|
Date: Thu, January 2, 2014 1:09 pm (answered 4 January 2014) Hi friend. I am a friend of bill wilson and dr bob. I am also one of those zero % you talk about taking a 5 year chip sept 4 2008. I feel horrible that the only type of meeting you have researched is that in which I call depression meetings. There are more than just talk therapy type meetings out there. Just to qualify myself a little I habe done talk therapy for about 15 years I have tried staying sober and yes the book does refer on pg 32 to the terms sober and dry. The outcome of my lack of not using aa is within 8 months of my first drink I was in the mental hospital for 3 1/2 months with dts. Yes full on dts after 8 months of alcoholic drinking. I am a 5'4 women who at the time weighed 160 lbs. I could down two large bottles if slightly flavored vodka followed by a case of fruit type drinks. Oh and not to mention my snorting the amount of cocaine up my nose to keep me high for days. So if you know anything about this book and no I haven't read your entire website because I didn't much like the abuse you spew. I'm actually a highly intelligent individual. So assuming you have read the book in full you did read the part about choosing a god as I understand him. One of my choosing. I dare you to find the page where this is quote. 'Take pen to paper and create your own concept of god' I have a concept of a higher power and do not belong to not wish to enter a church. Have you evet watched spirit science theres a good youtube channel you could in fact tear apart next. Oh I'm so sorry that was one of my character defects know as sarcasm peeking out. I have a lot of character defect which yes I try and work on. See its sad you only had a few bad instances with groups that in my opinion as a primary purpose member really have no place. There is no doubt that aa has been so watered down that no its success rate is aweful. I don't agree with open discussion meetings where members apew their shit and have verbal diahrea all over the place. I actually attend whats called a primary purpose book study meeting where we actually just focus on the teachings in the book. I love the fact aa never claims that a person will be better in a night. Its chief belief is that its progress rather than perfection. Bill wilson tried working with over 60 drunks before he met dr bob. Out cof curiosity how much of aa's history do you actually know? Yes we are a sort of branch off another fellowship. However bill didn't like how religious that group was so he left it. I have recovered from a hopessly seeming state of mind and body due to having a spiritual experience as a result of working these steps. I still struggle with my daily life because I'm far for perfection. Did I mention how aa never makes claims to be the only program in town? There are church organizations that actually take a religious view and people due recover that way. Oh I am also a sponsor and no I seriously do not try and convert everyone as the book actually talks against that in chapter 7 working with others. It says to approach your prospect/protege/friend and if he is not willing to discuss it don't push it as you may spoil a latter opportunity. Sir/madamn since I haven't any idea who you are, because I actually think your a coward if you can't publish your name for whichever reason. I could actually take you to court and sue you for defamation of character. Yes my legal right says that you are not legal allowed to walk around causing serious mental harm to people. Ooooh another question is there is a youtube channel called justanotherface123 in which that individual who sounds an awefully like you spews the same bs just in voice form. Would you happen to be that same individual? I'm sure you get alot of requests but since aa is a huge topic and OBVIOUSLY you are seriously misinformed just about how aa works I would live to have a voice to voice discussion. I will even be willing to skype with you. I have free long distance so I am more than willing to call you. However I will leave my phone number and since I can see you must not be employed as you have spent alot of time breaking down a program you know lil about I would so love to help you understand it better as I do this as a Sponsor. By the way my name is amanda p. a recovered alcoholic. Edmonton albeta 1-587-xxx-xxxx. Please call anytime. Or email facebook or text message or skype or hangout on apps. I very much look forward to speaking with you. Thank you ever so much. Amanda p. ♥
Hello Amanda,
Thank you for the letter.
Congratulations on taking care of your health for five years. Alas, you are grossly misquoting me.
I never said that zero percent of the A.A. newcomers pick up 5-year coins.
What I said, here:
http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-letters62.html#coins,
is that 1.63% of the newcomers pick up 5-year coins.
What I said is that the A.A. success rate is zero percent above normal spontaneous remission. Meaning:
A.A. does not improve on the situation at all. People who quit alone on their own do just as well
as those who go to A.A. meetings and "work the Steps".
People who go to church or the local Ladies' Home Garden Club get the same success rate.
A.A. is not due the credit for any recoveries. People always do it themselves, and save their own lives.
For example, there is me. If I was in A.A., I would have picked up my 13-year coin a few months ago.
I'm sure that someone in A.A. picked up a 13-year coin a few months ago, and someone else opined that
he proves that A.A. works. No he doesn't. He only proves that it is possible to attend A.A.
meetings for 13 years. So why don't you also opine that quitting alone, on your own, like how
I did, also works just as well?
Why don't you count the success stories where people got sober without A.A.?
Nonsense. It isn't a matter of what kind of meetings I attended. And it isn't just me. I have received
horror stories from a lot of different people who have been to every kind of A.A. meeting.
Look here:
the list of A.A. horror stories.
Actually, you went into DT's when you stopped drinking alcohol. DT's are caused by the sudden
lack of alcohol after prolonged heavy drinking. DT's have nothing to do with
whether you are attending A.A. meetings. Likewise, your mental illness is not caused by failure
to attend A.A. meetings. Nor was your cocaine consumption.
You are trying to assume that A.A. is a cure-all, which it isn't.
You said,
"The outcome of my lack of not using aa is...",
and then you listed some disastrously bad drug consumption habits that
ended with 3½ months in a mental hospital.
You are trying to imply that not going to A.A. meetings causes people to drink alcohol and snort cocaine.
No it doesn't. That is illogical and ridiculous. The vast majority of people in the USA don't go to A.A. meetings,
and they also don't snort suicidal amounts of cocaine and drink suicidal amounts of alcohol.
Look at me. I haven't been to an A.A. meeting in almost 12 years, and yet I have 13 years off of alcohol,
tobacco, cocaine, heroin, and all other illegal drugs. I don't need an old pro-Nazi cult religion
from the nineteen-thirties to control my hands and keep me from drinking and smoking and drugging.
Do you?
Can you explain how that works? How does A.A. control your hands and keep you
from picking up a drink or hit of coke? Or does A.A. control your mind and
control your behavior? If so, how does that work? Dictators all over the world
want to know how to control people like so many robots.
It is illogical for you to give all of the credit for your sobriety to A.A., and none to the mental hospital
that detoxed you and kept you from drinking and drugging for 3½ months. Obviously, the mental hospital
deserves a lot of the credit. You already had 3½ months of sobriety when you walked into your
A.A. meeting, didn't you?
But then the A.A. members started working on you and telling you that your sobriety was because of A.A., not
because of anything that you learned in the mental hospital.
They usually steal the credit that way.
That is nonsense. You are trying to tell me that a sick, cloudy-headed, detoxing, patient in a
mental hospital is a qualified theologian who can design and choose an appropriate "god", and then
create that god, and it will work for her and deliver miracles on demand?
You want the Big Book quote where Bill said that you can create your own concept of God?
Okay, here you are: Bill Wilson loved to brag that "God" can be whatever you wish:
(By the way, there was no
icy intellectual mountain in
Bill Wilson's life.
Bill Wilson was a superstitious flunk-out, not an intellectual.)
Bill also wrote,
Why stress "the spiritual feature" freely? Because you
aren't supposed to stress
the religious feature.
Keep on yammering,
"It's spiritual, not religious"
when the prospect says,
"I don't want to join a religion."
Also note Bill Wilson's arrogance. He thinks that people who disagree with his crazy Buchmanite theology are
"prejudiced" and "confused about certain theological terms and conceptions".
The "spirit science" channel sounds interesting. I've never watched it. Have you? Do you have a link?
Again, you are trying to claim that A.A. is good, and it's only a few meetings that you don't
like that are bad. Not so. Read and honestly answer
all of those A.A. horror stories.
And the "watered down A.A." argument is an old one:
"If we just get Back to the Basics and return to
the good old days
when Dr. Frank Buchman and the Oxford Group praised Adolf Hitler,
then we will have some real spirituality."
I don't think so.
I know a lot of A.A.'s history, including the fact that Bill Wilson failed to sober up alcoholics both
before and after he co-authored the opening chapters of the Big Book:
Nan Robertson reported:
And Bill wrote:
At a memorial service for Dr. Bob, Bill Wilson actually bragged
about the pathetically low success rate of the whole A.A. program. (Bill was making
himself out to be a long-suffering hero, working tirelessly to promote Alcoholics
Anonymous.)
Bill described the early days of A.A. this way:
"Take the bait"? Only a few percent of "these drunks"
would "take the bait"?
And what percentage of those new members who took the bait actually got sober and stayed sober? Even fewer.
You can read much more about the failure rate of A.A. in the early days here:
Yes, I know all about that "other fellowship" that was the parent of Alcoholics Anonymous.
It was called The Oxford Group, and it was the creation of an evil lying deceitful Lutheran minister
named Dr. Frank Nathan Daniel Buchman who praised Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler as wonderful lads.
I wrote up a history of that cult, here:
By the way,
neither Bill Wilson,
nor Dr. Robert H. Smith, nor Clarence Snyder quit the Oxford Group in protest
when
Frank Buchman publicly thanked Heaven
for giving us Adolf Hitler.
And Bill Wilson did not quit the Oxford Group because it was "too religious".
Bill Wilson was kicked out for
failure to follow orders to quit recruiting alcoholics and building up his own private sub-cult within
the Oxford Group.
I won't say whether you actually had a "spiritual experience", whatever you think that is.
I will say that "Working the Steps" does not induce spiritual experiences, it induces mental breakdowns and
conversion to belief in a cult religion. The 12 Steps are nothing but
Dr. Frank Buchman's practices for
recruiting people and converting them into believers in his cult religion.
If you have recovered your health by not drinking alcohol and not snorting cocaine, then wonderful. Now that really
does something good for your health.
See these Bait-and-Switch tricks:
Now it is true that there are religious programs like the Catholic Calix and St. Vincent de Paul programs, and
the Protestant Evangelist Rick Warren's Christianity-based
Saddleback program, but they don't get any better
success rate than secular treatment programs.
Meaning: They get the same success rate as going it alone, and quitting without a program.
Now that is interesting. So you downplay
the agressive recruiting techniques in
the Chapter 7 recruiting manual in the Big Book?
You are also ignoring all of
Chapter 4 of the Big Book —
"We Agnostics", which declares that all atheists
and agnostics must convert to Bill Wilson's religious beliefs.
What Bill Wilson really said there is that, when recruiting, you should not waste your time
on people who will never become good A.A. members. Be efficient, and seek out better prospects:
Indeed. We aren't trying to save alcoholics here, we are trying
to get more cult members. Don't waste your time on the
ones who won't join the cult. Keep fishing, and you will find someone
desperate enough to grab, like a drowning man, at anything
you hold out.
And you will find somebody; that's how this cult succeeds in
getting new members.
And note Bill Wilson's
delusions of grandeur
showing again:
If you don't push some alcoholic into Bill's program, then
you will be denying him the "opportunity to live
and be happy."
Bill actually claimed that alcoholics couldn't possibly recover, be happy, or even live,
without his Alcoholics Anonymous program.
Nobody else in the whole world had the magic. Just Bill Wilson.
That is the standard cult characteristic of
We have THE ONLY WAY.
Your reference to spoiling a latter opportunity actually comes from Bill's rap about making amends.
Bill Wilson rationalized why A.A. members should hide the religious
nature of Alcoholics Anonymous from outsiders while doing the 9th and 10th steps:
When Bill speaks of
"a future opportunity to carry a beneficial message",
what that really means is,
"a future chance to recruit the individual who
still smarts from our injustice."
Bill was always scheming to enlarge his cult.
Again, you really haven't read much of the web site, have you? I have revealed my real name,
and my identify, many times, over many years. Here is the autobiographical information:
My birth name is Terrance Hodgins, and I live in rural Oregon, west of Portland.
The name "Orange" began as a joke. A woman who used the name of
"Apple" ran a web site called AAdeprogramming.com, and I sent some
of my original papers to her web site. I said that since she was "Apple",
I would be "Orange", so that we could make jokes about mixing Apples and Oranges.
And the name stuck. I've been using that pen name for so long that many people know me by no other name.
By the way, isn't it curious how maintaining anonymity is a spiritual virtue when A.A. members do it,
and "cowardice" when non-members do it? Nothing like hypocrisy and a double standard, is there?
You think you can sue me for defamation of character?
The last guy who threatened
that slunk away with his tail between his legs.
And defamation of whose character? Bill Wilson is dead. You cannot sue for defamation of the character of
a dead man. Besides, Bill Wilson's character is indefensible. He was a compulsive liar,
a 2-bit hustler and stock touter,
a Wall street stock manipulator,
a religious cult member,
a narcissistic buffoon,
a thief and embezzler,
a philanderer and sexual predator,
a con man and quack healer,
a fake holy man,
and
a raving nut-case
— both before and after sobriety.
Suing for defamation of his character would be some kind of an obscene joke.
And
Dr. Bob was a crazy vicious
child abuser and a thoroughly digusting man.
Dr. Bob's character is also indefensible.
How about defamation of the character of the A.A. members who foist an old pro-Nazi cult religion
from the nineteen-thirties on sick people and lie to them and tell them that the religion is a cure
for alcohol addiction that works great, when it really has a 100% failure rate above normal
spontaneous remission? Those people are guilty of fraud and quackery and self-delusion too.
And then those quack healers tell people to stop taking their doctor-prescribed medications, and cause
people to die. Their character is also indefensible.
About causing serious harm to individuals: That is the big problem that I have with Alcoholics Anonymous.
A.A. is just an old cult religion that pretends to be a cure for alcohol abuse, and it has hurt a lot
of people. It should get sued out of existence.
Again, you have some reading to do:
I never heard of that YouTube channel. Do you have a link?
I have free long distance so I am more than willing to call you. However I
will leave my phone number and since I can see you must not be employed as
you have spent alot of time breaking down a program you know lil about I
would so love to help you understand it better as I do this as a Sponsor.
I'm always open to discussions of the facts, and debates. But email works best.
Telephone debates accomplish nothing because no one else can listen in.
Vocal arguments that aren't recorded are a waste of time.
When I answer emails, thousands of people can follow the discussions.
And I'm not misinformed. I've been studying A.A. for 13 years now, which is a lot longer than your 5 years.
So I suggest that you start by reading the entire Orange Papers web site, so that you will know what
we have already discussed and established and revealed.
I know the facts, you don't. You just have a few mistaken beliefs.
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Date: Thu, January 2, 2014 7:41 pm (answered 7 January 2014) Dude u got it all wrong. Call us feeble minded alcoholic crack-pots or whatever, but if you took this much time and energy to write something that takes forever to read, then your letting it control some area of your life and it obviously has power over you. I found it quite disturbing that someone could hate a group of people to this extent, much like how Hitler hated Jews.
Hello Ben,
Dude, you got it all wrong. I do not hate A.A. members. I simply object to
a cult selling quack medicine to sick people.
That does a lot of harm, and
telling sick people not to take their medications
makes sick people get even sicker. Somebody has to talk about that.
A.A. does not work as a cure for excessive drinking. A.A. is just an
old cult religion from the nineteen-thirties — The Oxford Group.
To get the 12 Steps,
all that Bill Wilson did was write down the cult recruiting
and indoctrination practices that were used by the Oxford Group.
Of course that is not a cure for a disease.
If you think I'm spending a lot of time denouncing A.A., think about the guys
who go to one or two or three A.A. meetings a day for 10 or 20 years. Now that is nuts.
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Date: Fri, January 3, 2014 10:37 am (answered 7 January 2014) I am writing a critique of AA and have seen your information over the years. Would you be willing to speak with me or would you prefer email only. I am not in favor of promoting AA. I am in your corner Thank you William
Hello William,
Thanks for the question. I'd be happy to correspond with you.
I prefer email because then thousands of people can read the correspondence.
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Date: Sat, January 4, 2014 12:09 pm (answered 7 January 2014) Hi, I would love to discuss 12 step programs with you. im a recovering drug addict with almost 9 months clean. I have gone to meetings and currently live in a halfway house but agree with a lot of the things you say and disagree with some. Are you in recovery? Also i am open to skype, online voice chat or phone calls.
Hello Sweet,
Thanks for the question. Yes, I'm open to communication. I prefer email so that other
people can follow the conversation too, but am open to whatever.
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Date: Mon, January 6, 2014 1:17 pm (answered 7 January 2014) Hi Terry, Happy New Year to both you and your fine feathered friends ;-), whose exploits you often catalogue in your delightful photographs. Incidentally, birding and bird photography is something I've gotten into myself since deciding not to drink and drug myself to death some years ago, now.
Anyway, I was minding my own business when I stumbled over this article: I was amazed to read such a clear, rational article about drinking. I myself drink moderately now. I learned how to do it myself. It was no big deal, either. I think it's wise to use approaches that are not limited to only total abstinence which, for the hypothetical 22 year old forced into AA, are nearly impossible to attain. I also enjoyed reading the 6th paragraph which sums up what the Orange Papers have been saying for years — that AA does not work. Four days later I read the letters to the editor about this story (below). The letters are fascinating, particularly one from a retired criminal justice professor by the name of Daniel Hood. Hope you and your readers find this interesting:
Your friend,
Hello Bill,
Thanks for the links. Now that is interesting. I recognize the name Gabriella Glaser. She has written some
books about recovery. I quite agree with what she wrote here.
I think I found just one error in the article:
"Bankole Johnson, an alcohol researcher and consultant to pharmaceutical companies who is also the chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Maryland School of Medicine..."
The information about Naltrexone is good. I have high hopes for that.
I wanted to post a comment, but the comments were already closed.
I wanted to say that
I saw that nobody mentioned the Rand Corporation study.
Many years ago, way back in 1978, the famous government think tank,
the Rand Corporation, found
that the successful people who had stopped drinking self-destructively
were evenly split between total abstinence and tapering off into
moderate, controlled, drinking. So total abstinence is not the only way.
It all depends on the individual person. Of course, the A.A. true believers flipped out when
the Rand Corporation released that report, and screamed that it was irresponsible to
release such information, and the Rand Corporation was "giving alcoholics an
excuse to drink". (More on that
here.)
I see that the A.A. members flipped out the same way here when Gabriella mentioned moderate drinking.
I'm reading the comments, and what a mess of hostility and anger. Talk about "having a resentment"!
The emotions are high; the facts are few.
(Try clicking on "All" of the comments; the web page defaults to showing you only the NY Times picks.)
Those A.A. members just seem to go nuts when somebody says, "But it's not
the only way to change your drinking habits."
Really. Since when was an old cult religion the only way to change our lives? Sieg Heil! and all of that.
"Dave of Portland" (my own home town!) complained:
Oh yes, recommending anything but the A.A. way is "misguided".
And as usual, "Lee from MN" just had to mention Audrey Kishline, the former leader of Moderation Management.
And like the Steppers always do, he neglected to mention that Audrey quit MM and returned to A.A., and after
3 months of A.A. meetings drove drunk and killed two people.
They always try to claim that Audrey proves that MM does not work, not that A.A. does not work.
And of course numerous A.A. supporters made great claims for the A.A. success rate, backed up by no evidence, of
course. Not a single valid medical test or controlled study or poll or survey.
They just constantly bandy about the word "millions". That is the cheap
propaganda trick of Appeal to Numbers.
And all of the token atheists are interesting too. For an organization that claims that
it is not a religion, they sure do talk about God and atheism a lot:
Now "KM from Philadelphia" had a different perspective:
Well, I won't bet my money on A.A., but
he is right about A.A. being a community, a culture, an identity, a lifestyle, a ritual, and a world view.
It's also a cult religion that becomes your new family.
Now that leads to the question of whether cult religion is a cure for addictions.
Well, it has never worked so far.
Synanon,
Rev. Jim Jones' People's Temple,
and A.A.,
all were cult religions that pretended to have a cure for drug addiction and alcohol
abuse, and they all failed to produce good results.
"Karen of Montreal" made one of the most intelligent and reasonable comments. I notice that she
is also a recovery professional who works to get good results. She is not just a cult member who
says that if the religion doesn't work for you, it is because you are bad:
When I work with people who are concerned about their substance use (or people close to them have expressed concern), I find a two step approach very helpful. If the person is more motivated to moderate their consumption, I suggest a trial of that. We make the plans, do the trouble-shooting, look at the thoughts that lead to over-consumption, itemize consequences of use and set goals. The person makes a real effort to make reduced consumption work, usually over many months, with as much honesty as possible, so that trouble spots can be identified and dealt with.
But from the beginning, this is framed as an experiment, with outcome unknown. If the person cannot successfully and quite consistently moderate their substance use, then we both know; abstinence becomes the goal, with the multiple possible paths to that goal.
There are no other physical or mental health problems where only one approach ever works. Why would we assume that to be the case for alcohol abuse, or any other substance abuse problem or compulsive behaviour?
I agree with Gabriella Glaser's summary: Moderation isn't for everybody. Like the Rand Corporation found, half of the
recovered alcoholics succeeded by moderation, and half by total abstinence.
I learned the hard way that I'm one of those who has to totally abstain. But that's okay. I feel like
I already drank my lifetime quota.
And you know what? That makes me
a "real alcoholic" by the A.A. definition.
But then when I say that I quit drinking without A.A. or any cult religion nonsense,
they say that proves that I'm not "a real alcoholic".
First I am a real alcoholic, and then I'm not.
Apparently, the only sober real alcoholics in the world are to be found in the A.A. meeting rooms.
(NOT!)
Lastly, yes, bird and nature photography is a lot of fun, isn't it? Beats the hell out of drinking yourself sick.
Have a good day now.
== Orange
Last updated 13 January 2014. |
