You claim to be a "critical thinker"?

The exchange within the Forum is visible now to anyone through Daily Motion on the Internet.

See [www.dailymotion.com]

Have you watched it?

The Forum leader berates the woman for almost and hour and reduces her to tears, then mocks her crying and says maybe she should get cancer and die or commit suicide.

The transcript is now up of the translated subtitles too.

See [www.caic.org.au]

Is that your idea of helpful advice and professional coduct?

Quote
turambar

With Landmark, you're basically paying some people to scour literature for good ideas, and then put together a presentation for you. I did the same thing in college. Most people say that college helped them, a few say that college was harmful, but I've never heard anyone say that college was a conspiracy.

LOLOLOL....Only if you think the works of L. Ron Hubbard contain "good ideas."

And when's the last time you heard someone say joining a cult like scientology is like going to college?

If you are that clueless, you've probably found a home at Landmark, which was called by Werner Erhard himself "scientology without the woo-woo" and by others as "scientology-lite."



Ellen

Quote
turambar

With Landmark, you're basically paying some people to scour literature for good ideas, and then put together a presentation for you. I did the same thing in college. Most people say that college helped them, a few say that college was harmful, but I've never heard anyone say that college was a conspiracy. Why then do some people here say that Landmark must be? Are these the same folks that characterize Harry Potter as a Wiccan plot? Oh geez. It just occurred to me that I should go look for that elsewhere on this forum.

Umm....has it occured to you to think about why you don't hear people saying college is a conspiracy but they do say Landmark is a cult?

Why would that be?

Glam

Quote
rrmoderator
You claim to be a "critical thinker"?

The exchange within the Forum is visible now to anyone through Daily Motion on the Internet.

See [www.dailymotion.com]

Have you watched it?

The Forum leader berates the woman for almost and hour and reduces her to tears, then mocks her crying and says maybe she should get cancer and die or commit suicide.

The transcript is now up of the translated subtitles too.

See [www.caic.org.au]

Is that your idea of helpful advice and professional coduct?

The video was a hack job with many things taken out of context, and France 3 was fined for violating French media standards. See: [translate.google.com]

The woman herself says the conversation was beneficial.

Sometimes a message that is for our own good is said in terms we don't want to hear. Wouldn't you rather have had your father and mother confront you as a child, rather than let you become a convicted, felonious tortfeasor?

i have done the landmark forum and believe
this was no hack job. in fact it was quite lite.

the forum that i took was far more severe.

in the forum that i attended jinnnedra told
a your woman in her early 20's that if she
had attended her form earlier in her life
she would never have gotten the CANCER
she was living with.

Quote
patrick-darcy
i have done the landmark forum and believe
this was no hack job. in fact it was quite lite.

the forum that i took was far more severe.

in the forum that i attended jinnnedra told
a your woman in her early 20's that if she
had attended her form earlier in her life
she would never have gotten the CANCER
she was living with.

Your statements are as twisted out of context as the French video. I've done it, too, and so have over 880,000 other people. January 2007, LE will probably report statistics in the 950,000 range, and then January 2008, it will be over 1,000,000 people. My guess is that around 90% of them would disgree with the view created by the French video, if not more.

Quote
critical_thinker
Your statements are as twisted out of context as the French video. I've done it, too, and so have over 880,000 other people. January 2007, LE will probably report statistics in the 950,000 range, and then January 2008, it will be over 1,000,000 people. My guess is that around 90% of them would disgree with the view created by the French video, if not more.

Hey, I'm surprised you haven't hauled out and pasted the lame-assed Yankelovich "study" again.


And, even if it's partially true, what a sad commentary on the state of the world, the general education level in Landmark target areas, the lack of curiousity of the average Landmark devotee, the nature of the "self-help" business, the success of the "church" of scientology in spreading the impression that traditional psychotherapeutic methods are "evil," or at least ineffectual, and the fact that in 2006 there are still cults and coercive groups in operation and still peddling their snake-oil to the gullible. Hey, it makes a skeptic agree with P.T. Barnum. Ol' ElRon must be peeing his pants laughing. And when Werner Erhard joins him, in that great hall of gurus-in-the-sky, they can both poke each other in the ribs and have a good laugh at the human race. And Oh, hey....you can haul up the Yankelovich study and wipe their butts with it where you'll be serving them as you do down here on earth.


Ellen

If so-called "critical thinker" can excuse the abuse seen through the French documentary he isn't critical thinking any more at all.

Landmark has tried so desperately to keep the video off the Internet because most people, who have not been influenced by their training, can see how bad the Forum is firsthand.

The transcript is up now.

See [www.culteducation.com]

The Forum leader says "If you want to do something for her, I don’t know, you could kill yourself. No, that’s not good enough. No, kick yourself. Find something that makes you suffer. Get cancer. Make it last for 29 years, so you suffer and die. That way you’ll feel better about your daughter croaking. So you have to accept it."

When the woman breaks down crying he says, "You spend your life whining. It’s not a pretty sight 'Bo, hoo, hoo. I’m not happy.'"

It's no wonder Landmark insisted that everyone sign a release absolving the company of any liability for anything the Forum leader does.

Of course a real professional (conuselor, social worker, psychologist or psychiatrist) could not and would not do this. They are accountable and take responsibility for what they do.

An expert that is critical thinking and has watched the same footage "critical thinker" claims is "twisted out of context observes the following:

"[The Forum leader] makes fun of any response of hers. But that’s not the problem. It’s the stranglehold he puts in place. And what frightens me is that in very little time, 3 or 4 days, we’re seeing what takes a sect 2 to 3 years to instill. The sect phenomenon is gaining momentum. And reviving childhood fears is not harmless. It puts the students, at least the ones who go along with the game, in the position of a child. This sets up the strangle hold of the guru. Because there’s an incest-like relationship between an all-powerful father and a child who is not even allowed to doubt, to question, to think critically. The only thing left is to listen."

In the end watching the "volunteer" would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

French Narrator says, "No contract or salary, no health insurance and nothing to sign. In this apartment, 20 people work full time. Most seem to have the same status: volunteer. They’re everywhere, even in the bathrooms."

Why would any adult that is a "critical thinker" clean a toilet for free as a "volunteer" at a for-profit privately owned company?

If McDonalds or Wal-Mart asked its people to clean the bathrooms for free they would walk out.

In Paris and elsewhere the Rosenberg family who seem to run Landmark much like a family business, make money through such free labor, reducing their overhead by using "volunteers."

The "volunteer" work force is compelling evidence for the description frequently applied that Landmark is engaged in "brainwashing."

Quote
elena
Ol' ElRon must be peeing his pants laughing. And when Werner Erhard joins him, in that great hall of gurus-in-the-sky, they can both poke each other in the ribs and have a good laugh at the human race.
Ellen

That is precisely how guys like Werner Erhard and Hubbard feel and think. They literally have contempt for the "sheep" who they are so easily able to control and exploit. They believe that they "deserve it". That is how sociopaths think. They perceive their victims as "deserving it" for being "so weak and stupid". Why do you think they get them to clean public toilets for free? To humiliate them. Also, Werner must have started that process of getting his followers to clean toilets for free as he thinks its hilarious to push people as far as he can.

I am not saying these people are foolish for doing this, they have been broken down and manipulated using very powerful psychological techniques, and they have been exploited by the Landmarkian sociopathic system.
But if one looks at criminals in jails, in almost every case they BLAME THE VICTIM, exactly like Landmark does. People who harm others always blame the victim.


Also, the Landmarkian posting here as "Critical Thinker" posted this..
"The video was a hack job with many things taken out of context, and France 3 was fined for violating French media standards."

That is the precise language patterns "hack job" and "fine" comment that was constantly posted in Wikipedia when they were trying to get the entry on the video deleted. Its either the same person, or the same mental virus.

The video is not a hack job.
Its a FACT JOB.

> Sometimes a message that is for our own good is said in terms we don't want to hear.
If you are a "critical thinker" then you will be able to make your argument in the form "A and B, therefore C". So,
A. Sometimes a message that is for our own good is said in terms we don't want to hear.
B. ???
C. Therefore, a Forum leader not trained in psychology is justified in destroying the mental stability of a Forum participant who never consented to this procedure.

What can you give for "B" that gets you from your premise to the conclusion?