Quote
Ether Dragon
It certainly can't hurt if people contact their local media. If enough buzz gets generated, the media will have their interest piqued. .

Going to the media is a first step, but unless a political action is taken, the results doesn't last. It fades away. For example, a series of articles were published in our local neswpaper (La Presse, Montreal) in 2003

[www.prevensectes.com]

... but I know for a fact that people continue to attend the Forum in Montreal by the hundreds. Who remembers what was published July 5 2003 in the newspaper? A permanent solution whould be in the form of a court decision or a law, but this is very unlikely in our countries because of our Bill of Rights. Look at Scientology for example. It's all over the media and people get sucked every day anyway. Unless something illegal is being commited or new laws are declared by our government (for example an "anti-cult" law like the About-Picard law in France), the fight and the controversy will go on and on. And Landmark feeds on the "controversy". It's an "Art" they have mastered.

As to warning people outside of a Landmark Forum - I'd go for it. The majority of the attendees haven't been programmed yet, and are likely to be skeptical. I know my wife was for the first two days. Someone (or a group) showing up to hand out fliers or simply shout a warning would undoubtedly have had an impact. At the very least, it would've helped them to re-engage their critical thinking and BS detectors.

Quote

Going to the media is a first step, but unless a political action is taken, the results doesn't last. It fades away.

I agree 100%. I would hope that the media attention would spark political action.

Yes, I heard it is the Sunday session that reels them in. Heard that from several sources. Probably by that time you've had limited sleep for 2 days straight.

How do they 'feed on controversy'? I've noticed that they have an answer for every objection.. is that what you mean? I think there must be a department in the organization that concentrates on that ;)

I think there are 2 things to do. I like following the French model, though the French are smaller & more absolutist, so an action like that may not completely fly, for a number of reasons...

I suggest this second way:

Keeping track of when the local meetings are. Posting anti LM (etc) links on community web pages (craigslist, myspace, etc) the week leading UP to any meeting, before the new recruits are taken in and preogrammed...

This may mean posting every week... whatever...

I think one of the best links to post is one that explains that once you make an emotional decision about something (such as what LM strives to do), it's difficult to revise your beliefs later, even when true facts are presented that totally refute your (false, emotional) belief. Here are two links re that:

1.) from:
[runolfr.blogspot.com]

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Illusory Causation
Illusory causation is a term that came up on NPR news this morning, and it caught my ear as something worth discussing in detail. Illusory causation is probably the root of belief in a lot of worthless alternative medicine products that you can find on the market today.

Illusory causation occurs when someone attributes a specific event to the wrong cause. In the story on NPR, for example, they explained how many people credit the herb echinacea with curing their colds. They believe the herb cured their condition because they started taking it when their cold symptoms started, and the symptoms went away soon afterward. However, three separate clinical trials have shown that echinacea doesn't make a cold go away any faster. The echinacea users believe that the cause of their relief is the herb, when the true cause is simply the human immune system, which can usually eliminate cold viruses given a little time. The belief in echinacea is an illusion, but the users want to believe it, and repeated association of echinacea with cold relief simply reinforces the illusion. They build up strong personal, anecdotal evidence for their beliefs.

Illusory causation can be attributed to numerous alternative medicines. Homeopathic remedies like Similisan are obvious candidates. As I noted in my previous article, Similisan makes a remedy for pink eye. Pink eye can have at least three causes, one of which is a virus. The human immune system will defeat viral pink eye after a few weeks, much as it will defeat the common cold. A person who uses Similisan during that time might easily assume that the homeopathic product cured the condition, when it really did nothing at all. Such a person would see Similisan as the illusory cause of his or her relief.

But as I said, pink eye can have more than one cause. There is also a bacterial form of pink eye, and this form doesn't easily go away on its own. Those who contract bacterial pink eye often need antibiotic eyedrops to cure the disease, and Similisan won't do a thing to help it. That's why Similisan has a disclaimer telling users to see a doctor if their symptoms don't improve within a few days (the time it normally takes for viral pink eye to start going away).

It's easy to believe in illusions and false causes, but they won't help you in a real emergency. Evidence-based medicine doesn't offer a cure for everything, but at least you can feel secure in the knowledge that evidence-based medical treatments really will deliver the effects that they claim to have.


2.)

Illusory causation (a type of superstition) and ingroup bias:
from :
[jonathan.mueller.faculty.noctrl.edu]

Ingroup Bias

The best example of Ingroup Bias deals with something that took place years ago. In fifth grade, a few girlfriends and I established The Bra Club. This club was exclusive to those girls who had already received their first bra. We planned all sorts of recess activities for our members. It was amazing (looking back) how quickly we all identified with the group. The boundaries setup extremely fast. ** You were in or out no -- in between.**

<<We in the bra club began to see those without a bra as something less than us.>> We also attributed non-related things, like saying something stupid to not having a bra. This ** illusion of causation** became quite a habit. "Look she tripped. Oh, that's cause she doesn't have a bra."

Stereotypes were also set up within the group. We associated the non-bras to things such as unintelligent, strange, clumsy, etc. At that time, the bra club also fell victim to false consensus. We thought that everybody thought that having a bra was the thing that made the world spin! Needless to say, my chapter of the bra club is now defunct. I'm sure somewhere the bra club exists and they are victimizing that poor non-bra, outgroup as we did!

I went to an afternoon meeting with dinner after. When we arrived, name tags were given out. Some people had green dots by their names, but some had red dots. No one could really figure out why one had any particular color over the other. When we finally sat down to dinner it became clear that the dot signified your meal choice (pre-selected). It was interesting how the 10 tables of people (12 per table) had literally grouped themselves by color code. For instance our table had only one green tag meaning that person had ordered prime rib rather than orange roughy. Before all were served and knew the color reasons, one person at our table even joked to Larry calling him our "token green," so obviously we somehow gave ourselves some identity via the codes. It was also interesting that as dinner went on most of us finally had to admit that we were just conforming to the perceived norm of "healthy eating" with the fish and Larry's prime rib really did look much better to us. We had not chosen what we wanted but what we thought we should want to eat at a company function.
...

Also, I suggest posting links to soem of rick ross's pages, but don't overwhelm... try various ones in rotatin, and see what sorts of responses come in... and I would suggest staying anonymous, since they DO attack anyone who criticizes LM / etc...

Quote
Maggie
How do they 'feed on controversy'? I've noticed that they have an answer for every objection.. is that what you mean? ;)

Yes. This is what I mean. The more controversy, the better they do. It's been like that for more than 30 years since EST was born. When there is controversy, it means there is a dialogue, and like you say, they have answers to every objections.

Landmark claim to have taken from many sources, including from Arthur Schopenhauer's writing entitled "The Art of Controversy". Have a look.

[etext.library.adelaide.edu.au]

Stratagem XXXVIII is particularily interesting:

Quote
="Schopenhauer's book"
A last trick is to become personal, insulting, rude, as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand, and that you are going to come off worst. It consists in passing from the subject of dispute, as from a lost game, to the disputant himself, and in some way attacking his person. It may be called the argumentum ad personam, to distinguish it from the argumentum ad hominem, which passes from the objective discussion of the subject pure and simple to the statements or admissions which your opponent has made in regard to it.

Sphinx:

It's really best to share links that have articles and information specifically about Landmark and its courses.

Here are the three primary links:

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

These links contain much research about LGATs and concerning Landmark, its courses, first-hand experience with those courses and the potential risks involved.

Also see [www.culteducation.com]

This link is to the research of a clinical psychologist who offers an analysis of what is wrong with mass marathon training such as Landmark, Lifespring, NXIVM, Sterling, etc.

Also see [www.culteducation.com]

This explains coercive persuasion techniques, which may apply directly to the methods used by Landmark and other LGATs.

This type of very specific information is much more helpful when attempting to caution people about Landmark.

That's why Landmark hired attorneys and spent a great deal of money in a failed attempt to take this information off the Worldwide Web.

So sweet that Landmark..which I will now refer to as skidmark ..has withdrawen their case.

Oh how sweet it will be when this whole thing comes down and it's exposed that Howie has been funneling money to Jack(Erhard)

My ex fiancee now tells me that the US NAVY is using Skidmark. Really...where? Show me..I keep saying. Provide something to back up these statements. According to her Oprah and Dr. Phil are big fans and have beeen through it. Really? I would like to see something to back up these claims.

Skidmark is getting desperate.. giving their courses in prisons now. They have finally found the captive audience they are looking for.

Goodbye LEC.

Here are some questions I have addressed to my local medical community:

- Suppose a Landmark Forum leader with no medical background would administer psychotropic "mind altering" drugs to his participants "without their informed consent"! He would be committing a criminal act in addition to illegal practice of medicine. Right? He would be charged and condemned and Landmark center would be shut down by the authorities. Yet, none of the participants would complain (if they ignore they were being drugged), because they would all feel "high", except for a few cases who would end up in hospitals or would commit suicide (as is the case for Landmark attendants).

- Now, why is it different for mind altering "technologies"? Why is it considered legal to administer a step by step "mind altering technology" to participants without their consent? It is well documented in medical journals that these techniques are very real (for example CBT) and that they can produce effects which are comparable to psychotropic drugs in patients. This explains why some participants have psychotic episodes, others commit suicide.

It is my opinion that these "mind altering techniques" should be identified better and controlled by the medical community and be declared a "medical treatment" comparable to the usage of psychotropic substances. This would set clear limits to the "mind altering and manipulation techniques" these "cults of greed" are using on innocent victims.

Does that make any sense to anyone?

Does anyone know exactly how they hypnotize people..for how long? What are the lasting effects?

My best friend is getting in deeper and deeper. Actually moving closer to local landmark hq. Looks like she is gone for good.