Quote
Passionate
I promise this isn't a religious discussion, but Impact seems to dabble in that field a bit so I thought I'd bring this up. One thing I have wanted to discuss is the "I AM" statement made in Summit. Pamela would say "I Am that I Am" while pointing to a trainee. The way she said it implied that Jesus would be pointing to any one of us and saying "I am that" or saying "I am John, I am!" meaning he is the same as us, or that he IS us. This confused me. Can any of you grads shed some light on this?

There are many degrees and levels that Impact likes to use with this statement. Probably the most basic is just the whole idea of changing your vocabulary from "I want", "I need", "I wish", etc. to "I AM". It eliminates the so called pink elephant. In Summit I think one of the main points is they use it to emphasize the group dynamic i.e. everything we see in someone or something else is a part of us. I believe it's a running theme throughout Summit about how everything we do effects not only us and our immediate surroundings, but the entire world. We've already had a few discussions on the problems with this philosophy.

Later in TIT they take the phrase to a whole new level. They teach that there are many levels to our spiritual selves. One of those levels is the part of our spirit that never left the presence of god. They call this the "I AM" presence. (Note this belief also comes up in many new age doctrines and is definitely not an Impact original). So if I am being one with my I AM presence then I am completely acting in the moment without letting my history or the worries of my future effect my current decision. They talk about being in the moment throughout the core trainings. Well, they believe that the I AM is the part of you that is always in the moment.

Therefore, saying I AM that I AM is basically saying that I AM completely one with you in this moment and that I acknowledge the part of you that is god and also the part of you that is part of me.

If you ask me, after they've torn you down through lifeboat, it's a way to bring in more lovey dovey fluffiness that sends you further up your spiritual high so they can continue to manipulate you.

Quote
Passionate
And if you want to compare me to Otter, then go ahead. The dude knew what he was talking about, what happens behind those closed doors at Impact. If I recall correctly, you didn't attend Impact. Klemmer may be a clone but is not Impact. Ex and Former have talked about how the TIT series is more structured towards the LDS people in this area, so may be very different than your Klemmer.

This is where you have not done your research, as I have done. They are carbon copies, and yes there a slight differences. They are none the less spitting images in how they operate within seminars, and what they produce in participants lives.

I have uncovered this illusion that these LGAT's want to use in saying how they are so different from each other.

Well, as we have been breaking the secrecy of how these LGAT's operate within seminars. This lie is being exposed on this website. So do your research, and read past posts on all LGAT threads Passionate.

As usual you have spoken without reading past posts on these threads, and are responding in an uniformed manner that has been a very common aspect of your posts that leave what has been revealed in past posts by many of us.

You may consider reading, and catching up on things on this website before you make these empty statements that are not based on what has been posted, and are empty in real content in what is stated.

Read, and read more first before you choose to make these types of comments passionate.

Please get your facts in order before making assumptions.

Quote
Passionate

Quote

Your thoughts on pre-determined responses reflect the Impact philosophy that what happens in the training room is a mirror of the outside world, and how someone responds in a training room says something about their life or their nature.

Yes i agree that this is one of Impact's philosophies. That's why I wrote them out. Ii thought those were some of their pre-determined responses. Maurice noted a few more, in a different vein.

Do I agree with it? Not totally. Like 90% not. An example of it can be is how I did the red-black game. I thought from the instructions given (and I was listening oh so closely to them) that there was no way to win the game, it was one more large-group interaction bound to fail. We were set up to fail from the start. Although that wasn't the actual porpose of the game, I was convinced of it. So I said something like that to the group and then shut up and didn't say anything again for a hour. I sniped at a few people, laughed at their certain ineptitude, and let them do their thing.

Well after I did that, we were all processed and I noticed that I do that in real life too. Was everything in the training room a reflection of my normal life? NO! There were a few that were representational though, this example being one. Others, like hugging stangers and eating with strangers, just isn't me.

Passionate, this post so shows how meaningless your words are in your posts.

You need to find a good psychologist to help you deprogram yourself from Impact if this is truly your intention here.

I personally highly doubt what you say is your intentions. I see an Impact apologist who is attempting to play his wits agianst this website as some kind of thrill ride in feeding your ego as you defuse this thread and attempt to make it sound incoherent to people coming into here to find out about Impact, and all the other LGAT's.

Your two faced posts are becoming extremely annoying, and I see right through them.

GET OFF THE FENCE, AND EITHER ACKNOWLEDGE THE TRUTH OF BEING STILL A BELIEVER OF IMPACT PHILOSOPHY, OR STOP THE TWO FACED POSTING AND QUIT TRYING TO UNDERHANDEDLY VALIDATE IMPACTS METHODS AND TECHNIQUES USED IN SEMINARS.

Stop the bull... It is really stinkin bad...

I wrote:

Quote

Your thoughts on pre-determined responses reflect the Impact philosophy that what happens in the training room is a mirror of the outside world, and how someone responds in a training room says something about their life or their nature.

Passionate wrote:

Quote

Yes i agree that this is one of Impact's philosophies. That's why I wrote them out. Ii thought those were some of their pre-determined responses. Maurice noted a few more, in a different vein.

Do I agree with it? Not totally. Like 90% not. An example of it can be is how I did the red-black game. I thought from the instructions given (and I was listening oh so closely to them) that there was no way to win the game, it was one more large-group interaction bound to fail. We were set up to fail from the start. Although that wasn't the actual porpose of the game, I was convinced of it. So I said something like that to the group and then shut up and didn't say anything again for a hour. I sniped at a few people, laughed at their certain ineptitude, and let them do their thing.

Well after I did that, we were all processed and I noticed that I do that in real life too. Was everything in the training room a reflection of my normal life? NO! There were a few that were representational though, this example being one. Others, like hugging stangers and eating with strangers, just isn't me.

[b:d6b50386c2]Once again you say "I agree" then proceed to state the opposite, in support of Impact. [/b:d6b50386c2]

You agree with me that the trainings are NOT a mirror of life then you give a long example of how a game WAS a mirror of life for you.

Another point. You said:

Quote

I sniped at a few people, laughed at their certain ineptitude, and let them do their thing.

But in your first few posts you said that on the trainings you tried to fit in and please the trainers.

[b:d6b50386c2]Sniping and laughing at people is not the same as trying to fit in. Which one of your statements is the truth and which one is the lie?[/b:d6b50386c2]

Quote

I sniped at a few people, [b:d6b50386c2]laughed at their certain ineptitude[/b:d6b50386c2], and let them do their thing.

[b:d6b50386c2]This is, once again, victim bashing. [/b:d6b50386c2]

[/quote]

Passionate, your agree-promote technique is equivalent to saying:

I don't agree with drugs and I don't recommend them. But hey, I had a lot of fun and I'm going to miss them and you know, on some of my acid trips I really learnt a lot about myself.

Just the kind of thing a drug-peddler would say to a roomful of schoolkids.

Quote
Passionate
Yes i agree that this is one of Impact's philosophies. That's why I wrote them out. Ii thought those were some of their pre-determined responses. Maurice noted a few more, in a different vein.

NO I did not! That's not what i posted, go back and check. STOP TWISTING MY ANSWER. Call me names, ignore me but don't you ever misquote me for your agenda.

To whom it may concern:

At this point "Passionate" has agreed with the following:

He would not recommend Impact to anyone under any circumstances.

He sees Impact as "dangerous" per the posted criteria.

He believes that Impact is using a "thought reform program."

He believes that Impact has all of the 13 liablitities typically associated with an LGAT.

Yes that is correct Rick I did say that.

It seems thah we are all in agreement on many things, but how I say them is different than how someone else would say them.

RS, I failed to see anything posted on this thread or the Klemmer thread that talked about the processes in Klemmer's TIT equivalent. That there are several of us who went to Impact TIT and agree that it was tailored to fit the big LDS population here, and may have been totally concocted by Hans, was what I was talking about, not the core trainings that are surely a carbon copy of each other. Ex, are you still going to post the processes in TIT?

Maurice, I didn't misquote you. We both posted things we saw as pre-determined responses to Impact processes. You came up with a different list than I did but they were what we saw. Having staffed, the ones I posted were the ones that the trainers would suggest, and many more. The ones you posted would never come out of a trainers mouth, but none-the-less true also.

SaneAgain, would you say there was not [i:bf5d171e95]one[/i:bf5d171e95] good thing that came out of your experience with Impact?

Passionate wrote:

Quote

SaneAgain, would you say there was not one good thing that came out of your experience with Impact?

:x

No, not [i:d0b3327e73]one[/i:d0b3327e73] good thing.

That's equivalent to asking a rape victim if there wasn't one good thing that came out of a rape. What are they supposed to say? Oh, he had nice after-shave??? What can I say about Quest... psychosis, wasted energy, wasted time, wasted money... uh... nope, [b:d0b3327e73]not one good thing[/b:d0b3327e73].

[b:d0b3327e73]
Why are you so hell-bent on looking for the good in Impact? [/size:d0b3327e73][/b:d0b3327e73]


.

Quote
Passionate
RS, I failed to see anything posted on this thread or the Klemmer thread that talked about the processes in Klemmer's TIT equivalent.

You must be reading a different website then...

Here are just a few of many...

Red/Black and how it is ran and processed in seminars...
LifeBoat and agian how it is ran and processed in seminars...

And many, many more that have been discussed, and shared on this website...

This post shows your true intention as truly what it is, and is not.

If you had read these threads as stated. You would have seen this aspect.

I doubt very highly you have read these threads as you have stated. Your posts say it all.

So, do us all a favor and take your apologectic tactics somewhere else.