Re: My one year
Mel
in message <1119710419....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>:
>Congrats! I just took my 3rd last night. Great job!!!
counting clean days is part of the problem. stop it immediately or you will
forever remain an addict.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
Searclaw
none the less, the moment that i forget that is the moment that i
relapse
Mel
message <1119859150.0...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
>I Will ALWAYS be an addict, maybe a recovering addict, but an addict
>none the less, the moment that i forget that is the moment that i
>relapse
stop listening to the cult lies. the 12 step cult spreads its lies far and
wide.
stop attending the cult meetings too.
they are the problem, not the cure.
Tak
They told me that too. They lied.
Tak
a#344
Mel
<jf70c195qcgst12rp...@4ax.com>:
the penny does not drop with many of those who are involved or who have ever
been involved with the 12 step cult. even many of the drop outs continue to
believe that the 12 step teachings are sound and feel that they themselves
are to blame for their failure to benefit from attending 12 step meetings.
what these people do not realise is the 12 step cult has a very powerful
message, hence its current worldwide success.
what the cult does is extremely insidious. it's message is designed to
create a dependency on it. it does this through spreading a message designed
to instill fear in its members.
it tells drug users that they are helpless addicts unable to kick their drug
habit on their own willpower and strength alone. they need something else.
that something else is regular attendance at their meetings. that is the
core message, and it represents the bottomline desire of the cult - to
expand their membership base.
this is the chief goal of any virus - replication. and just like a virus,
the cult gives little or no benefit in return, although it claims to do so.
the most obvious benefit offered is fellowship to those who typically have
none. the cult thus takes full advantage of the desire of lonely drug
addicts for companionship. in fact the cult tells members that loneliness is
something to be avoided and feared, because it can lead to drug use.
the cult also encourages members to follow the 12 step program which is
designed to introduce its members into the religion of the cult - a generic
belief in God, which allows NA to gain members from any and all religions.
they even strive to cater to atheists (possibly with less success) by saying
that atheists can think of God as being something other than a divine being.
the cult plays word games with its members, refusing to call itself a
religion (which has negative connotations for some people) instead favouring
the word "spirituality", which has greater appeal for many.
the cult is not overly concerned that everyone work the steps or believe in
God, though. merely attending their meetings regularly will quickly
indoctrinate newcomers with their teachings, their catchy sayings and their
jargon. very soon, all the newcomers will be parroting cult jargon and
re-interpreting their lives according to the worldview propagated by the
cult.
at every meeting of the cult, members will be reminded at some point that
should they choose to leave or stop attending meetings regularly, they run a
high risk of relapsing into drug addiction again, resulting in their death.
the reason this is true, according to the 12 step cult, is that members will
always be addicts (once an addict, always an addict) and will never recover
from the disease of addiction, which is what they all suffer from, according
to the cult. the cult's literature makes many assertions (like this) for
which no proof is offered. members are specifically discouraged from
challenging the program. acceptance is emphasised. members are told to
surrender.
it is extremely difficult to get a 12 step cult member to even consider that
they may be part of a dangerous cult, let alone convince them. one thing
that successful cults do very well is innoculate their members against
counter arguments. they will ask that people keep an open mind towards their
teachings, whilst closing their minds to entertaining any arguments that
mitigate against them.
there is no doubt that the 12 step cult has a very effective and powerful
method of ensnaring new people into its movement. it has even set up
numerous channels that regularly funnel new members its way. the growth rate
far exceeds the rate of attrition.
the cult embraces more than just addicts. it embraces the families of such
too, calling addiction a family disease and encouraging friends and family
of addicts to become members of its ancillary groups. it is pervasive.
that the 12 step movement is a cult can be clearly seen from the above
argument. that it represents a threat to society is not so clear to many.
i don't intend to fully address the threat in this post. i will content
myself to say this:
the threat to society is in the dependency it strives to create in its
members and its false teachings. the 12 step cult misinforms mainstream
society about drug addiction.
i believe, however, that the threat posed by the 12 step cult may all but
disappear once vaccines for addictive drugs become available.
Ærchie
any sense had already left town. Yet Mel was standin' in the doorway
saying:
"and the kicker is... i'm playing around. you really believe this shit."
~~Mel - 24th June, 2005
Nuff said!
Ærchie
Tak
>On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:41:13 GMT, Tak <nu...@null.com> wrote in message
><jf70c195qcgst12rp...@4ax.com>:
>>On 27 Jun 2005 00:59:10 -0700, "Searclaw" <gr...@chagford.com> wrote:
>>>I Will ALWAYS be an addict, maybe a recovering addict, but an addict
>>>none the less, the moment that i forget that is the moment that i
>>>relapse
>>They told me that too. They lied.
>>Tak
>>a#344
>
>the penny does not drop with many of those who are involved or who have ever
>been involved with the 12 step cult. even many of the drop outs continue to
>believe that the 12 step teachings are sound and feel that they themselves
>are to blame for their failure to benefit from attending 12 step meetings.
>
>what these people do not realise is the 12 step cult has a very powerful
>message, hence its current worldwide success.
i was told all tthis and more yet I kiced drugs back in 87 and can
have a drink if i wnat to and sto p at 1--2 .
Know what the 12 steppers told me?
if I could quit by myelf I didnt have a problem.
utter nonsense and totally wrong.
Mel
in message <sg41c19qorck3u2vq...@4ax.com>:
>"and the kicker is... i'm playing around. you really believe this shit."
> ~~Mel - 24th June, 2005
>Nuff said!
>Ærchie
don't let these things bug you if you don't understand them.
Ærchie
any sense had already left town. Yet Mel was standin' in the doorway
saying:
>On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 07:57:29 +0800, Ærchie <arch...@pphotmail.com> wrote
>in message <sg41c19qorck3u2vq...@4ax.com>:
>>"and the kicker is... i'm playing around. you really believe this shit."
>> ~~Mel - 24th June, 2005
>>Nuff said!
>>Ærchie
>
>don't let these things bug you if you don't understand them.
I understand enough to realise that you bore me - and that is unforgivable.
You are sentenced to six months in my kill-file - I'll check then to see if
you have gone the same way Drolly went.
Goodbye.
Searclaw
definition of a cult, the english dictionary (dictionary.com) defines
it as follows:
1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist
or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner
under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
2. The followers of such a religion or sect.
So firstly, as you so rightly stated, Narcotics Anonymous is NOT a
religion, nor has it ever claimed to be, it simply aknowleges the
existence of a higher power of your OWN understanding, whether that
higher power is God, Jehova, Alla, Buddah, or your dog's left testicle
is up to you. Secondly, when you take a look at that definition that i
just gave you, it's teachings are considered extreme or false, Narcotis
Anonymous is neither, Alcahol is a drug, it may be a legal one, but
that does not take away the fact that it is a drug, this takes care of
the extreme part, and now, Narcotics Anonymous has proven it's formula
in the lives of over two million addicts WORLD WIDE, (I'm South African
by the way,) anything that is false can't be this succsesful.
Now I am going to make a presumption here, i'm presuming that you
accept that drugs are more powerful than yourself, (providing that you
are an addict,) ergo, it stands to reason that you need something more
powerful than both you and the drugs to stay stopped, (stopping is the
easy bit, staying stopped is the hard thing,) that something is a
higher power of one's own understanding, NOT Narcotics Anonymous, i
could probably stay clean for the rest of my life without NA, I could
not however do it without the help of my lord and saviour Jesus Christ,
the point of the 12th step, (Having had a spiritual awakening as a
result of these steps we tried to carry the message to the addict who
still suffers,) is exactly what it says, to help the still suffering
addict. As to your insinuation that diseace is not a mental discease
please go to http://www.tandf.co.uk to fin a phycologists perseption.
the other thing that you seem to be misinformed about is the supposed
non-existance of a so called "vaccine" for drugs, there is one out
there for heroin, and one is in the pipeline for cocaine, what you
forget is that there is already such a thing called anti-booze, which
can infact kill you if you drink on it, and yet alcaholics still die
every day, and alchaholics anonymous is still as strong as ever.
you say that i would not even consider the fact than na is a cult,
perhaps you are right, perhaps i am just a brain washed cult member,
but i am a clean one, free from the chains of active addiction, and
quite frankly, to " indoctrinate newcomers with their teachings, their
catchy sayings and their
jargon. very soon, all the newcomers will be parroting cult jargon and
re-interpreting their lives according to the worldview propagated by
the
cult. " my best day using can't compare to my worst day clean, I'll see
you in the rooms sometime, and please realise, I'll greet you like a
brother
Mos
"Ærchie" <arch...@pphotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ptg2c1p3k6kj67bma...@4ax.com
Drolly is gone ? You are indeed fortunate.
Mel
<pus1c15qin1thf0kl...@4ax.com>:
>On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:50:32 +0200, "Mel" <m...@atj.faq.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:41:13 GMT, Tak <nu...@null.com> wrote in message
>>>>I Will ALWAYS be an addict, maybe a recovering addict, but an addict
>>>>none the less, the moment that i forget that is the moment that i
>>>>relapse
>>>They told me that too. They lied.
>>>Tak
>>>a#344
>>the penny does not drop with many of those who are involved or who have ever
>>been involved with the 12 step cult. even many of the drop outs continue to
>>believe that the 12 step teachings are sound and feel that they themselves
>>are to blame for their failure to benefit from attending 12 step meetings.
>>what these people do not realise is the 12 step cult has a very powerful
>>message, hence its current worldwide success.
>i was told all tthis and more yet I kiced drugs back in 87 and can
>have a drink if i wnat to and sto p at 1--2 .
>Know what the 12 steppers told me?
>if I could quit by myelf I didnt have a problem.
>utter nonsense and totally wrong.
yep. it's a standard 12 step cult reply.
if you can quit your drug habit without them, then you couldn't possibly
have been a "real" addict, because, in their view, "real" addiction cannot
be beat on your own. you need them.
circular arguments abound.
Douglas D. Anderson
"Searclaw" <gr...@chagford.com> wrote
> Dear Mel, let me first get something straight, what the heck is ur
> definition of a cult, the english dictionary (dictionary.com) defines
> it as follows:
>
> 1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist
> or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner
> under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
> 2. The followers of such a religion or sect.
But that is not entirely correct. The word "cult" derives from Latin cultus
meaning care, worship, adoration, and is from the same root as cultivate.
Thus plain and simple, there is nothing good or evil about the word cult.
The fact is that it has become confused in the popular imagination with
/occultism/ from Latin occultare, meaning to shut off from view, to cover
up, and hence associated with secret societies which study arcane and
supernatural things. The specific sort of cult which society seems to find
so evil has been dubbed "cult of personality", in which a group of people
effectively venerate and worship a person, whether a Hitler, a Freud, or
some pseudo-religious leader, such as Jim Jones, David Berg, David
Koresh, etc. Thus the definition of "cult" you give is most closely what
is properly a "cult of personality", yet a group of people who worship
NASCAR or NFL could equally be considered a cult.
Greg Evans
> The specific
> sort of cult which society seems to find so evil has been dubbed
> "cult of personality", in which a group of people effectively
> venerate and worship a person, whether a Hitler, a Freud, or some
> pseudo-religious leader, such as Jim Jones, David Berg, ...
Why would anyone worship David Berg? He was by far NOT Mad Magazine's best
cartoonist....
> Thus the definition of "cult" you give is most closely
> what is properly a "cult of personality", yet a group of people who
> worship NASCAR or NFL could equally be considered a cult.
But in those last two cases it would be a "cult of stupidity".
Mel
message <1119964373.1...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
>Dear Mel,
this is not email. you can drop this, especially if you quote properly (you
don't).
>let me first get something straight, what the heck is ur
>definition of a cult, the english dictionary (dictionary.com) defines
>it as follows:
any and all religions are cults.
cults teach falsehood to people and make them dependent on the teachings of
the cult in order to gain some kind of benefit, e.g. salvation, freedom from
drug addiction.
Christianity is a cult. So is Judaism, Islam, etc. They all teach lies and
they all affect their followers negatively to some degree or other. There
are of course benefits to joining a cult. If there were none, no-one would
join. But members of cults swallow a package deal - with the good, comes all
the bad too. The greatest bad that they all swallow is a distorted view of
reality. That leads to a cascade of problems for society in general, as
these cultists seek to impose their ideas on everyone else.
> 1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist
>or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner
>under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
> 2. The followers of such a religion or sect.
i'm not too concerned with definitions found in dictionaries. many define
cults to be religious organisations OTHER than the mainstream religions, so
as not to offend members of mainstream religions.
that's another clue right there. religions influence the politics of our
society. if enough people are members of any particular cult, we have to
start pandering to them and refrain from using language that offends them.
we can't risk offending them by telling them the truth, because if we do, we
will suffer economically (at the very least).
offend a cult enough and they start waging war on you. this has been
happening throughout human history.
cults are a convenient mechanism for influencing large groups of people. you
can toss out key phrases in your propaganda and get everyone running to do
your will. it's mind control. it's not absolute, people are not total
zombies, but in the absence of full knowledge, people vote according to
their "gut instinct", which for some reason, many people place a lotta faith
in. gut instinct gets you killed as often as it saves you. there is no
substitute for real knowledge.
Bush got a second term because the Christian cultists like him, and they
like him because he presents himself as a Christian to them. He's for most
of the things they are for and against the things they are against. When
Bush discriminates against homosexuals, thus violating their human rights,
the Christian cultists elect him into office. When Bush wages war against
Muslims, the Christian cultists elect him into office. When Bush makes
noises about ending abortion on demand, the Christian cultists elect him
into office. In the US, the Christian cult represents a huge voter bloc.
cults war against secular society. they're not interested in democracy and
giving everyone equal rights. Christians cultists were the ones lynching
blacks and murdering activists (for civil rights) in the 60s (in the US). In
South Africa, Christian cultists instituted Apartheid. cults are a net
problem for society - they present far more problems than they claim to
cure.
The Communists were right about religion (being a problem). Unfortunately,
Communism turned out to be a cult itself, and just like the religions they
sought to extinguish, they committed all the same sins that they wished to
eradicate. The Nazis were another cult.
Any organisation that wishes to impose its one central doctrine on everyone
else (tolerating no debate) is a cult.
>So firstly, as you so rightly stated, Narcotics Anonymous is NOT a
>religion,
You need to brush up on your English comprehension.
this is what I said:
-.-
the cult also encourages members to follow the 12 step program which is
designed to introduce its members into the religion of the cult - a generic
belief in God, which allows NA to gain members from any and all religions.
they even strive to cater to atheists (possibly with less success) by saying
that atheists can think of God as being something other than a divine being.
the cult plays word games with its members, refusing to call itself a
religion (which has negative connotations for some people) instead favouring
the word "spirituality", which has greater appeal for many.
-.-
Narcotics Anonymous is definitely a religious organisation. The 12 step cult
is a religion.
It's not a group that you join to corporately discover more about addiction
and how to kick it. There is no debate in NA. There is no challenging its
doctrines. NA groups read out at the beginning of each meeting that what
members say are their own opinions, only the NA literature is the official
NA view, i.e. NA literature is the scripture of NA.
>nor has it ever claimed to be, it simply aknowleges the
>existence of a higher power of your OWN understanding, whether that
>higher power is God, Jehova, Alla, Buddah, or your dog's left testicle
>is up to you.
As I said, NA propagates a generic belief in God designed to cater to
anyone, so that they will appeal to people from all religious persuasions,
or lack thereof.
Certain ideas about God are of course laughable, and if you mentioned in a
meeting that your concept of a Higher Power was your pet dog's ball, you
would be met with much derision and laughter.
I've tested this myself. I claimed in a meeting that Satan was my Higher
Power. That pissed most of them off very much. Someone even tried to
physically attack me.
so trust me on this, as much as a generic concept of God is advanced, the
reality is that only certain types of God are acceptable to the group.
>Secondly, when you take a look at that definition that i
>just gave you,
i don't think it's a good definition for the reasons i have stated above.
>it's teachings are considered extreme or false, Narcotis
>Anonymous is neither,
NA advances much falsehood, the most obvious one is that addiction is a
disease.
>Alcahol is a drug, it may be a legal one, but
>that does not take away the fact that it is a drug,
i'm satisfied that alcohol is a drug.
>this takes care of the extreme part,
no, there are other extreme teachings. the obvious example is that NA
teaches that addicts cannot defeat their addiction without help from a
Higher Power and from attending NA meetings regularly (90 meetings in 90
days).
This is both extreme and false.
And then they practice circular logic - if you can defeat your addiction
without aid, then you're not an addict. if you can't (defeat your addiction)
then you are (an addict). the outcome is that, no matter what happens, NA is
always right.
there is no objective way to decide if someone is an addict or not. they say
that every addict suffers from the disease of addiction, but there is no
objective way to discover whether or not some arbitrary person indeed has
this disease.
>and now, Narcotics Anonymous has proven it's formula
>in the lives of over two million addicts WORLD WIDE,
NA has proven nothing except that it is very good at spreading itself. It
caters to a pressing need - the need to address drug addiction, in the
absence of vaccines against addictive drugs. it fills a vaccum.
>(I'm South African by the way,)
I know. You mentioned that you are from Gauteng (JHB). I am a Capetonian.
I used to believe just like you do now.
>anything that is false can't be this succsesful.
sure it can. that is another logical falsehood propagated by cults and
marketing people - 1 million people can't be wrong!
wrong. they can be wrong. the whole world can be wrong, whilst believing
that they are right and being blissfully happy about it.
examples of this abound, for instance, people used to believe the world was
flat and that the Sun and all the stars revolved around the earth.
>Now I am going to make a presumption here, i'm presuming that you
>accept that drugs are more powerful than yourself,
drug addiction is not more powerful than me, or anyone. i believe that
anyone can quit addiction.
NA falsely teaches that quitting an addiction (without their and God's help)
is impossible. that is the greatest disservice that NA does to people
battling to end their addiction.
>(providing that you are an addict,)
my definition of addict is someone who is currently addicted to something.
>ergo, it stands to reason that you need something more
>powerful than both you and the drugs to stay stopped,
well your presumption was false, so this is too. However, I accept that drug
addiction is powerful and a vaccine would help addicts immeasureably to end
their addiction.
>(stopping is the easy bit, staying stopped is the hard thing,)
correct. all addicts stop using their drugs for some period of time (to
sleep, eat, etc.) - no one can use non-stop and continue to live.
and then the cravings come again, and so they use more.
a vaccine may not prevent the cravings, although i read (on
www.newscientist.com) an article about some gene therapy that stops heroin
cravings. URL at end of this post.
a vaccine prevents the addictive drug (heroin, cocaine etc.) from having any
effect. rather frustrating for the addict, but after a while the frustration
will wear off, and acceptance will set in. since taking more of the
substance has no effect, the addiction to it will eventually cease.
>that something is a
>higher power of one's own understanding, NOT Narcotics Anonymous, i
>could probably stay clean for the rest of my life without NA, I could
>not however do it without the help of my lord and saviour Jesus Christ,
that is your belief. it doesn't make it valid (for you or anyone else).
it is just an opinion that you choose to hold today.
>the point of the 12th step, (Having had a spiritual awakening as a
>result of these steps we tried to carry the message to the addict who
>still suffers,) is exactly what it says, to help the still suffering
>addict.
that is what NA claims to do. fact is that NA helps less than 10% of people
who come to it.
>As to your insinuation that diseace is not a mental discease
>please go to http://www.tandf.co.uk to fin a phycologists perseption.
psychology does not have all the answers. it has very little in fact.
>the other thing that you seem to be misinformed about is the supposed
>non-existance of a so called "vaccine" for drugs, there is one out
>there for heroin,
i am fairly well informed actually. i recently wrote an article about heroin
(copied below at the end of this post) that appeared in my Jun 03 2005
newsletter. You can read my newsletters online here:
http://capetownnews.info/pipermail/ctn-list_capetownnews.info/
>and one is in the pipeline for cocaine,
yes, I knew about this last year already.
none of this vaccines are available yet to the public.
>what you forget is that there is already such a thing called anti-booze,
i did not forget about it.
>which can infact kill you if you drink on it, and yet alcaholics still die
>every day, and alchaholics anonymous is still as strong as ever.
it's not a vaccine.
>you say that i would not even consider the fact than na is a cult,
>perhaps you are right, perhaps i am just a brain washed cult member,
i'm not criticising you. i'm criticising NA for taking advantage of drug
addicts who are extremely vulnerable members of society.
You believe NA's message because they have a powerful message. Cults do not
succeed with wishy washy messages. God is still respected by many people,
most of us were brought up to believe in God. NA hijacks people's background
belief in God to ensnare you into their cult.
The 12 step cult is a business and a political movement, at the end of the
day.
>but i am a clean one, free from the chains of active addiction, and
>quite frankly, to "indoctrinate newcomers with their teachings, their
>catchy sayings and their jargon. very soon, all the newcomers will be
>parroting cult jargon and re-interpreting their lives according to the
>worldview propagated by the cult."
>my best day using can't compare to my worst day clean, I'll see
>you in the rooms sometime, and please realise, I'll greet you like a
>brother
not everyone can use successfully.
-.-
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7445&feedId=online-news_rss20 -
"Heroin addiction gene identified and blocked. Scientists have not only
identified a critical gene involved in heroin addiction relapse, but they
have also successfully blocked it, eliminating cravings for the drug."
Well that portends the end of heroin addiction. It's a very exciting
breakthrough. Maybe we can soon see an end to the madness of heroin
addiction?
It's actually very interesting to read about the history of heroin
(http://opioids.com/heroin/heroinhistory.html), which was invented at the
same time (1898) as Aspirin and by the same company (Bayer AG - Germany) and
the same research team. Heroin and Aspirin were actually invented only two
weeks apart. Both are painkillers. Heroin is a more potent form of morphine
- it's four times as strong.
In case you're wondering, no, I've never used heroin nor do I have any
intention of ever doing so. :-)
I just have to add too, that the current hullabaloo in the local newspapers
about TIK is a lot of baloney. TIK is not a new drug. TIK is not even its
correct name. It's methamphetamine which has been known as SPEED for a very
long time now.
TIK is not the new wonder killer drug that is going to wipe generations of
children off the map. In the drug pecking order, TIK is a water pistol -
it's not even particularly addictive. TIK users will tell you that it's so
highly addictive that they can't quit, but they're just lying because they
don't want to stop.
The most potent and addictive narcotic is heroin, followed closely by
cocaine. All the rest are toy drugs to placate junior. If you want to be a
real hardcore junkie, you need to spike heroin, man. Heck, back in the early
1900s, doctors were dishing out heroin lozenges to mothers to give to their
coughing infants (heroin was prescribed as a remedy for coughing). heh. :-)
The most common heroin users back in 1902 were women in their mid 40s. The
most common heroin users today are 18 and male. Kinda puts a damper on that
cool image, doesn't it? Your long dead great-grandmother could have been a
heroin junkie back in the days when you could get an ounce (28 grams) for
under US$5. Slap on some frilly bloomers, d00d - that's the original
authentic heroin chic. ha ha.
On the East coast of the United States, back in those halcyon days, some
heroin users supported their habit by collecting and selling scrap metal
(i.e. junk). That's how heroin addicts came by the nickname junkies. Heroin
is also known as junk. It's incorrect to refer to any other kind of drug
user as a junkie. Just so you know. :-)
My view on all of this is that the only sane move to make is to legalize all
the illegal narcotics. Once Pandora's box is open, you might as well just
come to terms with the new reality rather than rush around trying to get all
the nasties back in the box. The drugs are out there now. You can't uninvent
them.
Searclaw
it, it helps keep me clean, i wouldnt want to risk going back out
there, so i'm quite content to stay in my supposed closed minded cult,
as long as it helps keep me clean, besides, you havent addressed half
of my comments, but thats fine, I'll just keep being a brain washed 12
stepper, as you call them, but hey, at least i'm clean, enjoy your
life, i'll pray for you all :-)
Mel
message <1120024741....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
>Friend, all i was trying to say
okay, you're not really interested in reading my answer.
>was that IF Na is a cult, then so be
>it, it helps keep me clean, i wouldnt want to risk going back out
>there,
precisely. the cult has told you that if you "go back out there", you will
die. you are kept fearful on purpose.
btw, have you ever stopped to consider what they mean by "going back out
there"? what does that really mean?
it's actually a meaningless statement isn't it?
but the cult says these things to instill the idea that you need NA for the
rest of your life. they want you to become dependent on them.
that's not a legitimate goal for any form of treatment.
>so i'm quite content to stay in my supposed closed minded cult,
>as long as it helps keep me clean,
what you don't seem to understand is that NA does not keep you clean. you
do, but NA claims credit for your success whilst disclaiming responsibility
for the drop outs.
>besides, you havent addressed half of my comments,
i addressed your entire post, but you haven't bothered to read it because
you're lazy and you don't really want to read stuff that will cause you to
examine your involvement in the 12 step cult.
that's all you are being asked to do - examine what NA tells you. but NA
specifically tells you not to do that.
>but thats fine, I'll just keep being a brain washed 12 stepper,
>as you call them, but hey, at least i'm clean, enjoy your
>life, i'll pray for you all :-)
i'm glad i don't feel that I need to attend NA meetings every week. i'm glad
i don't need to beg God to keep me clean. i'm glad that i just live my life
without worrying about a 101 things that NA tells people to worry about. i'm
glad that i can enjoy alcoholic beverages. i'm glad i don't have to listen
to a whole bunch of people making all kinds of "suggestions".
mike
talk as if addiction is not real, just some kind of hoax. wtf? Mike.
"Mel" <m...@atj.faq.com> wrote in message
news:kqj0c15ottnh46cpp...@4ax.com...
On the Road to Damascus
wrote:
>I don't even like 12 step groups and I think you sound like a paranoid. You
>talk as if addiction is not real, just some kind of hoax. wtf? Mike.
WTF? Do you make a habit of replying to 3 year old messages?
Douglas D. Anderson
"On the Road to Damascus" <my.life.s...@REMOVETHISgmail.com> wrote
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:03:58 -0500, "mike" <mik...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I don't even like 12 step groups and I think you sound like a paranoid. You
> >talk as if addiction is not real, just some kind of hoax. wtf? Mike.
>
> WTF? Do you make a habit of replying to 3 year old messages?
>
Irv Hyatt
"mike" <mik...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hI2dnbFURILioyDa...@comcast.com...
Right on the money. People can't seem to distinguish between dependency and
habit, and if that's the problem, "The Program" goes right out the window,
which of course it does. What a sad crock of shit it is.
Richard Catto
> I don't even like 12 step groups and I think you sound like a paranoid. You
> talk as if addiction is not real, just some kind of hoax. wtf? Mike.
I'm actually quite amazed that someone would reply to a post I made in
2005.
Reading it over, though, almost three years down the line is
instructive.
I've been clean for some years now. Sometimes a thought comes into my
head something along the lines of, "I wonder what it would be like to
use crack again now?" but it's just a thought, not the strong
compulsion to use that I used to get when I was newly stopped.
I relapsed often enough before to be able to answer that thought with
ease now - it would precipitate a chain of events over which I would
have little control. It would empty my bank account. It would cause me
much depression and anxiety and hopelessness. It would wreak all that
I have striven to create for myself over the years. I would lose the
life I have now.
NA didn't help me quit my addiction. When I think of the time I spent
in NA, what I mostly recall is the crap I had to endure from other
addicts battling to get clean. The people in NA and I didn't get
along. They upset me a lot. Pissed me off. Irritated the shit out of
me often. I found people to be argumentative and easily upset over
trivialities. I found little sanity in the rooms of NA. I wouldn't
care to subject myself to that all over again, just as I would not
wish to subject myself to drug addiction again.
I accept that I am still addicted to crack, and that if I were to use
it again, I would ruin my life all over again. I don't call myself an
addict today because for me that word implies the current use of an
addictive drug.
I'm glad I got out of addiction and I'm glad I also left the cult of
NA behind me.
If anyone who is currently struggling with addiction were to ask my
advice on how to get out of it, my advice to them would be to find
some way to make it impossible for themselves to get hold of and use
drugs for at least a few weeks. If you can live your life without
drugs for a while and actually decide you prefer living clean, then
you will find the ability within yourself to leave that life behind.
If you can decide you prefer living without drugs, you will get out.
But if you can't decide that, if you still feel you prefer to live
using drugs, you will not get out. Nothing can get you out unless you
decide you want to. But you need a few weeks clean to feel the
difference.
Father Haskell
> mike wrote:
> > "Mel" <m...@atj.faq.com> wrote in message
> > > <jf70c195qcgst12rp8eu7nhd5bsd0c9...@4ax.com>:
It's irresponsible people like you that ruin crack for everyone
else.
Richard Catto
> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
> >
> > I've been clean for some years now. Sometimes a thought comes into my
> > head something along the lines of, "I wonder what it would be like to
> > use crack again now?" but it's just a thought, not the strong
> > compulsion to use that I used to get when I was newly stopped.
> >
> > I relapsed often enough before to be able to answer that thought with
> > ease now - it would precipitate a chain of events over which I would
> > have little control. It would empty my bank account. It would cause me
> > much depression and anxiety and hopelessness. It would wreak all that
> > I have striven to create for myself over the years. I would lose the
> > life I have now.
> >
> > NA didn't help me quit my addiction. When I think of the time I spent
> > in NA, what I mostly recall is the crap I had to endure from other
> > addicts battling to get clean. The people in NA and I didn't get
> > along. They upset me a lot. Pissed me off. Irritated the shit out of
> > me often. I found people to be argumentative and easily upset over
> > trivialities. I found little sanity in the rooms of NA. I wouldn't
> > care to subject myself to that all over again, just as I would not
> > wish to subject myself to drug addiction again.
> >
> > I accept that I am still addicted to crack, and that if I were to use
> > it again, I would ruin my life all over again. I don't call myself an
> > addict today because for me that word implies the current use of an
> > addictive drug.
> >
> > I'm glad I got out of addiction and I'm glad I also left the cult of
> > NA behind me.
>
I don't, but you certainly do.
I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
MosNot
"Orange Mud" <oran...@void.null.invalid> wrote in message
news:mkcHskcp%td1n...@127.0.0.1...
> In article <a74d7f8e-64c2-49d4-aaf2-4e0004528d76
> @f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, rrc...@gmail.com says...
>> Orange Mud wrote:
>> > In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
>> > @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
>> > > I'm glad I got out of addiction and I'm glad I also left the cult of
>> > > NA behind me.
>> > You might be "clean" but you still suck.
>> I don't, but you certainly do.
>
> Oh yes, you do. You suck ass.
"i'd rather suck a black ass. " -- Mel (aka Richard Catto), 18 January,
2005
karmalube
"Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a74d7f8e-64c2-49d4...@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> Orange Mud wrote:
>> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
>> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
>> >
>>>>
>
> I don't, but you certainly do.
>
> I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
> is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
Get over yourself and get off the pity pot. From what I can tell by your
original posting, it's your negative attitude that attracts the kind of
treatment you keep whining about.
I imagine it's not just in NA that you experience this either. You will
attract it no matter where you go because it all starts with how we project
our own beliefs, values and attitudes.
OK....Let er rip. I'm holding onto my chair and I'm all prepared for a
lengthy response of denial and rationalization.
Parsons
"Richard Catto" <ctne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c...@o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
You know that you're still into drugs, Porky. You use them to drug
young boys so you can rape them.
Parsons
"Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a74d7f8e-64c2-49d4...@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
Try telling the truth just once, Dicky.
Irv Hyatt
"Father Haskell" <father...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a3bff96e-140a-417d...@t66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
LOL
Irv Hyatt
"karmalube" <karm...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:22Yvj.65455$Ly.23881@pd7urf1no...
>
> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a74d7f8e-64c2-49d4...@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>> Orange Mud wrote:
>>> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
>>> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
>>> >
>>>>>
>>> You might be "clean" but you still suck.
>>
>> I don't, but you certainly do.
>>
>> I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
>> is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
>
> Get over yourself and get off the
>pity pot.
How indoctrinated of you to use The Jargon
>From what I can tell by your original posting, it's your negative attitude
>that attracts the kind of treatment you keep whining about.
> I imagine it's not just in NA that you experience this either. You will
> attract it no matter where you go because it all starts with how we
> project our own beliefs, values and attitudes.
>
> OK....Let er rip. I'm holding onto my chair and I'm all prepared for a
> lengthy response of denial and rationalization.
I don't know who you are but DAMNED if you are one brain washed stepper!
Pobrecito!
>
>
Father Haskell
> Orange Mud wrote:
> > In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
Any group that preaches obedience to a "higher authority"
is evil.
MosNot
> Any group that preaches obedience to a "higher authority"
> is evil.
Husbands are evil !
peachy ashie passion
I'll second that notion!
Richard Catto
> @f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, rrc...@gmail.com says...
How old are you?
> > I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
> > is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
> Do they laugh at you when you cry and stamp your feet? 'Cause that's
> what I'm doing.
I don't know what they do, but I suspect more of the same ole shit
which is why I won't be going back anytime soon.
*PLONK*
Pretty much what I'm doing with you.
Richard Catto
> >> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
> >> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
> >> You might be "clean" but you still suck.
> > I don't, but you certainly do.
> > I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
> > is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
> Get over yourself and get off the pity pot. From what I can tell by your
> original posting, it's your negative attitude that attracts the kind of
> treatment you keep whining about.
If one disagrees with a cultist, one gets a predictably abusive
response.
> I imagine it's not just in NA that you experience this either. You will
> attract it no matter where you go because it all starts with how we project
> our own beliefs, values and attitudes.
I get it from white racists in South Africa too. They don't enjoy
being exposed as racists.
> OK....Let er rip. I'm holding onto my chair and I'm all prepared for a
> lengthy response of denial and rationalization.
NA is no longer my problem. You are your own problem now.
Richard Catto
> MosNot wrote:
> > "Father Haskell" <father...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>is evil.
> > Husbands are evil !
> I'll second that notion!
People are evil and the Internet is proof of that.
Parsons
You proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you're evil, Dicky.
Parsons
> karmalube wrote:
>> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> > Orange Mud wrote:
>> >> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
>> >> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
>> >> You might be "clean" but you still suck.
>> > I don't, but you certainly do.
>> > I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
>> > is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
>> Get over yourself and get off the pity pot. From what I can tell by your
>> original posting, it's your negative attitude that attracts the kind of
>> treatment you keep whining about.
>
> If one disagrees with a cultist, one gets a predictably abusive
> response.
Is that why you're so abusive, Porky?
>
>> I imagine it's not just in NA that you experience this either. You will
>> attract it no matter where you go because it all starts with how we
>> project
>> our own beliefs, values and attitudes.
>
> I get it from white racists in South Africa too. They don't enjoy
> being exposed as racists.
Then you must be a Kaffir.
>
>> OK....Let er rip. I'm holding onto my chair and I'm all prepared for a
>> lengthy response of denial and rationalization.
>
> NA is no longer my problem. You are your own problem now.
And you're still a coward that drugs and molests little kids, Dicky.
Parsons
Are you looking for another young boy to drug and rape, Porky?
>
>> > I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
>> > is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
>> Do they laugh at you when you cry and stamp your feet? 'Cause that's
>> what I'm doing.
>
> I don't know what they do, but I suspect more of the same ole shit
> which is why I won't be going back anytime soon.
Are you admitting that you're a quiter?
>
> *PLONK*
Did you just park that fat ass of yours again, Porky?
>
> Pretty much what I'm doing with you.
Are you still making idle threats, Dicky?
Parsons
"Orange Mud" <oran...@void.null.invalid> wrote in message
> In article <sxjwj.101800$N67....@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
> Parson...@bellsouth.net says...
Stand up to that coward and say boo and watch him run and cry to his mommy.
>
> Even though he's using Google Groups and thus does not have a way to
> "plonk" anyone. Heh.
He's crying over that.
MosNot
news:mqp4xb%fBxOdJ...@127.0.0.1...
> In article <sxjwj.101800$N67....@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
> Parson...@bellsouth.net says...
>>
>> Did you just park that fat ass of yours again, Porky?
>> > Pretty much what I'm doing with you.
>> Are you still making idle threats, Dicky?
> "plonk" anyone. Heh.
But he's claimed to be a high and mighty system administrator.
Richard Catto
> >> MosNot wrote:
> >> > "Father Haskell" <father...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >>Any group that preaches obedience to a "higher authority"
> >> >>is evil.
> >> > Husbands are evil !
> >> I'll second that notion!
> > People are evil and the Internet is proof of that.
> You proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you're evil, Dicky.
Prove it.
Richard Catto
> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > karmalube wrote:
> >> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> > Orange Mud wrote:
> >> >> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
> >> >> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
> >> >> You might be "clean" but you still suck.
> >> > I don't, but you certainly do.
> >> > I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
> >> > is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA meetings.
> >> Get over yourself and get off the pity pot. From what I can tell by your
> >> original posting, it's your negative attitude that attracts the kind of
> >> treatment you keep whining about.
> > If one disagrees with a cultist, one gets a predictably abusive
> > response.
> Is that why you're so abusive, Porky?
You tell me.
> >> I imagine it's not just in NA that you experience this either. You will
> >> attract it no matter where you go because it all starts with how we
> >> project
> >> our own beliefs, values and attitudes.
> > I get it from white racists in South Africa too. They don't enjoy
> > being exposed as racists.
> Then you must be a Kaffir.
Prove it.
> >> OK....Let er rip. I'm holding onto my chair and I'm all prepared for a
> >> lengthy response of denial and rationalization.
> > NA is no longer my problem. You are your own problem now.
> And you're still a coward that drugs and molests little kids, Dicky.
No you are.
Richard Catto
> "Orange Mud" <oran...@void.null.invalid> wrote in message
> > Parson...@bellsouth.net says...
> >> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> > *PLONK*
> >> Did you just park that fat ass of yours again, Porky?
> >> > Pretty much what I'm doing with you.
> >> Are you still making idle threats, Dicky?
> > Careful, he might "plonk" you.
> > Even though he's using Google Groups and thus does not have a way to
> > "plonk" anyone. Heh.
> But he's claimed to be a high and mighty system administrator.
I am. Fear me, dickweed.
Parsons
Still letting your fat ass do your talking for you, Porky?
Parsons
> Parsons wrote:
>> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> > karmalube wrote:
>> >> "Richard Catto" <rrc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> > Orange Mud wrote:
>> >> >> In article <ed84c32d-4f57-4e8c-b769-07d1086154e5
>> >> >> @o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, ctne...@gmail.com says...
>> >> >> You might be "clean" but you still suck.
>> >> > I don't, but you certainly do.
>> >> > I don't know who you are or whether you are actually in NA, but this
>> >> > is an example of the type of abuse one finds in real life NA
>> >> > meetings.
>> >> Get over yourself and get off the pity pot. From what I can tell by
>> >> your
>> >> original posting, it's your negative attitude that attracts the kind
>> >> of
>> >> treatment you keep whining about.
>> > If one disagrees with a cultist, one gets a predictably abusive
>> > response.
>> Is that why you're so abusive, Porky?
>
> You tell me.
I already did, Dicky.
>
>> >> I imagine it's not just in NA that you experience this either. You
>> >> will
>> >> attract it no matter where you go because it all starts with how we
>> >> project
>> >> our own beliefs, values and attitudes.
>> > I get it from white racists in South Africa too. They don't enjoy
>> > being exposed as racists.
>> Then you must be a Kaffir.
>
> Prove it.
You proved that a long time ago.
>
>> >> OK....Let er rip. I'm holding onto my chair and I'm all prepared for a
>> >> lengthy response of denial and rationalization.
>> > NA is no longer my problem. You are your own problem now.
>> And you're still a coward that drugs and molests little kids, Dicky.
>
> No you are.
You know that you do that all the time, Porky.
Parsons
You've already proved it many times that you are.
dennis
> > head something along the lines of, "I wonder what it would be like to
> > use crack again now?" but it's just a thought, not the strong
> > compulsion to use that I used to get when I was newly stopped.
>
> > I relapsed often enough before to be able to answer that thought with
> > ease now - it would precipitate a chain of events over which I would
> > have little control. It would empty my bank account. It would cause me
> > much depression and anxiety and hopelessness. It would wreak all that
> > I have striven to create for myself over the years. I would lose the
> > life I have now.
>
> > NA didn't help me quit my addiction. When I think of the time I spent
> > in NA, what I mostly recall is the crap I had to endure from other
> > addicts battling to get clean. The people in NA and I didn't get
> > along. They upset me a lot. Pissed me off. Irritated the shit out of
> > me often. I found people to be argumentative and easily upset over
> > trivialities. I found little sanity in the rooms of NA. I wouldn't
> > care to subject myself to that all over again, just as I would not
> > wish to subject myself to drug addiction again.
>
> > I accept that I am still addicted to crack, and that if I were to use
> > it again, I would ruin my life all over again. I don't call myself an
> > addict today because for me that word implies the current use of an
> > addictive drug.
>
> > I'm glad I got out of addiction and I'm glad I also left the cult of
> > NA behind me.
>
> > advice on how to get out of it, my advice to them would be to find
> > some way to make it impossible for themselves to get hold of and use
> > drugs for at least a few weeks. If you can live your life without
> > drugs for a while and actually decide you prefer living clean, then
> > you will find the ability within yourself to leave that life behind.
> > If you can decide you prefer living without drugs, you will get out.
> > But if you can't decide that, if you still feel you prefer to live
> > using drugs, you will not get out. Nothing can get you out unless you
> > decide you want to. But you need a few weeks clean to feel the
> > difference.
>
> It's irresponsible people like you that ruin crack for everyone
> else.
!. My addition was hell.
2. Na got me out of hell by stopping my addiction.
3. A cult is someones else religion. If N.A. is a cult I don't care
because it got me clean when nothing else would.
Irv Hyatt
"dennis" <dennisnan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:04eaadd2-644b-4f2b...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
ie, 'the program' teaches good arithmetic?
Father Haskell
An adult human being has full control over his or her impulses.
I don't have the SLIGHTEST pity for anyone who calls himself
an "addict," or respect for anyone who brags about being an
"ex" addict.
Richard Catto
> > 2. Na got me out of hell by stopping my addiction.
> > 3. A cult is someones else religion. If N.A. is a cult I don't care
> > because it got me clean when nothing else would.
> An adult human being has full control over his or her impulses.
> I don't have the SLIGHTEST pity for anyone who calls himself
> an "addict," or respect for anyone who brags about being an
> "ex" addict.
Actually recent research shows that cocaine users suffer from lowered
impulse control.
Parsons
What do you suffer from, Porky?
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7262971.stm
Irv Hyatt
I went to Venice Beach on Sunday and they were having a 12 step 'service' on
the beach.
I meandered over and sat down. As soon as a guy got up and started talking
about his "DISEASE" I had to leave. First they pass the buck to a higher
power (is that a mathematical concept I wonder?) and then declare themselves
diseased. I've yet to meet a single stepper who takes responsibility for
their own behavior. "The devil forced me to inject myself with heroin, now
I'm a diseased fallen person and can't get up by myself"... what a
crock-o-crap
peachy ashie passion
You know, the only people I've ever known who were this against 12
step meetings were addicts.
Richard Catto
> Irv Hyatt wrote:
> > I went to Venice Beach on Sunday and they were having a 12 step 'service' on
> > the beach.
> > I meandered over and sat down. As soon as a guy got up and started talking
> > about his "DISEASE" I had to leave. First they pass the buck to a higher
> > power (is that a mathematical concept I wonder?) and then declare themselves
> > diseased. I've yet to meet a single stepper who takes responsibility for
> > their own behavior. "The devil forced me to inject myself with heroin, now
> > I'm a diseased fallen person and can't get up by myself"... what a
> > crock-o-crap
> You know, the only people I've ever known who were this against 12
> step meetings were addicts.
Irv is a drug mammal.
Parsons
And you're still a kiddy molester, Dicky.
Greg Evans
> You know, the only people I've ever known who were this
> against 12 step meetings were addicts.
Not so! I've never been addicted to anything (well, except maybe BBQ), and
I flat-out refuse to attend any 12-step meetings!
peachy ashie passion
ahh, but do you go about saying they are worthless and cults and
whiners and....
?
Or do you just not go?
MosNot
"Greg Evans" <gregeva...@charterBLATHER.net> wrote in message
news:6366ioF...@mid.individual.net...
Can't say I blame you. At a barbeque, after about
four beers, even a two step is difficult to dance.