Kevin wrote:

Quote

Soon after this discussion another discussion occurred on the JCs forum that involved a mother claiming her children had been put at risk due to information being withheld from her. This concerned a JCs member who had confessed to fondling his girlfriend's daughter(s) "while they were sleeping", being sent on an outreach with her and her two children, and his known history being kept from her. It came out when another member who knew the person's history counselled the person to inform the mother. Dave has objected to the term pedophile being used to describe that individual and believed this was a one-off incident. Whatever the legal definition, the mother believed she should have been informed to make that call in relation to who travels with her children.

FAO DAVE, CHERRY AND KEVIN McKAY...

I feel this is an issue of huge importance which must be addressed immediately. I'd appreciate some feedback...

Was this man reported to the police?

Was/is this man still a member of the JCs? (up until the disbanding rumours 01.11.10)

There is an ex-member posting for the first time on the xJC's who was present during that incident:

[jcs.xjcs.org]

and gives quite a different slant on Cherryjc's account of 'an over-protective mother.' It seems that this mother wasn't that over-protective at all, except when she realised that a paedophile was in the group.

It does make one wonder why Davejc/Cherryjc then insisted that the 6 year-old boy sleep in a room with the adult males, one of whom was the paedophile.
The claim that Davejc/Cherryjc were making a point on overprotection by overriding the wishes of the 'over-protective mother' starts to look very thin indeed.

What point, exactly, were they trying to make by insisting that this 6 year-old boy share sleeping quarters with a paedophile?

Could this have been another of their strange little experiments? See if they could go for the big-time, just like their mentor 'Moses' David Berg of the infamous Children of God?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/29/2010 12:46AM by Stoic.

According to the xJC poster, the 'overprotective mother' incident seems to have occurred in 2003, so, although I am not au fait with either US or Australian law on the subject, this incident would appear to fall into the mandatory reporting category cited by Malcolm.

Instead we seem to have considerable pressure being applied by Davejc/Cherryjc and a variety of lesser members to the 'overprotective mother' to surrender her small child to very close and unprotected proximity to a confessed paedophile.

Quote
Stoic
What point, exactly, were they trying to make by insisting that this 6 year-old boy share sleeping quarters with a paedophile?

It sounds like another social experiment by McKay (former ''Shepherd'' of the notorious ''Children of God''). Much like his other social experiment which resulted in a paedophile abusing children in India. McKay appears to show little or no concern towards the dangers of paedophilia. When you have a leader who takes these unethical risks then bad things often happen. The worrying thing is history continues to repeat itself.

Cherry ''Consort'' McKay is now desperately trying to defend her husband. However, her version of events do not quite match up to those of two former members. It appears she's playing the old ''everyone's a liar but Dave'' card. It's encouraging to see former members challenging Cherry and Dave's version of events as this is clearly a very important issue. Dave McKay needs to recognise that his actions were incompetent and this man who confessed to abusing a child must be reported to the police immediately.

Stoic raises a few excellent points here...

Quote
Stoic
'Dave and I heard a "confession" by a man about an incident that occured years previously when he was in his teens. We heard that confession in the presence of the mother you are referring to. She may have know before us, but certainly we did not withhold or delay information getting to her. I know, because I was there. You were not.

We had no knowledge of anything prior to that time, and even the knowledge we had then was not that he was a paedophile, and it still is not. How many of us have done something foolish in our teens for which it would be unfair to place a lifelong mark against us.'

[jesus-teachings.com]

Here's a very interesting bit of double speak. Davejc/Cherryjc seem to have, in addition to the responsibility of hearing confessions, given themselves the authority that catholic priests have also, to absolve the person confessing from sin.
(An aside, catholic priests of integrity, while keeping the confessional secrets, urge the penitent to also own his crime to the relevant authorities---give unto caesar what is caesar's and what is god's unto god, etc)

I would like to know what defines a paedophile to Davejc/Cherryjc. According to the above statement, the popular notion of 'kiddy-fiddler' does not seem to quite cut it.

How much worse does it have to get before the paedophile term is brought into play, in Davejc/Cherryjc's world--the full spectrum of abuse that 'Moses' David Berg of the notorious Children of God indulged in?

Oh, wait, hang on--even Davejc's mentor, 'Moses' David Berg of the notorious Children of God, the author of that secret stash that Davejc seems to have used as a blueprint for his own cult-building, doesn't quite qualify as a paedophile in the universe according to Davejc/Cherryjc.

This is a very good question and it would be in McKay's best interests to address this immediately.

If Dave McKay doesn't class someone who has admitted to molesting a child as a paedophile then that is deeply concerning.

Quote
Stoic
'and even the knowledge we had then was not that he was a paedophile, and it still is not.'

This made me feel quite queasy, on first reading. I don't want to turn this into 'hunt the paedophile' but the above has the ring of a statement of current knowledge. Is the person in question still in the group, disbanded or not? Is this the hold Davejc has over him? All that insistence on confessing all your deepest darkest secrets plays right into Davejc's covert agenda.

You have a good eye for detail Stoic.

The above quote would suggest that the paedophile is in fact still a member of the JCs cult. Meaning he is still out there on our streets and in a position to offend.

The thing which worries me most is the fact the JCs spend alot of time working closely with children, particularly in Kenya where children are most certainly vulnerable.

Quote
Stoic
'How many of us have done something foolish in our teens for which it would be unfair to place a lifelong mark against us.'

And yet in an earlier article Davejc/Cherryjc acknowledged that kiddy-fiddling, or paedophilia to give the correct term, is intractable, incurable, ineradicable---unlike a youthful episode of theft which can be regretted, reconsidered, atoned for and a resolution made not to repeat.

[forum.culteducation.com]

You're 100% correct Stoic. There are contradictions all over the place here.

I would agree we've all done ''foolish'' things in our teens like underage drinking, underage smoking, playing truant etc. That is what i would class as ''foolish''. Molesting a child however is most certainly alot more serious and is in fact a very serious crime which should be reported immediately to the authorities.

Quote
Stoic
'There is a further dilemma which seems to be unique to paedophiles. They appear to be beyond feeling guilt for their behaviour, or at least beyond self-induced rehabilitation. Despite all of the condemnation that they receive from angry mobs and vitriolic media reps (as well as a lot of other therapies), they don't seem to be capable of changing. The rehabilitation rate is virtually zero.'

It's about time they started practicing what they preach.

Dave and Cherry's McKay's stance on paedophilia gets more disturbing by the day.

If someone has admitted to molesting a young girl then they should be treated as a paedophile and the appropriate action taken.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/29/2010 09:45AM by Apollo.

I've been doing some speculating as there are two unanswered things about this situation that really bug me:

1.Davejc's stated wish to find 'a more loving and humane approach' to paedophiles.

2.Davejc's strange little experiments of putting together known paedophiles with vulnerable potential victims.

There is also the refusal to recognise any accepted definition of paedophilia and the very odd attempt to redefine it for his listeners as an infectious disease---that is, something that can be caught by proximity rather than the general understanding of it as behaviour that is hard wired into the neurology of the paedophile.

When I was young and living in SE Asia we had a major rat problem--everybody did, it went with the territory.
There was however a distinct cultural divide between how the westerners (us) handled the problem--a quick burst from a flame-thrower to destroy the major nests--- and the local practice of putting out food for the rats at the bottom of the garden to ensure that they did not enter the house to seek food.

I am, of course, speculating but I think that experimentation of an alternative approach to recruitment may have been behind Davejc's behaviour in dealing with paedophiles.

He needed to find a steady supply of malleable and easy to manipulate people as recruits--that closed system always makes recruitment a never-ending, ongoing chore--recruitment is the major enterprise in any cult system.
A steady supply of such people would mean those already on the fringe of mainstream society, who would need only a little nudge to become true exiled outsiders and so become locked into his closed system because the now exiled outsider perceives a lack of acceptance elsewhere.

Paedophiles do fit this bill---it would be unthinkable, probably, for most, but Davejc had the shining example of 'Moses' David Berg of the notorious Children of God' before his eyes and in his secret stash of Cliff notes on cult building. With such a successful example to emulate, the unthinkable quickly becomes thinkable, particularly if it solves two problems in one swoop, recruitment and retention of the membership.

It must be noted that Davejc failed in these experiments, testimony not to him perhaps but to the fundamental decency of the members who would not wear this approach.
Poor old Davejc, foiled in yet another attempt to become the next 'Mo'.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/29/2010 03:18PM by Stoic.

I have a question for Malcolm, if I may, and if Malcolm feels like filling us in. It is prompted by a statement from Davejc/Cherryjc regarding the tally they kept in Australia of each individual members output of distribution of the Easy English books on the trains in India.

Was Davejc very businesslike in keeping such individual tallies of work done, were donations solicited for these books and did the tally extend to the collection of these?
Was a sense of competition fostered amongst the members to off-load most books/collect most in donations?
Were non-productive members censured or subtly made to feel inadequate if they did not produce?

I am thinking of the enterprise in terms of Davejc's private business and the members as his sales and distribution team and wondering how closely he tracked and monitored the business activities of the various teams.

How much autonomy was there, in business terms i.e. control of the bottom line (product shifted, receipts payable) from the leader who was often absent on another continent?

Quote

He needed to find a steady supply of malleable and easy to manipulate people as recruits--that closed system always makes recruitment a never-ending, ongoing chore--recruitment is the major enterprise in any cult system.
A steady supply of such people would mean those already on the fringe of mainstream society, who would need only a little nudge to become true exiled outsiders and so become locked into his closed system because the now exiled outsider perceives a lack of acceptance elsewhere.

My layman's hunch--protected by the US First Amendment

There are troubled adults who combine these two qualitiesL

Emotions and sexual development frozen at the age of early childhood. If a child has been attacked and molested, this developmental arrest may occur at the time when --they were themselves harmed by a predator.

This coincides with adult development in other areas, such as social charm, acquisition of job skills, and (the danger here) ability to make sophisticated plans.

Even when things are going well, a person with this bifurcated development will not see truthfulness as something based on objective facts, but sees truth as based on his or her fluctuating emotional needs and moods and cravings.

If the person leads a church, the bible will be interpreted through the the filter of a leaders fluctuting moods and cravings. Disciples will be selected according to their ability to soothe the leaders moods, not for any nobler purpose.

Small kids tend to be sensitive to non verbal information, and persons with this bifurcated development often retain a small child's ability to sense others who are compatible, and also of a similar make up--similarly vulnerable, as well. The person we are concerned with is like a domineering kid on the playground who senses which persons are also like kids, but more willing to be led and obey the leader.

What you get is the equivalent of a computer in which the operating system is something from the early 1990s but that runs sophisticated applications (adult charm, skillful outreach)

In a crisis and under stress, the system 'crashes' and reverts to the illogic of childhood, where everything is bad people vs good people, tantrum tossing etc..

If the troubled adult was harmed in childhood, he or she may find ways to exhibit the pathos of the wounded child (and for them the emotion is genuine--they are feeling themselves in danger of annihilation) and this can often elicit nurturing behavior and protectiveness from their enablers and from other adults who dont know the actual harm the individual has done using his or her adult body and adult resources.

One also gets a child's ability to play others off against each other (what happens in a badly run household when a kid finds ways to confuse adult care providers by saying Person #1 said this was OK, and Person #2 said that was OK, getting Persons #1 and #2 squabbling with each other.Meanwhile the child sneaks away without restraints being imposed.

This may resemble some of the kinds of identity games we have witnessed.

When someone with this kind of inner landscape (young child in an adult body)has a documented record of harmdoing, using his or her adult body, adult planning ablities and social skills, the way to nurture them is not to give in to the pathos or be scared by the tantrums, but to warn the community and take legal steps to keep them from committing any further harm.

Protection of small kids is a priority because its the one way to keep the cycle of trauma from being repeated.

That means making sure some persons are not allowed into the house..

'One also gets a child's ability to play others off against each other (what happens in a badly run household when a kid finds ways to confuse adult care providers by saying Person #1 said this was OK, and Person #2 said that was OK, getting Persons #1 and #2 squabbling with each other.Meanwhile the child sneaks away without restraints being imposed.

This may resemble some of the kinds of identity games we have witnessed.'

Something culled from my own observation and corroborated by Len Oakes (Prophetic Charisma) and his study of a variety of cult leaders, is that a closed community such as a cult is set up specifically to cater to the immature emotional needs of the leader (all other pursuits are secondary)---that would include a replication of the childhood situation where they found power in the ability to confuse and manipulate the adult care-givers by playing one party off against the other constantly and just generally muddying the waters by introducing elements to distract from the main agenda.

[www.youtube.com]

BERG AND MCKAY

The opening on Berg's history quotes Berg as writing, " I will never forget that I was taught how to masturbate by an older boy who whispered it in my ear during one of my Father's Sunday morning sermons".

The narrator than says: " Later David's mother catches him masturbating and she forces him to complete the deed in front of his Father. This is the beginning of what will be the central conflict in Berg's life..."

Interesting, given DM's fascination with the subject. He mirrors Berg in so many ways. The parallels are obvious and many.

Hap Wotilla, an ex-COG member who was an early member of that group, was and close to MO and was in COG leadership, on David Berg:

"I think he believed whatever he felt, whatever he thought, whatever his inclination was, that that was God. Even if he was drunk at the time, that that was the Lord. "Well, I did it, so it must be the Lord!" I don't think he left the door open to the fact that the Devil could be speaking to him and leading him into any of these areas at all."

So acute a description. This pretty much sums up the way I view DM: in his extreme narcissism, DM has conflated his mind and thoughts with God's mind and thoughts. Therefore he can do no wrong, and all who oppose him really oppose God. Obviously a dangerous position to be in.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2010 12:27AM by zeuszor.