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

Donald Lee (a.k.a. RationalDL)

ra·tion·al adj. 1. Having or exercising the ability to reason. 2. Of sound mind; sane. 3. Consistent with or based on reason; logical. 4. Mathematics. Capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers. --ra'tion·al·ly adv. --ra'tion·al·ness n.
--American Heritage Dictionary (Third Edition)
(also see the description of "What Is Rational" on the "Informed Consent" page)

As much as I sympathized with Lee in regards to his turmoil regarding "gangstalking" I realized in the end that his claims have no evidence to back them up. The big clue which has led to his downfall in the annals of The ARID Site was his claim of "truth" in 12-Step programs and his namecalling. Soon my own skepticism came to the fore as I asked questions and got hostility instead of answers from him regarding his claims.

How This Dispute Began

Well, it all began innocently upon the Yahoo! E-mail discussion group, 12-step-free, when he recently started posting messages. It was this claim of his which immediately set off alarm bells:

"There is some truth and logic in the written words, throughout the 12 steps."
--Donald Lee, 12-Step-Free, September 5, 2005 @ 11:24:01, Message #102967
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/12-step-free/message/102967?source=1
(copy archived here in case it's blackholed)

I was indeed skeptical of that claim so I responded accordingly:

Outgoing E-mail:

From:

ARID Site <thearidsite@juno.com>

To:

12-step-free@yahoogroups.com

Date:

Mon, 5 Sep 2005 19:51:24 -0400

Subject:

Re: [12-step-free] Re: Re: Orange Papers back online!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5 Sep 2005 20:40:02 -0000 12-step-free@yahoogroups.com writes:
>    Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 11:24:00 -0700 (PDT)
>    From: donald lee <rationaldl@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Re: Orange Papers back online!
> 
> I do believe that the stats are similar for all methods of
> recovery.  

That depends on what you define as "recovery".

According to Hester & Miller's "Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment
Approaches: Third Edition" the most common modalities used within the
addiction treatment industry (typically 12-Step indoctrination and
propaganda) are expensive and have an extremely low rate of positive
outcome.

Positive outcome would be self-effacy and autonomy: Personal
independence AWAY from that problem compulsive behavior. Naturally,
12-Step fosters increased dependency by design, which explains the
extremely low success rates (not to mention increased mental illness
and mortality rates).

If I were to define how I recovered it would be through what that
book defined as "Bibliotherapy": I relied on books to feed my head
and deprogram myself accordingly. Of H&M's list of ranked treatment
modalities (pp. 19) the technique I utilized was within the top ten:
It ranked 4.5 from a list of 50 modalities. The 12-Step modalities
were low-middling to dead last.
 
> Even for those without any type of program.

According to George Vaillant, a professor of psychiatry and A.A.'s
own non-alcoholic trustee as interviewed in the A.A. Grapevine (May
2001), 60% simply quit drinking on their own without ANY program or
guidance whatsoever.

Likewise, according to the Harvard Mental Health Newsletter (as cited
from The Orange Papers) 80% with a year of more of continuous
abstinence simply quit on their own.

It appears that no program whatsoever is vastly superior to what's
considered "mainstream". And "whatever works" just ain't necessarily
so.

> There is some truth and 
> logic in the written words, throughout the 12 steps.

Ok. I'll bite. What is the truth and logic within the 12-Steps? Is it
a method to quit drinking?

C'mon, rationaldl! You're losing me here!

> That's part of 
> it  What people haven't realized is that it becomes a total way of 
> life.

And that is what I am exposing: Its way of life is slavish devotion
to destructive social cultism, borne in fear and death. That's not
living free.

> I have found that it is the areas around the 12 steps, 
> hospitals shrinks aftercare who make the bucks, mess with you just 
> as bad.  etc

I'm just soaking in the cognitive dissonance you present: You are for
the 12-Steps yet you know of its problems. You know it's a scam and
yet you see "truth" in it. That's a piss-poor impression to leave.

> If people are hapy there let them stay, even if only 
> three addicts a year are makimg it.

And who gets to pay for that? I say they're free to stay as long as
they pay their own way and not on the public dole.

But three addicts a year who are "making it"? Out of how many? A
hundred? A thousand? Ten thousand? That's an abysmal failure rate no
matter which way you spin the figures. It's better just to scrap the
entire system and have these deeply deluded fools pursue some honest
work or education for a change.

We know what works and what doesn't because the research has been
done. The current fare within the Social Services System obviously
doesn't and is proven as a failure. If the system is immune to reform
it must be abolished.

> But don't be stupid enough to 
> tell anyone that it is the only way, and that you are all that in 
> treatment. Don't be that obtuse as to where you think you may plot 
> scheme or even begin to harass outsiders without dire consequenses.
>   Make a meeting, go home and that's as good as it gets.  Whe shit 
> happens now. It can be traced to you.

Unfortunately it appears that you support the same system by which
you were victimized. When you state in one sentence that all
treatment has similar outcomes and defend it by claiming that it
possesses some "truth" then, within your diatribe, complain about the
harassment I only can give you this as practical advice:

Make up your damn mind already!

Obviously 12-Step "trickment" is a public danger which causes more
problems than the addiction itself. But you come off as wanting it
around despite the proven ineffectiveness. My question is, why?

I just wonder if you can make a firm decision regarding the sincerity
of your opposition against the cult. There's more to life than the
devolution of one's own life to merely conform with the victim
mentality found within the Buchmanite cultocracy.

dr.bomb, Ph.D. AVRT(tm) \_____________________________
Editor of The ARID Site: http://thearidsite.tripod.com
<The Addiction Recovery Information Distribution Site>
PGP keys at http://thearidsite.tripod.com/ARIDPGPK.TXT
** The Twelve Steps are a downward spiral staircase **

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBQxzZvLw9MOKEeRC8EQK0aACeJvA13PEzA+iUZ99RzLpndwnfe0kAoPXx
3Qy80xfmtmuLtHfhOpNwobAI
=VAJR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Apparently, he didn't like the detailed fact-filled response as well as my observation concerning his own flip-flop. So, within the followup, he got angry as his true irrational nature was brought to the forefront:

"I have made up my mind about you. You sound educated but still an asshole."
--Donald Lee, 12-Step-Free, September 06, 2005 @ 12:48:21, Message #103042
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/12-step-free/message/103042?source=1
(copy archived here in case it's blackholed)

Now my skepticism was really on overdrive. I wound up with more questions, especially considering the fact that Lee was engaging within an ad hominem attack instead of a more civilized response:

Outgoing E-mail:

From:

ARID Site <thearidsite@juno.com>

To:

12-step-free@yahoogroups.com

Date:

Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:09:56 -0400

Subject:

Re: [12-step-free] Re: Re: Orange Papers back online!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 6 Sep 2005 21:13:36 -0000 12-step-free@yahoogroups.com writes:
>    Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 12:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
>    From: donald lee <rationaldl@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Re: Orange Papers back online!
> 
> I have made up my mind about you. You sound educated but still an 
> asshole.

That ad hominem attack was totally beneath you. Now you have
completely lost me. You don't need to get snippy with me, hombre. The
irony is that I always expect such behavior from a Buchmanite but
never expected the same from you.

> I support prisons, and still am aware of the dire need for 
> reform, and teatment for its inhabitants.

You're changing the subject. We're talking about the fraud known as
"addiction treatment". I just want to see the Buchmanism
indoctrination/money laundering centers condemned.

The people who want meetings can have them in their own homes on
their own time and dime. Hell, that can have a whole big Billapalooza
as long as no one is coerced into it or has to shell out ANY money
for an expensive introduction to it.

Unfortunately, "Treatment Works" is a hollow slogan spawned from the
cretinous RGM/ATI and nothing more.

> One day AA and nA can go 
> back to being just what they were meant to be. A program of 
> attraction.

Not very likely. For that to happen it would cause the organization
to shrivel rapidly. Without government coercion and lobbying the
money train comes to a screeching halt. That means a lot of the
leadership of the cult would be out of business and that bureaucratic
beast would be pushed back to Akron to die the festering, lingering
death it deserves.

But you knew that. Hey, I'm on your side here, Don.

And how would they go about gaining that attraction? Through
promotion, silly!

http://thearidsite.tripod.com/BLEXICON.HTM#confusingtheresults

However, as things stand, the extremists are in charge and they will
do ANYTHING to stay in power. Again, you already knew that.

Get into the head of a Buchmanite and you'll see that they're no
different than the Taliban or the misogynistic anti-choice Religious
Right in regards to their militant extremism. And, being that I have
seen some Buchmanites bringing guns to meetings, who knows what
they'll do to keep The Program safe from harm, especially since their
growth has slowed to a trickle as the oldtimers stay and become all
the more reactionary and the newcomers see clearly what's going on
and don't stay too long to become 1-5 years abstinent within A.A.

- From A.A.'s own figures, the new minority are people with one to five
years of continuous abstinence. The batshit insane oldtimers are the
majority preying off of the newcomers. Since the newcomers don't stay
very long that means only the oldtimers will stay and become a
growing majority. Hence, the creation of the downward spiral and why
the growth of A.A. attendance figures have slowed to a trickle. The
reactionary nature of the cult itself ensures that A.A. will kill
itself off through that polarizing downward spiral.

And, as more people learn more about this vicious pro-addiction
destructive religious drug cult, the more they'll stay away and offer
alternatives in lieu of it, keeping more newcomers away and starving
the cult off in the process.

You want to promote the horror stories of what these Buchmanites do
while A.A. promotes how "wonderful" it is as teaching drunks how to
live life "sober, one day at a time". One is the truth while the
other is a lie. I must ask which side you are on here: Of truth or
deception? To expose A.A.'s lies means to threaten its existence. And
yet, your ambivalence shows: You want it kept alive because you
believe that some people were "helped" by it (in your own words,
"three people").

Either you're not fully informed, masochistically get off on being
abused or are a closet Buchmanite (same thing, actually). Don, I hope
you can see my dilemma here for I honestly want to believe in your
own self-professed benevolence. But you're actions, specifically your
name-calling hostility, is confusing.

> Is this a simple neough analogy for yo to understand.  Sober is the
>  end result. The operative word being Clean and sober, even it is 
> alone, or with a voodoo prest.

Be careful with that priest though. That bastard left me with the
side effect of random instances of sleepwalking while singing the
"Coconut" song by Nillson. I'm sure it's better than being buried
alive though.

But it's cold comfort knowing that you didn't recommend Buchmanism.
For that I'm grateful.

Hey, maybe we can send the people to Straight Inc., Craig Academy or
some similar gulag of the therapeutic state. MAYBE they'll get "clean
and sober"...and depressed and suicidal too. Again, "whatever works"
just ain't necessarily so. Having people become dependent upon a
pro-addiction evangelical cult religion where they believe that
"slavery is freedom" and where dreams of authentic liberation are
crushed under the notion of the oppressed becoming the oppressor is a
piss-poor development.

Whatever happened to the notion of liberation FROM addiction without
instilling the belief in irrational cult superstition? Better bets
would be the works of Peele, DeSena, Fox, Schaler, Trimpey et.al.
which place a strong emphasis on personal responsibility and
autonomy. In fact, teaching the skill of self-recovery should be a
priority. For that to occur means the dissolution of the RGM/ATI.

The irony is that you use the word "rational" in your nick. Right now
I see nothing rationally consistent in your position. Also, you had
yet to answer my question of what "truths" the 12-Steps contain.

> If something is broke you fix it a little, or develope something 
> different.

...or throw it away entirely if it's completely junked.

> Does this let you know where I stand?

One moment you bitch about the "street theatre", "gangstalking" and
other hazing that you have endured and want to go through with
lawsuits for the purpose of, in your own words:

"We should all get publicity for what has been done to us, and for
the suffering the 12 step community has inflicted on us, at large."

The next moment you attack me because I point out that the system has
failed and want to realize the goal of its abolition so that no more
people are ever harmed by it again. So, to answer your question, I'm
not so sure where you stand on this. I don't know whether to
sympathize with you or to...well, I'll try being diplomatic just a
while longer. Your opening comments are proof positive that abuse can
be passed on, and on, anon.

Are you sure that your Yahoo! account isn't hacked? It's as though
you're getting all "Sybil" up in here.

Again, I'm on your side and you have my moral support if you should
go through with such an endeavor for your idea of reform. All you
need to learn is consistency and to drop the hostility and maybe
you'd earn back my full respect as well.

dr.bomb, Ph.D. AVRT(tm) \_____________________________
Editor of The ARID Site: http://thearidsite.tripod.com
<The Addiction Recovery Information Distribution Site>
PGP keys at http://thearidsite.tripod.com/ARIDPGPK.TXT
** The Twelve Steps are a downward spiral staircase **

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBQx9lrbw9MOKEeRC8EQLTHgCfQ2BxSLE8tpi+NqoclYS2xLPj5OIAnRrS
ybWYHZ38TIxBVWxI4RHELM0O
=V5nh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Despite a brief attempt at humor I tried to understand Lee's position. Again, a reasonable response on my part as well as my offer of continued support if he could see precisely where he was in error. However, all hopes of that occurring were dashed as Lee issued a big-time foot bullet:

"It is all letters which are filled with venom amd hostility. Some of what you say is true, and some of it is running your mouth on and on. Oh yeah. it isn't important to me, for you to understand where I stand, on any part of the 12 step dispute or forum. The original question was related to the logic of the 12 steps not truth. No the attack is not beneath me."
--Donald Lee, 12-Step-Free, September 7, 2005 @ 16:54:16, Message #103086
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/12-step-free/message/103086?source=1
(copy archived here in case it's blackholed)

BINGO! He just flat-out contradicted himself! He DID mention that there was "truth and logic" within the 12-Steps in his September 5 message. And, what is turning out to be a predictable pattern of behavior, offered more claims without evidence. In this case him claiming of my own hostility, nevermind the fact that it was Lee himself who called me an "asshole" and mentioning underhandedly me running my mouth "on and on" and implying deceit in the process.

Now I knew he wasn't on the level. So I responded with PLENTY of questions:

Outgoing E-mail:

From:

ARID Site <thearidsite@juno.com>

To:

12-step-free@yahoogroups.com

Date:

Thu, 8 Sep 2005 19:35:21 -0400

Subject:

Re: [12-step-free] Re: Re: Re: Orange Papers back online!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 8 Sep 2005 03:23:51 -0000 12-step-free@yahoogroups.com writes:
>    Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 16:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
>    From: donald lee <rationaldl@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Orange Papers back online!
> 
> Dr Bomb I'll get back to you later. It is all letters which are 
> filled with venom amd hostility.

And which letters would those be? Please cite specific examples.

> Some of what you say is true, and 
> some of it is running your mouth on and on.

Please point out, specifically, which of my arguments were false.

> Oh yeah. it isn't 
> important to me, for you to understand where I stand, on any part
> of  the 12 step dispute or forum.

So why should you bother with answers in response to simple
questions? Well, an inquiring mind would like to know, Don. That's
why.

> The original question was related to 
> the logic of the 12 steps not truth.

You claimed on Mon, 5 Sep 2005 11:24:00 -0700 (PDT) that:

"There is some truth and logic in the written words, throughout the
12 steps."

Technically, your claim wasn't a question. However that is YOUR
STATEMENT and you can search for it within the 12-Step-Free message
archive. You may even delete it if you so desire, which is futile
since I have a copy of it in digest form and will reproduce it
accordingly when it's "blackholed".

When ANYONE makes a claim I double-check through experience or
curiosity whether there is sufficient evidence to back up that claim.
When that person fails to do so I get rightfully suspicious and all
the more curious. I then start asking questions or researching
further. I get downright skeptical when one's right to free inquiry
is met with character attacks.

So I ask, for the sake of free inquiry:

1) What is the truth and logic in the written words throughout the
12-Steps and what evidence do you present to back up your claim?

2) Can you answer simple questions without resorting to hostility?

> No the attack is not beneath me.

So, if you're above such attacks why even engage in such attacks to
begin with?

> The analogy is ok. When something is broken it only needs fixing 
> where it is broken.

That is, unless it's not even salvageable. Such is the case with
12-Step-based "treatment" a.k.a. TSF (Twelve-Step Facilitation) which
dominates 95% of the billion-dollar industry.

My goal now is to infiltrate it and dismantle it from within. I'm not
getting any younger so I'm taking action now by educating myself
about what works and what doesn't.

With how corrupt the counseling profession has become, riddled with
two-hatting Buchmanites, I'd rather steer clients away for the sake
of their own lives, liberties and their individual pursuits of
happiness than have them wind up with the Faustian bargain of
sobriety-through-slavery within a destructive thought reform cult.

The clients themselves have goals. Good counseling respects those
goals, whether it be abstinence or the next best thing, moderation.
Let the client define the standard for success and not the other way
around.

> There is no way that you can end the whole 
> machine which centers around any group or person who receives
> funds,  and has a budget for treatment, and advertising.

Change can only occur if you are willing to risk all for it. For
example, I had a nice chat with my P.O. yesterday. He was impressed
with what I'm doing to the point that he admitted that he never saw
someone as dedicated as I regarding my abstinence and activism. (I
recorded the face-to-face conversation for good measure). Mind you
that as far as the stakes go, I'm risking imprisonment and therefore
my employment by doing this. I'd rather go "all-in" than fold this
hand. I'd rather risk death standing tall upon my own two feet than
live as a submissive slave upon my knees.

He knows that I dislike A.A. for a variety of well-founded reasons,
the biggest ones being its demonstrated ineffectiveness and it being
an obvious destructive religious cult (well, not in that exact
language). However, I'm not one to rest upon my laurels. I'm willing
to go as far as to file civil rights and malpractice lawsuits so that
my inalienable rights are recognized.

Change usually begins with conflict. That conflict sets the stage
that the path to social change can be created for others. Think about
the birth of our nation, the revolutionary war, the women's suffrage
movement, desegregation, womens rights', the anti-war movement, gay
rights and the civil rights movement at large. These seemingly
insurmountable moments in history were all realized through
perseverance and risk-taking for progress to be made for the next
generation. Indeed, for EVERYONE'S benefit, with liberty and justice
for all.

But I won't Bill$hit you. This means becoming an unreasonable person
against the status quo. That means suffering the slings and arrows of
those traditionalists afraid of change. It's exactly what's happening
now just as with any other crucial point in history regarding
progressive social change.

And, if I should fail in having my own inalienable rights recognized,
I'll pick myself up, brush myself off and prepare to take the next
hit within the fight. It'll take more than a bunch of guilt-inspiring
and defeatist Buchmanites to bring my ass down.

It's called "taking liberties" because liberty is not given. You
gotta take it back, dammit!

> There will be more. You may if you wish take me off your list of 
> mail to open and read. After I do this e-mail totally you will be 
> off mine.

Uhh, Don? Do you realize that this is from an Internet E-mail-based
discussion forum, right? Specifically 12-Step-Free. That means about
a THOUSAND of people are reading this exchange right here and right
now. Likewise, in regards to your "truth" statement regarding the
12-Steps, justified skepticism is the norm. You made a claim so
therefore back it up with evidence.

Instead you're going to unsub me from your list because of a message
posted here. That's certainly not very nice. In fact its downright
reactionary and casts your actions in a poor light. So feel free to
censor me not because of anything abusive posted to your list but
because you were "offended" elsewhere. Aside from me publicizing the
Amazon "phish" attempt and my public service warning regarding it, I
never posted there in a while.

You could, at least, answer my questions like a gentleman. I, at
least, have been cordial so far. And, if I were to have a list, I
would NEVER censor anyone. I say let the facts speak for themselves
but remember that action always speaks louder than words.

> There's a guy in NYC who reminds me of you. he is another 
> alternative method of recovery freak to.

So anyone who offers alternatives to the destructive social cultism
of Buchmanism is now considered a "recovery freak"? You better trim
your brush because your painting very large stereotypical strokes
here which cover some of the crowd here in 12-Step-Free land.

For what it's worth, I'd like to be E-mail penpals with that guy and
show him the awesome websites here. I'll even present yours too, with
all due fairness. Y'have his E-mail addy handy? ;->

> I also am of the opinion 
> that there now is religious freedom to contend with.

Religion is one thing which I am for as long as it is NEVER coerced
and no one is discriminated based upon it. I'm also 100% adamantly
opposed to destructive thought reform cults which have to DECEIVE
through their recruiting tactics to keep the cult alive, which is
what A.A. is and does. It and its various 12-Step sects have never
been nor ever will be anti-addiction organizations. It's a fraud, a
con, a lie and the biggest hoax ever perpetrated upon humankind.

There are HUGE differences between religion and destructive cults as
outlined by Steven Hassan (despite his support of A.A.) and "The Cult
Test" at "The Orange Papers" website (the classicly-formatted May
2004 .ZIP mirror, brought back from the brink, is available for
download again at http://www.geocities.com/saorangedl).

I highly recommend reading Hassan's book, "Combatting Cult Mind
Control"...with a Robert Jay Lifton "Thought Reform and the
Psychology of Totalism" chaser. They're the type of works which kick
you right in the gut due to the details presented within, guaranteed
to wake you up and realize how anyone can be deceived by cults in
general.

Besides, I'm sick of people killing themselves when they break down
at meetings because they "can't turn it over" or believe they have
found "power in powerlessness". I've personally witnessed too much
death and destruction already being done in the name of their cult's
deity (I've know of three suicides within a nine-month period within
my area while I was still going to meetings).

> So I will 
> continue to put my opinion and influence where I feel it will do
> the  most good.

I wish you well and good luck in your endeavor. Now if you can answer
my questions, especially:

"What is the truth and logic in the written words throughout the
12-Steps and what evidence do you present to back up your claim?"

Can you do just that much without resorting to any further hostility?
Despite my demeanor I'm optimistic. I know you can do it.

Anyways, upward and onward, be well and live well one LIFETIME at a
time.

dr.bomb, Ph.D. AVRT(tm) \_____________________________
Editor of The ARID Site: http://thearidsite.tripod.com
<The Addiction Recovery Information Distribution Site>
PGP keys at http://thearidsite.tripod.com/ARIDPGPK.TXT
** The Twelve Steps are a downward spiral staircase **

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBQyDJRrw9MOKEeRC8EQJaRQCgs3pvb1fUVB0YZN84vqPxjy/oOdoAoMhv
JplQn5goElDD83BA7LzDBKa7
=ytcq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I never did receive a satisfactory response. None of the questions and challenges I made to him were answered. Aside from a naive attempt by Lee to paint me as not being aware of the powers of the therapeutic state and various politicians by instilling paranoia, he plays the role of a "victim" against unnamed people who he claims are "gangstalking" him (#103105 from 12-Step-Free, and mirrored here).

His website is, likewise, a tale which may contain some truth but features nothing in the way of actual evidence. While it looks like he links to documents within his body text none of the links work. His claims as to who is specifically "gangstalking" him are left unsubstantiated. Despte him stating that he doesn't proclaim a collective "they" he goes right off and contradicts himself and uses "political system" as the synonym for "they".

For example, I am aware of abuses within the cult and its business known as "addiction treatment" and also mention names of people and places in regards as to how I was mistreated. However, Lee goes right off the deep end. Instead of offering specifics concerning the people and places all of that is left dangling without any elaboration. Mind you, he has the freedom of speech and can use it to single out those who have abused him via his website. He fails to do so. Without any such evidence then his entire storyline cannot be corraborated.

In light of the above and what's to follow, Lee comes across as deeply paranoid and cagey. I have also observed that when talking about addiction treatment he makes it a habit to capitalize the word, "Recovery", as if there's a divine way to do so and to criticize "Recovery" is to bring on the wrath of "they". It's just another observation as to how he says one thing then immediately contradicts himself. What I will do next is to compose a list of questions and E-mail that to him and in public on 12-Step-Free. His reputation is on the line as I anxiously await his "evidence".

More will indeed be revealed...

An Aside Concerning Lee's Online "Survey"

Upon his main website is a link to a "survey" of his own design. For those seeking more information as to the pernicious nature of Buchmanism within our Social Services System you'd think that it was to let your voice be heard.

On the contrary, it is merely a page concerning more of his own unsubstantiated claims. Specifically, of alleged names in "conversations" featured within the media (movies and television). I quote from Lee's survey website's opening webpage in full:

From "http://rationaldl.tripod.com/index.html", 2005/09/10

Who is Geshe Roache Lee

This is a survey.

This is not a contest just a simple survey.

Why during the most popular shows and movies has, the names Geshe Roache and Shadow Willowist, been editted in, even in old movies. If you haven't noticed it listen. Those names pop up during conversation, between characters.


These names are even overdubbed in old movies and series. It pops up everywhere, even in the applause tracks. All this takes an enormous amount of effort. The name wasn't used in these programs years ago. Why would any group go to such lengths? Here is one possible theory.

one possible theory to the Geshe Roach Lee and Shadow Willowist, insertions in dialogue.

The page includes a link to an outside website, "eharrassment.ca", where Lee claims that there's evidence of these "insertions in dialogue". I visited that site yet could find no such citations. I did, however, obtain Lee's phone number and alternate E-mail address from that very site. Could THAT be a reason why he's being "harassed" more, that he himself is deliberately making himself a "victim"? I can only speculate.

And then there's another page upon Lee's "survey" site:

From "http://rationaldl.tripod.com/id1.html", 2005/09/10
WHER DID THE SHADOW WILLOWIST COME FROM?

Who is Geshe Roache Lee? What is the Shadow Willowist?

In almost every show and commercial the names Geshe Roach Lee, and Shadow Willowist keep popping up in dialogue, between the characters, played by actors. It is even in old pictures, and shows, dubbed in with voice overs. You haven't noticed it? Listen, but not too hard. The names are thrown in as dialogue, as the actors are speaking, about situations or other characters in the storyline.

Unknown to the public these names, are not really part of the story line or story plot. yet they are thrown in gratuitously, unnecessarily. This is a simple survey. This is a way for you the public, to hear about it and give first hand experience and knowlege, about what you know or think about, the ongoing use, of these names, in all your favorite shows. I value your comments, and opinions, contact rationaldl@yahoo.com

Unfortunately, Lee makes a gigantic error of omission which he repeats habitually: He claims that this happens all of the time yet doesn't cite specific movies, television or radio shows to back up his claims. Also, nevermind the fact that one can obtain audio and video, digitize it and place it online as evidence. Lee likewise fails to do this. This is a perfect example on how the burden of proof is not upon the person who questions the claim but upon the person MAKING the claim.

To test his hypothesis, I decided to perform some independent research using the Google search engine. Certainly film and television aficionados would have noticed such additions. Whether from actual scripts or transcriptions of the actual dialogue from the footage in question, certainly such name would have been found by now.

The only sites which turn up regarding such names as of this writing (2005/09/10) are the author's own and the "eharrassment.ca" site he links to. The closest independent match was regarding "Shadow Willowisp", a suggested search phrase by the Google search engine. Its sole link was from an online RPG website describing 3-D character models.

Until Lee comes up with solid evidence to support his claims, significant doubt will remain as to their veracity. He, of course leaves himself an illogical and contradictory "out" and blames the listener if they can perceive the evidence: "Listen, but not too hard." So, if you don't hear it you're listening too hard. And, if you can't listen...well, you get the point.

What that has to do with Buchmanites stalking the self-recovered is beyond my understanding. As far as can be ascertained this is all just a figment of Lee's imagination and I'l probably be labeled as being as one of the many "gangstalkers" out to get him because of my critique. And that would be more paranoid that rational, wouldn't it?

Google Search Links:

Google phrase search: "Geshe Roache Lee"

Google phrase search: "Shadow Willowist"

Google name search: "rationaldl"

Google-suggested Search Links:

Google phrase search: "Geshe Roach Lee"

Google phrase search: "Shadow Willowisp"

Donald Lee's Links:

Recovery Legal Plan: http://www.geocities.com/rationaldl/index.html

The Geshe Roach Lee/Shadow Willowist "survey": http://rationaldl.tripod.com/index.html

E-mail: rationaldl@yahoo.com, dlleelee@yahoo.com (confirmed main E-mail address, see Part 2)

Yahoo! Profiles: rationaldl, dlleelee

Affected ARID Site Page:

Buchmanism Horror Stories: Supportive Services Gangsterism

Donald Lee's Poor Online Security Practices

(Update: 2005/09/11) I'll wager that 95% of this was brought upon by Donald Lee himself. As I mentioned earlier, I found his phone number and other E-mail address on the "eharrasment.ca" site. Combine that with a simple search on yahoo.com and plenty of people can find out how to contact him if they so desired.

While I won't publish his personal information here, it's a trivial task for anyone to piece together his profile. Remember that it was Lee and no one else who typed his information into such places online. Likewise, if he's being harassed then he should seriously consider how people acquired his information and take certain measures to get that information removed.

But that would remove the element of "gangstalking" as though he was arbitrarily singled out and losing his precious "victim" status in the process. That would entail Lee actually taking charge of the situation. And considering the facts from my own independent investigation into "gangstalking" there appears to be a link behind such advocacy against the alleged practice and militant right-wing religious zealotry and the militia movement. What better way that to tar and feather those who Lee disagrees with as being "gangstalkers" engaging in "street theatre" than realizing that maybe it's Lee himself who brought all this upon himself through his own irresponsibility in placing his own information out in the open online?

By posting his own personal information upon web sites which I classify as irrational anti-government paranoia and how anyone with about a half-hour of time and Internet access can divine more information from that, no wonder he may be receiving more attention. Not from the agents and employees of his local New York City government, mind you, but from ordinary citizens with way too much time upon their hands willing to reach out and mess with his head for personal entertainment. In this case not only is he himself the victim of his own actions but, in order to avoid personal responsibility, is willing to be duped by others whose motives are by far more sinister than his. He's his own pawn.

Again, it's the perfect excuse for him to label his own critics as "gangstalkers" by default. That includes me who chooses to expose him in an effort to "let the buyer beware" within the free marketplace of ideas.

Donald Lee Chickens Out

(Update: 2005/09/12) As a parting shot I E-mailed him the list of simple questions to answer:

Outgoing E-mail:

From:

ARID Site <thearidsite@juno.com>

To:

rationaldl@yahoo.com

Date:

Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:54:37 -0400

Subject:

Some open questions for Donald Lee.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Out of curiosity and for the sake of free inquiry I am interested in
answers to the following five questions, Don. I never received a
satisfactory response to each of these items so I'll present this one
more time. You made some claims and I would like to see if you can
properly support such claims through your responses:

1) What is your definition (not from a dictionary but your own idea)
of what Recovery and sobriety is? Is it a process or an event and
what constitutes a successful Recovery?

2) What is the truth and logic in the written words, throughout the
12-Steps?

3) What is your plan regarding your future use of drugs and/or
alcohol?

4) What specific instances within the media (radio, television and
film, including advertising) contain instances of the phrases "Geshe
Roache Lee" and "Shadow Willowist"? Provide citations documenting
this.

5) Regarding "gangstalking", can you mention specific names and
places regarding the participants in such an activity?

dr.bomb, Ph.D. AVRT(tm) \_____________________________
Editor of The ARID Site: http://thearidsite.tripod.com
<The Addiction Recovery Information Distribution Site>
PGP keys at http://thearidsite.tripod.com/ARIDPGPK.TXT
** The Twelve Steps are a downward spiral staircase **

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBQyXcpbw9MOKEeRC8EQLqtgCfWtL/e3MU9HrBBcRo8QVbNse8D/EAnj5L
40FSEpntKzOV+MTKR6tXumCj
=EK/J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Perfectly cordial. Five simple questions. And his response?

"However again, I am here to express my opinions and not jump through hoops for you. Your arrogance was unbelievable. So I won't be beneath name calling. I will give you a partial answer to no. 1) I use dictionaries. This is what the English language is made up of, and what most of recovery literature is printed in."
--Donald Lee, E-mail, September 12, 2005 (available here)

Well, gosh. I was asking for his original opinion and he gets snippy yet again. So much for diplomacy vs. arrogant ignorance.

And this is a person who I once thought was credible enough to feature his story within the Horror Story section of my site? And he can't even answer such simple questions even when he states that he's "here to express [his] opinions"? An inquiring mind wanted to know more and he wimped out with even more hostility. Oh well...upward and onward, you live and learn.

I won't remove his story and censor his ideas upon my website though. I feel that more people should get to know the real Donald Lee and decide for themselves his credibility, or lack thereof. Caveat Emptor.

The Saga Continues...

(Update: 2006/03/10) Donald Lee replies back after discovering this page. Thus, for the six-month anniversary of this page's creation, his responses and my further inquiries are detailed. His ongoing arguments, devoid of any empirical evidence, are still indefensible.

Back to the Caveat Emptor page.


Last updated 2006/03/12 - Added his main E-mail address to his link information.
Updated 2006/03/10 - Lee discovers this page and the saga continues on a second page.
Updated 2005/09/12 - Asked him five simple questions and got his non-response.
Updated 2005/09/11 - Added information on Lee's online security practices.

First posted 2005/09/10

(c)2003-2005 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