Notice how nobody said anything about "brainwashing" except for Cherry. I never used that word to describe anybody, "brainwashed." That word is never used in the article I referenced either. It's an article about conformity, socialization, and how humans are influenced according to their environments.

[welikejesus.com]

You know what? I learned of this man Asch and his experiment while I was watching a documentary about Charles Manson, of all people. The whole doc was about attempting to explain the Manson Family crimes from the point of view of understanding the Family as a cult and Manson as a narcissistic cult leader, from the point of view of psychology and sociology. It was not some slash-em-up exploitation doc. This man Zablocki was interviewed, and offered an explanation of how Manson was able to persuade these young people to help him bring Helter Skelter down and rule the world once they came back from out of The Bottomless Pit and all that. He referenced the Asch experiment as an illustration of the power of humans' need to conform in groups. So then the light bulb goes off and I start reading on Asch, Zablocki, etc.

So it does not matter, the evidence of Cherry's senses, because even if nobody said "brainwashed" or "brainwashing" that's what she wants to read and so that's what she reads. Sue wants to remember that somebody said that McKay and Berg are equally bad because their first names are both Dave, so that's what she remembers. The internal fantasy is preferable to the objective and verifiable reality. Normal modes of logic and cognition go out the window. So Cherry kind of proved Asch's point again. Her need to validate and justify her reality overrode the evidence of her mind and senses, and so she took an article on conformity and socialization and translated it as an article on the scary-sounding "brainwashing."

What difference does it make who is posting under who's name any more? You might as well be talking to David, in any case. Most of them sounded just like David even when he was around, anyway. Though in the JC mind, that is a compliment!

So he is not actively participating in the forums anymore, huh? So I guess that that must mean that he is passively participating. Passive-aggressively participating is more like it.

Speaking of participating, I really ought to know better anymore. Goodbye. (for now)

The Dude Abides!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2008 12:35PM by zeuszor.

Chris said:

I was surprised by how much of what appears in the article was old news to me. As a child I learned about Milgram's experiement, Asch's experiment, the concept of groupthink, and the fundamental attribution error. You can find references to some of these things in our official studies.

My brother, Kevin, was also influenced by this sort of material. I believe it is one of the reasons why Kevin argued so much with almost everything that Dave did for many years before he left the community. He was trying to avoid group think.

[welikejesus.com]

So I started reading again, right? Well, well, well. I stumbled onto something with this Asch thing. That's a good "dot" to connect, you know? Sure McKay knows about Asch, he studied that stuff himself. Duhhh! Why am I surprised to figure this out? I shouldn't be. It explains alot. My God. The implications of this new understanding nauseate me.

[jesuschristians.net]

[jesuschristians.net]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2008 03:08PM by zeuszor.

Dear Blackhat,

If David virtually dictated to Sheri what to write, that would in her "mind" (to use the term rather loosely) justify lying to the world in general, that David was not "actively" participating in the forum....

During the Nullabor walk, David used my name, to have something that HE had written, published (ie. He wrote the piece verbatim and then then put my name on it to ensure it was got press....This tirade of the pretence of honesty within the JeusChristians has a long and ignominious history!!)


BUT wait!....


Words of wisdom from prissy little Miss Chrissy,

I was surprised by how much of what appears in the article was old news to me. As a child (My God! What a precocious learner (or at very least a precocious liar)...could you provide the age at which this startling ability to fathom fundamental psychology was first displayed. I can remember nothing of it, up until the time I left the Jesuschristians, at which point you were 15 years of age I believe...still perhaps this prodigious feat occurred prior to my enslavement...possibly while you were in nappies?) I learned about Milgram's experiement, Asch's experiment, the concept of groupthink, and the fundamental attribution error. (I'm aware that you also learned of Christs instuctions to be "meek", humble ("poor in spirit"), and a "peacemaker"....concepts you learned about and then purposely chose not to practise.) You can find references to some of these things in our official studies. (Yes, by process of a perverted "reverse psychology" they are deliberately mentioned in order to deceptively allay the fears of any potential recurits that you don't actually engage in such behaviour....when of course you actually DO!)

My brother, Kevin, was also influenced by this sort of material. (It's perhaps more appropriate for Kevin to say exactly what he was influenced by....certainly not for someone who stood by and watched her father illegally dismiss Kevin and the rest of the community in Australia for the cash they had on hand and the souls David had entrapped in his servitude overseas)....I believe it is one of the reasons why Kevin argued so much with almost everything that Dave did for many years before he left the community. (Kevin doubtless "expressed his opinions" no more, or no less, with David during the years I wasn't there, than the years I was....you are using a deliberately loaded term "argument" in order to swing the debate here, evidence that you are guilty of the very pyschological chicanery you claim to be so deeply knowledgeable of!) He was trying to avoid group think. (....and you clearly didn't!!)


Another puzzle for me, for me Christine is why your sister Sheri always kept her looks and you didn't.....could it just be all those years of the simmering bitterness and hatred inside you and the perpetual dishonesty you've engaged in down through the decades, the self-righteous "Godliness" as you took every cent that anyone ever had and then stole years from the lives of people like Vicki, following which you threw people like her and her children out on the streets with nothing....I guess that sort of hard-heartedness would eventually be reflected in one's features, wouldn't it....

....but look, all is not lost....as we all understand that David now has enough money from the organ-harvest "cost-reimbursement" to be able to dabble in legal action....(royal you of course never had to donate because of your "blood line" (directly descended from an Apostle....God that's really something isn't it)..)...perhaps if you ask ever so sweetly, David would be prepared to discreetly put a little hard cash (from all those ill-gotten kidneys), behind a few Botox shots for you....then you could at least safely appear in some of those Takatifu Garden snaps again (....well....you could from a distance anyway!!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2008 09:31PM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

They're right, Malcolm. I agree with them over at the ex-JC forum. Bringing Christine's looks into the discussion was irrelevant and is a low blow. Cheap shot. Most people over at the ex-JC forum do not like me or my presence over there because I can get pretty over-the-top and emotive in my postings too and have had to be called out on that tendency many times.

[jcs.xjcs.org]

I've even called them "R2-Dave2 and Cherry-3PO" and compared Cherry to a robot. But I've never gone the way of taking jabs at people's physical beauty or lack of, or outright made fun of any of them. That's simply not cool and if that's not counterproductive toward building friendlier relations with them, then I do not know what is.

OK, there was that time with Casey during the discussion on vegetarianism. I got carried away with that one and apologized. Also I have called the Kronmillers' intelligence into question. But even then, I never implied that they were ugly or anything, just not so bright. And look, I DID use the b-word in that circumstance. I stand corrected.

[jcs.xjcs.org]

Now, understand that I do not have much more regard for them (the McKays who have remained in the cult) than do you. I see them less as victims and more as accomplices. But that is just from my POV and I could be wrong on that point.

Frankly, now that I have mulled it over for a few days, (just my opinion), if the word "brainwashed" ever fairly applied to anybody, it applies to Cherry and Christine, absolutely. But they shouldn't be objects of ridicule for that.



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2008 03:32AM by zeuszor.

Sorry, here's the link to the time when I was ripping on Casey and went too far with it:

[forum.culteducation.com]

* Brainwashing, the application of coercive techniques to change the beliefs or behavior of one or more people, usually for political or religious purposes



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2008 04:42AM by zeuszor.

MORE STUDIES IN SOCIAL PSYCH

[jesuschristians.net]

Losing Your Identity

Each time you agree with someone, you take on a small part of that person's identity; and your own identity bends slightly in favour of the person with whom you agree. If the agreement is very great, the change can be great. This similarity in values, actions, and even appearance is commonly noticed between married couples and between parents and children.

When a person comes in contact with ultimate Truth and yields to it, that person's whole life-style becomes transformed, resulting in a whole new identity. Jesus called it being "born again" or "becoming like a child" once again. Critics call it being brainwashed, becoming a robot, or simply losing your identity.

We've all heard of leaders like Charles Manson and Jim Jones who are apparently able to dominate the minds of their followers; and too much concern about such people can make us afraid to be led by anyone. But fear is the worst dictator of all. And the worst leaders (including Manson and Jones) know how to use it to achieve the very thing their followers fear.... domination over the follower.

If you run in fear from one devil, you go straight into the arms of a worse one. Those who refuse to listen to uncomfortable truths because they fear being controlled often end up trapped in the confines of their own ignorance.

Someone has said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

We have observed with sadness a number of people who felt drawn to us and what we teach, but they eventually ran in fear of "losing their identity." These same people have often ended up becoming slaves to their own irrational fears.

The solution lies neither in total rejection of us, nor in total submission to us, but rather in total submission to "Ultimate Truth". Not truth as we know it, or as you know it, but to Truth "out there" beyond all human limitations.

We have found that, by praying to "Truth" and asking Him (or It, if you prefer) to control our lives, we have developed a confidence that brings immunity to brainwashing by others. We can open our minds, listen humbly, and fully embrace truths from any source without fear of domination, because we are already dominated by a higher Power, which is Truth itself.

Beware of the delusion that tells you that your own mind can act as the final judge on all truth. Truth is bigger than any of us. But you will move closer to Ultimate Truth as you strive for greater honesty about your own shortcomings, and as you accept wholeheartedly the grains of truth that come to you from other sources.

As you do, your identity will change, but it will only change to represent a more informed you.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2008 09:27AM by zeuszor.

Dear Zeusor,

I will endeavour to refrain from further "low blows" as you remark, although I trust that you also took the time to point out on the JC site, that Christine made her puerile remarks about Kevins' inclination towards "argument" (patronizing self-righteousness attempting to justify Davids' "illegal" actions, by his OWN simpering rules) on a forum where she is aware that Kevin is unable to respond....

However, as it is my belief that Christine is able to comment on this forum.....

.....I possible do tend to become a little "careless" in how politely I address her or other Jesus....

The JC forum needs "diversions" from issues of substance (e.g. pouting little Christine batting back the tears at the simply horrid little personal snipes being made while happily seeing Vicki and her children thrown out on the streets with nothing after they gave everything they owned and years of service to the JC's provided Christine can quietly do so without the matter being discussed in public)...

I'm really not even interested in trying to play along with the their "games" (escalating ultimatums and a strategy of deliberately superflous demands) here.....but for the sake of the correspondence here, you'll see that I've refrained from any further comment about any ever so teensy-weensy weight gain that may or may not have occurred, since I last saw Christine ....

...BUT will instead simply discuss the "telling issues" Christine has raises....

Her "criticism" of Kevin (but indeed of any critic really...if anything the JesusChristians are certainly NOT inventive!) is the deliberate prostitution of the "Fundamental Attribution Error" (sometimes called the "actor-observer" error) where "people over-emphasize dispositional, or personality-based, explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing situational explanations"....David regularly purposely ignores his systematic dishonesty and "explains" away the fact that the VAST majority of the people who have personally committed themselves to the JesusChristians have ultimately left the JC's as somehow being, "their" problem....

He endeavours to invent "dispositional" reasons to explain away the "situational" abuses he perpetuates.....This is clearly deliberate on his part.

Christine would by this point of time have little (or any?) conscience of her own, because as you comment Zeusor, in "Losing Your Identity" "Each time you agree with someone, you take on a small part of that person's identity; and your own identity bends slightly in favour of the person with whom you agree. If the agreement is VERY great, then..." Christine McKay is only just so much "group think" now.....and if she is told Vicki has "turned from the plow" and was a "seed planted in shallow soil, who sprouted for a while and then withered in the sun".....Christine will simply lap it up and will choose not to question this fabrication further....

Milgrams experiment (where individuals are persuaded to torture and torment another human, despite their initial reluctance, as the procedure is "explained" to them by an authority figure) has it's corollary in the ease with which the JesusChristians will turn on their own, once Davids "approval" is withdrawn.....Hosea has committed the "sin" of living and acting independently of the JesusChristians.....to prevent the catastrophe of losing his domination over the lives of others....David will have begun to "explain away" what was wrong with Hosea....and any gossip and ill-will that he can generate towards Hosea will be tolerated and encouraged and expanded upon.....

And in conformity with the results of Aschs experiments (individuals refused to speak truthfully where they risked the ire of wider group disapproval) the individual members of the JesusChristians will act in disobediance with the scriptures BUT in conformity with David McKay, in order to gutlessly remain accepted by the wider "society" in which they now move....hence they will concur with any misrepresentation of Hosea (He was distracted "out of the spirit"!).....or Vicki(She loved her children more than "God")....or Kevin (He had an "argumentative" personality)......DESPITE whatever the facts of the matter, might be.

Their web-site does not discuss the psychological processes (other than Christine skiting about herself) that are at work within them and which DEFINITIVELY identify them as the cult that they are......their website will instead endeavour to deceitfully attribute "dispositional" reasons (so and so's in"adequacy" ) to better mask the "situational" injustices they persist with.....

...and the senior "leaders" of the Jesuschristians will conform due to their cowardice before God, in the processes that Milgram and Asch have so assiduously identified.

They defraud the Government (illegally obtained welfare payments), individuals (taking what others "forsake" for themselves, not "giving it away to a cause independent of themselves,) and would apparently have no qualms about the physical abuse of others external to their oganaization were they to be large enough ("thankfully" they are limited to the one Kenyan volunteer that they whipped in public to date).....

It would not really matter if I made comments in "poor taste" or not, on this forum, as the JesusChristians would simply invent them as "needed" on their website......(although I will try to find anew the sensitive new age me, that's deep, deep down there!!)......the leadership of the JC's are just utterly sick!

What's the latest on DJ?

I think the JC's prophecy of the 'End Times' is finally (yes, finally) coming to fruition. But, of course, not the way they expected...

Lord of the Flies, anyone?

As long as you are willing to acknowledge that everything you ever said about DM and/or the JCs was wrong, then reasoned, mature discussion can be possible. They would accept nothing less, and further insist that any and all exchange must be on their terms only. Even in the 80's they were being taught by David how to write to people, what buttons to push, how to bait people into arguing, all that. He's had years of practice in refining his game.

You may as well bang your head up against the wall all day long than try and "reason" with David McKay or any of his senior disciples/clones. Take my word for it; I've been persistently trying to reason with them for a couple of years now and it has not benefited me personally at all.

It is a game to them, to feel superior. It's all a big chessboard to David, I reckon, and he knows how to exploit his "pawns" to his full defensive advantage. Soon, though, all of the gambits will catch up with him and he'll find himself in checkmate. It's only a matter of time now.

He is already feeling cornered and having his usual tantrum, just like a little kid that will scream and hold his breath until the parent gives in and lets him have his way. His main tools are force and intimidation. I don't think he even understands what real emotions are. He must live in some kind of autistic world of utter disconnect from others. Absolute solipsism.

Like the vampires, I do not think that David McKay can stand the light of day, and he does not want to be in a position where he has to defend what he does. That is at the heart of the matter IMO.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2008 10:35PM by zeuszor.

Dear Zeusor,

I agree with you, that David is to all extents and purposes" criminally insane" and that those appointed to be "leaders" within the JesusChristians, (having seared their conscience with a "hot iron") hold these positions, having duly demonstrated their worship of David, by now being prepared to sell out any of the Christian principles, (that they were once enticed into membership with) for the doting (but fleeting and capricious) "approval" of their "Apostle"...

You have met some of the US team, and I'm wondering in your opinion Zeusor, how long it takes (on average....naturally there is individual variation) for someone to finally become well and truly, irrevocably spiritually asphyxiated through association with David McKay and his influence....(He has obviously got worse with the years....I'd assume that this would be a declining figure...)

....but you know, to physically beat a volunteer, and dishonestly testify against your own family, hock your own organs to buy "publicity",
......groom minors for membership, blackmail critics into silence, heartlessly take everything someone owns and then throw them out with nothing..etc.

...twisting the scripture, time and time again, on demand (and of late simply doing away with the trouble of referencing your behaviour to them)......


In your opinion, how long does it take to go down this path (of no return?)