I cant recall the names at the moment, but picked up a New Age free magazine the other day.

At least one female hypnotherapist was in there and her hair, its color, her make up, eyes, smile and dress style made her look like a BK-clone.

Start looking at pictures of various new entrepreneuses on the scene and see if any are similar in appearance to BK. It might be amusing if this turns out to be a trend

Must mention a friend of mine who graduated from one of Stanford University's professional schools told me that Ophrah Winfrey addressed this year's graduating class at Stanford.

He claimed that she gave each graduate a copy of E. Tolle's A New Heaven and a New Earth.

My friend took a university level course on the work of the ancient Buddhist philosopher, Nagarjuna, and he has read many of the early Buddhist sutras from the Pali canon in English translation, and has done some work studying the Buddhist philosophy of abhidharma. He couldnt get past the first few pages of ET.

And this man is a veteran of month long silent retreats and isnt afraid to have his ego challenged. He perservered through major anxiety attacks when doing these things.

He did well enough in law school that he not only graduated Order of the Coif but clerked for a federal judge. His powers of concentration far exceed those of the average citizen...and to him, Tolle was just mush. He was amazed that with all her resources, Oprah had singled him out for promotion.

Too bad. Years ago, she was doing really good things like highlighting mental illness, its impact on families, encouraging people to read books like Wally Lamb's novel, I Know This Much is True--which, though a novel, did much to bring real insight to something that matters to thousands of people--the impact of schizophrenia on both those who have it, and their families.

It was when she shared her microphone with people in this kind of predicament that Ophrah was at her best and she should return to that part of her work and stop playing messiah or consorting with would be saviors.

Even when they dont call themselves saviors or messiahs, the tip off is the giddy excitement shown by those around them---and the peer pressure, spoken or unspoken, to give them only praise and never ever, ask a single searching question. Saviors and messiahs promote herd mentality and group-intoxication--participation mystique.

And god forbid anyone do any fact checking or ask if the messiah has taken the responsiblity of carrying malpractice insurance. That spoils the warm cozy feeling right there--spoils the high.

Infallible perfect beings dont need it. Anticult was right. A hot dog vendor is accountable to more laws and regulations designed to protect the public than any guru--or messiah.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2008 07:55AM by corboy.

Here's the story. The comments are interesting.

[www.paloaltoonline.com]

Comments:

Comments
I went to the graduation, it was a lot of fun.

The most boring part was Oprah's speech.

I was all about her and Tolle. She even gave all the students the book he wrote. They were expecting a car... hahaha!!!.

I wonder what the faculty thought about her attack on science and physics in particular.

Oprah should not be put on a pedestal.

Happie

Posted by Happie, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2008 at 5:02 pm

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

When I read that Oprah was Stanford's graduation speaker I couldn't believe it. Most first rate schools try to get someone with some intellectual credentials or accomplishments.

But a TV celebrity who promotes unscientific cures and foolish products, what can they have been thinking? Some one or several people should be fired for creating such bad publicity. It's embarrassing.
Posted by Embarrassed, a resident of Stanford, on Jun 15, 2008 at 8:45 pm

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

just a clear example of how the farm has been sold.....

Posted by big Al, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2008 at 9:40 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was there and I must say the best part of the day was seeing how happy my parents were that I graduated.

The second best part was listing to the Stanford Chamber Chorale sing at Memorial Church.

Ophra was the downside of the day because is was all about her and not us the graduates. This was our day not hers.
Posted by Diane, a resident of Stanford, on Jun 16, 2008 at 7:55 am

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congratulations!

You made it.
Posted by Lucianna Andrea, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2008 at 8:49 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congrats to class of '08! For the curious, Stanford has posted the video of Oprah's speech at Web Link
Posted by Ian, a resident of Stanford, on Jun 16, 2008 at 10:14 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oprah was picked because her god child was graduating that day from Stanford. Her speech was weak with no substance.
Posted by Tim, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2008 at 10:20 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And maybe a few bucks to their endowment or development?

The Dumbing Down of America will not be stopped.

Who decided on the commencement speaker?

Posted by Dumbing Down, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2008 at 11:37 am

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harvard had JK Rowling, who delivered standard commencement fare, but with a snappy British accent! It wasn't exactly Marshall announcement the Marshall plan, I grant you...
Posted by Me Too, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2008 at 11:43 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gunn High School had rapper MC Hammer!? as commencement speaker -what next?! To think of someone like that lecturing a bunch of high-scoring Gunn students is hilarious.
Posted by anonymous, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2008 at 8:39 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good point, what could a bunch of braniacs like that learn from someone who has actually live a long, complex life with lots of ups and downs? Better off with some professor...
Posted by Good Point, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2008 at 9:02 am

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

Good point, Good Point.
Posted by second that, a resident of Menlo Park, on Jun 17, 2008 at 10:43 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe next year they can get Ryan Seacrest. Then Whoopi Goldberg the year after that. That is, if Oprah doesn't buy Stanford before then.
Posted by It is I, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2008 at 10:47 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear "Happie": She was quoting Martin Luther King - the full passage reads;

So, Dr. King said, "Not everybody can be famous. But everybody can be great, because greatness is determined by service." Those of you who are history scholars may know the rest of that passage. He said, "You don't have to have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and verb agree to serve. You don't have to know about Plato or Aristotle to serve. You don't have to know Einstein's theory of relativity to serve. You don't have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. You only need a heart full of grace and a soul generated by love."

Not really an attack on physics or classics either...
Posted by stephen, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2008 at 11:09 pm

The Byron Katie website is like a huge spider-web, with lots of sticky trapdoors. Dozens and dozens of ways in, video, text, audio, live Hotlines, worksheets, message boards, everything. Its all designed very carefully to appeal to different people in different ways, and groom and lure them into more books, audio, video, and ultimately the LGAT Katie School, and then into the 100 Day trainings, and beyond that, into being a fake BK Facilitator, and then who knows what comes next?

Its really one of the most sophisticated series of interlinked multimedia websites out there.

Now with the Oprah thing, they are going berserk with Oprah-propaganda. Oprahganda?
On the Byron Katie events page, they put LARGE OPRAH & FRIENDS logo's, several times.
They are going to milk the Oprah beast for years to come.
Because Oprah still has popularity, Byron Katie knows she can transfer some of that to herself, by simple association.

One day Oprah is going to have to answer for all of the thousands of people she has dumped into the hands of these New Wage scammers.

But notice that even though Byron Katie is trying to use Oprah as an endorsement, she is forced to post that Oprah is NOT endorsing Byron Katie. But Katie knows New Agey people don't read disclaimers.
But Oprah makes sure she protects her own ass, by forcing people to post these disclaimers.

(Posted on Byron Katie website)
"Oprah & Friends is a trademark of Harpo, Inc. Neither Oprah & Friends ®, Inc. nor its affiliated companies are responsible for nor do they endorse the advertising or other content contained on this website."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2008 10:11AM by The Anticult.

To whom it may concern:

csp has been banned from this message board.

A Wee Question:

Oprah promotes Eckhart Tolle. But...promoting someone is different from hiring someone.

But...would Oprah HIRE an administrative assistant with the unverifiable life background that Tolle gives?

Or, for that matter, BK?


------------------------------------------------
A correspondant who responded to misgivings about Oprahs' speech to the 2008 graduating class at Stanford wrote:

Dear "Happie": She was quoting Martin Luther King - the full passage reads;

So, Dr. King said, "Not everybody can be famous. But everybody can be great, because greatness is determined by service." Those of you who are history scholars may know the rest of that passage. He said, "You don't have to have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and verb agree to serve. You don't have to know about Plato or Aristotle to serve. You don't have to know Einstein's theory of relativity to serve. You don't have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. You only need a heart full of grace and a soul generated by love."

Not really an attack on physics or classics either...

Posted by stephen, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2008 at 11:09 pm

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

(C growls:

Well, what if you might be able to serve better if you do happen to know physics or classics?

A radiologist/oncologist had better know enough about physics so as to avoid under exposing or over exposing patients to radiation.

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

C ponders: My reading of that MLK quote was that Dr King wanted to instill courage in people in a dangerous venture and wanted to encourage as many people as possible to step forward and serve. But my guess, based on Kings own educational background, which was of a high level, was that he intended heart to balance intellect, not displace it, as Ophrah seems to imply.

(A hunch further supported by her promoting people like ET who have backgrounds that are not verifiable by any sort of fact checking and who would have immense difficulty finding employment at entry level with a story of enlightement on a park bench or from a cockroach on one's toe)

MLK wanted to encourage as many people as possible to serve. But...Dr King could not have given that speech that Oprah quoted had he not learned to make subject and verb agree.

And...MLK would not have been able to give that speech had he not taken courses on homiletics (preaching) at his seminary. And he could not have served as he served without having studied both Greek and Hebrew scriptures--rigorously.

And, remember, service, even the most loving service may misfire or be ineffective if one lacks the education needed to gather information, write coherant proposals or grants. Yes, we need as many as possible to serve, but King most certainly did not want a mere army of people with good intentions, good hearts and undeveloped critical thinking.

Let us examine what I see as the social context of O's speech.

It was given by a rich woman, a tycoon, to an audience of graduating students, many of whom are emerging with heavy burdens of loan debt to pay off. To get employment sufficient to pay their college debts those Stanford students will need much better resumes than what Tolle gives-namely his story of depression, instant enlightement, and bliss on a park bench with nothing said about how he supported himself or was supported during this time.

Suppose one of the Stanford students gave a prospective employer a life story of that kind--would he or she be hired? Now, how about Oprah. When she hires a personal assistant, would she accept someone who had a threadbare and unveriable background of the sort retailed by ET and BK?

Hell no. She'd probably insist that every one of her admin assistants undergo a background check--especially anyone who handles her finances.

Back to MLK:

It is often forgotten that Dr. King was a highly educated man. He wanted everyone to have access to the opportunities he enjoyed.

King was a scholar, and among the authors he read and grappled with when in seminary was Karl Barth, both of whom refused to support Nazism. Barth was an influential theologian and wrote in a dense and difficult style.

The Stanford University archives has an online copy of one of MLK's student papers, which shows he was very much a scholar. And by serving as he did, he had learned enough grammar to make subject and verb agree.

You can read one of MLK's early papers here--from the Stanford archives.

[stanford.edu]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2008 10:37PM by corboy.

I am a facilitator of TW and thinking about launching a website to offer my service to those who may want to experience TW. I have gotten as far as reading about page 9 of the 77 on this thread.

So far, what I can gleam as the main message from this thread are these two points:

1. People who have a need should seek help from a licensed therapist. BK isn't a licensed therapist.

2. TW can hurt people.

I am not interested in hurting others.

I think it is important to tell you that no one sent me here - I googled something and this thread came up and I found it. I am interested in the viewpoints here. I have no previous hypnotherapy experience, and have a master's degree in clinical psychology (not mail order).

From where I sit today, TW seems to have been helpful to my life.

Please let me know why I should or shouldn't offer facilitation in TW in your opinion?

But my guess, based on Kings own educational background, which was of a high level, was that he intended heart to balance intellect, not displace it, as Ophrah seems to imply.

This is very nicely put, corboy. The problem in so many of these groups is that they totally encourage people to 'listen to their hearts' at the expense of critical thinking.

Thereby the notion of 'selfless service' or 'seva' as Dr. King so beautifully describes becomes twisted and warped into its ugly step-sister, what someone (corboy I think) called 'slayva' on one post ... forced menial labor for the enrichment of a 'Master', 'Guru' or 'Enlightened One'.

I cant claim credit for 'slavya'.

I found it on one of the early AOL discussion threads relating to Siddha/Syda yoga.

It was a pun on 'slavya' (slave labor) for 'seva' (selfless service).

Just so I dont act like a fairy tale dragon and hoard treasure all to myself, I invite all interested persons to read the vast amount of material on those AOL threads. Solea, maybe your guru did a layover there, who knows?


[www.ex-cult.org]

[www.ex-cult.org]

[www.ex-cult.org]

[www.ex-cult.org]

[www.ex-cult.org]


Though they deal with SYoga,
there is so much in there that is transferable to what people went through in other groups, and also brilliant strategies for dealing with trolls that its like pouring out a sack of potting soil and finding huge, faceted gems all through it.

I think what triggered these discussions was publication of the article by Liz Harris O Guru Guru in the New Yorker magazine which exposed SY in the mid-1990s.

Since a number of SY people have apparently jumped the fence to BK and since there is a lot of evidence from the AOL collection that LGAT tech was used IN the expensive, month long SY Intensive, at least till 1996, and also (intersting!) that many SY people were concurrently attending other LGATs, this is worth reading because former SY people may have joined yet other groups and possibly shared some of their knowledge with a new generation of spiritual entrepreneurs/euses.

I am a facilitator of TW and thinking about launching a website to offer my service to those who may want to experience TW. I have gotten as far as reading about page 9 of the 77 on this thread.

So far, what I can gleam as the main message from this thread are these two points:

1. People who have a need should seek help from a licensed therapist. BK isn't a licensed therapist.

2. TW can hurt people.

I am not interested in hurting others.

I think it is important to tell you that no one sent me here - I googled something and this thread came up and I found it. I am interested in the viewpoints here. I have no previous hypnotherapy experience, and have a master's degree in clinical psychology (not mail order).

From where I sit today, TW seems to have been helpful to my life.

Please let me know why I should or shouldn't offer facilitation in TW in your opinion?

cultcity:

You should read more than 9 pages.

Your basis for supporting Katie is your subjective experience?

And on this basis you would promote Katie?

What specific information would it take for you to reverse your opinion about Katie?

Be very specific in answering this question.

Again, you should probably read more.