I've been in a cult, so I know what it's like to deliberately avoid seeing information. I also know what it's like when "the light goes on" and you realise that you have been tricked. For me it was very sudden; I can remember to this day exactly when and how it happened.

Of course I'm not saying that there haven't been needless fights on this forum. No one is perfect. But I've read some of the posts on the new forum and I prefer this one any day. The new forum is classic cult, I'm sorry to say. Anyone who has been in any cult would recognise it.

To give just one example, read the posts about someone breaking the "psychic contract" with his or her father. You may see this as something specific to Concept:Synergy. As an ex-member of a Bible cult, I remember all too well how we were urged to cut off contact with relatives and friends who opposed our involvement.

As far as I'm concerned, the link can stay. The same caveat applies here as to Dictionary's site: IP numbers could be tracked. One can add some protection by copying the URL, logging off your ISP, logging back on again and then pasting the URL in the browser. That way the logs won't show that you went to that site from here.

Since you knew that the link you posted would be controversial, I feel it would have been more respectful had you asked us first, as I recently mentioned to Dictionary.

I noticed that CosmicFool is criticized on that board for paranoia. If that were true, your link would have been deleted.

As for "true believers" leaving this board, whatever. They can stay or go. It does make more sense for a believer to participate on that board. This board was set up as a critique of Lazaris and C:S. True believers can post all they want, but it is going against the grain. One would expect a Democrat to run into more disagreements on a Republican message board than on a Democrat board, wouldn't one? Does that make Republicans paranoid?

Actually, I don't have a problem with breaking psychic contracts. I do think we have them and they are harmful. Breaking a psychic contract does not necessarily mean breaking ties with one's family.

I do see evidence of cult thinking on the part of the person who, after declaring us paranoid, questions his or her own sanity because Lazaris' advice was bogus. There are a few posts in that thread where people insist on taking on Lazaris' responsibility and rationalizing the Orb's BS.

They've pulled out the old "non-interference" excuse. Doesn't work. C:S claims that Lazaris suggested bringing Michaell on board. Shortly thereafter, Jach and Peny were divorced (so we're told) and Michaell and Peny are married. Also, if Lazaris believes in non-interference, he would not have built up Peny as a grand, shining magician - he would have left it to us to discern.

You can't advertise your Lazaris propaganda board on our site.

Ted is much more tolerant than I. If you don't know enough to ask before taking liberties with me, here is your notice.

Do your own work, promote your own site.

Lava and Peas,

Katie

You wrote:

quote:

---

I hope this address isn't removed as I think that this site will be one of balance and perspective

---

This indicates that you weren't sure if we would approve. But, as usual, you decided what was appropriate. You can do that on your board, not on ours.

Katie pointed out to me that we did a lot of work to promote this site. We decided to let you do your own work to promote your site.

Do the owners of this site identify themselves anywhere? The domain is owned by a couple who posted on this board a few months ago, but didn't like how it was run. Unlike most who don't like this site, they had the where-with-all to create their own.

I notice at the top, they say it is not a place for fanaticism. They say what kind of people the board is for. But, for some reason, we are depicted as paranoid because we challenge people who come here to disrupt the purpose of this board. What will happen when someone writes a fanatical post on that board? Will it be peace, love and good vibrations, or will the post be deleted or challenged?

Meanwhile, tell the person who was seeking permission from her father to break the psychic contract that she doesn't need permission. I think even the Grand Orb said that.

Cheers, Ted

You wrote:

quote:

---

Did you suddenly see the error of your reasonable ways?

---

Yes, as a matter of fact, I did. You have used this site for your personal agenda long enough. How did you know about the new site? From the shmoozing you did here, perchance?

Your concept of reasonableness seems to mean that we should pay for this site and it's promotion so that anyone with a contrary agenda doesn't have to. You're still trying to define the terms of this site. There's only one way to define the terms - start your own site. Will you be dictating to those folks how to run their site as well? They tried it with us. Then they did the reasonable thing - they started their own.

How many of the folks on that board came from your personal networking on this site?

I also find it amazing how you have discerned the safety of that board in two days. I guess it'll be "safe" until the first fanatic joins.

Cheers, Ted

I've come to the conclusion that the overall tone of the Lazaris advice given during MAGIC TIME question/answer sessions has been anti-family with the emphasis on breaking, rather than healing, family relationships. I think I would be much harder pressed to come up with this conclusion just by listening to the classic Lazaris discussions as taught on the cassette tapes or given outside of "magic time".

I think the world would be a hell of a lot better place if we used the challenges presented by our family relationship as the target of our metaphysics instead of trying to program for something like a fancy new car.

I know that others have said that Peny claimed she was adamantly anti-family. Should we be surprised that Lazaris had somewhat similar views? I really think this is the coward's way out of a difficult relationship. While you state that making mistakes in severing relationships can be a profound avenue of learning, isn't it more elegant to use the challenges of relationship as the "grist in the mill" used to help one grow spiritually?

I think the "cult" aspects of the Lazarians is very difficult to see or grok at first. Admittedly, things haven't degenerated to the point yet of Lazarians starting to have their own physical communities and compounds. I know Lazaris has made fun of a fellow channel and (more popular) author Elizabeth Claire Profit. They actually at one time maintained a weapon stocked compound in Montana. They may still have the weapons, but I can't say for sure. I once attended a seminar given by her at a New York City health expo. The true followers in the audience appeared to be more the type of people you would find at a typical church. They certainly did not seem to be stereotypical cult "moonie" type members or even new agers.

I think most long term Lazaris followers admit to a decline in the quality of the material. The actions of the C:S crew and the decline in Peny from the original early Lazaris years give a hint as to the direction things are going.

I view the real damage of any such organization is evident when the followers start having that glassy eyed appearance whenever they are talking about something using the spin and lingo of the group. At that point, they seem to stop thinking and feeling for themselves. They are on spiritual auto-pilot. They become so vulnerable. Without question, I have noticed such behavior with some, but by no means all, Lazarians.

Cheers, Craig

You say: Those who are friends of Lazaris who are now reading this and lurking, do yourselves a favor and leave.

I feel you are insulting the lurkers you are giving advice to. You imply that they have lost any ability to discern for themselves. They are not only grown-ups, but they should have a firm enough spiritual, emotional and psychological base from the Lazaris material to be able to consider facts and opinions that are contrary to their worldview. I think that some may view this site as a challenge to their own thinking that they can use to assure themselves of validity of their own views. They should come out stronger as a result of going through this process. If, on the other hand, they change their minds, isn't it better to happen sooner rather than later?

In any case, I think it is their decision, not yours, to stay or leave.

You say: Others should do what they can to repair what remains IF it is in their own psychological and spiritual best interests.

My question is how do we really know if it is in their best interest? Do we rely on what Lazaris says? Well, he has shown that he is fallible. Do we rely on someone such as yourself or another healer? I'm sure you'll admit you are also fallible.

If there is blatant and obvious risk of physical, emotional, or spiritual damage, I think any spiritual mature person would reach their own conclusion to withdraw. I think that is precisely the time they would really start to apply their metaphysics behind the scenes. But, I think it is their decision. I believe that once someone has reached a certain level of spiritual maturity, it does them a disservice to tell them what to do.

Go in peace.

Good post I guess lurkers are the proletariat that need to be saved by the more wise and fortunate bourgeoisie.

I agree that having one's beliefs and opinions challenged can can lead to a strengthening of same. I think it was Ben Franklin who said, "An unexamined life is a life not worth living" - or something along those lines. I would say, "An unexamined opinion is one not worth having".

quote:

---

Of course, it turned into a battle of wills.

---

A battle of your making, once again. Our will on this issue has been clearly stated.
Ted and I are hosts here, we don't invite anyone to impose their will on us. We have been more than clear about that.

Katie

please post this url here as frequently as you can, hopefully, I'll migrate before they delete it yet again ETC.

I'm still wondering why they haven't removed my email address from vicki's post to me in "The Green Mile" thread. I can only assume they think the 'bizzarus' coming at me is to their advantage.

I find it interesting that mine is a non-threatening email address....after all, I do promote SALLY!

Tim

Can't you help yourself?

Stop being "packaged" "COMPARTMENTALIZED" BORING

Tim Mouse

PS: to my knowledge and FYI the J&L Forum doesn't promote/encourage freedom of speech -- the boundaries shouldn't be battled, merely respected by the publishers....HELL, I'd think you'd all be glad when "somewhere else" engages me.

Email me, I have an engagement for you.

katie@cosmicfool.com

Thanks,

why not just post the URL and I'll be out of your hair....then if need be, you can get into mine on the other site, if you desire.

Lazaris once told this metaphorous story of the 'bridge'...I understand it more and more all the time. One thing I understand is that we each cross it alone, and we each cross our own bridge. What pisses me off is that Lazaris never said we should sometimes burn it behind ourselves.

Once again, I'll say I'm sad that you don't remember me AND I'll add I'm sad that you don't understand and seem to have no interest.

I expected more openness and honoring of freedom of speech and allowing people to make their own choice in whether they wished to go the the site that Dreamspring was talking about.

I would appreciate having the site posted.
Thank you for your consideration. If you choose not to post it here, would you please email me that site.

I am surprised that in the name of freedom of speech you would remove the link that Chris was speaking about.
As Craig mentioned, people can make their own decisions about CosmicFool, so why can't they make their own decisions about a link?

Thought the first one did not post.

quote:

---

I am surprised that in the name of freedom of speech you would remove the link that Chris was speaking about.

---

No, it was removed because it is a blatent abuse of the freedom of speech we do offer here and of our hospitality. The boundaries here have been clearly defined Donna. Ted and I are not interested in advertising pro-Lazaris sites.

As it happens, the "non-judgemental", "safe" site where "old arguments" are not permitted to be continued is also a "trash and judge the Cosmic Fool" site where every "old argument" which was abandoned here is raging in full glory. It's a very safe place for people to make character judgements and personal analyses of my marriage.

I have a big beef here Donna. My beef is with the numbers of people, yourself included who have paid us a visit, issued their judgements of other posters here, made their statements, and then declined to respond when challenged or questioned. It's like you are telling us that we are beneath your contempt, and that our questions are not worthy of a response from you.

This pattern has been repeated over and over here by people who are critical of "us" and this site.

It is incredibly frustrating for me to realize the number of posts I have taken the time to write to people who have come here full of opinions and judgements which have never received a response.

You have done exactly that yourself, and now somehow feel that you are owed something?

I'll make you a deal. Do a search on your name here, respond to the posts that were written to you, answer the questions asked, take responsibility for your presence here, and then Ted or I will be most happy to provide you with the ticket to your new world of safety and justice. Otherwise, I'm no more interested in fulfilling your requests than you are of mine.

Katie

It sounds like they want and need some balance added to their site. I, for one, would be happy to share my two cents on their board.

Remember guys...careful what you wish for, it may come true!

You said: ... the word "cult" brings images of the Waco compound, Heaven's Gate, and so on. But in my opinion these are only the most extreme groups.

I think you are exactly correct in your characterization. When people hear the word cult described to their group, their hair immediately stands on end as they think "no way am I one of them!".

While I personally believe that C:S has many cult-like characteristics, I feel it has yet to degenerate into a full-fledged destructive cult. However, the warning signs are definitely there that it may proceed down this path.

Caveat emptor!

I think you raise some important issues here.

quote:

---

Moving to a new site is the easy bit. Getting away from the questions that are raised on here is the hard bit. The questions won't go away just because you move to a new site.

---

We have a universal inability on the part of our Lazaris believing posters to answer questions. They cannot seem to differentiate between a question and an assault. Many of the questions posed to them are very much assaults on their BELIEF system, that I will grant. It's a sad state of affairs when a person is incapable of evaluating information from an objective place. It is very very much indicative of a controlled and numbed mind and spirit.

quote:

---

The new forum is classic cult, I'm sorry to say. Anyone who has been in any cult would recognise it.

---

And has become even moreso as of today now that the chain mail fence has been installed.
The admins have taken great care to make sure that nothing will be spoken there which might upset anyone's apple cart.

quote:

---

Apparently while the "psychic contract" was being broken, the father kept phoning and emailing. I'm not surprised. It must be an awful thing to see your child cut off contact at the request of some controversial organisation.

---

Yes, isn't this the saddest thing? Con:Sin is extremely anti-family. If you followed through that thread, the person in question has now come to a place of peace and celebration that she now gets it that her resolution of her feelings about her father have nothing whatsoever to do with having any kind of relationship with him.

I didn't not her mentioning that her father was an axe murderer, it would seem that once again, the cult think kicks in, and all contact is cut off with anyone who has a different perspective.

As a parent, I can tell you that there is absolutely no pain greater than that of a parent who is cut off from a child. It has happened to me, and I have done it to my own mother. I am happy to report though, as an aside, that since my departure from Con:Sin my relationship with my daughter has continued to improve. It isn't completely healed, but the groundwork is being laid. We had a nice time shopping for flowers for her garden yesterday.

I'm so glad to be working on my relationship with my actual daughter rather than with some conjured up etheric image of her in which I get to pretend she's agreeing to my demands about our relationship.

This is literally what is being recommended on that message board, and is a factual explanation of the Lazaris techniques for "breaking the contract of pain".

Is it really possible for an intelligent feeling being with a clear head to accept that such a technique could possibly be anything more than mental masturbation?

What happens with these kinds of techniques is that we do this "etheric" work with others, and then are literally forced to break our physical relationship with them lest we discover that the technique did not work. How else can we face up to finding out that the other person never did actually make any such agreement with us, and that our relationship has not changed except for the worst due to our acceptance of this thought that in order to get along with them we have to manipulate them in the ethers.

It's all so childish, but it isn't cute or funny, because it destroys lives and relationships.

quote:

---

There is an obvious vested interest. If you have no "support network" outside the cult, it becomes much harder to leave.

---

Right. One of the reasons for this site is to provide a "support network" which does not play by the rules of the cult.

Now we have a dilemma. Ted and I are discussing whether or not to post the link to the new cult site as requested by a few of our posters here.

On one hand, we'd love to be shot of the complainers here, let the cultists love bomb them. On the other hand, besides bristling at the sense of entitlement expressed here, as though Ted and I owe these people something, are we doing something very much unprincipled by voluntarily handing people over to yet another cult re-inforcement project?

What are your thoughts on this Pete? I know you've done a lot of thinking about cults and the ethical issues that are brought up around them.

I'm interested in the thoughts of others as well.

Katie

quote:

---

It sounds like they want and need some balance added to their site. I, for one, would be happy to share my two cents on their board.

Remember guys...careful what you wish for, it may come true!

---

So far the membership there is comprised of people who have left this board, most of whom came, dropped their load, and left before bothering to respond to any of the tougher questions and issues posed here. Among their loving posters is fingerprince,(Dolphingirl (Vicki), Crystal Clear, Chris of course, notably missing his alter-ego, and one or two others who of course have not identified themselves, but who state that they have posted or lurked here. Our questions were defined as insults and attacks. So far, the new board is running true to form.

I just wrote an email to Per and Helena expressing my thoughts about their site, and the new editing policy.

I got carried away and forgot to directly ask them whether or not they wish us to provide a link to their site. Here we are discussing it, but I realized we never asked their thoughts on the issue.

Here is the email I sent to them, I followed it up with the direct request for permission to provide their link information.

I'll let you know how or if they respond. Note in my email that I ask some challenging questions, so my mail will probably be deemed an attack.

quote:

---

Hello Per and Helena,

I note that someone posted on your site how lucky they were to have access
to both sites, yours and the Cosmic Fool.

Is everyone going to be so "lucky", or only those who meet your arbitrary
standards of posting?

I find your editing of your message board to be nothing more than the kind
of controlled behavior that is so indicative of cults.

It is so interesting to me that you had no problem posting or hosting posts
which break your own rules, not until they were responded to did you take
action.

Are you going to edit out every opinion you disagree with by deeming it to
be argumentative?

Are you going to remove every question that is asked of you which challenges
your belief system?

That is the Forum all over again. It's so interesting to me that you
accuse me of being like Peny, but you are the ones who are acting like Peny
by creating a complete control system over what is said and by whom on your
site.

I hope you will both give some very close attention to the cult awareness
sites which are profligate on the internet. You are in a cult, and your
site is conforming to a cult model also.

Here is a brief method by which to evaluate a group as a cult. It is
called the BITE method.

It is control over: Beliefs, Information, Thoughts, and Emotions. Think
about how your editing tactics might conform to that model.

You have already edited out questions which challenge YOUR beliefs,
declared thoughts expressed by me and others to be unacceptable,
and defined which emotions are appropriate and which are not. Do you really
believe that you can continue to fully enforce such controls? What is your
issue with anger, outrage, or any other strong emotions? Do you really
believe it is a healthy or helpful thing to judge against and try to control
such emotions? Or will you selectively decide who is "entitled" to their
beliefs, thoughts, and emotions, and who is not? Are you willing to publish
information which does not support your belief system? May I post
information on cult-awareness sites on your board for example? Or any
evidence we uncover which would provide evidence that Lazaris is a creation
of Jach's? If not, why not?

Do you really wish to create your own mini-cult within a cult?

Ted and I are pondering whether or not to place a link to you site on our
site. Chris took it upon himself to do that and I don't know that he had
your support or permission to do so.

I am confident that should we place such a link that your editing fingers
will be very busy. There are a lot of people who post and read on our site
who will ask challenging questions, express strong emotions, think
disturbing thoughts out loud, provide information which runs counter to your
beliefs, and possibly might even write a lot of posts.

BTW, what is your rule about how many posts a person can write in a given
period of time without being considered a "spammer". Do you know what
"spam" is?

Anyway, I do respect it that you took action and created your own site
rather than moaning away on ours, I think that is the best thing you could
have done.

I will watch your experiment with interest.

So far, I must admit, I am not in the least impressed with your tactics to
make your board a "safe" or more open place than ours.

It's really a shame that you are so uncomfortable with differing
perspectives and that you don't know the difference between an attack and an
opinion.

Well, this is an interesting experiment. I've long awaited this idyllic
space to be created by those who have tried to demand it of me and Ted.

Of course, I suppose that as long as you are incapable or unwilling to even
ponder the more difficult issues around the Lazaris materials, or to face
up to what adult interactions really are, you will find endless
rationalizations for your private club (cult) which so far is what it is.

I do believe that you both are operating from a place of good intentions, so
I wonder if you will take the time to respond to my questions here. If you
don't deem them significant or important enough to respond to point by
point, would you at least be courteous enough to provide me with that
information?

So, having said all that, may I feel as free to post on your site as you are
to post on mine?

All the best,

Katie

---

Katie, I think I personally would allow the link to be posted. I don't think it's clear cut though... It's especially not clear cut now you need approval to post to certain of the threads. Because of this I think the new board will just be full of hot air about how good the Lazaris material is.
For me, though, the deciding factor is that we can only tackle cults by offering people freedom. We can't offer people some other form of controlled existence which is different from the cult but just as controlled. It would be unethical and it probably wouldn't work anyway.

Freedom, however, means the right to go back to a cult if that is what someone decides to do. I want people to make up their own minds about things, after seeing the relevant facts, and without emotional pressure from cult leaders. But then they have to make their own decisions. I will try to get people to think for themselves, but I don't claim to have the right answers for everyone.

So, in summary, I am saying that I think the anti-cult people should allow both sides of the case to be presented.

Thanks for your great thoughts.

I fully agree that people should and do have the freedom to be in a cult or not, read on cult sites or whatever.

Ted and I are doing nothing to prevent anyone from having that freedom.

It's kind of a twist on things to realize that now because Chris took it upon himself to use our site to promote his agendas, once again, that we are therefore being put in the position of having to DO something in the name of providing freedom for others.

I'm still pondering my own rights to freedom, and how having an unwanted and unsolictied "responsibility" foisted on me plays into my own freedom.

Surely Per and Helena have some kind of advertising strategy that doesn't have anything to do with me and Ted.

Ted and I figured out how to promote this site without imposing on anyone else to do so, I'm still trying to figure out why I would essentially want to "help" those who have nothing but rotten feelings toward me and an agenda to dispute the information on this site without allowing for any counter-point. Are we supporting freedom by supporting a site that doesn't support freedom?

I get all the freedom stuff, but at the same time, there seems something a bit martyrish about providing people a place to go where I am under personal attack, and as of now, not even free to respond to it if I should choose to.

I don't know, it's to me kind of like handing a gun to someone to shoot you with because you believe in the right to bear arms. There's something a bit silly in the thinking.

Maybe I'm wrong, I'm still pondering.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. They are helpful.

Hey! One week from today, mate!!! (Shh)