Oh, and this is simply a Schriberian gem:

"The lawsuit was not about stifling freedom of speech; we stand for people's self-expression. The lawsuit was about holding Mr. Ross accountable for having repeatedly made or published false statements on his website that damaged the reputations of Landmark Education and the people who choose to take our programs, solely for the purpose of his own financial gain."


"We stand for people's self-expression !" Unless, of course, you don't happen to see it their way, then it's not authentic self expression, you understand...

"damaged the reputations of Landmark Education and the people who choose to take our programs"....
yeah, and so if that statement is true, how do you account for all those hundreds of thousands of happy, satisfied customers ? I mean, if this commentary is so effing "damaging" then why do you turn around and say that most people are happy with it ? Don't look too damaged to me. Oh yeah, Artso, since you're talking damages here, you've got to, by law, have a starting point, known as "actual damages".... so how did you calculate the "damage" this site, among others, had on your sterling reputation ?

And this howler..."solely for the purpose of his own financial gain."

"Solely" ? Solely ? What the hell do you mean by the word "solely" ? That this is part of a gigantic anti-cult marketing scheme ? What sort of great financial gain accrues to Mr. Ross as a result of his actions ? Got any calcs on that ?

Man, this bunk has more holes than swiss cheese.

Everyone's comments have been very helpful to me and hopefully I can figure out how to help my kids cope with the new reality their dad has unloaded on them at a difficult time. It doesn't surprise me that Larry W was into S&M because the Landmark philosophy seems to emotionally be just that.

What I am wondering is why my ex won't allow our kids or his family to meet his new fiancee or speak with her until after he has, as it puts it, "closes the deal." He wanted to pay for me to go to Landmark as well as for the kids to go and has been angry we aren't buying into it and believes he can't have any kind of relationship unless we all subscribe to how great this "world of possibility" is--and how can we not be happy, even if it hurst to hear his "truth" if it means he will be a man of "honor and integrity?" Guess that's the self-centered part of it.

But since my daughter has refused to engage in the Landmark philosophy he has been late sending his share of checks to college tuition for the first time and has claimed the checks were lost in the mail and she just finally told me yesterday she had trouble at the bank. This kind of thing has never happened with my ex before and my daughter called last night and said she feels he's being passive aggressive because she won't buy into this and attend the seminar. She still has schooling left and I can't imagine going through this every month or hiring an attorney at this point. Is there any chance he will revert his former self? Is there any way to make his see flawed thinking--which as I see it is the belief in a magic happy pill--? Do Landmark graduates ever just see the light? I just find it hard to believe that intelligent people can stay with this program for any length of time, other than perhaps because it fills a lonliness/belonging void? And I am very skeptical of this mystery woman he met whom he's supposedly marrying because her acceptance of their engagement was based on him participating fully in Landmark. Also, where can people go for suggestions on how to deal effectively with someone who is speaking Landmarkese and is suddenly so emotionally dead/not there/ different/completely flat?

Quote
anniebee
I'm curious as to why certain religious groups or religious affiliated groups haven't investigated Landmark--not that I am a proponent of Focus on the Family, but you'd think they's jump all over Landmark. I don't know how my kids are going to relate to their dad anymore because "he's not there" anymore. He claims he's had out-of-body, experiences of disassociation and it kind of scares me. He lives in 1000 miles away from us but I get the impression (form him anyway) that this hasn't affected his job or anything and I don't know how you can disassociate and be effective at work. He has already started his 10 week seminar and the Landmark woman than he became engaged to apparently isn't bothered by his history of addiction (which he says is just a "story" jsut as alcohol addiction is a "story") and pathological lying (about degrees, what he does, ---it was a 24/7 thing) because she thinks Landmark can or has changed all of these behaviors, literally overnight. He said it was like in The Matrix where he took a pill and the world immediately changed and pointed out that the people who wither wrote or produced The Matrix were Landmark devotees. Has anyone else hear this?

About "the Matrix",

The concept has its origins in the Stargate project, he secret CIA project led by the physicist and "Scientologist" Hal Puthoff together with Russel Targ, another physicist. The whole project was about psychic viewing and allegedly, Werner Erhard had some links with it. Psychic viewing was said to be possible because the world is constituted by a "Matrix" where non-local connections between all physical bodies exists due to their Quantum Mechanical nature (yes, the same ideas put forward by the cult movie "What the F%&@# do we know?!!!"). This way, you can interract with distant bodies, view, heal or create new realities by the power of your mind (Maharishi's doctrine!).

It has everything to do with the concept of "creating your own reality" put forward aggressively by Landmark. All these New Age concepts are deeply rooted in Landmark and other cult-like groups (TM, Scientology, etc...). It's simply insane and it has no scientific foundations. It's pure speculation and some critics has described it as Quantum Quackery!

The movie "The Matrix" was probably inspired by these same concepts behind the Stargate project, but I cannot find any direct evidence of that.