One of my informants from Down Under sent me a heads-up re a couple of new TV segments about David Schirmer, the Australian Secret star and investment adviser who has been embroiled in a bit of a financial scandal since last spring (or autumn, in his part of the world). You may recall that I have blogged about Schirmer a few times. One of the new links was to a video from the Aussie show A Current Affair (ACA), which has previously reported on David Schirmer’s shenanigans. The other was to a video from a New Zealand show, Close-Up.At the time I wrote this post I hadn't yet been able to access the ACA video (I've since watched it; see link below), but I did watch the Kiwi offering, Close-Up. Apparently Schirmer had recently put on an "unlimited-wealth" seminar in New Zealand (for which participants paid $120.00 a pop – $89.60 in US dollars), without disclosing that he was under investigation by authorities in Australia for mishandling hundreds of thousands of dollars in other people’s money. Close-Up’s Robyn Janes sat down to interview Schirmer, and all was going well until Janes started asking him about all that money he owed the folks in Australia. Schirmer clearly did not want to talk about that. "I just want to focus on the positives of The Secret," he replied. He said ACA, the show that had previously exposed the allegations against him, was "a gutter journalism show," and he added that the ACA reporter, Ben Fordham, had "one purpose and one purpose only: to defame me." When Robyn continued her questioning, Schirmer said the interview was over and promptly left the room while she followed, still questioning him.
He took refuge in a public restroom – an appropriate spot, I suppose, considering what he’s peddling. Robyn chose to err on the side of decorum and not follow him into the john, but Schirmer’s PR guy, a man who definitely has his work cut out for him, did talk to her. She asked him, "Wouldn’t it be a positive thing if David would just answer the questions?" Mr. PR replied, "But you’re focusing on the negatives. Even answering negatives is still focusing on the negative."
Spoken like a true New-Wage apologist. Robyn, I feel your frustration; we get a lot of that stuff Stateside too. After a while Schirmer came out of the bathroom and did promise that he would grant a live interview at some point in the future, but when Janes tried to pin down a date for that interview, Schirmer shut up, and he and his PR minion took off down the hallway.
Granted, the people who attended Schirmer’s latest snake-oil show have a bit of responsibility in this matter as well. Were they completely unaware of the scandalous scoop about this guy? New Zealand is not that far away, geographically or culturally, from Australia. And if I knew all about Schirmer, you’d think the Kiwis would.
But perhaps the point is irrelevant. Maybe Schirmer will be able to rise again no matter what he is accused of, or ultimately convicted of. After all, hope springs eternal, whether it’s hope for easy money or, for that matter, easy weight loss. Look at US infomercial con artist and author Kevin Trudeau. He has a shady past, to say the least. His "natural cures" have been pretty well discredited, he’s been fined millions of dollars by the US government, and the vast majority of readers on Amazon have given a low rating to his latest offering, The Weight-Loss Cure They Don’t Want You To Know About. Yet here is that book’s current Amazon sales ranking:
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #96 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)
Popular in these categories:
#1 in Books > Health, Mind & Body > Diets & Weight Loss > Diets > Weight Maintenance
#5 in Books > Health, Mind & Body > Personal Health
#5 in Books > Health, Mind & Body > Diets & Weight Loss > Diets > Weight Loss
And it has recently been in the top five in the "Advice/Miscellaneous/How-to" category on the New York Times bestseller list too.
And then there are the numerous New-Wage gurus who, though they may not be breaking laws or violating government regulations, are surely skating on thin ice ethically (not to mention logically, spiritually, scientifically, and many other ways). Many have proven themselves time and time again to be, if not quite sociopathic by clinical definition, at least lacking in much of a conscience. (Read what Steve Salerno has to say re the emerging culture of sociopathy.) These borderline sociopaths and smarmy narcissists can make the most outrageous and morally repugnant statements, brushing off all criticism as being a symptom of the critics’ shortcomings, and still their fawning followers and bubbly bobbleheads continue to line up, checkbooks or charge cards in hand, proclaiming, "Thank you, I love you!"
So who knows how the fortunes of Shameless Schirmer will turn? The Aussies are wise to him, and very soon the Kiwis will be as well, but who knows what he’ll try next? There is, after all, a whole thriving market of gullibles in the US. And, as been proven time and time again, people have short memories.
Well, that’s enough Cosmic Contificating for now. Here’s the link to the Close-Up (New Zealand) video.
And here’s the link to the ACA (Australian) video, which provides a backstory and nicely supplements the NZ piece. I received this link Wednesday, November 14, the day after I published this post. If the link still doesn’t work, I’ll let you know as soon as it's up on YouTube.
30 comments:
ok, from another angle, how these guys continue, and continue, and still continue some more...
(i always try to see things from an ever-broadening perspective , just because i notice every year that this is what is happening to my understandings, they are expanding, so in the spirit of getting to where they are going, i try to hasten the change)
(a) let us accept, only for a moment, that belief creates (some of our) reality - what we put our attention to is what is growing in life ....
(b) let us accept, only for a moment, that to become any sort of teacher requires some qualities, such as certainty, confidence, a high self-regard, enough charisma to have someone want to hear what you are going to say, persistence, and consistency of message - for starters...
to the degree that (a) is true, what is the "world" we live in? ...the sum total of all the belief systems bumping up against each other.... piling up together in an action/reaction, call and response, that is a lot like what ecology, nature, is doing, like a big standing wave of nearly infinite frequencies.... we see the bit we respond to, but "reality" is much more...
these teachers, in fact all of us, continue to hold a set of patterns about themselves/ourselves that continue to out-picture... we call it "who we are".... and the consequence is that we are continually getting the picture we "make/are"....
a mr. vitale or a mr. shirmer always has students, because that is how they see themselves, just as the people in the audience will always be there, because that is how they see themselves..... it may not be the same people, but there will be people.... some will figure it out and get on their own stage, others will change their mind, but it is a niche that is always filled, just like a niche in ecology...
so of course "he's baaaaack", it is "who he is", and one thing we can say about your hobby blog, you will never run out of raw material.... lol... (that made me laugh, to write that).... it is really hard to change the minds of teachers; they have strong minds or they wouldn't be doing what they do (it is not an easy job, at all!)...
and actually, it is a sign of just how generous life is to some (all?) of us.... there is a satsang teacher, i won't say his name, but it sounds a lot like "john david", and every year he comes here with a following, and arduously, slowly, it gets bigger and bigger.... he has been described as basically a sleazeball, but he doesn't give up, it is "who he is", and if nothing else, i admire him for his consistency and focus.... and it doesn't matter what i say about him, he will not stop.... and will always have a group around him, who at least are learning something, or they wouldn't be there for day two....
and just as there is "someone" for everyone, romantically, your basic lower level teacher will have some basically lower level students, (and the shining lights, the really high ones, we never hear about, they find each other in their own way)
so, what to do? life is like this..
thanks for letting me use your blog to structure some amorphous thoughts i have been having....
enjoy, gregory
I always enjoy reading your perspectives, Gregory, and I didn't find these thoughts at all "amorphous."
You made some good points, and I think that on some level, I've always understood that even seemingly sleazy "teachers" and "gurus" offer something of value for some people at certain points in those people's lives.
I had a private conversation with another blogger some time back regarding a particularly sleazy "spiritual leader." This person wrote, "...it's not what you believe, it's how you believe it. So even a scum bag con man like [he named the guru] can function as a wonderful and divine guru for a sincere devotee.
It's crazy how that works."
The thing is, I wonder at what price it sometimes "works." How much real damage do these gurus do? How much real good? To a great extent that's a subjective call, and I know it is not my job to be a spiritual cop, as someone once called it. People should be allowed to make their own mistakes, or find their own joy and fulfillment, as the case may be. Of course I'm speaking here of "consenting adults," not minors -- and most of us probably know of cases where gurus or spiritual leaders have used their position of power to (sexually) exploit children and young teens.
But even "consenting adults" should also have the right to make informed decisions. That, I think, is where blogs like mine can actually be of some use (beyond entertainment). If the guru du jour has a pattern of dirty dealings -- sexually, financially, or any other way -- folks have a right to know. If the spiritual leader preaches profound "truths" that contradict the "truths" s/he preached a few years ago -- and/or if his or her personal life is at marked odds with the lofty ideals s/he touts -- people have a right to know that too.
If they know, and turn a blind eye and choose to follow the leader, then yes, that's *their* choice. I get that, at least on an intellectual level. But I have emotional reactions too -- a mixture of mirth and annoyance and sometimes worry and sometimes anger, as may be more than apparent in my posts.
Anyway, thanks as always for sharing your thoughts.
yes, teachers do do damage, no doubt
(i make a distinction between "guru" and "teacher", reserving the former for a very special class of being where these sorts of questions do not arise so much, rare to find)
and it is already-damaged people, people who are suffering, whose life isn't working, who are the customers for such situations ... so there is already a predispostion for trouble...
there is a long-standing aphorism in the indian tradition of spiritual development, that a good student can learn from a bad teacher...
one would think that there is a niche for somebody to do a blog on how to be a good student!!
there is a lovely, intense/sweet guru here who insists that (especially for the foreigners) he is having nothing to do with enlightening his followers, he is just trying to get them up to normal...
and this is actually quite a widespread understanding about enlightenment, it is just getting to normal, healed, un-condidtioned...
since i am rambling with you, i have heard several indian teachers express surprise at how damaged self-esteem is in foreign students, especially americans... you wouldn't, at first go, think that, but when you consider where the world capital of the self-help industry is, it starts to make sense...
i am into whatever it is we call "growth", all the ironies ad contradictions that abound within that field are very interesting
enjoy the day
gregory
Very interesting points, Gregory. But if you think about it, perhaps it isn't surprising that Americans are the ones with the greatest self-esteem problems. As a culture we are so obsessed with self-esteem, and even though we talk a good game about the roots of healthy self-esteem (and self-worth), we tend to measure our worth by our cars and other toys. We are, of course, strongly encouraged in that direction by the marketers who control our media.
Some, including many of the New-Wage "leaders," may protest that the Panoz cars and expensive watches and other toys are just the icing on the cake and they can take them or leave them -- but they spend an awful lot of time protesting and explaining! As do some of their minions. ("He is NOT superficial. He is NOT superficial." (To paraphrase one of Mr. Fire's newest minions, "Sensei Tristan" of All-Ways Zen in Austin.))
Come to think of it (so to speak) we have the same dichotomy with sex; as a culture we are absolutely obsessed with sex and sexuality, but in a giggly, junior-high way. We gasp about a president who got a blow job, but we don't raise an eyebrow when our pre-teen daughters dress (and sometimes act) like little sluts. OMG, I'm beginning to sound like a moralist or something. :-)
Point is, on many levels, America is one f----d-up culture. But I'd still rather live here than anywhere else, though I strongly feel I would benefit from extensive travels elsewhere.
Following the logic of this thread, it is notable that the sleaziest used-car salesmen continue to sell cars, because that is "what they are."
No matter how many lemons they are able to pawn off on people whose finances preclude their purchase of a reliable vehicle from a more honest dealer, these salesmen will continue to sell until they are indicted, throttled by a dissatisfied customer, or just get too old to even shop for the gaudy costumes (or prayer beads) that they wear.
Does this mean that the customers they dupe actually deserve the products they get? I don't think so, but perhaps I'm just too naive in my compassion for them. Perhaps the existence of distinct classes - in both the marketplace and the world of spiritual quests - is right and proper. Perhaps the suckers deserve to be deceived.
Funny... If granted a face-to-face encounter with the divine architect of such a system, I'd simply have to refuse the keys to his/her kingdom, and live the rest of my existence in absolute disgust. Because in the final analysis, I need to believe that the creator of the universe was at least as nice as I am. :-)
Well said, Ron, and thank you. I think you've touched on the roots of my most fervent emotional responses to this endless parade of "spiritual" teachers and seekers/suckers. On one level I can "accept" it intellectually or philosophically, but I've not yet reached the point where I can just let it slide without saying something about it.
the used car salesperson will continue to sell cars, he may have remorse about his technique, may have a number of responses to what he sees of his method, but let us take this to a more extreme level.... the torturer and the tortured...
depending on philosphy one may say this is "designed", (or attracted),
or one may say that it is chance, but it doesn't matter which, it is happening....
so now what? yes, we don't like torture, and we don't like to be the torturer and/or the tortured... but life makes situations that no matter what one thinks pro or con, it is happening....
so now what? no amount of protest or analysis has ever stopped torture....
i am not trying to make a point, i am asking a question for us all.. what do we do now?
connie says protest, ron begrudgingly, perhaps, accepts its existence, gregory rolls his eyes, and keeps painting....
the point now can be made, who we are is not about how we can change life, it is that who we are is defined by how we respond to pre-existing circumstances throw up by a definitely apprentice god, small g well-deserved...
we cannot change people, we cannot change life... so what to do?
there is no correct answer, we do what we do...
enjoy, all for now, so cold last night that i needed a blanket, got down to 75 degrees
Schirmer's on a sudden PR offensive. He hijacked the "Schirmer Exposed--Part 4" name with another badly-done infomercial flogging his products. And a whopping 70+ comments already, most of them positive, when all his others don't rate hardly ANY.
But as a couple of naysayers have pointed out, MOST of the positive commenters all signed on within the same time, give or take an hour or two. And many of them don't seem to know how to end their comments with punctuation marks.
The whole thing definately smells of "sock puppets", as they say. Folks who think differently might want to join just to stem the tide a hair and bring things closer to reality.
Thanks for the heads-up, Anon. It's not surprising that Schirmer would continue to strike back; after all, the guy's gotta make a living. Do you have a link to Schirmer's newest PR foray? I'm sure there are many of us who would like to see it...and comment. :-)
You can search YouTube for the phrase "David Schirmer" in quotes and then click on the "Date Added" link to get to the most recent ones. There's only 40 or so in all. He's added four in the past two or three days.
The big on is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jZBV7MjB8c
Near as I can tell the only "real" comments on the positive side are someone called "straker2" and someone called "The Wazman1". Wazman admits to being a close personal friend. Don't know who straker is, other than someone who has a bunch of self-published fiction up on Lulu and some sort of bad-looking indie Sci-fi series up on youtube, but he subscribed to Wazman's channel--even though Wazman doesn't have any videos up.
To each his own, I guess. Straker might be some sort of actor called "Adrian Sherlock" who is listed in straker's credits. Adrian has a free tripod website (oooh!) that begins with the name "straker".
For a while David had a supporter named "Warren Henningsen" who very briefly had a blog flogging David's stuff. It disappeared pretty quick. If you googled THAT name you found another Australian actor, most famous for being on some sort of Australian version of "Skank Island" or whatever it was called.
I was thinking maybe "Adrian" was the unfortunate young man abandoned to face the TV crew when David ran into the bathroom, but he looks too old to be that poor soul. So who knows.
Thanks, Anon!
David Schirmer has really shown up who he is this time because he has tried to outsmart ACA but it has backfired. He was defaming people on his blog and was told to remove it otherwise he would be facing defamation charges. What he has said are yet more lies and he, so we are now finding out, has a real lot to hide apparently. Can't wait for the next installment and for the look on Schirmers face (which gets better by the expose) when he finally falls.
How can a man with such a high pedestal actually fall. Real simple, tell lots of lies and even to the authorities.
The fact that he was involved in the movie The Secret show just exactly what intentions the producers had for that. He and several others have absolutely no qualifications yet they are practicing a form of psychology on their clients. Forget the money issues with Schirmer, that is what I find the most concerning.
Thank you, Jill. It's interesting how Schirmer has had to alter his self-marketing as a result of his "troubles." Not too long ago he was marketing himself as a person who was qualified to give stock market advice and actually make "investments" for other people. Well, we see how *that* worked out. I don't know what the laws are in Australia re licensing for trading on the stock market on behalf of other folks, but they're pretty specific here in the US. Anyway, it seems clear that Schirmer has run afoul of more than one governing agency Down Under -- not to mention that he has angered quite a few individual investors.
On "The Secret" web site he is still listed as an "Investment Trainer." I looked at some of his recent vids on YouTube and notice that he's now billing himself as a "Life Coach."
Various other "teachers" on The Secret site are listed as philosophers, metaphysicians, and the like. In the New-Wage world, people can call themselves just about anything and get away with it. And they do get away with it. (I'm sure Joe Vitale and John Gray are not the only people in "The Secret" whose "doctorates" are phony, i.e., from unaccredited schools.) But when unqualified people start messing with other folks' psyches along with their bank accounts, that's when things do get dicey. You're right to be concerned.
This isn't to say that "qualified" or properly credentialed professionals have a sterling record. They're just as capable of exploitation and abuse as the uncredentialed folks. But at least there are established avenues of disciplinary or legal action with credentialed professionals.
i never asked, and never saw it either, but why did anybody take "the secret" seriously? it is a movie, based on a book, based on a theory.... an approximation three times removed from anything real...
just wondering...
michael moore's film "sicko", never saw that either, but wasn't it as much a point of view attitude statement about the medical world, and not exactly a factual documentary? i noticed in london it was being panned for holding up the nearly dysfuncitonl national health service as an example to follow...
so why all the fuss about a fiction film? it really is entertainment, and an opportunity for buying into an identity for its target audience, not unlock the whole foods chain in that regard...
why would one expect these guys not to be flawed?
enjoy...
Gregory, I think the big difference between "The Secret" and, say, a fictional (or intentionally fictional) movie is that "The Secret" has been aggressively marketed as being the truth. And not just the truth -- but a truth that holds the key to health, wealth, happiness, and spiritual fulfillment. It has "way too many flaws to mention here," to borrow from the sig file of one of its most boastful "teachers." But I will mention a few anyway.
"The Secret" presents the Law Of Attraction as real science, while abusing quantum physics theory in ways that sound credible to the gullible. It purports to be about an ancient "secret" that was known to, and used by, Einstein, Jesus, Plato, Edison, etc. It is not presenting this idea as fiction but as utter truth.
And whether by accident or design (I strongly feel it was the latter), the DVD has become a vehicle for some of the most fatuous and self-serving New-Wage hustledorks in modern history. That's why, from Day 1, I've referred to "The Secret" as a New-Wage infomercial rather than a movie. The values it seems to tout are crassly materialistic ones, and its simplistic rendering of valid principles (not "laws," but principles) has resulted in a whole new breed of "New-Age guilt."
Those are just some of the reasons "The Secret" raised such a s--t storm. Of course, its defenders say that the controversy results from the fact that most people are negative and/or are afraid of "new" ideas. But there is nothing new about "The Secret," except the marketing plan. And whatever else you might say, the marketing is brilliant, if obnoxiously so.
I saw the secret without knowing what it was, I walked into the cinema after the titles.
First big red flag- a guy with rev. before his name.
I'm so glad sociopaths put up useful labels so they are easier to avoid. Is it just me that feels no reverence whatsoever for this character?
Does he revere himself?
What is it we are meant to revere?
His ruthlessness?
Oh, and regarding "Sicko" -- I enjoy Michael Moore's work and think he is entertaining, witty, and occasionally brilliant when it comes to defining and documenting problems as he perceives them. Yes, like most works in that genre, his movies express a point of view that doesn't tell the "whole truth," whatever that is. (Moore's detractors, of course, would say that his movies are utter nonsense or flagrant distortions of truth.)
In "Sicko," the problem Moore addresses is the inaccessibility of decent medical care for hundreds of thousands of people in the US -- even those who supposedly have the best medical insurance. He's not critiquing Western medicine per se, only the deeply flawed delivery system thereof. It's really an indictment of the insurance industry.
I have no argument with Moore's contention that this problem is outrageous, especially since, as a struggling self-employed type, I am completely uninsured. I do, however, have a problem with his idealistic portrayal of life in Cuba, UK, Canada, France. I know he's merely trying to make a point that good medical care is more accessible in those countries, but there are countless folks who have a different opinion about that.
I can't speak for Cuba, the UK or France, but I have a Canadian friend who, though she lives in the US, is dealing with the Canadian health care system because her frail and aging mother still lives up there. My friend is pretty familiar with the ins and outs of the Canadian system and she says that, like most things, the truth is somewhere in between. The Canadian health care system is neither a nightmare nor a panacea. But that middle-of-the-road P.O.V. doesn't sell movies or books.
In any case, Michael Moore's intent with his documentaries is to address social problems and, to some extent, suggest solutions, however flawed those suggestions may be. However, I haven't heard of any Moore documentaries that purport to hold the secret key to health, wealth, happiness, fulfillment, etc.
For that matter, I haven't seen any indication that the Whole Foods chain is claiming to offer the ultimate key to happiness either, although to a large extent it does cater to the New-Wage market and the the eco-conscious, sustainable-world crowd. Still, that's not quite the same thing as peddling the facile (and fatuous) "truths" presented in "The Secret."
Hi, there, HHH! Would that "Rev" person be the Reverend Michael Beckwith, aka "Zormak from the Planet Woosabi 6," as Steve Salerno might say? :-)
"The Secret" is, if nothing else, a showcase for some of the most successful narcissists and borderline sociopaths in today's marketplace.
Oh yes, oops, of course you have you own reverend. Hmm lets see, how does he fare on the eyestooclosetogether-ometer?
Pass.
you know the marketing was good... we are talking about them, but somehow i don't think they are talking about us...
lol
i never saw "what the bleep" either, but there seems to be a whole subculture derived from that as well, celebrity seminar participants, with growing businesses... imoto, the water guy being one...
maybe we should make the next one... it can be a michael moore style expose of the self help business.... should get a decent return on investment, dont you think? especially if we put in a christian or two on the good guy's side...
I hasten to add, lest there be any misunderstanding by people who don't get it, that (as far as I know) the reverend Ron is not a real reverend in the churchy sense. I therefore do not refer to him. Paradoxically this qualifies him for some genuine reverence in my eyes.
HHH/Anon: The Rev is not a "churchy" type Rev, though his ordination is valid in the State of Texas, and he has performed a few wedding ceremonies in his time. One thing you probably won't find him doing is peddling crap like "The Secret." :-)
Hey, Gregory, great idea for an exposé... but as for me, I'd rather do a parody! Let's see... we could get Leslie Nielsen as the Bob Proctor character; and maybe Martin Short as John Gray; and Danny DeVito as...um...
An anonymous writer (not me, I am a different anonymous person, "anon2"!) made mention of a "Warren Henningsen". The person on the video that tries to defend Schirmer outside the bathroom is Warren Henningsen. I suspect he might also be wazman1. Warren introduced himself in an email sent to Schirmers database as someone who fawned over Schirmer, was the MC at his seminars, carried his bags and wiped his a.... for him, or something like that!
Wiped his a...? Now, that's a pleasant visual! Bleghhhh! :-) Anyway, thanks for the additional insight, Anon2.
I believe THE SECRET is a paradox of deluded greed and senseless emotional ruin. People like David Schirmer NEED and are desperate for recognition. They try to multiply their possessions but have absolutely no values. They have learned how to make a living, but don't have a life. They add years to life not life to years. They have narrow viewpoints and do larger things but not better things. They think they are big men but have very small character. They talk more, but learn less. They plan more, but accomplish less. They rush, but not wait. They focus on steep profits and have shallow relationships. They seek fancier houses but have broken homes. They make quick trips, have throwaway morality, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything. They have much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom....
How postively TRUE!
Well said, Anon...
Hi I'm Adrian Sherlock, and yes I'm both an actor and a low budget independent film maker (I assume by "bad-looking", the person writing meant that my YouTube series appears to be cheaply made. I may not be Hollywood, but I'm prepared to try my hand) and yes, I've met David Schirmer.
My opinion of the Secret is that it is a very useful tool which I've applied in my own life to positive effect. My view of David Schirmer is that he seems to be a genuine sort of guy, if he's made any mistakes in the past, I get the impression he's learnt from them and is unlikely to repeat them.
David is, I believe the owner of the Aust branch of Bob Proctor's Life Success business. Mr.Proctor's teachings helped me out a helluva lot when I was a young man with a lot of problems. I've seen David Schirmer live and he teaches the material Bob Proctor teaches, so it's well worth the money to hear it.
I know a lot of people are suspicious, cynical or distrustful of these type of teachers, and that may be understandable enough, but something you reject can't help you. And for me, that's the bottom line. I went to YouTube to find an audience for my film making, but I'm happy to support David Schirmer, I believe he's a decent guy.
All the best,
Ade.
Thank you for your comments, Ade. I am not sure which video(s) the commenters were referring to. But it seems clear that David Schirmer still has a handful of defenders, who also deserve to be heard. However, I think you should know that Bob Proctor has apparently dissociated himself from Schirmer.
I am a former "insider" of Cowgirl guru Lola Jones and her spiritual plagiarized version of Deeksha mixed with Law of Attraction she trademarked as: Divine Openings. What takes 21 days in India you can magically do with her in just 5 days (...but what there's more) I can confirm not only the greed of the guru but also the desperation of those who are attracted to the 'too good to be true' offer. The whole package is very seductive and although I bit the new age juicy worm- the hook was slowly extricated as I observed 'the talk' NOT match 'the walk' amongst MANY other things that I witnessed. She is also very fierce at shutting down anyone that exposes or challenges her while keeping her followers mesmerized with her spiritual spin to mitigate damages. Amazing how so many KEY members individuals around her have left once they figure her out and yet no one in the Divine Openings community questions this. There's nothing more sobering and humble than to admit you were duped (I guess that's what keeps you hooked), but when you can admit you were a sucker.. that is when your really free. Thank God for this blog and other websites that attempt to warn people of what's behind the shiny curtain. I always thought nay sayer's were just negative, unhappy, close minded people, but experience (always the best teacher) taught me there will always be greedy vampires when we bleed desperation. And the quest for enlightenment nearly sucked me dry. And by being "open" I lost my God given common sense. PS please let me know if there are other sites that I can post warnings about LOLA JONES
Post a Comment