Here is the latest posting from Davejc on his own site...it's very interesting.

[jesus-teachings.com]

It's the usual self-defensive rewrite about how Davejc knew absolutely nothing about the nefarious doings of the Children of God until 3 days ago------ his defence is not the interesting part.

What struck me in the self-righteous article is that every single mention of the Jesus Christians is phrased in the present tense, as if to Davejc they are still existing as a coherent group, despite being 'graduated.'
I don't think that Davejc, the nit-picking grammarian journalist who heaps 'disdain' on wrong usage of the language, would make such an elementary mistake as to speak of a finished and 'graduated' group in the present tense as if it was currently active or about to be resurrected in the future.

Also, why the careful repositioning of himself, the Jesus Christians and his knowledge of the Children of God if he is about to disappear off into his sunset years in his campervan, living on the government pension and an occasional dumpster dive?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2011 05:12AM by Stoic.

Dear Stoic,

David is feeling threatened and a little vulnerable....that's the reason for the (on-going really!) "repositioning"....this article is yet another repeat of David's ploy of "harping" ....whining and whining (and whining again) that all the complaints against him are fundamentally "baseless"...nothing more than sour grapes on the parts of those who "didn't have what it takes" to make it with the JC's....there would be some fear or another, prompting him to "pre-empt" his enemies in this....

(In part, I believe, David is trying here to predispose Trevor and Joe (probably the last two that at all take David seriously) to disregard any factual evidence that they are ultimately confronted with, about McKay (a strategy David emulates from other cults).....David will ALWAYS talk in the "present tense" about his cult, I beleive Stoic....even should they all disown him!)

As one might expect, David lies outright in several regards, for example in falsely attributing statements to people.....

"Malcolm says it was idyllic while he was there...."


I have NEVER said any such thing....but if we disregard the pyschological "repression" of any independant though, constant "guilt" at not satisfying McKay ethough, the ritual public humiliation and belittlement that the "grievance meeting" procedures employed in order to persuade one of the penalities you would incur, by not humouring David sufficiently;

if we ignore the blackmail (McKay requesting me to threaten my mother never to speak with her again, if she continued to speak negatively to my mother...privately taking me out of the farmhouse of Tallangatta, to make that phone call, while he quietly listened immediately beside me in order to ensure, I "hurt" my mother sufficiently), the perpetual focus on "hating your parents" (in order to better "love" David) and the welfare fraud (the group at McKay behest firt going onto unemployment benefits in mass at this time)

If we ignore such things,

I'd say that the "golden age" of the Christians that I lived through was indeed "idyllic" RELATIVE say to the unchecked ravages of pedophiles, that David "gifted" with unsupervised access to children, and the poisonous influence McKay has had on Joe Johnson, who would happily perjure the course of justice by criminally assisting with the laying of false charges against his own family, in order to win "kudos" and "cold, hard cash" (David clearly having "graduated" from the simple threatening phone calls of my day...)

What Dave McKay is doing is so obvious. Trying to rewrite the past and make himself look snowy white.

$32,000 on the cruise huh? Find that amount hard to believe. Where did the money come from anyway? Was it from the donations people made towards the good that the Jesus Christians claimed to be doing? Show me any Jesus Christians who earned any income to be able to fund this cruise. Their money was got by begging and peddling.

Or was it through the court case settlement which means that the money was misappropriated then at best, being used to send off 40 people on a cruise. I assume that money settlement TO THE "VICTIM" was for his medical needs in the future not to finance a trip for a bunch of culties.

J-O-B-S Dave, and nobody would have any ride to ask you how you spend your money. But as you beggar the system every chance you get, people WILL ask.

How is it that all the people in the photograph look pretty well heeled? Couldn't they pay their own ways? Did you have to bribe them to come?

I'm glad that photograph of the cruise has come out and stands to show the waste and squandering of money that was meant for charity or for medical treatment.

Dear ALN,

The "figure" quoted here is potentially "realizable" if the JC's arranged their berths to be "quad-share" (would you fancy sharing a room with David and Cherry though....How would THAT be for a holiday??) as the 42 passengers listed as attending the JC reunion would approximate a cost of AUD$761 each...and you may see similiar figures, "bandied about" on the "Pacific Dawn" web site!


I do agree with you, that the "cruise" (discussed for months and months in advance)...was David's attempt to "ram" his so-called "success" down the throats of his critics....and make us "weep" and "gnash our teeth" in bitter regret, that we failed to be considered sufficiently worthy to be invited along, languishing in nothing other than our own self- created misery, as King David and the royal entourage, right merrily amused themselves, after their decades of devoted service to the Kingdom of McKay....

(Ohhh!....(stretching my arms!)..."yawn"....)....dangling the possibility of being invited onto the "cruise" before a number of us (e.g. "Hello") and then, giggling, sharply pulling it back out of reach, if any interest was shown.... the taunt of a childish brat!

Surely though whats good for (some brainless, old) goose....is good for the Gander!

My wife and I are considering a cruise in the Greek Islands (including a little of Turkey) out of Thessaloniki, next year (has to tie in with my daughters schooling...so dates not fixed, just yet).....Would you like to come along? (We'd have to "go dutch"...I don't have a cult of my own, just yet.....to "finance" my own retirement and travels....!)

[www.greeka.com]

We can stage a reunion of the "Christians"......hint that we just might invite David along, and then dump him at the last minute!

It is as Stoic has pointed out , to see David specifically state, that he SPECIFICALLY left the COG's due to their sexual teachings, when former members (of his vintage) deny this....and we know full well that it was Cherry's objections ALONE that led him to "distinguish" his own COG cell, from the wider practises, of the time....

David again thinking to himself, the more he repeats and ever more loudly, repeats the fabrication that he was "morally outraged" by Berg....the more the world will be "obliged" to believe him....

Quote
Blackhat

Quote
Apollo
Free discussion my arse! LOL

OK, here's a test as to whether this is free discussion. Some time ago I posted about a strange adolescent act by one of the people involved in the JC's, where he admitted and was remourseful for an abuse he did while a mixed up teenager. I maintained at the time, that this person does not have the hallmarks of a paedophile, and that many mixed up teenage boys do weird sexual things while going through adolescence. This does not make them rapists or paedophiles. It's a mixture of hormones and opportunity.

Dave has posted something about this, which I think justifies my stance on this issue. X has apparently had some contact with "Stop it Now" following the stupid accusations made here and elsewhere. Here is a part of their response:

Here are some quotes from a letter 'X' received from Stop It Now.

Some people are wondering about my lack of postings recently, and I will say that this witch-hunt aimed at branding the JC's with paedophile connotations has been the main reason for my absence.

I know the JC's made a great error in allowing a convicted paedophile to distribute comics on a train in India to unaccompanied children, and that may still require some answers, but I have been very disturbed by the witch hunt on X.

I am absolutely astonished by your naivety Blackhat. You are placing far too much trust in a man who is known to lie by any means if he believes it will in some way benefit him. Dave McKay originally claimed there was only one incident of child abuse involving ''X''. Former member James then questioned McKay's version of events and he later admitted that there were two incidents of child abuse. This is a man who cannot be trusted. His word means nothing to me.

Dave McKay is a man who minimises child abuse. Dave McKay is a man who has a very soft approach towards paedophile's. When you have a group who have a soft approach towards paedophile's and who regularly work alongside vulnerable children then bad things often happen. A minimim of 18 children were abused at the hands of a paedophile working for the JCs cult. There was no compensation for his victims. This man was not reported to the Indian authorities. He only confessed to the police after a close friend who was not a member of the JCs was able convince him to do so. This was a man who was apparently being closely monitored yet he was able to abuse a minimum of 18 children. Dave McKay did not give out the impresison that the abuse happened on such a huge scale. We only found out after zueszor was able to locate a news article.

We also have the incident involving John who abused a child whilst working for the JCs cult. This has been completely swept under the carpet. John was not reported to the authorities or encouraged to seek the appropriate treatment. John and ''X'' have both been free to continue to offend thanks to an unethical and irresponsible cult who are only interested in covering their own back. The safety of children will always come secondary to protecting the reputation of this destructive cult.

There were no 'stupid' accusations. People were just doing what any responsible adult should do under these circumstances. Blackhat, if everyone shared your naivety then Dave McKay would have a free reign to cause destruction everywhere he goes. I have absolutely no idea what you're hoping to achieve here Blackhat. Why are you here?

I commend Frankie for taking the first steps and reporting these people to the authorites. It has encouraged me to do the same. I have reported two current JCs and one former JC to the police. I believe these three people have information regarding paedophilia within the JCs cult. I have been assured that this will be taken very seriously. This may not lead to an investigation but what it will do is bring more attention to the JCs cult and the more people who report them then the more chance there will be of an investigation. Anyone who has information regarding paedophilia should report it to the authorities.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2011 07:50PM by Apollo.

I understand your zeal, Apollo. If I had a case to put to the authorites, I would, but I don't......

As also someone with an interest in classical rhetoric, in particular the uses of rhetoric to persuade an audience, I wonder at your usage of the emotive term 'witch hunt,' Blackhat, in describing the attempts to uncover the relevant and concrete information on the various paedophiles that have found shelter and an unhindered opportunity to continue to offend within the Jesus Christians and under the paternal 'blind-eye' approval of the Apostle, Davejc.


A definition of the modern usage of the term:

[dictionary.reference.com]

witch hunt;
–noun
an intensive effort to discover and expose disloyalty, subversion, dishonesty, or the like, usually based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence.


Could this be an irrelevant and inappropriate use of 'Pathos' one of the three classic rhetorical modes of persuasion?

[en.wikipedia.org]

Pathos..... Greek: for "suffering" or "experience;" ..........represents an appeal to the audience's emotions. Pathos is a communication technique used most often in rhetoric (where it is considered one of the three modes of persuasion, alongside ethos and logos), and in literature, film and other narrative art.

Emotional appeal can be accomplished in a multitude of ways:

by a metaphor or story telling, common as a hook,
by a general passion in the delivery and an overall emotion and sympathies of the speech or writing as determined by the audience. The pathos of a speech or writing is only ultimately determined by the hearers.

Pathos is often associated with emotions, but it is more complex than simply emotions. A better equivalent might be appeal to the audience's sympathies and imagination. An appeal to pathos causes an audience not just to respond emotionally but to identify with the writer's point of view - to feel what the writer feels. So, when used in tragedy, pathos evokes a meaning implicit in the verb 'to suffer' - to feel pain imaginatively or vicariously. Pathos is often employed with tragedies and this is why pathos often carries this negative emotional connotation. Perhaps the most common way of conveying a pathetic appeal is through narrative or story, which can turn the abstractions of logic into something palpable and present. The values, beliefs, and understandings of the writer are implicit in the story and conveyed imaginatively to the reader. Pathos thus refers to both the emotional and the imaginative impact of the message on an audience, the power with which the writer's message moves the audience to decision or action.




Here is my true and appropriate appeal to pathos:

As someone who suffered the prolonged experience of being witch-hunted as a child for failing to believe the absolute tripe that I was expected to believe unquestioned, I can assure you that using the term in the context of seeking real, concrete and verifiable information on actions that are acknowledged to have occurred betrays very sloppy thinking indeed.
It is the same kind of sloppy thinking that Davejc routinely uses to bamboozle his victims.

The difference between a conman and a good and worthwhile rhetorician is that the latter respects the intelligence of his audience.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2011 10:13PM by Stoic.

I hear Grace is planning to leave the LACW. She says it's time to hit the road again. I pray to God Grace isn't about to do the unthinkable and return to the cult. That would be a first surely?

Here is a big hint, this would be 'logos':

'The pathos of a speech or writing is only ultimately determined by the hearers.'


It is a big hint that there is some personal, active thinking and reflection required upon listening to someone else's rhetoric, as well as further investigation and education, if necessary, before determining the worth (if any) of what one has heard or read.