Naturally, the info available on the WWASP site is going to be spun to their liking. That's how the game is played.
The defendants, otoh, are bound by a preliminary injunction against making any public negative comments about WWASP. That's why they can't answer.
I can guess, though, based on what I've read about Jeff over the last year or more. This is only a guess, just my opinion.
Jeff and Sue and all the Trekkers and PURE ppl are quite sincere and benevolent in their intentions. Except for those of you who have actually been enroled and/or employed in a WWASP facility, none of us can say "I know _____" happens at WWASP facilities. What we can say is that a lot of people make the same claims, many of these claims are consistent with our own experiences at other Synanon based programs and that we, personally, believe them.
Now WWASP seems to me to be holding people's feet to the fire for careless talk. Not necessarily inacurate in content. Just carelessly phrased.
Then throw in the complication of some of these folks believing, in all sincerity, that the basic method is good and helpful and that the solution to the problem is just a kinder, gentler implimentation. No need to attribute bad intent to these people. Good or bad, their intentions are beside the point.
If anyone on either side of this suit really wanted the whole truth told, I would think we'd be reading accurate transcripts and, possibly, seeing digital video. Instead, we're seeing only summaries, selected bits and pieces taken out of context and, for all we know, quite distorted.
When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
--
Anonymous . . . for obvious reasons
