Quote
Malcolm Wesley WREST
A certain individual (shall we call him "K"?) apparently released the information to the McKays which enabled them to thwart (destroy evidence, invent "explanatory accounts"?) of the case that was being prepared against them for welfare fraud.....

After the first Australian Story, I went onto the public forum set up for public discussion immediately following the show. Several hundred viewers accessed the forum that night and over the next few weeks.

I exposed DM's welfare and housing fraud on the forum, and within days authorities called on the McKays. Nothing happened, so I guess his premeditated cover-up stories worked. That was in the first half of 2007.
_________________________

This matter of 'a certain individual, (shall we call him "K"?)' thwarting the arrest of DM over welfare fraud sounds to me like mythology. Are you attempting to say that Private Eyes sent an advance copy of his evidence to "K" who then alerted his father and foiled the plan. To the best of my knowledge Private Eyes and K are not in communication.

If on the other hand, this mythology is about the dreaded Dossier ... then the copy I received doesn't contain enough to imprison DM, and it was circulated at least two years after the authorities got to DM after my ABC forum accusations. Is it that we are talking about how "K" received a copy of the Dossier from Ms Smith, sent to her by its author? After that "K" sent the relevant personal information (not the whole file) to any JC mentioned in the dossier. Is that what you are referring to Malcolm?

I think the major feature of the dossier was the unnecessary exposure of private information; as a means of getting DM into prison it wasn't enough. The authorities may well have it, but DM's stories were worked out well in advance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/2010 07:22PM by sWord.

Quote
sWord
The authorities may well have it, but DM's stories were worked out well in advance.

They do, be assured; I distributed that thing from Boston to Bangladesh.

sWord, maybe you can help us to understand how and why it is, that it seems like certain misinformation about DM's past and the history of the cult seems to get published from time to time on the forum that you own?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/2010 10:21PM by zeuszor.

Quote
Malcolm Wesley WREST
Dear Blackhat,

You have an admirable Pacifist outlook on life, for which you deserve credit....(a far cry from my own irasciblity),...

IF Dave has broken laws in any country, then he should be charged with that. But so far nobody has come up with anything.

If it were my wish to see Dave incarcerated, then I would be very disappointed by now.

A certain individual (shall we call him "K"?) apparently released the information to the McKays which enabled them to thwart (destroy evidence, invent "explanatory accounts"?) of the case that was being prepared against them for welfare fraud.....(hence my cynical reaction that "substantive information" never be shared with this mystery individual again).


Al Capone was, as you might remember, only ever convicted for tax evasion....this fact obviously completely absolves him of any suspicions of racketeering, accessory to murder, extortion, aggravated assault, fraud....and so on,....

...wouldn't you think?

Hey Mal,

That was a really good post.

There's no doubt McKay (former member of the notorious "Children of God") after all these years must now be an expert in deceiving our benefits systems. I know alot of people also do it but that doesn't make it any more acceptable, the man is a criminal. Certainly in the UK David Cameron is trying to crack down on it so Al and the rest of his gang may eventually come unstuck. Who knows they may even be forced to get off their arse and get a proper job which actually contributes to society. I also find it amazing that they don't have to pay any tax on their books. They hide under this 'donation' bracket but it really is a piece of nonsense. They claim they only cover the costs of production which i find hard to believe as how else would they be able to fly around the world on a regular basis?

If it's not coming from the benefits system and it's not coming from book sales then where's the money coming from McKay you fraud?

Agur has been banned from this message board.

Once banned always banned and registering under a new name doesn't change that status.

Quote
sWord
I think the major feature of the dossier was the unnecessary exposure of private information; as a means of getting DM into prison it wasn't enough. The authorities may well have it, but DM's stories were worked out well in advance.

Well, the comment about unecessary exposure of private information is interesting as it was Sisi who really exposed the information; it was really quite confidential up until then. Given it was provided to her at Bea's request for a possible legal proceeding it should have been considered priviledged.

DM's own posts demonstrate that he received more than just his personal information.

[jesus-teachings.com]

In case there is any confusion, there are in effect two dossiers, the one I put together that Sisi received and the one that Private Eyes put together, which (although I haven't seen it) I believe is far more detailed and is only distributed to legitimate authorities.

Dave McKay has regularly hinted or made comments over the years about attention he has been receiving from various authorities as a result of investigations.

Quote
zeuszor

Quote
sWord
The authorities may well have it, but DM's stories were worked out well in advance.

They do, be assured; I distributed that thing from Boston to Bangladesh.

sWord, maybe you can help us to understand how and why it is, that it seems like certain misinformation about DM's past and the history of the cult seems to get published from time to time on the forum that you own?

sWord or somebody else may come back regarding Sisi exposing the information, arguing that I wrote that I sent it "from Boston to Bangladesh." Allow me please to retort proactively, in order to head off this ancticipated counter-argument.

My point is, I've sent that thing out to dozens of individuals and organizations, and the people I sent it to kept it confidential and respected its purpose. They knew it wasn't for stalking or identity theft, but to provide background information on key players in the JC history. They were mature in handling the information and didn't divulge it to those being investigated, or get hysterical.

Bearing in mind, of course, that most of what was in my dossier was "open source" research and already in the public realm anyway!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2010 02:29AM by zeuszor.

Zeuszor, just read your reply re the fact that you sent it to many people, but you felt they would keep it confidential. Thank you for clarifying that.
Your comment seems to suggest that a potential for identity theft was something you considered.
Out of interest though, was any type of confidential agreement signed by any of these people that you chose to trust?
Was any kind of background checks or past felony check done before you sent the dossier out to these many "mature" individuals and organizations?
Of course, crooks rarely let people know if they intend to do something less than mature with information received, and organizations can contain many people who may not all have the same morals as the identified spokesperson.

Also, though I have not ever read the dossier, from other peoples comments, it was alleged to contain information such as the fact for example that one ex member had allegedly worked as a prostitute before joining the Jcs. Maybe this type of information was not included, ( please let me know if so!) but it would appear that this type of information, if it was included, had more of a focus, in some cases, of attempting to discredit ex members, than on identifying alleged welfare fraud?



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2010 03:08AM by yasmin.

This was posted on the JCs website this morning..

Re: To Sheila, Jared, or any other Johnsons/Simpsons 15/11/2010 07:33

Word has been received from Joe that he is doing well and feeling fine.

They're not giving much away but it seems Joe has had his operation and thankfully everything has gone well. It suggests this is the only form of communication the Johnson's have with their son. It's a very sad situation but ultimately McKay has achieved his main goal. He has managed to completely destroy any relationship Joe and his family had. Let's be honest that was the whole point of McKay creating the Johnson's third party thread. The family should have been kept more informed at a time like this, it's a dangerous operation. The Johnson's must have been worried sick. McKay really is a despicable 'human being'.

- Apollo


...thank you again, for bringing this to everyone's attention so promptly, Apollo.

The JC "forum" then is still active obviously....although I suspect that this is also an endeavour to "clean it up" (project a "humane, caring" side to the JC's) much rather than a genuine attempt to convey reassuring information....

If, (as I believe!), the "Tribulation Keepers" are simply an exercise in "crisis perpetuation" (the "gravity" of the situation demands ongoing and unswerving obedience to the all-knowing leadership of McKay), then once McKay is persuaded that he once more, has his flock focused on him, he will likely tire of these childish games and may well openly return to the JC site to continue the propaganda broadcasts. Littlerose it seems, has been "disbanded", that's all......


(It has nothing to do with me, and I respect the moderators right to operate the forum as he sees fit, however I do regret the "passing" of Agur.....)

I personally wish both sites could help educate the public more on how DM actually manages to convince people to do what he does.

He has got the two sides, one where he couches things in religious terminology. "They want to stop people following God".

and then:

There's his strictly Journalist spin:

One of my pet peeves is the lying by omission. He always talks about having the permission to take Bobby Kelly, but fails to mention it was withdrawn. He talks about Bobby being in contact with his grandparent, but fails to mention that what was said during those contacts that raised alarms bells, leading to the permission being withdrawn.

It really annoys me, because he is good at repeating his points and others aren't so good at countering his arguments.Jeremy Kyle was great though pushing the BS.

This is a section from Joe’s book (?) found in the media area of the Jesus Christian Forum. It is a great example of how DM uses the written word to manipulate. He starts off that he is, “open to us not going forward” and ends with, “I look forward to hearing further what people think" So it looks like he is being very democratic. But his message in the middle is pretty clear about what he wants and that he won’t accept any excuses.

The sentence, “I personally think what we have stumbled across here may be extremely significant in terms of the whole Christian message, and it would be good to get clarity from God on the matter before moving forward.” is pretty clever. It is similar to how he often expresses something he wants and then adds a passage from Jesus, to make it look like it is Jesus doing the asking and they are not following Jesus if they don’t do as Dave (Jesus) suggests.

A number of members were against the whipping trial, but a message from Dave and look how the situation changes almost instantly:

Though his reaction was the most dramatic, it wasn't just Ross having problems with the concept at the start. Several members wrote in with reservations about using a whip as a form of punishment... even if it was more merciful than imprisonment for several years... even if the "judge" had to be willing to take the lashes him/herself... and even if the pain would all be gone just minutes after the last lash. The thought of someone being whipped, and fear of what others would think, was causing members to react irrationally, often objecting to things which weren't even being suggested.

For a while it looked like the Kenyan solution was not going to be tried anywhere else. But Dave, buoyed up with support from a handful of other members, persisted.

"Dear brothers and sisters," he wrote in reply to the feedback received. "Like I said from the start, I am open to us not going forward with a mock trial in Long Beach. But remember, what I was asking for was revelations from God, or sound Christian teachings against going through with it. So far I have heard neither. No one seems to have received anything from God in the form of revelations saying not to go ahead, and the reasons against it have all been anything but Christian so far. Fear of public opinion, dislike of pain, and a desire to do nothing (to be "safe") do not qualify as sound Christian reasons. I'm going to ask people once again to think and pray about these issues, more seriously this time, as this really is important. If you have genuine arguments, please share them. I personally think what we have stumbled across here may be extremely significant in terms of the whole Christian message, and it would be good to get clarity from God on the matter before moving forward. I look forward to hearing further what people think."

We allowed for a few moments of silence after reading, then shared our thoughts.

"You know," Jeremy said, "I can see now that I was just reacting. I was being led around by fear of what others would think. Who cares what people think if it works, and if it is the right thing to do?" Even as he spoke, Jeremy was becoming a campaigner for the opposite position. He went on. "Truth is, this is the most Christian combination of justice and mercy I've ever heard of, apart from the cross of Christ, of course. I think I'm for it now!"

"Great!" Reinhard said. "And what about you, Joe?"

I thought about it for a second. I too had been taken back by the idea of someone (especially a Black person) being whipped, because of the connotations. Still, I could see that it was a very merciful alternative indeed, compared to what my family deserved. Asking myself if I would rather take a few lashes from a whip, or serve ten years in prison, helped to clarify that further for me.

Quote
yasmin
Zeuszor, just read your reply re the fact that you sent it to many people, but you felt they would keep it confidential. Thank you for clarifying that.
Your comment seems to suggest that a potential for identity theft was something you considered.
Out of interest though, was any type of confidential agreement signed by any of these people that you chose to trust?
Was any kind of background checks or past felony check done before you sent the dossier out to these many "mature" individuals and organizations?
Of course, crooks rarely let people know if they intend to do something less than mature with information received, and organizations can contain many people who may not all have the same morals as the identified spokesperson.

Also, though I have not ever read the dossier, from other peoples comments, it was alleged to contain information such as the fact for example that one ex member had allegedly worked as a prostitute before joining the Jcs. Maybe this type of information was not included, ( please let me know if so!) but it would appear that this type of information, if it was included, had more of a focus, in some cases, of attempting to discredit ex members, than on identifying alleged welfare fraud?

It's come to my attention that I have made some mistakes recently as far as Susan Smith Summers goes.

I regret any embarrassment I have caused her or her family though my errors.

I did send the dossier to a family member of Mrs. Summers but I did not send it to Mrs. Summers herself. I accept that once she was made aware of it that she took action that she deemed fit to protect innocent people. While I might not agree with her actions, I accept that I am the person who erred in releasing the dossier to many sources. If the dossier did become more public than I had hoped, this was caused by MY sending the dossier out recklessly and not by any action of Mrs. Summers who was under no legal obligation to keep the dossier confidential.

I apologize to Mrs. Summers for blaming her for my own mistakes.

I agree to abide by the previous court order which is still in effect and I promise Mrs. Summers I will stop any contact with her and I will cease speaking about her or any member of her family, on forums or in emails.

I accept that Kevin McKay is not responsible for the actions or words of David McKay and I regret anything I have said to imply otherwise.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2010 06:46AM by zeuszor.