Author Topic: AARC suing CL? (Read 8404 times)

ajax13 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 20, 2009, 08:14:40 PM »

To the very end, lazy ol' Reuben resorts to a very poorly thought-out specious analogy. The Sun says AARC is a residential facility after Minister Tarchuk specifically says that it is not residential. Not quite the same thing as people using or not using a given term to describe something. And Johnny, a former staffer said that AARC brought to mind a religious concentration camp on the Fith Estate program. But Johnny, you've always walked that lazy walk. What are the boys at Correlsense going to say when they see that arrest record, Johnny boy?

Whooter · « **Reply #16 on:** November 20, 2009, 08:25:44 PM »

Quote from: "ajax13"

The Sun says AARC is a residential facility after Minister Tarchuk specifically says that it is not residential

And many here call AARC a cult, still others a Gulag or Prison. So that is 5 descriptions..... is the Sun right? The minister? or various fornits posters? or all of the above? lol Is C Lunn innocent until proven guilty or is she an industry Shill as alledged..... does he wait for the court outcome? or will he have to back peddle on his other allegations to avoid a double standard......Or side with the allegations...tick...tick...tick...
Ajax13 walks a fine line to avoid the double standard.

ajax13 · « **Reply #17 on:** November 20, 2009, 08:49:02 PM »

Johnny, caught again being too lazy to write something coherent. Reminds me of when you said that a semi-independent study was the same as an independent study. Just like it's okay for a pilot to be conscious, or semi-conscious. Same thing, right, Johnny? The Minister who oversees residential facilities for children in care in the province said very specifically that AARC was not a residential facility, and the Sun then claimed that it was. AARC was using Christine Lunn to sell their program while she was still a client, and according to AARC being held in AARC by court order. I saw the promo on CFCN back in '97. In fact, AARC uses every single client to sell their program, as they are all required to attend AARC's fundraising beg-a-thons. Now back to you Johnny, and what's going to happen with your criminal record vis-a-vis your employer, whom you linked to your fraulent work with STICC. How long until the Correlsense boys see that criminal history, Reuben? Right to the bitter end you're just inadequate.

Whooter · « **Reply #18 on:** November 20, 2009, 09:28:32 PM »

Quote from: "Guest"

Quote from: "ajax13"
The Sun says AARC is a residential facility after Minister Tarchuk specifically says that it is not residential

And many here call AARC a cult, still others a Gulag or Prison. So that is 5 descriptions..... is the Sun right? The minister? or various fornits posters? or all of the above? lol Is C Lunn innocent until proven guilty or is she an industry Shill as alledged..... does he wait for the court outcome? or will he have to back peddle on his other allegations to avoid a double standard......Or side with the allegations...tick...tick...tick...
Ajax13 walks a fine line to avoid the double standard.

Oh No,Ajax13 choose "non residential" and threw fornits posters under the bus lol.. so it cant be a gulag or a prison since people leave at the end of the day no prison guards? or Cult?....... and we agree that C Lunn did shill (fundraiser) for AARC after graduation.

The Ajax13 Bike

ajax13 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 20, 2009, 10:11:16 PM »

Lazy ol' Reuben, you must have been in jail the day they taught the difference between synonyms and antonyms in school. Residential is the antonym of non-residential, whereas gulag can be synonamous with prison. Hard to tell if you're dumber than you are lazy, Johnny boy. The minister who oversees residential facilities for children, Janice Tarchuk said that AARC was non-residential in her abdication of responsibility for overseeing AARC. The Sun then claimed the exact opposite status for AARC, claiming that it was residential. Now of course we don't agree that C. Lunn did fundraisers for AARC after graduation, since as far as I know she did not. Feel free to embrace that unsubstantiated allegation if you wish, Reuben.
Now here's part of a definition for shill that describes both the AARC clients and you, John D. Reuben of STICC and soon to be formerly of Correlsense:
"Shills are often employed by confidence artists."

But this part only applies to you, Johnny:
"Shill" can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws. In this sense, they would be an implicit "shill" for the industry at large, possibly because their income is tied to its prosperity.

Whooter · « **Reply #20 on:** November 20, 2009, 10:45:58 PM »

Quote from: "ajax13"

Residential is the antonym of non-residential, whereas gulag can be synonamous with prison

Quote

"Shill" can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws. In this sense, they would be an implicit "shill" for the industry at large, possibly because their income is tied to its prosperity.

You are coming along ,Ajax13, I am proud of you. Yes words can have several meanings. People can view the exact same situation differently and its good you found a definition that makes you feel a little better about C Lunns shilling. Also remember that I may see a program as a Therapeutic boarding school while others see it as a gulag. Some see it as a residential treatment facility while others see it as a prison.

You seem to have it bad for this guy Johnny. You should try to get up the courage someday to confront him with how you feel. This seems to be your MO. You talk to strangers about Vause instead of to his face... the same with Heather, you ask questions about her intents to others but are afraid to ask her... and now you have moved on to Reuben. If I were you I would man up and speak directly with them. What are you afraid of?

ajax13 · « **Reply #21 on:** November 21, 2009, 01:22:33 PM »

I'm not sure that your arguments are that effective here, Johnny. You're posting in a forum for discussions of Straight and it's descendent programs. Since AARC is one of the last ones operating, with the demise of KHK, PFC, SAFE and Growing Together in the last few years, anyone hoping to defend this particular phenomenon has quite a struggle on their hands. The New Jersey Law Journal cited Phil Elberg's demolition of AARC's parent Kids, as an example of how to take on a cult in court. Never forget that AARC is Kids of the Canadian West, renamed. I've got a host home manual from AARC, and you can find a copy online if you look, that clearly shows that AARC uses it's clients as sales tools. We saw on the Fifth Estate that Rachael O'Neill was admitted to AARC in spite of a licensed healthcare worker, paid by AARC, who said that she did not have a substance dependency. AARC has no operating license, it uses a host home system that prompted closures of Straight programs and the end of the Seed's treatment of minors, and it's counselling staff is made up of unlicensed former clients, with the exception of the Executive Director, who came from the Kids cult, and is also an unlicensed amateur quack.
But somehow, John D. Reuben, educational consultant, you're going to convince people that folks who are criticizing AARC are wrong, even though you literally couldn't find AARC on a map, and you didn't know the difference between Vancouver WA. and Vancouver BC.
You are going to be fired from Correlsense Johnny, because they are going to get your criminal record, along with info about Aspen, and then they're going to get a random assortment of your Fornits work. After you're fired, it will remain to be seen whether you get sued, and whether or not Correlsense audits all of your activities involving their money. It would appear likely that jail is in your future, Johnny.
Could this program be spun, against all of that negative information? Possibly Reuben, but certainly not by someone as entirely inadequate as you.

Whooter · « **Reply #22 on:** November 21, 2009, 02:26:26 PM »

A long response to cover up the question of whether you intend to contact this Reuben guy or continue to ask questions on an open forum. I think if Reuben, Heather or Dr. Vause ever knocked on your door to discuss this face to face you would crap yourself and run. You hide in the shadows and discuss these people to a forum of guests with no intent of getting an answer from any of them.

I will continue to try to dissect your posts and answer what is relevant or directed towards myself.
If I think I can answer for Reuben, Vause or Heather I will give it a shot. But you are better off directing your questions to them.

ajax13 · « **Reply #23 on:** November 21, 2009, 03:59:13 PM »

I was unaware that you had been dissecting my posts. What I read was you claiming that Heather Forsyth's four stages of addiction were 5 levels of drug use. Then you claimed that you knew whether or not Rachael O'Neill was drug free after leaving AARC, and then you made some nonsensical claim about her checking in. Then you said she was doing well after AARC, even though one can plainly hear her state that she now suffers flashbacks and nightmares. Then you said that court documents showed that Christine L was a shill for AARC. You claimed that Janice Tarchuk denying responsibility for AARC when she stated specifically that AARC was non-residential and the Sun then stating that AARC was residential was the same as someone making an analogy. This, in addition to your history of such bizarre failures as not knowing that Calgary was a city within the province of Alberta, and not knowing that Vancouver BC was not the same as Vancouver WA.
Here's a suggestion Johnny. If you want to dissect something, try using a scalpel instead of a handful of shit. Metaphorically speaking.
You'll have plenty of time to work on your non-existent abilities once you're fired from Correlsense, and either sitting at home or lounging in jail.

Whooter · « **Reply #24 on:** November 21, 2009, 04:40:35 PM »

Quote from: "ajax13"

I was unaware that you had been dissecting my posts.

There are many posts to read here and you might not have noticed. If your question is directed at Reuben, Vause or Heather etc. then I try to avoid it unless I have the answer or can add some light.

Quote

What I read was you claiming that Heather Forsyth's four stages of addiction were 5 levels of drug use.

Exactly and the way we left it is if you heard from Heather we could compare her 4 Stages to the ones used by Mental Health professionals here in the States. Until she pipes in we at least have something on the table.

Quote

Then you claimed that you knew whether or not Rachael O'Neill was drug free after leaving AARC, and then you made some nonsensical claim about her checking in. Then you said she was doing well after AARC, even though one can plainly hear her state that she now suffers flashbacks and nightmares.

Well lets take a look at what Rachael says:

Alright then....

I do not smoke, drink, or use any drug. I haven't since several weeks before AARC. At that point I decided to I didn't want to anymore, so I stopped.

I am living a fantastic life with my husband and our beautiful daughter.

I have a stellar career, an amazing group of friends (including Olympic athletes and hopefully by Monday a Guinness World Record holder), a lovely home (rented, but we're working on buying our house), and in general a busy, but peaceful life.

I chair a non-profit organization, and hold over 5 major events every year that garner national media attention, competitors from all over the world and spectators from as far as Florida.

I don't blame AARC for any of this, I accept full responsibility. And I ran on Step One (after almost six months). I am supposed to be one of their failures. And I sure as hell intend on never using any of the "tools" AARC taught me.

Hmmmmm. doesnt seem too bad to me.

Quote

Then you said that court documents showed that Christine L was a shill for AARC. You claimed that Janice Tarchuk denying responsibility for AARC when she stated specifically that AARC was non-residential and the Sun then stating that AARC was residential was the same as someone making an analogy.

The claim says prior to her most recent comments Lunn was a supporter of the program, from which she graduated in January, 1997, even conducting voluntary speaking engagements to Calgary students.

Quote

This, in addition to your history of such bizarre failures as not knowing that Calgary was a city within the province of Alberta, and not knowing that Vancouver BC was not the same as Vancouver WA.

??

Quote

Here's a suggestion Johnny. If you want to dissect something, try using a scalpel instead of a handful of shit. Metaphorically speaking.
You'll have plenty of time to work on your non-existent abilities once you're fired from Correlsense, and either sitting at home or lounging in jail.

The above is what I refer to as dissecting. I cant respond to this when you go off the subject and start talking directly to Vause, Heather or Reuben. So I pass over this part.
Hope that helps to clear things up.

ajax13 · « **Reply #25 on:** November 21, 2009, 05:24:17 PM »

Rachael O'Neil states very clearly that she suffers nightmares and flashbacks from being in AARC, but that doesn't seem bad to John D. Reuben, ed con. In a way, I'm a little embarassed Johnny, when I take apart your bizarre and feeble efforts here. You're clearly mentally unsound, and more than a little dumb, but you provide a tremendous opportunity to demonstrate the various harmful aspects of AARC. It's a little time-consuming, but you serve your purpose here. If you do try to get a new username before you go to jail, I might suggest "Skeet". You're like a little clay pigeon.

Whooter · « **Reply #26 on:** November 21, 2009, 05:36:33 PM »

Quote from: "ajax13"

Rachael O'Neil states very clearly that she suffers nightmares and flashbacks from being in AARC, but that doesn't seem bad to John D. Reuben, ed con. In a way, I'm a little embarassed Johnny, when I take apart your bizarre and feeble efforts here. You're clearly mentally unsound, and more than a little dumb, but you provide a tremendous opportunity to demonstrate the various harmful aspects of AARC. It's a little time-consuming, but you serve your purpose here. If you do try to get a new username before you go to jail, I might suggest "Skeet". You're like a little clay pigeon.

See there you go taling to Reuben again. So I take it you will never man up and try to face any of these people yourself. It is interesting watching you talk to all these people on line when they obviously have never logged in here.

So I tossed Rachaels own words onto the table. As we have all read she is doing well and is drug free.... thats what AARC is about isnt it? When you find your post let me know. I tossed up the 5 Stages as outlined by the Mental health professionals. When you get a hold of Heather you should post her 4 stages up here so we can compare. I am sure they are the same as I posted (or fairly close) because the US and Canada are not typically that far apart from a medical perspective.

As an observation you seem to be getting more and more pissed at this Reuben guy. Why not call him? Try to break from your MO of hiding in the shadows and attacking people and their families. Then maybe you will develop the courage to call Heather and even Dr. Vause someday, although I have my doubts, but it is a goal. If something goes wrong at work to you run down to the boiler room and start screaming and then go back to your desk and hope the problem goes away? lol

ajax13 · « **Reply #27 on:** November 21, 2009, 06:18:12 PM »

Johnny, Rachael said she is suffering from nightmares and flashbacks about AARC. Prior to her appearance on the Fifth Estate, when she tried to talk about AARC on Fornits, she was assailed as a relapsed malcontent druggie. In order to defend herself, Rachael explained that she was in fact a responsible and successful person by posting the info you've quoted. Of course, the Fifth Estate demonstrated that according to a licensed psychologist, Rachael did not have a drug dependence disorder, yet she was still held in AARC for five months until she ran. Since Rachael was "drug free" prior to entering AARC, that is not what AARC was all about for her.
Something that you should realize Reuben, is that it doesn't matter exactly which posts are yours and which aren't. Correlsense is going to get your criminal record, along with the info about Aspen's troubles, and a brief explanation of your involvement. Once that ball is in play, then your bosses will be privileged to some of your Fornits work. It won't matter which is yours and which isn't. The general idea of you as a deviant criminal will already be the principle underlying the rest of the evidence. The Aspen deaths, the investigations, and the closures are iron-clad. Once they see that, and then the bizzzarro Fornits stuff starts turning up, the deal will be done. The complaint itself, coupled with the proven Aspen stuff will be enough to make you seem way more trouble than you're worth. Once suspicions are raised, it's all downhill from there for you, Johnny boy. That's the flip-side of your chickenshit attempt to play on Fornits refusal to out folks. Anything anonymous can be alleged to be yours. You can deny it, but then your bosses are going to have to ask themselves how your name got linked to this in the first place.
I'd suggest that you empty your pockets Johnny. You don't want to get everything wet once you start log-rolling.

Whooter · « **Reply #28 on:** November 21, 2009, 07:25:48 PM »

Quote from: "ajax13"

Johnny, Rachael said she is suffering from nightmares and flashbacks about AARC. Prior to her appearance on the Fifth Estate, when she tried to talk about AARC on Fornits, she was assailed as a relapsed malcontent druggie. In order to defend herself, Rachael explained that she was in fact a responsible and successful person by posting the info you've quoted. Of course, the Fifth Estate demonstrated that according to a licensed psychologist, Rachael did not have a drug dependence disorder, yet she was still held in AARC for five months until she ran. Since Rachael was "drug free" prior to entering AARC, that is not what AARC was all about for her.

Well that fine for you but the rest of us will go along with what Rachael said herself which is that she is drug free and living a happy life. If you can show this not to be the case then maybe a few of us may listen, but until then we are going to have to side with Rachael.

This Rueben guy is your next Vause? You should try to come up with a nick name for him like “TheWiz” and then predict the future like you did with AARC when you said they were breaking the law and should be licensed etc. you predicted they would be shut down in 6 months (that was more than 2 years ago)!! then the spotlight got put on them and they found AARC is doing fine. The kids were shown to be successful after graduation .... and poor Ajax13 was left with...well, well the newspapers are corrupt... the officials are corrupt...5th estate exposed them!! They should still be licensed!! lol.

So now that we all know AARC is moving forward and thriving your new prediction (pet project) is that this guy Reuben will be exposed fired and put in jail. Lol Do you want to put a time frame on it? I think we would all rout for you to do better than the last time. What do you think? 6 months, a year? 2 years? If he is not fired when you predict are you going to blame the local newspaper or corrupt officials in Massachusetts? And still claim you are right and everyone else is wrong. You are too afraid to even call and get the ball rolling!!

For a guy that hides in the dark you sure put forth confidence.

Whooter · « **Reply #29 on:** November 21, 2009, 08:27:48 PM »

Leave Ajax alone. When you have been told what to do and when to talk and who to talk to for years on end it is not easy to confront authority directly and sometimes it doesn’t matter if the person we are talking to is listening. It just feels good to pretend we are and getting it off our chests is more important than who we are talking to. So back the fuck off and let him post.

Fornits
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry