LAMBIE

A place for discussions that don't fit elsewhere.
Sandra

LAMBIE

Postby Sandra » Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:20 pm

:angel:




This is the BIG one.

THERE HAS BEEN CHANGE RECENTLY BUT NOT ALL THE WAY

A REALLY GOOD LEADER HANDS BACK POWER STRAIGHT TO THE PEOPLE

ALLRIGHT! :evilbat:

Lambie is a bit of a dunce :bday:

To see him walk about in a crowded room is to see someone who appears to be half labotomised.

He is socially inept (like we all are) until you get talking to him and I managed to have 2 to 3 or 4 decent conversations with him over the years. Particularly before I just left the S.E.S in 2001.

He revealed himself to be not quite so much of a wombat as I always thought he was. :onfire:

He has a subtle side as much as he has a labotomised side.

What he shouldn't be doing is overseeing a Borg enterprise. :robot:

He should encourage lateral mindedness and free thinking inside the school.

If there were to be an exposition investigation of the school over the coming two years the school wouldn't quite pass the test as it has done on the few occassions it has been investigated in the past.

There are a lot of intelligent people who have left over the past 5 years, who could quite easily band together with the right authorities and explain in technical detail how the school works on a subtle level.

One thing is the people in the school don't appear to notice how they go about things.

It is not fiction what I mentioned in the 'mattstollar spray' as one member kindly termed my long article CLOSE DOWN NO CHANGE YES, regarding how people are manipulated into the school. It is a reality and people who have been involved in that reality as tutors could be used to give a birds eye view.
Rasmussen, Marco Goldscmied, Gordon Ingram are three worldy people who know the ins and outs of things who could give evidence.

NOT TO CLOSE THE SCHOOL DOWN BUT TO CHANGE IT.

The school is not primarilly evil. It's suppossed to be beyond good and evil.

Which is a high charge.

No wonder they haven't figured it out yet.

But the school operates at the highest level on a form of deciet that is difficult to see.

The only way to be completely transparent would be to print the entire transcribed works of LEANARDO DA VINCI MACLAREN, SHEILA ROSENBERG AND SHANTANAND SARASWATI on the net. Then people
could see what they were getting themselves into as they join Part 1.

That would be truly transparent and then the school would really get the members to whom that sort of thing is attractive.

With a proviso also that the school could list a running commentary beneath these works that as it were says which words of these three individuals are treated as gospel and which aren't any more.

Then we could all see what the S.E.S is really about .

At the moment we just don't know.

I never knew when I was in it. I got fragments. But no one in the school in or out knew which of these fragments makes up the whole and which are to be left out.

This is an entirely reasonable suggestion.

At the moment all the information is being stored in the cupboards of a studies in Waterperry and Wood Green.

What is the school really about?

How does it work
Are people encouraged to think for themselves.
Are peoples lives interfered with still (I once got five people randomly suggesting that I should NOT attend contemporary art school all within the space of a few days. A friend of mine had the same) :fist:

Young people seem to be particularly vunerable.


Of course care and looking out for people is a completely acceptable phenomenom and people are free to leave also. Free to make their mind up any which way.

BUT THERE IS PRESSURE.

Transparancy as to the school's texts and the NON application of pressure is crucial to the schools survival.

Why care about everyone so much anyway. In some ways it's not that real. I don't think Lambie's given me that much of a second thought since I left. maybe occassionally.

So I'm not anti Lambie essentially, anti S.E.S or anti St James.

There is something there.

But it's being unnessassarily concealed and hidden in turns. They've actually got nothing to hide!

They don't need to become corporate. So new members aren't a priority.

So why not be completely transparent.

That way you don't need to be paranoid, we don't need to be paranoid and the investigating agency's if and when they are called upon don't need to be paranoid.

I'm being staight down the line here. There's no hidden agenda. The agenda is the peice of writing.

I don't want to bring the school down.

I've got a lot of love for it essentially.

And for Lambie

:fadein:

Sandra

One of my songs

Postby Sandra » Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:00 pm

Who do you think you are?



I read in a magazine just the other day
That love is a form of deppression.
Well I won't be taking any pills to cure my disease.
I was told by a man who thought he was holy
That Jesus was the way forward.
Well I told him that I was actually trying
To get back.
I was told by a man that true love lies in giving
Well he's given so much that he's got nothing left to give
Not that he ever did.
He told me that when I died
God would show me all things divine
I asked him if he had the reciept from last time.
He said being cynical was easy
I said it was just as easy to just keep saying yes.

Who do you think you are
Sitting in your chair
Looking infront of you
Telling me what's there.
Who do you think you are some kind of rebel?
Trying to level the system?

I said yes but I don't really believe that I'm a rebel.
Do you really believe that you are an authority.
He said for the sake of clarity I turn to the wise
I said then of course that makes you wise.
I said that out of weakness everyone turns to each other
You get the same validation from your guru that I get
From my brother.
He said that if you want to follow a fool then follow your brother
I said my point was not to follow another

Who do you think you are
Sitting in a chair
Looking in front of you
Telling me what's there
Who do you think you are
Some kind of rebel
Trying to level the system?

He said your kidding yourself if you think
you are not following something
I said you're killing yourself by forcing yourself
To be so clean
He said 'Look punk everybody's bad and good
You've got to drop the bad and go with the good.'
I said look unc, look under your hood
You've got to drop the bad and you've got to drop the good.
He said you'll never drop the bad unless you 'go'
With the good
I said no that doesn't make any sense
'Mr Good'

Who do you think you are sitting on your chair
Looking in front of you telling me what's there
Who do you think you are some kind of rebel
Trying to level the system

c 2001 Matt Stollar

John Lennon

Postby John Lennon » Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:40 pm

I like it

Sandra

HOW THE S.E.S WORKS

Postby Sandra » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:23 pm

HOW DOES THE S.E.S WORK TO COMPLETELY TRANSFORM THE PERSONALITY OF MEMBERS?

There is a poster on the tube that talks about practical philosphy.
How it can be used in a phenomenal way to change one's life.
Some philosphers are mentioned and so is meditation.
However the tone of the peice and the feeling of the graphics gives the impression of a modern course that is to do with escaping the bubble of a stressfull early second millenium typical lifestyle.
The feeling is one of empathy with the viewer, and the style is deliberately comforting and inviting. As my memory serves (I last saw the poster two weeks ago) the implication is that the course is merely a short course. Certainly a life times commitment to the organization is not implied.

Nor is it mentioned that after the initial terms, after perhaps 1 or two years, maybe even three, there is a drafting system that goes on that as it were grabs the student into the murky depths of a course that after a while isn't so straightforward. After some years in the S.E.S everything begins to merge together and the student begins to forget the initial experiences and why they joined the school in the first place. that's because it's all gone into the unconscious or the Chita as the S.E.S like to call it. however it is just at this point that the student becomes dependant on the school for some reason to as it were get to the happiness that he or she has forgotten. There is pressure applied at this point to start being punctual every time and to start attending weekends, then weeks. A year later the student starts to be chastised for breaking these commitments. Guilt is by now a powerful weapon and the student begins to feel that if he or she leaves they will be missing out on the most important thing in life, the direction that the school gives. It is insiduous and it is also hidden and subtle all these hidden impulses.
The direction that the school gives, quite in contrast to the people friendly poster and first year of part one begins to get more and more prescriptive.
If the fresh student starting part 1 were to know that his or her opinions about the roles of the sexes, about what clothers to wear, about what food to eat, about what music to listen to, about what time should be spent serving the school, or what time should be spent absent from normal life on mind bending weeks and weekends, or on what amounts of time one should spend on certain actions, that student would not join. The school which is more interested in it's ideals rather than the phenomenal practical philosophy, knows that it's ideals are unpopular, would commonly be percieved as sexist, homophobic and old fashioned therefore it introduces them gradually and subversively and to a large extent the process is also quite random. Just by being there a certain amount of time you begin to get acclimatised.
Well it's decietful isn't it. It starts of as one thing and then ever so very gradually becomes another.
The school should advertise it's ideals, the fact that they think women should obey husbands right from the start. Otherwise they are trying to convert people without those people knowing what is fully going on, and somewhere down the line that person is going to leave feeling confused and let down (because they're seemed to be something good and then suddenly it's turned into a mixture with something completely different)or in increasingly smaller proportion people are going to embrace the schools ideals and end up throwing away their C.D collections. A nice superficial example of the complete stripping away of everything that person was before they joined the school.
The fact is that this is what the school and it's leaders intend to do quite knowingly.
The leader of the school lives a near monastic life listening to a handful of mzart C.D's, reading a handful of authorized books, waited on hand and foot by other members of the school. A kind of monastic king. Money that the school charges is not only spent on heating lighting and maintanance. Most of this is supplied by inept school members. No the money is also spent on costly art exhibitions, subsidizing art courses, on plane tickets to transport various members of the school around the world. The leader spends the whole of the summer season away travelling. however every organization has the right to charge (just don't mention where the moneys going.)
But really the serious charge is that not only are the personal tastes possessions of the student gradually and subversively changed so are his or her opinions, down to a very split second level. At some point in the course the student will be asked to remember the 'will of the absolute' all the time, in every waking moment. At some point the measures of how long to do this and how long to do that and what to do will become insiduous and prescriptive to the point that the student really believes that this is his or her opinion. It's so see through having been out of it for 5 years and I was born into it.
Either the school becomes completely transparant from the beginning or it just offers a year long course that doesn't go into these other murkey territories.
I have made more spiritual, intellectual and emotional progress by a million miles being out of school than in it . I still meditate and I still have a strong sense of my spirit within but it's surrounded by my own thought process not someone elses.

ENQUIRIES ARE ON THEIR WAY SOON IF THE WHOLE HEIRACHY STRUCTURE AND ETHOS OF THE SCHOOL AREN'T CHANGED.

WHY DOES THE SCHOOL WANT TO CHANGE ANYONE?

WHAT'S THE POINT?

I'M FAR MORE INTERESTING UNCHANGED

SO IS EVERYONE ELSE


(If you want to get bored quickly attend a gathering of S.E.S people)



Samual Johnson

Postby Samual Johnson » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:42 pm

That might be early third millenium

and it's 'philosophers'

(plus all the other spelling and grammatical errors)

Samual Johnson

Postby Samual Johnson » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:42 pm

That might be early third millenium

and it's 'philosophers'

(plus all the other spelling and grammatical errors)

Sigmund Frued

Postby Sigmund Frued » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:45 pm

O.K do you have a pedantic neurosis?

anti-cult

Postby anti-cult » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:46 pm

All cult's need recruits. Cult's can't survive if thier recruits suddenly develop an ability to think for themselves. Hence the brain-washing, hence the constraints on every individual's time.

The SES may or may not be a cult. But all the signs are...

Sandra

Postby Sandra » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:58 pm

DAMN RIGHT!

Donald Lambie

Postby Donald Lambie » Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:07 pm

Matthew,
Brooke Green not Wood Green.
With love,
Donald Lambie

Ram

Postby Ram » Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:49 pm

Matthew,
Your spelling is appalling. Do you put that down to St James too?
With love,
Ram :Fade-color

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:44 pm

Anyone mind when this thread gets deleted?
Mike Gormez


Return to “Miscellaneous”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest