Quote
Rswinters
Can you post some links to the documentation that is available for us to read on this stuff?

Unfortunatly it is not in English, I will ask for an English translation, it might be available. It was good for me to read a balanced view, since I am far on the negative scale about Landmark :twisted:, but the clear message is: there have to be warnings included and forced by law.

Quote
question lady


Here is a link to a site I use to translate web sites. The translation isn't great, but it gives one the general idea.
[babelfish.altavista.com]

Wheeee...

More fun for me.

Here's a round-trip through Italian of one of Lawrence Platt's "essays."

(If you want to see what a thoroughly Landmark-destroyed mind looks like, check out his website. It's sad. He apparently means well and has devoted a large portion of his life to the slimy slickster. I wonder if anyone told him Werner Erhard picked this bit of belly-lint from the umbilicus of L. Ron Hubbard.)

[laurenceplatt.home.att.net]

This one is titled "Being Upset."

[laurenceplatt.home.att.net]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Being turning upside down: This Side Of a Saint Innovation Ramon, California, S.U.A. 4 November 2001

This test, being turning upside down: This side of an innovation, is the part of the companion to the tree-lined avenue of Stellenberg. In a transformed life, not only questions are solutions -. However one of the solutions that more often are asked is the solution to the upsetting. Been being annoying ahead, happily, in yours yacht transformed on the ocean transformed under a sky cloudless, blue, transformed with nothing but lle intentions transformed, when without warning... Wham! ... it is here: the breach and the breakup of a upset that ago it is known undesirable presence and ugly, amazingly, without warning unexpected, automatically and rudely against your will. While I do not have a solution for that one, it is useful to consider this: Behind every upset it is a engagement. Literally, if already you do not commit yourselves to something, you cannot be turns upside down to you. Or - to put it an other sense - you are not turns upside down you less that it is against one low priority of the engagement. Not, I do not mean that you commit yourselves to the upsetting. That what I mean is that if observed, you will see that one without a engagement to qualche.cosa of large that is contrasted, upsets it would not reveal like the upsets. I am suggesting that interrogated all that is igniting with you when you are it turns upside down in order to reveal and to obtain to you behind in touch with to that what really you commit yourselves. Not only that one will give your vision to you and will feed behind, but moreover new opening will generate one affinchè the action behind obtains them on the track. Werner Erhard distinguishes a upset is contained: * a contrasted intention; * an expectation not realized; * one communication not delivered. You do not have to make qualche.cosa, neither you must be all the sense particular to be RIGHT. You are Already RIGHT. If watched upset in the light of a that one you are already RIGHT, you will be able to say to the truth approximately the upset and will be able to distinguish the three articles that contain it. If you undertake the appropriate actions in order to complete those articles, you will obtain your life behind. You will be allowed to enter over in the innovation that attends.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've been thinking about this legal side of the fight against the LGATs and i must confess i have doubts about it. Don't take me wrong: I'm totally up for it, i would love to see all of them in jail where they belong. But the real point is awareness and information. I mean, imagine someone destroy them by legal action or by a political intervention. The drones, the zealots, they're not gonna wake up overnight. They'll still be brainwashed and they'll hold the doctrine and just start again.

Think of Landmark. You know the Reformers? the weirdos up to 'reforming landmark education?'. They have no problem whatsoever with the brainwashing, they have nothing against unpaid staff exploitation, they have nothing against off shore accounting and tax evasion. They just want to hide the 'negative image' and look better. If a legal action could stop landmark ML and his clan we'll be ready to start a brand new Landmark the day after the court's 'guilty' sentence. Maybe they'll change the name again (maybe Reformation Forum or something like that) like they changed from EST to Landmark. My point is, no legal action we'll really get rid of the LGATs until there will be drones ready to fill the gaps left by the cult leaders after they get caught, and people with no knowledge about cults to protect them.
In a sense, France (for example) is safer than the US or the UK: people know about cults there, they have governative offices checking cults out and listing them and warning the people. There is nothing cults can do against information (except preventive censorship): Landmark legally had the France 3 video canceled from youtube, but they'll never step back on France again. Even Werner Erhard left to follow his money to the cayman islands after the "60 minutes" video. There is nothing they can do against people aware of who they really are.
That said, keep going with the legal options: cults have to be sued and stopped and brought before a court - do not take my post as 'legal action is not important', i do not mean that. I'm just saying it's intelligence is the best defence. When they prey on the people, there is no better protection then 'I've heard of you. no thanks'.

It seems to me that you amongst a few others that have responded in this fashion. For me, this is not about shutting down LGAT's. It is not about making it so they can't operate in our society.

What I am suggesting is addressing within the legal realm the aspect of removing their ability to have participants sign releases from psychological damage. This aspect alone in my opinion can have the affect we all want on these LGAT's.

What do you think would happen to these LGAT's if they did not have this legal loophole that has been created by these releases in going unchecked in diving into the psychological realm in peoples lives with no regard to the harm that they are causing in some participants life.

I am specifically refering to me. I believe with a good lawyer, and a court of law that I could file a lawsuit agianst Klemmer & Associates and win. The only hitch is that I signed a waiver releasing them from such damage in me.

What would these companies look like if this legal waiver releasing them from psychological harm create in our society in regards to LGAT's.

In time, I believe that they would be still trying to be in existence in our society. But, they would have absolutely no affect on our society as they will be enmeshed in lawsuits, and the negative press from these lawsuits will publically expose LGAT for crap philosophy it is.

Precidence my man, precidence. It is what brings down the mightiest in our world. legal precedence is a powerful tool that is weilded in our society. Its time to use this legal mechanism to remove the legal loophole that allows for these LGAT's to thrive unchecked in our society.

I believe if the legal waiver releasing these LGAT's was to be legally removed from the LGAT seminar format. In time this would topple these LGAT's down in size to where they would be placed with the other get rich schemes that are a dime for a dozen in our society.

I don't care if they stay in business. I am only after getting to be held liable for the psychological harm, and how they are operating in a place of using psychological methods in participants psyches.

Quote
maurice
I've been thinking about this legal side of the fight against the LGATs and i must confess i have doubts about it. Don't take me wrong: I'm totally up for it, i would love to see all of them in jail where they belong. But the real point is awareness and information. I mean, imagine someone destroy them by legal action or by a political intervention. The drones, the zealots, they're not gonna wake up overnight. They'll still be brainwashed and they'll hold the doctrine and just start again.

Think of Landmark. You know the Reformers? the weirdos up to 'reforming landmark education?'. They have no problem whatsoever with the brainwashing, they have nothing against unpaid staff exploitation, they have nothing against off shore accounting and tax evasion. They just want to hide the 'negative image' and look better. If a legal action could stop landmark ML and his clan we'll be ready to start a brand new Landmark the day after the court's 'guilty' sentence. Maybe they'll change the name again (maybe Reformation Forum or something like that) like they changed from EST to Landmark. My point is, no legal action we'll really get rid of the LGATs until there will be drones ready to fill the gaps left by the cult leaders after they get caught, and people with no knowledge about cults to protect them.
In a sense, France (for example) is safer than the US or the UK: people know about cults there, they have governative offices checking cults out and listing them and warning the people. There is nothing cults can do against information (except preventive censorship): Landmark legally had the France 3 video canceled from youtube, but they'll never step back on France again. Even Werner Erhard left to follow his money to the cayman islands after the "60 minutes" video. There is nothing they can do against people aware of who they really are.
That said, keep going with the legal options: cults have to be sued and stopped and brought before a court - do not take my post as 'legal action is not important', i do not mean that. I'm just saying it's intelligence is the best defence. When they prey on the people, there is no better protection then 'I've heard of you. no thanks'.

Hi Rswinter
I understand you completely, I was actually talking of a more general picture of how to prevent these phenomena rather than have to fight them after.

As for the waiver, i am no lawyer, so i have really no idea how to solve that.

I don't really remember the staff i studied in high school, but i think there's this legal concept here in Europe that a civil right is still valid even if someone waive it away. I remember this example about slavery that would still be illegal even if someone agrees to be enslaved. LGATs do hurt people. And legally, damage is damage is damage. Maybe the waiver they made us sign has f***ed our chance to get a compensation, but it should not protect them from the malpractice accuses. At least a fine, a bad record....I repeat, i am no lawyer, i'm just writing down ideas, and my very small legal knowledge is european-based, don't know about the US system. Landmark waiver is based on the statement 'this is no therapy so bad-therapy-like effects are not to be considered responsibility of landmark', or something like that, i don't remember. They KNOW it IS therapy (kind-of). They do. There is bad faith there and they perfectly know it. They would deny that on court, obviously.

Maybe they could be sued by third people indirectly damaged. What about abandoned husbands or wives or kids or friends? they didn't sign any waiver but they suffered indirectly because of the LGATs. How could the LGATs protect themselves from that? I've read a thread by a man who lost her wife after she went to PSI. He could sue PSI for intentional infliction of emotional distress (is this the term?). After all, PSI made her leave him. I don't really remember the thread, so imagine this i just wrote above as a general example.
So, maybe third parties could have more chance against LGATs on the legal grounds. And once the damage is proven, even those who signed the waiver could have an extra point on their side...I don't know, i'm just wondering. If there is any expert here i'd be happy to know their opinions.

It will be the first hand paries like me who point out this malpractice and take a lawyers hand legally walking them through the legal system pointing out what is already in it.

Right now it is to muddied, and spread out in a incoherent fashion for lawyers, or the goverment to see it. In the united states these type of issues don't get addressed without there arising a public outcry of foul play going on.

When the public voice becomes loud enough for the legal system, and goverment to hear. Then they step in and look at what is up.

That is how our goverment works, it is based on the squeky wheel getting the grease in getting things done legally, and politically in the US.

I accept this, and have entrenched myself for a life long battle in addressing this legal aspect of LGAT's. I am in my forties, so that means I have a good forty more years of being an advocate that is going to do every thing that I can to create an organization that will continue when I die to deal with this LGAT issue in our nation, and world.

Brian Klemmer states in his seminars that he wants people to be playing on the world level because there are some very big problems in our world. Well, Thank you Brian. You have proved that loud and clear in the psychological damage done from Klemmer & Associates and how your company contradicts itself in what it creates in peoples lives.

The soon to be divorced wife that I am dealing with as a direct result of applying your crap philsophy that failed to stand impartial in how you dealt with both of us going through your seminars at two different times as my wife broke her commitment to professional marriage counseling to let them sort our marriage, or even if needed let it be in that realm be a decision of divorce between us.

Your companies stance of supporting my wife to not only break this committment to counseling, but the stance of saying your supporting my wife in accepting her greatness at my expense is a total contradiction of every thing you say you stand for in how we should interact with each other as ethical leaders.

Your failure to show up walking your talk as a company in this situation has showed the hypocrisy of your overall crap philosophy that I have been discovering exists in all LGAT's as it produces carbon copy destructiveness in many other trouble marriages, and even in many that did not have troubles prior to going.

In time, in time the legal hammer will fall. I have a good forty years to helping to direct the legal, and govermental authorities in seeing the existing laws that are already in the judicial system and to develop this hammer that will fall legally. In time, its just guiding the right people by the hand to connect the dots in this.

It will take some years, but no matter.

Quote
maurice
Hi Rswinter
I understand you completely, I was actually talking of a more general picture of how to prevent these phenomena rather than have to fight them after.

As for the waiver, i am no lawyer, so i have really no idea how to solve that.

I don't really remember the staff i studied in high school, but i think there's this legal concept here in Europe that a civil right is still valid even if someone waive it away. I remember this example about slavery that would still be illegal even if someone agrees to be enslaved. LGATs do hurt people. And legally, damage is damage is damage. Maybe the waiver they made us sign has f***ed our chance to get a compensation, but it should not protect them from the malpractice accuses. At least a fine, a bad record....I repeat, i am no lawyer, i'm just writing down ideas, and my very small legal knowledge is european-based, don't know about the US system. Landmark waiver is based on the statement 'this is no therapy so bad-therapy-like effects are not to be considered responsibility of landmark', or something like that, i don't remember. They KNOW it IS therapy (kind-of). They do. There is bad faith there and they perfectly know it. They would deny that on court, obviously.

Maybe they could be sued by third people indirectly damaged. What about abandoned husbands or wives or kids or friends? they didn't sign any waiver but they suffered indirectly because of the LGATs. How could the LGATs protect themselves from that? I've read a thread by a man who lost her wife after she went to PSI. He could sue PSI for intentional infliction of emotional distress (is this the term?). After all, PSI made her leave him. I don't really remember the thread, so imagine this i just wrote above as a general example.
So, maybe third parties could have more chance against LGATs on the legal grounds. And once the damage is proven, even those who signed the waiver could have an extra point on their side...I don't know, i'm just wondering. If there is any expert here i'd be happy to know their opinions.

Until Impact affects someone directly or through their family etc. there is not much hope of getting their interest, much less support. We should enlist the support of legislators, administrators, lawyers etc, who have had such experience with Impact in a way that they have felt or even seen the pain, frustration, and anguish expressed in profusion here. There has to be a pool of persons who have experienced Impact or other LGATs who fit this category and have friends or relatives in positions to make a difference. I can't offer a list of such folks, but I am looking and thinking about such.

Hopeful

Check out the "rebuttals" by Landmark fans and employees.

I suggest everybody add one of their own. Landmarkers must be afraid of this site:

[www.ripoffreport.com]


"While I work out of state, husband talked into Landmark forum Classes, paying top dollar to learn what is needed, to enrich his relationship with spouse, ME. Instead he is taught that it is quite alright to start new relationships, new life, getting rid of 'rackets', they call them, baggage; not having enough fun, go to Landmark Forum and meet someone new who can break up your marriage of 35 years, preaching goodness, what a hype and my husband paying for this service..."

The following is from my HEAL e-newsletter that arrived today. This particular news item is for people who have suffered abuse in the residential behavior modification programs (wilderness programs, "reform schools", etc), most of which use LGAT techniques. Perhaps accounts of LGAT experiences could be sent to the Committee also.

From Angela S.
HEAL Coordinator

We were able to persuade a mother just in the nick of time against sending her child to Sorenson's Ranch in Utah! The "escorts"
(paid kidnappers) were to arrive at 3am Friday night/Saturday morning. She is looking into local alternatives and planning to keep her son home and out of institutions.

I spoke with Sarah Dyson (of the Congressional Committee on Education and Labor) again today. She wanted to clarify that she is the Committee on Education and Labor liaison regarding the "teen help" investigation and that Rep. George Miller is "heading up" the investigation. She had received a number of e-mails and was concerned that there may be a misunderstanding. Also, she had initially stated that individuals should contact her with accounts of abuse, but, now, would prefer that statements be sent per the action alert we have on the website at: www.heal-online.org/teen.htm (and as seen below). Or, she would like HEAL to act as a clearinghouse for statements. HEAL is happy to collect statements to forward en masse to Sarah, but, we understand that some may have reservations about sharing their stories with any third party and therefore encourage those people to contact the Committee on Education and Labor per the action alert below and on the website.


Tell the Committee on Education and Labor Your Behavior Modification Program Survivor Story: I spoke with the person heading up the Committee on Education and Labor <[edlabor.house.gov]; investigation
into the teen "help" industry, by telephone on Tuesday (yesterday). He/she asked that we keep his/her personal contact information off of the website or any internet website. If you would like his/her specific contact
information, please contact: heal@heal-online.org
<mailto:heal@heal-online.org> subject: Letter to Congress on Teen Programs.


WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Submit Your Personal Story or Family Story of Victimization to:
US House of Representatives
Committee on Education and Labor
Majority Office
2181 Rayburn House Office Bldg
Washington, D.C. 20515
phone: (202)225-3725
In the Event of a Hearing (again, no hearing is scheduled at this time):
Submit a "Statement of Purpose" to the above address. Explain that you would like to testify at any hearing regarding the teen "help"/residential
treatment industry. Include information on who you are, what program you or a family member was in, and what you'd like to say at any hearing. Please note that members of the public are given 1-3 minutes (in general) to testify at any legislative hearing. And, note that submitting your personal or family story per the information above will be filed as part of the hearing and included in the public record. It may be more effective to submit your statement in writing than to plan to testify. There will be limited time and a limit to how many people can testify in person. Also, there may be no hearing on this issue at any time. It is a vague possibility at this point. There is nothing scheduled at this time. So, it is likely best if you submit your story in writing to be included in the public record as opposed to requesting to speak at a non-existent hearing at this time.

the problem might be, that once you are pissed of by the LGAT you don't want to deal with it any further ...

As far as my initial participation is concerned, I just was not informed. And at the time it just sounded quite interesting to me.

Currently, I am not really interested wasting my time to much on more official steps, rather than writing on this message board my opinions and my previous experience with Landmark Education, if I have spared time.

The fact, that I need to do this, means that this organization has damaged me and that I need to do something to get over it.

Information and warnings about the LGATs might help. Inform people that LGATs are selfish without any ethics, that they subtly persuade participants to work for no money and to recruit others ... and use techniques that can be disguised as being randomly taken from whatsover psychological technique, but without responsibility.

Landmark, for example, always claim to produce faster results than any psychotherapy ... but it is all superficial and dangerous, so experts are required to shed light on this.

Lawsuits are also necessary, see Rick and this site ... and my great respect for anybody who will take this on. Landmark is agressive and people who have sceptical views on it are attacked.
As usual, Landmark thinks it is the one and only organization which knows the truth about life and everything.

Probably the same applies to the other LGATs, therefore they are cults, even if they trying sue you if you say that. Where do we live actually ... (cult means: easy solution for everything, the one and only, look down on others ... like the Landmark guy recently saying in a thread "Landmark is laughing about what we say on this website", and no other views are accepted).