"Good Anti-Cult Movement"

KDirks7515

unread,

Jun 15, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/15/99

to

Good Anti-Cult Movement

>>Re: How did Jesus feel about persecution? (was: "John Engler is leaving
>>From: rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann)
>>Date: Fri, 11 June 1999 04:28 PM EDT
>>Message-id: <rognmichF...@netcom.com>

>>R. L. Measures (meas...@mail.vcnet.com) wrote:

: (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:

: > In looking back over the last 20 years of the anti-cult movement, I
: > cannot identify a single positive contribution that they have made to
: > rank-and-file members of any member of any fringe religious group, ICC or
: > otherwise.

You raise a valid point. The anti-cult movement has done precisely zero good
to the rank-and-file members of any fringe religious group including the ICC.
Though I do appreciate your regarding of the ICC as definitely "fringe", the
reason the anti-cult movement has done so little good to the rank-and-file
membership is that being a member is harmful. Doing good to the rank-and-file
member is to get them out. Therefore, they do no good to any member who stays
a member.

DUH!

: € The positive contribution is to those who otherwise might have been
: sucked into a religious group that uses cultic thought-control tools to
: fleece the faithful flock.

>>But that is not a positive contribution to we rank-and-file members.

Of course not. The good that is done to the rank-and-file members is also to
get them out of the ICC. Once that happens, they are no longer members.
Therefore, they do no good to those who stay members.

>>I don't use "thought-control tools"

I have noticed that.

>>(what, like a flathead screwdriver and a torque wrench?),

The term "peer pressure" at least comes to mind and that is only the nicest way
to put it.

Sleep deprivation due to the constant attendance requirements, information
control through such self-policing techniques as "spiritual pornography" when
challenged on your so called "faith", and the focus of spiritual leadership
through one person define what used to be called "brainwashing".

You can call it what you want of course. It stinks just the same.

And the use of these tools still has the same result and you know what it is.

It works . . . to some degree.

>>but my evangelism is rarely made easier when the person I'm sharing with has
>>read some negative hit piece about us, at least in the short-term.

I really hate to tell you this Roger but there isn't any place in the Bible
that makes it my job as a Christian or anyone's job in the world to make your
evangelism easier with you being a member of a Godless and evil cult.

Nor do I see anywhere in the Bible that makes it your job as someone who
considers himself to be a Christian to be constantly concerned about how
difficult the job is.

Just spread the truth and let God take care of the rest.

And John, you still have to come out with a Biblical example of EX-Christians
persecuting CURRENT Christians.

Even Judas had the decency to admit that he had betrayed INNOCENT blood.

Two and two are four. I have full faith. I can explain it. The other person
can understand it. All I need is a fair turn to speak.

What "negative hit piece" can you be talking about? YOUR ENTIRE "faith" as a
Christian is based on the testimony of men writing "negative hit pieces"
against the Jews.

It is based on the principle of "the testimony of witnesses".

And that is why it is so important to the SLIGHTEST validity of your "faith"
that you find an example of EX-Christians speaking against CURRENT Christians
in the Bible and what was done about it.

You see here Roger that they would be witnesses who testified as to what they
saw and heard.

But ALL of the "persecution" in the Bible was external. And it was REAL and
not like your whiney little complaint about how the ICC is spoken against.

They DIED for their "faith". YOU feel persecuted because the ICC keeps
sticking its collective (yes, I know about the Borg) foot in its own mouth and
doesn't like it when it is shown to be a fool.

People who write these "negative hit pieces" do it based on the testimony of
witnesses who have been members. That NEVER happened in the Bible.

Unless of course, you can count it being done against the Pharisees.

It NEVER happened against Christians.

Still and all, what you are basically saying here is that openly communicated
negative criticism of your religion makes your job of evangelism harder.

It feeds mine.

Paul converted his jailers.

You can't convert anyone who doesn't know you, has ONLY heard bad about you,
and you have the chance to defend yourself.

You have NO "faith" in your own belief.

>>Still looking, though.

I have been there and done that Roger. You keep doing the same "just show me"
bit.

I was told by the Campus Minister (okay he PREACHED) that he was totally open
to being wrong as long as someone approached him based on the Bible and what he
actually said.

He was a liar Roger.

Do YOU know what made him a liar?

When he was approached on any error, he first required that the other person
have his heart right with God to the satisfaction of the Campus Minister.

You see Roger, he was a liar.

Even back then, I had to make a "sin list". What happened to it I don't know.

I always thought it was just immediate word of mouth and it probably was. But
they still kept coming back to haunt me.

Even worse was the sin of "evil pride". You see Roger, unlike a lot of people,
I KNOW I am right and act like I do.

And the worst part is that I am so certain that I hear the other person out
BEFORE making them out to be the fools they are.

That doesn't come across very well to the self-righteous pompous people who
PRETEND to know. That is why YOU feel so victimized in the ICC. You have
chosen to follow the foolish ones.

>>What positive contribution has the anti-cult movement made to rank-and-file
>>members of any "cult"?

They leave and are no longer members so that your point is well taken that the
anti-cult movement has done ZERO good to "rank-and-file" members who stay
members at any time.

>>They've trashed our reputations,

Trashed what reputation?

According to the ICCs own estimates, you have to invite at least ten new people
a week in order to get one to show up. That tells you that your lives just
plain ain't the guiding light they should be to the world.

Also according to the ICCs own estimates, out of every ten people that show up,
only one will be baptized. This keeps excusing the constant criticism of
others that might cause someone to not be baptized.

According to the ICCs own estimate, two out of every three people who have ever
been baptized in the movement have left the movement.

According to MY estimate, out of every ten people ever baptized in the ICC nine
of them will leave within ten years. And out of every ten people that stay in
more than ten years more than nine will leave before they die.

And that is a conservative estimate.

And that doesn't count all of the family members, friends, counselors (I mean
the FREE ones here Roger like the clergy in their local church), and co-workers
who experience the ICC and don't even get that close.

Now Roger, when you talk about somebody having "trashed" your reputations, you
are supposed to be talking about something like me sitting here saying that you
are a transvestite when I don't have the slightest piece of evidence or
testimony to offer to show how I reached that conclusion.

Now you could be a transvestite for all I know. But I don't know it. And I
really don't want people here to get the idea that you are just from my total
(and I admit it) imaginary use of the possibility here.

But at least that would be trashing your reputation. I have no basis for it.
I totally made it up just to show my point.

But 99.99% of the bad rap the ICC gets is the direct testimony of those who
were members themselves.

In the meantime, 100% of the reason you believe in Jesus Christ is based on the
testimony of four "disgruntled" EX-members of the Jewish religion.

Who trashed whose reputation?

If you guys didn't keep telling yourselves how much better you are than other
churches in evangelism, no one would believe it.

Even if you just went by numbers in, you guys do diddly squat. Every "major"
religion takes in more members just by the conversion of their kids.

I still say that the ICC is merely the new Mormon religion that says "have a
kid and make a Christian".

While the real growth tends not to really be there, the NEW membership is. The
ICC goes by "percentage growth" instead of by real growth.

This makes it totally heartless on the part of the ICC that they lose such a
high percentage of members. It helps them to keep their grading scale up.

But they don't count the ones that leave. They are only dogs returning to
their vomit. Jesus didn't die for them. Jesus only died for the ICC.

Now I have to admit that I was already dead set against any religious
hierarchy. It is against individual religion and evangelism by definition.

It is based on man's leadership of one OVER another.

Jesus commanded against that.

>>slandered our ministers,

And no butts about it either!

>>deprogrammed our friends,

And this is still the part I never understood here Roger. Someone else on the
NG mentioned that the deprogramming can not exist unless YOU acknowledge that
the programming exists in the first place that you deny.

You are double-minded and hypocritical.

When I was in it, someone would leave or be leaving.

I would be "warned" against talking to him because it just might cause someone
like me, and it was just always assumed that I was spiritually immature because
I was NOT inviting people (and forget the fact that I was TOLD that I could
NEVER be heard out on a problem unless I was being more evangelistic).

And the reason that he left the church would be that he had become
"disillusioned".

Now Jesus said that we will know the truth and the truth will set us free.

I just don't understand how anyone can become "disillusioned" unless they were
fed a LIE of an illusion that was not the truth.

Would you please explain that to me Roger?

Believe it or not, I would really like to know.

>>and tried to make us out to be criminals

I have a question for you Roger.

In the ICC, I HAVE to pattern myself after my discipler. I even have to attend
EVERY service. I HAVE to have my "quiet times" (or I did at the time).

If I miss ANYTHING that I have had to attend recently, then it is an excuse for
him to basically tell me that nothing I say is ANY value whatsoever.

If I got in only one quiet time that week because I was thinking about how I
would approach him, then I AM WRONG!!!!!!!!

If I missed church a couple of times that past month without bringing back a
"near death statement" by a qualified physician, then I AM WRONG!!!!!

Now then Roger, and this is the question.

I was told that I had to give up on my selfish desire to be totally honest with
everybody if I was to be the evangelistic man God wanted me to be.

Was that criminal?

As far as I can tell, that kind of "advice" can only come from the darkest and
deepest depths of hell.

What it basically says is that as soon as he tells me to do so, I have to "snap
to" and on the way up ask how high.

And yes, I still say that what the ICC does would be considered criminal if it
was not hiding under the cover of "freedom of religion".

>>or mental patients.

I haven't ever seen that yet.

Now they are mental patient CANDIDATES!

They really do need a lot of therapy.

And the ICC does seem to do specifically poorly WITH mental patients.

But that IS why the exit counseling industry grows so well around the ICC.

>>But they say that they care and want to help us! Go figure.

I have done so. I have made a number of posts about your lack of mathematical
ability in counting the ICC.

In short,

The ICC dumps people in nothing flat. Calling the movement a "cancer" is bad
enough. But quickly deciding that your own people . . . that YOU have lost
YOURSELF . . . "dogs returning to their vomit" is . . .

Godless and evil.

Jesus died for him too. Make some room.

>>Roger Poehlmann
>>member, SF Church of Christ
>>(International Church of Christ)

Believe it or not, Roger here is getting more reasonable.

Now I realize the boos and jeers of the response to that, but you don't see the
thought going on "behind the eyes".

I do.

I have been out for over 17 years. Roger has been in for just over ten years.

I haven't stopped thinking. Neither has Roger.

When you have eternity in your heart, another decade or two doesn't make that
much difference.

I have forever.

Does he?

Thank you for listening,

Kevin Dirks.

Kevin Dirks

ken...@my-deja.com

unread,

Jun 15, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/15/99

to

In article <19990615105038...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
kdirk...@aol.com (KDirks7515) wrote:
> Good Anti-Cult Movement

> : > In looking back over the last 20 years of the anti-cult movement,
I
> : > cannot identify a single positive contribution that they have made
to
> : > rank-and-file members of any member of any fringe religious group,
ICC or
> : > otherwise.

How would one know if "good" has been done for a person or gruop of
persons? Have you spoken to any of these persons?

Kentie

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

R. L. Measures

unread,

Jun 17, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/17/99

to

In article <7k60is$reg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, ken...@my-deja.com wrote:

> In article <19990615105038...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
> kdirk...@aol.com (KDirks7515) wrote:
> > Good Anti-Cult Movement
>
>

> > : > In looking back over the last 20 years of the anti-cult movement,
> I
> > : > cannot identify a single positive contribution that they have made to
> > : > rank-and-file members of any member of any fringe religious group,
ICC or
> > : > otherwise.
>

> How would one know if "good" has been done for a person or gruop of
> persons? Have you spoken to any of these persons?
>
>
> Kentie
>
>

€ For the most part, Kevin Dirks is like a Nile Crocodile. Big mouth,
tiny ears.
--
- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jun 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/18/99

to

KDirks7515 (kdirk...@aol.com) wrote:
: Good Anti-Cult Movement

: >>R. L. Measures (meas...@mail.vcnet.com) wrote:
: : (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:

: : > In looking back over the last 20 years of the anti-cult movement, I
: : > cannot identify a single positive contribution that they have made to
: : > rank-and-file members of any member of any fringe religious group, ICC or
: : > otherwise.

: You raise a valid point. The anti-cult movement has done precisely zero good
: to the rank-and-file members of any fringe religious group including the ICC.
: Though I do appreciate your regarding of the ICC as definitely "fringe", the
: reason the anti-cult movement has done so little good to the rank-and-file
: membership is that being a member is harmful. Doing good to the rank-and-file
: member is to get them out. Therefore, they do no good to any member who stays
: a member.

: >>But that is not a positive contribution to we rank-and-file members.

: Of course not. The good that is done to the rank-and-file members is also to
: get them out of the ICC. Once that happens, they are no longer members.
: Therefore, they do no good to those who stay members.

So we're still looking. How strange--what if the California Air
Resources Board did nothing positive for the air quality of Californians
except to recommend moving to Colorado where the air is cleaner? What if
they proceeded to pollute the air even more in order to incentivise
Californians to leave the state?

You'd have testimonial letters from ex-Californians saying how unhealthy
the smog was in L.A. and since moving to Denver they breathed far easier,
and how they are now working hard to get their friends and neighbors OUT
of California.

Well, keep looking. But groups like CAN, AFF, REVEAL, etc. have done
absolutely nothing to improve the lives of rank-and-file members. They
didn't put a stop to conservatorships--ACLU lawyers did that. They
didn't put deprogrammers out of business and in jail--Scientologists did
that.

On every issue of concern from parental rights to tax deductions for
religious contributions to free speech, AFF is there--and on the WRONG SIDE.

Test5144

unread,

Jun 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/18/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"
>From: rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann)
>Date: Thu, 17 June 1999 10:14 PM EDT
>Message-id: <rognmichF...@netcom.com>

>
>KDirks7515 (kdirk...@aol.com) wrote:
>: Good Anti-Cult Movement
>
>: >>R. L. Measures (meas...@mail.vcnet.com) wrote:
>: : (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann)

(snipe. . . I mean snip)>So we're still looking. How strange--what if the

California Air
>Resources Board did nothing positive for the air quality of Californians
>except to recommend moving to Colorado where the air is cleaner?

(snipppppping more)

What? Ok. . .yeah. . .whatever. . . (Does anyone have a clue what Roger is
ranting about now?)

>Well, keep looking. But groups like CAN, AFF, REVEAL, etc. have done
>absolutely nothing to improve the lives of rank-and-file members.

Yes, REVEAL has. . . if the rank(emphasis on the rank)-and-file members look at
the REVEAL web site and decide to leave their ICC cultic church--that would
improve their lives (and bank balances) quite a lot.

testing 1 2 3 (wondering what medication Roger is on, and just where I can get
a hold of some--the hallucinations he has seem to be exquisite!!)

Mike Spurgeon

unread,

Jun 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/18/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:

> You'd have testimonial letters from ex-Californians saying how unhealthy
> the smog was in L.A. and since moving to Denver they breathed far easier,
> and how they are now working hard to get their friends and neighbors OUT
> of California.

Pretty much like ex-members saying how unhealthy the ICC was, and since
leaving, they breathed far easier, and how they are now working hard to
get their friends and neighbors OUT of the iCC.

> Well, keep looking. But groups like CAN, AFF, REVEAL, etc. have done
> absolutely nothing to improve the lives of rank-and-file members.

Leaving seems to vastly improve the lives of rank-and-file members.

You oughta try it.

Mike Spurgeon

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jun 20, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/20/99

to

Test5144 (test...@aol.com) wrote:
: >KDirks7515 (kdirk...@aol.com) wrote:

: >: >>R. L. Measures (meas...@mail.vcnet.com) wrote:
: >: : (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann)

: Yes, REVEAL has. . . if the rank(emphasis on the rank)-and-file members look at

: the REVEAL web site and decide to leave their ICC cultic church--that would
: improve their lives (and bank balances) quite a lot.

As a rank-and-file member myself, I find the REVEAL site to be offensive
and misleading. Being called a member of a "cult" is demeaning and
defamatory. I am told that being a member of my church is a "crisis"
situation and the tagline is "Leaving the International Churches of
Christ". I'm not interested in leaving, in fact, I'm interested in
helping others to join.

As for improving my bank balance, how will receiving counseling from
REVEAL's advertised "exit counselors" help this when they charge
"reasonable fees" of $400-$1,000/hour? Margaret Singer in fact charges
$350/hour for consultations. These are the people making gobs of money
off the backs of ICC members.

So as a current member, I see REVEAL putting up a website that
misrepresents my church and spreads hysteria that I and my family are
brainwashed cult whackos. That degrades my quality of life and makes me
take time trying to set the record straight.

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jun 20, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/20/99

to

Mike Spurgeon (mi...@spurgeon.net) wrote:

: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
:
: > You'd have testimonial letters from ex-Californians saying how unhealthy
: > the smog was in L.A. and since moving to Denver they breathed far easier,
: > and how they are now working hard to get their friends and neighbors OUT
: > of California.

: Pretty much like ex-members saying how unhealthy the ICC was, and since
: leaving, they breathed far easier, and how they are now working hard to
: get their friends and neighbors OUT of the iCC.

: Leaving seems to vastly improve the lives of rank-and-file members.

I've read a great deal of critical materials and after due consideration
of the various testimonies, accusations, arguments, etc. I have decided
that I do not want to leave the ICC. I understand that not everyone has
not had an overwhelmingly positive experience with the ICC as I have.
However, it is my considered choice to remain a member; thank you for
your suggestion--my years inside the ICC and outside the ICC have
convinced me that life inside the ICC is far superior than outside.

Now then, having made my decision to stay in the ICC, and knowing how
much the nice folks and REVEAL, TOLC, AFF, etc. care for the people in
the ICC and how they have devoted time, effort, and money to helping
people in cults, the question is this:

Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to
improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

If you like, I can give you some suggestions about how you *could* make
our lives better, and I find it curious that you haven't even asked the
membership of these groups what needs we have. Calling us nasty names
and violating our civil rights are not among them, by the way.

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 20, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/20/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom.com> wrote in message
news:rognmichF...@netcom.com...

>Being called a member of a "cult" is demeaning and
> defamatory. I am told that being a member of my church is a "crisis"
> situation and the tagline is "Leaving the International Churches of
> Christ". I'm not interested in leaving, in fact, I'm interested in
> helping others to join.

Yeah. That's why it's *STILL* hard for me to admit I was a cult member.

--
______________________
Fox Mulder AKA Lewis Johnson
DID 360.816.5346
FAX 360.816.5340
lewis_...@eli.net
ICQ 1363586 <--For lurkers that need to talk--<<
http://www.geocities.com/~lewjohnson/icc/
______________________
I intend to live forever - so far, so good.
-- Steven Wright

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 20, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/20/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom.com> wrote in message
news:rognmichF...@netcom.com...

> If you like, I can give you some suggestions about how you *could* make
> our lives better, and I find it curious that you haven't even asked the
> membership of these groups what needs we have. Calling us nasty names
> and violating our civil rights are not among them, by the way.

Roger,
I remember a reply of your's that was in a nutshell "sosue'us"

Well,,, back atchew SO SUE US if you think you cival rights have been
violated.

Jeremy

unread,

Jun 20, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/20/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...

"Being called a member of a "cult" is demeaning and defamatory"

I agree with Roger here, that's why I have a hard time admitting it - in
fact I find it embarassing when i talk to my friends (the ones that know
about it - a lot don't, its a secret part of my life). I feel sheepish when
admitting that the wool was pulled so badly over my eyes. I feel naive,
foolish, conned and embarassed over my time in the church. Looking back I
can't believe how badly I fell for it all. So yeah Roger it is hard to admit
that your in a cult - I still can't say it out loud.

"As for improving my bank balance, how will receiving counseling from
REVEAL's advertised "exit counselors" help this when they charge "reasonable
fees" of $400-$1,000/hour? Margaret Singer in fact charges $350/hour for
consultations. These are the people making gobs of money off the backs of
ICC members."

That's funny I've never even talked to an exit counsellor but I managed to
leave the church. Leaving the church cost me nothing financially - lot of
other costs though. Roger keeps making these outrageous statements that it
is cheaper to stay in the church and keep paying the mean 16% (to quote the
other current thread on the NG) that to pay exit counsellors. I say, based
on my time in the ICC, when over 100 ppl left the congregation, of which 3
or 4 were due to exit counselling, that it is cheaper to leave the church.
Let's have a survey, hands up all those who pay more to not be in the
church. Hands up all those who saved money by leaving the church.

Another point on hose lines, very rarely does the member pay for the exit
counsellors, that's usually paid for by concerned family members so to argue
it cost the member more to leave the church that to stay in is bogus.

>
>So as a current member, I see REVEAL putting up a website that
>misrepresents my church and spreads hysteria that I and my family are
>brainwashed cult whackos. That degrades my quality of life and makes me
>take time trying to set the record straight.
>

If that is time which would otherwise be spent recruiting ppl into your cult
then "AMEN TO THAT!!!"

Jeremy

ch...@icat.rmci.net

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 23:26:34 GMT, rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle
Poehlmann) wrote:
> As a rank-and-file member myself, I find the REVEAL site to be offensive
> and misleading.

How nice for you!

> Being called a member of a "cult" is demeaning and

> defamatory.

I would imagine it stings just as much as the terms "hell-bound
fallaway" or "adulterous pervert" or "weak-and-weird" or "failure as a
disciple" or what have you.

> I am told that being a member of my church is a "crisis"
> situation and the tagline is "Leaving the International Churches of
> Christ". I'm not interested in leaving, in fact, I'm interested in
> helping others to join.

That's your perogative. I hear that America On-Line is interested in
helping people to join, too. Doesn't make it right.

> As for improving my bank balance, how will receiving counseling from
> REVEAL's advertised "exit counselors" help this when they charge
> "reasonable fees" of $400-$1,000/hour? Margaret Singer in fact charges
> $350/hour for consultations. These are the people making gobs of money
> off the backs of ICC members.

Why would an ICC member pay money to have himself kidnapped and
deprogrammed (as you have claimed)?

You're not making any sense.

Mike Spurgeon

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
>
> I've read a great deal of critical materials and after due consideration
> of the various testimonies, accusations, arguments, etc. I have decided
> that I do not want to leave the ICC.

Fine.

> I understand that not everyone has
> not had an overwhelmingly positive experience with the ICC as I have.

Thank you for stating that so clearly. What have you done to rectify
this lately?

> However, it is my considered choice to remain a member; thank you for
> your suggestion--my years inside the ICC and outside the ICC have
> convinced me that life inside the ICC is far superior than outside.

From your statements about your pre-ICC life, that certainly seems to be
true for you.

> Now then, having made my decision to stay in the ICC, and knowing how
> much the nice folks and REVEAL, TOLC, AFF, etc. care for the people in
> the ICC and how they have devoted time, effort, and money to helping
> people in cults, the question is this:
>
> Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to
> improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

Two out of three say their lives are vastly improved on leaving.

> If you like, I can give you some suggestions about how you *could* make
> our lives better, and I find it curious that you haven't even asked the
> membership of these groups what needs we have.

What needs do you have?

> Calling us nasty names
> and violating our civil rights are not among them, by the way.

Keep up the good work, Roger. You remain a large part of the mindset
that convinces two out of three to leave.

Mike Spurgeon
The greatest proof of Christianity is not how far a man can logically
analyze his reasons for believing, but how far in practice he will live
his belief. (Adapted from T.S. Eliot)

Jani Heinonen

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 23:39:54 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
<rogn...@netcom.com> had countless chimpanzees randomly pounding
the keyboard and came up with:

>Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to
>improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

They provide information helping cult members to become former cult members,
thus vastly improving the quality of their lives.

--
Jani Heinonen

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Jani Heinonen wrote:

Or, if you read the Denver COC article you saw that it helped *PREVENT* a whole
family from being divided by the ICC.

--
In the Light,

______________________
Fox Mulder AKA Lewis Johnson
DID 360.816.5346
FAX 360.816.5340

lewjo...@uswest.net

ICQ 1363586 <--For lurkers that need to talk--<<
http://www.geocities.com/~lewjohnson/icc/
______________________

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer
in their home." --Ken Olson, president, chairman
and founder of Digital Equipment corp., 1977

Jeremy

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...

>Jeremy (jk...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:
>: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...
>
>: "As for improving my bank balance, how will receiving counseling from

>: REVEAL's advertised "exit counselors" help this when they charge
"reasonable
>: fees" of $400-$1,000/hour? Margaret Singer in fact charges $350/hour for
>: consultations. These are the people making gobs of money off the backs
of
>: ICC members."
>

>: That's funny I've never even talked to an exit counsellor but I managed
to
>: leave the church.
>
>: Another point on hose lines, very rarely does the member pay for the exit

>: counsellors, that's usually paid for by concerned family members so to
argue
>: it cost the member more to leave the church that to stay in is bogus.
>

>I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed)

What do you mean rarely discussed - whenever exit counselling was raised in
the church context it was harped on over and over how much these people
charged. I must have heard that standard ICC retort a thousand times - you
guys discuss it all the time, you never shut up about it.

fees that
>unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
>safehouse rental not included.
>
>More food for thought: if voluntary exit-counseling promises a 65% rate
>of effectiveness and 66% of those who join the church leave on their own
>volition, could it not be argued that exposure to critical materials
>actually *increases* retention rates? At least deprogrammers were
>claiming 80-90% effectiveness.

No because only a small portion of those 66% who leave the church were
exposed to exit counselling. My experience within the church suggests (at
least for my congregation) that the vast majority of leavers did so without
any exposure to exit counsellors and that these interventions were
relatively few and far between compared to the total number of leavers. The
exit counsellors promise a 65% effective rate for those that they deal with.
This number has nothing do with the 2 out of 3 people who eventually leave
the church. Don't fudge the numbers Roger!

Jeremy

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...

>ch...@icat.rmci.net wrote:
>: Poehlmann) wrote:
>
>: > Being called a member of a "cult" is demeaning and

>: > defamatory.
>
>: I would imagine it stings just as much as the terms "hell-bound
>: fallaway" or "adulterous pervert" or "weak-and-weird" or "failure as a
>: disciple" or what have you.
>

>I don't use phrases like that on this newsgroup in references to the
>entire ex-member population, precisely because they are offensive. I
>call former members of the church ex-members, because that is a courteous
>way to refer to them. I ask for the same civility in return, and an end
>to the defamation and the hysteria about "cults". There are ways to
>describe blacks, women, Jews, etc. that are simply words that non-bigoted
>people don't use. We've all heard them before, and when someone uses
>them we know exactly what that person is.
>
your courtesy is appreciated Roger. However this does not ring true of the
ICC as a whole. I myself was called hell-bound, a dog returning to his
vomit, a failure as a christian and all those nice things you don't call me
on this forum - all by ICC members

Jeremy

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom.com> wrote in message
news:rognmichF...@netcom.com...

> Jeremy (jk...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:
> : Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...
>
> : "As for improving my bank balance, how will receiving counseling from
> : REVEAL's advertised "exit counselors" help this when they charge
"reasonable
> : fees" of $400-$1,000/hour? Margaret Singer in fact charges $350/hour
for
> : consultations. These are the people making gobs of money off the backs
of
> : ICC members."
>
> : That's funny I've never even talked to an exit counsellor but I managed
to
> : leave the church.
>
> : Another point on hose lines, very rarely does the member pay for the
exit
> : counsellors, that's usually paid for by concerned family members so to
argue
> : it cost the member more to leave the church that to stay in is bogus.
>

> I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees that

> unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
> safehouse rental not included.
>
> More food for thought: if voluntary exit-counseling promises a 65% rate
> of effectiveness and 66% of those who join the church leave on their own
> volition, could it not be argued that exposure to critical materials
> actually *increases* retention rates? At least deprogrammers were
> claiming 80-90% effectiveness.

I bet NONE of them makes as much as McKean....

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom.com> wrote in message
news:rognmichF...@netcom.com...

> Again, I don't agree and have decided to stay. I don't dispute that you
> care about people who have left the ICC; I just don't feel the love that
> you have for those of us that are in the ICC.

Roger, I know I get sarcastic and propagate some side neck comments.
But if the only was I knew you was from your words on this NG, I would say
you are lacking in love.

--

______________________
Fox Mulder AKA Lewis Johnson
DID 360.816.5346
FAX 360.816.5340

lewis_...@eli.net

ICQ 1363586 <--For lurkers that need to talk--<<
http://www.geocities.com/~lewjohnson/icc/
______________________

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom.com> wrote in message
news:rognmichF...@netcom.com...

> Fox Mulder (ab...@uswest.net) wrote:
> : Jani Heinonen wrote:
>
> : > >Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done

to
> : > >improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?
> : >
> : > They provide information helping cult members to become former cult
members,
> : > thus vastly improving the quality of their lives.
>
> : Or, if you read the Denver COC article you saw that it helped *PREVENT*
a whole
> : family from being divided by the ICC.
>

> But I'm in the ICC and my family has been brought closer together as a
> result of our relationship with God and the friendships we have with
> other Christians. I don't see the anti's doing anything positive for me
> at all. If anything they seem to be trying to thwart our efforts to
> evangelize and to unite families in Christ.

Just wait 'till it your turn to exit the ICC..... You see we love
you know, and well love you then. More then I can predict from your ICC so
called friends.

Allen Barnett

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
>
> ...

> No, about 0.5% of those who have left the church say that. We've
> restored far more people to the ICC than currently speak out against it.
> The rest don't "say" anything either way.

Rog - many who leave the ICC go to their families and friends [if they
have any left] and explain the ICC and why they left. I don't miss a
chance to tell someone anywhere what I know about the ICC. Trust me -
most of the 'speaking out' doesn't happen here - or at REVEAL retreats
like you suggest - it happens *everywhere* else.

Try revising your estimate - I would say that 99.5% of those who leave
will tell others about their bad experience in the ICC. FoxFiles has
done a great job of exposing your Bible Talks - and the recent article
from Denver proves that mental abuse of teenagers is happening there.
It must be getting harder to find new members.

This abuse of your membership must stop.

--
Allen Barnett

Jeremy

unread,

Jun 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/21/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...

>Mike Spurgeon (mi...@spurgeon.net) wrote:
>: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
>: >
>

>: Two out of three say their lives are vastly improved on leaving.

>
>No, about 0.5% of those who have left the church say that. We've
>restored far more people to the ICC than currently speak out against it.

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

Jeremy (jk...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:
: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...

: "As for improving my bank balance, how will receiving counseling from
: REVEAL's advertised "exit counselors" help this when they charge "reasonable
: fees" of $400-$1,000/hour? Margaret Singer in fact charges $350/hour for
: consultations. These are the people making gobs of money off the backs of
: ICC members."

: That's funny I've never even talked to an exit counsellor but I managed to
: leave the church.

: Another point on hose lines, very rarely does the member pay for the exit
: counsellors, that's usually paid for by concerned family members so to argue
: it cost the member more to leave the church that to stay in is bogus.

I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees that
unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
safehouse rental not included.

More food for thought: if voluntary exit-counseling promises a 65% rate
of effectiveness and 66% of those who join the church leave on their own
volition, could it not be argued that exposure to critical materials
actually *increases* retention rates? At least deprogrammers were
claiming 80-90% effectiveness.

Roger Poehlmann

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

Jani Heinonen (postm...@localhost.localdomain) wrote:
: On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 23:39:54 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
: <rogn...@netcom.com> had countless chimpanzees randomly pounding
: the keyboard and came up with:

: >Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to

: >improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

: They provide information helping cult members to become former cult members,
: thus vastly improving the quality of their lives.

Again, I don't agree and have decided to stay. I don't dispute that you

care about people who have left the ICC; I just don't feel the love that
you have for those of us that are in the ICC.

Roger Poehlmann

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

Mike Spurgeon (mi...@spurgeon.net) wrote:
: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
: >

: Two out of three say their lives are vastly improved on leaving.

No, about 0.5% of those who have left the church say that. We've
restored far more people to the ICC than currently speak out against it.

The rest don't "say" anything either way.

: > If you like, I can give you some suggestions about how you *could* make

: > our lives better, and I find it curious that you haven't even asked the
: > membership of these groups what needs we have.

: What needs do you have?

I don't speak for the membership, but I personally would like to see
REVEAL, TOLC, AFF treat ICC members with humanity and respect, and not to
call us "cultists" and insult our faith in Christ by saying it is the
product of "brainwashing". I'd like them to repudiate those who support
conservatorships and have done violent deprogrammings, and to respect the
civil rights and religious freedoms of religious minorities. I'd like
REVEAL to let SFCC members worship God in peace and not disrupt our
seminars and to respect our privacy.

Evon

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom.com> wrote in message
news:rognmichF...@netcom.com...

> Mike Spurgeon (mi...@spurgeon.net) wrote:
> : Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:

<Snipped>
:

> Now then, having made my decision to stay in the ICC, and knowing how
> much the nice folks and REVEAL, TOLC, AFF, etc. care for the people in
> the ICC and how they have devoted time, effort, and money to helping
> people in cults, the question is this:
>

> Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to
> improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"One positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to
improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC".

Hmmmmmm.......

> WELL......if we are to believe that the things that John Engler has stated
to this NG have even an iota of truth in them......these organizations have
helped to bring to light many abuses of position and power that has occurred
in the ICC. If we are to believe ANY of what John Engler has claimed
here....he and others really HAVE taken at least SOME of these things to
heart and HAVE tried to make changes to end these abuses where they could.

Either, there is at least SOME small truth in what he has said on this
subject....or NONE of these efforts have really been taken seriously by
ANYONE who is sincerely interested in creating a less abusive environment
for ICC members.

SO.....Which is it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> If you like, I can give you some suggestions about how you *could* make
> our lives better, and I find it curious that you haven't even asked the
> membership of these groups what needs we have.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The calls that I get from current members are usually more along the lines
of how I can help them to locate the support and help that they need to get
OUT of the ICC.
But I guess these aren't the members that you had in mind for us to ask,
huh?

Former members already know the answer to your question. The rising numbers
of support groups, and former members, around the world speaks quite clearly
that many current members are seeking ...and finding...the answer, too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Calling us nasty names
> and violating our civil rights are not among them, by the way.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You mean names like "hackers" committing "criminal acts", "....other end of
a horse", "Sons (and daughters) of Satan", "fallaways", "dogs returning to
their own vomit"....just to name a few?
(Some of these are extracted from your own posts, Roger...others are from
the experiences of people who are posting on this NG)

Hey.......whose civil rights am I violating?
Whoes civil rights is REVEAL violating?

Is there any conversation that you do not turn into criminal hackers who
are work night and day just trying to "hack" into ICC websites, or how
other former member who post here (you remember...the "..other end of the
horse" ?)..... are racing around plotting to send you and your wife to a
mental institution so we can steal your kids?

No one here sensationalizes the subject matter discussed more than you do.

--
Evon
mev...@home.com
Phoenix Support Site
http://members.home.net/mevonw

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--
Evon
mev...@home.com
Phoenix Support Site
http://members.home.net/mevonw

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

This brings up something else...I wonder how many of these 100,000+
"happy" members are thinking of leaving? It's got to be quite a
chunk...

In article <slrn7mumlv.h...@fun107.kivikko.hoas.fi>,

--

R. L. Measures

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

In article <rognmichF...@netcom.com>, rogn...@netcom.com
(Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:

> Fox Mulder (ab...@uswest.net) wrote:
> : Jani Heinonen wrote:
>

> : > >Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to

> : > >improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

> : >

> : > They provide information helping cult members to become former cult
members,
> : > thus vastly improving the quality of their lives.
>

> : Or, if you read the Denver COC article you saw that it helped
*PREVENT* a whole
> : family from being divided by the ICC.
>

> But I'm in the ICC and my family has been brought closer together as a
> result of our relationship with God and the friendships we have with
> other Christians. I don't see the anti's doing anything positive for me

> at all. ......

€ If the anti-cult faction did not engage you in debate, you might have
to get a real job, .Rog.
--
- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

classof89 wrote:

> In article <vBDb3.162$qd5.5...@news.bctel.net>,
> "Jeremy" <jk...@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> At a mainline CoC I used to attend, we got to know a man and his wife
> who was one of my husband's professors. After getting to know this
> couple pretty well, it came up in conversation one day that this couple
> used to be members of the Boston Church of Christ while the husband was
> in grad school in the early 80's. They didn't like what they saw
> happening and left. This is the only time this subject came up. Although
> you won't see their names in this NG or at Reveal, they in no way
> support what was going on then in the Boston Movement or now in the ICC.
> So just because ex-members don't always actively protest what is going
> on in the ICC doesn't mean they support it. This is just one
> couple...who knows how many more like them are out there?

Good point. There is a guy I work with that lurks the NG from time to time,
who was part of the SFICC ten years ago. He say's he'll probably never post,
but does want to start a support group in the PDX area.

--
In the Light,

______________________
Fox Mulder AKA Lewis Johnson
DID 360.816.5346
FAX 360.816.5340

lewjo...@uswest.net

ICQ 1363586 <--For lurkers that need to talk--<<
http://www.geocities.com/~lewjohnson/icc/
______________________

"I don't believe in miracles, I rely on them"

Jaz

unread,

Jun 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/22/99

to

In article <7ko6de$a5g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, classof89 <blueo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <vBDb3.162$qd5.5...@news.bctel.net>,
> "Jeremy" <jk...@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>At a mainline CoC I used to attend, we got to know a man and his wife
>who was one of my husband's professors. After getting to know this
>couple pretty well, it came up in conversation one day that this couple
>used to be members of the Boston Church of Christ while the husband was
>in grad school in the early 80's. They didn't like what they saw
>happening and left. This is the only time this subject came up. Although
>you won't see their names in this NG or at Reveal, they in no way
>support what was going on then in the Boston Movement or now in the ICC.
>So just because ex-members don't always actively protest what is going
>on in the ICC doesn't mean they support it. This is just one
>couple...who knows how many more like them are out there?
>

Thousands and thousands. After all, their silence is approval--what is there
to add that hasn't been said here repeatedly?

Gintas

------------------------------------------------------------------------
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in
peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the
hand that feeds you; and posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
--Samuel Adams

unread,

Jun 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/23/99

to

Mike Spurgeon wrote:

> Jani Heinonen wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:35:28 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
> > <rogn...@netcom.com> had countless chimpanzees randomly pounding
> > the keyboard and came up with:
> >
> > >: Two out of three say their lives are vastly improved on leaving.
> > >
> > >No, about 0.5% of those who have left the church say that.
> >
> > Yet you claim to speak for the 100,000+ members who are supposedly thrilled
> > about being in the ICC. As for myself, ICC membership was the worst time of
> > my life. I am insulted by the fact that some bigoted yahoo from San Fransisco
> > feels he is a superior authority on how I perceived my life for over 2 years.
>

> Next Sunday Roger should look around while in church.
>
> And wonder which 2 out of 3 'happy members' will be gone in the near
> future...
>
> 66% of those 'happy members' are NOT speaking the truth about their
> state of happiness.
>
> 100% of ex-members have...

Funny, I use this same tactic to help people in prisons and other
institutions quit drugs. Since one in five people successfully make it a year
without using drugs (with a very close mortality rate of those who have progressed
in their disease to the point of being imprisoned or institutionalized) I ask them
to look around a try to pick out the four people (in a room of twenty) that will be
alive next year at this time. Then I asked them if they realize that nineteen other
people (again in a room of twenty) are looking at them asking the same question.

Mike Spurgeon

unread,

Jun 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/24/99

to

Test5144

unread,

Jun 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/24/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"
>From: rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann)
>Date: Mon, 21 June 1999 09:21 PM EDT
>Message-id: <rognmichF...@netcom.com>

>
>Jeremy (jk...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:
>: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message ...

(snipped)

>I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees that
>unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
>safehouse rental not included.
>

Look out Roger--the deprogrammers are out to get you!!!! Is that them that I
hear knocking at your door???

Run. . .Roger. . Run---........AAAAAArrrggg!!!!!

They're here!!! They're here!!!!

Sorry, I just like teasing Roger.

testing 1 2 3 (trying to breakout of my own safehouse right now.)

Allen Barnett

unread,

Jun 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/24/99

to

Test5144 wrote:
>
> ...

> Look out Roger--the deprogrammers are out to get you!!!! Is that them that I
> hear knocking at your door???
>
> Run. . .Roger. . Run---........AAAAAArrrggg!!!!!
>
> They're here!!! They're here!!!!
>
> Sorry, I just like teasing Roger.

That is SO Cruel ... Roger has been conditioned to defend hisself from
all forms of evil - including any perceived persecution in the form of
constructive criticism that comes toward the ICC. It can be in the
form of a new webpage about the ICC tactics - a new article on REVEAL
or on TOLC - or some write-up of a 10 year old court case. It can be
a chapter that he has just had the time to read in a 15 year old
book. Just Anything!

Test - dangit' - please bee cool! Roger is a 10 year member of the SF
ICC. He doesn't need all of these firecrackers going off all around
him.

He's already like a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.

--
Allen Barnett

Jphigg36

unread,

Jun 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM6/24/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"

>From: Allen Barnett

>He's already like a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.

Actually I'd say Roger is more like a rocking chair in a room full of
long-tailed cats:>

jim h

DAnder9518

unread,

Jul 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/2/99

to

Roger wrote:

>More food for thought: if voluntary exit-counseling promises a 65% rate
>of effectiveness and 66% of those who join the church leave on their own
>volition, could it not be argued that exposure to critical materials
>actually *increases* retention rates?

Hmmm 65% of members leaving over 3-5 days, vs. 66% leaving on their own over
3-5 *years*.

Sounds to me like critical information is *highly* effective.

----->Dave Anderson

DAnder9518

unread,

Jul 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/2/99

to

Roger writes:

>Can you name one positive thing that these anti-cult groups have done to
>improve the lives of rank-and-file members of "cults" like the ICC?

How about, like, helping them to *leave* the ICC organization?

----->Dave

Allen Barnett

unread,

Jul 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/5/99

to

Carol2180 wrote:
>
> In article <rognmichF...@netcom.com>, rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle

> Poehlmann) writes:
>
> >I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees that
> >unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
> >safehouse rental not included.
>

> If you are talking about security teams and safehouse rentals, you are no
> longer talking about exit counseling, but about deprogramming. There's a big
> difference.

> Carol Giambalvo
> Visit my Home Page: http://members.aol.com/carol2180/

It is so nice to have one of those dreaded 'De-Programmers' that Roger
speaks so lowly of - to post here in person. I trust that Roger will
have some direct communication with you here - on this newsgroup -
instead of slandering you on the fly. Fingers crossed - no bets
placed.

Roger seems to think that you are getting 'filthy rich' from your
profession. Tell us, ... do you make as much as the average ICC -
husband/wife evangelist team? According to the Audit Report that was
published for the LA - ICC, the guidelines state that benefits for
working for the ICC entitle you to 'lots of money'. If you are over
35 and work for the ICC church they will fund AUTOMATIC salary
adjustments for your retirement - they will put an extra - above your
salary - $125 to $750 per month into your TSA account. Do you have
such an account paid for by the members who left the church? The ICC
provides their full time employees with; health and dental - life -
long-term disability - and establishes the 403(b) Sheltered Annuity
Account - [as above]. ICC employees - [of any age] - can contribute
their 'minister salaries' - or tax free part thereof - to this account
for added punch. Many of their regular living expenses are also paid
for by the ICC. Any job related expenses are paid for by the ICC. I
know - the ICC bought Kips' condo as a parsonage / an investment - and
he pays the fair market rent from his salary - BUNK ! The ICC spent
$483,000 of their members money for Kips' condo - and it is just a
little apartment on the beach. Money in - Money out! No wonder that
Robert Tam is stressed-out by members wanting receipts at tax time. I
want to see more of the accounting !!

Anyway - Carol - it's really nice to be able to talk to one of the
'ICC created millionaires' here. I just didn't know that exit
counseling was so good because of the free ads you get on REVEAL.
Thanks Roger, ... for bringing this up.

--
Allen Barnett

Carol2180

unread,

Jul 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/6/99

to

How about offering recovery workshops for former members of groups and helping
them to begin or further their recovery process.

How about helping families understand the groups the family members are part of
and hopefully healing relationships with those members if they choose to remain
a part of the group?

unread,

Jul 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/6/99

to

But Carol, you just don't understand. The ICOC may have made a few small, very
isolated mistakes in the past, but they have been "rediscovering" old "truths"
and they have changed.........

afm

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

Carol2180 <caro...@aol.com> wrote:
: How about offering recovery workshops for former members of groups and helping

: them to begin or further their recovery process.

: How about helping families understand the groups the family members are part of
: and hopefully healing relationships with those members if they choose to remain
: a part of the group?

The question was: How has any anti-cult organization in the last 20 years
improved the lives of *current* rank-and-file members of the ICC?

Helping my family "understand" about the ICC took the form of media hit
pieces saying that church members were brainwashed, going to flunk out of
shcool, would give all their money to some religious charlatan, and would
cut themselves off from the family. Needless to say, I'm not, I didn't,
I haven't, and I wouldn't.

Thanks to the "help" of these loving, caring people at CAN, AFF, etc. my
parents refused to come to my wedding for fear they would be beaten and
killed for withholding money from my group. It was only after months of
praying, dialogue, excellent grades, etc. that they started to see that
not everything critical they had heard about the church was true. They
came to my wedding and had a great time (although they thought the sermon
was too long).

But it took years to rebuild what a few negative newspaper articles had
damaged. As a rank-and-file member, I would want AFF, CAN, and similar
groups to heavily invest in 10-foot-poles, connect them together, and not
touch my family or loved ones with them.

I see joining the ICC 10 years ago as being the best decision I've ever
made; thanks to God I am part of a vibrant fellowship, I have a happy
marriage, real friends, and a relationship with Christ. I don't want to
leave.

I realize, of course, that not everyone has had the same exuberant
experience that I have had with the ICC, and some ex-members have
expressed gratitude here for AFF's counseling them. But we're not
talking about whether EX-MEMBERS see benefits or not, the question was
whether CURRENT members, you know, the "children in cults" that we hear
about all the time.

What about us CURRENT members? How have groups like AFF, CAN, etc.
worked to improve our quality of life, fought for our civil rights,
protected our religious liberties, allied with us in custody battles,
etc.?

From my perspective as a CURRENT member, these groups have been on the
wrong side of every issue of consequence and have opposed religious
minorities every step of the way.

out...@my-deja.com

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom10.netcom.com> wrote:

> From my perspective as a CURRENT member, these groups have been on the
> wrong side of every issue of consequence and have opposed religious
> minorities every step of the way.

Sounds like you are starting to associate yourself with other "religious
minorities" like Scientology, Unification Church and the JWs. It's been
commented recently that you're sounding more and more like a
Scientologist with every post and you certainly use the same arguments
to defend your organisation.

Birds of a feather?

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

Carol2180 <caro...@aol.com> wrote:
: I don't know where you get your facts and figures.

You quoted a success rate of 63% for "deprogrammings" in your "Ethical
Standards" article, based on Langone's study. The 65% figure is from
Gretchen Passatino for voluntary counseling.

: The last 2 year's of family interventions, I (with my partners) have had a 100%
: success rate.

: The rates intervention specialists charge are similar to other consultants.
: I've yet to have a family complain. And as far as people who walk out of the
: group and want to have *exit counseling*, they are free to pay or not to pay as
: their needs dictate. I have worked with many, many walkaways and I challenge
: you to find one person who felt pressured in any way to come up with a *fee*.
: You make us sound as though we're in this *business* for money. There may be a
: very limited few who are -- and who don't work with former members anywhere
: from pro-bono to a free willing offering to a sliding scale -- remember, Roger,
: we've been there (with the exception of one intervention specialist) and we
: know what it's like leaving a group like the ICC.

How much you charge people who come to you seeking your services is none
of my business. I was rather shocked to see you quoting an exit cost
figure of $12,000 for disaffiliating an ICC member. Even if you do just
2 cases a month you're making more than the President of the United
States, and far more than any ICC minister, all of whom are allegedly
living off the backs of we members.

My concern is that the "ethical standards" that you and Rick Ross
subscribe to allow for the "cultist" to be physically restrained during
interrogation if a court order can be obtained. There is no restriction
on the usage of behavior modification devices, psychotropic and
neuroplectic drugs, nor are there adequate safeguards to prevent a repeat
of the Annie Kang debacle.

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

Carol2180 <caro...@aol.com> wrote:
: Poehlmann) writes:

:>I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees that
:>unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
:>safehouse rental not included.

: If you are talking about security teams and safehouse rentals, you are no
: longer talking about exit counseling, but about deprogramming. There's a big
: difference.

The "big difference" did not seem so large in the Annie Kang
exit-counseling incident that was written up in Cornerstone Vol. 25/110
last year (1998). This "family intervention" began with threats and
physical beatings at the hands of a family member, where Annie Kang was
driven to a remote safehouse in the woods in Pennsylvania.

Several exit-counselors, the kind who "don't do involuntaries" were
called in: John Wick, Mary Alice Chrnalogar, Tim Brauns, etc. Only David
Clark refused to participate when he learned that she was being held
against her will. The rest felt right at home in this remote safehouse
where the family provided the security.

Chrnalogar was interviewed by Cornerstone where she said: "But listen,
deprogrammings don't happen anymore, period. If people keep dreaming up
these things happening, they're just telling lies."

We've heard this before on this newsgroup--deprogramming days are over,
this is "ancient history", etc. But the published accounts continue to
come out, and the exit counselors who "don't do involuntaries" are
contradicted by their victims.

?!?!?!?

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

On 7 Jul 1999 15:44:57 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
<rogn...@netcom10.netcom.com> wrote:

Gee Roger. You are very quick to give validity to these type of articles, but
when ex-members publish what happens to them, you totally invalidate what they
have to say. Are you proud to be such a blatant hypocrite??

afm

?!?!?!?

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

>The question was: How has any anti-cult organization in the last 20 years
>improved the lives of *current* rank-and-file members of the ICC?

As long as one is a member of the ICOC, there is no way to hope improve their
life. Until one is willing to stand with an open mind and truly examine both
sides of the picture, can one hope to have a chance to improve their life by
leaving what is obviously a godless cult.

>
>Helping my family "understand" about the ICC took the form of media hit
>pieces saying that church members were brainwashed, going to flunk out of
>shcool, would give all their money to some religious charlatan, and would
>cut themselves off from the family. Needless to say, I'm not, I didn't,
>I haven't, and I wouldn't.

Media hit peices??? LOOK OUT! THERE IS A DEPROGRAMMER SNEAKING UP BEHIND
YOU!!!!
PAranoia is still alive and flourishing within the ICOC.

>
>Thanks to the "help" of these loving, caring people at CAN, AFF, etc. my
>parents refused to come to my wedding for fear they would be beaten and
>killed for withholding money from my group.

Oh Roger, aren't we being a tad bit melodramatic here, or maybe very deceptive.
Maybe your family wanted to make a statement that they do not support the cult
which has consumed your life. Also, you could have let them wear helmets and
bulletproof jackets :)

>It was only after months of
>praying, dialogue, excellent grades, etc. that they started to see that
>not everything critical they had heard about the church was true. They
>came to my wedding and had a great time (although they thought the sermon
>was too long).

Gee, it was wonderful and all that. Have they joined "G1TC"(tm)??? We all have
been patronized as a non-member guest. I am glad they attended your wedding. I
was married prior to the ICOC, but my father didn't attend due to bad blood
between he and my mother. It was not a good feeling to have that happen.

>
>But it took years to rebuild what a few negative newspaper articles had
>damaged. As a rank-and-file member, I would want AFF, CAN, and similar
>groups to heavily invest in 10-foot-poles, connect them together, and not
>touch my family or loved ones with them.

I would also "encourage"(tm) the ICOC to do the same thing, stop preying on the
weak and wounded. Keep away from them.

>
>I see joining the ICC 10 years ago as being the best decision I've ever
>made;

Scares me to think how miserable your life must have been.....

>thanks to God I am part of a vibrant fellowship, I have a happy
>marriage, real friends, and a relationship with Christ. I don't want to
>leave.

I would agree with you that is is due to God that yo have the above, DESPITE
your participation in a godless evil CULT.

>What about us CURRENT members? How have groups like AFF, CAN, etc.
>worked to improve our quality of life, fought for our civil rights,
>protected our religious liberties, allied with us in custody battles,
>etc.?

Again, the only way to help a cult member is to help them see the truth about
the organization to which they belong. When that happens, they become an
ex-member. Using your illogical reasoning, then I guess you can say that these
groups have never helped a current cult member.

>
>From my perspective as a CURRENT member, these groups have been on the
>wrong side of every issue of consequence and have opposed religious
>minorities every step of the way.

And of course your perspective is a balanced well thought out perspective, isn't
it?

>
>Roger Poehlmann
>member, SF Church of Christ
>(International Church of Christ)

afm
proud ex-member, Triangle Church of Christ
a division if the ICOC

?!?!?!?

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

>How much you charge people who come to you seeking your services is none
>of my business.

Then why do you even raise the issue.
>

I was rather shocked to see you quoting an exit cost
>figure of $12,000 for disaffiliating an ICC member. Even if you do just
>2 cases a month you're making more than the President of the United
>States, and far more than any ICC minister, all of whom are allegedly
>living off the backs of we members.

Gee Roger, even if he has charges someone $12,000, is this an average for each
disaffiliation throughout a year? Seems that you are making up facts and
hypothesizing a lot of things that you are totally ignorant of. Ignorance and
hypocrisy are a dangerous combination. Or maybe math is just a subject you just
can't get a grasp of. What does 2+2 equal? Be fair, don't use your fingers.

>
>My concern is that the "ethical standards" that you and Rick Ross
>subscribe to allow for the "cultist" to be physically restrained during
>interrogation if a court order can be obtained.

Let me see, no restriction on the use of drugs. Doesn't one have to be an MD to
prescribe and administer drugs? Are either of these people MD's? Gee Rog,
seems like you have the Kelly Graham syndrome. Liar, liar, pants on fire.

>There is no restriction
>on the usage of behavior modification devices, psychotropic and
>neuroplectic drugs, nor are there adequate safeguards to prevent a repeat
>of the Annie Kang debacle.

Gee Rog, there are no safeguards within the ICOC to prevent a repeat of what
happened to me. I guess that pushing one to the brink of suicide is ok, if it
is done in the name of "God". And I can document everything I speak about on
this issue. It will all become a matter of public information before the end of
1999.

afm

Calvin Kwan

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:

> How much you charge people who come to you seeking your services is none

> of my business. I was rather shocked to see you quoting an exit cost

> figure of $12,000 for disaffiliating an ICC member. Even if you do just
> 2 cases a month you're making more than the President of the United
> States, and far more than any ICC minister, all of whom are allegedly
> living off the backs of we members.

Another example of Roger not knowing what he is talking about or he is purposely
trying to mislead people! If an exit counseling cost $12,000 and that might very
well be a reasonable estimation. Carol and other exit counselors don't pocket
$12,000 of it. Have you forgotten there is usually an intervention team of about 2
other ex-members? Sometimes depending on the case, a licensed professional counselor
or another exit counselor would be brought in as well. How about the traveling cost
to get all the team members there? One intervention I was a part of, the round trip
plane ticket to get just me there cost at least $500. Not to mention the room and
board for the team members. The intervention team does not and will not stay with the
family during the intervention, partly because of the comfortability of the member
and that we want in no way to seem like we are detaining him/her. Therefore, the
team members always stay at another location, unless otherwise requested by the
member. And if the member decides to leave after the intervention, then Wellsprings
becomes an option for the member to go to. That also costs money.

An exit counseling costing $12,000 doesn't seem unreasonable to me, although I don't
know the exact figures myself, especially if you include all the team members fees,
traveling cost, meals, lodging, Wellsprings and other costs. I know many of these
"exit counselors". I can gurantee you they don't make the same money as the
President of the United States and they certainly don't average 2 cases a month.
Even 1 case a month is pushing it. Can anyone imagine being away from their spouse
and children 2 weeks out of every month? Most exit counselors I know wouldn't do 2
cases a month even if they can. That is why just about every exit-counselors that I
know of, have other careers other than doing interventions.

Besides can any parent put a price tag on their sons and daughters? Give me a break
Roger, your statement above is so misleading. You are obviously purposely attempting
to deceive others.

Calvin Kwan

patm...@aol.comnospam

unread,

Jul 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/7/99

to

One bright day in the middle of the night, Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
>Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
>
>> How much you charge people who come to you seeking your services is none
>> of my business. I was rather shocked to see you quoting an exit cost
>> figure of $12,000 for disaffiliating an ICC member. Even if you do just
>> 2 cases a month you're making more than the President of the United
>> States, and far more than any ICC minister, all of whom are allegedly
>> living off the backs of we members.

How much does a WSL make? Please include:

1. Salary
2. Housing allowance/Parsonage
3. Personal Ministry Expenses like food and entertainment.
4. Auto mileage.
5. Honorarium for speaking.
6. 401(k) funds (Or is it 403(b)?).
7. College funds for children.
8. Repatriation funds.
9. Salary of their personal assistant/maid.

This should all be readily available, as it is in other churches.

ch...@icat.rmci.net

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

On 7 Jul 1999 15:44:57 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
<rogn...@netcom10.netcom.com> wrote:

> The "big difference" did not seem so large in the Annie Kang
> exit-counseling incident that was written up in Cornerstone Vol. 25/110
> last year (1998).

Is this the same Cornerstone magazine of which the Passantinos are
associate editors?

The same Cornerstone magazine which is affiliated with the Cornerstone
festival, at which the Passantinos spoke last week?

Hmmm.

patm...@aol.comnospam

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

I'll bite: Who are the Passantinos?

Pat

Jeremy

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

?!?!?!? wrote in message <37857998...@news.mindspring.com>...

>On 7 Jul 1999 15:44:57 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
><rogn...@netcom10.netcom.com> wrote:
>

>>Carol2180 <caro...@aol.com> wrote:
>>: Poehlmann) writes:
>>
>>:>I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees
that
>>:>unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
>>:>safehouse rental not included.
>>
>>: If you are talking about security teams and safehouse rentals, you are
no
>>: longer talking about exit counseling, but about deprogramming. There's a
big
>>: difference.
>>

>>The "big difference" did not seem so large in the Annie Kang
>>exit-counseling incident that was written up in Cornerstone Vol. 25/110

>>last year (1998). This "family intervention" began with threats and
>>physical beatings at the hands of a family member, where Annie Kang was
>>driven to a remote safehouse in the woods in Pennsylvania.
>>
>>Several exit-counselors, the kind who "don't do involuntaries" were
>>called in: John Wick, Mary Alice Chrnalogar, Tim Brauns, etc. Only David
>>Clark refused to participate when he learned that she was being held
>>against her will. The rest felt right at home in this remote safehouse
>>where the family provided the security.
>>
>>Chrnalogar was interviewed by Cornerstone where she said: "But listen,
>>deprogrammings don't happen anymore, period. If people keep dreaming up
>>these things happening, they're just telling lies."
>>
>>We've heard this before on this newsgroup--deprogramming days are over,
>>this is "ancient history", etc. But the published accounts continue to
>>come out, and the exit counselors who "don't do involuntaries" are
>>contradicted by their victims.
>
>Gee Roger. You are very quick to give validity to these type of articles,
but
>when ex-members publish what happens to them, you totally invalidate what
they
>have to say. Are you proud to be such a blatant hypocrite??
>
>afm
>

I was just thinking exactly the same thing. Coming from one side "it must be
the truth!" From the other side "it must be false, twisted by sin and
bitterness!" Come on Roger eye-witness evidence is eye-witness evidence - it
works both ways...

Jeremy

PS I do acknowledge that there is validity in what you are stating about
exit-counsellors and deprogrammers. I personally do not agree with violent
exit counselling and kidnappings but that is not a get-out-of-jail-free card
for the ICC as you seem to make it out to be...

Jeremy

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

Roger said in reference to his relationship with his parents:

>>>
>>But it took years to rebuild what a few negative newspaper articles had
>>damaged. As a rank-and-file member, I would want AFF, CAN, and similar
>>groups to heavily invest in 10-foot-poles, connect them together, and not
>>touch my family or loved ones with them.
>

Could one not also argue that the damage done to your relationship with your
parents was not the result of these articles but rather them seeing the
changes in your life and not necessarily seeing them as positive? By this I
refer to the inevitable Kipification of all ICC members (haircut, speaking
style, slang, behaviour etc) My parents saw these same things in me and were
alarmed for my sake - before they had read any negative articles regarding
the church.

Just a thought

Jeremy

Bev Adams

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

Jeremy wrote in message <7F3h3.6$8R1....@news.bctel.net>...

>Could one not also argue that the damage done to your relationship with
your
>parents was not the result of these articles but rather them seeing the
>changes in your life and not necessarily seeing them as positive? By this
I
>refer to the inevitable Kipification of all ICC members (haircut, speaking
>style, slang, behaviour etc) My parents saw these same things in me and
were
>alarmed for my sake - before they had read any negative articles regarding
>the church.

I know I had concerns about the changes in our daughter long before we had
read any "spiritual pornography." I first had validation of my concerns
when someone told me our daughter's church was listed among abusive churches
in Newsweek's Heaven's Gate issue. Boy, did that raise my level of
concern!!! Information we found at the Reveal site actually toned down my
panic with level-headed information.

Bev

ch...@icat.rmci.net

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 02:09:37 GMT, patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:

> I'll bite: Who are the Passantinos?

They're a very nice California couple who run http://answers.org and
combat various cults.

I note that they also link to REVEAL.

http://www.answers.org/m_surf.html#cults

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom15.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7m3i7d$m...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com...
> patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:
> :>On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 02:09:37 GMT, patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:
> :>
> : In that case, I'm very confused ... If they're associate editors of
> : Cornerstone magazine and anti-cult, then why is Roger presenting
> : articles from Cornerstone magazine as anti-anti-cult?
>
> The Passatinos have presented many arguments against the "mind-control"
> myth,

Regardless of the rest of your drival, where do you get off calling mind
control a myth?

> which is the key factor in justifying deprogrammings,
> conservatorship, and social controls against religious minorities.
> Instead of seeing Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, ICC members, etc. as
> brainwashed zombies who need to be lobotomized, they respect the fact
> that we are thinking human beings who have voluntarily chosen our own
> religion. They view these groups as people who need to be converted to
> true Christianity, however, and that makes for an interesting discussion
> about God, the Bible, and salvation.

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jul 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/8/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom15.netcom.com> wrote in message

news:7m3ipc$m...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com...
> patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:

> : How much does a WSL make? Please include:

>
> : 1. Salary
> : 2. Housing allowance/Parsonage
> : 3. Personal Ministry Expenses like food and entertainment.
>

> No one in any other business would count these as "income". If a
> businessman takes clients or prospective clients out to lunch, he is
> reimbursed by his employer for the expenses. It is not 1099'ed to him as
> "income".

OK, so your admiting that the ICC is a business?

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:
:>On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 02:09:37 GMT, patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:

:>
: In that case, I'm very confused ... If they're associate editors of

: Cornerstone magazine and anti-cult, then why is Roger presenting
: articles from Cornerstone magazine as anti-anti-cult?

The Passatinos have presented many arguments against the "mind-control"
myth, which is the key factor in justifying deprogrammings,

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:
:>Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote:
:>
:>> How much you charge people who come to you seeking your services is none
:>> of my business. I was rather shocked to see you quoting an exit cost
:>> figure of $12,000 for disaffiliating an ICC member. Even if you do just
:>> 2 cases a month you're making more than the President of the United
:>> States, and far more than any ICC minister, all of whom are allegedly
:>> living off the backs of we members.

: How much does a WSL make? Please include:

: 1. Salary
: 2. Housing allowance/Parsonage
: 3. Personal Ministry Expenses like food and entertainment.

No one in any other business would count these as "income". If a
businessman takes clients or prospective clients out to lunch, he is
reimbursed by his employer for the expenses. It is not 1099'ed to him as
"income".

: 4. Auto mileage.

Again, if someone drives miles on his car for business purposes, he keeps
a log and invoices his employer.

: 8. Repatriation funds.

So if my company moves my job to Chicago, I have to pay income taxes on
my moving expenses? I don't think so!

: This should all be readily available, as it is in other churches.

We have no "WSL" on staff in San Francisco. Go fish.

Roger Poehlmann

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

?!?!?!? <aka...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

I've always said that we should hear from all perspectives. Many have
posted here that they received excellent counseling which was not at all
forcible or coercive. However, we have here a published account of
someone who claims to have been deprogrammed by a gaggle of these "I
don't do involuntaries" exit-counselors in a safehouse.

The only change seems to be that instead of the deprogrammer providing
the "security" is that the modern "exit counselor" has family or friends
of the victims do it. There's kind of a "don't ask, don't tell"
arrangement where the "exit counselor" can avoid criminal liability. The
victim is less likely to press charges against friends or family members,
and the exit counselor or "thought reform consultant" can always claim
that he/she didn't know the victim was being detained involuntarily.

ch...@icat.rmci.net

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

On Fri, 09 Jul 1999 00:32:33 GMT, patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:

>One bright day in the middle of the night, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:

>>> I'll bite: Who are the Passantinos?

>> They're a very nice California couple who run http://answers.org and
>> combat various cults.

>>I note that they also link to REVEAL.

>>http://www.answers.org/m_surf.html#cults

> In that case, I'm very confused ... If they're associate editors of

> Cornerstone magazine and anti-cult, then why is Roger presenting
> articles from Cornerstone magazine as anti-anti-cult?

That's my very question!

Somehow, I think that the truth lies more with Cornerstone magazine
than with Mr. Poehlmann's depiction of Cornerstone magazine.

Now you must also understand that Mr. and Mrs. Passantino are merely
associate editors, and may or may not represent the entire editorial
opinion of the magazine, or of Mr. Trott, the main editor.

(but I don't think he is a big cult fan, either. He seems very
orthodox.)

ch...@icat.rmci.net

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

On 9 Jul 1999 01:11:09 GMT, Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
<rogn...@netcom15.netcom.com> wrote:

>patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:
>:>On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 02:09:37 GMT, patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:

>: In that case, I'm very confused ... If they're associate editors of

>: Cornerstone magazine and anti-cult, then why is Roger presenting
>: articles from Cornerstone magazine as anti-anti-cult?

> The Passatinos have presented many arguments against the "mind-control"

> myth, which is the key factor in justifying deprogrammings,
> conservatorship, and social controls against religious minorities.

Whooo, a percentage of the total actions of exit counselors even
smaller than the percentage of the ICC budgets that actually goes for
benevolence.

> Instead of seeing Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, ICC members, etc. as
> brainwashed zombies who need to be lobotomized,

No biased language there, I see.

> they respect the fact that we are thinking human beings who have voluntarily
> chosen our own religion.

Or you'll go to Hell.

> They view these groups as people who need to be converted to
> true Christianity, however, and that makes for an interesting discussion
> about God, the Bible, and salvation.

Most of the rest of us here are actually *having* that discussion.

Would you like to join us?

(afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also very eak

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

>No one in any other business would count these as "income". If a
>businessman takes clients or prospective clients out to lunch, he is
>reimbursed by his employer for the expenses. It is not 1099'ed to him as
>"income".

>Again, if someone drives miles on his car for business purposes, he keeps

>a log and invoices his employer.

>So if my company moves my job to Chicago, I have to pay income taxes on

>my moving expenses? I don't think so!

>We have no "WSL" on staff in San Francisco. Go fish.

Roger,
I must commend you on another "awesome" job at saying absolutely NOTHING.

Just as a quick rebuttal, consider the following:

In business, the employer has a WRITTEN policy for allowable expenses for M&E.
If they don't, they are very very foolish. Does the ICOC have any sort of
policy for M&E. (Meals & Entertainment)?

Again, the written policy applies. Also, if the employee is reimbursed at a
rate above the IRS guidelines, it IS taxable income.

Same with moving expenses. There are a certain set of rules that have to be met
for this to be a deductible item. Also, a competent business would have written
policies in place for this, to make sure it is not abused, and the $ spent is
done so in a very efficient manner. Not a strength of the ICOC.

You also don't have an exit counselor on staff. So if the lack of a WSL negates
you honestly answering the question, then it also negates you being to ethically
persue the issue of E.C's charges and wages. Just try to allow the ex-members
to play by the rules you members play by. It is time for you to shed the "2
sets of rulebooks" tactics.

afm

(afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also very eak

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

>:>We've heard this before on this newsgroup--deprogramming days are over,
>:>this is "ancient history", etc. But the published accounts continue to
>:>come out, and the exit counselors who "don't do involuntaries" are
>:>contradicted by their victims.
>
>: Gee Roger. You are very quick to give validity to these type of articles, but
>: when ex-members publish what happens to them, you totally invalidate what they
>: have to say. Are you proud to be such a blatant hypocrite??
>
>I've always said that we should hear from all perspectives. Many have
>posted here that they received excellent counseling which was not at all
>forcible or coercive. However, we have here a published account of
>someone who claims to have been deprogrammed by a gaggle of these "I
>don't do involuntaries" exit-counselors in a safehouse.

Gee Rog. One published account. Let us say that everything she said is true.
Then you have the Exit-C's stating it doesn't happen anymore. Can you show us
anything that shows us it is indeed still going on? Could the rest of the story
be that they repented and changed their ways? Sitting here, it sure looks that
way.

Let's look at the published accounts of what ex-members state of the abuses they
were subjected to. If you are willing to accept her story as true just based on
it being published, then you have to apply that same rule to the published
stories from ex-members. Based on that, there are MANY stories of abuses within
the ICOC, then comes all the "we don't do that anymore". Then there are more
stories published about those same abuses occuring after the "not anymore"
statements. Another "we don't do that anymore". More cases after this denial
also. It seems that the evidence would weigh towards the exit counselors and
against the ICOC when a person tries to objectively determine who is truely
sorry and repented, and who didn't.

afm

>The only change seems

seems??? care to elaborate on this. Is this conjecture?

>to be that instead of the deprogrammer providing
>the "security" is that the modern "exit counselor" has family or friends
>of the victims do it.

If the family calls the exit counselor in after they have asked their child
home, how in the world can you even begin to equate a family's love and concern
to the actions of forcible detention of a person by an EC that you claim is only
in it for the money. This leap of logic is totally bizarre, even for you, Rog.

>There's kind of a "don't ask, don't tell"
>arrangement where the "exit counselor" can avoid criminal liability.

And you would base this accusation on what??? This is yet another example of
your glaring deception of trying to pass something off as a fact, when it is
really just a scenario that you dreamed up, and are presenting it as if it is a
verifiable peice of information. bulls***.

> The
>victim is less likely to press charges against friends or family members,
>and the exit counselor or "thought reform consultant" can always claim
>that he/she didn't know the victim was being detained involuntarily.

So what you are doing here is accusing families of cult members, and exit
counselors, of conspiring to committ kidnapping, then conspiring to committ
obstruction of justice. PLease Rog, show me some kind of proof that this is
anything other than a fig newton of your imagination. You live in California,
don't you? Ever considered a career as a script writer for one of the studios?
You certainly have the imagination for it.

afm

(afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also very eak

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

>The Passatinos have presented many arguments against the "mind-control"
>myth, which is the key factor in justifying deprogrammings,
>conservatorship, and social controls against religious minorities.

Roger, at the risk of being presumptous, can I take the above statement to mean
that you don't believe that mind-control exists?

afm

Test5144

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"
>From: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom10.netcom.com>
>Date: Wed, 07 July 1999 11:44 AM EDT
>Message-id: <7lvslp$2...@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>

>
>Carol2180 <caro...@aol.com> wrote:
>: Poehlmann) writes:
>
>:>I'm just pointing out the very expensive (but rarely discussed) fees that
>:>unlicensed, unsupervised exit counselors charge. Security team and
>:>safehouse rental not included.
>
>: If you are talking about security teams and safehouse rentals, you are no
>: longer talking about exit counseling, but about deprogramming. There's a
>big
>: difference.
>
>The "big difference" did not seem so large in the Annie Kang
>exit-counseling incident that was written up in Cornerstone Vol. 25/110
>last year (1998). This "family intervention" began with threats and
>physical beatings at the hands of a family member, where Annie Kang was
>driven to a remote safehouse in the woods in Pennsylvania.
>
>Several exit-counselors, the kind who "don't do involuntaries" were
>called in: John Wick, Mary Alice Chrnalogar, Tim Brauns, etc.

)>Only David

>Clark refused to participate when he learned that she was being held
>against her will. The rest felt right at home in this remote safehouse
>where the family provided the security.
>
>Chrnalogar was interviewed by Cornerstone where she said: "But listen,
>deprogrammings don't happen anymore, period. If people keep dreaming up
>these things happening, they're just telling lies."
>

>We've heard this before on this newsgroup--deprogramming days are over,
>this is "ancient history", etc. But the published accounts continue to
>come out, and the exit counselors who "don't do involuntaries" are
>contradicted by their victims.
>

>Roger Poehlmann
>member, SF Church of Christ
>(International Church of Christ)
>

Roger,

What a cramped, dark and dingy, lonely place your head is. I am glad that you
live in there and not I.

testing 1 2 3 ()

Test5144

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"

>From: Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom15.netcom.com>
>Date: Thu, 08 July 1999 09:30 PM EDT
>Message-id: <7m3jbe$m...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com>
>
>?!?!?!? <aka...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>:

(snipped for brevity)

>he
>victim is less likely to press charges against friends or family members,
>and the exit counselor or "thought reform consultant" can always claim
>that he/she didn't know the victim was being detained involuntarily

Roger, you are a 'thought reform consultant'. How can you live with the lies
that you tell daily? Has your conscience been completely seared, so that you
feel no twing of guilt when you dissemble so blatantly? Move over, don't stand
so close to me!! The lightening bolt meant for you, may hit me accidentally.

Callisto

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

(afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also very eak
<aka...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3787773c...@news.mindspring.com...

[snip]

> In business, the employer has a WRITTEN policy for allowable expenses for
M&E.
> If they don't, they are very very foolish. Does the ICOC have any sort of
> policy for M&E. (Meals & Entertainment)?

Not to let Roger off the hook on this one. (he just simply may not know the
answer because the books aren't exactly open) So I will answer it for you.

I know for a fact that the San Francisco Church of Christ does have a
written policy about reimburseable expenses. There is a monthly allowance
for each of the staff members that ranges between 300 - 800 per month (if my
memory serves right then it could be up to 1,600 for a married couple).
The amount of "professional reimbursement" is based on a few factors. 1.
Position 2. Location 3. Is the church office located in their home. The
proffesional reimbursement can cover the following:

Mileage @ .31 (maybe .32 by now) cents/mile
long distance charges inccurred due to the ministry
gifts to others
Meals - Allowed to only write off a meal with another member of the staff
1x/week, allowed to write off the meal with a non-ministry staff person if
the staff person pays for the other person's meal as well. The only time a
staff member is allowed to write off just their meal is if they are out of
town.
Entertainment - Allowed to write off things such as movie tickets if more
than one ticket is purchased.
Supplies - Pens, pencils, bibles, tapes, paper, etc...

> Again, the written policy applies. Also, if the employee is reimbursed at
a
> rate above the IRS guidelines, it IS taxable income.

I do know that all their reimbursements are right in line with the IRS
guidelines (although, the envelope is pushed and they know the loop holes)
The SF church has a CPA on staff that oversees and audits the finances of SF
as well as the finances of the churches that the SF church disciples.
Although the CPA they have on staff is very talented (she is a good friend
of mine so I'm a little biased), their system is not flawless. I can say
this because the Sacramento chruch got themselves into a huge financial mess
and had to get (beg) money from other churches to bail them out (Lewis knows
about this one. The PDX church is one of the churches that contributed to
get Sac out of the hole)

> Same with moving expenses. There are a certain set of rules that have to
be met
> for this to be a deductible item. Also, a competent business would have
written
> policies in place for this, to make sure it is not abused, and the $ spent
is
> done so in a very efficient manner. Not a strength of the ICOC.

They have this as well. Now, I can't say that the money is spent in an
efficient manner. I have seen the abuses in this area first hand.

My $ .02

-Stacey

[left in because I thought it was just too good to snip]

ka...@my-deja.com

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

In article <3787773c...@news.mindspring.com>,
aka...@bigfoot.com ((afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also

very eak) wrote:
> >No one in any other business would count these as "income". If a
> >businessman takes clients or prospective clients out to lunch, he is
> >reimbursed by his employer for the expenses. It is not 1099'ed to
him as
> >"income".
>
> >Again, if someone drives miles on his car for business purposes, he
keeps
> >a log and invoices his employer.
>
> >So if my company moves my job to Chicago, I have to pay income taxes
on
> >my moving expenses? I don't think so!
>
> >We have no "WSL" on staff in San Francisco. Go fish.
>
> Roger,
> I must commend you on another "awesome" job at saying absolutely
NOTHING.
>
> Just as a quick rebuttal, consider the following:
>

> In business, the employer has a WRITTEN policy for allowable expenses
for M&E.
> If they don't, they are very very foolish. Does the ICOC have any
sort of
> policy for M&E. (Meals & Entertainment)?

Most ICC employees can use the tax laws reserved for those in the
ministry. This includes many deductions.

On two occasions, I was asked to stay for dinner at a sector leaders
home. Each time, it was mentioned that I was an appx. $4.00
deduction. I don't think a plate of home made spegetti should qualify
as a $4.00 or so deduction!

For each person they feed, they get a standard deduction. It is the
unoffical job of the wife in the ICC to make sure the deductions are
high come tax time. This way, they can pay Special Contribution and
then some.

>
> Again, the written policy applies. Also, if the employee is
reimbursed at a
> rate above the IRS guidelines, it IS taxable income.
>

> Same with moving expenses. There are a certain set of rules that
have to be met
> for this to be a deductible item. Also, a competent business would
have written
> policies in place for this, to make sure it is not abused, and the $
spent is
> done so in a very efficient manner. Not a strength of the ICOC.
>

> You also don't have an exit counselor on staff. So if the lack of a
WSL negates
> you honestly answering the question, then it also negates you being
to ethically
> persue the issue of E.C's charges and wages. Just try to allow the
ex-members
> to play by the rules you members play by. It is time for you to shed
the "2
> sets of rulebooks" tactics.
>
> afm
>

--
Kathy
EX-member, Denver COC (ICC)

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

patm...@aol.comnospam

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

One bright day in the middle of the night, "Callisto"

<Call...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>(afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also very eak

><aka...@bigfoot.com> wrote
>
>[snip]

>> In business, the employer has a WRITTEN policy for allowable expenses for
>M&E.
>> If they don't, they are very very foolish. Does the ICOC have any sort of
>> policy for M&E. (Meals & Entertainment)?
>

>Not to let Roger off the hook on this one. (he just simply may not know the
>answer because the books aren't exactly open) So I will answer it for you.
>
>I know for a fact that the San Francisco Church of Christ does have a
>written policy about reimburseable expenses. There is a monthly allowance
>for each of the staff members that ranges between 300 - 800 per month (if my
>memory serves right then it could be up to 1,600 for a married couple).
>The amount of "professional reimbursement" is based on a few factors. 1.
>Position 2. Location 3. Is the church office located in their home. The
>proffesional reimbursement can cover the following:
>
>Mileage @ .31 (maybe .32 by now) cents/mile
>long distance charges inccurred due to the ministry
>gifts to others
>Meals - Allowed to only write off a meal with another member of the staff
>1x/week, allowed to write off the meal with a non-ministry staff person if
>the staff person pays for the other person's meal as well. The only time a
>staff member is allowed to write off just their meal is if they are out of
>town.
>Entertainment - Allowed to write off things such as movie tickets if more
>than one ticket is purchased.
>Supplies - Pens, pencils, bibles, tapes, paper, etc...

-snip-
Thanks, Stacey. Good info.
Pat

Callisto

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

Basically, if a staff member invites you over for dinner, they can write off
all of the groceries bought to make that meal. So I would say it was a bit
more than a $4 deduction.

-Stacey

<ka...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7m5h84$i6n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...

> In article <3787773c...@news.mindspring.com>,
> aka...@bigfoot.com ((afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also
> very eak) wrote:
> > >No one in any other business would count these as "income". If a
> > >businessman takes clients or prospective clients out to lunch, he is
> > >reimbursed by his employer for the expenses. It is not 1099'ed to
> him as
> > >"income".
> >
> > >Again, if someone drives miles on his car for business purposes, he
> keeps
> > >a log and invoices his employer.
> >
> > >So if my company moves my job to Chicago, I have to pay income taxes
> on
> > >my moving expenses? I don't think so!
> >
> > >We have no "WSL" on staff in San Francisco. Go fish.
> >
> > Roger,
> > I must commend you on another "awesome" job at saying absolutely
> NOTHING.
> >
> > Just as a quick rebuttal, consider the following:
> >

> > In business, the employer has a WRITTEN policy for allowable expenses
> for M&E.
> > If they don't, they are very very foolish. Does the ICOC have any
> sort of
> > policy for M&E. (Meals & Entertainment)?
>

Fox Mulder

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

Callisto wrote:

> Basically, if a staff member invites you over for dinner, they can write off
> all of the groceries bought to make that meal. So I would say it was a bit
> more than a $4 deduction.

OK then how 'baught it Gintas, we can rotate dinners at different peoples houses
in the Super True Church and eat for free (that is if we can exclude travel and
lodging, since many of us live in different parts of the world).

--
In the Light,

______________________
Fox Mulder AKA Lewis Johnson
DID 360.816.5346
FAX 360.816.5340

lewjo...@uswest.net

ICQ 1363586 <--For lurkers that need to talk--<<
http://www.geocities.com/~lewjohnson/icc/
______________________

"I don't believe in miracles, I rely on them"

KDirks7515

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"

>From: "Bev Adams" <ada...@vcss.k12.ca.us>
>Date: Thu, 08 July 1999 04:37 PM EDT
>Message-id: <37851...@news.vcss.k12.ca.us>

Amen to that!

Kevin Dirks.
Kevin Dirks

Allen Barnett

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

Callisto wrote:
>
> ...

> They have this as well. Now, I can't say that the money is spent in an
> efficient manner. I have seen the abuses in this area first hand.
>
> My $ .02
>
> -Stacey

You Know, ... NO member who 'volunteers' to get involved with
financial accounting would have to suffer mental duress about what
they had done - IF - just IF - the finances were more open. Usually
when something 'wrong' is happening - other concerned members might
'trim the sails' - just to keep the boat from sinking. I - personally
- don't like to do things that I think may be wrong. Ask -afm-.

Score one for Allen - the ICC needs to open the books to their
members.

--
Allen Barnett

Robert Miller

unread,

Jul 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/9/99

to

Roger/Michelle Poehlmann wrote in message
<7m3i7d$m...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com>...

>The Passatinos have presented many arguments against the "mind-control"
>myth, which is the key factor in justifying deprogrammings,
>conservatorship, and social controls against religious minorities.

>Instead of seeing Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, ICC members, etc. as

>brainwashed zombies who need to be lobotomized, they respect the fact

>that we are thinking human beings who have voluntarily chosen our own
>religion.

I can certainly understand why someone would bristle at accusations of being
a subject of mind control. The fact is you don't have to be a brainwashed
zombie to be mind-controlled. Highly intelligent people can be
mind-controlled. In fact, highly intelligent people are probably *more*
vulnerable to mind control because they tend to think they are too
intelligent to fall for it.

Behaviorist B.F. Skinner seemed to think mind control was both easy and
desirable. It's simply a matter of awarding desirable behaviors and
punishing undesirable ones.

Robert

(afm)(Judas)(60 Minutes correspondant) and also very eak

unread,

Jul 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/10/99

to

> I - personally
>- don't like to do things that I think may be wrong. Ask -afm-.

Yeah, Allen can be a real party pooper at times. Remember Allen, you are buying
the beer and tequila for me when I visit, and also for any other ex-members that
want to join us. Anyone wana visit Atlanta???
Allen's buyin'..........

Isn't it great how freely I can spend other peoples money........ :P

afm

bayleaf91

unread,

Jul 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/10/99

to

Hey, when it happens, CJ and I are "there" - let us know! That would be
an easy trip for us (literally, I mean). ;->

Peace,
Sarah :-)
--
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Atlantis/7815
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/Veranda/6087

"...it is from our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must
be read."
-- Thomas Jefferson

(Remove "gsc." from the reply-to address)

JimV1959

unread,

Jul 13, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/13/99

to

>"Fox Mulder" <lewjo...@uswest.net> questioned:
>Date: Fri, 09 July 1999 12:06 AM EDT
>Message-id: <hCeh3.28$wk3....@news.uswest.net>

>
>
>Roger/Michelle Poehlmann <rogn...@netcom15.netcom.com> wrote in message
>news:7m3ipc$m...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com...

>> patm...@aol.comnospam wrote:
>
>> : How much does a WSL make? Please include:
>>
>> : 1. Salary
>> : 2. Housing allowance/Parsonage
>> : 3. Personal Ministry Expenses like food and entertainment.
>>

>> No one in any other business would count these as "income". If a
>> businessman takes clients or prospective clients out to lunch, he is
>> reimbursed by his employer for the expenses. It is not 1099'ed to him
>as
>> "income".
>
>

> OK, so your admiting that the ICC is a business?

It certainly has a business structure to it.

Roger,

Here's how it works in the normal business world: Say Joe of ACME Widgets
takes a group of clients out. The tab is $100. Joe fills out his expense slip
and is reimbursed. (Just like you said .) However; ACME can only expense 1/2
of these type of costs, $50 in this case, and will pay taxes on the 2nd half.

As a small business owner for 20 years now, I can tell you that lunches are not
free. I see that 50% of meals as income - it's not written off as an expense
therefore taxes ARE paid on it. (Hey, maybe I even got to be there to share in
a bit of it; its a little easier to take in those cases.)

Maybe the ICC salesman doesn't get 1099'ed, but somebody is paying for it.
(Guess who?) While it may not be "income" it is definitely part of the
compensation package (just as salary and the parsonage are.) And the real
problem, IMO, is not the existance of compensations, but the way in which they
have been observed to have been abused.

We could (IMO, should) also include things like:
cell phones/service paid for by the church
retirement contributions by the church
healthcare provisions paid by the church (over say 50%)

anybody got any other ideas?

Jim

Callisto

unread,

Jul 13, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/13/99

to

JimV1959 <jimv...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990713171822...@ng-cf1.aol.com...

How about extra "bonuses" given to ICC staff to help pay off their debt.

Allen Barnett

unread,

Jul 13, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/13/99

to

Callisto wrote:
>
> ...

>
> How about extra "bonuses" given to ICC staff to help pay off their debt.

Say What? From church funds?

--
Allen Barnett

EW

unread,

Jul 13, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/13/99

to

>How about extra "bonuses" given to ICC staff to help pay off their debt.

Oh yeah. This is a good one. Triangle Church bought out the obligation Jay
Sledge had to go to West Point and then serve in the army. They also paid for
his schooling at NCSU that the army had paid for. This is the Jay Sledge that
was an evangelist for about 2 years, and then ran away when it was discovered
that he had taken to using the single women in the congregation as his little
harem. Ok, I exaggerate, he only had an affair with 3 women in about 2 years,
that is that anyone knows about. Gotta love how those tens of thousands of
dollars were spent.

afm

Jphigg36

unread,

Jul 14, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/14/99

to

>Subject: Re: "Good Anti-Cult Movement"

>From: eri...@mindspring.com

>Oh yeah. This is a good one. Triangle Church bought out the obligation Jay
>Sledge had to go to West Point and then serve in the army.

Stop, stop, this never happens in the ICC, can you prove this?

>They also paid for
>his schooling at NCSU that the army had paid for.

The leaders are hard workers for the Lord and don't need those pesky bills
holding them back, we have the world to save you know.

>and then ran away when it was discovered
>that he had taken to using the single women in the congregation as his little
>harem. Ok, I exaggerate, he only had an affair with 3 women in about 2
>years,

He did NOT have "sexual relations" with these women. Stop persecuting the ICC
with your hate filled statements, you should be ashamed.

johnnie B. Good

Callisto

unread,

Jul 14, 1999, 3:00:00 AM7/14/99

to

Allen Barnett <allen_...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:378BB4BF...@bigfoot.com...
> Callisto wrote:
> >
> > ...

> >
> > How about extra "bonuses" given to ICC staff to help pay off their debt.
>

> Say What? From church funds?
>
> --
> Allen Barnett

Yes, 'tis true. It would always make me roll my eyes when I would hear the
evangelist talk about how they had "worked hard to become debt free" and how
others needed to be better stewards of their money. Most members have no
idea that helping staff pay off debt incurred prior to them joining the
ministry is common.

Calvin have you heard of this in LA?

-Stacey