[Ibogaine] (OT) Re: [Ibogaine] what the bleep

Ron Davis rwd3 at cox.net
Sat Aug 13 10:47:58 EDT 2005


I can't freaking believe the first post i open, precoffee, pre everything i 
need to make my body  and what's left of my southern fried brain is 
preston's and company.  HELP, ANYTHING WILL BE ACCEPTED except c-4 and the 
likes or other means which may inadvertently cause harm to others if used in 
any fashion.
i'll ponder while working on me generator that has tripled in price despite 
corporate assurances there will be no price gauging in fla. and neither the 
feds nor the state  will go after these buggers under any theory. ok, maybe 
i exaggerated to make a point.  i need that movie, script, book, reviews to 
get up to speed, then i'll learn how to type and use spellcheck.  thanks to 
all, must start beating myself  in an ungodly way in case it gets ugly. 
ok, here's a way to start some shite this a.m. in case no one wants to go 
deep enough to discuss this issue/nonissue... i need a good signature block 
or maybe come back under another name and address and post my paltry 
credentials and make sure everyone knows it, so when i rant under the other 
name, it's credible.  won't work?
you guys are too slick for that aren't you?  it's still early and my mind is 
expanding as i hunt and peck.  ron, a.k.a. KOKO , THE KENAI, GLOBE TROTTING, 
KLOWN  (for all yuz geo. freaks that are still intrigued by the Rubberband 
Man commercials).  rumor has it Percy Sledge or his personal rep. is going 
for the dough.                                               From: "Preston 
Peet" <ptpeet at nyc.rr.com>
To: <ibogaine at mindvox.com>
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 6:12 PM
Subject: [Ibogaine] (OT) Re: [Ibogaine] what the bleep


> >We're also told that when Columbus came to America, the natives literally 
> >couldn't see his ships. They couldn't think outside the box of Indian 
> >life.<
>
> Yeah, "Beyond the 'Bleep'" called this "the old canard," which I heartily 
> agree with. What  stupid idea, but apparently some people believe that.
>    I found Beyond the Bleep to be a very interesting book, which examines 
> each presenter of the film, their background, what their pet theories are, 
> whether they acutally are using what could be called "testable" science or 
> simply making extraordinary claims (like JZKnight actually) with no 
> provable substance whatsoever.
>    Still, I'm very intrigued by the whole quantum physics thing, and was 
> very happy to have read this book. Thanks for posting this review
>
>
> Peace and love,
> Preston Peet
>
> "Madness is not enlightenment, but the search for enlightenment is often 
> mistaken for madness"
> Richard Davenport-Hines
>
> ptpeet at nyc.rr.com
> Editor http://www.drugwar.com
> Editor "Under the Influence- the Disinformation Guide to Drugs"
> Editor "Underground- The Disinformation Guide to Ancient Civilizations, 
> Astonishing Archeology and Hidden History" (due out Sept. 2005)
> Cont. High Times mag/.com
> Cont. Editor http://www.disinfo.com
> Columnist New York Waste
> Etc.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Boris Leshinsky" <bleshins at bigpond.net.au>
> To: <ibogaine at mindvox.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 1:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ibogaine] what the bleep
>
>
>
>> >did you see "What the bleep do we know"?
>> there are some interesting animations about addiction.
>> go slowly but firmly, recover your hijacked brain chemistry.
>> keep tapering benzos. I know nothing about bup.<
>>
>> Literallly just finished a book published by the Disinformation Company
>> (same folks putting out my books) called "Beyond the Bleep," by Alexandra
>> Bruce, and it explains a lot of the theories proposed and discussed in 
>> this
>> movie mentioned above. I haven't yet seen the film, but a three hour 
>> version
>> is supposedly in the works for Theatrical release later this year, and a
>> bigger DVD version for early 2006. It sounds like a film I do want to 
>> see,
>> and yes, they do discuss, in some parts apparently, addictive behavior, 
>> and
>> not just to drugs but to others things too, including even emotions.
>>
>
> that book really good (looked it up on Amazon), will have to check it out.
> This film has been mentioned on pretty much every mailing list and forum I 
> am on I (and thats a few), its certainly kicking up a bit of a storm.
>
> here's an interesting article about I found quite illuminating:
> from salon.com
>
> "Bleep" of faith
> An indie film gets buzz and a big rollout. But "What the Bleep Do We 
> Know!?" uses questionable on-screen experts -- and appears to be an 
> infomercial for a controversial New Age sect.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - -
> By John Gorenfeld
>
>
> Sept. 16, 2004 | Last week, the national release of the independent film 
> "What the Bleep Do We Know!?" seemed to be just the latest success story 
> in the Year of the Documentary -- a little movie that could, launched into 
> 60 theaters across the country by Samuel Goldwyn Films after selling out 
> small theaters for months. The film's co-director, William Arntz, has 
> called it "a film for the religious left," an answer to "The Passion of 
> the Christ." It presents itself as the thinking rebel's alternative to 
> Hollywood pabulum: a heady stew of drama and documentary, starring 
> Oscar-winning actress Marlee Matlin as a Xanax-addled photographer who 
> discovers joy when she learns that quantum mechanics makes spiritual 
> wonders possible.
>
> But the film -- buoyed by a slew of stories in regional and national 
> outlets (including Salon) about its supposed grassroots success -- has 
> largely avoided much skepticism. And as the distributors launched a 
> national advertising campaign, on NPR's "All Things Considered" among 
> other outlets, and earned respectable reviews from a number of critics 
> (the San Francisco Examiner calls it a "smart film," and Roger Ebert, 
> while not thrilled, gave it a thoughtful two and a half stars), their 
> movie has managed to avoid much scrutiny of what, exactly, it's really 
> about -- and who is behind it.
>
> That has meant little attention has been given to either the film's 
> agenda, or its questionable use of supposed experts. At least one 
> scientist prominently interviewed in the film now says his words were 
> taken out of context. And two other key subjects in the film are not fully 
> identified: a theologian who, the film fails to divulge, is a former 
> priest who left the Catholic Church after allegations of sexual abuse; and 
> a mysterious woman identified only as Judy "JZ" Knight, who is actually a 
> sect leader claiming to channel a 35,000-year-old warrior spirit named 
> Ramtha. [/b]The film's three co-directors are among those who follow 
> Ramtha and look to Knight's channeled maxims to decipher the mysteries of 
> life.[/b] These Ramtha followers reportedly number in the thousands. But 
> critics call the sect a cult.
>
> In the movie, the 58-year-old Knight, whose accent is as thick as her 
> mascara, makes the boldest statements -- pronounced with long, rolling 
> R's -- about particles and God. "We have grrreat technology. But we still 
> have this ugly, superrrstitious, backwahds cohncept of Gahd," she says, 
> adding that "the height of arrrrrrogance is the belief of those who would 
> see Gahd in their own image." Musing on the unity of consciousness and 
> matter, she reminds us that "it only takes a fantasy for a man to have a 
> harrrd-on." In her normal mode, Knight speaks the plain talk of her native 
> Roswell, N.M., but in the manly presence of Ramtha, said to have conquered 
> the continent neighboring Atlantis, Knight's jaw juts and her voice 
> deepens into something magisterial and brash. Her Ramtha's School of 
> Enlightenment, on a $2 million compound based in Yelm, Wash., boasts 
> followers -- including celebrities like actress Shirley MacLaine (who 
> attended Knight's seminars in the late '80s) and "Dynasty" star Linda 
> Evans -- willing to pay up to $1,600 for a seminar.
>
> Reached by Salon, Meyer Gottlieb, president of Samuel Goldwyn Films, says 
> he's seen "Bleep" about eight times. Its fledgling distribution company 
> Roadside Attractions had its first real hit earlier this year when it 
> launched festival favorite documentary "Super Size Me" and is hoping for a 
> similar sleeper hit with " Bleep." Asked what he thought of the expressed 
> desire by filmmaker Mark Vicente (on a Ramtha Web site, 
> BeyondTheOrdinary.net) for his viewers to emerge from his movie in an 
> "almost trance-like state," Gottlieb only laughed.
>
> "The question is, Is this movie promoting a cult?" he said. "The only 
> thing we're interested in from a marketing perspective is creating a cult 
> status for the film ... cults, from my perspective, they deal with groups 
> and leaders and that stuff. This movie is about individual thinking. 
> Individual control over your future -- and your own reality."
>
> But not everyone involved in the movie has good things to say about that 
> message.
>
> David Albert, a professor at the Columbia University physics department, 
> has accused the filmmakers of warping his ideas to fit a spiritual agenda. 
> "I don't think it's quite right to say I was 'tricked' into appearing," he 
> said in a statement reposted by a critic on "What the Bleep's" Internet 
> forum, "but it is certainly the case that I was edited in such a way as to 
> completely suppress my actual views about the matters the movie discusses. 
> I am, indeed, profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum 
> mechanics with consciousness. Moreover, I explained all that, at great 
> length, on camera, to the producers of the film ... Had I known that I 
> would have been so radically misrepresented in the movie, I would 
> certainly not have agreed to be filmed."
>
> "I certainly do not subscribe to the 'Ramtha School on Enlightenment,' 
> whatever that is!" he finished. Albert provided Salon with an excerpt from 
> a piece he's writing on the subject, in which he says, in part, "I'm 
> unwittingly made to sound as if (maybe) I endorse its thesis."
>
> When told of Albert's complaints, Gottlieb said, "I certainly don't see 
> it," but acknowledged he's "not into the science 100 percent." At press 
> time, the filmmakers issued an angry "Open Letter to the U.S. Media" in 
> which it attacked the "intellectual smugness and superiority" of its 
> critics. (You can download the PDF file here.)
>
>
> Knight's role as the voice of Ramtha is the most striking -- but hardly 
> the only -- omission of the film, which could easily be interpreted as a 
> full-blown infomercial for Ramtha. Two other on-screen experts are not 
> identified as Ramtha associates: Dr. Joe Dispenza, chiropractor and 
> mystic, listed as a student on the Ramtha Web site; and a man identified 
> only as "Dr. Miceal Ledwith."
>
> Ledwith (at one time Monsignor Michael Ledwith) was once on track to be 
> the next archbishop of Dublin, but the theologian stepped down as 
> president of Maynooth College in 1994, after a complaint that he had 
> sexually harassed a young seminarian. It was later revealed that Ledwith 
> had allegedly paid an six-figure sum to a man who accused him of sexual 
> abuse. Ledwith has maintained his innocence but left Ireland for the more 
> placid confines of Monterey, Calif. On the "Bleep" Web site, Ledwith's 
> relationship with the Catholic Church is only alluded to in a claim that 
> he was once "charged with advising the Holy See on theological matters," 
> but he is not identified as ever having been a priest, or even as a 
> lecturer at the Ramtha school. According to a Ramtha Web site, Ledwith has 
> joined "Ramtha's core of appointed teachers." (The Ramtha school and 
> Ledwith have not responded to requests for interviews. The "Bleep" Web 
> site recommends that journalists contact an independent publicist, but the 
> movie previously listed as its P.R. contact Pavel Mikoloski, also director 
> of public affairs for Ramtha's school.)
>
> Later in the film, a "scientist" explains that, thanks to the strangeness 
> quivering below the subatomic level, meditating monks have lowered the 
> crime rate in Washington, D.C. But not until the end of the film do we 
> learn that the scientist making this claim, John Hagelin -- who once ran 
> for president -- conducted the research while teaching (until 1999) at 
> Maharishi University , the school named for the Beatles' guru. In JZ 
> Knight's own publications, Ramtha's existence, too, is frequently 
> explained in terms of quantum mechanics.
>
> Funding for the $5 million "Bleep," according to various published 
> interviews with the film's creators, comes not from Ramtha but the 
> software fortunes of director Arntz, who designed the job-management 
> application AutoSys. Now popular in Unix environments, the program sold 
> for more than $14 million in 1995. ( Eerily, the startup money for AutoSys 
> was also of Atlantean origin, or so the original investor claimed. A 1999 
> piece in Wired by David Diamond described the life and suicide of 
> Frederick Lenz III, a guru in his own right, who called himself not Ramtha 
> but Rama. The software mogul told those who rendezvoused with Rama that 
> he'd taught meditation classes on Atlantis. Later, Lenz said his students 
> were bent on his murder, and he plunged himself into the waters of Long 
> Island Sound with a $30,000 watch on his wrist and 150 tabs of Valium in 
> his bloodstream.)
>
> On the film's Web site FAQ, the filmmakers answer the question of whether 
> "Bleep" is a recruitment film coyly, stating that "the short answer is no. 
> During the making of the film [originally to be titled 'Sacred Science'] 
> it was decided that what was important was the message, not the 
> messenger --  whoever that may be. Some people may be inspired to check 
> out RSE, and some people may be inspired to major at MIT in quantum 
> teleportation." (At press time, MIT was not yet offering such a major.)
>
> .Ramtha's School of Enlightenment had previously promoted itself in its 
> own films, but those had a lower budget. One was "Bleep" director Mark 
> Vicente's 2002 "Where Angels Fear to Thread." Its trailer (available here) 
> introduces Ramtha in the fashion of "Lord of the Rings," swinging a blade 
> and raising a goblet to "the challenge of being an individual."
>
> "Bleep" is a much slicker introduction. Its success relies heavily on word 
> of mouth, accelerated by the use of "Bleep Teams" organized by Captured 
> Light Industries, the production house set up by Arntz to create "Bleep." 
> (The film's other production house, Lord of the Wind, is named for Ramtha 
> himself.)
>
> Heading the Bay Area street team is Kathy Vaquilar, who organized regular 
> "Bleep" events in at least two cities a week during August. On Saturday, 
> Aug. 14, she helped organize a discussion in Berkeley that featured a 
> Ramtha representative, Cindy, "who told us more about the film's 
> background, how it got started, and about the school," she posted on the 
> "What the Bleep" forum the next day, when the movement was spreading to 
> nearby Walnut Creek. The next night, a meeting was slated for San 
> Francisco.
>
>
> Vaquilar told Salon that she coordinates the "Bleep" campaign with a 
> representative of Captured Light. "I don't know that much about the Ramtha 
> school," she wrote in an e-mail to Salon, and hastens to defend its role. 
> Knight, she writes, "was only used as an interview subject. What is taught 
> at the school might seem weird to most mainstream people, but for those 
> who study or read the same materials on their own without any connection 
> to the school or to JZ Knight, their stuff is not considered unusual, but 
> rather part of what's already cutting edge."
>
> That edge is something Vaquilar is familiar with. In August she promoted 
> the film at the Bay Area's UFO expo in Santa Clara, serving double duty 
> with the International Contact Support Network, which comforts those who 
> say they've encountered extraterrestrials. Vaquilar herself has written 
> about meeting insectoids, who treated her fairly well; but Knight, 
> speaking in the voice of Ramtha, has warned her own followers of the "Gray 
> Men," a clique of hostile off-worlders controlling Earth's banks.
>
> On the surface, the movie doesn't seem to be targeting the E.T.-obsessed; 
> in fact, it seems to follow in the footsteps of Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" by 
> asking us to thrill to the tapestry of space-time. But it has very little 
> patience for Enlightenment concepts like measurable results and scientific 
> proof. In the new science of "Bleep," symbolized by disembodied equations 
> and CG bubbles flying at us like stars at warp speed, we're past all that.
>
>
> We're also told that when Columbus came to America, the natives literally 
> couldn't see his ships. They couldn't think outside the box of Indian 
> life. And in a subway that seems like one of many conceits borrowed from 
> the "Matrix" movies (whose metaphor has similarly been borrowed by David 
> Icke, the British author who says the world is controlled by lizard men), 
> the heroine learns that you can see chi energy particles of love, that 
> they've been captured in photographs of water blessed by Buddhists. At 
> this juncture Matlin hears a voice in her ear: "Makes you wonder, doesn't 
> it?" It's Quark, the greedy alien from "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine"! 
> Actually, it's the guy who plays him, Armin Shimerman, as one of several 
> mysterious strangers guiding her to the truth.
>
> The impression left from sitting through a screening of "What the Bleep" 
> is that a lot of people enjoy hearing their griping about religious 
> fundamentalists reflected back to them, backed by science. There's also 
> plenty of stroking of lefty values; Ramtha has declared that all world 
> religions have in common "the suppression of women," adding, with the 
> brashness surely fashionable in the 33rd century B.C., "No woman who had 
> an abortion has sinned against God. Fuck all those assholes who tell you 
> that." On the other hand, papers from Knight's 1992 divorce case with 
> Jeffrey Knight hint that Ramtha is an ancient homophobe, who allegedly 
> declared that AIDS was Mother Nature's way of "getting rid of" 
> homosexuality and told Jeffrey Knight he should reject modern medicine and 
> overcome the disease using the school's breathing techniques, according to 
> court testimony. Tom Szimhart, a "deprogrammer" who testified on behalf of 
> Knight's husband (who eventually died of the disease) called the Ramtha 
> school a cult with an anti-scientific bent.
>
> The "backward" religion of Christianity, Ramtha explains in the movie, 
> doesn't appreciate how the parables of Jesus are explained by photon waves 
> and probability -- just as creationists suggest that the latest 
> archaeological science can explain Noah's Ark and a very young Grand 
> Canyon. The cumulative effect of "What the Bleep" -- whose co-director, 
> Betsy Chasse, produced the evangelical teen comedy "Extreme Days" 
> (2000) -- makes you wonder if it isn't as fundamentalist as the 
> Christianity and Islam that Ramtha inveighs against.
>
>
> Even the father of the Isn't the Universe Amazing genre, the late Sagan, 
> called Ramtha out. He opened his 1997 book "The Demon-Haunted World: 
> Science as a Candle in the Dark" by asking why, if Ramtha is 35,000 years 
> old, he gives us only "banal homilies" (sample: "I have come to help you 
> over the ditch ... It is called the ditch of limitation") instead of 
> telling us, say, about the currency, technology, social order and use of 
> birth control in prehistoric Lemuria -- a country popularized by Madame 
> Blavatsky, the turn-of-the-20th-century psychic. Sagan's argument, which 
> couldn't be further from the movie's, is that science has exposed so many 
> natural wonders, there's no need to gild the lily with gray aliens, 
> telepaths and the spirits of Cro-Magnon shoguns roaming the Evergreen 
> State.
>
> Needless to say the book isn't on the film's reading list, which instead 
> suggests reading the works of Ramtha
>
>
> ---------------
> the United Church of Religious Science, of all things, has released this 
> attack on the film, which is also an interesting read:
>
> http://religious-science.com/askland0405-science.pdf
> (or from:)
> http://www.religious-science.com/message-board-forum/viewtopic.php?t=49
>
>
> "Report on the Perversion of Science to Support Mysticism"
>
> Purpose: To assist in retarding the spread of pseudo-science and 
> misinformation, to present topics currently circulating our churches and 
> to encourage critical thinking.
>
> Addressing the topics of:
>
> Page 3 – Opening Quotes
> Page 4 - Introduction and Address to the Religious Science Community
> Page 5 - Responsibility and Reputation of Church Leaders
> Page 6 – Defining Critical Thinking
> Page 7 - What Is Science?
> Page 9 - What The Bleep Do We Know movie
> Page 11 - JZ Knight aka Ramtha
> Page 17 - What The Bleep Do They Know? – Expert Resumes
> Page 18 - David McCarthy – A Letter to Current Members of Ramtha’s School
> Page 19 - Masaru Emoto Water Healing
> Page 23 - Christopher Columbus Historical Facts
> Page 24 - The Maharishi Effect
> Page 26 - Sai Baba
> Page 36 - Manifestations
> Page 44 - Architecture Retaining Positive or Negative Energies
> Page 45 - One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge
> Page 46 - What The Bleep Do We Know Receives Pigasus Award
> Page 46 - Anticipation of Flawed Logic Responses
> Page 48 - Closing Remarks
>
> With writings and excerpts provided by Ernest Holmes, Robert L. Park, 
> James Randi, Dr. Kathryn Turner (Director of Education, United Church of 
> Religious Science), the Google Answers research team, Columbia University 
> athematics Department and others notated and credited.
>
> A copy of this report is available free of charge E-mail Conrad Askland at 
> askland at aol.com
> Please include name and mailing address
> Or download a PDF copy at www.Religious-Science.com
> Author’s Note: There are frequent references in this report to “RSE” which 
> stands for the Ramtha School of Enlightenment led by JZ Knight, aka 
> “Ramtha”. RSE has NO affiliation with Religious Science, Science of Mind 
> or the teachings of Ernest Holmes. Sometimes Religious Science will be 
> referred to as “RS” or the United Church of Religious Science as “UCRS”. 
> Please make note of this very important distinction.
>
> This report released April 20, 2005
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> /]=---------------------------------------------------------------------=[\
> [%] Ibogaine List Commands: http://ibogaine.mindvox.com/IbogaineList.html 
> [%]
> 
> \]=---------------------------------------------------------------------=[/
>
>
> 
> /]=---------------------------------------------------------------------=[\
> [%] Ibogaine List Commands: http://ibogaine.mindvox.com/IbogaineList.html 
> [%]
> 
> \]=---------------------------------------------------------------------=[/
>
>
> 





More information about the Ibogaine mailing list