Stefan:
> Kirt:
> >Especially the "worst children" joining any cult may find it
> >satisfying. By what standards do you see that children were becoming
> >loving beings?
> It was second hand information and I wrote that. So you should ask
> the persons reporting this, by which standards they judged. You are at
> the wrong address with me.
What *may* have happened: most children became loving beings, but there
were some failures, and the worst cases were reported to the press. Still,
even if there were 999 successes and 1 case of child abuse, that's enough
to send the guilty person to prison. You can save 999 lives, but if you
kill one person, you are a murderer.
> Some years ago a german, I know personally, tried to set up a company
> like Orkos, selling only instincto quality food. Because he couldn't
> "exploit" his workers, like Orkos does, he had to charge even higher
> prices than Orkos. And he got lots of trouble with the suppliers he
> ordered from. He saw that he permanently had to control the quality
> of the incoming foods (like Orkos does).
Maybe the prices at Orkos are "almost" justified, but I still don't understand
why some products are so expensive. For instance, their honey is 2-3 times
more expensive than ordinary organic, non heated honey.
And, given the high turnover of the company (17 million francs/year), if,
say, 1 million/year went undeclared into GC Burger's pockets, it would be
barely noticeable when you look at the prices.
> You always hick-hack on your guess of people needing gurus. Well, it was
> the press here, titling "... un gourou de la pedophilie" and it was the
> press declaring GCB to be a guru.
> For me he isn't. But for you, in your subconscious, I assume. That would
> explain your disappointed reaction and your negativity pretty well.
I don't doubt that GCB isn't a guru for you, but I am almost sure that
many persons consider him as a genius. As Tom says, "extreme diets
attract extreme people". It doesn't mean that extreme diets attract *only*
extreme people, but that a fragilized person is more likely to change
his diet than an ordinary one. And someone who is at the origin of a
theory supposed to make a revolution in your life is the best candidate
to become a guru. That phenomenon also applies to Natural Hygienists who
almost consider H. Shelton as a god.
> Anyway, this doesn't change anything in my argumentation. It even
> makes it stronger: the writer's of the L'Express article obviously in-
> cluded very old photos for their revelation story. I've got no idea
> what they intended to prove with these photos for the actual case.
> But this is my impression with all of the photos of the article.
> Photographing some naked boys on a self-made boat is plain ridiculous
> if the intention was to prove their abuse. For me it looked, as if
> they were having lots of fun on their boat.
Sure. It only proves that nudity is something natural at Montrame. It's
not as bad as abusing children, but try to walk in the street with
a naked 10 year-old boy and you will see the reaction of the police...
> By the way...
> perhaps the journalists should have taken the opening photo of the
> heavily discussed NFL book for the article... :-) I'am sure, nobody
> would have noticed.
> (For the new members of the list: this photo shows three naked boys,
> aged beginning twenty, in a tree).
Sex with young adults is not exactly pedophilia...
Anyway, as always, it is very hard to know the exact truth, even when you
try to read between the lines and select the facts, not the judgements
of the journalist. And the testimonies are often loaded with anger against
Burger or the supposed abusers. When they say that a 10 year-old girl was
in GCB's bed, it doesn't mean anything, you don't know what they did
in their bed...
Let me translate a part of Liberation's article:
[Burger] claims he sticks to theory. That's not in Jean's opinion, a historian
from Luxemburg, who stayed for 10 months at Montrame, in 1995. "There were
lectures in metapsychoanalysis, after which some practical sessions were
organized with children in Guy-Claude Burger's bedroom". Burger denies that,
without losing his temper. "One cannot say that. Society and law forbide that,
so I don't do it. I have experimented with that, but I gave up".
In 1964, Guy-Claude Burger got settled in a Swiss farm with a community.
For four years, he slept with a little girl, who is now almost 34, married
and lives near Lausanne. "At the time it began, she was already prepubescent,
he explains without a blink. One day, she mounted on me, and she performed
a penetration herself. I looked at her in the eyes without hindering her".
The little girl was 9.
My comments:
*What did Burger teach to the little girl, so that she became aware of her
sexuality and able to take the initiative in their sexual intercourse? What
did they do just prior to the sexual contact?
*Maybe Burger now condemns sexual intercourse, but you can do many things
in a bed...
|
