Eric Pepin - Higher Balance Institute - Discussion

[manny]

Hey Beau,

I am not arguing that this should not have been reported on or that the basis of the discussion is based only on the articles. Of course it should have been reported on as there was an indictment. It's how it was reported on and that this discussion uses only those articles for the "facts" of the case as opposed to discussing the facts as they were presented within the context of the trial. We could go round and round on the finer points of the articles. You either can see that they are written from a biased perspective or you can't. I am very willing to acknowledge the possibility that my personal biases judge the articles to be biased in favor of the prosecution. But I really do read a great deal of bias in those articles and I don't think I "protest too much."

Read them yourself...
1st article:_http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15312/
2nd article: _http://www.religionnewsblog.com/18401/

And I'm really not trying to get you to believe what I believe. But, I find it to be something that interests me: bridging different perspectives...that's kind of what I do. So I'm found wanting with you...can't see me losing any sleep over that. I'm fine with you having your way and me having mine if it comes to an impasse. What I find interesting is that the members that post so often to this site are coming down so hard on the prosecutor's side of things when so much of what I read here is very compatible with HBI's perspective. What fuels this animosity? Is it the actual material? Is it the claims they make on the site? Do you actually believe Eric is guilty? If so, why...because of those articles? I'm not trying to convert you to taking my point of view, but I do think these are fair questions as we work towards more understanding of each other.

Thank you for calling me on slandering prosecution. You're right. I personally do not have details of malicious intent on his part and hereby retract that statement...it was sloppy on my part. I do know that there are people who believe this to be the case. They can speak up here to those points if they are so inclined.

I wouldn't say Eric sold his soul to the devil with his marketing choices; a bit too much black and white thinking for my tastes. My belief is that he erred on the side of the "ends justifying the means." The general flavor of the story is that he believes so much in his methods that he is doing what it takes to get people's attention. If you want to criticize those choices, that is fine. I believe Eric has to deal with the consequences of those choices. The reason why I don't give them more crap about it is because, having made it past the marketing, I'm reaping a huge value from my involvement. So I don't really have any complaints except they are really turning a lot of people off, who otherwise would probably really get into it.

Regarding getting lots of people to sign up, it is definitely within the realm of possibilities that money is the only reason driving that, but there is a detail of this that relates to their mission, which is basically to wake souls up...kind of like unplugging people like in The Matrix films. Whether you believe that to be a true motivating factor or not is up to you. I'm just putting it out there as another reason in the realm of possibilities as to why they would try to get this out to the world, which doesn't make him any different that most programs or religions that believe their methods are making the world a better place.

Finally, I don't intend for my single statement of support for Eric Pepin and HBI to be used as a basis for HBI's credibility and I know that I have not suggested otherwise. I put it out there as one individual's personal testimonial and expect for it to be judged as such. I did this to go on record and add my voice to the dialogue. You are wrong in your inference that my investment in the HBI program is exclusively emotionally based. I am a very intelligent and rational person and I am invested in sharing my experience because I have experienced a value from the program that exceeds my expectations of it. When I come across something that I find to be really cool, I pass the word on. If something is getting a bad rap, and I find it to be a good use of my time, I add my voice to the dialogue in hopes that more clarity can be achieved.

Best,

Manny

 

[manny]

Laura,

Andrew Erwin may very well have said such a thing, but I can't imagine a reputable journalist printing such a biased statement. I did not hear in the transcripts Judge Erwin say the statements the article alleges him to have said, but I could have missed it...there's a lot there. I'd have to listen to it again specifically for omission of those statements to feel comfortable stating anything unequivocally. The only evidence I can produce at this point is that you listen and not hear them for yourself.

In general, I really appreciate the rigor to which I am being subjected here in defense of HBI and Eric Pepin. I do not expect anyone to just take my word for it and I would not feel good about the course of this dialogue if you did as ultimately it is my personal reputation that is at stake. In order to continue supporting the position I've taken so far and continue honestly answering your questions, I need to go through the transcripts again and notate relevant sections for reference. Given the holidays coming up and my general schedule, I will not feasibly be able to accomplish this prior to the new year. I will make every attempt to check back in with this board prior to the end of January.

Best wishes,

 

[Beau]

Hey Beau,

I am not arguing that this should not have been reported on or that the basis of the discussion is based only on the articles. Of course it should have been reported on as there was an indictment. It's how it was reported on and that this discussion uses only those articles for the "facts" of the case as opposed to discussing the facts as they were presented within the context of the trial. We could go round and round on the finer points of the articles. You either can see that they are written from a biased perspective or you can't. I am very willing to acknowledge the possibility that my personal biases judge the articles to be biased in favor of the prosecution. But I really do read a great deal of bias in those articles and I don't think I "protest too much."

Read them yourself...
1st article: _http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15312/
2nd article: _http://www.religionnewsblog.com/18401/

I hate to tell you, but their is no bias in those articles. Both of them have been presented in this thread previously. They pretty much contain what most news stories contain: who, what, where, when, and why, aside from the quotes by the various involved parties. Your claim that it's not what was reported, but how, is baseless. I don't see one editorial license taken in either article. If you do see such a thing, please point it out here. I think your investment of "being right" on this issue clouds your objectivity.

What I find interesting is that the members that post so often to this site are coming down so hard on the prosecutor's side of things when so much of what I read here is very compatible with HBI's perspective. What fuels this animosity? Is it the actual material? Is it the claims they make on the site? Do you actually believe Eric is guilty? If so, why...because of those articles? I'm not trying to convert you to taking my point of view, but I do think these are fair questions as we work towards more understanding of each other.

I think if you took the time to read the entire thread, and then familiarize yourself with the this forum and it's associated websites, you would understand that we are actually quite different that HBI, and that it's not animosity that we feel towards it, but that it's just another project to ensure that humanity does not wake up. That's why the thread is under the New Age COINTELPRO subsection.

Thank you for calling me on slandering prosecution. You're right. I personally do not have details of malicious intent on his part and hereby retract that statement...it was sloppy on my part. I do know that there are people who believe this to be the case. They can speak up here to those points if they are so inclined.

That's quite interesting. So you lied, essentially. What I mean is, you had no real reason to think this, other than your emotionally-laden beliefs which did not at all operate in reality. And now when called out on this, you just retract your attempt to manipulate the opinions of the readers. Well, I'm not going to let you gloss over this attempt to manipulate. To just glibly reply that "it was sloppy" is to not really understand what you were doing. It wasn't sloppy, it was plain manipulative. And you are here as the shiny rep of HBI??

 

[manny]

Beau,

Actually, I was not lying. I was repeating what I have been told in my process of trying to learn as much about this as I can about this. When you pointed out to me the slanderous nature of my statement, I owned it as a mistake on my part and I retracted it. I really do believe that prosecution was slanted, but I am not able to produce evidence to this end. That's why I retracted it.

But, I will have more to add related to my position on the sensational and biased nature of those articles.

On another note, your tone makes me wonder who or what you think I am. I keep stating as clearly as I can that I am here as someone who has had good experiences with HBI and that I believe the whole thing was a setup to get money out of Eric Pepin. But you have this aggressiveness in your interaction with me that makes me think you have a completely different picture of me painted in your mind. Can you just out with it and tell me what you think I'm doing here? I'm curious as to what that might be.

And why is this on a COINTELPRO discussion? I thought you guys were just having a go at some "spiritual teacher" who was in a legal bind because of alleged sexual misconduct. Do you think HBI is a COINTELPRO operation? Can you tell me more about that?

Thanks,

Manny

 

[anart]

On another note, your tone makes me wonder who or what you think I am. I keep stating as clearly as I can that I am here as someone who has had good experiences with HBI and that I believe the whole thing was a setup to get money out of Eric Pepin. But you have this aggressiveness in your interaction with me that makes me think you have a completely different picture of me painted in your mind. Can you just out with it and tell me what you think I'm doing here? I'm curious as to what that might be.

I see no aggressiveness in Beau's tone, fwiw. I do see Beau, and others here, holding you accountable for the rather 'slippery' and manipulative way in which you communicate. I also think that it's quite obvious what you are 'doing here' - you are here to protect and defend someone who you are emotionally (financially?/personally?/professionally?) invested in protecting. You also seem to have no interest in considering that at the end of the day, all evidence points to the fact that Eric Pepin is a pedophile who uses his position of 'power' and influence to hunt for sexual prey. He is a spiritual and sexual predator - they are quite common.

And why is this on a COINTELPRO discussion? I thought you guys were just having a go at some "spiritual teacher" who was in a legal bind because of alleged sexual misconduct. Do you think HBI is a COINTELPRO operation? Can you tell me more about that?

This forum is not in the habit of 'having a go' at anyone or anything. It is a forum that serves a very specific purpose - one of research to approach an objective understanding of our reality. As such, we catagorize information that leads away from an objective understanding of our reality in the cointelpro section. If the information provided by a source, in this case, HBI, leads people more deeply into sleep and self-calming, or if it does anything other than help to reveal the objective truth of this reality while claiming to promote 'personal or spiritual growth' - then it is, for all intents and purposes, cointelpro.

 

[Al Today]

Perhaps some people forget the definition of World Wide Web? On the World Wide Web, there is no privacy. How many people can be out here, reading this thread? For those who haven't been here long, may I say this forum may be considered an open classroom with study halls, discussions, and yes, debates? This is a good one. THANK YOU for this learning experience. Again, thank you... And the truth shall set you free. And if you lie, it may bury you.

 

[manny]

Anart,

Wow, you guys are part of a very interesting culture bubble! Now I'm just morbidly curious to see where you are coming from. OK, well, let's see where this all goes...

Do you mind elaborating on your last post, qualifying just about everything you wrote, or are you actually going to make me ask all the questions that are begging to be asked? Please start with how HBI leads people more deeply into sleep and self-calming. After that, please tackle the one about how "all evidence points to the fact that Eric Pepin is a pedophile who uses his position of 'power' and influence to hunt for sexual prey." I trust you have more than those two Oregonian articles to support these weighty claims.

And yes, I am invested in protecting Eric and HBI. I have not tried to hide that. The reason why I'm invested in this is because I strongly believe in the work that they are doing. But I'm hearing the implication that I have suspicious motives for doing so. If this is true for you please elaborate. I will address any suspicions to the best of my ability.

Regarding my communication style, how would you like me to communicate to you? If your methods are any example of how one should communicate, thanks but no thanks. I can live with "slippery" and "manipulative" if those are words you use for someone who attempts to maintain a certain level of mutual respect within the context of my interactions both online and off.

Best,

Manny

 

[anart]

Anart,

Wow, you guys are part of a very interesting culture bubble! Now I'm just morbidly curious to see where you are coming from. OK, well, let's see where this all goes...

Do you mind elaborating on your last post, qualifying just about everything you wrote, or are you actually going to make me ask all the questions that are begging to be asked? Please start with how HBI leads people more deeply into sleep and self-calming. After that, please tackle the one about how "all evidence points to the fact that Eric Pepin is a pedophile who uses his position of 'power' and influence to hunt for sexual prey." I trust you have more than those two Oregonian articles to support these weighty claims.

And yes, I am invested in protecting Eric and HBI. I have not tried to hide that. The reason why I'm invested in this is because I strongly believe in the work that they are doing. But I'm hearing the implication that I have suspicious motives for doing so. If this is true for you please elaborate. I will address any suspicions to the best of my ability.

Regarding my communication style, how would you like me to communicate to you? If your methods are any example of how one should communicate, thanks but no thanks. I can live with "slippery" and "manipulative" if those are words you use for someone who attempts to maintain a certain level of mutual respect within the context of my interactions both online and off.

Best,

Manny

Manny, please understand that for me to explain all that you apparently do not understand would take quite a bit of time. There is more than enough material freely available on this forum and its associated web sites to get you up to speed if you so choose. I have neither the time nor the inclination to take you by the hand and spoon feed you information that is freely available to you if you are willing to put in the time and effort to learn it.

In short, these topics have been covered in depth, so if you are sincerely interested, please make the effort to learn.

As far as your communication 'style', you have not so much maintained a 'certain level of respect' as you have engaged in subtle, and not so subtle, manipulation, suggestion and paramoralisms - but I think you know that .

 

[manny]

Anart,

I did a search on this forum for other articles elaborating on how HBI leads people more deeply into sleep and self-calming and how "all evidence points to the fact that Eric Pepin is a pedophile who uses his position of 'power' and influence to hunt for sexual prey." This forum is the only one that came up. Where is the material that is freely available on this site that addresses these matters as those are the ones that concern me.

Thanks,

Manny

 

[anart]

Manny, in order for one to understand how HBI leads people more deeply into sleep, one must understand the difference between being asleep and being awake. One must understand self-calming and awakening and the difference between the two. This is where you seem to be lacking understanding, which is certainly your choice.

If you research the work of G.I. Gurdjieff, upon which this forum is based, it may help you understand the difference between sleep and awakening and how that applies to the matter at hand. A thorough reading of the Channel Watch series, in this section of the forum, which covers many new age 'enlightenment programs' may also give you a general base of understanding from which to work. Or, at the very least, it will give you some insight into this forum and why what you are espousing is meeting such resistance.

While no one here would ever state that you don't have the choice to follow whatever path it is that you deem worthwhile, it is quite important that you understand that this forum is not here to help people sleep more soundly, and due to this rather simple fact, this appears to not be the forum for you. There are many, many forums out there that will embrace your line of thinking - this is simply not one of them.

 

[manny]

Yes, but my question is "how do you know that HBI leads towards sleeping." Do you have personal experience of the HBI teachings or is it your belief that if it is not the teachings of Gurdjieff, then it must lead to sleeping?

 

[anart]

Yes, but my question is "how do you know that HBI leads towards sleeping." Do you have personal experience of the HBI teachings or is it your belief that if it is not the teachings of Gurdjieff, then it must lead to sleeping?

~sigh~ No - it is not a belief. It has nothing at all to do with belief. If you would actually take the time to read the information provided, you would likely understand that. Please read and get up to speed with the information presented and discussed here, if you intend to remain on this forum. At this point in time your posts are noise and nothing more. You came to this forum with a clear agenda. Please also read the forum rules because your posts are currently violating those rules and the spirit and intent of this forum.

 

[manny]

Anart,

You know, that's fair enough. It's your board, I can play by the rules. I will read as much as I can before I post again.

Best,

Manny

 

[anart]

Let's see if this helps you out a bit to understand the difference (assuming you are sincere about your questions):

I believe that it is not up to us to determine how the meditation is going to work for us; ultimately, we're in service to a much bigger agenda and this training enables participants to slip into place much easier that we generally do. For me, my overt psychic skills have not developed as much as my ability to manifest/create. For others, other strengths are developed. For me, this meditation has proven to lubricate the process of manifestation and synchronicity in ways that I could never have foreseen. The major points of proof for me is the job I currently have, an amazing personal relationship with my wife and my friends, the evolution of my _http://www.mythosforcreatives.com/]MYTHOS for Creatives program, an incredible collaborative music project, a new home, and a multitude of other details large and small that comprise a life that I feel infinitely blessed to call my own.

This is your description of how HBI has 'helped you' - proof that it 'works' -- do you understand that what you have written here is wholly SELF-serving? What you have written here are all manifestations of things that have made you more comfortable in your sleep - more comfortable in your role as food - a more comfortable machine and nothing more.

What you do not currently seem to understand is that the Work we do here has nothing (or as little as possible) to do with serving the self. If you do actually take the time to read Gurdjieff, or at least about his Work, you might understand that and you might not, but at least you will likely understand why this forum is seemingly not for you and why you most likely will be happier elsewhere.

 

[Beau]

Beau,

Actually, I was not lying. I was repeating what I have been told in my process of trying to learn as much about this as I can about this. When you pointed out to me the slanderous nature of my statement, I owned it as a mistake on my part and I retracted it. I really do believe that prosecution was slanted, but I am not able to produce evidence to this end. That's why I retracted it.

Well, I find it hard to believe that you were unaware of the fact that what you were saying was not at all truthful. You have beliefs, that much is clear. But instead of saying that, your words were said in a way to sound as though you knew, and had proof, that the DA was unfairly targeting Pepin. But you don't. And you have the gall to criticize journalists?!?!

But, I will have more to add related to my position on the sensational and biased nature of those articles.

Again, the articles did not contain anything than relevant facts and quotes from the parties involved. You are the one who is sensational and biased.

On another note, your tone makes me wonder who or what you think I am. I keep stating as clearly as I can that I am here as someone who has had good experiences with HBI and that I believe the whole thing was a setup to get money out of Eric Pepin. But you have this aggressiveness in your interaction with me that makes me think you have a completely different picture of me painted in your mind. Can you just out with it and tell me what you think I'm doing here? I'm curious as to what that might be.

I think the purpose of your presence here is to do all you can to defend HBI, for whatever reasons you have. Because of that you are willing to be manipulative to the readers of this forum. I am not being aggressive. What I am is highly questionable about your intent and wholly incredulous about your style of communication. Welcome to the SOTT forum. We do not accept words based on beliefs.

And why is this on a COINTELPRO discussion? I thought you guys were just having a go at some "spiritual teacher" who was in a legal bind because of alleged sexual misconduct. Do you think HBI is a COINTELPRO operation? Can you tell me more about that?

Even though it is up to you, the newbie, to read and come to an understanding of what is being discussed on this forum, I'll answer your question by saying that the purpose of HBI does not seem to center around helping anyone else other than each person in their subjective little bubble. Great, you are happy. What does that do for the world, for the other humans on this planet? It's a completely self-serving product. No different than The Secret or a hundred other New Age set-ups. Because of HBI you have done things which centered only around you. And superficially at that. Hey, if it's for you, great. To each his/her own. But know that we at SOTT see this decisions for what it is and are not shy about calling a spade a spade. It might send you into a fit trying to defend your sacred cow, but we'd be doing a disservice to all the people who might be looking for real freedom and truth by not pointing out.