Dear Greycell,

As I assume that you are acting on behalf of “Sisi in Canada”, I would strongly advise you to caution her against any involvement with the JesusChristians:

I note that you ask:

What is the Rick Ross/ Malcom connection and why the ongoing feuds? Why not have your beliefs and let others have theirs. Why the love of fighting? Why does it seem the posts on this forum and others are just filled with hate and bitterness and snide remarks?

I'm concerned for someone I care about. I'd like answers before this person gets into anything they cannot get out of.

In Davids’ patently dishonest reply, which you may view for yourself, if you haven't already…. [welikejesus.com]

Your questions seem to indicate that you are widely read outside of this forum too. So have you read where Malcolm (for example) has said (several times) that he enjoyed a very positive relationship with me while in the community, but that he believes the rot set in after he left? Have you read where Malcolm has expressed a love relationship with his rifle, and his desire to use it to kill other people? I mean I'm talking about words straight from the mouth of someone who now talks of me as being totally without hope, sub-human, demonic, fit only for the worst sufferings of hell. I'm not asking you to even LISTEN to what I am saying in my own defence. I'm asking you to listen to MALCOLM (and others) with a critical ear. I would be considered a monster if I were to go so far as to say that Malcolm "has problems". And much the same has happened when I've said of others (e.g. Brian) that they have problems. Yet you seem to have taken these guys seriously with just about everything that they have said. I am surprised that you have not asked whether it is true that we eat babies, as cannibalism is just about the only crime that did not appear in your list of questions.


As I don't contribute to the JC forum (I'll consider it when I see Kevin and Apostate (two other prominent ex-members) reinstated without thier views subject to predatory editing....)...kindly allow me Greycell to speak on my own behalf here....

The “Cannibalism” jibe is simply a ploy to deceive you into doubting your right to be asking the questions you are….(I’ll presume that you can see right through this….)

To address some specific points concerning me.....

David was indeed once “human” and there was certainly a time when I would have once considered him one of my best friends.....

I have NEVER stated that I believed the “rot set in” after I left…..this is a fabrication intended to persuade you that I have become "embittered" with time.....I'll again assume that you have the intelligence to be able to read through cheap "smear campaigns"....

(….the “rot” did indeed set in for the wider group as David became more and more psychotically self-absorbed….(an accusation that yes, his own mother made of him, in his teenage years!!)….a narcissism that came to be increasingly reflected in the policies and practices of the Christians…. the last few years of my stay in the JesusChristians were the ongoing torment of wondering why I just didn't fit into "Gods Kingdom"....a deliberately manipulative strategy on the part of David McKay, that seeks to forever foment self-doubt in those who question what goes on in the name of "God")

David McKay to my mind is just nothing other than another “David Koresh” ….in the making. There have been plenty of false prophets like him before and and I’m sad to say that it is likely that there will be more to come.

Have you read where Malcolm has expressed a love relationship with his rifle, and his desire to use it to kill other people?

The episode David refers to here is in the early pages of this thread (search for it if you care)….it is plainly written in humour…I do not own any nature of fire-arm…I have never expressed a desire to “kill other people”….It is malicious misrepresentation, pure and simple. Ask David to furnish the quote (WITH the full context) on which he bases this opinion....if he delays or refuses to so, it is evidence that he has lied to you, in the belief that you would be unable to contradict him.....I'd suggest that you NOT trust the word of such a blatant fiend....and I advise you further to point this out to Sisi.

On the contrary, this attempt to belittle me, should be instructive of the nature of the “man” Sisi is being slowly led to believe, is a (self-described) Apostle of God.

I mean I'm talking about words straight from the mouth of someone who now talks of me as being totally without hope, sub-human, demonic, fit only for the worst sufferings of hell.

David McKay is criminally insane. (While I am unsure of your faith “greycell”, it is accurate that on current performance that I personally believe that David McKay would only be fit for “the worst sufferings of hell”)….David would, if given the chance, take Sisi into his fold where she would then, for a pittance, be expected to donate years of her life selling his literature and enticing others into membership, while her mind would be surreptitiously poisoned against you and any other family or friends who questioned her subjection to McKay.

“Joe” (“groomed” while he was a minor)is a prime example of the “fruit” of David McKays’ teachings….would you like to see Sisi bear the same relationship to you that Joe now bears to those who raised him?

Attempts will be made to circumvent your influence (Sisi will be communicated with privately and assured that your opposition is really just due to your obstruction of the "work of God"…and thus she will also be advised that she shouldn’t let you know that she is still in contact with the JesusChristians….she will be progressively fed “false dilemmas”…(“You can only serve God (read subservience to Mckay or his lackeys) or money”….he who does not hate his mother or father cannot be my(i.e. McKays) disciple…in order to convince her to take a step of “faith” into the abyss of isolation and suppressed fears that are life of the individual Jesus Christians. She would be taught that any unhappiness or dissatisfaction that she has, is simply the promptings of the Devil, …that to leave the JesusChristians would mean that she has backslidden and betrayed the faith…..Sisa will be humiliated in public and brow-beaten by her “elders” in “grievance meetings” (and told to starve herself in “prayerful fasts) if she resists the changes that will be progressively imposed upon her…..

There are no trust funds, independent auditing, judicial independence, secret ballots (those who don't toe David's line are thus readily identified)....the JesusChristians are essentially a fascist organization in ideology and operation....those who identify with the "Fuhrer" make the grade for long term membership.....Christian principles...are simply the sheeps' clothing for someone who has all alone just fervently desired a "cult following" to call his very own.....

“Pleasant” communication with you, on the JC site, is simply a means to an ends…the goal is Sisi’s membership….if you can be duped long enough, to prevent you from persuading her to reconsider joining, then you will be….it is an “absolutist” philosophy…as the JC are “saving” souls from “damnation” and directing them to “eternal life”…any fabrication or dishonesty they employ along the way can be “ultimately” justified in their own eyes....

Why don’t you ask after Betty in Kenya (a former member) and then enquire if you may have her fathers’ contact details, in order to verify whatever "tale" the JC’s may think they can tell you….

As David has admonished you in the meantime though.... Please listen to Malcolm



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2009 12:47AM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

To return to a (hackneyed) theme on David's part,

(again I quote David here from his website, carping how unreasonably I view him)

I mean I'm talking about words straight from the mouth of someone who now talks of me as being totally without hope, sub-human, demonic, fit only for the worst sufferings of hell. I'm not asking you to even LISTEN to what I am saying in my own defence. I'm asking you to listen to MALCOLM (and others) with a critical ear. I would be considered a monster if I were to go so far as to say that Malcolm "has problems".

David here is attempting to stare down those who accuse him with disingenuous protests of innocence.....the substantive issues in law and ethics that David is guilty of (misrepresentation, gain through deceit, the inculcation of hatred towards former family and friends...) stand unanswered and thus "my problems" whatever they may be, in no sense reduce the seriousness of what is alleged against him...

While all things are possible for God, UNLESS God himself chooses to do so, I would think that David certainly is "without hope".....nor does the allegorical use of monikers on my part, in any way diminish the nature of what is charged against him....and as from David's perspective "crime pays", I would personally see that the chances of him ever seriously altering his behaviour are remote...

...hence I must respectfully differ from those who think that "negotiation" will lead to any nature of improvement......David in no way suffers from "persecution" other than that which he has created for the purposes of his own (attempted) self-aggrandizement...and to rail against proceedings that seek to effect the operation of law upon him (Bobby Kelly, a minor that the JC's hoped to convert to the cause , for example was NOT returned to the care of his legal guardian, at the time the legal guardian first requested that return.... whipping those who cannot seek redress from you... extorting your critics into silence....making false claims in court) is transparently duplicitous!

David is only a "monster" in the sense that he is a out and out predator, prostituting the Christian scriptures, in order to manipulate those with ideals to his own sick purposes (of selling him!!)...not, heaven forbid, a flesh and blood monster.....

I've been advised for "safetys sake" not to humiliate David....yet while I'd consider David effectively "soul dead" ..... what with a little reanimation of the dead tissue, might God through the agency of another human actor be yet able to make of a former mass of lifeless tissues....I acknowledge that I really cannot forsee what changes in David may be wrought by others in due course



...it's only that, you know...well look!....given that David gets into such a song and dance when I by way of simile, label him a "monster"......

.....doesn't that lead one to wonder, just a little...

.....exactly what sort of song and dance David could get into AS a monster...[www.youtube.com]

(Just avoid any unsettling incidents with any stage lights, at all costs, though!......or he could return to type!!)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2009 03:42AM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

Today I come writing with a story to tell all of you, a story about The Man Who Thought That He Was Dead.

This man firmly believed he was dead, even though he was a living, normally–functioning human being. Well, his wife persuaded him to visit a psychiatrist, who tried in vain to convince him that he was in fact alive. Who wants to be married to a dead guy? The wife argued.

The psychiatrist hit upon a plan. In order to help this poor soul, the psychiatrist realized that he had to introduce the man to one fact that would contradict the belief that he held, that belief being that he was dead. The psychiatrist decided to prove to the man that dead men do not bleed.

So he showed the man medical reports and scientific evidence that dead men do not bleed. He took the man to a hospital and they witnessed an operation together, so that the man could see that living people bleed when cut. Next they went to the country morgue, and the man witnessed an autopsy, seeing that the corpse did not shed blood when incised.

After thoroughly convincing the man that dead men do not bleed, the psychiatrist took out a pin and pricked the man’s finger.

When the man saw the drop of blood trickle down his finger, his eyes bugged out. "Ha!" he cried, "Dead men do bleed after all!"

In a cult, abusive organization, or abusive relationship it does not matter if the information presented is true. If it is negative about the group or any member of the group, then you cannot say it. Usually such negative information will be will be labeled as slander, and if one persists in speaking it or writing it one can be disciplined severely, ultimately with expulsion from the group, or, if one is an outsider speaking ill about or being at all critical of the group, one can be demonized, dehumanized, poked fun at, humiliated, or what have you.

They're just too far gone, most of them, they have passed the psychological point of no return, and will not leave the group (or abandon the group mindset) no matter what happens. They are ALL just too personally invested in the group and have too much of an interest in believing in the group and its mission to just simply walk away.

I think that most of these poor souls would still believe in the JCs and its leadership no matter what evidence you provided them with to try and show them that DM is a phony.

Mormons and their devotion to Joseph Smith and the LDS Church are the first parallel example that comes to mind. You could put evidence, absolute proof that Joseph Smith was a fraud right before their eyes and they'd still hold to Mormonism as their religion. You could show them the proof that the Book of Abraham was not really translated from Abraham's writings "written by his own hand upon papyrus" and you could show them the proof that the BOM was plagiarized from a book by one Soloman Spaulding and they'd still believe in Mormonism.

Why? Because of the psychological principle of confirmation bias, aka Tolstoy Syndrome.

To put a fine point on what I am trying to say, trying to somehow get through to DM and his lackeys with logic and reasson is like writing to the waking dead.

Russian writer Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910), who in 1897 wrote:

I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their life.

A related Tolstoy quote is:

The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.

That's funny, that clip, Mal. And Cherry would be DM's Igor.

Dear zeuszor,

(Nice to have you back!)....thank you....yes it is a classic clip, from a classic old movie, isn't it!

Roland might play the part of Igor more persuasively, although a few of the other long term members would be fighting him for the role...

....There is always a chance that Cherry might still pack her bags and leave..(Roland and many of the others are no longer capable of imaging a world without McKay).....she's threatened to do so (and has done so once) in the past!...however on those occasions...surprise, surprise!!... "nice David" miraculously appears and somehow convinces her to return....

God knows why though!....(battered wife syndrome?)...I presume that she doesn't believe anyone else would have her, although I suspect that she may find some of her own children fairly welcoming, if she chose not to keep such bad company!!

At this point, since Cherry, Joe, Alf, and the rest have made public statements praising the Jesus Christians community (just as the character of Robert in the short film made a public statement praising The Wave) it will be much harder for any of them to admit that DM is abusive. It is humiliating to have to "eat one's words" and Robert/Casey/Joe/Alf/Cherry/any of them for that matter will more than likely redefine DM's abuses as "discipline" designed to improve the student/Jesus Christian who was hit or otherwise mistreated.

This is very much like what happens with the woman who is abused, physically or otherwise, by her husband. I see it as being exactly what has happened to Cherry. Having expressed her love for DM and having committed herself to living with him and being a part of their group "for better or for worse" she finds it impossible to entertain the thought that he could and would deliberately hurt her. So she redefines the abuse, and views it either as discipline to make her a better wife and mother, or as a punishment she deserves for failing to please her husband.

It would be very difficult at best for Cherry to leave the JCs at this point, IMO. But with God, all things are possible.

Thanks Mal, it's good to be here. More thoughts:

DM derives pleasure from manipulating people, period. If he figures he can take someone down the garden path by exploiting some ambiguity of language, then he will. But if that doesn't work, he has no problem with out and out deceit. It doesn't matter to him, the only point is to get a reaction. His behaviour is similar to that of serial murders, who, once in custody, pretend to wish to divulge information about unsolved crimes, but really don't want anything but attention. He loves to make folks dance. He isn't concerned with his own credibility, just with exerting control over other people, whether it's by enraging them, or deceiving them, or as he must do in his work exploiting people's misery, feigning empathy. The only goal for him is to get a response that he feels he controlled. It's all about control and nothing about dialogue with DM.

Dear Zeusor,

Some very good points!!

Alas I fear you are by and large, correct..."long termers" have made such heavy psychological commitments to the JesusChristians, that it no longer even matters to them whether or not David is actually "right" or "accurate" or "virtuous" in any way....the terms themselves now, just fail to register (Loading the language as Lifton put it!)....

However, I do see a little hope in that;

As you point out, any will of her own, or vestigal spark of conscience, may well now have died out in Cherry decades ago....however David himself tells us that he's still a little nervous of Joes and Alf's ultimate loyalty by the fact that he feels the needs to "reward" them with tidbits (the meaningless title of "leader")....

And as you note Zeusor, David is really only interested in the exercise of power over others, by whatever means he can..(thus we can "read" him by referencing his actions to his own manipulative goals)..and David yet seems to still be feeding the occasional "carrot" to Joe and Alf,

(whereas Jeremy or Roland can just be goaded to comply with whatever "sticks" may be at hand)....

Whoever David takes for granted (e.g. Cherry) are indeed, possibly "lost" for good, but those he treats a little "humanely" still have some prospects for escape in my opinion.

The "public statements" they have all made will one day be embarrassing soliloquys, but they are ultimately merely words....which can just be withdrawn in good time....

...I would have probably been prepared to have done exactly the same myself once...

....(...but just ask my opinion NOW, won't you!)

Can someone post the link to the full version of the Whipping trial online. It no longer available at Fox news.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/15/2009 06:15AM by matilda.

[www.youtube.com]

It was posted here about a year and a half ago.