David asked me who the guy in my new avatar is. It's Gerry Rafferty, from the band Stealer's Wheel. You know that song? He sang it.

"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with you..."


Well I don't know why I came here tonight,
I got the feeling that something ain't right,
I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair,
And I'm wondering how I'll get down the stairs,
Clowns to the left of me,
Jokers to the right, here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you.

Yes I'm stuck in the middle with you,
And I'm wondering what it is I should do,
It's so hard to keep this smile from my face,
Losing control, yeah, I'm all over the place,
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right,
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

Well you started out with nothing,
And you're proud that you're a self made man,
And your friends, they all come crawlin,
Slap you on the back and say,
Please.... Please.....

Trying to make some sense of it all,
But I can see that it makes no sense at all,
Is it cool to go to sleep on the floor,
'Cause I don't think that I can take anymore
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right,
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

Well you started out with nothing,
And you're proud that you're a self made man,
And your friends, they all come crawlin,
Slap you on the back and say,
Please.... Please.....

Well I don't know why I came here tonight,
I got the feeling that something ain't right,
I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair,
And I'm wondering how I'll get down the stairs,
Clowns to the left of me,
Jokers to the right, here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you,
Yes I'm stuck in the middle with you,
Stuck in the middle with you.

Let's see if we get a straight answer here:

In my case, you have a virtual bonanza just in the fact that I was associated with them for a few weeks more than 30 years ago.

[welikejesus.com]

Was it a few weeks or a few months David? There's a lot of difference between the two.

Also: what year please?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2008 03:50PM by zeuszor.

deleted by user



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2008 04:41PM by zeuszor.

umm...I spent ...ah...about three months...with the Children of God, just before they got into this flirty fishing thing. I left precisely because of that....

David McKay....on the Jeremy Kyle program(thank you Zeusor).....after David spent YEARS (before and after the introduction of "flirty-fishing") as the front man for the Children of God in Broken Hill....deliberate fabrications intended to circumvent the apprehension of the truth.....utterly reprehensible behaviour on the part of David.


Private Eyes ponders....."Were there effectively two different COG groups operating in Broken Hill in 1976? McKays and Moses Berg's?"

Owing to Cherry's (clearly not Davids!!) honesty, it is quite likely that Davids' "commune" probably chose not to engage in "flirty-fishing" while David deliberately turned a blind eye to the incident of it elsewhere, (in order to be able to continue to access Bergs' material....)...however the idea that there might have been "two" COG outposts in Broken Hill, would still fail to excuse David for publishing (his own) material with a home address that also featured as the contact address for material (that he also published?) for the Children of God.

Have you met or heard of "Happy", Private Eyes? He shared time with David in the Children of God, and I think would be able to clarify the background details in relation to the matters that you raise here.

umm...I spent ...ah...about three months...with the Children of God, just before they got into this flirty fishing thing. I left precisely because of that....

David McKay....on the Jeremy Kyle program(thank you Zeusor).....after David spent YEARS (before and after the introduction of "flirty-fishing") as the front man for the Children of God in Broken Hill....deliberate fabrications intended to circumvent the apprehension of the truth.....utterly reprehensible behaviour on the part of David.

Or was it just a few weeks? A contradiction. That's what David said last night.

In my case, you have a virtual bonanza just in the fact that I was associated with them for a few weeks more than 30 years ago. The fact that I left specifically BECAUSE of their sex teachings, and the fact that I have never hidden that fact, kind of gets in the way of your attempts to paint me with the same brush.

And, in our case, there was also a difference between living in their commune and being entirely on my own in my own home with my own family, even though I was considered a member. I spent only a couple of weeks actually living in one of their communes.

[welikejesus.com]

We are still waiting for an answer on the matter of the exact year of his involvement too. I will not hold my breath for an honest answer though.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2008 12:09AM by zeuszor.

Malcolm, I am playing a few games here with my questions, giving Dave every opportunity to come clean.

We have talked to a lot of people, many of whom have provided us with Statutory Declarations.

Dave suggests he wasn't involved in the COG in 1976. Yet we have the COG taking out full page advertisements in the newspaper he works for.
So was this the group that recruited him, still hanging around Broken Hill hoping to attract others like Dave or was it Dave's breakaway commune using the COG name?

If it was a COG group not connected to Dave, I guess further questions could be. Dave was a Journalist (funny, he is still claiming to be one! - we thought he was a carer!), he has four young children and he knows there is a sex cult operating in the town he lives in. He is shocked. After all, didn't he leave them over their sexual teachings? This evil cult starts placing full page advertisements in a newspaper he is employed by. Does he write an expose? Use his journalism skills to warn the community? Or, does he keep his mouth shut? After all, isn't that what ex members of cults are supposed to do, at least in Dave's World?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2008 12:57AM by private eyes.

Dear Private Eyes,

In the interests of due process, I acknowledge the efforts you are going to, to provide David with the natural justice (being able to address any accusations made against him) that he has always denied to anyone else...

Again though, I feel my cynicism justified (you know Private Eyes, the "good" thing about David is ....no matter how "overboard" you may think that you have unintentionally gone in your condemnation of him...he always somehow manages to prove whatever criticism you have made of him, absolutely right in the end!!)

with the quotations Zeusor has provided;

In my case, you have a virtual bonanza just in the fact that I was associated with them for a few weeks more than 30 years ago. The fact that I left specifically BECAUSE of their sex teachings, and the fact that I have never hidden that fact, kind of gets in the way of your attempts to paint me with the same brush.

No David you specifically left because Cherry threated to end the marriage if you placed her children in a situation where they would be sexually abused...the sex teachings didn't disgust you at all.....but the fact that the COG's were not prepared to make you a "leader" as quickly as you liked, DID disgust you.....you are painted with much the same "brush" as David Koresh

And, in our case, there was also a difference between living in their commune and being entirely on my own in my own home with my own family, even though I was considered a member. I spent only a couple of weeks actually living in one of their communes.

....and then continued to advertise the "cause", receive COG literature(from where you stole most of your precepts), entertain visiting COG members (and visit the other COG communes that you now deceitfully, claim that you "detested"), submit photos and news items to the COG newsletters, describing yourself as a "bother in the faith"....etc. etc....

....being entirely on your own, in your own home (nominated on your own accord as your own local COG point of contact) with your own family, of course fulfilling your fantasies of having your very own cult ......

Quote

After all, isn't that what ex members of cults are supposed to do, at least in Dave's World?

No sir, because actually there is no such thing as a cult in David's World (I prefer David; "Dave" too familiar for me.) He has said that there's no such thing as a cult, that nobody knows what a cult is, it's just a word to describe a group you don't like. In David's World, there are no cults, only unfairly persecuted religious groups and disgruntled, vindictive ex-members. David is always the victim of somebody's persecution, in his world. It gets so old to hear.

That quote is in the Fox 11 video. I'll edit that one later. Gotta remind myself...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2008 02:26AM by zeuszor.

[youtube.com]

"They don't even know what a cult is; nobody does. It's just used to put down a group you don't like."

Zeuszor, I see Dave is now exercising what's known in the business as the, I don't recall defence.

Dave McKay Quote:

"I don't know the exact year during which I was a member of the Children of God for a few months. I don't really keep records of what year it was that I did such and such thirty years ago. Whoops! I mean ROUGHLY 30 years ago! I'm living in the present. So if I suggested that I was a member one year, and some media report suggested that it was another year, I don't think it's a big deal."

Of course it is a big deal. It goes to credibility.

I don't suppose there is much point asking him now what month and year he saw, "The Gift of Love" on an International flight and specifically what month and year he was working shoulder to shoulder with David Wilkerson, now that his memory appears to be suffering.

It's funny how he is able to discuss sophisticated conspiracy theories with John, his retired Freemason friend. Yet, allegedly can't recall many specific historical events.

He has now suggested/implied that David Lowe (who he thinks is me) is blackmailing, threatening and apparently now involved in a conspiracy to bring down every Christian group involved in discipline. All backed by the Quakers.

Perhaps, if he is really interested in living in the present, he could ask the staff of the Broken Hill Library (who I spent almost three full days with recently), whether I even look like David Lowe.

I am also definetely not a Quaker. Whilst I do have great respect for the Quakers. I personally have issues with there accepting of the “new age” belief that God is a force and in everyone, not the personal loving God of scripture, John 3:16.

[youtube.com]

"They don't even know what a cult is; nobody does. It's just used to put down a group you don't like."

DM explains his COG days:

[welikejesus.com]

Okay, here it is, Brian. I don't know the exact year during which I was a member of the Children of God for a few months. I don't really keep records of what year it was that I did such and such thirty years ago. Whoops! I mean ROUGHLY 30 years ago! I'm living in the present. So if I suggested that I was a member one year, and some media report suggested that it was another year, I don't think it's a big deal.

Like Kirstie says, what is the big deal? I think you are too quick to use names like "liiar" before you even know the facts. In any investigation there are always going to be contradictions that turn up. One newspaper will say one thing, and another will say another. Is one newspaper made up of "liars"? Or was there just an innocent misunderstanding?

The primary misunderstanding here is based around the term "flirty fishing". It is used retrospectively to refer to something that was apparently happening since 1974 (if we can believe your sources, and I have no reason to argue with them) within the inner circle of top leadership in the Children of God. The term was also gradually leaked to the rank and file, but in such a way that it could be interpreted as just doing what the word said, i.e. "flirting". Girls recognised that guys were attracted to them when they were out on the streets, and so they "used" it rather than being put off by it, to get the guys to take the tracts and read them.

Obviously, as things became more blatant, it became harder and harder to believe that it was all that the "flrty fishing" letters was getting at. I remember saying to a female leader about use of the phrase "go all the way" in reference to the girls trying to witness to the guys, in one Mo letter, and I said that there was no way that I could support that, because my generation understood that phrase to mean having sex with someone. She said, "No, no, no, no! It's talking about being willng to marry someone in order to bring them to God." Because I was a good deal older than others in the movement at that time, and because I came from a conservative Christian background, she tried to convince me that it was just my "dirty mind" imagining all that stuff.

But what became the real turning point with the rank and file was something called "the Arthur letters". That is when it was clearly revealed to everyday members that Mo and his consorts had actually been practicing religious prostitution, and that is when I left. I wrote specifically to that same leader and more or less said, "I told you so." She had earlier said that she would leave too if I was right, but, of course, she did not. Was it 1976 when this happened? 1974? I don't know. But it was when it became clear to me what they meant by "flirty fishiing", and as soon as I had proof of religious prostitution (what we now understand "flirty fishing" to have been referring to), I left... along wiith quite a few others who left about the same time.

Brian, Cherry and I were discussing this morning my reference to you having an "evil mind" (in a post above) and whether it was necessary for me to say that. I'm sorry for using such strong words. On the other hand, what was being described is still pretty accurate.

I teased Cherry for correcting me for saying you had an evil mind, because a few minutes later, she mentioned the group fighting Scientology calliing themselves "Anonymous". She said, "It's just another name for cowardly liars." I teased her because now SHE was using strong language. But, the key thing with strong language is to be able to examine the evidence and see if it is accurate.

Because you have always been upfront with regard to who you are, you could probably see the truth in what Cherry was saying about anonymity more than all those other cowar... sorry, anonymous people over there on the RR forum. Just try to understand that there are a lot of us who can see that you (and David Lowe) are trying to link me with pedophilia in the COGs with all of this obsession over exactly when I left. Go back and read the stuff you have written on the topic. You invariably dredge up the sex teachings whenever you draw a link, don't you?

Get over it, Brian. It's a lot easier to accuse us Jesus Christians of being kooky in terms of our LACK of sexual activity than it is to paint us with the COG "free sex" brush... not that I expect either you or David Lowe to stop trying. If you can't find something wrong with us personally, you have no choice but to pump up hatred based on guillt by association. (Hopefully I have said that without being guilty of "name-calling".)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2008 11:44AM by zeuszor.