Missing the point!

[b***@gmail.com]

I am responding to question and comments from jason, Chuck and Loopy.
It has taken me many hours just to research enough to post this post
and I still haven't gathered all the information I intended to gather.
I hope you find it helpful.

Loopy,
Well then, if you can't show any CIA connection to control the minds of
the student/reader, what exactly are you claiming? As far as I can see
you present a suspicion that the CIA was involved in experiments, but
you can't describe these experiments nor can you show these
"experiments," had anything remotely to do with A Course in Miracles.

bidhati:
Through the reasearch I have done, I might have some different ideas as
to how and why Helen and her handlers came up with ACIM.

First of all, I do not believe that the CIA instigated the writing
of ACIM
for the purpose of controlling ACIMite's believers' minds, rather they
were
more interested in gaining the knowledge of how they could split a
person's
mind so that they would develop multiple personalities. After that,
they
wanted to know how to control the multiple personalities for reason's
related to national security and espionage.
The fact that she and Thetford may have believed the multiple
personality(Jesus) may be due to the obvious fact that ACIM seems
to be not only influenced by Thetford's Christian Science beliefs, but

also Helen's talents. One talent may have been the ability to write
in iambic pentameter, possibly derived from her love of Shakespeare's
works.
When you combine the intelligence of not only Helen and Thetford
but many of their educated collegues and research projecta that they
learned from, it is not surprising that ACIM could impress pea brains
that were not awareof their involvement with CIA contractors, and the
type of research that could lead to the writing of a religious
manipulation
such as ACIM.

Helen, may have just been a guinea pig or an unknowing victim, but
I find it odd that Jesus chose a woman that would spend her latter
days in a very dark depressive mentally ill state. Where was the
Happy Dream when she needed it? With all the first hand knowledge
that she had of the superior teachings of Jesus, she was certainly
left holding a rotten egg that was of no use to her.

excerpt from.....

http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/radio/ckln06.htm

The idea may have originated with Estabrooks but he may not have been
the first to actually publish it as such. Writing in "The
Psychoanalytic
Review" of 1947, Major Harvey Leavitt of the U.S. Army Medical Corps
described the hypnotic creation of a secondary personality,
"... hypnotically induced automatic writing was established early in
the course of treatment as a means of expeditiously gaining access to
unconscious material. After this procedure as utilized for a time, a
hypnotic secondary personality was produced by suggesting that the
writing was under control of a certain part of his personality unaware
to him.
" Leavitt then said that he created another personality in direct
contrast to
the one already established so he could work the two created
personalities
off against one another. He concluded, "... regardless of whether the
production of multiple personalities by means of hypnosis could be
construed
as additional proof that hypnosis is an artificially induced hysteria
or whether
the multiple personalities were artificial entities resulting from
direct
suggestions ... there exists a close relationship with personalities
spontaneously arising in hysterical dissociation. The importance of
producing
multiple personalities experimentally lies in the fact that certain
elements
of the original personality may be isolated which manifest a minimum of

censorship influences and thus may serve as helpful ajuncts in hypno-
analysis."


bidhati:
I think that it may be possible that Helen was either a knowing
volunteer
or an unknowing victim, or that she and Thetford were people who
started
to believe their own self created crapola.

Since much of Helen and Thetford's research was related to PAS
(Personality Assessment Sytem) created by Gittinger who is a confirmed
CIA contractor, it is important to know who he is and what he did....

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LSD/marks10.htm

Up until this point, most people have just thought
that Thetford was involved with the research done
by the CIA, but this list clearly shows that Helen
participated in research as well.

Also if you will read carefully, you will see that some of Helen's
research
and Thetford's is funded by Human Ecology.

http://www.pasf.org/print_bibliog.htm

excerpt........
Schucman, H. (1964, Sept.). Personality features and adaption
associated
with somatic reactions to stress. In W. N. Therford (Chm.), Human
ecology:
Studies in social and personality adaption. Symposium presented at
the
meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.

Human Ecology is the Code name of MKULTRA's and CIA program
that funded the research. There is no question that Gittinger worked
for the CIA for 26 years and there is no question that the Human
Ecology
Fund funded some of Schucman and Thetford's research.

Here are the senate hearing that prove that Gittinger was a CIA agent,
Humman Ecology was the name of the MKULTA program funded by
the CIA...

http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hearing06.htm


Also....
Gittinger's research on creating alters
and multiple personalities.Gittinger tested schizophrenics in
his early research and when the CIA hired him, he already
knew much(PAS) and continued his work, paid by the CIA.

The Joint Committe testimony and supporting documentation gives us
that
part of the purpose of these experiments was to develop, test, and
evaluate capabilities and techniques for producing predictable human
behavioral and/or physiological changes. The Select Committee report
tells us that "The research and development of materials to be used for
altering human behavior consisted of three phases: first, the search
for materials suitable for study; second, laboratory testing on
voluntary human subjects in various types of institutions; third, the
application of MKULTRA materials in normal life settings.

This leads me to wonder whether ACIM is the application of
MKULTRA material in normal life settings. I don't know that it has
worked to
CREATE dissassociative personalities that can be manipulated as
much as it has attracted people with personalities that can easily
disassociate themselves from reality.


Thetford worked on many projects funded by the CIA(Human Ecology)
and that were directly related to Gittinger's work(PAS) and Helen
also worked on a few projects funded by the CIA.

Excerpt.........
Thetford, W. N. (1961). Measurement of personality traits resulting
from the
interaction of abilities and environment: I. Theoretical formulation
underlying
the research. New York: Human Ecology Fund. (APA, N.Y.)

Thetford, W. N. (Chm.). (1964, Sept.). Human ecology: Studies in
social and
personality adaptation. Symposium presented at the meeting of the
American
Psychological Association, Los Angeles.

Thetford, W. N., & Schucman, H. (1962). The personality theory of John
Gittinger.
New York: Human Ecology Fund.

The reason that we may not know of the research that they may have been
doing during the writing of ACIM is because the Human Ecology Fund was
transfered to another name after 1962.

There is so much more information that casts more than a heavy shadow
of
a doubt as to whether Helen really channeled Jesus. The information is
too enormous to research. It takes a lot of concentration and the
ability
put events in chronological order to link people such as Gittinger,
Saunders, Spiegel and others to Thetford and Schucman but the
information is available. Thetford and Schucman had more than enough
research to know consciously or unconsciously how to create a multiple
personality, manipulate people to believe ideas that are beyond the
normal
person's comphrehension and education.

And all anyone has to do to further manipulate and/or control a
religious person is agree or pretend to agree with what they
believe(their
doctrines) and convince them that you are working for the good of
'whatever', according to what they believe. One more religious belief
like ACIM would not tip the applecart in favor of mind control through
religion, as there are plenty of religious ideas to choose from that
have
more followers. If ACIM had not been created, people with flaws in
their
reasoning ability would have found something else to believe to suit
their
gulliblity and need to think they are instructed by an invisible
authority.
We only have to look at President Bush's campaign to see that
this
is true. God Bless America approach played and plays a huge role in
getting people to agree with many things that Bush has done that might
otherwise been disagreed with.

No, I do not believe that ACIM was created by the CIA as a mind control
program for the masses, but rather was a by product of Thetford and
Schucman's combined research and education. They just may have got
hooked on their own crapola.

bidhati

[J]

Through the reasearch I have done, I might have some different ideas
as
to how and why Helen and her handlers came up with ACIM."

ROTFLMAO. What a team of "reseachers." Bodhi/Bidhati on the run from a
pedophile scandle, Katie Dean Vollmer who claimed to have stopped World
War III through Lazaris magic, and the anonomous, "Chuck," who
according to Katie Dean, she like to dress up in goldy lock curls and
pretty dresses.

Yeah, you guys are credible "reseachers." More like a bunch of
hysterics and fringe personalities who choose A Course in Miracles to
vent your paranoia.

[A]

***@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]

Post by b***@gmail.com
Through the reasearch I have done, I might have some different ideas as
to how and why Helen and her handlers came up with ACIM.
First of all, I do not believe that the CIA instigated the writing
of ACIM
for the purpose of controlling ACIMite's believers' minds, rather they
were
more interested in gaining the knowledge of how they could split a
person's
mind so that they would develop multiple personalities. After that,
they
wanted to know how to control the multiple personalities for reason's
related to national security and espionage.

So this is what you've deduced based upon the
"research" you've done? What a fucking idiot.

I understand why you were a Ramtha groupie. A
nitwit is a nitwit is a nitwit, no matter who
or what goofy teacher, or theory they follow.

Did you think this up all by yourself, or did
you get some help from the drunks at the bar?

[snip]

[Pieter Douwes]

Post by b***@gmail.com
Through the reasearch I have done, I might have some different ideas as
to how and why Helen and her handlers came up with ACIM.

Are you sure it was not
a prejudice you wanted to affirm;
that you had not made up your mind already
*before* you did any research?
Since if that is the case,
you cannot but find
what you look for.

[b***@gmail.com]

Pieter:
Are you sure it was not
a prejudice you wanted to affirm;
that you had not made up your mind already
*before* you did any research?
Since if that is the case,
you cannot but find
what you look for.

bidhati:
There was a time when I was a student of ACIM. I think that I speak
from a point of having had a mind set that allowed me not to question
the validity of ACIM. Therefore I do not think I have a predjudice
toward ACIM as much as I have a common sense approach to nonsensical
religious ideas that have no basis of proof that they are true other
than a group of people have chosen to believe them and pass the mind
viruses on to other people.

C'mon, Pieter, ACIM is just as ridiculous as the Ramtha Teachings and
many other New Age mumbo jumbo teachings. Helen may have had a bit of a
jump on the New Age movement but her claims are no more proveable than
any other New Age claim that is based on subjective experience. Because
someone 'feels' ACIM is the truth or 'feels good' by believing it does
not give any more credence than any other made up claim or story that a
person can take and through mere attribution, reach a conclusion that
it is superior knowlege that will, somehow if followed, magically lead
them from the terrible state of being a mere human being to being a
God, or God, or rewarded with a wonderful life by God.

If you notice this site is nothing but an exchange of human ideas of
what the Course REALLY means to how special people are because they
believe it and it has been that to the students since the day of it's
conception. Even the scribe or author with her so called special
talents of hearing the voice of Jesus could not utilize it so that she
got the ultimate pay-off for following the dangling carrot. Geez,
people will probably be doing this tail chasing long after you are
dead, and that is the really sad thing.

I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.
I do not expect you to know or understand what I am talking about
because you could not possibly know how it feels to have claimed
ownership of your own mind. I have walked in your shoes with your
beliefs, and I really do understand the way you and many of these
people think. I know the reasons that you so desperately need to
believe. You have never walked in my in my shoes and have never thought
the way I think now, so I do not expect you to think of me as anything
but predjudice, or disruptive, or insulting. Why? Because these
particlur beliefs always use and angle to make sure that you never get
free from the bonds of ignorant thinking. ACIM's angle is that anything
that says anything different than what ACIM claims is the ego. In
Christianity, anything that contradicts the Bible is the Devil or the
anti-christ. Hell, delusion, bad karma, which is just really human
suffering is the punishment for not believing. Convincing people that
all sufferring is due to a human error in thinking is simply nonsense,
but it is a belief that is designed for those who find it hard to face
reality and not only deal with it, but possibly change it. And by
changing it, I do not mean handing someone an airy fairy belief that
allows them to deny that the world and suffering exist.

[Noggin]

Post by Pieter Douwes
Are you sure it was not
a prejudice you wanted to affirm;
that you had not made up your mind already
*before* you did any research?
Since if that is the case,
you cannot but find
what you look for.
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.
I do not expect you to know or understand what I am talking about
because you could not possibly know how it feels to have claimed
ownership of your own mind.

And there's the incontrivertible fact of the matter. You opened your mind to other possibilities
and the True Believers have not and will not. Yet they will close their minds like steel traps
to any other possibility about you, or me, or anyone else who's done the research they haven't,
while declaring us to be the closed minded ones.

Pieter hasn't done any research into the materials that you have, he hasn't opened his mind to
concepts that aren't spoon fed to him by ACIM, his mind is made up already, so he is doing what
he accuses you of, affirming his prejudice. As to anyone finding what they are looking for, that
is not for anyone else to judge unless they state what they are looking for with credibility
backed up by demonstrable evidence. If the ACIMites are looking for "love", "peace",
"forgiveness" "wisdom" and "joining" as they say, they have not achieved these states by
demonstrable fact. They could be looking for something else, and I have to agree with you that
all roads point to "Specialness", and clearly ACIM provides them with a sense of that, and all
the little ACIM based cults provide a sense of validation of that. They might disagree and fight
about almost anything else, but the Chain that Binds is the believe that they are special for
believing in ACIM, irregardless of the fact that you can't get two of them in agreement about
what it even means. Open minds can notice these things, closed minds remain forever enslaved to
the false promises and claims.

Post by Pieter Douwes
I have walked in your shoes with your
beliefs, and I really do understand the way you and many of these
people think.

The same with me, but not the same with those who like to accuse us of prejudice, close
mindedness, and ignorance. It's a tough fact to face, hence the need to make things up about us
instead, even to the extent that some can't even grant us our individual identities. I guess
they think we don't know who we are or something, go figure. But let's face it, the show is all
about validating the cult, it has nothing to do with you, me, or anyone else who isn't a member.
But we're not meant to notice.

Post by Pieter Douwes
I know the reasons that you so desperately need to
believe. You have never walked in my in my shoes and have never thought
the way I think now, so I do not expect you to think of me as anything
but predjudice, or disruptive, or insulting. Why? Because these
particlur beliefs always use and angle to make sure that you never get
free from the bonds of ignorant thinking.

My point precisely. And we can evaluate ignorant thinking because we bother ourselves with
facts, even the easy ones, like getting to know each other in 3D rather than depending on our
impressions from an internet newsgroup. Yet, we are meant to be shamed into believing things
that we know to be untrue. Quite the struggle these people have taken on for themselves, I often
wonder what they get out of it.

Post by Pieter Douwes
ACIM's angle is that anything
that says anything different than what ACIM claims is the ego

As with all assertions of false authority, it is self-validating. The second one steps outside
the box of it, or as they like to say the "paradigm" of ACIM, nothing holds together. The second
they accept their OWN authority on what their experience is, what they are feeling, what is going
on around them, ACIM reveals itself as the deadly soul sucking mindrape it is intended to be.
The world abounds with sources of true and profound inspiration that are all cut off by the ACIM
claim that it's all just "ego illusion". Our actualities abound with fellow humans having true
and profound experiences around us that are all cut off by the ACIM claim that they are just "ego
illusions". There isn't an ACIMite here who doesn't evaluate everything and everyone in their
lives against the claims and promises made on the false authority of ACIM.

Post by Pieter Douwes
In
Christianity, anything that contradicts the Bible is the Devil or the
anti-christ. Hell, delusion, bad karma, which is just really human
suffering is the punishment for not believing. Convincing people that
all sufferring is due to a human error in thinking is simply nonsense,
but it is a belief that is designed for those who find it hard to face
reality and not only deal with it, but possibly change it. And by
changing it, I do not mean handing someone an airy fairy belief that
allows them to deny that the world and suffering exist.

There's no question that since the beginning of recorded history humanity has sought to explain
the unexplainable. Little by little it learned how to test and prove theories and in doing so
managed to explain a lot of things at least to the point of functionality. There is much we
don't know, but we do know enough about how things work to have evolved into an industrial,
technological, and intellectual society that more than amply provides for our needs and many of
our desires. We can therefore establish that the methods used to achieve that knowledge is
useful, functional and valid.

None of those methods can be applied to the evolution of "spiritual" beliefs, that's the problem.
We can explore, guess, surmise, suppose, hope, imagine, fantasize, dream, and most of us enjoy
doing that. The problem arises the second we accept anyone else as an "authority" on these
matters, because the fact is that no one is an authority on these matters. We're all here for
some unknown reason headed for some unknown fate, and that scares the pants off of people, so the
emotionally satisfying solution for the moment is to latch onto whatever "authority" is telling
us what we want to hear. And we want to hear it so badly that we forget all about the testing and
proving process is all we know that does actually function for us.

If you take apart any of these "speeeeritchual" beliefs, they are all self-validating, the same
as ACIM is. Every experience is funnelled through the "paradigm" of whatever dogma, promises,or
claims are being made by someone whose "authority" we have emotionally latched onto, and it's the
false authority that causes the trouble, because people use it to "prove "their own theories, and
that isn't the functional way to prove anything.

Dumping the false authorities requires us to start from scratch. It means reviewing each of our
beliefs under a completely different light. That can be a scary and emotionally paralyzing
prospect, there's no question, but only to the point where we are still holding on to the idea
that someone else can and does know any better than we do what the hell is going on here. For
me, the moment of liberation came when I truly did let go of the idea of outside "authority" on
these matters, and I accepted the fact that I'm essentially on my own to figure things out. Which
is not to say that the thoughts and experiences of others are of no interest to me. They are of
vast interest to me, as long as they aren't offered on the basis of false authority. I have no
interest, and I know I have nothing to gain but headaches from investing in the claimed
"authority" of others on matters for which they can provide no proof or evidence of their claims
and promises except on the basis of the claims and promises of other sources of false authority.
There's the heart of the problem, the claims of false authority. Without it, we can function
together to have shared understanding that are meaningful and productive. In it's presence all
we can do is enslave ourselves to it, or claim it for ourselves and enslave others. Operating
from a place of false authority is fundamentally the most vile thing we can do to others and
ourselves, it's the proven root of all that is rotten in life.

Which brings us back to the point in question, that being that you are operating from a place of
preconceived notions and prejudice. The facts prove otherwise, and it's about the most
ridiculous and dishonest accusation that can be made about someone like you, or me, who has taken
the time, had the courage, and cared about ourselves enough to step outside the box, drop the
need for someone else's claims of authority, and go in on our own.

As both of us have said countless times, there is no one who could possibly understand the
ultimate sense of freedom and elation that comes from that choice, or I should say each one of
those choices, because it is a process. We don't just drop all our dubious beliefs overnight, it
takes time, attention to detail, and most of all a passion for the Truth.

It's unlikely to me that we have or will ever have all the necessary components to "KNOW" all
that we wish to know, during our lifetimes. It is evident and provable to me though, that we can
certainly really KNOW a lot of things that our enslavement to false authorities prevented us from
knowing, and that's really the bottom line here, isn't it?

One thing I do KNOW is that this bunch of nutters is full of shit, that they are a nasty bunch,
most of whom aren't even well-educated in any classical sense, so they don't even have the
benefit of that frame of reference. They have spent their life energy invested in studying false
authorities and trying to fit every other experience into the nice cozy boxes labeleled
"specialness" by those false authorities. That is not the way to educate oneself, or to be able
to put anything into a valid, useful, or functional context.

Anyway, I know you know what I mean, and I also know that it's unlikely that any of these
"enlightened" ones can even read through a post like this without the denial and avoidance
kicking in and fueling all the inevitable knee-jerk sneerings, ugly judgements, and rubber/glue
games. Because, let's face it, there's nowhere else to go with all that "enlightenment". It's a
self defeating system.

I guess they can't answer the question "what do you get out of it?" because when they try all
they can come up with is crap, and they know it's crap, they know it isn't what they signed on
for, it isn't what was claimed and promised, so better to try to kill the questioner, as we see
from Pieter's baseless accusations.

[A]

***@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.

Uh huh. That's why you've been spending this
past six months posting on the newsgroup, to
convince everybody (including yourself) that
is so? If you were so "happy and content", I
doubt you'd be wasting your life with a gang
people you claim you don't like, or respect.

Jerkoffs like you are miserable little turds
who try desperately to forget how they acted
like sheep by following idiots like "Ramtha"
or "Lazaris". No matter how much time you or
Katie spend here, it clearly never helps you
feel any better about yourself. Yet here you
stay, convinced beyond reason that magically
one day it will happen. It's said that doing
the same thing over and over while expecting
a different result is insanity. You two stay
here, hoping that insulting the posters here
will relieve your guilt and shame. It hasn't
worked for you yet, I'd think that if you're
half as intelligent as you say, you would've
have figured it out by now. No such luck. :)

[snip]

[Pieter Douwes]

Post by Pieter Douwes
Are you sure it was not
a prejudice you wanted to affirm;
that you had not made up your mind already
*before* you did any research?
Since if that is the case,
you cannot but find
what you look for.
There was a time when I was a student of ACIM. I think that I speak
from a point of having had a mind set that allowed me not to question
the validity of ACIM.

So you studied ACIM compulsively?

Post by Pieter Douwes
Therefore I do not think I have a predjudice
toward ACIM as much as I have a common sense approach to nonsensical
religious ideas that have no basis of proof that they are true other
than a group of people have chosen to believe them and pass the mind
viruses on to other people.

Did you study ACIM because of
a group of people believing in it?
While your common sense indicated
that it is an accumulation of
nonsensical religious ideas?

Post by Pieter Douwes
C'mon, Pieter, ACIM is just as ridiculous as the Ramtha Teachings and
many other New Age mumbo jumbo teachings. Helen may have had a bit of a
jump on the New Age movement but her claims are no more proveable than
any other New Age claim that is based on subjective experience. Because
someone 'feels' ACIM is the truth or 'feels good' by believing it does
not give any more credence than any other made up claim or story that a
person can take and through mere attribution, reach a conclusion that
it is superior knowlege that will, somehow if followed, magically lead
them from the terrible state of being a mere human being to being a
God, or God, or rewarded with a wonderful life by God.
If you notice this site is nothing but an exchange of human ideas of
what the Course REALLY means to how special people are because they
believe it

That is not a teaching of ACIM.
Understanding ACIM does mean
knowing that we human beings are equals.

Post by Pieter Douwes
and it has been that to the students since the day of it's
conception. Even the scribe or author with her so called special
talents of hearing the voice of Jesus could not utilize it so that she
got the ultimate pay-off for following the dangling carrot. Geez,
people will probably be doing this tail chasing long after you are
dead, and that is the really sad thing.
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.

You are absolutely right to follow your heart
and your own intuition, not that of others.

Post by Pieter Douwes
I do not expect you to know or understand what I am talking about
because you could not possibly know how it feels to have claimed
ownership of your own mind.

You mean becoming an adult
from being an adolescent.
I know the process.

Post by Pieter Douwes
I have walked in your shoes with your
beliefs, and I really do understand the way you and many of these
people think. I know the reasons that you so desperately need to
believe. You have never walked in my in my shoes and have never thought
the way I think now, so I do not expect you to think of me as anything
but predjudice, or disruptive, or insulting. Why? Because these
particlur beliefs always use and angle to make sure that you never get
free from the bonds of ignorant thinking.

This sounds to me as
the protesting adolescent who thinks
(s)he is hindered in becoming self-reliant.

Post by Pieter Douwes
ACIM's angle is that anything
that says anything different than what ACIM claims is the ego. In
Christianity, anything that contradicts the Bible is the Devil or the
anti-christ. Hell, delusion, bad karma, which is just really human
suffering is the punishment for not believing.

Say whatever you want about ACIM, but in it
punishment is *only* an artifact of the ego.

Post by Pieter Douwes
Convincing people that
all sufferring is due to a human error in thinking is simply nonsense,
but it is a belief that is designed for those who find it hard to face
reality and not only deal with it, but possibly change it. And by
changing it, I do not mean handing someone an airy fairy belief that
allows them to deny that the world and suffering exist.

[~Deborah]

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living

I see.

(~Deborah thinks 'yikes')...

carry on, you can prolly pull the wool over your eyes for as long as you
like....

Post by b***@gmail.com
since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.
I do not expect you to know or understand what I am talking about
because you could not possibly know how it feels to have claimed
ownership of your own mind. I have walked in your shoes with your
beliefs, and I really do understand the way you and many of these
people think. I know the reasons that you so desperately need to
believe. You have never walked in my in my shoes and have never thought
the way I think now, so I do not expect you to think of me as anything
but predjudice, or disruptive, or insulting.

I see.

(further thoughts of OMG!)

Post by b***@gmail.com
Why? Because these
particlur beliefs always use and angle to make sure that you never get
free from the bonds of ignorant thinking.
ACIM's angle is that anything
that says anything different than what ACIM claims is the ego. In
Christianity, anything that contradicts the Bible is the Devil or the
anti-christ. Hell, delusion, bad karma, which is just really human
suffering is the punishment for not believing. Convincing people that
all sufferring is due to a human error in thinking is simply nonsense,
but it is a belief that is designed for those who find it hard to face
reality and not only deal with it, but possibly change it. And by
changing it, I do not mean handing someone an airy fairy belief that
allows them to deny that the world and suffering exist.

Don't worry Bidhati... Be Happy... <I'm whistling>
:)

~Deborah

[jason]

Therefore I do not think I have a predjudice

Post by b***@gmail.com
toward ACIM as much as I have a common sense approach to nonsensical
religious ideas that have no basis of proof that they are true other
than a group of people have chosen to believe them

but this could be said of any and all religious or spiritual belief.
this is the nature of spiritual and religious belief throughout the
ages; God's existence cannot be "proven" scientifically so the
individual believes because of faith.

all this proves....is that you are an atheist.
so what.

[Noggin]

Post by b***@gmail.com
Therefore I do not think I have a predjudice

Post by b***@gmail.com
toward ACIM as much as I have a common sense approach to nonsensical
religious ideas that have no basis of proof that they are true other
than a group of people have chosen to believe them

but this could be said of any and all religious or spiritual belief.

Correct.

Post by b***@gmail.com
this is the nature of spiritual and religious belief throughout the
ages; God's existence cannot be "proven" scientifically so the
individual believes because of faith.
all this proves....is that you are an atheist.
so what.

Jason, all it proves is that she's not willing to accept things soley on the basis of blind
faith.

If people who are so willing would just admit it, there would be no need for many of these
debates, actually. I don't know why people don't admit it, especially those who promote the idea
that it's a good and helpful thing to do.

There are non-atheists, myself included, who can seperate out the difference between what we
believe on the basis of blind faith, what we have some reason to suspect, and what we know for
sure becasuse we can prove it to ourselves and anyone else who uses the standard methods of
evaluation. We can place appropriate weight on each of these categories of belief, and be clear
about where we are with things. One of the benefits of that process is that it doesn't result in
us getting hysterical and feeling that we have been mortally wounded by incoming assaults every
time we are faced with a question or doubt about those of our beliefs that we know we are
accepting on blind faith, or just "some" reason to suspect.

There's really nothing wrong with blind faith, if you just take it as a part of the equation, but
there's everything wrong with it, when it's the only part of the equation.

[jason]

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.

if you were really happy and content, I doubt that you'd be frantically
googling the internet to try and find some kind hasty CIA conspiracy
theory to prove that a blue book wasn't inspired by Jesus to 10 or 11
people who have already made up there minds about such matters.

i suspect you would actually be out there enjoying your happiness and
contentness.
if you really have given up these foolish notions, why are you running
around trying so admantly to PROVE they are bunk? sounds to me like
you haven't given them up at all....there must be some doubt lingering
in there. if you really didn't believe in it then you simply
wouldn't concern yourself with such things anymore and go on about your
life.

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.

if you were really happy and content, I doubt that you'd be frantically
googling the internet to try and find some kind hasty CIA conspiracy
theory to prove that a blue book wasn't inspired by Jesus to 10 or 11
people who have already made up there minds about such matters.
i suspect you would actually be out there enjoying your happiness and
contentness.
if you really have given up these foolish notions, why are you running
around trying so admantly to PROVE they are bunk? sounds to me like
you haven't given them up at all....there must be some doubt lingering
in there. if you really didn't believe in it then you simply
wouldn't concern yourself with such things anymore and go on about your
life.

Come on, Jason! Everything you just said to bidhati can be more accurately said about you, based
on this post.

The quest for information and knowledge is a part of a healthy, happy, productive life, the
history of humanity has shown that time and time again. It has also shown that it's the work of
narrow, immature, jealous, and frightened minds to pooh pooh, sneer and jeer at it and try to get
it to stop.

Read a Dickens novel, it will help strengthen your mind against the discomforts it feels when
it's challenged. And it will add to your happiness and enjoyment of life, I promise, and give
you a far better frame of reference about the qualities and endeavors that result in a joyful or
a bitter life.

In fact, since it's your birthday, I'm going to order you one from Amazon. You'll be hearing
from me.

[A]

[snip]

Post by Noggin

Post by jason
i suspect you would actually be out there enjoying your happiness and
contentness.
if you really have given up these foolish notions, why are you running
around trying so admantly to PROVE they are bunk? sounds to me like
you haven't given them up at all....there must be some doubt lingering
in there. if you really didn't believe in it then you simply
wouldn't concern yourself with such things anymore and go on about your
life.

Come on, Jason! Everything you just said to bidhati can be more accurately said about you, based
on this post.
The quest for information and knowledge is a part of a healthy, happy, productive life

Are you suggesting that what Bidshiti is doing
here is a quest for information and knowledge?

You're even dumber than I thought. Trust me, I
didn't think that was possible. You fooled me.

Then you're not the "Cosmic Fool" for nothing.

[Nancy]

Post by A
Are you suggesting that what Bidshiti is doing
here is a quest for information and knowledge?
You're even dumber than I thought. Trust me, I
didn't think that was possible. You fooled me.
Then you're not the "Cosmic Fool" for nothing.

She already knows it all -- right down to the
most fleeting thought that passes through the
mind of a trcm lurker.

Just joking. :))

There is a word for folk who believe they
know what everyone else is thinking.
Unfortunately it escapes me,

n.

[jason]

Post by Noggin

Post by jason

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.

if you were really happy and content, I doubt that you'd be frantically
googling the internet to try and find some kind hasty CIA conspiracy
theory to prove that a blue book wasn't inspired by Jesus to 10 or 11
people who have already made up there minds about such matters.
i suspect you would actually be out there enjoying your happiness and
contentness.
if you really have given up these foolish notions, why are you running
around trying so admantly to PROVE they are bunk? sounds to me like
you haven't given them up at all....there must be some doubt lingering
in there. if you really didn't believe in it then you simply
wouldn't concern yourself with such things anymore and go on about your
life.

Come on, Jason! Everything you just said to bidhati can be more accurately said about you, based
on this post.
The quest for information and knowledge is a part of a healthy, happy, productive life, the
history of humanity has shown that time and time again. It has also shown that it's the work of
narrow, immature, jealous, and frightened minds to pooh pooh, sneer and jeer at it and try to get
it to stop.
Read a Dickens novel, it will help strengthen your mind against the discomforts it feels when
it's challenged. And it will add to your happiness and enjoyment of life, I promise, and give
you a far better frame of reference about the qualities and endeavors that result in a joyful or
a bitter life.
In fact, since it's your birthday, I'm going to order you one from Amazon. You'll be hearing
from me.

i'm currently reading Animal Farm. orwell. dickens is next.

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by Noggin

Post by jason

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can never expect you to understand how happy and content I am with
living since I gave up these foolish New Age notions and how freeing it
is to suddenly be able to see this nonsense for what it is, nonsense.

if you were really happy and content, I doubt that you'd be frantically
googling the internet to try and find some kind hasty CIA conspiracy
theory to prove that a blue book wasn't inspired by Jesus to 10 or 11
people who have already made up there minds about such matters.
i suspect you would actually be out there enjoying your happiness and
contentness.
if you really have given up these foolish notions, why are you running
around trying so admantly to PROVE they are bunk? sounds to me like
you haven't given them up at all....there must be some doubt lingering
in there. if you really didn't believe in it then you simply
wouldn't concern yourself with such things anymore and go on about your
life.

Come on, Jason! Everything you just said to bidhati can be more accurately said about you,
based
on this post.
The quest for information and knowledge is a part of a healthy, happy, productive life, the
history of humanity has shown that time and time again. It has also shown that it's the work
of
narrow, immature, jealous, and frightened minds to pooh pooh, sneer and jeer at it and try to
get
it to stop.
Read a Dickens novel, it will help strengthen your mind against the discomforts it feels when
it's challenged. And it will add to your happiness and enjoyment of life, I promise, and give
you a far better frame of reference about the qualities and endeavors that result in a joyful
or
a bitter life.
In fact, since it's your birthday, I'm going to order you one from Amazon. You'll be hearing
from me.

i'm currently reading Animal Farm. orwell. dickens is next.

That's good! Dickens will be a nice change from Orwell. There's quite a contrast between the
ways they both address social ills and the condition of humanity.

Did you get my email???

[jason]

Post by b***@gmail.com
There was a time when I was a student of ACIM.

so let me get this straight.
you were a student of ACIM.
and you decided it wasn't for you.

now where's all the secret mind control
brain numbing zombie stuff in the book then??

if you studied it and decided you could take it or leave it
and it didn't make a mind numbed cultie out of you
than there's obviously nothing malevolant with the material. right?

in fact you are A Perfect EXAMPLE of how it's not a cultic teaching!

[J]

"in fact you are A Perfect EXAMPLE of how it's not a cultic teaching!"

ROTFLMAO. Yeah, don't you just love these hysterics who ramble on about
a book, as though somehow it beyond their personal power and free will
to simply put the book down and sell it at a yard sale?

[Nancy]

Post by J
"in fact you are A Perfect EXAMPLE of
how it's not a cultic teaching!"
ROTFLMAO. Yeah, don't you just love
these hysterics who ramble on about
a book, as though somehow it beyond
their personal power and free will
to simply put the book down and sell
it at a yard sale?

LOL!

n.

[J]

Post by J
ROTFLMAO. Yeah, don't you just love
these hysterics who ramble on about
a book, as though somehow it beyond
their personal power and free will
to simply put the book down and sell
it at a yard sale?

LOL!

That's what it boils down to, right? Somehow none of the hysterics ever
explain how people can be made to read a book or the CIA can make
people read a book. A classic example of don't ask too many questions,
just believe what idiots on the Internet tell ya.

[jason]

Post by J
"in fact you are A Perfect EXAMPLE of how it's not a cultic teaching!"
ROTFLMAO. Yeah, don't you just love these hysterics who ramble on about
a book, as though somehow it beyond their personal power and free will
to simply put the book down and sell it at a yard sale?

indeedie.

what's most disturbing is that this kind of simple, plain, and ordinary
logical conclusion totally escapes the frantic anti-course culties.
hmmmmm.....simple logical conclusions being missed...reminds me of a
cult zombie! how ironical!

the truth is that if any of these ANTI-course goofs could show me some
logical objection
I might listen. but so far all i'm seeing is frothing at the mouth.

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by J
"in fact you are A Perfect EXAMPLE of how it's not a cultic teaching!"
ROTFLMAO. Yeah, don't you just love these hysterics who ramble on about
a book, as though somehow it beyond their personal power and free will
to simply put the book down and sell it at a yard sale?

indeedie.
what's most disturbing is that this kind of simple, plain, and ordinary
logical conclusion totally escapes the frantic anti-course culties.
hmmmmm.....simple logical conclusions being missed...reminds me of a
cult zombie! how ironical!
the truth is that if any of these ANTI-course goofs could show me some
logical objection
I might listen. but so far all i'm seeing is frothing at the mouth.

Ahhhhh, so my understanding of your perspective is incorrect! I should have read all your posts
before arriving at my conclusions...therein lies the benefit of careful research!!

You'll never see anything BUT frothing at the mouth, Jason, as long as you think that
questioning, doubting, and researching require one to froth at the mouth.

The fact is that you can't see us, so all the frothing is only in your own imagination. Why do
you imagine us frothing, wonder? If you were to KNOW that we are not frothing, would it change
your opinion about anything?

[dryd[takethisout]]

Post by b***@gmail.com
all sufferring is due to a human error in thinking is simply

True!

Just think about it. An error in thinking is what has caused all the
problems in the world. Before anything can happen (excluding natural
disasters), first it must be thought of. If the thinking is in error so
is the resulting action. That is a self evident truth.
If you want to pick holes in Acim teaching, you need to find another
point than this one, because no matter what you come up with in the way
of suffering there will be an error in thinking that led to it happening.

[Chuck]

Hi bidhati,

Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.

I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of whatever
they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they had no
control over this according to the funding rules.

But there are also some differences.

I can see the relationship with MPD, but I also see a relationship with
other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.

My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the needs
for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping" and editing
the tool to customize it to the specific area of interest by subject
matter experts in that area.

I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

Post by b***@gmail.com
I am responding to question and comments from jason, Chuck and Loopy.
It has taken me many hours just to research enough to post this post
and I still haven't gathered all the information I intended to gather.
I hope you find it helpful.
Loopy,
Well then, if you can't show any CIA connection to control the minds of
the student/reader, what exactly are you claiming? As far as I can see
you present a suspicion that the CIA was involved in experiments, but
you can't describe these experiments nor can you show these
"experiments," had anything remotely to do with A Course in Miracles.
Through the reasearch I have done, I might have some different ideas as
to how and why Helen and her handlers came up with ACIM.
First of all, I do not believe that the CIA instigated the writing
of ACIM
for the purpose of controlling ACIMite's believers' minds, rather they
were
more interested in gaining the knowledge of how they could split a
person's
mind so that they would develop multiple personalities. After that,
they
wanted to know how to control the multiple personalities for reason's
related to national security and espionage.
The fact that she and Thetford may have believed the multiple
personality(Jesus) may be due to the obvious fact that ACIM seems
to be not only influenced by Thetford's Christian Science beliefs, but
also Helen's talents. One talent may have been the ability to write
in iambic pentameter, possibly derived from her love of Shakespeare's
works.
When you combine the intelligence of not only Helen and Thetford
but many of their educated collegues and research projecta that they
learned from, it is not surprising that ACIM could impress pea brains
that were not awareof their involvement with CIA contractors, and the
type of research that could lead to the writing of a religious
manipulation
such as ACIM.
Helen, may have just been a guinea pig or an unknowing victim, but
I find it odd that Jesus chose a woman that would spend her latter
days in a very dark depressive mentally ill state. Where was the
Happy Dream when she needed it? With all the first hand knowledge
that she had of the superior teachings of Jesus, she was certainly
left holding a rotten egg that was of no use to her.
excerpt from.....
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/radio/ckln06.htm
The idea may have originated with Estabrooks but he may not have been
the first to actually publish it as such. Writing in "The
Psychoanalytic
Review" of 1947, Major Harvey Leavitt of the U.S. Army Medical Corps
described the hypnotic creation of a secondary personality,
"... hypnotically induced automatic writing was established early in
the course of treatment as a means of expeditiously gaining access to
unconscious material. After this procedure as utilized for a time, a
hypnotic secondary personality was produced by suggesting that the
writing was under control of a certain part of his personality unaware
to him.
" Leavitt then said that he created another personality in direct
contrast to
the one already established so he could work the two created
personalities
off against one another. He concluded, "... regardless of whether the
production of multiple personalities by means of hypnosis could be
construed
as additional proof that hypnosis is an artificially induced hysteria
or whether
the multiple personalities were artificial entities resulting from
direct
suggestions ... there exists a close relationship with personalities
spontaneously arising in hysterical dissociation. The importance of
producing
multiple personalities experimentally lies in the fact that certain
elements
of the original personality may be isolated which manifest a minimum of
censorship influences and thus may serve as helpful ajuncts in hypno-
analysis."
I think that it may be possible that Helen was either a knowing
volunteer
or an unknowing victim, or that she and Thetford were people who
started
to believe their own self created crapola.
Since much of Helen and Thetford's research was related to PAS
(Personality Assessment Sytem) created by Gittinger who is a confirmed
CIA contractor, it is important to know who he is and what he did....
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LSD/marks10.htm
Up until this point, most people have just thought
that Thetford was involved with the research done
by the CIA, but this list clearly shows that Helen
participated in research as well.
Also if you will read carefully, you will see that some of Helen's
research
and Thetford's is funded by Human Ecology.
http://www.pasf.org/print_bibliog.htm
excerpt........
Schucman, H. (1964, Sept.). Personality features and adaption
associated
with somatic reactions to stress. In W. N. Therford (Chm.), Human
Studies in social and personality adaption. Symposium presented at
the
meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.
Human Ecology is the Code name of MKULTRA's and CIA program
that funded the research. There is no question that Gittinger worked
for the CIA for 26 years and there is no question that the Human
Ecology
Fund funded some of Schucman and Thetford's research.
Here are the senate hearing that prove that Gittinger was a CIA agent,
Humman Ecology was the name of the MKULTA program funded by
the CIA...
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hearing06.htm
Also....
Gittinger's research on creating alters
and multiple personalities.Gittinger tested schizophrenics in
his early research and when the CIA hired him, he already
knew much(PAS) and continued his work, paid by the CIA.
The Joint Committe testimony and supporting documentation gives us
that
part of the purpose of these experiments was to develop, test, and
evaluate capabilities and techniques for producing predictable human
behavioral and/or physiological changes. The Select Committee report
tells us that "The research and development of materials to be used for
altering human behavior consisted of three phases: first, the search
for materials suitable for study; second, laboratory testing on
voluntary human subjects in various types of institutions; third, the
application of MKULTRA materials in normal life settings.
This leads me to wonder whether ACIM is the application of
MKULTRA material in normal life settings. I don't know that it has
worked to
CREATE dissassociative personalities that can be manipulated as
much as it has attracted people with personalities that can easily
disassociate themselves from reality.
Thetford worked on many projects funded by the CIA(Human Ecology)
and that were directly related to Gittinger's work(PAS) and Helen
also worked on a few projects funded by the CIA.
Excerpt.........
Thetford, W. N. (1961). Measurement of personality traits resulting
from the
interaction of abilities and environment: I. Theoretical formulation
underlying
the research. New York: Human Ecology Fund. (APA, N.Y.)
Thetford, W. N. (Chm.). (1964, Sept.). Human ecology: Studies in
social and
personality adaptation. Symposium presented at the meeting of the
American
Psychological Association, Los Angeles.
Thetford, W. N., & Schucman, H. (1962). The personality theory of John
Gittinger.
New York: Human Ecology Fund.
The reason that we may not know of the research that they may have been
doing during the writing of ACIM is because the Human Ecology Fund was
transfered to another name after 1962.
There is so much more information that casts more than a heavy shadow
of
a doubt as to whether Helen really channeled Jesus. The information is
too enormous to research. It takes a lot of concentration and the
ability
put events in chronological order to link people such as Gittinger,
Saunders, Spiegel and others to Thetford and Schucman but the
information is available. Thetford and Schucman had more than enough
research to know consciously or unconsciously how to create a multiple
personality, manipulate people to believe ideas that are beyond the
normal
person's comphrehension and education.
And all anyone has to do to further manipulate and/or control a
religious person is agree or pretend to agree with what they
believe(their
doctrines) and convince them that you are working for the good of
'whatever', according to what they believe. One more religious belief
like ACIM would not tip the applecart in favor of mind control through
religion, as there are plenty of religious ideas to choose from that
have
more followers. If ACIM had not been created, people with flaws in
their
reasoning ability would have found something else to believe to suit
their
gulliblity and need to think they are instructed by an invisible
authority.
We only have to look at President Bush's campaign to see that
this
is true. God Bless America approach played and plays a huge role in
getting people to agree with many things that Bush has done that might
otherwise been disagreed with.
No, I do not believe that ACIM was created by the CIA as a mind control
program for the masses, but rather was a by product of Thetford and
Schucman's combined research and education. They just may have got
hooked on their own crapola.
bidhat

[Noggin]

Post by Chuck
Hi bidhati,
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political manipulation.

Probably what you haven't yet established are the connections between all of these same people
and projects and countless other cults and religions. There is plenty of testimony to support
that fact, even despite all the destroyed information, and the dots can be connected most
dramatically to the "Pseudo Christian" movement, that being the Fundmentalist groups that have
set up "churches" for the purpose of political incitement and organizing. The recent Terri
Schiavo hysteria was a manipulated political "event" that has nothing to do with anyone's "right
to life" but everything to do with inciting mass hysteria toward the end of using people's
already implanted "beliefs" to mindlessly lobby for legislation that will erode our personal
freedoms and rights. Go back and re-research Father Bernard Groeshel and connect the dots
between him, the CIA, ACIM, and the neo Pseudo Christian "right to life" movement, and I think
you might share my conclusions about this. And that is only one connection that can be made,
there are countless of them, but that's a great place to start, since we've already placed him in
his historical role in regards to ACIM.

You may recall me telling you that my interest in the government's involvement in cults began far
before my Liezaris experience. It is no doubt my upfront and personal experiences that cause me
to approach this issue from a completely different direction than it does you. I'm operating
from a ground up perspective, starting with the FACT that I know for sure that government
agencies were involved in founding, instigating some really nasty cults. I was shocked into that
awareness because of my activities on behalf of a cult member who was on trial in Philly, and my
resultant friendship with her and her fellow cult members. Some of the things that began to
happen to and around me were frightening beyond belief the first being when someone pointed out
to me that I was being surveilled by a BATF agent who was monitoring my movements, listening in
on my phone calls, and eavesdropping on my conversations outside the court room. At the time I
was nothing more than an interested citizen, taking advantage of the opportunity to observe a
noteworthy court proceeding and get some background insight into the situation that resulted in
the prosecution. It was a bone chilling experience, that's all I can tell you, and as time went
on, little by little the bigger picture emerged that this was not an isolated situation. I'm
sure I've filled you in on some of this, but maybe we need a long sit down at Big Belly Bob's
again to discuss it now that you have a different frame of reference by which to evaluate it.
This time we won't go on Amateur Manly Man Drag Night though, it always distracts me when you're
in a micro-mini, and Ted is pretty in pink designer gear from the Champs Eloise in Paris.

Post by Chuck
I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of whatever
they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they had no
control over this according to the funding rules.

I completely disagree. I believe that Judith Skutch was already a player, and was brought in
with deliberate intention to disseminate ACIM to the public. I think it's beyond evident that
the CIA never bothers themselves about funding rules, that's fact was the basis for the Senate
hearings into MK-ULTRA activities.

Post by Chuck
But there are also some differences.
I can see the relationship with MPD, but I also see a relationship with
other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.
My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the needs
for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping" and editing
the tool to customize it to the specific area of interest by subject
matter experts in that area.

I'm not grokking, so I won't comment.

Post by Chuck
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

I think you give more credibility to the idea that a lot of this happened by accident than I do.
I would probably agree if it weren't for my knowledge of other similar groups and projects.
These "accidents" don't just keep happening. What I do think is that ACIM, like the Urantia Book
were early projects that didn't yield the kind of widespread response that was hoped for, or
later recognized to be possible, but the idea was the same, to create little armies of zombies
under the banner of "spirituality" or "religious belief" that could be called upon to function on
behalf of the Totalists amongst us as "moral authorities" on spoon-fed issues with the end goal
being the emotional manipulation of society in general to default on freedom in favor of
"morality" as defined by the good and holey people.

Post by Chuck
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

I think that the ACIM copyright was the bone thrown to Skutch, Wapnick, et al, as reward for
their participation, and ongoing efforts on behalf of the mindrape. Where I think we are in
agreement is that it never was a job well done, and I doubt that any of the remaining players
have very many brownie points left with the founders of these, dare I say, "conspiracies"? I
would suspect that the lesson was learned from the ACIM and Urantia Book projects that creating
religions for spineless, mindless, irresponsible, lazy people, isn't the way to go. Can you
imagine anyone trying to get this gang together to do something functional, like show up at a
political rally with signage and lots of free Kool-Aid? Can you imagine the nightly news
interviews with Carrie? "Anyone can make whatever they like out of all and everything, there is
no right or wrong, it's all about whatever makes you feel good in the moment". Or Slobbering
Soulless Sheryl Moore Valentine, DC from Pasadena and Wanna-Be Speeeeeeeritchual Icon, drooling,
spitting, gaffawing, and adjusting her husband's bad toupee, The Pretty Queen Lee Flynn
demanding flattering lighting while launching into one of the classic used car salesman epics of
glad handed transparent manipulation? ACIM never succeeded in generating a body of followers
that would or could be credible to a mindless audience of nightly news watchers, no way. Skutch
failed big time.
No, it just didn't pan out, but many lessons were learned, no question. We have far more
sophisticated "religious" fanatics today.

ACIMites can count themselves among the fortunate, though, because many of these projects
resulted in the death of masses of the members. I could never figure out why the BATF and
government agencies were so involved in situations like Waco Texas, the Symbionese Liberation
Army, MOVE, etc etc, that all resulted in identical incinerations of members, but the picture is
becoming much clearer.

Of Curse, the verdict isn't in on Endeavor Academy yet, that one is ripe for a sudden mass
cremation if ever one was.

I also don't know the extent to which our entire government is involved or knowlegeable about
what is going on, but I find it nearly impossible to suspect that anyone who can connect these
dots hasn't, and that's some pretty scary stuff.

And naturally, this is all "whacko conspiracy" theorizing, there are no facts to back any of it
up, or anything. Actually, what I think is that the internet is pulling the plug on that clever
strategy against the pursuit of valid information. Too many people are having their eyes opened
about too many situations and instances of mind control projects and schemes, and there's more
and more information becoming available on a regular basis to avoid the connecting of the dots.
There are also more and more people going back to the founding principles of this country, and
noticing that much of the current "religious" fervor isn't supportive of them, not to mention
that if anything meets the actual criteria for a "whacky conspiracy theory" it's religion itself.
And to ice the cake, we finally are getting a closer peek into the big cults, especially
Scientology, due especially to Tom Cruise's recent public humiliations, and suddenly it isn't
quite so easy for them to write off or destroy their critics and exposers.

All of that is the good news part of a bad situation. I still have enormous faith in humanity
and its passion for freedom, so I do depart from the average "conspiracy theorist" in that
perspective. It's just a matter of clearing out all the debris so we can see what is actually
going on. The dictionary is a great starting place for that.

[A]

Noggin wrote:

[snip]

Post by Noggin
I'm not grokking, so I won't comment.

The first half of your sentence is so
true, if only you'd honor the second.

[snip]

[b***@gmail.com]

Noggin:
Hi bidhati,

Post by Chuck
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

Noggin:

I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of
doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political
manipulation.

bidhati:
Thanks for presenting some more interesting information. As yet, I have
not had the time to research many things that I skimmed by in gathering
the information on Helen and Bill. I fully intend to though. It just
takes a lot of time to connect the names, the groups and put them in a
chronological sequence that makes sense.

Noggin:
And to ice the cake, we finally are getting a closer peek into the big
cults, especially
Scientology, due especially to Tom Cruise's recent public
humiliations, and suddenly it isn't
quite so easy for them to write off or destroy their critics and
exposers.

bidhati:
I am glad that Tom Cruise has made a fool of himself recently and I
will be glad when the lid gets blown off of that cult and they are
recognized as the manipulators and political controllers that they are.

[A]

***@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]

Post by Noggin
I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of
doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political manipulation.
Thanks for presenting some more interesting information. As yet, I have
not had the time to research many things that I skimmed by in gathering
the information on Helen and Bill. I fully intend to though. It just
takes a lot of time to connect the names, the groups and put them in a
chronological sequence that makes sense.

ROTFLOL!

The three scholars:

Moe, Larry, and Curly.

[s***@yahoo.com]

Moe, Larry, and Curly
------------------------------

And Shemp

Just because he wasn't in a body at the time shouldn't be a
disadvantage.

~ Carrie

[A]

Post by A
Moe, Larry, and Curly
------------------------------
And Shemp
Just because he wasn't in a body at the time shouldn't be a
disadvantage.

Well then, let's not forget Joe. :)

[Noggin]

Post by Chuck
Hi bidhati,

Post by Chuck
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of
doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political manipulation.
Thanks for presenting some more interesting information. As yet, I have
not had the time to research many things that I skimmed by in gathering
the information on Helen and Bill. I fully intend to though. It just
takes a lot of time to connect the names, the groups and put them in a
chronological sequence that makes sense.

I know, I've been at it for years, actually. Not as a concerted course of study, but just as a
series of experiences and observations that suddenly began to merge into patterns. Like you, I
tend to analyze things beyond the surface appearance. I'm especially wary of "party lines" and
media reportage, given that I've been up close and personal to events and people who have been
the subject of it, so I know how much bullshit it can and usually is. People who don't dig a
little deeper about matters of interest can be assured that they are being snookered, that's the
lesson I've learned several times over now.

Post by Chuck
And to ice the cake, we finally are getting a closer peek into the big cults, especially
Scientology, due especially to Tom Cruise's recent public
humiliations, and suddenly it isn't
quite so easy for them to write off or destroy their critics and exposers.
I am glad that Tom Cruise has made a fool of himself recently and I
will be glad when the lid gets blown off of that cult and they are
recognized as the manipulators and political controllers that they are.

Yes, Scientology is a big one, and it's gratifying to note that after so many years of hidden
abuses, and endless manipulations to keep the facts from coming out about who and what it/they
really are, it appears that they are going to take themselves down in the end. It appears that
their scheme to take over Tom Cruise's mind and use him as their most effective recruiter is
backfiring. They were waaaaaay better off when he kept his affiliations on a back burner in the
public eye.

I'm sure that most people have never given much thought to cults or mind control, in the common
mentality those are still kind of fringe concepts that most people don't think are relevant to
them. But suddenly we have Tom Cruise out and about with the cameras documenting his popping
cult eye, and as they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. It's clear that something
immensely disturbing is going on with Cruise, and that this new "relationship' with Katie Holmes
is an obvious put up. I heard a commentator yesterday mention that Holmes was being interviewed
and asked something like "what are your feelings for Tom?" and she hesitated, himmed and hawed a
bit, so her identified Scientology handler whispered in her ear, but in range of the microphones
"You adore him". Public cult manipulation 101 that made the national news. It doesn't get any
better than that!

It's a good thing, a very very good thing, and I hope poor Tom snaps out of it. Scientology has
ruined his life, he's sold his soul to them, sold out his ex-wife, his children, and God only
knows who else for the "pleasure" of being Scientology's top boy.

I have a friend in Hollywood who says that when young aspiring actors hit the scene the "clued
in" ones know that the most important first stop on their climb to fame is to the nearest
Scientology brain sucking factory, even before getting an agent or auditioning anywhere, because
Hollywood insiders know that the good Church of Scientology has a lot of power and influence in
the entertainment industry, and that they can and do make and break careers. If Tom keeps on as
he's going, it doesn't seem likely for that kind of influence to maintain itself. If we see that
Scientology ends up destroying one of the most successful acting careers of all times, that will
make the whole situation a horse of a different color. I'm sorry for Tom Cruise in a way, but he
did sell his soul to the devil. There is ample information out there about the horrors and
crimes of Scientologists to allow anyone to make an accurate evaluation of the situation, and Tom
clearly decided he liked the money and fame better.

Oh well, maybe he'll do the world a huge service by continuing his public spiral into fanatical
obsession and irrationality. And I say that being no fan of the Psychology/Psychiatry community
myself. At least there is some valid science that has come from it, and most of its
practitioners have some kind of formal training and the big one ACCOUNTABILITY. I don't know
how Tom Cruise fathoms he's going to actually convince anyone that he's more astute on the topic
than people who at least formally studied it are. He's just coming off as a crazed and arrogant
little git. What will happen, IMO, is that just like with the Con:Scam post exposure, all the
reasonable people will pack up and go home, and Scientology will only be able to attract the
usual cast of nutters and losers, and let's face it, there just ain't no big bucks in sucking the
brains out of nutters and losers, so another once "successful" cult bites the dust, and just
becomes another fenced in prison for the voluntary inmates.

Which goes to the issue of why our pet topic, ACIM never made it to the big time, that being
because it never did attract the kind of fanaticism and zealotry needed to grow a good cult from
anyone but nutters and losers. And that's why those involved in its early evolution have long
since packed up and moved on to more lucrative waters. ACIM is a bust, by any method of
evaluation, even as a viable religious movement, for those who don't like to think about the
cult aspect of all these new and groovy religious or "faith based" groups and movements, as they
suddenly like to call themselves.

[J]

Which goes to the issue of why our pet topic, ACIM never made it to the
big time,

ROTFLMAO. Really. That's why Course principle just received an award
from the American Medical Association and Katie Dean Vollmer and her
hate cult, Cosmic Fool are on a hate cult watch list. Yeah, you are
credible.

[Bill]

Post by Noggin
Which goes to the issue of why our pet topic, ACIM never made it to
the big time,
ROTFLMAO. Really. That's why Course principle just received an award
from the American Medical Association and Katie Dean Vollmer and her
hate cult, Cosmic Fool are on a hate cult watch list. Yeah, you are
credible.

Hmmm, millions of copies sold, translated into
dozens of different languages, spun off into a
variety of different offshoots (The Center For
Attitudinal Healing, for instance), dozens and
dozens of books, thousands of articles, not to
mention the scores of testimonies for numerous
people from all walks of life who've benefited
from the teachings, & it's still going strong.

Compared to the website of the prolific author
Katie Dean's The Cosmic Fool, who's barely had
a person post besides herself in the past four
months. Yeah, it's never made the big time but
you sure have. Your medication need reviewing.

Speaking of pet topics, tell us again how your
"channeled information" stating that channeled
information should not be given for the masses
to use, ended up on your website? Oh but wait,
you had a psychic moment telling you that your
website would be a flop, and that masses would
never read it? Ok, that explains it then. LOL!

--------------------------------------------------
"No loving, helpful, or wise entity would ever
choose a particular individual through whom to
transmit information which is helpful or necessary
to humankind." Katie Dean channeling who knows who

http://cosmicfool.com/lazaris/channel.html

[A]

Post by Noggin
Which goes to the issue of why our pet topic,
ACIM never made it to the big time

Hmmm, millions of copies sold, translated into
dozens of different languages, spun off into a
variety of different offshoots (The Center For
Attitudinal Healing, for instance), dozens and
dozens of books, thousands of articles, not to
mention the scores of testimonies for numerous
people from all walks of life who've benefited
from the teachings, & it's still going strong.

Compared to the website of the prolific author
Katie Dean's The Cosmic Fool, who's barely had
a person post besides herself in the past four
months. Yeah, it's never made the big time but
you sure have. Your medication need reviewing?

Speaking of pet topics, tell us again how your
"channeled information" stating that channeled
information should not be given for the masses
to use, ended up on your website? Oh but wait,
you had a psychic moment telling you that your
website would be a flop, and that masses would
never read it? Ok, that explains it then. LOL!

--------------------------------------------------
"No loving, helpful, or wise entity would ever
choose a particular individual through whom to
transmit information which is helpful or necessary
to humankind." Katie Dean channeling who knows who

http://cosmicfool.com/lazaris/channel.html

[Chuck]

I've re-ordered the exchange to try to clarify.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the needs
for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping" and editing
the tool to customize it to the specific area of interest by subject
matter experts in that area.

I'm not grokking, so I won't comment.
From what I've looked into, I can the basic ACIM work as possibly

applying to a number of interest areas for the CIA. These include
Creation of Multiple Personalities
Using of the material to create "fringe" cults
Investigating the use of religious beliefs as a weapon to break POWs
(offensively and defensively)
Investigating the use of religious beliefs to "turn" someone

As I see it, the base ACIM would be used by these different audiences
and used in different ways depending on the objectives of the specific
program. It wouldn't necessarily be distributed intact or in its
entirety.

Note that I do agree with you on the cult aspect of this, I think it's
a difference in scope and deployment. There's also a difference whether
ACIM was a multi-purpose tool or a singularly focused one.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
Hi bidhati,
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political manipulation.

As I wrote above, I agree with the posibility that ACIM was intended to
be used as the basis for cult formation and manipulation. If I was
going to use the material for this purpose, I would reserve the
teacher's manual for the leader and distribute the rest of the material
to the followers.

Post by Noggin
Probably what you haven't yet established are the connections between all of these same people
and projects and countless other cults and religions. There is plenty of testimony to support
that fact, even despite all the destroyed information, and the dots can be connected most
dramatically to the "Pseudo Christian" movement, that being the Fundmentalist groups that have
set up "churches" for the purpose of political incitement and organizing. The recent Terri
Schiavo hysteria was a manipulated political "event" that has nothing to do with anyone's "right
to life" but everything to do with inciting mass hysteria toward the end of using people's
already implanted "beliefs" to mindlessly lobby for legislation that will erode our personal
freedoms and rights. Go back and re-research Father Bernard Groeshel and connect the dots
between him, the CIA, ACIM, and the neo Pseudo Christian "right to life" movement, and I think
you might share my conclusions about this. And that is only one connection that can be made,
there are countless of them, but that's a great place to start, since we've already placed him in
his historical role in regards to ACIM.

The pattern that I see in all these examples that I've looked at so far
is one of a relatively small, tightly controlled group working to
expand their influence over a larger population, rather than actively
recruiting to gain mass which typically amounts to a loss of tight
control.

Post by Noggin
You may recall me telling you that my interest in the government's involvement in cults began far
before my Liezaris experience. It is no doubt my upfront and personal experiences that cause me
to approach this issue from a completely different direction than it does you. I'm operating
from a ground up perspective, starting with the FACT that I know for sure that government
agencies were involved in founding, instigating some really nasty cults. I was shocked into that
awareness because of my activities on behalf of a cult member who was on trial in Philly, and my
resultant friendship with her and her fellow cult members. Some of the things that began to
happen to and around me were frightening beyond belief the first being when someone pointed out
to me that I was being surveilled by a BATF agent who was monitoring my movements, listening in
on my phone calls, and eavesdropping on my conversations outside the court room. At the time I
was nothing more than an interested citizen, taking advantage of the opportunity to observe a
noteworthy court proceeding and get some background insight into the situation that resulted in
the prosecution. It was a bone chilling experience, that's all I can tell you, and as time went
on, little by little the bigger picture emerged that this was not an isolated situation. I'm
sure I've filled you in on some of this, but maybe we need a long sit down at Big Belly Bob's
again to discuss it now that you have a different frame of reference by which to evaluate it.
This time we won't go on Amateur Manly Man Drag Night though, it always distracts me when you're
in a micro-mini, and Ted is pretty in pink designer gear from the Champs Eloise in Paris.

Can you believe that Neandrathal tht won the contest? Sheesh.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of whatever
they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they had no
control over this according to the funding rules.

I completely disagree. I believe that Judith Skutch was already a player, and was brought in
with deliberate intention to disseminate ACIM to the public. I think it's beyond evident that
the CIA never bothers themselves about funding rules, that's fact was the basis for the Senate
hearings into MK-ULTRA activities.

OK, the funding rules I was referring to were thee rules that were used
by Human Ecology for grants. In this model, the results of the research
are given to MKULTRA but there were no restrictions on using the
results for other purposes.

Since I haven't yet been able to tie Judith to a CIA program, I'm
proceeding on the basis that she was recruited for some purpose by
Helen and Bill but didn't know what was really going on.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
But there are also some differences.
I can see the relationship with MPD, but I also see a relationship with
other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

I think you give more credibility to the idea that a lot of this happened by accident than I do.
I would probably agree if it weren't for my knowledge of other similar groups and projects.
These "accidents" don't just keep happening. What I do think is that ACIM, like the Urantia Book
were early projects that didn't yield the kind of widespread response that was hoped for, or
later recognized to be possible, but the idea was the same, to create little armies of zombies
under the banner of "spirituality" or "religious belief" that could be called upon to function on
behalf of the Totalists amongst us as "moral authorities" on spoon-fed issues with the end goal
being the emotional manipulation of society in general to default on freedom in favor of
"morality" as defined by the good and holey people.

I think the difference we have is the scale of the experiment. I can't
quite get my head around creating an "army of zombies" as an initial
intent without first taking the steps to prove the material in on a
smaller scale. But if this was the initial intent, then there would be
no need for a copyright, which was an eleventh hour act that attempted
to hide the originator.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

I think that the ACIM copyright was the bone thrown to Skutch, Wapnick, et al, as reward for
their participation, and ongoing efforts on behalf of the mindrape.

Clearly they benefitted monetarily. I still have my doubts as to
whether they were supposed to be "promoters" or "damage control". If
they were "promoters", they didn't do a very good job, IMO.

[Noggin]

Post by Chuck
I've re-ordered the exchange to try to clarify.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the needs
for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping" and editing
the tool to customize it to the specific area of interest by subject
matter experts in that area.

I'm not grokking, so I won't comment.
From what I've looked into, I can the basic ACIM work as possibly

applying to a number of interest areas for the CIA. These include
Creation of Multiple Personalities
Using of the material to create "fringe" cults
Investigating the use of religious beliefs as a weapon to break POWs
(offensively and defensively)
Investigating the use of religious beliefs to "turn" someone
As I see it, the base ACIM would be used by these different audiences
and used in different ways depending on the objectives of the specific
program. It wouldn't necessarily be distributed intact or in its
entirety.
Note that I do agree with you on the cult aspect of this, I think it's
a difference in scope and deployment. There's also a difference whether
ACIM was a multi-purpose tool or a singularly focused one.

Ok, I see your point, but let me offer another one. If you and I spent months and years
studying the scientific principles and components behind the deliciousness and appeal of
chocolate cake, do you think it would be unrealistic to imagine that at the end of it, we'd sell
our recipe for chocolate cake to someone who might be successful at marketing it, just as an
added little bonus at the end of all our hard work? Do you think it would be hard to find someone
who would be interested in marketing our scientifically researched, honed and tested chocolate
cake that we believed and claimed to be the worlds' most irresistable and addictive chocolate
cake ever produced, and would we care a whole lot if they screwed up the recipe down the line, or
even if they followed it to the tee, but it still failed to prove itself to be what we claimed it
was, given that our names weren't on the cake boxes anyway? Maybe we have a friend who helped
us out with some of our ingredients who we didn't mind setting up in business in return for the
assistance, Maybe it's not the most accurate and comprehensive analogy, but hopefully it makes
my point, that being, why go to all this work and then just shitcan the results?

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
Hi bidhati,
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political manipulation.

As I wrote above, I agree with the posibility that ACIM was intended to
be used as the basis for cult formation and manipulation. If I was
going to use the material for this purpose, I would reserve the
teacher's manual for the leader and distribute the rest of the material
to the followers.

I don't think you would have, given that one of the clever components of the concept was to not
have identifiable leaders, and therefore no accountability. Lack of accountability is one of the
major appeals of ACIM, and a deliberately implanted reason for it's appeal, IMO. Or it is also
possible that the author's just weren't really all that polished at what they were doing yet, and
the lack of accountability factor just found itself into the materials through osmosis. It is
true and verifiable that by some mechanism, the followers of any philosophy or leader do take on
the true characteristics of that philosophy or leader far and beyond the surface claims and
promises. But given the fact that it's beyond clear to me that ACIM was consciously designed to
cause people's brains to go into a loop, one seemingly credible statement feeding into another
completely incredible statement, with the end goal being the emotional, intellectual, and
ethical paralysis we witness here on a daily basis, I am sticking with the former conclusion,
that the apparent lack of leadership is a deliberate component to the project.

Let's not forget the issue of authority here. One quick and easy way to test a group,
philosophy, theory, or religion is by evaluating the source authority upon which it is based. By
making the "authority" conveniently Jesus for those who like Jesus, and even more conveniently
"someone else important" for those who don't like Jesus, we have no actual authority whatsoever,
and therefore no accountability. If they chose to promote, say, Judith Skutch or Ken Wapnick as
the official "authorities" there would be at least some accountablitly, and all things considered
about Judith Skutch and Ken Wapnick, one would have to conclude that not even a sinister mind
control experimenter would place their faith in either of those two lying, sleazy dimbulbs to do
more than follow instructions in a half assed way.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin
Probably what you haven't yet established are the connections between all of these same people
and projects and countless other cults and religions. There is plenty of testimony to support
that fact, even despite all the destroyed information, and the dots can be connected most
dramatically to the "Pseudo Christian" movement, that being the Fundmentalist groups that have
set up "churches" for the purpose of political incitement and organizing. The recent Terri
Schiavo hysteria was a manipulated political "event" that has nothing to do with anyone's
"right
to life" but everything to do with inciting mass hysteria toward the end of using people's
already implanted "beliefs" to mindlessly lobby for legislation that will erode our personal
freedoms and rights. Go back and re-research Father Bernard Groeshel and connect the dots
between him, the CIA, ACIM, and the neo Pseudo Christian "right to life" movement, and I think
you might share my conclusions about this. And that is only one connection that can be made,
there are countless of them, but that's a great place to start, since we've already placed him
in
his historical role in regards to ACIM.

The pattern that I see in all these examples that I've looked at so far
is one of a relatively small, tightly controlled group working to
expand their influence over a larger population, rather than actively
recruiting to gain mass which typically amounts to a loss of tight
control.

Bingo! Yet, there is an entirely new topic at hand, that being the growing numbers of members of
this group, or at least "sock puppets" for them, to rob an abused phrase from our in-house
genius. Once one gets the full picture of what is going down, it's not too hard to see who is
playing. Eg, Terri Schiavo's parents are now being trotted out to express their many
indignations against their "murderous" and "loathsome" ex- son-in-law, Michael Schiavo. Suddenly
that manufactured media icon, Mark Furhman gets the heads up to write THE definitive book on the
situation, in which we read all his astutely detectivelike theories about how Terri was likely
abused by Michael, and hence the event that led to her vegetative state. Keep following the
bouncing ball, and you'll see that the tight little circle is getting wider. There are big bucks
in it, if nothing else.

Now let's get really crazy here, and mention the topic of Robert Skutch's recently quite
successful children's book, which by some stretch of credibility manages to be THE children's
book that makes it into public school libraries across the nation, and becomes the topic of a
manufactured controversy. How come Robert Skutch, of all people, one might wonder. Book deals
are a huge bone that gets tossed to the right people who have the right things to say.

Mark Furhman, btw, was literally instructed to write his book, it wasn't an idea that he came up
wiith oh his own, by his own testimony. One really has to ask oneself if good old media
manufactured Mark Furhman is such a poor detective as to not be capable of connecting a few dots
himself.

If you really want to see the whole cast of characters in this Neo Pseudo Christian Facsist
movement hawking their wares and weaving their webs, tune into Hannity and Colmes on Fox news
every week night. It's a veritable clubhouse for the panderers of the "correct" perspective,
organizing central for the Neo Totalist movement posing as a patriotic, "faith based" provider of
"news" and stimulating discussion, with that refugee from a Martian UFO encounter, Alan Colmes
serving impotently as the in-house "alternative perspective". You don't need to put much time
into it, all it takes is a bit of insight into what is going on and the amount of time it takes
to here the opening announcement about the guests and topics on the table. I find the show to be
disgusting in the extreme, so I don't wish you to suffer either, but it is definitely a
noteworthy project to be aware of. I guarantee that it will provide you with many fun hours of
interesting fodder for your connecting the dots project.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin
You may recall me telling you that my interest in the government's involvement in cults began
far
before my Liezaris experience. It is no doubt my upfront and personal experiences that cause
me
to approach this issue from a completely different direction than it does you. I'm operating
from a ground up perspective, starting with the FACT that I know for sure that government
agencies were involved in founding, instigating some really nasty cults. I was shocked into
that
awareness because of my activities on behalf of a cult member who was on trial in Philly, and
my
resultant friendship with her and her fellow cult members. Some of the things that began to
happen to and around me were frightening beyond belief the first being when someone pointed
out
to me that I was being surveilled by a BATF agent who was monitoring my movements, listening
in
on my phone calls, and eavesdropping on my conversations outside the court room. At the time
I
was nothing more than an interested citizen, taking advantage of the opportunity to observe a
noteworthy court proceeding and get some background insight into the situation that resulted
in
the prosecution. It was a bone chilling experience, that's all I can tell you, and as time
went
on, little by little the bigger picture emerged that this was not an isolated situation. I'm
sure I've filled you in on some of this, but maybe we need a long sit down at Big Belly Bob's
again to discuss it now that you have a different frame of reference by which to evaluate it.
This time we won't go on Amateur Manly Man Drag Night though, it always distracts me when
you're
in a micro-mini, and Ted is pretty in pink designer gear from the Champs Eloise in Paris.

Can you believe that Neandrathal tht won the contest? Sheesh.

I know! I'm sure it was rigged, Chuck. No one came close to your hairy stunningness in that
adorable micro mini! But I got a lot of it on tape, so next time we get together we can review
the evidence and present it to Big Belly Bob, who as you recall was conveniently missing during
the judging. I thought there was something a bit off about that Big Belly Bertha guy he left in
charge, I don't know about you!

I'm actuallly thinking of putting the whole damned episode up as an audio exposee on the CF site,
just so the world will know of the horrors and injustices that are suddenly being perpetrated
down at Big Belly Bob's but I wanted to clear it with you first! I know it was a very public
humiliation, and I do want to be sensitive to your feelings, you know. I don't want you to
abandon my cult and start disagreeing with me on this newsgroup, that would totally buss my
groove, because as you know, it's all I live for!!

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of whatever
they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they had no
control over this according to the funding rules.

I completely disagree. I believe that Judith Skutch was already a player, and was brought in
with deliberate intention to disseminate ACIM to the public. I think it's beyond evident that
the CIA never bothers themselves about funding rules, that fact was the basis for the Senate
hearings into MK-ULTRA activities.

OK, the funding rules I was referring to were thee rules that were used
by Human Ecology for grants. In this model, the results of the research
are given to MKULTRA but there were no restrictions on using the
results for other purposes.

I don't think anyone is capable of accurately evaluating the line between fact and fiction in
regards to anything claimed by those who received and disseminated funds granted to the Human
Ecology project, and that's one of the big problems here. I operate from the perspective that
the only possible way to gain any valid insight into the situation is by analyzing the known
factors about the project and the players, but still we can only speculate on much of this, so
I'll go with Carrie on this one and say that your perspective is just as valid as my perspective
and continue to argue my perspective, but I'll leave out the part where you won't have it "right"
until you share mine. That would make me dizzy, and I don't like being dizzy. I've already
shared my thoughts on this, we can now refer to it as the Chocolate Cake Theory for posterity.

Post by Chuck
Since I haven't yet been able to tie Judith to a CIA program, I'm
proceeding on the basis that she was recruited for some purpose by
Helen and Bill but didn't know what was really going on.

I'm in total disagreement with you on this. I'm quite sure that Judith Skutch was recruited
because she was already serving the purpose with her "work" with the Paranormal. I actually have
some other projects to attend to today, so I'll save my thoughts on that for a different
discussion though. I'll leave it for the moment by saying that it's clear to me that Judith was
brought in because of her proven marketing skills in selling politically expedient hogwash to the
American populace, and her demonstrated willingness to serve the cause. She is likely not much
more than a "useful idiot", but it challenges my boundaries of credibility to imagine that she
didn't know what was going on, and wasn't hand selected for good reason.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
But there are also some differences.
I can see the relationship with MPD, but I also see a relationship with
other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

I think you give more credibility to the idea that a lot of this happened by accident than I
do.
I would probably agree if it weren't for my knowledge of other similar groups and projects.
These "accidents" don't just keep happening. What I do think is that ACIM, like the Urantia
Book
were early projects that didn't yield the kind of widespread response that was hoped for, or
later recognized to be possible, but the idea was the same, to create little armies of zombies
under the banner of "spirituality" or "religious belief" that could be called upon to function
on
behalf of the Totalists amongst us as "moral authorities" on spoon-fed issues with the end
goal
being the emotional manipulation of society in general to default on freedom in favor of
"morality" as defined by the good and holey people.

I think the difference we have is the scale of the experiment. I can't
quite get my head around creating an "army of zombies" as an initial
intent without first taking the steps to prove the material in on a
smaller scale. But if this was the initial intent, then there would be
no need for a copyright, which was an eleventh hour act that attempted
to hide the originator.

I think the copyright issue was a non-issue at that point. In order for anyone to profit from
the scam, someone had to own the copyright, and clearly at that point no one ever expected that
anyone would ever bother themselves challenging or questioning it. When one consider sthat the
challenge that did eventually occur came from the one true and clearly identifiably destructive
cult by any definition to have arisen from this whole scam, it opens a whole new area of
possibilities as to how and why it did happen, now that I think about it.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

I'm not following you on any of this, could you elaborate on what you mean by the possible
"negative" uses of ACIM that Helen and Bill recognized?

Again, refer to the recent and very transparent strategy of awarding book contracts to useful
idiots and co-conspirators in todays version of the ongoing project and maybe you will see what I
see about the copyright issue.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin
I think that the ACIM copyright was the bone thrown to Skutch, Wapnick, et al, as reward for
their participation, and ongoing efforts on behalf of the mindrape.

Clearly they benefitted monetarily. I still have my doubts as to
whether they were supposed to be "promoters" or "damage control". If
they were "promoters", they didn't do a very good job, IMO.

No, but they got rich from it, and it was and continues to be a valid source of research
material. It was an early experiment, and really only noteworthy from that understanding. ACIM
is very small potatoes by comparison to the recent explosion of Pseudo Christian groups and
causes, but it's still a nice little earner, and still functions to prove its purpose, and the
shortcomings of this early piece of work.

In any product development project there will be "failures" or "disappointments". In the quest
for the biggest piece of the market share, less stunning products will be produced, but even some
of those end up having enough of a market to make them worthwhile. Toyota doesn't discontinue
their less popular models despite the fact that their Camry rules the market, for example.

That's how I see it, anyway. I do find a lot of interest in some of your conclusions though,
because per usual, you are approaching the topic from a different angle than I am and that's
always a good thing.

At some point maybe we'll be able to evaluate which of us is developing the "Camry" and which the
"Celica", who knows? I guess what matters is that they both serve the purpose of getting their
drivers from point A to point B.

[Chuck]

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
I've re-ordered the exchange to try to clarify.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the needs
for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping" and editing
the tool to customize it to the specific area of interest by subject
matter experts in that area.

I'm not grokking, so I won't comment.
From what I've looked into, I can the basic ACIM work as possibly

applying to a number of interest areas for the CIA. These include
Creation of Multiple Personalities
Using of the material to create "fringe" cults
Investigating the use of religious beliefs as a weapon to break POWs
(offensively and defensively)
Investigating the use of religious beliefs to "turn" someone
As I see it, the base ACIM would be used by these different audiences
and used in different ways depending on the objectives of the specific
program. It wouldn't necessarily be distributed intact or in its
entirety.
Note that I do agree with you on the cult aspect of this, I think it's
a difference in scope and deployment. There's also a difference whether
ACIM was a multi-purpose tool or a singularly focused one.

Ok, I see your point, but let me offer another one. If you and I spent months and years
studying the scientific principles and components behind the deliciousness and appeal of
chocolate cake, do you think it would be unrealistic to imagine that at the end of it, we'd sell
our recipe for chocolate cake to someone who might be successful at marketing it, just as an
added little bonus at the end of all our hard work? Do you think it would be hard to find someone
who would be interested in marketing our scientifically researched, honed and tested chocolate
cake that we believed and claimed to be the worlds' most irresistable and addictive chocolate
cake ever produced, and would we care a whole lot if they screwed up the recipe down the line, or
even if they followed it to the tee, but it still failed to prove itself to be what we claimed it
was, given that our names weren't on the cake boxes anyway? Maybe we have a friend who helped
us out with some of our ingredients who we didn't mind setting up in business in return for the
assistance, Maybe it's not the most accurate and comprehensive analogy, but hopefully it makes
my point, that being, why go to all this work and then just shitcan the results?

It's not clear to me that the results were shitcanned in the context of
what the CIA might have been interested in, assuming the purposes that
I wrote. The question is whether the intention of the CIA was to use
the material for the creation of "armies of zombies" through mass
distribution. At this point, I can't land on that square, which seems
to me to be the major difference we have.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
Hi bidhati,
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I'm in disagreement with you on that. It's very much their style of doing things to create and
manipulate religious cults toward the end of using them for political manipulation.

As I wrote above, I agree with the posibility that ACIM was intended to
be used as the basis for cult formation and manipulation. If I was
going to use the material for this purpose, I would reserve the
teacher's manual for the leader and distribute the rest of the material
to the followers.

I don't think you would have, given that one of the clever components of the concept was to not
have identifiable leaders, and therefore no accountability. Lack of accountability is one of the
major appeals of ACIM, and a deliberately implanted reason for it's appeal, IMO.

I wrote what I did based on what I've read about the CIA's purported
use of cults. The lack of identifiable leaders (externally) is a
benefit but so is having an identifiable leader internally to do the
bidding of the controlling agent. The accountability point you raised
also feeds into the multiple personality possibility that bidhati
raised. I don't think that the multiple personality aspect is contrary
to the cult aspect, rather I see it as a complementing basis in the
cult context.

Post by Noggin
Or it is also
possible that the author's just weren't really all that polished at what they were doing yet, and
the lack of accountability factor just found itself into the materials through osmosis. It is
true and verifiable that by some mechanism, the followers of any philosophy or leader do take on
the true characteristics of that philosophy or leader far and beyond the surface claims and
promises. But given the fact that it's beyond clear to me that ACIM was consciously designed to
cause people's brains to go into a loop, one seemingly credible statement feeding into another
completely incredible statement, with the end goal being the emotional, intellectual, and
ethical paralysis we witness here on a daily basis, I am sticking with the former conclusion,
that the apparent lack of leadership is a deliberate component to the project.
Let's not forget the issue of authority here. One quick and easy way to test a group,
philosophy, theory, or religion is by evaluating the source authority upon which it is based. By
making the "authority" conveniently Jesus for those who like Jesus, and even more conveniently
"someone else important" for those who don't like Jesus, we have no actual authority whatsoever,
and therefore no accountability. If they chose to promote, say, Judith Skutch or Ken Wapnick as
the official "authorities" there would be at least some accountablitly, and all things considered
about Judith Skutch and Ken Wapnick, one would have to conclude that not even a sinister mind
control experimenter would place their faith in either of those two lying, sleazy dimbulbs to do
more than follow instructions in a half assed way.

Here you've raised another aspect that is puzzling to me, at least in
the context of what has happened with ACIM since it was released. It
seems to me that if the intention was the creation of "armies of
zombies", particularly in the US, the more expedient way to do this
would be to embrace the "Jesus" of the course as the historical "Jesus"
of the Christian Church. It would, in its basic application, provide an
attraction for those prone to "cult" hopping.

[snip]

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin
I'm
sure I've filled you in on some of this, but maybe we need a long sit down at Big Belly Bob's
again to discuss it now that you have a different frame of reference by which to evaluate it.
This time we won't go on Amateur Manly Man Drag Night though, it always distracts me when
you're
in a micro-mini, and Ted is pretty in pink designer gear from the Champs Eloise in Paris.

Can you believe that Neandrathal tht won the contest? Sheesh.

I know! I'm sure it was rigged, Chuck. No one came close to your hairy stunningness in that
adorable micro mini! But I got a lot of it on tape, so next time we get together we can review
the evidence and present it to Big Belly Bob, who as you recall was conveniently missing during
the judging. I thought there was something a bit off about that Big Belly Bertha guy he left in
charge, I don't know about you!
I'm actuallly thinking of putting the whole damned episode up as an audio exposee on the CF site,
just so the world will know of the horrors and injustices that are suddenly being perpetrated
down at Big Belly Bob's but I wanted to clear it with you first! I know it was a very public
humiliation, and I do want to be sensitive to your feelings, you know. I don't want you to
abandon my cult and start disagreeing with me on this newsgroup, that would totally buss my
groove, because as you know, it's all I live for!!

In the search for truth and justice, I am willing to subject myself to
further public humiliation in order to expose what's really going on at
Big Belly Bob's. I suspect that some here will appreciate having more
grist for their mills, as the variety is getting pathetic. All I can
say is that Neandrathal must have rigged the voting and paid Big Belly
Bob to leave. After all, Amateur Manly Man Drag Night is a house
filler, and the manager on duty gets his or her cut of the tips.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of whatever
they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they had no
control over this according to the funding rules.

I completely disagree. I believe that Judith Skutch was already a player, and was brought in
with deliberate intention to disseminate ACIM to the public. I think it's beyond evident that
the CIA never bothers themselves about funding rules, that fact was the basis for the Senate
hearings into MK-ULTRA activities.

OK, the funding rules I was referring to were thee rules that were used
by Human Ecology for grants. In this model, the results of the research
are given to MKULTRA but there were no restrictions on using the
results for other purposes.

I don't think anyone is capable of accurately evaluating the line between fact and fiction in
regards to anything claimed by those who received and disseminated funds granted to the Human
Ecology project, and that's one of the big problems here. I operate from the perspective that
the only possible way to gain any valid insight into the situation is by analyzing the known
factors about the project and the players, but still we can only speculate on much of this, so
I'll go with Carrie on this one and say that your perspective is just as valid as my perspective
and continue to argue my perspective, but I'll leave out the part where you won't have it "right"
until you share mine. That would make me dizzy, and I don't like being dizzy. I've already
shared my thoughts on this, we can now refer to it as the Chocolate Cake Theory for posterity.

I think at this stage, having alternative working theories is useful
(at least to me). I also don't think anyone is capable of accurately
evaluating the line between fact and fiction in regards to anything
claimed by those who received and disseminated funds granted to the
Human Ecology project. I am relying heavily on the senate committee
reports and testimony as having the closest representation of the truth
that is available, but still acknowledge that there is room for doubt.
I looked into the Rockefeller comission report and found it had some
interesting stuff but seemed mostly be about other things that the two
senate publications didn't get into
(http://history-matters.com/archive/church/rockcomm/contents.htm)

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
Since I haven't yet been able to tie Judith to a CIA program, I'm
proceeding on the basis that she was recruited for some purpose by
Helen and Bill but didn't know what was really going on.

I'm in total disagreement with you on this. I'm quite sure that Judith Skutch was recruited
because she was already serving the purpose with her "work" with the Paranormal.

I'm not sure what the disagreement is here. I agree that Judy had a
useful track record which could be exploited. I agree that the area in
which her track record existed was a CIA interest area and the public
story about how the course came into being was related to her track
record.

Post by Noggin
I actually have
some other projects to attend to today, so I'll save my thoughts on that for a different
discussion though. I'll leave it for the moment by saying that it's clear to me that Judith was
brought in because of her proven marketing skills in selling politically expedient hogwash to the
American populace, and her demonstrated willingness to serve the cause. She is likely not much
more than a "useful idiot", but it challenges my boundaries of credibility to imagine that she
didn't know what was going on, and wasn't hand selected for good reason.

I agree that she was hand selected for good reason, as suggested above.
At the time she was selected, I don't think she knew and probably
didn't become aware until the interest in obtaining a copyright got
started, if then.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
But there are also some differences.
I can see the relationship with MPD, but I also see a relationship with
other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

I think you give more credibility to the idea that a lot of this happened by accident than I
do.
I would probably agree if it weren't for my knowledge of other similar groups and projects.
These "accidents" don't just keep happening. What I do think is that ACIM, like the Urantia
Book
were early projects that didn't yield the kind of widespread response that was hoped for, or
later recognized to be possible, but the idea was the same, to create little armies of zombies
under the banner of "spirituality" or "religious belief" that could be called upon to function
on
behalf of the Totalists amongst us as "moral authorities" on spoon-fed issues with the end
goal
being the emotional manipulation of society in general to default on freedom in favor of
"morality" as defined by the good and holey people.

I think the difference we have is the scale of the experiment. I can't
quite get my head around creating an "army of zombies" as an initial
intent without first taking the steps to prove the material in on a
smaller scale. But if this was the initial intent, then there would be
no need for a copyright, which was an eleventh hour act that attempted
to hide the originator.

I think the copyright issue was a non-issue at that point. In order for anyone to profit from
the scam, someone had to own the copyright, and clearly at that point no one ever expected that
anyone would ever bother themselves challenging or questioning it. When one consider sthat the
challenge that did eventually occur came from the one true and clearly identifiably destructive
cult by any definition to have arisen from this whole scam, it opens a whole new area of
possibilities as to how and why it did happen, now that I think about it.

I think we're back on the point of whether someone having a copyright
serves the objective of creating an "army of zombies". I don't think it
does as a general statement. It could if it can be shown that the
control afforded by the copyright was used in a manner that promoted
the objective.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

I'm not following you on any of this, could you elaborate on what you mean by the possible
"negative" uses of ACIM that Helen and Bill recognized?

Its use as a basis for creating multiple personalities and cults.

Post by Noggin
Again, refer to the recent and very transparent strategy of awarding book contracts to useful
idiots and co-conspirators in todays version of the ongoing project and maybe you will see what I
see about the copyright issue.

I do see what you are saying and it does demonstrate a way it could
have been done. I just have not been able to make the link in doing
this to what is known about MKULTRA, which in my reading, was focused
on very tangible CIA interest areas for CIA operations and all were
done in a relatively contained, compartmentalized manner rather than on
a mass scale. It is possible that this was yet a cover for something
else or part of something bigger, but I haven't spent any time
exploring this possibility.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin
I think that the ACIM copyright was the bone thrown to Skutch, Wapnick, et al, as reward for
their participation, and ongoing efforts on behalf of the mindrape.

Clearly they benefitted monetarily. I still have my doubts as to
whether they were supposed to be "promoters" or "damage control". If
they were "promoters", they didn't do a very good job, IMO.

No, but they got rich from it, and it was and continues to be a valid source of research
material. It was an early experiment, and really only noteworthy from that understanding. ACIM
is very small potatoes by comparison to the recent explosion of Pseudo Christian groups and
causes, but it's still a nice little earner, and still functions to prove its purpose, and the
shortcomings of this early piece of work.
In any product development project there will be "failures" or "disappointments". In the quest
for the biggest piece of the market share, less stunning products will be produced, but even some
of those end up having enough of a market to make them worthwhile. Toyota doesn't discontinue
their less popular models despite the fact that their Camry rules the market, for example.
That's how I see it, anyway. I do find a lot of interest in some of your conclusions though,
because per usual, you are approaching the topic from a different angle than I am and that's
always a good thing.
At some point maybe we'll be able to evaluate which of us is developing the "Camry" and which the
"Celica", who knows? I guess what matters is that they both serve the purpose of getting their
drivers from point A to point B.

I prefer the Liberty, it has a nice ring to it. :D

[jason]

Post by Noggin
to me that I was being surveilled by a BATF agent who was monitoring my movements, listening in
on my phone calls, and eavesdropping on my conversations outside the court room.

good. maybe he can clear up this nancy "phonegate" issue once and for
all!

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by Noggin
to me that I was being surveilled by a BATF agent who was monitoring my movements, listening
in
on my phone calls, and eavesdropping on my conversations outside the court room.

good. maybe he can clear up this nancy "phonegate" issue once and for
all!

Well, it should be cleared up, that's for sure. I'm glad you agree. In the situation stated
above, the phone calls being monitored were calls I made from a payphone by someone casually
leaning against it while I chatted about matters like what we were going to have for dinner, who
turned out to be a BATF operative. I was informed of this by a news reporter who clued me in to
what was going on. At the time I didn't believe her, but it didn't take much of an effort on my
part to establish that she was correct that the person in question was in fact a BATF operative,
and that he was surveilling me.

The last I heard, Nancy was contending that there is no such thing as phone records for incoming
calls, and that is a total falsehood, but so far no further excuses, so I guess we're still in
the place where Nancy just likes to make spurious allegations and not be responsible for them,
which is nothing new, she just keeps coming up with one after another, with no end in sight. I
suspect that has a lot to do with the fact that her behavior is okey dokey ok with the cult as
long as she remains loyal to the real cause, which clearly has nothing to do with ethics,
honesty, morality, or truth. And par for the Course, no chirping in from Soulless, who started
this groovy strategy for trying to marginalize me, and failing that, to intimidate and harass me
from posting here. But we've already been down this road with Soulless to no avail, son now that
Nancy has chosen to chirp in and add some fuel, now it's her turn to show what she's made of,
once again. So far, she's still toxic cotton candy posing as a decent and honest person.

I'm curious to know how you feel about Nancy's claims that she was visited and instructed by a
"voice" that when referring to itself mentioned it's own crucifixion, who called itself "Jeshua",
but who Nancy stated in her own commentaries that she believed to be Jesus who wrote ACIM, who
she said told her that she was chosen because she was willing and capable, who she later spent
months and months denying she ever thought was Jesus until her own words to the contrary were
pointed out to her, upon which she claimed forgetfulness, but about which she is now agreeing
that she did think was Jesus all along. What are your thoughts about the fact that under the
guise of her now disclaimed "voice" she made actual guarantees, including the accomplishment of
World Peace, provided techniques, gave spiritual counsel and advice on serious life issues to
that end?

I also wonder what you feel about the fact that Nancy now skirts the whole issue by saying that
it just might have only all been her imagination, but to date has done nothing about being
responsible for confessing that on the same public venue she used to publish all that, or for
apologizing and explaining herself to anyone who might have taken her claims, techniques, and
advice at face value.

Do you think she has any responsibility for doing any of those things? Do you have any
responsibility or inclination as a fellow believer and supporter of ACIM to address them?

[jason]

Post by Noggin
I'm curious to know how you feel about Nancy's claims that she was visited and instructed by a
"voice" that when referring to itself mentioned it's own crucifixion, who called itself "Jeshua",
but who Nancy stated in her own commentaries that she believed to be Jesus who wrote ACIM, who
she said told her that she was chosen because she was willing and capable, who she later spent
months and months denying she ever thought was Jesus until her own words to the contrary were
pointed out to her, upon which she claimed forgetfulness, but about which she is now agreeing
that she did think was Jesus all along.

sorry, i have no opinion on this issue, mainly because i don't care
(that's not meant in a bad way, i'm just uninterested).


What are your thoughts about the fact that under the

Post by Noggin
guise of her now disclaimed "voice" she made actual guarantees, including the accomplishment of
World Peace, provided techniques, gave spiritual counsel and advice on serious life issues to
that end?

sorry, i have no opinion on this issue, mainly because i don't care
(that's not meant in a bad way, i'm just uninterested).

Post by Noggin
I also wonder what you feel about the fact that Nancy now skirts the whole issue by saying that
it just might have only all been her imagination, but to date has done nothing about being
responsible for confessing that on the same public venue she used to publish all that, or for
apologizing and explaining herself to anyone who might have taken her claims, techniques, and
advice at face value.
Do you think she has any responsibility for doing any of those things? Do you have any
responsibility or inclination as a fellow believer and supporter of ACIM to address them?

the only question that came to my mind after reading your post about
the Nancy Phonegate thing was... CALLER ID.

none of this is really any of my business, BUT
if Nancy's freinds or relatives received calls from someone did they
have caller ID?
and couldn't they check that to see who it was?

those are the only thoughts i had on the issue.

[Nancy]

Post by jason
the only question that came to my mind
after reading your post about
the Nancy Phonegate thing was... CALLER ID.

I wouldn't call it "Phonegate."

Those who received a call were either listed
as references on my resume or had the same last
last name that I do and are listed in the
public directory.

They said that the Caller ID read "Private."

Post by jason
none of this is really any of my business,
BUT if Nancy's freinds or relatives received
calls from someone did they have caller ID?
and couldn't they check that to see who it was?

Up here, we have the option of not allowing our
numbers to show on Caller ID. Don't you have that
down there?

Post by jason
those are the only thoughts i had on the issue.

Okay.

n.

[Noggin]

Post by Nancy

Post by jason
the only question that came to my mind
after reading your post about
the Nancy Phonegate thing was... CALLER ID.

I wouldn't call it "Phonegate."

So what? I'll call it "Phonegate" along with Jason. That works for me. You're not in charge of
what it's called, now that you started it.

Post by Nancy
Those who received a call were either listed
as references on my resume or had the same last
last name that I do and are listed in the
public directory.
They said that the Caller ID read "Private."

Well, how about if I call you, Nancy and you can report back what my caller ID says? You do
want to get to the truth of this matter, yes?

Post by Nancy

Post by jason
none of this is really any of my business,
BUT if Nancy's freinds or relatives received
calls from someone did they have caller ID?
and couldn't they check that to see who it was?

Up here, we have the option of not allowing our
numbers to show on Caller ID. Don't you have that
down there?

Yes, we have it, but it all depends on what phone service one uses on both ends how the call
shows up on caller ID, including a blocked number.

But all of that is academic, because I've made the offer to have all of the relevant phone
records, my own included, public. That would solve the matter for once and for all.

For some reason though, you seem more content to continue on with the spurious allegations, lame
explanations, and sleazy excuses about the situation, which leads me to believe that the calls
never happened, or if they did, that you don't want to know the truth about where they came
from. It's more fun for you to just keep repeating your ill-conceived but self-serving
conclusions, as has always been your practice since the first time I met you. Which only makes
you a cheap rumor monger with an axe to grind, and not what any rational person would regard as a
"speeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeritchual" person. Whatever that is meant to mean, but we all know it means
that you're supposed to care about the Truth, at the very least.

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by Noggin
I'm curious to know how you feel about Nancy's claims that she was visited and instructed by a
"voice" that when referring to itself mentioned it's own crucifixion, who called itself
"Jeshua",
but who Nancy stated in her own commentaries that she believed to be Jesus who wrote ACIM, who
she said told her that she was chosen because she was willing and capable, who she later spent
months and months denying she ever thought was Jesus until her own words to the contrary were
pointed out to her, upon which she claimed forgetfulness, but about which she is now agreeing
that she did think was Jesus all along.

sorry, i have no opinion on this issue, mainly because i don't care
(that's not meant in a bad way, i'm just uninterested).

I find your claimed disinterest to be interesting. You seem quite interested in theorizing about
us critics, how come not your fellow believers?

E.g, if you were to suddenly discover that all the ACIM believers here were ex-convicts who had
all committed violent crimes, would that interest you? A seemingly extreme example, I know, but
then again, the writings of Joseph Duncan, a suddenly prominent ex-convict who has committed
horrific crimes would qualify him as a fellow believer in the teachings of ACIM, if he were
posting them here.

Do you think that the choices you make about what to find interest in or not has anything to do
with the validity of the conclusions you reach? Like if you want to paint your room, but have no
interest in knowing the different materials, tools, and techniques that are available do you
think your disinterest might effect the outcome of the paint job?

And more to the point, is it really disinterest, or could your failure to mentally pursue the
topic be more validly defined some other way?

Post by jason
the only question that came to my mind after reading your post about
the Nancy Phonegate thing was... CALLER ID.
none of this is really any of my business, BUT
if Nancy's freinds or relatives received calls from someone did they
have caller ID?
and couldn't they check that to see who it was?
those are the only thoughts i had on the issue.

Right, but the questions that raises in my mind are how can you stop your thought process on a
dime like that, and why would you want to? Do you have any concerns at all about the state of
ethics of your fellow believers, mentors, and sources of validation of your own beliefs? Do you
think it's a good idea to have such concerns?

[Nancy]

Post by Noggin
The last I heard, Nancy was contending that
there is no such thing as phone records for
calls, and that is a total falsehood, but so
far no further excuses,

As far as I know, there isn't. My phone bills
only show calls I make. My caller ID shows
incoming calls ONLY from those who have chosen
not to keep their identity private.

Post by Noggin
so I guess we're still in the place where
Nancy just likes to make spurious allegations
and not be responsible for them, which is
nothing new, she just keeps coming up with
one after another, with no end in sight.

You are the one who has made allegations about
me and about many, many others for years and
years, as anyone who attends this newsgroup
knows. I've made no "spurious allegations" about you.

Post by Noggin
I'm curious to know how you feel about
Nancy's claims that she was visited and
instructed by a "voice" that when referring
to itself mentioned it's own crucifixion,

The "voice" said he did not die by crucifixion.

Post by Noggin
...who called itself "Jeshua", but who

No... I said that *I* called him Jeshua, and
I've said right along that I thought all sorts
of things about where the voice was coming from.

One thing... and this, to me, was one of the most
striking things about the dialog, was that he
said that this sort of dialog is available to anyone
who wants it. There is nothing special about it.

He also, as you well know, condemned
what he called the "New Age Marketplace" with its
myriad trinkets and baubles -- salvation available
for a price. He laughed at the hucksters who claim
that love / salvation / happiness can be purchased.
He feels that it is not right to attempt to make
money by attempting to sell "idols" to folk on the
premise that these "idols" will deliver what is
available free to all.

Post by Noggin
What are your thoughts about the fact that under the
guise of her now disclaimed "voice" she made actual
guarantees...

The only guarantee was of the immediate healing
power of forgiveness -- and physical healing was NOT
mentioned.

Post by Noggin
including the accomplishment of World Peace

World Peace, he said, can only be accomplished by
forgiveness and, he said, forgiveness can only
begin with you and me -- there are no crusades,
no magic formulae, no spells. Just forgiveness -
NOW - of those against whom you hold grievances
in your immediate personal life.

Post by Noggin
Provided techniques...

Unlike Lazaris, the only "techniques" he pushes
are forgiveness and listening to your inner
guidance whether you call it/him/her the Holy
Spirit or the Higher Self or your heart or
your conscience or Charlie.

Post by Noggin
Gave spiritual counsel...

The only spiritual counsel he gives is to forgive.

Post by Noggin
And advice on serious life issues to that end...

The only advice he gives is to forgive and to
listen to your guidance by whatever name you
call it.

Post by Noggin
I also wonder what you feel about the
fact that Nancy now skirts the whole
issue by saying that it just might have
only all been her imagination, but to
date has done nothing about being
responsible for confessing that on the
same public venue she used to publish all
that, or for apologizing and explaining
herself to anyone who might have taken
her claims, techniques, and
advice at face value.

I believe that the answer to most human
difficulties is forgiveness and I believe
that the most reliable guidance we can
turn to is the voice within -- whatever
we call it. I am not about to apologize
for believing this and I am also not
about to apologize for passing this on
as advice.

Post by Noggin
Do you think she has any responsibility
for doing any of those things? Do you
have any responsibility or inclination
as a fellow believer and supporter of
ACIM to address them?

Katie, I OWN what I say. I put my name on
my posts. My mistakes are right there for
everyone to see. I try to deal with everyone
honestly and respectfully -- even you.

You attack peoples' characters and repu-
tations over the Internet while hiding
behind a pseudonym. You may think you've
built an admirable reputation but what
you've truly gained is notoriety.

You've gone out of your way to damage me.
I have not retaliated and will not retaliate.
Why? Because it's against my belief system,
I truly believe that the greatest good is
always accomplished peacefully and that
nothing good can be accomplished by
attack.

n.

[Chuck]

Post by Noggin
The last I heard, Nancy was contending that
there is no such thing as phone records for
calls, and that is a total falsehood, but so
far no further excuses,

Nancy:
As far as I know, there isn't. My phone bills
only show calls I make. My caller ID shows
incoming calls ONLY from those who have chosen
not to keep their identity private.

You might check with your phone company about the records they are
required to keep. Or you might check the following:
http://www.witchvox.com/wren/wn_detail.html?id=13395

I know internet sources aren't necessarily the best, but it will save
you the effort of trying to track the right person down in the phone
company to give you the specifics. My quick review of the reference is
that the information contained in it reasonably represents the kind of
information that is captured and available, at least in the US. I don't
remember the Canadian regulations specifically, but as a general
statement, this kind of information is captured and used worldwide. The
details include originating number and this is not blocked by caller ID
personal choice. The originating number that shows up might be "an
umbrella" number. Typically this happens when a business has its own
switch which interfaces to the telephone company. When an extension
places a call through the external telephone network, the umbrella
number is what often shows up in the call record rather than the number
of the extension. The company switch also keeps call records, so if
there is a legal reason, these records can be obtained and the two sets
of records can be used to identify the specific extension.

What you get on your phone bill is a subset of the captured information
processed by billing software which is specifically related to the bill
you pay. There are legal means for obtaining this information,
particularly when part of a criminal investigation.

[Noggin]

"Chuck" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:***@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
The company switch also keeps call records, so if

Post by Chuck
there is a legal reason, these records can be obtained and the two sets
of records can be used to identify the specific extension.
What you get on your phone bill is a subset of the captured information
processed by billing software which is specifically related to the bill
you pay. There are legal means for obtaining this information,
particularly when part of a criminal investigation.

Or a civil investigation.

There is no reason that Nancy's phone company wouldn't provide that information up on her
request, or upon the demand of a subpoena, failing her willful participation in the process of
getting to the truth of the matter.

[Alababa]

Post by jason

Post by Noggin
to me that I was being surveilled by a BATF agent who was monitoring my movements, listening in
on my phone calls, and eavesdropping on my conversations outside the court room.

good. maybe he can clear up this nancy "phonegate" issue once and for
all!

Can you imagine anything more boring than following
Katie around and listening to her conversations? :)

[s***@yahoo.com]

Post by Alababa
Can you imagine anything more boring than following

Katie around and listening to her conversations? :)

Same with John, writing here

But a lot seem to follow around here. Or, maybe they do the following,
it's hard to tell.

~ Carrie

[J]

ROTFLMAO. Gee, Carrie how many people around here tell you are dumb?
Nearly everyone? That kidda shows what people think of the quality of
your writing and conversation.

[Noggin]

Post by Alababa

Post by Alababa
Can you imagine anything more boring than following

Katie around and listening to her conversations? :)
Same with John, writing here
But a lot seem to follow around here. Or, maybe they do the following,
it's hard to tell.

Not to break anyone's bubbles or anything, but I've been known all my life for being an extremely
interesting conversationalist. Just to keep things factual, so we can keep score on who has to
make things up and who doesn't in order to support a point.

[s***@yahoo.com]

I was wondering, if I register and start writing on the new moderated
board, will John follow me there and write stuff to me (there) like he
does here?

Speaking of following people around.

~ Carrie

[J]

ROTFLMAO. What can be more obvious than you follow people around on
this board, argue with them, tell them why they are hypocrites and not
"living the course," then toot your own horn for living the course.

Get a life old woman. Don't you have to pull up your support hose or
something?

[A]

Noggin wrote:

[snip]

Post by Noggin
Not to break anyone's bubbles or anything, but I've been known all my life for being an extremely
interesting conversationalist. Just to keep things factual, so we can keep score on who has to
make things up and who doesn't in order to support a point.

:Now we have Holey Ellen following suit, or claiming to
:anyway, stating as her excuse that I called her a cunt.
:
:But, let's face it, it isn't my use of words like "cunt" or
:"pussy" that is the problem here, Ellen is no innocent babe
:in the woods, she can hold her own with any swearing sailor.
:
:Oh, bored with the Cunt Show? Or is it the wee fellas who
:got bored? That's the problem with middle aged women and
:silly little boys, it's all giggles, fumbles and quick get-aways.
:
:You're just a cheap tacky cunt Nancy, when you get right
:down to it.
:
:You're a nasty little cult cunt aren't you Nancy?
:
:Your a fucking predator Nancy, a total vampire.
:
:You're a fucking liar on top of everything else Nancy, and a
:pathetic one.
:
:You're a fucking lame ass dime a dozen spineless chiropractor
:big whoop.
:
:Do you live in her skin you fucking big mouthed shit for
:brains idiot?
:
:Fucking nasty ass zombie.
:
:I do know MEAN though, so don't try to fuck with my head,
:fucking wanna be slapping smirker in training.
:
:Fucking BITCH.
:
:But this fucking religion you are making living and a sex life
:out of doesn't have any special excuses.
:
:And you think someone here deserves a kind or civil word from me,
:precisely why Sheryl? Given that I'm not interested in joining
:your dirty little cult and have no agenda to pose as someone who
:gives a shit about anyone but myself. Like you do.
:
:As it happens, I make it a rule to be as rude as possible to
:holey people, it's the only right thing to do.
:
:I have met the Dalai Lama and some of his monks. We didn't
:discuss his holeyness so all went well. The Pope can kiss my
:Irish ass. He's already stooped over low enough to make the target.
:
:This shit works on you? Do you succeed in getting anyone else to
:volunteer for a butt fucking with this kind of nonsense, or do you
:just think it's deep because it worked when Wayne pulled it on you?
:
: - Katie Dean aka Noggin, webmaster of "The Cosmic Fool"

[Nancy]

Post by Noggin
Not to break anyone's bubbles or
anything, but I've been known all
my life for being an extremely
interesting conversationalist.
Just to keep things factual, so
we can keep score on who has to
make things up and who doesn't
in order to support a point.

I've never had a conversation with
you, but I have read a lot of your
posted material online. In all those
thousands of pages of verbiage, I
don't recall your participating in
even one equitable exchange. Either
you are pontificating or you are
passing judgment or, if someone has
disagreed with you, you are attacking
their character.

I somehow doubt that your offline
personality is much different.

n.

[A]

Post by Nancy

Post by Noggin
Not to break anyone's bubbles or
anything, but I've been known all
my life for being an extremely
interesting conversationalist.
Just to keep things factual, so
we can keep score on who has to
make things up and who doesn't
in order to support a point.

I've never had a conversation with
you, but I have read a lot of your
posted material online. In all those
thousands of pages of verbiage, I
don't recall your participating in
even one equitable exchange. Either
you are pontificating or you are
passing judgment or, if someone has
disagreed with you, you are attacking
their character.
I somehow doubt that your offline
personality is much different.

She's probably ugly. Which makes the
encounter that much more disgusting.

[J]

Chuck and Bodhi/Bidhati play "6 Steps from the CIA," a paranoid
varation of the game, "6 Steps from Kevin Bacon."

Too funny!

[Nancy]

Hee hee.

And how many steps are YOU from Kevin?

n.

[J]

And how many steps are YOU from Kevin?

I don't know. Proably at least 6. On the other hand only a few steps
from the CIA. I live in the United States and the CIA is part of the US
government. See how easy it is to associate me with the CIA?

[Nancy]

LOL! It must be the trenchcoat and fedora. :)

n.

[Noggin]

Post by Nancy
LOL! It must be the trenchcoat and fedora. :)

Let it be noted for the record that you not only fail to encourage Jason to THINK, but make sport
of discouraging him from doing so.

You're not a good person, Nancy. Someone has to tell you.

[Lee]

Hi Chuck,

So, there we have it then. You have actually signed off
on this hair-brained theory that the Course was authored
by CIA operatives. That's your working theory, in a
nutshell, after almost two years of researching this
material? Astounding.

What exactly is Katie's leverage over you, Chuck ...?
Did she convince you that less than a unified stance
would weaken your alliance ... or isolate her in
wacko-land ?

I was surprised at Katie's desperation, in betting the
farm on this one, but I'm astounded! that you could be
pressured into toeing the new party line, in about one
week. Do you have any idea how 'patently absurd a
position you've staked out, in order to substitute your
impossibly convoluted origin-story for the simple,
straight-forward account of Bill and Helen?

Helen's hears insistent inner voice. Calls work associate
in middle of nite. Is told, "if it insists you take notes,
take them, so we can sleep. I'll look at them with you
in the morning, ok?" ... Next morning, 'notes look
pretty coherent ... ok no need for alarm ... I'll monitor
this with you, Helen ... I understand that you're
frightened ... next day's notes coherent, benign ...
and the next ... You read me your notes, Helen, I'll
type them out and we'll see where this is going ...

What part of that account do you have difficulty with?
It doesn't require a belief in God, or the hereafter,
or Jesus ... nor any agreement with the output in
content, of what Helen's 'inner voice' came up with.

The story begins with an extraordinary example of
the type of unexplainable phenomena that is regularly
documented and reported -- unlikely candidate
exhibits some capacity of the brain that science
cannot account for ... like the fellow in a mental
institution that reads in 2 dozen languages, and
reads upside-down text perfectly (all self-taught),
but can hardly dress himself. Clinically speaking,
we simply have a manuscript that resulted from
a prolonged case of inner dialoguing, with the
baseline supposition of Helen's conscious encounter
with a discrete part of her own deeper psyche.

All the rest, as they say, is interpretation. ;)

If I were opposed to the Course, I could safely
run forever with counterpoints opposing any
claims of "inspired" origins for the material, by
explaining the material in terms of non-ordinary
phenomena arising from psyches, in several
cognitive areas (including mathematical and
musical "idiot savants" whose talents confound
science). After all, we're beyond explaining an
idiot savant's peculiar talents in spiritualist terms.
Or in terms of possession or visitations by past
masters. Or in conspiracy's terms. ;)

So, why the need to drag a secret gov't program
and a committee of 'specialists in their fields' into
an unsupportable new origin-story that defies
any ability to postulate the proposed *mechanics*
involved in authoring, transmitting, writing,
editing, 'handling' and covering up the production
of the manuscript known as ACIM ?

This is intellectual and logical Hari-Kari, Chuck.
Are we to believe you'd be saying these things,
or that bidhati would, without cover of anonymity ?

If we start from the cold, clinical and perfectly 'logical'
baseline I've described, in acknowledging that a
manuscript was apparently produced by some manner
of inner dialogue process in Helen, the position that
you're staking out is WAY further to the loonie fringe
than the claim that the dialogueing was inspired.

And it's totally unnecessary, toward effectively countering
claims of divine origin (whose claims all come down
to a matter of opinion and interpretation, after all).

Furthermore, it was probably the only stance that
anti-Course activists could ever AGREE on, that
addresses the material instead of its students. After
all, what are the chances that Katie is ever going to
be happy with a final postulation of yours or bidhati's
that substantively differs from her own, regarding
the conspiracy theory.

And just how far will you bend, to her will, if her
theory offends your intelligence ??

I think this is probably a deal-breaker for the tattered
solidarity that Katie dances double-time to martial,
from you THREE (3).

Will you EVER be able to assert a difference of opinion
with Katie, that doesn't yield to what we read of her
scolding you back into line? 'Dunno, for sure. That's
why I began with the rhetorical question "What's the
leverage or attraction about ...?"

You do puzzle me, Chuck.

~ Lee

Post by Chuck
Hi bidhati,
Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you
wrote, I see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am
right now.
I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically.
That wasn't their style of doing things.
I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of
whatever they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they
had no control over this according to the funding rules.
But there are also some differences.
I can see the relationship with MPD, but I also see a relationship
with other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.
My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the
needs for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping"
and editing the tool to customize it to the specific area of
interest by subject matter experts in that area.
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions,
she saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate.
From what I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this
on the public was similar to what I've read about nuclear
scientists and the bomb.
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill
recognized. This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA
involvement and try to target the tool in a way that would
minimize the negative application. The "self study" aspect of the
course is one of the "wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect
this.

Post by b***@gmail.com
I am responding to question and comments from jason, Chuck and
Loopy. It has taken me many hours just to research enough to post
this post and I still haven't gathered all the information I
intended to gather. I hope you find it helpful.
Loopy,
Well then, if you can't show any CIA connection to control the
minds of the student/reader, what exactly are you claiming? As
far as I can see you present a suspicion that the CIA was
involved in experiments, but you can't describe these experiments
nor can you show these "experiments," had anything remotely to do
with A Course in Miracles.
Through the reasearch I have done, I might have some different
ideas as to how and why Helen and her handlers came up with ACIM.
First of all, I do not believe that the CIA instigated the
writing of ACIM
for the purpose of controlling ACIMite's believers' minds,
rather they were
more interested in gaining the knowledge of how they could split a
person's
mind so that they would develop multiple personalities. After
that, they
wanted to know how to control the multiple personalities for
reason's related to national security and espionage.
The fact that she and Thetford may have believed the multiple
personality(Jesus) may be due to the obvious fact that ACIM seems
to be not only influenced by Thetford's Christian Science
beliefs, but
also Helen's talents. One talent may have been the ability to
write
in iambic pentameter, possibly derived from her love of
Shakespeare's works.
When you combine the intelligence of not only Helen and
Thetford but many of their educated collegues and research
projecta that they learned from, it is not surprising that ACIM
could impress pea brains that were not awareof their involvement
with CIA contractors, and the type of research that could lead to
the writing of a religious manipulation
such as ACIM.
Helen, may have just been a guinea pig or an unknowing victim, but
I find it odd that Jesus chose a woman that would spend her latter
days in a very dark depressive mentally ill state. Where was the
Happy Dream when she needed it? With all the first hand knowledge
that she had of the superior teachings of Jesus, she was certainly
left holding a rotten egg that was of no use to her.
excerpt from.....
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/radio/ckln06.htm
The idea may have originated with Estabrooks but he may not have
been the first to actually publish it as such. Writing in "The
Psychoanalytic
Review" of 1947, Major Harvey Leavitt of the U.S. Army Medical
Corps described the hypnotic creation of a secondary personality,
"... hypnotically induced automatic writing was established
early in the course of treatment as a means of expeditiously
gaining access to unconscious material. After this procedure as
utilized for a time, a hypnotic secondary personality was
produced by suggesting that the writing was under control of a
certain part of his personality unaware to him.
" Leavitt then said that he created another personality in direct
contrast to
the one already established so he could work the two created
personalities
off against one another. He concluded, "... regardless of
whether the production of multiple personalities by means of
hypnosis could be construed
as additional proof that hypnosis is an artificially induced
hysteria or whether
the multiple personalities were artificial entities resulting from
direct
suggestions ... there exists a close relationship with
personalities spontaneously arising in hysterical dissociation.
The importance of producing
multiple personalities experimentally lies in the fact that
certain elements
of the original personality may be isolated which manifest a
minimum of
censorship influences and thus may serve as helpful ajuncts in
hypno- analysis."
I think that it may be possible that Helen was either a
knowing volunteer
or an unknowing victim, or that she and Thetford were people who
started
to believe their own self created crapola.
Since much of Helen and Thetford's research was related to
PAS (Personality Assessment Sytem) created by Gittinger who is a
confirmed CIA contractor, it is important to know who he is and
what he did....
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LSD/marks10.htm
Up until this point, most people have just thought
that Thetford was involved with the research done
by the CIA, but this list clearly shows that Helen
participated in research as well.
Also if you will read carefully, you will see that some of
Helen's research
and Thetford's is funded by Human Ecology.
http://www.pasf.org/print_bibliog.htm
excerpt........
Schucman, H. (1964, Sept.). Personality features and adaption
associated
with somatic reactions to stress. In W. N. Therford (Chm.), Human
Studies in social and personality adaption. Symposium presented
at the
meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.
Human Ecology is the Code name of MKULTRA's and CIA program
that funded the research. There is no question that Gittinger
worked for the CIA for 26 years and there is no question that the
Human Ecology
Fund funded some of Schucman and Thetford's research.
Here are the senate hearing that prove that Gittinger was a CIA
agent, Humman Ecology was the name of the MKULTA program funded by
the CIA...
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hearing06.htm
Also....
Gittinger's research on creating alters
and multiple personalities.Gittinger tested schizophrenics in
his early research and when the CIA hired him, he already
knew much(PAS) and continued his work, paid by the CIA.
The Joint Committe testimony and supporting documentation gives us
that
part of the purpose of these experiments was to develop, test, and
evaluate capabilities and techniques for producing predictable
human behavioral and/or physiological changes. The Select
Committee report tells us that "The research and development of
materials to be used for altering human behavior consisted of
three phases: first, the search for materials suitable for study;
second, laboratory testing on voluntary human subjects in various
types of institutions; third, the application of MKULTRA
materials in normal life settings.
This leads me to wonder whether ACIM is the application of
MKULTRA material in normal life settings. I don't know that it has
worked to
CREATE dissassociative personalities that can be manipulated as
much as it has attracted people with personalities that can easily
disassociate themselves from reality.
Thetford worked on many projects funded by the CIA(Human Ecology)
and that were directly related to Gittinger's work(PAS) and Helen
also worked on a few projects funded by the CIA.
Excerpt.........
Thetford, W. N. (1961). Measurement of personality traits
resulting from the
interaction of abilities and environment: I. Theoretical
formulation underlying
the research. New York: Human Ecology Fund. (APA, N.Y.)
Thetford, W. N. (Chm.). (1964, Sept.). Human ecology: Studies in
social and
personality adaptation. Symposium presented at the meeting of
the American
Psychological Association, Los Angeles.
Thetford, W. N., & Schucman, H. (1962). The personality theory
of John Gittinger.
New York: Human Ecology Fund.
The reason that we may not know of the research that they may
have been doing during the writing of ACIM is because the Human
Ecology Fund was transfered to another name after 1962.
There is so much more information that casts more than a heavy
shadow of
a doubt as to whether Helen really channeled Jesus. The
information is too enormous to research. It takes a lot of
concentration and the ability
put events in chronological order to link people such as
Gittinger, Saunders, Spiegel and others to Thetford and Schucman
but the information is available. Thetford and Schucman had more
than enough research to know consciously or unconsciously how to
create a multiple personality, manipulate people to believe ideas
that are beyond the normal
person's comphrehension and education.
And all anyone has to do to further manipulate and/or control a
religious person is agree or pretend to agree with what they
believe(their
doctrines) and convince them that you are working for the good of
'whatever', according to what they believe. One more religious
belief like ACIM would not tip the applecart in favor of mind
control through religion, as there are plenty of religious ideas
to choose from that have
more followers. If ACIM had not been created, people with flaws in
their
reasoning ability would have found something else to believe to
suit their
gulliblity and need to think they are instructed by an invisible
authority.
We only have to look at President Bush's campaign to see
that this
is true. God Bless America approach played and plays a huge role
in getting people to agree with many things that Bush has done
that might otherwise been disagreed with.
No, I do not believe that ACIM was created by the CIA as a mind
control program for the masses, but rather was a by product of
Thetford and Schucman's combined research and education. They
just may have got hooked on their own crapola.
bidhat

[Noggin]

Post by Lee
Hi Chuck,
So, there we have it then. You have actually signed off
on this hair-brained theory that the Course was authored
by CIA operatives.

Hopefully he's actually signed off on the theory that you're as sleazy a snake oil salesman as
ever there was.

To call the theory "hairbrained" is disingenuous at best, contemptuous at worst. There is ample
material there to engage a reasonable mind, so what else could you do but employ the tired, used
up, lazy closed minded old technique of sneering down your Royal Nose at Chuck for finding
interest in it?

Some people do more to prove a point by trying to disprove it than anyone else could do with all
the facts in the universe. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words, and all of your say
"Desperate Creep on Board".


That's your working theory, in a

Post by Lee
nutshell, after almost two years of researching this
material? Astounding.
What exactly is Katie's leverage over you, Chuck ...?

He's my sex slave, actually, and I make guacamole just the way he likes it too.

Post by Lee
Did she convince you that less than a unified stance
would weaken your alliance ... or isolate her in
wacko-land ?

Yep, I told him no whips and chains for a month for him if he dared dispute me on the newsgroup.
You must be psychic on top of everything else. Kinda like Asshole Ala Mode.

Post by Lee
I was surprised at Katie's desperation, in betting the
farm on this one,

Yep, I put the old family homestead on the line for this one, I did, it's true. Asshole Ala Mode
with Whipped Cream.

Post by Lee
but I'm astounded! that you could be
pressured into toeing the new party line,

You often make things up and then become astounded by them. Did you learn that from your pal
Judith Skutch Whitson? Asshole Ala Mode with Whipped Cream and Chocolate Sprinkles

Post by Lee
in about one
week.

The power of whips, chains, sexual slavery and guacamole. Beats the hell out of worn out snake
oil salesmanship.

Post by Lee
Do you have any idea how 'patently absurd a
position you've staked out, in order to substitute your
impossibly convoluted origin-story for the simple,
straight-forward account of Bill and Helen?

Which version, just for curiosity's sake? Oh, nevermind, curiosity kills the Cult Kitties, I
nearly forgot.

Post by Lee
The story begins with an extraordinary example of
the type of unexplainable phenomena that is regularly
documented and reported -- unlikely candidate
exhibits some capacity of the brain that science
cannot account for ... like the fellow in a mental
institution that reads in 2 dozen languages, and
reads upside-down text perfectly (all self-taught),
but can hardly dress himself. Clinically speaking,
we simply have a manuscript that resulted from
a prolonged case of inner dialoguing, with the
baseline supposition of Helen's conscious encounter
with a discrete part of her own deeper psyche.
All the rest, as they say, is interpretation. ;)

Ewwwwwwww..........the winky smileys even!! Asshole Ala Mode with Whipped Cream, Chocolate
Sprinkles, Wrapped in Cotton Candy

Post by Lee
Will you EVER be able to assert a difference of opinion
with Katie, that doesn't yield to what we read of her
scolding you back into line? 'Dunno, for sure. That's
why I began with the rhetorical question "What's the
leverage or attraction about ...?"
You do puzzle me, Chuck.
~ Lee

It's an easy thing to figure out, Ms Majesty. Just read your Divinely Inspired Book. Whatever
you think is wrong with Chuck is actually what is wrong with you. 'member?

Assholes Ala Mode with Whipped Cream, Chocolate Sprinkles, Wrapped in Cotton Candy , topped with
a Plastic and Paste Royal Tiara 'n Hot Air abound.

[Sheryl Valentine]

katie about chuck? : He's my sex slave, actually, and I make guacamole just
the way he likes it too.

sv; the image that comes to mind....did anyone see the movie Sideways? the
scene with the waitress going at it with the biker guy? LOL Sheryl
--
www.dr4baxs.com

Post by Noggin

Post by Lee
Hi Chuck,
So, there we have it then. You have actually signed off
on this hair-brained theory that the Course was authored
by CIA operatives.

Hopefully he's actually signed off on the theory that you're as sleazy a
snake oil salesman as ever there was.
To call the theory "hairbrained" is disingenuous at best, contemptuous at
worst. There is ample material there to engage a reasonable mind, so what
else could you do but employ the tired, used up, lazy closed minded old
technique of sneering down your Royal Nose at Chuck for finding interest
in it?
Some people do more to prove a point by trying to disprove it than anyone
else could do with all the facts in the universe. As they say, a picture
is worth a thousand words, and all of your say "Desperate Creep on Board".
That's your working theory, in a

Post by Lee
nutshell, after almost two years of researching this
material? Astounding.
What exactly is Katie's leverage over you, Chuck ...?

He's my sex slave, actually, and I make guacamole just the way he likes it too.

Post by Lee
Did she convince you that less than a unified stance
would weaken your alliance ... or isolate her in
wacko-land ?

Yep, I told him no whips and chains for a month for him if he dared
dispute me on the newsgroup. You must be psychic on top of everything
else. Kinda like Asshole Ala Mode.

Post by Lee
I was surprised at Katie's desperation, in betting the
farm on this one,

Yep, I put the old family homestead on the line for this one, I did, it's
true. Asshole Ala Mode with Whipped Cream.

Post by Lee
but I'm astounded! that you could be
pressured into toeing the new party line,

You often make things up and then become astounded by them. Did you learn
that from your pal Judith Skutch Whitson? Asshole Ala Mode with Whipped
Cream and Chocolate Sprinkles

Post by Lee
in about one
week.

The power of whips, chains, sexual slavery and guacamole. Beats the hell
out of worn out snake oil salesmanship.

Post by Lee
Do you have any idea how 'patently absurd a
position you've staked out, in order to substitute your
impossibly convoluted origin-story for the simple,
straight-forward account of Bill and Helen?

Which version, just for curiosity's sake? Oh, nevermind, curiosity kills
the Cult Kitties, I nearly forgot.

Post by Lee
The story begins with an extraordinary example of
the type of unexplainable phenomena that is regularly
documented and reported -- unlikely candidate
exhibits some capacity of the brain that science
cannot account for ... like the fellow in a mental
institution that reads in 2 dozen languages, and
reads upside-down text perfectly (all self-taught),
but can hardly dress himself. Clinically speaking,
we simply have a manuscript that resulted from
a prolonged case of inner dialoguing, with the
baseline supposition of Helen's conscious encounter
with a discrete part of her own deeper psyche.
All the rest, as they say, is interpretation. ;)

Ewwwwwwww..........the winky smileys even!! Asshole Ala Mode with
Whipped Cream, Chocolate Sprinkles, Wrapped in Cotton Candy

Post by Lee
Will you EVER be able to assert a difference of opinion
with Katie, that doesn't yield to what we read of her
scolding you back into line? 'Dunno, for sure. That's
why I began with the rhetorical question "What's the
leverage or attraction about ...?"
You do puzzle me, Chuck.
~ Lee

It's an easy thing to figure out, Ms Majesty. Just read your Divinely
Inspired Book. Whatever you think is wrong with Chuck is actually what is
wrong with you. 'member?
Assholes Ala Mode with Whipped Cream, Chocolate Sprinkles, Wrapped in
Cotton Candy , topped with a Plastic and Paste Royal Tiara 'n Hot Air
abound.

[J]

ROTFLMAO. Katie Dean Vollmer thus establishes her credentials for
rational discourse.

Sounds like all these would be all these Lazaris-trained, women
"magicians," like Dean would be better off dealing with their eating
and sexual kinks rather than saving the world from the CIA. I doubt
obese dominatrixs from North Carolina will ever catch on in the United
State. The rolls of blubber testing the outer limits of spandex is just
too gruesome a sight. Which is perhaps why she's kinda spinning her act
into "Earth Mother of the sexually confused." Her Lazaris magic seems
to be nothing more than attempting to put guys in a dress, as revenge
for putting a whale in a dress and calling her Katie Dean.

Too funny.

[Chuck]

Post by Lee
Hi Chuck,
So, there we have it then. You have actually signed off
on this hair-brained theory that the Course was authored
by CIA operatives. That's your working theory, in a
nutshell, after almost two years of researching this
material? Astounding.

Nope, not my working theory at all. Nope, haven't been working on
researching this possibility for almost two years. Actually it's only
been less than a month that I've done any work on it.

I have stated, and I still maintain, that the CIA was involved in the
authorship of the course. This discussion is about how and why, not
whether.

Post by Lee
What exactly is Katie's leverage over you, Chuck ...?
Did she convince you that less than a unified stance
would weaken your alliance ... or isolate her in
wacko-land ?

HUH? if the theory is wrong, it's wrong. I don't happen to think it's
wrong. There is too much information available to anyone who looks to
dismiss it without prejudice, IMO.

Post by Lee
I was surprised at Katie's desperation, in betting the
farm on this one, but I'm astounded! that you could be
pressured into toeing the new party line, in about one
week. Do you have any idea how 'patently absurd a
position you've staked out, in order to substitute your
impossibly convoluted origin-story for the simple,
straight-forward account of Bill and Helen?

The "party line" of what Bill and Helen have said isn't inconsistent
with what I've written.

The material that I discovered in the process of looking into the
possibility is way more interesting and to me valuable than getting the
"right" answer to this specific question.

[Lee]

Post by Chuck

Post by Lee
Hi Chuck,
So, there we have it then. You have actually signed off
on this hair-brained theory that the Course was authored
by CIA operatives. That's your working theory, in a
nutshell, after almost two years of researching this
material? Astounding.

Nope, not my working theory at all. Nope, haven't been working on
researching this possibility for almost two years.

It's the Course that you've spent two years examining.

Post by Chuck
Actually it's only been less than a month that I've done
any work on it.
I have stated, and I still maintain, that the CIA was involved in
the authorship of the course. This discussion is about how and
why, not whether.

Post by Lee
What exactly is Katie's leverage over you, Chuck ...?
Did she convince you that less than a unified stance
would weaken your alliance ... or isolate her in
wacko-land ?

HUH? if the theory is wrong, it's wrong. I don't happen to think
it's wrong. There is too much information available to anyone who
looks to dismiss it without prejudice, IMO.

The information you speak of is nothing new. So what is your
explanation for the fact that it is routinely dismissed by those
with every desire to discredit the Course, and that others' efforts
to "connect the dots" have yielded dead ends. This is a pretty
well-known and controversial book, Chuck. Does it strike you
just a little funny that there are no throngs writing elsewhere on
the net about this CIA conspiracy to produce ACIM ?

And how do you explain the shockingly intimate 'second-layer'
of material documenting their ongoing discourse with Helen's
voice, found throughout the early portions of ACIM's unedited
Urtext manuscript ?

Post by Chuck

Post by Lee
I was surprised at Katie's desperation, in betting the
farm on this one, but I'm astounded! that you could be
pressured into toeing the new party line, in about one
week. Do you have any idea how 'patently absurd a
position you've staked out, in order to substitute your
impossibly convoluted origin-story for the simple,
straight-forward account of Bill and Helen?

The "party line" of what Bill and Helen have said isn't
inconsistent with what I've written.

How so, when neither mentions any source for this
material, beyond Helen's inner voice ?

Post by Chuck
The material that I discovered in the process of looking into the
possibility is way more interesting and to me valuable than
getting the "right" answer to this specific question.

I can easily imagine that's so. But you are proposing
an impossibly unwieldy alternative origin for what we
read in ACIM.

~ Lee

[Noggin]

Post by Lee
And how do you explain the shockingly intimate 'second-layer'
of material documenting their ongoing discourse with Helen's
voice, found throughout the early portions of ACIM's unedited
Urtext manuscript ?

You're easily shocked and you think intimacy is what a crack house full of junkies share.

[Chuck]

Post by Lee

Post by Chuck

Post by Lee
Hi Chuck,
So, there we have it then. You have actually signed off
on this hair-brained theory that the Course was authored
by CIA operatives. That's your working theory, in a
nutshell, after almost two years of researching this
material? Astounding.

Nope, not my working theory at all. Nope, haven't been working on
researching this possibility for almost two years.

It's the Course that you've spent two years examining.

Actually, I've been looking into the course for about 3 years.

Post by Lee

Post by Chuck
Actually it's only been less than a month that I've done
any work on it.
I have stated, and I still maintain, that the CIA was involved in
the authorship of the course. This discussion is about how and
why, not whether.

Post by Lee
What exactly is Katie's leverage over you, Chuck ...?
Did she convince you that less than a unified stance
would weaken your alliance ... or isolate her in
wacko-land ?

HUH? if the theory is wrong, it's wrong. I don't happen to think
it's wrong. There is too much information available to anyone who
looks to dismiss it without prejudice, IMO.

The information you speak of is nothing new. So what is your
explanation for the fact that it is routinely dismissed by those
with every desire to discredit the Course, and that others' efforts
to "connect the dots" have yielded dead ends.

I haven't seen any "evidence" of "the fact that it is routinely
dismissed by those with every desire to discredit the Course." Could
you provide some references? Some of the efforts to connect the dots
that I've seen haven't given any conclusions, so if there are some
references which acknowledge dead ends, please let me know where you
found them.

Post by Lee
This is a pretty
well-known and controversial book, Chuck. Does it strike you
just a little funny that there are no throngs writing elsewhere on
the net about this CIA conspiracy to produce ACIM ?

Most of the "throngs" that I've seen writing about ACIM are proponents.
Most of the "critical" reviews are from traditional Christian believers
attempting to distinguish their beliefs from what they see in ACIM. I
have no idea why there aren't throngs writing elsewhere on this and
don't think that's particularly relevant to what I'm doing.

Post by Lee
And how do you explain the shockingly intimate 'second-layer'
of material documenting their ongoing discourse with Helen's
voice, found throughout the early portions of ACIM's unedited
Urtext manuscript ?

I haven't come to any conclusions about the 'second-layer' and whether
or not this is particularly relevant to where I end up. I'll save my
speculation until I have something more meaningful to say.

Post by Lee

Post by Chuck

Post by Lee
I was surprised at Katie's desperation, in betting the
farm on this one, but I'm astounded! that you could be
pressured into toeing the new party line, in about one
week. Do you have any idea how 'patently absurd a
position you've staked out, in order to substitute your
impossibly convoluted origin-story for the simple,
straight-forward account of Bill and Helen?

The "party line" of what Bill and Helen have said isn't
inconsistent with what I've written.

How so, when neither mentions any source for this
material, beyond Helen's inner voice ?

There are any number of possible reasons for ascribing what was done as
Helen's "inner voice". If it was in fact Helen's "inner voice", that
doesn't necessarily cut the ties to it being the result of working on a
CIA sponsored project. From what I understand, Helen and Bill did not
work together on this only on their "own time". Is that a correct
understanding, from your perspective?

Post by Lee

Post by Chuck
The material that I discovered in the process of looking into the
possibility is way more interesting and to me valuable than
getting the "right" answer to this specific question.

I can easily imagine that's so. But you are proposing
an impossibly unwieldy alternative origin for what we
read in ACIM.

C'mon, it's no more unwieldly than the theories that get promoted
around here that Helen's inner voice was Jesus of the NT, for whom
evidence of existence is pretty sparce and frequently from sources of
dubious pedigree with discrepancies between accounts that had a self
interest in promoting. But, if you want to go with that line, I have
THE two widow's mites and one of the thirty pieces of silver paid to
Judas that you can use as proof. Maybe we can get an auction going,
starting at $10,000 for all three, which is a real bargain given the
historic significance of what is being offered. Now, for the sake of
honesty, I have no tangible, independently verifiable evidence that
what I have were THE actual physical coins that the stories in the NT
tell of, but that shouldn't matter because my "inner voice" told me
they were and my "inner voice" guided me to the selection of these
particular coins. Do I hear $10,000 to start the bidding?

[J]

I have stated, and I still maintain, that the CIA was involved in the
authorship of the course. This discussion is about how and why, not
whether.

ROTFLMAO. Yeah, a rational claim if you play "6 Step from the CIA,"
along with postulating the mysterious Mr.X. Your claim makes perfect
sense if anyone thinks an an anonomous internet poster whose 15 minutes
of Internet fame was in Goldy lock wig and frilly dress actually spent
two years doing anything but pretending he was Goldy Lock to Katie Dean
Vollmer's Big Bad Wolf.

These Internet nutcase multiply like roaches.

[b***@gmail.com]

Chuick:
Hi bidhati,

Thanks for posting where you are so far in this. From what you wrote, I
see some similarities in your conclusions and where I am right now.

I don't think the CIA asked for ACIM to be created specifically. That
wasn't their style of doing things.

I don't think the intent of the CIA was to use the results of whatever
they asked for to be disseminated to the public, but they had no
control over this according to the funding rules.

bidhati:
I didn't think that was the case that they(CIA)were conspiring to
control the minds of pea brains, but I will stay open to what
information Noffin has. It takes a lot of time to read the information,
connect the dots and draw conclusions based on facts.

Chuck:
But there are also some differences.

I can see the relationship with MPD,

bidhati:
Sorrym, what is MPD?


but I also see a relationship with
other programs. As such, I can't yet land where you are.

My working theory about this is that ACIM was a response to a
requirement for a multi-purpose tool which would respond to the needs
for a number of programs. This would be done by "wrapping" and editing
the tool to customize it to the specific area of interest by subject
matter experts in that area.

bidhati:
I can see that and honestly say that I agree that might be the case.
And maybe Helen and Bill took it to different levels in their own
personal research. Like I said, I think, I think ACIM or the channeled
voice of Jesus was a by-prodiuct of not only their research,
intelligence in the field of pschology, but possibly of Helen's
multiple personality that claimed to be Jesus. There was lots of
research done on alters and multiples at that time and maybe just maybe
Helen stated believing hers.

Chuck:
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

bidhati:
Hmm... that's a thought. Another idea is that with her tenure, she
could have been just flat out embarrassed to claim that she had written
it. She would definitely become the laughing stock of the scientic
community if she chose to believe that one of her multiple
personalities was Jesus.

Chuck:
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

bidhati:
An interesting idea, but I have to honestly say that I am not sure that
that was the case. If it were, why wouldn't they just have destroyed
the nonsense, instead of try to contain it?
Interesting idea, but I am just not sure. I will have to give it a
littl more thought. The jury is still out and it takes a lot of time to
research, doesn't it?

Thanks for the response and different ideas.

[Chuck]

bidhati:
Sorrym, what is

MPD?

Chuck:
Multiple Personality Disorder, sorry for the acronym.

bidhati:
Hmm... that's a thought. Another idea is that with her tenure, she
could have been just flat out embarrassed to claim that she had
written
it. She would definitely become the laughing stock of the scientic
community if she chose to believe that one of her multiple
personalities was Jesus.

Chuck:
I agree. But if she really believed what was created, it wouldn't
matter. This says to me that she (and Bill) were playing "safe" for
whatever reason we come up with.

Chuck:
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.

bidhati:
An interesting idea, but I have to honestly say that I am not sure
that
that was the case. If it were, why wouldn't they just have destroyed
the nonsense, instead of try to contain it?
Interesting idea, but I am just not sure. I will have to give it a
littl more thought. The jury is still out and it takes a lot of time
to
research, doesn't it?

Chuck:
We're playing with ideas, so I can't say I'm sure it was the case, it's
a working (and workable for me) hypothesis.

Judy didn't "control" the distribution by eliciting the appropriate
understandings between her and those that received copies. This was
brought out in the copyright trial and was the basis for overturning
the copyright.

I've worked with document control and one of the keys is to ensure the
recipient understands the specifics of why the document is in their
care and what their responsibilities are in maintaining that trust.
This wasn't done conscientiously, if at all.

Because it wsn't done, there wasn't an easy way to retrace where the
document had been, who made copies, who got copies, and so forth.

Trying to retrace the steps would have given rise to suspicion and
assuming the CIA was involved, this was something to be avoided among
the general population.

So there are two inhibitors:

Getting the copies back when you don't know who's got them and avoid
raising suspicion.

Yes, research takes a long time and it's a challenge because it's hard
to discard possibilities without having a working hypothesis.

[J]

Yes, research takes a long time and it's a challenge because it's hard
to discard possibilities without having a working hypothesis.

ROTFLMAO. Without having a working hypothesis? Well you got that one
right, not much of your brain working. But its interesting that you
assume the CIA could hire someone to write a masterpiece like A Course
in Miracles, yet can't give an example of anyone who could do so, much
less someone working for the CIA.

It seems to me if you want to precede with something that resembles a
working hypothesis you should first cross your T's and dot your I's. It
doesn't seem very scientific to precede with your "investigation,"
until you demonstrate your initial assumption that A Course in Miracles
could have easily been written by someone on the CIA's payroll, then
past off as a religous revelation through Schucman.

[Fonce]

Post by Noggin
Which goes to the issue of why our pet topic, ACIM never made it to
the big time,
ROTFLMAO. Really. That's why Course principle just received an award
from the American Medical Association and Katie Dean Vollmer and her
hate cult, Cosmic Fool are on a hate cult watch list. Yeah, you are
credible.

Hmmm, millions of copies sold, translated into
dozens of different languages, spun off into a
variety of different offshoots (The Center For
Attitudinal Healing, for instance), dozens and
dozens of books, thousands of articles, not to
mention the scores of testimonies for numerous
people from all walks of life who've benefited
from the teachings, & it's still going strong.

Compared to the website of the prolific author
Katie Dean's The Cosmic Fool, who's barely had
a person post besides herself in the past four
months. Yeah, it's never made the big time but
you sure have. Your medication need reviewing?

Speaking of pet topics, tell us again how your
"channeled information" stating that channeled
information should not be given for the masses
to use, ended up on your website? Oh but wait,
you had a psychic moment telling you that your
website would be a flop, and that masses would
never read it? Ok, that explains it then. LOL!

--------------------------------------------------
"No loving, helpful, or wise entity would ever
choose a particular individual through whom to
transmit information which is helpful or necessary
to humankind." Katie Dean channeling who knows who

http://cosmicfool.com/lazaris/channel.html

[Noggin]

Post by Chuck
We're playing with ideas, so I can't say I'm sure it was the case, it's
a working (and workable for me) hypothesis.
Judy didn't "control" the distribution by eliciting the appropriate
understandings between her and those that received copies. This was
brought out in the copyright trial and was the basis for overturning
the copyright.
I've worked with document control and one of the keys is to ensure the
recipient understands the specifics of why the document is in their
care and what their responsibilities are in maintaining that trust.
This wasn't done conscientiously, if at all.

But Chuck, put things into historical context. At the time when Skutch et. al started promoting
ACIM the average person had no access to legal information. Lawyers were for the wealthy and
powerful, and sophistication about copyright issues were hardly the domain of the kind of people
Skutch was pitching to, or Skutch herself, or even her handlers, for that matter. The law was
clearly not regarded as any kind of a hindrance or a guideline for any of them, they all
flaunted it at every turn. We live in a far more sophisticated world these days, so what is
common logic now wouldn't apply back then. The work you do with document control is the result
of many, many big mistakes that were made earlier on, no different than the one Skutch likely
made.

And let's not forget that Skutch is an arrogant piece of work, or that she herself wasn't all
that sophisticated at that point. I think there is a lot to your "loose cannon" theory in
regards to how Judith Skutch conducted herself, and I think that goes more to the theory that she
never gave a glancing thought to there being any future potential for copyright problems. Those
were heady times for her, you can hear that in her voice when she's pitching ACIM and spinning
her fairy tales about where it came from. She actually sounds as though she's making things up as
she goes along, which she probably was. That is the nature of her kind of contempt, arrogance,
greed and dishonesty. She knew better than anyone that she wasn't pitching to mindful,
responsible people, so why worry about future legal implications?

Post by Chuck
Because it wsn't done, there wasn't an easy way to retrace where the
document had been, who made copies, who got copies, and so forth.

No, that's another pile of demonstrated and established lies, and really, what more do we need to
know about it? From day one, ACIM can be proved to have been founded on a pile of endless lies.
That about says all I need to know about it in regards to the claim that it was authored by Jesus
as inspired instructions for the awestrucken and grateful masses. It also explains why every
ACIMite of my awareness has absolutely no problem whatsoever justifying and indulging in lies
themselves. Nothing ever comes from lies but more lies, that's a well-established actuality.
There is no such thing as "taking the good stuff" and "leaving the bad" as these avowed and
dedicated liars like to promote as being a valid technique toward enlightenment. There is no baby
in the bathwater, that's a lie and always has been a lie, but it often serves to shut up the
mindless, hence its popularity.

Post by Chuck
Trying to retrace the steps would have given rise to suspicion and
assuming the CIA was involved, this was something to be avoided among
the general population.
Getting the copies back when you don't know who's got them and avoid
raising suspicion.

I am still in disagreement with you that these were issues that were likely to have been
considered matters of any consequence at that place in the historical timeline.

Surely you don't suspect, for example, that Judith Skutch or anyone was the least bit concerned
about Specialness Addicts and Career Bubblehead Self-Promoters like our own Fair Queenie Lee
Flynn concerning themselves with copyright issues or any of the actual details of where ACIM
really did come from? Judith was already a successful marketeer of smoke and mirrors "science"
and cotton candy beliefs. She knew the audience better than anyone, and IMO, that's why she was
hand picked to deliver the message.

[Chuck]

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
We're playing with ideas, so I can't say I'm sure it was the case, it's
a working (and workable for me) hypothesis.
Judy didn't "control" the distribution by eliciting the appropriate
understandings between her and those that received copies. This was
brought out in the copyright trial and was the basis for overturning
the copyright.
I've worked with document control and one of the keys is to ensure the
recipient understands the specifics of why the document is in their
care and what their responsibilities are in maintaining that trust.
This wasn't done conscientiously, if at all.

But Chuck, put things into historical context. At the time when Skutch et. al started promoting
ACIM the average person had no access to legal information. Lawyers were for the wealthy and
powerful, and sophistication about copyright issues were hardly the domain of the kind of people
Skutch was pitching to, or Skutch herself, or even her handlers, for that matter. The law was
clearly not regarded as any kind of a hindrance or a guideline for any of them, they all
flaunted it at every turn. We live in a far more sophisticated world these days, so what is
common logic now wouldn't apply back then. The work you do with document control is the result
of many, many big mistakes that were made earlier on, no different than the one Skutch likely
made.

We seem to be writing past each other. What I was writing about was
"document control" used to maintain an understanding of who had the
document and for what purpose it was given. An example is the "document
control" that Helen and Bill did when the gave copies of the course to
a select few individuals for feedback - the HLC version is an example.

Post by Noggin
From this, I appears to me that Helen and Bill were familiar with the

concept, which was very much understood at the time in various
government and industry circles. Now it's not clear if Helen and Bill
intended to have Judy maintain this same kind of control and she just
screwed up, or if Helen and Bill intended for Judy to widely
disseminate the course. From my recall of the court transcripts, Judy
claimed an intention to control the documents and went so far as to
seemingly contradict herself when challenged with other information
showing that the distribution was something less than controlled. Also
according to the transcripts, Judy's distribution occurred before the
copyright was filed for.

Post by Noggin
And let's not forget that Skutch is an arrogant piece of work, or that she herself wasn't all
that sophisticated at that point. I think there is a lot to your "loose cannon" theory in
regards to how Judith Skutch conducted herself, and I think that goes more to the theory that she
never gave a glancing thought to there being any future potential for copyright problems. Those
were heady times for her, you can hear that in her voice when she's pitching ACIM and spinning
her fairy tales about where it came from. She actually sounds as though she's making things up as
she goes along, which she probably was. That is the nature of her kind of contempt, arrogance,
greed and dishonesty. She knew better than anyone that she wasn't pitching to mindful,
responsible people, so why worry about future legal implications?

The impetus for the copyright came from Helen (through her "voice").
But I think we're losing the thread here. What I can't reconcile is
that, if the intention was to create "armies of zombies" using the
material, having a copyright seems to me to be counter productive.

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
Because it wsn't done, there wasn't an easy way to retrace where the
document had been, who made copies, who got copies, and so forth.

No, that's another pile of demonstrated and established lies, and really, what more do we need to
know about it? From day one, ACIM can be proved to have been founded on a pile of endless lies.
That about says all I need to know about it in regards to the claim that it was authored by Jesus
as inspired instructions for the awestrucken and grateful masses. It also explains why every
ACIMite of my awareness has absolutely no problem whatsoever justifying and indulging in lies
themselves. Nothing ever comes from lies but more lies, that's a well-established actuality.
There is no such thing as "taking the good stuff" and "leaving the bad" as these avowed and
dedicated liars like to promote as being a valid technique toward enlightenment. There is no baby
in the bathwater, that's a lie and always has been a lie, but it often serves to shut up the
mindless, hence its popularity.

Post by Chuck
Trying to retrace the steps would have given rise to suspicion and
assuming the CIA was involved, this was something to be avoided among
the general population.
Getting the copies back when you don't know who's got them and avoid
raising suspicion.

I am still in disagreement with you that these were issues that were likely to have been
considered matters of any consequence at that place in the historical timeline.

If my elaboration above doesn't resolve this disagreement, then OK. I
really think this is minor compared to other disagreements we have to
work through.

[Noggin]

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
We're playing with ideas, so I can't say I'm sure it was the case, it's
a working (and workable for me) hypothesis.
Judy didn't "control" the distribution by eliciting the appropriate
understandings between her and those that received copies. This was
brought out in the copyright trial and was the basis for overturning
the copyright.
I've worked with document control and one of the keys is to ensure the
recipient understands the specifics of why the document is in their
care and what their responsibilities are in maintaining that trust.
This wasn't done conscientiously, if at all.

But Chuck, put things into historical context. At the time when Skutch et. al started
promoting
ACIM the average person had no access to legal information. Lawyers were for the wealthy and
powerful, and sophistication about copyright issues were hardly the domain of the kind of
people
Skutch was pitching to, or Skutch herself, or even her handlers, for that matter. The law was
clearly not regarded as any kind of a hindrance or a guideline for any of them, they all
flaunted it at every turn. We live in a far more sophisticated world these days, so what is
common logic now wouldn't apply back then. The work you do with document control is the
result
of many, many big mistakes that were made earlier on, no different than the one Skutch likely
made.

We seem to be writing past each other. What I was writing about was
"document control" used to maintain an understanding of who had the
document and for what purpose it was given. An example is the "document
control" that Helen and Bill did when the gave copies of the course to
a select few individuals for feedback - the HLC version is an example.

Post by Noggin
From this, I appears to me that Helen and Bill were familiar with the

concept, which was very much understood at the time in various
government and industry circles. Now it's not clear if Helen and Bill
intended to have Judy maintain this same kind of control and she just
screwed up, or if Helen and Bill intended for Judy to widely
disseminate the course. From my recall of the court transcripts, Judy
claimed an intention to control the documents and went so far as to
seemingly contradict herself when challenged with other information
showing that the distribution was something less than controlled. Also
according to the transcripts, Judy's distribution occurred before the
copyright was filed for.

Ok, I read you. What I got out of Judith Skutch's testimony is that she was trying to cover her
tracks in retrospect of understanding what she should have done in order to protect the
copyright. In other words, she was lying under oath, good holey person that she is. I remain of
the mind that no one at the time was very much if at all concerned about copyright issues.
According to D. Patrick Miller, it was claimed that the "Voice" told them to apply for a
copyright at the time they did. I guess the "Voice" wasn't very up to snuff on copyright law
either. What I think is that after the initial hysteria over the nice bone they'd been thrown,
it finally occurred to them a bit late in the game that in order to control the profits from the
sale and promotion of the book, they'd have to get a copyright, and they did so with little
concern that anyone would ever challenge them, hence the claim that the "Voice" told them to do
it.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin
And let's not forget that Skutch is an arrogant piece of work, or that she herself wasn't all
that sophisticated at that point. I think there is a lot to your "loose cannon" theory in
regards to how Judith Skutch conducted herself, and I think that goes more to the theory that
she
never gave a glancing thought to there being any future potential for copyright problems.
Those
were heady times for her, you can hear that in her voice when she's pitching ACIM and spinning
her fairy tales about where it came from. She actually sounds as though she's making things up
as
she goes along, which she probably was. That is the nature of her kind of contempt,
arrogance,
greed and dishonesty. She knew better than anyone that she wasn't pitching to mindful,
responsible people, so why worry about future legal implications?

The impetus for the copyright came from Helen (through her "voice").
But I think we're losing the thread here. What I can't reconcile is
that, if the intention was to create "armies of zombies" using the
material, having a copyright seems to me to be counter productive.

Ok, I don't get that. How can you control the flow of indoctrination if you don't control the
flow of information? But that isn't really a case that I want to argue, because all paths lead
me to believe that this project descended into pure chaos, so there isn't much point in trying to
find the logic in it beyond understanding where the MK-ULTRA project was in the course of it's
research into how to use what they'd learned to control the masses rather than just individual
people. It was an early experiment that clearly didn't produce the hoped for results, even if at
that point there were any hopeful results beyond finding out if they could invent it, how many
people might fall for it, and how much money could be made from it. We have no way of knowing
that unless we get sworn testimony from a variety of valid sources, and I don't suspect that is
going to happen. What we do know is that by now the same players are involved in religious/"faith
based", and fanatical cult movements that most certainly have created armies of useful zombies,
so we do know that's where they were going with this. Your argument is to me like saying that
Wonder Bread Bakeries made some bad loaves of ugly looking bread in 1944, therefore how could we
argue that they were interested in selling a lot of bread. We know that they were interested in
selling a lot of bread when they made the bad bread, because they are now selling a lot of bread.
Assuming that there is still a Wonder Bread bakery, which I actually don't know, because I don't
buy air bread, but hopefully you take my point. In the process of honing a product a lot of
mistakes are made, and sometimes the end product isn't exactly the same as the initial product,
once the testing and debugging process is completed. A lot happens between concept and
implementation, as I know you are aware.

I am not arguing the point that the MK-ULTRA project at that point in time had all their ducks in
a row, or even a clear plan of action, simply that they were screwing around with different
possibilities, and Helen's adventures in hearing voices was one of them. From there we only know
what we know, and can only speculate, but to me it's all just academic, because we do know where
these experiments have gone, and that's the point of significance, and the thread that ties
things together. Again, we can get so bogged down in minutia that we can lose site of the fact
that there is a big picture available for reference.

Post by Chuck

Post by Noggin

Post by Chuck
Because it wsn't done, there wasn't an easy way to retrace where the
document had been, who made copies, who got copies, and so forth.

No, that's another pile of demonstrated and established lies, and really, what more do we need
to
know about it? From day one, ACIM can be proved to have been founded on a pile of endless
lies.
That about says all I need to know about it in regards to the claim that it was authored by
Jesus
as inspired instructions for the awestrucken and grateful masses. It also explains why every
ACIMite of my awareness has absolutely no problem whatsoever justifying and indulging in lies
themselves. Nothing ever comes from lies but more lies, that's a well-established actuality.
There is no such thing as "taking the good stuff" and "leaving the bad" as these avowed and
dedicated liars like to promote as being a valid technique toward enlightenment. There is no
baby
in the bathwater, that's a lie and always has been a lie, but it often serves to shut up the
mindless, hence its popularity.

Post by Chuck
Trying to retrace the steps would have given rise to suspicion and
assuming the CIA was involved, this was something to be avoided among
the general population.
Getting the copies back when you don't know who's got them and avoid
raising suspicion.

I am still in disagreement with you that these were issues that were likely to have been
considered matters of any consequence at that place in the historical timeline.

If my elaboration above doesn't resolve this disagreement, then OK. I
really think this is minor compared to other disagreements we have to
work through.

Yes, I know, it's an octopus and I tend to approach these kinds of evaluations from a different
place than you do. If I'm reading you correctly, you're working upward from the early events
toward a conclusion, and I'm working backward from an already established conclusion.
Hopefully, if we're both on the right track, we'll meet somewhere in the middle, and have a beer.

[Chuck]

Katie:
"Yes, I know, it's an octopus and I tend to approach these kinds of
evaluations from a different
place than you do. If I'm reading you correctly, you're working upward
from the early events
toward a conclusion, and I'm working backward from an already
established conclusion.
Hopefully, if we're both on the right track, we'll meet somewhere in
the middle, and have a beer."

Do I have to wait until we meet in the middle for that beer?

I think that's a fair expression of what the major focus in my approach
is. I have chosen to "bound" the question somewhat by restricting my
focus specifically to the CIA, with the major emphasis on MK-Ultra and
those programs that have been specifically tied to MK-Ultra. This
"binding" is based in part on what is known about the program along
with my personal experiences in the government during the time that the
course was being scribed.

Based on this approach and background, I am of the opinion that if the
Course was (I think it is) the result of work for the CIA, there should
be a linkage to specifically identified CIA interests. I think some of
the possibilities have been identified, summarized as the creation of
multiple personalities, the creation of controlled cults, and the
defense against the use of religion as a weapon, and the use of
religion as a weapon. Within this group and within the broader ACIM
community, the aspect of dissociation with shared reality related to
multiple personalities can be seen, can be tied to what is in the
course and is reinforced by the Gittinger connection between Helen and
Bill, the creation of controlled cults, which also ties with the
dissociation, can be seen in Endeavor and to some extent Raj, and the
use of religion as a weapon can be seen in some of the dialog here and
elsewhere, just not in a form that I would expect from a professionally
trained manipulator.

I think a number of the papers that Saunder, Helen and Bill wrote on
PAS and funded by Human Ecology can be tied as well to these identified
interest areas.

[J]

Gee, Ted. What a marriage! You have wait to meet your wife for a beer!
But you knuckleheads are not the only one who can do the "research."
Funny, you didn't discover Katie Dean Vollmer's own anti-cult activism
has its origins in MK-ULTRA. In fact, there are more direct and
uncontroversial MK_ULTA links to the so-called anti-cult movement, than
there is to any evidence that the CIA somehow wrote A Course in
Miracles. Gee, Ted. It seems anyone can play "6 steps from the CIA."

Does this mean, with this new information, you'll start investigating
anti-cult activity? No, I didn't think so. Too funny!

But here a from "Cults, Anti-Cultists, and the Cult of Intelligence"
by Daniel
Brandt.

""Another fun fact is that the Cult Awareness Network itself has a CIA
connection. Louis Jolyon "Jolly" West, chairman of the Department of
Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences at UCLA's School of Medicine, is
currently on the advisory board of CAN and a similar group called the
American Family Foundation. For fifteen years he has been a keynote
speaker at CAN conferences. In the 1950s and 1960s, West did contract
research for MK-ULTRA and was personally acquainted with MK-ULTRA
director Sidney Gottlieb. Under the terms of his CIA-funded contract,
West ran a program at the University of Oklahoma that experimented with
LSD. (At one point he gave an elephant a huge dosage at the Oklahoma
City Zoo, which resulted in its death.) After the Watts riots in 1965,
West promoted the view that violence was caused by genetic factors, and
offenders could be treated by psychosurgery and chemical
castration.[30]"

Some speculate that the CIA is working both sides of the street on the
cultism issue. "

http://tinyurl.com/bsj7b

[Noggin]

Post by Chuck
"Yes, I know, it's an octopus and I tend to approach these kinds of
evaluations from a different
place than you do. If I'm reading you correctly, you're working upward
from the early events
toward a conclusion, and I'm working backward from an already
established conclusion.
Hopefully, if we're both on the right track, we'll meet somewhere in
the middle, and have a beer."
Do I have to wait until we meet in the middle for that beer?

No, in fact, it's probably better that you don't, since this discussion here is taking up more
time than I can commit to continuing along with right now. I think it's great to be having it,
but we get more accomplished over a few beers, and now we can be far more efficient in keeping a
record of those discussions at least. There really isn't all that much value in hashing it back
and forth here that can't be accomplished in other more efficient and effective ways. Patience
is a virtue. I'm good with getting the work done and then publishing it, if that works for you.
Not that I think there is a "done" in regards to this topic, more like a lot of "dones for the
moment". In that spirit, I'll not be responding here to this post beyond this point, but I'll
save it for future reference. Right now I really can't spend so much time here, that's all there
is to it, so as far as our interaction on the topic goes, let's do it at Big Belly Bob's.
Which isn't saying that I won't jump in from time to time should the topic remain alive.

Post by Chuck
I think that's a fair expression of what the major focus in my approach
is. I have chosen to "bound" the question somewhat by restricting my
focus specifically to the CIA, with the major emphasis on MK-Ultra and
those programs that have been specifically tied to MK-Ultra. This
"binding" is based in part on what is known about the program along
with my personal experiences in the government during the time that the
course was being scribed.
Based on this approach and background, I am of the opinion that if the
Course was (I think it is) the result of work for the CIA, there should
be a linkage to specifically identified CIA interests. I think some of
the possibilities have been identified, summarized as the creation of
multiple personalities, the creation of controlled cults, and the
defense against the use of religion as a weapon, and the use of
religion as a weapon. Within this group and within the broader ACIM
community, the aspect of dissociation with shared reality related to
multiple personalities can be seen, can be tied to what is in the
course and is reinforced by the Gittinger connection between Helen and
Bill, the creation of controlled cults, which also ties with the
dissociation, can be seen in Endeavor and to some extent Raj, and the
use of religion as a weapon can be seen in some of the dialog here and
elsewhere, just not in a form that I would expect from a professionally
trained manipulator.
I think a number of the papers that Saunder, Helen and Bill wrote on
PAS and funded by Human Ecology can be tied as well to these identified
interest areas.

[J]

"I'm good with getting the work done and then publishing it, if that
works for you."

As though you two knuckle head would publish a work and actually
identify yourselves with your real names and current contact
information. The last thing you two idiots want to do is associate
yourselves directly with demonstrable stupidity without an alias. Who
are you, kidding?

[Nancy]

Post by J
"I'm good with getting the work done and then publishing it, if that
works for you."
As though you two knuckle head would publish a work and actually
identify yourselves with your real names and current contact
information. The last thing you two idiots want to do is associate
yourselves directly with demonstrable stupidity without an alias. Who
are you, kidding?

It could well be a lucrative little venture,
though. Conspiracy theories, these days, are
fairly high ticket items, even edging out
recovery (especially cult recovery).

It may not be long before we see them on
Larry King debating with Marianne Williams
and Deepak.

n.

[J]

It may not be long before we see them on
Larry King debating with Marianne Williams
and Deepak.

That's not how public relations work. When people have established
reputations worth tens of millions, they go on Larry King because it
helps them, or for some reason they are forced, not to unnecessarily
debate two airheads. The lower depths of discourse found on this
newsgroup doesn't necessarily play on prime time. Katie would have to
completely unlearn her natural way of communicating. "Marianne, you
narcissistic slut," wouldn't fly on Larry King.

[Noggin]

Post by Nancy

Post by J
"I'm good with getting the work done and then publishing it, if that
works for you."
As though you two knuckle head would publish a work and actually
identify yourselves with your real names and current contact
information. The last thing you two idiots want to do is associate
yourselves directly with demonstrable stupidity without an alias. Who
are you, kidding?

It could well be a lucrative little venture,
though. Conspiracy theories, these days, are
fairly high ticket items, even edging out
recovery (especially cult recovery).

Could be almost as good as being Private Secretary to Jesus.

Post by Nancy
It may not be long before we see them on
Larry King debating with Marianne Williams
and Deepak.

Your fantasies and projections do reveal the inner you, Nance. Not that you're not one of the
most transparent asshole around, anyway.

[J]

"Your fantasies and projections do reveal the inner you, Nance. Not
that you're not one of the most transparent asshole around, anyway."

Yeah, you are ready for prime time, Katie.

Too funny.

[Noggin]

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can see that and honestly say that I agree that might be the case.
And maybe Helen and Bill took it to different levels in their own
personal research. Like I said, I think, I think ACIM or the channeled
voice of Jesus was a by-prodiuct of not only their research,
intelligence in the field of pschology, but possibly of Helen's
multiple personality that claimed to be Jesus. There was lots of
research done on alters and multiples at that time and maybe just maybe
Helen stated believing hers.

I'm really going to have to look for that audio clip of Helen stating that she didn't really
believe it at all, but was more accurately just going along with what other people told her. .
This is the downside of my research strategy which is done mostly for my own benefit, I don't
catalogue things that I should catalogue for future discussions like this. I'll search around
and see if I can find it, I think it provides an important peek into the truth of the matter
about Helen's role in all of this, and it takes away some of the "maybes" from the equation.

Post by b***@gmail.com
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

The problem is that I don't think there is much reliable information about what was going on with
Helen, and that is why I found that audio clip of her speaking to an early audience of ACIM marks
to be amazingly revealing.

Post by b***@gmail.com
Hmm... that's a thought. Another idea is that with her tenure, she
could have been just flat out embarrassed to claim that she had written
it. She would definitely become the laughing stock of the scientic
community if she chose to believe that one of her multiple
personalities was Jesus.

I believe there is some truth to that. There is evidence that Helen was most embarrased and
confused by all of this. In fact, it seems that it caused her to sink into a deep, permanent,
and deadly depression, which was no doubt the most expedient of all possibilities for the
marketeers and promoters of ACIM. Helen served her purpose by participating in the scribing
scam, she was far from a good piece of marketing material once that was accomplished , that's for
sure. It would be like trying to dress Carrie up and send her out into the world to amaze and
inspire people with her mindless babblings and repulsive social "skills". Who knows, maybe they
deliberately caused her depression and resultant demise. It was all most convenient, for sure.
It's clear from the audio tapes I listened to that it became quiet apparent early on that Helen
was a loose cannon who could not be relied upon to follow the script.

Post by b***@gmail.com
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.
An interesting idea, but I have to honestly say that I am not sure that
that was the case. If it were, why wouldn't they just have destroyed
the nonsense, instead of try to contain it?
Interesting idea, but I am just not sure. I will have to give it a
littl more thought. The jury is still out and it takes a lot of time to
research, doesn't it?
Thanks for the response and different ideas.

[Noggin]

Here's something by the Fearless Publisher on the copyright issue, and also a peek into Helen's
confusion, if anything Miller says can be validated.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.religion.course-miracle/msg/7d98b0bbb5c0f0f2?hl=en&

Post by Noggin

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can see that and honestly say that I agree that might be the case.
And maybe Helen and Bill took it to different levels in their own
personal research. Like I said, I think, I think ACIM or the channeled
voice of Jesus was a by-prodiuct of not only their research,
intelligence in the field of pschology, but possibly of Helen's
multiple personality that claimed to be Jesus. There was lots of
research done on alters and multiples at that time and maybe just maybe
Helen stated believing hers.

I'm really going to have to look for that audio clip of Helen stating that she didn't really
believe it at all, but was more accurately just going along with what other people told her. .
This is the downside of my research strategy which is done mostly for my own benefit, I don't
catalogue things that I should catalogue for future discussions like this. I'll search around
and see if I can find it, I think it provides an important peek into the truth of the matter
about Helen's role in all of this, and it takes away some of the "maybes" from the equation.

Post by b***@gmail.com
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

The problem is that I don't think there is much reliable information about what was going on
with Helen, and that is why I found that audio clip of her speaking to an early audience of
ACIM marks to be amazingly revealing.

Post by b***@gmail.com
Hmm... that's a thought. Another idea is that with her tenure, she
could have been just flat out embarrassed to claim that she had written
it. She would definitely become the laughing stock of the scientic
community if she chose to believe that one of her multiple
personalities was Jesus.

I believe there is some truth to that. There is evidence that Helen was most embarrased and
confused by all of this. In fact, it seems that it caused her to sink into a deep, permanent,
and deadly depression, which was no doubt the most expedient of all possibilities for the
marketeers and promoters of ACIM. Helen served her purpose by participating in the scribing
scam, she was far from a good piece of marketing material once that was accomplished , that's
for sure. It would be like trying to dress Carrie up and send her out into the world to amaze
and inspire people with her mindless babblings and repulsive social "skills". Who knows, maybe
they deliberately caused her depression and resultant demise. It was all most convenient, for
sure. It's clear from the audio tapes I listened to that it became quiet apparent early on
that Helen was a loose cannon who could not be relied upon to follow the script.

Post by b***@gmail.com
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.
An interesting idea, but I have to honestly say that I am not sure that
that was the case. If it were, why wouldn't they just have destroyed
the nonsense, instead of try to contain it?
Interesting idea, but I am just not sure. I will have to give it a
littl more thought. The jury is still out and it takes a lot of time to
research, doesn't it?
Thanks for the response and different ideas.

[Noggin]

And another:

"
One thing that made Helen believable, in my eyes, was that she
constantly questioned the extraordinary experiences she was having
before and during the transmission of ACIM. She always held out the
distinct possibility that she was simply going nuts -- a critical
self-awareness that probably kept her sane. "

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.religion.course-miracle/msg/c0e367cb8816b881?hl=en&

Post by Noggin
Here's something by the Fearless Publisher on the copyright issue, and also a peek into
Helen's confusion, if anything Miller says can be validated.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.religion.course-miracle/msg/7d98b0bbb5c0f0f2?hl=en&

Post by Noggin

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can see that and honestly say that I agree that might be the case.
And maybe Helen and Bill took it to different levels in their own
personal research. Like I said, I think, I think ACIM or the channeled
voice of Jesus was a by-prodiuct of not only their research,
intelligence in the field of pschology, but possibly of Helen's
multiple personality that claimed to be Jesus. There was lots of
research done on alters and multiples at that time and maybe just maybe
Helen stated believing hers.

I'm really going to have to look for that audio clip of Helen stating that she didn't really
believe it at all, but was more accurately just going along with what other people told her. .
This is the downside of my research strategy which is done mostly for my own benefit, I don't
catalogue things that I should catalogue for future discussions like this. I'll search around
and see if I can find it, I think it provides an important peek into the truth of the matter
about Helen's role in all of this, and it takes away some of the "maybes" from the equation.

Post by b***@gmail.com
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

The problem is that I don't think there is much reliable information about what was going on
with Helen, and that is why I found that audio clip of her speaking to an early audience of
ACIM marks to be amazingly revealing.

Post by b***@gmail.com
Hmm... that's a thought. Another idea is that with her tenure, she
could have been just flat out embarrassed to claim that she had written
it. She would definitely become the laughing stock of the scientic
community if she chose to believe that one of her multiple
personalities was Jesus.

I believe there is some truth to that. There is evidence that Helen was most embarrased and
confused by all of this. In fact, it seems that it caused her to sink into a deep, permanent,
and deadly depression, which was no doubt the most expedient of all possibilities for the
marketeers and promoters of ACIM. Helen served her purpose by participating in the scribing
scam, she was far from a good piece of marketing material once that was accomplished , that's
for sure. It would be like trying to dress Carrie up and send her out into the world to amaze
and inspire people with her mindless babblings and repulsive social "skills". Who knows,
maybe they deliberately caused her depression and resultant demise. It was all most
convenient, for sure. It's clear from the audio tapes I listened to that it became quiet
apparent early on that Helen was a loose cannon who could not be relied upon to follow the
script.

Post by b***@gmail.com
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.
An interesting idea, but I have to honestly say that I am not sure that
that was the case. If it were, why wouldn't they just have destroyed
the nonsense, instead of try to contain it?
Interesting idea, but I am just not sure. I will have to give it a
littl more thought. The jury is still out and it takes a lot of time to
research, doesn't it?
Thanks for the response and different ideas.

[Noggin]

"Okay, I remember hearing somewhere that Helen asked the voice why she had
been chosen for this and was told "because you would do it".

Nancy claimed her "voice" told her the same thing.What a cheezy little wanna-be our Nancy is,
huh? And a coward too. I guess she thought that the world would just swoon, and never ask any
questions of her, so she'd never have to mock up a resume again in her life and her fortune would
be assured. She sure packed up and went home at the first hint of doubt, our Nance. It's not
quite so easy to snooker the masses as it is to snooker her, it seems, must have been a shock to
discover.

It totally amazes me that here was your good cult buddy, clearly trying to pull one over on you,
and that's just fine and dandy with you all. This whole episode in Holey Nancy's dishonest
Adventures with Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeritchual Career Potential just gets a pass from you who are
all allegedly about achieiving Enlightenment and doing "God's work".

It's always been glaringly apparent that "enlightenment" and the Will of God ala you ACIMites
have nothing whatsoever to do withthe practice of morality, ethics, honesty, truth, or
consistancy, but what's truly stunning is that you don't even feel the need to even pay lip
service to the concepts. But how could you? If you held anyone to any valid standards there
wouldn't be anyone to validate your superstitions and sense of specialness for you. And I know,
Helen's Curse says it isn't about specialness, so no one can accuse you of needing to feel
special, I got the scam.

Instead there is only one "sin" that must be corrected, that being the "sin" of noticing that
ACIM is an ugly pile of crap, and ACIMites all hypocrites with the ethics of alley cats. No
offense to alley cats.

That fact is proved over and over again, with no need for grasping at straws, soliciting
testimony from nut cases, bad mind reading acts, falsely assigning motives, lying, or making
claims of false authority.

This is truly the most unethical crummy group of assholes I've ever encountered. That's why I
find you all to be so fascinating. Never, not once, have I had the experience of one of you
rising to the occasion and reacting or responding to flat out dishonesty or a glaring lack of
ethics the way any half-ass we dragged in off the street would. Most people just aren't as well
practiced and devoted to the cause of dishonesty as you lot.

The question remains unanswered: What do you get out of it?

Post by Noggin
Here's something by the Fearless Publisher on the copyright issue, and also a peek into
Helen's confusion, if anything Miller says can be validated.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.religion.course-miracle/msg/7d98b0bbb5c0f0f2?hl=en&

Post by Noggin

Post by b***@gmail.com
I can see that and honestly say that I agree that might be the case.
And maybe Helen and Bill took it to different levels in their own
personal research. Like I said, I think, I think ACIM or the channeled
voice of Jesus was a by-prodiuct of not only their research,
intelligence in the field of pschology, but possibly of Helen's
multiple personality that claimed to be Jesus. There was lots of
research done on alters and multiples at that time and maybe just maybe
Helen stated believing hers.

I'm really going to have to look for that audio clip of Helen stating that she didn't really
believe it at all, but was more accurately just going along with what other people told her. .
This is the downside of my research strategy which is done mostly for my own benefit, I don't
catalogue things that I should catalogue for future discussions like this. I'll search around
and see if I can find it, I think it provides an important peek into the truth of the matter
about Helen's role in all of this, and it takes away some of the "maybes" from the equation.

Post by b***@gmail.com
I think Helen, along with Bill, was a witting participant in the
creation of the tool. I think that, as a result of Judy's actions, she
saw the tool being used in a way that she didn't anticipate. From what
I've read about her, Helen's reaction to unleashing this on the public
was similar to what I've read about nuclear scientists and the bomb.

The problem is that I don't think there is much reliable information about what was going on
with Helen, and that is why I found that audio clip of her speaking to an early audience of
ACIM marks to be amazingly revealing.

Post by b***@gmail.com
Hmm... that's a thought. Another idea is that with her tenure, she
could have been just flat out embarrassed to claim that she had written
it. She would definitely become the laughing stock of the scientic
community if she chose to believe that one of her multiple
personalities was Jesus.

I believe there is some truth to that. There is evidence that Helen was most embarrased and
confused by all of this. In fact, it seems that it caused her to sink into a deep, permanent,
and deadly depression, which was no doubt the most expedient of all possibilities for the
marketeers and promoters of ACIM. Helen served her purpose by participating in the scribing
scam, she was far from a good piece of marketing material once that was accomplished , that's
for sure. It would be like trying to dress Carrie up and send her out into the world to amaze
and inspire people with her mindless babblings and repulsive social "skills". Who knows,
maybe they deliberately caused her depression and resultant demise. It was all most
convenient, for sure. It's clear from the audio tapes I listened to that it became quiet
apparent early on that Helen was a loose cannon who could not be relied upon to follow the
script.

Post by b***@gmail.com
As a result of Judy's actions, there was a need for a "containment
plan" which resulted in the copyright focus to try to "control" the
possible "negative" uses of the tool which Helen and Bill recognized.
This containment plan also needed to distance the CIA involvement and
try to target the tool in a way that would minimize the negative
application. The "self study" aspect of the course is one of the
"wrappers" used (unsuccesfully) to effect this.
An interesting idea, but I have to honestly say that I am not sure that
that was the case. If it were, why wouldn't they just have destroyed
the nonsense, instead of try to contain it?
Interesting idea, but I am just not sure. I will have to give it a
littl more thought. The jury is still out and it takes a lot of time to
research, doesn't it?
Thanks for the response and different ideas.

[Lee]

Noggin wrote:

[snip]

Post by Noggin
It's always been glaringly apparent that "enlightenment" and the Will of God ala you ACIMites
have nothing whatsoever to do withthe practice of morality, ethics, honesty, truth, or
consistancy, but what's truly stunning is that you don't even feel the need to even pay lip
service to the concepts.

On Katie Dean's "Cosmic Fool" web blog, the
following gem was pounded out from Katie to
warn humanity about "channeled information"
coming from an individual to humanity. Well
I suppose she's in another category, not an
individual, so maybe she really is a cosmic
fool? My guess, is from the planet Dumbass.
--
"No loving, helpful, or wise entity would ever
choose a particular individual through whom to
transmit information which is helpful or necessary
to humankind." Katie Dean channeling who knows who

* http://cosmicfool.com/lazaris/channel.html

*(Posted on: The Cosmic Fool, supposedly
for the benefit of humanity. Go figure.

-----------------------------------------------------------
:Now we have Holey Ellen following suit, or claiming to
:anyway, stating as her excuse that I called her a cunt.
:
:But, let's face it, it isn't my use of words like "cunt" or
:"pussy" that is the problem here, Ellen is no innocent babe
:in the woods, she can hold her own with any swearing sailor.
:
:Oh, bored with the Cunt Show? Or is it the wee fellas who
:got bored? That's the problem with middle aged women and
:silly little boys, it's all giggles, fumbles and quick get-aways.
:
:You're just a cheap tacky cunt Nancy, when you get right
:down to it.
:
:You're a nasty little cult cunt aren't you Nancy?
:
:Your a fucking predator Nancy, a total vampire.
:
:You're a fucking liar on top of everything else Nancy, and a
:pathetic one.
:
:You're a fucking lame ass dime a dozen spineless chiropractor
:big whoop.
:
:Do you live in her skin you fucking big mouthed shit for
:brains idiot?
:
:Fucking nasty ass zombie.
:
:I do know MEAN though, so don't try to fuck with my head,
:fucking wanna be slapping smirker in training.
:
:Fucking BITCH.
:
:But this fucking religion you are making living and a sex life
:out of doesn't have any special excuses.
:
:And you think someone here deserves a kind or civil word from me,
:precisely why Sheryl? Given that I'm not interested in joining
:your dirty little cult and have no agenda to pose as someone who
:gives a shit about anyone but myself. Like you do.
:
:As it happens, I make it a rule to be as rude as possible to
:holey people, it's the only right thing to do.
:
:I have met the Dalai Lama and some of his monks. We didn't
:discuss his holeyness so all went well. The Pope can kiss my
:Irish ass. He's already stooped over low enough to make the target.
:
:This shit works on you? Do you succeed in getting anyone else to
:volunteer for a butt fucking with this kind of nonsense, or do you
:just think it's deep because it worked when Wayne pulled it on you?
:
: - Katie Dean aka Noggin, webmaster of "The Cosmic Fool"

[y***@yahoo.com]

Katiechuck believed she wrote:

45. Noggin Jul 11, 8:30 am

Here's something by the >Fearless Publisher on the >copyright issue, and also a >peek into Helen's
confusion, if anything Miller >says can be validated.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.religion.course-miracle/msg/...

you STILL don't get the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle,

for lazy minds:

it says ANYTHING can't be validated....!!!

tell just one fcking thing you CAN verify FOR SURE...!!!

even you CAN'T know what the fck you are, so you even CANNOT verify
yourself...!!!

Linda Th gullibly believes she's validating what the fcking Christian
Science states...!!!

yes, yes, yes, she STILL like you, don't get the Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle,

LOLOLOLOLLLLLL!!

Ped

[Richard A. Thayer]

Post by y***@yahoo.com
Linda Th gullibly believes she's validating what the fcking Christian
Science states...!!!

I do what I do. Currently I will involve
various references and many
other ways and means than others here.
Can I help it I get you in
a gigantic FIZZ because I happen to write
strongly! LOL

Now PED,

Don't feel too threatened by the strength
of my writing.


Hey, take a breath and try and xplain the word
validate.!
Without spitting all over yourself, though.
Betcha can't do it

Post by y***@yahoo.com
yes, yes, yes, she STILL like you, don't get the Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle,

Because I'm not looking at it, or even
considering it , at the moment, stupid!
Been there, done some of that in my long
life, enough times
already .

Frankly Ped, you're peddling a theory
about uncertainty is quite fitting.
Could make you a changed person.
Should be interesting when you finally
get around to making claims that you
aren't really certain about.. though.

Gotta stop that habit, Ped or uncertainty
ain't what you be speakin..


* like my beliefs for example*. You
spoke as if you were awfully CERTAIN of Linda T's
beliefs..above..

May I suggest that your uncertainty theory
idea is at the moment
purely in the idea stage , fully UNincorporated
into your personal belief system yet.
May I predict it's gonna
take you a long time to morph yourself into
that after years of peddling the certainty of
what you see/saw in the Course?


You think you validate and are promoting the
uncertainty theory at the moment?

Pardon my French, but.....


Like hell, you are.


LINDA T

[jason]

Post by b***@gmail.com
Human Ecology is the Code name of MKULTRA's and CIA program
that funded the research. There is no question that Gittinger worked
for the CIA for 26 years and there is no question that the Human
Ecology
Fund funded some of Schucman and Thetford's research.
Here are the senate hearing that prove that Gittinger was a CIA agent,
Humman Ecology was the name of the MKULTA program funded by
the CIA...
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hearing06.htm

and here's what Gittinger says about it......

Mr. GITTINGER." Well, it was established to undertake research in the
general area of the behavioral sciences. (snip)

The Agency in effect provided the money. They did not direct the
projects. Now, the fact of the matter is, there are a lot of innocent
people who received the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology
money which I know for a fact they were never asked to do anything for
the CIA but they did get through this indirectly. They had no knowledge
that they were getting CIA money."


what part of THEY DID NOT DIRECT THE PROJECTS...and THERE ARE A LOT OF
INNOCENT PEOPLE WHO RECEIVED the S.I.H.E. MONEY WHICH I KNOW FOR A FACT
THEY WERE NEVER ASKED TO DO ANYTHING FOR THE CIA....THEY HAD NO
KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY WERE GETTING CIA MONEY....
do you not understand?

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by b***@gmail.com
Human Ecology is the Code name of MKULTRA's and CIA program
that funded the research. There is no question that Gittinger worked
for the CIA for 26 years and there is no question that the Human
Ecology
Fund funded some of Schucman and Thetford's research.
Here are the senate hearing that prove that Gittinger was a CIA agent,
Humman Ecology was the name of the MKULTA program funded by
the CIA...
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hearing06.htm

and here's what Gittinger says about it......
Mr. GITTINGER." Well, it was established to undertake research in the
general area of the behavioral sciences. (snip)
The Agency in effect provided the money. They did not direct the
projects. Now, the fact of the matter is, there are a lot of innocent
people who received the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology
money which I know for a fact they were never asked to do anything for
the CIA but they did get through this indirectly. They had no knowledge
that they were getting CIA money."
what part of THEY DID NOT DIRECT THE PROJECTS...and THERE ARE A LOT OF
INNOCENT PEOPLE WHO RECEIVED the S.I.H.E. MONEY WHICH I KNOW FOR A FACT
THEY WERE NEVER ASKED TO DO ANYTHING FOR THE CIA....THEY HAD NO
KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY WERE GETTING CIA MONEY....
do you not understand?

Uh, oh! Calm down, Jason!

Maybe instead of scanning the materials looking for excuses, it would serve you better to take
the time to get the full picture. Let's face it, Jason, there is a lot of information here that
should cause any reasonable person to at least take the time to educate themselves and think this
situation through before simply discounting it on the basis of some cult line excuse.

I really don't think that you want to be in a cult, or follow a false teaching, do you? The
problem is that you'll never know if you are in a cult or following a false teaching if you
don't do your own homework, take advantage of ALL available information, think it through, and
arrive at your own conclusions on that basis.

No one here can so far PROVE to anyone else that Helen was the subject of a deliberate plan to
use mind control techniques to get her to believe she was channelling a new religion. But we can
arrive at likely conclusions once we've availed ourselves of the available information, and
that's the difference between those of us who strongly suspect or are willing to consider the
possibility that ACIM is the result of CIA mind control projects, and those of you who just
discount it out of hand. We're doing our homework, and you aren't.

I would be far more interested in your opinion, and your opinion would be far more valid if you
showed some willingness to study up on the topic. Who knows, maybe you'll be the one to present a
compelling argument, based on verifiable facts that Helen was actually channeling Jesus out of
her CIA funded mind control research project office.

Do yourself a favor, and approach this with intelligence and an open mind, and see if you can get
through it without losing your temper and getting punishing. I know you don't want to do that.
No one is trying to force you to believe anything. Well, not those of us who are doing our
homework, anyway. That's just cult hysteria, you don't have to buy into it.

[jason]

***@gmail.com wrote:


since your big on believing things that are "provable"....can you
supply any real proof that ACIM was not of divine inspiration?

[Noggin]

Post by jason
since your big on believing things that are "provable"....can you
supply any real proof that ACIM was not of divine inspiration?

You can't prove that is was, Jason, that's the point.

If you take the two theories, A being that ACIM is of divine inspiration and B being that it came
from a CIA mind control research project experiment you can write a list below each one of the
available evidence to support each conclusion. That would be a good starting point, and the
basis of solid research.

If you would like to do that, I would be more than interested in seeing what you come up with.
If you're willing, just stick to the facts, and leave all the assigned motives, mind readings,
and bad excuses out of the equation.

There is a valid way to do this, Jason, and that is one way. Or maybe you have a better way, I
don't know, it's certainly possible.

Asking for proof of a negative isn't a valid way, nor is it an ethical approach, because the
claims are already made, and therefore subject to challenge by any reasonable, conscientious
person.

[jason]

Post by Noggin

Post by jason
since your big on believing things that are "provable"....can you
supply any real proof that ACIM was not of divine inspiration?

You can't prove that is was, Jason, that's the point.

exactly my point.

so it comes down to:

"I believe ACIM was inspired by Jesus and is a good thing"
vs.
'I believe ACIM was inspired by the CIA and is a bad thing"


this goes back to the nature of spiritual faith and belief.

since GOD cannot be scientifically proven or disproven....we can't make
a scientific conclusion either way.

it comes down to "I believe...."
or
"I don't believe...."

[A]

Post by jason

Post by Noggin

Post by jason
since your big on believing things that are "provable"....can you
supply any real proof that ACIM was not of divine inspiration?

You can't prove that is was, Jason, that's the point.

exactly my point.
"I believe ACIM was inspired by Jesus and is a good thing"
vs.
'I believe ACIM was inspired by the CIA and is a bad thing"
this goes back to the nature of spiritual faith and belief.
since GOD cannot be scientifically proven or disproven....we can't make
a scientific conclusion either way.
it comes down to "I believe...."
or
"I don't believe...."

I think it comes down to something more
fundamental than that, Jason. While I'd
agree belief initially plays a role, if
left there it's just that, a belief. As
the saying goes (whoever said it) faith
that can't be tested, can't be trusted.

I think it comes down to something that
Siddartha Buddha had said about belief:

"After examination, believe that which
you have tested for yourselves and found
reasonable, and which is in conformity
with your well-being and that of others.”

[Noggin]

Post by jason

Post by Noggin

Post by jason
since your big on believing things that are "provable"....can you
supply any real proof that ACIM was not of divine inspiration?

You can't prove that is was, Jason, that's the point.

exactly my point.
"I believe ACIM was inspired by Jesus and is a good thing"
vs.
'I believe ACIM was inspired by the CIA and is a bad thing"
this goes back to the nature of spiritual faith and belief.
since GOD cannot be scientifically proven or disproven....we can't make
a scientific conclusion either way.
it comes down to "I believe...."
or
"I don't believe...."

No, Jason, it isn't really that simple. Any conclusion can be rated on the scales of
reasonableness and functionality on the basis of the process used to arrive at them. The first
question that pops into most minds when they are confronted with previously unheard of
information is "how did you arrive at that conclusion". It's a function of the healthy human
mind to want to pursue the reasons behind any conclusion.

The fact that the thread in all your posts today is "I don't want to think about it" is one
indication that ACIM is NOT a good thing. You have to do something not good to yourself in order
to be so reluctant to think about things, especially matters that you are discussing on a regular
basis, and forming conclusions about that effect your life, not to mention your soul, your
relationships, your choices and decisions, and your understanding of what your life is about.

Other than the post I responded to earlier in which you state that you are willing to open your
mind just a little to the reasons someone might conclude that ACIM didn't come from Jesus and
isn't a good thing, it seems that your current strategy is to go into the momentary comforts of
denial and avoidance, and that is not a good thing. No one who has concern for you would
advocate that strategy, and I really hope you aren't trying to advocate it for yourself, because
it's precisely what has led Carrie to where she is, for example, and I don't suspect that you
would like to wake up one day only to discover that you've become another Carrie Denial and
Avoidance Monster. Carrie is no doubt really "content" in the little box she's created for
herself, just like a prisoner in 5 X 8 cell can be, but I don't suspect that's the kind of
"contentment" you're looking for, but it is the only kind you can ever achieve by the strategies
of Denial and Avoidance.

[s***@yahoo.com]

Post by jason
since your big on believing things that are "provable"....can you

supply any real proof that ACIM was not of divine inspiration?
--------------------

I think it was already proven here that you can't prove something
didn't happen.

In regard to Katie NOT stopping WW3. I thought the fact we didn't
have a WW3 showed she could have (with her group and minds joining in
peace).

But, it was proven here (which means most of the people here agreed
with it) that this isn't real proof.

I would think it leaves room for the possibility, though.

~ Carrie