[Vision2020] The Daily News, or journalism in Moscow (was Questions for you legal eagles)

[Glenn Schwaller]

I didn't see anything in the News concerning his probationary stint.  Maybe
there will be something tonight.  I was going to attend the court session on
Friday, but a delay pushed things forward into another time commitment.  His
car is no longer in the courthouse parking lot so one can assume he as been
release to District 2 Probation and Parole supervision.

If there is a dearth of "good investigative reporters" in the Quad-City
region, (maybe it's not the reporters but supervision editors??) I suspect
one could always phone the Lewiston television station and tell them of a
"news story that may be of value to the general population" - ditto for the
Spokane stations.  They do post stories and photos of offenders recently
released into the Spokane area - maybe even to other areas if someone lets
the cat out of the bag.

I guess time will tell the full story as it transpires.  I suppose one could
always call P & P and voice one's concerns to the resident corrections
people in Moscow.  I suspect they like to keep on top of what the locals
think and would like to know.

Schwaller

"You can always see it coming but you can never stop it."
     Michael Timmins

On 5/5/07, Saundra Lund <sslund at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Wayne, Keely, et al,
>
> Did anyone see anything about Sitler's court review in today's Snooze?  I
> didn't, but it's possible I missed it.  How about in the Trib (I don't
> subscribe to it)?
>
> You wrote:
> "Yes, an good investigative reporter could shed some light on this . . . "
>
> I don't know about the Trib, but to use "investigative reporter" (let
> alone
> "good investigative reporter") and "Moscow-Pullman Daily News" in the same
> sentence is an apparent oxymoron these days.  I remember way back when
> that
> wasn't the case (I started subscribing back in 1988), but the Daily News
> has
> become the Daily Snooze and has been floundering as a news source for
> quite
> awhile, I'm sorry to say & IMHO.  I don't know what the problem is, but I
> sure wish they'd get it figured out!  Keely made some excellent points in
> her post, and since she's well versed in journalism, I'll defer to her.
>
> Wayne, you wrote:
> "When the local major newspapers trumpet the views of child molestation
> enablers/fosterers/concealers but not of the victims, and when they fail
> to
> warn the community of the insidious threat to their children, there is
> something very wrong that only a through housecleaning would change."
>
> Again, I don't know what the problem is, but there *is* a problem.  It is
> absolutely unfathomable to me that *both* the Trib & the Snooze completely
> dropped the ball on the Sitler case . . . and apparently continue to drop
> the ball.
>
> After all, we've read the incessant bloated whining time and again in
> those
> very rags all about how Kirkers (including NSA students who maintain
> membership in their home churches) are integrated "good neighbor" members
> of
> this community.  Either that's a pack of lies or this serial pedophile was
> a
> risk to every child in our community, and the newspapers failed
> *miserably*
> -- and continue to fail miserably -- in their duty to report the news.
>
> Further, I'll remind folks of what I think is a salient fact:  the Kirker
> community reportedly *was* warned about Sitler's predation *months and
> months* before the rest of us.  And, they *didn't* share their knowledge
> of
> the danger with the rest of us  :-(  Seemingly, they cared more about
> their
> reputation than about the safety of *all* the children in our community --
> that's not what I'd consider good neighbors.  Remember, this predator
> didn't
> live a cloistered existence within our community between September 2003
> and
> March 2005 -- he was out & about without supervision because no one knew.
> But, once his sexual victimization *did* become known, the Kirk kept it a
> secret from the rest of us without regard for all the children in this
> community.
>
> That's bad enough, but this selfishness was compounded by our local
> newspapers (and I use the term loosely) failing miserably to do what we
> subscribers pay them to do:  report local (and other) news.
>
> And, quite frankly, one has to wonder why?  If one looks at some of the
> so-called "news" items that graced the pages of the Snooze from the time
> Sitler's crimes became known until the rest of us found out, one has to
> wonder if the Snooze has any clue whatsoever as to what "news" is?  I'm
> interested in lots of things, but for me, safety issues trump everything
> else, particularly safety as it relates to our children.  And, I know I'm
> not alone:  I've not spoken to one single non-Kirker who doesn't agree
> that
> our newspapers failed miserably on the Sitler case.
>
> Certainly, from the time Doug Wilson first learned in March 2005 about
> Sitler's serial sexual abuse of children in our community until the time
> the
> rest of us learned about it in June 2006, Wilson was no shrinking violet
> with the press.  His bloated whining -- and that of his cohorts --
> appeared
> frequently and loudly in the local press (doesn't that sound better than
> calling them newspapers?) on a wide range of topics.  Yet he completely
> failed to mention his dirty little secret, and because we don't have a
> newspaper worth the ink & paper it takes to print it, the dirty little
> secret that should have been front page safety news remained Wilson's &
> the
> Kirk's private dirty little secret.
>
> Indeed, during the time in question, the Snooze gave Doug Wilson his very
> own guest column!  Did Wilson use that opportunity to sound the alarm?  Of
> course not!  It was more important for him to spew rhetoric, twist
> Christanity, call names, and attack the critics who don't share his
> particular twist on Christianity or his worldview than to protect our
> community's children.  It would be several more months before he even
> sounded the alarm to the rank-and-file members of his own church.  And,
> because the Snooze was, in fact, snoozing, Wilson was allowed to keep his
> dirty little secret.
>
> Now that the dirty little secret has seen the light of day, and in light
> of
> what we now know about who knew what when -- and what *should* have been
> reported by any local newspaper worth its salt -- I think some might find
> it
> enlightening to see exactly what Wilson chose to write about -- and what
> the
> Daily News published -- back in June, 2005, three months after Wilson knew
> of Sitler's repeated victimization of children in our community.  For your
> re-reading pleasure:
>
> "Lambs and geese, foxes and wolves
> Column, Doug Wilson
> Saturday, June 18, 2005 - Page Updated at 12:00:00 AM
>
> If I might, I would like to briefly respond to Rose Huskey and Saundra
> Lund,
> who served up a veritable casserole of charges to your readers on Saturday
> last (Opinion, June 11 & 12). This is hard to respond to in the space of
> just 700 words because charges can always be raised with relative economy
> of
> scale. "Scoundrel, liar and cheat" only takes four words, and it almost
> always takes more than four words to answer once the mud-gobbing has
> begun.
>
> Anyone who has followed the vituperation poured out on our church over the
> last several years in places like Venom 2020 knows that this whole
> controversy is not a simple matter of a couple of nice ladies trying to
> get
> some "renegade church" to obey the law. Because of that, the headline of
> that column is the main thing I would like to respond to "When the Fox
> Preaches, Watch Out for the Geese."
>
> When Jesus commissioned his disciples, he ordained them to something that
> was almost the exact opposite of this. He said that he was sending his
> preachers out as lambs among wolves (Luke 10:3). To use the metaphor of
> Saturday's column, he was sending the goose to preach to the foxes.
>
> Why would the Lord use this kind of image? What is the nature of lambs?
> What
> is the nature of wolves? One of the most obvious differences is that lambs
> are in no position to try to coerce anyone to do anything. Still less are
> they in a position to compel wolves to do anything. But wolves do not
> think
> the same way. They have no scruples about imposing their view of the
> world,
> or their view of lunch, on the lambs.
>
> Everything that Huskey and Lund point to as examples of our ecclesiastical
> misdeeds are actually examples of voluntary transactions, freely entered
> into. From enrollment in New Saint Andrews College, to boarding
> arrangements, to attendance at Christ Church, what we have is a group of
> peaceful, law-abiding people, working hard to mind their own businesses,
> love their own families, and improve their community. Attempted harassment
> through governmental or "legal" channels has been the order of the day
> (nine
> such attempts so far). These attacks come from individuals with a private
> set of personal or ideological grudges and too much time on their hands. I
> am not counting the petty vandalisms in the private sector and other
> periodic manifestations of spite. Further, in the eyes of our accusers, to
> point any of this out is to be guilty of "whining," which is hopefully not
> the evaluation they would offer if we were black or Jewish and getting the
> same treatment. The Intoleristas have certainly lived up to their
> nickname.
>
> This illustrates the difference between freedom and coercion. The reason
> believing Christians love freedom the way we do is because God has
> promised
> us that "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Cor. 3:17).
> We are not interested in trying to force those who differ with us to do
> anything. They, on the other hand, are not shy at all about the free and
> liberal use of coercion. In saying this, I am not talking about laws we
> all
> must live by. This whole controversy has been driven, first, by
> misunderstanding the law, and second, highly selective and discriminatory
> applications of those misunderstandings to our ministries alone.
>
> The confusion on this is so pronounced that it cannot be accounted for by
> appealing to mere political differences. There are only two fundamental
> ways
> to walk in the world -- the way the Lord showed us or our own autonomous
> way, the way of unbelief. Genuine faith in God the Father through Jesus
> Christ always leads us into the law of liberty. Rejection of God's
> sovereignty, and of his kindness to us through the death of Jesus Christ,
> leads necessarily into patterns of coercive attempts to run the lives of
> others. And if those others dare to differ, then the attempts are ramped
> up
> to run the dissenters out of town. What else could "Not In Our Town" mean?
> But the Lord Jesus died on the cross, was buried, and rose again from the
> dead on the third day in order to demonstrate that the way of the Lamb
> triumphs over the way of the wolves.
>
> Doug Wilson is the pastor of Christ Church in Moscow."
>
> Indeed!
>
> How very desperate Wilson must have been to keep his dirty little secret
> at
> the cost of the safety of our community's children.  His unchristian
> attacks
> on those who chose to challenge him during that time make a lot more sense
> now, don't they?  And, how very desperate he must remain that we all
> forget
> about Sitler . . . and about Wight, one of the Kirk's then-Golden Young
> Men.
>
> How very desperate the Moscow-Pullman Daily News must be for us all to
> forget that it missed -- or perhaps buried -- the story all the while
> giving
> Wilson plenty of ink on anything else his heart desired.
>
> And, how very desperate the Daily News must be for us all not notice that
> it
> continues to miss -- or bury -- the story.
>
> A more skeptical yet still reasonable person might question whether the
> Daily News has reason to continue to miss -- or bury -- the story?  It
> certainly would be beneath contempt for the Snooze to turn a blind eye
> simply to protect its income from those parking space it rents to Wilson's
> New St. Andrews . . .
>
> Oh, and as long as I'm cc'ing Nathan Alford on this, I'll add that I
> didn't
> appreciate the spate of blank emails (a dozen or so in all) your newspaper
> sent to my email address on Thursday!  Geez -- what was that about?!?!  I
> responded to the first asking what was up, and I'm *still* waiting for an
> answer.  As they continued and continued and continued to fill my inbox, I
> tried calling as well.  Of course, no one was available to answer my
> questions or make it stop.
>
>
> Saundra Lund
> Moscow, ID
>
> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
> nothing.
> - Edmund Burke
>
> ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2006 through life
> plus
> 70 years, Saundra Lund. Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce
> outside
> the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the
> author.*****
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
> On Behalf Of Art Deco
> Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 10:37 AM
> To: Vision 2020
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Questions for you legal eagles
>
> Keely, et al,
>
> During the time when this debauchery of justice was more active, the only
> press coverage by those wonderful community newspapers, the Daily News and
> the Lewiston Morning Tribune was only one significant article.
>
> That article was a spoon-fed, whine-baby complaint from Cultmaster Douglas
> Wilson and No Saints Around Headmaster Roy Atwood.  The article told of
> the
> alleged great woes that the publicity from Steven Sitler's and Jamin
> Wight's
> actions were causing the cult and NSA.
>
> Yes, an good investigative reporter could shed some light on this case
> especially with material that could be supplied to the reporter.  Not only
> would the more creepy aspects of the principals' actions be brought to
> light
> and serve as a warning/wake-up call to the community, but other aspects of
> these matters including obstruction of justice and the failure of all
> parts
> of the local criminal justice system to handle this matter correctly and
> with appropriate justice would be exposed.
>
> That these wonderful, community minded newspapers failed to report on
> these
> sexual abuse/exploitation cases from the beginning, but only reported upon
> the alleged sufferings of the principal enablers/fosterers/concealers, but
> not upon the sufferings of the many victims, should answer your implied
> questions.  It is doubtful that the local newspapers have the interest,
> inclination, and courage to run a series on child/neglect as the
> Spokesman-Review has just done.  Quite the opposite is most likely the
> case.
>
>
> When the local major newspapers trumpet the views of child molestation
> enablers/fosterers/concealers but not of the victims, and when they fail
> to
> warn the community of the insidious threat to their children, there is
> something very wrong that only a through housecleaning would change.
> Unfortunately at this time, brooms, mops, carbolic acid, and journalistic
> ethics are not available at either the Daily News or the Lewiston Morning
> Tribune.
>
>
> Wayne A. Fox
> 1009 Karen Lane
> PO Box 9421
> Moscow, ID  83843
>
> (208) 882-7975
> waf at moscow.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: keely emerinemix <mailto:kjajmix1 at msn.com>
> To: Glenn Schwaller <mailto:vpschwaller at gmail.com>  ;
> vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 4:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Questions for you legal eagles
>
> Referring to Mr. Schwaller's Point #5 --
>
> Yes, that is sad.  Perhaps even inexcusable.  The answers to these and
> many
> other questions strike me as the sort of thing that ought to be covered by
> your local daily newspaper.  Maybe we'll see the answers in tomorrow's
> story.
>
> Anyone?  Anyone?
>
> keely
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>         Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 11:51:34 -0700
>         From: vpschwaller at gmail.com
>         To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>         Subject: [Vision2020] Questions for you legal eagles
>
>         1.  I suspect one will find out if the No Contact Order will be in
> effect at today's hearing.  Again, this will fall under P&P's jurisdiction
> as well.
>
>         2.  I'm not sure if there will be "national publicity" on this
> case
> one way or the other.  Seems like there is enough of a problem getting the
> MPD News to pick up anything of importance going on in the community . . .
>
>         3.  I'm sure if the court was not aware of the "trophy website"
> then, they are now.  A good point on why they or law enforcement was not
> aware of it at the time.  Seems like unless the MPD or LCSD is handed the
> weapon in a murder, they can't seem to find it so I suspect the web site
> was
> unknown to them.
>
>         4.  I guess one would have to make inquiries to the Prosecuting
> Attorney's office and/or the court to find out what was going on in the
> plea
> bargain.
>
>         5.  All very good questions - sort of sad we don't have a good
> investigative reporter in the region that could answer these and other
> questions in a neutral manner.
>
>         Schwaller
>
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070507/36b5b28a/attachment-0001.html