An example of the last conversation, I am unable to get any loans, grants scholarships for school, as of now I feel I have exhausted my options, until I can come up with some new ones. Anyway he says this is an example of my past holding me back, (I incurred a ton of debt when my mother died as I had let her use my charge cards, I was never able to get out of the hole and had to claim banktruptcy a while back which still kills my credit even though the 7 years have passed) Any way he badgers me about why I haven't made it to school, I tell him at the moment I simply haven't found a way to get the needed money, SO he does offer to loan me the money but I am obviously hesitant since I am a do it yourself kind of gal. I say ok that is one option not one that I am willingly to consider just yet give me another option, he says did you call President Obama and ask him? I am dumbfounded at this statement and I laugh and say um no I did not call the president of the united states, that is not an option that can even be entertained without laughing so give me another one, he says did you ask all your friends if you could borrow the money, I say well No I did not, most of my friends are middle class folks with children etc, they don't have thousands of dollars I can just borrow. He said well you haven't run out of options you just do not want it enough. Ok I do understand if you want something bad enough you will get it, I haven't given up, but apparently to him I will still be in the same position 10 years from now because I do not want it enough. I cannot wrap my brain around how he thinks I should call the president, nag my friends etc. That is not ok in my book.

I wasted 7 years of my life with an anxiety disorder, it is inherited from my fathers side of the family, my grandmother, aunt, and cousin and my father all suffered from it. It left me agoraphobic, I have since in the last two years been completely free of the anxiety attacks etc. A lot of CBT and xanax along the way and I feel like myself again. He of course believes my past caused my anxiety disorder, I do not have a turbulent past, no big traumas etc... According to him my anxiety disorder that cost me a relationship and my freedom is nothing but an excuse (he has not used the word racket on me thank god)... I found his thinking cold and unrealistic, I do not know how Landmark warps their minds to the point that they cannot even see the obvious.

I am sorry if no one wants to hear about this I can stop.

Stoic,

I know he is using subtle pressure I recognize that and therefore do not actually feel pressured. I do not even like organized religion (christianity, catholicism etc) I do not buy the idea that any one place can help me change, I don't want to change I am happy with who I am, financially I am not good but otherwise I am happy, and the forum will give me nothing I need as far as finances go. I have always believed we can do anything we put our minds to and I do not need LGAT to achieve it. My friend was very successful financially before he got involved and his personal life is still nothing to brag about so he cannot entice me with his experiences with Landmark. Even if that was reversed I would not be interested as I can do it myself and seeing his personality eradicated is enough for me to say no way.

I think he will be in it forever, he wants to be my friend but he does not invite me to anything that includes his present friends (we go to movies here and there stuff like that dinner etc mostly we just talk on the phone) so his friendship branch is merely a twig in my eyes. He doesn't seem to remember I am as he put it one of the smartest people he has ever known. Too bad for his poor brain it was once one of the most attractive things about him....

I am here because I do want to understand, I would never abandon him I will always be around if he needs a friend but regular everyday friendship is out because honestly I have found him to be boring and tedious at best. I know that young man full of laughter and smiles is in there, I have no hope of him ever coming forth again but I am a true friend. Just not true enough to go to the forum (Saying this makes me think of mad max) Anyway last night he tried to make a deal with me, that if I hadn't found the financial means to get into school by the end of the year I let him take me to the forum. I told him No.

Mag

Quote
Stoic
'of course now the conversation is all about how I refuse to change'

Magpie, the conversation being all about how you refuse to change is pressure, subtle but persistant--the kind of drip, drip pressure that if allowed to continue will eventually have you believing that you are flawed in some mysterious way (that only Forum can point out to you) because you are resisting change.

This assumes that there is some attainable 'ideal way to be' that only Forum can elucidate and that when you reach that ideal--which recedes eternally into the distance like all ideals, no matter how much work you do or money that you pay----you will be perfect and live the dream.
This is a no-win scenario, except for the business that collects from every idealist that it ensnares.

Your friend is already ensnared and his conversation being all about how you refuse to change is an effort to displace his feelings of discomfort at being ensnared onto you.
If the focus is off of him and squarely on you as the flawed one then he can feel comfortably superior and delude himself for a moment that he is already perfect.
It gives him some momentary relief from the feelings of inferiority that he has aquired from being ensnared by this con game.

This twisted dynamic serves him, not you. It involves the recipient, you, being willing out of misplaced obligation, sympathy or kindness to take on his problems that he is projecting on to you.

Do not attempt to work out his problems or to do an amateur counselling job on him.

He is like the non-swimmer who, in his efforts to survive, will drown any swimmer who tries to help him. A trained life-guard is taught to knock out without hesitation or to leave such a person who is floundering in panic--- otherwise both are likely to drown.

Hi Everyone,

I just wanted to say that it's nice to see a site like this. I was suprised when I Googled Est/Landmark etc as to what was out here. Obviuosly I'm not alone. I did the Est training 30 years ago and it's just recently that I have some courage to look at some of the things that "I got"

Besides having the few beliefs I had at 20 totally blown from my mind, the scariest thing that I got from it was that "I was God". (Others were God in their lives) Please don't get me wrong.. I don't think I'm nuts- thats why I couldn't look at it. It's just with all they were saying about "creating things" etc, even to the point of creating how others react and what they do etc. It was scary. And with the high that goes along with it, for awhile it felt like there was some truth to it. I was involved in a couple seminars afterword but it was too scary for me so I stayed away and tried not to think about it. I wasn't sure what reality was anymore and looking back I'm lucky I didn't end up in a nut house or worse.

Anyhow, the experience really screwed up my head and I have spent the last 30 years being afraid to look at this stuff and not really knowing how, who, or what I was supposed to be like. Thank God (who I don't think is me) I'm finally getting strong enough to try to sort some of this out. Sites like this and Youtube are helping. Thanks again.

Dear SL, welcome. I am not a professional but can pass this on from the Ross Institute Archives.

If at some point you want to take your recovery further, send a PM to rrmoderator and obtain a referral to some exit counselors in your area. THat will be the very best way to identify the exact techniques that were done to you when you went through EST.

You were on the recieving end of some highly potent technology. And for a very long time, there was very little information available to citizens about the methods and deception involved.

In the 1970s no one knew the potential hazards of all this. Werner Erhard was a major celebrity.

This article was written by psychologists who participated in a spin off of EST.

Here, from another part of the Ross Archive is their analysis of the day to day structure of the training.

[www.culteducation.com]

and an article by the same author citing problems with mass marathon trainings.


This article below makes it clear that some of the methods used included trance induction. When people are not told that trance induction is being used, thats like putting drugs in your beer while your back is turned.

That article also makes clear that in these LGATs they took care to exclude anyone who showed signs of not obeying instructions. Anyone likely to disrupt was scooted away so discreetly that you and the others would not have been aware of it.

This stuff is rehearsed as precisely as ballet. No one individual can ever out think a entire structure set up in this way.

You were in no position to give full and informed consent. You were objectified and 'processed' through a very carefully structured environment---what the authors of this paper call a milieu.

In the United States, we are socialized to experience ourselves as independent, and not to see the extent to which, even in the best of circumstances, our sense of ourselves is shaped by environment and social setting.

The LGAT environment and the 'script' used by the trainer and the other volunteers plus the sleep deprivation and peer pressure are designed to produce a 'high' that is just as real and as addictive as the drugs sold by dealers on the street.

And the power of these LGATs is that they give the feeling of total adult autonomy combined with the rush and the sense of no consequences and total possibility that is age appropriate when we are tiny children, walking for the very first time and exploring our environment.

The key thing in early childhood (age 18 months to 2 to 3 years is you experience yourself as the sole cause of everything, good or bad. That is why little children and even older children so often fear they are to blame if their parents get divorced.

The believes inculcated in an LGAT that you create your own reality is not a breakthrough--it is a huge backward step that dials your mind and emotions back to early childhood--and youre conned into experiencing that not as a backward step but as a huge step forward.

A tiny child around age 18 months to two years or so is too young to know about ethics, or consequences. At that age, we have an energy we will never have again, we are high and excited because at last we can walk and explore, and its like being on a great psychedelic drug trip. When we are that young, we are high on our sense of discovery, but we do not know that to survive the 'trip' of early childhood we need 'trip guides'--that is, adults looking out for us.

A tiny child at this age will be convinced that he or she can fly, but a good parent will make sure to keep that happy and excited child from jumping out a window.

Back to you, SL, what EST may have done was cause people to feel that wonderful high that is characteristic of early childhood--but they fail to protect you when in that high, and exploit you instead.

The worst and saddest thing is, you were left feeling afraid and ashamed, where it was the LGAT leaders who should have felt that shame and who should have had a humble fear of misusing the powerful methods they had in hand.

In part of the article there is this

Quote

Participants are instructed to get in touch with their feelings, even exaggerate. They are encouraged to notice what they held back from their parents, how they stopped being "real" with them and with the world. The resulting subject matter is quite sensitive and emotional. This is the first of a series of exercises dealing with the participants' parents. These exercises are successively regressive.

Not the word regressive--its all part of taking you back to the emotional and cognitive reactivity of early childhood--and abandoning you there.

and not this

Quote

The trainer usually asks for a show of hands for those who now believe they can create their own headaches, colds, and so forth. He asks increasingly more extreme questions, until finally, he asks if they believe they can cure their own cancer? All this is done publicly. Three of 3 "behavior" subjects reported that self -presentation concerns are very strong at this time: if participants don't conform to the group norm by this point in the training they chose to hide it and feel embarrassed or at fault.

and this here is a set of suggestions that make you feel empowered but by denying you could ever be victimized.

By extension this means--you can never face that you are being victimized by the entire calculated and manipulative set up of the LGAT itself.

This will instill shame later on at the more though that you could have been harmed, not helped by the LGAT. The authors do not say this but this is my personal hunch.

This 'there are no victims' concept is now very commonplace in other New Age and fake Buddhist stuff. This shows up in Byron Katies material all thie time.

Quote

Day Two—event seven
The last series of exercises is one 3 of 3 "behavior" subjects (100%) and 15 of 15 "experience" (100%) subjects remembered and talked about: "victim accountable." Participants are instructed to tell a story in which "they" did it to "you" (i.e., stories in which the storytellers perceive themselves to be the victim of the story). First partners try to top one another by telling victim stories in the big group. Then they break up into dyads and tell their story. Each partner must convince his or her partner that they were indeed victimized. Then they must tell the story again, as if they caused the result. It is especially important to tell the partner "what you were pretending not to know." Partners must continue telling the story and explaining until their partners are convinced that they really do believe they are "at cause."

Afterwards, they share in the large group. One "behavior" subject remembered a woman who learned from the exercise that she was not a rape "victim." She got in touch with the fact that she had set up the whole thing, that she wanted it to turn out the way it did. She was eight years old at the time of the rape.

The trainer sometimes writes an the board some of the good things that come from the concept that individuals set up every occurrence in their lives. Three of 3 "behavior" subjects (100%) and 15 of 15 "experience" subjects (100%) remembered the trainer being very powerful and forceful about this viewpoint. He argued that when individuals come from being the "victim" they feel one down, but "why feel one down about something that's your own choice?" The trainer proclaims. "I set up everything" including his "choice" of parents, his death, and so forth. "There are no accidents, and there are no miracles."

This material especially the there are no victims ideology, is almost commonplace in the New Age and Fake Buddhist scene today.

By working with an exit counselor you can become aware of the techniques and learn ways to avoid being re-triggered.

And EST was highly influential. It launched many spin offs.

Werner Erhard was a celebrity in his day. He was photographed with the 16th Karmapa, who was a most exalted leader of an important Tibetan Buddhist lineage. Werner even sponsored two visits by Swami Muktananda to the US and in addition coached Muktananda on how to use EST tech in Muktananda's supposedly Hindu 'Siddha Yoga Intensives'. Participants thought they were practicing yoga but were without knowing it, processed through an LGAT disguised as ancient Hinduism.

[forum.culteducation.com]

And to this day many former members blame themselves for missing the good old times. They think something is wrong with them because they continue to have dreams, old emotions come back.

With few exceptions, they dont know that Muktananda and very likely his successor, Gurumayi, were using EST derived technology on them.

So congratulations on coming out. Welcome to the discussion community.

And this will be important because the material you faced in EST is still in use today and has been refined to seem less confrontational but all the more effective. Some companies are persuaded to use this in employee training program.s

So you deserve to know how this The Anticult has written a lot of posts about this.

Dear sL

Welcome to a recovering community, and again thanks to RRModerator for having this opportunity. It has been since 2003 that I quit my involvement in a LGAT called Insight training (all based on ESt, Landmark, etc), and the good news is that recovery is possible. I have to say that this forum and its very kind, open-hearted and willing to share contributors did a lot to help me recover. Tonight is another night that I felt I should browse around and see if I can contribute to sharing and learning about the evils and the effects of LGATS generally, and hopefully help someone or just encourage another person to take a step towards recovery. I have some buddies who did Landmark in the USA, others who did Insight (Lifespring) training (like myself) and the open sharing revealed that most have a lot of commonality. I would love to share with you. Just let me know, either on the forum or by private messaging.

Regards and good for you for taking the first step.

Ryk

See [www.cultnews.com]

The Rick A. Ross Institute for the Study of Destructive Cults, Controversial Groups, and Movements has officially changed its name to The Cult Education Institute for the Study of Destructive Cults, Controversial Groups and Movements.

The new domain name entry point and gateway to the Internet archives of the institute will soon be culteducation.com.

The Cult Education Institute archives is a library of information about destructive cults, controversial groups and movements, which was initially launched in 1996 and has continued to be under construction and expansion for the past 17 years.

The public message board attached to the The Cult Education Institute will soon only be accessible through the domain name culteducation.com. More than 100,000 entries from the former members of destructive cults, controversial groups and movements and others concerned has accumulated at the board over the past decade. The message board content continues to grow daily and it serves as a free speech zone for those who wish to share their insights and concerns about the topics listed.

bump

From a post made in 2004 by someone named LEC_escapee

(Quote)I can tell you from personal experience about "blocking" at Landmark. I have been trying to figure out for a few months now why I was involved in an abusive relationship (with someone I met at LE, who was also heavily involved and stayed long after I a leadership role). I couldn't understand why I didn't listen to myself. I KNEW a lot were wrong with the relationship and that his treatment of me was unacceptable. I could see no point earlier in my life where I was so blind and dumb before. It was this blocking and the constant coaching I received at LE around it. Over and over again.

At LE you are coached to not listen to the voice in your head, that it's not really you, that it's your identity. This is a conforting thought when your head is spewing judgmental comments about yourself and others (hey, she's ugly, oh that wasn't me, I'm really nice).

It's not helpful when your voice is telling you that you are not safe, not happy and whatever the situation just doesn't work for you. There is no room for personal taste or ambition or desire. You are expected to be happy no matter what, with no matter what...and if you aren't then you are failing and not doing "it" right.

In my experience, a lot of people use the LE distinctions to get their own way and this is as a result of the psychological pressure of the business model, as well as the fact that most coaching is done by untrained volunteers making up their own stuff.

I bucked the system there for most of my time there. I was humiliated, ostracized and overcoached because my inner voice just wouldn't shut up! I was clear that I was going to use the distrinctions how I wanted, I wasn't going to recruit and that LE wasn't the end or be all of self-improvement and that it, in fact, lacked basic humanity. And that there are things in the world that are wrong and need to be fixed.

And, I still was sucked in way more than I liked for longer than I liked.

Maybe what there is to do for people around you is to keep talking about personal satisfaction, fun, choice and compassion. I like another post I saw pointing out that sometimes there are things that are clearly wrong - like abuse, apartheid, etc.

What I did was create a personal value statement and measured my life against it and discovered that the time I spent at LE did not fit my values (freedom, creativity, quality of what I take part in, etc.) or were any help in fulfilling my goals in life (eradicating the stigma of metnal illness by 2010, being rich, being happy, healthily dealing with past grief (grief is a story and a racket at Landmark, there is no room for natural human emotion)), and the time at LE took away from those goals.

Perhaps you can help your friends focus on what their values and goals are in life and help them see that time at LE and invalidating others doesn't do it. Without ever mentioning your opinions and fears about LE.

posted 12-31-04 by LEC_escapee
(Unquote)

More posts from LEC_escapee.

All this was written in 2004.

PS to run a search, always select the "all dates" option and the entire
message board.



[forum.culteducation.com]

This site had a section for people who loved LEC, a section for people who felt neutral and a section for people who reported problems.

[www.sciquill.com]

(quote)Visitor Feedback
Updated 17 March 2003

This is a complete record of comments, stories, and criticisms submitted by readers (identified by first name only—no email addresses will be posted). I have left them unedited except for bleeping out the more colorful language. I've also added my responses, which vary in tone depending on my mood. Due to high volume, we are not accepting new feedback at this time. Thanks to all those who contributed!

Your feedback comes in three flavors:
I Hate Landmark (133)| I Love Landmark (45) | I'm Just Weird (or indifferent) (26)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I Hate Landmark!"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 March 2003
Subject: Education?
From: Chris

Landmark Education? Unfortunately, I took two courses before finding your info on the internet. Its not that it is all bad, but considering that the methods are really like practicing psychology without a license it should be considered fraud. Yes, some get something out of it. The ones I worry about are the ones that are allowed to take it that have severe emotional problems. That is irresponsible. Yes, they are not completely open. Everthing I have read complaining about it is true. The worst parts are irresponsibility about disturbed people, heavy proselytizing, and attempts at mind control. They prey on the weak that need real healing, just like Scientology. Once I read about the history of Werner Erhard I knew immediately he was a phony used car salesman who saw an easy scam.

NoLandmark replies: You don't even need severe emotional problems to get hurt by Landmark; in fact you need a strong and healthy emotional makeup just to defend against their methods.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 March 2003
Subject: landmark
From: kiompie

First of all thank you for posting your site on the web, it is great to have my suspicions confirmed.

Today, I had my own Landmark experience here in Belgium. We were asked by a friend to go to one of the introductory meetings, he wanted to know our opinion about the guy who was presiding over the meeting. So we went there, the three of us, to see what all the fuss was about.

There were actually two Landmark guys, a younger one who did the presentation and an older guy who seemed to be some kind of supervisor. We were the only guests.

First, we had to write down our names and phone numbers on a piece of paper, so they could contact us later in the week for an "evaluation" of the evening. Next we were given a brochure and a few sheets of paper for the "exercises". The younger guy then started to give his presentation in order to show us how Landmark would make our lives better. We had to take one sheet of paper and divide it into two columns, the right one for listing things in our lives that "worked" and the left one for things that "did not work". At this point I interrupted the speaker and asked him why I should provide this very personal information to somebody I did not know, why he thought he could help me with my problems and what kind of an organisation I was dealing with. He then started babbling about how my past was my future and how they would turn that around by removing the past and opening me up to the future. I was told to just do the exercise and see how it worked. When my friends voiced similar concerns, the older guy stepped in to convince us the exercise would reveal all the benefits.

So, we dutifully wrote down a few things that we thought were "not working" and were invited to talk about them. The younger guy helped us out by telling a sob story about how he used to have a problem with his little brother - too boring and predictable to repeat here . The three of us started to comment on the definition of the phrase "not working", giving examples of times when "not-working" things were actually a positive phase people had to go through, etcetera. In short, we were sabotaging their strategy with all kinds of philosophy. Again, the older guy stepped in to lead us back on the right track. We then went on to discuss the things that were "working" in our lives. All the time, the speaker was pressing us to give a clear example and not to get side-tracked. It was all very childish, something you would do to fourth-graders, and we were constantly being told how nice and great it was that we were "sharing". I cannot remember how many times the younger guy thanked us for what we said, but it was getting pretty irritating and way too obvious.

Anyway, after that we had the "you do not know what you do not know" rubbish, including a pie chart showing all the knowledge in the world and how little we knew. At the end of the presentation we were told how great Landmark was, how many people were already being helped all over the world and how we had to sign up. They were really putting pressure on us to commit. We all gave different arguments about why we did not want to commit and had to explain, over and over again, why not. That is their trick. As soon as you start, politely, explaining why you do not feel the Forum could be beneficial to you they start to question/undermine your motives and your beliefs. All very friendly and nicely, but in a way very offensive.

When I said I already had some good friends who were helping me with my issues - and that I had already come a long way in solving them - the older guy started to harass me with this "that is your story" talk. Like I was fooling myself and my friends did not know what they were doing!

It was the typical "you do not believe because you do not want to believe" routine. He insinuated that I refused to face my issues, that I was stubborn and self-delusional. I then told him I could see right through their strategies and that they should come up with something better in order to convince me, but to no avail. He went on ad nauseam.

In the end I pocketed the piece of paper with my name and telephone number - to avoid future harassment - and left with my friends, who also thought the whole thing was utterly ridiculous.

I now know two things. Firstly: Landmark preys on vulnerable people. And if you do not think you are vulnerable, they will try and convince you that you are and that you need their help. You definitely do not!! A lot of the stuff they say makes sense, but there is nothing new. There are many other - free - places you can go to for information and help. Secondly, the friend who arranged this meeting for us is going to be sorry he did.

NoLandmark replies: Thanks for the insights. Landmark hates those like you who would dare stand up for yourself.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 14 March 2003
Subject: Your Forum
From: Jessica

Man, you've got those suckers NAILED. Well done. I have a Bachelors' Degree in Anthropology, and exposing the intentions of an organization such as Landmark Education is the ultimate philanthropic effort for today's society in my experience.

My best friend was recently approached by a "graduate" member of Landmark, and she being soft-spoken and not altogether strong willed allowed herself to be continually coerced by a new "friend" and a brigade of callers to put down a deposit on a Landmark Education seminar scheduled to take place in her area. She's got a good head on her shoulders, but has a very difficult time saying "No" to anyone, especially strangers. I think this stems from her need for acceptance from the general public, and this is the exact kind of mindset most malleable to a manipulative organization such as Landmark. Coincidentally (and fortunately) her mother attended an EST seminar many years ago, and my friend's father immediately made the connection when she went to him with her concerns regarding the situation she is in now. Apparently her mother had to go through considerable deprogramming to unlearn all the poisonous propaganda fed to her by the members of EST, and thanks to my friend's trust and respect in her father she decided to put a stop to her affiliation with her Landmark "friend" and fend off future phone calls from their people.

Not everyone has people they can truly trust or rely on, and according to statistics there are enough people hurting and confused to keep the cash flowing through Landmark Education's veins. I applaud your efforts to prevent individuals from getting sucked into a downward-spiraling case of dependency to which there is no physical end.

Please let me know if I can do anything to help.

NoLandmark replies: Glad your friend got out. It's funny that Landmarkians also consider themselves philanthropists...and they really believe it.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 March 2003
Subject: pre-landmark issue
From: Kam

A good friend of mine paid for me to do the forum. I absolutely do not want to do it, but be claims "My word is my word" and once Im a Landmarkian i will realize that when I say Yes it means Yes. As well, the $400 bucks is already paid for.

I know that they don't brainwash per-se, but what can I do to safeguard myself?

NoLandmark replies: Don't let them convince you that everything you've learned in life thus far are "stories" that should be ignored in favor of Landmark's philosophy. And always ask yourself whether their technology is designed to help you or to get your money.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 March 2003
Subject: Landmark Forum and the Red Fags, my play
From: Stephen

Hi, just wanted to thank you for the link from your site to my play "Land Mark Forum and the Red Flags". I originally had the short play on my playwrighting site: stephenpeace.homestead.com, and it didn't get that many visits. But the visits it did get were from "Formicans", usually, the top tiered Formicans who stood to lose money if their ideology and brainwashing was questioned. One guy was really nasty and we traded e-mails for a few times. He was obnoxious and called me a "whiney assed piece of BLEEP!" for having written my play. I think my parting shot was that I was going to set up a site that made finding my play easier. You have helped me in my quest. It is interesting how many hits I have had since this link was established. I hope he was bing 'authentic", and can see that his "rackets" are now being exposed. I now have hits on the play from all over the world, and most of them are off of the link at your site. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. --An interesting side lite to the play and the woman who invited me to the meeting is she recetly said that it was a "waste of time and she wished she had the thousands of dollars she spent on it back".

NoLandmark replies: I am a fan of theater.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12 March 2003
Subject: landmark
From: Becky

Take it from a fifty year old, well educated, open minded woman: DON'T GET INVOLVED WITH LANDMARK EDUCATION. AT BEST YOU WILL SPEND MANY MISERABLE HOURS IN THEIR UNPLEASANT COMPANY AND CUT YOUR LOSSES.

If you think you would enjoy making reservations at an exclusive, expensive restaurant and then sitting down to be served cockroaches sauteed in cat urine, while the waiter smiles & convinces you it is Strawberries Jubilee, then go ahead and PAY LANDMARK YOUR $400 PLUS and bon appetit!

I participated in one of LANDMARK'S DISGUSTING WEEKENDS and the result so far has been fPOST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER.

THESE PEOPLE ARE CROOKS AND THEY SHOULD BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS FOR PERSONAL HARM AND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES! SPEND YOUR MONEY ON SOMETHING FUN AND BENEFICIAL - FLY TO CANCUN & DRINK PINA COLADAS IN THE SUN -- IT WILL COST ABOUT THE SAME AND BELIEVE ME YOU WILL GET A LOT MORE OUT OF IT!

NoLandmark replies: But then where will I get my cockroaches in cat urine fix? Yum!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 March 2003
Subject: london
From: Colin

Thanks for a great site. No doubt Landmarkians are directed here to guage tactics of defence etc.

I'm in London and also concerned about a friend who has been drummed into it. Luckily I had had a "fruitcake" experience by a cult in the States many years ago so as soon as I met people from the Forum huge great alarm bells started ringing!

Like Joe from London I am interested in meeting non-Landmark people who want to combat this disease.

Any suggestions?

NoLandmark replies: I'd be thrilled if Landmark were actually directing participants to this site, but I think instead participants are told you can't get any information about Landmark on the web. I have thought about setting up a listserve for us nolandmarkians. You can set one up for free with Yahoo Groups.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 March 2003
Subject: Landmark experience
From: Josh

I met a beautiful woman at a party a few weeks ago and we exchanged phone #s. Which was great because I have no friends in this part of the country and am lonely. We hung out a few times, including a big party at her house. She is very outgoing, I'm introverted. Then she told me about landmark forum. I realized that a lot of the gibberish philosophy she had shared with me was regurgitated Landmark ideas. I agreed to go to an into lecture last night. I read the Nolandmark forum to prepare myself.

The insight exercise we did at the meeting was harmless enough and somewhat insightful. But the emphasis on recruitment left me with a bad feeling in my gut. At the beginning of the meeting they told us to turn off the little voice in our heads. I turned to my friend and said that I call that voice, "thinking." At the end of the meeting there was a really heavy duty segment about living in the now and not the future. And taking the class now living more fully instead of putting off our future.... It was all couched in very fluffy doubletalk. People had shared the whole evening and everyone seemed sincere, though shameless about sharing all their emotions (is anyone modest anymore?) Some people said they, "got this," or "got that." I recognized that was Landmark language they had been hypnotized with.

I still haven't eliminated the possibility of taking this class sometime. Though I don't cotten to warming a chair for 16 hours a day and sleep deprivation. My friend really tried to get me to sign up for a class immediately. I'm seriously wondering if this person likes me for who I am or only for my potential that Landmark can supposedly bring out in me. Time will tell. It turns out she has been an assistant at 10 of these trainings.

I'm taking my phone off the hook for a few days to avoid any phone calls from her or Landmark about these programs. She tends to ramble on for an hour at a time anyways.

If this is so fufilling why can't these people be happy instead of trying to recruit others into their group? If one really can see the value intrinsic in people, then one should see that people are already complete and can find their own path and own happiness.

What a turnoff.

NoLandmark replies: One must remember that the philosophy isn't designed to make people happy; it is designed to retain and acquire paying members. To reach this goal, it cleverly ties member happiness to the very acts of volunteering and recruiting. That is why your friend cannot accept you as you are--if she did it wouldn't help fill Landmark's coffers now would it?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(unquote)