Quote
Dave McKay
Hey Muppet (or was that puppet?), here's your chance to say something specific. You say that all of this stuff was negative. How about if you hit me right now with the absolute most damning and provable evidence against me or the Jesus Christians... right here... right now. Your chance to tell the world.

Just saying that you saw a bunch of stuff that made us look bad doesn't really let the rest of the readers know what it was. You see, on the whole, the media has to answer legally for stuff that they print, and so mostly what they do is rely on innuendo. It's not nice, but viewed up close, it has no substance.

The one exception was the Guardian's claim that we kidnapped Bobby Kelly. THAT was what I was getting at. We never kidnapped Bobby, and no charges were ever laid. It was all a beat-up from the start. We had written permission from Bobby's grandmother from the start, and his grandmother was actually instructed NOT to even tell us that she had changed her mind. She was coaxed into signing papers to make Bobby a ward of the state because she had been convinced by Graham Baldwin that she would never see Bobby alive again unless she did exactly as he told her. She apologised for that later... but it was too late.

So go on, tell us the worst statement that was there in the media, apart from the lie about us kidnapping Bobby. And then let me squirm!

Richard,
One thing puzzles me here.,
You say ' DM says she apologised for that later... but it was too late.'
What a bizarre statement. Who did she apologise to and why was it too late?

Dave, I am posting your private emails to me as they represent your divisive agenda of pulling people aside privately to try and silence them somehow. As I said in the email, rather than complain about me privately, how about responding publicly to simple questions?

I paste a copy below:

From: apostate To: Dave McKay Posted: 09-14-2006 11:26 AM Subject: Re: Howdy from Dave
Edit message
Dave McKay wrote:
(quote)Hi Tony. Why so secretive about who you are? We've seen your posts here and elsewhere enough to have worked that out. Did you think we would send thugs to beat you up or something?(end quote)


As I said to Fran. These days you sound so much like the church types you teach against. Look at your above questioning. See how similar it is to those you used to meet in the street demanding to know who you were, where you fellowship, why you are not disclosing all the info they want on demand. I guess you are going to have to deal with a similar response. Who I am is not as important as the discussion on this particular thread.

Regarding the question about my concerns about whether you would send thugs around to see me. Who knows these days Dave! You are into whipping people. From what I see of you it is not long before you engage in justified vigilante action.



Outbox :: Message From: apostate To: Dave McKay Posted: 09-14-2006 03:16 PM Subject: Re: Howdy from Dave
Edit message
Dave McKay wrote:
Dave McKay wrote:
Hi Tony,

(quote)The comparison with churchies is relevant to an extent. Certainly, as you have said, what you say is more significant than who you are. But the difference is that I never once hid from them who I was personally. Their concern was always with some organisational identity, that could then be fed into their computers and judged on the basis of the name rather thann the truth in what was being said.

I haven't been that impressed with your own grasp of the truth, including the dig about us becoming vigilantes. Shows an appalling lack of appreciation for what is really about to happen! You have heard something about a whip and come up with, "You are into whipping people....etc."

Anyway, keep it up Tony. The more exaggerations you make, the sillier you look when people find out the full facts. And on that basis, yes, it is very wise to keep your personal identity secret... not because you are going to be thugged, but because people will see you for the irrational ranter that you are.

Dave (end quote)


It is unlikely you would be impressed with any criticism that comes your way as that would be asking a bit much from you at this point of time. Do you honestly expect me to "appreciate" your plans of a public flogging of someone to preach a message. You actually boast about giving someone lashes in Africa as though it was OK and acceptable. Sick, Dave, sick.

You have never hid who you are? Is that right Dave, or should I call you "Anne" or was that "Anita". Your hypocrisy amazes me to this day.

I notice that you have drawn me away to speak privately as opposed to a public forum... why is that? Everything I said was out in the open. But this is how you work isn't it Dave! I remember you saying once that you can recognise divisive types by their actions of wanting to secretly speak with you. But then I guess you do not want others to see the irrational ranter YOU are.

Till we talk again. Make it public next time, as that is where it started and that would be keeping with your own beliefs about walking in the "light", if you can handle that.

Hello again Matilda, In the vein of of frank and candid communication as Dave says the forum lacks, I posted a response to your question about the JC's receiving govt. benefits at Deakin once before but for some reason it never appeared. The answer was Yes. The honest to whom doctrines was at it highest around this time as it was then that thefts from Deakin university occured by members of his community. Followers would also sign blank withdrawal forms for the treasurer to be able to access their centrelink benefits to be put into a communal pot when they were out of the country.

Dave also receives a carers pension for his wife while living in a govt. housing trust flat. The system he criticises so much certainly takes good care of him.[/quote]


When you first arrived here on the board you announced that you had just been chatting to an ex member. The thought did cross some minds that you may have been on a damage limitation exercise as you generally give a terse warning to an ex member and then cut them off. Xenophone seems to be fresh out and did not recall some of your teachings even though they are probably still very much in his mind. Apostate appears to be out for a long time and has put some distance between you and him. He began a patient dialogue and now it appears you tried to frighten him off with a few quiet words. but it didnt work.
I see a pattern emerging. According to another ex member, you once threatened to excommunicate a couple of your members, because they considered a request from a new reruit. She requested that half of the money she had foresaken be returned, (4 figure sum) because it did in fact belong to her husband and not to herself. She had been encouraged to withdraw it from a joint bank account and was accompanied on a number of trips to the ATM by your members. Something was said about it being 'the devils money'. the couple appeared to the new recruit to be genuinely worried that they would be excommunicated and would not give the money back. In the end the woman grabbed the money from a van and ran off. You then wrote her a high pressure letter and even though she did not stay more than a few weeks with you she was extremely affected by the experience. Difficult to believe that a religious leader would display what was pervceived as greed but it fits the same pattern as reports of events of greed at Deakin, in receiving govt assistance and reports of a carers allowance. It does not fit the framework of someone who claims ' to live by faith' or 'work for 'god and not for money'!

Ex members are beginning to speak out now. The JC's are different to other larger groups. Very few join and very few leave and for this reaon it is easy for anyone who does a bit of research to identify them. One reason few have spoken publicly is because of DM's tendency to behave in the rattling fashion exhibited here in these emails to Apostate. The smaller the group , the more intimidated the follower feels and the longer it takes for them to speak out. Thank you Apostate and Xenophone.[/color:5e94981471]

Quote

Expert view
Dr. Robert Jay Lifton -- author, psychiatrist and professor at the City University of New York -- testified during the Patricia Hearst bank-robbery trial as an expert on ''coercive persuasion.'' This is his ''model of thought reform'':

Environment control: Communication with those outside the group is limited.

Time with the JC's is spent almost 100% with other JC's. Visits to family etc are at least with one other JC

Quote

Mystical manipulation: Prophetic words help the target person become convinced of the higher purpose and special calling of the group.

Revelations from listening times, modified according to the predilections of Mr Mckay, guide the groups new activities and goals. New major projects come from David alone

Quote

Demand for purity: A goal of the group is to bring about change on a global, social or personal level: ''Perfection is possible if the person stays with the group.''

self explanatory

Quote

Cult of confession: The group encourages self-disclosure to members, including admitting sins and imperfections.

there was a practice of keeping a minute by minute diary of thoughts and actions that was required to be submitted to the leader, with fasting and prayer if "sin" was commited

Quote

Sacred science: The group says its perspective is absolutely true and explains everything.

Jesus and David's "sincerity" are the twin cornerstones

Quote

Loaded language: Loaded terms and cliches prejudice thinking.

People are classified as :vipers, pigs, snakes, pharisees, empire builders, time bandits, systemites, goats or sheep

Quote

Doctrine over person: The group's doctrine overrules individual experience.

If it's tracts we are to do, we all must do it. If it's standing in the sewer, we all must do it.

Quote

Dispensing of existence: Salvation is presented as possible only within the group.

The remnant of the faithful. Lip service to the idea that one need not be in the group to be saved, but no suggestions as to other valid groups to join other than the JC's. If one was in development work, you would see someone in the Red Cross suggest someone work with Oxfam if they had an interest in water, or with World Vision if they wanted to do sustainable small scale agriculture in villages. There is no alternative presented to the JC's

This is a very useful way of assessing the group.

quote="cultmalleus"]

Quote

Expert view
Dr. Robert Jay Lifton -- author, psychiatrist and professor at the City University of New York -- testified during the Patricia Hearst bank-robbery trial as an expert on ''coercive persuasion.'' This is his ''model of thought reform'':

Environment control: Communication with those outside the group is limited.

Time with the JC's is spent almost 100% with other JC's. Visits to family etc are at least with one other JC
Private conversations with friends or family members are discouraged. Letters sent to individual JC's are read by leaders and responses often collective.
[/color:a6006df6f6]

Quote

Mystical manipulation: Prophetic words help the target person become convinced of the higher purpose and special calling of the group.

Revelations from listening times, modified according to the predilections of Mr Mckay, guide the groups new activities and goals. New major projects come from David alone
Dreams are recounted and interpreted by leader/ group therby manipulating perceptions. [/color:a6006df6f6]

Quote

Demand for purity: A goal of the group is to bring about change on a global, social or personal level: ''Perfection is possible if the person stays with the group.''

self explanatory
Despite public declarations to the contrary, Dave believes that his group is the only group that have the truth. JC's are discouraged from leaving and beoming renegrades. Many have an instilled fear of 'cultbusters'.

Quote

Cult of confession: The group encourages self-disclosure to members, including admitting sins and imperfections.

there was a practice of keeping a minute by minute diary of thoughts and actions that was required to be submitted to the leader, with fasting and prayer if "sin" was commited
JC's can be 'hotseated' when they are considered to be slipping or rebelling. It is much easier to accept the criticisms quickly because failure to so can result in some extremely high pressured and damaging experiences.
JC's sodeclare their commitment to the virgin army as a percentage on a regular basis.[/color:a6006df6f6]

Quote

Sacred science: The group says its perspective is absolutely true and explains everything.

Jesus and David's "sincerity" are the twin cornerstones

Quote

Loaded language: Loaded terms and cliches prejudice thinking.

People are classified as :vipers, pigs, snakes, pharisees, empire builders, time bandits, systemites, goats or sheep
McKay is very wary of any 'critical thinking and does not allow individuality. He teaches the grou to 'mark those who cause division'. In effect , if a member raises questions after speaking to relatives/ outsiders, they will be encouraged to cut all contact in order to bring about cohesion and fear of outside influences.[/color:a6006df6f6]

Quote

Doctrine over person: The group's doctrine overrules individual experience.

If it's tracts we are to do, we all must do it. If it's standing in the sewer, we all must do it.

Quote

Dispensing of existence: Salvation is presented as possible only within the group.

Recruits 'forsake all' including family , friends, occupation, possessions, study, photos, letters. JC's follow orders, targets, quotas. Food is obtained from bin raiding at supermarkets. When food has gone off, it is sometimes washed in a diluted bleach solution before it is cooked UGH!![/color:a6006df6f6]

The remnant of the faithful. Lip service to the idea that one need not be in the group to be saved, but no suggestions as to other valid groups to join other than the JC's. If one was in development work, you would see someone in the Red Cross suggest someone work with Oxfam if they had an interest in water, or with World Vision if they wanted to do sustainable small scale agriculture in villages. There is no alternative presented to the JC's[/quote]

Hey ex-JCs, please tell us, in detail, exactly what the "Virgin Army" thing is all about. How does it relate to teachings about the 144,000?

Quote
zeuszor
Hey ex-JCs, please tell us, in detail, exactly what the "Virgin Army" thing is all about. How does it relate to teachings about the 144,000?

My understanding of the virgin army is that it draws on teachings from the book of Revelation and both literalises, and symbolises it to make it fit their particular slant. The literal side is that members should remain single, if they have to get married then they are encouraged to not have children. There were a large number of vascetomies happening as result. Children are veiwed as liabilities to the group under this perspective and those couples with children eventually had to leave as their was no real consideration of their needs as family units. As a result, children were also taught by their parents to distribute tracts as young as 4 and 5 years

The 144,000 aspect talks about staying clean and free of sin by abstaining from contact with women, i.e. "virgins". For single members this is literal, but seeing as how Dave and others are married it also has a symbolic interpretation that women represents corrupt church groups or groups.

The 144,000 will be led by the two witnesses eventually. This is where Dave liks to skirt the edge of delusion as he claims he is the annointed one, so it is only a hairbreath away from directly claiming to be one of them. Mind you his "co-founder" terminolgy could also be linked to this line of thinking.

Dave instituted a policy where members had to ask one onether what their percentage of committment to the 144,000 was on daily basis, any less than 100% would bring the inevitable grievance meeting asking for an explanation.

[quote="
Dave McKay wrote:
(quote)Hi Tony. Why so secretive about who you are? We've seen your posts here and elsewhere enough to have worked that out. Did you think we would send thugs to beat you up or something?(end quote)

Dave (end quote)



Hello again Matilda, In the vein of of frank and candid communication as Dave says the forum lacks, I posted a response to your question about the JC's receiving govt. benefits at Deakin once before but for some reason it never appeared. The answer was Yes. The honest to whom doctrines was at it highest around this time as it was then that thefts from Deakin university occured by members of his community. Followers would also sign blank withdrawal forms for the treasurer to be able to access their centrelink benefits to be put into a communal pot when they were out of the country.

Dave also receives a carers pension for his wife while living in a govt. housing trust flat. The system he criticises so much certainly takes good care of him.[/quote


[size=18:b737326205]Dave's veiled threat in the email reveals a lot . He has always boasted that ex members have never criticised him. Now outsiders can see why.
Such an email would trigger the fear instilled in the group and memories of meeting his wrath face to face are awful. He has a way of putting members down!

Dave has alaways denied that group members got benefits boasting that 'we live by faith'. Wrong. The poor group of manipulated puppets do not live by faith, they live in fear of Dave. The email betrays an author who far from being an anointed disciple of Jesus, is rather nasty and a bit of a coward.

So Dave, are you proud of what happened at Deakin ? Australia fair has sheltered and fed you well. How have you repaid her? The bank accounts must be pretty full now. Are they declared anywhere?
No wonder you a re trying to silence Apostate [/size:b737326205]

What exactly happened at Deakin with the thefts and all? I don't understand.

post deleted

Hey Dave McKay: how come you will not reply to my emails and thoughtful questions, man? How come you won't send me any moreof the Restricted Articles?I just want to know, from your own mouth (or fingetips, you know what I mean), 1) what exactly you teach in terms of the Virgin Army and the 144,000, aand 2) whether or not you believe that you are one of the Two Witnesses. Please do not dance around the issue, Sir. A simple yes or no will do nicely. Peace and Love, stay Irie,
B (as in, "B" real.)