[L8fGLM4d]

i can agree somewhat with your impressions of that book. for me, the only reason i finished reading it was because of a lack of other reading material. her views are highly influenced by a particular synthesis of christianity which in some ways is inconsistent with her message which may be related to why the writing itself is hard to enjoy. my experience when seeking has been that at many times information will present itself in a way which, because of some nuance in the way it's presented, triggers a questioning of many of its suppositions which are frequently the same suppositions supported in material with which one can agree. this can trigger a sort of "crisis" if you're not already in some semblance of balance; in a way, i had this feeling when first reading david's loo study guide. but after reading the loo material itself, i realized that the feeling of crisis was solely attributable to my own reaction to the particular way the material was presented in relation to my own mental configurations at that time. i get a similar feel from many of proj camelot's more "deep black"' type interviews; it takes a second or sometimes third listen for me to determine which information triggered the response and why it did so. usually it's something trivial like fulford's sniffling (guessing a cold or allergies) which triggered the mental image of a schizo-phreak and in turn made me dismiss him and his information. after re-listening and re-analyzing my own response i have been able to reach a more complete ... understanding, i guess you could say.

enjoy this wall of text with no paragraphs.. i know i did :d

-charles