Sunday, June 24, 2007

A Sabbath contemplation for Mr. Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

Pastor Wilson sure took a beating last week after the PCA General Assembly adopted a committee report condemning Federal Vision. In case you forgot, the vote was something like 1400 in favor of the report and about 30 against it. Man, talk about a landslide. Someone should call a search and rescue team to dig Wilson out. The poor gumbo never saw it coming.

There was something else he didn’t see either: this time the good guys took a page from Pastor Wilson’s playbook and had their blogs ready so that they could CONTROL THE CONVERSATION, rather than concede it to him.

For example, Green Baggins is systematically nailing Wilson, point for point, on his blog, and Wilson, who must always have the last word, is responding. This probably explains why you only posted five times last week and Ms. Tanaka ran interference for you. Too busy getting Bagged.

Dr. R. Scott Clark of The Heidelblog (excellent name) wasted no time making a general application of the “W” word — “wolf” — to the heretics who propagate Federal Vision. Dr. Clark also noted their favorite rhetorical device: “their tactic has been to criticize my person and my conduct of the discussion in order to deflect the discussion away from the issue at hand.” Welcome to the party, Dr. Clark; that’s their only argument. (Note to Ms. Tanaka: the sophists gave birth to the ad hominem.)

And Bob Mattes has made the most brilliant point yet on his blog, Reformed Musings. In fact, I believe his simple comparison will help everyone get their heads around the Federal Vision. You see, Mr. Schwaller, Federal Vision confuses the average Joe because it is so difficult to explain. But Mr. Mattes bypassed a convoluted explanation that would only make matters worse and drew a simple comparison between Pastor Wilson’s Federal Vision and his magnum opus Southern Slavery As It Was:

Together Doug Wilson and Steve Wilkins did for Christianity and US history what the Federal Vision is doing for the Reformed faith. This is theonomic theology at its absolute best. Here’s a quote from page 18 under the section heading of “Unexpected Blessings”:

Slavery produced in the South a genuine affection between the races that we believe we can say has never existed in any nation before the War or since. Whatever its failures, slavery produced in the South a degree of mutual affection between the races which will never be achieved through any federally-mandated efforts.

Ouch; that’s gotta hurt. And you will note that Mr. Mattes served on the committee that wrote the report condemning Federal Vision. He sure did his homework. Just wait until he learns that Wilson and Wilkins plagiarized the whole thing!

So there it is, Mr. Schwaller. Something for your consideration before you join the fossils of Pompeii, a mere hole in the ash heap of history.

Dougs’ Hero

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Ms. Tanaka and her Samurai sword

Dear Ms. Tanaka,

I have assumed nothing about you and I projected nothing upon you. You, however, presume that your hatred is not “characterized by maliciousness or malevolence, but rather by an overriding concern for God’s justice, truth, and righteousness” and that your hatred somehow defends the Lord of Glory “from His enemies,” which is preposterous.

I suspect that if you polled this listserv, most people would characterize many of your posts as malicious and malevolent and, whatever else you may think, the King of all the earth does not need someone calling herself “Princess Sushitushi” to defend His cause. Somehow it just looks, ummmmm what’s the word? . . . oh, yes — ludicrous.

But I have a question for you. Last December while you were defending Pastor Wilson’s hateful culture of imprecatory prayer, you wrote,

In Galatians 1:8 Paul pronounces a curse upon heretics who seek to pervert the church, and in chapter 5:12 he prays that they would be emasculated and neutered lest their heresy reproduce.

Here’s my question: since the PCA has added its voice to the swelling ranks of Reformed denominations condemning Federal Vision as disruptive to the peace and purity of the church, sub-confessional, non-confessional, and/or heretical, which certainly fits the biblical definition of the word “heresy” if not the Roman definition, and since Pastor Wilson is perhaps the most outspoken proponent of the Federal Vision, do you pray a curse upon him that God would “emasculate and neuter him lest his heresy reproduce”?


Dougs’ Hero

Thoughts for Ms. Tanaka

Dear Ms. Tanaka,

Thank you for your extended answer to my question; it helped very much.

Before we lose focus, however, let’s make sure of the original context of your assertion. At the time, you were attempting to defend Pastor Wilson’s imprecatory theology and you premised your argument thus: “The Book of Revelation is vey [sic] revealing indeed in this respect.” Further, you supported your proposition by alleging, “Jesus says twice in this book that He HATES the Nicoliatans [sic].”

However, in response to my inquiry you have modified your position by stating, “Actually, Jesus’ exact words are that He hates the DEEDS and DOCTRINES of the Nicolaitans, which is certainly not the same thing as saying that He hates the Nicolaitans,” though you did not modify your conclusion. Nevertheless, you are correct. Hatred for a person’s deeds is not the same as hatred for that person. Not even close. For example, I hate your DEEDS and I hate your DOCTRINE; but I do not hate you.

This is important for three reasons. First, Scripture declares, “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Rev. 22:18, 19)

Ms. Tanaka, please notice that this text pronounces a curse — an imprecation — on anyone who adds to or takes away from the words of the Apocalypse. I call this to your attention because you added to the Book of Revelation when you wrote, “Jesus says twice in this book that He HATES the Nicoliatans [sic].” You added an object — the Nicolaitans — an entire body of people, to the Lord Jesus’ hatred. And you aggravated your offense by deliberately taking away words from the Book of Revelation; you took away the words DEEDS and DOCTRINE.

The second reason this is important is because you added to and you took away from the Word of God in an attempt to defend Pastor’s Wilson’s theology of hate. To be sure, you dripped with venom when you wrote, “Jesus says twice in this book that He HATES the Nicoliatans [sic].” Unfortunately, your proof text did not justify your hatred; it only pronounced a covenantal curse upon you and justified your eternal condemnation. Think about it, Ms. Tanaka. A plain reading of the text means that you added all the plagues of the Apocalypse on your head and at the same time you took away your part from the book of life.

And the third reason this is important is that according to your hermeneutic, if you do not repent of your deeds and your doctrines, i.e. your theology that permits interpolation of the Word of God, then the Son of God will hate you, if He does not already. You wrote, “we can safely say that unless the Nicolaitans repent of their deeds and doctrines, they are most assuredly hated by God, even as they suffer torment in Hell while waiting for the final judgment at the end of history when they shall be cast into the Lake of Fire for all eternity.”

Yes, Ms. Tanaka, “The Book of Revelation is very revealing indeed in this respect,” and I just thought you would want to know what it reveals. May it lead to a change in heart.

Thank you,

Dougs’ Hero

From: “Taro Tanaka”
To: Vision2020
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 5:53 AM
Subject: Separating the Princess from the Schwaller: Not yet

Ternier Hedenkoff wrote:

[[ can you please show me where in the Book of Revelation that “Jesus says twice in this book that He HATES the Nicolaitans.” ]]

Actually, Jesus’ exact words are that He hates the DEEDS and DOCTRINES of the Nicolaitans, which is certainly not the same thing as saying that He hates the Nicolaitans. However, we can safely say that unless the Nicolaitans repent of their deeds and doctrines, they are most assuredly hated by God, even as they suffer torment in Hell while waiting for the final judgment at the end of history when they shall be cast into the Lake of Fire for all eternity. One of the things that will be burned up in the Lake of Fire is the absurd notion that God hates only sins but never hates the sinners who cling to those sins out of their hatred toward Him.

First of all, the Bible says God will “render to every man according to his deeds” (Rom 2:6, quoting Psalm 62:12). Second, from the context, the Nicolaitans are clearly Christians who have apostasized or who are in the process of apostasizing. Third, the Bible clearly states that God hates certain people; some of these are named individuals and some are unnamed persons who happen to fall into certain categories of people that God says He hates. Fourth, we will fail to understand God’s hatred properly if we assume His hatred is essentially no different from our hatreds. We know our own frailties and it is all too clear that the hatreds engaged in by men are encumbered by sinfulness; however, it is crucial to recognize that God is never unrighteous in any respect, including in the hatred He harbors toward certain things and certain individuals.

I hope this helps!


Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Separating the Princess from the Schwaller: Not yet

Dear Princess Sushitushi,

Allow me to welcome you back to the Viz and at the same time express my hope that you return quickly to your self-imposed exile; we rather enjoyed the last six-months of relatively venom-free posts.

However, before you go and before I respond to your allegation, I have had a question for you ever since posted something here last December. To set the context, you offered this particular post to defend the wicked imprecatory culture planted by Pastor Douglas Wilson here in Moscow.

You wrote,

The Book of Revelation is vey [sic] revealing indeed in this respect. . . . Jesus says twice in this book that He HATES the Nicoliatans [sic].

Now, I do not doubt that you actually believe this. In fact, I am persuaded me that you believe this alleged twofold statement from the Son of God justifies the contempt you show for persons bearing the image of God. Nevertheless, can you please show me where in the Book of Revelation that “Jesus says twice in this book that He HATES the Nicolaitans.”

Thank you.

Dougs’ Hero

Monday, June 18, 2007

Happy Schwallers Day!

Dear Dr. Campbell and fellow Visionaries,

I am afraid that Mr. Schwaller cannot accept your invitation to meet for coffee today, as he has a preexisting date to speak at the annual ACCS conference, which is a yearly gathering of so-called educators who couldn’t follow an argument if you marked it with bread crumbs. However, in lieu of his company I shall provide you with the conclusion to yesterday’s tragic story of the Greyfriar who learned his lessons well and the Pastor who taught him how to finish the job, because it did not end when Pastor Douglas Wilson threatened the victim’s father with discipline. There remains yet one more chapter.

Happily, the father of the victim successfully removed himself from Pastor Wilson’s predatory threats and he lived to talk about it. Indeed, he spoke to the SPLC’s Intelligence Report, which reported,

The father of the girl in the second incident told the Intelligence Report that church officials tried to keep that quiet as well. At one point, he said, they threatened to bring him under church discipline for failing to protect his daughter. “It would be like me getting robbed and the police coming over and arresting me because I didn’t have five locks on the door, only one,” he said. “It was just bizarre.”

This paragraph is fair enough. A father analogizes the pastoral abuse he suffered at the hands of Douglas Wilson and concluded it “just bizarre.” But if anything’s true about Pastor Wilson, he has to have the last word. Consequently, he lashed out at the father when he saw the article, writing,

Let’s just say that I have never seen quite so striking an example of a father neglecting his daughter. But this is not one that you have to take my word for. Just look at the previous paragraph. This is a father who was willing to talk to Intelligence Report about this particular incident because he doesn’t believe his daughter has been through enough. And the ghouls at SPLC were willing to print it.

After you’ve picked up your jaw, please track Pastor Wilson’s argument. First, with typical Wilsonnuedno he implied that the Greyfriar sexually assaulted the child because of the father’s negligence. Stay with it; this is not a gratuitous whack at the father. Pastor Wilson really believes this and, quite frankly, everyone knows it’s the father’s fault when the student molests the child after the pastor vouches for him. Remember, if you can’t trust your pastor, who can you trust?

Second, Pastor Wilson conceded that the victim had “been through enough,” though he implied it was at her father’s hands, not the molester’s. And third, Pastor Wilson proved his point by affirming that when the father spoke to the media, he aggravated his child’s ordeal. Unfortunately, Wilson failed to state how speaking to the media about Wilson’s pastoral abuse exasperated the child’s suffering. Nevertheless, Pastor Wilson’s point stands: if you discuss the incident in the media, no matter what context, you compound the victim’s pain.

Fair enough. Let’s say the Greyfriar sexually assaulted the child because of the father’s neglect, and let’s say that the father worsened the child’s torment by talking to the media. In fact, let’s go all the way. Let’s impute ALL blame and guilt for this incident to the father: HE DID IT ALL. But let’s not forget to grant Pastor Wilson’s point either: anyone who brings publicity to this incident adds to the child’s suffering and establishes their own guilt. This crime is so reprehensible that the ghoul who commits it stands self-condemned by their action.

If this true, then why would Pastor Wilson blog it?

On that note, I want to wish Pastor Wilson a happy Schwaller’s day!

Dougs’ Hero

Sunday, June 17, 2007

A Sabbath Meditation for Mr. Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

For today’s Sabbath meditation, allow me to call to your attention an important historical fact regarding “God’s hand of judgment” that you may not know. You will recall that Pastor Douglas Wilson documented in his book Fidelity that “rape is God’s judgment on a culture,” and that he distinguished between rape “perpetrated by foreign soldiers” and rape that resulted from “citizens turning on one another.”

This is an important distinction for you to reflect upon because in the years 2003–2005, TWO rapists, not one, visited Christ Church, and both men were citizens of the Kirk who turned on their own. This historical fact becomes even more interesting when you note that Pastor Wilson hand chose one of the rapists to join the Greyfriars program, so that he could prepare him for the ministry.

However, my point in calling this to your attention is not to comment on this student’s remarkable learning prowess; rather, my point is to note his teacher’s extraordinary ability to reinforce his instruction. You see, before the court convicted this Greyfriar of SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD, Pastor Wilson put a full-court press on the father of the victim to NOT prosecute the perpetrator. Unfortunately, Pastor Wilson never explained why he didn’t want the Greyfriar prosecuted. One theory is that he wanted to avoid the negative publicity attached to two back-to-back Christ Church sex-offender cases in one summer; the other theory is that Pastor Wilson enjoys keeping child rapists near the flock.

Whatever his motive, Pastor Wilson squeezed the father of the victim to lay off the Greyfriar. In fact, he squeezed him so tight that he actually threatened him with church discipline. No, that’s not a typo; read it again. Pastor Wilson threatened the father of one of the victims with church discipline because the man contemplated prosecuting the Greyfriar to the hilt, which could have resulted in a life sentence.

Can you imagine that, Mr. Schwaller? A Kirk family learned that one of Pastor Wilson’s hand-chosen disciples sexually abused their child, and Pastor Wilson responded by protecting the molester AND seeking to punish the victim’s father. This point becomes even more shocking when you remember that one of the primary responsibilities of a shepherd, if not THE primary responsibility, is to PROTECT THE FLOCK. In this case, however, Pastor Wilson was more concerned with protecting the predator than the sheep.

Dr. Jay Adams coined an axiom that I think applies to Pastor Wilson, which I will paraphrase: “whenever a church refuses to discipline its sin, it will discipline the righteous by default.” This is exactly the case at Christ Church. The shepherds have welcomed predators into the flock and simultaneously punished the sheep, which brings us back to my original point.

If this Greyfriar had any doubts about the propriety of his wicked behavior, Pastor Wilson went out of his way to remove them. Indeed, he rewarded the guilty and chastised the innocent to underscore all of his student’s previous lessons, as a good instructor should. Better yet, he taught him how to finish the job. Accordingly, by Pastor Wilson’s standards, it’s not enough to defile an innocent child; an accomplished predator understands the importance of finishing off the father.

But I suppose if there’s any consolation here for the poor lost souls of the Kirk, they can meditate upon this, If you can’t trust your pastor, who can you trust?

Dougs’ Hero

Friday, June 15, 2007

A Lying Schwaller

Visionaries and Mr. Schwaller,

Mr. Schwaller has represented himself as an authority on Steven Stinger’s case, including such things as where he parks at the courthouse to where he will sit at Christ Church. But he has carefully tailored the information he feeds us about Steven Stinger to place Pastor Wilson and Christ Church in the best possible light and he refuses to explain in what capacity he “worked for several months with Mr Sitler and other sex offenders in our area.” However, Mr. Schwaller made sure to leave the impression that he worked with Stinger in a therapeutic capacity when he stated, “I felt he [Stinger] was grasping” and when he referred to Stinger’s “previous and ongoing treatment.”

Federal privacy laws prohibit physicians/therapists from disclosing their patients’ names except in very limited circumstances, such as court cases, and even then the bulk of their disclosures are not public record. So if Mr. Schwaller worked with Stinger in the capacity that he implied, he would have violated HIPAA, which is punishable by a fine of $250,000 and 10 years in prison (penalties).

Ministers, however, have no obligation to protect privilege, other than what conscience, good faith, and a few landmark cases require, which raises the obvious question: Since Mr. Schwaller could not have worked with Stinger in a mental-health-care capacity, what minister in the area has “worked for several months with Mr Sitler and other sex offenders in our area” who could speak to Stinger’s “ongoing treatment”?

The answer, of course, is Pastor Douglas Wilson, who has worked with at least three high-profile sex offenders in our area in the last year — Steven Stinger, Jamin Wight, and a deadbeat Greyfriar whom Pastor Wilson shamelessly paraded in front of the community as a TOKEN of his contempt. (Two Greyfriars from the same class that expelled Michael Metzler; yes, Pastor Wilson attracts deviants and he cultivates perversion.)

But to answer Mr. Schwaller’s inquiry, “Maybe [Dougs’ Hero] would care to bullet them [Mr. Schwaller’s lies],” here are the most prominent:

First, Mr. Schwaller lied when he wrote, “I am NOT Doug Wilson. I’ve never met Doug Wilson. . . I am NOT affiliated in any way with NSA, Christ Church, Logos School nor anything that (as far as I know) is tied to those institutions.” This is a lie because Glenn Schwaller exists as a consortium of idiots from Christ Church, which includes Pastor Wilson. I say this because only one man holds this community in such contempt that he would dispatch a Taro-type character to address this awful subject, so that he could defend Wilson while simultaneously ridiculing the community. The Princess appeared on this list when the Stinger story broke, just as Mr. Schwaller appeared the day Judge Stegner released Stinger.

Nevertheless, no one familiar with this case — not Bill Thompson, Judge Stegner, Dean Wullenwaber, RC Sproul Jr, and certainly not the primary victims in Moscow — no one thinks any of this is cute or funny, except Mr. Glenn Schwaller, whose future is so bright he has to wear shades, and who found time to work “Fudds [sic] First Law of Opposition” into the conversation as well as a few “apologies to Veronica Quaife.” The staggering contradiction between the content of some of Mr. Schwaller’s posts and his incredibly flip/antagonistic attitude toward the community confounds me. While Steven Stinger horrifies most human beings, Mr. Schwaller finds this an occasion to belittle, mock, and humiliate, and only one man in real life fits that profile — the minister who cares so little about Stinger’s predations that he would yak his schwaller and fantasize about a hostile take over the Moscow Food Co-op on April Fools Day instead of searching for victims. Perhaps if Stinger had stung Hero, he would not live so close to Grandma.

The second lie follows from the first, “Glenn Schwaller lives, breathes, and exists.” Sure, Doug. Glenn Schwaller does not exist as a human being, which probably explains why no one at the county has heard of him.

To save time, I will call your third lie all the times that you misrepresented persons from this list, including me, by putting meanings on our words that we never intended. Several times you have twisted my words and the few times I asked you to clarify your misrepresentation, you ignored my request, which is consistent with your predatory nature. You tried to create vulnerability and failed. But like a wolf, you lied in wait until the next time.

The fourth lie that Mr. Schwaller has told this community relates to critical information that he has withheld from us about Steven Stinger. As I said, Mr. Schwaller has carefully tailored the information he feeds us; I expect the community will learn of Mr. Schwaller’s bad faith soon enough.

“Dougs’ Hero”

PS: Since you’re in Virginia, can you confirm if your pal told Denise? Our sources say she doesn’t know just as you withheld this from your flock.

From: “Glenn Schwaller”
To: Vision2020
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 3:49 PM
Subject: Don’t change the subject DOUG

I’m not sure what information I’ve posted Our Hero thinks is a lie. Maybe he would care to bullet them. I’ve posted some opinions on things he has asked about. At times I’ve cited what I believe to be factual information, but a difference of opinion cannot be construed as a lie.


Thursday, June 14, 2007

Mr. Schwaller had a very bad day


Many of you might not know that for the last five years, Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, has led a theological movement called “Federal Vision,” or “FV” (aka “Auburn Avenue Theology” because it publicly debuted at Steve Wilkins’ church). A summary of FV would require too much, but in short it holds that the Church has misunderstood the gospel for the last 400 years and that the “Federal Vision” now makes it clear. Suffice to say that since 2002 it has caused tremendous problems in churches across the nation.

I call this to your attention because yesterday the 34th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of America (PCA) adopted a report condemning “Federal Vision” as not in conformity with the Westminster Standards, which is the standard of the Reformed church. The vote was overwhelming. One witness reported that only 30–50 commissioners voted “No” out of 1400.

The significance of this vote cannot be overstated. The PCA is the largest Presbyterian & Reformed denomination in the world, so this vote signals the beginning of the end for any of Pastor Wilson’s claims to orthodoxy. For years he has hailed “the voice of the Church” as the final authority. Indeed, he functionally excommunicated his own brother by citing the “the voice of the Church.” Yesterday, however, the Church spoke. The PCA’s report named Douglas Wilson eight (8) times.

Locally, this vote represents a huge step toward isolating Moscow as a center for anti-Christian doctrine, at least to the extent that Pastor Wilson spearheads the Federal Vision. It also legitimizes those who have called Christ Church a “cult” in recent years, at least to the extent that false doctrine is the centerpiece of a cult.

But if anything else is true, you can be sure of these two things. Yesterday the PCA repudiated the teaching of Douglas Wilson. And yesterday Mr. Schwaller had a very bad day.


PS: You can download the PCA report here.

Sunday, June 10, 2007

A Communion Meditation for Mr. Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

As you prepare to defile this week’s Table again, I want to give you more background in your crash course on the disingenuous machinations of Douglas Wilson, particularly as they apply to his distorted sense of self-importance in direct opposition to the needs of his flock..

Please take a moment to read this blog entry entitled “Kick It Up A Notch,” which he posted on April 30, 2005, in response to unnamed events that transpired the previous week. And bear in mind that he wrote this about six weeks after he discovered a serial pedophile committed abominations with Kirk lambs for the past 18 months, or to use his words, six weeks after he learned that “God’s hand of judgment” fell on Christ Church.

Now please note the two most striking points of this post. First, Pastor Wilson immediately established himself as the center of attention, putting himself on par with the psalmist and St. Paul. Second, notice that Pastor Wilson used vivid language to describe a serious event that he called an “attack,” but he NEVER IDENTIFIED the exact nature of this so-called “attack”; he never stated what specifically happened.

For example, he implied that someone had “reviled” him for Jesus’ sake, but he didn’t say who or how. He called this event a “disguised attack on the purity and consequent potency of the gospel,” and He compared its significance to Paul’s confrontation of Peter at Antioch, but I don’t recall any apostolic assemblies in the last two years. He called it a “tribulation” whereby he would “enter the kingdom of heaven,” but he omitted the specifics of his distress. It was something that “troublemakers” caused because they wanted to “win the respect of the unbelieving world,” but he neglected support this innuendo with any facts. He intimated that he refused to compromise his faith, unlike the “moderate Christians” who had. To be sure, the “attack” and subsequent hardship was so severe for Pastor Wilson that it required special intercession from the saints, whom he publicly thanked for their support because it “meant a great deal.” And he eased the concern of his friends, saying that he and his wife were doing “quite well.”

But please notice, Mr. Schwaller, that Pastor Wilson NEVER IDENTIFIED the exact nature of this so-called “attack”; he never stated exactly what happened. He completely failed to pinpoint the actual historical event itself, leaving his readers to their imaginations to discover the awful truth.

It’s fair to say that he described his family’s trial as so severe that the average reader could walk away thinking it was too terrible to mention; that, for example, he just learned a serial pedophile had raped his grandchildren for the past 18 months. I must admit Pastor Wilson left me with the impression that all four of Job’s messengers had visited him at once, or that bad men tried extorting a repudiation of his faith from him.

But none of these things happened, Mr. Schwaller, not even close. You see, Pastor Wilson could not state directly in plain language the nature of this “attack” because the sad facts of the matter would have immediately punctured his inflated storyline. There was no “attack.” No one “reviled” him. There was no “tribulation.” These things were all figments of Wilson’s imagination — pure fantasy. This is because only one event occurred that week: WORLD Magazine reported that Douglas Wilson committed plagiarism when he co-wrote and edited the book Southern Slavery As It Was. That’s it. Pastor Wilson suffered profound tribulation because WORLD Magazine reported that he committed plagiarism. And their report wasn’t even an “article.” It was a 387-word vignette on the sidebar, which was exactly 300 words less than his blog post. This was the “attack” on poor Pastor Wilson; this was his “tribulation.”

But while no one reviled him, he reviled WORLD Magazine for using the words “stolen sections” to describe his sin. And while no one demanded that he renounce his faith, he demanded that WORLD Magazine apologize to him for the story. And while no one suffered harm that required the saints’ intercession, he made the world suffer as he threw his unrelenting fit of rage.

Mr. Schwaller, as you consider Pastor Wilson’s dreadful ordeal, please compare it to the indescribable acts perpetrated against those innocent children by Steven Sitler just a few weeks before Wilson wrote his fantastic story. Factor in Wilson’s refusal to notify congregation and community, as well as his April Fools Day joke on the Moscow Food Co-op; and don’t forget the beatings that he gave MLK Jr and John Wesley for their plagiarism. Finally, look at Wilson’s cholesterol-laden menu for his self-absorbed gluttony festival described in excessive detail down to the obscene stuffing spilling over the belt of his size 66 (too small) pants.

And with all of these historical facts set before you, ask the question, What the schwaller is wrong with this man?

Now make sure you look nice and holy for the people today, because you are a very brave and important person.

Thank you.

Saturday, June 09, 2007

A Schwaller Primer

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

You appear quite bent that sex offenders spawned by Christ Church represent a special interest to the community. Unfortunately, you have concluded that this constitutes a form of “persecution,” which is no surprise given your tendency to echo the thought processes of Douglas Wilson who regularly confuses reaping what he sowed with persecution.

Regardless, you will recall that we established four deviant personality traits that Douglas Wilson instilled in Steven Sitler while he preyed in Moscow under Wilson’s oversight. He learned how to deceitfully manipulate; he learned that narcissistic self-love exceeds self-denial as the preeminent Christian virtue; he obtained Wilson’s approval to break any law — God’s or man’s — if it stood between him and his personal lusts; and he learned that human beings made in the image of God are nothing more than physical objects meant to bring sadistic pleasure to kirkers wielding serrated edges. But Steven Sitler’s tutelage under Douglas Wilson didn’t end the day Wilson discovered his abominations. In fact, that’s when the hands-on lessons began. Please, let me explain.

First, Pastor Wilson taught Steven Sitler that kirkers live by another set of standards than the rest of the world. For example, in the case of the BTK serial killer, Wilson maintained that true repentance required the killer to “plead guilty in court to any crimes he committed, publicly declare that he has sought God’s forgiveness, and ask for forgiveness from the families of the victims.”

Sitler, however, used his intimate knowledge of the victims to plea bargain one count, instead of witnessing a good confession. In other words, “he didn’t plead guilty in court to any crimes he committed”; rather, he leveraged the court for a sweetheart deal whereby the court agreed to prosecute him for only one offense if he agreed to name his victims, which obviously spared him the embarrassment of “pleading guilty in court to any crimes he committed.” It also reinforced all of his previous lessons whereby Pastor Wilson instructed him how to manipulate others to obtain his selfish desires.

Second, Pastor Wilson taught Sitler that when kikers commit abominations, Pastor Wilson will cover them up. In Sitler’s case Wilson helped achieve this objective by arranging appropriate counsel for the main principals. For example, Sitler’s parents retained the finest lawyer money could buy — Dean Wullenwaber — as defense counsel — at Wilson’s recommendation. Likewise, the victims retained counsel at their pastor’s recommendation; unfortunately, they retained the most incompetent attorney in the state — Greg Dickison — who recently abandoned his law practice to sell real estate. In the end, Wullenwaber negotiated Sitler’s plea bargain while Dickison no doubt offered consolation to the victims as they watched Wullenwaber work the system.

Third, Pastor Wilson taught Sitler that his perversion stems from “discontent” rather than an evil heart. We know this because in his letter to Judge Stegner, Wilson wrote, “The assignments I have given him have included the reading of books on everything from the obvious issues of sex and sexuality, to the underlying issues of his discontent.” Can you believe that, Mr. Schwaller? Douglas Wilson pinned Sitler’s serial pedophile on “underlying issues of his discontent.” HOW STUNNINGLY STUPID! Think about it; when feelings of discontentment overwhelm you, Mr. Schwaller, do you feel like raping two year olds? I certainly hope not. Whatever you may feel, however, I am confident that Wilson’s pastoral counsel reinforced the trivial nature of Sitler’s crimes, at least in the psychopath’s mind, when he attributed its original source to “discontent.” This leads to the final lesson.

Pastor Wilson taught Sitler that his crimes were nothing more than a “problem” requiring repentance, and Wilson rewarded Sitler’s genuine repentance with a letter to Judge Stegner, which stated, “When we first began, I can honestly say that Steven did not know the real nature of his *problem.* . . . I have good hope that Steven has genuinely repented, and that he will continue to deal with this to become a productive and contributing member of society.” Now even you, Mr. Schwaller, must have a difficult time swallowing this one, because you have lectured us time and again that Sitler cannot be “cured” and that he will always pose a constant threat to children. But Pastor Wilson thought Sitler suffered from a “problem” correctable by genuine repentance, which raises the obvious question, If Wilson thinks serial pedophilia is nothing more than a “problem,” what does he call “wickedness”?

Therefore, Mr. Schwaller, you may protest that the community pays too much attention to sex offenders bred by Douglas Wilson’s malignant theology; but you have to admit that Pastor Wilson has done little to discourage criminal behavior in his disciples. In fact, the evidence appears overwhelming that Pastor Wilson diligently labors to diminish their felonies, which not only contributes nothing to their rehabilitation, it positively encourages their iniquity. Obviously this translates into a greater threat to the community at large whether you like it or not.

So once again I encourage you to repent of the bitterness that clearly feeds your compulsion to harass the community on this subject, which really only bothers two people — Glenn Schwaller and Douglas Wilson.

Thank you.

Thursday, June 07, 2007

Schwaller channeling Wilson, Schwaller channeling Wilson: Do you read me?

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

Recently I received an email from the person whom I consider the foremost authority on the subject of Douglas Wilson’s disingenuous machinations. The email contained a side-by-side comparison of Wilson’s words, which he wrote in response to public criticism of him, and your words, which you wrote in response to public criticism of him. Here are the two citations:

It is my intent to blog my way through this book [a book critiquing Wilson’s disingenuous theology], offering my thoughts on this general subject for the edification of a bemused Christendom, and to do so whenever one of three conditions pertain: a. I am amused b. I am about to burst a blood vessel on my forehead, or c. I need to set the record, as they say, straight. . . . — Douglas Wilson

Just to set the record straight (not that I particularly care about setting the record straight, I just like to hear the collective hammering of the veins in the foreheads of a few of our 2020 visionaries). . . . — Glenn Schwaller

I call this historical coincidence to your attention not to ask you to account for Pastor Wilson’s words. They make sense enough. I call it to your attention to ask you to account for your words. I don’t understand WHY you actually tried to set the record straight if you really “like to hear the collective hammering of the veins in the foreheads of a few of our 2020 visionaries.” This seems to contradict your point of not caring to set the record straight. After all, if you don’t care about setting it straight, and you actually enjoy listening to the collective hammering of veins, I’m not sure why you would stop the pleasure.

Don’t get me wrong. I sense your outrage and your contempt. But I don’t see the irony or the point. It’s as though you channeled Douglas Wilson but someone or something interfered with your reception and the subsequent temporary distortion caused you to mistype a word or phrase, or perhaps a full line of copy. And you will recall that this was your first “I’m not Doug Wilson, I just act like him” episode.

I would appreciate it if you would interpret your words for me and exactly whose veins you heard hammering in whose forehead when you typed your post. As I’ve noted before, I am confident that the answer will help you discover the Schwaller within.

Thank you.

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Of Schwallers and Idiots

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

Your recent exchange with Mr. Hansen illustrates your brazen willingness to manipulate words in order to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION; but I confess that Mr. Hansen handled you quite well. In fact, it reminds me of the time that Pastor Wilson, whose disingenuous machinations you know not, tried to manipulate Drs. Quinlan and Ramsey into public debating him about his book Southern Slavery, As It Was. (Of course, this happened before a UW professor caught Wilson in his plagiarism.)

In typical Wilsonian fashion, he strutted around town beating his chest, “I challenge you two to debate me!” And they of course gave him all the attention due the town fool, ignoring him much the way this list ignores you. But Wilson won’t take “no” for an answer because everyone must bow before him and his paramasturbatory visions of post-millennial glory. So the idiot took his challenge to the Viz, which you can read right here.

I tell you, Mr. Schwaller, you really have to admire a Christian pastor when he personally insults respected members of the community. He’s such a brave man. Nevertheless, I call these historical facts to your attention because I want you to see Mr. Hansen’s perfect response to Pastor Wilson’s courageous double dare. You can read it right here.

TOUCHÉ!! Well, that’s about the funniest slam I ever read. Pastor Wilson tried to manipulate other people’s words so that he could CONTROL THE CONVERSATION, and Tom Hansen handed it right back to him, good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over. WHAP! Indeed, I’m sure that even you can appreciate Mr. Hansen’s quick wit.

So I thought that I’d share this moment in history with you, Mr. Schwaller, as a little reminder to be careful when you twist other people’s words.

But before I let you go, I have one question for you about something you wrote to Mr. Hansen. Speaking of Sitler and his probation, you said, “That does NOT mean they will follow these rules. It does NOT mean the community is “safe”. Only an idiot would believe that.”

By contrast, two years ago Pastor Wilson pleaded with Judge Stegner for a “measured and limited” sentence because Wilson had “good hope that Steven has genuinely repented, and that he will continue to deal with this to become a productive and contributing member of society.”

Therefore, given your standard that “only an idiot” would believe the community is safe from Sitler, do you think that Pastor Wilson is an idiot for grounding his urgent plea to Judge Stegner on nothing more than “good hope”?


Bob Herodotus

a schwaller from the beginning

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

You recently declared that you have never met Doug Wilson, so I want to encourage you to meet him in order to familiarize yourself with his deceitful machinations, because when it comes to lying, no one can fudge a better schwaller than Pastor Wilson.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I don’t want you to meet him so you could enhance your ability to schwaller. Rather, I want you to meet him so that you, Mr. Glenn Schwaller, the man who personally worked with serial pedophile Steven Sitler for several months but refuse to prove it, can see the malignant influence that Pastor Douglas Wilson had over the young man in your care. You will be surprised to discover that Pastor Wilson and pedophile Sitler share many things in common.

For example, you recall the time that Wilson ran from this listserv after the community caught him telling huge schwallers. Well, as previously noted he returned to the list using various pseudonyms, such as Edna Wilmington, Rod Johnson, A. Tad Nosey, Bubba Jones, Kyle DeSpinauer, Faul Ottomaticks, Citizen X, Fiat Lux, Christian Burns, Princess Sushitushi — I think you get the picture. You see, he primarily uses these characters to defend his reputation or to run interference for HIS agenda during any one of his regular scandals that occur at random intervals. Of course the irony is that he stoutly condemns “anonymous” posts on the one hand while he regularly uses them on the other. As I said, the man is a flaming schwaller.

However, my point is to show you one particular pseudonym deployed by Wilson in 2004 and the specific location where he laundered that pseudonym’s emails, when he shwallered to this community. The name was “P.S. Stile” and Wilson laundered “Stile’s” posts through Colville, WA. Yes, Colville, WA — Steven Sitler’s hometown. We know this because Mr. Wayne Fox did the legwork and posted it right here on Vision 2020.

I call this to your attention hoping that you could sniff around. Perhaps you could take advantage of your personal relationship with Sitler and contact him to see if he and Wilson worked together in conjunction with Sitler’s parents or his pastor, when Wilson tried to deceive the community with one of his clever schwallers. And mind you, this theory is not beyond the realm of possibility when you remember that Steven’s mother was a diehard Wilson loyalist when he fled from this list:


I mean, can you imagine how awful someone in Colville must feel if, while Wilson taught them to schwaller so they could ridicule “intoleristas,” Sitler used deception to molest children? (BTW, Wilson coined the term “intolerista” to license his flock to treat members of the community with hate; “naming” for Wilson is the first step in dehumanizing.) At least, I hope someone would feel bad because I am certain that Pastor Wilson doesn’t care about “The victims, the victims, THINK OF THE VICTIMS!” He’s too concerned about April Fools’ jokes to worry about a few victims.

Therefore, perhaps you, Mr. Schwaller, could be a vessel of honor to our community. Perhaps you could share some more insight from your counseling sessions with Sitler and show us how Wilson helped corrupt the pedophile. Maybe others, through your hard work, could begin to understand the ripple effects of Wilson’s corrupting influence over the poor souls who sit under his wicked ministry. Perhaps then they may see the truth of Paul’s axiom, “Do not be deceived, evil company corrupts good morals,” for, indeed, there is no evil company like Douglas Wilson. After all, he was a schwaller from the beginning and the father of it.

Bob Herodotus

“Oh, I swear I’d kill that little weasel if I could.”
— Mark Knopfler (with apologies to all weasels)

Sunday, June 03, 2007

Mr. Schwaller Preyed All Day

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

You will recall that about two weeks ago, I wrote, “Sitler learned from Wilson how to create opportunities by misrepresentation and then pounce on weakness the moment he saw it.” And you will recall that this particular post sent you over the edge into an “I am not Doug Wilson, I just act like him” fit of rage.

I call this to your attention because you responded to “Let Us Prey” according to this modus operandi. You did not acknowledge that the author of the post predicated his argument on Douglas Wilson’s formal fallacy of affirming the consequent, and you did not acknowledge that the writer illustrated his point with one example of kirkers being inconsistent with their own beliefs, when they should not. Then you made the extraordinary leap from God answering the Kirk’s imprecatory prayers to God sending JH to Moscow for some unknown slight. In other words, you twisted the argument and superimposed your perversion on me:

“It sounds to me as if you are saying Christ Church is an enemy of God, offered an imprecatroy prayer to God improperly, and as punishment for that, God sent Steven Sitler to abuse their children. Did I get that right? Is that how the God you believe in functions?? Did God send us Jason Hamilton for some unknown slight to Him or some other poor soul?”

Can you see your misrepresentation? It’s clear that you wanted to create weakness, or vulnerability in my position, so that you could exploit it by pitting your straw man against the community. Mr. Schwaller, your style (in this post) reminds me of Doug Jones — the Kirk’s sidewinder. He might look cute and chubby, like the Pillsbury Dougboy; but that plump little reptile glides rather smoothly, dripping sincerity with each deception, so that he can position himself to lunge on his prey.

But the Kirk’s cold-blooded elder is not my point; my point is that your misrepresentation constitutes one more proof that you suffer from a terminal case of “I am not Doug Wilson, I just act like him” disease. Think about it. You used deceit to gain the moral high ground. This is classic Wilson who holds deceit as a virtue to take dominion, which brings us back to point.

Doug Wilson and Doug Jones cultured an environment where treachery is a virtue, and Steven Sitler thrived in their treacherous culture. Indeed, he flourished as they taught him to create susceptibility in his victims through guile. Ironically, they taught him, by example, right here on Vision 2020. The Kirk’s predatory elders taught the Kirk’s God-sent predator to sharpen his skills in this very forum. Now that’s ironic. It also leads to my final point.

Your attempt to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION has failed and I remind you of my outstanding request for you to tell us “in what capacity you ‘worked for several months with Mr Sitler and other sex offenders in our area’ and how we may confirm this claim.” I am certain the answer to this request will help you discover the Schwaller within.

Thank you,

Bob Herodotus

From: “Glenn Schwaller”
To: Vision2020
Sent: Sunday, June 3, 2007 2:56 PM
Subject: A Sabbath Contemplation for Mr. Schwaller — Let Us Prey

Dear Mr Herodotus

Thank you for the information. Since Poohs Blog or Poohs Speak (I don’t remember what it’s called) seems to be down at the present time, I have no way of reading all the information that is available.

As I understand it, imprecatory prayer asks for God to destroy His enemies. To me, the “His” indicates enemies of God, not the enemies of some poor guy who thinks he’s being persecuted. An enemy of Doug Wilson (or you, or me, or anyone) is not necessarily an enemy of God. Even if you or I or Doug Wilson THINK someone is an enemy of God, doesn’t make it so. So I guess it’s up to God to determine if the enemies against whom the imprecatory prayers were offered were enemies worthy of being punished in His name.

It sounds to me as if you are saying Christ Church is an enemy of God, offered an imprecatroy prayer to God improperly, and as punishment for that, God sent Steven Sitler to abuse their children. Did I get that right? Is that how the God you believe in functions?? Did God send us Jason Hamilton for some unknown slight to Him or some other poor soul? If so, you may keep your God; mine would never be so evil and callous.

There was what I felt to be a divinely inspired service at the Presbyterian Church this morning. At no time this morning did I feel the presence of an cruel, insensitive God. When I do, it’s time to find another God.


As far as Douglas Wilson’s thoughts on rape, I find them to be abhorrent.

A Sabbath Contemplation for Mr. Schwaller — Let Us Prey

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

Continuing our education in the ABCs of Doug Wilson, you recall that I told you that a local blogger broke the story about Steven Sitler and Pastor Wilson’s failure to warn his flock. Well, exactly one year ago today, that blogger posted the following essay on his website, which I lifted and archived for the benefit of folks like you. You will notice that I used this post as the template for my previous contemplation:

Douglas Wilson has adopted a policy of affirming the consequent, which is the logical fallacy holding that the proposition “if A then B” necessitates the proposition “if B then A,” even though “if B then A” is plainly false. For example, Scripture teaches that, as a rule, righteous people will suffer persecution for their righteousness; but Scripture does not teach that everyone who experiences opposition is living righteously, which is the position advanced by Wilson when he points to all of the Kirk’s internal and external grief, saying, “We must be doing something right.” And while it may be true that Christ Church and its affiliated ministries may be doing something right, it is certainly true that they are doing many things wrong — very wrong — such as prayer.

Perhaps you could reflect upon the Kirk’s imprecatory-prayer policy and its possible relation to Steven Sitler’s serial predation of Kirk children. From June 2003 through July 2003, Christ Church conducted imprecatory-prayer meetings — daily — asking God to visit judgment upon their “enemies.” Steven Sitler arrived in Moscow to attend New Saint Andrews College in August 2003. And if you believe that God answers prayer, then this fact deserves serious contemplation, especially in light of Douglas Wilson’s thoughts on rape, in his book Fidelity:

Violent rape is a judgment of God upon a people. . . This does not justify the perpetrators; it is simply the recognition that when disaster befalls a city, sexual disaster for the women is part of this. This does not mean that a woman who is raped should assume any personal responsibility for it; she is innocent. . . Violent rape is God’s judgment on a culture, and individual women who are part of that culture are included in the judgment. But this does not mean that they as individuals “deserved” it. . . . We see the same judgment at work in disintegrating cultures: ‘Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil’ (Eccl. 8:11). Here the rape is not being perpetrated by foreign soldiers, but is the result of citizens turning on one another. Every culture is a gathering of sinners, and so rape is always a possibility. But when God’s hand of judgment is heavy upon a people, women are in far greater danger of sexual assault than at other times. (Douglas Wilson, Fidelity: What It Means To Be a One-Woman Man [Moscow: Canon Press, 1999] 82, 83)

If this serial pedophilia had taken place in the local government school system, Wilson would have wagged his finger at the disintegrating culture, and if a person against whom the Kirk utters their imprecatory prayers had suffered a similar hard providence, Wilson would fill the web with gloats and jeers. But now we see that God has visited the unspeakable upon Christ Church, and He did it at the exact time when they labored in prayer beseeching harm upon their neighbors. This should not go unnoticed.

Douglas Wilson’s enemy theology cultivates selfishness, implants acrimony, fosters revenge, and breeds hate. It is a culture of death. It is a culture under “God’s hand of judgment.” And the Kirk’s enemy theology reached its zenith in the summer of 2003, when they asked for pain, calamity, torment, and affliction upon others; and God Almighty answered their imprecations with one of their own citizens. God sent them Steven Sitler to rape helpless and innocent children.

But the point is not Sitler’s abuse. These dear loved ones who suffered at Sitler’s hands are not merely victims of child molestation; they are victims of profound spiritual abuse. They are victims of Doug Wilson’s enemy theology. And if the Kirk wants relief, or even mercy, then they should seek it at the very place where they scorned it — on their knees, in prayer.

Thank you.

Friday, June 01, 2007

Another Contemplation for Mr. Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

You have noted that you are so new to our community that you are “still educating [yourself] on the history of this rather unfortunate mess [Sitler], MSD’s woes, and many of the other community issues at large.” You have also noted that you are not Doug Wilson, have never met Doug Wilson, and are not familiar with the disingenuous machinations of Doug Wilson; so I want to help you in your education as it relates to the subject of Douglas Wilson; after all, I am the Unofficial Father of Vision 2020 History. Please bear with me.

You will recall that a member of Christ Church caught Steven Sitler molesting one of his children, and a few days later Douglas Wilson discovered the unthinkable took place on his watch in his church. Now let me place this historical fact in another context for you. In one of his books, Wilson wrote this:

Violent rape is a judgment of God upon a people. . . This does not justify the perpetrators; it is simply the recognition that when disaster befalls a city, sexual disaster for the women is part of this. . . Violent rape is God’s judgment on a culture, and individual women who are part of that culture are included in the judgment. . . . We see the same judgment at work in disintegrating cultures: “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Eccl. 8:11). Here the rape is not being perpetrated by foreign soldiers, but is the result of citizens turning on one another. . . But when God’s hand of judgment is heavy upon a people, women are in far greater danger of sexual assault than at other times. (Douglas Wilson, Fidelity: What It Means To Be a One-Woman Man [Moscow: Canon Press, 1999] 82, 83)

Accordingly, Pastor Wilson affirms that “citizens turning on one another” and “violent rape” are “God’s judgment on a culture.” Further, he states, “when God’s hand of judgment is heavy upon a people, women are in far greater danger of sexual assault than at other times.” Now if you apply Wilson’s standard and argue from the weak to the weaker, i.e. from “women” (weak) to “children” (weaker), then you may argue that “when God’s hand of judgment is heavy upon a people, *children* are in far greater danger of sexual assault than at other times.”

Given this principle, you may conclude that a Kirk pedophile turning on Kirk citizens and having his way with Kirk children for 18 months falls into the category of “violent rape” and “God’s judgment,” at least by Wilson’s standard. And when you throw in Sitler’s West Virginia spree in summer 2003, the judgment appears much worse, at least as far as the CREC is concerned. Whatever you believe, Mr. Schwaller, I am confident that the Judge of all the Earth has done right, at least by Wilson’s standards.

But my point in calling these awful facts to your attention is not to rub your nose in “God’s judgment.” You have convinced me that you neither fear God nor regard man, and that you have no more concept of human decency than Sitler or Wilson. Indeed, I believe that if you knew the victims saw you right now, you wouldn’t give a rip. What do you care? IT’S ALL ABOUT DOUG.

Nevertheless, I think it’s important for the readers of Vision2020 as well as lurkers from the Kirk to have a little perspective. Douglas Wilson learned of Sitler’s crimes on March 11, 2005. After that, we don’t know when Sitler began confessing the names of his victims; we don’t know how long it took him to remember the names he confessed; and we don’t know when Wilson decided to conceal this information from the Kirk. But we do know this much.

On March 11, 2005, Douglas Wilson had good cause to examine his heart, his doctrine, and his manner of life, because by his standard “God’s hand of judgment” had just fallen on the Kirk’s “disintegrating culture.” We know that of all men, Pastor Wilson had an absolute obligation to exhaust himself searching for more possible victims of Steven Sitler, and that this obligation included an exhaustive search within the local community. Indeed, if any man had occasion to grow up and act mature, Pastor Douglas Wilson was that man.

Unfortunately, this was not the case. We know this because exactly 20 days after Wilson discovered that “God’s hand of judgment” had just fallen on the Kirk, or less than three weeks after he learned that a serial pedophile ravaged Kirk children for 18 months, Doug Wilson resolved for time and eternity to show the world exactly where his pastoral priorities lay. The great man of God found time to play an April Fools’ Day joke on the local community:

Big News Topic: Current Events
Now that the papers are all signed, and my attorney says that there is nothing that can be done about it, I suppose this would be a good time to announce that through the generous help of a third party my wife and I have bought the Moscow Food Coop. For me to have been involved in the negotiations publicly would have been obviously counterproductive, but now that the deal is done, I think there is no longer any sense in being coy. At the same time, despite local politics, I want to assure all the regular Food Coop customers that there is absolutely no intention of selling the Coop’s new downtown location to Christ Church, or of diminishing in any way the quality of service that our customers have come to expect.

Think about it, Mr. Schwaller, the fool had no idea how many more undiscovered victims remained in his church (just as he still does not), but 20 days after he learned a child rapist laid waste the lambs of the flock, Pastor Wilson found time to yank some locals’ chains, hoping to get a good laugh at their expense. In case your math is off, that’s almost one day per confessed victim. What a funny guy. Do you think the victims laughed, Mr. Schwaller? I don’t.

But perhaps I expect too much. Perhaps April Fools’ gags help Wilson reflect on his calling, or maybe April Fools’ Day is the Kirk equivalent of the Day of Atonement. I don’t know and I don’t care. Of this much, however, I am certain. When God delivers the final blow to the Kirk’s rotten culture (which is currently in motion), Pastor Wilson will have no occasion for laughter, he will have no one to mock or belittle, and he will have nowhere to run. In fact, he should know by now that God will make him the punch line that day, because Scripture says,

Because you disdained all my counsel, and would have none of my rebuke, I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your terror comes, when your terror comes like a storm, and your destruction comes like a whirlwind, when distress and anguish come upon you. Then they will call on me, but I will not answer; they will seek me diligently, but they will not find me. Because they hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the LORD, they would have none of my counsel and despised my every rebuke. Therefore they shall eat the fruit of their own way, and be filled to the full with their own fancies. (Proverbs 1:25–31)


Thursday, May 31, 2007

Glenn Schwaller, Pastor of Christ Church

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

On May 31, you wrote,

“Unless someone has some specifc [sic] questions regarding the conditions of Mr Sitler’s and others’ release, or related topics, I shall NOT revist [sic] this issue.”

But on June 1, you wrote,

“But what have YOU, Mr Hansen, given the circumstances the legal system has put us in, done to protect or inform the community? Oh yes, you have a little web site. And what exactly did that offer for community protection and information that was not readily and more timely available elsewhere? What have YOU, Mr Hansen, done to educate and inform yourself and others about how the system works and how best to work with it, given the release of sex offenders in our community? Have you talked with our local P&P officers? Have you talked with P&P officials in Lewiston? Have you talked with the local police, Bill Thomspon, Judge Stegner, legislators or community officials? Would you share the information they have given you with us as a gesture of your commitment to educate and inform the community?”

Mr. Schwaller, why do you expect others to answer your questions when you have adopted a policy of stonewalling our questions? This double standard of yours is a classic symptom of the “I am not Doug Wilson, I just act like him” disease, which is a malady that results in bloated selfishness, swollen self-righteousness, inflamed hypocrisy, and engorged ego. Unfortunately, it is terminal. It leads to hell. I urge you to seek help immediately. And may I suggest that the most expedient route for you to overcome your deadly case of “I am not Doug Wilson, I just act like him” is to answer my question, which I asked two days ago — “Please . . . tell this listserv in what capacity you ‘worked for several months with Mr Sitler and other sex offenders in our area’ and how we may confirm this claim.”

This is your remedy, Mr. Schwaller; this is your chance to live. If you answer my question with the truth, you will discover that you are more than a hypocrite; you are a fraud — a fake — a big fat liar. You will discover that Glenn Schwaller is not real in the same sense that Tom Hansen is real. Glenn Schwaller is the figment of a deranged imagination. He is hyper-extension of sick man. Do something. Do something constructive. Get help.

And answer my question.


Monday, May 28, 2007

A personal invitation to Mr. Schwaller

Visionaries and Mr. Schwaller,

I personally invite Mr. Schwaller to return to this forum because I for one found his posts both provocative and enlightening. Hard facts about serial pedophiles are difficult to ascertain and I commend him for sharing his knowledge of this unseemly subject with us so that we as a community can be better prepared to address a predator in our midst.

With this in mind, I have a couple of questions for Mr. Schwaller.
  1. Can you please tell us the recidivism rate for serial pedophiles?
  2. Can you please share with us the average number of children that repeat offenders violate before their discovery?
  3. Finally, given your familiarity with Steven Sitler’s case file, can you please describe for us a worst-case scenario for the children of Moscow (number of victims, age of victims, types of abuse, etc.), if Mr. Sitler resumes his pattern of serial predation?
I believe that these are reasonable questions for a community to ask and I believe that you have our community’s best interests at heart.

Thank you,


Saturday, May 19, 2007

The Secret Life of Schwaller Mitty, Part I

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

You say, “QED,” but your latest rhetorical devices indicate that you have fallen head first into a protracted “I am not Doug Wilson; I just act like him,” downward spiral, which will only end in calamity. Please, let me help restore you by filling in yet more blanks.

In order to understand this next point, you must firmly grasp the axiom that IT IS ALL ABOUT DOUG, and you must understand that the only way for Pastor Wilson to insure that all things remain ALL ABOUT DOUG, he must CONTROL THE CONVERSATION. He must bend and shape and twist the dialogue, if not prohibit it outright, to insure that when anyone says anything about him (or his church), they either say nice things or else he is present to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION.

This objective is easy enough to achieve inside the church where he rules with an iron fist. For example, in a previous post I referenced Duck because, as you know, Wilson gave him an ultimatum: “Sign the Christ Church Commitment to Loyalty or I’ll put you in the bread line.” The Christ Church Commitment to Loyalty prohibited free speech and it required the strict appearance of perfect loyalty to the church — so strict that if anyone ever questioned it, Wilson would immediately terminate him. The rest of the stories spun by Wilson are complete fabrications. I have read the Christ Church Commitment to Loyalty and I have spoken to Duck. Sadly, most kirkers are afraid to call him because they know that when they hang up, they will have to make a costly decision (Wilson knows this too). However, the point of the Christ Church Commitment to Loyalty and the point that you must understand was Wilson’s obsessive need to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION.

An even better example of Wilson’s need to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION is the case at hand — Steven Sitler. Mr. Schwaller, what pastoral consideration could possibly exist that would override Wilson’s absolute responsibility to warn his flock of predation? Of course, you and I both know that the answer is “No reason or excuse exists that could in any way relieve him of this obligation.” But believe it or not, last year the paper quoted Wilson (or one of his proxies), saying something like they “did it for the victims,” whatever that means.

By comparison, the church in Colville not only sent letters to the congregation, they adopted a policy to purchase a full-page ad in the newspaper to place Sitler’s photograph before the public with the warning: CONVICTED PEDOPHILE, if he ever returns to Colville. Now that’s a church that cares. Not Wilson; he didn’t say boo to the flock, let alone the public, which brings us back to point.

Wilson decided to ignore the urgent duty of warning his congregation because he wanted to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION. He understands that the words “Serial Pedophile” lead to six-inch headlines, and in 2005 he certainly didn’t want to go through another 2003–04. After all, IT’S ALL ABOUT DOUG. So he CONTROLLED THE CONVERSATION by withholding vital information.

Now take this principle and apply it to Vision 2020. Wilson needs to CONTROL THE CONVERSATION, but after he ran away from here in 2003, he put himself in a pickle. How could he honor his pledge to sign off 2020 yet simultaneously CONTROL THE CONVERSATION? The answer to this question lies within the Secret Life of Schwaller Mitty.

It is not enough for Pastor Wilson to have proxies spreading his opinions on this bulletin board. Ultimately, he must visit this list in person to make his arguments firsthand. So when he said farewell in December 2003, he left by name only because even at that time he had two Schwaller Mittys — two fictitious personalities with pseudonymous email accounts — subscribed to Vision 2020 so that he could CONTROL THE CONVERSATION. And these two conjured characters were the first in an endless parade of pseudonyms who would visit this forum at various points in Kirk history, so that Wilson could CONTROL THE CONVERSATION.

Mr. Schwaller, I introduce you to Edna Wilmington (#1) and Rodney Johnson, the first two pseudonyms deployed by Wilson in November 2003, a couple of weeks before he signed off this listserv. Mr. Schwaller, think of them as the Ghosts of Schwaller’s Past, for these two fakes were the beginning of Schwallers — extensions of a deranged imagination slipping into madness — so that Wilson could CONTROL THE CONVERSATION.

Mr. Schwaller, you must save yourself from this “I am not Doug Wilson; I just act like him,” downward spiral, lest you fall into oblivion with all the others.

The Secret Life of Schwaller Mitty, Part II will follow.


PS: Mr. Schwaller, you have persuaded me that you can follow an argument and that you do not need repetitive caps. Please indulge me, however, because there is a group of people who require such things to help jar them out of their stupor.

From: “Glenn Schwaller”
To: Vision2020
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 4:31 PM
Subject: A Man of Constant Schwaller

Thank you Mr Herodotus.

Your response most certainly put all the pieces together for me.

quod erat demonstrandum


Friday, May 18, 2007

A Man of Constant Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

I want to give you incentive to overcome your “I’m not Doug Wilson, but I act just like him” syndrome, by relating another story that hopefully will put all the pieces together for you.

You will recall my narrative about how Douglas Wilson stormed off of this list in a huff after he completely humiliated himself. Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end there. You see, during the whole “It’s Not About Slavery” thing, Wilson took personal offense at public statements issued by three members of the University of Idaho’s faculty and administration. Mind you, he had no cause for offense. Nevertheless, he threw a number of temper tantrums (not unlike your recent outburst), and he demanded apologies from the three men at UI, much the same way that you recently insisted upon apologies.

However, in addition to this, he also utilized members of his church, in a well-coordinated public-relations blitz, to heap constant verbal abuse upon the three men, and Vision 2020 became the primary venue for Wilson and his pet monkeys to rail. Presumably he thought this a wise peace-making strategy. But whatever he thought, I have never witnessed such vicious personal attacks in my life.

Well, time rolled on and Wilson’s efforts at reconciliation only produced more strife in the community and they utterly failed to induce the much-desired apologies. But he wanted satisfaction, so he wrote a letter to the governor of the State of Idaho asking him to compel the three men to apologize, and a couple of weeks later while the governor visited Moscow, a reporter asked him what he intended to do about Wilson’s letter, which brings us to the punch line. The governor replied, “Douglas who?”

No joke. I laughed so hard I almost wet my pants. Of the million different things that any of us could ask Boise to address, Douglas Wilson thought so much of himself that he begged the state governor to make three men say, “I’m sorry.” But his plea never landed on the governor’s desk; his staff deemed it too unimportant to waste the boss’ time (or else some mail clerk round-filed it thinking it was a Trinitarian prank). Can you imagine Wilson’s humiliation? If he had any sense he would have gone home and stuck his head in the oven. But he didn’t, and that’s not my point.

My point is that while Pastor Douglas Wilson exhausted all of his church’s energy demanding apologies from the Daily News, the Spokesman Review, The Idaho Statesman, the AP, Governor Kempthorn, etc.; and while his army of goons went forth to harass and intimidate the local community, the unthinkable took place inside Kirk homes. Steven Sitler raped Kirk children. And nobody knew it.

Pastor Wilson had them all consumed with his hate-filled agenda. They wrote letters to the editor; they made sport on; they flooded Vision 2020 with malicious emails. They had only one cause: IT WAS ALL ABOUT DOUG.

And it’s still ALL ABOUT DOUG. Steven Sitler’s abominations have changed nothing. Even now, as some of them read this, they are grinding their teeth, scheming ideas to exact retribution against me. This is because Douglas Wilson has trained his followers to think one dimensionally; they have only one purpose that brings meaning to their lives: IT’S ALL ABOUT DOUG. Pastor Wilson welcomed a serial pedophile back into the fold (without ever warning them of predation), and the Kirk families don’t care one whit, because they have learned IT’S ALL ABOUT DOUG.

So you see, Mr. Schwaller, it really isn’t worth it. Don’t give your life to this hopeless cause. You will lose the rest of your days pursuing empty apologies for non-existent offenses to satisfy an unfeeling man whose only interests reside in his bloated ego. He will waste your soul the same way Sitler violated those dear children.

And because he has no capacity for human emotion, and because he cares only about himself, and because he uses people and throws them away, he is called A MAN OF CONSTANT SCHWALLER.


Thursday, May 17, 2007

The Schwaller Returned to Capistrano

Welcome back, Mr. Schwaller,

I have many things to say to you, but I fear each one may provoke another temporary “I am not Doug Wilson, I just act like him,” lapse of reason on your part; so I shall limit myself to three points and proceed delicately.

First, I note your “I am not Doug Wilson; I just act like him” syndrome because whenever called to account for his obvious failures, Doug Wilson invariably throws a fit and begins accusing everyone right and left of wrongdoing. It is really quite a remarkable phenomenon to behold. The man is like one of Pavlov’s dogs with a bad case of rabies; instead of salivating when he hears the bell, he froths at the mouth, shows his teeth, and growls. Thankfully, 2020 has witnessed few of his outbursts for some time; few, that is, until yesterday when you reacted to my post right on queue. So I encourage you to deal with your obvious bitterness before it spreads out of control.

Second, I note that you apologized to me for “venting” when you should have apologized to the entire listserv for your rude, “venomous” little fit. Your behavior was completely inappropriate and not conducive toward civil dialogue. Admittedly, we have a local church in town that encourages petulance such as yours; however, this listserv is for the most part dedicated to reasonable exchanges, with perhaps a few exceptions. So I encourage you to apologize to the entire list, which you specifically named during your fit of rage, so that no one will think you a hypocrite. After all, you demanded that Messieurs Fox and Hansen apologize to the whole bulletin board for statements that you deemed offensive; how much more should you have to apologize for your reckless, unqualified statements, which essentially blasted every one in the forum?

Third, I note that you tagged your tirade with John 8:7 and I confess that you appear somewhat confused, because YOU were the one throwing stones yesterday. Please remove the rock pile that covers your post and reread it. Then apologize to the list for twisting Scripture during your “I am not Doug Wilson; I just act like him,” panic attack.

Well, as I said, I have many things to say but you have convinced me that you’re too immature to hear them all at once; perhaps tomorrow, after you have apologized, we may pick up where we left off and you can tell us by what standard you attribute “some modicum of sincerity” to an apology delivered by the psychopath Sitler? and by what standard do you ask Messieurs Fox and Hansen to apologize?

After that, maybe you will be kind enough to engage the arguments I advanced in my post yesterday, which sent you over the edge into your “I am not Doug Wilson; I just act like him” eruption.

Thank you,


Wednesday, May 16, 2007

The Inner Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

Given the wide variety of contributors on this board as well as the broad range of subjects broached on any given day, I am not sure how you conclude:

“Moscow Vision 2020 seems to be a very partisan group of Moscow residents designed to discourage public information unless it meets that partisan viewpoint, and debate seems to be limited to name-calling, mudslinging, shin-kicking and eyeball-gouging.”

Unlike you, I do not presume to condemn this whole list based upon a limited sample addressing an isolated subject, unless, of course, things are not as you represented. I must confess that your shrill response indicates that I touched a nerve. It’s as though you’re personally invested in things pertaining to Douglas Wilson, despite assuring us otherwise.

Therefore, Mr. Schwaller, I encourage you to slow down, take a deep breath, and reach down to touch that inner you. Be at peace with the real person inside of you. Identify the man within and say, “Be still, Glen, there is no venom here. No one has called me any names; no one has slung any mud at me, kicked me in the shins, or gouged my eyeballs out. I’m going to be A Okay. Everything’s just fine.”

There you go, Glenn, everything will be just fine.

Perhaps it will help if I give you some more perspective. You recall how Douglas Wilson ran from this listserv after he proved to the whole community that he did not live by his own standard, which he had previously maintained was fixed and unmovable. Well, this time last year Mr. Wilson rejoined this list for a short period after a local blogger notified the community about Steven Sitler’s predations. And it’s important to note that the blogger’s information relative to Sitler was much like yours — just the facts.

The strangest thing, though, was that while the blogger focused on points of community awareness, Wilson immediately dragged the victims into the conversation, saying that any talk of Sitler reopened their wounds and forced them to relive their tragedy; and Wilson used this pretense to demand silence from the community regarding the subject of Steven Sitler: “The victims, the victims, the victims; THINK OF THE VICTIMS!”

It was a remarkable display of cowardice for a pastor to use victims of a serial pedophile as human shields to protect himself from answering for his failure to warn the flock of predation. Think about it. He never warned his congregation that a serial pedophile dwelled among them for 18 months. Talk about negligence. As you said, Mr. Schwaller, “Doug Wilson could have handled things in a better way.”

But my point is that you have provided some very helpful information with your posts, and your contributions are consistent with the goals of this list; however, you should be thankful that you’re not dealing with a madman constantly screaming, “THE VICTIMS! THE VICTIMS! THE VICTIMS!” You seem to understand much better than Pastor Wilson that serial pedophiles create horrible prospects for a community. In fact, even though you still have not answered my question (“by what standard do you ask Messieurs Fox and Hansen to apologize?”), I believe that if you had been here last year, you would have demanded an apology from Pastor Wilson to the entire community.

Anyway, I have carried on much too long here. I simply wanted to help you get composure after your last outburst and I hope I offered you some perspective in much the same way you have tried to offer “facts.”

Before I let you go, though, I have one more question. How do you think the victims feel knowing that Steven Sitler is roaming the streets on probation, and that his freedom may be due in large part to Pastor Douglas Wilson’s letter to Judge Stegner?


From: “Glenn Schwaller”
To: Vision2020
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 1:18 PM
Subject: Schwaller the Reductio

“Schwaller catches a whiff again. . .”

Just to set the record straight (not that I particularly care about setting the record straight, I just like to hear the collective hammering of the veins in the foreheads of a few of our 2020 visionaries) I was not attempting to absolve, forgive, condone, nor vilify Doug Wilson, Steven Sitler, Christ Church, nor anyone for that matter. I was simply addressing a VERY specific point in Ms Ford’s post, and how I chose to interpret (some of you might use the words “twist” “manipulate” “exploit”) that particular passage of scripture.

One can use any passage of scripture to strengthen one’s point. One can use any manner of teaching styles or methods to inform or influence. In either case, it seems it is up to every individual to determine if we agree or disagree, follow or flee. All of us are teachers. All of us have taught well. All of us have taught poorly. All of us have wounded a weak conscience and thus “sinned against Christ.”

I’ve been monitoring this site for less than a month, and the venom that oozes from a majority of these posts becomes tedious. Contrary to the disclaimer on the homepage Moscow Vision 2020 seems to be a very partisan group of Moscow residents designed to discourage public information unless it meets that partisan viewpoint, and debate seems to be limited to name-calling, mudslinging, shin-kicking and eyeball-gouging. I must admit though, it DOES make a difference.


“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”
John 8:7

Schwaller the Reductio

Schwaller whiffs again, this time minimizing the impact of Wilson’s influence on his devotees when he wrote,

“For your example to hold up, Mr Sitler . . . would need to have seen Doug Wilson . . . in the act of molesting children, then justify his actions by saying “Well Doug did it, it must be OK for me to do it.” Since this was not the case, Doug Wilson cannot be held accountable for Mr Sitler’s actions, in the sight of man, of law, or of God.”

Of course, this is absurd because it ignores the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, which clearly holds teachers to a higher standard, “for in many things [they] offend all” (James 3:1, ff). And the “many” includes all the little things that encompass a man’s doctrine and that illustrate his sermons on a daily basis. Consider these examples of the influence of Wilson’s doctrine on Steven Sitler:

Pedophiles rely on manipulative deceit to capture and silence their victims, and Steven Sitler sat under the master of manipulation — Douglas Wilson — when he preyed in Moscow. Rest assured that by reading Wilson’s blog and observing his interaction with the public, Sitler learned cunning beyond measure. Yes, indeed, he watched his pastor twist other’s words into meaning something that no one intended, in order to manipulate them into giving him what he wanted (do kirkers really believe the stories that Wilson peddles about Duck? He fabricated every one of them while he applied enormous economic and emotional pressure on the Schulers, hoping they’d cave). Sitler learned from Wilson how to create opportunities by misrepresentation and then pounce on weakness the moment he saw it. And not ironically, Sitler arrived in Moscow in fall 2003, just in time to witness Wilson and Jones deceitfully manipulate the thesis of Southern Slavery As It Was into a book about non-violent emancipation. He saw Wilson dismiss the capital crime of manstealing and manipulate its proceeds — slavery — into a “life of plenty.” Wilson taught him how to manipulate words so that oppressive slaveholders became “noble Christians” and stolen labor became a lifestyle of “mutual affection.” Yes, know for sure that Wilson taught Sitler the deceitful art of manipulation.

Pedophiles are typically narcissists and Sitler sat under the poster child of narcissism — Douglas Wilson — during his stay in Moscow. Indeed, his parents educated him on the Wilson classical model, praising all things Wilson, with the hope they could send him to New Saint Andrews College where he could fawn over every word that fell from the master’s lips. And as saw the master encourage the worshiping multitudes to adore him, know for sure that he learned self-love exceeds self-denial as the preeminent Christian virtue.

Pedophiles act in contempt of all law — God’s and man’s — in order to obtain their desires, and Sitler’s 18 months in Moscow forever embedded the principle in his mind that if the law stands in your way, break it. Steven Sitler was an eyewitness to Douglas Wilson’s public defiance of state property tax law as well as the City Zoning Code, and he learned firsthand that Christian dominion Wilson-style provides for self-willed antinomianism, if necessary. Wilson taught Sitler that the law does not represent a gift from God, rather it is a tool of the godless intoleristas to persecute the godly kirkers whose reign shall be for ever and ever. No doubt Wilson’s wholesale contempt for authority encouraged Sitler to disdain any authority who would check his impulses. (If you disagree with this assertion, please show me one example in the last five years where Wilson exemplified humble Christian submission to the civil magistrate pursuant to Romans 13.)

Finally, pedophiles see children not as humans but as objects, and the most important lesson that Steven Sitler learned in Moscow was in the field of anthropology. Douglas Wilson taught Steven Sitler to take joy and satisfaction in dehumanizing and humiliating human beings made in the image of God. And just as Wilson strips people of their dignity, taking sadistic pleasure in flaying them alive with his serrated edge, so Sitler stripped children of their dignity, scarring them for life with his naked flesh. No surprise that victims of pedophiles usually suffer acute shame — inexplicable feelings of humiliation and embarrassment — as a result of their molestation. And Sitler learned the chief article of his faith in Moscow, Idaho, where Douglas Wilson, pastor of Christ Church, taught him the ABCs of dehumanization. (This is also perhaps the best explanation that accounts for kirkers’ lack of horror at Sitler’s crimes; Wilson has successfully desensitized them from feeling compassion for their fellowmen. They are “without natural affection.”)

No, Christian doctrine is not limited to a set of credos; rather, it is a system of beliefs lived out each day. And while Douglas Wilson never approved of pedophilia or taught Steven Sitler how to rape a child, he certainly helped the serial pedophile hone the deviant personality traits necessary to commit the unspeakable, and Wilson did it in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Welcome to Christ Church, Moscow.


Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Question for Mr. Schwaller

Dear Mr. Schwaller,

You would have “staved off some ignorance” and “offered up . . . factual information” if you had simply replied, “We may never know,” and even then you should not have qualified your answer with the word “may” because we WILL NEVER KNOW what drives Steven Sitler. This is because the man is a psychopath, i.e. he has no conscience and no compunction. He lacks the moral capacity to feel right and wrong — and he is aggressive. One public record (which the court has sealed) documented in explicit detail his rape of a two-year-old girl, in a room immediately adjacent to a group of adults. “Perhaps perhaps perhaps,” you find this flip. I do not; hence my inquiry about the website in relation to the so-called apology.

At best, Steven Sitler did not comprehend that the photographs of victims on his website horrified normal, decent human beings, which is another way of noting that he is twisted at levels no one understands. Consequently, “‘cured’ is not an option.” And as “cured” is not an option, then it follows that no one can ever trust him under any circumstance, which probably accounts for his constant need to have a chaperon, i.e. a court-appointed guardian who will insure that he does not wander near children. And if the man is so untrustworthy that even “a distressed result from a polygraph is going to bring P&P and the court down on him like a ton of Logos Bricks,” then it follows that no one should believe a word he says, which includes his apologies. Besides, somehow the words, “I’m sorry I molested your baby,” just don’t cut it.

So it is laughable that you attribute remorse, “even if it was not 100% heartfelt,” to a psychopath, and if this was not so serious it would be downright hilarious that you manipulated this seeming remorse into cause for demanding an apology from community members who expressed shock at the probation of a serial pedophile.

Since you represent yourself as new to the listserv, let me tell you a story. Years ago, Pastor Douglas Wilson used to berate this list with the question, “By what standard?” I say “used to” because after hectoring and haranguing the community with his fixed biblical standard, he proved himself a textbook hypocrite when he applied a relative standard to justify the unbiblical thesis of his book “Southern Slavery As It Was.” It was really quite amusing, though the amusement didn’t last long. The poor fool ran from here faster than you can say “Edna.”

I call these historical facts to your attention, Mr. Schwaller, to ask you two questions: First, by what standard do you attribute “some modicum of sincerity” to an apology delivered by the psychopath Sitler? and by what standard do you ask Messieurs Fox and Hansen to apologize?

Bob Herodotus

From: “Glenn Schwaller”
To: Vision 2020
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 10:37 AM
Subject: Question for Mr. Schwaller

Dear Mr Herodotus

I’m not quite sure what you are implying by referring to me as “one of the all things to all men kind of guys.” If you mean that I think I’m an omnipresent self important kind of guys, then no. If you are suggesting as Paul did to the Corinthians that “I am made All things to all men, that I might by all means save some.”, well no, I don’t think that is correct either. I don’t believe I’m trying to save anyone, other than to try and stave off some ignorance by offering up what I believe to be factual information. Not that it matters; I’m just curious.

And alas (at least for those of you who thrive on innuendo, conspiracy, supposition and gossip), I am not another incarnation of Doug and Doug on a skylarking expedition. I’m glad you “know better.”

I make no excuse nor offer any apology for seeming to be intimately familiar with the court records (they are public domain), P&P policy and procedure (I also have some insight into policy and procedure of the prosecutors office, and MPD and LCSO), Mr Sitler’s automobile (I just happened to see him leaving the jail on they way to one of his treatment programs), and Christ Church’s seating arrangement. Well, here I should make an apology — I did not intend to suggest that I know anything about their seating arrangement. I was attempting to point out that I know how other similar situations have been handled, and how Mr Sitler’s attendance at that or any other church (or public arena in which children may be present), would most likely be handled.

So, onto contradictory implications:

I was not trying to be dismissive about Mr Sitler’s trophy website — this was a response to Wayne Fox’s questions from May 4th “Was the court aware of Sitler’s trophy website of photos of children, some of whom were his alleged victims? Or was this information withheld from the court? Was this evidence in the possession of the LCSD at the time of sentencing and re-sentencing or did they miss this in their “investigation?”“

I was assuming (possibly an error on my part) that Mr Fox meant “were they aware at the time of the original sentencing.” As such, I believe I was correct in stating that if the court was not aware of the website (at the time of the original sentencing) they are now (as of his review on May 4th). I don’t know why Mr Sitler chose not to disclose that fact earlier on. Perhaps he was advised not to do so (the right to remain silent among all those obnoxious civil rights we have — sorry. I apologize for the sarcasm). Perhaps it was to see how well local law enforcement was at doing their job of “discovery.” Perhaps he thought it was not germane to the case. Perhaps perhaps perhaps. We may never know. I believe the court was well aware of his other victims since his admission to other crimes was, I think, part of the plea agreement. If one wants to split hairs as lawyers are so fond of doing, from a legal perspective (assuming these were “normal” photographs) it may not have been illegal for him to have these photos in his possession. In the interest of full disclosure, remorse, and empathy for his victims, Mr Sitler should have brought this to the court’s attention. And admittedly it does leave his apology somewhat hollow. My point was, at least at some level he did offer an apology. It may not have been 100% heartfelt, but I choose to believe there was some modicum of sincerity in there. That was more than I have seen from Mr Hansen and Mr Fox for suggesting Mr Sitler should be allowed to board in a home with children present, putting them at potential risk. As I and others have pointed out, regardless of their tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic intent, this was worse than in poor taste: this was and is unacceptable, and they (Mr Hansen and Mr Fox) should apologize to the 2020 community.