friends leave.
There are words that are powerful. The omission of certain words can be even more powerful
.
from the waste, and the big mistake we all made to follow that person, something can possibly arise. (And probably, I should add a big question mark in this statement). I believe in transformation - and I learned mostly on it out here in the real world, not in Fof .


In total agreement, I just want to add my opinion: I think that they should recognize that it was in a cult, I do not reduce, not rob me experience, do not hurt me. I will not be so afraid to experience what we have learned to label as "negative", to the point of suppressing all thought "divergent" in us. I consider these feelings rather like a bee, or an insect that has its function in the universe. I try to live without pain dismiss this intimate, we are strong enough. I prefer to feel sad or negative, rather than extinguish any fire within me. And rather than force me still to think that FoF was a "wonderful experience". And who cares anyway.
admitting they had been in a cult, it can free (as well as help altri a farlo) e, per parafrasare la conoscenza della Quarta Via, ci permette di chiudere qualcosa per poter passare a qualcosa d’altro, per lo meno dentro di noi. Ma sul serio, non per finta.
Aver ancora paura dimostra che non siamo ancora liberi.
Baci da Lisa Simpson

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Outboard Fuel Line Problems

The Epiphany of the banana Fotogian (by Nereo) The screening of





Thursday, December 20, 2007

Camera Flash Around Newborn Baby

fotogian ..





Friday, December 7, 2007

Where To Exchange Canadian In Wa

CVD wikipedia? another cog of the slaves of IGB!



A handful of men to govern Wikipedia

An email private administration, made public, reveals the existence of a group of "elect" and privately decided to other users of the free encyclopedia.

[ZEUS News - 06/12/2007 http://www.zeusnews.it/index.php3?ar=stampa&cod=6520]

Legend has it that Wikipedia is a virtual place where you work in harmony and transparency for make knowledge available to all, where problems are discussed in public and dove ognuno può dire la propria.

Una email scritta da una (ormai ex) amministratrice di Wikipedia, Durova, ha però svelato una realtà piuttosto differente.

Costei premeva per il ban di un molto attivo - e perciò sospetto, secondo l'admin - utente di Wikipedia, dal curioso nickname "!!" (doppio punto esclamativo): la Durova lo considerava uno di quelli che tentano di sabotare dall'interno l'enciclopedia libera, scrivendo informazioni fuorvianti o inesatte così da screditarla.

Tutta la discussione sarebbe avvenuta in una mailing list segreta, accessibile solo a pochi amministratori che potevano così decidere delle sorti di Wikipedia lontano dalla folla degli utenti.

Just an administrator, however, posting a private email to Durova, has brought to light this parallel reality, and The Register has also been responsible for spreading the news, which in these hours is making several people to discuss Wikipedia and more.

in addition to the discovery of a "business center secret" of what should be a collaborative effort that has no secrets, there's the fact that the allegations were unfounded Durova enough to force the administrator to resign from office together with the rapid reintegration of "!!". According to James

Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia, but it would just "a storm in a teacup" since you wrongly banned was readmitted in just 75 minutes. On the other hand, we know that the same Wales has done everything to silence any dicussion about the secret mailing list, reports The Register again.

that the situation is perceived as serious as demonstrated by the words of Charles Ainswort, also reported by the English website: "I have never seen the Wikipedia community as angry as in this case. I think there was more hidden anger and frustration with the" clique that rules "of what I thought and Durova's aggressive behavior and his arrogant refusal to take sufficient information they did come out."

The problem is not in fact the existence a mailing list for coordination among administrators, but its secrecy and the consequent behavior of the chosen few, a situation in which a project such as Wikipedia did not just come to exist.

This whole story has so angered many and raised the suspicion of an initiative worthy but still, from time to time, has already been criticized for a perceived lack of transparency and democracy. "