Justice! - care to introduce yourself?

Discussion of the SES, particularly in the UK.
User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Justice! - care to introduce yourself?

Postby Free Thinker » Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:41 pm

Having jumped right into this board, which has been established for some time, telling people what to do and being what I consider rather aggressive in your posts, how about taking some time to introduce yourself?

What is your connection to the SES?

Why are you posting here?

How did you find out about this BB?

To start.

Thank you
FT

Justice
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:13 pm

Justice! - care to introduce yourself?

Postby Justice » Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:14 pm

Dear Free Thinker,

Thank you for your views.

My postings have mainly concentrated on encouraging parents and pupils who claim to have been abused to have the courage to speak out publicly, in order to seek justice for themselves, and prevent such things from continuing into the future.

In what way do you find this offensive?

Planet
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 8:40 pm

Postby Planet » Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:00 pm

I was wondering the same questions. As a former pupil I wondered who or what Justice represents exactly.
I did not myself participate in the St James / Vedast inquiry mainly due to a belief that it would not be in my real interests at that time and would serve no real purpose for me or be of any real help to me in resolving any issues I have.

User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:53 pm

Nowhere did I say I was offended.

Please answer my questions. Just to be fair, please see the thread I started when I joined, entitled "Greetings-ex-SOPP student" (from the US, or NY) where I explain the answers to the questions I have asked you.

User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:30 am

Still waiting...tap tap tap...

chrisdevere
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: Battersea
Contact:

Postby chrisdevere » Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:04 pm

Hear hear free thinker!

I agree we would like to know what your connection to St Vedast is?
Christopher de Vere
chrisdevere@hotmail.com

User avatar
Stanton
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:23 am

Postby Stanton » Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:18 pm

I don't think Justice! has any connection with St James or the School. He's more interested in poking with a pointy stick to impede any kind of resolution. That's his agenda.

User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Fri Feb 17, 2006 5:39 am

I agree, which is why I posted this thread. Everyone else has talked about what their connection is. Someone who doesn't have one would have a hard time doing so without others knowing it was fake.

Anyway, I just wanted to point it out and I'm glad others agree with me.

User avatar
Stanton
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:23 am

Postby Stanton » Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:08 pm

No word from Justice! on his identity or why he's posting on this BB. Fair to assume that he's from one of the 'save you from a cult' organisations that he's so keen to promote?

Justice
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:13 pm

Justice! - Care to introduce yourself?

Postby Justice » Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:35 pm

Stanton said in his posting dated Sunday February 19th 2006

No word from Justice! on his identity or why he's posting on this BB. Fair to assume that he's from one of the 'save you from a cult' organisations that he's so keen to promote?


In an earlier posting last year dated Wednesday March 30th 2005 Stanton said:
Fair enough! Perhaps I should say that I've never been a pupil at St Vedast or St James, neither have I been a parent with children there, or a teacher at any of the schools. The only reason I submitted a post in the first place was because I thought it possible - from reading the posts - that former pupils might shy away from giving an account of their experiences at an inquiry. I have no agenda. So I would just like to say again - forget your fears! The QC - whoever he or she might be - is a professional, should protect your confidentiality (and you can ask for this if you're in any doubt) and will have experience of other inquiries. Their business is to establish the truth so far as possible. The point is that an inquiry has been called, you can either take part in it or not as you wish. There may not be another opportunity. If you don't take part, don't come forward - how are you going to face yourself in the future?


Anonimity is no crime as Stanton obviously appreciates. I have my reasons for remaining anonymous for the time being, and respect Stanton's reasons, whatever they are, for doing likewise. He has told us who he isnt - not who he is!

I am not from a 'save you from a cult' organisation as Stanton sneeringly implies. But even if I was - why can anyone criticise someone who wants to save a fellow human being from possible harm at the hands of a Mind Control Cult?........unless of course they either DO have an agenda, or simply dont appreciate how many lives are wrecked by Destructive Cults.

User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:20 pm

But Justice!, we already realize how dangerous cults are. That is why we are participating in this board, and why almost all of us are their ex-pupils or ex-members or family members/friends of those two.

We don't need to be "saved" from the SES, since we already have been. And we realize the psychological harm done by cults, which is why if you read the past postings, you'll find many threads dedicated to figuring out how we were harmed by being members and finding help and resolution.

Speaking for myself, I would never go to a discussion board dedicated to something I had no experience with and begin a million posts telling the members there what to do. I would first join the group and find out about them and speak with them and then gently offer advice instead of shouting it out before even introducing myself.

Goblinboy
Moderator
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 4:07 am

Postby Goblinboy » Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:23 am

Stanton wrote:No word from Justice! on his identity or why he's posting on this BB. Fair to assume that he's from one of the 'save you from a cult' organisations that he's so keen to promote?


Stanton,

I don't want to waste time pointing out the obvious, but you appear to be criticising Justice for a deficiency that you also share.

This is not meant as any sort of attack, as it's valuable to have a people with a variety of perspectives involved in these discussions. However, I suggest that the credibility of your postings would be enhanced with a little background about yourself and rationale for your participation.

Regards,

GB.

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:29 pm

Well now, shall we have a "I'm more open than you argument" - very new age.

my own view is that whilst I am protective about the need for this BB to be a safe and open place for people to uncover the deception of the SES as well as figure out whether there was anything of use gained from it. It is not mine to control.

It also occurs to me that Justice's posts arrived after the inquiry report with much urgency, and invited everyone to take it further. For all I know it could be the inquiry chairman himself!

What is for sure is that he/she is being very energetic in starting threads and so is in the first page more often than not. Proactivity is not a bad thing under the circumstances.

We should recognise the paranoia about 'outsiders' and 'perceived controllers' that came from our experience of St J, SES, and now means that many seek anonymity in any further dealings to do with that time. It is part of the illness. In the same way, current St J pupils that have posted have been distrustful of moderate helpful advice because it came from anonymous 'outsiders' to their school.

Of course the decision to be anonymous is entirely personal, but make the decision aware of fears that were put there and are not your own.

User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:00 pm

Certainly some or total anonymity is expected on a board like this. I, for example, have never stated my name, etc. but if you know me, then you'll recognize me from my posts because of the details I have offered.

Since I didn't experience any of the abuse that this inquiry has investigated myself, I have a different feeling about my anonymity, and I'm much more open than some who were physically abused. I respect the rights of others here to keep their personal details as quiet as they wish.

That being said, it is not giving anything away to state simple facts like:

I am an ex-pupil, ex-student, ex-pupil's parent, friend of a member, etc.

so that those reading one's posts have a frame of reference to understand why one is saying what one posts.

I would never go on a board, for example, where rape survivors were posting to help get over their trauma, or to discuss investigations or court cases with their attackers, and just start telling people what to do without explaining why I was there.

Abuse is a very deep-reaching experience, and not one which those who have not been involved can understand. Especially with an organization as complicated, secretive, and controlling as the SES. So while an outsider may certainly have some valid suggestions in general for what to do, that person can have understanding of what it has been like for us, and therefore will not know what we need to heal or what ways of finding resolution we might want.

When I am ready to have a baby, I am certainly not going to ask friends who have never had one for advice on labor and delivery. Thus, I joined this BB to get help with my particular experiences, and not just a general board. When you want to tell people what to do, you need to give them some idea of what your experiences are that cause you to give them such instructions. Otherwise they have no way to judge whether your instructions have any merit.

So members here can feel free to stay completely anonymous and not reveal any information about what their experience has been regarding the SES or why their posts are important for us to read, but I'm simply not going to put any weight into them.

This goes for both Justice and Stanton and anyone else who joins without any description (although through Stanton's posts, you can see that he/she knows a fair bit about the school and it's leaders so is possible a friend or family member of a member.)

User avatar
Stanton
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:23 am

Postby Stanton » Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:36 pm

It's fair enough what you ask. Since joining this BB nearly a year ago I've been looking for an opportunity to introduce myself but - like the wallflower at a dance - have wondered if I had anything to contribute which might be helpful or welcome.

I joined the School years ago in my early twenties searching for a system of knowledge to give meaning to life. Like many others, I tried various systems, including a spell at an ashram in India, but found that the School was the most satisfying and complete. And so it continued - for some time.

Eventually, it became less satisfying and I left. Life was then more alive but there was always an unanswered question. The search for meaning had been diverted but not buried. Recently, a personal crisis sparked a moment of truth and I realised that I would have to - wished to - return to the School. As much a surprise to you, perhaps, as it was to me.

So I started again in Part 1 and loved it! As to the future, we shall see, I'm taking it day by day.

A couple of old friends from the School told me about this BB. It didn't make pleasant reading but I persisted. I have never doubted the personal accounts from former St James pupils and you will see from my posts that I strongly encouraged submissions to the enquiry. It was a unique opportunity. I myself sent an email submission. I had learnt from the BB of an injustice about which I had knowledge, and so I was happy to do what I could to rectify the situation.

I've been disappointed that the governors of St James from the period 1975-85 have not resigned. As I also posted, they should have recognised that the governance of St James was their responsibility and drawn the obvious conclusion from the Townend report. They, too, had an opportunity and have not taken it. However, they will have to live with the knowledge that they were blind when they should have been alert - and that may have to be enough.

As you will understand from what I've said I've no wish for harm to be delivered to the day schools or the SES. But there is an opportunity here for the School to cast off any stagnant, protective, inward-referring or defensive devices and desires. Members of the School - if they are at all awake - must now understand what can happen if people believe that they own the truth - and have the power to put that belief into full effect. No one is immune. It can happen to anybody in any organisation.

Reconciliation has become a suspect word on this BB but if anything I say now - or at any other time - can aid this process then I am very willing to contribute.

Now - please excuse me for a moment while I prepare my own defences for the expected brickbats.


Return to “General discussion of SES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests