SES Forums

Sparks
By talking about the new facilities and the state of the schools at present we are mearly countering the statements made about continuing abuse / poor running of the school at present, or feeling to that effect in other posts / threads.
I agree, and if you read other threads, Sam also agrees that the governers that were around at the time should seriously think of resigning or if the demand gets too great should be fired.
Teachers that were around at the time have not resigned because they have gone on to become perfectly good teachers. If you read my earlier post about my time as a pupil in Mr Laceys form class you will see that he has "reformed" and never laid a finger on a single child and hardly even raised his voice in all the time i was there. Those that continued the violent tendencies into my time have now left, eg Colin Russel. I am fully suportive of teachers that still carry out violent acts now (physical or mental) leaving, but the fact is there are none anymore.
As for parents not being told of the SES when they sent there child to the school, I can only comment from personal experience, and to the best of my knoledge my parents were told.
I agree that the school is doing self damage by not carrying out these points to some extent, especialy 1 & 3, (if 3 is true) but there is still a certain amount of malicious content on this forum which is destructive to the present school.

james wrote:...I still strongly remember the day when the rumours started to circulate of accusations of assaults by teachers and DL sat us down and confessed to us that he had done things in the past. (Whether the rumour of the knee in the balls is true I don?t know) He seemed genuinely sorry that he had carried out these actions and he agreed that they had been done without any for-thought and in the heat of the moment. (And please don?t give the predictable argument ?he?s only sorry now because he?s afraid of getting fired etc??)...

It's a shame he couldn't bring himself to say it in public, any genuine appology has always been welcomed here. It's appearance would have made a world of difference to many people on this board, but instead it's absence sent out a message of arrogance. Unfortunately the ground that was gained by the one current teacher who did appologise, has been lost twice over by the lack of comment from the other two.

As is usual in these cases, the biggest issue lies in what hasn't been said and done!

James, if you are still in-touch with DL and still have that same respect for him, then maybe you could persuade him to come on here and re-iterate what he said to you on that day. It is not too late, and do you know what...he'll probably feel better about doing it too!

Alban

James, Whitedevil, Sam,

Without wanting to point out the obvious, there's fundamental agreement between yourselves and most other posters on the board about calling for the dismissal of the Governers.

james wrote: I agree, and if you read other threads, Sam also agrees that the governers that were around at the time should seriously think of resigning or if the demand gets too great should be fired.

There's been a lot of additional noise as well, some of which has resulted in Daska feeling compromised and threatened. I'd like to suggest we leave off ad hominem attacks (google for it, if you need to), and stick to the issues.

I'd also like to suggest that James apologises to Daska asap.

I will also restate (as per my post to Whitedevil yesterday) that most posters appear to acknowledge your concerns. I don't think anyone wishes you anything but the best. It is "sadistic and wrong" to hurt schoolchildren. However, you do need to look deeper into the root causes of what you "suffer".

The inquiry came about because of the behaviour of SES members and teachers at your school towards pupils in the 1970s, 80s and 90s. Now these individuals and organisations are, to some extent, reaping what they have sown. The effects of the actions of the SES members and teachers - which include the public voice provided by this bulletin board, the inquiry and the media interest it generates - are affecting you and your peers.

It's an unfortunate corollary. There are clearly some good things happening at St James. But St James will come under scrutiny because of its unavoidable relationship with the past. You are unfortunate to be attending the school at a time when the legacy of its past caught up with it.

Nothing very useful comes of victims blaming victims. And don't forget Santayana's advice (now there's a Neo-platonist who could teach a thing or two to the SES) - those who who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.

This is a huge learning opportunity for St James. Let's hope the opportunity is taken.

Cheers,

GB

It's like a "redefinition of words" campaign is going on. I have seen it before with another group which has even an official policy for it. It goes like:

- On the moment the ex-pupils and parents here are all ready described as hardened critics and boy would SES like to know every ID, but soon no one should be surprised when you will be called antisocial hatemongers if you persist. Because after all;
- The aim to get the responsible people to take responsibility is all of a suddenly a campaign to take down a school complete with third hand stories of defacing a building.

If I were paranoid I'd say something is brewing.

..remember Lacey smashing a blackboard in twain with his fists??...I don't think "violent tendencies quite does Russell justice, I would suggest "deranged psychopath"

daska wrote:I have deliberate removed all my posts on this thread because I'm feeling threatened by James persistant questioning of my identity and reasons for remaining anonymous.

I had been trying to be constructive and informative but it is obvious that while the current sixth form etc at St James are quite happy to write, sometimes quite agressively they are not prepared to read and respect the opinions and experiences of others.

I doubt I will return to this board

Daska,

I think the majority here value your contributions to this board, don't let yourself be bullied by a few with bad attitudes.

think the majority here value your contributions to this board,

Just tell 'em to "rack off" daska - your posts ARE appreciated.

I think I need to change the title of one of my previous threads to read:

"Dont be Intimidated by St. James Staff or SES Parents OR PUPILS OF SES PARENTS AT ST. JAMES"

Dont be intimidated, these people cant hurt you!

Goblinboy wrote:There's been a lot of additional noise as well, some of which has resulted in Daska feeling compromised and threatened. I'd like to suggest we leave off ad hominem attacks (google for it, if you need to), and stick to the issues.

I'd also like to suggest that James apologises to Daska asap.

Well said, and I willingly add my voice to all those people who have defended D.

To my detractor.If you base your opinion of St James kids just on me then that is most obviously absurd. All schools produce bad eggs. Eh eh! And you don't know for sure that I am not a woman. I have intimated that I am a man but this may be a disguise. Whose asking you to send your kids to St James? Do I care? Perhaps if I reffered to old geezers and bent over bints you would be more offended?

Can someone point me to the post that threatened daska? I can't find it - has it also been deleted?

All that happened was James asked for daska to tell him who he/she really is......very offensive apparently!

Oh and by the way, RE: Snr Girls school and Vedic Dancing:
FACT: DOES NOT HAPPEN, instead they learn: Ball room, Jazz, Ballet, Modern dance (hip-hop/RnB) and one more I cant remember.

Sam xox

my parents aren't in the SES, they think it's a tad ridiculous frankly. So my parent's are not SES members and as far as i can tell i'm not intimidating anyone. Boy, your not getting much right are you. plus iv'e heard rumours that you have nothing to with St james/Vedast. If so how on earth can you comment on what goes on there? how do you have the nerve?

Sam Hyde wrote:All that happened was James asked for daska to tell him who he/she really is......very offensive apparently!

There's a tradition on this forum from the very beginning that everyone has a right to remain anon for whatever reason. For having relo's in the cult or perhaps being a parent sitting on the fence vis-a-vis taking the kids off the schools or not, or being a current pupil or teacher. Doesn't matter what the reason is.

Requesting that a person, any person, reveals his identity is considered bad behaviour.

Maybe not cricket but we're noobies, and are surprised that this was found 'offensive' anyway.........moving on.

Sam xox