|
I am a physician who has only been in part-time, volunteer practice since a severe burn injury years ago; I am only interested in providing only alternative/complementary and fibromyalgia care. I was board certified in Family Medicine and board-eligible in Public Health / Preventive Medicine, and was on the "fast-track" as a Public Health Service officer when, as a result largely of job stress (EVIL boss, constant no-wins, bad command, lying superior officers), I was forced into military alcohol rehab which REQUIRED me to embrace the 12-steps and GO TO CHURCH on Sun. I had already recognized the problem and was working on it in my own way, getting support, etc., but once I felt forced to talk about God it was counter-productive. Treatment was abusive except for the professionals treatment in 1992. My first counselor told me "you're a liar and everything in your life is a lie". I was flabbergasted, having been a high achiever on my own merits, not from lying. I didn't realize that would be the position of the majority of my mental health providers, and didn't realize how discredited I would become overnight. I went before the Hawaii Medical Board as a result of "relapse" while on vacation from my job and a mostly slanderous letter from my supervisor; I was doing everything "right" and being monitored by the Arizona Medical Board, one of the strictest in the country. The interviewer (a supposedly recovering doc who I knew had sold cocaine, falsified med records.etc) shouted at me in front of 20 other docs about how I was lying about my use of cocaine, etc. Being recently severely injured, I just started crying. I felt like saying "just because you did doesn't mean I did) The doctor's health group there then refused to assist me: the head of the group didn't even meet with me face to face. I vowed then never to talk to anyone "official" about this again, and stopped going to any doctor's meeting/group when that supposedly recovering doc. might be there. I avoided alcohol for seven years, but then had about an 7 yr period of bad alcohol use, resulting in multiple ER trips, inpt rx., ETC. I was doing well again here in Mass. when I went on a cruise with my family of origin and subsequently got a DUI. I wanted to go to court, but was stuck here in Mass. with a bad post-operative infection, so took a no-contest for wet & reckless, a misdemeanor. The Calif. medical board recently requires professionals to report any misdemeanor conviction, and use the no-contest plea as proof of guilt. They have also abolished the voluntary, anonymous doctor's group and all interface is now punitive and expensive. I have been on soc sec disability & a VA pension and don't earn big bucks (never did, being in the Public Hlth Svc) I have done extensive reading and research since this all started, and knew that a rational emotive or cognitive behavioural approach works best for "mood management" for me; I have a strong personal and family hx. of depression related to physical challenges, not just alcohol abuse. The "treatments" for alcohol abuse have been more harm than good, and I am reluctant to even talk to the Calif. medical board investigator; I had just decided not to renew my license and just let it go, when the investigator called. I am anticipating that I will be required to meet (and pay for) a session with THEIR selected psychiatrist, who will be 12-step based. I need assistance finding an addiction specialist or psychiatrist who will be respectful and not force a 12-step framework, preferably one who will be RET/CBT based and willing to interface with the Calif. medical board. Jack Trimpey, the founder of Rational Recovery, will help me only if I show up immediately and shell out $4k (plus travel, etc) for his assessment, which won't be enough for the Med Board. I don't have that money, and don't agree with him on several key issues, but I did read his "Small Book" in 1991. I am trying to set something up before I meet with the investigator, esp. an appt. with a reasonable shrink, either in Mass ASAP or Calif. in July. Do you have any recommendations? Even a phone call or e-mail would be helpful at this point. I feel very desperate about having to even talk about what I consider my 12-step trauma. Do you know of any licensed professional (administrative law, not criminal) in Calif. who has successfully interfaced from a non-12 step point of view (either recovering "spontaneously" or with an RET approach.)? Please feel free to give out my phone number : (xxx) xxx-xxxx and e-mail: xxxxxxxx@yahoo.com. Any assistance you can provide me at all will be helpful. Thanking you in advance. Martha
Hello Martha,
Thank you for the letter.
There are some things that you can do.
The first thing that comes to mind is to sue the bastards.
You can do that, you know. It is actually against the law to force people into
a religion.
We were just talking about that.
Read this letter.
Also see:
And perhaps the readers have some suggestions, too. I purposely blanked out your phone
number and email address, because printing them can get you more spam than you ever wanted.
But I will forward any messages that I get.
Have a good day, and don't hesitate to write back.
== Orange
Very interesting article Mr Orange. You seem very angry. Did the NA/AA programme not work for you? Would you like to correspond with me about the effectiveness of the 12step programme and the questions you ask about cultism? Yours sincerely, Mark McN.
Hello Mark,
Thanks for the letter. As I have said many, many times before, I didn't go to A.A. and N.A.
for very long after I discovered that the 12-Step routine is just another cult.
I have never done the 12 Steps, never had a sponsor, don't believe in Bill Wilson or
the Big Book or Buchmanism,
and I have not been to an A.A. or N.A. meeting in 8 years, and I still
have 9 1/2 years off of alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes.
So my "program" is working great.
You want to correspond? Sure, we can correspond. But I must warn you that I've heard all
of the standard A.A. and N.A. slogans and propaganda lines before, starting with:
So do you have anything new to bring to the table?
Before you waste your time or my time repeating stuff that has already been said dozens
of times before, please let me point you to some facts and discussions:
Have a good day.
== Orange
Dear Dioxin, Congratulations for being censored on Yahoo! This makes me want to discontinue my Yahoo Plus account. Please be careful about attributing famous quotes to yourself. Mark Twain enthusiasts still exist. Yes, there are still people out there who read. I have been a lover of Samuel Clemmons since age 16, some 36 years ago. They are also the ones who are most likely to check into your site. However, he was the one who said, "My enemies are numerous and I know them well, but [Heaven] save me from those who would do unto me for my own good [against my own will]. You're cutting it close, but this come to the edge of plagiarism. With Twain, it is so tempting to do a change-a-graph. You are dead-on accurate with Lewis's Letter to Malcolm about the immorality of forced treatment. http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-gulags.html
Hello John,
Thanks for the letter. I just learned something.
I did not plagiarize that saying from Mark Twain. That one comes entirely from personal
experiences in the 'sixties, when so many people wanted to put me in prison for
smoking pot and taking LSD and being against the Vietnam War,
and they wanted to do it "for my own good", because they
supposedly cared about me and my life.
I love Mark Twain, and I always give him fair credit when I quote him. But I actually knew very little about Mark Twain in the 'sixties when I made up that line. I had received the typical American high school education where you only get a tiny dose of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, like the story about painting the fence, and then I also read the Classic Comics version of "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court". And that was it. We got the full text of The Scarlet Letter — had to read that one from cover to cover — but almost no Twain. It wasn't until many years later that I learned what a genius Mark Twain was. And when I read what he really wrote, I understood why we got so little Mark Twain in high school. Too controversial. Too relevant. Too real. The narrow-minded parents would have a hissy-fit. And it wasn't until you sent this letter that I learned that Mark Twain wrote that line that is so close to my own. It is encouraging to see that Mark Twain agrees with me. Have a good day now. == Orange
P.S.: (2011.01.15) I just stumbled across this, which is even older, and expresses a similar
sentiment:
I have to say, I just had the misfortune of stumbling on your web site. I guess the question is...what is your point? I may question some AA doctrine myself, but is it helping or hurting people? What is so wrong with listening to persons sharing experiences and examining self. Many other groups from cancer survivors to battered women also utilize this tactic. I have been in rehab 3 x and not drinking is a struggle, I don't currently attend AA meetings (haven't for some time), but if it works for some people, I am happy for them not trying to pick it apart. Did it fail you or a loved one, and that is why you are so bitter?? My guess is yes (or you run an alternative treatment facility and it is seriously messing up your cash flow). Stop blaming AA for all of your shortcomings and get a life. My guess is whomever was involved with this is project is an addict because to waste precious time when one could be volunteering at an animal shelter, or something positive is a sick and self centered individual. Stay away from AA meetings, the people that seek help there are better off without a cynical ass like you. Ashley
Hello Ashley,
My point is to get the truth out there.
You asked,
"is it helping or hurting people?"
The answer is, "It is hurting people — more people than it is helping."
Dr. George Vaillant discovered that when he tried to prove that A.A. works to help alcoholics
quit drinking.
And Dr. Vaillant just loves A.A., and he even became a member of the Board of Trustees of A.A.,
and continues to promote A.A.,
after he proved that A.A. kills more alcoholics than it helps.
Read this.
Then you asked,
"What is so wrong with listening to persons sharing experiences and examining self."
There is nothing wrong with that.
If that was all that there is to A.A., then A.A. might be a good thing. But there is so much
more to "The Program", like:
You said,
"but if it works for some people".
That is damning with faint praise. The evidence is that A.A. kills more people than it actually saves.
A.A. is not a good thing when it
saves one guy and kills five others
at the same time.
Please note that anything will appear to "work for some people". It doesn't matter whether
the alcoholics do ballerina dancing, or eat ice cream, or play tiddly-winks, "the program" will
appear to work for some people. There will always be some people who will quit drinking to save
their own lives, no matter where they are.
You said,
"Did it fail you or a loved one, and that is why you are so bitter?? My guess is yes
(or you run an alternative treatment facility and it is seriously messing up your
cash flow)."
Yes, I have seen the 12-Step routine hurt people.
Why don't you check out
the list of horror stories that people have sent in.
And no, I do not run a competing treatment center.
Thanks for demonstrating the
ad hominem propaganda technique
where you accuse people of having
ulterior motives when they tell some truth that you don't want to hear.
You said,
"Stop blaming AA for all of your shortcomings and get a life."
And that is another ad hominem attack, which just goes to show that you don't
have any actual facts to offer in defense of A.A.
Have a good day.
== Orange
Hi Mr. Orange, I read with interest "The Heresy of the Twelve Steps". I wonder if it should have been titled the Heresy of AA though. You have outlined is a literal explanation of some of AA's material. It's like saying and orange has tough skin, you can't eat and orange... The twelve steps were based on the book of James and much of AA's material is taken from the Book of James and Corinthians along with other books of the bible too many to mention right now. There is much more to AA's program with deeper meaning. It leads the alcoholic who is honest, willing and opened minded to the one true God. Many people who come to AA don't believe in God and refuse to believe in God. But they must have a spiritual connection in order to recover. Man can not serve 2 spirits- and when the alcoholic comes to AA on his own, in complete defeat, a spiritual transformation must take place. The spirit of alcoholism controlled him, something else must take over and that is where God takes over if he is willing to believe in something more powerful than his own self will. Many alcoholics who come in and are willing to believe in something, eventually believe that something is God and may begin going to a church and that is where the church comes in to teach the new "believer/alcoholic" about God. I drank from the time I was 14 until I was 32, went to AA, had a spiritual awakening to say, joined a church and got very involved (teaching, etc.). I decided I didn't need AA any longer and about 5 years later I was back at it, and it was even worse. I went back to AA for a while, but had so much guilt I didn't stay sober, I also didn't work the steps. Step 4 is what brings us to a relationship with God, getting to know who we are and our character defects and then allowing God to (with our action) take them away. Since I didn't take any action, I was drinking again, even worse. The problem I found with not keeping AA in my religious life was that most christians cant relate to alcoholism. An alcoholic needs another alcoholic to talk to sometimes. If you are not an alcoholic, you just will not know what it is like. I am now 48 and have been sober 3 years and could not have done it with out God's help and the help of AA. Some people can do it without AA. That's great. I think there are many people who come to AA now that have no place there. They are ordered there by the court for many things DUI to domestic violence. AA's success rate will get even worse- no doubt in my mind. Who knows how many people actually die from alcoholism that don't come to AA? Most alcoholics blow their brains out, take a bottle of pain pills and end their life or, just drink till their organs cease to function with the obituary reading "they passed away suddenly". When I read your paper, I thought it was so negative and would probably make anyone who might seek help from AA recoil and continue drinking. I'm not trying to change your mind about AA, you would have to be open minded and willing to do that... but I believe that AA offers some hope to the hopeless alcoholic and once they get there God will do the rest, if they let him. Have a wonderful day and thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my thoughts. Peggy A.
Hello Peggy,
Thanks for the letter.
Well, starting at the top:
But that practice turned out to be a big mistake, and the early
Christian Church soon banned public confessions. By the fifth century,
only priests were allowed to hear confessions, and only in private.
The problem with public confessions was that the old people were offended by graphic
confessions (especially of an explicit sexual nature), while the young people were corrupted by the
practice — they were hearing about things that sounded like they
would really like to try them too. And then there is the problem with people becoming
jaded from hearing about sins all of the time.
They get to thinking, "Everybody is doing it..."
And then people took pride in their sins: "My sins were much bigger and more outrageous than
your wimpy-ass little sins."
So James' instructions were reversed and declared invalid. Remember that James was not Jesus Christ,
and his words do not carry the same weight.
There is more on that subject
here.
There is nothing in the Bible that supports these Steps:
About the only idea that can be justified is the idea of making amends and fixing what is wrong.
The 12 Steps are actually based on the teachings of Dr. Frank Nathan Daniel Buchman, and
nothing else. Bill Wilson, Dr. Robert Smith, and Clarence Snyder learned that strange occult
theology from Frank Buchman's "Oxford Groups".
Even Bill Wilson said so:
Bill Wilson was, of course, being dishonest there when he used the name of
Sam Shoemaker as the leader of the Oxford Groups. The American and British
people could still remember Frank Buchman raving,
"I thank heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler...",
so Wilson didn't want to mention Frank Buchman. But Buchman was the real
leader of the Oxford Groups, and Buchman was the creator of all of
that wierd occult theology.
Frank Buchman did not write the Bible, and Buchman's teachings are not Biblical teachings,
especially not his declarations that
he wanted a world run by
"Christian Fascist Dicators", like Adolf Hitler.
In fact, Frank Buchman and his teachings were so in conflict with Christianity that
the Catholic Church banned Buchman's cult twice.
A.A. constantly declares that it is not a religion, and you can believe
in any kind of God or Higher Power that you like. Doorknob Almighty,
Baal Bedpan, Rock, Tree, or "G.O.D.=Group Of Drunks" are allegedly all okay.
But now you talk about the A.A. program leading people to "the one true God".
Well, that is not only religion, it is arrogant religion.
There is more evidence that practicing Buchmanism leads you to the One True Devil than to the
One True God.
Again, you are showing that A.A. is a religion.
And there is zero evidence that joining the A.A. religion and believing
in the A.A. "one true God" makes people quit drinking.
A.A. is a failure. It doesn't work.
There is also no evidence that alcoholics must get a "spiritual
transformation" in order to quit drinking.
The one thing that is really required to quit drinking is to stop putting
alcohol in your mouth and swallowing it.
I am now 63 years old and have 9 1/2 years clean and sober, and I thank God that She gave me
the power to recover without having to join a cult religion.
The opposite question is equally valid:
I notice that you did not actually address any of the other issues that I brought up in
that web page,
The Heresy of the Twelve Steps,
besides the "public confessions" problem.
There are a lot of other issues there:
You have not addressed any of those things.
Would you care to talk about those problems with A.A. theology?
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Hi Terrance, I'm so glad you found a nice place to live. I was worried for you. I can't imagine how frustrating and difficult it must've been to be homeless and under the gun to find a home. Congrats, man. Glad to see the "Papers" up and running again, too. I keep thinking about those scurvy AA dogs that can barely contain their glee at your temporary homeless situation. What a pathetic lot. Tell me: what kind of spirituality does one have if one looks down upon his fellow human with a sense of satisfaction when he's going through a rough patch? Why, it's the AA brand of spirituality. What a twisted, disturbed way of thinking. I can remember some years ago when I was in their clutches and hearing bad news about fellow members. Get this: If someone in my home group relapsed and drank himself to death, which did happen every few years, people would say conceitedly, "Well, some must die so that others may live"." Or this, "Well, he turned out to be a great teacher." Jesus, can you believe that? And they call it a "home group." Man, that's some messed up "home." If you are new out there and reading these pages you really better watch out because you might start seeing the world this way too, if you "keep coming back."
Bill N
Hello Bill,
Thanks for the letter and the moral support.
Yes, it is so revealing when people think that a trivial issue like being temporarily homeless
proves something about big spiritual issues. That is a very shallow spirituality.
And the Schadenfreude is unbecoming.
Temporary homelessness really is a trivial issue in the big scheme of things.
Sure, it's a major inconvenience when you are homeless, but it is nothing compared to
a problem like being addicted to drugs or alcohol.
I know, because I've done both, more than once.
Sleeping out in a field with a sleeping bag, and waking up healthy and
clear-headed, isn't so bad at all, even if you are a little cold and have to walk a mile to
get a cup of coffee. Waking up sick and hung-over, and knowing that you are going
to die, is no fun at all.
The fix for homelessness is pathetically easy: just find some place else to live.
The fix for addictions can be tough, real tough.
You can fix the problem of homelessness in a few days: just write a check, fill out some paperwork,
sign a new lease, and get the keys.
Fixing addictions takes a lot longer and is much more difficult.
Anyway, now, at this minute, I'm looking out the window and it's beautiful
out there. It is 7:30 in the morning, and I've been up since 5 AM,
drinking coffee and working on answering email, and watching
the sky lighten. The sky out there is
totally clear and cloudless and a beautiful light blue now,
and we are in for a week of good weather.
There are trees everywhere you look. This place is really correctly named, "Forest Grove".
They cut down most of the trees a long time ago, to make room for houses and farms,
and it is still loaded with trees, and all of the hills around the town are forested.
It took a lot longer to get a place like this to live, rather than some box downtown, but it was worth the wait. Have a good day. I'm going to. == Orange
[The story of Carmen continues here.]
may I ask what your mission is and why in regards to AA?
Hi Patrick,
Yes, you may ask.
My mission is to get the truth out there.
Why in regards to A.A.? Because I've been involved with A.A. and recovery for many years.
I saw some bad stuff going on, and had to speak up.
The list of stories that will tell you all about that is
here.
Have a good day.
== Orange
Date: Sat, May 29, 2010 6:08 am (answered 28 June 2010)
Don't you feel that you have doubts and cowardice? I had the same doubts as yours. But when in disastrous situations filled with sufferings I could have an inner guidance through the chanting and definitely could overcome many situations, then I came to believe and act to benefit my life. I know what I am speaking about. BTW, your escapist statement in your email message: that " have a good day anyway" — was really very cheap. You can do better. Safwan
Hello Safwan,
Whether I have "doubts and cowardice" has nothing to do with whether Nichiren Shoshu
Buddhism is a cult.
I am not afraid of meditation or chanting. I know about it.
I also know that excessive chanting can be used to mess with people's minds.
It is a thought-stopping tool. The Hari Krishas — ISKCON — use it for the same reason.
I also know that Nichiren Shoshu is not Buddhism. You don't even talk about Buddha
much — it's more about Nichiren and his teachings.
I also read
your web site,
and saw how you had to insult and denounce all of the other sects
of Buddhism. Like how
you called the Zen Buddhists ignorant liars.
That is the standard cult characteristic
Denigration of competing sects.
You completely misunderstood what the Zen master was saying. When a Zen master answers a bogus
question by saying, "I don't know", what he is really saying is that there is no ego, so there
is no "I" to know. You twisted it all around and called him a liar.
BTW,
I end all of my letters with "Have a good day",
and when I know that the correspondent isn't going to be happy with I
am saying, I often say "Have a good day anyway".
Look here, for examples.
So have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Date: Wed, June 23, 2010 4:21 pm (answered 28 June 2010) Orange, I am not sure AA causes people to stop drinking. I stopped drinking many times, but found I could not "stay stopped." That was where AA helped me, helped me to stay stopped. I really believe that a person with an alcohol problem must end up pretty desperate to decide to stop and that is when AA becomes the most helpful.
Sincerely,
Hello Penny,
You are still trying to claim — just with different words — that A.A. makes alcoholics
quit drinking and stay quit — for a longer period of time.
But the evidence says just the opposite. A.A. does not make alcoholics quit drinking,
and A.A. does not keep them sober.
No matter whether we look at the medical tests of A.A., or count the sobriety coins given
out, or even just read the historical facts, A.A. fails to get'em sober and keep'em sober.
The medical tests:
The counts of sobriety coins given out:
So much for keeping them sober over the long haul.
And note that those are the best-case numbers. Undoubtedly, some of those people are fibbing, and
don't really have that many years of sobriety when they collect those coins.
Then, the historical information:
Everybody from Nell Wing, Bill Wilson's secretary,
to Francis Hartigan, Lois Wilson's secretary, reported that A.A. only sobered up about
5% of the alcoholics. But 5% is the normal rate of spontaneous remission in alcoholism.
That is the percentage of alcoholics who just sober themselves up without
any "program" or "treatment".
So A.A. is not due the credit for that 5%. That leaves 0% of the sober
people that the A.A. program gets the credit for.
A.A. just doesn't do the job.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
And please continue to keep yourself sober.
== Orange
Hi, nice web site. A couple of questions for you. 1. What evidence is there that the protocols of zion was created by Russian secret police.
Hello Ken,
Thank you for the letter and the compliments, and the question.
That is one of those questions that has both a simple answer and a very difficult answer.
The simple answer is that there are at least these three books that give that information:
And I guess that there must be many more books that give the story, perhaps with
a bibliography that points back to the source documents.
The difficult answer is finding the source materials that those authors used, which
would provide a further degree of proof.
Undoubtedly, they used some documents even older, but I don't have the first two
of those books handy, to read their bibliographies.
I do have the third book, Konrad Heiden's book,
but it doesn't list the bibliography. But it does say a lot
of interesting things about The Protocols:
This is the origin of the supposed textbook of Jewish world domination.
Today [1944] the forgery is incontrovertibly proved, yet something infinitely
significant has remained; a textbook of world domination pure and simple.
...
An impartial court has established the truth, even anti-Semitic propagandists
have today dropped the myth of the Jewish conspiracy in Basel and admitted Joly's
authorship.
The book was laid on the tsar's table. Its effect was strong but not lasting.
At first the tsar was shaken, praised the book's wealth of ideas, its mighty
perspective, and believed it all. But Ratchkovsky had gone too far.
At that time, perhaps, the deepest sources of the forgery were not discovered;
but it soon became clear to the Russian public, who for a hundred years
had been only too familiar with the methods of the secret police, that
such documents from the hand of the Ochrana did not carry much weight.
Minister Stolypin even succeeded in convincing the tsar of the forgery.
The tsar gave orders that the book should no longer be used as progaganda,
for 'we must not fight for a pure cause with unclean weapons.'
Not Nilus but Rasputin became the tsar's confessor.
Nevertheless, the Ochrana did its best to spread its product among the masses.
Butmy, the leader of the Black Hundreds, also published a version of the Protocols.
In 1917, during the World War and after the tsar's downfall, Nilus published
the last edition of his book, with the Protocols in the appendix.
This time it was: 'He is near, he is hard by the door.'
It is this edition which was placed on Alfred Rosenberg's table.
It was from this edition that the loquacious and seductive demon of world domination
spoke to the young man.
Rosenberg believed in the secret session of Basel, at least he did then.
For this we cannot be too hard on this lad of twenty-four.
Then Heiden goes on to describe how Rosenberg showed the book to leaders of
the Thule Society in Munich, which contained some of the
political radicals who would later form the Nazi Party.
And Rosenberg himself later became a member of the original Nazi Party inner circle.
There is much more, too much to type. Konrad Heiden's book is fascinating.
Heiden's book was published in 1944, when Hitler was still alive.
Heiden had "fought Hitlerism from 1920, when it was only a bad smell
in Republican Germany, until he had to escape from the country". [January
Book-of-the-Month Club News there. I can't tell which year.]
Anyway, to make a long story short, I imagine that there must be dozens of
books that tell the story of the Protocols. To trace the story
back to the original documents will require further sleuthing, although
we have some of the names of the original documents there.
Oh, and there is one more book of interest that I just found at the local library
in response to your question: 2. Do you know if a list exists of the names of the 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust? I don't know, but I imagine that one does exist — or at least, a good attempt to create one exists. I can't believe that the survivors of the holocaust would let the names of their murdered friends and relatives vanish into oblivion. I would ask the Holocaust Museum that question. I think they are located in Washington, DC. Thanks Ken.
You are welcome. That is an interesting subject.
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Last updated 30 September 2013. |
