War Made Easy By Unitarian*Universalist U*Us Refusing To *Practice* Conflict Resolution And Peacemaking With Victims Of U*U Clergy Misconduct
The following is a somewhat lengthy response to some questions that U*U blogger David G. Markham asked me in responding to a comment that I made on his 'War Made Easy' blog post.
U*Us talk the talk about restorative justice and peacemaking but, at least in my well-documented case, abjectly fail or indeed obstinately refuse to make the slightest effort to walk what they talk. I have repeatedly requested/demanded that the UUA and Unitarian Church of Montreal responsibly implement the policies that they claim to adhere to with respect to clergy misconduct and congregational safety etc. but thay have repeatedly refused to do so. Upon fully resuming my public protest in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal this September I told the President of the UCM's Board that I was prepared to voluntarily suspend my protest indefinitely as long as the leaders of the Unitarian Church of Montreal agreed to enter into dialogue with me and that dialogue proved to be productive. Last Sunday he told me flat out that "the board don't want to negotiate".
So nothing has changed.
It's the same old same old. . .
When I sought dialogue with Rev. Diane Rollert she pretended that my emails contained threats against her personal safety (do try to find any threats in them) and sought a restraining order against me on the basis of claiming to have "reasonable grounds to fear" that I would commit a "serious personal injury offence" against her or other church members. Rev. Rollert rounded up various other Montreal Unitarians to provide depositions to the police about how deathly afraid they were that I would do a Jim Adkisson on them as it were. Of course this was months *before* Jim David Adkisson more or less materialized the paranoid fantasies of Rev. Diane Rollert and other Montreal Unitarians hundreds of miles south of Montreal in Knoxville, Tennessee. . .
I don't believe in the "positive feedback" principles of 'The Secret' that seems to be popular with *some* New-Agey U*Us but maybe U*Us should none-the-less err on the side of caution by being a bit more careful about the negative thought forms they put out to the U*Universe. It's a bit of a disturbing "coincidence" that while Montreal Unitarian U*Us were conjuring up paranoid delusions of your's truly entering the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a gun and shooting Montreal U*Us to death that a genuinely deranged "lone gunman" decided to go on a rampage down the road a bit. I *do* believe in what Carl Gustav Jung called "synchronicity".
I am not joking, some Montreal Unitarians actually claimed to fear that I would enter the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a firearm or two and murder U*Us. They even pretended that this was an "immanent threat" that required immediate action by the police, even though there were no genuinely *reasonable* grounds to hold to this paranoid belief. Of course that is giving these U*Us the benefit of the doubt and assuming they weren't just lying through their teeth in order to obtain some relief from my peaceful public protest in front of their alleged Unitarian Church. . . You should see some of the paranoid and/or perjurious depositions that Montreal Unitarian U*Us made to the Montreal police force in yet another Unitarian*Universalist cynical and misguided effort to force an end to my peaceful public protest.
In fact you will almost certainly get that opportunity in the near future since I fully intend to post some or all of them to the internet so that U*Us and other people can see for themselves the kind of paranoia and/or fear-mongering I am dealing with. I tried to nip this U*U paranoia and fear-mongering in the bud by formally complaining about Rev. Ray Drennan's labeling me as "psychotic" and slandering Creation Day as a "cult" way back in 1996 but no. . . the UUA's aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee under the dubious leadership of its Executive Secretary aka Director Rev. Diane Miller just had to pretend that Rev. Drennan's obvious insulting and defamatory fear-mongering which arose out of his dogmatic fundamentalist atheism, and most probably some deep personal insecurities as well, was "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership."
Now I have to deal with U*Us, apparently including some other "less than secure" U*U clerics, publicly suggesting that I am "a dangerously deranged psycho/sociopath" who is intent on entering the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a gun and murdering "less than innocent" U*Us. Apparently these paranoid U*Us are blissfully unaware of the fact that I am strongly opposed to the death penalty for far worse crimes than just being outrageously hypocritical assholes, and have never owned so much as a BB gun in my whole life. . . The fact of the matter is that I have been peacefully protesting in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal for over a decade now and, to the very best of my knowledge, no Montreal Unitarian U*U has ever received the slightest scratch or bruise because I have been totally non-violent in the course of my "non-violent direct action" of publicly protesting against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy.
Even when Montreal Unitarian U*Us were assaulting me on occasion I did not return the violence in an effort to defend myself but simply warned them that if they did not cease and desist that they would be charged with assault. One moronic Queen's Counsel lawyer by the name of Kenneth Howard QC failed to heed my clear warning when he technically assaulted me while in the process of stealing some of my picket signs. Kenneth clearly thought he was above the law thanks to his status as a Queen's Counsel lawyer. He found out the hard way that he was not quite as above the law as he quite delusionally believed. . . although he did get off a bit easier than if he had not been a QC lawyer. Kenneth ultimately copped a plea and was subjected to "non-judicial treatment" for his criminal acts of theft and assault against me and thus avoided adding a criminal record to his credentials.
The only "death threats" or other threats of violence that have been uttered in this ongoing war of words are those that have been directed at me by Montreal Unitarians, as well as some veiled threats made by U*Us online. One Montreal Unitarian who threatened to "punch (my) fucking lights out" one Sunday morning was charged with uttering threats. After initially denying having made this threat that a 911 dispatcher characterized as "death threats" because people don't always come too after having their fucking lights punched out. . . he too finally copped a plea after I quite generously allowed him to be subjected to "non-judicial treatment" for his criminal act as well. I even waived the restraining order that I could have had him subjected to as a result of him pleading guilty to threatening me, since I felt that any threat that he *might* have posed to me had been effectively neutralized by his guilty plea.
My generosity towards this belligerent U*U was rewarded by Rev. Diane Rollert and other Montreal Unitarians presenting highly misleading depositions to the police, and/or misleading and even outright false sworn testimony in court, in order to obtain a year long restraining order against me. They were "lucky" enough to get a biased judge who was clearly prejudiced against me because I decided to represent myself rather than hire a lawyer. AFAIAC concerned Montreal Unitarians never proved that they had any "reasonable grounds" for their paranoid fantasies about me but the female judge granted the restraining order anyway. I am confident that a more reasonable judge would not have granted the restraining order given the same highly questionable depositions and sworn testimony.
Rev. Diane Rollert even told one easily provable lie in her sworn testimony, along with some other less provable lies such as pretending that I "screamed" at her during this early encounter with her, but the judge did not care about that, even though I clearly pointed out the readily provable lie in my cross-examination of Rev. Rollert. For the record I have never "screamed" at anyone in the whole course of this conflict. I have very good control over my emotions and "screaming" is just not my style. I believe that Rev. Diane Rollert falsely accused me of "screaming" at her because she wanted to portray me as mentally unbalanced, as per the fear-mongering slander I have been fighting against for the better part of fifteen years now.
So, getting back to your questions David. Here is a suggestion. Why not ask the UUA and Unitarian Church of Montreal what "victim/offender reconcilation conferences or peacemaking circles" they have ever entered into with me. The answer is none aka zero aka love. You might then ask them why they have failed (indeed refused) for well over a decade to enter into ANY form of viable conflict resolution process with me. Of course there are people at the UUA, and indeed the UCM, who are quite familiar with various conflict resolution practices but quite regrettably for all concerned they absolutely refuse to responsibly *practice* them. Of course such practices would help my situation (and no doubt some others. . .) but in my experience the U*Us at the UUA and UCM are pathologically allergic to admitting to any kind of misconduct, injustice, or other wrongdoing, hence their incredibly stubborn refusal to enter into dialogue with me for more than a decade.
I have been a bit slow off the mark to directly contact UUA President Peter Morales and request/demand that he take steps to ensure that the UUA finally takes responsible steps towards resolving this conflict but I intend to do so very soon. Various distractions kept me from doing so in September and October, or earlier this month. We will see how he responds to my communication (if at all) but unfortunately I am not all that optimistic about how President Morales will respond to my "electronic communication". After all the UUA Board of Trustees has ignored all of my previous emails, or lamely passed the buck right back to the very same UUA administrators whose negligence and incompetence caused me to contact the UUA's BOT in the first place. Needless to say these implicated UUA administrators stood on the side of love by doing absolutely nothing at all to responsibly redress my grievances after UUA Trustees passed the buck back to them. . . Forgive me for mixing sports metaphors but that seems to be par for the course for U*Us.
U*Us talk the talk about restorative justice and peacemaking but, at least in my well-documented case, abjectly fail or indeed obstinately refuse to make the slightest effort to walk what they talk. I have repeatedly requested/demanded that the UUA and Unitarian Church of Montreal responsibly implement the policies that they claim to adhere to with respect to clergy misconduct and congregational safety etc. but thay have repeatedly refused to do so. Upon fully resuming my public protest in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal this September I told the President of the UCM's Board that I was prepared to voluntarily suspend my protest indefinitely as long as the leaders of the Unitarian Church of Montreal agreed to enter into dialogue with me and that dialogue proved to be productive. Last Sunday he told me flat out that "the board don't want to negotiate".
So nothing has changed.
It's the same old same old. . .
When I sought dialogue with Rev. Diane Rollert she pretended that my emails contained threats against her personal safety (do try to find any threats in them) and sought a restraining order against me on the basis of claiming to have "reasonable grounds to fear" that I would commit a "serious personal injury offence" against her or other church members. Rev. Rollert rounded up various other Montreal Unitarians to provide depositions to the police about how deathly afraid they were that I would do a Jim Adkisson on them as it were. Of course this was months *before* Jim David Adkisson more or less materialized the paranoid fantasies of Rev. Diane Rollert and other Montreal Unitarians hundreds of miles south of Montreal in Knoxville, Tennessee. . .
I don't believe in the "positive feedback" principles of 'The Secret' that seems to be popular with *some* New-Agey U*Us but maybe U*Us should none-the-less err on the side of caution by being a bit more careful about the negative thought forms they put out to the U*Universe. It's a bit of a disturbing "coincidence" that while Montreal Unitarian U*Us were conjuring up paranoid delusions of your's truly entering the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a gun and shooting Montreal U*Us to death that a genuinely deranged "lone gunman" decided to go on a rampage down the road a bit. I *do* believe in what Carl Gustav Jung called "synchronicity".
I am not joking, some Montreal Unitarians actually claimed to fear that I would enter the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a firearm or two and murder U*Us. They even pretended that this was an "immanent threat" that required immediate action by the police, even though there were no genuinely *reasonable* grounds to hold to this paranoid belief. Of course that is giving these U*Us the benefit of the doubt and assuming they weren't just lying through their teeth in order to obtain some relief from my peaceful public protest in front of their alleged Unitarian Church. . . You should see some of the paranoid and/or perjurious depositions that Montreal Unitarian U*Us made to the Montreal police force in yet another Unitarian*Universalist cynical and misguided effort to force an end to my peaceful public protest.
In fact you will almost certainly get that opportunity in the near future since I fully intend to post some or all of them to the internet so that U*Us and other people can see for themselves the kind of paranoia and/or fear-mongering I am dealing with. I tried to nip this U*U paranoia and fear-mongering in the bud by formally complaining about Rev. Ray Drennan's labeling me as "psychotic" and slandering Creation Day as a "cult" way back in 1996 but no. . . the UUA's aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee under the dubious leadership of its Executive Secretary aka Director Rev. Diane Miller just had to pretend that Rev. Drennan's obvious insulting and defamatory fear-mongering which arose out of his dogmatic fundamentalist atheism, and most probably some deep personal insecurities as well, was "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership."
Now I have to deal with U*Us, apparently including some other "less than secure" U*U clerics, publicly suggesting that I am "a dangerously deranged psycho/sociopath" who is intent on entering the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a gun and murdering "less than innocent" U*Us. Apparently these paranoid U*Us are blissfully unaware of the fact that I am strongly opposed to the death penalty for far worse crimes than just being outrageously hypocritical assholes, and have never owned so much as a BB gun in my whole life. . . The fact of the matter is that I have been peacefully protesting in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal for over a decade now and, to the very best of my knowledge, no Montreal Unitarian U*U has ever received the slightest scratch or bruise because I have been totally non-violent in the course of my "non-violent direct action" of publicly protesting against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy.
Even when Montreal Unitarian U*Us were assaulting me on occasion I did not return the violence in an effort to defend myself but simply warned them that if they did not cease and desist that they would be charged with assault. One moronic Queen's Counsel lawyer by the name of Kenneth Howard QC failed to heed my clear warning when he technically assaulted me while in the process of stealing some of my picket signs. Kenneth clearly thought he was above the law thanks to his status as a Queen's Counsel lawyer. He found out the hard way that he was not quite as above the law as he quite delusionally believed. . . although he did get off a bit easier than if he had not been a QC lawyer. Kenneth ultimately copped a plea and was subjected to "non-judicial treatment" for his criminal acts of theft and assault against me and thus avoided adding a criminal record to his credentials.
The only "death threats" or other threats of violence that have been uttered in this ongoing war of words are those that have been directed at me by Montreal Unitarians, as well as some veiled threats made by U*Us online. One Montreal Unitarian who threatened to "punch (my) fucking lights out" one Sunday morning was charged with uttering threats. After initially denying having made this threat that a 911 dispatcher characterized as "death threats" because people don't always come too after having their fucking lights punched out. . . he too finally copped a plea after I quite generously allowed him to be subjected to "non-judicial treatment" for his criminal act as well. I even waived the restraining order that I could have had him subjected to as a result of him pleading guilty to threatening me, since I felt that any threat that he *might* have posed to me had been effectively neutralized by his guilty plea.
My generosity towards this belligerent U*U was rewarded by Rev. Diane Rollert and other Montreal Unitarians presenting highly misleading depositions to the police, and/or misleading and even outright false sworn testimony in court, in order to obtain a year long restraining order against me. They were "lucky" enough to get a biased judge who was clearly prejudiced against me because I decided to represent myself rather than hire a lawyer. AFAIAC concerned Montreal Unitarians never proved that they had any "reasonable grounds" for their paranoid fantasies about me but the female judge granted the restraining order anyway. I am confident that a more reasonable judge would not have granted the restraining order given the same highly questionable depositions and sworn testimony.
Rev. Diane Rollert even told one easily provable lie in her sworn testimony, along with some other less provable lies such as pretending that I "screamed" at her during this early encounter with her, but the judge did not care about that, even though I clearly pointed out the readily provable lie in my cross-examination of Rev. Rollert. For the record I have never "screamed" at anyone in the whole course of this conflict. I have very good control over my emotions and "screaming" is just not my style. I believe that Rev. Diane Rollert falsely accused me of "screaming" at her because she wanted to portray me as mentally unbalanced, as per the fear-mongering slander I have been fighting against for the better part of fifteen years now.
So, getting back to your questions David. Here is a suggestion. Why not ask the UUA and Unitarian Church of Montreal what "victim/offender reconcilation conferences or peacemaking circles" they have ever entered into with me. The answer is none aka zero aka love. You might then ask them why they have failed (indeed refused) for well over a decade to enter into ANY form of viable conflict resolution process with me. Of course there are people at the UUA, and indeed the UCM, who are quite familiar with various conflict resolution practices but quite regrettably for all concerned they absolutely refuse to responsibly *practice* them. Of course such practices would help my situation (and no doubt some others. . .) but in my experience the U*Us at the UUA and UCM are pathologically allergic to admitting to any kind of misconduct, injustice, or other wrongdoing, hence their incredibly stubborn refusal to enter into dialogue with me for more than a decade.
I have been a bit slow off the mark to directly contact UUA President Peter Morales and request/demand that he take steps to ensure that the UUA finally takes responsible steps towards resolving this conflict but I intend to do so very soon. Various distractions kept me from doing so in September and October, or earlier this month. We will see how he responds to my communication (if at all) but unfortunately I am not all that optimistic about how President Morales will respond to my "electronic communication". After all the UUA Board of Trustees has ignored all of my previous emails, or lamely passed the buck right back to the very same UUA administrators whose negligence and incompetence caused me to contact the UUA's BOT in the first place. Needless to say these implicated UUA administrators stood on the side of love by doing absolutely nothing at all to responsibly redress my grievances after UUA Trustees passed the buck back to them. . . Forgive me for mixing sports metaphors but that seems to be par for the course for U*Us.
Comments