Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
matilda
()
Date: August 15, 2009 09:17PM
Quote
Malcolm Wesley WREST
I strongly agree with Yasmin AND I know that Zeuszor has the maturity not to release information to those who do not need to view it.
Again, I must disagree with Offended that any information be "removed".....(corrections of the data that you claim was inaccurate will now be researched and made)...however just as clearly that information should not be carelessly released at all...
We do all of course share concerns over "protecting the innocent"
...regrettably (perhaps unbelievably for you)...your mother is NOT the only person in the world affected by the fraud that McKay perpetuates....
There are those who could potentially be duped into membership of the JesusChristians who must also be taken into account...
...hence, the "innocent" need to be protected from the deceit with which McKay would seek to entrap them (prostituted scripture, manipulative language, progressively poisoned relations with anyone external to the cult such as immediate family)
Your "concerns" Offended reflect your bias that David McKay is simply "misunderstood" and that no-one who spends time with David McKay really "suffers" in any fashion
I am not aware that you have ever acknowledged that David McKay is an utterly unscrupulous individual who preys on the idealism of those far younger than him, seeking to entrap them in years of unpaid servitude, "selling" him...
I have yet to hear of your anguish over the trauma many have suffered through their associations with McKay down through the years....
If you wish to be taken seriously, I would welcome hearing such....
I also note, that your mother had the goodness to write to David (while I was ensnared in the cult) and berate him for what he was doing...David deliberately read this letter aloud to me, and others in the group (to demonstate to us the "sacrifices" he was making, having to "dump" his "systemite" mother!)
As a consequence of the your mothers' efforts, I too have a "personal relationship" with your mother (she "communicated" with me)....please STAY OUT of the relationship I share with your mother....Its' a private matter that I don't want you to interfere with.....I will share that letter (page 187 of this thread I believe)...whenever I choose to....that is a matter between your mother and I....please DO NOT interfere with our relationshipl!!
AND, (as you repeatedly request), I will personally try to use my "influence" to prevent the release of any information inimical to the rights of privacy of your mother or any other party
Most importantly, I see that David himself has told us what he "thinks" about this "secret dossier"....(though his toadie, Glenn as recently as last night the 15th Aug 2009)
Would the media outlets even want this information.one has to wonder how many other people have seen this information. I think brian needs to cough up all the places he sent this information too.so they can be contacted and advised to shred the info. With all that info one could only imagine the identity fraud that could occur.speaking out is one thing but is anyone apart from mcrob going to act?[jcs.xjcs.org]
THUS, we now know that (through the transparent manipulation attempted here)
David is desperately interested in knowing who has this information and wants to "neutralize" it in any way that he can. Naturally he needs to first know who has it. David is also very concerned that it would affect his ability to draw attention to himself through the media.
....and CONSEQUENTLY, we (discreetly) persevere with "secret dossiers", in whatever shape or fashion, that might take.
(For those unfamiliar with the background, here
Poor widdle Glen, is an individual independant of the JC's who has NEVER met anyone of Davids' critics or gone to the trouble to verify their accounts....but Glenn, lacking "love and understanding" in his life....and needing to feel "special" somehow, hence on account of having met David once, who smiled through his fangs and made Glenn feel some "warmth and acceptance.....Glenn now relays information to David about the activities of those who are critical of him and passes on what David wants to say in other forums in order to poison the debate therein...)
Malcolm,
Will keep this brief.
The McKay family have a right to their privacy.
You are aware of a letter that Alice wrote to her son.
His siblings may have made similar representations without your knowledge.
Whatever the case, his parents and siblings deserve some respect and privacy.
What legitimate use could their personal details be to anyone, member of potential?
What legitimate use could your parents/ siblings addresses, telephone numbers and banking details be to anyone,member or potential?
None! It is outrageous to suggest otherise. It is abusive to violate someone's privacy and circulate their details like this.
I think you would feel just as outraged, if your siblings addresses, telephone numbers etc were fowarded to a litany of agencies and media outlets.
I agree with Offended that it should stop. It should not have happened in the first place.
The current JC's and their founders also have a right to their privacy.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: August 15, 2009 11:07PM
The main purpose of my going about this research, was to get the media and government (particularly agencies like Interpol, the FBI, etc.) interested in pursuing the cult. This purpose has been achieved.
Now that various cult-education groups, apologetics groups, law enforcement agencies etc. in my country have become interested in investigating McKay and the Jesus Christians, they are conducting their own investigations and have the ability to confirm the accuracy of the information that they collect.
Therefore, I am no longer going to distribute any material.
Now that various cult-education groups, apologetics groups, law enforcement agencies etc. in my country have become interested in investigating McKay and the Jesus Christians, they are conducting their own investigations and have the ability to confirm the accuracy of the information that they collect.
Therefore, I am no longer going to distribute any material.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Malcolm Wesley WREST
()
Date: August 16, 2009 04:22PM
Dear Matilda,
Will keep this brief.
My family have not:
Duped individuals into spending unpaid years of their lives "selling" a cult,
where they "lived" for a pittance in order to pour every cent they had into the "coffers" of McKay
Engaged in organized welfare fraud, and generally perverted the course of justice wherever possible
Whipped individuals, defrauded people, blackmailed and extorted those seeking access to their family
If they had,
They WOULD absolutely lose any guarantee to the absolute "rights of privacy", that they might otherwise enjoy,
As "privacy" would be a MINOR issue in relation to the crimes alleged against them, (hence crime figures have their "privacy" abridged by the police)
..and in NO SENSE of the word is it "hypocritical" or "unreasonable" for me to advocate having (and sometime using) dossiers of information on McKay,
But your "caution" to me is both hypocritical and unreasonable...thus while,
Zeusor has kindly offered (in general) to no longer forward such information,
I would however imagine that I too hold the documents in question (Zeusor has forwarded some files to me that I have actually never opened..)
You can forget all about Zeusor....but if you'd care to make some "clever" reply to me now,
I will personally, ASAP send off the offending information MYSELF to some destination of "ill-repute"
...and you can just have a little converation with Rob about that, for all I damn well care!
....just try me!!
Will keep this brief.
My family have not:
Duped individuals into spending unpaid years of their lives "selling" a cult,
where they "lived" for a pittance in order to pour every cent they had into the "coffers" of McKay
Engaged in organized welfare fraud, and generally perverted the course of justice wherever possible
Whipped individuals, defrauded people, blackmailed and extorted those seeking access to their family
If they had,
They WOULD absolutely lose any guarantee to the absolute "rights of privacy", that they might otherwise enjoy,
As "privacy" would be a MINOR issue in relation to the crimes alleged against them, (hence crime figures have their "privacy" abridged by the police)
..and in NO SENSE of the word is it "hypocritical" or "unreasonable" for me to advocate having (and sometime using) dossiers of information on McKay,
But your "caution" to me is both hypocritical and unreasonable...thus while,
Zeusor has kindly offered (in general) to no longer forward such information,
I would however imagine that I too hold the documents in question (Zeusor has forwarded some files to me that I have actually never opened..)
You can forget all about Zeusor....but if you'd care to make some "clever" reply to me now,
I will personally, ASAP send off the offending information MYSELF to some destination of "ill-repute"
...and you can just have a little converation with Rob about that, for all I damn well care!
....just try me!!
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Blackhat
()
Date: August 16, 2009 04:27PM
Dave has posted some things on his site about a "how do I get in contact with one of our relatives" phone call to one of his brothers, and suggested it may have come from me, or someone connected with "the dossier". Well it didn't come from me!
I want to make sure he reads something his other brother has posted on the XJC Forum about this:
Yes, Dave, people who have normal communications and families ask each other for updates on contacts. That's how we organise family and old-friends occasions and celebrations throughout the years, and as each year goes by.
You seem to be left with one lifetime Gilligan's Oceanic Folly!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/2009 04:34PM by Blackhat.
I want to make sure he reads something his other brother has posted on the XJC Forum about this:
Quote
mcrob
Of course,,,,,, but wait,,,,, Dave? Don't you have another daughter-in-law? And I don't ask this question simply to suggest your accusations that McRob and Kevin are trying to get more information MAY be just a guess. I state this because I KNOW your "almost certainly"s and your "Of course"s are WAY off base. Sorry to dissappoint you, but Kevin and I are not conspiring against you, and though I didn't know about the phone call until you mentioned it above, I do know about other family communications taking place totally unrelated to anything Jesus Christianie (is that a word?) in nature which explain this phone call. But,,,, the poor timing on Brian's part is going to throw a shroud of suspicion on any communication between family members for awhile, and I do not fault Dave in the slightest for hinting that there might be foul play involved. But I think jumping on an accusation of me and Kevin goes a little farther than just plain wise caution.
Yes, Dave, people who have normal communications and families ask each other for updates on contacts. That's how we organise family and old-friends occasions and celebrations throughout the years, and as each year goes by.
You seem to be left with one lifetime Gilligan's Oceanic Folly!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/2009 04:34PM by Blackhat.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Blackhat
()
Date: August 16, 2009 05:21PM
And another thing...(from your brother)
Quote
mcrob
I can think of only one response to Dave's fuzzy logic accusation. Paranoid delusion.
Either 1) Dave now disregards any attempts to be even remotely truthful in a desperate attempt to increase the size of his grand conspiracy theory. Being polite in my rebukes to Brian is an indication I am part of the grand conspiracy? This one made me laugh. I sorry if everyone can't be as rude as you Dave. I'll try harder next time.
or 2) Dave really does believe the paranoid delusion he is putting out, in which case someone needs to get him some serious help.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Blackhat
()
Date: August 16, 2009 07:38PM
So once again we have an interesting situation. The JC's have been banned from the XJC Forum. But they want to ask XJC people for what they have in Brian's dossier.
OK guys, one suggestion. Why not go over there and ask?
I am sure that unto him who asks, it will be given....
Go on, go over there and ask....
That's the kind of people we are!
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/2009 07:42PM by Blackhat.
OK guys, one suggestion. Why not go over there and ask?
I am sure that unto him who asks, it will be given....
Go on, go over there and ask....
That's the kind of people we are!
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/2009 07:42PM by Blackhat.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
luckylady
()
Date: August 17, 2009 02:24AM
Isn't it true that Jesus said he was the "Truth"? Why is it so hard for REAL Christian to see the truth???
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Malcolm Wesley WREST
()
Date: August 18, 2009 09:23AM
Dear Matilda,
I apogize for the "abruptness" in my last posting.....
Behind the scenes there has been a LOT of private emailing...to address the issues you raise (hence I didn't take too kindly to being taken to task over my own alleged indiscretion.....as far as I know, I have a COMPLETE SET of the "secret dossiers" which I have never even as much as opened!....I will though, do so, in the event that they are required to support a criminal claim against McKay. I reserve my RIGHT to retain them.)
It is NOT an "abuse of privacy" to lay criminal charges against someone which must then be substantiated.
(The information that Rob has complained of being released (his late fathers SSN number?) would likely never be necessary for such substantiation....however if there ever was a "conflict of interest" in some matter, I would potentially release details, only after initially discussing the matter with him.)
Not is it an "abuse of privacy" to release suspected information of concern, to responsible Govt. authorities or to recognized and supervised media organizations that are themselves subject to wider laws of "verification" and "due process".
It may be an "abuse of privacy" to release some particular nature of information to unconnected individuals, or to connected individuals who somehow stand to "gain".
Sisi (and others) were of course "connected" in the sense that Brian was concerned that they were about to be duped into turning every cent they owed over to McKay and cronies and to commit themselves to years of unpaid servitude as "newsboys" for McKay. You of course may argue that they are still not entitled to be provided information about McKay, even in this respect. However I believe that Brian, considered himself to be acing in the interest of others, and was in no sense, "malicious".
Sisi it appears, loves being "important"...hence she is relaying (on drip feed) all that Brian may have once discussed with her....that's nice for her to bask in the (ever so brief) adulation of David McKay.....she is of course assuming that everything she was fed by Brian, did not of course, already contain some deliberate "bloopers" (put their earlier by PE in the event of such a scenario)....but that of course is another story....let McKay continue to wallow....and Sisi big note herself (once her "usefulness" has expired, she will find herself dumped out in the cold).....I find the shallowness of it all amusing!.....
I apogize for the "abruptness" in my last posting.....
Behind the scenes there has been a LOT of private emailing...to address the issues you raise (hence I didn't take too kindly to being taken to task over my own alleged indiscretion.....as far as I know, I have a COMPLETE SET of the "secret dossiers" which I have never even as much as opened!....I will though, do so, in the event that they are required to support a criminal claim against McKay. I reserve my RIGHT to retain them.)
It is NOT an "abuse of privacy" to lay criminal charges against someone which must then be substantiated.
(The information that Rob has complained of being released (his late fathers SSN number?) would likely never be necessary for such substantiation....however if there ever was a "conflict of interest" in some matter, I would potentially release details, only after initially discussing the matter with him.)
Not is it an "abuse of privacy" to release suspected information of concern, to responsible Govt. authorities or to recognized and supervised media organizations that are themselves subject to wider laws of "verification" and "due process".
It may be an "abuse of privacy" to release some particular nature of information to unconnected individuals, or to connected individuals who somehow stand to "gain".
Sisi (and others) were of course "connected" in the sense that Brian was concerned that they were about to be duped into turning every cent they owed over to McKay and cronies and to commit themselves to years of unpaid servitude as "newsboys" for McKay. You of course may argue that they are still not entitled to be provided information about McKay, even in this respect. However I believe that Brian, considered himself to be acing in the interest of others, and was in no sense, "malicious".
Sisi it appears, loves being "important"...hence she is relaying (on drip feed) all that Brian may have once discussed with her....that's nice for her to bask in the (ever so brief) adulation of David McKay.....she is of course assuming that everything she was fed by Brian, did not of course, already contain some deliberate "bloopers" (put their earlier by PE in the event of such a scenario)....but that of course is another story....let McKay continue to wallow....and Sisi big note herself (once her "usefulness" has expired, she will find herself dumped out in the cold).....I find the shallowness of it all amusing!.....
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: August 18, 2009 09:40AM
Was anything ever sent out about Sisi? No, nothing ever was, and so none of this is really any of her business anyway.
It looks like she has had a good read of stuff she is shocked about!
She has posted there over 160 times in just the last month or so. So who is the obsessive one?
Better IMO to leave Sisi alone though, Mal. Don't antagonize her, that is my suggestion.
She, like I, would be far better off trying to forget about the JCs, leaving the whole sorry mess behind, and focusing on more important and uplifting pursuits.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/18/2009 09:55AM by zeuszor.
It looks like she has had a good read of stuff she is shocked about!
She has posted there over 160 times in just the last month or so. So who is the obsessive one?
Better IMO to leave Sisi alone though, Mal. Don't antagonize her, that is my suggestion.
She, like I, would be far better off trying to forget about the JCs, leaving the whole sorry mess behind, and focusing on more important and uplifting pursuits.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/18/2009 09:55AM by zeuszor.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Malcolm Wesley WREST
()
Date: August 18, 2009 12:38PM
I would possibly quite enjoy "antagonizing" Sisi Zeuszor, but no, I agree with you....leave her to the "gentleman" who lied to the world she was tied up in a locked up basement somewhere....company she perhaps thoroughly deserves...
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.