Make your own free website on Tripod.com
The Addiction Recovery Information Distribution (ARID) Site

About ARID
ARID Media

RECOVER NOW!

Articles
Options
Links
Activism
Books
Mailbag
Old News


PGP Public Key
E-mail The ARID Site


Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign!


Get Firefox!


Get Thunderbird!


OpenOffice.org


Caveat Emptor

"ca'veat emp'tor (emp'tôr), let the buyer beware: the principle that the seller of a product cannot be held responsible for its quality unless it is guaranteed in a warranty. [1515–25; < L]"
--Simon & Schuster Webster's College Dictionary

"CAVEAT EMPTOR (Lat., "let the buyer beware"), principle applied in early common law that the buyer of defective goods could not hold the seller legally responsible. The theory of the early common law was based on the assumption that the buyer was able to examine the goods for any obvious defects, and that if the goods had latent defects of which the seller was unaware the buyer should bear the loss. Under modern law, however, the rule of caveat emptor does not apply to the sale of goods. The rule instead is that the seller is deemed to make an implied warranty that the goods are reasonably fit for the purpose intended by the buyer. Goods that are defective may be sold without legal liability if the fact is brought to the attention of the buyer. The rule of caveat emptor is sometimes used in modern law in reference to a real estate sale in which the seller does not specifically state that the title to the real estate is clear. In such sales, which usually are conducted under supervision of a court in bankruptcy or mortgage foreclosure, or in other judicial proceedings, the buyer takes the risk of acquiring a defective title."
--Simon & Schuster New Millenium Encyclopedia

If there's one thing which I cannot tolerate more than two-hatting Buchmanites are the snake-oil peddlers who claim they are against the 12-Step cult yet espouse its tenets.

The tragedy is that all of Buchmanism's myths and tenets have been thoroughly debunked and the organization it spawned from, Alcoholics Anonymous, has been unequivically proven through its own doctrines to be a sinister pro-addiction destructive thought reform religious cult. Unfortunately, due to political correctness and a permissive unquestioning AAmerican culture, these facts may very well never see the light of day within the corporate owned and corporate-subsidized mass media.

Cut to the anti-addiction movement, commonly slurred as merely "anti-A.A." More and more people are taking the risks in exposing the dangerous aspects of cult membership and of the burgeoning therapeutic state mandating such attendance. From independently-published websites, books and lawsuits, people are finally "taking liberties" and flexing their own inalienable rights, including their right not to be a slave simultaneously to addiction AND a destructive cult. This has led to a growing niche market for authentic anti-addiction information away from pro-addiction Buchmanism.

A subset of apologists and sycophants has developed within this market: The "professional victims" who wish to try to bridge the gap between the irreconcilable differences between truth and falsehood while labeling those who know such differences as being "closed-minded". There are now websites and books available which appear to be staunchly against Buchmanism on the surface. Upon further examination one finds the same debunked mythology being presented as "scientific fact"...or much worse. These poorly-researched sources of disinformation make claims yet fail to offer any evidence of their claims' veracity. And worse, they're profiting from others bad choices in life and making matters worse for such individuals who believe the lies as though they were true. Finally, when inquiries are made, the purveyors of this snake-oil nonsense attack the inquiring mind at large.

They are no different than Buchmanites in their responses regarding very simple questions. Caveat Emptor, indeed.

What I offer here, in the spirit of free inquiry and freethought as inspired by James Randi, is an extensive vivisection of people and the information they peddle. The genius is in its simplicity: I ask very simple questions. My judgement is based upon the responses (or none) to those questions. Whoever fails to meet the burden of proof of their own claims will be detailed here.

As for the body of the rest of my website, in accordance with the ideas of free speech and my own stance against censorship, I may have posted such disinformation from such individuals and linked to their websites and related products accordingly. What I will NEVER do is delete such speech from my website. What I will do instead is to augment what's there with this new information. So, if there's a link, I'll replace the existing link to the appropiate page here and have that link appropriately labeled, "CAVEAT EMPTOR". The original and related links will be on that new page.

This is my way of flexing the idea of Informed Consent by letting the buyer be wary of what's out there in the purveyors' own words and actions. It's along the lines of Sun Tsu's philosophy regarding the art of warfare: "Get the enemy to defeat itself".

--dr.bomb


Let the buyer beware of these peddlers within the free marketplace of ideas...

Rick Ross (Censorship)
(Link to Orange Papers Page)

Melanie Solomon (Spammer)
(Link to MMFHOH Forum)

James Frey

Donald Lee (RationalDL)

Back to the Options page.


Last updated 2006/09/21: Added Rick Ross
Updated 2006/08/21: Added Melanie Solomon

Updated 2006/02/02: Added James Frey
Created 2005/09/10

(c)2003-2006 dr.bomb & The ARID Site - All Rights Reserved
Quotes are attributed to their appropriate sources.
E-mail policy: If I feel it's outrageous enough in an informative sense I'll publish it at my own discretion.

drunken cultists