You might as well just skip this post, which is now outdated, and go straight to the comments. Or at least go straight to the PS's. And then read the comments.In the interests of fairness, I wish to point out a blog post that Aussie Secret star David Schirmer posted on Wednesday, 18 February, 2009. He says he has been cleared by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), and that he is now going to sic the "best defamation barristers" on some of the people who have accused him of wrongdoing or have reported on those accusations. He adds that he is looking forward to "this interesting journey."
The link to his blog post is here. There doesn't seem to be a permalink to that particular post, but as I noted above, it is dated 18 February, 2009.* Schirmer has also apparently had all of the videos of the exposé from the Aussie TV show A Current Affair removed from YouTube (in his blog post, he implies that A Current Affair removed them, but they didn't, and the videos are still up on the ACA web site). His Wikipedia entry has been considerably sanitized as well.** Moreover, he seems to be practicing some intimidation tactics on people who have expressed opinions about him on Twitter and on other sites. Negative info about him seems to be disappearing from the Web....
I have always said that if it turns out there's evidence that David Schirmer has been falsely or unfairly accused, I will publish it. For now, all I have is that one blog post of his.*** If I am given links to any documents from the ASIC clearing him, I will certainly publish those too. (Needless to say, I will also publish credible evidence to the contrary as well.)
Just thought y'all would want to know. I may be snarky, but I do try in my own way to be fair as well.****
* Or it WAS dated 18 February. See the PS.
** Well, so much for that Wikipedia entry having been "cleaned up." I just checked and it's been changed again, as of 21 February, to reflect some of David Schirmer's troubles. If you have a lot of time to waste, here's a link to the history of the Wikipedia entries on David Schirmer.
** * And now we don't even have that blog post. Again, see the PS.
**** Sometimes I try too hard, it seems.
PS added on 22 February: It seems that after changing the wording on his 18 February blog post in which he claimed to have been "cleared" by the ASIC, David Schirmer has now removed that post altogether. Go figure. He is now joyfully on his way to the US of A, flying first class, of course (or at least implying that he's flying first class). He should be touching down in LA pretty soon...
PPS added on 25 February: Melbourne's Mini-Madoff is currently in Albuquerque, NM, and then, according to his Tweet on Twitter, he's headed for "Chicago, Toronto, Detroit, Dallas, Austin, Phoenix, Atlanta, LA and home!"
* * * * *
Now more than ever, your donation is needed
to help keep this Whirled spinning.
Click here to donate via PayPal or debit/credit card.
If that link doesn't work, send PayPal payment directly to
scrivener66@hotmail.com
or to cosmic.connie@juno.com
If PayPal, be sure to specify that your contribution is a gift. Thank you!
to help keep this Whirled spinning.
Click here to donate via PayPal or debit/credit card.
If that link doesn't work, send PayPal payment directly to
scrivener66@hotmail.com
or to cosmic.connie@juno.com
If PayPal, be sure to specify that your contribution is a gift. Thank you!
48 comments:
Connie I think your comments are very fair but I am one of those people who want to see Schirmers evidence before i think differently about what he is being accused of. I know sometimes people get a bit narky when they are accused of something but he seems to go really overboard in my opinion. To me that stinks of something not being right. I just can't understand because if he really didn't do anything why worry about a few people who think he has? Let them go do what they feel they need to do to free themselves of the anger. The secret teaches people not to dwell on the negatives so why doesnt he do what he teaches, ignore it and move on. I also find it difficult to believe that nothing went down when Bob Proctor accused him of deception and misleading conduct in the courts in Australia. What was that about? I am sure Proctor would have been trying to resolve any problem before he took legal action and you never see anyone elses personal battles exposed in the media like this guy. Its almost as if he enjoys it. I think he could have been a lot more professional by just leaving it instead I think his attitude inflamed everything. Just my 2 bits worth and I'm willing to see his proof. If it means that the people who are accusing him will put up videos and pictures of him if he does I think he is a total fool and it would make a mockery of his apparent beliefs and his part in the secret. I'm neither here or there about him personally more disgusted with what hes said and done because I feel he could have acted much more professional. I can also see how a lot of people would get very frustrated because he has this attitude going on which is pretty ugly. I think it is time for him to stop and get on with life now if he is free to do what he wants. Will watch but not interested in his stuff anyway.
Yeesh.
Does this mean a "Schirmer and Proctor" reunion could be on the cards? Will the secretions welcome back their long lost member with open arms, preaching forgiveness for their failure to stand by their 'persecuted' Secret Teacher? Perhaps someone, somehow (and I'm guessing Vitale) will come up with a new DVD or audio cd about the virtues of forgiveness, starring - you guessed it - Schirmer! Heck, someone might even do something along the lines of LOA and the Courts... the possibilities are unlimited! Maybe even Rhonda Byrnes is getting inspired right now at Schirmer's "apparent" success (but, like you said Connie, I'll believe it when I see the proof that ASIC really HAS cleared him of such a thing, and besides, just because one door closes, doesn't mean that others have to shut too, right? I mean, there's still other legal thingys going on, by what my memory can recall).
Hey Connie, I have a question - how would a person go about initiating some kind of action to persuade (let's take the Australian government here) governments that greedy LOA operators actually harm people, and should not be allowed to operate in a commercial sense? In fact, if anyone has any ideas, please let me know. All I can think of is a mass petition.
Thank you for your input, F Tosh. I too want to see more evidence, and so far I haven't seen any. David Schirmer is certainly welcome to make the exonerating documents public and/or send me copies or links.
Keep in mind that the matters ASIC was investigating had to do with Schirmer's stock market trading and investment operations. This has nothing to do with the Bob Proctor matter, which is an entirely different case -- one in which the court ruled against David Schirmer. My understanding is that Proctor sued David Schirmer and his company (or companies) for false and misleading business practices; I also understand that Schirmer has violated numerous court orders related to that case.
While it is possible that David Schirmer has been cleared by the ASIC of certain charges/allegations related to his stock market/investment dealings, that could simply be because the ASIC failed to uncover sufficient evidence. Given Schirmer's apparent skill at making records disappear and doing other things to keep ahead of the law, that is not terribly surprising. (Notice that I said "apparent" skill; I am judging from some of his public statements and material, such as the Entrepreneurship course where he actually teaches how to protect one's assets against lawsuits and such.)
I agree with you that if he puts up videos telling "the whole story" -- including the personal stuff he has hinted at about a disgruntled ex-employee -- it will probably backfire on him, as I understand there are photos... well, that's getting into National Enquirer/TMZ territory, and he's not famous enough for that, LOL.
While I understand that sometimes people are falsely accused and sometimes those accusations take on a life of their own, my feeling about most of the allegations related to him remains pretty much as it always has. Two cliches come to mind: (1) Where there's smoke, there's fire; and (2) The leopard does not change its spots.
There's always the possibility that I am wrong, and as I said, I'm keeping an eye out for evidence that I am. But as you put it regarding Schirmer's claims of being cleared, "something stinks of not being right."
Abalance, as I noted in response to F Tosh's remark above, the Bob Proctor situation is a separate matter (as are numerous other legal actions -- suits and countersuits -- in which David Schirmer and his companies have been involved). Proctor filed a lawsuit against David Schirmer for misleading business practices. So I don't foresee a Proctor/Schirmer reunion any time soon...but then again, I've been wrong before.
I do see Schirmer making more lemonade out of this batch of lemons -- and yes, if he markets himself properly and gets the right kind of attention, Joe V may decide it's advantageous to do some JVs with him after all. Stranger things have happened.
Joe has actually done a "subliminal" DVD on the power of forgiveness, but I'm sure he's open to doing more on that topic. In fact, "unconditional forgiveness" was one of the themes he pulled out of his...um...hat when he was blogging about his dinner with scammer and convicted fraudster Kevin Trudeau.
So at this point, nothing would surprise me...
What I find interesting in this case is that David Schirmer has been blaming other people for his lack of success when the reason why he has had to blame other people is because they have a complaint against him. That makes no sense. He should have addressed the complaints against him first and then he wouldn't have had to blame anyone. That seems to be the hussledork way.
I would reckon for most people it would be once burned twice shy. I am grateful for everyone who spoke up about the issues with all of these teachers. It is about time this industry was regulated. I don't know if Schirmer is right or wrong in fact I have no interest in that but I have a lot of interest in people that get hurt from their actions and the way they force their beliefs on other people and denigrate them if they don't do as they have been told.
I wonder just how much of what this spruiker says is actually true. I have been caught by one and I know that some people will do anything to justify what they are doing regardless of its affect on anyone. The only reason these people follow this path is for money and glory because there is no other benefit in it.
I believe this person should be putting up the letter they received as evidence to really prove that what he is saying is correct. What gets me going is that he is claiming on his twitter site to be a faith walking christian. Have you ever seen a faith walking christian be so public about their own personal problems? You have to question the motives of these people some times.
Connie I do not believe that Schirmer has been cleared there is just too much you know what on the pile to believe that. I'll believe it when I see it and I want to see Schirmers letter becuase I just don't trust the guy. I'm sorry, I just don't.
Thanks to all commenters...I am kind of on the run this morning and afternoon but will be back later with more. For now it looks as if David Schirmer is already backing off a bit about being totally cleared by the the Aussie authorities who were investigating him. He has already changed the wording on his blog post.
Word has it that he has also sent intimidating emails to people who have dissed him, which could explain some of those fawning apologies on Twitter.
More soon!
~CC
schirmer says this in his blog
"It is interesting that as of today Channel 9 & Fordham have pulled all defamatory videos off YouTube, and all references from other users have been deleted."
if you google the phrase "david schirmer exposed" for the past month youll find all the tweets in question. when you click on the links the tweets provide youtube says
"This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Schirmer Financial Management."
aca didn't pull them off. schirmer did.
Addendum/correction to my comment above:
I dug a little bit into my cache to find Schirmer's original Feb. 18 blog post. In the interests of accuracy, the major revision in his post is as follows:
Original:
The EXCITING NEWS is ... I was informed last week that as at
January 19, 2009 that ASIC has allowed our application for our
managed fund to proceed.
Revised version:
The EXCITING NEWS is ... I was informed last week that as at
January 19, 2009 that ASIC has asked if the application for our
managed fund is proceeding.
==
In both versions he still implies he has been cleared by ASIC, and, of course, his blog post title remains the same, "Secret Teacher Gets Cleared."
Wow he is really playing with fire! Personal fights or justification by anyone does not belong in the media but then this guy was claiming to be a somebody so he asked for his personal life to be exposed I guess. I think it would be fair to say that he has probably been grinding the hardest axe on his own business by a very long shot. Not paying bills while boasting about all the cars and houses and whatever else stuff he has is really not smart. I go along with many others now and think he would be much smarter just to take leave of this crap and focus on his business. I do take offence to the one rule for me and one for you people though so he has my support if he shuts up and gets on with business but he loses it if he starts public justification. If he can create a fund then good for him if he cant there are probably reasons why he cant and thats fine he just needs to keep that to himself, move on to something different. He seems to get very bogged down with blame. He has the chance to shine for what he says he believes in so lets see it happen by making something good of it all not a public bitch session please.
Thanks for your comments, Hope. I agree with your observation that David Schirmer seems to have planted the seeds of his own destruction. As for his putting so much effort into publicly justifying himself... well, I have to say that I can understand his doing that. After all, most people would want to defend themselves against their accusers. But in my opinion as an outsider/observer, his defenses do not seem all that credible.
I do get the feeling that every time Mr. Schirmer defends himself he just digs himself deeper into a hole. He wins some support and sympathy (e.g., those poor saps on Twitter), but even those modest gains may very well be offset by the strengthening of other people's negative opinions of him. Something about "protesting too much..."
Schirmer has frequently said he never had a chance to defend himself to or on "A Current Affair," and that may be true. It may also be true that ACA used some unfair "ambush" tactics, as I discussed here shortly after the first expose was aired. But then again, HE approached A Current Affair first, with the idea of giving positive exposure to The Secret (and to himself). Obviously his plan backfired.
So, lacking the option of taking over Channel 9 or other Aussie media, all he is left with is the option to defend himself in the court of public opinion. Many of his public remarks in defense of himself probably fall under the category of ad hominem attacks against his accusers (and those who report on the accusations). That is, he often focuses more on what he claims to be the personal motives of his detractors (e.g., a jilted ex-lover/employee; a TV show riding on the ratings back of The Secret) rather than the substance of the accusations.
Now, when gauging things for myself, I actually DO try to look at the motives of the people arguing as well as the substance of their argument. In other words, the old sayings, "Consider the source" and "take it with a grain of salt" are good rules of thumb when trying to ferret out the truth. They're not good rules in formal debate, of course, and they're not good when you're on a jury and are instructed only to look at the evidence -- but they ARE good rules for the everyday process of figuring out what's really going on.
Yet there's always the possibility that the person presenting the ad hominem argument is mistaken or outright lying about his detractor's motives. That has to be considered as well.
Moreover, as several people have pointed out, Schirmer has a tendency to go on the offensive a little too frequently to be credible. So I have to consider *his* motives, and it looks to me as if he's just throwing up smokescreens.
I've come to my own conclusions about the events of the past few days, regarding Schirmer's claims to have been "cleared" (and yes, I do have better things to do with my time, and I *do* them, but this stuff here is a hobby for me). My guess is that he's making an all-out effort to clean up his reputation, in light of his latest campaign to expand his brand into the U.S. Maybe his exploitation of the email from ASIC -- via his February 18 blog post in particular -- was a last desperate attempt to clear his own name. After all, if that email was dated January 19, you'd think he would have used it sooner. Perhaps he was really set off by those two folks who made negative remarks about him on Twitter.
As for his changing the wording on that blog post, I could give him the benefit of the doubt and say that perhaps he simply misunderstood the intent of the ASIC communication, and maybe someone explained it to him after he'd already published his post. Nevertheless, he kept the post's headline -- "Secret Teacher Gets Cleared" -- as is. Of course one could argue that perhaps by this he simply meant he had been cleared to continue his application process with the ASIC. But in the substance of the post he implied that the ASIC email was proof that the accusations against him were slanderous and motivated by the greed and selfishness of his accusers. So unless he completely changes the wording his blog post, he can't claim that the headline was not deliberately deceptive.
In any case, it looks as if he's headed to the U.S. and will be here Monday. Lucky us!
Yawn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3GZWdjMimE&feature=related
That was a bit rude of me, I think. My apologies.
Anon 1:06 & 3:14 -- 'Twas not rude at all. The Schirmer saga is rather boring to many, I imagine. Besides, your first comment prompted me to follow the link, and that reminded that I used to watch "The Young Ones" regularly on one of the obscure satellite channels back in the big dish days. I still remember a line from one of the shows where one of the guys said, 'I'm so hungry I could eat my own ear wax. And we all know how horrid that tastes.' That kind of thing stays with you. So thank you, H...er...I mean, Anon.
And I do need to get off of my butt and finish some of those other blog posts in the pipeline.
It's on topic, Schirmer digs the Young Ones. Well known fact.
Is this the usual husseldork way, accuse everyone else of all the wrong doing and take no responsibilty for anything. I have never heard of anything more pathetic, more immature or more selfish than that. That guy is acting like a nazi and he has never even written a book let alone got any letters behind his name. Geeesh, is that what they get up to down under. What is happening with Rhonda Burnes too, she doesn't appear any better.
To the anonymous writer who said this "I believe this person should be putting up the letter they received as evidence to really prove that what he is saying is correct." You have your answer, it appears that what he said was not what was in the letter from the Australian Commission. That tells everyone just what these sorts of people will do to make things that are not appear to be what they want them to be and what they want everyone to believe. That is extremely deceitful but probably explains why everyone is so p****d off with this guy. How can you possibly trust someone who cannot even be honest.
There has got to be people out there who really have some dirt on this guy because why is he fighting so much if he has done nothing wrong? Anyone who is innocent ignores the crap that people say about them because it doesn't matter in the big picture. I think this appears more a case of a hurt ego and what is this about him changing the wording on his website?
I tried to find something about Schirmer in the Australian papers, but they obviously have more sensible things to write about.
Top Stories:
Crazed chimp ripped off woman's face
Teacher jailed for taking student's virginity
Toddler drowns on eve of parents' wedding
Man's penis injured in grinder accident
....But nothing about Schirmer.
Oh that is so typical, try to get money out of people any way they can to feed their GREED FOR MONEY while blaming everyone else of the very thing that you are doing. That guy has lost the plot.
Connie, was this guy REALLY flying first class or was he JUST SITTING IN THE FIRST CLASS LOUNGE????????????????????????
This is ALL marketing and these people will grab hold of ANYTHING that will capture peoples imagination and MAKE THEM BELIEVE that they are what they say they are. Saying you are sitting in first class lounge MAKES PEOPLE BELIEVE that you are flying first class when it is possible that he was not. It is possible that he was in sub class but probably has access to the lounge so he can plug his computer in while he's waiting to get on the plane. I do not believe he is genuine but that is my personal opinion.
I have watched this guy for long enough to come to the conclusion that the cracks that have appeared are far deeper than anyone is letting us know about and that even includes all those people who spoke up on the Aussie TV show. That just does not happen without some serious problems not being taken care of properly and it looks like this guy is running away from those problems.
You might also like to consider that is is also possible that all those negative comments about him were removed just before heading over here so that new people he is marketing to now won't see them?????
He does not appear to like anyone who questions anything about him so what does that say about his understanding of any of the laws he claims to understand.
The comment you referred to of him possibly intimidating someone into apologizing publicly is not only disgusting and the lowest act it also shows the world that this guy really has a false and sad opinion of himself and he has very little respect for the laws. His stunts in the last few days appear to be to make people in our country believe that he was cleared in Australia when he obliously has not been and if comes out that that was a deliberate stund then that is very serious and should be exposed.
I wonder when HE will publicly apologise to all those people he has wronged? It shows that no matter what he does right now it will backfire on him because he is constantly fighting all laws. I do not want to meet the guy I feel I know a lot about him already and it makes me sick. He appears to be driven by money and greed and right now I find that sickening.
5 MINUTES MGMT COURSE
________________________________________
Lesson 1:
A man is getting into the shower just as his wife is finishing up her shower, when the doorbell rings. The wife quickly wraps herself in a towel and runs downstairs. When she opens the door, there stands Bob, the next-door neighbor. Before she says a word, Bob says, 'I'll give you $800 to drop that towel.' After thinking for a moment, the woman drops her towel and stands naked in front of Bob, after a few seconds, Bob hands her $800 and leaves.
The woman wraps back up in the towel and goes back upstairs. When she gets to the bathroom, her husband asks, 'Who was that?' 'It was Bob the next door neighbor,' she replies. 'Great,' the husband says, 'did he say anything about the $800 he owes me?'
Moral of the story: If you share critical information pertaining to credit and risk with your shareholders in time, you may be in a position to prevent avoidable exposure.
Lesson 2:
A priest offered a Nun a lift. She got in and crossed her legs, forcing her gown to reveal a leg. The priest nearly had an accident. After controlling the car, he stealthily slid his hand up her leg. The nun said, 'Father, remember Psalm 129?' The priest removed his hand. But, changing gears, he let his hand slide up her leg again. The nun once again said, 'Father, remember Psalm 129?' The priest apologized 'Sorry sister but the flesh is weak.' Arriving at the convent, the nun sighed heavily and went on her way. On his arrival at the church, the priest rushed to look up Psalm 129. It said, 'Go forth and seek, further up, you will find glory.'
Moral of the story: If you are not well informed in your job, you might miss a great opportunity.
Lesson 3:
A sales rep, an administration clerk, and the manager are walking to lunch when they find an antique oil lamp. They rub it and a Genie comes out. The Genie says, 'I'll give each of you just one wish.' Me first! Me first!' says the admin clerk. 'I want to be in the Bahamas , driving a speedboat, without a care in the world.' Puff! She's gone. 'Me next! Me next!' says the sales rep. 'I want to be inHawaii , relaxing on the beach with my personal masseuse, an endless supply of Pina Coladas and the love of my life.' Puff! He's gone. 'OK, you're up,' the Genie says to the manager. he manager says, 'I want those two back in the office after lunch.'
Moral of the story: Always let your boss have the first say.
Lesson 4
An eagle was sitting on a tree resting, doing nothing.A small rabbit saw the eagle and asked him, 'Can I also sit like you and do nothing?' The eagle answered: 'Sure, why not. 'So, the rabbit sat on the ground below the eagle and rested. All of a sudden, a fox appeared, jumped on the rabbit and ate it.
Moral of the story: To be sitting and doing nothing, you must be sitting very, very high up.
Lesson 5
A turkey was chatting with a bull. 'I would love to be able to get to the top of that tree' sighed the turkey, 'but I haven't got the energy.' 'Well, why don't you nibble on some of my droppings?' replied the bull. They're packed with nutrients.' The turkey pecked at a lump of dung , and found it actually gave him enough strength to reach the lowest branch of the tree. The next day, after eating some more dung, he reached the second branch. Finally after a fourth night, the turkey was proudly perched at the top of the tree. He was promptly spotted by a farmer, who shot him out of the tree.
Moral of the story: Bull Shit might get you to the top, but it won't keep you there..
Lesson 6
A little bird was flying south for the winter. It was so cold the bird froze and fell to the ground into a large field. While he was lying there, a cow came by and dropped some dung on him. As the frozen bird lay there in the pile of cow dung, he began to realize how warm he was. The dung was actually thawing him out! He lay there all warm an d happy, and soon began to sing for joy. A passing cat heard the bird singing and came to investigate. Following the sound, the cat discovered the bird under the pile of cow dung, and promptly dug him out and ate him.
Moral of the story: (1) Not everyone who shits on you is your enemy. (2) Not everyone who gets you out of shit is your friend.(3) And when you're in deep shit, it's best to keep your mouth shut!
THUS ENDS THE FIVE MINUTE MANAGEMENT COURSE
Like Schirmers claim he has been cleared of all wrong doing, his claim of being in first class is bullshit as well. I'm sorry I am so over the guy that I find his comments and manipulation offensive. I bet that guy who is travelling with him is completely clueless as to what Schirmer is really up to. I wonder if he really understands the type of documents that schirmer puts together behind the scenes? I've seen some of them and I'm afraid he is the last person on this earth that I would ever do business with. Make your own mind up.
I like morals one, five and six. I think that guy is full of bullshit. I also think the guy he's got tagging along like a pathetic little kid who has been let loose in a lolly shop is embarassing. Together they make a ridiculous pair that remind me of Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dee. Basically a pair of idiots making their way around out country to screw up even more people. I have never seem more bullshit packaged in pretty boxes than what those guys sell.
A very very very healthy dose of consumer skeptism is required when being within earshot of these people.
All of this just proves beyond a shadow of doubt that greed will never make you a nice person let alone a christian.
Here is scientific proof that being an optimist or pessimist is NOT all in the mind as these people try to sell it, it appears its all in the genes. My opinion is that what these people are trying to sell is nothing more than a feel good pill(hope or hype in other words) which they market to the gullible for ridiculous prices which they then attempt to justify by giving themselves impressive titles and pretending to be very successful. Sucessful it seems, in very loose and unidentifiable terms?
"Science finds cause to feel good
Richard Alleyne, London
February 27, 2009
WHETHER a glass is viewed as half-full or half-empty depends on your genes, British scientists claim.
Variations in a mood-altering gene influence whether people take a pessimistic or optimistic view of the world, researchers at the University of Essex believe.
They found that different versions of the gene, which is involved in the transportation of the "wellbeing" chemical serotonin, affect whether we are drawn to negative or positive aspects of the world.
Those with a long version of the gene tend to have a "sunny disposition", dwelling on positive aspects of life and deliberately playing down the negatives. Those with a shorter version do the opposite.
The psychologists behind the study believe that the findings could be used to develop new treatments for anxiety and depression. They came up with the results after showing positive and negative images to 97 volunteers.
The participants were shown a series of slides, each containing a pair of images drawn from a psychological tool called the International Affective Picture Set.
The images were divided into three categories: negative ones designed to inspire fear or stress, such as a menacing spider or person on the verge of committing suicide; erotic or pleasant ones; and neutral ones. The researchers then judged which images grabbed their attention.
Those with the longer version of the gene averted their gaze towards positive images, such as sweets, while others were prone to looking at the negative pictures, such as the spiders. The psychologists believe that everybody tends to notice either good or bad events selectively, and these biases play an important role in our general reaction to stress.
Their research, published in Proceedings B, the Royal Society journal, suggests that a common genetic variation underlies these biases.
Professor Elaine Fox, of the University of Essex, said: "People who carried one form of the serotonin transporter gene tended to look on the bright side of life, and selectively avoided negative material.
"Meanwhile, those who carried the other version showed a complete absence of this protective bias."
The researchers said such biases were important because they were associated with different degrees of resilience and susceptibility to mood disorders, including depression and anxiety.
Professor Fox said: "Selective processing of positive emotional information, for example, is associated with enhanced sociability and wellbeing, while a bias for negative material is associated with neuroticism and anxiety."
But while many of us might be genetically disposed to be like grouchy Victor Meldrew of the sitcom One Foot in the Grave, most of us do not see ourselves that way, it appears.
Separate research from the Social Issues Research Centre published this week suggested that three-quarters of Britons consider themselves optimists."
Go figure why so many people get caught by these people and hand over so much of their hard earned money only then to realise that all they do is pack their bookshelves with repetitive books and plastic packs puffed out to appear impressive.
In my view these money hungry gold diggers should be ashamed of themselves for being so false.
Spiders aren't negative. I think that shows negative bias in the minds of the shrinks, who obviously like flies all over their kitchen.
How did they know people weren't looking at the spider for a long time just to figure out why they use a spider?
In fact, spiders are very good. They give you a chance to use great words like 'pedipalps' and 'arachnid'.
I say when you get so deep in your own sh*t the only hope you've got is to be an eternal optimist or I suppose pretend you are in cohoots with the man upstairs.
I'm with you, hhh, why should spiders get a bad press?----lets hear it for the optimistic spiders.
Is that the best Schirmers mate Benjamin Bressington can do? Making fun of the worlds fatest man? What an idiot. Takes one to know one and it also takes one to use one.
Didn't you run off huffing and puffing and slamming the door?
Thanks for all your comments, everyone; I've been remiss in responding individually but I appreciate all of your remarks. (I love the "management lessons," as well as the article about possible genetic factors in our method of processing information. And I quite agree that spiders are not at all negative. I've always been fascinated by spiders and insects.)
And getting back on topic, it looks as if our favorite spruiker caught somewhat of a lucky break, as Ben Fordham, the reporter from A Current Affair who has been on Schirmer's case, is now facing legal troubles of his own. These are not related to Fordham's numerous stories on Schirmer but rather to another story about an alleged contract to murder a male prostitute. Ben and an ACA producer allegedly used a hidden camera and published the resulting footage; they are charged with violation of Australian laws concerning the use of listening devices. The two are also charged with concealing a serious offense (i.e., the alleged ordering of the contract killing).
The person who allegedly ordered the killing, a 71-year-old former mayor, has also been charged.
http://tinyurl.com/b9rpus
David Schirmer has already publicly commented about this, writing:
"...ACA is the most stupid show on TV … as well as totally inaccurate, deceptive and slanderous. Ben Fordham has sought to ruin many good Australians over the years with lies and deception. I don’t wish anyone to go to prison, I do hope though that justice is done to Fordham for the evil he has done to many people." This was a comment to a February 25 piece on the Aussie TV site, "What's On The Tube."
http://tinyurl.com/bbr6te
Sigh. I don't and never have condoned illegal or unethical tactics by journalists. From both a legal and ethical standpoint, the end does not necessarily justify the means. And yes, I am and always have been well aware that A Current Affair, as well as more "legitimate" news outlets in Australia and the US, are concerned more about ratings than anything else. Tabloid shows are notoriously less concerned than the more mainstream outlets with journalistic ethics, and more interested in sensationalism. This doesn't mean that they don't hit upon the truth on occasion, but it does mean that...well...you have to consider the source. This is tabloid TV, after all.
But I have never believed that the evidence for David Schirmer's misdeeds is based solely on the information in the ACA exposes. And in my opinion this latest turn of events does not exonerate David Schirmer or, for that matter, any of the other people that Ben Fordham and A Current Affair have covered. It does, however, give Schirmer and others a little boost in their campaign to convince the world of their own innocence.
This is what I think we might call one of those "unintended consequences." It's a shame, really.
And I really do hope that if charges against them are true and they are convicted, the ACA guys can avoid prison. Matter of fact, I've never advocated prison for David Schirmer if the allegations against him are true. I think prison should be reserved for violent criminals who pose a real physical danger to society. I can't speak for the people who were allegedly wronged by Schirmer, but I don't think they're necessarily interested in seeing him go to prison either. Heck, they probably just want their money back.
If you can make money by writing a nice sum into a blank cheque, can you make your own laws by writing your own onto official stationary?
I think there is another book and DVD in there.
Can you do that with scientific laws too?
I mean, let's say it was mid-winter and you faced a heavy fuel bill.
Rather than focusing your intent by filling in a blank cheque, you could just tippex a meteorology book and put your own figures in, helping thereby to attract warmer weather.
Couldn't you?
This is not my comment but I think it is very well said:
"People like this provide very little value to anyone and it's clear that the only reason he is rich is because he has taken value from other people, often without their consent."
AMEN!
Amazingly, that Mojo woman has written a spider story with the word 'pedipalps' in it.
Even more amazingly, after reading it I went to the kitchen, and there on the floor was a spider running around.
A witches familiar doesn't have to be a cat or toad does it?
What is ironic is the most of these people fail dismalling in their relationships. It is their relationships that cause all of their problems that is because they appear completely ignorant of other peoples needs. All they seem to be good at is telling other people what their needs are. They think that a relationship means that everyone must do what they want them to do and people are never given a chance to say what they really think without being put down for it. Ask them and they would swear on their own mother that its not like that but ask everyone else and its so obvious.
Business is all about relationships relationships relationships.
If you do not nurture them, then here is a very good example of what happens. The relationship issue is their own fault at what point they acknowledge it is the point the situation turns for them. They are the ones out there doing the selling themselves and they must take responsibility for anything to change.
I heard another situation similar to this and the guys accusers said "I would spit in his face if I saw him". You see that is what happens when relationships have been all one waya and still some people just don't get it. Eventually those who have given and given and given will not give any more and their giving turns to anger. That anger will never stop until the apparent perpetrator realises how they screwed up and takes responsibility for it.
Not one of those people complained about the jets, the company tours and the like while they believed the relationship was intact. The relationship ends when it becomes obvious that the relationship is all one sided. None of those peoples lives will ever be the same again and none of them will trust the perpetrators ever again without some change. The only way things can change is if the person seen as the perpetrator gets themselves on the same level in the relationship where they can start again. Most of the perpetrators do not have the genuine compassionate capacity to get to that level and start again. I could be wrong, this guy might realise where the problem is and make amends soon but from what I can see he's not in any place to do it right now. He remains in the ignorant blaming phase which will never help anyone least of all himself.
I like the advice others have given that he stop the continual threats and blame and take a more humble part in the relationship. After all that is what he is teaching and that is what people judge him on. Take responsibility, walk away and start over. Forget the anger being thrown at him because that won't stop whilever he remains in that place himself.
I could bet my life on it that if he chose to be the bigger person, not the person he claims he is but the real bigger person, that all of his issues would cease. I bet we would see a completely different story and I hope that is what we will see. I hope, I really do.
Well if things weren't ironic enough wasn't it this very guy who offered advice to someone like "affiliates are all about relationships". Did I also hear someone else say something like when hogs fly? Sorry I can't help laughing, you can't get any more black and white than that. I think the skies are only gray because this guy has spent too much time stirring up the dust himself and I am beginning to think he wants it that way. Time to move on to other pastures oink oink
You can run but you can't hide and from what he put on his website I think this guy has probably just lied to all the public in the worse possible way.
The guys in this type of business are all twittering away egotistically seeing who can get the most twits to follow them and basically comparing their appendages. The unsuspecting are following and doing exactly as they are told walking straight into the trap being set for them. I sit back and watch with amusement. It is so obvious that while it is a social networking site its a case of who those with the biggest egos and it is an absolute waste of time except for those who want something from you. Think about it, if you spent as much time doing things for yourself as people are twittering away they would be very comfortable. Just another lesson in gross and selfish manipulation of people.
What a wanker!
David Schirmer is a bloody liar. He pulled that punch before he took on a trip of the US to make it APPEAR like he was cleared of all wrong doing. Now he has to live with the bloody lies he tells. But what it did do was confirm that he is a bloody liar. He has spent the last at least 10 years blaming other people for his problems. Every time someone leaves his employ they get blamed and he has been doing that for years. I know because a friend of mine was caught up in his shit.
I used to work with schirmer in late 1980's and early 1990's In Toowoomba QLd. There is a very easy way to tell when he is lying, his lips move. However, he is a very good conman!
Post a Comment