Sylvia Browne: Linda Rossi interview

ExMinister said:
A big thank you to Mrs. Akers for setting the record straight about whether or not Sylvia Browne had apologized.

As of this morning, in light of Rossi's claim that Browne apologized 3 times and the fact that this didn't happen, I officially no longer believe that any spokesperson or higher-up in Browne's organization is operating with any amount of sincerity, including and especially Browne herself.

And yes, I know, all the rest of you were already there.

Count me as officially and irrevocably disgusted.
Click to expand...

you're just now getting there? i thought you were there log ago!
 
RSLancastr said:
you're just now getting there? i thought you were there log ago!
Click to expand...

No I thought there were a few people there who were sincere. My husband and I both thought Linda was one of them. Having known her, we thought if anyone was sincere but just didn't get it, it would be Linda. We assumed she was fooling herself, or just not looking at the evidence, but that she really believed.

Hearing her claim apologies for Sylvia that never happened - in fact, in hindsight taking into account the whole tone of that ridiculously overly emotional interview - we no longer believe that about her.

We have heard enough stories from the ministers about Sheila and Michael and Ben and the others to figure they couldn't be entirely sincere. But we weren't sure. We had the impression that they had had chosen to bury their heads in the sand when it came to seeing the facts about Sylvia, for personal reasons (salary, gifts, status, a desire to believe in Browne's philosophy).

But even burying your head in the sand is not the same thing as outright lying to defend someone.
 
Linda Rossi disgusted me no end when I saw the first Anderson Cooper interview with Robert, and Randi and Rossi. Randi allowed her to talk but when it was his turn constantly interrupted him and hurled ad hom accusations at him and even put words in his mouth. She constantly batted her eyes angrily and basically resorted to saying that Randi is an atheist, therefore he cannot be trusted. I was glad when Randi finally shut her up for 2 seconds by saying, "DO YOU MIND? IT'S MY TURN!" (well, basically that.)

Disgusting. I didn't believe her for a moment. But she did so poorly and of course Sylvia herself would never consent to appear. :mad:
 
Minarvia said:
Linda Rossi disgusted me no end when I saw the first Anderson Cooper interview with Robert, and Randi and Rossi. Randi allowed her to talk but when it was his turn constantly interrupted him and hurled ad hom accusations at him and even put words in his mouth. She constantly batted her eyes angrily and basically resorted to saying that Randi is an atheist, therefore he cannot be trusted. I was glad when Randi finally shut her up for 2 seconds by saying, "DO YOU MIND? IT'S MY TURN!" (well, basically that.)

Disgusting. I didn't believe her for a moment. But she did so poorly and of course Sylvia herself would never consent to appear. :mad:
Click to expand...

The difference is that I thought she sounded ignorant and obnoxious but I still thought she was sincere and just playing the fool for Sylvia Browne.

Now I think she's in on it, which is where I get totally disgusted.

I don't know, I guess I can forgive people for being deceived and acting foolishly as a result, even if the harm they do still upsets and frustrates me. But to KNOW someone is a fraud and to lie for them. That's disgusting to me. To know someone like Browne is a fake and not use what you know to warn people away from them! That's even worse.
 
ExMinister said:
The difference is that I thought she sounded ignorant and obnoxious but I still thought she was sincere and just playing the fool for Sylvia Browne.

Now I think she's in on it, which is where I get totally disgusted.

I don't know, I guess I can forgive people for being deceived and acting foolishly as a result, even if the harm they do still upsets and frustrates me. But to KNOW someone is a fraud and to lie for them. That's disgusting to me. To know someone like Browne is a fake and not use what you know to warn people away from them! That's even worse.
Click to expand...

You're quite right, there is a difference. You know/knew Linda, so you are in a better position than I am. But when I saw her I didn't believe her for a second. But you could be right in that she DID believe at the time but is now in on a lie. But her complete lack of manners, style, and name-calling on the original interview made me think she was in on it all along. But I don't know that for sure, so thanks, Ex-Min. I was biased against her from the start, and that's not good. I appreciate your perspective. :)
 
Hi Sgf8. Not sure I understand what you're asking here. The most up-to-date count on what?
Click to expand...

Guess I didn't word that right. I was saying that you wanted to be "counted" and I was asking others how many that was right now. Guess if you have to explain then....it wasn't that funny.
 
You're quite right, there is a difference. You know/knew Linda, so you are in a better position than I am. But when I saw her I didn't believe her for a second. But you could be right in that she DID believe at the time but is now in on a lie. But her complete lack of manners, style, and name-calling on the original interview made me think she was in on it all along. But I don't know that for sure, so thanks, Ex-Min. I was biased against her from the start, and that's not good. I appreciate your perspective. :)
Click to expand...

Linda knows where the bones are buried. Wouldn't it be great if she spilled the beans on Sylvia? Wow! I can dream can't I?
 
Minarvia said:
You're quite right, there is a difference. You know/knew Linda, so you are in a better position than I am. But when I saw her I didn't believe her for a second. But you could be right in that she DID believe at the time but is now in on a lie. But her complete lack of manners, style, and name-calling on the original interview made me think she was in on it all along. But I don't know that for sure, so thanks, Ex-Min. I was biased against her from the start, and that's not good. I appreciate your perspective. :)
Click to expand...

But, see, it turns out YOU were right all along! If anything, my past personal impression of her clouded my judgment.

sgf8 said:
Guess I didn't word that right. I was saying that you wanted to be "counted" and I was asking others how many that was right now. Guess if you have to explain then....it wasn't that funny.
Click to expand...

:) Thanks! Things do tend to go right over my head, sad to say.
 
ExMinister said:
No I thought there were a few people there who were sincere. My husband and I both thought Linda was one of them. Having known her, we thought if anyone was sincere but just didn't get it, it would be Linda. We assumed she was fooling herself, or just not looking at the evidence, but that she really believed.

Hearing her claim apologies for Sylvia that never happened - in fact, in hindsight taking into account the whole tone of that ridiculously overly emotional interview - we no longer believe that about her.

We have heard enough stories from the ministers about Sheila and Michael and Ben and the others to figure they couldn't be entirely sincere. But we weren't sure. We had the impression that they had had chosen to bury their heads in the sand when it came to seeing the facts about Sylvia, for personal reasons (salary, gifts, status, a desire to believe in Browne's philosophy).

But even burying your head in the sand is not the same thing as outright lying to defend someone.
Click to expand...

Could it be possible that Sylvia told Linda Rossi that she personally sent those letters to the Hornbeck family? You know Rossi better than me, but I have to ask if that would be possible.
It seems also possible Rossi knows deep down Browne is a fake but still looks the other way for either personal gain or because she don't to face the fact she is aiding a fraud.
 
Could it be possible that Sylvia told Linda Rossi that she personally sent those letters to the Hornbeck family? You know Rossi better than me, but I have to ask if that would be possible.
It seems also possible Rossi knows deep down Browne is a fake but still looks the other way for either personal gain or because she don't to face the fact she is aiding a fraud.
Click to expand...

In the book "Mistakes Were Made: But Not by Me" (author will be at TAM8) they explain that usually these things start out in baby steps. No one really aims to be a fraud or to aid one, but it is just little things. Then they take another step and so on and so on. After awhile you have too much invested to walk away, or to admit the truth. You start justifying it to yourself, and making excuses. It takes a VERY strong person to walk away.
 
It could also be something like that Sylvia's underlings believe in Gnosticism and the religion and all that but don't believe in Sylvia. Maybe they stay in it for what they do think is true and filter out what they don't think is true and realize is a fraud. And they somehow manage to separate the two in their minds and do not realize it is all part of the same con.

Kind of like Sylvia herself. She allegedly believes in New Age and Gnosticism even though she does not believe in trances, spirit guides, talking to the dead, etc.

Or who knows. Heaven knows what these people really think. As with Montel, it's a true mystery.

Here is a situation where you would give a lot more than a penny for someone's thoughts.

You'd really, really like to know what is going on in the mind of someone who works for a fraud like that.
 
Severus Snape said:
Could it be possible that Sylvia told Linda Rossi that she personally sent those letters to the Hornbeck family? You know Rossi better than me, but I have to ask if that would be possible.
It seems also possible Rossi knows deep down Browne is a fake but still looks the other way for either personal gain or because she don't to face the fact she is aiding a fraud.
Click to expand...

You do bring up a good point.

Linda claims that Sylvia apologized by sending a personal letter, via a web site apology, and on television.

It's possible that this is the story line Sylvia herself has given her own people, and it's also possible that Sylvia claims this now in lectures and interviews when asked and her people have overheard her say it. Sylvia probably knows that it's unlikely anyone will hear anything to the contrary (grr), unless, now that it has come to our attention, it is written up eventually on Robert Lancaster's web site.

So, yes that's a possibility.

As Eeeney pointed out, who knows.

I need to let go of assumptions about the motives of these people, many of whom have managed to deceive me in the past.
 
sgf8 said:
In the book "Mistakes Were Made: But Not by Me" (author will be at TAM8) they explain that usually these things start out in baby steps. No one really aims to be a fraud or to aid one, but it is just little things. Then they take another step and so on and so on. After awhile you have too much invested to walk away, or to admit the truth. You start justifying it to yourself, and making excuses. It takes a VERY strong person to walk away.
Click to expand...

Wow, great book and I am going to be at TAM8 - I can't wait!

You know, I just have the hardest time understanding how people could justify staying with something under any circumstances of pretense, if they are not outright in it for money or status. If you are sincere, how can you justify that to yourself?

I have walked away from 20 years of beliefs. It HAS been hard, incredibly hard at times, but would I rather live a lie? Never!

EeneyMinnieMoe said:
It could also be something like that Sylvia's underlings believe in Gnosticism and the religion and all that but don't believe in Sylvia. Maybe they stay in it for what they do think is true and filter out what they don't think is true and realize is a fraud. And they somehow manage to separate the two in their minds and do not realize it is all part of the same con.

Kind of like Sylvia herself. She allegedly believes in New Age and Gnosticism even though she does not believe in trances, spirit guides, talking to the dead, etc.

Or who knows. Heaven knows what these people really think. As with Montel, it's a true mystery.

Here is a situation where you would give a lot more than a penny for someone's thoughts.

You'd really, really like to know what is going on in the mind of someone who works for a fraud like that.
Click to expand...

Well, she definitely believes in trances and spirit guides. Think Francine and all the many years of "information trances" she did. She even claims to talk to deceased loved ones for people, though watching her on Montel, she's not very convincing at it.

You are right, there are people who stay with the philosophy and believe in Francine, even though they no longer have much confidence in Sylvia herself. Even ministers who feel they have witnessed instances of Sylvia faking the trances will say they still believe "some of the trances were real." I don't get that. If someone has a history of lying, how do you know when to trust them? How do you tell which trances are real?

I totally agree with you that it would be so interesting to know what is really going on in the minds of this group of people. Are they deceiving themselves? Cold-bloodedly deceiving others for personal gain? Some strange combination of the two??
 
sgf8 said:
In the book "Mistakes Were Made: But Not by Me" (author will be at TAM8) they explain that usually these things start out in baby steps. No one really aims to be a fraud or to aid one, but it is just little things. Then they take another step and so on and so on. After awhile you have too much invested to walk away, or to admit the truth. You start justifying it to yourself, and making excuses. It takes a VERY strong person to walk away.
Click to expand...

I can't go to TAM, but I may order the book. I do believe that a lot of people begin small and then find themselves in too deep, so to speak. But I also believe a lot of these people from the very start, imo, such as John Edward, Sylvia, Van Praagh, Alison Dubois...I believe they knew from day one, "perfected" their art and set out to make money. Oh, and Uri Geller I think was a con from the very start.

And yes, it takes a VERY strong person to walk away, such as that Fox sister way, way, back who started this entire thing. She came out and told the truth. Yes, she lied again when she was broke, but she told the truth and even demonstrated her methods. It must have been hard for her and grated on her conscience, especially since she and her sister began as children just playing a prank. :(
 
ExMinister said:
You are right, there are people who stay with the philosophy and believe in Francine, even though they no longer have much confidence in Sylvia herself. Even ministers who feel they have witnessed instances of Sylvia faking the trances will say they still believe "some of the trances were real." I don't get that. If someone has a history of lying, how do you know when to trust them? How do you tell which trances are real?
Click to expand...

Isn't it so strange how people will think that way?

Some Christians say things like "I don't believe in silly stories like Jonah and the whale or Adam and Eve or the Red Sea- but I believe in Jesus. I have faith in the central story."

Two other examples I can think of:

In his Stop Kaz days, Robert met a minister who said he did not believe "the celebrity part" of Kaz's story but believed all the rest.

When I met someone who believed in John of God's claims, I explained how he is able to fake running a knife over someone's eyes, pretend to remove tumors and the forceps-in-the-nose trick. In great detail, with video clips and diagrams.

The individual shrugged and said "That's how he does it? I'll believe that. Well, allright, I believe he is doing a trick there. Still, I think he has psychic abilities and really does help those people".

:covereyes :confused:


ExMinister said:
I totally agree with you that it would be so interesting to know what is really going on in the minds of this group of people. Are they deceiving themselves? Cold-bloodedly deceiving others for personal gain? Some strange combination of the two??
Click to expand...

My money is on some strange combination of the two.
 
Last edited:
Eeney, it's like my mom with the Kaz story. she didn't believe some parts but compartmentalized them and still believed the rest.
 
It's still bizarre, though. How can you separate one from the other when they are clearly part of the same whole?

One would think that the concept of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" would apply here.

Someone has lied once? Maybe give them a second chance. Treat them suspiciously. And only take them seriously "just in case".

Someone lies twice or more? Never, ever believe or trust them again. Treat anything they ever say or do ever again as highly suspect at best.

It's also odd how this type of thinking only applies to woo. If someone claimed to be an artist and claimed to have created a great painting but was later exposed as having faked it, no one would wholeheartedly take his word for it the next time he showed a work of art he claimed to have painted. They wouldn't even give him the chance to lie twice; they'd laugh him out of town before he'd even have the chance to open his mouth and claim painting 2. There would be strong prejudice against him even before the second time, let alone during the second time.

Even the most gullible and clueless person on Earth would treat him as a fraud unless proven otherwise. And would need a lot of convincing and a lot of evidence before even being prepared to entertain the idea that maybe while painting 1 was a fraud, painting 2 might actually be real.

Only in woo do people compartmentalize like this.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom