Hello All,

In a long post (Re: Alcoholics Anonymous challenged to take part in an
open debate, 11/21/2007) Gill accused me,

"You cut/paste and write out of context, what, should I believe your crap?"

Aside from having no clue what he is talking about because I had cut
_nothing_ from the thread, here is the report from the New York World
Telegram on an interview with Frank B, Bill Wilson's and Dr. Bob's
spiritual leader.

Nothing has been cut out which is probably just as well because it
sounds even worse in its entirety.

I am awaiting further silly response from Gill to distract from the
issues at hand.
__________________________________________________

Frank Buchman's New York World Telegram Interview

HITLER OR ANY FASCIST LEADER CONTROLLED BY GOD
COULD CURE ALL ILLS OF WORLD, BUCHMAN BELIEVES

By William A. H. Birnie,
World-Telegram Staff Writer

To Dr Frank Nathan Daniel Buchman, vigorous, outspoken,
58-year-old leader of the revivalist Oxford Group, the Fascist
dictatorships of Europe suggest infinite possibilities for remaking the
world and putting it under "God Control".
"I thank Heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler, who built a
front line of defense against the anti-Christ of Communism, " he said
today in his book-lined office in the annexe of Calvary Church, Fourth
Ave and 21st St.
"My barber in London told me Hitler saved Europe from
Communism. That's how he felt. Of course, I don't condone everything the
Nazis do. Anti-Semitism? Bad, naturally. I suppose Hitler sees a Karl
Marx in every Jew.
"But think what it would mean to the world if Hitler
surrendered to the control of God. Or Mussolini. Or any dictator.
Through such a man God could control a nation overnight and solve every
last, bewildering problem."
Dr Buchman, who is directing an Oxford house-party tonight at
the Lenox, Mass. estate of Mrs Harriet Pullman Schermerhorn, returned
from Europe aboard the Queen Mary, after attending Oxford meetings in
England and the Olympic Games in Berlin.
A small, portly man, who doesn't smoke or drink and listens
quietly to "God's plans" for a half hour or so every day, usually before
breakfast, Dr Buchman talked easily about world affairs while eight or
nine Oxfordites -- good-looking young fellows in tweeds -- sat on the
floor and listened.
"The world needs the dictatorship of the living spirit of
God," he said and smiled, adjusting his rimless glasses and smoothing
the graying hair on the back of his head. "I like to put it this way.
God is a perpetual broadcasting station and all you need to do is tune
in. What we need is a supernatural network of live wires across the
world to every last man, in every last place, in every last situation...
"The world won't listen to God but God has a plan for every
person, for every nation. Human ingenuity is not enough. That is why the
isms are pitted against each other and blood falls.
"Spain has taught us what godless Communism will bring. Who
would have dreamed that nuns would be running naked in the streets?
Human problems aren't economic. They're moral and they can't be solved
by immoral measures. They could be solved within a God-controlled
democracy, or perhaps I should say a theocracy, and they could be solved
through a God-controlled Fascist dictatorship."
He looked around the room at the eight or nine young men
drinking in his words, and straightened the crimson rose in his button hole.
"Suppose we here were all God-controlled and we became the
Cabinet," he said. "You" -- pointing at the reporter, who seldom
ventures off the pavements of Manhattan -- "You would take over
agriculture. You" -- a Princeton graduate beamed -- "would be Mr Hull.
Eric here, who has been playing around with a prominent Canadian who's
Cabinet is material1, would be something else, and this young lawyer
would run the Post Office.
"Then in a God-controlled nation, capital and labour would
discuss their problems peacefully and reach God-controlled solutions.
Yes, business would be owned by individuals, not by the State, but the
owners would be God-controlled."
The Oxford Group has no official membership lists, no
centralised organisation, but Dr Buchman estimated that "literally
millions" listened in to his recent world broadcast from the meeting in
England attended by 15,000 persons. Finances?
"God runs them," he smiled. "Don't you say every day, Give us
this day our daily bread? And don't you receive?"
The group is built on the simple thesis that there is a
divine plan for the world and that human beings, with faith and
devotion, can receive God-given guidance in a "quiet time" of communion.
Most Oxfordites write down their guidance and then check it against the
"four absolutes" -- absolute honesty, absolute purity, absolute
unselfishness, absolute love.
"Those are Christ's standards," Dr Buchman explained. "We
believe that human nature itself can be changed by them. We believe in
answering revolution by more revolution -- but revolution within the
individual, and through the individual, revolution in the nation, and,
through the nation, revolution in the world. It's as simple as that --
Christian simplicity. And it's fun, too. We call each other by our first
names and our meetings are always informal.
"I held meetings at the Republican and Democratic
conventions. What Washington needs is God-control. Landon talks about
divine guidance. Why doesn't he apply it? And the finest thing Roosevelt
ever said was this -- 'I doubt if there exists any problem, political or
economic, which would not melt before the fire of spiritual awakening'.
"Oxford is not a one-way ticket to heaven, although that's a
splendid thing and lots of people need it. It's a national ticket, too.
That's the ticket we should vote in this coming election -- God's ticket."
Dr Buchman is unmarried, a graduate of Muhlenberg College,
which awarded him a doctorate of divinity in 1926. He said he was
"changed" -- Oxfordites use the word to mean complete surrender to God
control -- by a gradual process.
"I was in England and I began to realise I was a sinner and
there was an abyss between Christ and me," he said. "I was resenting my
lost power and I was confessing others' sins when the real problem was
mine. Then I went to church.
"A vision of the Cross. Of Christ on the Cross. An actual
vision. I was changed then, but I've been changing ever since. A little
even today, I suppose."
"And when was the vision, Dr Buchman?"
"Let's see," he said, and rustled some pamphlets in his hand.
"Let's see -- what year was the vision?"
He looked around at the faces turned toward him. "What year
was the vision?" he repeated. One of the young men spoke up. "1908,
wasn't it, Dr Buchman?"
Dr Buchman smiled at him.
"Of course," he said. "That was it. 1908."

Ken wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> In a long post (Re: Alcoholics Anonymous challenged to take part in an
> open debate, 11/21/2007) Gill accused me,
>
> "You cut/paste and write out of context, what, should I believe your crap?"
>
> Aside from having no clue what he is talking about because I had cut
> _nothing_ from the thread, here is the report from the New York World
> Telegram on an interview with Frank B, Bill Wilson's and Dr. Bob's
> spiritual leader.

Wasn't talking about the thread you
dork, I was talking about your so
called book.

>
> Nothing has been cut out which is probably just as well because it
> sounds even worse in its entirety.
>
> I am awaiting further silly response from Gill to distract from the
> issues at hand.

What issue? That you have and
underlying motive to attack AA?
Let's see, you failed yourself
trying AA. You and a bunch of other
book sellers don't want the court
system to send people to AA, and
some of these book writers just
happen to have another way for
alcoholics to get sober, right? Oh,
and all of the recovery hospitals
and homes need to stop this
spreading of Fascist followers and
murderers. Wow, this sounds like a
job for Homeland Security!
Thanks for exposing this evil
organization.
Sorry for the silly response, it's
just that your so silly.

Enough from me.........Troll on

GILL wrote:
> Ken wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> In a long post (Re: Alcoholics Anonymous challenged to take part in an
>> open debate, 11/21/2007) Gill accused me,
>>
>> "You cut/paste and write out of context, what, should I believe your
>> crap?"
>>
>> Aside from having no clue what he is talking about because I had cut
>> _nothing_ from the thread, here is the report from the New York World
>> Telegram on an interview with Frank B, Bill Wilson's and Dr. Bob's
>> spiritual leader.
>
> Wasn't talking about the thread you dork, I was talking about your so
> called book.
>

Gill,

So then I was correct that you didn't read it.

>>
>> Nothing has been cut out which is probably just as well because it
>> sounds even worse in its entirety.
>>
>> I am awaiting further silly response from Gill to distract from the
>> issues at hand.
>
> What issue? That you have and underlying motive to attack AA?

Telling the truth about AA is attacking AA? That is a very, very sad
defense but probably the best one you have.

> Let's see, you failed yourself trying AA.

I failed? Wasn't AA supposed to help me stop drinking? How bizarre to
accuse those who resolve drinking problems far, far better without A.A.
of "failing A.A." Can you not see a serious problem with your thinking?

Would you also argue that someone who doesn't get over pneumonia with
penicillin but does much, much better with another antibiotic has
"failed penicillin"?

Unlike you, I'm trying to stay away from name-calling but there are a
few words that come to mind.

> You and a bunch of other book
> sellers don't want the court system to send people to AA,

What about the U.S. Circuit Courts that have made the rulings and the
U.S. Supreme Court which has chosen _not_ to challenge the Circuit
Courts' ruling that coercion into A.A. is illegal?

> and some of
> these book writers just happen to have another way for alcoholics to get
> sober, right?

Well, if you are going to call almost any way except AA, then I suppose
I have "another way."

> Oh, and all of the recovery hospitals and homes need to
> stop this spreading of Fascist followers and murderers.

Hey, it isn't my fault that you are a follower of Frank B's so-called
"spiritual principles" sanitized to deceive the public. Nor is it my
fault that so many people die "waiting for the miracle" because they
have been convinced by the Steppers they are Powerless.

> Wow, this sounds
> like a job for Homeland Security!
> Thanks for exposing this evil organization.
> Sorry for the silly response, it's just that your so silly.

Actually, you are acting in a very, very predictable fashion. You might
want to take a look at an article title "Cult Busting" about how cult
members act when their cult is criticized at:
http://www.morerevealed.com/articles/cult_busting.jsp

> Enough from me.........Troll on

Is only speaking with reverence of the codification of Oxford Group
spiritual principles, the Twelve Steps not trolling here? Is one only
allowed to speak of the resolution of drinking problems through the
adopting neo-Buchmanistic religion?

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

Ken wrote:
> GILL wrote:
>> Ken wrote:
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> In a long post (Re: Alcoholics Anonymous challenged to take part in
>>> an open debate, 11/21/2007) Gill accused me,
>>>
>>> "You cut/paste and write out of context, what, should I believe your
>>> crap?"
>>>
>>> Aside from having no clue what he is talking about because I had cut
>>> _nothing_ from the thread, here is the report from the New York World
>>> Telegram on an interview with Frank B, Bill Wilson's and Dr. Bob's
>>> spiritual leader.
>>
>> Wasn't talking about the thread you dork, I was talking about your so
>> called book.
>>
>
> Gill,
>
> So then I was correct that you didn't read it.
>
>>>
>>> Nothing has been cut out which is probably just as well because it
>>> sounds even worse in its entirety.
>>>
>>> I am awaiting further silly response from Gill to distract from the
>>> issues at hand.
>>
>> What issue? That you have and underlying motive to attack AA?
>
> Telling the truth about AA is attacking AA? That is a very, very sad
> defense but probably the best one you have
You call pulling things out of
history that have absolutely no
relevance to AA truth?
Why don't you point out anything in
the book Alcoholics Anonymous
that is causing all these murders
and antisemitism you referred to.
>
>> Let's see, you failed yourself trying AA.
>
> I failed? Wasn't AA supposed to help me stop drinking? How bizarre to
> accuse those who resolve drinking problems far, far better without A.A.
> of "failing A.A." Can you not see a serious problem with your thinking?
Oh, so your sober?
So in a newsgroup that on topic
discussion should be RECOVERY from
drugs and or alcohol you insist on
bashing some of the members
organized methods of support?
That's a definition of a TROLL.
>
> Would you also argue that someone who doesn't get over pneumonia with
> penicillin but does much, much better with another antibiotic has
> "failed penicillin"?
>
> Unlike you, I'm trying to stay away from name-calling but there are a
> few words that come to mind.
>
>> You and a bunch of other book sellers don't want the court system to
>> send people to AA,
>
> What about the U.S. Circuit Courts that have made the rulings and the
> U.S. Supreme Court which has chosen _not_ to challenge the Circuit
> Courts' ruling that coercion into A.A. is illegal?
What about it? Do you think AA
WANTED all the court cards in AA? I
guess the Judges can send them to
some of your buddies to get their
cards signed. Or you can visit them
in jail to listen to how they were
framed.
>
>> and some of these book writers just happen to have another way for
>> alcoholics to get sober, right?
>
> Well, if you are going to call almost any way except AA, then I suppose
> I have "another way."
So you really have no other way, is
that your message here? Oh yeah,
"Look out, the murdering AAs are
coming after the jews!"
>
>> Oh, and all of the recovery hospitals and homes need to stop this
>> spreading of Fascist followers and murderers.
>
> Hey, it isn't my fault that you are a follower of Frank B's so-called
> "spiritual principles" sanitized to deceive the public. Nor is it my
> fault that so many people die "waiting for the miracle" because they
> have been convinced by the Steppers they are Powerless.
It's our little
secret.......shhhhhhhh... we eat
the weaker ones.
>
>> Wow, this sounds like a job for Homeland Security!
>> Thanks for exposing this evil organization.
>> Sorry for the silly response, it's just that your so silly.
>
> Actually, you are acting in a very, very predictable fashion. You might
> want to take a look at an article title "Cult Busting" about how cult
> members act when their cult is criticized at:
> http://www.morerevealed.com/articles/cult_busting.jsp
Hey you resemble some kooky
conspiracy theorists. You may want
to check your actions here: >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory


>
>> Enough from me.........Troll on
>
> Is only speaking with reverence of the codification of Oxford Group
> spiritual principles, the Twelve Steps not trolling here? Is one only
> allowed to speak of the resolution of drinking problems through the
> adopting neo-Buchmanistic religion?
You haven't done so one iota.

Jesus fucking Christ! I did a bit o
Googling and found wacko Ken on a
Kent State mail server dating at
least to 1996, and his babbling
conspiracy rants are still almost
word for word the same.
http://listserv.kent.edu/
What a waste!
Of my time. LOL

GILL wrote:
> Ken wrote:
>> GILL wrote:
>>> Ken wrote:
>>>> Hello All,
>>>>
>>>> In a long post (Re: Alcoholics Anonymous challenged to take part in
>>>> an open debate, 11/21/2007) Gill accused me,
>>>>
>>>> "You cut/paste and write out of context, what, should I believe your
>>>> crap?"
>>>>
>>>> Aside from having no clue what he is talking about because I had cut
>>>> _nothing_ from the thread, here is the report from the New York
>>>> World Telegram on an interview with Frank B, Bill Wilson's and Dr.
>>>> Bob's spiritual leader.
>>>
>>> Wasn't talking about the thread you dork, I was talking about your so
>>> called book.
>>>
>>
>> Gill,
>>
>> So then I was correct that you didn't read it.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Nothing has been cut out which is probably just as well because it
>>>> sounds even worse in its entirety.
>>>>
>>>> I am awaiting further silly response from Gill to distract from the
>>>> issues at hand.
>>>
>>> What issue? That you have and underlying motive to attack AA?
>>
>> Telling the truth about AA is attacking AA? That is a very, very sad
>> defense but probably the best one you have
> You call pulling things out of history that have absolutely no relevance
> to AA truth?

Gill,

Do you really think that Bill Wilson and Dr. Bob's spiritual leader, the
Frank B. who came up with A.A.'s "spiritual principles" and who
essentially came up with the entire A.A. "program" was a total nutcase
is irrelevant to "AA truth"? I'm afraid that is the AA truth.

I think your displays of anger and frustration at criticism of your cult
are very revealing of the "AA truth."

> Why don't you point out anything in the book Alcoholics Anonymous that
> is causing all these murders and antisemitism you referred to.

Who said the Big Book "is causing all these murders and antisemitism"?
Most certainly, it is responsible, along with the local gurus, of
pushing a lot of people off into despair and suicide with their
Powerless crap, morbid introspection and waiting for divine
intervention, but "murders and antisemitism" is your attempt to create a
straw man.

However, keep it up and as time allows, I'll post some choice excerpts
from the official A.A. literature. :-)

>>> Let's see, you failed yourself trying AA.
>>
>> I failed? Wasn't AA supposed to help me stop drinking? How bizarre
>> to accuse those who resolve drinking problems far, far better without
>> A.A. of "failing A.A." Can you not see a serious problem with your
>> thinking?
> Oh, so your sober?

It depends what you mean by "sober." Most certainly I am not drunk.
However, "sober" in A.A. means much, much more than the Standard English
"not drunk." It means totally abstinent and "working a program of
recovery." Otherwise, one is on a "dry drunk."

I actually had three beers this month, the first drinks I have had this
time of year in a long time. While on a semi-vacation I had one with
dinner, and one on two other occasions after dinner with a family member
so I am "not sober" in Programese, the language of non-thought. But I am
most certainly doing absolutely fine except that I average _so_ far less
than the drink a day for health purposes or however much it is
considered to be now that if I wasn't critical of A.A., I would probably
be counted as a successful abstainer by a 12-Step "treatment" center.

> So in a newsgroup that on topic discussion should be RECOVERY from drugs
> and or alcohol you insist on bashing some of the members organized
> methods of support? That's a definition of a TROLL.

Here again you are using the "loaded language" typical of cults of all
types. You say the word "RECOVERY" (in all caps no less) and yet it is
unlikely any of the A.A.ers here have "recovered" unless purely by
accident. They are all just one drink away from suicidal drunks, aren't
they? They _never_ get well, do they?

Also, you refer to A.A. as "organized methods of support." What other
supposed "support groups" except for the 12-Step ones tell people that
normal human emotions are disease symptoms, separate members from the
rest of humanity ("earth people" or "normies" and "alcoholics" or
"addicts"), and tell people if they leave they will die? That is not
support. That is manipulation and control.

>>
>> Would you also argue that someone who doesn't get over pneumonia with
>> penicillin but does much, much better with another antibiotic has
>> "failed penicillin"?
>>
>> Unlike you, I'm trying to stay away from name-calling but there are a
>> few words that come to mind.
>>
>>> You and a bunch of other book sellers don't want the court system to
>>> send people to AA,
>>
>> What about the U.S. Circuit Courts that have made the rulings and the
>> U.S. Supreme Court which has chosen _not_ to challenge the Circuit
>> Courts' ruling that coercion into A.A. is illegal?
> What about it? Do you think AA WANTED all the court cards in AA?

Read this pamphlet from A.A. G.S.O.
A.A. Guidelines: Cooperating with Court D.W.I. and Similar Programs
http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org/...pwithcourt.pdf
explaining to A.A.s how to get the courts to coerce people to A.A. and
explain to me why A.A. is actively seeking coercees (and in
contradiction to the First Amendment) if they don't want court cards and
other forms of coercion from the courts.

> I guess
> the Judges can send them to some of your buddies to get their cards
> signed. Or you can visit them in jail to listen to how they were framed.

Who is talking about framed? In this country, it doesn't matter if
someone was framed or not. No one in this country is supposed to be
coerced into _any_ religious group. That is something that at one time
I though was long left behind with the Renaissance.

>>
>>> and some of these book writers just happen to have another way for
>>> alcoholics to get sober, right?
>>
>> Well, if you are going to call almost any way except AA, then I
>> suppose I have "another way."
> So you really have no other way, is that your message here? Oh yeah,
> "Look out, the murdering AAs are coming after the jews!"

Actually, I can give you a list of many other ways that work far better
than A.A. and will do so upon request since it isn't handy. However,
since _nothing_ works far better than A.A., I'm not sure why you think
it is necessary.

>>
>>> Oh, and all of the recovery hospitals and homes need to stop this
>>> spreading of Fascist followers and murderers.
>>
>> Hey, it isn't my fault that you are a follower of Frank B's so-called
>> "spiritual principles" sanitized to deceive the public. Nor is it my
>> fault that so many people die "waiting for the miracle" because they
>> have been convinced by the Steppers they are Powerless.
> It's our little secret.......shhhhhhhh... we eat the weaker ones.

Well, that is a rather "cute" way of saying what I heard many times at
meetings. When a member was pushed off into suicide or suicidal drinking
someone would always announce, "Some must die so others can live."

>>
>>> Wow, this sounds like a job for Homeland Security!
>>> Thanks for exposing this evil organization.
>>> Sorry for the silly response, it's just that your so silly.
>>
>> Actually, you are acting in a very, very predictable fashion. You
>> might want to take a look at an article title "Cult Busting" about how
>> cult members act when their cult is criticized at:
>> http://www.morerevealed.com/articles/cult_busting.jsp
> Hey you resemble some kooky conspiracy theorists. You may want to check
> your actions here: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

Here you go again. Ozone to Gill. Ozone to Gill.
So you think A.A. isn't a religious cult that does more harm than good.
So what. No cult member doesn't believe the same about their own cult.

>>
>>> Enough from me.........Troll on
>>
>> Is only speaking with reverence of the codification of Oxford Group
>> spiritual principles, the Twelve Steps not trolling here? Is one only
>> allowed to speak of the resolution of drinking problems through the
>> adopting neo-Buchmanistic religion?
> You haven't done so one iota.

Nonsense. I have criticized the Oxford Group/12-Step "spiritual
principles" that use people being in trouble as leverage for conversion
to their religion quite a bit.

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

GILL wrote:
> Jesus fucking Christ! I did a bit o Googling and found wacko Ken on a
> Kent State mail server dating at least to 1996, and his babbling
> conspiracy rants are still almost word for word the same.
> http://listserv.kent.edu/
> What a waste!
> Of my time. LOL

Gill,

Yep, my "conspiracy rants" as you call it (citing the official A.A. and
scientific literature) is still the same. Strange how repetitive
telling the simple truth can be, isn't it?

Here is a rant for you from the Journal of Abnormal Psychology which was
posted just today on addict-l by someone else. This is one of the many
papers I used as reference in More Revealed: A Critical Analysis of
Alcoholics Anonymous and the Twelve Steps aka The Real AA: Behind the
Myth of Twelve Step Recovery.

Loss of control drinking in alcoholics: an experimental analogue.
http://www.garfield.library.upenn.ed...AFW2300001.pdf

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

Ken wrote:
more nonsense

GILL wrote:
> Ken wrote:
> more nonsense

Gill,

Just for you:

Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path.
Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely
give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are
constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are
such unfortunates. They are not at fault; they seem to have been born
that way. They are naturally incapable of grasping and developing a
manner of living which demands rigorous honesty. Their chances are less
than average.

There are those, too, who suffer from grave emotional and mental
disorders, but many of them do recover if they have the capacity to be
honest.

Our stories disclose in a general way what we used to be like, what
happened, and what we are like now. If you have decided you want what we
have and are willing to go to any length to get it -- then you are ready
to take certain steps.

At some of these we balked. thought we could find an easier, softer way.
But we could not. With all the earnestness at our command, we beg of you
to be fearless and thorough from the very start. Some of us have tried
to hold on to our old ideas and the result was nil until we let go
absolutely.

Remember that we deal with alcohol, cunning, baffling, powerful! Without
help it is too much for us. But there is One who has all power that One
is God. May you find Him now!

Half measures availed us nothing. We stood at the turning point. we
asked His protection and care with complete abandon.

Here are the steps we took, which are suggested as a program of recovery:

.. . .

Our description of the alcoholic, the chapter to the agnostic, and our
personal adventure before and after make clear three pertinent ideas:
(a) That we were alcoholic and could not manage our own lives.
(b) That probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism.
(c) That God could and would if He were sought.

Being convinced, we were at Step Three, which is that we decided to turn
our will and our life over to God as we understood Him. Just what do we
mean by that, and just what do we do?