Current Page: 5 of 14
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: Alexis ()
Date: July 09, 2004 11:12PM

Well, since the WizardofOz is confused to what is actually happening at LEC and felt the need to coerce one of our board members to get his post posted, I decided I would clear a few things up for him.

Below are the real LEC definitions of the values LE professes:

[i:2a9edf7a03]Being extraordinary! [/i:2a9edf7a03]= Being a LEC volunteer, being LEC staff, being a Forum leader AND coercing others to take the courses

[i:2a9edf7a03]Saying yes to life![/i:2a9edf7a03] = Signing up for each course and taking them over and over and over ......AND coercing others to take the courses

[i:2a9edf7a03]Being powerful in the face of any circumstances! [/i:2a9edf7a03]= Being in denial about what is really going on OR constantly being at the LEC center, the only environment where you might be able to be "powerful", especially if you are staff or a FL AND coercing others to take the courses

[i:2a9edf7a03]Being courageously willing to take risks[/i:2a9edf7a03] = Taking another course AND coercing others to take the courses

[i:2a9edf7a03]Openly expressing love and appreciation[/i:2a9edf7a03] = Again coercing others to take courses AND being extraordinarily rude to those who disagree with you

[i:2a9edf7a03]Generously giving up resentments and urges to dominate or manipulate others[/i:2a9edf7a03] = Letting LEC completely control your mind, money and time AND again coercing others to take courses (they tell you this to erase the feelings of unease you have about recruiting)


Wow, positively sinister!
I can't believe I fell for this!
Yes actually it is, and I can believe you fell for it.

If you really think that LEC's values mean anything more than what I wrote above then you are using your own interpretations (or as LEC calls already always listening or story making) and not LEC's interpretations. But then again I really can't blame you for thinking those values would have the interpretation that any reasonable person would expect them to. [i:2a9edf7a03][b:2a9edf7a03]That is precisely why LEC is so sinister.[/b:2a9edf7a03][/i:2a9edf7a03] They give what would seem to be everyday advice BUT give it their own special meaning with a hidden agenda. If it's really all about the feel-good advice why, oh why would you pay several hundreds dollars for what you can get free from library books? Simple answer, it's not about the so-called advice. It's about mucking with people's heads so they don't realize they've been conned.

Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: logan ()
Date: July 09, 2004 11:17PM

Dear Corboy,

You had suggested that someone with other life experiences would make a more suitable seminar leader than someone that was just working around LGATs.
My question wasn't of a medical nature. My question is this:

If someone leading an LGAT happens to be an MD that has been in charge of Cancer Research laboratories at an esteemed hospital with Ivy League affiliation would you consider that person qualified enough to lead a seminar?

The question had nothing to do with medical issues. It's about knowing who your seminar leaders are and seeing if that passes your stringent requirements.

Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: July 09, 2004 11:42PM


I will answer this question.

You completely miss the point.

An MD that specializes in cancer research has the expertise to deal with issues related to his or her field, not psychology or therapy.

What does cancer research have to do with large group awareness training, or group therapy?

Unless the doctor is a psychiatrist or psychologist, their training in an unrelated field does not qualify them to lead people in what essentially can be seen as a kind of group therapy.

And BTW you are off topic.

Please stay on topic or start a new thread for your point of interest.

People don't go to a plumber to fix electrical problems, or a foot doctor for heart treatment.

See []

The above link spells out the problems with mass marathon training like LEC in very clear language. It was written by a Ph.D. clinical psychologist and relies upon cited research from appropriate professionals with directly related credentials and qualifications.

See []

The abstracts cited in the above link regarding psychosis related to LEC were written by MD psychiatrists and clinical psychologists.

What's your purpose posting on this board?

Seems like you are here to be disruptive and/or subvert the board.

Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: Cosmophilospher ()
Date: July 10, 2004 01:58AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: July 10, 2004 05:23AM

The topic of this thread:Examining and debating the possible role of LGAT room environment and scripting the social interactions to covertly disorient and disempower the subjects while empowering the leader:

This bundle of information may perhaps turn out to be the most compelling and useful body of information on LGATs that has been assembled on's message board.

Contributors to this 'think tank' have been Drew Kopp (not in person, but through his article, found for us by both kittypaw and Concernedoz), Hope, Hossgal, Alexis--all of whom reported first hand accounts of the physical aspects of their LGAT seminars.

I implore visitors to read and ponder this material carefully, former LGAT alumni to see and report how it matches or doesnt match with what they have observed== and to stay on topic.

Some members are sincerely interested in LGAT linguistics, rather than room set up. If so, respect the integrity of the room arrangement discussion by discussing LGAT semantics on a different thread, one dedicated to that topic and no other.

It could be especially tempting to dodge the possible implications of the room set up and seek distraction by analyzing LGAT word-games on threads where such discussion is NOT welcomed or considered appropriate. If so, we will move these semantics discussions to separate thread dedicated to that topic.

An anxious flight into linguistic analysis might be a way to reassure oneself that one is 'too smart' to ever fall victim, or that one is 'smart enough' to 'crack the LGAT code' and 'find the hidden levers' all by oneself.

[i:7e148a3967]It is possible that one cannot really recover from a wounding LGAT experience until you carefully ponder the role of the physical setting--and that you responded quite predictably to it. [/i:7e148a3967]

[b:7e148a3967]This thread is for those who are ready to explore the profound implications of the LGAT room set up as described an analyzed by Drew Kopp[/b:7e148a3967].

Rather than face the extent of our malleability in relation to an LGAT"s unique social environment as described by Kopp, its so much more reassuring to imagine a single talented, special person (you) can out-think an LGAT by analyzing its word games.

But this fantasy of personal invulnerability, which is also a fantasy of personal power, of being 'smart enough' to out-think any LGAT, will [b:7e148a3967]probably not [/b:7e148a3967]help your recovery. It will probably hamper it.

We may find it so much more reassuring to focus on the word games and dismiss revelations from Kopp, Hope and Hossgal about the room set up.

The key to regaining your power in relation to LGAT power theft is to admit you were disoriented in a very special physical environment that disabled your critical thinking and estranged you from your body.

If you know anyone thinking of doing an LGAT, especially one known to be controversial, advise them to visit this board and other sites, too and when here, to go to this thread.

This information may be of great value to exit counselors working with persons trying to wake up from LGAT conditioning.

LGATs can always re-write word games as soon as we figure them out. They have little to lose by 'sharing their philosophy.'

But room set ups are likely to remain standard--which means once you know what a covertly manipulative room set up looks like, you can turn around, walk out and go home.

Just stay focused on the room set up--Kopp suggests that this could be an important site of where the action is.

Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: Alexis ()
Date: July 10, 2004 07:58AM

I remember being so focused on the FL that I completely forgot about the people next to me and especially the people in the back of the room. I remember focusing so hard because the seating was uncomfortable and I knew I had a long weekend ahead of me, because I wanted to block out the people sitting way to close to me and because I thought I needed to listen since the speaker was so pronounced.

Corboy is right about the room set up.

It is one of the greatest reliefs to know that the room setup had everything to do with how landmark was able to get such a hold over me. For years I racked my brain wondering why it happened. In fact just thinking of the room setup helps me to remember more of what happened during the forum, advanced course and IFLP meeting.

The room setup truly cannot be downplayed.

If you doubt the room setup has anything to do with the effect of landmark, then you do not realize how much time is spent on the setup and how anal they are about the setup. I have a design degree ---- I know anal. LEC is so anal they make obsessive/compulsives seem laid-back - no kidding!!!

I worked in a theater; not even they were as crazy about the precise placement of every little piece on the stage or in the theater. They know mistakes happen, but not LEC. If any participant is distracted for any reason the FL will call on the CM. The FL makes a HUGE deal in front of participants if he/she thinks the room is not perfect. The people I knew who volunteered for the forum all complained about how tedious it was to step up the room and keep it perfect. They always explained it as "perfecting the room helps the participants get it."

And oh how it does, just not as they are led to believe. All their work helped the participants get into a trance to brainwash them. The volunteers, not realizing the dynamics of hypnosis and thought-reform, are the catalyst for the environment. How painful it is when former volunteers realizes they were used to help brainwash people - without them knowing or profiting the way Erhard does!!!!!!!

Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: Toni ()
Date: August 12, 2004 01:04AM

Thank you for the detailed explanation of the room environment.
Also, FYI, lowering the body's temperature is part of the physiology of falling into sleep or semi-hypnotic state. That is why sleepy people like to curl up in a blanket while watching TV.... can artificially induce such by lowering the temperature of the environment.

The above descriptions of environment also apply to my knowledge of how the room is manipulated by another LGAT called "The Miracle of Love" (MOL). but additionally, the MOL has people stay in a nearby hotel, with assigned roommates, strangers, and a shuttle to bring folks to and from the hotel to the location of the Intensive. Volunteers (only attractive ones) are present at all times to provide fresh kleenex, clean up any little drop of lint that falls, and wipe sweat off of people... enhancing the expression of true love and caring... Meals are catered and delivered.. everyone eats together and returns to the Intensive together. People are assigned matching binders, identical pens to write with. Nothing individual. Between, fatigue, constant controlled environment, never alone time, one wears down one's individuality.

Thank you also for expressing the biological / enivronmental controls of seratonin production. I don't know why i had missed that! So true! And makes sense that I've been told from MOL Intensive attendee "The experience in that room is real. You cannot deny that." Seratonin IS real.

Also, MOL changes the content of their Intensives 'to meet the evolving needs of the times for mankind, thus staying always current and not stagnant'... but the room manipulation and control of every second of one's week, remains the same. sigh.

such manipulative con artists.

Thank you for being here!

Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: Researcher ()
Date: June 06, 2005 02:45PM

This is an old thread but I am posting this here because of the thread title.

Something none of the posts above would be aware of is that large group meetings contain an element to cause [b:d2ee185a96]subliminal persuasion. [/b:d2ee185a96]

The problem arises from a conflict of physiology. It was discovered when workers using the very first close-spaced office workstations began having bizarre or pseudo-psychotic episodes. The cause of this was peripheral vision reflexes and the solution was the Cubicle.

To this day the cubicle prevents these mental events, mental breakdowns, in the business office.

That conflict of our physiology is though we can ignore peripheral vision reflexes we can't stop "subliminally seeing" the movement that triggers the reflexes. We can't tell our brain to stop attempting to force a reflex.

In large group meetings that go on for hours each person can subliminally detect movement from others sitting nearby This acts as subliminal stimulus. When the person's brain understands this stimulus as reinforcement operant conditioning happens.

The message of the speaker is reinforced without the listener's knowledge.

My site is about that conflict of physiology. I am attempting to spread the message about the existence of the problem.

I believe it is the source of sudden suicides and disappearances of college students.

Follow the instructions to begin with the [b:d2ee185a96]Demonstration[/b:d2ee185a96] page then the [b:d2ee185a96]Everquest Connection [/b:d2ee185a96]page.

The page on EST explains the problem as it applies to large group sessions. EST was known to cause psychotic mental breaks but at the time experts were unaware of the design and civil engineering discovery.


Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: midonov123 ()
Date: June 07, 2005 01:47AM


Strangely enough, I found your website yesterday night even before I read your post. I was trying to find some explanations as to why Landmark’s system of logic can lead to psychosis. I did your demonstration on the subliminal vision, and I agree with you that the phenomenon exists. However, I fail to understand why a flickering light or movement in my subliminal peripheral vision would lead to a psychotic episode. Why would the hearing of white noise not cause the same effect? It is well known that if I sleep with a fan roaring in my bedroom, I will stop hearing it after a while just as well. The same thing for odors. If I go into an animal barn, the smell is terrible but after a while we don’t smell a thing. Would that lead to psychosis?

I stumbled upon your website because I was trying to understand how come my ex-girlfriend reminded me so much of my psychotic ex-wife in the way she was behaving with me. Just like it is impossible to make my ex-wife understand that she is psychotic and that her reality is pure delusion, I also have realized that it is impossible to make my Landmarkian girlfriend realize that her perception of the reality about Landmark is delusional. She doesn’t even realize or will not accept that she is acting as deployable agent to recruit more and more people to join Landmark, and that she “works” for that company without being paid. She doesn’t realize or will not accept that she is dependant and docile and that she has been led into a regressive fallacy.

According to Freud, the denial of reality leads to nevrosis. But in addition to denial of reality, when this reality is replaced by another “imaginary” or deceptive one, this leads to psychosis. This is exactly what landmarks does. Denial of reality and replacement of the reality by a deceptive one with a hidden agenda. This new reality replaces traditional concepts by new ones. For example, no one at Landmark is trying to “sell” anything. They only “share their new possibilities”. They don’t “work” without being paid, they “participate”. Also, no one at Landmark is capable of “not listening” to contrarians. It’s only that the messengers are “running rackets”, meaning the contrarians are defective and should do the Landmark forum. They don’t put “pressure” on people, they just want to “make a difference”. There are many examples, but the bottom line is “denial of reality” and “replacement by a new and distorted reality”. According to Freud, it is these two ingredients that leads to psychosis. Is it possible that Landmarkians are on the edge of psychosis because of the defective system of logic and the replacement of the reality by a new one, and nothing else?


Options: ReplyQuote
Manipulating the room's environment
Posted by: elena ()
Date: June 07, 2005 10:46PM

....Would that lead to psychosis?]

Hi MD,

I looked at this too. It seeemed to me that the author was suggesting that the sustained refusal or attempt to inhibit the usually automatic response to turn your head towards any movement you perceive in a setting where there is very little peripheral movement would "confuse" or "frustrate" your instinctive, self-protective reaction, and, beyond that, would dampen or desenitize, over time, your perception and/or your ability to sense the environment, as in your above examples. Moveover, that this artificially imposed restriction on what would be a natural response erodes the inside/outside "interface," boundry or perceived significance, which would make sense for the contention that Landmark and similar "trainings" bring about an "interiorization" - an emphasis on what is sensed internally or in the imagination over what is felt, sensed, or perceived from the environment. As the opposite of this, who hasn't known a combat vet or a victim of trauma or abuse who doesn't have an exaggerated "startle" response or is otherwise physiologically "hyper-vigilant." It would seem that they instinctively and self-protectively over-emphasize the importance of peripheral information coming in from the environment. (This might tie into the rapid lateral eye-movement "therapy" that has had some success with victims of PTSD, though I haven't read or heard anything about it recently.) The author's suggestion might make sense in the examples he gives of a space, room or darkened space where there is only an occasional movement which would be more readily perceived and, perhaps, sensed as a threat. But it doesn't make much sense to me that it would apply to a room full of people who are moving about, even if only slightly, all the time. I would think your mind would accommodate the situation with expectations that would neutralize any startle reflex, but maybe the intense focus "demands" that you control an ordinary reflex to the point that it becomes habitual and "confounds" your usual reality-testing, causing it to "go on strike" or alter its functioning in some way. I would imagine this would be temporary, in most cases, excepting for those whose minds won't "recalibrate," for one reason or another. Does this make sense?

In addition, I think your analysis of the intellectual dis-engagement of perception from reality, (by "reframing," re-naming, or otherwise "re-configuring"), that Landmark and similar programs teach, demonstrate, and practice that can be deadly, for some people, is correct for the reasons you cite. They lose the ability to "explain" reality to themselves and cling, with some ferocity, to the subsitute "explanation" Landmark provides. Of course, this "substitute" explanation was cobbled together from philosophical and psychological "floor-sweepings," so how good could it be? Most people "sense" that the substitute "explanation" is faulty, problematic, or dangerous - at least at some level - if they have anything resembling a functioning conscience. I imagine this "conflict" causes such discomfort for many that they opt for the imaginary, wishful-thinking-type explanations, which is another way of saying they opt for insanity. The set of beliefs and convictions, (those usually formed in very early childhood), that they arrived with might have been "dysfunctional," but the set that Landmark "implants" is downright bizarre. Normal "walking wounded" trade their neuroses for psychoses, as you have seen.

Why anyone would risk their very most precious ability to perceive, guage, and make sense of reality to these rank amateurs and con artists I don't know. But the fact that that is what they are doing is, of course, only obvious to those of us on the outside.


Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 5 of 14

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.