Several local Boy Scout councils have been caught clear-cutting trees in forested areas under their control, in many cases illegally and most definitely in clear violation of their own stated philosophies and policies towards nature, as the article points out:
"But for a high-profile organization such as the Boy Scouts, which touts itself as pro-environment, conducting high-impact, commercial timber harvests that at times violate regulation, or simply push the limits of ecological best practices, smacks of hypocrisy, they say." (Emphasis mine)
Now where have I heard the Boy Scouts been called hypocrites elsewhere, albeit about other aspects of their organizational behavior? Oh, that's right, right here on this blog, about their willful ignorance of their own stated sexual abuse avoidance policies, as well as their shameful lack of help for victims of such abuse.
Back to the subject at hand. We're not talking about managed harvesting, which is quite good for forests when wisely and carefully done. This is the equivalent of strip-mining the land, even after they made explicit promises never to do so in specific areas:
"The old woman who donated that property to the Scouts had entered into an agreement with the state to protect it from logging," said Keene, senior forester for the Institute for Wildlife Protection."
Why are the councils engaging in such activities? Money seems to be the answer, as usual, with making up for the lack of donations due to their bans on gays and atheists given as the chief reason in the article, along with the rich salaries earned by the Scouting leadership for their excellent stewardship of their natural resources and outstanding protection of the boys under their supervision (cough, cough):
"Local and regional executives can earn annual compensation of $100,000 to $300,000 per year. At the national level, Scouting executives make even more."
But they're too poor to help out local councils with dedicated funds for counseling and legal fees for the victims of predatory Scout leaders. Nope, they're on their own on that one.
I would be remiss if I didn't also bring up the likely additional factor of multi-million dollar judgments and settlements of sexual abuse cases also bringing financial pressure, although I'm positive the Scouts would never admit to such a reason.
We know better, of course. This article originated out of Seattle, and I have knowledge of eight currently pending sexual abuse cases in that area alone. That's gotta hurt the ol' pocketbook just in legal fees, to say nothing of the eventual damages sure to be awarded.
It seems that just like with the Catholic Church, financial woes partly resulting from the payment of money to settle sex-abuse cases is starting to eat the Scouts up from the inside out. Unfortunately, if the leadership doesn't soon wake up and realize their mistakes, they're not going to have an organization left, not to mention those cushy salaries.
If they don't care enough about the boys' safety to prioritize a national protocol for helping victims of abuse, and they don't seem to care a fig about the environment, what's left to make the Scouts worth joining?
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Monday, January 5, 2009
Sellouts
The Boy Scouts, panicking at their ever-dwindling numbers, apparently are willing to chuck their own background check procedures over the side in order to attract more Hispanic Scouts:
"We go in a uniform that looks like the Border Patrol," said Paul Moore, head of the Scouts' Los Angeles Area Council. "Then we ask (adult volunteers) to fill out complex applications that ask for their Social Security numbers. I think we've found some good ways in L.A. to deal with some of these things, but we have to do a better job of getting parents to see Scouting as something that aligns with their hopes and dreams for their kids." (Emphasis mine)
Those "complex" applications (perplexing because they're in English, maybe?) that ask for SSN's are required for a very specific reason - to conduct background checks on prospective Scout leaders, so that previously convicted sex offenders aren't allowed to join troops. The fact that Mr. Moore is complaining about the fact that prospective leaders have to fill them out is quite disheartening, to say the least, and flies directly in the face of statements made to me personally regarding ensuring Scout safety.
Also, what's with the cheap Border Patrol crack? Both uniforms are shades of brown, that's about it. That fact shouldn't be a problem, unless the BSA is willing to go on record as sanctioning law-breaking and wishes to specifically attract illegal immigrants. There goes "obedient" in the Scout Oath, I suppose. The Border Patrol is an honorable agency attempting to do an impossible job with no support from the Federal government. It's not some sort of evil group that scares law-abiding people away.
I guess diversity and tolerance of illegal immigration, along with that desperate attempt to gain numbers, trumps any policy of ensuring the safety of the boys in the troops.
This is yet another eye-opening story that shows that the Boy Scouts aren't serious about following their own system of checks and balances. Enroll your child at your risk.
"We go in a uniform that looks like the Border Patrol," said Paul Moore, head of the Scouts' Los Angeles Area Council. "Then we ask (adult volunteers) to fill out complex applications that ask for their Social Security numbers. I think we've found some good ways in L.A. to deal with some of these things, but we have to do a better job of getting parents to see Scouting as something that aligns with their hopes and dreams for their kids." (Emphasis mine)
Those "complex" applications (perplexing because they're in English, maybe?) that ask for SSN's are required for a very specific reason - to conduct background checks on prospective Scout leaders, so that previously convicted sex offenders aren't allowed to join troops. The fact that Mr. Moore is complaining about the fact that prospective leaders have to fill them out is quite disheartening, to say the least, and flies directly in the face of statements made to me personally regarding ensuring Scout safety.
Also, what's with the cheap Border Patrol crack? Both uniforms are shades of brown, that's about it. That fact shouldn't be a problem, unless the BSA is willing to go on record as sanctioning law-breaking and wishes to specifically attract illegal immigrants. There goes "obedient" in the Scout Oath, I suppose. The Border Patrol is an honorable agency attempting to do an impossible job with no support from the Federal government. It's not some sort of evil group that scares law-abiding people away.
I guess diversity and tolerance of illegal immigration, along with that desperate attempt to gain numbers, trumps any policy of ensuring the safety of the boys in the troops.
This is yet another eye-opening story that shows that the Boy Scouts aren't serious about following their own system of checks and balances. Enroll your child at your risk.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
A response to a comment
An anonymous person left a comment that I feel deserves a response, so I will do so publicly (my comments in bold):
Well Doug, there are a few things you are contradicting yourself with.....a long time fan of the Northern Muckraker
Thanks for the kind words about my main project.
I don't understand your agenda. What do you want to happen?
1. To get your Eagle Scout Badge?
I think that's a pretty small thing to ask for, given what I have been through, and especially given the fact, reported to me by email as well as numerous commenters to this blog, that the Eagle requirements have been modified and waived on a significant number of occasions, for much less compelling reasons, in my opinion.
I worked damn hard for that award, and was denied it just when it was in reach through no fault of my own. Honestly, it's the least they could do, and it wouldn't cost them a dime. Actually, the PR value alone would be worth millions to them.
2. To embarrass an organization?
If that's what it takes to get redress for past wrongs and to ensure that no other boy has to go through a similar ordeal, sure. They chose not to listen when I tried going through normal, private channels, so they brought this website upon themselves.
3. Take on your aggression on someone or an organization who had nothing to do with your situation?
The organization has plenty to do with my situation, as more than twenty years after my incident there still appears to be no institutional policies for dealing with such abuse other than to keep quiet and hope the boys go away and don't sue. Oddly, the BSA doesn't seem to understand that providing assistance, both legal and emotional, would undoubtedly go a long way towards preventing the onslaught of abuse cases that they're currently dealing with. (I've talked to one attorney who knows of at least 8 pending cases in the Northwest alone. Maybe we're going to have to begin publicizing them here, in order to show the magnitude of the problem.)
1. If that was your intention why when you start to not get your way you turn the conversation to what they (the Boy Scouts) did wrong? Did they know about the molestation? Did they transfer the scoutmaster? Did they cover up, or did they hand over the accused to the proper authorities? And why do you hold a whole religion responsible for one persons actions? Would a background check if it had come out clean prevented your situation?
I'm not sure what you're asking here, but I'll do my best to answer. The Scouts did not "hand him over to the authorities" he was caught red-handed by a parent of one of the abused kids. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of the Scoutmaser. I do hold them responsible for their actions in the wake of the incident, which was to not do a darn thing for anyone and hope that it would all soon blow over.
As to the comparison to the Catholic Church, I'm certainly not "holding a religion responsible for one person's actions". I was comparing the similarity of the two organizations' responses to the same type of situation, and attempted to point out how denial at the highest levels is hurting both groups. I merely found it telling and ironic that a high-ranking official would so emphatically deny such obvious, proven criminal actions on the part of senior officials in his own church, because it shows that he also has the same blind spot when it comes to his employer.
A background check would have come back clean on the perpetrator and would not have prevented the crimes from taking place. As I said above, however, and as I pointed out to them at their headquarters, I don't blame the organization for what happened to me, but I do blame them for their lack of response in my and thousands of other cases.
2. When the organization had no chance in understanding the magnitude of your situation and after decades you return and ask for a full on public apology when you waited so long to bring it to their attention? not saying that time resolves a situation but why now? what has happened in your life when you need to redirect your aggression from the responsible party to the parent organizations? How about the police department? how about your parents? how about your siblings? where is the end point?
I didn't ask for an apology, only the chance to earn what had been denied me, and subsequently to be apprised of how the organization's policies have changed to help future victims of sexual abuse. The end point? That is when the BSA decides to take full responsibility for their policies, both on their hypocritical iron-clad "criteria" for awards as well as for their track record of not helping sexual abuse victims.
3. Furthermore you have people responding to your postings saying they will advise people they know not to let their kids into scouting....OK so now what happened to you is going to prevent other children from experiencing a great childhood of camping trips etc.
My intent is not to deny children camping trips or other Scouting-type experiences. They're fine character-builders and fun activities. This particular organization, however, has shown on numerous occasions that they can't or won't clean up the messes that leaders of their groups have made. Until they begin to do so, it's fair to warn people about just what possibly type of predatory environment they're about to send their son to, and to inform them of the (lack of a) response and help they'll be getting from the national organization should something go wrong.
You seem like a troubled person that cannot make a rational decision about how to deal with your past. why don't you find a way past your situation instead of making yourself at home in your misery? I truly wish you all the best but until you make more sense or communicate and act with a sole purpose I will not understand your plight!
You're right, it's extremely hard to make rational decisions about this, given the level of emotion that it raises in me. I can only try as hard as I can to do what I feel is the right thing, and let the chips fall where they may. To date, the overwhelming majority of responses to my campaign have been positive, with people calling and emailing me to "keep up the pressure". That tells me that I'm doing something right at least, and that there are thousands of ex-Scouts like me who were in like circumstances that are angry at the BSA and want them to change their ways immediately. Therefore, I soldier on.
As always, your mileage may vary, and all points of view are welcome here. Just keep it civil.
Well Doug, there are a few things you are contradicting yourself with.....a long time fan of the Northern Muckraker
Thanks for the kind words about my main project.
I don't understand your agenda. What do you want to happen?
1. To get your Eagle Scout Badge?
I think that's a pretty small thing to ask for, given what I have been through, and especially given the fact, reported to me by email as well as numerous commenters to this blog, that the Eagle requirements have been modified and waived on a significant number of occasions, for much less compelling reasons, in my opinion.
I worked damn hard for that award, and was denied it just when it was in reach through no fault of my own. Honestly, it's the least they could do, and it wouldn't cost them a dime. Actually, the PR value alone would be worth millions to them.
2. To embarrass an organization?
If that's what it takes to get redress for past wrongs and to ensure that no other boy has to go through a similar ordeal, sure. They chose not to listen when I tried going through normal, private channels, so they brought this website upon themselves.
3. Take on your aggression on someone or an organization who had nothing to do with your situation?
The organization has plenty to do with my situation, as more than twenty years after my incident there still appears to be no institutional policies for dealing with such abuse other than to keep quiet and hope the boys go away and don't sue. Oddly, the BSA doesn't seem to understand that providing assistance, both legal and emotional, would undoubtedly go a long way towards preventing the onslaught of abuse cases that they're currently dealing with. (I've talked to one attorney who knows of at least 8 pending cases in the Northwest alone. Maybe we're going to have to begin publicizing them here, in order to show the magnitude of the problem.)
1. If that was your intention why when you start to not get your way you turn the conversation to what they (the Boy Scouts) did wrong? Did they know about the molestation? Did they transfer the scoutmaster? Did they cover up, or did they hand over the accused to the proper authorities? And why do you hold a whole religion responsible for one persons actions? Would a background check if it had come out clean prevented your situation?
I'm not sure what you're asking here, but I'll do my best to answer. The Scouts did not "hand him over to the authorities" he was caught red-handed by a parent of one of the abused kids. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of the Scoutmaser. I do hold them responsible for their actions in the wake of the incident, which was to not do a darn thing for anyone and hope that it would all soon blow over.
As to the comparison to the Catholic Church, I'm certainly not "holding a religion responsible for one person's actions". I was comparing the similarity of the two organizations' responses to the same type of situation, and attempted to point out how denial at the highest levels is hurting both groups. I merely found it telling and ironic that a high-ranking official would so emphatically deny such obvious, proven criminal actions on the part of senior officials in his own church, because it shows that he also has the same blind spot when it comes to his employer.
A background check would have come back clean on the perpetrator and would not have prevented the crimes from taking place. As I said above, however, and as I pointed out to them at their headquarters, I don't blame the organization for what happened to me, but I do blame them for their lack of response in my and thousands of other cases.
2. When the organization had no chance in understanding the magnitude of your situation and after decades you return and ask for a full on public apology when you waited so long to bring it to their attention? not saying that time resolves a situation but why now? what has happened in your life when you need to redirect your aggression from the responsible party to the parent organizations? How about the police department? how about your parents? how about your siblings? where is the end point?
I didn't ask for an apology, only the chance to earn what had been denied me, and subsequently to be apprised of how the organization's policies have changed to help future victims of sexual abuse. The end point? That is when the BSA decides to take full responsibility for their policies, both on their hypocritical iron-clad "criteria" for awards as well as for their track record of not helping sexual abuse victims.
3. Furthermore you have people responding to your postings saying they will advise people they know not to let their kids into scouting....OK so now what happened to you is going to prevent other children from experiencing a great childhood of camping trips etc.
My intent is not to deny children camping trips or other Scouting-type experiences. They're fine character-builders and fun activities. This particular organization, however, has shown on numerous occasions that they can't or won't clean up the messes that leaders of their groups have made. Until they begin to do so, it's fair to warn people about just what possibly type of predatory environment they're about to send their son to, and to inform them of the (lack of a) response and help they'll be getting from the national organization should something go wrong.
You seem like a troubled person that cannot make a rational decision about how to deal with your past. why don't you find a way past your situation instead of making yourself at home in your misery? I truly wish you all the best but until you make more sense or communicate and act with a sole purpose I will not understand your plight!
You're right, it's extremely hard to make rational decisions about this, given the level of emotion that it raises in me. I can only try as hard as I can to do what I feel is the right thing, and let the chips fall where they may. To date, the overwhelming majority of responses to my campaign have been positive, with people calling and emailing me to "keep up the pressure". That tells me that I'm doing something right at least, and that there are thousands of ex-Scouts like me who were in like circumstances that are angry at the BSA and want them to change their ways immediately. Therefore, I soldier on.
As always, your mileage may vary, and all points of view are welcome here. Just keep it civil.
Not much to report, oddly enough
I'm still waiting for the official response to my formal request, made in person, that I be able to earn my Eagle Scout award.
I'm also still waiting to hear the details of the program that provides counseling and legal help to victims of pedophile Scout leaders.
If I don't hear something on either issue by next week, I will have to agitate further.
I'm also still waiting to hear the details of the program that provides counseling and legal help to victims of pedophile Scout leaders.
If I don't hear something on either issue by next week, I will have to agitate further.
Monday, December 15, 2008
The full protest report
I set up outside BSA headquarters at 7:oo am on Tuesday, December 9, 2008. Here is a piece of video showing where I set up:
Here's another piece that better illustrates my uniform, which demonstrates how much I had invested in Scouting:
One person who didn't appreciate my little demonstration:
I didn't receive any reaction from the BSA until after WFAA Channel 8, the ABC affiliate in Dallas, showed up to give me an on-camera interview. Soon after the cameraman left, someone came out to talk to me (Sorry about the traffic noise, it was full on rush hour at that point):
I took them up on their offer to come in and discuss my situation. I met with two men named David Burke and Bill Steele. Mr. Burke is the head of communications for the BSA, and was the person in the above video who approached me and invited me to chat. I neglected to note which position Mr. Steele currently occupies with the BSA.
The main points from our discussion (from memory, as I did not tape the meeting):
1. Both men were polite and respectful, as was I. Mr. Burke apologized for the lateness of their replies to my written and telephoned requests, claiming that it was an organizational problem that they are currently attempting to rectify.
2. Neither man could believe my claim that no one from Scouting ever offered any help whatsoever to me. Well, believe it, because it (didn't) happen.
3. Mr. Burke informed me that he did not know of any formal program on the national level to assist victims of sexual abuse by Scout leaders. He did subsequently email me and informed me that he had looked into matters and that such a program did exist, although he did not furnish details.
4. The only time the meeting became uncomfortable for me was when I compared Scouting's previous handling of sexual abuse cases to the Catholic church's system of archbishops transferring "problem" priests from parish to parish. Mr. Burke strongly objected and stated (paraphrased), "As a Catholic, I don't believe that the archbishops did such things".
To me, this underscores the naivete of Scouting's national leadership to their own problem. Why? To me there is overwhelming evidence that church officials did precisely what they are accused of doing and many juries agree with me, as the many multi-million dollar judgments against the Catholic Church prove. Anyone who believes otherwise is deluding themselves and possesses a dangerous blind spot about their own organization, in my opinion.
5. In summary - they told me that Eagle Scout is a youth award, and that my chances of receiving it at this late date are slim to none, which is pretty much the answer I expected out of them. If they don't see the value in correcting their predecessors' past mistakes, so be it. I believe that it's pretty small of them, however, and that their policy of not allowing former Scouts that were damaged on their organization's watch to complete their Eagle award, however late it may be, graphically shows that they don't follow their own stated values.
I also still believe that they don't go nearly far enough to protect boys against sexual victimization, and that any counseling program isn't adequate, if the head of communications doesn't know about it and subsequently has to undergo research to verify that it in fact exists.
In my view, the BSA still has a long, long way to go in this area, and we plan on being around to make sure that it either improves its track record significantly (and soon), or else we will dedicate ourselves to putting it out of business.
Here's another piece that better illustrates my uniform, which demonstrates how much I had invested in Scouting:
One person who didn't appreciate my little demonstration:
I didn't receive any reaction from the BSA until after WFAA Channel 8, the ABC affiliate in Dallas, showed up to give me an on-camera interview. Soon after the cameraman left, someone came out to talk to me (Sorry about the traffic noise, it was full on rush hour at that point):
I took them up on their offer to come in and discuss my situation. I met with two men named David Burke and Bill Steele. Mr. Burke is the head of communications for the BSA, and was the person in the above video who approached me and invited me to chat. I neglected to note which position Mr. Steele currently occupies with the BSA.
The main points from our discussion (from memory, as I did not tape the meeting):
1. Both men were polite and respectful, as was I. Mr. Burke apologized for the lateness of their replies to my written and telephoned requests, claiming that it was an organizational problem that they are currently attempting to rectify.
2. Neither man could believe my claim that no one from Scouting ever offered any help whatsoever to me. Well, believe it, because it (didn't) happen.
3. Mr. Burke informed me that he did not know of any formal program on the national level to assist victims of sexual abuse by Scout leaders. He did subsequently email me and informed me that he had looked into matters and that such a program did exist, although he did not furnish details.
4. The only time the meeting became uncomfortable for me was when I compared Scouting's previous handling of sexual abuse cases to the Catholic church's system of archbishops transferring "problem" priests from parish to parish. Mr. Burke strongly objected and stated (paraphrased), "As a Catholic, I don't believe that the archbishops did such things".
To me, this underscores the naivete of Scouting's national leadership to their own problem. Why? To me there is overwhelming evidence that church officials did precisely what they are accused of doing and many juries agree with me, as the many multi-million dollar judgments against the Catholic Church prove. Anyone who believes otherwise is deluding themselves and possesses a dangerous blind spot about their own organization, in my opinion.
5. In summary - they told me that Eagle Scout is a youth award, and that my chances of receiving it at this late date are slim to none, which is pretty much the answer I expected out of them. If they don't see the value in correcting their predecessors' past mistakes, so be it. I believe that it's pretty small of them, however, and that their policy of not allowing former Scouts that were damaged on their organization's watch to complete their Eagle award, however late it may be, graphically shows that they don't follow their own stated values.
I also still believe that they don't go nearly far enough to protect boys against sexual victimization, and that any counseling program isn't adequate, if the head of communications doesn't know about it and subsequently has to undergo research to verify that it in fact exists.
In my view, the BSA still has a long, long way to go in this area, and we plan on being around to make sure that it either improves its track record significantly (and soon), or else we will dedicate ourselves to putting it out of business.
Friday, December 12, 2008
I'm working on it
I apologize for the delay in getting the full report about the demonstration posted. I'm having some video editing issues, having never performed that task before.
In the meantime, here's a question: If abuse in Scouting is so rare, then why are other people researching whether anyone has engaged in precisely the kind of protest that I accomplished on Tuesday?
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
A successful protest, I must say
A full report will be coming shortly. In the meantime, here's a couple of still photos (sorry about the lighting, it's quite dark at 7 am there):
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
