RE: WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

[Guest guest]

Perhaps Bill Kurtis was aware of this. The news feeds they get are

pretty incredible. Might explain the A & E program.

WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the

homepage

www.rational.org/recovery

Lane

[Guest guest]

There has been discussion of this for a few days on arf12s. It's worthy of

note that Kishline is said to have returned to AA within the past couple of

months.

Judith

> RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the homepage

>

> www.rational.org/recovery

>

> Lane

>

_______________________________________________________

Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

[Guest guest]

pete reported here in Feb that Stanton said she returned to AA and that was

about two months before the accident.

Re: WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

> There has been discussion of this for a few days on arf12s. It's worthy of

> note that Kishline is said to have returned to AA within the past couple

of

> months.

>

> Judith

>

>

>

> > RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the homepage

> >

> > www.rational.org/recovery

> >

> > Lane

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________________

> Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

>

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Vegas, Baby!

> Great deals on airfare, hotels and

> car rentals from Expedia.com!

> http://click./1/5206/2/_/4324/_/961505994/

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Here's a copy of the email I sent to the Trimpeys this morning. It

seems I just can't keep my opinions to myself anymore. Oh well.

Here goes:

Dear Jack and Lois,

I am a recent escapee of 12-step fanaticism, and have been doing

exhaustive research on " nonAA " for some time. While I find some of

what you have to say enlightening (primarily the theory about post-12-

step disorders), I find what you are saying about Audrey Kishline's

accident disturbing.

It disturbs me because it seems that you are, like the 12-step

acolytes, promoting the notion that your way is the only way and that

moderation should be abolished completely. I think any reasonable

person knows that moderation is not for everyone, but that's not to

say it's not for anyone! One of the reasons I left AA was that I was

tired of The Program trying to shove me into their tiny little

foxhole of The Way Things Are. Now it seems you're doing the same

thing, using Ms. Kishline's accident as a bayonet.

I am shocked and saddened to hear of this tragedy for many reasons,

the most prominent being that people like you will now use it as a

soapbox against the moderation movement, like a bad politician taking

digs at his/her opponents to get elected. There are MANY people who

drink moderately for the rest of their lives without incident after

indulging in excessive drinking in their past. I suspect we won't

hear about any of them. It's the all-or-nothing attitude toward

drinking in our culture that is at the root of the problem. Other

cultures TEACH moderate drinking to their children right from the

start and have far less problems associated with drinking as a

populace than we do in America.

Like everything else, the decision to drink or not to drink is a

personal one, and everyone needs to find the way that works for them

from the variety of choices that should be available. The " us or

them " mentality only fans the fire of fanaticism.

Like AA, you have taken a " everyone else-is-wrong-we're-right "

position that attempts to invalidate any other solution but yours.

You should be ashamed.

Noël

> RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the

homepage

>

> www.rational.org/recovery

>

> Lane

[Guest guest]

First time I read this response I took it as a little defensive

second time around it read totally different.

As far as unsolicited advice goes. I think most of us do it.

Particularly with newer members of the list. I can see how that

might get under some people's skin though. Some people appreciate

it, some don't, it's hard to tell which way people will go.

The intent wasn't malicious in this case.

Or maybe I completely missed something. In any event you seem to be

agreeing more than disagreeing.

Re: WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

I really

> believe that you have had alot of information in the past week or

so and you

> should take some time to sort it all out.

Well, allow me to retort! I thought this list was established for

just that reason - so that we could " sort it all out " and express our

opinions *free*ly. However, that does not give you the right to make

judgments about me and what I need when you know absolutely nothing

about me. Being judgmental and offering unsolicited advice are two

of the worst spoils of 12-step indoctrination.

I know AA hurt you, it has

> done some serious damage as you well know to lots of people.But

that does not

> mean that noone else can make it work for them.

Obviously you read my letter, so the above simply means that you

simply misinterpreted what I said in it. I did not bash AA as a

group, nor did I bash RR or MM or anything else. Nor did I say that

anyone should or should not affiliate themselves with any of them.

What I said was that I objected to his stance of " our way is the only

way " . Allow me to refresh your memory (from my letter):

" Like everything else, the decision to drink or not to drink is a

personal one, and everyone needs to find the way that works for them

from the variety of choices that should be available. The " us or

them " mentality only fans the fire of fanaticism. "

In fact, you reiterated my point for me later in your post when you

said (quotation marks mine):

" moderation is just not an option for some. And she proved it.

However, mabey

> it works for some.

But again whats good for me does not mean thats

> what works for everyone. "

From my letter:

" I think any reasonable person knows that moderation is not for

everyone, but that's not to say it's not for anyone! "

> I drank to get drunk all the time. To party hard, and to

> be wasted to the point of bar brawls and homelessness. So I don't

drink. I

> don't want to try to drink.

Who's being defensive?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

---

@Backup- Protect and Access your data any time, any where on the net.

Try @Backup FREE and receive 300 points from mypoints.com Install

now:

http://click./1/5666/2/_/4324/_/961554875/

---------------------------------------------------------------------

---

[Guest guest]

yes I do. just reminds me of the people who would first come to AA.

Defensive hostile and just plain overwhelmed. Of course im being judgemental.

Shes firing off letter after letter to people and coming back for group

re-enforcement. Its hard to get rid of those AA habits.

[Guest guest]

Actually, Audrey Kishline had returned to AA, and attempted abstinence, prior to

the accident. So if there's any failure there, it should be AA's failure,

right?

javajenv@... wrote:

> Actually I responded to the letter you wrote the Trimpneys. I really

> believe that you have had alot of information in the past week or so and you

> should take some time to sort it all out. You seem to be taking alot of

> things as personal attacks, and I have been reading all of your posts hoping

> that you would become a little less defensive. I know AA hurt you, it has

> done some serious damage as you well know to lots of people.But that does not

> mean that noone else can make it work for them. Most of the people in this

> group and Jack and Lois and Stanton and all of them continue to make there

> main point as its about choice. What Jack was saying was that people who are

> problem drinkers have no business trying to moderate at the publics expense.

> People are dead a child is dead. Because she could not drink safley. She was

> a chronic drunk, getting drunk and getting behind the wheel. ALOT. I guess

> moderation is just not an option for some. And she proved it. However, mabey

> it works for some. I drank to get drunk all the time. To party hard, and to

> be wasted to the point of bar brawls and homelessness. So I don't drink. I

> don't want to try to drink. But again whats good for me does not mean thats

> what works for everyone.

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

I thought it was a good letter, too, and certainly well put together. I have

gathered from our posts that Jack " the Beast " Trimpey is of the Methodist

persuasion. This may underlie his abstinence ethic. I used to be part of a

Methodist community (am still a member, though not a regular church-goer at

moment) and Iwas never " pulled up " for drinking, in which I did not indulge

to excess. I also know good Methodists who do drink. It must be a matter

of personal choice, though there's a serious " ought " involved, too --

something of which AA certainly seems inadequately aware in its

" spirituality by numbers " game.

Yours,

.

ps -- what is " spirituality " ?!?

>

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Subject: Re: Re: WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

>Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 02:22:12 -0600

>

>Good e-mail -- I like it!

>

>nicolenoel@... wrote:

>

> > Here's a copy of the email I sent to the Trimpeys this morning. It

> > seems I just can't keep my opinions to myself anymore. Oh well.

> > Here goes:

> >

> > Dear Jack and Lois,

> >

> > I am a recent escapee of 12-step fanaticism, and have been doing

> > exhaustive research on " nonAA " for some time. While I find some of

> > what you have to say enlightening (primarily the theory about post-12-

> > step disorders), I find what you are saying about Audrey Kishline's

> > accident disturbing.

> >

> > It disturbs me because it seems that you are, like the 12-step

> > acolytes, promoting the notion that your way is the only way and that

> > moderation should be abolished completely. I think any reasonable

> > person knows that moderation is not for everyone, but that's not to

> > say it's not for anyone! One of the reasons I left AA was that I was

> > tired of The Program trying to shove me into their tiny little

> > foxhole of The Way Things Are. Now it seems you're doing the same

> > thing, using Ms. Kishline's accident as a bayonet.

> >

> > I am shocked and saddened to hear of this tragedy for many reasons,

> > the most prominent being that people like you will now use it as a

> > soapbox against the moderation movement, like a bad politician taking

> > digs at his/her opponents to get elected. There are MANY people who

> > drink moderately for the rest of their lives without incident after

> > indulging in excessive drinking in their past. I suspect we won't

> > hear about any of them. It's the all-or-nothing attitude toward

> > drinking in our culture that is at the root of the problem. Other

> > cultures TEACH moderate drinking to their children right from the

> > start and have far less problems associated with drinking as a

> > populace than we do in America.

> >

> > Like everything else, the decision to drink or not to drink is a

> > personal one, and everyone needs to find the way that works for them

> > from the variety of choices that should be available. The " us or

> > them " mentality only fans the fire of fanaticism.

> >

> > Like AA, you have taken a " everyone else-is-wrong-we're-right "

> > position that attempts to invalidate any other solution but yours.

> > You should be ashamed.

> >

> > Noël

>

________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

WHOA! " Yes you do " what? Who or what are you responding to?

Please, if you're going to attack me, at least address the email to

me so that I may respond to it.

I say again (since you obviously didn't get it) - I'm not trying to

persuade anyone to do anything. Just stating my opinion, that's

all. What, have you sent letters to people & they haven't been

posted? Sounds like you're the pissed off one, and jealous to boot.

If you read anything " defensive, hostile or overwhelmed " in my

letters, maybe that's because that's how they make YOU feel. I

certainly didn't feel that way when I wrote them.

And please, ix-nay on the personal attacks. This is not the place

for them, am I wrong? Since you insist on bringing up the parellels

between AA and this list, might I suggest to you that instead of

being angry and judgmental, you might cut " the newcomer " a little

slack? Or do you only have room in your philosophy for people who

agree with yours?

> yes I do. just reminds me of the people who would first come

to AA.

> Defensive hostile and just plain overwhelmed. Of course im being

judgemental.

> Shes firing off letter after letter to people and coming back for

group

> re-enforcement. Its hard to get rid of those AA habits.

[Guest guest]

I have had lots of opinions posted, even published. However, I don't have to

bring it to everyones in the groups attention. I am happy for your crusade

against the evil AA empire. Thats the point of all of this. you just seem to

need alot of attention. It's an AA affliction. You want everyone to to think

your smart and to notice you and your effort. This group is full of

knowledge. Try to absorb some of it , instead of being so hostile all the time

[Guest guest]

That is certainly my take on it. But most will view it as evidence that MM

doesn't work.

---

Kayleigh

Zz

zZ

|\ z _,,,---,,_

/,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_

|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'

'---''(_/--' `-'\_)

>Actually, Audrey Kishline had returned to AA, and attempted abstinence, prior

to

>the accident. So if there's any failure there, it should be AA's failure,

right?

>

--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--

Before you buy.

[Guest guest]

Yes, I am smart- is that what bothers you? Forgive me for writing so

much, but I AM a writer, so I guess I maybe I do have a writing

affliction of some kind. By the way, since we're dispensing free

advice, you might want to brush up on your contractions.

I maintain that I'm simply expressing my opinions. You're getting

hostile as a result, which I don't understand. All you have to do is

click right on by when you see my name, if you don't want to read

what I have to say. I don't agree with everything that's said here

and I think some of it is pretty screwy, but I don't get all up in

arms about every little thing. I believe you have some sort of

personal problem with me which I can't even begin to figure out (and

wouldn't want to try).

I am an excellent debater, so I could continue with this whole stupid

thing ad nauseam, but I have a busy life so what say we just agree to

disagree and drop this whole thing before everyone else on the list

dies of boredom? I'm ready to die of boredom myself.

>

> I have had lots of opinions posted, even published. However, I

don't have to

> bring it to everyones in the groups attention. I am happy for your

crusade

> against the evil AA empire. Thats the point of all of this. you

just seem to

> need alot of attention. It's an AA affliction. You want everyone to

to think

> your smart and to notice you and your effort. This group is full of

> knowledge. Try to absorb some of it , instead of being so hostile

all the time

>

[Guest guest]

are you a stripper?

[Guest guest]

This is the most lecturing and patronizing thing I've seen on this

list in a while. I had commonly seen this sort of talk in beginner's

meetings where 'old timers' (in this case, those with one or two years

in AA qualified) lectured to newcomers to AA about the program and

about the newcomers' miserable lives, and how lucky they were to have

someone with 'a little time' to 'share the program' with them.

At 08:47 PM 6/20/00 EDT, javajenv@... wrote:

>Actually I responded to the letter you wrote the Trimpneys. I really

>believe that you have had alot of information in the past week or so and you

>should take some time to sort it all out.

-----

http://listen.to/benbradley

[Guest guest]

Kishline returned to AA in January.

This kind of AA-return trajedy might be quite common. In ahtachet

job

posing as TV journalism done on the work on controlled drinking done

by the Sobells, the critics noted that two of their patients died

while intoxicated... what they failed to mention was that they dod so

immediately after leaving abstinence-based treatment!

A similar twist is being done with Kishline. When she returned to AA,

it proved that MM was a failure. Kill a couple of ppl when drunk in

AA, and its STILL an MM fault apparently.

P.

> >

> > > RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the

homepage

> > >

> > > www.rational.org/recovery

> > >

> > > Lane

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________________

> > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

> >

> >

> >

----------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> > Vegas, Baby!

> > Great deals on airfare, hotels and

> > car rentals from Expedia.com!

> > http://click./1/5206/2/_/4324/_/961505994/

> >

----------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Well said Nic

It seems even the AA-hating Trimpeys want to use the Kishline trajedy

to kick MM, even tho she was an AA member for some 5 months before

it!

P.

-- In 12-step-freeegroups, nicolenoel@c... wrote:

> Here's a copy of the email I sent to the Trimpeys this morning. It

> seems I just can't keep my opinions to myself anymore. Oh well.

> Here goes:

>

> Dear Jack and Lois,

>

> I am a recent escapee of 12-step fanaticism, and have been doing

> exhaustive research on " nonAA " for some time. While I find some of

> what you have to say enlightening (primarily the theory about

post-12-

> step disorders), I find what you are saying about Audrey Kishline's

> accident disturbing.

>

> It disturbs me because it seems that you are, like the 12-step

> acolytes, promoting the notion that your way is the only way and

that

> moderation should be abolished completely. I think any reasonable

> person knows that moderation is not for everyone, but that's not to

> say it's not for anyone! One of the reasons I left AA was that I

was

> tired of The Program trying to shove me into their tiny little

> foxhole of The Way Things Are. Now it seems you're doing the same

> thing, using Ms. Kishline's accident as a bayonet.

>

> I am shocked and saddened to hear of this tragedy for many reasons,

> the most prominent being that people like you will now use it as a

> soapbox against the moderation movement, like a bad politician

taking

> digs at his/her opponents to get elected. There are MANY people who

> drink moderately for the rest of their lives without incident after

> indulging in excessive drinking in their past. I suspect we won't

> hear about any of them. It's the all-or-nothing attitude toward

> drinking in our culture that is at the root of the problem. Other

> cultures TEACH moderate drinking to their children right from the

> start and have far less problems associated with drinking as a

> populace than we do in America.

>

> Like everything else, the decision to drink or not to drink is a

> personal one, and everyone needs to find the way that works for them

> from the variety of choices that should be available. The " us or

> them " mentality only fans the fire of fanaticism.

>

> Like AA, you have taken a " everyone else-is-wrong-we're-right "

> position that attempts to invalidate any other solution but yours.

> You should be ashamed.

>

> Noël

>

>

>

> > RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the

> homepage

> >

> > www.rational.org/recovery

> >

> > Lane

[Guest guest]

I havent subbed to MM for quite a while now,

but I doubt that the MM members disputed her desire to abstain - many

MM's do. They will have disputed I expect her desire to return to AA.

The writer noted that 30% of members switch to abstinence-based

groups

- but they didnt mention that many choose to abstain *in* MM.

P.

> It appears nobody wanting it " out " knew she was a public figure

until now.

> the Seattle Times just got ahold of the story Saturday.

>

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/dis

play?s

> lug=booz17m & date=20000617 & query=kishline

> and then expanded again today.

>

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/local/html98/booz20m_20000620.ht

ml

>

> WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

> >

> > RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the

> > homepage

> >

> > www.rational.org/recovery

> >

> > Lane

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

----------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> > Old school buds here:

> > http://click./1/5536/2/_/4324/_/961509435/

> >

----------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

" A hit, a very palpable hit " , Sir,

.

>From: watts_pete@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Subject: Re: WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

>Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 23:39:23 -0000

>

>Kishline returned to AA in January.

>

>This kind of AA-return trajedy might be quite common. In ahtachet

>job

>posing as TV journalism done on the work on controlled drinking done

>by the Sobells, the critics noted that two of their patients died

>while intoxicated... what they failed to mention was that they dod so

>immediately after leaving abstinence-based treatment!

>

>A similar twist is being done with Kishline. When she returned to AA,

>it proved that MM was a failure. Kill a couple of ppl when drunk in

>AA, and its STILL an MM fault apparently.

>

>P.

>

>

> > >

> > > > RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of the

>homepage

> > > >

> > > > www.rational.org/recovery

> > > >

> > > > Lane

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > _______________________________________________________

> > > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> > > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

> > >

> > >

> > >

>----------------------------------------------------------------------

>--

> > > Vegas, Baby!

> > > Great deals on airfare, hotels and

> > > car rentals from Expedia.com!

> > > http://click./1/5206/2/_/4324/_/961505994/

> > >

>----------------------------------------------------------------------

>--

> > >

> > >

> > >

>

________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Javajen,

This argument is total BS.

Kishline failed to ABSTAIN while TRYING TO ABSTAIN. If this could

in fact " prove " anything, it would prove that for her ABSTINENCE was

impossible and she should have stuck to moderating!

Ive recently being arguing with steppers on the about.com alcohol

forum abt moderation, and got the usual horror stories from one guy

abt ppl who drank again, and then the same guy admitted that of all

these ppl, none of them actually TRIED to moderate, they were all

failures at abstaining!

Why in holy hell failures at abstention are given as proof that they

must do so is for me the most bizarre aspect of the incredibly

Alice-Through-the-Looking-Glass world of American alcohol culture.

> Actually I responded to the letter you wrote the Trimpneys.

I

really

> believe that you have had alot of information in the past week or

so

and you

> should take some time to sort it all out. You seem to be taking

alot

of

> things as personal attacks, and I have been reading all of your

posts hoping

> that you would become a little less defensive. I know AA hurt you,

it has

> done some serious damage as you well know to lots of people.But

that

does not

> mean that noone else can make it work for them. Most of the people

in this

> group and Jack and Lois and Stanton and all of them continue to

make

there

> main point as its about choice. What Jack was saying was that

people

who are

> problem drinkers have no business trying to moderate at the publics

expense.

> People are dead a child is dead. Because she could not drink

safley.

She was

> a chronic drunk, getting drunk and getting behind the wheel. ALOT.

I

guess

> moderation is just not an option for some. And she proved it.

However, mabey

> it works for some. I drank to get drunk all the time. To party

hard,

and to

> be wasted to the point of bar brawls and homelessness. So I don't

drink. I

> don't want to try to drink. But again whats good for me does not

mean thats

> what works for everyone.

[Guest guest]

Pete

It's to be in this group and realize one's not certifiably insane for

finding and remarking on such gaping holes in the whole bag of sticks and

string that makes up the moral and medical philosophy we know and love to

hate at stepNazism,

Yours,

.

>From: watts_pete@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Subject: Re: WOW, check out the RR website on Kishline

>Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:17:09 -0000

>

>Javajen,

>

>This argument is total BS.

>

>Kishline failed to ABSTAIN while TRYING TO ABSTAIN. If this could

>in fact " prove " anything, it would prove that for her ABSTINENCE was

>impossible and she should have stuck to moderating!

>

>Ive recently being arguing with steppers on the about.com alcohol

>forum abt moderation, and got the usual horror stories from one guy

>abt ppl who drank again, and then the same guy admitted that of all

>these ppl, none of them actually TRIED to moderate, they were all

>failures at abstaining!

>

>Why in holy hell failures at abstention are given as proof that they

>must do so is for me the most bizarre aspect of the incredibly

>Alice-Through-the-Looking-Glass world of American alcohol culture.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > Actually I responded to the letter you wrote the Trimpneys.

>I

>really

> > believe that you have had alot of information in the past week or

>so

>and you

> > should take some time to sort it all out. You seem to be taking

>alot

>of

> > things as personal attacks, and I have been reading all of your

>posts hoping

> > that you would become a little less defensive. I know AA hurt you,

>it has

> > done some serious damage as you well know to lots of people.But

>that

>does not

> > mean that noone else can make it work for them. Most of the people

>in this

> > group and Jack and Lois and Stanton and all of them continue to

>make

>there

> > main point as its about choice. What Jack was saying was that

>people

>who are

> > problem drinkers have no business trying to moderate at the publics

>expense.

> > People are dead a child is dead. Because she could not drink

>safley.

>She was

> > a chronic drunk, getting drunk and getting behind the wheel. ALOT.

>I

>guess

> > moderation is just not an option for some. And she proved it.

>However, mabey

> > it works for some. I drank to get drunk all the time. To party

>hard,

>and to

> > be wasted to the point of bar brawls and homelessness. So I don't

>drink. I

> > don't want to try to drink. But again whats good for me does not

>mean thats

> > what works for everyone.

>

________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Pete,

Thanks for the clarification. At times, because of work or whatever,

I have missed some important posts on 12sf.

Thanks,

Tommy

> > >

> > > > RR's added something interesting and tragic at the top of

the

> homepage

> > > >

> > > > www.rational.org/recovery

> > > >

> > > > Lane

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > _______________________________________________________

> > > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite

> > > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

> > >

> > >

> > >

> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> --

> > > Vegas, Baby!

> > > Great deals on airfare, hotels and

> > > car rentals from Expedia.com!

> > > http://click./1/5206/2/_/4324/_/961505994/

> > >

> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> --

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

-----Original Message-----

>Kishline returned to AA in January.

>

>This kind of AA-return trajedy might be quite common. In ahtachet

>job

>posing as TV journalism done on the work on controlled drinking done

>by the Sobells, the critics noted that two of their patients died

>while intoxicated... what they failed to mention was that they dod so

>immediately after leaving abstinence-based treatment!

>

>A similar twist is being done with Kishline. When she returned to AA,

>it proved that MM was a failure. Kill a couple of ppl when drunk in

>AA, and its STILL an MM fault apparently.

>

>P.

Actually, what happened to Kishline could have been very similar to what

happened to me in '93. After 4 years of completely controlled moderately

heavy drinking I decided to give abstinence another try, went to 3 or 4 AA

meetings, and within 2 months was coming off a major binge in a hospital

with a full-blown case of psychotic Stepmania.

Btw, just a note on the timing -- in January Kishline reported that she had

already started going to meetings, but this return might have commenced

before January.

-- wally