I just feel so angry. Jason Weston tells me that I can go back into HAI in another community as long as I talk to him and mediator first. So I should want to go back into an organization that allowed me to be sexually assaulted? And I should have to clear it with Jason, who kicked me out and left the offender in? How sick is this?
↧
Re: human awareness institute
↧
Re: human awareness institute
That is definitely messed up. Your therapist sounds like a good and wise person, I'm glad you have someone helping you deal with things. Fwiw, I am so sorry that this happened to you and that they, HAI, are treating you like trash. You are not worthless and you don't deserve this, you are a strong and brave person - good for you dealing with it in your own way, don't let them tell you when you should be over it. Some things we never really get over, but even if you do, you deserve better than what they are offering. Sounds like you know that, so stick to your guns - you are in the right and they are being disgustingly awful to you. Hugs if you want them, wish you all the best!
↧
↧
Re: human awareness institute
Oh my god, thank you for this. I was feeling suicidal. Mediator threatened me today stated she would not "support" me if I don't keep quiet about HAI. I posted a review of them on Facebook. I did that after waking up from a nightmare about what happened. I am having to leave the city I live in because of them.
↧
Re: The Wright Institute for Lifelong Learning?
Something interesting I just came across. Cynthia Koroll, who is an Illinois attorney and appears to have been standing up for the Wrights in various online comments I've seen is has received two ARDC complaints. The pending complaint is very serious to me and sounds very much like some of the behaviors I've read about on here. Here's the most egregious part to me:
Quote
. Between July 11, 2015 and July 27, 2015, Respondent sent to Goodman, Juravin and Hyman hundreds of texts, emails, tweets and Skype instant messages containing racial slurs, anti-Semitic comments and threats of litigation, including the following:
" You are a witness. You better be damn straight that every word can be backed up because I will never let this go. I will litigate this until you and your slimey Israeli punk client wish he had never thought of hiring a white, brilliant Gentile." Email to Hyman dated July 20, 2015, 12:16 p.m.
"?so suck some more on that Israeli slong [sic] girl. Hope you choke as I will take you apart bit by bit in every legal way possible from now until the end of your career." Email to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 9:35 a.m.
" You WILL regret ever meeting me. I will turn over every rock you and your fucking towel head Arab crawled out from under from now to eternity." Email to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 9:35 a.m.
"Tell your Israeli terrorist that this is American [sic] and he can go fuck himself and the camel he rode in on. Take that pussy little Monk loving faggott [sic] and his retarded kid with him." Email to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 9:35 a.m.
" J ust talked to a Jewish friend, he says that this is typical of an Israeli Jew. And he suggests a fraud count and treble damages." Text message to Hyman dated July 16, 2015, 9:58 p.m.
"Lose some weight, get a facial and deal with the speech impediment. Jackass." Email to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 9:35 a.m.
"It will be a public proceeding and everyone that sees and hears you will think: He must be a poor man. He must be a thief. And in the process you will look like a low life scummy thief. Because making me foot the bill for your litigation is STEALING. I do not know what God or idol you worship but my God says that stealing is breaking a commandment. Do you look in a mirror Don? What do your kids think about their Father when the policeman comes to the house AGAIN to serve him papers? Little kids are scared of cops. Maybe they think that the policeman might take Daddy away?" Email to Juravin dated July 20, 2015 at 2:37 a.m.
"So get the Israeli to pay me in full. Drop the ducking suit and apologize?.Eat that shit. All of you." Skype message to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 10:33 a.m.
"Today I might tweet and Facebook all your personal comments about your coworkers from our Skype conversations . . . After I call Paul's [Berger] wife today." Email to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 6:41 a.m.
" You are just a piece of shit." Email to Goodwin dated July 20, 2015, 9:35 a.m.
"Rachel Hyman is Orthodox Jew. Berger is Jewish. But they bash Juravin for cheap practices and Jewing down all for discount." July 21, 2015 11:02 a.m. Tweet
"cheap Jew bastard" Email to Goodwin dated July 21, 2015, 2:24 p.m.
"So get your Team and the Israeli together. Work up a sweat on his swarthy oily brow and put together a proposed order." Email to Goodwin dated July 23, 2015, 8:57 p.m.
"you are simply morally bankrupt and sociopathic or so terrified of having to get another job that you have taken leave of your senses?.." Email to Berger, Goodwin and Hyman dated July 24, 2015 at 4:40 a.m.
"You do not have the right to call yourself a lawyer. Because there is another name for a woman who will do anything for pay. It is not "counsel"." Email to Berger, Goodwin and Hyman dated July 24, 2015, 4:40 a.m.
"Though Israeli slong [sic] might have been a bit over the top Twitter LOVES it." Email to Goodwin dated July 25, 2015 at 1:25 a.m.
↧
Re: human awareness institute
Mediator really is playing games with me, telling me that I should not only be over this by now but that I should have no triggers left over from my childhood. The thing is that I have a much more extensive background in psychology (master's degree) than this life coach has and know intellectually that she is being ridiculous but she is screwing with my head. She started out with all this love, love stuff but now tries to tell me that I should switch therapists. At one point she even offered herself instead. She is very invested in protecting her own image of HAI and seems a bit btainwashed herself. I am having a hard time getting past the fact that Jason Weston, executive director, kicked me out of the group and left a sex offender in. Hr said he wanted to protect me from being triggered by the offender. Meanwhile he left the other women in the group at risk. Fortunately, the perv, whose name was Jim, was scared off by me pressing criminal charges. Only after Mediator's involvement did Jason ban perv Jim from HAI. Mediator acts as if this is a trivial matter. What would happen to an executive director in any other organization who put people at risk like that? Just want some confirmation that my perceptions are solid. These people are great at gaslighting and manipulation.
↧
↧
Re: human awareness institute
HurtingAngel,
My recommendation would be that you stop talking to this mediator.
She is NOT qualified to make these assessments, you don't have a therapeutic relationship with her, and that is not her purpose. It looks to me as if she is blowing right through your boundaries and doing you further harm. It sounds as if she is deliberately trying to throw you off-balance.
If it were me, I would cut off ALL contact with these people.
My recommendation would be that you stop talking to this mediator.
She is NOT qualified to make these assessments, you don't have a therapeutic relationship with her, and that is not her purpose. It looks to me as if she is blowing right through your boundaries and doing you further harm. It sounds as if she is deliberately trying to throw you off-balance.
If it were me, I would cut off ALL contact with these people.
↧
Re: human awareness institute
HurtingAngel,
After re-reading your post:
Any other executive director might be brought up on charges.
As you've already pointed out, this mediator is involved in the HAI program. I don't know that program, but it sounds a lot like LE. It looks as if she is still trying to run the program on you ~ everything she says to you is within the paradigm of the program, (thus her recommendation that you switch therapists ~ your therapist doesn't fit their philosophy, which is a good thing, IMHO). Also, once again, she is trying to put the focus back on "what's wrong with you, " instead of what's wrong with the program, or with the way the situation was handled.
Does this woman even have a license as a therapist? If not, she is breaking the law even offering herself up as a therapist, and i have a hard time believing that ANY professional would recommend that someone dump their therapist and offer themself. I suspect that would be a breach of ethics.
If it were me, I would run screaming. There is a whole world outside of the program, and part of it is the law. I would look there.
After re-reading your post:
Any other executive director might be brought up on charges.
As you've already pointed out, this mediator is involved in the HAI program. I don't know that program, but it sounds a lot like LE. It looks as if she is still trying to run the program on you ~ everything she says to you is within the paradigm of the program, (thus her recommendation that you switch therapists ~ your therapist doesn't fit their philosophy, which is a good thing, IMHO). Also, once again, she is trying to put the focus back on "what's wrong with you, " instead of what's wrong with the program, or with the way the situation was handled.
Does this woman even have a license as a therapist? If not, she is breaking the law even offering herself up as a therapist, and i have a hard time believing that ANY professional would recommend that someone dump their therapist and offer themself. I suspect that would be a breach of ethics.
If it were me, I would run screaming. There is a whole world outside of the program, and part of it is the law. I would look there.
↧
Re: PSI Seminars: Legal Action?
Here we are in 2017 and PSI is still wreaking havoc "one mind at a time". How about a class action lawsuit? Anyone interested???? These LGAT companies are BUSINESSES not churches, so let's do something! NOW!
↧
Re: human awareness institute
Helpful as always, kdag. My brother is also pleading with me to break off contact with them. Mediator is a life coach and, thus, is not bound by any code of ethics or licensing board. Today I wrote an email to Mediator and cc'ed it to Jason Weston telling them I wanted no further contact. I am going to continue to work with my therapist and if I have any future contact with HAI I will have my own lawyer. Mediator was making her support contingent on me not doing anything to "threaten" HAI. They were also telling me that I could take more levels in another city if I spoke to Jason and Mediator first. I asked Mediator if I could talk about my experience in the Midwest if I went to another level, she didn't answer.
↧
↧
Re: human awareness institute
I also want to write about what happened when I first asked for help. The next day I settled down enough to call Paul Black, the Ohio organizer who facilitated the event. Paul began to offer an inventory of my moral shortcomings then tried to impose Landmark teachings on me. When I said I didn't want to hear about Landmark Paul said well, then, he wouldn't help me. It took two years for Jason to take any action against Paul. Paul, along with Mo Fritz and Eve Baird, is not allowed to serve on team until he takes their new training on sexual assault and trauma. For two years after the training it was business as usual for Paul.
↧
Re: human awareness institute
I guess it's a little confusing reading your entries. You acknowledge the fact that they manipulate and influence people and "brain wash" yet you state in a previous entry that you enjoyed the program. You have a masters in psychology and are recognizing the techniques and abuse applied in these programs. So why keep in contact and continue to put yourself in a situation that gives them the power to have you second guessing yourself? It just seems very back and forth. These LGATs main purpose is to make people question themselves and their critical thinking so that they can indoctrinate their "new belief system" into people. I understand they've caused you pain and it isn't ok. It just seems like you're holding onto something?
↧
Re: human awareness institute
I don't know why Paul would bother offering up Landmark. It sounds like pretty much the same thing, and I would expect them to handle it the same way. They pretty much say on their consent form that YOU are responsible for anything they do to you. People sign it, not knowing that they respect absolutely no boundaries, and use methods that I could only describe as psychopathic.
Their offer on the "more levels," in another city is hilarious, and predictable. They just don't know when to let go, as much as they preach that very thing. They just have to get in the last word, it has to be within the narrow parameters of what they teach, and any disagreement is never due to flaws in their own teachings, as far as they're concerned.
As to going "No Contact," good for you! Also, I'm glad that you have retained an attorney. If you hear another peep from them, be prepared to back it up with a restraining order.
Their offer on the "more levels," in another city is hilarious, and predictable. They just don't know when to let go, as much as they preach that very thing. They just have to get in the last word, it has to be within the narrow parameters of what they teach, and any disagreement is never due to flaws in their own teachings, as far as they're concerned.
As to going "No Contact," good for you! Also, I'm glad that you have retained an attorney. If you hear another peep from them, be prepared to back it up with a restraining order.
↧
Re: PSI Seminars: Legal Action?
crback22 -
I would be - sort of. The problem I see is that they are DIFFERENT companies, and I don't think that we can file such a thing against an entire class of businesses, but just one at a time.
The other problem I have is that some of us have had crimes committed against us. In my case, I would personally rather see a criminal prosecution. I don't know if a lawsuit would complicate that, or not.
If you get a class action suit going against PSI, that's great! I hadn't even heard of PSI until you brought it up, but if it's anything like L.E., (sounds like it is), a class-action suit would be a good thing, IMHO.
I would be - sort of. The problem I see is that they are DIFFERENT companies, and I don't think that we can file such a thing against an entire class of businesses, but just one at a time.
The other problem I have is that some of us have had crimes committed against us. In my case, I would personally rather see a criminal prosecution. I don't know if a lawsuit would complicate that, or not.
If you get a class action suit going against PSI, that's great! I hadn't even heard of PSI until you brought it up, but if it's anything like L.E., (sounds like it is), a class-action suit would be a good thing, IMHO.
↧
↧
Re: human awareness institute
Yes, good for you! I think it's really important for your mental health not to listen to them anymore, they are def trying to gaslight and confuse you and get you to see things their way, which is not good for you. It's only good for them, and you have zero obligation to talk or listen when they've shown so little care and concern for you. You should certainly have a lawyer if they try anything again. *hugs* Do what's best for you, you know what that is. Make a blog or keep posting here so you feel like you have a voice, tell your story, that's important too, but don't talk to them. They've failed you on every level, you deserve better.
↧
Re: PSI Seminars: Legal Action?
They're all the same! I will speak with a class action lawsuit lawyer this week among other connections I have made through other organizations. I think if we can start at one and it's successful we can snowball that to the others. Any ideas please share them with me. Leah Remini is making headway in this subject so let's ride this train while it's picking up momentum
↧
Re: PSI Seminars: Legal Action?
I am working on getting people who are up to taking PSI down together. It's gonna take numbers and I think a lawsuit (class-action) is a possibility- it won't necessarily be about money- but actually stopping them. Anyone interested in standing up against them please message me.
↧
Werner Erhard's intent - Pure scam or deluded egomania?
I have a question about Werner Erhard's intent behind Landmark. I'm watching a documentary on him, and it's creepy now that I believe it intentionally brainwashes people. However, here's my thought: do you think Erhard's goal from the beginning was to start a scam he knew would trick people and make him a lot of money? Or do you think he believed his own lies and thought he really should be the leader to take people into some new era of thinking?
Either way, it's evil. But it makes me wonder: how could someone be so evil as to knowingly push such mean things onto people with the understanding that the net result is negative? For example, I can imagine a nun abusing a child in school because they feel the net outcome will be positive. The kid might have lifelong trauma from it, but it made them pay attention and get more benefits than if the nun just let the kid be "bad".
But if the nun knew slapping the kid's wrists would ultimately result in a net negative on that person's life, could she do it? Do you think nuns enjoy hurting people, or do you think it's just a consequence of necessary order?
So, that takes it back to Erhard. Did he see the physical abuse, the intentional brainwashing (I'm certain he knowingly used techniques to manipulate people to make them learn what he thought would truly help them), and the negative consequences of his seminars as just part of the process of making a real difference?
Or, did he not care about that and just want money?
Please share any documents, links, videos or other sources that can help me. Thanks so much and thank you Rick Ross for saving lives.
Either way, it's evil. But it makes me wonder: how could someone be so evil as to knowingly push such mean things onto people with the understanding that the net result is negative? For example, I can imagine a nun abusing a child in school because they feel the net outcome will be positive. The kid might have lifelong trauma from it, but it made them pay attention and get more benefits than if the nun just let the kid be "bad".
But if the nun knew slapping the kid's wrists would ultimately result in a net negative on that person's life, could she do it? Do you think nuns enjoy hurting people, or do you think it's just a consequence of necessary order?
So, that takes it back to Erhard. Did he see the physical abuse, the intentional brainwashing (I'm certain he knowingly used techniques to manipulate people to make them learn what he thought would truly help them), and the negative consequences of his seminars as just part of the process of making a real difference?
Or, did he not care about that and just want money?
Please share any documents, links, videos or other sources that can help me. Thanks so much and thank you Rick Ross for saving lives.
↧
↧
I think I know the best way to prove an LGAT is bad
I've tried to convince so many people that Landmark is not good, but because Landmark is so good with its psychological tricks, it's hard to find one solid reason why it's not good. For example, abuse? Rip off? Scam? Unsustained progress?
Sounds like regular psycho-therapy to me. Of course, there's one predominantly crucial difference between therapy and LGAT seminars.
Look at the structure of the company. Examine who gets paid, how the employee strata works. See how the employees are treated. Ask them what their tasks are. How much control do they have over their ideas? Are they paid well with traditional standards?
What I'm trying to say is that a regular company acts like a regular company. It values capitalism, sometimes exploits employees but generally follows the law. That's not to say that a regular company is the correct way to be ran. But that's like saying capitalism isn't necessarily better than communism.
I only have experience with Landmark, and I can say the company structure is not normal. Far too much volunteer work with the illusion of employment. My guess is the top people in Landmark have some sort of anti-capitalist agenda. It's not just to make a ton of money. Landmark could theoretically restructure into a normal business and probably still make money.
Instead, they choose to remain alien, pretending their slaves are getting something more valuable than money. That's what truly makes Landmark and possibly other LGATs bad. It's not just a scam. It's a virus. It's a sick new form of thought meant to literally transform you out of traditional thinking and into a new form of thinking that in large numbers can be used to destroy the very fabric of society.
Sounds like regular psycho-therapy to me. Of course, there's one predominantly crucial difference between therapy and LGAT seminars.
Look at the structure of the company. Examine who gets paid, how the employee strata works. See how the employees are treated. Ask them what their tasks are. How much control do they have over their ideas? Are they paid well with traditional standards?
What I'm trying to say is that a regular company acts like a regular company. It values capitalism, sometimes exploits employees but generally follows the law. That's not to say that a regular company is the correct way to be ran. But that's like saying capitalism isn't necessarily better than communism.
I only have experience with Landmark, and I can say the company structure is not normal. Far too much volunteer work with the illusion of employment. My guess is the top people in Landmark have some sort of anti-capitalist agenda. It's not just to make a ton of money. Landmark could theoretically restructure into a normal business and probably still make money.
Instead, they choose to remain alien, pretending their slaves are getting something more valuable than money. That's what truly makes Landmark and possibly other LGATs bad. It's not just a scam. It's a virus. It's a sick new form of thought meant to literally transform you out of traditional thinking and into a new form of thinking that in large numbers can be used to destroy the very fabric of society.
↧
Re: Werner Erhard's intent - Pure scam or deluded egomania?
anonday,
I don't know how much it matters whether or not they/Warner believe that they are making you a "better" person.
They sell their courses as programs that will make you more effective in your own life, and something that will help you to fulfill your own goals. What they do, once you are in, is to try to hijack your time and money toward THEIR agenda, and try to make you into the kind of person THEY want you to be. If they have a social goal, it seems to be to get people to accept totalitarian authority, and without complaining.
Keep in mind that YOU are the customer. YOU are paying them, but they try to put the shoe on the other foot from the minute you walk in the door. They invade peoples' privacy, and try to exert authority that they don't actually have. The only authority that these people do have is to ask you to leave their premises.
I don't know how much it matters whether or not they/Warner believe that they are making you a "better" person.
They sell their courses as programs that will make you more effective in your own life, and something that will help you to fulfill your own goals. What they do, once you are in, is to try to hijack your time and money toward THEIR agenda, and try to make you into the kind of person THEY want you to be. If they have a social goal, it seems to be to get people to accept totalitarian authority, and without complaining.
Keep in mind that YOU are the customer. YOU are paying them, but they try to put the shoe on the other foot from the minute you walk in the door. They invade peoples' privacy, and try to exert authority that they don't actually have. The only authority that these people do have is to ask you to leave their premises.
↧
Re: Werner Erhard's intent - Pure scam or deluded egomania?
The other part if this is informed consent.
Someone else posted some time ago, (in fact there have been several posts like this), about hypnotic induction in an LGAT, and how the leader was describing what is happening in the mind during hypnosis AS he is doing this, but not informing participants that he was doing it. I had some kind of soundtrack used on me, again without any kind of consent. The effects were undesirable and unpleasant, and may have caused long-term damage.
These techniques can sometimes be used in therapeutic settings, but always with signed, informed consent AND by someone who is qualified. Landmark specifically states, on the waiver they have you sign, that they are NOT mental health professionals or doctors, and that the program IS NOT therapeutic in design, methodology or intent. In reading their waiver, one would reasonably come to the conclusion that they WOULD NOT use any such techniques.
Once again, their ultimate goal or intent doesn't matter. They are out of line on so many levels.
In some of the literature, they apparently do state that they have a couple of psychiatrists as consultants, but even then, at no point have participants established a therapeutic relationship with these people, nor have they ever signed a consent for treatment. I would assume that any psychiatrist who would recommend the use of these methods, under these circumstances, would be guilty of malpractice.
Someone else posted some time ago, (in fact there have been several posts like this), about hypnotic induction in an LGAT, and how the leader was describing what is happening in the mind during hypnosis AS he is doing this, but not informing participants that he was doing it. I had some kind of soundtrack used on me, again without any kind of consent. The effects were undesirable and unpleasant, and may have caused long-term damage.
These techniques can sometimes be used in therapeutic settings, but always with signed, informed consent AND by someone who is qualified. Landmark specifically states, on the waiver they have you sign, that they are NOT mental health professionals or doctors, and that the program IS NOT therapeutic in design, methodology or intent. In reading their waiver, one would reasonably come to the conclusion that they WOULD NOT use any such techniques.
Once again, their ultimate goal or intent doesn't matter. They are out of line on so many levels.
In some of the literature, they apparently do state that they have a couple of psychiatrists as consultants, but even then, at no point have participants established a therapeutic relationship with these people, nor have they ever signed a consent for treatment. I would assume that any psychiatrist who would recommend the use of these methods, under these circumstances, would be guilty of malpractice.
↧