| Excerpt from below - I think this is extremely important and germane |
|  |
|
|
|
Forum |
|
|
|
From NikW's post below:My own 'negative' judgement about premies has almost nothing to do with 'the old days' - but does have a great deal to do with how they support a corrupt and corrupting set up without having the backbone to either stand up and point out what is wrong - or get up and leave. They may be happy, but others will pay a price for those premies, cosy world remaining untroubled. Right on Nik - you say so well something that hasn't gotten enough traction in my opinion. Namely that warm bath solpsism courtesy of vicious ad hominem attacks, at the worst, and what must be called none other than fraud at best (and a particularly despicable and intimate kind of fraud at that) accrues to the blissfully ignorant adherent's moral ledger. But, does anybody care about this idea, really? Because if it has validity, then its really not okay - you know, the leave the happy premie alone shit, it means they are enablers, and responsible. They are culpable.
|
|
|
|
|
It is an important point, because when people enable premies to continue on in their belief-system, they are also encouraging those people to support a fraud, namely Prem Rawat. It's as if because of all of revisionism, and/or what premies' lifestyles look like now (as if that constitutes "happiness"), when compared to say, the 70s and early 80s, that denial and enabling excuses anything that Prem Rawat has ever done, and still does. It's utter bullsh*t, IMO. Prem Rawat has hurt a lot of people, and somehow, because he seems so innocuous now, that somehow makes everything he's ever done, A-Okay, including the lies he propagates about himself today! Premies, by definition of their belief in Prem Rawat and their protection of his lies, become liars themselves -- even if it's by ommission.
One major thing that comes to my mind is the cover up of the Jagdeo child sexual abuse. Some may think that because it happened so long ago that such a cover-up of pedophilic abuse of premie children by Rawat & Co. can or should be brushed under the rug. Well, the courts in the U.S. didn't think that victims of Catholic priests should be brushed under the rug at all, and the abuses that were adjudicated had happened decades before. When legal action was taken because of it, the rulings have proved otherwise -- in favor of the victims. But, hey, let's all bury our heads in the sand and be Pollyannas!!
The huge issue is the funding by premies of Prem Rawat's lifestyle. Just about one year ago he sold the Serenity yacht, which was funded by premies but Rawat never got around to explaining just how that megayacht fit into his "propagation plans." He didn't bother to even tell premies that they had purchased that luxury boat for him, but hey, that's okay, too -- he's the Lord, right? Premies continue to buy into the big lie that Rawat is actually doing propagation. They indulge in a lot of cognitive dissonance surrounding that claim because the numbers don't bear out that any propagation is happening, and what premies are funding is the high living being done by Rawat and his family. Why is it perfectly okay for Prem and his adult children to be living off the premie dole after all of these years? I mean, really! Why don't those Rawat kids get jobs and why aren't premies asking those questions? Hello? Right on Nik - you say so well something that hasn't gotten enough traction in my opinion. Namely that warm bath solpsism courtesy of vicious ad hominem attacks, at the worst, and what must be called none other than fraud at best (and a particularly despicable and intimate kind of fraud at that) accrues to the blissfully ignorant adherent's moral ledger.
I have to say that what premies have done anonymously to those of us who use our real names on this forum has been far worse than "warm bath solopism, courtesy of vicious ad hominem attacks." What anonymous premies have done is libel some of us to the extent that it's gone on for over three years. They've contacted some of the employers of ex-premies and professional associations in an attempt to ruin exes' careers, personal lives and well-being. They've done worse than that, too, stuff I won't even bring up on this board. It's enormously ironic isn't it, that those things are the exact same allegations set forth on Elan Vital's faq's against ex-premies?!? It's hilarious sort of, until I Google my name and come up with a libelous, hateful premie website that has my real name on it. Those are real life consequences to me, for using my real name online and those consequences extend far beyond cyberspace. Those premies have done it on purpose, too -- anonymously.
I don't buy the argument of some that it's all okay to still be "blissful premies" because some premies haven't been aware of any of this stuff, or about what Rawat has ever done, or that premies "secretly" don't condone it, as if exes are supposed to be mindreaders and know of their disapproval through intuition. Actions speak louder than words.
Premies have threatened my life because I've been vocal and forthright about my time in the cult. I've been hung in effigy. I've been told by premies that I don't deserve to live because of what I've said online, and that I should watch my back. Recently, an ex-premie wrote to me saying that they "understand why I feel the need to protect myself from premies." Well, that was the understatement of the year! But, I'm not about to drag out all of the hundreds of posts premies have written (just about me in particular in a three year campaign) because since Forum 8 started, a policy was made so that these things just aren't discussed here specifically anymore, and I agree with that policy.
In a cult where the leader is consistently protected by his followers -- and that means all of his followers I don't care where they live or who they are -- and premies say that they "just didn't know" is simply no excuse. And, IMO, anyone who enables these premies to continue on in their ignorant bliss is no friend of mine. All of these excuses sound to me just like a co-dependent who shares a life with an alcoholic or a junkie. It's patent denial and borders on delusional thinking, too, because where the rubber meets the road, either premies have integrity or they don't. Now there is ample information available to them to make that choice about themselves.
Modified by Cynthia at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 07:40:07
|
|
|
|
Hi Cynthia,You and Songster Hit the "Nail on the Head". Thanks Again! Sincerely, Hilltop ~ Spring has Sprung. Flowers are on the way!
Modified by Hilltop at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 22:13:43
|
|
|
|
Modified by Henna at Sat, Apr 02, 2005, 19:06:08
|
|
|
|
...its really not okay - you know, the leave the happy premie alone shit, it means they are enablers, and responsible. They are culpable.
Careful mate! You are treading on dangerous ground here. You need to keep at least a grain of humility, enough to recognize that your opinion about Maharaji is just that... an opinion. And you fucking well better "leave the happy premie alone", otherwise you are culpable of something quite disgusting -- of interfering with human rights, or worse.
You guys are sounding more like right-wing christian neandrathal fanatics every day.
|
|
|
|
What to do when somebody you know is in a cult?
The response can range anywhere from an indulgent smile to kidnapping.
I think that we must consider all the circumstances. To give one example - if your kid has disappeared into a cult headed by a man who teaches the way to Heaven is hitching a ride on the Haley's comet, then steps should be taken before your kid kills himself. There are parents in the United States who lost their children in just this way. They probably did not know what to do, and they probably got no help from anybody. The USA, afterall, adheres to freedom of religion with nearly no reservations.
For ex-premies and premies, we have the dilemma of not wanting to hurt our friends and loved ones while wanting to actively counter-measure Rawat's teachings. One example - a premie in my town, a woman who is the main local contact person for PWK, has a husband who is not a premie. He has refused to let her have anymore "meetings" in their home. This presents a dilemma for the husband and wife, and the same dilemma is faced by all of us who have been involved. It comes with the territory of a cult. It is unavoidable. Whenever you have a teaching that is so narrow and restrictive that it relies on the power of one human savior-figure, then a differing of opinion is inevitable, and there will always be the question of how to proceed, both individually and collectively on the level of national government.
The truth is never narrow and dependent on the power of one human being. This is a truism. Unfortunately for us, the human race does not seem to have evolved a gestalt of this truth yet. Instead, twenty-first century humans still behave with monkey-like, hierarchical, and even combative thinking as they awkwardly contemplate the Unknown.
It's pathetic that the cult member plays the "human rights" card. The obvious fact is that cults do damage, to varying extents. So there has to be some kind of balance between human rights/individual freedom vs the judicious prosecution of con-men. There are no simple, one-sided solutions.
When religious leaders become terrorists, the truth becomes evident even to the dullest members of our societies. But most cult leaders are careful and smart enough to "fly under the radar" as Rawat so appropriately puts it. Rawat has the problem of needing a campaign of reaching out to the public without the public becoming too aware of it. His dilemma in this regard is becoming more and more problematic for him, as evidenced by the Keys program and its amazing restrictions. And our dilemma of how to counter-measure Rawat's cult is becomiing less and less problematic as this particular cult enters its dying stage.
Modified by Will at Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 10:08:48
|
|
|
|
I read today on the Religion News Blog that Australia is dealing with the problem of religion and "hate" speech. There is a new law there against critical speech toward races and religions. People are now becoming aware that mixing race and religion in the law is a very bad idea, and that critical debate in religion is entirely appropriate. However, a certain Christian group seems to have gone too far in vilifying Islam.
Another thought: If Rawat were a politician, he would be a dictator who forbids freedom of the press. Why do premies put up with this, just because it is in the realm of religion? I don't think any ex is suggesting that we deny premies their human rights. Nor even just "spoil their fun." But there are certain premies who have lied and cheated for Rawat, and they deserve an opposing voice, especially in the public arena, such as the Keys program.
There are other premies who are honest and not involved in any overt deception, other than what I would consider self-deception. I have been accused of trying to spoil their fun. From my perspective, truth is more fun than deception; but from their perspective they already have the truth. So it is a debate. The most revealing thing about this debate is that exes are SO much more willing to really talk about it, while the premies freeze up/shut down pretty quickly.
Related link: http://www.religionnewsblog.com/10732/Hatred-law-needs-overhaul--churches
|
|
|
|
>better "leave the happy premie alone", otherwise you are culpable of something quite disgusting -- of interfering with human rights, or worse<
And which human rights are those ? Certainly none that are enforceable as such in the US where TPRF and Elan Vital Inc. are headquartered. - Citizen Rights perhaps - but not 'Human Rights' , for the latter you need the aegis of the UN (a weak influence) or the European Court of Human Rights (a strong influence).
When dealing with oppressive, bullying organisation the ECHR has made a recent and interesting ruling in the case of the MacDonalds Two ( a couple who fifteeen years ago distributed leaflets critical of MacDonalds' environmental and nutrition record - and were sued for libel by the multi national). The ECHR has ruled that the British Government failed to ensure that the individual's human rights were upheld because it denied them legal aid (public funding) for their defence.
No one but you Jonx has suggested any action that involves interfering with [individual's] human rights - still you need to get that in don't you so that Rawat can hide behind a smokescreen of premies being attacked because of their religious affiliation. Er? hang on though it's not about religion is it ? OK I'll ask again which human rights are those ?
And on the subject of 'affiliation' - why not tell us if you do or do not benefit financially from Rawat, Elan Vital, TPRF or related operations ? After all it's a significant issue if you are aguing not only from some philosophical basis but on the basis of maintaining a material reward.
|
|
|
|
To add to your post and since you seem to be knowledgable on the subject, I ask: Where is it written that "ignorance," whether religious or secular, is a "human right?"
Where is it written that someone is permitted to hide their nefarious past, so as to attract more people into their schemes? That must be a human right, given that premies (JOnx in particular) defend it so!
We better get a-crackin' and find those citations, quick, before we get ourselves in trouble with the human-rights-police......... BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Modified by NAR at Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 17:22:54
|
|
|
|
>Where is it written that "ignorance," whether religious or secular, is a "human right?"<
Of course no where does 'ignorance' get any support. Thankfully there are not any ' human-rights-police' (even if Jonx believes there are - perhaps he's thinking of Damien Scattini) merely legal opportunites (in those countries that have adopted conventions into domestic law) to assert protection of human rights. I'd actually like to see any premie who feels their rights have been infringed seek remedy in the courts - it would require specific definitions of belief that Rawat has spent 30 years avoiding.
Nik -was that too serious any answer ?
|
|
|
|
Although I was being facitious (of course) in my post.
You are right. I'd love to see a premie go to court and say their right to their non-religious religion and human rights were being infringed by people telling the truth...... that would be very interesting indeed!
|
|
|
|
Jonx, I get this impression from you that you think people being critical of Rawat and/or premies causes some kind of unwarranted damage to either of them. That just makes no sense.
But considering the way we have been criminally attacked by premies for doing so, you would think that many of them think so.
|
|
|
|
The thing is Jonx, there is no human right to be deluded, or to spread untruths. My position is that it is downright immoral (a violation of human rights and dignity) to insist on the objective truth of any proposition, in the absence of logically satisfactory evidence for that proposition.And just because there is no right to be deluded or to go about telling lies, so there can be no right not to be offended. Your religious beliefs about Rawat really do stink to adherents of other Messianic religions. Your notions of karma and devotion are repellent to most Hindus and Muslims. And all cults are laughable and absurd to victims of other cults. Sure you can plead to be left to enjoy your masturbatory religious fantasies in peace. The Christian Church wanted Galileo to leave them in peace to enjoy their fantasy about the Earth being at the centre of the Universe. But people still have just as much right to tell the truth about Rawat's racket as Galileo had to tell the truth about the Sun. Any offence this causes to your clerics and their fellow travellers is down to them only. Their feeling of offence flows from nothing more substantial than having an error pointed out to them. Growing up can be painful, sure. But remaining in an infantile dependence is likely to be worse. Jonti
-- never a premie
|
|
|
|
Jonx,
Nobody is interferring with your right to believe what you want to believe or to even worship Maharaji if that's what you want to do in your life. In order to interfere with that, someone would have to perform a lobodomy on you or something drastic like that. Honestly, you can't accuse exes of abridging your freedom of religion, but then again, Rawat says it's not a religion, so you may want to check with him on that point sometime soon if you're confused.
But, if you discuss your beliefs and worship of Rawat on this forum, expect to have your believe and worship challenged here, because it's called the Ex-Premie Forum, Forum 8. It's your freedom of choice to come to this forum to make posts, after all, no one has forced you to do that, and even by your posting here that act doesn't remove your faith and trust in Maharaji either. And no one forces you to even read this forum. Therefore, your rights remain intact.
You're thinking is blurry these days, Jonx. This is just a discussion forum on the internet, not the Supreme Court, The Congress of the United States, or the White House.
Lighten up.
Modified by Cynthia at Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 14:55:53
|
|
|
|
Your lord and massa doesn't even possess an elemetary school education. He's ignorant! Intentionally ignorant, no less! It's not like he doesn't possess a brain. So why did he decide to ignore its growth?
Not only that, he tells YOU it is a waste of time while sending his kids to private schools, at YOUR expense. Where do you think he got the money to do that? All he had to do was be smart enough to con YOU. So, in one way you are correct, education isn't everything. It obviously didn't stop YOU (or I) from falling for this nonsense. However, once I began to use what I had been taught, problem solved! Once I began to think logically, rationally and with a modicum of FACT, problem solved.
By the way, Mr. Humble, you follow an uneducated boob (I know, I said that before). If you see some guy, who happens to know the bible quite well and is a "preacher," but doesn't even possess an elementary school education, you call him a backwoods hick with great contempt. Well, don't look now buddy, but your holier-than-thou ego is showing and it really IS ugly! You follow an uneducated boob and you have the kahonies to talk about Christian Neanderthals? Don't lie....... the right wing part wasn't your target, it was the Christian part and I'm certain that you were thinking of some backwoods place like West Virginia with everyone running around barefoot.
Human rights? Human rights? You have, once again, proven that you don't possess a dictionary or the slightest understanding of the meaning of those words. Human rights includes "dignity," something that your boob massa doesn't permit in his twisted, disgusting little world.
Modified by NAR at Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 17:12:01
|
|
|
|
Careful? Are you threatening me you fucking piece of shit? Your fear of culpability is not my problem - it is the problem of your conscience, or what remains of it. To take responsibility for those whom you promote is the most basic form of moral integrity, and is obviously utterly beyond your grasp.You are beneath contempt. My "opinions" about "Maharaji" are considerably better founded and well informed than yours will probably ever be. A classic mistake in the feds failure to intercede in cult abuse and misconduct is an unreasoning fear of infringing on the constitutionally protected freedom of religion. Any informed cult litigator will happily concede the right of anyone to have whatever misguided beliefs they choose to adopt. The line cults cross, however, that makes them vulnerable to legal action is in the specific demonstration of those beliefs when exercised in contravention of the laws of the land. And the resulting punitive litigation, when it does against all financial odds succeed, is not only fully proper and richly deserved, it is required of a courageous and enlightened society. As far as "leaving happy premies alone" is concerned it is my view that they do not deserve a free pass philosophically here on this site. There is enough information available that is suffficiently well documented (and I might add not vigorously legally challenged) that makes it deliberately reckless and irresponsible to ignore. People who do this, like yourself, do not deserve any respect or any allowances. You arrogantly thumb your nose at strong evidence that your beloved guru has done and continues to do great harm. So Fuck You. Your post has made me more angry than I have ever been on this forum, or about this material for a long time. You have absolutely no idea what you are dealing with or who Maharaji actually is, do you? No fucking idea.
|
|
|
|
It's about time someone put these cult creeps in their proper place. Thanks for flushing the toilet!
|
|
|
