Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Edgar Cayce

Expand Messages
  • carynlouise24
    Interesting reactions – Well it is interesting Mars is the reincarnation of the Old Moon. Explains the `trance state. One thing in life which I cannot
    Message 1 of 18 , Jul 11, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Interesting reactions – Well it is interesting Mars is the
      reincarnation of the Old Moon. Explains the `trance' state.

      One thing in life which I cannot stand is when people say `blessings'
      or `God bless you' – like they have this authority to tell God who to
      bless who not to bless!

      Well back to Billy … then



      --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > *******Well, I'm sorry but I have to tell you that some of your
      information is woefully inaccurate! You could verify this by doing a
      search online or reading a few books about the Cayce Readings. I'd
      recommend reading a biography of the man first, such as "There Is A
      River" by Tom Sugrue, then look through whatever books of excerpts
      from his psychic readings interest you, like Edgar Cayce on Atlantis,
      Edgar Cayce on Jesus and His Church, etc. You'll find the information
      quite similar to Theosophy and anthroposophy, frequently identical.
      >
      > The objection of Rittlemeyer's was about people claiming to be
      an authority because of who they supposedly were in another life.
      This has nothing to do with telling what other peoples' past lives
      were--- which of course Dr. Steiner also did, so Rittlemeyer's
      criticiism about "claiming authority" on the basis of previous
      incarnations couldn't possibly include. He meant saying 'Well, I was
      so-and-so in a past life and so you should listen to me' (as one poor
      soul currently does who claims to have been Cayce himself, while
      producing no evidence of any abilities in this life). Telling people
      they should study music because they have an unrealized musical gift
      due to having been a musician in ancient Greece, as the Cayce
      Readings might do--- well, that's a completely different thing than
      what Rittlemeyer was talking about, clearly. Dr. Steiner also would
      identify learning disabilities in children as coming from past lives
      and use this knowledge in treatment.
      >
      > Also, the Readings did not identify Cayce as having been
      Pythagoras. He did say that in a past life he was an Egyptian
      initiate unknown to history named Ra Ta, whose memory later became
      mixed in with the mythological Ra. But he didn't claim people should
      listen to him because he was that priest in the time of the building
      of the pyramids. In fact, Cayce didn't ask people to listen to him at
      all, as he was not a teacher like Steiner. He was a freakish case of
      an ordinary-seeming man who, because of his past lives, could go into
      a trance state and connect with the same sources as Blavatsky and
      Steiner. In his trances, he mainly was asked medical questions about
      people who were sick. Other stuff was secondary to him and he wasn't
      sure how much to trust it himself.
      >
      > -starmanwww.DrStarman.com
      >
      >
      >
      > To: steiner@...: carynlouise24@...: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:51:19
      +0000Subject: [steiner] Re: Edgar Cayce
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > The Edgar Cayce's I have read are:The Life Story of JesusThe Origin
      and Destiny of ManRevelationMany Happy Returns My thoughts are:In
      Friedrich Rittelmeyer's `RUDOLF STEINER ENTERS MY LIFE' Friedrich
      writes:`His (Rudolf Steiner) attitude in the Krishnamurti affair
      shows that he regarded it as the greatest occult sin to claim
      authority for anyone on the ground of previous incarnations. In the
      age of the "Consciousness Soul" everyone must appeal with his
      teaching simply and solely to men's own objective sense of truth, and
      convince them purely on the basis of reason'.Edgar Cayce in an
      unconscious state claimed authority for person's previous
      incarnations and this should be a reason for concern. For instance;
      say someone like Edgar Cayce had to say to me `you were Mickey Mouse
      in your previous incarnation' – if I was naïve enough to believe this
      (because I was seeking the fundamental question of life `who am I') I
      would spend the rest of my life prancing around thinking to myself `I
      am Mickey Mouse' and further begin to act, take on the role of,
      Mickey Mouse - only to find when I pass through the portals of death
      I was actually Donald Duck in a previous incarnation and thus wasted
      a whole life in misconception.The age old wisdom comes to mind `Know
      Thyself' through yourself being yourself.Another factor; Edgar Cayce
      has claimed himself to be the great ancient leader Ra and the great
      mathematician Pythagoras in previous lifetimes.As far as I know not
      even Rudolf Steiner would claim to ascertain who he was in previous
      lifetimes in such an open manner; and further the true understanding
      of reincarnation of Initiates is not truly understood by the
      uninitiated.At this point I would like to say; Stephen Hale is
      greatly respected and (in my view) his investigations into the Karmic
      relationships between people is well thought through, done in a very
      concise manner and most importantly in a conscious manner. These
      investigations, on people who have already passed through the
      portals, namely Rudolf Steiner himself, directly proves the above
      writing by Friedrich Rittelmeyer on Rudolf Steiner's view on previous
      incarnations are done with an objective sense of truth based on
      knowledge and reason and is a gift invaluable to anthroposophy.I have
      spent years pondering Edgar Cayce and it is not without undue
      considerations I put this forward.--- In steiner@yahoogroups.com,
      Durward Starman <DrStarman@> wrote:>> > > > To: steiner@:
      Cheeseandsalsa@: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:32:21 -0400Subject: Re: [steiner]
      Edgar Cayce> > > > Barbara Handclow who isn't an anthro said that
      Cayce is a member and his father of the masons. She wrote that they
      were of the dark occult brotherhood...I personally do not resonate
      with what he brought to us. > I do agree - a balance is always good
      in communications.Any thoughts ... I wonder what Rudolf Steiner would
      have to say on Edgar Cayce?> > > 1> > .> *******> > > > > > Well, in
      this particular case I can say flatly that the lady is mistaken.
      Neither Cayce nor his father were Masons, I know that from personal
      study and contact with his family and many people who actually knew
      him here in Virginia Beach. He was not a member of anything, and in
      fact didn't know about Theosophy or anything esoteric until he began
      answering questions about such matters in his "readings." He almost
      never remembered anything he said in trance so they had to have a
      stenographer take it all down, and he read what he'd said afterwards
      along with everybody else. He was a simple Christian while awake and
      never joined anything except the local Presbyterian Church here. His
      father was a difficult man whom Edgar didn't get along with very
      well, but he also was not a member of any brotherhood or anything and
      had nothing to do with Edgar Cayce's work most of his life. > > As to
      what you don't resonate with in the Cayce Readings, well there's a
      lot that may be criticized in many ways. I don't know what you've
      read from them. > > Starman>
      __________________________________________________________> It's a
      talkathon – but it's not just talk.> http://www.imtalkathon.com/?
      source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_JustTalk>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _________________________________________________________________
      > Making the world a better place one message at a time.
      > http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace
      >
    • Durward Starman
      ******* Why do you connect this to the planet Mars? I connect the trance state to Saturn, as it s a reversion to the state of consciousness of Ancient Saturn.
      Message 2 of 18 , Jul 11, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        ******* Why do you connect this to the planet Mars? I connect the trance state to Saturn, as it's a reversion to the state of consciousness of Ancient Saturn.

        -starman

        www.DrStarman.com




        To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
        From: carynlouise24@...
        Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:19:09 +0000
        Subject: [steiner] Re: Edgar Cayce


        Interesting reactions – Well it is interesting Mars is the
        reincarnation of the Old Moon. Explains the `trance' state.

        One thing in life which I cannot stand is when people say `blessings'
        or `God bless you' – like they have this authority to tell God who to
        bless who not to bless!

        Well back to Billy … then

        --- In steiner@yahoogroups .com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@. ..> wrote:
        >
        >
        > *******Well, I'm sorry but I have to tell you that some of your
        information is woefully inaccurate! You could verify this by doing a
        search online or reading a few books about the Cayce Readings. I'd
        recommend reading a biography of the man first, such as "There Is A
        River" by Tom Sugrue, then look through whatever books of excerpts
        from his psychic readings interest you, like Edgar Cayce on Atlantis,
        Edgar Cayce on Jesus and His Church, etc. You'll find the information
        quite similar to Theosophy and anthroposophy, frequently identical.
        >
        > The objection of Rittlemeyer' s was about people claiming to be
        an authority because of who they supposedly were in another life.
        This has nothing to do with telling what other peoples' past lives
        were--- which of course Dr. Steiner also did, so Rittlemeyer' s
        criticiism about "claiming authority" on the basis of previous
        incarnations couldn't possibly include. He meant saying 'Well, I was
        so-and-so in a past life and so you should listen to me' (as one poor
        soul currently does who claims to have been Cayce himself, while
        producing no evidence of any abilities in this life). Telling people
        they should study music because they have an unrealized musical gift
        due to having been a musician in ancient Greece, as the Cayce
        Readings might do--- well, that's a completely different thing than
        what Rittlemeyer was talking about, clearly. Dr. Steiner also would
        identify learning disabilities in children as coming from past lives
        and use this knowledge in treatment.
        >
        > Also, the Readings did not identify Cayce as having been
        Pythagoras. He did say that in a past life he was an Egyptian
        initiate unknown to history named Ra Ta, whose memory later became
        mixed in with the mythological Ra. But he didn't claim people should
        listen to him because he was that priest in the time of the building
        of the pyramids. In fact, Cayce didn't ask people to listen to him at
        all, as he was not a teacher like Steiner. He was a freakish case of
        an ordinary-seeming man who, because of his past lives, could go into
        a trance state and connect with the same sources as Blavatsky and
        Steiner. In his trances, he mainly was asked medical questions about
        people who were sick. Other stuff was secondary to him and he wasn't
        sure how much to trust it himself.
        >
        > -starmanwww. DrStarman. com
        >
        >
        >
        > To: steiner@...: carynlouise24@ ...: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:51:19
        +0000Subject: [steiner] Re: Edgar Cayce
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > The Edgar Cayce's I have read are:The Life Story of JesusThe Origin
        and Destiny of ManRevelationMany Happy Returns My thoughts are:In
        Friedrich Rittelmeyer' s `RUDOLF STEINER ENTERS MY LIFE' Friedrich
        writes:`His (Rudolf Steiner) attitude in the Krishnamurti affair
        shows that he regarded it as the greatest occult sin to claim
        authority for anyone on the ground of previous incarnations. In the
        age of the "Consciousness Soul" everyone must appeal with his
        teaching simply and solely to men's own objective sense of truth, and
        convince them purely on the basis of reason'.Edgar Cayce in an
        unconscious state claimed authority for person's previous
        incarnations and this should be a reason for concern. For instance;
        say someone like Edgar Cayce had to say to me `you were Mickey Mouse
        in your previous incarnation' – if I was naïve enough to believe this
        (because I was seeking the fundamental question of life `who am I') I
        would spend the rest of my life prancing around thinking to myself `I
        am Mickey Mouse' and further begin to act, take on the role of,
        Mickey Mouse - only to find when I pass through the portals of death
        I was actually Donald Duck in a previous incarnation and thus wasted
        a whole life in misconception. The age old wisdom comes to mind `Know
        Thyself' through yourself being yourself.Another factor; Edgar Cayce
        has claimed himself to be the great ancient leader Ra and the great
        mathematician Pythagoras in previous lifetimes.As far as I know not
        even Rudolf Steiner would claim to ascertain who he was in previous
        lifetimes in such an open manner; and further the true understanding
        of reincarnation of Initiates is not truly understood by the
        uninitiated. At this point I would like to say; Stephen Hale is
        greatly respected and (in my view) his investigations into the Karmic
        relationships between people is well thought through, done in a very
        concise manner and most importantly in a conscious manner. These
        investigations, on people who have already passed through the
        portals, namely Rudolf Steiner himself, directly proves the above
        writing by Friedrich Rittelmeyer on Rudolf Steiner's view on previous
        incarnations are done with an objective sense of truth based on
        knowledge and reason and is a gift invaluable to anthroposophy. I have
        spent years pondering Edgar Cayce and it is not without undue
        considerations I put this forward.--- In steiner@yahoogroups .com,
        Durward Starman <DrStarman@> wrote:>> > > > To: steiner@:
        Cheeseandsalsa@ : Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:32:21 -0400Subject: Re: [steiner]
        Edgar Cayce> > > > Barbara Handclow who isn't an anthro said that
        Cayce is a member and his father of the masons. She wrote that they
        were of the dark occult brotherhood. ..I personally do not resonate
        with what he brought to us. > I do agree - a balance is always good
        in communications. Any thoughts ... I wonder what Rudolf Steiner would
        have to say on Edgar Cayce?> > > 1> > .> *******> > > > > > Well, in
        this particular case I can say flatly that the lady is mistaken.
        Neither Cayce nor his father were Masons, I know that from personal
        study and contact with his family and many people who actually knew
        him here in Virginia Beach. He was not a member of anything, and in
        fact didn't know about Theosophy or anything esoteric until he began
        answering questions about such matters in his "readings." He almost
        never remembered anything he said in trance so they had to have a
        stenographer take it all down, and he read what he'd said afterwards
        along with everybody else. He was a simple Christian while awake and
        never joined anything except the local Presbyterian Church here. His
        father was a difficult man whom Edgar didn't get along with very
        well, but he also was not a member of any brotherhood or anything and
        had nothing to do with Edgar Cayce's work most of his life. > > As to
        what you don't resonate with in the Cayce Readings, well there's a
        lot that may be criticized in many ways. I don't know what you've
        read from them. > > Starman>
        ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _> It's a
        talkathon – but it's not just talk.> http://www.imtalkat hon.com/?
        source=EML_WLH_ Talkathon_ JustTalk>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
        > Making the world a better place one message at a time.
        > http://www.imtalkat hon.com/? source=EML_ WLH_Talkathon_ BetterPlace
        >




        The i’m Talkaton. Can 30-days of conversation change the world? Find out now.
      • carynlouise24
        I trace it to the Old Moon stage of clairvoyance for specific corresponding reasons. Arhimanic and his sidekick the untamed Luciferic. We understand during
        Message 3 of 18 , Jul 14, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I trace it to the Old Moon stage of clairvoyance for specific
          corresponding reasons. Arhimanic and his sidekick the untamed
          Luciferic. We understand during the Old Moon period the astral body
          was in development and the mineral was not yet included in the human
          body, this was a predominately Luciferic stage.

          In Rudolf Steiner's `Polarities in the Evolution of Mankind' eleven
          lectures given to members of the Anthroposophical Society in
          Stuttgart 5 March to 22 November 1920 pg 108 – we read

          `The Jesuit literature on the material world is much more brilliantly
          written than the works of many others writers on the subject today.
          Father Erich Wasmann's work on ants, for example, is really good, you
          will gain more from reading it than from the pedantic, uninspired
          writings of other scientists. Many more examples could be given.

          The (work of the) Jesuits would be excellent if they confined
          themselves to the material world; it is a deliberate aim (of the
          Jesuits) to use their description of the material world to encourage
          people to associate knowledge with the materialistic aspect of the
          physical world only.

          The intention is to pretend to human minds that the methods used to
          gain knowledge cannot be used to investigate the supersensible
          world. In ancient times Lucifer-dominated individuals suggested that
          human beings would gain mastery of the world if they made use of
          ancient divine knowledge, yet evolution had already gone beyond this
          point.

          Now we have late followers of those people from post-primeval times
          pretending to the world that it is not possible to extend knowledge
          to the supersensible sphere and that knowledge cannot go beyond the
          sense-perceptible world. In those early times the intention had been
          to drug people with supersensible knowledge.

          Now human beings of the same ilk want to use all possible means to
          push humanity into the physical world; they want human beings stuck
          in that world and grasp the supersensible world only with the
          nebulous impulse of faith.

          In post-primeval times the aim had been to inundate humankind with an
          excess of supersensible knowledge. Today those late followers want
          human beings to have less than the right amount of knowledge in this
          sphere. Past intent was to provide supersensible knowledge that was
          no longer appropriate. Present intent is to let people have only
          sense-bound knowledge, making the supersensible world an area where
          every individual may hold whatever views he or she likes.

          What would be the outcome if the group of people to whom we are
          referring were to achieve some kind of victory? These are the people
          who deliberately make a sharp distinction between knowledge and
          belief. There are of course large numbers of easily led people who
          come across the diatribe on the `clear distinction between faith and
          knowledge' and repeat it; they merely repeat it.

          What is all this about? The aim is to do the opposite of what those
          individual in post-primeval times did in their way. In the old days
          the intention was to prevent humanity from descending completely and
          taking up its mission on earth. Today the intention is to keep
          people tied to that mission on earth to prevent their further
          development, for which the earth would provide the basis. The very
          people who are now supporting materialism call
          themselves `spiritualists', or priests of some faith or other,
          representatives of the supersensible world.

          In those ancient times the people offering a life in the spirit that
          was no longer justifiable called themselves materialists. They did
          so from the point of view which I have characterized. Today a large
          number of people who really wish to keep humanity bound to the
          material world call themselves representatives of the spiritual
          world.'

          Page 50

          Think of all the efforts we go to in spiritual science working
          towards anthroposophy to form sufficiently clear ideas; for
          instances, as to how far the things we become aware of in human
          minds, in the form of dreams, may or may not be reflecting the
          truth. As human beings we cannot immediately distinguish truth from
          falsehood when something appears in the course of a dream. The same
          state of mind arises for a congregation when they are told lies by
          people who know those lies will be believed. The soul is brought to
          a state, a mood, by those lies where it becomes the willing tool of
          those desiring power. It is easiest to get people into your power by
          planting illusions in their unsuspecting minds'.




          --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > ******* Why do you connect this to the planet Mars? I connect the
          trance state to Saturn, as it's a reversion to the state of
          consciousness of Ancient Saturn.
          > -starman
          > www.DrStarman.com
          >
          >
          >
          > To: steiner@...: carynlouise24@...: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:19:09
          +0000Subject: [steiner] Re: Edgar Cayce
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Interesting reactions – Well it is interesting Mars is the
          reincarnation of the Old Moon. Explains the `trance' state.One thing
          in life which I cannot stand is when people say `blessings' or `God
          bless you' – like they have this authority to tell God who to bless
          who not to bless!Well back to Billy … then --- In
          steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@> wrote:>> >
          *******Well, I'm sorry but I have to tell you that some of your
          information is woefully inaccurate! You could verify this by doing a
          search online or reading a few books about the Cayce Readings. I'd
          recommend reading a biography of the man first, such as "There Is A
          River" by Tom Sugrue, then look through whatever books of excerpts
          from his psychic readings interest you, like Edgar Cayce on Atlantis,
          Edgar Cayce on Jesus and His Church, etc. You'll find the information
          quite similar to Theosophy and anthroposophy, frequently identical.>
          > The objection of Rittlemeyer's was about people claiming to be an
          authority because of who they supposedly were in another life. This
          has nothing to do with telling what other peoples' past lives were---
          which of course Dr. Steiner also did, so Rittlemeyer's criticiism
          about "claiming authority" on the basis of previous incarnations
          couldn't possibly include. He meant saying 'Well, I was so-and-so in
          a past life and so you should listen to me' (as one poor soul
          currently does who claims to have been Cayce himself, while producing
          no evidence of any abilities in this life). Telling people they
          should study music because they have an unrealized musical gift due
          to having been a musician in ancient Greece, as the Cayce Readings
          might do--- well, that's a completely different thing than what
          Rittlemeyer was talking about, clearly. Dr. Steiner also would
          identify learning disabilities in children as coming from past lives
          and use this knowledge in treatment.> > Also, the Readings did not
          identify Cayce as having been Pythagoras. He did say that in a past
          life he was an Egyptian initiate unknown to history named Ra Ta,
          whose memory later became mixed in with the mythological Ra. But he
          didn't claim people should listen to him because he was that priest
          in the time of the building of the pyramids. In fact, Cayce didn't
          ask people to listen to him at all, as he was not a teacher like
          Steiner. He was a freakish case of an ordinary-seeming man who,
          because of his past lives, could go into a trance state and connect
          with the same sources as Blavatsky and Steiner. In his trances, he
          mainly was asked medical questions about people who were sick. Other
          stuff was secondary to him and he wasn't sure how much to trust it
          himself.> > -starmanwww.DrStarman.com> > > > To: steiner@:
          carynlouise24@: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:51:19 +0000Subject: [steiner] Re:
          Edgar Cayce> > > > > The Edgar Cayce's I have read are:The Life Story
          of JesusThe Origin and Destiny of ManRevelationMany Happy Returns My
          thoughts are:In Friedrich Rittelmeyer's `RUDOLF STEINER ENTERS MY
          LIFE' Friedrich writes:`His (Rudolf Steiner) attitude in the
          Krishnamurti affair shows that he regarded it as the greatest occult
          sin to claim authority for anyone on the ground of previous
          incarnations. In the age of the "Consciousness Soul" everyone must
          appeal with his teaching simply and solely to men's own objective
          sense of truth, and convince them purely on the basis of
          reason'.Edgar Cayce in an unconscious state claimed authority for
          person's previous incarnations and this should be a reason for
          concern. For instance; say someone like Edgar Cayce had to say to me
          `you were Mickey Mouse in your previous incarnation' – if I was naïve
          enough to believe this (because I was seeking the fundamental
          question of life `who am I') I would spend the rest of my life
          prancing around thinking to myself `I am Mickey Mouse' and further
          begin to act, take on the role of, Mickey Mouse - only to find when I
          pass through the portals of death I was actually Donald Duck in a
          previous incarnation and thus wasted a whole life in
          misconception.The age old wisdom comes to mind `Know Thyself' through
          yourself being yourself.Another factor; Edgar Cayce has claimed
          himself to be the great ancient leader Ra and the great mathematician
          Pythagoras in previous lifetimes.As far as I know not even Rudolf
          Steiner would claim to ascertain who he was in previous lifetimes in
          such an open manner; and further the true understanding of
          reincarnation of Initiates is not truly understood by the
          uninitiated.At this point I would like to say; Stephen Hale is
          greatly respected and (in my view) his investigations into the Karmic
          relationships between people is well thought through, done in a very
          concise manner and most importantly in a conscious manner. These
          investigations, on people who have already passed through the
          portals, namely Rudolf Steiner himself, directly proves the above
          writing by Friedrich Rittelmeyer on Rudolf Steiner's view on previous
          incarnations are done with an objective sense of truth based on
          knowledge and reason and is a gift invaluable to anthroposophy.I have
          spent years pondering Edgar Cayce and it is not without undue
          considerations I put this forward.--- In steiner@yahoogroups.com,
          Durward Starman <DrStarman@> wrote:>> > > > To: steiner@:
          Cheeseandsalsa@: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:32:21 -0400Subject: Re: [steiner]
          Edgar Cayce> > > > Barbara Handclow who isn't an anthro said that
          Cayce is a member and his father of the masons. She wrote that they
          were of the dark occult brotherhood...I personally do not resonate
          with what he brought to us. > I do agree - a balance is always good
          in communications.Any thoughts ... I wonder what Rudolf Steiner would
          have to say on Edgar Cayce?> > > 1> > .> *******> > > > > > Well, in
          this particular case I can say flatly that the lady is mistaken.
          Neither Cayce nor his father were Masons, I know that from personal
          study and contact with his family and many people who actually knew
          him here in Virginia Beach. He was not a member of anything, and in
          fact didn't know about Theosophy or anything esoteric until he began
          answering questions about such matters in his "readings." He almost
          never remembered anything he said in trance so they had to have a
          stenographer take it all down, and he read what he'd said afterwards
          along with everybody else. He was a simple Christian while awake and
          never joined anything except the local Presbyterian Church here. His
          father was a difficult man whom Edgar didn't get along with very
          well, but he also was not a member of any brotherhood or anything and
          had nothing to do with Edgar Cayce's work most of his life. > > As to
          what you don't resonate with in the Cayce Readings, well there's a
          lot that may be criticized in many ways. I don't know what you've
          read from them. > > Starman>
          __________________________________________________________> It's a
          talkathon – but it's not just talk.> http://www.imtalkathon.com/?
          source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_JustTalk> > > > > > >
          __________________________________________________________> Making
          the world a better place one message at a time.>
          http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace>
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > _________________________________________________________________
          > The i'm Talkaton. Can 30-days of conversation change the world?
          > http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_ChangeWorld
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.