Discussion:
The Truth Will Set You Free
(too old to reply)
s***@yahoo.com
2008-03-08 13:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org

Steve in Tennessee
Kyle
2008-03-08 22:56:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Orange's site and the More Revealed site are tremendous resources on
AA.
Wozza Ports
2008-03-09 09:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
thanks for pointing that out, Steve. It would be good if we could get a
regular message like that posted.
GaryRock
2008-03-11 06:58:11 UTC
Permalink
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-14 04:19:01 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,

"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."

Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
AZ Nomad
2008-03-14 15:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
In other words, don't think too much because you're too fucking lazy to
explain and much of what you think won't stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by Ken
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Sorry, but you don't have to check your brains at the door to become sober and
you can help others without being an anti-intellectual prick.
GaryRock
2008-03-19 04:38:06 UTC
Permalink
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-19 18:22:34 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

If you wish to keep score, let us do so.

* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.

* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.

* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.

* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do the
same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not, but
A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their drinking
and has a far higher suicide rate.

* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being
the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens for
a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."

* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to excess
being a disease since the forties under the leadership of occasional
drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group N.C.A.A.D. It is
only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to the pigeons (an
A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find out that it is a
"spiritual" disease.

* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.

If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism" channeled
through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps, they can
check out the book at:

http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp

and other books at the library at:

http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
GaryRock
2008-03-20 02:49:56 UTC
Permalink
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION people
have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?

AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6

GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending A.A.
for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do the
same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not, but A.A.
does away with all those who would have moderated their drinking and has a
far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being the
Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens for a
man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to excess
being a disease since the forties under the leadership of occasional
drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group N.C.A.A.D. It is
only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to the pigeons (an A.A.
term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find out that it is a
"spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism" channeled
through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps, they can check
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-20 18:48:18 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.

And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.

Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one
million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION people
have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending A.A.
for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do the
same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not, but A.A.
does away with all those who would have moderated their drinking and has a
far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being the
Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens for a
man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to excess
being a disease since the forties under the leadership of occasional
drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group N.C.A.A.D. It is
only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to the pigeons (an A.A.
term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find out that it is a
"spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism" channeled
through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps, they can check
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
GaryRock
2008-03-20 20:12:22 UTC
Permalink
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S. alone,
it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one million
members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION people
have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do the
same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not, but
A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their drinking
and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being
the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens for
a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to excess
being a disease since the forties under the leadership of occasional
drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group N.C.A.A.D. It is
only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to the pigeons (an
A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find out that it is a
"spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism" channeled
through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps, they can
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-21 02:23:38 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.

Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S. alone,
it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one million
members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION people
have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do the
same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not, but
A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their drinking
and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being
the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens for
a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to excess
being a disease since the forties under the leadership of occasional
drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group N.C.A.A.D. It is
only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to the pigeons (an
A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find out that it is a
"spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism" channeled
through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps, they can
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
GaryRock
2008-03-21 04:45:24 UTC
Permalink
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they are
false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one
million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do
the same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not,
but A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their
drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being
the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens
for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to
the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find
out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps,
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-21 06:30:40 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known A.A.
to lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where the 95%
figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.

Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?

It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they
lie, like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery
number.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they are
false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one
million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do
the same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not,
but A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their
drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being
the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens
for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to
the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find
out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps,
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
GaryRock
2008-03-21 12:14:09 UTC
Permalink
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there facts
wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you. The truth
will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book was
written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They admitted
that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something about their
credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few meetings surveyed and as
previously put forth, maybe these numbers were for the first few years.
Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they said groups were sprouting
up. How they got these numbers, keeping in mind communication was basic, who
knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was written. I
thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which frustrated them.

GR
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known A.A. to
lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where the 95%
figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they lie,
like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they
are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one
million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do
the same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not,
but A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their
drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear
to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to
find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they
have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps,
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way
in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Wozza Ports
2008-03-21 12:25:03 UTC
Permalink
Clearly, they were making it up.

"You have no conception these days of how much failure we had. You had to
cull over hundreds of these drunks to get a handful to take the bait."
Bill Wilson, at the memorial service for Dr. Bob, Nov. 15, 1952

You can read the whole speech at
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-Dr_Bob_Memorial.html . But if you don't
trust orange's site, read it somewhere else, it is the same.
Post by GaryRock
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there
facts wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you. The
truth will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book was
written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They
admitted that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something
about their credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few meetings
surveyed and as previously put forth, maybe these numbers were for the
first few years. Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they said
groups were sprouting up. How they got these numbers, keeping in mind
communication was basic, who knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was written. I
thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which frustrated them.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known A.A.
to lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where the 95%
figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they lie,
like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they
are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known
better than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two
million A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There
are two million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one
million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been
attending A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A.
board member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not
only do the same number of people manage to abstain by going to
A.A. as not, but A.A. does away with all those who would have
moderated their drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear
to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come
to find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually
helping people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only
thing they have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are
too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way
in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and
12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-21 18:30:36 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

Strange that you say you are not here to defend A.A. yet that is what
you are doing. When a bald-faced lie like the 75% recovery rate in the
Big Book is mentioned, you fantasize that somehow that says something
about A.A.'s credibility.

When the Big Book was written, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. When it
was published, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. The meetings claimed to
have been A.A. meetings by A.A.historians are:

1) Bill Wilson's meeting in New York that was called "not maximum" by an
Oxford Grouper and that one of Sam Shoemaker's underlings at Calvary
Mission told people not to go to. The fact that one of Shoemaker's
underlings told people not to go is the evidence used to supposedly
prove it wasn't an A.A. meeting. This meeting started before Bill
Wilson met Dr. Bob.

2) The Oxford Group meeting at T. Henry Williams house in Akron, Ohio
where both Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson attended.

3) The Columbus meeting which sort of was an A.A. meeting except that
among other things, alcoholics and their wives met together. They were
rather open about their Oxford Group connections. It started after the
conversion of Marty Mann with the Big Book showed that the Big Book
worked better for conversions than the Bible.

So taking _all_ the meetings that there was supposed to be when the Big
Book was published in 1939, one has three meetings. The actual number of
meetings is zero.

Many of the stories were removed from the back of the original Big Book
because the writers got drunk. I don't remember off the top of my head
how many, but of these "showcase recoveries," so many got drunk that the
75% success rate is shown for the lie that it is.

The numbers of "recoveries" has _always_ been pathetic. That is the
reason for "Anonymity at the media level," to hide the frequent
drunkenness of A.A. members.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/



Alos
Post by GaryRock
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there facts
wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you. The truth
will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book was
written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They admitted
that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something about their
credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few meetings surveyed and as
previously put forth, maybe these numbers were for the first few years.
Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they said groups were sprouting
up. How they got these numbers, keeping in mind communication was basic, who
knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was written. I
thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which frustrated them.
GR
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known A.A. to
lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where the 95%
figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they lie,
like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they
are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known better
than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two million
A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program." There are two
million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of one
million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do
the same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not,
but A.A. does away with all those who would have moderated their
drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear
to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come to
find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they
have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps,
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too
smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way
in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and
12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
GaryRock
2008-03-22 04:38:57 UTC
Permalink
There was meetings at the houses. Spinmeister.
GR
Gary,
Strange that you say you are not here to defend A.A. yet that is what you
are doing. When a bald-faced lie like the 75% recovery rate in the Big
Book is mentioned, you fantasize that somehow that says something about
A.A.'s credibility.
When the Big Book was written, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. When it was
published, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. The meetings claimed to have
1) Bill Wilson's meeting in New York that was called "not maximum" by an
Oxford Grouper and that one of Sam Shoemaker's underlings at Calvary
Mission told people not to go to. The fact that one of Shoemaker's
underlings told people not to go is the evidence used to supposedly prove
it wasn't an A.A. meeting. This meeting started before Bill Wilson met
Dr. Bob.
2) The Oxford Group meeting at T. Henry Williams house in Akron, Ohio
where both Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson attended.
3) The Columbus meeting which sort of was an A.A. meeting except that
among other things, alcoholics and their wives met together. They were
rather open about their Oxford Group connections. It started after the
conversion of Marty Mann with the Big Book showed that the Big Book worked
better for conversions than the Bible.
So taking _all_ the meetings that there was supposed to be when the Big
Book was published in 1939, one has three meetings. The actual number of
meetings is zero.
Many of the stories were removed from the back of the original Big Book
because the writers got drunk. I don't remember off the top of my head
how many, but of these "showcase recoveries," so many got drunk that the
75% success rate is shown for the lie that it is.
The numbers of "recoveries" has _always_ been pathetic. That is the
reason for "Anonymity at the media level," to hide the frequent
drunkenness of A.A. members.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Alos
Post by GaryRock
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there
facts wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you.
The truth will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book was
written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They
admitted that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something
about their credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few meetings
surveyed and as previously put forth, maybe these numbers were for the
first few years. Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they said
groups were sprouting up. How they got these numbers, keeping in mind
communication was basic, who knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was written.
I thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which frustrated
them.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known A.A.
to lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where the 95%
figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they
lie, like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery
number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they
are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known
better than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two
million A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program."
There are two million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of
one million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been
attending A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A.
board member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not
only do the same number of people manage to abstain by going to
A.A. as not, but A.A. does away with all those who would have
moderated their drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear
to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come
to find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually
helping people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only
thing they have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are
too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite
way in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and
12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-22 19:22:47 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

What is there to spin? Bill Wilson's meeting in New York was at his
home. I thought everyone knew that. The meeting at T. Henry Williams
house was at T. Henry Williams house. The first meeting in Cleveland
which some A.A. historians describe as A.A. meeting #3 was in a house.

Where is the spin?

Are there other meetings unknown to the world that existed prior to the
ones that A.A. historians correctly and incorrectly claim to be the
first A.A. meetings?

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
There was meetings at the houses. Spinmeister.
GR
Gary,
Strange that you say you are not here to defend A.A. yet that is what you
are doing. When a bald-faced lie like the 75% recovery rate in the Big
Book is mentioned, you fantasize that somehow that says something about
A.A.'s credibility.
When the Big Book was written, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. When it was
published, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. The meetings claimed to have
1) Bill Wilson's meeting in New York that was called "not maximum" by an
Oxford Grouper and that one of Sam Shoemaker's underlings at Calvary
Mission told people not to go to. The fact that one of Shoemaker's
underlings told people not to go is the evidence used to supposedly prove
it wasn't an A.A. meeting. This meeting started before Bill Wilson met
Dr. Bob.
2) The Oxford Group meeting at T. Henry Williams house in Akron, Ohio
where both Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson attended.
3) The Columbus meeting which sort of was an A.A. meeting except that
among other things, alcoholics and their wives met together. They were
rather open about their Oxford Group connections. It started after the
conversion of Marty Mann with the Big Book showed that the Big Book worked
better for conversions than the Bible.
So taking _all_ the meetings that there was supposed to be when the Big
Book was published in 1939, one has three meetings. The actual number of
meetings is zero.
Many of the stories were removed from the back of the original Big Book
because the writers got drunk. I don't remember off the top of my head
how many, but of these "showcase recoveries," so many got drunk that the
75% success rate is shown for the lie that it is.
The numbers of "recoveries" has _always_ been pathetic. That is the
reason for "Anonymity at the media level," to hide the frequent
drunkenness of A.A. members.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Alos
Post by GaryRock
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there
facts wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you.
The truth will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book was
written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They
admitted that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something
about their credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few meetings
surveyed and as previously put forth, maybe these numbers were for the
first few years. Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they said
groups were sprouting up. How they got these numbers, keeping in mind
communication was basic, who knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was written.
I thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which frustrated
them.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known A.A.
to lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where the 95%
figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they
lie, like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery
number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that they
are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that 95%
leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call that
spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on A.A.'s
Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have known
better than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two
million A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program."
There are two million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of
one million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION
people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been
attending A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A.
board member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not
only do the same number of people manage to abstain by going to
A.A. as not, but A.A. does away with all those who would have
moderated their drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to
excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership of
occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group
N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear
to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees) that they come
to find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually
helping people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only
thing they have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are
too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite
way in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and
12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
GaryRock
2008-03-23 14:46:54 UTC
Permalink
You said below that there was no AA meetings when the bok was written. Now
you say they were a Bill W. house?
Please elighten me some more, but try to keep it pithy.
GR
Gary,
What is there to spin? Bill Wilson's meeting in New York was at his home.
I thought everyone knew that. The meeting at T. Henry Williams house was
at T. Henry Williams house. The first meeting in Cleveland which some
A.A. historians describe as A.A. meeting #3 was in a house.
Where is the spin?
Are there other meetings unknown to the world that existed prior to the
ones that A.A. historians correctly and incorrectly claim to be the first
A.A. meetings?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
There was meetings at the houses. Spinmeister.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Strange that you say you are not here to defend A.A. yet that is what
you are doing. When a bald-faced lie like the 75% recovery rate in the
Big Book is mentioned, you fantasize that somehow that says something
about A.A.'s credibility.
When the Big Book was written, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. When it
was published, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. The meetings claimed to
1) Bill Wilson's meeting in New York that was called "not maximum" by an
Oxford Grouper and that one of Sam Shoemaker's underlings at Calvary
Mission told people not to go to. The fact that one of Shoemaker's
underlings told people not to go is the evidence used to supposedly
prove it wasn't an A.A. meeting. This meeting started before Bill
Wilson met Dr. Bob.
2) The Oxford Group meeting at T. Henry Williams house in Akron, Ohio
where both Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson attended.
3) The Columbus meeting which sort of was an A.A. meeting except that
among other things, alcoholics and their wives met together. They were
rather open about their Oxford Group connections. It started after the
conversion of Marty Mann with the Big Book showed that the Big Book
worked better for conversions than the Bible.
So taking _all_ the meetings that there was supposed to be when the Big
Book was published in 1939, one has three meetings. The actual number of
meetings is zero.
Many of the stories were removed from the back of the original Big Book
because the writers got drunk. I don't remember off the top of my head
how many, but of these "showcase recoveries," so many got drunk that the
75% success rate is shown for the lie that it is.
The numbers of "recoveries" has _always_ been pathetic. That is the
reason for "Anonymity at the media level," to hide the frequent
drunkenness of A.A. members.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Alos
Post by GaryRock
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there
facts wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you.
The truth will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book
was written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They
admitted that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something
about their credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few
meetings surveyed and as previously put forth, maybe these numbers were
for the first few years. Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they
said groups were sprouting up. How they got these numbers, keeping in
mind communication was basic, who knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was
written. I thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which
frustrated them.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known
A.A. to lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where
the 95% figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they
lie, like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery
number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that
they are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that
95% leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call
that spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on
A.A.'s Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have
known better than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two
million A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program."
There are two million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of
one million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40
MIILION people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been
attending A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A.
board member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that
not only do the same number of people manage to abstain by going
to A.A. as not, but A.A. does away with all those who would have
moderated their drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking
to excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership
of occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front
group N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it
becomes clear to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees)
that they come to find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually
helping people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only
thing they have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are
too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite
way in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery
and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Ken
2008-03-23 18:26:36 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

Oxford Group members wrote lots of books, of which the book titled
"Alcoholics Anonymous" was just one. There is _nothing_ in the original
Big Book that didn't also exist in the Oxford Group. A.A. got its name
from the title of "Alcoholics Anonymous." Check the history.

What makes you think that the meeting in Bill Wilson's house was a
meeting of an organization that didn't exist? Did you forget or have
you never known that Bill Wilson was an Oxford Grouper? Don't you know
who Ebby T. who played a central role in saving Bill Wilson in Town's
Hospital was?

Wilson started the meeting in his _home_ after being saved by Ebby T.
and before he had even met Dr. Bob, who according to A.A. mythology, was
a co-founder of A.A. How is it possible that Wilson started an A.A.
meeting before there was an A.A., even before he had asked American
Oxford Group leader Sam Shoemaker to write the Steps to codify Oxford
Group spiritual principles for him?

Or do you believe that A.A. is one of God's Science fiction fantasies,
one in which people jump around in time?

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
You said below that there was no AA meetings when the bok was written. Now
you say they were a Bill W. house?
Please elighten me some more, but try to keep it pithy.
GR
Gary,
What is there to spin? Bill Wilson's meeting in New York was at his home.
I thought everyone knew that. The meeting at T. Henry Williams house was
at T. Henry Williams house. The first meeting in Cleveland which some
A.A. historians describe as A.A. meeting #3 was in a house.
Where is the spin?
Are there other meetings unknown to the world that existed prior to the
ones that A.A. historians correctly and incorrectly claim to be the first
A.A. meetings?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
There was meetings at the houses. Spinmeister.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Strange that you say you are not here to defend A.A. yet that is what
you are doing. When a bald-faced lie like the 75% recovery rate in the
Big Book is mentioned, you fantasize that somehow that says something
about A.A.'s credibility.
When the Big Book was written, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. When it
was published, there were _no_ A.A. meetings. The meetings claimed to
1) Bill Wilson's meeting in New York that was called "not maximum" by an
Oxford Grouper and that one of Sam Shoemaker's underlings at Calvary
Mission told people not to go to. The fact that one of Shoemaker's
underlings told people not to go is the evidence used to supposedly
prove it wasn't an A.A. meeting. This meeting started before Bill
Wilson met Dr. Bob.
2) The Oxford Group meeting at T. Henry Williams house in Akron, Ohio
where both Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson attended.
3) The Columbus meeting which sort of was an A.A. meeting except that
among other things, alcoholics and their wives met together. They were
rather open about their Oxford Group connections. It started after the
conversion of Marty Mann with the Big Book showed that the Big Book
worked better for conversions than the Bible.
So taking _all_ the meetings that there was supposed to be when the Big
Book was published in 1939, one has three meetings. The actual number of
meetings is zero.
Many of the stories were removed from the back of the original Big Book
because the writers got drunk. I don't remember off the top of my head
how many, but of these "showcase recoveries," so many got drunk that the
75% success rate is shown for the lie that it is.
The numbers of "recoveries" has _always_ been pathetic. That is the
reason for "Anonymity at the media level," to hide the frequent
drunkenness of A.A. members.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Alos
Post by GaryRock
My apologies but I am not here to defend AA. Maybe they do have there
facts wrong, maybe not. Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Same goes to you.
The truth will set you free is the thread.
Next, I would suggest the 75% recovery rate was possible as the book
was written in 1939. Note that 25% of that 75% continued to drink. They
admitted that 25% continued to drink and 25% quit. That says something
about their credibility. It is feasible as there was only a few
meetings surveyed and as previously put forth, maybe these numbers were
for the first few years. Maybe it was only for a few groups as the they
said groups were sprouting up. How they got these numbers, keeping in
mind communication was basic, who knows.
I would guess the numbers were about a year before the book was
written. I thought when they first started, nobody stayed sober which
frustrated them.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
What makes you think I believe them to be false? I've never known
A.A. to lie in their internal documents. The Comments document where
the 95% figure from the Triennial Survey is an A.A. internal document.
Are you telling me that the A.A. leadership lies even among themselves
when they don't expect outsiders to see it?
It is when promoting themselves to newcomers and outsiders that they
lie, like in the Big Book where they have the outrageous 75% recovery
number.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Ok so you use AA's numbers in your rant KNOWING and believing that
they are false? No spin zone here Ken.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
You are too funny. I cite the numbers directly from A.A.W.S. that
95% leave A.A. in the first year (that is 19 out of 20) and you call
that spinning the numbers.
Have you never been to elementary school and studied arithmetic?
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Don't spin the numbers. That's not playing fair.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
Maybe I am brainwashed. I took the figure from "Comments on
A.A.'s Triennial Surveys" published by A.A. Maybe I should have
known better than to believe A.A.'s own data.
And your numbers below are from outer space. There are no two
million A.A. members with one year or longer in the "program."
There are two million A.A. members total world wide.
Counting just the one to two million coerced to attend in the U.S.
alone, it is not difficult to see how they could reach a total of
one million members with 19 out of 20 leaving in the first year.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40
MIILION people have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been
attending A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A.
board member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that
not only do the same number of people manage to abstain by going
to A.A. as not, but A.A. does away with all those who would have
moderated their drinking and has a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from
being the Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a
pro-fascist quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank
"Thank Heavens for a man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking
to excess being a disease since the forties under the leadership
of occasional drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front
group N.C.A.A.D. It is only as one works the Steps that it
becomes clear to the pigeons (an A.A. term for new indoctrinees)
that they come to find out that it is a "spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually
helping people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only
thing they have left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism"
channeled through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are
too smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite
way in public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery
and 12 step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Kai R
2008-03-20 10:02:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
Ken
2008-03-20 18:33:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
Kai,

Actually, I am critical of the idea pushed by A.A. that abstinence or
"jails, institutions, and death" are the only possible outcomes. They
seem to boast of doing away with all the "recoveries" that would qualify
for the "moderation" category, which one finds in samples of the general
population.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
GaryRock
2008-03-21 12:23:18 UTC
Permalink
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his plan
allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I have
no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or whatever
now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending A.A.
for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
Ken
2008-03-21 18:37:32 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

I'm not the one who "wants it both ways." A.A. "help" does away with
the possibility for moderation in its members by preaching
"Powerlessness" and disease. Of course, one can argue that A.A. doesn't
harm anyone who doesn't believe anything they say.

Most people who are alcohol dependent at one point in their lives go on
to moderate and not only that, do so without any "help," no less the
kind of help that tells them it is impossible to do so.

Just because both moderation and abstinence are reasonable goals does
not mean that criticism of an organization that promotes only one goal
and insists the other goal is impossible for everyone is from someone
who is trying to have it both ways.

There are organizations that promote abstinence for their members
without coming up with a fake disease to frighten members/potential
members into thinking moderation is impossible for all alcohol dependents.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his plan
allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I have
no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or whatever
now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending A.A.
for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
GaryRock
2008-03-22 04:37:43 UTC
Permalink
I don't preach the Disease concept. Niether did Bill W and you know it. It
is only used in the Dr. Opinion.
Anyway let's move on to this cult thing. How come the 95% discussed are able
to leave? Did the big bad AA'ers go and threaten them or their families. Who
is the leader? A real cult goes to any length to keep members. AA is not
only a bad treatment, but they do a lousy job of being a cult. Let's hear
your spin.
GR
Gary,
I'm not the one who "wants it both ways." A.A. "help" does away with the
possibility for moderation in its members by preaching "Powerlessness" and
disease. Of course, one can argue that A.A. doesn't harm anyone who
doesn't believe anything they say.
Most people who are alcohol dependent at one point in their lives go on to
moderate and not only that, do so without any "help," no less the kind of
help that tells them it is impossible to do so.
Just because both moderation and abstinence are reasonable goals does not
mean that criticism of an organization that promotes only one goal and
insists the other goal is impossible for everyone is from someone who is
trying to have it both ways.
There are organizations that promote abstinence for their members without
coming up with a fake disease to frighten members/potential members into
thinking moderation is impossible for all alcohol dependents.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his
plan allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I
have no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or
whatever now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
Wozza Ports
2008-03-22 06:41:46 UTC
Permalink
"Jails institutions and death"

is that not a threat?
Post by GaryRock
I don't preach the Disease concept. Niether did Bill W and you know it. It
is only used in the Dr. Opinion.
Anyway let's move on to this cult thing. How come the 95% discussed are
able to leave? Did the big bad AA'ers go and threaten them or their
families. Who is the leader? A real cult goes to any length to keep
members. AA is not only a bad treatment, but they do a lousy job of being
a cult. Let's hear your spin.
GR
Gary,
I'm not the one who "wants it both ways." A.A. "help" does away with the
possibility for moderation in its members by preaching "Powerlessness"
and disease. Of course, one can argue that A.A. doesn't harm anyone who
doesn't believe anything they say.
Most people who are alcohol dependent at one point in their lives go on
to moderate and not only that, do so without any "help," no less the kind
of help that tells them it is impossible to do so.
Just because both moderation and abstinence are reasonable goals does not
mean that criticism of an organization that promotes only one goal and
insists the other goal is impossible for everyone is from someone who is
trying to have it both ways.
There are organizations that promote abstinence for their members without
coming up with a fake disease to frighten members/potential members into
thinking moderation is impossible for all alcohol dependents.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his
plan allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I
have no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or
whatever now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
John K.
2008-03-22 13:02:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>

Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.

John K.
GaryRock
2008-03-22 13:39:44 UTC
Permalink
Exactly. And who is the leader of his so called cult. All cults have one
leader that controls the show.
Wozza and the 4 other guys have Ken.
GR
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.
John K.
Ken
2008-03-22 19:29:14 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

Do you work hard at looking like an idiot or does it come naturally to
you?

Is that the best you can do?

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Exactly. And who is the leader of his so called cult. All cults have one
leader that controls the show.
Wozza and the 4 other guys have Ken.
GR
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.
John K.
Ken
2008-03-22 19:24:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.
John K.
John,

Of course, A.A. has great power to inflict its opinion on others. Aside
from the usual cult techniques, through great effort they have the use
of the courts and private employers.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
John K.
2008-03-22 20:55:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.
John K.
John,
Of course, A.A. has great power to inflict its opinion on others. Aside
from the usual cult techniques, through great effort they have the use
of the courts and private employers.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Oh horsepucky. The courts and private employers sometimes use AA in an
attempt to sober up a drunk. Do you really think that employers would stop
firing people who show up drunk at work if AA were to disappear ? Would the
courts stop sending drunk drivers to jail ? Would "I'm sorry your honor, I
was drunk" become a valid defense ?

I've been a sober member of AA for 20 years now and they still haven't
taught me any of "the usual cult techniques". Maybe they only exist in your
own mind because you still cannot comprehend why someone would
*voluntarily*, happily, hang around AA without being the victim of some kind
of "brain washing".

John K.
Ken
2008-03-22 23:12:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
John,
Of course, A.A. has great power to inflict its opinion on others. Aside
from the usual cult techniques, through great effort they have the use
of the courts and private employers.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Oh horsepucky. The courts and private employers sometimes use AA in an
attempt to sober up a drunk. Do you really think that employers would stop
firing people who show up drunk at work if AA were to disappear ? Would the
courts stop sending drunk drivers to jail ? Would "I'm sorry your honor, I
was drunk" become a valid defense ?
I've been a sober member of AA for 20 years now and they still haven't
taught me any of "the usual cult techniques". Maybe they only exist in your
own mind because you still cannot comprehend why someone would
*voluntarily*, happily, hang around AA without being the victim of some kind
of "brain washing".
John K.
John,

"Sometimes use" is perhaps the understatement of the century. It is
against the law to coerce A.A. attendance in spite of the fact that in
some of the U.S. Circuit Court districts it is still being done without
even attempting to hide it. It is every bit as illegal to coerce
someone into A.A. as it is into Scientology or the Moonies, whatever the
reason.

Considering that all methodologically-sound research of coercion into
A.A. shows it worse than no "treatment" whatsoever, I would most
certainly expect there would be less "Powerlessness" around without
coercion into A.A. "Normal judicial sanctions" (e.g. simple probation
for first offense) work better than A.A.

Perhaps you believe you haven't learned any of "the usual cult
techniques" because you are absolutely clueless as to what they are.
Might I suggest you do some reading like, "Thought Reform and the
Psychology of Totalism: A Study of 'Brainwashing' in China" by
R.J.Lifton, "Coercive Persuasion" by Edgar Schein et al, and Combatting
Cult Mind Control by ex-Moonie Steven Hassan. You can't argue the point
when you have no idea what you are talking about.

As to A.A.ers being so "happy," I was around A.A. long enough to hear
what those who boasted about their happiness at meetings had to say at
after meeting coffee when there were no newcomers present.

"Acting as if," giving testimony at meetings about how happy one is to
"help the newcomer" no matter how angry, depressed, or hopeless one
really feels is not the same thing as being happy.

Also, if A.A.ers are all so happy, how come Harvard psychiatrist,
Al-Anon and A.A. board member George Vaillant in his own research found
a 5 or 6 times higher suicide rate among A.A.ers?

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
John K.
2008-03-23 17:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
John,
Of course, A.A. has great power to inflict its opinion on others.
Aside
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
from the usual cult techniques, through great effort they have the use
of the courts and private employers.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Oh horsepucky. The courts and private employers sometimes use AA in an
attempt to sober up a drunk. Do you really think that employers would stop
firing people who show up drunk at work if AA were to disappear ? Would the
courts stop sending drunk drivers to jail ? Would "I'm sorry your honor, I
was drunk" become a valid defense ?
I've been a sober member of AA for 20 years now and they still haven't
taught me any of "the usual cult techniques". Maybe they only exist in your
own mind because you still cannot comprehend why someone would
*voluntarily*, happily, hang around AA without being the victim of some kind
of "brain washing".
John K.
John,
"Sometimes use" is perhaps the understatement of the century. It is
against the law to coerce A.A. attendance in spite of the fact that in
some of the U.S. Circuit Court districts it is still being done without
even attempting to hide it. It is every bit as illegal to coerce
someone into A.A. as it is into Scientology or the Moonies, whatever the
reason.
It is NOT illegal in most U.S. Circuit Court districts. It won't be
until/unless those districts rule on it. It won't be the law of the land
until the Supreme Court rules on it. If it bothers you so much, get behind a
push to get it in front of the Supreme Court. It doesn't matter much to me.
I seriously doubt that stopping all court coercion would have much effect on
AA. In my experience it is very rare that those folks stay sober or stick
around after their court committment is completed.
Post by Ken
Considering that all methodologically-sound research of coercion into
A.A. shows it worse than no "treatment" whatsoever, I would most
certainly expect there would be less "Powerlessness" around without
coercion into A.A. "Normal judicial sanctions" (e.g. simple probation
for first offense) work better than A.A.
Really ? I'd have to see what criteria were used to decide which individuals
got probation and which ones got sent to AA. If it wasn't totally random,
then any statistics or conclusions are meaningless.
Post by Ken
Perhaps you believe you haven't learned any of "the usual cult
techniques" because you are absolutely clueless as to what they are.
Might I suggest you do some reading like, "Thought Reform and the
Psychology of Totalism: A Study of 'Brainwashing' in China" by
R.J.Lifton, "Coercive Persuasion" by Edgar Schein et al, and Combatting
Cult Mind Control by ex-Moonie Steven Hassan. You can't argue the point
when you have no idea what you are talking about.
My goodness ! Mind control so subtle that even the people who are doing the
controling are unaware that they are doing it. You really are grasping at
straws.
Post by Ken
As to A.A.ers being so "happy," I was around A.A. long enough to hear
what those who boasted about their happiness at meetings had to say at
after meeting coffee when there were no newcomers present.
I didn't say that everybody was happy or that they were happy all the time.
What I meant to covey was that they were happily attending meetings as
opposed to unhappily grousing about having to be there (and we have some of
those too).
Post by Ken
"Acting as if," giving testimony at meetings about how happy one is to
"help the newcomer" no matter how angry, depressed, or hopeless one
really feels is not the same thing as being happy.
Also, if A.A.ers are all so happy, how come Harvard psychiatrist,
Al-Anon and A.A. board member George Vaillant in his own research found
a 5 or 6 times higher suicide rate among A.A.ers?
5 or 6 times higher compared to what ? Cloistered nuns ? Average citizens ?
Active (drinking) alcoholics ?

John K.
Post by Ken
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Ken
2008-03-23 18:59:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
John,
Of course, A.A. has great power to inflict its opinion on others.
Aside
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
from the usual cult techniques, through great effort they have the use
of the courts and private employers.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Oh horsepucky. The courts and private employers sometimes use AA in an
attempt to sober up a drunk. Do you really think that employers would
stop
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
firing people who show up drunk at work if AA were to disappear ? Would
the
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
courts stop sending drunk drivers to jail ? Would "I'm sorry your
honor, I
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
was drunk" become a valid defense ?
I've been a sober member of AA for 20 years now and they still haven't
taught me any of "the usual cult techniques". Maybe they only exist in
your
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
own mind because you still cannot comprehend why someone would
*voluntarily*, happily, hang around AA without being the victim of some
kind
Post by Ken
Post by John K.
of "brain washing".
John K.
John,
"Sometimes use" is perhaps the understatement of the century. It is
against the law to coerce A.A. attendance in spite of the fact that in
some of the U.S. Circuit Court districts it is still being done without
even attempting to hide it. It is every bit as illegal to coerce
someone into A.A. as it is into Scientology or the Moonies, whatever the
reason.
John,

Comment interspersed below.
Post by John K.
It is NOT illegal in most U.S. Circuit Court districts. It won't be
until/unless those districts rule on it. It won't be the law of the land
until the Supreme Court rules on it.
I have a question because I am far, far from a legal scholar. If the
Moonies manage to get a Moonie judge to send lawbreakers to Moonie
indoctrination camps, is it legal for the judge to do so since no court
has ruled against it?
Post by John K.
If it bothers you so much, get behind a
push to get it in front of the Supreme Court.
I wish I had the financial resources to do so.
Post by John K.
It doesn't matter much to me.
I seriously doubt that stopping all court coercion would have much effect on
AA. In my experience it is very rare that those folks stay sober or stick
around after their court committment is completed.
If court coercion has so little effect, then why does A.A. not only
boast of members gotten through coercion but also work so hard above the
meeting level to get coercees?

Do you think that a Big Book ordered from A.A. by a 12-Step treatment
center for a court coercee doesn't go toward A.A.?
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
Considering that all methodologically-sound research of coercion into
A.A. shows it worse than no "treatment" whatsoever, I would most
certainly expect there would be less "Powerlessness" around without
coercion into A.A. "Normal judicial sanctions" (e.g. simple probation
for first offense) work better than A.A.
Really ? I'd have to see what criteria were used to decide which individuals
got probation and which ones got sent to AA. If it wasn't totally random,
then any statistics or conclusions are meaningless.
Yes, if it wasn't random it would be meaningless. However, it was
totally randam. A brief discussion of the study and the reference so
you can find the original is at:

http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_28.jsp

It is the first study discussed, "Dittman et al".

Note that no successful effort has been to repeat it, even though there
has been plenty of time, it is easy to do, it is relatively cheap and
that it is not only normal but expected in science to repeat studies
with unexpected results.
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
Perhaps you believe you haven't learned any of "the usual cult
techniques" because you are absolutely clueless as to what they are.
Might I suggest you do some reading like, "Thought Reform and the
Psychology of Totalism: A Study of 'Brainwashing' in China" by
R.J.Lifton, "Coercive Persuasion" by Edgar Schein et al, and Combatting
Cult Mind Control by ex-Moonie Steven Hassan. You can't argue the point
when you have no idea what you are talking about.
My goodness ! Mind control so subtle that even the people who are doing the
controling are unaware that they are doing it. You really are grasping at
straws.
Do you think lower level Moonies, Scientologist, Jehovah's Witnesses, La
Rouchies et al really know what they are doing? The best way I can sum
the scant knowledge that an A.A. member is likely to have is along the
lines of, "When I was new someone told me that."
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
As to A.A.ers being so "happy," I was around A.A. long enough to hear
what those who boasted about their happiness at meetings had to say at
after meeting coffee when there were no newcomers present.
I didn't say that everybody was happy or that they were happy all the time.
What I meant to covey was that they were happily attending meetings as
opposed to unhappily grousing about having to be there (and we have some of
those too).
No one said happy all the time. See below.
Post by John K.
Post by Ken
"Acting as if," giving testimony at meetings about how happy one is to
"help the newcomer" no matter how angry, depressed, or hopeless one
really feels is not the same thing as being happy.
Also, if A.A.ers are all so happy, how come Harvard psychiatrist,
Al-Anon and A.A. board member George Vaillant in his own research found
a 5 or 6 times higher suicide rate among A.A.ers?
5 or 6 times higher compared to what ? Cloistered nuns ? Average citizens ?
Active (drinking) alcoholics ?
Compared to alcoholics who didn't go to A.A.

"Some must die so others can live" is only true for A.A. members.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by John K.
John K.
Post by Ken
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Wozza Ports
2008-03-23 00:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.
John K.
Then why do people in AA keep saying that, if they have no power to inflict
them?
John K.
2008-03-23 14:57:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your opinion
may vary.
John K.
Then why do people in AA keep saying that, if they have no power to inflict
them?
Because we have observed that they seem to be the natural consequences of
prolonged excessive alcohol consumption.

John K.
Wozza Ports
2008-03-24 01:17:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
Then why do people in AA keep saying that, if they have no power to
inflict
Post by Wozza Ports
them?
Because we have observed that they seem to be the natural consequences of
prolonged excessive alcohol consumption.
John K.
Yes, but the majority of people who quit do so without AA.
John K.
2008-03-24 01:52:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
Then why do people in AA keep saying that, if they have no power to
inflict
Post by Wozza Ports
them?
Because we have observed that they seem to be the natural consequences of
prolonged excessive alcohol consumption.
John K.
Yes, but the majority of people who quit do so without AA.
I'm unsure of the 'majority', but I would certainly agree that many people
who decide to quit drinking simply do so without ever going near AA. Why on
earth would they ? There are however, those folks who have tried their best
to quit drinking by themselves and have failed miserably. I don't think
there is a scientific answer as to why they fail. It could be 'moral
weakness' or maybe a strange mental illness, or a 'spiritual malady' or
improper childhood potty training, or any of a myriad of other theories. It
doesn't matter. My point is that there exist people who are totally
incapable of stopping drinking on their own. Those are the ones that AA
tries to help.

John K.
Ken
2008-03-24 03:09:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
Then why do people in AA keep saying that, if they have no power to
inflict
Post by Wozza Ports
them?
Because we have observed that they seem to be the natural consequences
of
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
prolonged excessive alcohol consumption.
John K.
Yes, but the majority of people who quit do so without AA.
I'm unsure of the 'majority', but I would certainly agree that many people
who decide to quit drinking simply do so without ever going near AA. Why on
earth would they ? There are however, those folks who have tried their best
to quit drinking by themselves and have failed miserably. I don't think
there is a scientific answer as to why they fail. It could be 'moral
weakness' or maybe a strange mental illness, or a 'spiritual malady' or
improper childhood potty training, or any of a myriad of other theories. It
doesn't matter. My point is that there exist people who are totally
incapable of stopping drinking on their own. Those are the ones that AA
tries to help.
John K.
John,

I can't help but jumping in on this. In the U.S., the federal
government has done studies showing that the majority of people who at
one time were alcohol dependent get over their problem with any outside
help. What you and other A.A.s miss is that A.A., through their public
relations efforts, make stopping or moderating more difficult for people
by convincing them that good reasons to stop or moderate are disease
symptoms and they have a disease that can't be held at bay except one
day at a time through the intervention of God through A.A.

A.A. creates "alcoholics" by convincing them that excellent reasons to
change their behavior is proof they have a disease that results in
"jails, institutions, and death." This is done to the public through
movies, television shows, newscasts, and personal testimonials by
anonymous A.A. members as to the "true nature of their disease."

A.A. gets hordes of people coming through their doors that believe they
can't change their behavior without intervention of the A.A. rescuing
deity. Then, when A.A. gets a tiny percentage to both go through
indoctrination and abstain, they get them to boast to anyone who will
listen to the horrors of their "disease" and the "miracle" of A.A.

According to Marty Mann, founder of what is now the N.C.A.D.D.
testifying before Congress seeking money to "educate" America in 1945,
there were 145,000 alcoholics in the U.S. Now, after decades of
education in A.A. disease doctrine, there are estimates running as high
as 30,000,000 alcoholics and tens of millions more who supposedly need
Al-Anon. Going by population growth, if the rate of alcoholism only
stayed unchanged, we'd have far less than half a million alcoholics.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Wozza Ports
2008-03-30 19:43:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
Post by Wozza Ports
"Jails institutions and death"
is that not a threat?
<huge snip>
Only if you have the power to inflict them. Otherwise it is simply an
opinion, based usually on observing the experience of others. Your
opinion
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
may vary.
John K.
Then why do people in AA keep saying that, if they have no power to
inflict
Post by Wozza Ports
them?
Because we have observed that they seem to be the natural consequences
of
Post by Wozza Ports
Post by John K.
prolonged excessive alcohol consumption.
John K.
Yes, but the majority of people who quit do so without AA.
I'm unsure of the 'majority', but I would certainly agree that many people
who decide to quit drinking simply do so without ever going near AA. Why on
earth would they ? There are however, those folks who have tried their best
to quit drinking by themselves and have failed miserably. I don't think
there is a scientific answer as to why they fail. It could be 'moral
weakness' or maybe a strange mental illness, or a 'spiritual malady' or
improper childhood potty training, or any of a myriad of other theories. It
doesn't matter. My point is that there exist people who are totally
incapable of stopping drinking on their own. Those are the ones that AA
tries to help.
John K.
They fail because they didn't really want to stop. They said they wanted to,
but really, they didn't. There is no one who can't stop on their own. Just
don't drink it. Who is having it forced down their throat? No more excuses!

AA tries to help everyone, because AA wants everyone to join their cult.
Some in AA think the whole world should be on the program, alcoholic
("besides, we think our way of living has advantages for all").

Ken
2008-03-22 19:18:55 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

While Wilson certainly had enough public disclaimers for alcoholism
being a disease, aside from "The Doctors Opinion" there are others
including those mentioned in the footnote from More Revealed directly below.
______________________________________________

Some AA members have stated that the concept of disease was foreign to
early AA, since it was a spiritual, not medical, program. However, much
reference is made to alcoholism being a disease by the earliest members
of AA in the Big Book. In telling of her own conversion process one of
the "pioneers of AA" says, "I was suffering from an actual disease that
had a name and symptoms like diabetes or cancer..."(p.227) Other early
Big Book references by the earliest members to alcoholism as a disease
can be found on pages 187, 191, 307 and 308. (Third edition)
______________________________________________


Of course, do not forget that even going back to the Oxford Group days,
the Groupers were in the habit of sequestering away potential recruits
in hospital rooms allowing them only Oxford Group visitors and Oxford
Group reading materials until they converted. They even had a term for
this, "oxfordizing."

From the official A.A. website,
_____________________________________________
During this hectic ten-year period, Dr. Bob devoted himself to the
question of hospital care for alcoholics, and to their indoctrination
with A.A. principles. Large numbers of alcoholics flocked to Akron to
receive hospital care at St. Thomas, a Catholic hospital. Dr. Bob became
a member of its staff. Subsequently, he and the remarkable Sister M.
Ignatia, also of the staff, cared for and brought A.A. to some 5,000
sufferers. After Dr. Bob’s death in 1950, Sister Ignatia continued to
work at Cleveland’s Charity Hospital, where she was assisted by the
local groups and where 10,000 more sufferers first found A.A. This set a
fine example of hospitalization wherein A.A. could cooperate with both
medicine and religion.
http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org/en_information_aa.cfm?PageID=2&SubPage=60
_____________________________________________

Of course, one wouldn't want to leave out the work of Marty Mann, the
first woman credited with long-term sobriety in A.A. and the
organization now named N.C.A.D.D. that set out to teach America that
alcoholism is a disease and needs treatment.
http://www.ncadd.org/history/decade1.html
_____________________________________________

Now you can argue all you want that alcoholism as a disease is foreign
to A.A. because of the disclaimers Wilson made to outsiders as necessary
to win their support but it is very clear that A.A. members were busy
creating and promoting it.

You make a silly argument as to why A.A. isn't a cult. The first is
implying that because people can leave, it isn't a cult. People can
leave Scientology, the Hari Krishnas, the Moonies, and they could even
leave the People's Temple and Heaven's Gate (Total Overcomers Anonymous)
until the last few days of those groups existence. Are you going to
argue they aren't cults?

As far as leaving goes, there are between one and two million people a
year coerced to Step groups and there are 12 Step treatment centers
where people are prevented from leaving.

Also, you say a cult must have a leader. Most certainly, A.A. has its
leaders but I think you seem to think that because Bill Wilson is dead,
A.A. isn't a cult. By that logic, Scientology isn't a cult because
L.Ron Hubbard is dead and that if the Reverend Moon of the Moonies was
to die today, tomorrow the Moonies wouldn't be a cult either.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
I don't preach the Disease concept. Niether did Bill W and you know it. It
is only used in the Dr. Opinion.
Anyway let's move on to this cult thing. How come the 95% discussed are able
to leave? Did the big bad AA'ers go and threaten them or their families. Who
is the leader? A real cult goes to any length to keep members. AA is not
only a bad treatment, but they do a lousy job of being a cult. Let's hear
your spin.
GR
Gary,
I'm not the one who "wants it both ways." A.A. "help" does away with the
possibility for moderation in its members by preaching "Powerlessness" and
disease. Of course, one can argue that A.A. doesn't harm anyone who
doesn't believe anything they say.
Most people who are alcohol dependent at one point in their lives go on to
moderate and not only that, do so without any "help," no less the kind of
help that tells them it is impossible to do so.
Just because both moderation and abstinence are reasonable goals does not
mean that criticism of an organization that promotes only one goal and
insists the other goal is impossible for everyone is from someone who is
trying to have it both ways.
There are organizations that promote abstinence for their members without
coming up with a fake disease to frighten members/potential members into
thinking moderation is impossible for all alcohol dependents.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his
plan allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I
have no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or
whatever now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
GaryRock
2008-03-23 15:07:31 UTC
Permalink
Sciencetologist, moonies etc have been documented as threating and causing
harm to ex members. Were they free to leave Jonestown, Manson, Dividian etc.
Read factual books, not opinion's. Spare me the bullshit.
Then you go on a rant about alll these members promoting the Disease shit
and say they had disclaimers but they are not valid in Ken's World.. In your
world these people should be suppressed. THAT IS CULT TACTICS.
AA's are free to do as they please otherwise your talking to the last
fucking guy who would go. You are also free to have your (albeit long
winded) opinion. How come no AAer has firebombed your ass?

You are also bashing some Nun that as you quoted below "Helped 10,000
people". This Nun was some mean ass Cult leader. Whatever.

I though we already cleared up the stat thing. Ok, redundancy is required
with you. 2 million a year "COERCED". Once again that means 73 years times 2
million means 146 million have been coerced? Minus 1, as I was not coerced
(you can trust me on that one) leaves 145,000,999 have been COERCED to AA.
HALF THE USA!

GR
Gary,
While Wilson certainly had enough public disclaimers for alcoholism being
a disease, aside from "The Doctors Opinion" there are others including
those mentioned in the footnote from More Revealed directly below.
______________________________________________
Some AA members have stated that the concept of disease was foreign to
early AA, since it was a spiritual, not medical, program. However, much
reference is made to alcoholism being a disease by the earliest members of
AA in the Big Book. In telling of her own conversion process one of the
"pioneers of AA" says, "I was suffering from an actual disease that had a
name and symptoms like diabetes or cancer..."(p.227) Other early Big Book
references by the earliest members to alcoholism as a disease can be found
on pages 187, 191, 307 and 308. (Third edition)
______________________________________________
Of course, do not forget that even going back to the Oxford Group days,
the Groupers were in the habit of sequestering away potential recruits in
hospital rooms allowing them only Oxford Group visitors and Oxford Group
reading materials until they converted. They even had a term for this,
"oxfordizing."
From the official A.A. website,
_____________________________________________
During this hectic ten-year period, Dr. Bob devoted himself to the
question of hospital care for alcoholics, and to their indoctrination with
A.A. principles. Large numbers of alcoholics flocked to Akron to receive
hospital care at St. Thomas, a Catholic hospital. Dr. Bob became a member
of its staff. Subsequently, he and the remarkable Sister M. Ignatia, also
of the staff, cared for and brought A.A. to some 5,000 sufferers. After
Dr. Bob’s death in 1950, Sister Ignatia continued to work at Cleveland’s
Charity Hospital, where she was assisted by the local groups and where
10,000 more sufferers first found A.A. This set a fine example of
hospitalization wherein A.A. could cooperate with both medicine and
religion.
http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org/en_information_aa.cfm?PageID=2&SubPage=60
_____________________________________________
Of course, one wouldn't want to leave out the work of Marty Mann, the
first woman credited with long-term sobriety in A.A. and the organization
now named N.C.A.D.D. that set out to teach America that alcoholism is a
disease and needs treatment. http://www.ncadd.org/history/decade1.html
_____________________________________________
Now you can argue all you want that alcoholism as a disease is foreign to
A.A. because of the disclaimers Wilson made to outsiders as necessary to
win their support but it is very clear that A.A. members were busy
creating and promoting it.
You make a silly argument as to why A.A. isn't a cult. The first is
implying that because people can leave, it isn't a cult. People can leave
Scientology, the Hari Krishnas, the Moonies, and they could even leave the
People's Temple and Heaven's Gate (Total Overcomers Anonymous) until the
last few days of those groups existence. Are you going to argue they
aren't cults?
As far as leaving goes, there are between one and two million people a
year coerced to Step groups and there are 12 Step treatment centers where
people are prevented from leaving.
Also, you say a cult must have a leader. Most certainly, A.A. has its
leaders but I think you seem to think that because Bill Wilson is dead,
A.A. isn't a cult. By that logic, Scientology isn't a cult because L.Ron
Hubbard is dead and that if the Reverend Moon of the Moonies was to die
today, tomorrow the Moonies wouldn't be a cult either.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
I don't preach the Disease concept. Niether did Bill W and you know it.
It is only used in the Dr. Opinion.
Anyway let's move on to this cult thing. How come the 95% discussed are
able to leave? Did the big bad AA'ers go and threaten them or their
families. Who is the leader? A real cult goes to any length to keep
members. AA is not only a bad treatment, but they do a lousy job of being
a cult. Let's hear your spin.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
I'm not the one who "wants it both ways." A.A. "help" does away with
the possibility for moderation in its members by preaching
"Powerlessness" and disease. Of course, one can argue that A.A. doesn't
harm anyone who doesn't believe anything they say.
Most people who are alcohol dependent at one point in their lives go on
to moderate and not only that, do so without any "help," no less the
kind of help that tells them it is impossible to do so.
Just because both moderation and abstinence are reasonable goals does
not mean that criticism of an organization that promotes only one goal
and insists the other goal is impossible for everyone is from someone
who is trying to have it both ways.
There are organizations that promote abstinence for their members
without coming up with a fake disease to frighten members/potential
members into thinking moderation is impossible for all alcohol dependents.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his
plan allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I
have no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or
whatever now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
Ken
2008-03-23 18:40:59 UTC
Permalink
Gary,

And so have 12 Steppers. Or do you not consider it threatening and
causing harm when 12 Steppers threaten people with loss of their lives,
families, and careers? Or maybe it is not threatening and causing harm
if they are "two hatters"? Even when Steppers lie they believe they are
doing good, very much like the Moonies with their "divine deception."

And what are the factual books, pray tell? You have disputed even
official A.A. literature here.

Who said anyone should be suppressed? You are being just plain silly
now. What you mean is that no one should disagree with A.A.'s rewriting
of their own history and A.A.'s propaganda techniques. And _that_ is
cult tactics -- attack the critic.

Lol! And when you try to pretend A.A. isn't integrally tied up with
"disease", sometimes physical, "sometimes spiritual", you accuse me of
bashing a nun because I cite information from the A.A. literature where
A.A. was busy indoctrinating people into A.A. and its disease.

Maybe it is A.A. that was bashing the nun. Maybe A.A. is lying about
what they were doing with her. Lol!

And in other places when people criticize A.A. for encouraging coercion
A.A.ers argue that coercion never works but here, you argue that it has
to be all different people coerced every year to make up the 1 to 2
million people a year number. Lol! A.A. and you can't have it both ways.

One thing I can't argue with though, is that _with way A.A. talks_, one
would think it would be difficult finding a "suffering alcoholic" with
all the years "God's life-saving grace has been flowing through A.A.'s
world arteries" dispensing the miracle of recover. Lol!

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Sciencetologist, moonies etc have been documented as threating and causing
harm to ex members. Were they free to leave Jonestown, Manson, Dividian etc.
Read factual books, not opinion's. Spare me the bullshit.
Then you go on a rant about alll these members promoting the Disease shit
and say they had disclaimers but they are not valid in Ken's World.. In your
world these people should be suppressed. THAT IS CULT TACTICS.
AA's are free to do as they please otherwise your talking to the last
fucking guy who would go. You are also free to have your (albeit long
winded) opinion. How come no AAer has firebombed your ass?
You are also bashing some Nun that as you quoted below "Helped 10,000
people". This Nun was some mean ass Cult leader. Whatever.
I though we already cleared up the stat thing. Ok, redundancy is required
with you. 2 million a year "COERCED". Once again that means 73 years times 2
million means 146 million have been coerced? Minus 1, as I was not coerced
(you can trust me on that one) leaves 145,000,999 have been COERCED to AA.
HALF THE USA!
GR
Gary,
While Wilson certainly had enough public disclaimers for alcoholism being
a disease, aside from "The Doctors Opinion" there are others including
those mentioned in the footnote from More Revealed directly below.
______________________________________________
Some AA members have stated that the concept of disease was foreign to
early AA, since it was a spiritual, not medical, program. However, much
reference is made to alcoholism being a disease by the earliest members of
AA in the Big Book. In telling of her own conversion process one of the
"pioneers of AA" says, "I was suffering from an actual disease that had a
name and symptoms like diabetes or cancer..."(p.227) Other early Big Book
references by the earliest members to alcoholism as a disease can be found
on pages 187, 191, 307 and 308. (Third edition)
______________________________________________
Of course, do not forget that even going back to the Oxford Group days,
the Groupers were in the habit of sequestering away potential recruits in
hospital rooms allowing them only Oxford Group visitors and Oxford Group
reading materials until they converted. They even had a term for this,
"oxfordizing."
From the official A.A. website,
_____________________________________________
During this hectic ten-year period, Dr. Bob devoted himself to the
question of hospital care for alcoholics, and to their indoctrination with
A.A. principles. Large numbers of alcoholics flocked to Akron to receive
hospital care at St. Thomas, a Catholic hospital. Dr. Bob became a member
of its staff. Subsequently, he and the remarkable Sister M. Ignatia, also
of the staff, cared for and brought A.A. to some 5,000 sufferers. After
Dr. Bob’s death in 1950, Sister Ignatia continued to work at Cleveland’s
Charity Hospital, where she was assisted by the local groups and where
10,000 more sufferers first found A.A. This set a fine example of
hospitalization wherein A.A. could cooperate with both medicine and
religion.
http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org/en_information_aa.cfm?PageID=2&SubPage=60
_____________________________________________
Of course, one wouldn't want to leave out the work of Marty Mann, the
first woman credited with long-term sobriety in A.A. and the organization
now named N.C.A.D.D. that set out to teach America that alcoholism is a
disease and needs treatment. http://www.ncadd.org/history/decade1.html
_____________________________________________
Now you can argue all you want that alcoholism as a disease is foreign to
A.A. because of the disclaimers Wilson made to outsiders as necessary to
win their support but it is very clear that A.A. members were busy
creating and promoting it.
You make a silly argument as to why A.A. isn't a cult. The first is
implying that because people can leave, it isn't a cult. People can leave
Scientology, the Hari Krishnas, the Moonies, and they could even leave the
People's Temple and Heaven's Gate (Total Overcomers Anonymous) until the
last few days of those groups existence. Are you going to argue they
aren't cults?
As far as leaving goes, there are between one and two million people a
year coerced to Step groups and there are 12 Step treatment centers where
people are prevented from leaving.
Also, you say a cult must have a leader. Most certainly, A.A. has its
leaders but I think you seem to think that because Bill Wilson is dead,
A.A. isn't a cult. By that logic, Scientology isn't a cult because L.Ron
Hubbard is dead and that if the Reverend Moon of the Moonies was to die
today, tomorrow the Moonies wouldn't be a cult either.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
I don't preach the Disease concept. Niether did Bill W and you know it.
It is only used in the Dr. Opinion.
Anyway let's move on to this cult thing. How come the 95% discussed are
able to leave? Did the big bad AA'ers go and threaten them or their
families. Who is the leader? A real cult goes to any length to keep
members. AA is not only a bad treatment, but they do a lousy job of being
a cult. Let's hear your spin.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
I'm not the one who "wants it both ways." A.A. "help" does away with
the possibility for moderation in its members by preaching
"Powerlessness" and disease. Of course, one can argue that A.A. doesn't
harm anyone who doesn't believe anything they say.
Most people who are alcohol dependent at one point in their lives go on
to moderate and not only that, do so without any "help," no less the
kind of help that tells them it is impossible to do so.
Just because both moderation and abstinence are reasonable goals does
not mean that criticism of an organization that promotes only one goal
and insists the other goal is impossible for everyone is from someone
who is trying to have it both ways.
There are organizations that promote abstinence for their members
without coming up with a fake disease to frighten members/potential
members into thinking moderation is impossible for all alcohol dependents.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Good point. Ken wants it both ways. He bashed AA's for drinking but his
plan allows for consumption.
Personally since I started d&u at 13, once I start, I go on a run that
ususally takes some kind of disaster to stop. It got worse with age. I
have no choice but to abstain. I know others who after treatment, AA or
whatever now socially drink. So who is right or wrong here? Nobody.
I have never socially drank and have never wanted too as it is all or
nothing for me.
GR
Post by Kai R
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending
A.A. for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
But why do you find that a problem? Are you claiming abstinence is
mandatory for those with substance abuse problems?
--
Kai
GaryRock
2008-03-20 20:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by GaryRock
So if there are 2 mill members and 95% left, that means 40 MIILION people
have attempted AA in the first year.
Which averages to 800,000 a year over say, 50 years.
Who are the real "stupid" brainwashed ones here?
AA - 2 Million
Ken's Crew - 6
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
If you wish to keep score, let us do so.
* A.A. claims about 2,000,000 members worldwide.
* 95% who attend A.A. leave within the first year.
* Research has shown that only half of those who have been attending A.A.
for five years have managed to maintain abstinence.
* Even people like George Vaillant, Harvard psychiatrist, A.A. board
member and Al-Anon have found in their own research that not only do the
same number of people manage to abstain by going to A.A. as not, but A.A.
does away with all those who would have moderated their drinking and has
a far higher suicide rate.
* A.A. learned most of its methods of winning new recruits from being the
Oxford Group in the 1930s. The Oxford Group was a pro-fascist
quasi-fundamentalist religious group headed by Frank "Thank Heavens for a
man like Adolph Hitler" Buchman."
* A.A. has been promoting the idea with the public of drinking to excess
being a disease since the forties under the leadership of occasional
drunkard Marty Mann since the 40s with the front group N.C.A.A.D. It is
only as one works the Steps that it becomes clear to the pigeons (an A.A.
term for new indoctrinees) that they come to find out that it is a
"spiritual" disease.
* A.A. has such a miserable, indefensible record of actually helping
people that A.A. members frequently resort to the only thing they have
left -- name calling.
If one wants to learn more about the "program for alcoholism" channeled
through a dead monk directly to Bill Wilson, the 12 Steps, they can check
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/mr/newmr_5.jsp
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/index.jsp
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
Let's keep score.
AA - 2.5 million
Ken's Crew - 6 - 2 being mental cases and the rest using junkies.
GR
Post by Ken
Gary,
It seems you have forgotten the A.A. saying,
"No one is too stupid for the program but plenty of people are too
smart."
Sorry, you can't have it one way in meetings and the opposite way in
public forums.
Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/
Post by GaryRock
The truth if your in the bottom of the low IQ crowd.
GR
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Agent Orange has the rational truth on a website.
A must read for anyone whom needs the truth about recovery and 12
step
groups.
WWW Orange-Papers.org
Steve in Tennessee
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...