I've only had a few days retreat, I've things to do online with Swami, which is fine :)
I have also been one of many members of
> a certain Vedanta-related Facebook group run by
> someone who has contributed to this thread under
> the user name of “earthquake”.
> Because of my involvement with these two people,
> this thread interests me. Personally, I have
> benefited from my association with both people,
> however I have only had positive experiences with
> James Swartz. I can’t say the same about
A useless assertion about a forum member. Unless, it is quantified.
Gaslighting is where one person or group of people sublty or overtly try to sow seeds of doubt targeting people of groups. You have begun in this post with this above claim.
The other point is that it's a Vedanta group. Not 'Vedanta-related'. Shiningworld is Vedanta-RELATED. My group is a traditional vedanta group with both myself and resident Swami teaching using our lineage name. This is another sowing seed of doubt, gaslighting, which fails as neither myself nor the resident Swami are 'Vedanta-related' teachers. We are Vedanta teachers. The group is endorsed by who is present from the lineage.
Shiningworld are masters of gaslighting, and it can be subtle. Your post is one such gaslighting piece, and i'll show why here.
> I am glad that people are expressing their
> concerns about James Swartz and others here.
Really? You do know that isn't credible? The reason is that for someone who says they are 'glad' that people are expressing concerns about James Swartz, you've already spent a noticeable amount of time challenging what has been said...
...Without taking up multiple offers of both SWartz own emails and online police reporting, to show how the Swartz' post lies, yet still being a mouthpiece for whatever they officially post. This is not the conduct of someone 'glad' people are expressing concerns about SWartz. It is the conduct of a servant, or sub-servient person(s) that are not interested in discovering the truth, merely in propogating lies.
It has always been known that the SWartz' and whoever makes these account here, would never want to see the SWartz' own emails that prove they post lies about others. It is why it has been constantly offered to all of these accounts. The point has been proved by around half a dozen Swartophile accounts that have came on and been a mouthpiece for the SWartz' lies, while refusing to view the independent evidence that shows they are lieing. This is Gmail emails from the SWartz' themselves, and a local online police report I myself have made about things.
> I’ve noticed that some contributors to this thread
> have been labelled “trolls”, while others haven’t,
> when addressing concerns about James Swartz (JS).
> People saying negative things about JS have not
> been called trolls, while people saying positive
> things about him have.
You challenged multiple things I reveal about the Swartz (proved in their own emails), and you do not look at the evidence.
You repeat assertions that I committed an illegal act, yet you refuse to look at my online police report. In fact, you say you do not want to know.
You accuse me of abusing my students in regard to money yet you refuse to take up my challenge to share screenshots of the actual conversations you and I both claim took place. You know that my students that were there, they read what I write here? Did you know that?
At this point your credibility is debunked. Why are you here then? To gaslight and try to cause trouble. This isn't any ordinary forum, this is the lion den, and you were always going to be transparent.
> It also doesn’t seem appropriate to me when some
> users demean or otherwise ridicule other users in
> this thread. For example, earthquake is quoted
> saying the following statements to various users:
> ““It's really cute that you have now went away and
> got some help The posting flow is different from
> you. What we are looking here is to get their
> attention. We're really happy at this.”, “I'm
> rolling my eyes and laughing. Amateur hour is
> here.”, “Either I am blind or you are nuts.”,
> “What are earth are you asking this for, are you
> deranged?”, …
> And just recently, to me, he has said, “ I can
> tell we are entering the twilight zone with you
> people again...Though your master took much
> relish...It's not slander, it's libel. I thought
> you would have known the difference, since you
> like writing…”
In this attempt at gaslighting you are omitting vast context. The reason why such comments are made are in response to debunked lies and assertions made about me, that are infinitely more negative that what I have ever gave in response to the few Swartzophile accounts that came on here to challenge me. There is no point in directly interacting with me, if when I stick my tongue out at you in response to your lies, you throw your rattle out of the pram.
The other important context that should be reminded in some of those quoted comments, is that as a former member of staff I know for a fact that Shiningworld inner circle wil co-ordinate responses online. Often we will not be talking to one person. It will be one person posting, but the accumulated effort of the SWartz' and others. We can call them 'legion'. In this manner, I will say to Traveller99 and the others here, that more often than not they are likely right when they accuse accounts of being Swartz. The God-king will be influencing responses often.
> Earthquake lumps me in with “you people”, however
> I have no idea what group of people he is talking
> about. I am here writing as an individual. He
> says that JS is my “master”. As an individual, I
> have no master, particularly in the realm of
> spiritual teachers. I am not an agent of JS or
> his organization, ShiningWorld. He also claims
> that I like writing, but I have only written a
> small fraction in this thread compared to him.
You know exactly who I am talking about by 'you people'. Everyone reading knows. Why begin a whole spiel starting with a lie. It is ridiculous. But it is gaslighting. Attempting once again to sow seeds of doubt that I, a major contributor to this thread, is not posting under rules.
You post like the rest of those people. You people come on here with different accounts, and sometimes the writing style changes but that main thrust does not.
> Also, under the stated rules on the Cult Education
> Institute website, “Any person that is here to
> cause trouble, start arguments and/or intimidate
> people, will be banned.” To me, earthquake’s
> belittling of other users is intimidation.
if you are not an agent of SWartz as you've just wrote above, what gives you the right to speak for 'others users' that support Swartz' here? By placing yourself as the spokesperson for those 'other users' you implicate yourself with 'you people.
> What I’m curious about too, and it seems that
> nobody’s really brought it up, is that there is a
> rule that “The purpose of this message board is
> not to promote a specific religious and/or
> political viewpoint. Don't use it to preach or
> Throughout this thread, earthquake consistently
> promotes “traditional” Vedanta and that he is a
> verified teacher of it, preaching that James
> Swartz doesn’t fit into his (earthquake’s)
> particular lineage of advaita vedanta.
There is no 'promotion' of anything that is religious. There is me, teacher of traditional vedanta, not anonymous, who shows that what Swartz teaches isn't what he claims it to be. And that, what he teaches controls, rather than free people. That is the context of why Vedanta has been mentioned. It has been very effective in informing people of the difference between the real deal and not.
The forum owner himself posted in this topic sharing how they view a Swami in another lineage as the real deal. A view I share with him also.
> though this thread is supposed to be about JS,
> there are numerous posts by earthquake getting way
> off topic, just talking about the particular
> religious/spiritual viewpoint he is interested in
> and identifies with. In fact, he implies that JS
> is unqualified as a teacher because he doesn’t
> fall squarely into this lineage.
That is another nice attempt as gaslighting, but it is not true at all. Every single time I have spoke about Vedanta has been in context of a full piece of writing that discredits the Swartz'. One only has to look at the previous and up-coming paragraphs in each time I speak of Vedanta, to show this. That's another epic fail Allowance.
There has also been absolutely no assertion nor implication that Swartz is not a valid teacher because he doesn't fall into my lineage. I noticed what you are doing here, all of you keep trying to rewrite history. He is not a valid teacher of vedanta as he does not teach in the traditional manner. By the words of Shiningworld website, never mind his actions, this is proved.
And anyhow, are you complaining about me going off-topic here, while you ignore viewing the evidence of SWartz# own emails proving they posted lies about me months ago? Hardly a salient point in regard to the truth. It's silly-billy time again, isn 't it...
> I also think that we have to be really careful
> with this thread. It is one of the most popular
> threads in the "Cults," Sects, and "New Religious
> Movements" section of the message board. It is
> clearly dominated by the users Traveler99 and
> earthquake, who have each posted numerous posts
> over the past two years.
New information has been staggered out over the course of time, and it is intended that this will continue to be the case. It's popular, and that is only going to grow.
> For a forum apparently dedicated to finding out
> the truth, I think it’s vital that people examine
> their intentions and logic before writing
> anything. Kindness might also be appreciated.
> My impression from this entire thread is that
> questioning anything negative said about James
> Swartz, his wife, or his organization is frowned
> upon, to say the least. I don’t think that’s
> healthy in the pursuit of truth.
"A forum apparently
dedicated to finding out the truth"...
You close by gaslighting of the forum itself. You are not interested in the truth, you've already shown this, so why even try to imply what the forum apparently or not may be interested in. You're credibility was non-existent from the start for reasons mentioned above. This utterly transparent attempt at causing a death blow to silence the activity of this thread, another masterpiece by the masters of gaslighting and by-passing = Swartz' & groupies.
What is common in all the Swartzophile accounts that come on here is that you repeat the gaslighting and abuse of Swartz. You are offered evidence and you by-pass that. Then you carry on gaslighting whistleblowers. You people show all the same modus operandi in all these accounts.