New: A message from Jeff Bent (Beyond90Seconds.com, September 17, 2009)
Update: Bent may be forced to eat (Albuquerque Journal North, September 7, 2009).
“At the very least, the warden told him if this religious fast progresses into the extent of a hunger strike, force-feeding could be on the table,” Bland said. (Albuquerque Journal North)
————————————————————————————————————————-
(September 1, 2009) Convicted sex offender Wayne Bent says he’s fed-up with (allegorically speaking) being sexually abused by the State of New Mexico. In an August 31 post headlined My Crown of Thorns on the Strong City website, Bent writes that he has been fasting for two days and will continue to go without the state’s food and water.
Bent’s latest writing begins with a salutation to his distant flock:
Dear little family at Strong City,
Today [August 19, 2009], I heard the message that my appeal for bond was denied [Read the brief filed with the NM Court of Appeals .
In setting-out to explain his rationale for his latest fast, Bent sets the table by sharing that he was twice the victim of sexual molestation during childhood. Those stories are followed by this excerpt:
Now, in my old age, I have been molested again by a dirty old man. He is the State of New Mexico. This present molestation of me has affected me a hundredfold more than when I was barely eleven. I have been used as a sex object for the State of New Mexico and Dragonfly Productions in the UK, as well as the National Geographic Channel, in their fantasy movie of me. This little boy is greatly abused again, many times over.
In an allegorical picture, I see myself as the little eleven-year-old; a dirty old man kidnaps me and takes me to his prison house at Los Lunas. He now molests me there for these nine months, and makes me his sex object.
Bent and many of his followers have fasted numerous times since his 2008 arrest. Last December, a Taos jury found Bent guilty of one count of second-degree sexual contact of a child and two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
So, how long will this fast last? Some paragraphs near the end of Bent’s latest offering appear to provide some insight:
I must now refuse to take any sustenance from the State. I will eat none of their food, or drink none of their water. I will cut off this hypocrisy. I refuse to be the State’s “head on a pole.” I do not belong to the State, and no, I am not its property. I have a heart, soul, and mind that belong only to God. This will never change. I will eat only that food and drink that are brought to me by my family, as in the last two imprisonments, and for the same reasons. My family believes in me, and none of them lie and say I molested girls. Their food comes with love. I will no longer receive food from this false owner.
So what will happen if the prison refuses to let my family provide for me? I will die of starvation in this dirty old man’s house, who has molested me for nine months; and, I may die of dehydration, unless God Himself sends the delivering Angel to me. It will be up to the State whether I live or die, but I must be true to myself. It is up to my Father what my resolution will be. It is written of this moment, “Blessed are those believers who die in the Lord from now on.” Revelation 14:13. “Be faithful unto death, and you will receive a crown.” Revelation 2:10.
Whether Bent dies of starvation remains to be seen. In the immediate future, it wouldn’t be surprising to learn that one or more of his supporters will join him in his fast.
Indeed, the first person to comment beneath Bent’s Crown of Thorns is his devoted Esther.
The comparison to the Mason Cult has more to do with the glassy eyed stares and the unquestioning loyalty to cult leader and his crazy take on religion. (I’m definitely not the first person to mention the similarities). I know that you guys are non violent and don’t do drugs. As far as what I watch and get involved with on the Internet, I have followed this out of curiosity, and after 2 years, I have learned a lot about Wayne. I read Wayne’s crazy rants and tried to find some sense in them, but there was none to be found.
Milton, are you living at SC? If not, why not? I thought the whole idea of this church was to live together in perfect harmony on “the land”.
I know you can keep in touch by phone and internet but it’s not quite the same as being right there in the big middle of this mess.
If you are, that’s great, but I thought the last time we’d heard from you it was from Oregon or Washington, can’t remember for sure.
Oh, and for the record I defend personal liberty. My personal liberty is just fine. I own my house, own vehicles, own my business and I even own *gasp* guns. I pay my taxes and my health insurance plan covers our needs. My children have all received wonderful college educations and are making their own mark on our world.
I might not like everything the government says or does but if I don’t, I work to change it. I noticed that members of the LOR don’t vote. If you don’t vote, then you can’t complain when someone you dislike gets elected or some plan you are against becomes law.
The last time I looked, chaining yourself to a tree or fasting to get what you want didn’t work out too well for the people participating. I don’t think WB is going to fair too well either, but who knows? Maybe the appeals court will rule in his favor and all this fasting, whining and being force fed will have been for naught.
THE LOR GOD
The absolute allegiance to an infallible god that LOR is required to serve is the man Wayne Bent. For example, when one of his devoted followers writes:
“I have known him for many many years in various capacities and have never known him to digress from strict integrity in any particular. Etc.”
He is not talking about Jesus, but about Wayne. It is the Wayne god that is given the exalted position “in any particular.” Jesus is only used by way of comparison to him, as if Wayne’s cross (multiple fornications and the natural embarrassment to him it brought) should be considered somehow equal to the passion of the Savior on His cross.
Wayne first, and his followers have made this comparison, and though it would embarrass some of the members to compare what Wayne’s fornication to the cross of the Savior, they dare not say so to anyone. If they let it slip in an unguarded moment, they know the consequences all to well. Would they admit it, that they have to be just so careful? Of course not. Even such an admission would get them in sudden trouble. They would have to retract it and show appropriate repentance or down the road they go, kickin rocks.
As I said, absolute obedience as to an infallible god is what is required if you want to remain considered an insider. Not to Jesus, as one confused poster implied, but to our man in prison. It is Wayne who they speak of as having loved them so wonderfully, never deviating from integrity in any way, as long as whoever is speaking has known him. How many such “testimonies” (broken records) have we heard now?
As in any other cult, they monitor themselves and each other most carefully. If not, if they were to allow for a moment, say an honest question to be entertained, such as a Bible text that indicates the abomination of taking your son’s wife to bed whenever you want, just that question and you are a goner. You don’t have to be warned not to speak of such a text, the members all know it. Their god (the man Wayne) has spoken on the matter and that settles it. It is for them to take whatever spin he has put on it. If they are going to add something to it, it would be how wonderful he has always been during the 20 or 30 years they have known him. Nothing else is necessary or tolerated.
Can someone explain who this Milton person is and what is his connection to Wayne Bent and Strong City?
RESOLVE
Jeff assures us that he knows what his father is doing—fasting. Just fasting–until he gets his way. Wayne explained it this way, he didn’t want to sign off on it, as a child molester, as a “turd” in the state septic tank, something like that. But then if he got some better food, he would agree to do it. Which I guess would mean to go ahead, stop his fast unto death and be their turd in their tank.
Jeff feels free to speak of what he calls his dad’s reserve. Because of Wayne’s reserve, Jeff says the state will fail.
What evil thing is the state doing? What sort of torture it is perpetrating on the meek and mild messiah? The state is doing its best to keep messiah alive, against his will—feed him. Three times a day it was bringing him vegetarian meals—such torture. If he ate them, he would not die. But then he could not claim he was being killed. If he starves himself to death, which is a form of suicide, his devoted followers will claim he was killed. Not dead yet, they claim he is being killed and laud his awesome resolve.
His resolve is to be stubborn and threaten to kill himself. I doubt he thinks for a moment that they would let him go through with it, which means he trusts them to keep him alive. This confidence is what gives our man the “resolve” to appear to be quite intent on suicide (by fast).
We will soon hear of him again, and from Jeff, explaining how great was his resolve and how the state in its evil intention to feed him, could not break him.
If he has refused to take food or water, to preserve messiah’s life, the state has probably connected him to feeding tubes. If he has removed them, the state may have had to fasten him to something solid. If he is released from his straps while still determined to remove them, they will not be removed. As soon as he assures those in charge of his care that he will not remove them again, or that he will partake of sustenance again, they would unstrap him. But if this were known, Jeff would not be able to taut his considerable resolve. If he begins eating again, the state could not be characterized as failing. The failure would be Wayne’s.
Still, I expect that with our man eating again, some claim will be made that it was the state that made the concession. It was they who really gave in to Wayne in some way, and not the other way around. Some kind gesture on their part will be used to demonstrate how they gave in, actually caved in to Wayne at last.
What is more likely is that he became tired of the straps and tubes. So much for messiah’s considerable resolve.
Milton is a former minister of the church. At Castle Dome, he along with Allen Armstrong and John Thompson were basically severed from their Minister credentials and not paid from the tithe anymore. Wayne Bent was then the only paid minister of the LOR. Milton is still a member of the LOR and had lived at Strong City for about 3 or so years. I believe he current is remarried, as he lost his former wife Verna (Purity) when she passed away at Strong City 26 Dec 2006. She is buried there. Milton now lives in Oregon.
From my understanding, Bent has been put into segregation as he is a danger to others and himself.
You don’t get the benefits, for example vists from the outside world when your in segregation.
Basically, he’s going to sit and hold his breath until he gets what he wants. And I just love how the LORites think that fasting until death will get them their way.
Jan – you might want to email Prudence. She can tell you all about Milton.
TORTURED AND MOLESTED BY THE STATE
Wayne says that the state is torturing and molesting the innocent. The innocent—and who would that be–himself. Jeff says, “Now they are trying to silence and break him.” If he dies while undergoing the states torture, Jeff was instructed to get the word out that he was killed by someone.
So then, what does all this sort of awful torture look like? The state is doing its best to keep messiah alive. That’s it. Feed him. That’s the torture. What makes it torture is that three times a day our man is given vegetarian meals which are delivered to him without fail, to do with as he pleases.
Jeff says that in their endeavors against his father, the state will fail. Actually, more to the point, if it fails (to feed him), his father will die. Perhaps Jeff does not realize this, but he had better hope that it doesn’t fail or his father will not continue to exist.
Well, truth be told, both Jeff and his father have thought this out to some degree. With the use of a quick calculation, they know the state will not let Wayne die. This confidence in mind, Wayne has the courage to make another show of a fast to the end, knowing the end will not be.
One thing about death by fast is that unlike other methods of suicide, it takes some time. In other words, at any time during your suicide by fast, if you are interrupted by those in charge of your care, you will not die. Be sure Wayne has included this in his calculations.
Wayne claims to be molested now. And what does this molestation of messiah look like? He has noticed they won’t let him go home where he could continue molesting the various women waiting there for the “healings” to proceed. People always need to be healed, even though they were already healed once. He would promise not to do any more such healings if they would just let him go home. But now he is convinced it ain’t gonna happen, so he has begun to call it his molestation, by the “dirty old man” sustaining his life, the state.
Jeff says they intend to break him. And for Jeff, what does this breaking of messiah look like? Regular communication with his devoted followers. If he doesn’t try suicide by starvation, he has a long list of privileges to which he has become accustomed. If messiah doesn’t persist with the intention of harming himself, those pleasures will all be restored. Perhaps somewhat more than other inmates might enjoy. This is what Jeff calls “breaking him”.
What Jeff calls his resolve is simply his stubborn refusal to interrupt his latest tantrum, be fed and enjoy the special freedoms granted him to date. But Jeff says he knows his father, and he won’t be doing that. He won’t be the one to blink first, wink or say uncle. Jeff is betting that the state “will fail”. If Jeff is correct and they fail at feeding him, it means they will let him have his way and he will die. If the state fails, he will die by his own hand, by starvation. Does Jeff really mean what he says?
Jeff likes the sound of it, “the state will fail” but as for the state failing, Jeff may not like what that would mean. Or perhaps, if he wants to see his father again, he would prefer to take it back. He should take it back. Before speaking, he should have thought it through—just one step further would have been enough.
I believe that except for a few (from Strong City), most of us here on this list hope that the state prevails, Wayne blinks first, ends his tantrum and goes back to eating, his life saved. If Wayne prevails, he is a dead man. Just a wink from our man and his life would be preserved. Just that quick. But it would cost him some face and for messiah, just the thought of that might be too much to bear.
The only thing I have ever heard Wayne Bent say in judgment about David Mead is, “I loved that man.”
By thy words,
This might be true what you say. This may be all that you heard him say. But if so, then you weren’t there when over night, he turned everyone against me with his pronunciations on me (judgments).
Good thing for me they didn’t mean anything. They all failed, not being true. The curses pronounced on me were not to be. Not so, as it turned out.
If you were there, you heard them with everybody else, so you must not have been present. It was then that about half the members turned against me, would not speak to me for to them, I was “dead, lost, the devil.” If you have contact with those who were there, just ask them if this was not what he said about me. Or look it up in what was written of the devil, and who it was that “michael” said had gone against him in all the various evil ways that only he could describe. Not just some words, entire papers were written against me.
If you were there and believed Wayne, you treated me this way too. And if not, then perhaps you can make the statement that you never heard Wayne say more about me.
And if you were present in that day, just tell us who you are and I will remind you of your particular attitude and your treatment of me in that day. And if you were present, I understand that you might not like to be reminded. Then you would probably rather remain anonymous.
On the other hand, I hope that what you say is true, that you weren’t there for the rest of what he said, for it is true that before that day he did love me, as I still love him. Why do you think I write my head off in the effort to help him see his errors? Except for the sexual, my errors were much the same as his. The only difference between us now is that I have repented, which he takes as a serious threat, not being willing to repent of it.
Day 14 of Wayne’s Protest for Catered Meals!
Jan,
If the state is doing its job, which I think we can expect it is, what is the difference between day 14, and oh, say day 12, or 19? Things will change (for the better) when our man begins to accept those regular and healthy vegetarian meals again. That’s the way I eat and I can vouch for it, vegetarianism. I have never eaten flesh, but I certainly don’t have that gaunt, weak or familiar sickly vegetarian look you would expect. I have two senior Olympic gold medals in table tennis.
There is quite an interesting update on the Strong City site by Jeff Bent, tonight. There seems to have been a reversal on allowing Wayne access to his attorney, which seems legally like a smart move. I found it hard to understand why the prison would want to tread on that precarious legal ground, with no attorney allowed to visit. That just seemed wrong.
And Jeff feels they are performing like the “Three Stooges,” in their actions. It might seem like that, in a way because I am sure they are in unfamiliar territory with Wayne’s fast. Even though they may want to try and maintain some degree of humanity towards his actions, they still have to appear in charge and that in deed will be a challenge as this moves into week 3 and Wayne is only taking in water.
Jeff also received a mysterious email from an “inside source,” supposedly letting him know his dad’s current condition. The email contained this:
For some reason that gave Jeff some comfort and from it he gathered that God’s victory in all this is at hand. I guess my brain has a hard time wrapping myself around Jeff’s theories but then I never claimed to think like a Lorite. And no David, it is not necessary for you to explain it to me. I will just wait and see what develops.
WAYNE NEGOTIATES WITH OFFICIALS
He goes home with the promise that he will do no more of those healing sessions.
Okay Wayne, we thought you promised not to proceed with those healing sessions.
These aren’t healing sessions. They are counseling procedures.
What’s the difference?
The healing sessions, that was a one time deal. God doesn’t need any more of those.
Jeff has taken rationalization to a new level!
Jeff allowed this comment on Strong City’s site:
5. Posted by John Paul on September 11th at 8:32 AM
Hello,
I just want to say that Wayne Bent and all of his followers are a pack of fools. He predicted the end of the world on October 31, 2007. Did it come to past. The Bible says that anyone who makes predictions that does not come true are false prophets. Wayne Bent is a sex starved pervert.
NO MORE HEALING SESSIONS
Wayne Bent has let it be known that God was satisfied with those healing sessions and would not require any more of them. With this in mind, what harm to go home? He feels the officials who have charge of him should be willing to let him go back to his ranch and flock.
Back at the ranch it would be understood, no more healings. To this end, he would be monitored. Of course his monitors not understanding his religious services or just what he was doing, it would have to be explained to them again, as it was in the trial.
Well Wayne, it looks like you are back at it again. What you are doing with these women in these counseling procedures is the same as you did in the healing services.
Oh no. Sorry, you plainly don’t’ understand, that idea just comes from out of your own lust. This is very different from that?
Don’t you have them undressed again and in bed with you?
Not for healing. Healing is all over now.
What are these sessions for then? Isn’t this what you were charged for? This very kind of thing? Charged and sentenced?
Nobody could prove it.
You admitted it, wrote about it almost daily in detail on the internet. Along with the personal accounts of the various women involved.
See what I mean, you are looking at it from the viewpoint of the natural man. We are religious but you aren’t. Like the world does, you have let your own imagination run wild. When we do it, we are like doctors who have no sexual thoughts whatsoever.
It may be natural what you are doing, but didn’t you agree not to proceed this way?
These are all counseling procedures now, not healing sessions. Catch my drift? See the difference?
Disturbing to say the least.
I can understand why Jeff feels as he does about what Judge Baca said in a Sidebar Discussion. I remember how I felt when I was doing the transcripts and heard it. I was quite surprised. I believe there is even a discussion here on Beyond 90 Seconds about this. Now Jeff has a link up to that audio and you can all hear Judge Baca’s words:
Jeff says:
Some of you may not agree but for me there just might be reasons why these people feel as they do about the State. At the very least they have good reasons to question the severity of the sentence.
Please listen to Judge Baca’s words at the most recent Strong City Post.
Jan
Jan, I guess it comes down to deciding whether you believe the act that Bent performed was for healing, as they claim, or for sex, as all of Bent’s prior writings lead up to, and the pattern he had already shown. I know the jury didn’t get to see everything, but they saw enough to make the decision that this was sexual and just a step in the grooming and control of these underage girls. Also, I guess most of us, by our own sense of right and wrong, immediately knew that a naked minor with a naked(or not) 66 year old man, was not right.
I’m sure the jurors could also see how impossible it would be for these young girls to sit across from not only Bent, but also the only family that they know and say something that would devastate the whole cult. That is alot to put on anyone, but everyone saw A.S. was traumatized.
Unfortunately, Judge Baca’s off the record comments are not relevant in relation to the trial outcome or his eventual sentencing actions, because he was not making a ruling and, most importantly, we don’t know the context. For example, we don’t know whether he was saying those words (even sarcastically) to the defense attorney to be reminding that such was her position. Or, it could be argued that perhaps he merely had a momentary lapse of awareness, which was refreshed, concerning such evidence, prior the sentencing by reviewing the transcript. Off the record comments are not evidentiary or can they be regarded as significant.
The jury decided that there was evidence that the breast was touched. The jury members are the “deciders of fact.” There were several indicators which could be interpreted as evidence of breast touching. Wayne Bent stood up and showed on his own chest exactly where he placed his large hand over the girls’ “sternums.” It is a simple deduction that a hand placed the way he demonstrated couldn’t help from touching a portion of the breast. Also, one of the victim witnesses said that he kissed her on the breast, which would have been sufficient evidence for the eventual jury decision.
This statement of Judge Baca’s is not only a red herring, but it is a very bad tactic to be raised in a defense appeal process (it was mentioned in the defense appeal arguments), because it is so easily disproved (as I have illustrated) and the rebuttal which can be so methodically done illustrates and emphasizes that there is indeed sufficient evidence of a touching of the breast. The better defense position is not to focus on some offhand off the record comment by the Judge for which the context is not understood and the substance of which is refutable, but instead to concentrate on the inappropriateness of the sentence. This is because an appeals court can direct a re-sentencing and this is the one area where there is a strong likelihood of success.
I have long maintained that Wayne Bent should be serving his sentence only under house arrest and that it should be a maximum of of only three years. To read my argument for his immediate resentencing and release to serve the balance at his remote ranch just go to my blog (click on my name to the right). Then once you are viewing my blog look in the right panel for a link entitled, “Free Wayne Bent.”
I am surprised that Wayne has given up hope so easily. The denial of the appeal bond is not a portent of doom regarding the outcome. I think the likelihood of an order for resentencing is strong. The Baca sentence was inappropriate and I think the appeals judges will agree. But, let’s don’t try to make the position on a spurious argument about something Baca said in a sidebar which could have a dozen varied contextual interpretations, all of which are the opposite of what the words seem to say.
I believe the discussion about the sidebar conversation was that Ms Montoya was saying that her evidence would disprove that there was any touching. Sort of like when you are really listening to someone and to make sure you understood them correctly, you repeat what they said back. Judge Baca was repeating it back to her.
They also said that they didn’t get all their witnesses in but the State was also limited in witnesses. Prudence didn’t testify and that was one of the big reasons she was there.
I truly believe that A.S. was traumatized and also felt violated. That’s enough for me to believe it was wrong.
Sentence wise, it’s a little over done but then I wasn’t the judge who had to deal with all the b.s. over the months, the fasting, the word fasting, the letters, etc. Perhaps the Supreme Court will send the case back for a new sentence, if he’s still alive.
Although I felt the sentence was to the max, I feel like house arrest for Bent would be the equivalent of no punishment. Also, Bent knew he was doing wrong, and did it anyway, knowing there would be consequences.
KM pointed out the appeal argument (which the defense has raised); that they didn’t get all their witnesses in. However, courts (judges) have long had the discretionary option to limit the number of witnesses when those being excluded are not actually witnesses to the crime being tried, nor are they those who could testify concerning the whereabouts of the accused at the time of the crime or any other eye witness accounting would be exculpatory (proving innocence). One general rule for exclusion is, if the defense (or the prosecution) has repetitive (saying the same thing as others who did take the stand) character witnesses, whose testimony which would tend to obfuscate or perhaps de-emphasize probative evidence by just making the trial unnecessarily long and boring, then those are permissible to be limited in number. Otherwise defense attorneys will sometimes resort to presenting a never ending parade of lengthy witnesses who really have nothing to add, but whose time consuming testimony will distance the jury from previous prosecution (or defense) witnesses who actually were at the scene of the crime they are considering.
I’m of the opinion that the prosecution wasn’t denied Prudence’s testimony, but, instead, they made the decision not to call her, since she wasn’t there at the crime scene and they felt that the defense hadn’t raised anything with their “character” witnesses, so there was nothing salient which needed to be rebutted.
How important should a whispered side bar be considered? If a man beats you with a club for instance, should he be so glad what he thinks the judge thought, that the judge may have whispered something to the effect there was no evidence your eyes for example were put out?
That you may not have done this or that—so. Okay, the whole scene was obscene. What you did was foul enough, without adding to it.
After a molestation of any kind, there are always many offenses left uncommitted. This, in any crime scene. The molester can always say something like, “well, I didn’t do this or that.” Or “I thought the judge said he thought I didn’t do something or another. If this is an acceptable defense, no one would be guilty.
Jeff calls the judge a hate-good for sentencing his father after being found guilty for what he did.
Any molester of children when caught can look at what he “didn’t do” and say something like, “There were plenty of foul things that I did not do to it/them, which I certainly could have done, had I not been so circumspect. And I know the judge noticed some of them too, yet he convicted me for what I did do. How inappropriate of him. What a judge hate-good. Now I know what to expect from the evil system.”
I thought what the judge said in the sidebar was troubling in the sense that if it were my loved one on trial and I then later listened to these transcripts and heard that statement coming from the judge, I would be very angry and would probably feel even more justified in believing my loved one was innocent.
I do know that “off the record comments are not evidentiary nor can they be regarded as significant,” as Sam so astutely stated in his above post.
In fact I agree with everything Mr. Redman said. It was quite well written. There is no question that to pull this one sentence of Judge Baca’s and be focusing on it for the Appeal would be a huge mistake. We certainly were not privy to that whole conversation so how and what Judge Baca meant is not exactly clear. And it is as Sam said actually not true based on the testimony of A.S.
I do not know what arguments Bent’s attorney used for the Appeal. But since I too, have long felt this sentence was completely out of line for the offense, hopefully that is their main argument. It would be a shame to not wait and see if this sentence can be reduced and I too am surprised at this hasty dramatic fasting drama because that seems to be an action that shows Wayne Bent is just giving up. I never thought this man was a quitter.
Jan, Wayne is not giving up. No way. He is not quitting—this it the biggest tantrum he can throw. The best threat he can muster. Far from giving up, he intends to get his way with now. If not all he wants, at least as much as he can get. You misperceive the man. Jeff could explain it for you.
Beside what Sam reported, clearly showing what the record shows of the touching of the breast, KM put the small snippet of Judge Baca (that Jeff took out of context) in proper context. As anyone could who did not intend to sell it as something else.
KM noticed that it was not said as “a statement”, but during a private conversation, and in direct response to Wayne’s lawyer. She had just said something to the effect that there was no evidence for the touching, which was a part of her job description to say, and the judge was repeating it back to her, that she understood what she just said. In conversation, it happens all the time.
This is the kind of thing Jeff (and Wayne) have to hang on to. But what else do they have?
They are certainly not so careful in their own pronouncements such as to the judge upon sentencing “I won’t be there but for a few days”, something like that “just so you know”. This is a really big error on the part of messiah, but does it matter. No, better to look for an error on the part of the judge so as to make him Hate-Good for it.
Just so you know Wayne, it has been more than a few days, and your still there.
How about “Guilty on all counts”? Jeff just recounted for us how his father called him forward to his table to tell him he would be found guilty. He want us to see the amazing prophecy fulfilled. He had written it on a napkin if I remember correctly and passed it to his lawyer as well, “Guilty on all counts”, it read. In retelling of his fathers accuracy as a prophet, he left this part out. Why did he leave it out, guilty on all counts? He was not found guilty on all counts.
If he is messiah, this error, these errors are worse than Judge Baca who makes no such claim.
No need to speculate
Actually, what was actually said in the exchange is quite clear. There is no need to speculate about who said what in response to whom.
From the transcript:
So, there is no need to misquote anyone when we can read what was actually said. It is a strange exchange, but it seems apparent that it was a communication by the judge directed specifically to Ms. Montoya with the judge pointing out that whether the breast was touched is the crux of the matter for the jury to decide.
There is some validity to the consternation expressed by Jeff Bent that it seems to be in complete contrast, even though the jury returned a guilty verdict, for a judge to make such a statement and then days later impose such a draconian sentence. But, like I said earlier, what the judge commented off the record is not relevant in the appeals process. And without understanding his demeanor (his facial expression to the defense attorney might have indicated that he was being sarcastically facetious), no one can know if he was actually implying something other that what the words say.
But, whatever the opinions, it’s better not to have to guess what words were actually spoken.
— Sam
Hello Eileen,
Thank you for you letter of yesterday. You didn’t give me a way to respond but since you must have intended your letter would be a blessing to me in some way, I certainly take it that way and thought to answer it here.
Firstly, I believe you are sincere in your affections toward Wayne, and in your recounting of the history you have with him. My affections and worship was sincere as well, but slightly different from yours. Mine was not to the man Wayne, but I too was sincere in my trust of the church (LOR) and its ability to save us. This you can believe.
But sister, neither Wayne (as in your case), nor the church (as in mine) are worthy of our worship or trust to save us, for they cannot. I had to repent of that trust. But there is One who is worthy of it. Soon Wayne will lie in his tomb and not be raised the third day as his followers will expect. Nor the third week, etc. Please notice that the One more deserving of our trust could not be held in his tomb until the second resurrection, but was raised the third day to eternal life. How can we fail to see the difference? His resurrection is ours.
Do you think I am offended at Wayne’s treatment of me, sister Eileen? On the contrary. Let me take this opportunity to disabuse you of this thought. I give Wayne all the credit for making me want to be out of LOR, and away from him, for at the time, as I said, I (mistakenly) thought it my salvation. I have told him this and personally thanked him for his treatment of me. For this, God used him mightily. If it had not been for the man Wayne, I would probably still be in the church LOR and much like you and the others still there. Praise God from whom all blessings flow!
How nice it would be if I could claim that I studied myself out of LOR, but I cannot take any of the credit for that (as some do). NONE. The light came after I was removed from it.
You speak highly of the book, His Only Gift. It may surprise you to find out that theme did not come from Wayne. Ask the old timers like the Davises or anyone else. Wayne’s contribution was what he calls “cause and effect” as you well know. Much of the idyocricy in which you believe came from me, I am ashamed to say.
I know, Wayne wants to claim it all as his origin, and I would like to credit him for it all too, but it isn’t so. At least 50% of what was called LOR was mine. Do you think me proud for saying this? Then you have misunderstood me. Then you don’t know how ashamed I am for my part in it.
The reason I write about it now as I do is to undo the damage if I can. As much as possible. Expose the error, not because I am hurt or offended as you might think, but because I have hurt other dear ones like you. This is not accomplished with tears alone, but some difficult, hard things must be said as well, which you might wonder at. How can David say such things to his former loving friend?
If I am correct, it may be that you will not be with us much longer. I would heal you if I could. Before you go and leave us alone, I happen to know and trust that Jehovah God can steal your heart away…away from man. This is all it would take. He did it for me, which means He can do it for anyone. He does it all the time. In this, I have the utmost confidence.
One other thing, you spoke of the importance of how we treat “the least of these.” You have some of these dear ones too, sister Eileen. You may see some of them soon, and I can assure you that what you said to me is correct–your treatment of them will be received by Him, as if it were Him. Again, if you are correct, and I know you are, what an opportunity.
If we do not correspond here again…, dear sister, go in peace.
David Mead
Even better response, Mr. Redman.
David
Because you have chosen to make public what I intended to be a private communication, I will post the letter I sent to you by way of Mr. Horner in a following comment so that those reading might have an accurate context with which to consider your response.
Regarding your response, I find myself amazed and thinking, How are the mighty fallen. The mean-spirited words of David Mead read here on this site bear no resemblance to the pre-church split David Mead who had been described to me by those who knew him. Claiming yourself now to be ashamed of cause and effect, (of which God, alone, is the author), shows you to be adversarial to the very foundation of heaven.
Refer not to me as your sister, David, for my family are those who love, cherish and do the will of God and nothing more, even unto the death of their own self-interested life.
The “least of these” are safe with God.
David
My name is Hanifa Travesser, formerly Eileen O’Keefe of upstate NY.
In 1985, through a series of divinely arranged circumstances, I found myself, with my then husband and two young children, in the Colville, Washington living room of Allen Armstrong. Having never met the man before and also, at the time being a drug addicted, recently sobered alcoholic back-to-the-lander, Allen’s ways and preaching seemed a little odd to me. However, considering myself “open minded”, I looked past his oddities and agreed to his invitation to sit in on a bible study. As he began that study, Allen read from Exodus, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.”
At that moment, I was transported into a whole other consciousness. I do not remember another word Allen said at that time. Those words, “Remember the Sabbath day…” rang throughout my entire being. I had no idea what a sabbath day was nor what it meant to keep it holy but I did know that Father, Himself, spoke to my heart and the heavenly orchestra that accompanied His words, resounding within my entire being, could not be denied. It was a defining moment, to say the least, in my experience as a soul made in the image of God.
From that point on, I found myself being moved into a realm that was entirely new, and yet, at the same time, interestingly comfortable and familiar as though I had lived in the Sabbath knowledge forever. Although I now knew that the 7th day was set apart for God, what that would mean in terms of my every day life began to unfold on a moment by moment basis. I did not want to become a 7th day adventist for when Allen had introduced me to that religion, it did not resonate with what God had put in my heart. I did, however, want to learn from the foundation that had established the adventist faith as I heard God speaking through those old teachings. When we left Colville and returned to our tiny homestead in upstate NY, little did I know just how my life would be changed simply because I began to believe God.
After about a year or so, and after a very intense time of being carried through an heavenly education by God, alone, I gave birth to my first and only son. In three months time this little one’s work was done and his little robust body succumbed to SIDS. During this same interim of time, on the other end of the continent, Allen and Stephanie had been going through their own process of separating themselves from false teaching and apostasy. We had corresponded somewhat over the time since I had met them in person. After I informed them of my son’s death, (and not as a response to that but only coincidentally), they sent me materials and letters regarding their process but my grief was so intense that I could not receive much of what they had written. Indeed, it all sounded like Greek to me at the time.
Eventually, through Allen and Stephanie, I was introduced to Wayne’s writings. Reading his words was like talking to myself. I had such a ring in my heart of the truths he espoused in his simple and clear style. One day, as I read in His Only Gift, I felt myself stumbling over Wayne’s addressing of children, their salvation and the state of the dead. Up until this time, I had wanted to believe that my son was safely in heaven with Jesus. The truth of what Wayne wrote caused me to feel undone as I wondered why there was such a disparity between what I wanted to believe and what he was saying was true. This discomfort was especially magnified because the home bible study group I was then attending had already begun to speak to the issues about my son’s death and they were in agreement with my catholic view. The conflict between these two schools of thought troubled me and it was the first time I remember feeling offended by the truth.
Over the years since then, I have found myself offended a million times by what Wayne has told me, both personally and publicly, and have had to go off to a quiet place to ask Father about it all. The pattern is consistent. Wayne would say something that I felt offense at and I would go and pray about it. Father would show me that only my ego was offended and that Love sides happily with the truth.
A true friend tells the truth at all times, even if it puts the relationship in jeopardy. A true friend will risk losing a friendship for his trust that the truth will prevail over the preconceived notions, unconscious deceptions and traditions of man. A true friend loves at all times, including times of speaking hard things. Wayne Bent has been the only true friend I have ever had. Though the words given him to speak have often caused me to die again and again, I am grateful beyond the means I have to express it that his integrity and faithfulness to the word of God to his soul, (far beyond the confines of the letter of the law), have always opened a door into a sacred place and offered me more light than I ever dreamed of.
Siding with truth has cost me everything in terms of human existence. The world looks on and mocks but I could not have done anything differently. Father has led me all the way. He sometimes used Wayne to nudge me back onto the path I was ignorant of until His divine pressure caused me to see clearly.
It is not Wayne who offends you, David. Father used a man to offend you and in so doing, illustrates His word that what you do to the least of these (is not Wayne “least” in your eyes right now?) you do unto Him. It was ever thus that humans get the opportunity to see God in human flesh, anyone and everyone’s human flesh, and then decide what they will do with/to Him.
Wayne has spoken of you over the years and always with tenderness and respect. It took many years after the split to be able to deal with the pain inflicted on his heart by losing what he considered to be one of his most precious friends. I have often seen tears in his eyes as he recalled the events that led up to and included the split.
Your public demonizing of Wayne is shameful and unfounded. Even if there was some basis upon which Wayne was “guility” of the things you say he did, why is it that time and the power of love has not softened your heart towards him and caused you to forgive him for the crimes of which you accuse him?
Your judgment of Wayne is really your judgment of yourself. Reading your bitter words is a window into your soul. I am sorry for the blackness you harbor because I know what it is doing to you. There is no remedy for an offended soul. I know. I have been there more times than I can count. The only hope of relief/healing I have ever found is in choosing to die to one’s self and humbly agreeing with God.
Sincerely,
Hanifa
I have been quietly following this case for the past couple of years.
What speaks louder to me than any comment on this page is Judge Baca stating that there was no evidence to support a touching of the breast.
This judge went forward with a trial knowing this.
There are a 3 sets of people here attacking Wayne Bent.
1. disgruntled former LOR members
2. people who are following the case and *think* they have a grasp on these people’s beliefs
3. regular internet trolls who have nothing else to do but make these attacks
Now, pushing all of these three things aside, here is what I see:
A man who was sentenced to a crime regardless of the fact that Judge Baca didn’t have enough evidence.
We have a former member of the church, a young woman stating that although she felt molested, Wayne Bent never touched her breast.
Seriously people. Set your own prejudices aside and look at the case itself.
There are way too many of you wanting to burn this man at the stake because YOU are against everything he believes in.
Does not matter how it is interpreted, this judge still went through with this trial knowing full well that there was no evidence.
Please show ME the evidence. Even the witness stated that she was NOT touched on the breast.
There is still no proof but this man is going to sit in prison for many years. All we have is hearsay.
Imagine yourself sitting in a prison on that.
After reading through the majority of these comments I am left to wonder how many here have actually lived with LOR, how many are groupies so that they can get their “bash Wayne Bent” fix, and how many are truly interested in the case and have a respect that these people are real human beings.
I, too, have followed this case for over 2 years. I read the transcripts, and as Sam as pointed out in his above posts, A.S said on the stand that Wayne kissed her on the breast. This young girl was so traumatized by this “healing” that she took a stand against everyone she knows. My heart goes out to the parents and A.S.
Wayne’s actions were not much different than the catholic priests who molested many young bodies and minds because they had the trust of their flock.
I not only read the transcripts, I typed and listened to every word of the transcripts. And what has been posted here by Sam is important for you to read and reread again. Any other part that you are not remembering accurately, just ask me, I have it. I wish some of you could have actually heard the words, because sometimes written words, only tell part of the story.
Jane you are in my opinion not being fair about the posting here. Not everybody on any message board is going to agree with everything on either side. There are always shades of grey. Yes, former Lorites are much more likely to be very critical of Wayne and his actions. If they continued to believe as you do Jane, they would still be there.
But there are some here that are really concerned about the remaining members at Strong City, like Jeff and especially young members like Esther. Many of us have expressed such concern many times.
And there are a couple like myself and certainly Mr. Redman that have posted repeatedly that this sentence was much to severe. Sam has given very articulate and well thought out suggestions on how an appeal might succeed and not by trying to bring down Judge Baca by some odd remark in a sidebar.
There are even a few here believe it or not, that have actually donated to an Appeal effort. So saying that the comments here are misplaced, or trolls, or groupies is probably not the best assessment of the eight-five or so comments here.
For the most part, this has been a great discussion, especially the comments from Wayne’s loved ones. I honestly do feel their pain in all of this. No matter how some of us might feel about Michael, he is a human being and he obviously has very strong supporters. I just hope, and I have said this many times neither he nor they do anything they will regret. As the Appeal, if approached correctly, might just bring a reduced sentence. I would think waiting to see how it all shakes out, would be worth it.
I think that anyone who has followed this for as long as Jane has and only gets that everybody is out to get the LOR is out of touch with reality. I can’t speak for the internet trolls and the people in grouping #2 that she speaks of, so let me say something for the “disgruntled ones” that might reflect some of their thoughts. There are very few of us, if any, that aren’t heartbroken over this mess. We would only hope that there is a way in which the LORites eyes could be opened to the moral corruption that they have fallen into. We are more than glad to let these dear ones find happiness in this world where they can, but we will not stand idly by and watch a tragedy happen without speaking out and doing what we can to prevent it. We want the best of Gods blessings to be upon them.
Jane you will never know the things the LOR has put people through, and it is obvious that you don’t know the first thing about what you are talking of in this regard, so what might serve you well is to put your prejudice aside and ask questions of people like David. They were there. So you go ahead and speculate to what ever conclusion you want, but you have no justification for vilifying ex-members.
Now, I would have you ask yourself this, why would I choose to have sympathy for a convicted sexual offender and his supporters and castigate people that wouldn’t go along with them? And why would I chose to believe that the only motivation that these “offended” former members have for speaking out is to persecute the current members. Could it be that somebody suggested it and you bought it hook, line and sinker. Welcome to mind control, you have just taken your first step into Wayne’s world. You need to wake up and smell the coffee. Just because someone utters the words messiah, rights, love and persecution doesn’t make it so.
CULT STYLE MIND CONTROL
Often here the question is raised, in the cultic form of mind control, how does it happen.
The subject of mind control has been mentioned here recently. I was a cult member as most of us know and it happened to me. This said, some would be quick point out that I too made it happen to others. And they would be correct. So I guess I qualify for one who could explain it.
I certainly did not think it mind control at the time, either what was done to me, or what I did to others. To us, it just seemed like persuasion. At first it would offend me, but then, like the sister described it for us, I would fight it, either privately or with others who already had accepted it, until I had accepted it as well. To us it seemed like what is called simply advice, or argumentation. We thought we were merely persuading each other, rather like missionaries would do in their work for others less fortunate than they. Less fortunate in that they do not understand what the missionary does.
This does not sound so threatening now does it. How to put it in perspective. Really, in retrospect, it was often “an offer that could not be refused”
I know now that our first impression was the correct one—offense. Our minds were offended. It takes a series of these before you get to where you will accept for instance a man taking various men’s wives to bed, including his own son’s. As it happens in cults, this is really a most common occurrence and anyone who doesn’t want to find himself down the road kickin rocks in the next five minutes will struggle with it until he confesses to the other members how right it is. And when you have had enough of struggling with it, in view of what it will cost you (the church and heaven—salvation) you will accept even this. How to put this into perspective.
For one example, we all know that under Hitler, it got to the point where people had their arms sawed off of them and sewed onto others, just to see what would happen. The people who did the sawing, what were they thinking? By then, because of mind control, they had come to the place where they thought it was a medical procedure. After all, even today in hospitals it is now routine to take body parts from one persona and sew them onto another. This, in order to saves lives. Well, Hitler’s saw men came to think they were doing the same thing. Something good.
Now, as for mind control, let’s compare what is happening in cults (like Strong City) and what happened under Hitler with the saw men. The subjects for arm switching were all unwilling ones. This is to say, according to the record, none of them were in agreement with what was about to happen to them. None of them came in off the street and offered his body for the medical experimentation they knew went on in those places. This, in great contrast to the cult member who is first made willing.
At first, the member is offended by what he hears. His better judgment is aroused, but he is trained to wrestle with it until he submits. Has not the guru always been right before? Is this not the church? Are we not the people? Are not all the testimonies the same, that the leader has never been found in error in all the twenty or more years that anyone has known him? Has he not always been led of God? Is he not a man of the strictest of integrity? Has he not wept for his people? Has he not made the utmost of personal sacrifices for them? Did he not bring to them the foundation of heaven’s government—cause and effect? Then how could this latest offence be wrong? It must be correct, just like all the rest. That he might be wrong this time, Boy, What was I thinking.
If Hitler were to have the same measure of success as the cults, he would have had to take more time with the perspective candidates. The ones slated for organ and limb transplants. He would have carefully left them alone until they came willingly, perhaps naked and ready. He would have recorded their willingness and how God had led them to ask for it.
Then, and only then would he have begun to work his magic on their bodies. This, so no one could say they had not asked for it, or were unwilling. And if after he started on them, if some of them became unwilling, or changed their minds for some reason, became fearful or conscience changed its mind, he would have them replaced. Thus, maintaining the strictest of integrity.
Hitler thought that in all he did, he was fulfilling prophecy. But unlike the cults, he may not have had a ready scripture for each procedure. The cult leader does. He might even have a prophecy with the actual number of subjects he is presently treating (healing, bedding). He may even have a couple more than his prophecy (text) allows for. Or he may have to switch out a few to maintain the number indicated (who he wants involved).
Suppose Hitler had enjoyed the same level of “success” as the cult leader, and his subjects all became willing ones? Then he could have demonstrated as do the cults, that he did not do anything to them that they did not ask for? Would this have been a superior achievement to the way he actually did it?
In contrast to Hitler, the cult leader is proud that he can say that in all he does, he never works his magic (healing) on the unwilling. Is this superior to Hitler’s method, who always did it to the unwilling? Which one is better, the cult leaders method, or Hitler’s?
LIKE A GOOD PHYSICIAN.
I have a question for Jeff and Wayne. Wayne has set forth the superiority of what he does in his healing sessions to that of worldly doctors, some of whom he says have sexual thoughts while examining their female patients. In this, he may be correct. There may be some doctors who have sexual thoughts while examining their patients. We should not argue this point.
Wayne has explained that he is fulfilling the prophecy of Isahiah 4:1, and the seven women. He says that if he had not done it, someone else would have. For him, this was not a pleasant thought and so he soon became willing, was obedient to the prophecy, and during some healing sessions, consummated with most of them.
He has further made the effort to explain to us that in these sessions, his thoughts were like those of a good doctor. In other words, not of a sexual nature. What he wants us to understand is that he is not like us, the world, who during sex are thinking sexual thoughts.
Now here is my question; has anyone else wondered how a consummation could happen without thoughts of a sexual nature?
I mean it seems that without some thoughts of a sexual nature, the consummation would not have taken place. Not a true or real consummation. Sure, there could have been an attempt made or several of them, but don’t we know from experience that they would have failed?
And if so, Isaiah 4:1 has yet to be fulfilled. Imagine that. Wayne is proceeding under the impression, thinking that it was fulfilled, just for the attempt. No wonder his “lord” has not returned.
If he is correct in his description of how it happened, without a thought of a sexual nature, it may be that someone else will have to do it (as he suggested).
As I just commented on the more recent Wayne Bent thread, keep it respectful here. Feel free to disagree. But keep it respectful.
The vast majority of your comments have been very good. Please keep it going strong…
David Mead, in a reply to Milton you wrote, “When it was sold to him, he bought it, and now he thinks we should buy it as well.” I want to state clearly in response to your comment that no, we have nothing to sell, not even to you. Don’t you remember, David? The Gift is free. What has happened is that you have not recognized the Gift in the opened and publicly revealed Package, and so you have refused what has been freely given. It’s okay though, because that was the whole point. Each soul is free to choose what they want. I don’t want you or anyone else to have anything that you don’t want.
I remember those early days very well and you are right, David. You were surely under the influence of “mind control” as you demanded in your low booming voice at LS seminars, “Who do you say that I am?” But it had nothing to do with any kind of hypnotic spell that Wayne held over anyone’s mind. It was simply your own context that caused you to follow a man around, trying to copy him, and then later claiming “mind control” because you were following the voice of a man instead of the Voice of God. If one can’t recognize the difference, one is sure likely to end up when it’s all over crying, “victim of mind control!”, but it can’t be blamed on anyone but one’s self. You did not recognize the Voice of God when He spoke through Wayne. You only saw then, and still only see now, a man, or you would not be mocking him now. That is how you could rise up against him. You did not believe he was a man filled with the Holy Spirit for God’s purposes. That is how you could make the false claims that you and the others made, which brought about the church split. It is how you can cover up your own sin and project it onto Wayne now. It happened the same way with Jesus, too. Some souls were offended, especially the Pharisees, and Jesus was nailed to a tree.
Tell me, where is everyone now, David? Where are all those folks who were standing with you then? No one’s life could ever be the same again after that experience. For me personally it served to ground my faith even deeper than before in what the church was about. Some were too confused to even go back to where they had come from and others just left in their offenses. A few, such as yourself, have not been able to let it go. Your life is still all about the LOR or you would not be writing on Internet blogs in the manner that you are. It’s all wrapped up to look like something different than what it is, though. You write of your terrible experience in a “cult” that you want to repent from now, and to warn the whole world against it, but that’s really a total evasion of the truth of the matter. The truth is, that “it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”
You can argue your “points” all you want to, fill the blogs with your hateful dissertations, while at the same time claiming to love the one you mock. You speak with a forked tongue and your bite is that of a viper. You can swear you know all about Wayne’s motives from beginning to end, you can speak to persuade those who like yourself believe they know so much because after all, “I was there”, but you know nothing of Him at all. You have proven by your words and actions that you never did, not even in the very beginning. You never knew his Spirit. You left in 1988 and anything you think you know of the church since that time, or of Strong City, has come from more offended souls such as yourself. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”
You can’t admit the truth even though it is totally obvious, that you did get offended when called to account for your behavior at the time which quickly led to the general dissension among many members and culminated in the subsequent church split. Even Hanifa tried to share with you how “a true friend will always tell the truth at all times, even it if puts the relationship in jeopardy.” She shared her own experience in enough detail for anyone who so desires to understand the principle, to understand how Messiah works with the human soul, but still you do not, or will not, see it.
My words will also be turned into something else other than intended to fit the context of the individual who reads them. The reason for this is written in the Scriptures, “And by unlimited seduction to evil and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing (going to perdition) because they did not welcome the Truth but refused to love it that they might be saved. Therefore God sends upon them a misleading influence, a working of error and a strong delusion to make them believe what is false, In order that all may be judged and condemned who did not believe in [who refused to adhere to, trust in, and rely on] the Truth, but [instead] took pleasure in unrighteousness.”
How Wayne has loved you, though. I’ve been here since day one and nothing but expressions of respect and true love have ever passed Wayne’s lips when referring to David Mead. He was personally devastated with the result of the split on many levels. It took years for him to be resolved. He still loves you, David, in a way that you will never understand with your current context, and I, for one, am not about to try to change your mind/context. Michael’s Spirit came in Wayne to assure each soul that free choice, breaking the chains that bound us to our previous contexts that were not given of God but by “mere men.” “Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”
Sincerely,
C. Davis
I am putting this post on this thread, as I can see that the most current thread about Wayne’s fast is rather full at the monent and rather heated. But further down that thread Milton Berheisel wants me to quit riding the fence, per say, and to really speak my mind. I am willing to do that, and that is why I wrote my book. Milton wants to know where I stand, for whatever reason for himself, I just don’t know, but here goes. I will let my book speak for me. Following is a very small section from my book where I am writing about my thoughts and opinions about the 7 Virgins and Wayne’s Nude “Healing” sessions with the under aged girls. Here goes:
“No one knows what goes on behind closed doors, yet we also know what major attractions cause those doors to be closed and a “Do Not Disturb” sign to be put on the doorknob. These seven virgins were selected by the same methods which attracted the original “Two Witnesses”. Suggestive e-mails are sent out to the camp, saying that seven literal virgins are needed to pour out the Seven Last Plagues onto the earth. Also e-mails are also sent out saying how we all need to be naked and unashamed before God, and Michael says, “I am the perfect embodiment of God. I am humanity and divinity combined, and I swear it by the One who lives forever and ever”, his own words. So these young virgin girls are being groomed to believe and to desire to be naked and unashamed before God. And Wayne is viewed as God in the flesh. One by one they present themselves to Michael and have private nude one on one, skin to skin sessions with him alone in his bedroom. Soon Michael has sex with the virgins and deflowers most of the known legal age virgins in the church on the Land. Many years earlier Wayne had a vasectomy performed on himself, so he was not able to make any female pregnant. Interesting enough, two male virgins had also presented themselves to Michael as well, but he turns them away. He only wants the young girls. But a problem arises, he still needs two more virgins, as only five of them have come forward. Soon two more female virgins, biological sisters come forward, two sisters aged 16 and 14 years of age, Ashley Sayer and Lakisha Sayer and they want to also be naked and unashamed as well, and they also tell Michael that God sent them. Michael wrestles with God, so he tells us, and he holds a meeting with the church to bring them into the decision making process. He asks us if we all would still support him if he agreed to allow these two underage girls to come to him to fulfill their request. Many of us are speechless. I can see faces filled with doubt, concern and fear. The other virgins were of legal age, but these two are minor children, and Michael was seriously considering to give them what they wanted. Michael is looking for anyone to raise an objection to the matter on the table. Remember Michael owns everything. We have everything in common and he buys all the food and clothing for the camp. We have nothing, and he has everything. He has all of the women, the vehicles, the land, our lives, and I really do want to see someone else raise their hand in objection so I could also stand with them and raise my hand. There is silence in the room and everybody is looking around. He tells all of us that we would be taking a chance, that we would be supporting someone who could be accused of sex crimes against children, and we would be privy to it. He does spell it all out to us. We know everything and still the room remains quiet. I really want to raise my hand. The LOR had just recently lost one of her members in death, and that was my very good friend, Cecil Halstead. Cecil would have raised both of his hands and said a loud “NO”. How I wished Cecil was in that room then. No one raises their hand, and I sit there and I become a coward, and my raising my hand alone would insure my being forced to leave the land with nothing. Two witnesses in the room would have ended it, for it was written, “Out of the mouth of two witnesses, let it be established.” The whole room stays very quiet, and the entire church enters into his crime with him. He has bought our silence, and a small smile forms on his face, and he gets up and dismisses the meeting. The whole camp has assured to look the other way. I leave the room with a sick feeling in my stomach. Nothing is withheld from Michael Travesser. Now even the children belong to him. Michael does not have intercourse with the two sisters. Instead he has what he calls “nude” healing sessions with each of them. I will not go into detail, as this is not one of those kinds of books. But what goes on behind those closed bedroom doors are simply wrong and illegal.”
Well now you have it Milton. I saw myself as a coward back then. And yet, in my heart, I still believe that I was not alone in that room as I remember the tension of that room. I was able to read the many faces. There were other cowards there present as well. But where are they now? Still there. You wasn’t there. Would you have raised your hand? I couldn’t live with it for long, and at the appointed time I was true to my own heart and left Strong City. I have never returned, and I never will. You now have your answer.
I should probably clarify myself somewhat, how and why I write as I do. As for making Strong City a strong jail, former LOR member writes that he was “just kidding, sort of”.In other words, he was not necessarily serious
What makes much of what I write seem is serious is Strong City, Wayne and whatever he is presently doing, which now is his fast. I realize that most of us here are serious with their comments and have legitimate concerns for those few who Wayne still has confused. I too am truly concerned about them. But there is danger in taking what they say, what they intend to sell us about Wayne, too seriously. This is because the spin they put on it isn’t reality. We know that but they don’t.
And when we take it seriously, they could feel encouraged to proceed with it, sell us some more, and perhaps think they should believe it more themselves.
In much of what I say, I am repeating back to them, what they said to us. For instance, if we don’t accept what Wayne has done (we all know what it was), we are told we will be lost. Not accepting him and his behavior as our Messiah, our salvation is not possible. Isn’t this what we have been told. Sam could find it for us if there is any doubt.
But when I say it back to them, somehow it doesn’t sound as believable as when they say it to us. They don’t like how it sounds when I say it back to them. Now it sounds offensive. Coming from me, it sounds ridiculous. Well, that could be because it is. Or is it just me? It is offensive, it is ridiculous, it is sexual and not religious. Of course you can make anything you want into your religion and call it religious and require others to respect it. But not everything you, just because you call it religion deserves respect. This is Wayne’s case.
Do I hope him the best? Yes, all the best. Is he doing himself and other damage? Yes. So how do I put those two together? I am doing it the best I can.
He wants me to put the two together; respect him by respecting what he has done (is doing). I can’t do that. I do not respect what he does and neither should anybody else, lest they damage themselves further. He concludes that since I obviously don’t respect what he does, that I don’t respect him. This, he has sold to his followers—David Mead doesn’t respect me. And also others here are tempted to feel the same.
I admit there are some things that I can give him the benefit of the doubt about. He mostly likes to emphasize the things we cannot grant him a doubt about. Things so obviously harmful to those around him that thee is no question about their nature. It is of these that I mostly try to write. They are so far out that to consider them in writing as if normal or believable, even to consider them at all in any way, you have to border on the offensive. And one who tries can be misunderstood.
Simply said, even in my seriousness, I am mostly having fun. Not all of what I write do I believe; some have felt the need to question me about it.
As for the fast, I/we need have no fear for our man. He knows how far he wants to take it and when to decide he has gotten all the mileage out of it that he can.