Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Nihilanthic on December 30, 2004, 08:38:00 PM
-
I saw it on fox news, so it MUST be true!
?America?s kids are all right. Juvenile violent crime (search) has fallen every year ? and nearly halved ? since 1995. The percentage of high school students who carry weapons to school is at a 10-year low. There were 14 homicides on school campuses in 2002-03, down from 34 10 years earlier. Teen birthrates (search) are at a 20-year low, and high school dropout rates are at a 35-year low.
Funny, though, how BS treatment for kids, and fears about kids, are not on the decline either....If life were fair, Dan Quayle would be making a living asking 'Do you want fries with that?'
John Cleese
-
Actually, it was our old friend Radley.
http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.ph ... forum=32&1 (http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=7635&forum=32&1)
-
Whoops! Didnt know I was crossposting!
Oh well. No harm done I guess. TY for the link!If Christ were here now there is one thing he would not be -- a Christian.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
-
No worries, just wanted to give Radley some credit...he's been good to us. :em:
-
I'm a program parent and this is awesome news! Could it be that the siblings of the kids in the program, who go to the teen seminars and their parents that are learning to be better parents... or the impact that all the Challenge Days being held all over the country in our junior high schools http://www.challengeday.org/ (http://www.challengeday.org/) are making a difference? What about all the teen programs within the different churches? I know it's only a drop in the bucket, but this is what we all want!
http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Dec/20041230News012.asp (http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Dec/20041230News012.asp)
More teens are avoiding bad choices
Sex, drug use are down, study says.
Knight Ridder Newspapers
Published Thursday, December 30, 2004
SAN JOSE, Calif. - Sex, alcohol, drugs.
For teenagers, these have long been considered rites of passage, the conventional ways to rebel.
Maybe not anymore.
Now, being "good" is in.
That seems to be the conclusion from the host of studies and surveys that have trickled out during the past year.
Earlier this month, a federal study reported that smoking and drug use among teens continued to decline in 2004, especially among younger teens. Another government study reported that U.S. teens are waiting longer to have sexual intercourse and the vast majority of those who do are using contraception.
No one is sure why teenagers are engaging in less risky behaviors, and many experts are wary about labeling today?s teens as "good," free of problems that plagued earlier generations.
Briana Taylor, 17, a senior at Leigh High School in San Jose, Calif., says she has been influenced to steer clear of drugs by the funny and smart anti-drug public health ads on MTV and in teen magazines.
Indeed, targeted public health campaigns might be succeeding in educating teens on the potential negative consequences of specific substances and behaviors. The drop in risky behaviors could also be because of the fact that with the Internet and television, kids are exposed to more but also can seek out information as they need it. And today?s parents - the hell-raising generation that terrified their parents - might be better informed than the previous generation and able to quickly, directly and calmly address problems.
And there could be another reason, the corollary to the over-scheduled child. "I don?t think kids have a lot of time to be bad anymore," says Mary Lamia, a clinical psychologist and host of the radio show "KidTalk with Dr. Mary."
From movies and television shows, Christine Takaichi, 15, of San Jose, thought high school was going to be about battling temptations, "the things you weren?t supposed to do," she says.
The reality at her all-girl, private high school has been different. So far, she hasn?t been to a party where there was alcohol.
Recently, Briana asked her parents whether she could attend parties. "I asked them to trust me that I wouldn?t do anything like drink," she says. Her parents agreed.
Her mother, Lisa Taylor, 44, says she is better prepared than her parents. "I think there?s more awareness now for having lived through it," she says.
Researchers say teens still are having sex, drinking and doing drugs. Just not as much.
For example, the teen birthrate fell 38 percent from 1990 to 2002, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That?s good news. But still, 47 percent of high school students report having had sexual intercourse, down from 54 percent in 1991.
And while illicit drug use is down overall among teens and has been steadily falling since 1996, drugs still are a part of many teenagers? lives. By the time they have left high school, about 50 percent of kids have tried an illicit drug. Among seniors, 39 percent have used an illicit drug in the past 12 months, according to a recent report by Monitoring the Future, a 30-year survey of teenagers and young adults by the University of Michigan.
Copyright © 2004 The Columbia Daily Tribune. All Rights Reserved
-
On 2004-12-30 18:24:00, Anonymous wrote:
I'm a program parent and this is awesome news! Could it be that the siblings of the kids in the program, who go to the teen seminars and their parents that are learning to be better parents... or the impact that all the Challenge Days being held all over the country in our junior high schools http://www.challengeday.org/ (http://www.challengeday.org/) are making a difference? What about all the teen programs within the different churches? I know it's only a drop in the bucket, but this is what we all want!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
No, darlin! The whole of the troubled parent industry, even today at its high ebb, only accounts for less than 1% of American families. Just because you dismiss the other 99% as unenlightened and irrelavent doesn't mean they don't exist.
No, look more closely. Radley's article is talking about longerm trends in the entire world (you know, that tiny speck of rudamentary civilization outside US borders? Yeah, those people.)
No one is sure why teenagers are engaging in less risky behaviors,...
I think the only risky behavior in which teenagers are engaging less frequently is probably believing that the DARE surveys are actually anonymous.
Impiety: Your irreverence toward my deity.
--Ambrose Bierce
-
mmm hmm. How to Book A Challenge Day. :rofl: :rofl:
You are comic relief.
I'll come back later to rebut, in case you seriously think that a $bling-bling$ enterprise is gonna come in your school and make them all LOVE each other. MMM HMM. Yeah. Teenagers love that stuff for comic relief too!
Oh, and as for the brainwash boot-camps, PROGRAM PARENT, okay, maybe they'll suppress the violence for a year or two. But better WATCH OUT! The severely abused, abandoned child has a way of SNAPPING!
You don't deserve your children. You fucking pawn them off on someone else. You locked them up and left them there. THAT they won't forget.
By the way, you sound totally brainwashed, space-camp, high on lack of oxygen. And I know you can't see it right now, but ask some relative or someone who has known you and your family for a long time.
-
Challenge Day, a non-profit organization, and its team are committed to stopping teen violence and alienation.
http://www.challengeday.org/ (http://www.challengeday.org/)
Dear lord! If they only knew!Arms in the hands of citizens [may] be used at individual discretion...in private self-defense...
-- John Adams, (1788)
-
(My post above was for the "program parent", not Antigen. Looks like we were busy cracking up over it at the same time! :rofl: )
-
On 2004-12-30 18:41:00, Antigen wrote:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
No, darlin! The whole of the troubled parent industry, even today at its high ebb, only accounts for less than 1% of American families. Just because you dismiss the other 99% as unenlightened and irrelavent doesn't mean they don't exist.
I just wanted to make sure she saw this. It really bears repeating.
BTW...a LOT of us were laughing behind our screens reading this. Thanks for the comic relief!! :wave:
-
On 2004-12-30 18:43:00, miseducated wrote:
Oh, and as for the brainwash boot-camps, PROGRAM PARENT, okay, maybe they'll suppress the violence for a year or two. But better WATCH OUT! The severely abused, abandoned child has a way of SNAPPING!
I doubt it. DARE and Peer Counceling never had that promised effect. More likely, they'll just sow seeds of doubt among families, cause more violence and more reporting and get a little recruiting in before they draw media attention, like Narconon did in California, and get shut out.
We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication.
--Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat
-
With regards to suppression and snapping, I was referring to the boot-camps, the Straights, the long-term thought reform prison-schools.
-
Hey "darlins" - I never said the change in choices by the kids was ALL due to seminars/workshops, but it's a start.
Glad I had something to do with the laughter...it's the best medicine, you know.
-
Miseducated,
Do you believe that every parent that puts their child in a program is mistreating and abandoning them?
-
That's a really good question, Perrigaud. It is a little hard to answer because "a program" could mean just about anything. But, since we seem, in these forums, to be talking about "programs" in which parents put "troubled teens", and one common denominator is that the kid cannot leave the program on his own will, and another common denominator is that there is a fundamental emphasis on secrecy leading me to suspect, well, that they are not above board and reputable, I will answer with respect to that sort of program. The short answer is yes, I do think that parents who put their kids in programs like that are mistreating and abandoning them.
Try turning the tables. What if all of a sudden kids had the legal right to sign their parents into involuntary treatment for "troubled parents"? I mean, can you imagine, locking up an adult who has been tried for no crime? And then, making them go through some variation on treatment to which he must submit if he hopes to ever get out of there?
Now someone is going to come back and say "but my kid went voluntarily," and to them I would still have to say that you are the grown-up, it is your job to do your homework to understand what is going on in these places. Brainwashing is mental torture. I will go dig up some of the stuff I have been reading on brainwashing, and provide links in a later post.
Thanks for asking!
-
To be honest with you I see both sides. There are cases where the kids were sent for no real concrete reason other than they weren't listening. Other's (such as myself) really needed to be sent. My parent's did try just about everything. In the end I realized that the way I was living my life was full of destruction. In my program there apparantly were cases of abuse and assault. I never witnessed any of that personally but I don't doubt that it happened.
-
Perriguad, I appreciate your willingness to look at this from another perspective. I have a question. You stated that you fully believe that abuses and assaults went on in the program you were in. What would you say to those people? Did they deserve this? Was you getting the "help" you say you needed worth their beatings? It's kinda like saying that what they went through was OK because some people got something out of it.
I'm really not trying to pick a fight here. I respect the fact that you ARE willing to look at this with a little more of a critical eye instead of just summarily dismissing everything we say.
-
On 2004-12-31 05:33:00, miseducated wrote:
Try turning the tables. What if all of a sudden kids had the legal right to sign their parents into involuntary treatment for "troubled parents"? I mean, can you imagine, locking up an adult who has been tried for no crime? And then, making them go through some variation on treatment to which he must submit if he hopes to ever get out of there?
Actually, we don't even have to resort to imagination to find this scenareo. Just take a little time and look into elder care and neglect issues. There are plenty of outfits that will lock away your needy and troublesome elder relatives, take your money and/or their social security or pensions, neglect them and abuse them if they dare complain to you or anyone else about it. It's actually a big problem nationwide.
Ironically, Joy Margolis, who used to be a spokesperson for Straight, Inc. later turned up as a spokesperson for Lutheran Services of Florida when they were accused of misallocation of funding and elder neglect. I guess she found her calling early on, eh?
And I suspect this will turn out to be a matter of special concern for parents who have been less than scrupulous when researching placements for their teenagers.
If you believe that people cannot be trusted to govern themselves,
then can they be trusted to govern others?
--Thomas Jefferson
-
Can you say without a doubt that there were abuses going on? Hearsay is one thing, but you even admitted you didn't witness any. Wouldn't be impossible not to know this? I'm not saying that sometimes a staff person wouldn't make a bad decision, but I firmly believe they would be fired on the spot, and the parents contacted, which I know from first hand experience as a parent that this happened to. I wasn't happy it happened, but grateful he wasn't hurt and the staffer was fired.
-
Wouldn't be impossible not to know this?
It would be possible not to know it was abuse. If a kid is put in a state of severe psychological pressure, and told over and over again, that it was the victim's fault and that if only the victim would have followed the rules s/he wouldn't have been abused, and that it's for the victim's "own good", and that it can't be considered abuse because the victim "asked" for it to happen by breaking the rules, etc. etc., the kid might just end up believing it. That's what the program is all about, actually.
-
On 2004-12-31 10:07:00, Dolphin wrote:
"Can you say without a doubt that there were abuses going on? Hearsay is one thing, but you even admitted you didn't witness any.
The knee-jerk definition of abuse is knocking some kid around, anywhere from cuffing them upside the head, to hog-tying them on a concrete floor for days on end. I feel it is incorrect to say abuse can only be categorized as physical beatings.
That said, I will relate what my grandaughter has said over the last year living with us, about what she witnessed or knew was happening at Casa by the Sea. BTW, I believe her for a lot of reasons beyond our blood relationship, mostly because what she sometimes-reluctantly mentions follows to a "T" the experiences of literally hundreds of other survivors I have listened to.
She personally spent a huge amount of time, more than two months, in solitary confinement when she first was entered into Casa. This was kept from her parent, the family rep flat-out lying about what was happening to her, with 6 of her first 8 letters being destroyed until she finally was able to write an acceptable "manipulation" letter, stating that "...this place is not what it seems". She does recognize the inequity of her punishments, especially the random, capricious nature of more days solitary punishment meted out by newly-minted higher level kids (who have absolutely NO business disciplining anybody, much less with the life-and-death circumstances Casa kids feared). My kid often says with chilling quietness that she was absolutely convinced she would die in Casa. She was 14 years old.
One girl in her dorm had spent most of her first year there in R&R, the aforementioned-hog-tying room. This girl had permanent scars on her chin from spending so much time resting it on the concrete floor.
Only days before my kid arrived, a girl had attempted an escape by scaling the high stucco wall surrounding the entire compound. Although my kid did not personally meet this girl, her exploits spread throughout the compound (hearsay?), with credible witnesses relating the girl had a crushed pelvis from her fall from the wall.
Would you consider it abuse to withold toilet paper, sanitary napkins, aspirin, etc.? This was done to children I personally know. Would you consider it abusive to deny people toilet privileges until they were forced to soil themselves? My own kid was denied orthodontic care for more than 8 months, and when *something* was finally done, it was done in the most cruel and terrifying manner. Interestingly, my kid tells of the trips to the Ensenada dentist, but really doesn't recognize or think of the mean, purposely-scarey events as abuse. She will, eventually.
These are credible instances of abuse, from a witness...and this was only on the girls' side, even though the boys' side of Casa was notorious for greater wrongs. I personally know one skinny 16yo boy who lost 25 pounds in 4 months at Casa, due directly to witheld food. This same boy, being somewhat large for his age, was recruited to drag boys to R&R, kicking and screaming, although he himself was never committed to that space. One boy I have spoken to suffered grevious physical injuries at High Impact, the facility that is-or-is[was]not WWASPS, including broken bones and teeth knocked through his lip.
My grandaughter saw several boys being force-marched back into the Casa compound after having been run up and down the steep mountainside across the freeway from the Casa site as punishment. One boy was vomitting from the exertion.
This is personal, credible testimony from someone who lives in my house. If you want more, just ask Cherish Wisdom about her daughter's experiences at Provo Canyon, or Buzzkill about her son's time at Dundee. How much personal testimony about *physical* abuse do you need to believe it happened? We're not even venturing into the mental anguish and abuse of the entire Program. Let's just say, you have been presented with evidence a jury would weep over (see the PURE trial), and to ignore it or challenge it is...well, stupid.
-
On 2004-12-31 10:07:00, Dolphin wrote:
"Can you say without a doubt that there were abuses going on?
Nope. But then I haven't sent my kid there. You can damned well bet I'd need more than hearsay to convince me that these people do NOT abuse their students before I'd trust them to care for any of my kids.
In another thread we're discussing exactly how the Program 'works'; specifically, what parents and former students who support the program
think, what they know and don't know about it. So far, the concensus seems to boil down to this:
Ginger, Niles, whoever - WHO CARES HOW IT WORKS? It works for anyone that CARES enough about their life to do the tough stuff to get past whatever got them in the mess they were in. The past does NOT have to equal the future unless you want it to - in other words, if you are in your "safe" place and are too afraid of what it's like on the other side of what's comfortable, whether it's working or not, you'll keep asking about other's experiences over and over again until you decide to just let it go and do something different, or not.
As someone once said - Analysis paralysis! Stay stuck in your crap, it's not my problem. It's YOUR life and your choice.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=10#73167 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=7573&forum=9&Sort=D&start=10#73167)
So, to recap the position of Program supporters, you have no clear understanding of what does go on in these Programs while you're not permitted regular contact and communication w/ your kids. But you're damned sure there is no abuse or undue manipulation or intimidation going on because everyone who says so are liars, losers and lunatics.
Is that about an accurate assesment? If not, what is?If we had been born in Constantinople, then most of us would have said: "There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet." If our parents had lived on the banks of the Ganges, we would have been worshipers of Siva, longing for the heaven of Nirvana.
--
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps.
-
On 2004-12-31 06:57:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"To be honest with you I see both sides. There are cases where the kids were sent for no real concrete reason other than they weren't listening. Other's (such as myself) really needed to be sent. My parent's did try just about everything. In the end I realized that the way I was living my life was full of destruction. In my program there apparantly were cases of abuse and assault. I never witnessed any of that personally but I don't doubt that it happened. "
You know, this was really all I wanted to hear from you.
Look, I can speak to this from maybe a different perspective. You're new, but I've kind of worn some of the regulars here out talking about my personal experience with being bipolar, and having lots of bipolars in my family, so I'll keep it short this time.
A lot of the survivors here who are least happy with the programs got sent for trivial reasons.
Me, I sure do have a major mental illness--I'm high function, but there are other members of my family, and who have been in various generations of my family, who weren't high function. Some of us have been institutionalized for spans of time---and needed to be---and some have had worse experiences. My great grandmother was chained to a tree in the yard in her manic phases, when she got violent, because that was all they had to do with her. She was dangerous, and they knew she wasn't criminal but was just nuts, and there were no treatments.
Institutionalization is better than that. And being stable on medication and *not* institutionalized is better still.
I've never needed to be committed, but I love my family.
You might say I have a personal stake in seeing that treatment of the mentally ill, and civil commitment procedures and conditions, work properly and humanely.
I don't want to end residential treatment.
I'll sure as hell have family members who need it.
And we tend to be early onset---it showed up in me when I was five years old, and my nine year old daughter already has it.
So our future generations, in my family, are likely to encounter the system for good or ill in our teens.
I'd sure prefer it to be for good rather than ill.
And that's why, even though I have a life, I spend so much time on this damned issue.
I really do *not* want to end residential care for teens.
I want it to be affordable.
I want it to work.
I want it to be safe and effective.
And I want kids who are capable of doing well in *outpatient* care to have that opportunity.
You ever wonder why I spend so much time on here when I've never been (fortunately) in one of these facilities and it "doesn't affect me"? Because it affects my whole damned family---out to the nth generation. And I love my family.
Timoclea
-
This is personal, credible testimony from someone who lives in my house. If you want more, just ask Cherish Wisdom about her daughter's experiences at Provo Canyon, or Buzzkill about her son's time at Dundee. How much personal testimony about *physical* abuse do you need to believe it happened? We're not even venturing into the mental anguish and abuse of the entire Program. Let's just say, you have been presented with evidence a jury would weep over (see the PURE trial), and to ignore it or challenge it is...well, stupid.
Spots, what evidence? Accusations? Personal Testimony? Accusations and personal testimony are not evidence. Have you not heard the personal testimony of those who work in, or run the programs. They too have plenty of positive things to say about what happens in the programs.
There are plenty of parents that have plenty of positive things to say (personal testimonies) as well. Their testimony contradict yours. And, their children's testimony contradictS that of your granddaughter's. Why do you not consider their "testimony" as good as evidence? Because it is not evidence! Nor is yours or anyone elses. Someone telling you how "great" the program is has not proven to you that it is "great". Yet its the same story they tell over and over again. Why do you not believe them? BECAUSE IT IS NOT EVIDENCE!
The accusations themselves may be true none the less, BUT THEY ARE NOT EVIDENCE. People telling the same stories over and over, does not make them true.
I don't know anything about Cherish Wisdom or her daughters experience at Provo, but I do know about Buzzkill and I do know Buzzkill wouldn't know reality if it slapped her smack dab in the face. And as for Buzzkill's son, I have talked to him personally. He called my house. I know where his head is at.
-
I've talked to your boys too Carey. . .
They've called here several times.
As for evidence - you may spout off all you wish about what is and what isn't -
Thank God it isn't up to the likes of you.
-
Get over your bad self Carey. What an absolute insufferable ass you still are.
-
On 2004-12-31 13:50:00, Carey wrote:
The accusations themselves may be true none the less, BUT THEY ARE NOT EVIDENCE. People telling the same stories over and over, does not make them true.
Many different people from different places over the course of years telling similar stories about the same organizations and people is evidence (but not proof). Sworn affidavits that make more sense taken together than anything the proponants have come up w/ to the contrary is evidence (still not proof). News articles, again, many different people who don't know each other describing the same people behaving the same way AND fact checking by various media organizations (who routinely wager their assets against their work) is yet more evidence (still not proof, though). Photographs of children in something like dog kennels, physical evidence like words carved on walls, bruises, scars, illness, weight loss, etc. -- more evidence, STILL not proof.
Taken all together, that's a pretty compelling pile of evidence, don't you think? I do. I'm pretty well convinced. But there's one thing I can see that you probably can't and hopefully never will, Carey. I read and listen to what these kids and their parents tell me about their experience. Not just the major points, but the way they describe what it feels like to be afraid to smile at someone or afraid to cry and to never have a moment that you're not under close scrutiny and busy worrying about avoiding some minor infraction that will get you punished in whatever way is most harmful to you personally, be it physical pain, humiliation in front of the other kids, not going home or talking to family. Whatever your weakness.
And I pay attention to how they describe having been maneuvered into the situation. It all adds up.
More compelling evidence.
So, in the face of all this very compelling evidence, what's the other side of the story? "It works, we don't know how, we just trust the process and anyone who says otherwise are all liars, losers and lunatics." I don't find that very compelling at all. Do you?
Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.
--Thomas Paine, American revolutionary
-
If I said you're blue, would you then say, "no you're blue."
Ha Ha Ha. My boys called your anonymous house. Does an anonymous person with an anonymous house have an anonymous phone number. Did they dial 1-800-anonymous. That is really funny. They must have dialed 1-800-anonymous-collect.
Once again, no argument on your part to try and make your case for "testimony" being "evidence." I guess my point hit you hard. Testimony is testimony. Testimony is a statement. A statement is words and "words are all I have to take your heart away."
Do I make your blood boil anonymous?
Name calling...how childish.
-
There's more than one anon here Carey. I didn't say anything about your boys calling my house. I'm just one who's been around here for a while and it just amazes me to come back and see you STILL being nothing but a condescending bitch. You don't make my blood boil at all. I just sit here and roll my eyes and feel badly for anyone who has to come in contact with you. Talk about someone with "issues" :lol: . DAMN woman. Get a life.
-
Ginger,
Personally, I have seen how both sides work. I have seen those who are for programs lie and manipulate and I have seen those who are against the programs do the same damn thing. Both sides have an agenda and both sides are playing with peoples lives.
Somewhere in the middle "lies the truth." Based on all of the testimony, I am not sure exactly where that is.
Do I think kids have been hurt. Sure I do. Do I think that some of the kids who claim to have been hurt are lying? Yes I do.
-
There's more than one anon here Carey. I didn't say anything about your boys calling my house. I'm just one who's been around here for a while and it just amazes me to come back and see you STILL being nothing but a condescending bitch. You don't make my blood boil at all. I just sit here and roll my eyes and feel badly for anyone who has to come in contact with you. Talk about someone with "issues" . DAMN woman. Get a life
More than one anon? Oh really? Well let me help you. The phone call part is for anon 1 and the name calling is for anon 2. Anon 2 would be You.
Hope that cleared things up for you.
Any way,
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Name calling again. Curse words at that. And you are calling me a B____. I think I got ya stirred. Come on, admit it. The truth shall set you free.....
-
On 2004-12-31 10:18:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Wouldn't be impossible not to know this?
It would be possible not to know it was abuse. If a kid is put in a state of severe psychological pressure, and told over and over again, that it was the victim's fault and that if only the victim would have followed the rules s/he wouldn't have been abused, and that it's for the victim's "own good", and that it can't be considered abuse because the victim "asked" for it to happen by breaking the rules, etc. etc., the kid might just end up believing it. That's what the program is all about, actually. "
Here's the best way I can explain it. All those little things add up. Those petty sounding grievances that you just quit bothering to talk about because you just can't explain it to people who haven't experienced something very similar.
There are hundreds of spoken and unspoken rules pertaining to everything from posture to facial expression, taboo words and phrases and, most importantly, attitude. In order to make it, you have to really learn and accept the dogma so that it becomes second (or first) nature; so that your responses, verbal or otherwise, are convincingly "appropriate".
For someone who's trying hard and voluntarily to embrace the Program, that's a hell of a juggling act. For someone who's trying to maintain a grasp on their own view while convincing others, it's crazy making!
Either way, predicting staff and higher phase clients' response to everything that happens becomes a full time job. It's very much like what a battered woman has to do; keeping him from 'getting upset' becomes a full time job.
In the course of doing that, whether you intend to internalize it or not, you lose sight of your first, natural responses to a lot of things. You can watch, even take part in doing horrible damage to someone and sincerely not view it that way.
I'm sure you've all read of the numerous accounts of kids who were already dead before the staff and/or other clients realized they weren't faking. And you must think those kids and staff are monsters. And I can't disagree w/ that. But do you understand that they probably really don't know it? In their alternate reality, kids w/ legitimate grievances are like ghosts; some crazy people believe in them, but "we enlightened ones" know better. So when a kid is panting, yelling, running, acting panicked or angy or sick, the are not looking for a kid who needs assistance or medical care or something. Those kids are just figments of the coddling yuppie imagination. So they see what they believe in; a manipulative kid who's just faking.
That's why it happens again and again and why their supporter will go to any lengths to defend them. They simply unsee what they're doing. They're detached from reality in the most litteral of ways. Come the millennium,
month 12,
in the home of greatest power,
the village idiot will come forth to
be acclaimed the leader.
--Nostradamus
-
On 2004-12-31 15:15:00, Carey wrote:
"Ginger,
Both sides have an agenda and both sides are playing with peoples lives.
No, all sides have an agenda (there are far more than two sides to this story). That's because we're dealing w/ people and people always have motivations for what they do. There is no such thing as any human word or deed that is not backed by some agenda. Well, there is, but generally we view that kind of random, meaningless activity as at least neurotic.
You can make an educated guess about how reliable someone is by watching them over time. Have they been up front? Are their actions consistent w/ their stated agenda? (if they state one at all) Are their actions consistent w/ each other (some people are not intentionally deceptive, but merely confused)
When you say "those who are against the programs" are you talking about long-term survivors who have no current involvement w/ programs today? Or are you talking about people who favor some programs over others?
for nothing can keep it right but their own vigilant and distrustful superintendence.
--Thomas Jefferson
-
On 2004-12-31 15:20:00, Carey wrote:
Name calling again. Curse words at that. And you are calling me a B____. I think I got ya stirred. Come on, admit it. The truth shall set you free.....
"
If it makes you feel better Carey, believe what you want. It's a shame, because occasionally you make a good point but it ends up being lost on the fact that you're treat everyone with such disdain.
-
When you say "those who are against the programs" are you talking about long-term survivors who have no current involvement w/ programs today? Or are you talking about people who favor some programs over others?
I am talking about the individuals I have come in contact with over the last couple of years.
Hell, I am "against the programs."
-
On 2004-12-31 16:09:00, Carey wrote:
"When you say "those who are against the programs" are you talking about long-term survivors who have no current involvement w/ programs today? Or are you talking about people who favor some programs over others?
I am talking about the individuals I have come in contact with over the last couple of years.
"
Well that could include both groups she listed. Care to actually answer the question now?
-
If it makes you feel better Carey, believe what you want. It's a shame, because occasionally you make a good point but it ends up being lost on the fact that you're treat everyone with such disdain.
Do you speak for "everyone"? Maybe you think you do.
I know I don't. I wouldn't even claim to.
Did I make another "good point"?
-
On 2004-12-31 16:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 16:09:00, Carey wrote:
"When you say "those who are against the programs" are you talking about long-term survivors who have no current involvement w/ programs today? Or are you talking about people who favor some programs over others?
I am talking about the individuals I have come in contact with over the last couple of years.
"
Well that could include both groups she listed. Care to actually answer the question now?"
I think Ginger knows my answer. It doesn't matter if you do.
-
On 2004-12-31 16:13:00, Carey wrote:
"If it makes you feel better Carey, believe what you want. It's a shame, because occasionally you make a good point but it ends up being lost on the fact that you're treat everyone with such disdain.
Do you speak for "everyone"? Maybe you think you do.
I know I don't. I wouldn't even claim to.
Did I make another "good point"?
"
Yep, sure did. Just proved mine right there dear.
-
On 2004-12-31 16:15:00, Carey wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 16:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 16:09:00, Carey wrote:
"When you say "those who are against the programs" are you talking about long-term survivors who have no current involvement w/ programs today? Or are you talking about people who favor some programs over others?
I am talking about the individuals I have come in contact with over the last couple of years.
"
Well that could include both groups she listed. Care to actually answer the question now?"
I think Ginger knows my answer. It doesn't matter if you do."
and there again hon.
-
On 2004-12-31 12:39:00, spots wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 10:07:00, Dolphin wrote:
"Can you say without a doubt that there were abuses going on? Hearsay is one thing, but you even admitted you didn't witness any.
The knee-jerk definition of abuse is knocking some kid around, anywhere from cuffing them upside the head, to hog-tying them on a concrete floor for days on end. I feel it is incorrect to say abuse can only be categorized as physical beatings.
That said, I will relate what my grandaughter has said over the last year living with us, about what she witnessed or knew was happening at Casa by the Sea. BTW, I believe her for a lot of reasons beyond our blood relationship, mostly because what she sometimes-reluctantly mentions follows to a "T" the experiences of literally hundreds of other survivors I have listened to.
She personally spent a huge amount of time, more than two months, in solitary confinement when she first was entered into Casa. This was kept from her parent, the family rep flat-out lying about what was happening to her, with 6 of her first 8 letters being destroyed until she finally was able to write an acceptable "manipulation" letter, stating that "...this place is not what it seems". She does recognize the inequity of her punishments, especially the random, capricious nature of more days solitary punishment meted out by newly-minted higher level kids (who have absolutely NO business disciplining anybody, much less with the life-and-death circumstances Casa kids feared). My kid often says with chilling quietness that she was absolutely convinced she would die in Casa. She was 14 years old.
One girl in her dorm had spent most of her first year there in R&R, the aforementioned-hog-tying room. This girl had permanent scars on her chin from spending so much time resting it on the concrete floor.
Only days before my kid arrived, a girl had attempted an escape by scaling the high stucco wall surrounding the entire compound. Although my kid did not personally meet this girl, her exploits spread throughout the compound (hearsay?), with credible witnesses relating the girl had a crushed pelvis from her fall from the wall.
Would you consider it abuse to withold toilet paper, sanitary napkins, aspirin, etc.? This was done to children I personally know. Would you consider it abusive to deny people toilet privileges until they were forced to soil themselves? My own kid was denied orthodontic care for more than 8 months, and when *something* was finally done, it was done in the most cruel and terrifying manner. Interestingly, my kid tells of the trips to the Ensenada dentist, but really doesn't recognize or think of the mean, purposely-scarey events as abuse. She will, eventually.
These are credible instances of abuse, from a witness...and this was only on the girls' side, even though the boys' side of Casa was notorious for greater wrongs. I personally know one skinny 16yo boy who lost 25 pounds in 4 months at Casa, due directly to witheld food. This same boy, being somewhat large for his age, was recruited to drag boys to R&R, kicking and screaming, although he himself was never committed to that space. One boy I have spoken to suffered grevious physical injuries at High Impact, the facility that is-or-is[was]not WWASPS, including broken bones and teeth knocked through his lip.
My grandaughter saw several boys being force-marched back into the Casa compound after having been run up and down the steep mountainside across the freeway from the Casa site as punishment. One boy was vomitting from the exertion.
This is personal, credible testimony from someone who lives in my house. If you want more, just ask Cherish Wisdom about her daughter's experiences at Provo Canyon, or Buzzkill about her son's time at Dundee. How much personal testimony about *physical* abuse do you need to believe it happened? We're not even venturing into the mental anguish and abuse of the entire Program. Let's just say, you have been presented with evidence a jury would weep over (see the PURE trial), and to ignore it or challenge it is...well, stupid. "
So when is YOUR science fiction novel going to be published?
-
On 2004-12-31 16:15:00, Carey wrote:
I think Ginger knows my answer. It doesn't matter if you do."
No, I really don't. And it would be a logical error for anyone to paint both groups w/ the same broad brush.In order to live free and happily you must sacrifice boredom. It is not always an easy sacrifice.
-- Richard Bach
-
You see Ginger, you get someone like this anon who just can't stand for someone to come on here and try and have an intelligent debate. They are so threatened by a challenge that they start playing these "you're it", "no, you're it" games.
I challenged Spots on her "testimony" evidence. Then you Ginger post your thoughts, which I might add, raise questions in my mind. The questions give me food for thought. But then....someone, anon 1 & 2, jump in with their useless name calling and games. They don't have anything intelligent to say, just you B____, you A__, and then they follow it up with generalizations (disdain for everyone).
-
and here it is again. http://www.wwasprebuttal.com (http://www.wwasprebuttal.com)
i KNOW there's WAY more truth in this I'd be an idiot to say that some abuse doesn't happen in some programs or all of them, but it really is in how you define as abuse. A kid starving themselves and saying the "program wasn't feeding them." Blaming the program for separating them from their peers and saying that they didn't do anything to deserve it. The stuff goes on and on. And do you know why the majority of parents don't believe it? How could they? Remember all the lies before the admission? Again, the boy that cried wolf.
Do you think it's abuse when your child is taking dangerous drugs, having sex for money, cutting, punching holes in the walls, disrespecting their own lives? Probably not. I see that as the worst kind of abuse when an idiot parents chants...it's just normal teen rebellion. Talk about denial! Who's abusing whom?
-
On 2004-12-31 16:27:00, Carey wrote:
"You see Ginger, you get someone like this anon who just can't stand for someone to come on here and try and have an intelligent debate. They are so threatened by a challenge that they start playing these "you're it", "no, you're it" games.
I challenged Spots on her "testimony" evidence. Then you Ginger post your thoughts, which I might add, raise questions in my mind. The questions give me food for thought. But then....someone, anon 1 & 2, jump in with their useless name calling and games. They don't have anything intelligent to say, just you B____, you A__, and then they follow it up with generalizations (disdain for everyone). "
Oh, well golly gee Carey. Didn't know you got distracted so easily by a few idioms.
I'm just someone who has seen you continuously treat people who disagree with you this way. That's MY observation. MINE. I didn't speak for anyone else.
Now, answer the question Ginger asked please. If you already have in the time I've taken to type this, then you have my apologies.
-
Group 2.
-
Are you a parent who put your kid in a program?
Are you a parent who feels guilty?
Are you a parent who is looking to blame someone else for neglecting your child?
Just curious.[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-12-31 16:40 ]
-
On 2004-12-31 16:37:00, Carey wrote:
"Are you a parent who put your kid in a program?
Are you a parent who feels guilty?
Are you a parent who is looking to blame someone else for neglecting your child?
Just curious.[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-12-31 16:40 ]"
Fuck you Carey. I was a kid IN a program. I feel guilt about nothing. Freudian slip???
-
On 2004-12-31 16:47:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 16:37:00, Carey wrote:
"Are you a parent who put your kid in a program?
Are you a parent who feels guilty?
Are you a parent who is looking to blame someone else for neglecting your child?
Just curious.[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-12-31 16:40 ]"
Fuck you Carey. I was a kid IN a program. I feel guilt about nothing. Freudian slip???"
Which program?
-
On 2004-12-31 16:36:00, Carey wrote:
"Group 2."
Thank you. That wasn't so hard now was it?
-
Which program?
But, you really shouldn't dish it out, if you can't take it. So, are you as angry with your parents as you are with me?
-
Carrey, if you want to get any meaningful discussion out of this forum, you really have to let things roll off.
You're right, some participants in this particular discussion are trying strenuously to disrupt any kind of meaningful dialog. I don't think Spots is one of them.
LOTS of people involved in the broader debate, personally or or as an area of activism (both groups and others not specified) have gotten fooled, confused and/or allied themselves w/ others who have misrepresented (or been confused about) their agendas.
You've learned a lot over the past couple of years. So have I. So have some of them. Them others, well just don't respond to them.
Finally, even though some of Group 1 have allied w/ the wolf in sheep's clothing doesn't mean the have bad intentions or are stupid or will never discover their error. No sense picking enemies where you don't have too, ya' know?
Serious shit here! When you first came around, I thought something didn't add up because of the nature of the attack on you. It looked and smelled to me just exactly like a Program smear campaign. And, the more we discuss and learn about the topics (putting aside, personal attacks intemperate outbursts) the more it looks like that. But it really took a LOT of effort and time to pick out the occasional relavent detail from all the mud slinging.
Just ignore the bullshit. Honestly, your knowledge and insights are welcome here and so are everyone else's. You'll make more progress getting at the truth if you don't take part in the bullshit.
Every man has a property in his own person.
This nobody has any right to but himself.
The labor of his body and the work of his
hands are properly his.
--John Locke
-
On 2004-12-31 16:53:00, Carey wrote:
"Which program?
But, you really shouldn't dish it out, if you can't take it. So, are you as angry with your parents as you are with me?"
My mom, no. My dad, yes. Talks to people who don't agree with him exactly like you do.
-
On 2004-12-31 16:53:00, Antigen wrote:
Honestly, your knowledge and insights are welcome here and so are everyone else's.
See, I agree with this completely. Carey, you and I are much more on the same page than you could possibly imagine. I just can't stand to see someone who obviously has well thought out, intelligent points taint them with the way you deal with people. I agree with most of what you post and always get something out of it. But it gets to the point where you really discredit yourself. Whether or not you realize it, you can really come across as a self-serving, self-righteous, sancitmonious, pompass ass to people. And very often, to the people who are more "on your side" (for lack of a better term) than you know. When you do that, they tend not to listen to what you're saying...all they hear is HOW you're saying it.
-
I hear ya Ginger.
But sometimes you have to call it as you see it. You know why? Because ya have to make people realize that there are probably a whole lot of others who see it exactly the same.
I think there are probably a whole lot of people out in the real world who really don't give a rats ass about what is happening to rebellous teens. And when you get one who comes across like our Anon, well it makes people care even less. You see anon needs to convince those who are skeptical, those who question and debate issues like myself, that what is happening to teens is true. He/she will never do it by attacking people. All he/she will ever do is make them even more sure that these places should exist.
Now if the point of fornits is to just let people belly ache, then shut out those that raise questions. But, if the point of fornits is to make a difference then teens and parents against programs need to learn to debate without attacking.
-
On 2004-12-31 17:08:00, Carey wrote:
"I hear ya Ginger.
But sometimes you have to call it as you see it. You know why? Because ya have to make people realize that there are probably a whole lot of others who see it exactly the same.
I think there are probably a whole lot of people out in the real world who really don't give a rats ass about what is happening to rebellous teens. And when you get one who comes across like our Anon, well it makes people care even less. You see anon needs to convince those who are skeptical, those who question and debate issues like myself, that what is happening to teens is true. He/she will never do it by attacking people. All he/she will ever do is make them even more sure that these places should exist.
Now if the point of fornits is to just let people belly ache, then shut out those that raise questions. But, if the point of fornits is to make a difference then teens and parents against programs need to learn to debate without attacking. "
I could have written this about you Carey.
-
On 2004-12-31 17:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 16:53:00, Antigen wrote:
Honestly, your knowledge and insights are welcome here and so are everyone else's.
See, I agree with this completely. Carey, you and I are much more on the same page than you could possibly imagine. I just can't stand to see someone who obviously has well thought out, intelligent points taint them with the way you deal with people. I agree with most of what you post and always get something out of it. But it gets to the point where you really discredit yourself. Whether or not you realize it, you can really come across as a self-serving, self-righteous, sancitmonious, pompass ass to people. And very often, to the people who are more "on your side" (for lack of a better term) than you know. When you do that, they tend not to listen to what you're saying...all they hear is HOW you're saying it.
"
Is it about how I say it that is important? Or, is it about what is said that is important? I am not here trying to make friends. I am not trying to impress anyone.
I came on and posted that personal testimonies don't equate to evidence. I posted that I have talked to Buzzkills son. I was attacked for doing so. Why? Because someone felt threatned by my thoughts.
How better should I have started the conversation?
-
On 2004-12-31 17:08:00, Carey wrote:
Now if the point of fornits is to just let people belly ache, then shut out those that raise questions. But, if the point of fornits is to make a difference then teens and parents against programs need to learn to debate without attacking. "
Neither you nor I nor anyone else has the power to make everyone who posts here learn proper debate w/o attack. In fact, given the nature of the discusion, we can expect repeat visits from people who's primary means of communicating is through personal attack. I won't shut them out. I used to be one of them and they're welcome here. They don't think so because, in their world, disagreement or challenging questions are a sure precursor to ejection and humiliation. But honestly, all of you, even our perenial friend from Phoenix, are welcome here.
The point of Fornits is so damned much simpler than I think you realize. The point is to just lay it all out, warts and all, and to let the reader decide what to make of it.
Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
Thomas Jefferson, 1787
-
On 2004-12-31 17:13:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 17:08:00, Carey wrote:
"I hear ya Ginger.
But sometimes you have to call it as you see it. You know why? Because ya have to make people realize that there are probably a whole lot of others who see it exactly the same.
I think there are probably a whole lot of people out in the real world who really don't give a rats ass about what is happening to rebellous teens. And when you get one who comes across like our Anon, well it makes people care even less. You see anon needs to convince those who are skeptical, those who question and debate issues like myself, that what is happening to teens is true. He/she will never do it by attacking people. All he/she will ever do is make them even more sure that these places should exist.
Now if the point of fornits is to just let people belly ache, then shut out those that raise questions. But, if the point of fornits is to make a difference then teens and parents against programs need to learn to debate without attacking. "
I could have written this about you Carey. "
"You're it, no you're it"
So why didn't you. Cause you couldn't think of it on your own?
Oh yeah I forgot, you are just a kid.
-
On 2004-12-31 17:16:00, Carey wrote:
"
Is it about how I say it that is important? Or, is it about what is said that is important? I am not here trying to make friends. I am not trying to impress anyone.
I came on and posted that personal testimonies don't equate to evidence. I posted that I have talked to Buzzkills son. I was attacked for doing so. Why? Because someone felt threatned by my thoughts.
How better should I have started the conversation?
"
Both what you say and[/i] how you say it, albeit to a lesser degree. Of course this isn't about making friends, but damn, do you really have to be as rude as you come across?
No one felt threatened by what you said about speaking to her son. I don't even have the slightest clue about your argument with Spots, but more times than not(not always) I see you come off with such smugness. Again, it really distracts from the entirety of your message...which I mostly agree with.
It was only an observation. Apparently I hit a nerve. All I'm asking is that you learn to work and play well with others a little better.
-
On 2004-12-31 17:22:00, Carey wrote:
"You're it, no you're it"
So why didn't you. Cause you couldn't think of it on your own?
Oh yeah I forgot, you are just a kid.
"
All I can do is shake my head. I didn't write that with the slightest negative intention and you come back with this. My intent in posting that was to, again, point out that we really do have some common ground here and it looks like we're both thinking a lot more alke than we thought. I had hoped that might illicit a more civil response from you.
Wow. I apologize. You're issues much run quite a bit deeper than I had realized.
-
On 2004-12-31 17:22:00, Carey wrote:
"You're it, no you're it"
So why didn't you. Cause you couldn't think of it on your own?
Oh yeah I forgot, you are just a kid.
"
No Carey, I WAS a kid victimized by money hungry sadists. Not anymore.
-
Yes, and they took away your identity too, I guess. They still have you too frightened to speak for yourself, you speak as an anon. You still are a victim.
The more I read, the more we converse, the more I realize, how sad it is for you to be you.
Ginger, I think I will go now. This site is for "victims."
-
In my experience, it was always the kids with the most fucked up families who were "acting out" the most. The kids whose parents were happy, gentle, and well-adjusted were fine. When I was a teenager, I thought I would like to go to a mental institution, just to get away from my parents, who were always yelling, at their kids or at each other! But, instead of the real abuser in the family getting kicked out, I got shipped off to one of the american gulags. I was "acting out" in part because I was in a lot of pain over my home life.
Spots, sorry I didn't say it before, but your post a couple pages back about what your grandkid and the other kids went through really touched me. I am sad those kids had to go through that, but I am glad they have someone who will listen to them and take them seriously.
-
THIS is where I saw you first going after someone. From where I'm sitting, Spots was stating her opinion that if a jury heard this "testimony" (OK, I guess you could say she was guilty of misusing the term "evidence") that they would find it compelling. She listed in quite plain terms WHY she believed this and was, again, met with smugness and extreme hositlity. It amazes me because you are both against abusive treatment....correct??? I know that you differ from there on what programs are or aren't classified as abusive or whatever other semantics. Sometimes I can't tell because of the krassness of the 'debate' but I honestly don't have the time or patience to keep up with it. .
Just my PERSONAL opinion.
On 2004-12-31 13:50:00, Carey wrote:
"This is personal, credible testimony from someone who lives in my house. If you want more, just ask Cherish Wisdom about her daughter's experiences at Provo Canyon, or Buzzkill about her son's time at Dundee. How much personal testimony about *physical* abuse do you need to believe it happened? We're not even venturing into the mental anguish and abuse of the entire Program. Let's just say, you have been presented with evidence a jury would weep over (see the PURE trial), and to ignore it or challenge it is...well, stupid.
Spots, what evidence? Accusations? Personal Testimony? Accusations and personal testimony are not evidence. Have you not heard the personal testimony of those who work in, or run the programs. They too have plenty of positive things to say about what happens in the programs.
There are plenty of parents that have plenty of positive things to say (personal testimonies) as well. Their testimony contradict yours. And, their children's testimony contradictS that of your granddaughter's. Why do you not consider their "testimony" as good as evidence? Because it is not evidence! Nor is yours or anyone elses. Someone telling you how "great" the program is has not proven to you that it is "great". Yet its the same story they tell over and over again. Why do you not believe them? BECAUSE IT IS NOT EVIDENCE!
The accusations themselves may be true none the less, BUT THEY ARE NOT EVIDENCE. People telling the same stories over and over, does not make them true.
I don't know anything about Cherish Wisdom or her daughters experience at Provo, but I do know about Buzzkill and I do know Buzzkill wouldn't know reality if it slapped her smack dab in the face. And as for Buzzkill's son, I have talked to him personally. He called my house. I know where his head is at.
"
-
On 2004-12-31 17:43:00, Carey wrote:
"Yes, and they took away your identity too, I guess. They still have you too frightened to speak for yourself, you speak as an anon. You still are a victim.
The more I read, the more we converse, the more I realize, how sad it is for you to be you.
Ginger, I think I will go now. This site is for "victims." "
You really need to get over yourself. :lol:
-
On 2004-12-31 16:53:00, Carey wrote:
"Which program?
But, you really shouldn't dish it out, if you can't take it. So, are you as angry with your parents as you are with me?"
Sorry, missed this question amongst the bullshit. The answer is none of your fucking business.
-
in regards to the which program question. Already answered the other. :em:
-
Ok, let me be a little more clear.
Some people posting in these forums and in this thread have a vested interest in setting us all at each other's throats.
Of course I don't know that in that I can't prove it, imperically, to the standard of proof acceptable to a competent court. It's just my opinion. Take it, leave it or use it somehow. Your call.
Just don't fall for it. A lot of people around here don't like me very much. I've been called everything from a slut to a malfecant agent of the devil ot (get this!) a Mason! I don't give a shit! Really. Honestly. Call me uneducated, I'll consider the relavence to the topic. After all, I never finished the 10th grade. It might be relavent. Call me something I'm not, I don't care enough to answer. I really don't.
What I'm trying to say is DON'T FALL FOR IT! Just don't. None of you. You who have a vaguely bad notion of who and what Carey is, consider that you may have been influenced by some very ugly and obviously unfounded statements about her. Carey, please consider that everybody else here is just as vulnerable to that kind of impressions as you are.
I have an unfair advantage. I can make an educated guess about who's saying what. It's not that I'm posessed of superior intillect. Just that I have information that I can't give out w/o violating the trust of people who depend on that promise of reasonable privacy. (except, of course, in the case of Lee Colburn. In that case, I freely admit that I took advantage of an intemperate moment when he was strung out on rage and manipulated him into giving me permission to divulge his anonymous posts. And it was fun, I enjoyed it thoroughly!)
But I do look back and see where the initial hostile, inciteful posts come from and, more often than not, they come from people who, in other conversations, try (hard) to make WWASP programs seem kind, gentle and worthy.
Again, just don't fall for it, ok? You don't have half the enemies you think you do and you're not the enemy of half the people who think you are. Just ignore the obvious incitement and only address those people and those points that are worthy of your attention.
I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment, to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure.
--Clarence Darrow, American lawyer
-
***Ginger, I think I will go now. This site is for "victims."
Don't let the door hit you in your judgmental ass on the way out.
-
The evidence I witness was a video the Mexican police took of High Impact.
It was very compelling evidence.
-
On 2004-12-31 17:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-12-31 17:22:00, Carey wrote:
"You're it, no you're it"
So why didn't you. Cause you couldn't think of it on your own?
Oh yeah I forgot, you are just a kid.
"
All I can do is shake my head. I didn't write that with the slightest negative intention and you come back with this. My intent in posting that was to, again, point out that we really do have some common ground here and it looks like we're both thinking a lot more alke than we thought. I had hoped that might illicit a more civil response from you.
Wow. I apologize. You're issues much run quite a bit deeper than I had realized.
"
oops, should be 'your' issues. sorry.
I really meant this too. It's a shame that it got to this point. There is a lot more common ground here than not.