RE: Fw: [divinely-female] sad anniversary

[Guest guest]

I have considered at length with as much deep feeling and intellect as I

can what it means to be a Jungian. One of the most characteristics of

expressing Jungian thought my mentor has taught me is precision of

language, to be exacting about how I describe something. If I am not

precise, how can I achieve the second of the most important things my

mentor is in the process of teaching me, which is to heal the ego and

educate the shadow? I haven't done a very good job if it, but I do my

best.

I find that many in our culture use language that paints with such broad

brushstrokes that any precision or definition is lost. Those people tend

to use emotionally charged language that labels more than it defines.

This has all the look and feel of being a shadow projection. These

people and their all-encompassing labels, tend to put entire ranges of

concepts and entire groups of people into simple broad categories that

can be easily dumped into the shadow.

In their hubris, these people use labels that lack any definition and

wind up stretching the truth to such a point that that they become liars

and they know they are liars, but to be dismissive is convenient, and

it's easy. The gain for the person doing this is that they don't have to

investigate, they don't have to consider whether the other party might

actually be correct, heaven forbid, and they get to be dismissive and

feel superior to those they are dismissing. This is a very unhealthy

side of our culture, in my opinion.

And so it is when I am inundated with this unhealthy side of our culture

on a daily basis, I long for one oasis where we can discuss with a

precision of language and really examine concepts without being caught

up in emotional shadow projections. I guess that is too much to ask from

some people here, as I see that people here are just as oblivious to

their shadow side and caught in complexes as is the culture as a whole.

Just the same, I want to ask anyway: what is our role as Jungians on

this list? Is there anywhere we can educate and reveal the shadow side

of life?

And so all of this is driving me and influencing my own projections, and

so it is when I read something like this statement:

-----

<<but not in the crazy, " white-trendy-liberal " or

" Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense.>>

-----

My first response is, what the hell is this supposed to mean?

My second response is, why is this person, who is supposed to be a

Jungian, is in fact a self-professed expert, labeling people in such a

way who have legitimate, deeply felt beliefs as to how people and

nations should behave in the world?

So how about a few broad brushstrokes of my own? For the past 100 or so

years the US has been staggering around like a drunken adolescent frat

boy with an erection, forcibly inserting it wherever it feels like,

telling the rest of the world " our foreign policy is to do whatever we

want and to have you do whatever we want, " drunk on and addicted to its

own power.

How surprised we are when other people object to this policy.

I believe it was Greg who called the US bombing and killing in

Afghanistan " Operation Infinite Hubris, " and he was prophetic and

absolutely correct. And what did it gain? The Taliban is coming to power

again in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was planned well before 9/11, the events of 9/11 just being

the excuse. The Bush administration has as much as admitted (Perle, et

al) that Iraq was about nothing more than the US needing to take it out

on somebody, like a teenager who'd gotten beaten up looking for somebody

to take the anger and rage out on and found the most convenient target.

And Syria and Iran are next? What hypocrites we are, going after the

shadow projected " other, " and not paying attention to where the

hijackers really came from and who supports them because it might shed

light on a relationship that those in power would like to remain hidden.

There are many people, myself included, who believe the time for this is

over. It must end. This isn't optional if we are to survive. You don't

have to be a genius to see the handwriting on the wall. We've got to

change. Not everyone has realized that the best chance of healing is if

it happens 1x1x1, and so there are activists. Are they crazy? Don't they

have a role to fill, in the overall scheme of things? Certainly they

have complexes like everybody else, but crazy?

One by one by one people are going to either heal their egos, educate

their shadows, and have a spiritual awakening and we will survive, or we

won't. And it probably doesn't much matter in the end. But I'd like to

give it one last try before mother earth decides for us what our destiny

is going to be.

And if that makes me crazy in the " white-trendy-liberal " or

" Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense then I plead guilty.

PS

Did you know that in Saudi Arabia a woman can't get an identity card

because she by law has no identity? She is the property of her husband.

This is what the US is supporting. Remember that the next time you fill

up at your local Exxon-Mobil.

[Guest guest]

Dear , All:

I also share your eloquent and deep felt assessment of the behavior of our

government. In terms of our list, I think we bring together a very diverse and

broad spectrum of experience and communication styles, (Jungian and otherwise)

ranging from young and brash to sublimely wise and wonderful...I like to

think of myself as basically kind and thoughtful ( if not often wise and

wonderful:-) and lately the world has been reflecting back moments when my

speech

(albeit not intentionally) has been harsh, impatient and critical) and having to

own that has stopped me in my tracks. It seems to me to be a life long work;

this learning to use language with precision and more importantly for me, with

kindness.

Otherwise we just add to the wounding of our world.

Warm Regards,

Suzanne

[Guest guest]

Culver wrote:

>

> -----

> <<but not in the crazy, " white-trendy-liberal " or

> " Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense.>>

> -----

> My first response is, what the hell is this supposed to mean?

I don't know - perhaps you are an example of what the hell it is supposed to

mean.

>

>

> My second response is, why is this person, who is supposed to be a

> Jungian, is in fact a self-professed expert, labeling people in such a

> way who have legitimate, deeply felt beliefs as to how people and

> nations should behave in the world?

I don't recall ever having seen fa refer to herself as an " expert. " She

refers to herself as a student. That said, you should hope one day to

develop half her expertise.

>

>

> So how about a few broad brushstrokes of my own? For the past 100 or so

> years the US has been staggering around like a drunken adolescent frat

> boy with an erection, forcibly inserting it wherever it feels like,

> telling the rest of the world " our foreign policy is to do whatever we

> want and to have you do whatever we want, " drunk on and addicted to its

> own power.

>

> How surprised we are when other people object to this policy.

>

> I believe it was Greg who called the US bombing and killing in

> Afghanistan " Operation Infinite Hubris, " and he was prophetic and

> absolutely correct. And what did it gain? The Taliban is coming to power

> again in Afghanistan.

>

> Afghanistan was planned well before 9/11, the events of 9/11 just being

> the excuse. The Bush administration has as much as admitted (Perle, et

> al) that Iraq was about nothing more than the US needing to take it out

> on somebody, like a teenager who'd gotten beaten up looking for somebody

> to take the anger and rage out on and found the most convenient target.

I believe you grossly underestimate the " neo-cons " if you attribute recent

events to a sort of projective, reactive hissy-fit. It is far more well

thought-out and well planned than that. FDR took advantage of an extraordinary

emergency to change the U.S. regime fundamentally (for the worse, imo).

The neo-cons are attempting to take advantage of an extraordinary emergency to

change it again. More power to them.

>

> And Syria and Iran are next? What hypocrites we are, going after the

> shadow projected " other, " and not paying attention to where the

> hijackers really came from and who supports them because it might shed

> light on a relationship that those in power would like to remain hidden.

>

> There are many people, myself included, who believe the time for this is

> over. It must end. This isn't optional if we are to survive. You don't

> have to be a genius to see the handwriting on the wall. We've got to

> change. Not everyone has realized that the best chance of healing is if

> it happens 1x1x1, and so there are activists. Are they crazy? Don't they

> have a role to fill, in the overall scheme of things? Certainly they

> have complexes like everybody else, but crazy?

>

> One by one by one people are going to either heal their egos, educate

> their shadows, and have a spiritual awakening and we will survive, or we

> won't. And it probably doesn't much matter in the end. But I'd like to

> give it one last try before mother earth decides for us what our destiny

> is going to be.

>

> And if that makes me crazy in the " white-trendy-liberal " or

> " Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense then I plead guilty.

>

>

>

> PS

> Did you know that in Saudi Arabia a woman can't get an identity card

> because she by law has no identity? She is the property of her husband.

> This is what the US is supporting. Remember that the next time you fill

> up at your local Exxon-Mobil.

What has internal Saudi law to do with us, or with you? What's it to you? Are

you suggesting that the U.S. should put pressure on the Saudis to change

their laws? (No wonder some people think that we're anti-Islam.) It begins to

seem that you don't object to a foreign policy that is " to do whatever

we want and to have you do whatever we want, " as long as it is what *you* want.

You don't object to " cultural imperialism, " as long as it is your

particular brand of (white-trendy-liberal?) cultural imperialism. Everybody

wants to rule the world.

All I want from the Saudis is cheap gas and that they not export violence. I

certainly don't care about their internal political or their legal

arrangements. What do you want?

I've got a '73 Imperial that does 7 mpg on a good day. I think I'll head on over

to my local Exxon Mobil station and tank that sucker up. Maybe go for

a nice, aimless little cruise through the desert, maybe even head for the beach.

It's only 375 miles (I can do it in five hours), and I've got all

weekend.

Dan Watkins

" Hop in my Chrysler,

It's as big as a whale,

And it's about to set sail. "

The B-52's

" The American way of life is not up for negotiation. "

Bush I

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg,

Greg Rieke wrote:

> Thanks for your courageous contribution .

>

What's courageous about preaching to the choir?

Regards,

Dan

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

Magnificent.

RE: Fw: [divinely-female] sad anniversary

I have considered at length with as much deep feeling and intellect as I

can what it means to be a Jungian. One of the most characteristics of

expressing Jungian thought my mentor has taught me is precision of

language, to be exacting about how I describe something. If I am not

precise, how can I achieve the second of the most important things my

mentor is in the process of teaching me, which is to heal the ego and

educate the shadow? I haven't done a very good job if it, but I do my

best.

I find that many in our culture use language that paints with such broad

brushstrokes that any precision or definition is lost. Those people tend

to use emotionally charged language that labels more than it defines.

This has all the look and feel of being a shadow projection. These

people and their all-encompassing labels, tend to put entire ranges of

concepts and entire groups of people into simple broad categories that

can be easily dumped into the shadow.

In their hubris, these people use labels that lack any definition and

wind up stretching the truth to such a point that that they become liars

and they know they are liars, but to be dismissive is convenient, and

it's easy. The gain for the person doing this is that they don't have to

investigate, they don't have to consider whether the other party might

actually be correct, heaven forbid, and they get to be dismissive and

feel superior to those they are dismissing. This is a very unhealthy

side of our culture, in my opinion.

And so it is when I am inundated with this unhealthy side of our culture

on a daily basis, I long for one oasis where we can discuss with a

precision of language and really examine concepts without being caught

up in emotional shadow projections. I guess that is too much to ask from

some people here, as I see that people here are just as oblivious to

their shadow side and caught in complexes as is the culture as a whole.

Just the same, I want to ask anyway: what is our role as Jungians on

this list? Is there anywhere we can educate and reveal the shadow side

of life?

And so all of this is driving me and influencing my own projections, and

so it is when I read something like this statement:

-----

<<but not in the crazy, " white-trendy-liberal " or

" Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense.>>

-----

My first response is, what the hell is this supposed to mean?

My second response is, why is this person, who is supposed to be a

Jungian, is in fact a self-professed expert, labeling people in such a

way who have legitimate, deeply felt beliefs as to how people and

nations should behave in the world?

So how about a few broad brushstrokes of my own? For the past 100 or so

years the US has been staggering around like a drunken adolescent frat

boy with an erection, forcibly inserting it wherever it feels like,

telling the rest of the world " our foreign policy is to do whatever we

want and to have you do whatever we want, " drunk on and addicted to its

own power.

How surprised we are when other people object to this policy.

I believe it was Greg who called the US bombing and killing in

Afghanistan " Operation Infinite Hubris, " and he was prophetic and

absolutely correct. And what did it gain? The Taliban is coming to power

again in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was planned well before 9/11, the events of 9/11 just being

the excuse. The Bush administration has as much as admitted (Perle, et

al) that Iraq was about nothing more than the US needing to take it out

on somebody, like a teenager who'd gotten beaten up looking for somebody

to take the anger and rage out on and found the most convenient target.

And Syria and Iran are next? What hypocrites we are, going after the

shadow projected " other, " and not paying attention to where the

hijackers really came from and who supports them because it might shed

light on a relationship that those in power would like to remain hidden.

There are many people, myself included, who believe the time for this is

over. It must end. This isn't optional if we are to survive. You don't

have to be a genius to see the handwriting on the wall. We've got to

change. Not everyone has realized that the best chance of healing is if

it happens 1x1x1, and so there are activists. Are they crazy? Don't they

have a role to fill, in the overall scheme of things? Certainly they

have complexes like everybody else, but crazy?

One by one by one people are going to either heal their egos, educate

their shadows, and have a spiritual awakening and we will survive, or we

won't. And it probably doesn't much matter in the end. But I'd like to

give it one last try before mother earth decides for us what our destiny

is going to be.

And if that makes me crazy in the " white-trendy-liberal " or

" Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense then I plead guilty.

PS

Did you know that in Saudi Arabia a woman can't get an identity card

because she by law has no identity? She is the property of her husband.

This is what the US is supporting. Remember that the next time you fill

up at your local Exxon-Mobil.

[Guest guest]

Dear :

Thank you for using precise language to clearly articulate my deepest

feelings. Let those who proudly admit to their imperialist ideology

rant and rave, raise their American flags on their SUV's, gas up

their tanks at Exxon-Mobil and head off to the beach, while the

innocent American soldiers who are put in harm's way in Iraq, give up

their lives to line up the oil thirsty war mongers in Pentagon and

the Bush administration. Let them suck up to the dictatorial Saudi

regime for purely personal interests (the Saudi oil) while the Saudi

trained Wahabi terrorists brutally massacre innocent people in the

U.S. Instead of going after the real culprits of 9-11, let the

imperialist lackeys isolate themselves in this country and around the

world by murdering the innocent and the disarmed with their bombs and

missiles. The people of the world shall not forget, nor forgive such

people!

In this world, we now have two super powers: The U.S.A. and World

Public Opinion. The events of February 15, 2003 clearly showed us

that millions of people from around the globe can and will take to

the streets to protest the imperialistic, expansionist, pre-emptive

policies of the Wolfowitz-Perle type people who have taken over this

nation's foreign policy.

As an Iranian Sufi Muslim and exilee who has been stung and

persecuted by reactionary institutionalized religion, I would like

nothing more than to see the current dictatorial regime of the

mullahs in Iran overthrown and the reactionary Wahabi zealots (in

Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, and elsewhere)

disempowered. I would like nothing more than to see democracy thrive

in these backward kept nations. But whose example are these people to

follow? Those who fought for the American Independence and wrote the

U.S. Constitution? Or the imperialistic policies of Bush, Dumsfeld

and Cheney? Who is supposed to bring democracy to these countries?

Dan Watkin's president Bush or the enlightened intellectuals of these

same nations arousing their own ill-educated people to rise up and

take power in their own hands? Haven't we seen enough of the CIA

overthrowing popular governments and enthroning their own puppet

regimes leading to more dictatorship and oppression(as in Iran)?

What happened to Afghanistan? We all know that the U.S. has turned a

deaf ear to Karzai regime's plea for funds and supplies to prevent

the Taliban from usurping power once again. and we are quite aware of

the fact that the Taliban were able to kick the Soviets out of

Afghanistan, albeit with the help of the CIA. But they have enough

armaments and mass support (amongst those who perceive their religion

and way of life under attack by foreign imperialists) that they can

and most likely will overthrow the American plugged regime in

Afghanistan. What then? How have we improved the standard of living

for those who happen to have survived the 5000-ton U.S. bombs? What

has the world gained by the U.S. attack of this ancient beautiful

land where all cultures and religions used to live side by side?

And what's going on in Iraq right now as we speak? How have we rooted

out terrorism? How have we helped establish democracy? To the

contrary, the U.S. authorities have orchestrated attacks on mosques

and murder of Shi'ite majority leaders in Iraq, thus fueling the

already roaring fire and arousing more anger and hatred amongst the

berieved. The poverty-stricken displaced and homeless Iraqi's don't

even have access to drinking water. They're dying of thirst,

starvation, lack of medical attention, etc. But we are forbidden from

seeing their lamentable images on our government censored T.V.

stations.

As for those who have been fighting the reactionary Muslim regimes,

like the Mojahedeen of Iran (who had sought refuge from the

ayatollah's in Iraq), Dumsfeld violently disarmed them even though

they had never fired a bullet against the U.S. led armed forces. Then

they bombed the Mojahedeen's headquarters and massacred unarmed young

men and women who had pledged their lives to overthrowing the regime

of the mullahs in Iran. The Pentagon tried to disempower the Iranian

people's only hope for liberation from the reactionary Khamenei

regime by disarming and killing the Mojahedeen solely to appease the

dictatorial regime of the mullahs in Iran. Otherwise, they would not

have let the U.S. easily have its way in Iraq.

On the other hand, Colonel Powel and the State Dept. want to appease

and maintain the current regime in power so long as the Iranian

mullahs would also give them a piece of the pie and allow the U.S.

government to plunder its natural resources! The only major power

that Iran has yet to bribe is the United States. But Colonel

and the State Dept. want to ensure their own take by disarming and

brutally murdering Iranian revolutionaries. That is why certain

Mojahedeen ended up tragically taking their own lives in Europe by

setting themselves on fire! That was the only quick way they knew

(short of violence to other people) to get the world's attention and

prevent further murderous attacks on their forces in Iraq.

While the world is being deprived of its real freedom fighters, while

young and naive American soldiers are torn away from their families

and jeopardizing their lives, and while innocents are being brutally

murdered, displaced, starved and sent to mass graves as a result of

U.S. imperialistic policies, let their supporters in American or

Japanese or German SUV's gas up their tanks and drive to the beach....

Ghazaleh

>

> In their hubris, these people use labels that lack any definition

and wind up stretching the truth to such a point that that they

become liars and they know they are liars, but to be dismissive is

convenient, and it's easy. The gain for the person doing this is that

they don't have to investigate, they don't have to consider whether

the other party might actually be correct, heaven forbid, and they

get to be dismissive and feel superior to those they are dismissing.

This is a very unhealthy side of our culture, in my opinion.

>

> And so it is when I am inundated with this unhealthy side of our

culture on a daily basis,

> -----

> <<but not in the crazy, " white-trendy-liberal " or

> " Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense.>>

> -----

> My first response is, what the hell is this supposed to mean?

>

> My second response is, why is this person, who is supposed to be a

> Jungian, is in fact a self-professed expert, labeling people in

such a

> way who have legitimate, deeply felt beliefs as to how people and

> nations should behave in the world?

>

> So how about a few broad brushstrokes of my own? For the past 100

or so years the US has been staggering around like a drunken

adolescent frat boy with an erection, forcibly inserting it wherever

it feels like, telling the rest of the world " our foreign policy is

to do whatever we want and to have you do whatever we want, " drunk on

and addicted to its own power.

>

> How surprised we are when other people object to this policy.

>

> I believe it was Greg who called the US bombing and killing in

> Afghanistan " Operation Infinite Hubris, " and he was prophetic and

> absolutely correct. And what did it gain? The Taliban is coming to

power again in Afghanistan.

>

> Afghanistan was planned well before 9/11, the events of 9/11 just

being the excuse. The Bush administration has as much as admitted

(Perle, et al) that Iraq was about nothing more than the US needing

to take it out on somebody, like a teenager who'd gotten beaten up

looking for somebody to take the anger and rage out on and found the

most convenient target.

> And Syria and Iran are next? What hypocrites we are, going after the

> shadow projected " other, " and not paying attention to where the

> hijackers really came from and who supports them because it might

shed light on a relationship that those in power would like to remain

hidden.

>>

[Guest guest]

Well, Greg, I have to say that I agree with Dan here. The prevailing

consensus around this fire is liberal to an extent which I believe Jung (who

took his voting duties seriously and was generally on the side of liberal

policies, according to Barbara Hannah's biography of him) would have

deplored. There is a difference between holding basically liberal views

(which in fact I do myself, most of the time) - and parading our political

correctness in a smug, self-satisfied way which leads to inflation and lack

of recognition of the shadow - which is something I see all too often on

this list. Hence my liking to play devil's advocate.

And, before everyone comes screaming in, no I do not have anyone in

particular in mind, and yes, I am aware that many of you do extremely valid,

caring work out there in the world, without feeling the necessity to show

off about it every five minutes. But, the general tone of this list does

veer in the direction of self-righteousness, IMO.

As for Culver - well, I'm all for encouraging lurkers to post more

often, but I have to say that, far from displaying courage, 's brief

appearances on this list are akin to that of a hit and run driver (since he

is so fond of getting digs at people's cars. Lost on me - I don't drive

myself, LOL!!) He de-lurks in order to attack long-standing list-members

(under the guise of the high moral ground of course) - then is unable to

take the fall-out and scuttles back into hiding.

I am sorry, Greg, to see you encouraging the self-righteous and

self-congratulatory tone of this list, which is one of the reasons I don't

post anywhere near as much as I used to (that, and general busyness, which I

guess is true of almost all of us). So - I go back to my reading for as long

as I can keep my eyes open, and leave you all to high-five each other, sure

in the knowledge that, whichever side may choose to drop a bomb on you, you

will all have the best places in heaven. My job right now is in the real

world, whatever may become of it.

fa

[Guest guest]

My, now, wasn't that just about as self-righteous and

self-congratulatory as they come, fa? And aren't you the fine one

to talk about hit and run? Whew!!

Marilyn

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/15/2003 6:39:40 AM Central Daylight Time,

josefa@... writes:

Sorry to disappoint you, but I haven't run anywhere - merely crawled into

bed last night, after finishing my reading. But, look on the bright side -

at least my remaining here will save you all the trouble of looking for

another " enemy " on whom to hang your shadow projections.

fa

Re: Fw: [divinely-female] sad anniversary

> My, now, wasn't that just about as self-righteous and

> self-congratulatory as they come, fa? And aren't you the fine one

> to talk about hit and run? Whew!!

> Marilyn

>

>

>

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings

may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I haven't run anywhere - merely crawled into

bed last night, after finishing my reading. But, look on the bright side -

at least my remaining here will save you all the trouble of looking for

another " enemy " on whom to hang your shadow projections.

fa

Re: Fw: [divinely-female] sad anniversary

> My, now, wasn't that just about as self-righteous and

> self-congratulatory as they come, fa? And aren't you the fine one

> to talk about hit and run? Whew!!

> Marilyn

>

>

>

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings

may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Huh?????????? You've become the " enemy " since when? And my objection

to what you said (the style more than the content, to be accurate)

constitutes " shadow projections " ? I don't think so.

Marilyn

> Sorry to disappoint you, but I haven't run anywhere - merely crawled into

> bed last night, after finishing my reading. But, look on the bright side -

> at least my remaining here will save you all the trouble of looking for

> another " enemy " on whom to hang your shadow projections.

> fa

[Guest guest]

<<As for Culver - well, I'm all for encouraging lurkers to post

more

often, but I have to say that, far from displaying courage, 's

brief

appearances on this list are akin to that of a hit and run driver (since

he

is so fond of getting digs at people's cars. Lost on me - I don't drive

myself, LOL!!) He de-lurks in order to attack long-standing list-members

(under the guise of the high moral ground of course) - then is unable to

take the fall-out and scuttles back into hiding.>>

<<Anyway, I'm glad that you were not endorsing the attack on me which

was, as

far as I can see, made by a very troubled person who obviously needs an

" enemy " upon whom to vent. I will now quit with the sarcastic remarks

and

post only when I have the time and inclination to say something

appropriate.

Preferably about Jung!>>

fa, Greg, All,

Speaking of long standing list members, I have been a member for almost

3 years. A 3 years in which I have posted infrequently, yes, but I've

also posted from the deepest part of myself and never has word one in

support or criticism been spoken. And there have been times when I have

been sickened by what has been spoken here, by those who are supposedly

learned in the teachings of CGJ.

And may I say through all these months and years observing the comings

and goings on this list, that what you, fa, said above is typical of

your behavior on this list.

Again, as you have many times previously on this list, you take a

perceived slight, blow it up into an attack, make some absolutist and

generalized statement about moral high ground and how I am a very

troubled person who needs an enemy. And if that isn't the pot calling

the kettle black, I don't know what is. You accuse, you vomit your

shadow all over everybody and you can't back up any of it. There isn't

anything obvious here. You don't know me. You have no right and no basis

on which to diagnose me.

Which one of us is the deeply troubled one, when you were writing a very

nicely thought out post to Greg, but you've got to get in one more dig,

don't you, and you've just got to attack with vitriol and venom, making

statements about somebody you've never met.

Why can't you just answer my question? Please compare what you said in

your last 2 emails and what I said below.

In the ONLY part of my previous email that was specifically directed at

you, I said:

---------------------------------------------

<<<<And so all of this is driving me and influencing my own projections,

and so it is when I read something like this statement:

-----

<<but not in the crazy, " white-trendy-liberal " or

" Black/Asian/any-other-minority activist " sense.>>

-----

My first response is, what the hell is this supposed to mean?

My second response is, why is this person, who is supposed to be a

Jungian, is in fact a self-professed expert, labeling people in such a

way who have legitimate, deeply felt beliefs as to how people and

nations should behave in the world?>>>>

---------------------------------------------

Do I have a shadow? Yes I do, and I believe I pointed that out in the

previous post. I have shadow projections and they influence how I think

and feel. AND SO DOES EVERYBODY ELSE.

Do I have a right to ask these questions of you when you yourself have

told me, and I quote, that " your qualifications have been posted for all

to see, " and Greg and others seem to respect you as an analyst? I think

I do have the right to ask you those questions.

And, if you are an analyst, isn't the bar just a little higher for

somebody who supposedly is very learned and hopefully has some

compassion for the suffering in the world, otherwise why would she

aspire to such a difficult calling?

Is what I said an attack? Maybe, and I take responsibility for that, as

you can see above. Will you admit to the vehemence and violence of your

own attacks?

In your email to Greg in which you labeled me " deeply troubled " you said

that your shadow crept out. Thank you admitting that you have one.

There is a huge gulf, though, between what you say and what you profess

to intend through your posts. You say you have compassion, but if you do

it is seriously lacking for anybody on this list.

A couple of months ago, when Ghazaleh posted an article that you reacted

emotionally to, Alice said that G. has to accept that people are going

to have their buttons pushed and accept the reaction, or not post the

article. Does that not apply to you as well?

Is it not fair to say that when you use phrases like " crazy white

liberal-black-hispanic advocate " that somebody is going to take offense?

If it doesn't apply to you, please tell us why. Is it that you were

playing devil's advocate? Well, could you please let us all know ahead

of time when you are going to play devils advocate so we know how to

interpret your language?

Because the facts as I see them, regardless of what you intend, is that

your behavior at times on this list over the past 3 years that I have

been a member here has been horrible. You seem to think the posts of the

last 3 days live in a vacuum, but they don't. It's not the last 3 days.

It's the last few months since Ghazaleh rejoined the list, and it was 2

years ago with " who's a traitor. " This a pattern of behavior that has

lasted 3 years and maybe longer and I'll bet a lot of people here can

see it.

And you have never once apologized for this behavior that I have seen.

Even your post after the " lawsuit " thread wasn't an apology. An

explanation, but not an apology. I can only conclude that you feel that

we are not owed an apology, perhaps because you see yourself as the

offended one.

I don't know you, I don't know your qualifications. All I have to go by

are what you and others say. You say you are an analyst, I accept that.

To me, that means you have more of a responsibility for your behavior.

And yet, why is it that you just don't seem to get it?

Greg seems to respect you. I do not. To me right now, you are a petty

person. You have a pattern of overreaction and then playing the

misunderstood victim. Whenever somebody points it out, you trot out your

" qualifications " and say you're playing the devils' advocate and we are

just supposed to sit back and enjoy it.

We don't have to be friends, but I don't want us to be enemies.

If you've got something to say to me, then say it. If you've got a case

to make, then make it. If I don't get kicked off the list for this, I'm

not going anywhere. I'll take you on any day, any time. I may not have a

piece of paper that says I've passed a test, but I'll put my experience

up against you anytime. And I'll do it with thoughtfulness and

compassion if you will as well.

But don't expect any more free rides. The next time you make some gross

generalization or accuse somebody of being troubled, or attack somebody

for their political beliefs, expect to be called on it. Every time you

use phrases like you use above, I'm going to call you on it. If I'm not

here, I hope somebody else does.

And to think, that after knowing Alice's work for over 10 years, and

knowing Alice herself for 8 years, it would come to his. All I wanted to

do was learn. I guess I got a lesson. Shut up, , or you'll have a

professional who's never met you making a public diagnosis of you.

I guess it's a mark of how far I've progressed in my inner work that I

can look at the above statements and still not hate you.