Shhhhhh.......Don't tell anyone the truth about Alcoholics Anonymous, you might scare away the new prospects

Steinbach and Reinhardt became acquainted in 1994 while attending alcoholics anonymous and narcotics anonymous meetings in Devils Lake.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6240933184236322630&q=%22nar...

This thread was Tweeted on Twitter by a dead aclcoholic. Do you suppose St. Boniface is still with Bill W. & helping him write?

Shhhhhhh. Don't tell anyone the truth about AA/NA......http://www.orange-papers.org/forum/node/3154 Brought to ya by BillW.
8:16 AM - 1 Feb 13

Tweet text
Reply to @BillW12Boniface
https://twitter.com/BillW12Boniface

Powerful video indeed! I do think that those individuals who were part of that AA group should be held accountable, and that the legal system will have to re-evaluate how they force people into AA. However, I don't know if GSO in New York will in anyway be held accountable for this tragedy. Perhaps they should be held accountable but I don't that GSO will be held accountable. Just my thoughts.

joedrywall- if you read the Service Manual Concept, 4, 5 or 6 ..I forget which states that they are fully responsible. Its just that you and even me were too brainwashed by listening to the preamble ..a lie and the 12 traditions- half of them are lies read every time we once attended a meeting. Its pretty much all B**llshit and of course they are liable. Just like the Catholic CHurch and The Boy Scouts.

joedrywall- if you read the Service Manual Concept, 4, 5 or 6 ..I forget which states that they are fully responsible. Its just that you and even me were too brainwashed by listening to the preamble ..a lie and the 12 traditions- half of them are lies read every time we once attended a meeting. Its pretty much all B**llshit and of course they are liable. Just like the Catholic CHurch and The Boy Scouts.

Here is a good article to read. Below is a snippet. You can read the whole thing here:

http://gcnewyork.com/columns08/101608kraus.html

Limitations

While the general rule is that internal policies may be introduced as evidence of negligence, it is hardly a foregone conclusion that a company's internal policies will be used against it in a negligence action. There are at least four arguments a company may make to avoid admission of an internal policy:

• That the policy reflects a standard of care exceeding that required by common law;

• That the policy simply reflects the company's aspirations for how business should be conducted and was created in the spirit of recommendations rather than rules;

• That it was not the purpose of the policy to prevent whatever harm befell the plaintiff;9

• That it should be excluded under a Rule 403 analysis or its state equivalent.

The most frequently applied limitation barring the admission of internal policies is that to the extent internal rules and regulations exceed the standard of care, they are not admissible. Two recent cases involving theatres, Gilson v. Metropolitan Opera10 and Branham v. Loews Orpheum Cinemas,11 make this limitation quite clear.

In Gilson v. Metropolitan Opera, the New York Court of Appeals analyzed whether the defendant was negligent in failing to escort a customer to his seat when the lights were out in the theatre. The customer clearly exhibited an infirmity affecting his ability to walk safely, potentially causing harm to himself or to another patron. The Court ultimately found that requiring theatres to provide escorts for patrons exceeded the "reasonable care" expected of a theatre and, accordingly, held that the defendants owed no such duty to the plaintiff. Nonetheless, the plaintiff argued that the opera house's internal rules and guidelines were "independent evidence of negligence."

The Court rejected this argument, holding that internal guidelines exceeding the standard of ordinary care "cannot serve as a basis for imposing liability." The Court reiterated its holding in a prior case that "violation of a company's internal rules is not negligence in and of itself, and, where such rules require a standard that transcends reasonable care, breach cannot be considered evidence of negligence." Based on this reasoning, the Court affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the case on summary judgment. Even the dissenting judge, who felt that summary judgment was inappropriate, did not base this objection on the fact that the opera house violated its own policies, but rather on other common law indicators of the standard of care.

The First Department immediately followed this ruling in its 2006 case of Branham v. Loews Orpheum Cinemas Inc. In Branham, the court held that the theatre's aisle-check policy, which required an employee to patrol the aisles every 15 to 20 minutes to generally ensure the customers' safety and enjoyment, "imposed a higher duty of care than is required under the law." Accordingly, the court held that the motion court could not rely on the policy in finding a triable issue of fact, stating that "[w]hile a defendant's internal rules may be admissible as evidence of whether reasonable care was exercised, such rules must be excluded, as a matter of law, if they require a standard of care which transcends the traditional common-law standard of reasonable care under the circumstances."

In the 2007 case of Montes v. New York City Transit Authority,12 a case arising out of the defendant's bus hitting a young boy while he was crossing the street, the Appellate Division, First Department, held that the lower court did not err in excluding the Transit Authority's internal investigation report on the cause of the accident because the "Transit Authority's internal standards impose a code of conduct on its drivers that exceeds that of the common law by presuming that every accident is preventable, and that when one occurs, the driver must have been to some extent at fault."

Not only may internal policies and procedures be rendered inadmissible if they exceed the standard of care, a company may also avoid their being introduced as evidence of the standard of care if the policies are explicitly identified as nothing more than recommendations. In Diaz v. New York Downtown Hospital,13 the Appellate Division considered a negligent supervision action against a hospital where the plaintiff alleged that an independent contractor sexually assaulted her during a vaginal sonogram. The plaintiff alleged that the hospital was negligent in not having a female observer present and relied on two medical professional organizations' guidelines for this proposition. One guideline stated that it was "recommended" a woman be present and the other provided that a "female member . . . should be present when possible."

The court found that the "guidelines [we]re couched in advisory terms," and, as such, they "[fell] well short of establishing the 'accepted standard of care' alleged by plaintiff's expert." As with internal policies, the court held that "[a]lthough noncompliance with such a customary practice or industry standard may be evidence of negligence, the failure to abide by guidelines or recommendations that are not generally accepted standards in an industry will not suffice to raise an issue of fact as to a defendant's negligence." Essentially, the court found the pointedly non-binding nature of the guidelines to be determinative as to whether they were evidence of the standard of care. This analysis is instructive as to how courts will treat similarly worded internal policies.

A federal court may also rely on Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to deny admission of an internal rule or policy. In Thompson v. City of Chicago,14 survivors of an individual who died during his arrest brought suit against the City of Chicago and police officers, and sought to introduce into evidence the police department's General Orders, practices, and policies to establish the appropriate use of force as part of their wrongful death claims.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the material was properly excluded under Rule 403, which permits a court to exclude evidence if "its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury." The court reached this decision after considering that while a breach of internal guidelines may open an officer up to professional sanctions, "they have little or no bearing on whether the officer breached his duty of care in apprehending [the decedent]," and, further, that a limiting instruction to this effect would result in "unnecessary and detrimental jury confusion."

It seems to just keep getting weirder and more so.The only Aa member that i still talk with spoke about returning to USA.Holding hands to recite Matthew 6 verses 9-13 the "Lord's prayer".good to hear that Holly weird is digging into Homosexual "sponsorship" I looked at SMART but really quickly I noticed how so much of their good ideas were for me toDONATE MONEY ,DONATE MONEY.
I never accepted the 12 steps. ever.I simply accepted what =my own ideas about getting and staying sober.Recently I was thInking{dangerous thing}about Thomas Alva Edison.
did you know that he was so determined and so filled with faith in his own abilities that before he made one light bulb--he failed over 10,000 times to create a successful light bulb.But he was deternined that somehow he was going to take electricity and use it to make light.Today we take this idea for granted byt this man though faith in his own abilities and determination that one way or another he would succeed to make light from electricity. After 10,000 failures succeeded.Colonel Sanders-everyone knows KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN the home of diabetes and heart troulbe and fat foods.well he took his recipe to over 1,000 restaurants before he found one restaurant that would try his idea.Now look at the good side.Fast cheap food-and it is a multi billion dollar machine.So much of myown sobriety was and is that I was determined to quit.somehow.AA initially helped but it took only 3 months for my first major leave of absence.No anonmyity. A 37 year sober queen determined that somehow he was going to screw me. and what a lot of crap.like a restaurant where there is no food,but a wonderful menu.One honest meeting"We actually are not open minded."
After one members threats-I stop feeling safe and every meeting-I went with preperation for cutting anyone putting his hands on me.Some noticed and some were just determined to take control of my life.Screw surrender to god/Buddha/Jesus/Jehovah--I am God.Now OBEY ME.OBEY ME.OBEY ME.
7 years to complete the Steps?do you have someone to push you around in a wheel chair and to feed you?
Yes it is good to be reminded that these so called steps are crap.Philosophy ,as Prem calls them.No real knowledge about Alcoholism.But let's PRETEND.And pretend #1.let's pretend that people in AA actually learn to mind their own business-ie step#3.Look at them selves,take their own inventory #3.
Lots of talk but the valuable pieces of love and of life- totally ignored.good idea to stop pretending to be God or a God,but it just never seems to happen.The biggest mouths about the steps never ever practised minding their own business to busy taking my inventory.What a waste of time.Talk talk tak,with little reality anywhere .Steppers,my ass,talkers.It took me 3 tries to quit.Now I am happy to be sober,but AA.I do not need the lies and I do not need the anger.the agro that they so enjoy creating.length of sobriety seemed to= I can be as hateful and viscious as i want to be and it's okay.I am a God>i have length of dry sobriety.One compared it to filling a swimming pool with feces vomit and urine and swimming in it.
BETTER TO LIGHT ONE CANDLE THAN TO CURSE THE DARKNESS.

It seems to just keep getting weirder and more so.The only Aa member that i still talk with spoke about returning to USA.Holding hands to recite Matthew 6 verses 9-13 the "Lord's prayer".good to hear that Holly weird is digging into Homosexual "sponsorship" I looked at SMART but really quickly I noticed how so much of their good ideas were for me toDONATE MONEY ,DONATE MONEY.
I never accepted the 12 steps. ever.I simply accepted what =my own ideas about getting and staying sober.Recently I was thInking{dangerous thing}about Thomas Alva Edison.
did you know that he was so determined and so filled with faith in his own abilities that before he made one light bulb--he failed over 10,000 times to create a successful light bulb.But he was deternined that somehow he was going to take electricity and use it to make light.Today we take this idea for granted byt this man though faith in his own abilities and determination that one way or another he would succeed to make light from electricity. After 10,000 failures succeeded.Colonel Sanders-everyone knows KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN the home of diabetes and heart troulbe and fat foods.well he took his recipe to over 1,000 restaurants before he found one restaurant that would try his idea.Now look at the good side.Fast cheap food-and it is a multi billion dollar machine.So much of myown sobriety was and is that I was determined to quit.somehow.AA initially helped but it took only 3 months for my first major leave of absence.No anonmyity. A 37 year sober queen determined that somehow he was going to screw me. and what a lot of crap.like a restaurant where there is no food,but a wonderful menu.One honest meeting"We actually are not open minded."
After one members threats-I stop feeling safe and every meeting-I went with preperation for cutting anyone putting his hands on me.Some noticed and some were just determined to take control of my life.Screw surrender to god/Buddha/Jesus/Jehovah--I am God.Now OBEY ME.OBEY ME.OBEY ME.
7 years to complete the Steps?do you have someone to push you around in a wheel chair and to feed you?
Yes it is good to be reminded that these so called steps are crap.Philosophy ,as Prem calls them.No real knowledge about Alcoholism.But let's PRETEND.And pretend #1.let's pretend that people in AA actually learn to mind their own business-ie step#3.Look at them selves,take their own inventory #3.
Lots of talk but the valuable pieces of love and of life- totally ignored.good idea to stop pretending to be God or a God,but it just never seems to happen.The biggest mouths about the steps never ever practised minding their own business to busy taking my inventory.What a waste of time.Talk talk tak,with little reality anywhere .Steppers,my ass,talkers.It took me 3 tries to quit.Now I am happy to be sober,but AA.I do not need the lies and I do not need the anger.the agro that they so enjoy creating.length of sobriety seemed to= I can be as hateful and viscious as i want to be and it's okay.I am a God>i have length of dry sobriety.One compared it to filling a swimming pool with feces vomit and urine and swimming in it.
BETTER TO LIGHT ONE CANDLE THAN TO CURSE THE DARKNESS.

The PAID EMPLOYEE'S of AA have been advised by multiple members that the rooms & meetings have multiple criminals present. AA itself deliberately bottom feeds & trolls the prison, parole & court systems for members. Members, present & ex, all steppers @ one time have repeatedly advised the PAID EMPLOYEE'S that all those present in the rooms & @ meetings are advised that AA interacts with parole departments & trolls for paroled convicts @ all times to be mandated to meetings! AA should have been & still should advise any & all person's who enter the rooms or a meeting that they may be interacting with convicted felons! Paid employee's of AA have been advised the rooms & meetings are & can be dangerous due to the mandated paroled convicts & those paid AA employee's have chosen over & over to just ignore this potential danger to any one in the rooms & @ meetings. AA & its paid employee's are responsible for doing nothing, absolutely nothing to advise or warn any one in the meetings, the rooms or the public. AA & its paid employee's are negligent.

and employers, social workers, insurance carriers, and organ transplant teams do not enjoy judicial privilege . If they were VERIFIBLY alerted to the dangers -such as the predators hunting in the rooms- yes they are liable if they have not effectively warned people they are coercing.

That is why the "Keep comin back" section archived at Stinkin Thinkin is so important. Anyone that is coerced to AA should have an acquaintance send some of those news stories via CERTIFIED MAIL to the coercing person.

and the organization will return to what it was meant to be. Willing people exchanging ESH. I have never had a problem with that.

I have a real problem with the disgusting and coercive industry it has become, and the real dangers that are an embedded part of it. I have problems with the misinformation that is promoted as medical fact, and the methodology promoted that destroys families.

Yes I am very bitter.

I must humbly admit that I have never read the service manual. I will have to look that up.