Social engineering at it’s finest!

Share Button

A study of apologies, the implementation of a paedophile mentoring and reintegration program for Cornwall and Eastern Ontario, and the execution of various educational programs are part of the Cornwall Public Inquiry Phase 2 program. announced by Justice Noramnd Glaude on Thursday, 29 March 2007.

Given the Cornwall Public Inquiry mandate which neatly side-steps the allegations of a paedophile ring and cover-up this sort of consciousness raising could have been anticipated, but that doesn’t make a lot of it any easier to swallow.  The forgive and forget and get on with life after you hug your local paedophile while he says he’s sorry after he served maybe six or eight months in jail or one year under house arrest for destroying how many lives is hard to take at the best of times.  It’s doubly hard when the impetus arises in a community which presumably has but a handful of bona fide paedophiles and horde of “alleged” ones roaming the streets unfettered and free.

Apologies and adopt a paedophile! So, …let’s study the ups and downs and ins and outs of saying “I’m sorry” and, for those of you in Cornwall, if you can find a real paedophile to adopt, adopt a paedophile and help him “re-integrate” – without anyone knowing but you and him and the select few who are given to taking chances with children’s lives. And let’s educate the masses so they don’t denounce paedophile-friendly system.  Let’s educate them to understand why it’s just so terribly hard to lay charges or proceed to trial when the alleged victim is, for example, a stereotypical male victim of same-sex sexual abuse who says he was abused, and his “alleged” molester is a pillar of the community who adamantly denies the allegations.  And let’s get on with business of educating the masses to understand that paedophiles are people too – they’re our brothers, fathers, sons and uncles – they need a little love from you and me because, after  all, they’re just like you and me!!

Do you see where we’re going here?  Do you see what’s happening?

Do you see how powers that be are going to turn us upside down and inside out with consciousness raising until we’re all so brain-washed we want a paedophile to run the local day care, …because we understand that paedophiles have rights, and they have needs, and who’s to blame them for the odd slip up here and there?  After all, it’s not their fault.  They’re made that way.  It’s their “sexual orientation.”

Yes.  Let’s just give paedophiles a chance – after all, what’s the life and future of the odd vulnerable child compared to the affirmation, well-being and self-esteem of a convicted or known paedophile?  And, if in the process a child is molested, well, no big deal; there’ll be educational programs to help us identify the child who is being sexually abused, and programs in place to help the victim of childhood sexual abuse get over the abuse and even forgive his molester, and educational and support programs in place to help those victims of childhood sexual abuse who are deemed credible enough by police and Crown attorneys to lay charges and who, of course, have expressed the all important persistent desire to pursue charges. 

There’s nothing to worry about.  The powers that be have it all mapped out:  Love a paedophile.  Adopt a paedophile.  Help a paedophile re-integrate.  He’s your father, your brother, your uncle.  He might even be your parish priest.  He’s just an all round nice guy.

So what if he’s just, as Michael Petrunik says, something called a “bum-toucher.”  And besides, what’s the occasional relapse given the high risk of paedophiles to re-offend?

We’re talking about children here!  Every “occasional relapse” means at least one more child is condemned to a life of pain, turmoil, shame, guilt, silence and, certainly when the victim is male, an almost inevitable future of drugs, alcohol, broken relationships and/or crime.

But, what’s that compared to building the self-esteem of his molester?  Pittance?!!

Do some victims of sexual abuse become molesters?  Yes.  Do all?  Absolutely not. The majority do not. It is unfair and unjust to cloak them all with this sordid baggage.

Are most molesters victims?  Probably.  But does that exonerate them?  Do we give a molester who has been molested himself a bye?  Do we rationalize his crimes and sins and perversions because he was once on the receiving end?  I think not.  There does come a point in life where we each must be held accountable for our actions and live with the consequences, and there comes a time when justice must be done, and there comes a time when all moral right-minded rationale people conclude that the threat posed to innocent and vulnerable children by putting them in harm’s way is of greater import than building the self-esteem of a paedophile.

This is social engineering at it’s finest.  It has nothing to do with justice. It does absolutely nothing to protect our children.

And that’s more than enough for now,

Sylvia
(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

PS: I will be going through the recent transcripts today and in the days ahead – posting and blogging.  Stay tuned :).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Social engineering at it’s finest!

  1. robar says:

    Sylvia,

    They just don’t get it. No matter what they do at this Inquiry, some of us “mushrooms” just won’t get fooled. They can try as much as they want to “re-engineer” us, but when you care for kids, no program other than substantial jail time for paedophiles will meet the needs of our society. Even with this Inquiry currently in progress, there are still kids being abused in Cornwall and surrounding area. Ask most teachers. A lot of teachers suspect that they have kids in their classrooms that are being psychologically, physically or sexually abused. IT HAS TO STOP. This Inquiry could make a substantial advance in stopping these molesters and abusers, but not in the way that it is being conducted. IT SHOULD INSTILL UNADULTERATED FEAR IN PAEDOPHILES. It is far from doing so. It should send an uncompromising message that pedophilia will NOT BE TOLERATED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. The [name deleted], [name deleted], [name deleted] [name deleted] and their ilk as well as their enablers should face substantial jail time for their deeds. It’s not enough that they will eventually face their maker. Society needs examples NOW.

    The participants of this Inquiry have seen the damage that paedophiles have caused to the “victims” that have appeared before them up to now. Destroyed lives have paraded in front of us since the “victims” have started testifying. A new generation of “victims” could be helped now if this Inquiry did its job properly. It’s not by pushing the problem further under the rug that the Inquiry will accomplish its task. We need effective action and we need it now.

    We have had a few errors identified in a few affidavits. Our rag of a newspaper finally wakes up and calls for Ledroit Becket to do its job properly. Where the hell were they all of these years when this problem was facing our community. Hiding under their bottom line!!!!! It ingratiated itself with the paedophiles of our city in order to protect its revenues and save itself from lawsuits. Hell, there wasn’t any benefit to be derived from the victims, was there?

    And then we have Cipriano!!!! What a pathetic little man. I still haven’t figured out what the hell he is doing there. I didn’t know that Charlie or the Sequins were institutions.

    The only reason that he is there is to protect Charlie’s reputation. What contribution from an institutional perspective can Cipriano provide? Isn’t it Sheriff-Scott’s job to defend the Diocese?

    This Inquiry’s mandate is so convoluted!!! It needs direction. It can’t cover all aspects that should be reviewed unless it expands its mandate. It needs to deal with the paedophile ring, the cover-up and the institutional response. Logic dictates that the Inquiry deal with the paedophile ring. The dots are starting to tell us that there was an underlying identification among paedophiles that certain “victims” were more susceptible to be quiet if abused. C-10 testified that Seguin referred him to Malcolm MacDonald when C-10 needed a lawyer. He intimated that he probably told him also that he was a “victim”. From what I have read, there seemed to be 2 main rings in operation. There was overlap in these 2 rings. You need to read some of Shelley and David Price’s comments to see this overlap. The only way to identify these rings is to have the Charlie’s, Shaver’s, Wilson’s, MacDonald’s, Laroque’s and others on the stand and testifying. Fat chance that it will happen!!!!! We also need to have the enablers testify in their efforts to facilitate the cover-up. Have these people been identified yet? How pervasive was this effort in Cornwall and area. Who was involved at the Provincial and Federal level? Who was involved in the Judiciary at both levels of government? Will the Commish finally face the music and do the honorable thing? The way this Inquiry has been going up to now, I can’t see him changing his mind.

    In order to assess institutional response in these circumstances, you need to have people directing these institutions who will honor the rules and procedures. No rules, whether written or oral, can protect our children if the head or senior members of organizations are the abusers. You are dealing, in essence, with paramilitary organizations. Whether police or religious orders, underlings are trained to obey orders and protect the institution. A victim’s first line of complaint is usually one of the two organizations.

    Manderville’s cross-examination of C-10 on Thursday last made me sick to my stomach. What a poor excuse for a man he is. Re-victimize the “victim”. Mr. Commish sat on his hands and allowed the abuse to proceed. Although he had assured C-10 at the outset of the testimony that he would be there to assure fairness, when push came to shove, Manderville spewed his venom and the Commish crapped his pants. So much for his little talk to assure the witness, at the beginning, when a new witness takes the stand. “I’ll be there for you until it serves my purpose.”

    Why are he and Callaghan so touchy when it comes to testimony against Shaver, Stuart MacDonald or even Judge Fitzpatrick? What are they afraid that testimony will reveal? Was it that these two cops were part of the decision making group that decided to kill Perry Dunlop and his family? What evidence does Shaver have that would inculpate senior Justice or Government officials in order to save his hide? This is standard procedure with RCMP or FBI. I know. I have seen this process at work in both organizations. It’s not pretty.

    I am still of the opinion that the unfairness of the process and this “social re-engineering” will bring forth a “victim” or a Garry Guzzo that will blow the lid off this charade. This will force this Commish or a replacement to complete this Inquiry that will affect change. It will lead to laws to change the status quo and provide effective protection to our kids. It also needs to deal with the iniquity of the past and send this scum and their supporters to jail.

    I don’t have the documentation or rapport that you seem to have with the victims. Although accused of trying to scuttle this Inquiry, you have enough knowledge to keep the process honest. Keep up the good work. You are not alone in wanting this expensive process to produce effective protection to our kids.

    Robar

  2. Sylvia says:

    I very reluctantly decided I had to edit out several names and one comment Robar. Not because I disagree with what you have to say – not at all. I just don’t want to see you behind behind bars for expressing an honest opinion. I must try to keep myself and others legally-correct. There has been enough damage done already – we don’t need to add more notches to the gun butts.

    As for the Price allegations – to date there hasn’t been a boo about Dave or Shelley at the Weave Shed. I am waiting…

    Sylvia

  3. robar says:

    Sylvia

    Thanks for covering me on my previous comment. The frustration that I have with this process is sometimes more than I can bear.

    There are too many people in Cornwall and surrounding area with vital information that could alter the focus of this Inquiry. They don’t want to get involved. Playing the “3 Monkeys” keeps children at risk. It would be a shame to waste this vast amount of money on Glaude’s “social re-engineering” without effective protection of the kids.

    Robar

  4. Panther says:

    ”A study of apologies, the implementation of a paedophile mentoring and reintegration program for Cornwall and Eastern Ontario, and the execution of various educational programs are part of the Cornwall Public Inquiry Phase 2 program. announced by Justice Noramnd Glaude on Thursday, 29 March 2007.

    Given the Cornwall Public Inquiry mandate which neatly side-steps the allegations of a paedophile ring and cover-up this sort of consciousness raising could have been anticipated, but that doesn’t make a lot of it any easier to swallow. The forgive and forget and get on with life after you hug your local paedophile while he says he’s sorry after he served maybe six or eight months in jail or one year under house arrest for destroying how many lives is hard to take at the best of times. It’s doubly hard when the impetus arises in a community which presumably has but a handful of bona fide paedophiles and horde of “alleged” ones roaming the streets unfettered and free.”

    This is disturbing to me. The bottom line in offender treatment is accountability. If the Justice System and the community or society as a whole is unwilling to stand up and hold the sex offender accountable then what example do the offenders really have and who is able to protect the children? For me there are quite a few problems in how the Inquiry is presenting it’s Phase II. On the surface it sounds just peachy keen. I suppose that sounds sarcastic and perhaps it is but it astounds me just how naïve many people are concerning accountability and treatment of sex offenders. It’s such a volatile and emotional problem and it seems to me the spectrum is either one extreme or the other.

    You bring up a very good point. I know I don’t see very much accountability in sentencing. This I think is a major problem and I didn’t see it addressed by the Phase II of the Inquiry. I don’t know why Eastern Ontario (at least what I’ve seen coming out of Cornwall, Belleville and Kingston) tends to be light on accountability for sex offenders. It makes no sense to me. Hanson heralds from eastern Canada and I had considered him an authority in Sex Offender Treatment. Granted I didn’t agree with all his precepts but a lot of his work had a lot of merit.

    From a Justice Ssystem accountability perspective sex offenders require longer sentences for several reasons. Many feel longer for punitive reasons but there are also treatment reasons. Canada, last I heard, was pro treatment models. The sentences Judges are handing down in Eastern Ontario are not taking that into account. Most sex offenders should be receiving at least 18 months of intense sex offender treatment within the prison system prior to being put back into the community. A sex offender treatment program tends to run a minimum of three years. To hope that children will be safe if supervision is done by community members trained via seminars is naïve at best and downright scary to me for a lot of reasons. Unless something has drastically changed over the last 5 years or so many in Corrections felt that while many citizens did not like the idea of sex offenders often being released into the community under the supervision of probation and parole short of their maximum sentence, the advantage of being able to supervise the sex offender for a longer period of time as a result helped in lowering the long term recidivism rate. Although the offender was not in prison he/she was still accountable to probation and parole and had access to continuing treatment. The worst problem in dealing with the convicted sex offender and sentencing was when the offender opted not to participate in the treatment programs within the prison system and maxed out his sentence with no treatment. When that occurs there is nothing the justice system can do except for wait for them to offend again and the process starts all over again.

    ”Apologies and adopt a paedophile! So, …let’s study the ups and downs and ins and outs of saying “I’m sorry” and, for those of you in Cornwall, if you can find a real paedophile to adopt, adopt a paedophile and help him “re-integrate” – without anyone knowing but you and him and the select few who are given to taking chances with children’s lives. And let’s educate the masses so they don’t denounce paedophile-friendly system. Let’s educate them to understand why it’s just so terribly hard to lay charges or proceed to trial when the alleged victim is, for example, a stereotypical male victim of same-sex sexual abuse who says he was abused, and his “alleged” molester is a pillar of the community who adamantly denies the allegations. And let’s get on with business of educating the masses to understand that paedophiles are people too – they’re our brothers, fathers, sons and uncles – they need a little love from you and me because, after all, they’re just like you and me!!

    Do you see where we’re going here? Do you see what’s happening?”

    You have another good point here in my opinion. J.

    Sex offenders lack empathy. Most people do not understand what lacking empathy entails with a sex offender. Sex offenders are very adept at grooming people. Sure many have heard at least the words that they groom children in order to offend. They also groom the parents, the relatives, the teachers, and the other people in supervisory positions at day care camps and/or their own families. Yes, and as community leaders. They are good at what they do. People who lack empathy can and often are very charming. They know how to mimic emotions; they learn by what others say and how they ‘act’. They will tell you anything you want to hear. They will psych out your weak points and exploit them. Most sex offenders rarely even get a glimmer of true empathy until they have been years in a treatment program. Some never will.

    Another problem I would anticipate with this is the ‘forgiveness’ element. I suppose it’s based in what we who have had Christian upbringings were taught. You are ‘good’ if you can forgive; you are not ‘good’ if you do not. We didn’t learn that perhaps forgiving from the ‘head’ does not heal the ‘heart’. We also didn’t explore that forgiveness is mute if the offender doesn’t have a clue what he/she is asking forgiveness for. A parrot can be trained to say ‘I’m sorry’. Then ask the parrot to tell you what they are sorry for and how their actions impacted you and those you love. They can’t.

    Does that sound harsh? Our children are at stake.

    ”Do you see how powers that be are going to turn us upside down and inside out with consciousness raising until we’re all so brain-washed we want a paedophile to run the local day care, …because we understand that paedophiles have rights, and they have needs, and who’s to blame them for the odd slip up here and there? After all, it’s not their fault. They’re made that way. It’s their “sexual orientation.”

    I truly hope that if the Inquiry goes through with their Phase II proposals as I read them that they make sure that anyone who has contact with pedophiles is capable of knowing that in Community Based Treatment Programs where the sex offender sits is their own choice. If they are talking the talk and not walking the walk then they need to be placed in prison where they cannot hurt the community. This is no reflection on the person who had a sincere desire to ‘help’. When you allow a sex offender to con you, when you make excuses for sex offenders when they even start to minimize, deny or begin to play you; you are not ‘helping’ them and you are endangering vulnerable people around you. You are becoming part of the problem not part of the solution.

    Regarding his or her sexual orientation, each sex offender is unique. There is no simple formula in sex offender treatment. Each has their own set of triggers, each has their own set of motivations. Pedophilia is not just clumped into ages of attraction there are many many variables.

    ”Yes. Let’s just give paedophiles a chance – after all, what’s the life and future of the odd vulnerable child compared to the affirmation, well-being and self-esteem of a convicted or known paedophile? And, if in the process a child is molested, well, no big deal; there’ll be educational programs to help us identify the child who is being sexually abused, and programs in place to help the victim of childhood sexual abuse get over the abuse and even forgive his molester, and educational and support programs in place to help those victims of childhood sexual abuse who are deemed credible enough by police and Crown attorneys to lay charges and who, of course, have expressed the all important persistent desire to pursue charges. “

    If some in the Inquiry really believed that there would be offenders lined up to give testimony to help the mandate of the Inquiry. There is not.

    “There’s nothing to worry about. The powers that be have it all mapped out: Love a paedophile. Adopt a paedophile. Help a paedophile re-integrate. He’s your father, your brother, your uncle. He might even be your parish priest. He’s just an all round nice guy.So what if he’s just, as Michael Petrunik says, something called a “bum-toucher.” And besides, what’s the occasional relapse given the high risk of paedophiles to re-offend?”

    That’s called minimization. It’s very common among offenders and those who wish to protect them.

    ”We’re talking about children here! Every “occasional relapse” means at least one more child is condemned to a life of pain, turmoil, shame, guilt, silence and, certainly when the victim is male, an almost inevitable future of drugs, alcohol, broken relationships and/or crime.

    But, what’s that compared to building the self-esteem of his molester? Pittance?!!

    Do some victims of sexual abuse become molesters? Yes. Do all? Absolutely not. The majority do not. It is unfair and unjust to cloak them all with this sordid baggage.

    Are most molesters victims? Probably. But does that exonerate them? Do we give a molester who has been molested himself a bye? Do we rationalize his crimes and sins and perversions because he was once on the receiving end? I think not. There does come a point in life where we each must be held accountable for our actions and live with the consequences, and there comes a time when justice must be done, and there comes a time when all moral right-minded rationale people conclude that the threat posed to innocent and vulnerable children by putting them in harm’s way is of greater import than building the self-esteem of a paedophile.”

    It really disturbed me that in what I read regarding Phase II the mention was on victims who then go on to offend. What a very subtle slap in the faces of the majority of the Cornwall victims. I found that so offensive. The pedophiles in Cornwall walk the streets pointing to the few victims they had consciously groomed to offend. Yes pedophiles also groom young children and teens to offend. Why? So they have a supply of victims for their deviant behaviour when those they have already offended mature past the age of their attraction. It also contributes to the conspiracy of silence. It’s one of the diabolical parts of the creation of victims.

    Just a few of my thoughts.

    Best,
    Panther

  5. Panther says:

    Oops, sorry. I meant to have my remarks not in bold so it would be easier to read. Looks like I goofed 🙁

    Panther

  6. Sylvia says:

    I tried removing the bold and indenting the quotes instead. But, seems the software gremlins are hard at work – several paras insist on appearing in bold. Try as I might I can’t do a do a thing about it 🙁 I’ll try again later.

    Excellent comments Panther!

    Sylvia

  7. Panther says:

    thank you. That looks much better 🙂 I’ll get the hang of it eventually LOL

    I’m not sure how to do the indenting but that looks much better I think.

    Best,

    Panther

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *