Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Carey on February 04, 2004, 04:21:00 PM
-
ISAC your information is not accurate. You better go back and check your information. If you don't have the details and facts straight you will be seen as less than creditable.
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-04 13:22 ]
-
If only I had a dollar, for everytime that thought ran through my head! Thank you Cary, once again.
-
gee, carey, guess you investigated it ALL and could write hundreds upon hundreds of pages in reports. Puleez. :wave:
-
That was intelligent anon. Hundreds and hundreds of pages of information that has inaccuarcies is not important to you?
-
i happen to have first hand knowlege and personal experience regarding some of that information, so, sorry. i'm not willing to disregard it all cuz carry says so!
-
Anon, I did not tell you to disregard it. I told you that it contained some inaccurate information.
ISAC your information is not accurate. You better go back and check your information. If you don't have the details and facts straight you will be seen as less than creditable.
Then I went on to say that if they, ISAC, did not have the details and facts straight, they will be seen as less than creditable.
You see anon, that is a fact, nothing more nothing less. I am not trying to persuade you to think any differently than you already think. I was simply stating a fact...it contains inaccurate information.
-
On 2004-02-04 16:25:00, Carey wrote:
"Anon, I did not tell you to disregard it. I told you that it contained some inaccurate information. "
OK, OK....you didn't tell her to disregard it. :roll: It seems like you feel the need to respond to EVERY SINGLE POST no matter how innert the info or statement is. This argument is getting old. Carey...might I suggest that you post what you want and if someone takes it the wrong way or responds in an unkind manner.....LEAVE IT THE FUCK ALONE. I have no idea about the actual substance of the "debate", but I DO see that you can't seem to help responding to things that people post that YOU, YOURSELF say are ridiculous and have no value. If they are as inane as you say, then they'll be seen for what they are, but for you to continue this childishness (and I'm not saying you're alone in this, you're not) by having to respond to every damn post is just plain stupid. They're baiting you and you fall right into it.
I also feel that YOUR tone comes across as incredibly bitchy towards ANYONE that has a differing opinion than yours. Again, I don't have an opinion one way or the other as far as the substance of this goes, but just thought I'd share some observations with you from someone reading all these.
-
Ouch! :silly:
but I DO see that you can't seem to help responding to things that people post that YOU, YOURSELF say are ridiculous and have no value.
Could you be a little more specific? What was it that I said was "ridiculous" and what did I say "have not value?"
Sorry you don't like to see my posts...but then who said they are for you :smile:
Oh yeah...
They're baiting you and you fall right into it.
...nobody is baiting. I just like helping people out.
-
see....exactly what I mean. I don't think you're posts are for me....just some thoughts I thought I'd pass on.
-
Well, I think it's weird ISAC is selling information. Yeah, they probably spent alot of time and money doing their investigation, but there are other ways to keep the lights on. Also all the promotional hype on the website is a real turn off, even if it is well-deserved. My advice is don't toot your OWN horn so much. It is not professional and reminds me of the much reviled parent-referral-services who are notorious for falling our over themselves (self-adulation).
:roll:
-
On 2004-02-04 17:06:00, Carey wrote:
Could you be a little more specific? What was it that I said was "ridiculous" and what did I say "have not value?"
Sorry you don't like to see my posts...but then who said they are for you :smile: "
You may not have used the words "ridiculous" or "have no value".....but, you get what I'm getting at and you still have to split hairs!!!!!!!!!!!! This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about.
-
This argument is getting old. Carey...might I suggest that you post what you want and if someone takes it the wrong way or responds in an unkind manner.....LEAVE IT THE FUCK ALONE
Hey are you one of those control freaks? I think you are.
Remember this, it is important, the only person you can control is yourself. Why don't you just tell yourself you are in control and you don't have to read what I post. THAT WORKS REALLY WELL!!! Now you can be in control of that. OK :wave:
-
On 2004-02-04 17:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-02-04 17:06:00, Carey wrote:
Could you be a little more specific? What was it that I said was "ridiculous" and what did I say "have not value?"
Sorry you don't like to see my posts...but then who said they are for you :smile: "
You may not have used the words "ridiculous" or "have no value".....but, you get what I'm getting at and you still have to split hairs!!!!!!!!!!!! This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about."
Sheesh, Anon. Sounds like you have a hair up your a**. Who is baiting who, here?
:rofl:
-
Sorry I just can't resist...
You may not have used the words "ridiculous" or "have no value".....but, you get what I'm getting at and you still have to split hairs!!!!!!!!!!!! This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about
Look, it is important that when you make an accusation that you have the facts to back it up.
I really find this kinda funny.
Like I said, you can control what you read, but you can not control what I say....therefore you can just choose to opt out and not read what I post.
Is that a deal?
-
On 2004-02-04 17:10:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Well, I think it's weird ISAC is selling information. Yeah, they probably spent alot of time and money doing their investigation, but there are other ways to keep the lights on. Also all the promotional hype on the website is a real turn off, even if it is well-deserved. My advice is don't toot your OWN horn so much. It is not professional and reminds me of the much reviled parent-referral-services who are notorious for falling our over themselves (self-adulation).
:roll: "
Is ISAC doing investigative work on behalf of some lawfirm?
-
I just like helping people out.
"
You helped yourself when you took that 12,500 dopey.
-
Hell Anon, $12,500 is chump change compared to what these ed cons and independent referral agents charge for their "services". Read the court record, baby, it's a real eye-opener.
:lol:
-
You helped yourself when you took that 12,500 dopey.
See if you can answer this....
How does that make me "dopey"?
I think it just makes you angry....I don't think it makes me "dopey."
-
On 2004-02-04 17:26:00, Carey wrote:
"Sorry I just can't resist...
You may not have used the words "ridiculous" or "have no value".....but, you get what I'm getting at and you still have to split hairs!!!!!!!!!!!! This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about
Look, it is important that when you make an accusation that you have the facts to back it up.
I really find this kinda funny.
Like I said, you can control what you read, but you can not control what I say....therefore you can just choose to opt out and not read what I post.
Is that a deal?"
I read yours for apparently the same reason you read mine. I find you HYSTERICAL.
In my original post to you, I didn't think I was sarcastic or nasty to you....as I said before, just pointed out some observations. I feel like we ALL have a right to chime in here as you insist on carrying on a personal war with quite a few people here. Looks like you have a problem with anyone saying anything you don't like. I'll read what I feel like...especially if it's as entertaining as your posts.
You and your white horse enjoy your self-righteousness. I'll get my kicks watching you. :wave: To be quite honest, it looks like you're one of those people who needs a bandwagon to jump onto. Oooooops, forgot, it wasn't just that you needed a cause...you got quite a nice chunk of change out of it too now, didn't you?!?!
-
Excuse me for butting in, but you know what's dopey? The fact that people actually make money referring kids into programs they may or may not have ever even visited, themselves. What kind of a parent would think that this was a "valuable" service? Either a very gullible or very stupid parent, that's who. Shame, Shame, Shame!!!!!
-
This is how you come across to me......you may or may not have the right motives, but you really come across as a holier-than-thou bitch and anyone who doesn't realize that you are the one true champion of childrens' rights and bow down to your way of doing things is met with nothing but a consescending tone. You really may have a point in what you're saying, but the WAY you say it and HOW YOU COME ACROSS makes people want to slap you.
In my first post I clearly stated that you were not the only one at fault in your little war of words with people. I still believe that, but DAMN.......lighten up on people.....you're not the only one who cares about kids!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Good, now that we have gotten past the control issues you have, maybe you can actually contribute something of substance rather than just ranting and raving about the fact that you don't like my posts.
By the way, I have never had a problem with your posts. And yes, I do enjoy reading them. I do enjoy responding to them. I would never tell you to Shut the Fxxx UP. You know why because I would hate to miss something that you say that might be important. Everyone has a voice and everyone has a right to be heard...even you!
Now lets be honest though...
In my original post to you, I didn't think I was sarcastic or nasty to you....as I said before, just pointed out some observations.
Don't you think telling someone to Shut the Fxxx UP is nasty?
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-04 18:20 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-04 18:21 ]
-
On 2004-02-04 18:09:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Excuse me for butting in, but you know what's dopey? The fact that people actually make money referring kids into programs they may or may not have ever even visited, themselves. What kind of a parent would think that this was a "valuable" service? Either a very gullible or very stupid parent, that's who. Shame, Shame, Shame!!!!!"
::bigsmilebounce::
-
On 2004-02-04 18:13:00, Carey wrote:
"Good, now that we have gotten past the control issues you have, maybe you can actually contribute something of substance rather than just ranting and raving about the fact that you don't like my posts.
By the way, I have never had a problem with your posts. And yes, I do enjoy reading them. I do enjoy responding to them. I would never tell you to Shut the Fxxx UP. You know why because I would hate to miss something that you say that might be important. Everyone has a voice and everyone has a right to be heard...even you!"
That's fine, but please, think about what I said about your condescending tone. You really may have some great things to contribute but because you belittle people (i.e. telling me about my supposed control issues)it takes away from YOUR credibility.
-
That's fine, but please, think about what I said about your condescending tone. You really may have some great things to contribute but because you belittle people (i.e. telling me about my supposed control issues)it takes away from YOUR credibility."
I guess what I'm trying to say is.....don't be such a bitch, you're points/arguments will go much further.
-
I would never tell you to Shut the Fxxx UP.
Don't you think telling someone to Shut the Fxxx UP is nasty?
I didn't tell you to shut the fuck up....I said leave it the fuck alone.
-
Another example of you taking something that has ONE GRAIN of truth and twisting it to fit your scenario.
-
I don't see Carey as being bitchy. She has been the target of malicious slander, veiled threats and downright despictable personal attacks. She has also apparently been sued, as has Ginger, by Ms. Scheff, who (correct me if I'm wrong) someone said in an earlier post "does not read Fornits".
Go figure. :roll:
-
I can see that nothing much has changed here. There really should be a separate forum for this Litigious material..and bitching..mudslinging, etc...
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
:skull: :skull: :skull:
-
On 2004-02-04 18:39:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I don't see Carey as being bitchy. She has been the target of malicious slander, veiled threats and downright despictable personal attacks. She has also apparently been sued, as has Ginger, by Ms. Scheff, who (correct me if I'm wrong) someone said in an earlier post "does not read Fornits".
Go figure. :roll:
"
See???? Now THAT's how to disagree without the "tone".
-
O.K., so what information is incorrect in the report? You didn't specify that.
-
Cary with what you have done with the hard drives and selling WWASP the info and also having lunch with their lawyers you have no crediablity with me. ISAC did the reserch and you did not. You are just a WWASIE pissed because of the report get over it. Go back to the WWASP buliten board where you belong with all the other messed up WWASPIE'S!
Also you cant acuse me of being one of Sue's flunkies either you all know who I am and where i stand. I just speak the cold hard truth nothing else!
-
Devlin, now you are making statements that are false. But, hey I can't control what you say. And further, I don't want to or need to.
-
O.K., so what information is incorrect in the report? You didn't specify that.
I second that. You may or may not be right but we've had three and a half pages of mudslinging. Can we please get to the facts of the matter?
-
Carey had lunch with WWASP too. There is no end to her bad behavior!
-
First, I have never had lunch, dinner or any other meal with anyone from WWASP or any of their attorneys. I did give them my computer, as already stated, and I chose to meet with them in a public place, the place happen to be a restaurant.
Someone, and we know who that is, wants it to look like WWASP and their attorneys and I are best buds. Well that ain't the case.
Second, the information on the boys in at least one of those articles is innacurate. I have not finished reading the entire piece of work put together by ISAC.
You may or may not be right but we've had three and a half pages of mudslinging.
Who has been slinging the mud? Not me!
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 06:54 ]
-
Who has been slinging the mud? Not me!
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 06:54 ]"
"Hey are you one of those control freaks? I think you are.
Remember this, it is important, the only person you can control is yourself. Why don't you just tell yourself you are in control and you don't have to read what I post. THAT WORKS REALLY WELL!!! Now you can be in control of that. OK "
" Good, now that we have gotten past the control issues you have, maybe you can actually contribute something of substance rather than just ranting and raving about the fact that you don't like my posts. "
Carey...this kind of stuff is what I'm speaking of.....the passive aggressive condenscending and belittling like you're just so above it all. THAT'S what people seem to be taking offense at.
-
That's not mud slinging. Mud slinging is calling names, telling people to "leave it the F alone, etc. etc.
I asked a question, "are you a control freak?" Then I stated what I thought. Of course that was after I was told to "leave it the F alone."
But lets not debate that issue. Besides that is really not what makes everyone mad. What makes everyone mad is the fact that they can not argue thier case....I am guessing that is probably because they don't have one.
-
That was me.
One more thing, what you really don't like anon is the fact that when it is dished out I can take. Problem is you can't do the same.
-
This report has been in the works for a long time and there has obviously been alot of hard work put into it. If you have a discrepancy, why didn't you contact ISAC instead of coming on this board to make it known? I'm sure that they would have made corrections if they were warranted. Again, why not notify them instead of posting the thread on fornits? I really don't understand this. The comment you made initially would lead someone that didn't know what was going on to believe the whole report was inacurate and they lacked credibility. Please think before you post so as not to lead to any misunderstandings.
-
Piss off Carey....it's all too evident that it is impossible to carry on any kind of a debate of the issues with you without your snotty little digs.....to be honest with you it's how people used to talk to me in the program whenever I didn't bow down to them. I supported you before, but I have lost all respect for you. Your intentions may or may not be honorable, but you are sinking to the level of those that you protest so much.
I started this out saying that you were not the only one at fault in this little war and I still believe that but DAMN....your like one of my kids that just keeps it going. The tone you come across with is one that is just dripping with sweet venom. Just like when the group would rip someone apart then tell them how much they love them and they're "helping" them. You're one of those martyrs that insists on everyone acknowledging how they suffer all in the name of helping (back of the hand laid gently across the forehead while sighing "don't mind me" :roll: ) Seems to me that you need this little cause to fill some kind of void in your life.
Go ahead, jab at me some more. As I said before, it's of no use to continue to try and have a meaningful dialog with you.
Someone said before that this seems like more of a revenge/anger thing with your ex than anything else. From the way you come across here, you seem vindictive...but you do it in the smarmy passive aggressive manner.
-
I did think before I posted it. I am sure that with what little I read, and the inaccuracies I found, there very well could be more. My point is what ISAC has posted is not "God's Word." I am just trying to tell people that although ISAC would like you to think that it is "God's Word," IT IS NOT. Thats all.
There really is not anything on ISAC's site, other than the State Department's warning, that carries any weight.
ISAC is only interested in telling you what they want you to hear. ISAC's web site is run similar to the WWASP website. They post what they want,they advertise what they want, they tell you only what they think you need to know.
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 11:41 ]
-
ISAC should reconsider the way they promote themselves and their goals and objectives. Selling information gives an appearance of profiting from their non-profit investigation. If people need and want this info, they should MAKE A DONATION, not be forced to cough up a few bucks. ISAC also has a problem blowing their own horn, and like it or not, that is hurting their credibility.
-
On 2004-02-05 11:38:00, Carey wrote:
"I did think before I posted it. I am sure that with what little I read, and the inaccuracies I found, there very well could be more. My point is what ISAC has posted is not "God's Word." I am just trying to tell people that although ISAC would like you to think that it is "God's Word," IT IS NOT. Thats all.
There really is not anything on ISAC's site, other than the State Department's warning, that carries any weight.
ISAC is only interested in telling you what they want you to hear. ISAC's web site is run similar to the WWASP website. They post what they want,they advertise what they want, they tell you only what they think you need to know.
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 11:41 ]"
Good thing about ISAC, they didn't take $12,500 like you Carey. You are such a sick woman!
-
There goes the mud slinging again. :lol:
-
On 2004-02-05 12:14:00, Carey wrote:
"There goes the mud slinging again. :lol: "
Actually, just the truth Carey.
-
On 2004-02-04 17:10:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Well, I think it's weird ISAC is selling information. Yeah, they probably spent alot of time and money doing their investigation, but there are other ways to keep the lights on. Also all the promotional hype on the website is a real turn off, even if it is well-deserved. My advice is don't toot your OWN horn so much. It is not professional and reminds me of the much reviled parent-referral-services who are notorious for falling our over themselves (self-adulation).
:nworthy:
-
Again, my question was "Why didn't you notify them of the error instead of posting it on fornits?" I should think that going to the source would be more suitable than posting a thread about it or did you have other intentions when you started the thread? Maybe you were hoping to have others see them as liars?
I don't believe that ISAC would like anyone to believe that their word is "God". I have been on their website and don't see the similarity to WWASP. Could you please explain? What beef do you have with them? You come across as being very upset with them. Especially when you compare them to WWASP. Why would you compare a child advocacy group to that of WWASP?
-
On 2004-02-05 11:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Piss off Carey....it's all too evident that it is impossible to carry on any kind of a debate of the issues with you without your snotty little digs.....to be honest with you it's how people used to talk to me in the program whenever I didn't bow down to them. I supported you before, but I have lost all respect for you. Your intentions may or may not be honorable, but you are sinking to the level of those that you protest so much.
No, she's pointing out the exact same thing that many others have thought and posted before, Bill.
I started this out saying that you were not the only one at fault in this little war and I still believe that but DAMN....your like one of my kids that just keeps it going. The tone you come across with is one that is just dripping with sweet venom. Just like when the group would rip someone apart then tell them how much they love them and they're "helping" them. You're one of those martyrs that insists on everyone acknowledging how they suffer all in the name of helping (back of the hand laid gently across the forehead while sighing "don't mind me" :roll: ) Seems to me that you need this little cause to fill some kind of void in your life.
Wow, the POT calling the kettle black again! Little cause? Oh please, this little cause is obviously your income!
I'd say Cary's cause would be her children.While, isn't your revenge?
Go ahead, jab at me some more. As I said before, it's of no use to continue to try and have a meaningful dialog with you.
Pardon me, but you seem to be the one jabbing!
Someone said before that this seems like more of a revenge/anger thing with your ex than anything else. From the way you come across here, you seem vindictive...but you do it in the smarmy passive aggressive manner."
*Tsk* *Tsk*
Look in the mirror ISACers. You have all been guilty of stiring up enough crap on this forum and Straight's forum, to be comparable to the Elan posters. :roll:
Get some class!
-
Again, my question was "Why didn't you notify them of the error instead of posting it on fornits?" I should think that going to the source would be more suitable than posting a thread about it or did you have other intentions when you started the thread? Maybe you were hoping to have others see them as liars?
I did explain it. You just didn't get it.
Here it is again:
ISAC is only interested in telling you what they want you to hear. ISAC's web site is run similar to the WWASP website. They post what they want,they advertise what they want, they tell you only what they think you need to know.
That is why I posted it here. Because here, everyone is welcome and everyone has a voice.
-
That was me.
-
Isaac claims the seed was started by a synanon member. No evidence this is true.
Isaac claims the modality used by Wwasp was developed by The Straight. Not true. The wwasp is related to CEDU,not the straight, and uses a modality much different than the straight did.
Isaac has made up a name for this modality which credits the Straight for the entire teen industry. The roots of WWasp predate the straight by almost ten years.
and on and on.............
Isaac is full of shit and needs to be started over.
-
Isaac attempts to connect the straight and Wwasp by saying Mel sembler was a fundraiser for the republican party and a wwasp person is a republican policital fundraiser in Utah. f
How weak is that? ISAAC is fast and loose with their "facts".
Isaac, I am not sure why you do what you do, but whatever it is you are doing, you are not doing it well. I would hope that your intentions are better than your end results. Your "research" final result is to make the entire body of critics of the teen help industry look less credible.
-
Apparently, Carey (forgetting to log in again) said:
ISAC is only interested in telling you what they want you to hear. ISAC's web site is run similar to the WWASP website. They post what they want,they advertise what they want, they tell you only what they think you need to know.
There is nothing wrong with publishing "edited" information on your own site, such as ISAC may have done. There certainly should be no obligation for such a child advocacy group, most of whom are 40-something Straight survivors, to provide rebuttal or alternative "WWASPS-is-really-a-good-thing" information. One would think that, understanding that ISAC stands for "International Survivors' Action Committee" would hint toward their anti-behavior-modification attitude.
ISAC has done a great service in publishing many first-person abuse statements, in publishing the tangle of suspicious businesses that make up WWASPS, in publishing records of closures, lawsuits, etc. against WWASPS, in providing volunteer support folks who can talk a victim (in my case, I as a relative with a child incarcerated incommunicado in WWASPS), in facilitating communication between victims and various media and government officials anxious to find "the other side of the story" opposing WWASPS' marketing blitz. Their site is huge, if you spend time looking at all the document links, and the State Department warning is the tip of the iceberg, only visible to those who choose to slid lightly through the information instead of working hard to find what ISAC has gathered together.
To say that "ISAC's has it's facts wrong and shouldn't be trusted" is like saying "The Pentagon is spending money poorly and it should have its funding cancelled". Say something specific, or don't say anything at all, because your blanket statement doesn't mean diddly.
Well, here we are on page 5 or so of this thread, and Carey has managed to take a reference to ISAC's information and turn it into a cussing match. For those still with us, please take a few minutes to check out the ISAC's site. The wealth of information available may help you decide whether you really want to turn your child over to the WWASPS organization or not.
-
Just who the hell our these ISAAc people anyway?
They claim "25 years of investigative...." and "drug free workplace" among other things. Yet I am sure they are a new group. Then they chide a wassp group for doing the same thing, having a recent incorporation and claiming years and years of experience..
Is there even a workplace or is this just a rouse? How can you be help to a "drug free workplace" when there is no workplace? Isn't the ISAAC address someone's house?
They claim to have "health professionals, etc.." like they have a huge "staff" yet none of these staff members are listed.
Interesting.
I have a vision of one or two, or even a handfull of former straight people trying to generate an image of this huge staff with all this investigative experience.
I doubt it..
Once again, there is a HUGE crediblity problem here that isn't helping anything but apparantly the ego of a very few people and discrediting the hard work of people legitimately trying to stop the abusive teen help industry.
Message to ISAAC, you don't say anything until you are absoulutey sure of your facts....EVER. Then you carefully understate your position. Never assume or interpolate facts during an "investigation" and never release these facts until they can be verified by a third party source.
Otherwise, what you have are "factoids", a rather dubious acheivement. Just because you write something down in report format does not make it credible.
:silly:
-
ISAC is only interested in telling you what they want you to hear. ISAC's web site is run similar to the WWASP website. They post what they want,they advertise what they want, they tell you only what they think you need to know.
Hey ISAC and Spots about that statement...the one I posted again right here...well it was an answer to someones question. More importantly, it was my answer to a question that was asked of me.
Someone asked me why I did not address the inaccuarcies I found on your site to you or anyone else at ISAC. Well that was my answer.
You can toot your horn all you want, but it has nothing to do with my answer to the anons question as to why I posted the statement here. Like I said I posted here because this is where people, INDIVIDUALS that is, are able to do so without any censorship.
Spots Apparently, Carey (forgetting to log in again) said
Hmmm...maybe that is why I followed the post with and "That was me." Maybe you just got lost on that. Might have been to hard for you to follow.
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 15:48 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 15:48 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 15:50 ]
-
Here we go round the mulberry bush, again.
Carey, you started this thread with:
?ISAC your information is not accurate. You better go back and check your information. If you don't have the details and facts straight you will be seen as less than creditable.?
This comment is obviously a confrontation directed specifically at ISAC on this, a public forum. What was your intention? I believe it?s more of your typical MO designed to incite argument, rather than share useful information.
What benefit did the comment have to the general public?
If your purpose was to disclose information that you believe to be inaccurate, then why not address it that way? Why not spell out the inaccuracies you found. Dear Public Readers at Fornits, I read a couple of pages at ISACs and discovered that they have a few things wrong about my specific situation. They are 1) blah, blah, blah 2) blah, blah, blah.
You make a vague comment and present NO facts and then have the nerve to ask someone else to be ?a little more specific?? And irony of ironies, you later defend again with this comment, ?Look, it is important that when you make an accusation that you have the facts to back it up.? I was wondering, why doesn?t that apply to you? Do you feel you have enough credibility to make blanket accusations and people will believe them without evidence or rationale?
This anon hit the mark with this, ?I should think that going to the source would be more suitable than posting a thread about it or did you have other intentions when you started the thread? Maybe you were hoping to have others see them as liars??
It appeared again that you had made a public accusation with no substance and defended it with, ?...nobody is baiting. I just like helping people out.? Helping out WHO? Who was the opening accusation helpful to?
And finally after at least two requests, you make this confession, ?Second, the information on the boys in at least one of those articles is innacurate. I have not finished reading the entire piece of work put together by ISAC.?
And who the fuck is ?everyone? in this comment, ? What makes everyone mad is the fact that they can not argue thier case....? NO.. that is not what makes ?EVERYBODY? HERE mad. SOMEbodies are mad/frustrated/disgusted/bored about/with the fucked up way you communicate on a public forum.
And then these lame and contradictory comments:
"I am sure that with what little I read, and the inaccuracies I found, there very well could be more.
There really is not anything on ISAC's site, other than the State Department's warning, that carries any weight.?
That?s a pretty bold accusation. Where are the ?facts? to back it up? Or, is it yet another exaggeration? And you warn others as to how they might gain/maintain credibility? Your accusation had NO credibility until you posted that personal information about YOUR SONS was wrong. The rest of your comments are further accusations that haven?t been proven and remain your opinion.
I know little about ISACs and after reading all your posts, know not a thing more, except that they may have gotten some of your information wrong. What a long-ass thread to read to get to that conclusion. THAT is the point SOME people are making. You've been asked on numerous ocassions to make your accusation and present the "facts" to substantiate it.
-
Yes, who are the powers-that-be at ISAC and why would anyone trust information for sale? Really baaaaaaad move.
-
(QUOTE) Message to ISAAC, you don't say anything until you are absoulutey sure of your facts....EVER. Then you carefully understate your position. Never assume or interpolate facts during an "investigation" and never release these facts until they can be verified by a third party source. Otherwise, what you have are "factoids", a rather dubious acheivement. Just because you write something down in report format does not make it credible. (QUOTE)
Damn good advice, Anon.
-
Anon,
ISAC your information is not accurate. You better go back and check your information. If you don't have the details and facts straight you will be seen as less than creditable.
Nothing has changed, still a valid point!
My intention and the benefit - To let others know that what they find on ISAC is not the whole truth nothing but the truth....
Carey, you started this thread with:
?ISAC your information is not accurate. You better go back and check your information. If you don't have the details and facts straight you will be seen as less than creditable.?
This comment is obviously a confrontation directed specifically at ISAC on this, a public forum.
If your purpose was to disclose information that you believe to be inaccurate, then why not address it that way?
Because that is not the way I choose to address it.
Do you feel you have enough credibility to make blanket accusations and people will believe them without evidence or rationale?
Wow, now that is a good one. That is what you people do constantly!!!!!! ISAC'S whole site is nothing more than accusations...there is not a shred of evidence on it. They have one of Amberly's 3 sworn statements on it. How creditable is that? It is not. She is a known liar. But hey, if that is the best they have,then that is the best they have.
And you ask if I am creditable, well I have never lied. If you beleive Amberly, a known liar, then you don't beleive in truth you beleive in what you want to beleive in. Hey, but you know what, I can't control that.
I am helping out. I may not be helping you, but I am helping out. The people who read Fornets will be able to hear not just your side or the other side, but they will hear from someone who thinks outside the "boxes." I am trying to help people to think independently.
Sorry I have upset you so very badly...get over it, already!! :wave: Remember, keep your cool and stay in control of yourself...the only person you can control is you!
:wink:
ISAC is only interested in telling you what they want you to hear. ISAC's web site is run similar to the WWASP website. They post what they want,they advertise what they want, they tell you only what they think you need to know.
The inaccuacies are there! :wink:
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2004-02-05 19:44 ]
-
On 2004-02-05 19:31:00, Carey wrote:
creditable.
you'd be a little more credible if you learned how to spell credible. Please take note. :rofl: :rofl:
-
For anyone that has ever been on the wwasp website, the parent forum, you KNOW that "they" don't just say what you wantto hear. There are hundreds of parents and teens posting on there every single day. They only time someone is banned is when they attack someone (or like Karen Z, attacking a religious group) but other than that you can say anything you please.
ISAC seems to have chosen the biggest target they could find and I agree it's filled with allegations and heresay, not proven facts. Some good info, some really, really bad info relating to all behavior change programs.
People will believe what they want, but to be responsible, check it out with local law enforcement or local physicians, therapists, etc.
-
Anon, BIG WHUP. If Carey's spelling bothers you so much, you should check out the PURE website and take them to task for their poor grammar and spelling skills.
:flame:
-
Once again, ISAAC is full of shit and needs to be come down on, take a dose of "confrontation therapy" and then have their program started over.
ISAAC, your little group isn't working thier steps correctly.
:grin:
Seriously, you guys resemble that of which you fight...a dogmatic group of cultish people that only hear themselves talking...
Get some facts, get a clear cause, and stop pretending you are this huge organization with years of experience. You are a new, relatively small group of ex straightings that are about to get in way over your heads.
-
(QUOTE) Seriously, you guys resemble that of which you fight...a dogmatic group of cultish people that only hear themselves talking...(QUOTE)
::bigsmilebounce:: ::rocker::
-
It is not my spelling that bothers you, it is what I have to say. But I guess if all that you can and know how to pick at is my spelling, well then, that is all that you can do and that is all that you know. :eek: :eek:
You are right to the other anon about ISAC not being a big organization, it is only a few individuals one of who I have personal experience with, Marti Heath. This is an individual who has overstepped her bounds...significantly!
-
Carey,
You say ISAC's information is not accurate, prove it. Do you have REAL EVIDENCE to back up your claim of inaccurate information?
-
Ok if ISAC wants to be accurate they can start by posting all of Amberly's statements, not just the one they like. It is very misleading to post limited information, unless of course one is trying to mislead.
There are other things that are not true on ISAC's website. I will disclose those in court. Remember, I am being sued in an attempt to keep me from exposing all that I know. Once I get through that, I will be glad to share it with you.
-
http://www.isaccorp.com (http://www.isaccorp.com)
This domain has temporarily been disabled.
To restore the domain, contact your Customer Support.
:???:
-
What exactly does that mean?
-
What exactly does that mean?
WWASP doesn't like the report and has served ISAC's ISP with an injunction?
Just guessing
-
Anon,
Your comments about the BBS Parent Forum is a blantant lie.
My experience when I was participating in that Program was just the opposite from what you stated.
I say many people expelled from the BBS forum for voiceing their concerns, mistrust,their true insight into what was transpiring in seminars.
Their concerns with the lack of communication from family reps and directors.Concerns with their child's facility.The on going obvious(which was so obvious at the time)cultish lingo,attitude of the Program parents.
Unless something has drastically changed since my many,many months as a program parent,three seminar graduate,your statements are incorrect.
Randy immediately removes anyone who offers concerns.Expresses concerns.
That is how they keep the delusion going.
No negative is ever allowed from normal thinking,functioning parents.
The lie is perpetrated with "trust your family rep.Work your program let your child work theirs."
Change the subject:
It'snt intersting how KK justifies any and all complaints of abuse with the "kids are liars."
What will he say whey that one does'nt fly anymore.
The ignorance is so obvious.
He must have forgotten his newspaper quote from Denver. That is the only truthful thing I have experienced him to have said.
BTW Where is their PR group to hide behind.
-
My experience as a forum participant (R&R forum only [Resource Realizations, the seminar marketing group]) was that the forums themselves are probably 75% sham. Any time I went onto the R&R site, it ALWAYS listed AT LEAST 3-5 people online at the same time, whether it was 12 noon or 3:15AM. There would frequently be a change/addition in number of participants online, but there would be no indication of additional folks submitting messages. Messages were old, and a new single message each week was the norm. Granted, this site is not the busier BBS one, but there still is some traffic. However, other than the gushy effusive "Love and Hugs to all my fellow XXX seminar participants in San Diego [or wherever]. This weekend was AWESOME!!!", the real posts were sporadic and infrequent. Two times mothers posted about uncomfortable feelings from their kids' letters from Dundee. Following immediately were rah-rah letters from other moms (or staff???)...you know, let the kid work it out, he is lying, etc. I forwarded these mother's email to former Dundee parents, and the forum parents were invited to pursue the information if they so desired. I don't know if they did...but I do know that Dundee was shut down for abuse.
In this Fornits thread, I was stunned by Anon posting that *hundreds* of parents post to the BBS every day, and that they can say anything negative they want. I adamantly disagree with that, based on the reports of parents who were there. I did not have access to the BBS; it required a password and student number. Oh, BTW, our grandaughter ocassionally refers "jokingly" to herself as Number 4, her ID number at Casa, used instead of her given name. Makes her sound like something out of the old Patrick McGoowan TV show "The Prisoner", which was about as creepy as any WWASPS facility.
As a testament to the incredible gullibility of WWASPS parents, they may really believe that *hundreds* of parents post every day about the kids they cannot talk to directly, nor send mail to directly, nor check on personally...the kids who have been warehoused "off-site". When I went to the linked site offered on this thread, it turned out to be a password-protected front page. Why did the Anon even bother to post this page? Anyway, that site listed 58 people online when I was there. 58 people??? At midday??? Out of 2000 kids incarcerated, 58 parents are talking with each other on a Tuesday at noon??? This is really stupid, but, if you believe that, then you probably also believe all the fantastic, gushy, desperate plaudits in The Source (each "story" written in the same syntax, the same verbage, the same style...hhmmm...as the editor. What a coincidence!)
BTW, how did I get on the R&R forum site? I asked for a password, and was given one. Simple as that. On the Casa by the Sea site, some areas are public, but others, including photos of the kids, are password protected. My kid said that once a month, they were all rounded up by family, given new clean uniforms (khaki and white, not the navy sweats that "Worksheets" kids live in), posed on bleachers like a grade-school class picture, photographed, and then marched back to Worksheets [or wherever]. So much for checking on the condition of your kid via an Internet home page.
Anyway...I've become a horrible cynic, but WWASPS has tutored me well. Don't believe anything, especially when it is hidden behind the smoke and mirrors of WWASPS.
-
Ken Kay told me I was put off the BBS b/c I had pulled my son, many months prior to my booting. He Insisted this was the reason why, and that it had nothing to do with my final post. We exchanged a good deal of email about this.
I maintain it was because of my final post; which was Not an attack on any religion. I had expressed concern that the students were being presented with the Book of Mormon; which was denied. But what got me booted was when I ask what chance a Catholic Family Rep had of ever working their way up to director? I was off the board with in moments of that final post.
What I found Most interesting, was how upset the BBS ers were with me for bringing up 'the Mormon thing', as it was called; while totally ignoring my expressed concern about the realities of OP.
I also find it intersting, that after all this time - over a year now, you still troll boards and whine about me and that final post!!
Amazing.
God's Peace -
KarenZ
-
Why doesn't ISAAC step up and list the "members" that belong to this "drug free workplace"???? Just who is doing these "investigations". Is it Marti Heath as suggested by Cari or someone else. Is it really many, many many people..congressmen, health professionals, business people. Just who are these folks? Step up and take a bow and take credit for your reports.
You know, when you demand crediblity of others, you must have it yourself. You cannot shine the light on others when your own statements can be brought into question and when you pretend to be something you aren't. I think the idea behind ISAAC is a good one, but the application of this Idea by these people stinks to high heaven.
Issac, GET ON THE FIRST ROW, BACKS STRAIGHT, EYES TO THE FRONT, YOU ARE BEING STARTED OVER.
:grin:
-
I logged onto the site a few minutes ago without any problems. You all need to calm down and get a grip. :scared:
-
Oh gee, thanks Anon. What would we do without someone to tell us when it's time to get a grip,
even though the website was apparently M.I.A. for awhile, dipstick.
:rofl:
-
Where is the proof that Congressman Miller said this:
http://isaccorp.com/wwasp/BethalBoys/bethalboys.html (http://isaccorp.com/wwasp/BethalBoys/bethalboys.html)
-
ISAC, do you not see the wisdom in providing documenation to SUPPORT your statements? This is what people are talking about. Personally, I have no reason to doubt the sincerity of your mission as stated on your website but question the use of general or broad statements such as the one about Congressman Miller in conjunction with the information contained on your website. You are essentially intimating that Congressman Miller gave you a directive to release information to the public but provide no documentation to support this statement as factually correct.
-
ISAC you say on your site:
We wish to be fair to all parties involved, and there is no intent whatsoever to present inaccurate information.
Well then, in all fairness to all parties involved, add all three of Amberly's sworn statements to your report.
-
Anon wrote:
They only time someone is banned is when they attack someone (or like Karen Z, attacking a religious group) but other than that you can say anything you please.***
Come on, why would WWASP or anyone associated with them give two hoots if someone "attacked a religious group" unless it happened to be a religious group that was near and dear to their heart, and/or part of the program?
What exactly did KarenZ say that was perceived as an attack? You all have a history here of accusing people of attacking when in fact they are simply disagreeing. Is this more of the same?
She maintains that she expressed a concern and asked a legitimate question. Prove her wrong, or quit wasting people's time.
-
Heck, I'd be more worried about putting my kid in a program owned or operated by ex-Mormons like those who belong to the FLDS sect. Polygamists in charge of a program for troubled teens would not sit well with me at all. No sireee. Those folks belong in jail because polygamy is morally reprehensible and absolutely illegal.
-
Proof?
Ha, there isn't even the slightest suggestion other than a self serving statement!
-
On 2004-02-06 13:32:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Proof?
Ha, there isn't even the slightest suggestion other than a self serving statement!
"
Uh, can you be more specific here? What self-serving statement?
-
The statement that has now disapeared. You know, the one one their website that said a congressman had asked them to publicly release the information they had on WWASP.
Ahemm.....I SINCERELY DOUBT IT. We are back to square one with ISAAC's credibility problem.
-
Uh, here it is, off there website...
PRESS RELEASE NOTICE:
ISAC TO RELEASE ONE OF THE LARGEST INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS EVER DONE IN U.S. HISTORY REGARDING A TREATMENT ORGANIZATION .
ORIGINALLY PART OF THIS REPORT WAS TO BE GIVEN TO LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS ONLY BUT CONGRESSMAN MILLER HAS AGREED THAT THE RELEASE SHOULD BE COMPLETELY PUBLIC.
THIS REPORT WILL BE RELEASED IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE.
The Report Will Be Posted On This Page.
You believe it if you want. I would have to hear "congressman Miller's version myself straight from the horses mouth.
-
Law Enforcement Officals? I hope this is not in reference to the Dept. of Justice. Didn't the DOJ issue a press release or something saying there would be no federal investigation b/c these are private schools/programs?
:scared:
-
ISAC, can you answer my question as to whether this report was turned over to the DOJ or any other federal or state government offical? This is very confusing.
-
HERE, check this out from the ISAAC websit
e
__________________________________________
"ALL ISAC Staff donate a portion of their salaries to ISAC on a bi-weekly basis. The entire ISAC team is dedicated to saving the children and often fund all of ISAC projects.
ISAC's Executive Branch is made up of business owners, paralegals, private investigators, professionals, medical professionals, and survivors of abusive programs. The Executive Branch has well over twenty five years experience at both investigations and the investigations of abusive treatment facilities.
ISAC does not hold any political or religious views. ISAC's staff is held to a drug free workplace policy.
ISAC is a non-profit corporation registered in the state of Florida and has submitted an application for Recognition of Exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code."
______________________________________________
Now, doing a little "investigaten" of my own, I find that the registered agent for ISAC is Marti Heath. There are no other corporate officers listed with the state of Florida. The corporation was founded less than a year ago, March 2003 to be exact.
Who is on Staff? (above a staff is alluded to) The "Entire team" , how many? Where is this executive branch located? Where is the "drug free workplace" located? How many people, Bi-weekly,are donating a portion of their pay to ISAC?
This all sounds like a big fucking fantasy to me, and it is helping destroy the crediblity of legitimate critics of The teen help industry.
I am sick and fucking tired of hearing about ISAC and their investigations, which appear to be compilations of newspaper articles, rumour,supositions and ennuendo to me. It is time someone calls them down on the carpet for this nonsense.
-
THANK YOU ISAC---GO AWAY WWASPIE YOU HAVE A BBS WAITING TO HEAR YOUR FOUL MOUTH!!
-
On 2004-02-07 16:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"THANK YOU ISAC---GO AWAY WWASPIE YOU HAVE A BBS WAITING TO HEAR YOUR FOUL MOUTH!!"
Anon, why do you accuse the other anon of being a WWASPIE? The poster was objecting to ISAC hurting the credibility of "legitimate" critics of the teen help industry. Now does that seem to fit your definition of a WWASPIE? Didn't think so.
:wink:
-
Not a waspie, just sick of bullshit, no matter who is slinging it.
In fact, Wwasp can kiss my left cheek while Isac kisses the right.
-
On 2004-02-07 17:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Not a waspie, just sick of bullshit, no matter who is slinging it.
In fact, Wwasp can kiss my left cheek while Isac kisses the right.
"
Anon, if you can't appreciate the discussion, then you can kiss off. Sheesh, this is an INTERACTIVE discussion forum in case you hadn't noticed. And issues, by nature, are multi-dimensional so you might as well get used to diverse opinions and points of view because it goes with the territory and that ain't no bullshit.