Sorry? "Please explain?" Hahaha!

I, for one, have no interest in any 'statements' made by the tag team of Davejc/Cherryjc--which is singularly lacking in credibility, in my view,---of their stance on paedophilia. They lie, prevaricate, edit and confuse--constantly and frequently.

I am, on the other hand, mightily interested in the way they employ the grooming methods of paedophiles, learnt from Davejc's mentor, 'Moses' David Berg of the notorious Children of God to ensnare innocent young people into their cult.


1. Emotional congruence
(1) Paedophiles have been sexually abused in childhood and cope with the experience by the repetition of the offence or by identification with the aggressor*


This one is interesting, are they suggesting that Davejc was abused in childhood as an apology for the his later identification with the aggressor, his mentor, 'Moses' David Berg of the notorious Children of God?

Every paedophile who has ever been caught has used that one as his first excuse/rationalisation. No-one falls for it anymore.

No-one falls for it anymore.

Except Blackhat, of course, who in the space of a few days has turned from a sharp manipulative player into some-one unable to follow a line of thought and now wants everything s-p-e-l-l-e-d o-u-t for her.

Wondering why.
What brought on this fog of brain confusion? Why, the emphasis on Davejc/Cherryjc's use of paedophile grooming methods to keep thir cult going.
Now why would keeping their cult going be of interest and concern to Blackhat?

What the?

I have been on this forum since way back, and don't need you, Stoic, to question my credentials. Go back over the last 500 pages of postings before you attack me like that.

Stoic:

Please refrain from personal attacks.

If you want a make a point, fine, but it doesn't need to be in the form of a personal attack.

Thanks, moderator.

Now why would keeping their cult going be of interest and concern to Blackhat?....and Malcolm?

Blackhat could always be just another "double agent", I suppose.....rather like me. (Like to see McKay put out of action....but for reasons that are credible and verifiable, not simply for hearsay accusations of "association"....)....as I've often hoped that if they (the remaining JC's) were able to remove McKay from power that they'd be able to yet make something "positive" out of the whole thing, somehow.....sadly I fear not....the cancer(in their minds) is too deep!...I question whether they'll be able to keep it up and running anywhere as long as "K" and the others, after the split in '96.

I agree with you Stoic that McKay's "grooming" techniques have disturbing parallels in the techniques of sex offenders,...however, does "mandatory reporting" predate the contact with "B".....to me it would seem not, as the relevant act dates from 1998

CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS (CARE AND PROTECTION) ACT 1998 - SECT 27 Mandatory reporting 27 Mandatory reporting

(1) This section applies to:

(b) a person who holds a management position in an organisation the duties of which include direct responsibility for, or direct supervision of, the provision of health care, welfare, education, children’s services, residential services, or law enforcement, wholly or partly, to children.

(Presumably an "Apostle of God" in the act of running his cult, would satisfy the requirements of "direct responsibility" and "direct supervision"....)

.....Blackhats observations of McKay's behaviour being possibly morally reprehensible(reckless endangerment), but without being "illegal"(under Criminal Law that is..a civil suit might still have some grounds) would appear legally credible. I agree with Stoic that not a word that McKay might say (either as "McKay" or as "Cherry") have a whit of credibility....however the comments made by "K" in regard to the issue, do deserve consideration.


"Cherry"s defence of child sex offenders is yes, (as always) intellectually spurious.....and ignorant of the universe external to the little world of the JC's.


CRIMES (SERIOUS SEX OFFENDERS) ACT 2006 - SECT 3 Objects of Act (3) Objects of Act

(1) The primary object of this Act is to provide for the extended supervision and continuing detention of serious sex offenders so as to ensure the safety and protection of the community.
(2) Another object of this Act is to encourage serious sex offenders to undertake rehabilitation.

Quote
Malcolm Wesley WREST
...I question whether they'll be able to keep it up and running anywhere as long as "K" and the others, after the split in '96.

In point of fact, Mal, the split took place on Good Friday in 1998, not 1996. Just in the interest of accuracy...

(Thank-you for the correction there Zeusor.....can you remember how long "K" and friends, kept the community up and running post - McKay?)


While David is being so kind as to "explain" for us all, that behaviour of his that we have all judged so harshly it seems...

.....perhaps he could elucidate this little matter!

Last Monday morning, unable to sleep due to protracted, ongoing "calls of nature" (too much rich turkey meat and stuffing, and the copious Bicardi I imbibed at a Boxing Day party, the day before, I fear)....with little else to do, I logged onto the the JC website,....David was online(at 5:30 a.m. Aust time)....thinking to myself that I might as well wait and see what he was about to post, I waited until he logged off three quarters of an hour later (at approx 6:15 a.m.)...and found....NOTHING! Is there a "delay in the transmission" here? David had been on the thing for likely an hour or more and hadn't posted a thing!

Well David, if you wouldn't mind, as you've been so good as to desperately "account for" any association that you may have (of course unknowingly)had with serial child sex offenders, could you kindly also tell me why you were awake in the wee hours of Monday morning, staring at a computer screen, into which you ultimately declined to enter any data...(psychotically and frantically "editing" out, perhaps, anything that might be used to "disprove" you, or to impugn your "character" at some future point?)

Were you reliving "old victories"? ...reminiscing over days "of yore", when your cult "ringed" the globe with it's operation in four continents. .........
YES! ...you know, the "ring" of power...when you wielded the "ring", and your malevolence was all powerful....now those nasty, ungrateful folk have stolen the "ring" of power from you....haven't they....not they deserve it of course...it was all yours in the first place, wasn't it!, ...but the computer and the memories it affords you, is at least one way that you can relive the "glorious past"...is that why you wake at the ungodliest of hours, to sullenly stare into the screen and so to be able to glumly recall all that was once "precious", your very expression no doubt becoming ever more "twisted" by the hideous envy and hatred for others, at work inside you....all for the sake of your "precious"...!

(My, my....I wonder how that lifestyle might be impacting upon you mentally...!) [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/28/2010 11:58PM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

'I have been on this forum since way back, and don't need you, Stoic, to question my credentials'

Simply asking a question, Blackhat, as you have previously asked me very personal questions--which I answered.

Two anonymous posters on a public discussion board, I claim no credentials. I don't think that you have claim to any either.