The Syndicate Meets The Secret

Michele Blood wrote a “book” with Bob Proctor. It’s called …

Become A Magnet To Money: Through The Sea Of Unlimited Consciousness

… I shit you not :: that’s what it’s fucking called. But don’t let that bit of obvious illiteracy get in the way of you buying this crap.  Because seriously …

“This revolutionary new book will open your consciousness to the truth of what wealth really is. This book could be the magic lamp you have been searching for!”

Did you hear that people?  We’re not fucking around here … we’re talking MAGIC LAMPS.  It’s exactly what you’ve been searching for {during your “Robitussin as a beverage” phases}!

“This book goes deep… deeper than you may have ever experienced before.”

That’s what she said! … … … BOOM!

“If you only knew the omnipotent power that you can plug into, your life would be breath taking.”

OMFG :: just an editorial note for the Universal Creative Source and Sea of Consciousness Machine :: it should be …

“If you only knew the omnipotent power that you could plug into, your life would be breathtaking.”

See the difference? It’s still a terrible sentence bereft of meaning … but at least now it’s not totally fucking daft.

Anywayz :: Michele Blood has the secret of magic lamp wealth and everything … but she don’t know how to sell it on them Internez … cause she so stupid.

Enter {from underneath the stage all covered in demonic fecesIrwin Frank Kern.

Ms. Blood attended the Magic Bullet seminar where Irwin was extolling the virtues of telephone boiler rooms.  She took the opportunity to ask a question about getting affiliates for crappy products … and Frank took the opportunity to explain how everyone should form a syndicate and become its Godfather.

Godfather is French for Trade Union.

Or something.

All Michele Blood needs to do is form a French cartel consisting of the top self-help creeps like Tony Robbins :: T. Harv Eker :: and James Arthur Ray etc.

Boom :: profits!

Forming bullshit cartels is the magic lamp that the Sea Of Unlimited Consciousness forgot to tell Michele Blood about. Good thing she has Irwin.

>> bleep bloop

204 thoughts on “The Syndicate Meets The Secret”

  1. Thanks for the advice Irwin, I am thinking about forming my own “magic lamp trade union” anyone interested?

    1. @Sheeple 1 ::

      I’m in!

      Hopefully JAR will come out of my lamp so I can kick him in the nuts … and then wish him out of existence.

      1. @SD,

        You know, basically what Death Ray is saying is that he willingly caused the deaths of his victims? How else could it be? He claims to be a mechanic of the universe, plugging commands into it that it willingly churns out. It “Whatever you put out there consistently, think feel and act upon, comes to you…”

        Righty-o Death Ray…you fucken nut job…

      2. @SD, i think i peed a little when i read that. who is this bozo on the video with michelle? who drops F bombs from the stage?

      3. @SD,

        Dear Mr. Droid,

        It does not behoove you, a mechanical contrivance, to mock the secrets of The Great Ectoplasm. Inasmuch as you cannot qualify for passage on the Soul Express, since you are impervious, impenetrable, shockproof and water-tight, it seems cruel to shatter the few nontaxable dreams we lesser, mortal constructs cling to when specters such as male-pattern baldness, erectile dysfunction, varicose veins and vaginal dryness conspire to rob us of the simplest organic pleasures. Whether there is or is is NOT a Great Pumpkin, can’t we keep our fantasies? At worst, we lose nothing when the lights go out – the Void, if that be all there be, is peaceful and there are no elections, parking meters, Larry King or artificial sweeteners to endure. Granted, there is no more empirical evidence of The Afterlife than there is confirming the existence of the Easter Bunny or justifying Regis Philbin’s fame, but as long as we’re not sacrificing children or digging up your lawn in search of magical talismans, how much of your kinetic power source are we consuming?

        Pardon me, I did not intend to castigate such a noble champion of the minion multitude. In fact, I was suddenly struck by a notion – I think it was a notion, it didn’t leave a dent in my skull but my ears were ringing for a few minutes – that there might be a constructive, entertaining AND lucrative way to curtail the “d-bags”. A new on-line game. You’d be the perfect host!

        Guru Death Watch!

        The public buys coupons, using PayPal, by filling in the name of their preferred Evil Guru, along with the time, place & cause of their demise. The names and dollar values purchased are listed on-line, with the chosen “dates of death” hidden.

        When an Evil Guru expires, by any means, whoever has chosen all 3 key features wins The Grand Prize – which is a portion of the total value of coupons issued against that name.

        Of course, there’s no way the game producers could prevent some twisted, outraged, crazed maniac from waiting for the gross to hit 7 figures, buying a coupon and then simply subcontracting the job of delivering the appropriate coup de gras at the right time & place.

        No doubt a few legal ripples to iron out, perhaps if registered in one of the ‘Stans, or Tennessee, Patron State Of Shootin Stuff, there’d be fewer hurdles. A good FTC disclaimer should suffice.

        If it pulled good numbers, it could be expanded to included politicians, bankers and telemarketers.

        As I stated earlier, this was a sudden notion. If it’s offensive or inappropriate, in your view, please accept my sincere apologies. Maybe it would be more acceptable if we added a “maimed for like” option.

        But no ClickBank.

        Thanks for keeping gravity down.

        Yours truly,

        Elwood P Dowd

        PS – Like the finish on your side panels – do you use natural, like Carnuba, or strictly synthetics?

      4. @SD, I’m thinkin that Rhonda Byrnes had no idea what she would unleash when she dreamt upon a star about the big secret. Sadly the genie ballsed up and gave her a bunch of fraudulent con bags. Now thats what I call sucksess.

  2. Frankly (pun intended) disturbing!

    The tasteless little gaff about JAR and his sales slump (since he murdered all those innocent folks n all) aside, this really is eye-opening for anyone going into Internet Marketing or affiliating with any of these ‘syndicate’ assholes…..

    ……or at least it would be if they would actually OPEN THEIR FUCKIN EYES!!

    That room is full of noobs hanging off every one of his manipulative words, can they not see that they are NOT part of the syndicate, that they will only EVER be treated as the low down affiliates with the odd bone and scraps fed to them? That they themselves have parted with a few grand to finance Irwins lifestyle (he’s a champion surfer you know…) and they are the EXACT kind of idiots and fools that Frank is telling them to target! Aaargh, it’s infuriating to watch this stuff!

    And above all else WHY CAN’T THEY SEE IT’S WRONG?? Not only are they going to become victims of the syndicate themselves, they are going to promote useless crap (for scraps) to other innocent noobs and keep the wheel of spiel turning.

    I know your blog has already had a massive impact SD, and I imagine it has also saved many folks a ton of cash that they may have otherwise parted with, but I fear that this syndicate with its ruthless regard for human rights will just keep on destroying more lives as it feeds off their weaknesses.

    I pray that I am wrong and that you bring the whole fuckin lot down!

    1. @Wiggin-Out ::

      “That room is full of noobs hanging off every one of his manipulative words, can they not see that they are NOT part of the syndicate, that they will only EVER be treated as the low down affiliates with the odd bone and scraps fed to them?”

      Nope they can’t see that. But …

      1. This happened before I let The Syndicate cat out of its bag. People come in and get ground up for meat before they can detect the patterns. 35% customer churn each year people tell me. I’ll bet it’s more like 50%. Anyone in the group who has any social wisdom about the situation is either in on the game … or deeply dependent on it.

      2. If you weren’t listening for this … you wouldn’t hear it. It’s only about 3 minutes in a 36 hour bullshit storm.

      Still … it’s pretty crazy … and people paid $5K or something to be there.

      Something’s gotta be done about this shit. It’ll happen … keep the faith.

      1. @SD,

        I keep sending your links to people in authority along with length explanations about the scams they all perpetrate…and nothing gets done

        I think it’s about time we shame a few public officials into doing something about these scam artists

        This is getting sickening

  3. Poor old Frank. He thinks he’s showing off his intelligence by discussing the origin of ‘syndicate’ whereas really he’s displaying his ignorance.

    It’s easy to see how he got muddled, poor lamb.

    This is the definition of ‘syndicate’ from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=syndicate

    “1620s, “council or body of representatives,” from Fr. syndicat, from syndic “representative of a corporation” (see syndic). Meaning “combination of persons or companies to carry out some commercial undertaking” first occurs 1865.”

    Whereas what he’s probably thinking of is syndicalism – http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/syndicalism

    “–noun
    1. a form or development of trade unionism, originating in France, that aims at the possession of the means of production and distribution, and ultimately at the control of society, by federated bodies of industrial workers, and that seeks to realize its purposes through general strikes, terrorism, sabotage, etc.
    2. an economic system in which workers own and manage industry.”

    Monsieur Kern, vous etes un cretin.

    1. @Pass the Sick Bag ::

      Ha!

      Each night my dreams have Irwin standing up in court making his “it’s French for Trade Union” defense. It always ends badly for him.

    2. @Pass the Sick Bag,

      am i the only one who notices that the definition you gave for “syndicate” (ie “combination of persons or companies to carry out some commercial undertaking”) is actually totally appropriate for what the so-called ‘syndicate’ does, while the definition you gave for syndicalism, with its strikes and terror and workers seizing the means of production, makes no sense in the context of the ‘syndicate?’

      kern and his group aren’t ‘workers’ in the marxist sense of that term, since they don’t answer to anyone, so syndicalism is precluded here. they are, however, a group of people joined together for the purpose of a commercial exercise, namely, the scheduling of launches and the cross-promotion of junk products and who knows what else.

      which is just a wordy way to say that your post makes no sense, and anybody who voted it up should feel a little silly. kern may not be right on a lot of stuff, but according to your etymology he’s using the word *syndicate* correctly.

      1. @etymologist,

        The secret to understanding my post is to watch the video.

        This is what FK says: “Syndicate is, I think, French for trade union and that’s why I made the mafia joke because everyone thinks it means mafia. It really means trade union.”

        Changing the subject, WTF is going on with those sunglasses tucked into the top of his shirt.

        He looks like a porky Eurotrash sleazeball pimp.

        1. @, My god, you’re right.
          As a connoisseur of porky Eurotrash sleazeball pimps, I have to agree that the current look is missing ‘cool surfer dude’ by a mile but hitting the bulls-eye spot-on for porky Eurotrash sleazeball pimp.

  4. Unfortunately one sick bag wasn’t enough for the effects of the comment about James Ray. The fifth one is in the process of being filled at the moment.

    Nothing can illustrate the utter moral bankruptcy of Frank Kern better than that comment.

    This is what he said:

    “Have you ever noticed that all the people in the internet marketing world are promoting each other? We’re not psychic. All the top people work together to serve the market better and to help each other’s business. It’s based on the principle there’s no such thing as my customer. Right, so if they’re buying your stuff, they’re also buying mind movies stuff. They’re also buying Tony’s stuff. They’re also to a degree probably buying T Harv Eker’s stuff. Maybe not James Ray as much any more. (Audience titters.) I wasn’t trying to hate man. I was just saying. You know. It was a shame that whole thing happened. Whatever. It’s a bummer.”

    OK Frank, so you think it’s acceptable to make a flippant joke about the deaths of three people. And you think the right way to describe this utter tragedy for their families is as “a shame” and “it’s a bummer”.

    In my world Frank, “a bummer” is when an Amazon order is delayed or a friend cancels a night out. Not when three people die. Or perhaps you think the death of customers is acceptable collateral damage on the road to riches.

    Frank, I don’t think you have anything valuable to offer the world. It’s time for you to leave the scene and engage in a period of silence and reflection …. for everyone’s sake.

    1. @Pass the Sick Bag, Irwin apparently isn’t the only one given to self-centered dismissiveness when it comes to the tragedies James Ray left in his wake. Case in point: a recent exchange on Twitter. It started on December 5 when a guy who goes by the Twitter moniker @acesprayer re-tweeted JAR. To that RT, @NancyOgilvie replied: “@acesprayer did u know that @JamesARay is awaiting trial for 3 cts of manslaughter? He killed 3 students at his event in 10/09.”

      To which @acesprayer replied: “@NancyOgilvie @JamesARay how do u know he’s guilty? Accidents happen! James change my life. I met him in atlanta a while back! Don’t judge like that!”

      I piped in: “@acesprayer @JamesARay changed a lot of other people’s lives too. Irreparably. And he ended a few as well. WAKE UP.”

      And @acesprayer responded, “@CosmicConnie @JamesARay I speak from my experience. I’m awake. And I don’t judge! And I apreciate [sic] what he taught me. Too bad what happened!”

      I’m probably tweeting to a wall, but I replied to @acesprayer “‘Too bad what happened?’ I think the families of the dead deserve better than that. Maybe ‘judging’ could have saved some lives.”

      It seems clear that “judging” is still a dirty word in large segments of Unicorn Village. Fortunately the U.S. and Arizona legal systems do not agree.

      1. @Cosmic Connie,
        I just wanted to tell you that I appreciate your comments and especially Nancy Ogilvie’s comments on Twitter with her rebuttals to JAR’s tweets. I read them everyday on the side of Salty’s blog just to see what she will say…

    2. @Pass the Sick Bag, “Maybe not James Ray as much any more. (Audience titters.)”

      Killing people has never been so hilarious!

      WTF???????

      1. @Bryan Neuman ::

        You think your dead Mother is a bummer … James Ray has seen sales decline. Stop with the hate … and have some empathy.

    3. @Pass the Sick Bag,

      Here here… Listen to the man Frank, you fucken Turd Eating Cock Knocking Asswipe… Even while I’m a shallow lying Californian dreaming whore, you made light of people dying…you should have your teeth kicked in for that.

  5. Love this line:

    Forming bullshit cartels is the magic lamp that the Sea Of Unlimited Consciousness forgot to tell Michele Blood about. Good thing she has Irwin.

    Seems like the SUC should’ve mentioned that to her.

  6. I looked at the sales page for the “book” by Michele and Scientist Bob — an amateur job, and they spelled Drew Heriot’s name wrong. (For those who don’t recall: Drew was the director and screenwriter for the original Secret DVD; he was responsible for much of the creativity of the project, and he allegedly got screwed out of a great deal of money by Rhonda Byrne, and he sued her, and, alas, lost. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/17/1210765254572.html )

    But Michele and Bob’s product did get some rave reviews from credible folks — such as someone who claims to be an “Angelic Counselor.”

    It looks as if Scientist Bob is really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one. The Secret’s heyday has obviously come and gone, and that “Reposition your boner” thing Bob did a couple of years ago with another New-Wage guru whose business dealings are questionable at best, Mary Manin Morrissey, has probably outlived its useful life too, if it ever really had one. http://tinyurl.com/7tsykb

    I have a feeling Bob’s days are numbered (and no, this isn’t a reference to his advanced age).

  7. Preaching to the converted, on both sides I guess…

    I do wonder what would have happened if the Tony Awards had gone ahead…

    1. @BarkingMad ::

      I think I might have won one. Just a hunch.

      My acceptance speech would have been fricking awesome. Oh wells.

  8. What I’m beginning to NOT understand is why these guys are still freely running their businesses in flagrant violation of competition law. You can’t just form a private cartel and go around bankrupting the naive.

    I don’t wanna get all anti-globalization here or anything, but maybe these Syndicate people are a reflection of a morally bankrupt society at large. When you have the WTO, World Bank, and IMF (big-ass debt cartel) going around collapsing the economies of third world countries in order to force the citizens into slave-wage labor (as illustrated in Confessions of an Economic Hitman) then doesn’t this enable pricks like Kern and his latent-homo dude parade posse to do what they do?

    America–no, the human species–needs to grow up and fast to combat these cancerous tumors arresting our evolution. Anybody have any real strategies to take these guys down?

    1. @WN ::

      Globalization doesn’t have to be synonymous with back-breaking debt policies :: there are beautiful parts about it too. But that’s another sad topic.

      If the government can’t even stop these public confession giving ghetto ass chuckle heads from brutally abusing people … then how are we supposed to believe that they are going to be capable of doing a god damn thing about the more pervasive :: and subtle :: destroyers of the good?

      It’s pathetic.

  9. Magic lamps…Syndicates…Unikerns alluding to French… Man, will it never end?
    Thankfully we have a light at the beginning of the tunnel with our Droid.

    BTW, SD, I hope it’s ok if I put a link in my last blog article to this blog.
    Look for “this attorney” in the last part of the post.

    Feel free to punish me if I did a bad.

    Thank you all for your comments.
    It only solidifies the opinions I’ve had for the last 4 years.

  10. “Globalization doesn’t have to be synonymous with back-breaking debt policies :: there are beautiful parts about it too.”

    Wow. Just wow.

    Spoken like a true Shriner. Total bullshit.

    I bet you think depopulation is needed too… you know, for those with “unlucky genes”, (unlike you Salty)?

    Fact: the WTO, The World Bank, The United Nations and the IMF all work together to control we the sheeple. They are controlled by the Royal Institute of International Affairs (just connect the dots with Google). And they are pulling the rug out from underneath the United States (and other first nations) as the masses watch football and Dancin’ with the Stars to avoid the New Age “negative” news.

    Time to cover your sad magic act with your Fez hat, dude.

    1. @Salty New World Order ::

      Missing the fucking point as usual @StumpedMarkus.

      Globalization could also mean the mixing of peoples and ideas … and the breaking down of the kind of nationalistic sentiments that lubricate our constant wars with one another.

      I’m not going to discuss the World Bank :: WTO :: IMF :: et al here … but suffice it to say that I am not a big fan.

      I’m the revolutionary cowboy you’ve always wanted to be Markus. Just face it … and get on board the freaking robot train.

      PS … You’re a nut-job.

    2. @Salty New World Order,

      It appears that you’re purposely trying to derail the thread here.

      Which is dumb of you.

      And transparently derisive.

      Learn how to construct an argument, douche-fuck.

      1. @Cosmic Connie,

        hahaha isn’t Kevin’s new pyramid scheme, the $1000.00/month club all about dispensing New World Order secrets he learned while he was part of the “good ol boys” club?

        Salty should expose him, like he dun me. Even if I look like a fool, I feel a better man for it :)

    1. @Duff,

      * Dividing territories, an agreement by two companies to stay out of each other’s way and reduce competition in the agreed-upon territories.

      That the European Union at work there, forcing certain countries to only sell specific goods to others, and only buy certain ones from a select few etc. For Example, Country A can only sell it’s mile to Country B and C, but can also only buy it’s cheese from X and Z. Country B can sell it’s cheese to E and R but can only buy it’s milk from A and Z. There’s a set time period for such practices, but they put them into effect.

      Oh wait, they’re a “Union”…ok…got it…

  11. “…we have sold over 800,000 actual physical products.”

    OMG. So they’re wanting to to go “viral” with this thing and scam millions more with this mental junk.

    Why can’t she just use her “magic lamp” to illuminate the shit out of it? Um.. because Kern needs to use it find his tiny pecker. What a douche.

    1. @Irwin, See how mr. Kern plays it cool but probably can be thinking she is already a better scammer than him?

      mr. Kern thought bubble: Even in my old “FTC Getting” days it is so much better than me. :-(

  12. “In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win.” Rupert Murdoch

    The secret movie might have made one person temporarily rich but the rest reverted to their usual fighting and sharing of scabies which just exposed their low level of intelligence and lack of wealth. In the end the truth does come out and all of these people are being discovered for who they’ve always been.

      1. @Chris, Proctor took Schirmer to court and won but I wouldnt trust either of them because they are both in the same business and none of these guys like anyone else on their turf. Schirmer made a name for himself for screwing people over to make himself rich because he kept boasting about buying luxury stuff while not paying anyone anything and claiming losses so none of what he did made any sense to the sensible. Most people with a fraction of grey matter look after those that help you but it appears Schirmer helped himself to the lolly jar and didnt give a shit about the people that helped him or his responsibility to them. I’m not sure the guy is still operating but if he is he’s a shell of the padded ego he used to be and nobody trusts him any more nor should they.

  13. Can anyone tell me why all of these people are based out of San Diego? Seriously – just about ALL of the big namers’ in this shitbag group are all based out of San Diego.

    What the hell is in the water down in San Diego?

    1. @JD, LOL. I have the same question about Utah based scammers as well. They could have the same problem. One way or another these tricksters and snake oil salesman need to continue to be named and shamed. Still not enough people are aware of their activities. If you check out the Warrior Forum you would think Frank Kern is a god or something. It is hilarious to be honest.

    2. @JD ::

      Geographic co-location :: in person sales seminars :: phone rooms :: “old school” cartels. Where’s the Internet part of “Internet Marketing”??

  14. Here are 2 nice domains I recently found:

    MikefilsaimeSucks DOT com
    FrankKernSuccess DOT com

    Mike owns his own sucking domain and explains why (we all know that already tiny little twat) and Frankie calls himself success (RIGHT ON!).

    Someone once said (humorously) ==> “Don’t confuse fame with success. Madonna is one; Helen Keller is the other.”

    I think the domain should be FrankKernFAME(or FLAME / FAKE / FUCK / WHATEVER).com.

    Love and worst of luck!

    Mr. Flame.

    1. I also noticed a KoOl video of Michellieee about “Musivation Motivation”.. Too bad she doesn’t practice (Or maybe she does?) “Mussitation Motivation” (Mumbling / To those who are in need of a dictionary). That’s more like it!

      OK, to be serious; I have no idea who is this accent M.I.L.F, but my grandma is far more convincing from her grave ==>

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f4-FuPT6WI

      Love,

      Mr. Flame #2.

    2. @Mr. Flame,

      I read some comments on MikeShitStainsucks dot com, I mean MikeFilsaimeSucks {hard} DOT Com

      and read this fucken losers comment:

      “Mike, this is really good stuff. I’ve always despised the Guru Name Bashing Marketing. I remember the first time we talked and I promoted butterfly marketing. I asked if it would be okay if I used a variation of the the BFM name and you obliged. I think that when you are using someone’s name to support and promote them in a positive way, it is a awesome thing. I’ve created several websites that promote our fellow marketers and because I do it in good taste, I never receive any negative feedback. In fact, one such Guru (will remain nameless) saw a site I created around his products and services, and liked it so much that he gave me access to the product he was promoting at the time.
      Mike, thanks for all that you have done to mentor me and take my business and personal life to the next level.
      In my book, you definitely don’t suck! :)

      Lonnie Robinson”

      “I think when you are using someone’s name to support and promote them in a positive way, it is a awesome thing.”

      followed by

      “In fact, one such Guru (will remain nameless) saw a site I created around his poducts and services, and like it so much that he game be access to the product he was promoting at that time.”

      Lonnie reads as if he’s half literate, so I can’t tell if what he’s saying is that he was actually promoting a product he did not have and subsequently gained access to it because the “Guru” liked what he was doing, or if the Guru gave him access to a new frauduct of his. Either way, he’s another reason why IM is a cancer these days. Writing reviews on products you don’t own for the sole purpose of profiting from your bullshit review is a fraud period. If it is to get access to the product for free, it’s a dual purposed fraud. Fuck Lonnie.

      In another one of the comments on MikeShitStainSucks DOT Com, from the Shit Stain himself confirms there is nothing one can do if the website has no monetizing practices, etc…bwahahahahahahahah… must burn his arse that he can do nothing for his “good name” {rolling eyes} when it comes to postings like these… Free Speech, which of course Shit Stain repeatedly says he is all for and fully supports. Free speech…what a bitch, hey Mikey? lol

      “Mike {Shit Stain} says:
      May 10, 2010 at 8:22 pm

      Hey Erik,

      If a person does not have any (any) way to profit, there is not much you can do.

      No external Links
      No Banners
      No posts to other websites even without links.

      Then there is not much you can do. Your Trademark will not help you much.

      In other words, you can stand every day in from of a bakery with a picket sign that says “I hate the food here” and there is NOTHING the store owner can do. It is free speech. However, if you did the same and then said, “Go to my store down the block” you could have issues with Defamation or Slander. (Written words of the same such as a blog is Libel.)

      You can learn more about it here defamation.”

      1. @Maria Androgynous,

        LOL, read the email correspondance between Shit Stain and the one who owned the MikeFilsaimeSucks DOT com domain before him. Reading some of Mike’s emails is torturous enough, parsing meaning from some of his grade school literacy, but here’s one that made me LOL

        “It is simply what the courts will say and I look forward to proving this in court to protect other marketers (including you) from such unnecessary deformation.”

        Shit Stain claims he paid his lawyer $5000.00 for his assistance in retrieving the website from this dude. He could have at least had his lawyer proof read his stupid emails to begin with. I’m pretty sure his high priced lawyer would have been able to catch DEFAMATION from DEFORMATION

        LOLOL

        Was that a bit of a freudian slip there Mike Shit-Stain Filsaime? You certainly do look a little less deformed with the beard and goggles on though. BWAHA

        Mike seems to have trouble putting his spoken words into type or print based words. If you read the transcript on the site, it flows much better than when Mike attempts to put the drek that comes out of his mouth on paper, or screen.

        I wonder what part of the brain is deformed when this particular task is called upon? Or is it defamed?

        LOL

        Any neuro-anatomy students around?

        Discuss….

  15. So I just tried to unsubscribe from Brad Fallon’s new uQast list for his launch…

    Guess what happened when I clicked “unsubscribe”?

    I was taken to his squeeze page. WHAT?? I’m pretty sure that’s the exact OPPOSITE of unsubscribing LOL.

    That officially makes every email I get from him from now on illegal spam. Who to tell…?

  16. This guy sounds like another snake oil salesman and a thug as well. I don’t think I have ever bought a product from him (knowingly at least) and this convinces me not to ever make that mistake. I heard he uses NLP techniques in his videos to sell his hyped up products.


    1. I heard he uses NLP techniques in his videos to sell his hyped up products.

      He uses coercive persuasion in his videos. Remember folks: NLP doesn’t manipulate people, douchebags manipulate people.

      1. @Duff, I stand corrected. Thanks Duff. He certainly looks like a very manipulative fellow. He really has the “kernerds” over at WF sucked in LOL.

      2. @Duff,

        Too bad that many of the NeLPers of the world DO use it to manipulate. Must be part of the cancer flowing down, or is it UP, from it’s roots when one of the developers was the biggest fucken scammer you could ever imagine. Taking the good work of several caring therapists to make a linguistic technique that really was intended to manipulate people into doing what you wanted, which BTW has been communicated by Bandler many times.

        When that failed, he could always use a gun, which he did to murder someone and has also done in following seminars to coerce people into change.

          1. @SD,

            I know Bandler ain’t really scamming people online, or is he these days? But he’s as big a douche bag, if not bigger than Tony Robbins. I’m sure there’s a load of material just waiting to be shown. You’d get all the Bandler’ites coming to comment too and you know that would shed a whole lot of light on NLP and the coercive tactics that Harlan KuntStein and Frank Korn Kernal have been ‘openly’ using and bragging about.

            1. @Maria Androgynous,

              Bandler is certainly a very shady character and he’s not the only one by a long shot. Of course several people high up in the APA (American Psychological Association) were a part of creating torture protocols for Guantanamo Bay.

              Everywhere you look, useful tools of practical psychology are abused for evil or selfish ends.

            2. @Maria Androgynous,

              I don’t think Bandler understands online persuasion very well. He’s more of a mess-with-your-mind-in-person kinda guy.

            3. @Jimmy Ray,

              I honestly don’t know what people mean most of the time when they use the descriptor “NLP” so I’ll skip your comments on that one.

              What caught my eye is this:

              “If you’re easily hypnotized, there’s definitely something amiss with your brain.”

              I think you do people a disservice when you say ignorant things like this. It’s almost the same as when a hypnotist says things like “You are in complete control at all times and no suggestions will be accepted unless you choose them to.”

              These are merely ways of reducing or removing resistance which in turn makes hypnotizing that much easier.

              Just because you have seen a large number of hacks trying to hypnotize people with goofy language patterns or other ridiculous and transparent BS does not make the phenomenon of hypnosis BS. Nor does it mean that only the stupid and ignorant can be hypnotized.

              People have been battling against the reality of hypnosis for centuries. Or at least they think they have because in reality they find themselves dealing with intricacies involved in the pet systems that people paste over the phenomenon instead of the phenomenon itself. Kind of like you’re doing in your “rant about NLP” post above.

              To quote a biographer of Anton Mesmer: “Many observers who believed there was something in Mesmerism could not see what it was because Mesmer obscured their view by throwing up smoke screens of baffling theories.”

            4. @Christopher Tomasulo,

              I don’t know what you understood of that, but I’ll be more specific… In hypnotic states you are in a predominant Alpha brain wave pattern. If you are easily induced into alpha by hypnotic language, there’s a problem. In Alpha brain wave state, you are far more suggestible and have diminished critical thinking capacity. There’s nothing ignorant with the statement at all.

              If you think giving up control of your mind to a showman or “hypnotist” is fun or good times, be my guest.

              “Just because you have seen a large number of hacks trying to hypnotize people with goofy language patterns or other ridiculous and transparent BS does not make the phenomenon of hypnosis BS.”

              I never said the phenomenon of hypnosis was BS. It’s very real. It’s just dangerous to allow someone to tamper with your mind that way and again if you’re easily induced, then there is a problem.

            5. @Christopher Tomalooser,

              LOL, I just clicked on your website and the first sentence of your ad copy reads:

              “In June of 2002 I attended Roy Williams Magical Worlds curriculum at the Wizard Academy.”

              So you’re peddling magic by people at the Wizards academy hey Harry Potter?

              You teach people how to use magic words to induce people into suggestible trances. Lol…no wonder your vagina is all taut.

              “Now I’d like to tell you that I have a great memory and that I can recite to you all I learned at the Magical Worlds seminar but alas I don’t remember all that much because I was drunk the whole time”

              lolol

              I’d suggest that you need to sober up in the real world too, not just at Hogwarts there buddy.

            6. Scientific criticism

              Main article: NLP and science

              There are three main scientific criticisms of NLP. First, some critics[who?] argue that NLP’s claims for scientific respectability are not based on the scientific method. In response, advocates of NLP argue that NLP is a pragmatic discipline, largely interested in what “works” rather than existing theory. Second, there is a lack of empirical research or evidence to support the core aspects of NLP or the claim that NLP is an effective and rapid set of techniques for enhancing psycho-therapeutic practice, interpersonal communication and social influence.[citation needed] One of the originators of NLP, John Grinder, retorts that the meta model was based on his expertise in linguistics and empirical work in collaboration with Richard Bandler in the early 1970s.[citation needed] However, some critics[who?] maintain that the experimental research that does exist has been overall unsupportive of the central assumptions and core models of NLP, and that it is therefore up to the proponents to back up their models and claims of effectiveness with evidence.[citation needed]

              In an article published in 2005, psychologist Grant Devilly stated that at the time it was introduced, NLP was heralded as a breakthrough in therapy, and advertisements for training workshops, videos and books began to appear in trade magazines. The workshops provided certification. However, controlled studies shed such a poor light on the practice, and those promoting the intervention made such extreme and changeable claims that researchers began to question the wisdom of researching the area further.[47]

              The title of “neuro-linguistic programming” is simply a pretense to be a legitimate discipline such as neuroscience, neurolinguistics, and psychology. Michael Corballis (1999) stated that “NLP is a thoroughly fake title, designed to give the impression of scientific respectability”.[61] Furthermore, NLP adapted many scientific sounding terms, such as eye accessing cues, metamodeling, micromodeling, metaprogramming, neurological levels, presuppositions, representational systems, and submodalities, intended to obfuscate and to give the impression of a scientific discipline[62]}. According to Canadian skeptic Beyerstein (1995) “though it claims neuroscience in its pedigree, NLP’s outmoded view of the relationship between cognitive style and brain function ultimately boils down to crude analogies.”[63]

              That there is a lack of empirical research or evidence to support the core aspects of NLP and the claim that NLP is an effective and rapid set of techniques for enhancing psycho-therapeutic practice, interpersonal communication and social influence.[15] NLP is rarely discussed in academic textbooks and has a limited number of journal articles dedicated to it. NLP has mostly been taught via short seminars and workshops, audio programs and books in a variety of application fields rather than universities, although it is sometimes taught at continuing educational colleges connected to universities. A small number of universities offer postgraduate courses in neuro-linguistic programming in the United Kingdom, and in Australia a postgraduate course is accredited.[55]

              Heap states that generalizations about the mind and behavior, such as those purported by NLP proponents, can only be arrived at through prolonged, systematic, and meticulous investigation of human subjects using empirical procedures. Heap (1988) stated “There is just no other way of doing this”. In general, authors in the field of NLP have rarely expressed an interest in providing a coherent theory; instead, they often state their primary aim in modeling “what works”. They also claim there is ample evidence for NLP as an eclectic approach drawing from existing “cognitive-behavioral approaches, Gestalt therapy, hypnotherapy, family therapy, and brief therapy.[64]

              John Grinder offers a counterexample arguing in retrospect that the meta-model, for example, drew from his expertise in transformational grammar and empirical work in collaboration with Bandler between 1973 and 1975.[24] Tosey and Mathison state “the pragmatic and often anti-theoretical stance by the founders has left a legacy of little engagement between practitioner and academic communities”.[44][65]

              The experimental research that does exist was mostly done in the 1980s and 1990s, and on the whole was unsupportive of the central assumptions and core models of NLP.[citation needed] It consisted of laboratory experimentation testing Bandler and Grinder’s hypotheses[66] that a person’s preferred sensory mode of thinking can be revealed by observing eye movement cues and sensory predicates in language use.[44] A research review conducted by Christopher Sharpley which focused on preferred representational systems, in 1984,[67] followed by another review in 1987 in response to a critique published by Einspruch and Forman,[68] concluded that there was little evidence for its usefulness as an effective counseling tool. Reviewing the literature in 1988, Michael Heap also concluded that objective and fair investigations had shown no support for NLP claims about “preferred representational systems”.[15] A research committee[43] working for United States National Research Council led by Daniel Druckman came to two conclusions. First, the committee “found little if any” evidence to support NLP’s assumptions or to indicate that it is effective as a strategy for social influence. “It assumes that by tracking another’s eye movements and language, an NLP trainer can shape the person’s thoughts, feelings, and opinions (Dilts, 1983[69]). There is no scientific support for these assumptions.”[70] Secondly, the committee members “were impressed with the modeling approach used to develop the technique. The technique was developed from careful observations of the way three master psychotherapists conducted their sessions, emphasizing imitation of verbal and nonverbal behaviors… This then led the committee to take up the topic of expert modeling in the second phase of its work.”[70] Von Bergen et al. (1997) state that “the most telling commentary on NLP may be that the latest revision of his text on enhancing human performance, Druckman (Druckman & Bjork 1991) omitted all reference to Neurolinguistic Programming.”[71]

              These studies, in particular Sharpley’s literature review, marked a decline in empirical research of NLP, and particularly in matching sensory predicates and its use in counsellor-client relationship in counseling psychology.[72] Barry Beyerstein (1995) stated that NLP was based on outmoded scientific theories and that its “explanation” of the relationship between cognitive style and brain function was no more than crude analogy.[63] According to Efran and Lukens (1990), claiming that “original interest in NLP turned to disillusionment after the research and now it is rarely even mentioned in psychotherapy”(p. 122).[73]

              Norcross et al. (2006) conducted a Delphi poll of American doctoral-level mental health professionals and academics in psychology and psychotherapy in which 73.3% of respondents reported that they were familiar with NLP as an approach and, on average, rated NLP for the treatment of mental and behavioral disorders between possibly and probably discredited. The ratings given by psychologists from the cognitive and behavioral orientations were significantly less favourable towards NLP than those from the humanistic and psychodynamic orientations.[74] A follow-up study by Norcross et al. (2008) found that NLP for the treatment of drug addiction was rated as among the top ten most discredited of the interventions included in the study.[75]

              NLP practitioners and academics Tosey and Mathison, have argued that the experimental approach is not always appropriate for researching NLP and propose that NLP modeling could be used to explore phenomenology.[76][77] Gareth Roderique-Davies (2009) stated that “Phenomenological research is free from hypotheses, pre-conceptions and assumptions, and seeks to describe rather than explain. Given the claims made by proponents of NLP, this adds little to the credibility debate and would produce reports concerning the experience from the perspective of the individual rather than confirmation of the claimed efficacy. The fact remains that NLP proponents make specific claims about how NLP works and what it can do and this compels providing evidence to substantiate these claims.” He argued that the proposal to conduct phenomenology research using NLP modeling “constitutes an admission that NLP does not have an evidence base and that NLP practitioners are seeking a post-hoc credibility.”[78]

          2. @SD,

            For anyone who thinks these comments are cult-like and syncophantic to the SD agenda, here is a counterexample as I am still a big fan of NLP despite the massive corruption within the community of practitioners.

            1. @Duff,

              What’s there to understand about online persuasion other than there’s more access to people globally who can be mind-fucked? Since Richard Bandit was always a scum bag who liked to mind-fuck people you’d think that he’d be taking advantage of the online world. Although maybe he’s more clever than we give credit? He steers clear so he won’t be such a target of critics? Either way, his time should be due sometime soon. And don’t you think that perhaps the massive corruption within the community has something to do with the work itself being a big con job to begin with?

            2. @Duff, I’m also a fan of “NLP”, I’m sure Bandler and Grinder only repackaged something that has been taken from somewhere much older than anything Erickson or Satir did.

            3. @Duff, I like NLP too. I was just saying I heard Frank Kern used it to manipulate people into buying his products. It does actually help people so I am with you there. I have a course in NLP I bought but have been too lazy to complete it. I’ll get around to it eventually I guess.

            4. @Duff,

              #1 – NLP only really works on the gullible to manipulate. How worn and boring is the “You, like me, are probably…blah blah blah” language pattern? Even Speed Seduction losers like Ross Jeffries will readily tell you that it only works on stupid chicks, most of which will probably bang you for a meal, glass of wine, and you telling them they’re Purty over and over…

              #2 – Any evidence of it’s therapeutic benefits is inconclusive and quite weak when compared to other methods such as CBT. So I don’t care how many swoosh patterns people are convinced to run before their anxiety levels get overloaded, it’s efficacy is questionable

              #3 – The benefits seen on stage can be characterized in the same light as evangelical head smacking benefits…basically adrenaline and placebo induced. People put on a show when others are watching cuz they’s afraid to not be “normal”. I especially like how that idea is planted into their minds by fraudulent stage performers (read; NLPers) by implying that only really intelligent people can be hypnotized and they’re fully in control, blah blah blah. If you’re easily hypnotized, there’s definitely something amiss with your brain.

              #4 – It was and still is a major vehicle for the delivery of New Wage thinking (thanks for the term Cosmic Connie). Amongst it’s many idols is Robert Anton Wilson, and in much of the NLP literature put forward by “practitioners” you can readily find the ideas of the shit-eater Aleister Crowley. There’s a reason why NLP appeals to these weak minded people, all looking for that magic lamp, genie in the bottle types the-secret-seekers, etc.

              #5 – The fact that the majority of it’s users DO use it to try and mind-fuck people confirm that the intention it was created out of was not for the greater good but to take advantage of one of our primal human weaknesses: to manipulate and control others for the purposes of gaining power and advantage over them.

              It only works on stupid people who lack critical thinking skills.

            5. @Jimmy Ray,

              I honestly don’t know what people mean most of the time when they use the descriptor “NLP” so I’ll skip your comments on that one.

              What caught my eye is this:

              “If you’re easily hypnotized, there’s definitely something amiss with your brain.”

              I think you do people a disservice when you say ignorant things like this. It’s almost the same as when a hypnotist says things like “You are in complete control at all times and no suggestions will be accepted unless you choose them to.”

              These are merely ways of reducing or removing resistance which in turn makes hypnotizing that much easier.

              Just because you have seen a large number of hacks trying to hypnotize people with goofy language patterns or other ridiculous and transparent BS does not make the phenomenon of hypnosis BS. Nor does it mean that only the stupid and ignorant can be hypnotized.

              People have been battling against the reality of hypnosis for centuries. Or at least they think they have because in reality they find themselves dealing with intricacies involved in the pet systems that people paste over the phenomenon instead of the phenomenon itself. Kind of like you’re doing in your “rant about NLP” post above.

              To quote a biographer of Anton Mesmer: “Many observers who believed there was something in Mesmerism could not see what it was because Mesmer obscured their view by throwing up smoke screens of baffling theories.”

            6. @Jimmy Ray,

              You wrote:

              “I don’t know what you understood of that, but I’ll be more specific… In hypnotic states you are in a predominant Alpha brain wave pattern. If you are easily induced into alpha by hypnotic language, there’s a problem. In Alpha brain wave state, you are far more suggestible and have diminished critical thinking capacity. There’s nothing ignorant with the statement at all.”

              It’s ignorant to tell people that only stupid people or people that have something wrong with their brain can be hypnotized. That IS what you implied and said previously. Is it not?

              You said:
              “If you think giving up control of your mind to a showman or “hypnotist” is fun or good times, be my guest.”

              I don’t think that and I never even hinted that I did so I can only wonder where that came from.

              You said: “I never said the phenomenon of hypnosis was BS. It’s very real. It’s just dangerous to allow someone to tamper with your mind that way and again if you’re easily induced, then there is a problem.”

              No fucking kidding. That was MY point. Don’t imply that only weak-minded fools can be hypnotized and have people put down their guard.

              EVERYONE CAN BE HYPNOTIZED.

              If your heart beats when “you” don’t tell it to beat then guess what? – you have another consciousness. That means you got yourself TWO consciousnesses. If someone can get that first consciousness to drop it’s guard or “fall asleep” at the job – which can be done through a variety of methods – including the most powerful of all – the use of AUTHORITY TO ENGENDER BELIEF – then you’re going to be hypnotized – like it or not – regardless of what all the feel good hypnotists and other Pollyanna folk would have you to believe. Smart-mind, weak-minded and predominantly Alpha-Waves? – irrelevant in that case. You’re toast and will be highly suggestible whether you like it or not.

              Have you ever believed an authority? Have you ever studied an elaborate system to look at or study things in the world? These things all DROP RESISTANCE which is the real key to hypnotism and effective suggestibility.

              But let’s forget my crazy talk and just go with your Alpha waves… under your definition I just need to sit you down to watch a few minutes on the tube to get you hypnotized.

              You’re easy.

            7. @Christopher Tomasulo,

              You can call me ignorant for saying only stupid people can be hypnotized, but it doesn’t change that truth.

              What exactly am I easy for anyhow? The Alpha brain wave state and the increased suggestibility in this state is well documented, unfortunately for your theory.

              “No fucking kidding. That was MY point.”

              Actually it was the point I was making, which you completely missed…so much for your covert communication abilities.

              “Don’t imply that only weak-minded fools can be hypnotized and have people put down their guard.”

              Right, because those who are in control and don’t like to be made to look like fools regularly bark on stage and forget how they were put into trance. To borrow a quote from you “you’re easy”.

              “Have you ever believed an authority? Have you ever studied an elaborate system to look at or study things in the world?”

              I’ve learned how to question things. Have you?

              I think I’ve hit a nerve with you because you’re only of the dupes peddling the “covert communication” hype, and the majority of your customers must be dumb fucks, so of course you’ll need to protect your position on the variety of bullshit you peddle to them.

              You’re a scum bag.

            8. @Maria Androgynous,

              maybe he’s [Richard Bandler] more clever than we give credit?

              Actually, I think it’s the opposite. Bandler is quite human and therefore limited in his persuasive skills. I mean, just look at his websites! Bandler’s a kind of evil genius when it comes to in-person communication, but he doesn’t know much about graphic design or other communication basics in other mediums.

              And don’t you think that perhaps the massive corruption within the community has something to do with the work itself being a big con job to begin with?

              No, I don’t think so. There is also a lot of corruption in the field of psychiatry, in medicine, in law, in psychotherapy, in exercise equipment, in business, and in blogging. I don’t think any of these areas are “a big con job to begin with” necessarily. There are some very kind, soft-spoken, non-manipulative trainers of NLP, as well as many therapists who use NLP distinctions to help their clients live better lives. Heck, even Bandler helps people, that is when he’s not threatening them to change or else.

            9. @422–in some ways yes, “there’s nothing new under the sun” etc. But I still find the jargon and techniques of NLP really useful.

            10. @Chris,

              There’s a YouTube video that analyzes a video of Kern supposedly showing his use of “NLP” but really it just describes the persuasive techniques he’s using. My point is that people often scapegoat NLP as equivalent to manipulation, when the blame for manipulation should be placed squarely on the manipulator.

              NLP describes aspects of communication and how to change them but doesn’t prescribe values or ethics. Amoral psychopaths take this as license to do whatever they want to other people using the distinctions of NLP. Some infamous trainers of NLP are in fact amoral psychopaths and thus the conflation, but not all are.

              That said, some techniques are more neutral than others. A technique for getting a woman in a committed, monogamous relationship to ditch her boyfriend and have sex with you is immoral in pretty much all contexts, IMHO (you can thank Ross Jeffries for creating that one). Whereas a technique for curing a phobia is usually good in all contexts. And a distinction like the size of an inner picture may be good or bad or neutral depending on the context.

            11. @Chris,

              To give another example, everyone who’s ever taken martial arts knows how to kick, punch, and maybe even kill another human being by crushing their neck with their elbow. Knowing how is not immoral, unethical, or illegal. Starting a bar fight is assault and could put you in jail. Defending your life against a mugger might or might not be assault, and is totally ethical in my opinion. You can probably think of many more examples too.

              All of these contexts utilize fighting techniques but have various degrees of legality and ethics. The blame always rests with the individual, although some techniques are more dirty or vicious than others.

            12. @Jimmy Ray,

              “You can call me ignorant for saying only stupid people can be hypnotized, but it doesn’t change that truth.”

              Agreed.

              I guess I was easy to hypnotize. I know for a fact I was stupid. Spent over 5 figures in 5 years chasing idiotic promises of riches and new age crap.

              You said, “I’ve learned how to question things. Have you?”

              Yeah. Not one cent goes out of my pocket for info-crap… now. I can spot this brain-fuck manipulation a mile away.

              Ironically, therapeutic hypnosis has never worked for me. I can rarely go into a hypnotic state when it’s for my own good. Why does hypnosis work so much better when you’re being screwed? If someone can explain that to me, I’d appreciate it.

            13. @Jimmy Ray,

              Specific language patterns are not “NLP” any more than a punch is “Karate.” NLP is a pragmatic discipline of communication and change with a hodgepodge of distinctions. I personally find “you, like me” a ridiculously cheesy statement that exposes the speaker immediately to me as a phony. There is a principle of NLP that goes “the meaning of your communication is the response you get.” Most modern theories of communication (pragmatics) have similar principles. In this case, when James Ray says “you, like me” I go inside and say “no I don’t, asshole!” and that’s what that phrase means to me.

              Any evidence of it’s therapeutic benefits is inconclusive and quite weak when compared to other methods such as CBT

              NLP is a pragmatic communication discipline, not a school of psychotherapy. CBT is effective in my opinion, but is subject to massive publication bias (see http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/196/3/173?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=cuijpers&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT). Much of CBT is also described by a subset of NLP, the Meta-Model. Personally I found CBT helpful as a client of psychotherapy when I suffered from depression in college and recommend it, but it highly depends on the practitioner and whether this form of therapy is well suited for the client. Many clients (and friends of mine) have horror stories of CBT therapists.

              The benefits seen on stage can be characterized in the same light as evangelical head smacking benefits

              I completely agree. Avoid all charismatic “sage from the stage” gurus and you’ll be much better off. Most rock-star seminar therapists don’t do followups. Change can be rapid and easy sometimes, but often isn’t and this messiness doesn’t make for a good show.

              Practical psychological techniques and spirituality is definitely home to messy thinking and corruption–agreed there. That’s why I encourage rigorously skeptical thinking about such things. Thinking is rare in every domain however–doesn’t mean you and I shouldn’t do it. Personally I like a lot of what RAW had to say, but find Crowley impenetrable.

              Yes, many people use tools of practical communication to manipulate others. The same could be said of all religions and belief systems including anti-belief systems like atheism or humanism, all political parties, all careers whatsoever, all money, all new technologies, all sciences, etc.

              I recommend avoiding all NLP trainers that advertise using NLP to gain fame, power, money, or sex, and instead seek out trainers that advertise using NLP to be a better person, a better parent, more kind, and more a more whole and sane human being.

              Low-down-dirty-tricks of communication =! NLP. Some NLP trainers use and even teach low down dirty tricks, yes, but NLP is just a hodgepodge of practical communication tools. That’s all. Communication “works” on everybody, but nasty tricks are usually obvious if you have a working BS detector.

            14. @Jimmy Ray,

              You wrote:

              “You can call me ignorant for saying only stupid people can be hypnotized, but it doesn’t change that truth.”

              That’s true. It doesn’t.

              “What exactly am I easy for anyhow? The Alpha brain wave state and the increased suggestibility in this state is well documented, unfortunately for your theory.”

              Well it sucks explaining stuff to simple-minded folk but here I’ll spell it out for you..

              You said that only stupid people could be hypnotized. You then said that if you are in hypnotic states you are in a predominant Alpha brain wave pattern.

              TV puts you almost instantly into a predominant Alpha state. So I’m saying that it’s pretty easy to hypnotize ANYONE (according to your definition) including YOU by putting them in front of a TV for a few minutes.

              I can go slower next time if you’d like.

              You wrote:

              “You’re a scum bag.”

              I knew your brilliant rhetorical ability would shine through eventually.

            15. “Only stupid people can be hypnotized.”

              Everyone’s stupid sometimes.

              It’s true that highly analytical individuals (i.e. skeptical, on guard, cynical, critical-thinking, etc.) are generally harder to persuade or control, but that constant guarding comes with it’s own problems (usually anxiety).

              There are also techniques that specifically target the analytical mind and disrupt it. These techniques are helpful for therapists working with intellectual/analytical clients but of course are also used by psychopaths and other coercive persuaders.

              Just as in martial arts, you might be an expert, always mindful of attackers etc. but almost everyone gets hurt in a fight (especially when there are knives or guns).

            16. @Christopher Tomasulo,

              If you think there’s anything rhetorical in calling you a scum bag, you’re even dumber than I initially thought.

              But I digress, them’s some real covert communication you’re putting on display. What’s especially amusing “Dr.” Sulo is that you got all butt-hurt that I insult your precious field (Neuro Linguistic Programming), full of crooks and swindlers, no less.

              The best part is how you put all those covert
              communication skills on display to win me over like this. You know, like you say you do on them webs pages of yours.

              I’m in awe. I applaud you.

              So Harry, where do I sign up for your Fast Track to NLP course? Can I do it online? Are there monthly membership fee’s involved. DO you provide a forum with other Word Wizards to help me learn those covert tricks that you so brilliantly weaved into your flame war against my opinion on your previous NLP?

              Incidentally, I thought you said you knew nothing about NLP in your first response, butt boy?

              Quick, pull out the Meta Model Handbook, there’s a swish pattern for the stupidity you feel right now, in’t there?

            17. @Christopher Tomasulo,

              If you think there’s anything rhetorical in calling you a scum bag, you’re even dumber than I initially thought.

              But I digress, them’s some real covert communication you’re putting on display. What’s especially amusing “Dr.” Sulo is that you got all butt-hurt that I insult your precious field (Neuro Linguistic Programming), full of crooks and swindlers, no less.

              The best part is how you put all those covert
              communication skills on display to win me over like this. You know, like you say you do on them webs pages of yours.

              I’m in awe. I applaud you.

              So Harry, where do I sign up for your Fast Track to NLP course? Can I do it online? Are there monthly membership fee’s involved? DO you provide a forum with other Word Wizards to help me learn those covert tricks that you so brilliantly weaved into your flame-war against my opinion on your precious NLP?

              I get it. You got “touched” by my criticism of the field you swindle people out of hard earned cash, and instead of using them precious sub modalities to modulate your reaction, you put them on display here. Bravo. Another reason to acknowledge the uselessness of NLP, or rather in support that NLP works well…to sell stupid people on stupid things…you’re a great poster child in fact.

              Incidentally, I thought you said you knew nothing about NLP in your first response, butt boy?

              Quick, pull out the Meta Model Handbook, there’s a swish pattern for the stupidity you feel right now, in’t there?

            18. @Duff,

              I know what NLP is. I studied it way back when Rex Sykes was still running the seminar business before he went broke and used all that covert communication ability to do stage hypnosis, er *cough* corporate entertainment.

              Duff, maybe you can get “Dr.” Sulo to help you out here. Can you please show me some evidence of NLP’s therapeutic efficacy? A peer reviewed study or two?

              Many thanks

              NLP is yet another tool for the human weakness that most people posses whereby dominating and controlling others is desirable. Except first with NLP you have to fool yourself, then you realize there are bigger fools out there and you can peddle it to them.

              Bandler may be, in your mind, a linguistic genius but whenever I hear the man I hear swine and scum coming out of his mouth. I’d find it hard to believe that he could NLP me into anything. I suppose if you want to give him that power, it’s your right to do so.

            19. @Duff,

              PS Duff, you mention how Richard Bandler has helped people, therapeutically no less, correct?

              Can you tell me why he is unable to magickally transform himself from a fat wheezing diabetic with moobs into something more “healthy”. Oh wait, he’s still a coke head…forgot…sorry…

              but then…how come he can’t manipulate them sub modalities to magickally experience the *high* of cocaine without using?

              Something’s wrong…I say…maybe the neural plasticity has become fibrotic somewhere in that mygdala or something.

              Someone quick, dial up Erickson on the meta-astral-telephone. “Dr.” Sulo, you there?

            20. @Duff,

              Me:
              “Only stupid people can be hypnotized.”
              You:
              “Everyone’s stupid sometimes.”

              Huh? That’s your answer? So everyone’s stupid sometimes and therefore who cares that they’re stupid enough to let someone in their mind, make them cluck like a chicken on stage or do something ridiculous like fork over $1997.00 for CORE INFLUENCE and MASS CONTROL? You real?

              Really doesn’t that support the statement that only stupid people can be hypnotized?

              And I’m not talking about the mindless trance you see while watching TV like Dr. Sulo describes above.

              *I don’t watch a lot of TV btw Christopher* but that’s not important…

              “It’s true that highly analytical individuals (i.e. skeptical, on guard, cynical, critical-thinking, etc.) are generally harder to persuade or control, but that constant guarding comes with it’s own problems (usually anxiety).”

              Thems some real interesting presupps you possess there Duff. That someone who is analytical must be on the road to anxiety. LOL.

              I’m pretty sure you’ve adopted those beliefs in your NLP studies somewhere along the way. It’s one of the many strategies NLP’rs or mind-fuckers use to try and make you feel stupid for asking pertinent questions.

              How sure are you that people with highly attuned crticial thinking skills are “anxiety” ridden? You have some evidence for that belief there Duff?

              “There are also techniques that specifically target the analytical mind and disrupt it.”

              People have developed a lot of tricks to *trick* people over the years. So what?

              “These techniques are helpful for therapists working with intellectual/analytical clients but of course are also used by psychopaths and other coercive persuaders.”

              Virginia Satire used a variety of language patterns to help people change. She used a lot of guilt induction too. Brilliant…whatever… what I don’t get from the “linguistic” community is why the belief that analytical thinking has to be somehow removed in order to therapeutically help someone.

              Cognitive Behavioral Theory has no such beliefs and is 100% more successful than NLP in helping people overcome whatever is troubling them. It’s evidence based and it works.

              I guess most people just like the magic bullet in the end.

              “Just as in martial arts, you might be an expert, always mindful of attackers etc. but almost everyone gets hurt in a fight (especially when there are knives or guns).”

              That’s a lame analogy Duff, sorry. Learning NLP man be useful for self-defense, so you can laugh when someone tries to run a dumb pattern on you, but if you’re smart enough you don’t need to learn NLP to do that since most language patterns violate normal flow of communication, unless you’re a ninja covert communicator like Dr Sulo or something like that. But then again when someone is trying to mind-fuck you, it’s not literally the same as having your life challenged by someone wielding a knife or a gun.

            21. @Regrets,

              It works when you are about to fork over money because of the MAGIC BULLET, GENIE IN A BOTTLE phenomenon that people are subject to allowing to manipulate them. The dream that we can become rich and lead an easy life is an easy one to manipulate, obviously.

              I’m glad you pointed out the lack of effectiveness in “therapeutic hypnosis” … have you ever seen some of these NLP or Hypnosis dupes out there, running from one seminar to another, looking into this academy, or that academy or the Wizard’s academy learning a Magical Word Curriculum, still never overcoming their loser nature in life?

              Wonder why?

              Read the words in CAPS above…unlike you, they’re still running from one MAGIC BULLET bullshit training to another…*knowing* (believing) that eventually they’ll find it. Eventually they wise up, like you did, or realize that the real profit is peddling this garbage to others and open up a covert communications business and try to recover their losses by swindling others out of their hard earned cash.

              Congrats for breaking the cycle.

            22. @Duff,

              Are you seriously trying to compare the manipulative nature of NLP, born directly out of modeling other who were doing change-work, and then taught implicitly citing how easily it is to manipulate others into doing things, ethically or not, that they might not otherwise do to exercise equipment. For realz?!?

              Bandler could easily get someone to design a more appealing website. He’s not really after Anthony Robbins like fame anyhow, probably mostly because he’s a douche bag drug addict and knows that if he ever reaches that sort of fame everyone would know he blew some prostitutes head off with a gun while high on coke with a known drug dealer.

              I don’t think he’s an evil genius either, just evil and he has a really bad track record of fucking people over.

              You’re right, there is A LOT of corruption in the world, but that shouldn’t be an excuse or apology for the fact that NLP is inherently manipulative and most people use it to manipulate others and typically not for their benefit.

              I really don’t get the apologists amongst you in the NLP field always making excuses for an evil fuck like Bandler anyhow. He’s evil, he murdered someone in cold blood, blew her head off and then proceeded to finish off a mound of coke before hiding like a coward in the closet when police found him, trembling in shame and cowardice.

              Rather people should learn to be honest and call it like it is. I reckon it would go a longer way to reducing the burden on oneself and reduce the need for therapy or tactics to change-past-history, more NLP speak for brainwashing yourself.

              Peace

            23. @Jimmy Ray, while I can agree with you slightly on some points, such as NLP being used to dupe naive crowds, I do not agree with you on CBT being 100% more effective. As with anything dealing with human beings, there are always exceptions and unsolved cases.

              When dealing with deep seated and life-long issues, it is never easy and will take time, energy, patience, proper knowledge and so much more.

              While you’re pointing out all the fallacies of NLP, you’re presenting CBT in “Cognitive Behavioral Theory has no such beliefs and is 100% more successful than NLP in helping people overcome whatever is troubling them. It’s evidence based and it works”

              So while you’re rightly pointing out the dangers in fully accepting NLP as the end all, you are actually doing the same thing you speak against with CBT. No form of therapy, communication, or change work is 100% successful, nor is it going to be right for everyone and there will always be those who will abuse any method of influence.

              As to your belief that only stupid people can be hypnotized, I would be very careful with that line of thought. Life tends to throw you curve balls sometimes, and you may end up eating your words one day.

              Besides, from the looks of it, you’ve totally hypnotized yourself into thinking you’re 100% right on this issue.

              Respectfully,
              422

            24. @422,

              If you’re going to attempt a rebuttal on something I said, you could at least have the courtesy to read what I said properly, don’t you think?

              This statement of yours is false:

              “No form of therapy, communication, or change work is 100% successful”

              I never said it was 100% successful, so you’re wrong there. I’ve said it has a lot more evidence backing it up than NLP. That’s a fact. I also said it was 100% more successful than NLP. If you have evidence to claim otherwise, go ahead and produce it.

              And maybe your thinly-veiled ‘curse’

              “As to your belief that only stupid people can be hypnotized, I would be very careful with that line of thought. Life tends to throw you curve balls sometimes, and you may end up eating your words one day.”

              Ooooh…I’m so scared now. Are you going to NeLP me through the computer screen like Dr. Sulo did? Maybe I’ll double post again or something. Silly me. I should go get my tin foil hat before responding to you in the future…

              That might work on someone who’s weak minded and has little self esteem, but it only gave me a few seconds of amusement.

              Nice try though. You’re probably used to debating with stupid people, but that’s what you get if you hang out with devotee’s of NLP.

              “Besides, from the looks of it, you’ve totally hypnotized yourself into thinking you’re 100% right on this issue.”

              Having an informed opinion on a topic is hypnotic in your world now? That’s also very funny.

              If he is one of your mentors, you might like me quoting him here, Anthony Robbins once said he was trying to get people out of trance rather than keep them in it. I would tend to agree that this is a good intention.

              The more aware you become of the various changes in and around you, the less susceptible you become to these tricks. Hence stupid unaware people are more easily tranced out. Period.

              Therefore, only STUPID people can be HYPNOTIZED ;)

              With respect to Robbins, you can’t sell a whole bunch of lies without a bit of truth, huh?

              Instead of thinking about that rationally, I suppose I could have put that lame though-provoking insult of yours in a rocket and watch it travel into the sun and NLP it out of my brain.

              This will be my NLP contrubution, the rocket-sun-pattern ™.

      1. @Kann, It’s just your inner demons and lack of medication that make you chuckle hysterically, you worthless cocksucker.

  17. From the video: “You should run your business like the mafia…except you shouldn’t kill anybody…unless they fuck with you.”

    Better watch out Salty, Frank’s coming for you ;-)

    Michele said she lives in San Diego now. Jesus, does San Diego have some kind of “come and live here scammers” ad campaign running?

    Hey, wait a minute… San Diego…SD…Salty Droid…SD…

    What the hell’s going on here?

    1. @Anonymous Bastard ::

      He mumbled “unless they fuck with you” under his breath … I amped up the audio 375% to make it clearer. He has a very bad habit of saying exactly what he means.

  18. “You should run your business like the mafia…except you shouldn’t kill anybody…unless they fuck with you.”

    What a pud.

    It’d take me roughly 30 seconds to end that guy. And I’m sure I’m not the only one.

  19. So Bob Proctor surfaces again….Did I ever mention that when the Sweatlodge Tragedy happened, the first attorney which James Ray called, to represent his employees who were present at the Sweatlodge was Mike Proctor? A Chip off the old Block….they all suck.

    1. @Toxic Moxie ::

      Mike Proctor was the lawyer sitting in with Ms. and Mrs. Fredrickson during their interviews with detectives. He’s not actually related to Bob Proctor is he?

        1. @Cosmic Connie ::

          Yeah I don’t want to research it either … but I do want to know. It would kind of surprise me if he had a well adjusted child capable of normal functioning.

  20. I was reading,Tragedy in Sedona, by Connie Joy and she was saying how Ray pressured EVERYONE at his seminars to buy CASES of his books so the books would make it on the “Best Seller” list,so that he could be called a “Best Selling Author”

    1. @wondering why, Yep, that’s SOP with hustledorks; do what you can to game the system to make your book a bestseller. Wait till you get to the part in Tragedy in Sedona where JAR pulls a blatantly unethical money-grab stunt during a guided meditation (group hypnosis, actually).

      Notwithstanding the author’s own New-Wage orientation, there’s some pretty damning stuff about JAR in that book.

        1. @Duff, I read some of his book the “4 hour work week” and I’m not sure if what was me, but the book was crap. It had no relevance for me in helping me set up an online business. I felt it was hype, but maybe I am being too critical.

  21. Now what I just noticed about that the seminar people are being big cheapskates in the video because I can see that they didn’t even give mr. Kern a table to put his sunglasses on.

  22. Magic lamps and unlimited consciousnes, how cute…

    Sounds like HG wells, he talked about creating a giant mamooth brain proccesing everything thats going on all the time, everywhere. How would he make such a thing? I don’t know, he was very imaginative, had lots of weird ideas.

    I know the New age writers. They are sitting at home, picking up books from a huge collection of Unicorn turd-publishers, ripping off here, ripping of there, stealing from eachother, picking wacky stuff from their wacky brains, when they are done, they feel cool and intelligent, they love to be admired by their hope-dope fans who have no idea what they are buying into.

    The subjective pdeudo-world of self help-magic: ohh, how the gurus wish they coud just live in that little chocolate box of mysticism and fantasy forever. Some of them may even be so serious about it, theyve convinced themself it’s the real world. I think This whole self-help guru-world indsutry is adoloscensce blown completely out of proportion. These people need a good spank.

  23. The level of sucking each other off is just so damn incredible.

    These people look the other way because to call anyone out means they could then be called out

    It’s a never ending circle jerk. Can’t beat the competition…form a syndicate

    that’s what this country needs…business advice from the Fucking FRENCH

  24. Frank Kern’s latest *scheme – he calls it so himself, which of course is just a way of saying I’m evil, but not really…see for yourself:

    The sales letter @ frankkernsuccess DOT com / scheme2.html
    ————————————————————
    Application To Participate In Evil Scheme*

    (*actual scheme not really Evil.)

    Dear Friend,

    I will not try to sell you on applying for this.

    Instead, I will simply tell you what it’s about, who it is for …and who it’s NOT for.

    Here’s What This Is About

    Back in late August, I tested a system of marketing and selling that worked way better than anything I’ve ever tried.

    In fact, it brought in just over $216,000.00 on the front end …from ONE sales message …sent to a list of only 1,000 people.

    I’ve since been tweaking it and it has been working extremely well. So well that I will never go back to the “Old Way” of doing things.

    (This explains why I haven’t done a launch or really come out with anything new in almost a year. It’s because I no longer have to – this new model has replaced everything.)

    Anyway, the model will either work for you or it won’t …and the only way we can find out is for you to learn about it first hand.

    I’m Willing To Walk You Through It – FOR FREE – As Long As You Realize It’s NOT For Everybody.

    Look – I know you get pitched all kinds of “one size fits all” marketing schemes on a near hourly basis these days.

    This isn’t one of them. This is very specialized stuff and it doesn’t work in every business.

    This project IS for:

    *
    People who sell information products, or are coaches, authors, or speakers.
    *
    People who value helping others and contributing to their marketplace just as much (or more) as they value making money.
    *
    People who know their business can grow, and who are willing to work to make that happen.
    *
    People who are willing to actually talk to other human beings (as opposed to only sending email or something.)

    This project is NOT for:

    *
    People who sell “get rich quick” or “Biz Opp” materials.
    *
    People who do CPA marketing …or only want to be affiliates.
    *
    People who have no business, aren’t actually selling anything, or are perpetually in “information gathering mode”. (If you haven’t gotten started yet, that’s OK just as long as you’re ready to actually start doing something.)
    *
    People who do NOT currently sell (or either don’t want to sell) information products, advice, or coaching. (In other words, if you sell lightbulbs or something, this isn’t a good fit.)

    And now for more brutal honesty: After we explain everything to you …and suggest ways to apply this methodology to your business, we might (God forbid) …pitch you something.

    And if you decide to buy something, it’ll be expensive.

    Finding out about it is free – but if you want advanced training, it’s costly.

    Here’s How It Works

    Like I said, it’s free to learn about what I’m up to and how it can be applied to your business.

    If you think it’s a fit after you learn about it, I’ll invite you to take my advanced training – or you’re free to do everything on your own and never take my training. Either way is fine with me.

    So if you’re curious, here’s what to do:

    First, you’ll need to enter your REAL email address below.

    Then you’ll be taken to an application where I ask you all sorts of invasive questions about your business. OK – they’re not that invasive. I’m just really wanting to make sure I think we’re a fit before I take up both of our time explaining everything.

    Anyway, the application will come to my office and one of two things will happen.

    Possibility number one: I’ll decide my stuff is NOT a good match for you and I’ll let you know politely.

    Possibility number two: I’ll decide we MIGHT be a good match and someone from my office will schedule a call to see if we really are.

    If that happens, you’ll get a VERY valuable overview and Strategy Session where you see exactly how the system works. Plus, you’ll get some suggestions on how you can apply it immediately to your business.

    That’s all free.

    If you you like what you hear, you’ll be invited to take some advanced training. Nobody will pressure you or hassle you or anything lame like that. You’ll simply get a polite invitation. If you want in on that training, great. If not, no problem. We’re cool either way.

    I’m only looking for around 25 people for my next training and my subscriber base is around 200,000 strong.

    I’ll review applications on a first come, first-served basis.

    OK here’s the first step:

    Email sign up form

      1. @,

        A testimonial page? What for?

        I read half of the first one and stopped when a fan of his explained how he thought it was cool that Kern was high and about to get high himself. Winners!

  25. This is a response to @Jimmy Ray, as much as I disagree with you, I do appreciate your reply. It looks as like you’ve put a lot of effort and emotion into it. I can respect that.
    422

    1. @422,

      Sure whatever you say. Nice way to pack up your indefensible arguments and run town there ;)

      But then shit-talking wankers like you always do that when you’re called out. It’s just a weakness, don’t expect forgiveness from me though :)

      1. @Jimmy Ray,

        Did you take a break from Usenet trolling to come to this blog?

        Non-sequitors, ad-hominem attacks, inability to read or comprehend what you read along with and all kinds of weak-minded-fool responses vomited from your keyboard sure make it look that way.

        Uh oh…

        I fed the troll.

        1. @C Tomasulo, poor Jimmy does not realize that he would be a prime target for the kind of predator that uses brainwashing and mind manipulation. He wouldn’t even be a challenge.

        2. @C Tomasulo,

          Usenet trolling? Can you elaborate?

          I don’t know “Doc Dumbledorf” it’s been your comments that have been voted down ;) I’m sure there’s a pattern you can run on your mind to convince yourself that you’re the one adding value here though. Congrats on getting some backlinks either way.

          The second paragraph actually is quite interesting, but I won’t go into why I think you’re putting it on display. I don’t think you’d get it.

          I’m also hardly to blame for your error in understanding what I said about Hypnosis. It’s clearly documented there. You know, how you comprehended that I was saying it didn’t exist. Told me a lot about how you filter things when angry, jr.

          You should focus more on covert >comprehension< skills, because the current products of your imagination are void of anything of value, even creative and that is if your only point was to distract from the point that mostly sociopaths become adept at using NLP, and dummies continue to be adept at getting fleeced.

          Is there a fast track Hypnosis program for that anyhow?

          On the flip side, thanks for putting your "covert" communication skills on display. Your amateur use of the Milton Model tells me you probably just discovered NLP recently and think it's the bomb, but that's the nature of young zealots.

          Please, spare us the lessons on logic, if you want to cry about being called names, remember the one using ad hominem in his first response was you, and only for the reason that I insulted NLP.

          You're a perfect example why stupid people shouldn't be told they can "manipulate" others. How excited did it make you to learn that you could make a profession out of it anyway?

          Next we'll probably find out you're a Bandler Ball Licker too.

      2. @Jimmy Ray, I’m actually still here (have not ran anywhere). I have responded to you with respect and courtesy, would it be too much to ask the same of you? Have you considered the fact that your insulting behavior could detract from your message?

        You’re dead set in your ways and seem to get off on insulting others, and you want me to continue on with you? The more anyone would try to discuss this NLP subject with you the more you’d hold on to your own views, so go ahead. If it works for you and enhances the quality of your life, then so be it.

        Even though you’ve thrown insult after insult at me, I can still hold your views just as valid as Duff’s and any NLP proponent. Respecting other people’s views does not mean you have to give up your own. For all we know, none of us could be right about this topic.

        The kinds of people that are in danger of falling for manipulation and mind control abuse:

        Those who are dead set in their own beliefs – easy to manipulate and brainwash. Manipulators, psychopaths and scammers will often use your own rigid foundation of belief and values to brainwash you, Jimmy. Perhaps, you are right in that only “stupid” people get manipulated.

        You come off as a bit sore and angry about this topic, Jimmy. I hope you feel better at some point.

        1. @422,

          You’re not as smart as you think. Are you a student of Doc Sulo’s by any chance? When you start of a response by taking something I say out of context and end it with an insult, then further insult my intelligence by pretending you were courteous and respectful with a really basic and lame NLP trick, you show why NLP (ie; a little knowledge) is dangerous in a depraved

          You want to prove me wrong, go back and show me how NLP is more effective than CBT. It was a pretty basic challenge that you’ve been working hard to avoid and instead joined in with lazy minds like Doc Sulo to turn this into a pissing contest. Clearly I’m more well versed on NLP jargon…and lies…than either of you two wanna-be’s expected, so you Nancy’s turn to shit-talking, but then I’d reckon I’m better at that then either of you two also. Sucks to be you guys ;)

        2. @422,

          {@Jimmy Ray, I’m actually still here (have not ran anywhere)}

          You haven’t provided anything supporting your position on NLP either, or addressed any of the questions put your way. You just changed goal posts and started shooting blanks.

        1. @Duff,

          So why at 6:51pm did you continue to engage if you were convinced at 5:58pm that nothing I said was in “good faith”

          You’d be better off if you could make a factual statement and back it up, or answer some of the ones asked of you, like for example what evidence do you have that people who use critical analysis end up with anxiety?

          Any idea why you believe that, or what proof do you have to support it?

          I’ll expect silence on this issue, or another ingenious platitude from the bowels of the Structure of Magic. Look on page 88 ;)

  26. (This is in response to @Jimmy Ray above. The comment threading became unweildy so I started a new thread below.)

    I know what NLP is. I studied it way back when Rex Sykes was still running the seminar business before he went broke and used all that covert communication ability to do stage hypnosis, er *cough* corporate entertainment.

    I consider Rex Sykes an example of an amoral psychopath teaching NLP. I can see why your view of the subject would be framed in this way given your teacher.

    Can you please show me some evidence of NLP’s therapeutic efficacy? A peer reviewed study or two?

    No, I cannot. There are some people working on raising money for research however.
    http://nlprandr.org/

    That said, I don’t believe that NLP is a therapeutic modality but models therapy. I also am opposed to so-called “evidence-based” psychotherapy as there is too much publication bias (see http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/196/3/173?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=cuijpers&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT once again) and evidence-based approaches tend to turn individuals into generalities in harmful ways to please insurance companies. Therapy is much more art than science IMHO, and method is probably only 10% or less of the total impact. I still like the methods of NLP, but usually it doesn’t have that much total impact on the overall change IMHO. My view is heretical to the standard NLP dogma which claims magic cures of course, but also heretical to the CBT dogma and other ideological claims to power amongst competing psychotherapies. As I heard recently (which I believe is based on a study but I don’t have a link), “the best psychotherapy is the one the therapist believes in.”

    NLP is yet another tool for the human weakness that most people posses whereby dominating and controlling others is desirable.

    It can be and has been. I have no illusions about this. Chemistry has also played this role. Any high school chemistry student can make a pipe bomb with household ingredients. We should be careful not to scapegoat any one domain of human knowledge as the source of all evil.

    Bandler may be, in your mind, a linguistic genius but whenever I hear the man I hear swine and scum coming out of his mouth. I’d find it hard to believe that he could NLP me into anything. I suppose if you want to give him that power, it’s your right to do so.

    I am not defending Bandler in the least. I can’t stand him personally. But I do think he is brilliant–totally and completely lacking an ethical compass, but brilliant. People are complex like that.

    Can you tell me why he is unable to magickally transform himself from a fat wheezing diabetic with moobs into something more “healthy”. Oh wait, he’s still a coke head…forgot…sorry…

    Again, I’m not defending Bandler. His philosophy of happiness is that one should be in extreme positive pleasure states as much as possible. He used to do this with coke, now he does this with hypnosis and NLP. Either way, it is an addiction.

    how come he can’t manipulate them sub modalities to magickally experience the *high* of cocaine without using?

    He can and does. It’s called the “drug of choice” technique and can sometimes be helpful in addiction recovery when used in the right context. The problem with endogenously generated highs though is that they are also addictive and often spike more intense cravings for the real thing so it can backfire. I have no idea if he still uses or not though.

    Huh? That’s your answer? So everyone’s stupid sometimes and therefore who cares that they’re stupid enough to let someone in their mind

    No, I’m saying everyone’s vulnerable to psychological abuse. Pretty much all experts on coercive persuasion and cults say the same thing. Anything less is to blame the victim.

    How sure are you that people with highly attuned crticial thinking skills are “anxiety” ridden? You have some evidence for that belief there Duff?

    It is certainly true of me, and is common knowledge in therapy circles. Therapists have to work on generalizations sometimes while still paying attention to the client’s specific situation. Your mileage may vary.

    what I don’t get from the “linguistic” community is why the belief that analytical thinking has to be somehow removed in order to therapeutically help someone.

    That is not a presupposition of mine.

    Cognitive Behavioral Theory has no such beliefs and is 100% more successful than NLP in helping people overcome whatever is troubling them. It’s evidence based and it works.

    Now THAT’s an enormous generalization! CBT has a philosophical basis in Stoicism. But what if I have philosophical objections to some of the assumptions of Stoicism and my therapist only knows CBT? Is it ethical to impose that ideology on the client? Must I always face my situation in life by correcting my “irrational” thinking? Is it inappropriate to express my feelings through art, music, dance, or simply to feel them? (All therapeutic modalities.) What if I live in a tribal culture in sub-Saharan Africa and believe I am possessed by spirits? Numerous studies show much greater recovery rates from psychosis in indigenous countries than in Western countries and it is believed to be the case due to a belief in spirit possession. Cultural construction plays an enormous role in the creation of “psychological illness.”

    Look–you were obviously fucked with by some manipulative douchebags. There are lots of those in the world, and NLP has more than it’s fair share. I agree with you on all those points. But is simply not true that because NLP isn’t a magic bullet full of light and love that therefore CBT is because it is “peer reviewed” and somehow magically free from ideology or bad therapists.

    1. Just for comparison’s sake, here are some examples of the wide variety of values and scuzziness of two hypnotists:

      Richard Bandler, creepy dude: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s941m7CKft4
      Stephen Gilligan, gentle soul (who was once tempted by the dark side but came to the light): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GTPnvCc_SM

      Feel free to deconstruct one or both here. For the record, I find Bandler creepy and lacking in a moral compass and Gilligan sweet and kind albeit a tad New Agey at times.

    2. @Duff,

      “I consider Rex Sykes an example of an amoral psychopath teaching NLP. I can see why your view of the subject would be framed in this way given your teacher.”

      I never said Rex Sykes was my teacher, I said I studied NLP way back when he was running seminars before he went broke doing that and started doing stage hypnosis and corporate Christmas parties etc. You just applied a meaning to what I said that was not there Duff. Have you ever considered that you’ve done that with the whole of NLP too?

      Think about the Milton Model for a second Duff. Why was it names after Milton Erickson? Possibly because Erickson was purposefully vague, allowing his clients to assign meaning to what he was saying in order to let them convince themselves? Wonder why the Milton Model is used so often to convince you that NLP is actually valuable for anything more than tricking people into things that they quite possibly would be tricked into regardless?

      Take Speed Seduction for example. The founder Ross Jeffries has openly said it works mostly on girls that are easy to begin with. These girls would be most guys who were creative enough and persistent enough to catch their attenion. SS gives some of those guys a belief that what they’re about to do with a girl is sneaky and will trick her, but in reality what they’re really doing is approaching a girl because of that belief. It’s their effort that is the difference. With a bit of any sort of persuasion and persistency they’d get enough women to bed them. It’s all about the numbers. If you’re a loser who’s afraid to talk to a girl, of course you’re not going to get laid, but with Speed Seduction (boring NLP bullshit language patterns) you run patterns on 10 chicks and one of them f*cks you. Wow! That sounded like a night at the clubs for me in my early 20’s. Approach enough girls and you’re going to find one that will go home with you. Numbers.

      Anyway, I won’t go into the exhaustive resourced I’ve got my hands on with respect to NLP or studying NLP, but suffice to say that I’ve read the majority of the popular book written on the subject by many who are considered *leaders* in the field. Almost all of it is rehashed and/or add-on from Badit and Grinder’s original rip-off of Satire, Ericksen, Bateson et al. All the other chronies that followed suit: Rex Sykes, Tad James, and other hucksters and fraudsters just did what most other conmen do and realize there were enough dummies out there to scam. Thankfully I never spent a dime on any training. Libraries are free, and torrents work really well

      But you know, I’m curious as to why you’d say Rex Sykes is Amoral? Just because you thought I believed it? :)

      I asked:
      “Can you please show me some evidence of NLP’s therapeutic efficacy? A peer reviewed study or two?”

      You responded:
      “No, I cannot. There are some people working on raising money for research however. http://nlprandr.org/

      So what? I’ll tell you why you can’t find any peer reviewed studies on it’s therapeutic value and that is because…there are NONE.

      What happens on stage, the placebo effect that wears off after a seminar where participants are already induced into feeling good and agreeable, have been shown to be, on multiple occasions, short-term. The anecdotal evidence you’ve based your belief on is precisely that, a show.

      What you think worked in NLP probably would have worked with a variety of psychological approaches in the hands of a half competent therapist.

      NLP’s effectiveness has, so far, failed to show it’s significance over other well researched techniques CBT being just one that I mentioned, which has evidence supporting it’s effectiveness.

      You’re opposed to “evidence-based” science? Why? How else are you going to judge what works and what does not? And I’m not talking about what works in sales, where buyers remorse is high somehow translating into short-term effects in therapy.

      How do YOU judge what works and what does not? By testimonials?

      In response to Richard Bandler being a drug abuser Duff responds:

      “He can and does. It’s called the “drug of choice” technique and can sometimes be helpful in addiction recovery when used in the right context.”

      I knew the Bandler apologism wasn’t going to stop. He’s in your head clearly.
      Bandler is a coke head Duff… he still uses. I know this because I know people close to him. He’s a COKE HEAD and a MURDERER.

      This proves the “drug of choice” technique is 100% complete bullshit, and you believe in it? That’s highly amusing.

      I said:
      “NLP is yet another tool for the human weakness that most people posses whereby dominating and controlling others is desirable.”

      Duff’s well thought out response:
      “It can be and has been. I have no illusions about this. Chemistry has also played this role. Any high school chemistry student can make a pipe bomb with household ingredients. We should be careful not to scapegoat any one domain of human knowledge as the source of all evil.”

      LOL, spoken like a true devotee. Making the non-sequitur arguments that we can expect from victims of a particular “path”.

      How can you, in your right-mind (and left one if it’s working ;) compare NLP a linguistic tool that is mostly used to manipulate people in MARKETING mostly, to a body of science like Chemistry?

      I know the popular trick NLP’rs use is claiming it’s just a *tool*, you know like a hammer…that can build up or break down.

      It’s how that tool came into existence right? I mean GUNS don’t kill people…but PEOPLE kill people right? But what was a gun created for Duff? It was created specifically for KILLING, einstein.

      NLP was created specifically for Manipulating.

      A body of knowledge like Chemstry was not solely intended to fleece and dupe people. Maybe someone who is a cunt likes to abuse their knowledge of chemstry to create designer drugs to manipulate someone, but that does not put that body of knowledge on an even keel with NLP. You have such shoddy reasoning skills. It’s the lack of critical thinking come out.

      Duff:
      “We should be careful not to scapegoat any one domain of human knowledge as the source of all evil.”

      This is a meaningless platitude. Who said NLP was the source of all evil? It’s just a tool an *evil* fuck helped to create for the purposes of doing evil. Brilliant.

      If you started thinking more about why you’re such an NLP devotee, and why you repeat the same flawed arguments that most other devotee’s repeat, and ask yourself what you could gain by questioning your beliefs about NLP, maybe you’d have better arguments.

      NLP is not the source of all evil, but “evidence-based” science is? ;)

      Duff says:
      “I also am opposed to so-called “evidence-based”

      Yea, what a surprise {eye rolls}

      Duff says:
      “That is not a presupposition of mine.”

      No but the presupposition in your statement (which I’m sure was brain washed into you by some NLP hucksters) is that critical thinking leads to anxiety.
      I asked you before, and I’m going to PRESS you again (don’t get excited), do you have PROOF for this belief of yours?

      Duff says:
      “No, I’m saying everyone’s vulnerable to psychological abuse”

      -Everyone- Duff? That’s quite the Meta Model violation. You don’t know your NLP that well do you?

      “Look–you were obviously fucked with by some manipulative douchebags.”

      That’s a nice mind-read Duff…but aren’t you violating your religion yet again? Mind-reads are supposed to be a no-no in NLP too, aren’t they? ;)

      I’ll tell you this, and whether you believe it or not has no bearing on my, but I’ve never been coerced or manipulated into doing something I didn’t want, or convinced to do something I hadn’t already thought about quite thoroughly and researched. I’m just not that stupid. I’ve also never spent a red cent on NLP. Have you? Are you protecting your purchase by any chance?

      Any other questions from your crystal ball that you’d like debunked?

      It’s no wonder you don’t like Evidence-Based proof, when you have a crystal ball to look into.

      My bad.

      “Magically free of Ideology.”

      Do you even know what that means? Is having an ideology wrong and now against NLP too? You have an interesting habit of using meaningless platitudes you know.

      I’m not some studid fuck who doesn’t know NLP inside and out. I know what it is. I’ve learned the tenants and famed practices. It’s manipultive. It’s useful in sales because people are gullible and looking for magic bullet. Therapy is merely one of the avenues people can get fleeced by unscrupulous losers who use NLP, but these people are also looking for a magic bullet and therefore predisposing themselves to being manipulated.

      NLP wouldn’t be able to work on someone who has half a brain, can critically think and knows how to ask questions properly.

      Science isn’t the enemy, like NLP has conditioned you to believe. Quite the contrary. Science asks questions, do you?

        1. @Duff,

          You no doubt. I didn’t think it would be long before the revealing questions caused you to fold like a cheap suit. Close up shop and head for greener pastures Duff. Quick, before the big bad scientists get you.

          BTW Duff is that how you’ve always responded to being challenged…and not just physically that is. Just fold and run?

          Protect that NLP no matter how much obscurity it creates in your mind and especially ignore any/all criticisms for your new age science there is. After all, according to you all thems critical thinkers are axiety ridden isn’t they? And NLP has *tricks* to keep their critical minds doing critical thinks while communicatin to the real thems in the meantime, right? I mean look at yourself as an example right? You just stopped thinking about it long ago, now you’re the perfect parrot for this Science without Scientific backing, huh? The irony…

          Hey Duff, you’d have thought that if all that bad evidence based stuff was just so wrong and only created for insurance companies, one of the NLP hucksters/scientists would have figured out that creating a few evil evidence based science reports would have helped it profit further huh?

          lol

          A mind is such a beautiful thing to waste Duff.

  27. (This is in response to @MariaAndrogynous above, as the threaded comments reached their maximum level).

    Are you seriously trying to compare the manipulative nature of NLP, born directly out of modeling other who were doing change-work, and then taught implicitly citing how easily it is to manipulate others into doing things, ethically or not, that they might not otherwise do to exercise equipment. For realz?!?

    I’m lost. What exactly are you referring to here? (It may be my confusion over the threaded comments.)

    Bandler could easily get someone to design a more appealing website. He’s not really after Anthony Robbins like fame anyhow, probably mostly because he’s a douche bag drug addict and knows that if he ever reaches that sort of fame everyone would know he blew some prostitutes head off with a gun while high on coke with a known drug dealer.

    A lot of assumptions there. Again, I’m not defending Bandler in any way whatsoever. I don’t know why Bandler doesn’t get a more appealing website. I don’t know whether Bandler still uses coke or not. I don’t know whether Bandler committed murder or not (I do know he was on trial for murder, and it seems likely that either he or his drug dealer shot the individual that was murdered). Just trying to be honest here. But again, I’m not in the Bandler school of NLP. NLP is a personal communication discipline–it matters a whole hell of a lot who you learn it from.

    You’re right, there is A LOT of corruption in the world, but that shouldn’t be an excuse or apology for the fact that NLP is inherently manipulative and most people use it to manipulate others and typically not for their benefit.

    How specifically is NLP inherently manipulative, in the pejorative sense of manipulative? Which “most people” specifically use it to manipulate others in what contexts? People definitely manipulate other people. NLP trainers have manipulated other people. People who know nothing whatsoever about NLP (even 2 year olds!) have manipulated other people. Some NLP trainers almost never manipulate other people. I prefer to deal in specifics, listing out the crimes of others rather than make broad generalizations.

    I really don’t get the apologists amongst you in the NLP field always making excuses for an evil fuck like Bandler anyhow. He’s evil, he murdered someone in cold blood, blew her head off and then proceeded to finish off a mound of coke before hiding like a coward in the closet when police found him, trembling in shame and cowardice.

    Rather people should learn to be honest and call it like it is. I reckon it would go a longer way to reducing the burden on oneself and reduce the need for therapy or tactics to change-past-history, more NLP speak for brainwashing yourself.

    From where specifically did you get that I am making excuses for Bandler? I am in no way doing so. That said, how do you know that Bandler shot the person? I give it a 50/50 chance that he did (since there were only two other people present), but I wasn’t there. Personally, I don’t like to accuse people of murder. I am trying to be as honest as possible here, not changing any history.

  28. @ Duff,

    Whoa there Duffster

    “I don’t know whether Bandler committed murder or not (I do know he was on trial for murder, and it seems likely that either he or his drug dealer shot the individual that was murdered). Just trying to be honest here. But again, I’m not in the Bandler school of NLP. NLP is a personal communication discipline–it matters a whole hell of a lot who you learn it from.”

    You’re fucking kidding right?

    The gun used was registered to him. He snorted copious amounts of cocaine. The prostitute also did his books and was responsible for sleeping with clients they both supplied coke to, and none of this is hearsay, it’s all snippets that had been taken out of either his or Marino’s (the accomplice)
    testimony.

    Let’s pretend your theory is right and it was Marino who killed Corine Christensen. That would make Bandler an accomplice himself wouldn’t it?
    Especially given the gun was registered to him. He said he knew about it when he blamed Marino for doing so and said he was going to go to police, some 36 hours after the murder, when his head had cleared from doing all the coke he had done.

    —————————————————————-
    When Two Murderously Guilty Men Mysteriously Become ‘Not Guilty’
    November 4, 1986, the Santa Cruz SENTINEL reports Corine Anne Christensen, 34, is found dead of a point-blank inflicted .38 caliber gunshot wound just beside her left nostril. This discovery occurs 36 hours after James Marino and Richard Wayne Bandler (and no others) were in her Live Oak residence, bitterly arguing and snorting a lot of cocaine. Marino will later testify that Bandler introduced him to and trained him for a large quantity of cocaine dealing and trafficking, encompassing national distribution, via commercial air traffic accessed, trans continental clientele and ‘innerCircle connections’.
    —————————————————————-
    Future newspaper reports and trial testimony reveal that Ms. Christensen was Bandler’s bookkeeper as well as prostitute for hire, to Bandler’s much controversied, protectively concealed ‘V.I.P. innerCircle’, and that Ms. Christensen rationed Richard Bandler’s personal ingestion of cocaine to “one ounce per week”.
    —————————————————————-
    Departing Ms. Christensen’s home, the two men drove to the end of the Capitola wharf, where Marino says he complied with Bandler’s order to throw the weapon into the ocean from the pier. The two men then parted each other’s company (Sheriff’s divers later recover the weapon, exactly where Marino described it to be).
    —————————————————————-
    A day and a half later, James Marino went to his lawyer, Kate Wells, and reported the above, telling her he ‘hopes it’s a dream’. Marino’s lawyer sends her (at that time) husband to Ms. Christensen’s house, whereupon he returns from the scene to inform Mr. Marino that his report was not a ‘dream’. The police are called in at this time. Bandler will later testify that he spent his day and a half in bed, snorting a lot of cocaine with one of his two girlfriends. When asked why he didn’t report the crime, he replied that he “intended to do so”, after he’d “cleared his head.”
    —————————————————————-
    Marino says Bandler shot her. Bandler says Marino shot her. Each man says he witnessed the murder, and both affirm that there are no other suspects. Officials determine post facto that, in the 36 hour interval between the murder of Ms. Christensen and the police reportage of that fact, the victim’s entire domicile had been elaborately ransacked; in what was clearly a thorough search of her home and all of its contents. Including a ripped open teddy bear and the care-free dishevelment of her personal effects. Testimony and reports from and among Bandler ‘associates’, revealed wide knowledge that Ms. Christensen routinely sequestered large amounts of book-keeping data, cash and cocaine, in an office safe in her house. All of this material was disappeared; without explanation…
    —————————————————————-
    On April 22 1987, the SENTINEL quotes Judge Tom Kelly twice, saying: “THE ONLY THING I KNOW BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT IS THAT THE MURDERER (defendant Bandler or witness Marino) WAS HERE IN THIS COURTROOM.” This Kelly quote is repeated in bold print as a by-line heading, and then again in lower case typeface. November 3, 1987, the SENTINEL, in subjecting James Marino, dubiously pronounces him “the key witness for the defense and the prosecution”. (The pinnacle of duplicity.)
    —————————————————————-
    It is repeated many times and in slightly varying phraseology, in an assortment of newspaper articles on this case, that the murder was motivated by drugs and sexual tensions, having nothing to do with Bandler’s work in N.L.P., Army Intelligence or the C.I.A. chiefs he was hob-nobbing with in his home (a few houses down from the murder scene): as though the murder was unrelated to Ms. Christensen’s prostitutional relationship with who knows how many persons of what social station (the paramount issue of the identities of the often touted ‘important people’ is never pursued in this case).
    Kathy Holub continues in MIND OVER MURDER – “Bandler and Christensen were freinds , not lovers. But Bandler often hired her to have sex with his friends.”
    —————————————————————-

    So you “don’t know” whether Bandler was guilty or not.

    Sounds precisely like apologism to me.

    Grow some balls and admit the leader of your religion is a crooked murdering scum bag, no better than any of the f*cks being exposed here, responsible for some of the means they use to fleece people, and easily en par if not worse than James DEATH Ray for the destruction he caused to some people’s lives.

    Grow a pair, will ya!

  29. @ Duff,

    More on precious Bandler the Bandit co-creator of the New Wage Science of Neuro Linguistic Programming:

    ——————————————————————–
    The mind guru who electrocuted his stepfather

    Richard Bandler is a cocaine addict who was once tried for murder, and who admits to being “a little sociopathic “. Yet he has changed the way millions of people think. The Guardian’s Jon Ronson went to meet him.

    It is a Friday in April, and you’d think some crazy evangelical faith healing show was taking place in the big brown conference room of the Ibis hotel in Earl’s Court, West London. The music is pumping and the 600 delegates are ecstatic. There are people from British Airways, Virgin Atlantic, British Gas, BT, Bupa, Dixons, the Department for Work and Pensions, Ladbrokes and Transport for London. They have come to learn how to be better in the workplace. Lots of them tell me they signed up because of the TV star Paul McKenna, but the great revelation is the other speaker – the man they hadn’t heard of.

    Of all the gurus who thrived during the Californian New Age gold rush of the Seventies, Richard Bandler has had by far the biggest influence, on millions of people, most of whom know nothing about him. Bandler invented NLP, or Neurolinguistic Programming. From what I can gather, NLP is a way of “re-patterning” the human brain to turn us into super-beings. It is the theory that we can be reprogrammed as easily as computers. You were abused as a child? Forget therapy; just turn off the bit of the brain that remembers the abuse. You want to become a great salesperson? NLP will reprogram you. Some people hail the way NLP has seeped into training programmes in businesses across the world. Others say NLP is a cult invented by a crazy man.

    I first heard of Bandler in 2002, when a former US Special Forces soldier told me he’d watched him, two decades earlier, bring a tiny girl into Special Forces and reprogram her in seconds to be a world-class sniper. Bandler’s theories were greeted with high praise in the Seventies and Eighties: Al Gore and Bill Clinton and practically every Fortune 500 Corporate chief declared themselves fans. But then there was the descent into the dark side – reportedly, during the Eighties, a coked-up Bandler had a habit of telling people he could dial a number and have them killed just like that. Then came the murder trial: in 1988, Bandler was tried and acquitted of murdering a prostitute, Corine Christensen. She’d been found slumped over a dining table, a bullet in her head. Her blood was found sprayed on Bandler’s shirt. And now there’s the renaissance, in the form of Bandler’s partnership with the British TV hypnotist Paul McKenna. In 1994 McKenna -a long-time .admirer – suggested to Bandler that they go into business together. Since then, NLP has become bigger than ever, a vast empire that’s making everyone millions.

    Purple Haze booms through the speakers and Bandler climbs on to the stage. He hushes the crowd. “I marched up the Amazon,” he says. “I threatened gurus to get them to tell me their secrets. They’re pretty co-operative when you hold them over the edge of the cliff.” There is laughter. “There was one Indian guru,” Bandler continues, “I was holding him over the edge of a cliff, I said to him, ‘My hand is getting tired. You have seven seconds to tell me your secrets.’ Well, he told me them fast, and in perfect English!” I have to say that, had I been tried for murder, I would be less forthcoming with the murder gags.

    Two hours pass in a flash. Bandler is mesmerising. He talks about childhood trauma. He puts on a whiny voice: ‘”When I was five, I wanted a pony… my parents told me I was ugly…’Shut the fuck up!” He gets the audience to chant it: “Shut the fuck up! Shut the fuck up!” If you hear voices in your head, he says, tell them to shut the fuck up. “If you suffered childhood abuse, don’t go back and relive it in your mind. Once is enough!” He says psychotherapy is a racket. Who cares about the roots of the trauma? “Don’t think about bad things!” During the lunch break, a delegate sidles up to me. “You’re a very naughty boy!” she says. “Richard will be very cross with you!” “What?” I yelp. “You kept writing when Richard was talking even though you knew you weren’t supposed to!” she says. “And you didn’t have a smile on your face. Everyone was laughing, but you were scowling.” Earlier Bandler said he had no unhappy clients. His exact words were, “The reason why all my clients are a success is that I killed all the ones who weren’t.”

    Over the days that follow, Bandler and McKenna cure a stream of delegates of their phobias and compulsions. There’s a woman who had barely left her home for a year. She says a bossy voice in her head tells her the heater will turn itself on when she’s out and burn down her house. Bandler gets her to turn down the knob in her brain that controls the volume of the bossy voice. Then he gets the bossy voice to tell her, “If you keep worrying about this heater, you’re going to miss out on everything good in your life.” This is called the Swish technique: you take a bad thought, turn it into an image, and then swish it away, replacing it with a good thought. “I don’t care about you any more, heater, because I want to get my life back,” the woman says, and the audience cheers. Yesterday, Bandler cured someone who had a fear of doctors. Now he gets him to stand up. “Are you scared of going to the doctor?” he asks. “I… uh… hope not,” the man replies quietly. “Boo!” shouts the audience, only half good-naturedly.

    Richard Bandler was horn in 1950. He grew up in a rough part of New Jersey. During our interview I don’t expect him to talk much about his childhood because several profiles say he never does. So I’m surprised when he says, “I was a compulsive kid.” “Where did your compulsiveness come from?” I ask. “From being alone most of the time. My mother was always out working, and my father was violent and dangerous.” He pauses. “Well, my first father was gone by the time I was five. My mother later married a guy who was a drunk and a prize fighter in the navy. He was very violent – broke a lot of my bones. But in the end I won.” “How?” I ask, expecting him to say something like, “Look at me now, I’m getting driven around in a Bentley.” But instead he says, “I electrocuted him.” “Really?” I say. “I didn’t kill him,” he says, “but I could have. I waited until it was raining. I got a wire-mesh doormat. I stripped a lamp cord, put it underneath the doormat, put the other end in the keyhole and put my hand on the switch. When the key went in, I clicked the switch. There was a loud scream. He went over the railing. Six months in hospital.”

    The family moved to California, where Bandler became “a juvenile delinquent. Then I discovered it wasn’t the Harley-Davidson that was scaring people. It was the look in the eye.” He was diagnosed as a sociopath. “And, yeah, I am a little sociopathic.” He says NLP came to him in a series of hallucinations while he was “sitting in a little cabin, with raindrops coming through the roof, typing on my manual typewriter”. When you think about it, there is something sociopathic about seeing people as computers who store desires in one part of the brain and doubts in another. “See, it’s funny,” says Bandler. “When you get people to think about their doubts, notice where their eyes move. They look down! So, when salespeople slide that contract in, suddenly people feel doubt, because that’s where all the doubt stuff is.” “So where should a salesperson put the contract?” I ask. “Put the contract on a clipboard,” he says, “and present it to them up here!”

    These were the kinds of ideas Bandler was typing in his cabin at the age of 25. His book would eventually be published under the title The Structure Of Magic. It was a huge hit. “Time magazine, Psychology Today, all of these people started seeking me out,” he says. He designed training programmes for businesses across the US. They made him rich. He was hailed as a genius. But by the early Eighties things were spiralling downwards. His first wife filed for divorce, claiming he had choked her. He became a prodigious cocaine user and struck up a friendship with a cocaine dealer, James Marino. In early November 1986, Marino was beaten up; he got it into his head that his girlfriend, Corine Christensen, had organised the beating so she could take over his cocaine business. Bandler phoned Corine, and the conversation was recorded: “Why is my friend hurt? I’ll give you two more questions, and then I’ll blow your brains out…” Eight hours later Corine was shot in the head at her home. “Tell me about the murder trial,” I say. He tells me what he told the jury – that Marino did it. Yes, he, Bandler, was in the house at the time. He lifted her head, which is how her blood ended up his shirt.
    ———————————————————————-

    So even if Bandler is to be believed, he was there when Marino shot her…lifted her head up and then just left and kept snorting coke with two other prostitutes up to 36 hours later to *clear his mind* before reporting to police.

    Niiiiiice

    1. @Jimmy Ray, Three things:

      1. To all of the above….Bravo! Very well said.

      2. Thank you for mentioning the murder victim’s name instead of calling her “the prostitute”,

      3. Thank you for pointing out that all of that Seduction BS is just that….BS.

      (And as to Duff’s comment up there somewhere – a female who is in a committed, monogamous relationship cannot be tricked into ditching her boyfriend to sleep with someone else. Unless she WANTS to ditch her boyfriend to sleep with someone else. In that case, she is neither committed or monogamous.)

      1. @what??,

        Good point. A girl who is committed can’t be speed seduced into changing, ditto for other aspects of NLP. These guys/gals get drawn in from the hyped up marketing that tells them they can change things quickly, convince others of anything, etc, and it’s that belief they protect in these sorts of arguments.

        I really wish Duff didn’t fold so easily. At least try the Doc Sulo tricks. I really wish he’d defend his meta-model violations. He broke one of his religions 10 commandments there. I like the presupposition that critical thinking leads to anxiety, even though that is patently false. See how he won’t address that stupid belief. Mostly because it’s NLP Dogma that shall remain unchallenged. It just is because Bandit said so, and a whole slew of disciples followed suit. Now it’s repeated over and over that those lacking critical thinking just accept it. Wonder why? ;)

        Bashing critical thinking is one of the various NLP tricks to cause victims to feel bad for using their brain, drop their guard and just let their emotions take over.

        I’d like to know why it’s so hard for Duff to acknowledge that NLP was born out of deception and that’s why it’s largely used to deceive. That there really has been nothing new in NLP since Bandit and Grinder introduced it in the 70’s other than lame attempts to re-brand it. Look at Grinder trying with his New Code NLP (bla bla blah), when Bandit effectively gagged him for several years from using the term NLP. Then Robbins with the failed NAC, and even Bandler with the lame DHE.

        In the end, the original is what stuck and that’s because so many people took it and ran with it in an age where change-work psychology was popular (still is) and most participants are already convinced before they show.

        As it stands some 70 years later, NLP has proven no therapeutic value and there have been many attempts at validating it.

        It remains a pseudo-psychological toy, mostly useful for selling to those already sold.

    2. @Jimmy Ray, although I don’t think I was able to clearly communicate my view to you, you’ve made me re-evaluate on whether or not I will have anything to do with NLP.

      I never really went any further than downloading and watching videos of NLP. While I thought many of the principles made sense, I didn’t believe that it works on everyone 100%. I did not know all about Bandler’s past, and having done a preliminary search on Google, found quite the websites telling of the same thing and more. I’ll be digging around for more info.

      The thing about the prostitute and the cocaine dealer, even if Bandler didn’t kill her, he was there with the other guy, doing things that go against my own values. I do not want to have anything to do with a program if it came from someone who is a sociopath and possibly a murderer. Also, the CIA thing had me curious too.

      Thanks Jimmy Ray, and my apologies if I’ve offended you.

      422

  30. The episode where Frank tells his joke about Jar and the audience laugh is very telling. Frank is like, “Thanks god Im Not involved in murder like James is, he’s screwed, im not that far out.” and the audience respond with that same feeling, that scummy feeling of fake-relief, and they start giggling, not knowing what to do because, really they feel a little guilty as well, being in the company of Frank, those sheeps have no idea how to react to the situation because they know, that as a Frank kern follower, laughing when the guru’s joking is part of the codex.

    Confused and insecure they are, these sheeps, and Frank is just corny, testing how much bs. he can unload, having fun with his audience, playing with them, he propably sees them as his little fetish. There is an element of Self pleasuring-sadism about these guru-seminars. Like when Tony Robbins is on stage talking to all those emotional wrecks, I mean, you can just see that this guy is very emotional, and the audience as well, and it looks disturbing. And Tony is revelling in it. He can’t get enough of it. Seriously, it looks like he’s on drugs,you will notice if you pay attention.

    1. @Mathias,

      So true. Have you seen Tony Robbins newest stage show in Australia where he has a psychologist narrating what he’s doing, using provocation, to bring a women out of the sad/angry cycle he describes with a nice figure-8? At one point he asks her point-blank, when was the last time she blew her husband.

      The syndicate influence is apparent through out his show with his liberal use of *fuck* *god damn* *blow* *blew* *hell* *shit*

      At one point he tells her about her daughters illnesses and says “oh yea, I know all about you…” In other words, he had profiled several people in the crowd and learned about their family history so that when he asked for a demo, he could pick one he already knew how to mind-warp.

      At another point in the show he proceeds to describe exactly what her husband is like and then NeLP’s her “isn’t that right?” Of course, she’s already in a suggestible state, but that doesn’t stop her facial expression from showing doubt before reluctantly agreeing. Robbins smiles, he’s certainly having fun with these people, all of which are already conditioned to agree with this uneducated, uncredentialed salesman.

      1. @Jimmy Ray,

        Yep, for Tony, it’s all about maximing emotional impact, as if a short bust of emotions somehow makes you free and able to deal with the rest of life’s challenges.

        He’s dealing with humans, complex creatures, but he doesn’t care, he experiments with people, he hallucinate hot buttons, and then he push those buttons and wacth in awe what happens. Like a little child, who’s just finished blowing out the lights of a fucking birthday-cake, because as he reasures you, he is very emotional. Like a drug-addict.

        It’s a game, some people hike, some people bungy jump, Tony does his seminars, why Because he’s passionate about it, And i mean he IS, it’s fun, ask him and he will tell you just how much he loves the stage, but he won’t go into detail about the consequences of what he teaches, no no, because as a human with liited awareness and understanding he doesn’t really know, yet he’s dealing with people and emotions.

      2. @Jimmy Ray, what date was that one on? I searched on his site, but only saw a few events listed in Fiji, and the only Australian event is for March 2011. Any links or video clips?

    1. @SD, @Jimmy, @Duff, @Maria and anyone else interested here- Have a few questions that I’d like to see other people’s opinions on, concerning NLP.

      The information about Bandler, just doesn’t sit right with me, personally.

      Here’s the problem, though. Do people just completely erase and toss any and all NLP materials?

      Should we at least learn enough about NLP to protect ourselves and help others who may not be privy to the tactics of mind control and manipulation?

      Or is it all too dangerous and we should stay as far away from any information like that as possible? If that’s your stance, would you please explain in detail as to why you think this way?

      If, on the other hand you say it’s ok to learn to protect yourself, then how far deep down do you draw the line? And why? Are there any dangers of falling prey, while just learning enough to protect yourself?

      Maybe I’m wrong here, but it seems that within the NLP arena, it’s ok to use coercive manipulation, as long as you’re doing it for the good of the person. Of course, the judge of “good” is usually someone other than the person. Am I wrong on this? Duff or someone else who’s more versed in NLP care to answer?

      @Jimmy Ray, your comments about NLP being designed with the intent to manipulate and mind control people is important. Do you have any specific references that point to that? I’m especially curious about the CIA bit. (MK-Ultra connections?)

      422

      1. @422, I missed one more question.

        Do you feel or think it is ok to learn NLP with the intent of doing something good. In other words, despite the original purpose of it, whether it was good or bad, is it alright to learn the material and then use it for good?

        Could it ever be used for good? Why or why not?

        1. @422,

          NLP is useless in the real sense of the word USE as far as therapeutic value is concerned. You get a few people who start parroting the same dogmatic beliefs that it started out with, and giving anecdotal stage show stories to it’s effectiveness.

          What are you trying to accomplish?

          Re; Robbins Australia Show. I don’t know the date. I caught a clip of it online somewhere and I don’t have a link handy, but basically you can see the Kern effect in place. Robbins never was one to use profanities in his shows, but now that he knows it sells even better because it makes you *real* {ya know}, he uses it.

      2. @422,

        NLP was created out of Bandler learning Gestalt therapy as a result of transcribing Fritz Perl’s recordings. He found he could pick up on the patterns that the Fritz Perl was using and Banlder found he could get similar results himself. Later he had the same experience with Virginia Satir.

        Bandler went to John Grinder (a linguistics professor) when he was an undergraduate and together they analyzed and created a system from the work of Satir, Perl and later Milton Erickson (the now famous hypnotist).

        They created various model’s from these therapists and hypnotists. Models of what made these therapists effective with their clients.

        This is where the Milton Model and Meta Model come from.

        They also found that these successful therapists held certain beliefs about their clients that also seemed to contribute to their success. From there the NLP presuppositions were born.

        That was what NLP was until the mid-1980’s. Of course they kept trying to add more things but what I just wrote about above was essentially what NLP was.

        Nowadays – the descriptor “NLP” is thrown around to describe anything and everything and in my opinion that makes it meaningless.

        Most of what people say is “someone using NLP” is often just language that matches what someone would say if they used one of the formula’s found in the Milton Model – a model of Milton Erickson’s unique brand of indirect conversational hypnosis.

        And just as a side note – all therapy deals in the Psycho – Logical realm. Key the word “psycho.” It’s not the outside world and it’s tough to do “science” on subjectivity. (Not that that stops the motivated people that get funding). I’m not saying this to defend NLP because I could care less. I read and wrote about NLP 10 years ago and have since moved on with my interests. But the fact is some people and therapists DID have a knack at helping clients in a way that others didn’t – Satir, Perl and Erickson were among those. NLP was an attempt to codify that elusive “knack.”

        Learning NLP for manipulation is like taking a go-cart cross country when you could take an airplane instead.

        Marketing, sales, dramatists, writers and PR people have put the most powerful means of manipulation available out in the open for anyone who has the ability to read… And they made it possible for social scientists to take their results and create careers by creating studies that prove what those same sales and marketing people have known and written about for at least the last 100 years and in many cases hundreds of years.

        1. @C. Tomasulo,

          “Learning NLP for manipulation is like taking a go-cart cross country when you could take an airplane instead.”

          Nice metaphor. And what exactly does it mean? Please explain yourself if you would. Thanks.

          1. @Regrets,

            You wrote:
            “Nice metaphor. And what exactly does it mean?”

            I’d say it’s a shitty metaphor if you can’t figure out what it means after reading it and the paragraph of explanation that follows it.

            What I “mean” is that if I want to learn what specific successful therapists do to get successful outcomes with their therapy clients then I’d most likely read books by people like Virginia Satir and Milton Erickson. Then I would also probably look into the models created based on those therapists that were created by Bandler and Grinder.

            If I want to learn how to “manipulate people” or what to watch out for when people manipulate people then I could probably learn some things studying the above therapists and the models created based on their work but it would be a highly circuitous learning path for manipulation – no?

            I will add that a big piece of the success of these therapists does include one very important factor – the perception of expertise and authority in the mind of the client – here’s someone sitting on a couch – paying money – listening to someone they have faith in for one reason or another. That’s something to think about.

            But in the everyday world – REAL manipulation is so right in your face that it’s almost foolish to start looking under rocks.

            How many times as a child were you told to use your imagination? How many times today did you use your imagination? Who’s imaginary stuff were you playing in your mind? When you argue about “ideas” or positions – where did you pick those ideas up from? Where did they pick them up from?

            I could go on and on with the questions. But I if you step out of your imagination and hallucinations just for a moment you’ll see that a LARGE portion of our modern world occurs in the PSYCHO- LOGICAL world not in the real world. That’s something that should make people take pause – since it makes us all easily manipulated in ways that make the Matrix look tame.

            1. @C. Tomasulo,

              Coercion and military force is the best way to manipulate people, period.

              For Manipulation to be really effective there has to be context, it’s really about creating context

              Language, education, environment, achitecture & city-planning, symbolism, social engineering, LAW, Military force

              I guess that sums it up :)

            2. @Mathias,

              You wrote:

              [quote]Coercion and military force is the best way to manipulate people, period.[/quote]

              The best way? That’s debatable. But in the context of the comments on this blog it’s irrelevant since the current discussion here revolves around mental manipulation.

              Or are you changing the subject?

            3. @C. Tomasulo,
              “I’d say it’s a shitty metaphor if you can’t figure out what it means …”

              I stand corrected.;)

              So you’re saying the best way to learn manipulation is to study master manipulators?

              I wonder if you could be just a tiny bit more specific? Any names? Anyone in particular I should study? And how should I study them? Take notes? Write everything they say out in longhand? Draw mind maps? It would help to have something more concrete.

              So you think paying money to people “perceived as an authority” helps people do better in therapy? I can tell you that has very little effect, much less than you think.

              But it’s a common technique used by people selling bullshit products to claim that if you get something for free it won’t have any perceived “value” for you and therefore it won’t help you. Wrong again.

              Manipulative techniques do not work in therapy because the purpose of manipulation is to get control of someone’s mind, whereas successful therapy teaches a person to gain control of their own mind. Simple.

            4. @Anonymous,

              You wrote:

              “So you think paying money to people “perceived as an authority” helps people do better in therapy? I can tell you that has very little effect, much less than you think.”

              I didn’t say it helps people do better in therapy. Stop hallucinating what you think I said or what you think I mean.

              ALL OF THE TECHNIQUES TOOK PLACE IN THE CONTEXT OF THERAPY. This has many pieces to it BESIDES the words used or the patterns of linguistics. That’s my point.

              Part of that INCLUDES the fact that people look to their therapist as an authority, an expert and therefore will listen to them speak in a way that might not work in any other context.

              You wrote:

              “Manipulative techniques do not work in therapy because the purpose of manipulation is to get control of someone’s mind, whereas successful therapy teaches a person to gain control of their own mind. Simple.”

              I have no idea where you’re coming from or what you’re getting at with this paragraph. I said that learning to manipulate by learning techniques modeled from therapists like Satir, Fritz Perls and Milton Erickson was circuitous at best. So I’m not sure where you’re going with the whole “manipulation does not work in therapy” thing. Manipulation might work fine in therapy. I don’t know. Maybe it doesn’t work with you. I don’t know. All I’m saying is that learning techniques that work in a therapeutic setting from successful psychotherapists is probably not an efficient way to learn how to manipulate people.

              You wrote:
              “I wonder if you could be just a tiny bit more specific? Any names? Anyone in particular I should study? And how should I study them? Take notes? Write everything they say out in longhand? Draw mind maps? It would help to have something more concrete.”

              What do you want to accomplish? YOU need to be more specific.

              There are 100+ years of written literature in the realms of sales, marketing, drama and writing. That alone could keep you busy for a while.

            5. @C. Tomasulo,

              You said: “I will add that a big piece of the success of these therapists does include one very important factor – the perception of expertise and authority in the mind of the client – here’s someone sitting on a couch – paying money – listening to someone they have faith in for one reason or another.”

              I said, “So you think paying money to people “perceived as an authority” helps people do better in therapy? I can tell you that has very little effect, much less than you think.”

              You said, “I didn’t say it helps people do better in therapy. Stop hallucinating what you think I said or what you think I mean.”

              I was paraphrasing, not hallucinating. Unless you think paraphrasing IS hallucinating, but I’m pretty sure that’s incorrect. You know, a person can have a slight misunderstanding of another person’s meaning. Doesn’t mean they have developed psychotic symptoms. It’s important to keep some perspective here.

              You said, “I have no idea where you’re coming from or what you’re getting at with this paragraph.”

              Well, it just popped into my mind because we were talking about manipulation AND therapy so I threw it out there. My apologies if it didn’t follow your idea of coherent, cohesive, correct conversation.

              You said, “What do you want to accomplish? YOU need to be more specific.”

              I want to know, 1) who you consider to be masters at manipulation, like maybe 3-4 names of actual people, 2) I want to know what specifically to look for in these people’s communication that show manipulative techniques, like maybe 4-5 specific language patterns or characteristics, and 3) I want to know what the intent of each specific thing might be, like what it is meant to accomplish.

              Thanks.

            6. @Regrets,

              You wrote:
              “I was paraphrasing, not hallucinating.”

              You’re right. Over-reaction on my part.

              You wrote:
              “I want to know, 1) who you consider to be masters at manipulation, like maybe 3-4 names of actual people, 2) I want to know what specifically to look for in these people’s communication that show manipulative techniques, like maybe 4-5 specific language patterns or characteristics, and 3) I want to know what the intent of each specific thing might be, like what it is meant to accomplish.”

              I’m not going to answer all of these questions in full on this blog. I might on my own blog. I just stepped into this conversation to say that it’s unwise to think that only stupid people can be hypnotized. Then I stepped in again because Jimmy Ray Ray’s crank-induced posts got 422 so hopped up that 422 was debating learning NLP to figure out what manipulators do. I just wanted to let 422 know A. How NLP was created and B. It’s probably not the most efficient way to learn manipulation.

              But to at least give you the courtesy of SOME answer…

              1) I think the master manipulator of the 20th century was Edward Bernays. If you study his campaigns you’ll learn more about manipulation of masses of people than from almost any other source. If you then take what you learn and use it to dissect modern campaigns like the modern “Global Warming/Climate Change” – you’ll learn even more.
              2) Language PATTERNS are a very small part of persuasion. If you want to study language and it’s effects – including manipulation of emotions – read a good novel and mark out the places you were affected emotionally. Then go and get some books on writing and find out what devices the writer used to elicit that emotion from you. Then practice and see if you can elicit the same effect (if you want that skill).
              3) To use Edward Bernays – Most of Edward Bernays campaigns had the intent of making things that people were completely against (or would be under normal conditions) acceptable and many times – desirable. Look at his campaigns for making it acceptable for women to smoke in public or his campaign to find a way to dump Alcoa’s waste product in the water supply. Or how early in his career he took part in changing the opinion of the entire USA (which was completely against going into WWI) so that by the time we entered people were all for it.

          2. @Regrets,

            He’s saying that there are better ways to manipulate, and Bandler agree’s which is why he’s fond of pulling guns out at *shows* where he has a “stubborn” client and motivating them to change by pointing it at them (true story).

            1. @Jimmy Ray,

              Well, I guess that is a better, faster “100 times more powerful” way to manipulate. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

          3. @Regrets,

            I wouldn’t apologize to Tomasulo for what you think is coherent communication since that’s not his area of expertise. His area is “covert” communication, as in communication that isn’t really there, secret and under the radar. He’s also an expert on covert comprehension, so while he’s the one accusing you of reading into cr@p that he says which is purposefully vague, it’s really more insidious than that. It’s more about what he does. He’s an arse-hole, don’t waste time reasoning with him, it won’t work, just mock his stupid ass and move on.

            1. @Jimmy Ray,

              Good point, thanks for the reminder. Trying to talk sense to a covert communicator/mind manipulator is a pretty circuitous way to getting a pain in the ass. Might as well go the faster, better, easier, more powerful route and sit down real hard on the floor.

      3. @422,

        “Or is it all too dangerous and we should stay as far away from any information like that as possible?”

        I think the most dangerous thing is to be stupid, as was pointed out earlier, being unaware, naive, unknowing, or whatever. That makes a person more vulnerable to manipulative techniques. There are lots of ways you can get brains though, mostly for free like this blog and other sites that question things or criticize the many scammers and posers out there.

        “If, on the other hand you say it’s ok to learn to protect yourself, then how far deep down do you draw the line? And why? Are there any dangers of falling prey, while just learning enough to protect yourself?”

        Nah. Just remember your brain is yours to manage and there’s no reason to let other people mess with it.

        I pay attention when my “hot buttons” are being pushed, when I start to get excited, emotional or wrapped up in a “story”. You can tell when you’re starting to trance out and you can pull out of it too. It’s a natural thing but nothing to fear as long as you are aware of it. Awareness is everything whether it’s sales letters or in person-to-person manipulation or political crap or whatever.

        Also, if anyone tells me that reprogramming my unconscious mind is going to solve all my problems (especially if combined with words “coaching” or “course”), I know I’m being bullshitted big time. The words “reprogram” and “unconscious” are a great red flashing light for mind-fucking manipulation on the horizon. “Mastermind group” is another, but it’s so ludicrous that even when I was stupid I didn’t fall for that one.

        As for using it for good? Some hypnosis and NLP-ers say they can put anyone into a trance any time they want, well how nice for them. But can they really get someone to make permanent changes to improve life? I hear Milton Erickson could and I think was substantiated, but he was a genius. Maybe a couple other people could. Most people are just hacks. So personally, I think it is fairly useless in a therapeutic setting. That said, if it does work in that setting, for some people, then I’m all for it. Usually it doesn’t, though. And certainly not by the lesser trained. A good therapist (hard to find as all hell) can help someone with any techniques, a bad one can’t and can also do harm.

        I know this didn’t really answer your questions but I’m in a talk-to-myself kind of mood right now. Sorry for the thesis.

        1. @Regrets,

          Most good manipulative fucks like Bandit, Robbins, Kern et al, already know that people coming to the events have convinced themselves to a certain degree already, quite possibly fully convinced. From there all they have to do is put on the show and basically point to what they want them to do, and with sheer numbers in the audience, the entertainers get their way, look effective, sell product, whatever.

      4. @422,

        NLP to protect yourself, from what? Below me patterns? (Blow me) or you-like-me nonsense?

        Not necessary. If you listen to the words, when patterns are run, they stick out and sound irregular, almost amusing.

        I remember going to buy a new printer at Future Shop where the salesman is trying to get me to buy extended warranty and I keep cutting him off telling him I’m not interested. I guess Future shop paid for some “sales” training and this guy starts waving his hand up in the air and as if trying to weave a picture for me says “Imagine…” and I cut him off again and say “No…” Eventually they give up.

        There’s always the element of *capturing* one’s imagination. So with that, they already need to be convinced to some degree or agreeable.

        To the degree that you allow someone to capture your imagination is up to you. Stupid people allow it to happen more readily.

        Critical thinkers, despite what Duff’s NLP inspired belief has told him, do not.

  31. NLP is a concept with roots in modernism: change your self, change your story, change your identity, reinvent and alter your state, The modelling of exellencé is of course modelling of bullcrap. Sadly.

    They say that the past doesn’t matter. It’s all about “the power of now” like the pig-faced Eckhart Tolle preach. it’s a manipulating idea, Don’t always make excusions about what happened to you to justify your present actions sounds more appropriate, But that wouldn’t suit the New wagers and their “being in the moment bs.”

    After all, these people are all about “New”, that’s why they tie themself to the word “new age.”

  32. http://www.mindcontrol101.com/go/nlpsecret/

    Quick get the NLP Secret {barf}

    Yep, for the first time ever Dantalion Jones aka David Barron of Military Language patterns…covers the manipulative effects of NLP quite well actually. There’s a torrent of all his books and CD’s available…don’t get carried away with his illuminati conspiracies though, mostly just for color IMO.

    Latest Email from David Barron aka Dantalion Jones

    ————————————————————–
    Ten minutes of your time.

    “Start with just ten minutes of your time and YOU can be on your way to TURNING AROUND virtually ANY area of your life, using this POWERFUL personal development technique.

    And some people only need to do it once, too.

    This amazing technique can help you enjoy EXTREME CONFIDENCE on all levels, unlock your hidden CHARISMA, let go of LIFE-LONG personal issues, dissolve YOUR fears, and it can even help you get rid of “REAL” problems, such as pain and impotence.

    We call it The NLP SECRET.

    It’s a special technique used by world-famous self-help guru Anthony Robbins in his one-on-one sessions, and taught by Dr John Grinder, the co-founder of NLP.

    And, for the first time ever, now the NLP Secret is being unveiled.

    To YOU…”
    ———————————————————

    @ a special price and for a limited time….blah blah blah..

    Imagine that…only 10 minutes and you learn the NLP secret. Wowza!!!!!

    The most successful scams involve:

    Appeals to trust and authority: people tend to obey authorities so scammers use, and victims fall for, cues that make the offer look like a legitimate one being made by a reliable official institution or established reputable business.

    Visceral triggers: scams exploit basic human desires and needs — such as greed, fear, avoidance of physical pain, or the desire to be liked — in order to provoke intuitive reactions and reduce the motivation of people to process the content of the scam message deeply.

    Scarcity cues. Scams are often personalised to create the impression that the offer is unique to the recipient.

    Induction of behavioural commitment. Scammers ask their potential victims to make small steps of compliance to draw them in, and thereby cause victims to feel committed to continue sending money.

    The disproportionate relation between the size of the alleged reward and the cost of trying to obtain it. Scam victims are led to focus on the alleged big prize or reward in comparison to the relatively small amount of money they have to send in order to obtain their windfall.

    Lack of emotional control. Compared to non-victims, scam victims report being less able to regulate and resist emotions associated with scam offers. They seem to be unduly open to persuasion, or perhaps unduly undiscriminating about who they allow to persuade them.

    {I see DUMB people}

  33. At David Barron’s site http://mindcontrolworld DOT com/mind-control-products-2/3105-2/

    He writes:

    9 Powerful Ways To Manipulate People

    Have you ever thought of how to manipulate people and get unfair advantages of them? It is vital in achieving your goals. By the time you finish reading this post, you will discover 9 powerful ways to manipulate people.

    Here are 9 strong tips on how to manipulate someone.

    1. Consider the Weight of the Situation. It is always easy to alter a simple condition. What you just have to do is to project that you are a forward authority in any given matter. People always go for what has been proven right (especially by a reliable person). And if you are just simply good at that, you already have the world in your hands!

    2. Unsolicited Helping or Rescuing. Help others even they do not request it, need it or want it. The goal is to make them owe you. The way this rule works is “if someone does you a favor, you owe him a favor in return”.

    3. Sympathize With the Person. If you can trick people into thinking that you feel for them and that you stress the importance of their choice, it would be easy for you to modify the decision without them fully knowing that you are changing the whole scenario. You just have to be a good speaker and then everything comes right behind after.

    4. Make People Insecure About Themselves. If the decision-maker starts his statement with “This will not work!” or “I’m bad at this!” you have all the chances to butt in your opinion that is supposed to stand above the one he currently holds. The goal is to be in the “after all I have done for you, and now you owe me” position.

    5. Inspire People to Get Their Support. You have to make people believe that your opinion will matter and it will not put them in any trouble.

    6. Shame, Scold, Blame Others. You will use this technique to collect for past favors and make someone responsible. Your goal is to be in the “it is all your fault” or “after all I have done for you and now you treat me like this” position.

    7. Use Your Power Wisely. Use physical, verbal, intellectual power, threats etc. to put people into “one up, I am right and you are wrong” position.

    8. Body Language. Politicians use body language widely in elections to manipulate people. You can do it, too. There are certain positions of head (bending it to the right side) and body which creates powerful manipulative effect. Don’t underestimate this.

    9. Find Weak Points of People. Most manipulators use this technique to manipulate women to have sex with them without any resistance which is dishonest. Anyway, you can use this in other situations.

    It’s strange that he hasn’t published any of the comments directed at Dave Barron though? Why? Strange….

    1. @Robber Barron,

      He he, Manipulating people

      as if you just go over to one of them 6 billion people, use a few tricks and then get that person’s car keys and wallets, you can do that, definitely, through suggestions, but then we are dealing with street magicians, who btw do it for fun, unless they are hustlers. Manipulation Is for the small clique of teen school-girls who bully and set the standard for all the other kids. They can force their peers to plague their parents for the latest fashion and gadgets. Which Amounts to billions of dollars! That’s manipulation on a grand scale.

      But Why would an “adult”(whatever that is) want to manipulate people? I can see the short term benefits, but in the long run… come on, Be decent, Seriously, go get ideas and begin to communicate and create networks, That’s how real business and influence happens

      You need a fucking idea and you need communication going between people, so that there’s giving and sharing which hopefully in the end leads to good business.

      Ideas-communication
      Simple, but hard to do.

      Ghandi had ideas, and he shared(communicated) those ideas with his people, it worked, and it still works today.

      But where are those ideas? And “how” do you communicate an idea when you have one?

      What is communication anyway?

      (Fill in the Blank)

  34. I just found Frank Kern’s new Guru protege on Stompernet’s uQast
    it’s fucken hilarious!!

    http://www.uqast.com/a966/Willyam-Hillbilly-Redneck-Internet-Marketer

    He does reviews on Fiverr.com

    I think I know where my next $5 is going.

    http://www.fiverr.com/users/mgrim/gigs/give-a-trailertrash-redneck-hillbilly-review-up-to-4-min

    Here’s the one for IM’s.

    THIS IS GOLD!@
    http://www.fiverr.com/users/mgrim/gigs/do-a-redneck-hillbilly-video-review-for-internet-marketers-and-gurus

  35. Krank Fern seems to be advertising his boiler room scam again…Internet Marketing now sucks according to Krank, but didn’t he say the opposite in his “State of the Internet” address a month or so ago? The link is a video-sales-ad from Ryan No-Diess about a free source of offline traffic, yes for only $97.00 you can gets it for youself…something about buying opt-in email addresses, marketing to them, then reselling it or some shit like that…I couldn’t be bothered listening to it all, those bloody video sales letters with Mickey Mouse cranking on the other end are so annoying…anyhow….

    From: Krank Fern
    Subject: Internet Marketing Sucks

    Weird subject line coming from an “Internet
    Marketing” guy, right?

    But c’mon …with all the Google Slaps and
    so forth, getting traffic online HAS been
    a pain in the ass lately, right?

    Anyway – I’ve been testing OFFLINE
    strategies for traffic getting since late
    August.

    My first test got me $216,000.00 in sales
    from a letter mailed to 1,000 people.

    …So I thought I was pretty smart.

    And then I saw this video and realized
    I have a lot to learn.

    Right around the 7-minute mark, it shows
    how one guy is building an email list
    by driving traffic from offline sources
    ….and he’s getting the list for free.

    Watch it here. (No opt in needed).

    Frank

    P.S. I’m testing the strategy in this video
    this week. I’m guessing it works pretty
    well.

    Watch it here.

  36. Well Friends, finally, Monger, Blowhole & Assface, his 3-Stooge Attorneys, have complied with the Judge’s demand for the “mysterious missing audio tapes” on the last day of the deadline…..this was just uploaded late this afternoon…..let’s see what happens from here. Have a good day, everybody !!!! :o)

    http://bit.ly/eNL2ZD

Comments are closed.