There is absolutely no question that the Wiz and his minions are attempting to discredit and vilify anyone who speaks out against AARC. They in fact have an enemies list, reminiscent of their philsophical brethren in Stalinist Russia. The end justifies the means after all. Praise the Maximum Leader and Executive Director! Here is an example of an AARColyte attempting to deflect attention from abuses perpetrated by AARC through a series of statements meant to discredit the victims.
This is from the Fifth Estate comments page. The poster put his child in AARC. The poster knows that he is lying in his statement, but has told his children that it was necessary in order that the public be aware of what kind of person Christine Lunn is. How one can convey truth by lying is beyond me, but then this is an AARColyte we're talking about:
"I find it interesting that in 2003 Christine Lunn was so happy with the role that AARC played in her recovery that she and her mom spoke to a group of parents concerned about their out of control teenagers. I remember her saying that she had tried every other facility in Calgary and had been rejected by all of them. The only one left was AARC. She knew she had to go there if she was going to get help. At that point in time she had a criminal record for armed robbery (arrested at age 15). In 2003 she had been sober for 7 years thanks to AARC (her words). In 2006, I heard her mother speak again about how the program at AARC had helped her and her family. In fact, it was Christine's story that convinced me that my family should look to AARC for help. My question is, what happened in Christine Lunn's life over the last 5 years that now she finds she has to blame AARC? Interesting how Fifth Estate neglected to mention what Christine's life looked like before AARC. It isn't every kid who is arrested for armed robbery at age 15. I wish her well in her search for a better life.
Pat West | | Posted February 15, 2009 12:29 PM"
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/discussion/2009 ... rless.htmlChristine Lunn began speaking out against AARC in the late nineties. In fact, notorious pervert Marty Heeg observed just such an episode whilst he was bird-dogging an AA meeting, and in total breech of AA principles, reported M. Lunn's story back to AARC. Mr. G tried to contact M. Lunn in an effort to quash the claims. By 2000, M. Lunn's brother was back in AARC, no longer a sib but a full-fledged client. Christine was at this point placed on the AARC enemies list and prohibited from visiting her brother in the Centre. Yet another example of the totalist behavior of AARC followers. It's okay to lie, because the program is sacred and lying about those who would criticize it is a necessary sin.
What is really charming is the fact that M. Lunn's juvenile record is brought up by this "man". Such records are sealed, but that doesn't stop AARColytes from publicly breeching the legal right of someone to confidentiality. But it's necessary, in order for this AARColyte to use the tried and true AARC technique of equating criminal or otherwise antisocial behavior with addiction.
This is one of the principle dangers for people in AARC. Many of the young men placed in AARC are in fact dangerous criminals with personality disorders. In order for the Wiz to keep them in AARC, thereby winning the "law and order" support, along with the cash, he has always equated criminality with drug addiction. So what you get are a bunch of violent young men held in AARC with other kids who are at their mercy.
Here's another charming bit from the number one AARColyte fart-catcher:
http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=27120The original poster has gone out of his way to disparage both Christine Lunn and Rachel. He was a staffer when Rachel was in AARC, and in my opinion has displayed truly bizarre behavior with regard to her, leading me to think that he is an accomplice in her rape.
Now, how this poster would have any idea who M. Lunn had accused of sexually assaulting her, and whether or not this is the right person, is beyond me. AARC claimed that M. Lunn had never reported such an episode. If she hadn't made an accusation, how could she have accused the wrong person.
As M. Lunn later formed a relationship with the man who victimized her, AARC has now changed their story. The fact is that AARC sent M. Lunn home with an adult oldcomer while she was a minor. In the home she was abused. It was reported to AARC, and they covered it up. M. Lunn was in fact forced to deny that the assault had taken place. As the oldcomer was A. an adult and B. in a postion of authority, this was a serious crime and would have had untold consequences for AARC, the host home family, the Oldcomer and the Wiz.
The fact that M. Lunn later formed a relationship with her abuser by no means diminishes the seriousness of the crime perpetrated against her by AARC and the Oldcomer, and does not fall outside of the behavior that could be expected of one subjected to systematic abuse.
