Lambie forces Debenham into SES apology

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
StVSurvivor
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:04 pm

Lambie forces Debenham into SES apology

Postby StVSurvivor » Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:24 am

I now hear through the SES grapevine that, as a result of all the negative publicity (past and present), the Inquiry, this BB, and the hard work of SESSA and PPIAG, a large schism has been developing right throughout the SES, with the hard-line traditionalists on one side, and the progressive rebels on the other. It was starting to concern Lambie and his cronies so much that he asked Debenham to make a full apology to all SES members for the actions he was responsible for at St James/Vedast. Debenham refused to do this, so Lambie applied a little pressure, essentially forcing Debenham into it. Apparently it was verbal, and took place recently at a very large meeting. I do not know if it was recorded. It appears Lambie did this more in the vain hope of healing these divides rather than through any noble or transparent motive – so more damage limitation as per usual, it appears.

I also hear that Debenham is now virtually friendless within the SES and feels his entire life’s work has been misunderstood and a waste.

If anyone know anymore on this, or if they believe these facts are in any way inaccurate, please feel free to comment.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Postby bonsai » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:22 am

This is all very interesting. It would be nice to know if any of this can be confirmed by others.

I don't like the idea of anyone being forced to apologise. I think forced apologies are meaningless and it certainly does not wipe the slate clean in any way.

To some extent we have seen this with the apologies that have been made by those since the inquiry, there is something about them which is just not sincere enough or humble enough.

I hope that Debenham will apologise honestly and through his own conviction for his actions throughout his career but if he stands by his actions and feels that he has nothing to apologise for then he shouldn't and he should be judged by his actions and his lack of remorse.

I too am aware of the division and schism that these issues with St James have caused within the SES and I am not surprised that Lambie is concerned. However I believe that Lambie should stop being the puppet master in the situation and make the changes that allow all the people to be responsible for their own actions.

Out of interest, why would Debenham be forced to make an apology to the SES and not publicly? My cynical mind suggests that again it's the people inside the SES that matter more than those outside.

Bonsai

StVSurvivor
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:04 pm

Postby StVSurvivor » Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:05 pm

bonsai wrote:Out of interest, why would Debenham be forced to make an apology to the SES and not publicly? My cynical mind suggests that again it's the people inside the SES that matter more than those outside.

Thanks for the response Bonsai. I agree - like I say, it just looks like more of the usual damage limitation. It also highlights a total lack of focus on who the real victims were in all of this. But why does none of this surprise me anymore? (rhetorical question :roll: ) If it all wasn't such a serious matter, I'd find it amusing. They are riding roughshod over peoples lives, memories and emotions. Ah yes, emotions, I remember those things - but we’re supposed to pretend we don’t have them aren’t we. Either that or keep them permanently suppressed to the extent we’re no longer conscious of them…at least that’s what they tried to indoctrinate us into believing.
Last edited by StVSurvivor on Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.

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

Postby Goblinboy » Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:56 pm

StVSurvivor wrote:
bonsai wrote:...like I say, it just looks like more of the usual damage limitation. It also highlights a total lack of focus on who the real victims were in all of this.


Classic stuff from the SES - find a scapegoat, denounce and ostracise him or her, while deflecting blame from the organisation and its leadership.

Debenham's absurd and damaging regime required consent and support from literally hundreds of SES people, from McLaren (and subequently Lambie), to the legions of "white middle-class drones" as Gandalf categorised them.

So Debenham will die in ignominy, while those equally responsible sail on pure and blameless. Nice work SES.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Postby bonsai » Fri Jul 21, 2006 11:25 am

Goblinboy wrote:So Debenham will die in ignominy, while those equally responsible sail on pure and blameless. Nice work SES.


That's certainly the fear.

Whilst Debenham is far from blameless in the situation, he was MacLaren's puppet.

The SES is ultimately responsible for everything that occurred at St James and whilst Debenham in not innocent the SES must not be allowed to get away without bearing its share of the responsibility.

Bonsai

User avatar
bella
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 10:52 am

Postby bella » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:09 am

How would a genuine schism between hardline traditionalists and progressive rebels be healed by Debenham apologising for negligence at the London Boys' School? Why would Lambie think it would? I dunno - pacifying people who sympathise with the St James/Vedast boys without any thought to the value of the apology in and of itself doesn't seem likely to me.

gadflysdreams
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:30 pm

Postby gadflysdreams » Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:30 am

Debenham being used as a scapegoat for the outrageous mind control being excercised by the SES is typical. He's effectively off the scene now, so slamming him may have a temporary effect within the SES, ie going some way to healing the growing schism within the organization.
But go to the "1996 Report" and read about the vows/testimonies (different sentences for men and women) that SES students were required to announce - publicly, I have heard tell! The era of Debenham and Caldwell was passing at that stage. The SES top bods were now a new generation - destined to control both SES and St. James. You'll find them in the top posts now! And, yes, the next generation of similar ilk, are even now being sqeezed up the ranks. Some of these latter group will have been SES/Foundation Group success stories from the first generation of such "pure" breed.
It's like a drug that takes on some and not others. It has obviously begun to show signs of wearing off on Debenham, otherwise Lambie would not be so keen to offer him as the sacrificial lamb.

User avatar
Ben W
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 2:33 am

Debenham

Postby Ben W » Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:51 am

[Hello again everyone.]

I agree that forced apologies are not worth much if anything.

I have just skimmed this thread so may have missed the subtlety of it - but if the main thrust is that the SES is no longer supportive of Debenham then my response is:

YIPPEE!

There is a separate question around SES, its specific role in the schools (both in the past and now) and its role more generally.

However there is also a very important issue around Debenham - the "CEO" of the school right through the worst abuses and, as far as I can tell, responsible for setting and supporting the tone, and responsible for the worst violence that occured.
Child member of SES from around 1967 to around 1977; Strongly involved in Sunday Schools ; Five brothers and sisters went to ST V and St J in the worst years

User avatar
Merry
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:25 pm

Postby Merry » Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:13 pm

Large Schisms? Scapegoats? Sacrificial lambs? Hardliners vs Rebels? Jeepers Creepers - must be the silly season.

You're working yourselves up in to a lather with bugger all to go on (excuse my french). Where is this thread going ?.........I heard there was a mass brawl between the hardliners (The Jets) and the rebs (The Sharks).....it spilled out in to the street at Mandeville Place and ended with a stabbing, shooting and a drive-by damp wiping...etc etc. Rather like chinese whispers isn't it?.

Have fun but stay out of the sun.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Postby bonsai » Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:07 pm

Merry wrote:Large Schisms? Scapegoats? Sacrificial lambs? Hardliners vs Rebels? Jeepers Creepers - must be the silly season.


Merry wrote:Rather like chinese whispers isn't it?.


Merry,

I agree that it is like chinese whispers.

Perhaps, as an SES member you could shed some light on the issue and tell us a little about this apology that the Debenham is supposed to have made to members of the SES.

Perhaps you could tell us your views of what is actually happening in the SES and shed some light.

I think it is fair to say that if Debenham has made some sort of apology, forced or otherwise, then we are very interested to know why he hasn't made it publicly or to the victims of his mistreatment.

All I have to go on is the formal notices the SES publishes on its websites, this forum and hearsay from the people I know in the SES.

Lately there has been precious little through the official channels, perhaps again you can shed some light.

Bonsai

StVSurvivor
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:04 pm

Postby StVSurvivor » Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:23 pm

Hello Merry,

My source is certainly a credible one - no Chinese whispers/silly season stuff coming from this direction.

As I said in the opening post:
StVSurvivor wrote:If anyone know anymore on this, or if they believe these facts are in any way inaccurate, please feel free to comment.

You are an SES member. So in all seriousness, what do you know about this?

User avatar
Merry
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:25 pm

Postby Merry » Tue Jul 25, 2006 10:39 pm

Hello Bonsai and StV,

It's far too late for me to be up at this of night posting, I can't burn a candle at one end let alone two.

All I can relate is my own experience. I know of no one being forced to apologise to anyone and I can say with complete certainty that Nicholas Debenham has not been ostracised at all. I am also sure he has as many friends now as he did before the enquiry findings. No scapegoats are being sought-honestly, people would not allow it.

I and many of my friends in the school recognise there is deep questioning of what we are about (by we students). In my case it is the realisation that the school is not responsible for my path in life or my decisions, only I am responsible for that and the resulting consequences.

I have mentioned before that I do not consider my involvement in the SES necessarily to be a life long committment but I do feel there are winds of change and very fresh ones too.

I've just noticed a mosquito has been biting me like it has been on a starvation diet and just been offered a feast for free - I knew this should have waited 'til the morning.

If you would like to contact me please feel free.

Best wishes

Patrick

Aaargh - it got me again.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Postby bonsai » Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:39 am

Merry wrote:All I can relate is my own experience. I know of no one being forced to apologise to anyone and I can say with complete certainty that Nicholas Debenham has not been ostracised at all. I am also sure he has as many friends now as he did before the enquiry findings. No scapegoats are being sought-honestly, people would not allow it.


Has Debenham actually made any apology of which you are aware?

Bonsai

User avatar
Merry
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:25 pm

Postby Merry » Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:13 pm

Hello Bonsai,

I find these days that I often don't see many of the people that I used to bump into. Though there obviously has been great concern about the cause of the enquiry it isn't the main topic of conversation all of the time. I simply am unable to answer your question. What I have suggested in the past is that people write to him directly. I understand that he is very willing to meet and speak to ex-pupils and I really would recommend that. If you don't want to do that then perhaps just correspond by letter.

All the best

Patrick

User avatar
Merry
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:25 pm

Postby Merry » Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 pm

Actually I think the title of this thread should be changed until known to be true. It's a bit like the Sun 'Newspaper' - dramatic headline but lacking substance.


Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest