Quote
Malcolm Wesley WREST
....I think that he was probably a non-neurotypical person in the first place.... Zeuszor

My God! Zeuszor...Why...that's it!....

I think I now know the cause of the problem that has so afflicted David...

You know...I've seen the very same thing happen elsewhere...

[www.youtube.com]

I've held onto this until the opportunity to reveal things presented itself.

[jcs.xjcs.org]

Small world. I was actually part of this study, and participated last February, as I actually live very near MIT.

I was one of the control group that was made up of non-neurotypical people, and did everything described here, minus the magnets.

They were running fMRI scans on Aspies out at MIT, in the Gabrieli lab. And I have the neuropsych eval and fMRI pictures to prove it. If I could, I'd post those fMRI pics and show you.

[web.mit.edu]

I was in that tube for an hour and a half or so doing those moral reasoning tasks. I was paid sixty dollars, and received a fifty dollar Barnes and Noble gift card as well.

So I do not judge DM as a bad man by virtue of the fact that he too is likely on the spectrum, as I myself am on the spectrum. I understand very well how non-NT people think and the meaning of the word "perseveration."

[jcs.xjcs.org]

Public accusations generally deserve public explanation and PUBLIC APOLOGY.

I will make a public apology to Kevin after he and I square certain things away privately. There are just certain things that I cannot write of in public, certain names that I cannot mention in such a venue. I hope that all can understand and respect that.

What do you think that is the worst thing that will happen if you write me privately, Kevin?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2010 03:33AM by zeuszor.

Quote
zeuszor
No need to apologize, ma'am. Now that I have (as thoroughly as I know how) answered your question, cait, please kindly answer one for me: what do you see as being the positive attributes of DM's personality and/or character? What good things do YOU have to write of him?

hey Zeuszor,
I do continue to be sorry, but please don't mistakenly interpret my use of the word 'sorry' in this situation as being in any way apologetic : I simply regret that you are unable to divine my meaning. I did not mean to apologise to you, just as I don't mean to apologise for Dave.

I am sorry that in this world, some people should be unable to find any redemptive feature in another, and I am sorry too for whatever you have suffered that leaves you unable to credit Dave with possessing any kind of humanity. *Please note, this continues not to be an apology. Maybe it is because Dave specialises in demanding public apologies that I am almost arbitrarily opposed to either asking for or making them unnecessarily.

Further, realistically, I don't consider it appropriate that you should ask me to relate Dave's good side to you, when he clearly hasn't chosen to show that side of himself in any of his dealings with me. While I may not have experienced the good in him however, I am nevertheless aware that he is human and is therefore lovable to some, as are we all. Obviously even those he has wronged would be aware of his positive attributes - I believe Malcolm is.

Quote
zeuszor
Public accusations generally deserve public explanation and PUBLIC APOLOGY.

I will make a public apology to Kevin after he and I square certain things away privately. There are just certain things that I cannot write of in public, certain names that I cannot mention in such a venue. I hope that all can understand and respect that.

What do you think that is the worst thing that will happen if you write me privately, Kevin?

Just as I am not an apologist for Dave, I do not presume to speak for Kevin, however I must remark that I can see he has not asked you for any apologies Zeuszor, and can't help wondering if you aren't trying to ramp up some kind of animousity here with your wild west showdown-style challenge to "write you privately".

I would like to encourage you to liberate yourself from the need for either public or private apologies : differentiate yourself from Dave in this, and accept that not every-one who thinks differently to you is wrong and needs to be publicly admonished: some of us are just wrong, (or even not wrong).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2010 09:29PM by cait.

Good morning, ma'am. I just took one of my finals and am in a fine mood today.

Quote
cait
Further, realistically, I don't consider it appropriate that you should ask me to relate Dave's good side to you, when he clearly hasn't chosen to show that side of himself in any of his dealings with me.

I beg your pardon, but how was this an inappropriate question for me to have asked you? It seems fair in my mind, considering you put the question to me first, and I answered it. I see no good in DM, that is not used for bad.

Quote
cait
Just as I am not an apologist for Dave, I do not presume to speak for Kevin, however I must remark that I can see he has not asked you for any apologies Zeuszor, and can't help wondering if you aren't trying to ramp up some kind of animousity here with your wild west showdown-style challenge to "write you privately".
I would like to encourage you to liberate yourself from the need for either public or private apologies : differentiate yourself from Dave in this, and accept that not every-one who thinks differently to you is wrong and needs to be publicly admonished: some of us are just wrong, (or even not wrong).

With respect, now who's ramping it up with the hyperbole and polarizing rhetoric? The apology thing was not even my idea, first of all, and nobody said anything about a showdown, either. If Kevin expects me to apologize to him for something, then fine. He should write me privately and we'll iron things out between us, then I'll issue a public apology for whatever things I feel are necessary to be apologized for. That's all that I am saying. Otherwise, the peanut gallery should butt out and go to an AA meeting or something.

Again, it is not a part of my agenda to help reconcile Kevin with his parents, or at least with his mother. It is my agenda to undermine the cult's ability to recruit anybody new, and for this I do not apologize.

I think Cait has hit the nail on the head mentioning your inability to accept anyone with an opinion differing from yours, and you continually accuse people who share a differing opinion as it being an attempt to censor you. You continue to attack anyone who thinks different than you regardless of their stance concerning the Jesus Christians (for OR against) and no one is asking for an apology from you because you have show time and time again that you will apologize for something and then IMMEDIATELY repeat the same action. Name calling (peanut gallery) anyone who dares post something on your personal forum here is the reason you have found very few people posting here anymoreb besides yourself and Malcolm (don't you think 9 consecutive posts all by you is indicative of an obsession?). You would think Rick Ross would recognize this fact and do something about your horrible treatment of everyone else who posts here. This is not your own personal anti-Kevin forum, so why not give it a rest. You claim your only objective is to minimize Jesus Christian recruitment, so does your latest campaign against Kevin imply you believe Kevin aids Jesus Christian recruitment, or is it just that you cannot tolerate someone else with a differing opinion (even if they are posting on an entirely different website and not infringing on your personal space here)?

To whom it may concern:

This thread is not meant to be the exclusive expression of anyone.

Anyone is welcome here that posts within the agreed upon rules.

It does seem that many people posting here historically have had an agenda, which appears to be attempting to subvert this thread.

Dave McKay is a fading public figure, despite his periodic antics to gain media attention.

Quote
aghast
I think Cait has hit the nail on the head mentioning your inability to accept anyone with an opinion differing from yours, and you continually accuse people who share a differing opinion as it being an attempt to censor you. You continue to attack anyone who thinks different than you regardless of their stance concerning the Jesus Christians (for OR against) and no one is asking for an apology from you because you have show time and time again that you will apologize for something and then IMMEDIATELY repeat the same action. Name calling (peanut gallery) anyone who dares post something on your personal forum here is the reason you have found very few people posting here anymoreb besides yourself and Malcolm (don't you think 9 consecutive posts all by you is indicative of an obsession?). You would think Rick Ross would recognize this fact and do something about your horrible treatment of everyone else who posts here. This is not your own personal anti-Kevin forum, so why not give it a rest. You claim your only objective is to minimize Jesus Christian recruitment, so does your latest campaign against Kevin imply you believe Kevin aids Jesus Christian recruitment, or is it just that you cannot tolerate someone else with a differing opinion (even if they are posting on an entirely different website and not infringing on your personal space here)?

Part of what I object to is you confronting me on a thread that is supposed to be about the Jesus Christians. By doing so, you have aligned actually yourself with the cultists. If you think that I am out of balance or behaving in an unhealthy way, then you should have found another venue to tell me so.

For another thing, the traffic at XJCs is still pretty slow, even after I'd been banned from there. So you cannot blame me for that ghost town. It's four or five people who post there on a regular basis. How to explain that?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2010 04:48AM by zeuszor.

I think it really comes down to the split. He wants David to admit he was wrong to throw him out. It's about reconcilation, but as with everything else over there, it has to be on Kevin's terms.

Let's face it: if it wasn't for the split, Kevin and the others would probably still be members. In fact, they strike me as disappointed (at times) that they are not. This is why they never use the word "cult" when describing the JCs.

They likely are doubly disappointed that there is practically no group left to which they might return. The house, so to speak, has burned down and now there is nowhere to move into. They come from a background where unanymity is required, where unless you agree with and go along with everything then you cannot be part of the group.

Can't any of you just send me an email?

There must be something in the McKay's genes where they need attention.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2010 06:05AM by zeuszor.

Dear Zeuszor,

(If you'll pardon me....I won't weigh into the current debate over "who" is maligning "who" here...)


I've often thought that the personality types most likely to "escape" cults.....(and here I'm begging the question you have raised over whether or not some individuals may have remained in the JC's were they not to have been "forced out" by circumstances beyond their control) is how "independant" a particular personality is....be that "good" or "bad" independance...

(Should a "healthy" suspicion of the direction of others be indeed welcomed at an early age...?[www.youtube.com] )

....those who are more emotionally self-reliant and "obstreperously" independant, only really ever committed to ideas that have first satisfied their own judgement,....appear to be those who have generally found their way out of the JC's and indeed most other cults.....while these traits may have their "positives" and "negatives"....they seem to feature prominently in those who have had the strength to able to abandon what they were told was the exclusive "Kingdom of Heaven" and risk facing "damnation" outside the comfortable cocoon of "acceptance" they faced within the cult if they only but chose to comply.....



Alf for example, seems to have retained a "dignity" to his own postings,

that I hope will see him

have the strength of character, that he will need

to one day, boot McKay, backside and all,

well clear of him and his future....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2010 09:38AM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

RR = warfare, hand grenades, heavy artillery (Mal, me)

XJCS = grannies, young women, traumatized persons, ex-members

It has all become a farce. The attention has come off McKay and the cult to people feeling sorry for poor Kevin.

I suggest that the peanut gallery keep their suggestions to themselves, or else go to an AA meeting or go confer with Father Romeo.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2010 11:45AM by zeuszor.