Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > PURE Bullshit and CAICA
WHAT HAPPENED TO CAICA DISCLAIMER?
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: ""Guest"" ---As long as Sue Scheff's Whitmore blog is still up; what's the big deal about Izzy taking her's down?
And Sheff's Whitmore blog advertises that 2 more are coming out:
one by Izzy and one more by Scheff.
Maybe Izzy taking down that Whitmore blog was just a ploy,, while she was yakking with Psy; her way of "drawing him into her web?"
--- End quote ---
Hello? In her own words in one of those emails to another parent, she raved about the Sudweeks and what good people they are.
Leopards don't change their spots.
If you think logically, it seems most likely she got in contact with Psy for one reason and one reason only - DAMAGE CONTROL.
IMO, Zehnder fools no one but herself - a common dilemma with persons who see only what they choose to see. I feel rather sorry for her but not enough to overlook what has been revealed on this forum and others about her integrity, or lack thereof, as the case may be.
Anonymous:
Think Izzy is simply using her vast legal experience to re-write that disclaimer to cover herself better? Could it possible get L O N G E R ? :-?
Anonymous:
Frankly, I see this all going away, if she removes the statement that she is a referral zone free, or at least that takes care of one of the problems.
Now that just leaves her boastings about being an adovate, while placing children in kinder, jentler programs, other than WWASP, or indirectly placing them through Sue Scheff, then I could see this all going away, at least until she's caught doing something else.
She needs to discontinue that aliance, and her aliance with the Sud's family, or this is not going away any time soon.
Anonymous:
No offense guest, but I think it is highly naive to think that if Izzy does X,Y and,Z she is off to the races.
You are failing to take into account the fact that a leopard does not change it's spots.
Izzy showed a fundamental "disconnect" in intregrity by virtue of ignoring the facts about PURE and the SUDS.
She can not claim ignorance because she was NOT ignornant of the facts.
She simply chose to ignore and or "spin them". Hell, she even went so far as to blame other parents and children. Accuse someone of having a "vendetta", etc. etc. etc. She withheld important details from the public regarding the SUDS background. She violated confidentiality. The list goes on.
That's extremely obvious, IMO.
Anonymous:
No offense taken. Those are all part of her problem too, agreed. However, my take was about the same that a, and b, are both lacking in integrity. Goes without saying don't cha' think?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version