Cyril Lykkebo Malka

by Kent 82 Replies latest jw friends

  • chasson
    chasson

    I will not answer for other but only for me.

    I didn't trust you while you were a JW, as you said a lot of things which were way out. I still don't trust you, you are too unstable.
    It is easily proven that you have used some of my claim when i was still a JW going to the meeting in danish's forum. You can say what you want know, you have talked on the french's letter about voting in some danish's mailing-list. You know that even if you don't want to recognise it. I have translate for you from english to french a webpage about baptism that i have include on my website, at this time, i htink you thank me for that. Sorry if you have forgotten.

    About money, Chasson, since it seems so important to you. Correct: As a specialist, I take a lot of money for courses or for help in law. Those people want the knowledge I do have, they have to pay. What is it to you? The 1500 you speak about, is for courses.
    The question is not only money, this is promise that after a three hours of curses of 215 $, you can say that some depressive's people could stop taking pills. Are you sure you are talking about nervous breakdown ?
    The problem with you and you don't talk about it, is if you have had problems with "idiot" in Denmark, why on the french's net, when M. Leblank has come you have made nothing and more you have sustained this men who is so persecuted in his head than he has belivied that the little robot Rlucie on usenet dedicated to say welcome, is in fact a robot which persecuted him, used by the some friend on Usenet, who he believe, are freemason. Say nothing to this men: OK, but sustained him: NO even when he made some phone's menace to his ex-friend !!!

    Chasson: You aren't serioous enough! You talk loud but never get on from the Internet. Whatever you have against me.... I don't know... Your problem, your work... The fact is: You don't do nothing: All that you do is translate articles from Kent to almost allright french. (It surprises me you can judge my french, with the grammaticals and vocabulary mistakes you do yourself!)
    If you read my website, you can see that some webpage are personal research or my personal comment, but this is not my problem. There must be someone to translate Alan Feurbacher or the ONU's stuff in french, for the information of the french's ex-jw and you know that.

    I judge your french when you have the ability to translate some german with no fault other than typo in the same word and same typo as a man who has really translate that. I don't care about your french's error until you are not saying that you have made translation you have not make, or when a document is not usefull. Sometine work alone is not a good thing.

    It is okay though. I never got you down on the french newsgroups, when you let as you came with a news... I let you have it. Even thougt it is 100% illegal: You translated it from Kent, which got it from a mewspaper somewhere without authorization... did you, Kent?
    Is it legal to use and spread the elders's book and the CLH's manual ?you have your answer.

    And to finish:

    I will never call the man a "joker" or a "rocket scientist" in public, as I believe everything of this kind only helps WatchTower and others.
    Yes, you have not used terms like that, but for our last discussion on usenet, you have said a things like that: "If Kent said thinks reliable, one know that" That's all.

    Bye

    Charles

  • chasson
    chasson

    Another point,

    Britt you said:

    He has, however, told that he is a psycho-analyst, which everybody in Denmark has the right to call himself, just like everyone has the rigth to call himself a "revisor" or therapist. So, he has a title that is worth nothing in Denmark, but is recognised in France.
    What do you understand by "recognised in France"? As in Denmark, In France everybody has the right to call himself a "psycho-analyst":

    http://www.spp.asso.fr/Main/Questions/p5Uk.htm

    Bye

    Charles

  • Henriksen
    Henriksen

    To Cyril Malka,

    At the very end of your mail of December 1, you wrote: »Now, since you participate to this debate about taking me down, and just make an "EOD" when things get hot, I would suggest you answer those questions or admit what you did (at least! A bit of honnesty!).«

    Since you ask for honesty I’ll not only give answer to your four questions but also add some comments to your other claims:

    In between, I have writen that I was a counsellor for the Ex-Jws group in Denmark, which is correct, (you can read about this in a early book of the ex-Jw's magazines in Denmark!).
    This is not true, and I would indeed like to se your "documentation"! According to the letters below you have NEVER been a counsellor or consultant to the Danish group of ex-JW "Støttegruppen for Tidligere Jehovas Vidner"!!!

    Søren Bo Henriksen, was asked by Scientology if I was a counsellor for the group while he was president of it. To this question, he answered "no", which is correct, as he only was vice president while I was a counselor.
    No, not true. In a letter dated July 19, 2000 Knud Jespersen wrote on behalf of the chairman Jørn Osbæck and Gudrun Jespersen (chairwomen during the time in question 1989-1995):

    »Støttegruppen as an association had knowledge of the man through a part of the 1990’s and as far as we remember he has given two talks to us, one in Nyborg around 1992 and later on one in Copenhagen. Besides that he had together with his wife at that time helped Støttegruppen writing applications to different funds for financial means to our work.

    Cyril Malka has never been a member of Støttegruppen and he has never been any kind of consultant to us, .. .. .. In fairness it has to be added that he has offered his help for a fee, which Støttegruppen never have made use of. .. .. ..

    So when You write that "he has been a consultant for Støttegruppen for Tidligere Jehovas Vidner for a number of years", we have to emphasize very clearly that it is an evasion of facts.«

    And here is (as a supplement to the letter from Knud Jespersen dated July 19) what I wrote in my letter (dated August 1) to Scientology concerning Cyril Malkas role above in connection with Støttegruppen:

    »Today I received your letter of July 31 in which you ask whether or not Mr. Cyril Malka has carried out consulting work for Støttegruppen for Tidligere Jehovas Vidner during the period when I was chairman (November 1995 to November 1999). The answer is no.

    Regarding the claim of Mr. Cyril Malka that he have been a consultant to Støttegruppen for Tidligere Jehovas Vidner I’m able to give additional information to the answer given by the committee member Knud Jespersen in his letter dated July 19. The period in which Mr. Cyril Malka on behalf of Støttegruppen wrote and mailed applications to different funds for financial support covers the period from February 1993 until the fall of 1993, when he in a letter to the association dated October 2, 1993 announces that he no longer wishes to do so.

    The nearest we have been to a cooperation between Støttegruppen for Tidligere Jehovas Vidner and Mr. Cyril Malka appears from a letter dated March 16, 1993 from Mr. Cyril Malka addressed to the former chairman Gudrun Jespersen. In this letter Cyril Malka for a symbolic amount offers to work for Støttegruppen with evaluation of therapists who offer help to former members of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The offer was refused.«

    It is also correct that Søren Bo Henriksen had made a kind of "cyber" helping page, which was called "Dialogos Counselling". As his habit, even the name wasn't his idea: Dialogos came from "DialogCenter", and SBH took the name from there. He called it Dialogos Counselling, so he registered the letters DC (as in Dialog Center) and tried to sue the Dialog Center hereafter... How great!

    I would *very much* like to se documentation on these statements about Dialogos Counselling or me truing to sue Dialogcentret.
    In fact the case is as follows: In the fall of 1998 I (as chairman of Dialogos Counselling) received a letter from "Dialogcentret" (which is way the organisation is registered and thereby the correct way to write it!) in which they wrote that they would bring Dialogos Counselling to court if necessary to prevent us from using the name "Dialogos/Dialogos Counselling". After some corresponding with Dialogcentret and their lawyer Peter Gabrielsen they withdrew their claims as the name and logo DC-Dialogos Counselling was and still is recognised and registered by the Danish authorities.

    And for the record:

    1) I have used the name “Dialogos/Dialogos Counselling” since march 1995 (on the Internet from 02/1997) and in June 1998 I turned over this name to a new association of which I was co-founder.

    2) Dialogcenter’s chairman Johannes Aagaard has from the beginning had knowledge of me using the name Dialogos Counselling and did not object to this before I withdrew form the Dialogcenter in 1998.

    1. Did you or did you not help the sect Scientology against me? Even though you KNEW it was to be used in a case against Scientology? The letter was written by Karna Jensen on Scientolgys own letter paper and it was said, it was to be used in a court of law. did you, or did you not help them against me?
    I received a letter from Scientology on August 1st 1999 which I quite correctly answered the same day as I always try to do with all my letters, no matter who the sender is. If answering a letter is help, then let it be so. (se above)

    2. Did you or did you not got a letter from Anne Korsholm, in a standard of DJF saying you had to pay a bill for the illegal use of her paper about NLP where my wife, Britt, and me were the source?
    No, I didn’t, but Dialogos Counselling received a letter from Anne Korsholm October 16 (dated October 12), and *not* "in a standard of DJF".

    3. Is it correct or not, that you then put your "Dialogos Counselling" down because you then didn't have to pay this bill?
    No. The discussion about closing down the association "Dialogos Counselling" began at the end of spring 2001. On October 4th a letter was sent the members of the association for a meeting on October 20 where the agenda was to close down the association. On this meeting it was decided by a unanimous vote close down the association from that day on.

    4. Is it correct or not, that you tried to frame me, that you tried to make me look like if I have pulled myself as a "psychologist" (as I have never tried to!) to different people, press or people, as for example my former patient: Judy Prescott? (she authorized me to use her name and mails to you if needed! those would be send to anyone who want to know the truth!)
    No, it is not true. Concerning Judy Presscott she sent me an e-mail on June 3, 1999 asking me if I could recommend you as a therapist.

    On June 6. 1999 I wrote: »Concerning Cyril Malka I wont state anything about the quality of his psychological knowledge and experience, but from my own experiences concerning former members of Jehovahs Witnesses I can't recommend him, rather the opposite.«

    On June 7. I received another e-mail, where I was asked why I couldn't recommend Cyril Malka:

    June 9., I answered: »It is not a lack of knowledge to his psychology that was the reason for not giving a more specific answer about his "psychological quality" but the fact that I know him personally very well and I know that there with good reason can be given critic to his use of "psychoanalyst"

    The title "psychoanalyst" is not protected as it is the case with "Psychologist". This means that everybody may call himself or herself "psychoanalyst" in Denmark without having the same qualifications and competence as the psychologists have. In Denmark when Cyril Malka describe himself as psychoanalyst it is expected that the (as well as others) have a psychological education (from the University), which is not the case.«

    Now, since you participate to this debate about taking me down, and just make an "EOD" when things get hot, I would suggest you answer those questions or admit what you did (at least! A bit of honnesty!).
    Yes, Cyril Malka it would be nice with to se you practice ‘A bit of honesty!’ yourself.

    Bye
    SBR Henriksen

  • Henriksen
    Henriksen

    To Cyril,

    In your mail of December 1st you wrote: »I can (at the opposite of others!) document everything I say, all you need to do is ask.«

    Now where I have answered some of your questions I think it’s about time for you to provide some **documentation** on the claims listed below. You have published those claims on your French website and on your Danish mailing-list "sekter" (October 21, 2001):

    You claim . . .

    . . . that the web-site http://hjem.get2net.dk/dialogos.counselling/ has been closed by the Internet provider Get2net A/S caused by material on the site that was illegal or could lead to lawsuits.

    Documentation please!

    . . . that Dialogos Counselling on a local TV-station (TV-STOP) should have displayed newspaper articles as if they were written by the association itself or its property.

    Documentation please!

    . . . that Tiscali A/S has closed the web site http://www.dialogos-counselling.dk/ on account of a complain from the Danish newspaper Kristeligt Dagblad.

    Documentation please!

    Your promised: »I can document everything I say, all you need to do is ask.«? I hereby ask you!

    I’m waiting.. .. ..
    Søren Bo Rødgaard Henriksen

  • Britt Malka
    Britt Malka

    I think there is a tendence among the writers of this thread at least, to not read what is written. This means answering only part of sentences, using some of the words in a paragraph to hit back with etc. I don't think there is anything I can do or say that will change this way of arguing, which is the reason why I will not answer some of the things written here.

    You presumeably think that this is just a lousy excuse for not being able to answer, so please allow me to give just one example:

    I write:

    So, he has a title that is worth nothing in Denmark, but is recognised in France. Nevertheless, he has been chosen to help in the court against the Scientology. His title may be useless, but his knowledge isn't, which is the most important, when it comes to the strugle against the cults.
    Chasson apparently only sees: [...] but is recognised in France. And THIS he answers too. He does not see the meaning - that a title is not important, but the knowledge - but only finds words, words, words, that he can "argue" against. So - it seems that the title psycho-analyst may not be recognised in France either, but so what? Who cares? We don't.

    And now again it happens. The letter from Cyril is read with glasses who searches for words that can be twisted and used against him. Great job, boys! But neither you, SBH, or you, Chasson, has read, or you both chooses to ignore, that Cyril wrote:

    This is my first and my last mail on this group. Anyne who would like to know more is welcome to write to: [email protected]
    Even if he hadn't wrote so, I am sure that the last messages would not be answered, because you take his words, twist them as if he had written something else than he did, and THEN you argue against the twisted words. Should he argue back on that?

    If a peson says: I don't like ice-cream, and another person says: You say that ice-cream is dangerous to your health, which I believe it is not, because children of all times have been eating ice-cream, and they have survived, should you then argue back on that person, that some children have actually died, maybe not because of the ice-cream, but of taking a swim after having eaten ice-cream?

    Or should you just shake your head, smile and drop the discussion?

    E.g. Cyril wrote:

    SBH knew that DJF didn't sued people without money, so he put his site (and Dialogos Counselling - help to people in distress because of cults!) down, so he hadn't to pay the bill. Dialogos Counselling exists no more.
    Then you, SBH argue: Could I get documentation for the fact that KD closed this page?

    You see? (No, I guess you don't...)

    For the cause - the struggle against the cults - it is IMAO more important that you helped the Scientology. You admitted that, but with the words, let it be so... Oh, yes, who cares? When it comes to the real aim, no means should be foresaken, should they? Here you actually helped the Scientology in a case where you knew (or at least had the possibility to read in the letter) that it should be used against three victims of the gready cult. You took the side of the cult against the victims, when you answered that letter.

    Just for not being accused for misquoting you, here is what you wrote:

    I received a letter from Scientology on August 1st 1999 which I quite correctly answered the same day as I always try to do with all my letters, no matter who the sender is. If answering a letter is help, then let it be so.
    No matter what the question was, I would never have answered Scientology, especially not in a case where they write that the information should be used in a trial against them. No matter what the answer to them would be, they would use it. For me, and for several other people I know and respect, there is a great difference between answering letters the same day to most people, and answering a letter at all, when it comes from a sect/cult.

    But as we can see from this discussion, we are very different, and we choose to act very differently. Unfortunately, on that account, I cannot wish you good luck with your work, because I do not find your work an honourable cause.

    --
    Britt Malka
    www.malka.dk - www.etsectera.com

  • Malka
    Malka

    Hi,

    Since you asked, Soeren. I have putted back my site about you and the things you have done online again. It can be found at
    http://www.multimania.com/counselling

    People will be able to see by themselves.

    I will as well put the new documentations and the result of all the talk here online too. I will also put every documentation avalaible online as well. Since you are interested that everyone knows. It will be done: By your wish... Remember that!

    I notice, that you still react in a perfect WT manner: You have the truth! Now, not about God, but about the WT...

    I noticed that you didn't answer the questions I asked, but speak about something else. You refer to a news. I have actually complained about your site to Get2net to make it removed. It was removed shortly after. If it isn't on purpose, it is a funny coincidence, and of course I will change this...

    Anyway... You will be able to read everything about it on the updates of the page on multimania... As well as everyone else interested.

    BTW: Why didn't you (in best JW's style) not answer: Did you, or did you not helped the criminal cult of Scientology against some formers members by writing a letter against me, that Scientology used in court for try to stop the case. The case which is the first of its kind in Denmark and might mean a lot for a lot of ex-cults members.

    Did you or did you not help The Scientology just to get me down?

    You never frankly answered this question, but speak of something else.

    This documentation will be put online too.

    Have fun!

    Cyril

    PS: No more answer will be given else than on the page of Multimania. Any documentations about this talk will be given in private to anyone who wish it from [email protected]

    Any other talk about Soren Bo Henriksen, who isn't that interested will only be made in private as I find this kind of public trash unpleasant.

  • Henriksen
    Henriksen

    Dear Britt,

    I'm impressed - you read my answers and questions to Cyril as the Devil reads the Bible.

    E.g. Cyril wrote:
    SBH knew that DJF didn't sued people without money, so he put his site (and Dialogos Counselling - help to people in distress because of cults!) down, so he hadn't to pay the bill. Dialogos Counselling exists no more.
    Then you, SBH argue: Could I get documentation for the fact that KD closed this page?
    No - my answer was:

    3. Is it correct or not, that you then put your "Dialogos Counselling" down because you then didn't have to pay this bill?
    No. The discussion about closing down the association "Dialogos Counselling" began at the end of spring 2001. On October 4th a letter was sent the members of the association for a meeting on October 20 where the agenda was to close down the association. On this meeting it was decided by a unanimous vote close down the association from that day on.
    My argument in question concerns the claims raised by Cyril on his French website and the Danish mailing list, not his mail of December 1st, which you're refering to!

    SBR Henriksen

  • chasson
    chasson

    Hi Britt,

    Chasson apparently only sees: [...] but is recognised in France. And THIS he answers too. He does not see the meaning - that a title is not important, but the knowledge - but only finds words, words, words, that he can "argue" against. So - it seems that the title psycho-analyst may not be recognised in France either, but so what? Who cares? We don't.
    Actually, when you have lied and recognised it, you don't care. I don't know why Cyril was so motived to say in the beginning of his Internet's participation, that he has connection with the University of Paris VII, when he has leaved France at the age of 18. You can't graduate at the age of 18 years in this university, you must take 4 years after the "Bac" to graduate. So the need to be recognised with title that means nothing was not my part but the Cyril's part. Now, that we have find that your title means nothing, yes you don't care. It would be more interesting that since the beginning, you didn't care to show title...

    And now again it happens. The letter from Cyril is read with glasses who searches for words that can be twisted and used against him. Great job, boys! But neither you, SBH, or you, Chasson, has read, or you both chooses to ignore, that Cyril wrote:

    This is my first and my last mail on this group. Anyne who would like to know more is welcome to write to: [email protected]
    You have forgotten that Cyril have asked question to Henriksen, so if he would have not answered, you should come to say thaht he can't answer and now he have answered you say that he don't know reading a mail. Sorry, this is the post of Cyril who is not logical. When you want to stop to speack, you don't ask question.

    www.etsectera.com
    Where danish's ex-jw paid 7$ to read what it is freely available on JW.com and online newspaper.

    Bye

    Charles

  • chasson
    chasson

    I have forgotten to notice that:

    Don't you think it's funny, that you never have "time" to answer when it seems, you are on a wrong way? But you have time to write more trash?
    Well, if you are not Cyril Malka, how could you deduce that ? You know me ? Where ? Surprising ;-)

    Bye

    Charles

  • Scorpyo
    Scorpyo

    Hello Chasson,

    Well, if you are not Cyril Malka, how could you deduce that ? You know me ? Where ? Surprising ;-)
    It is correct, one shouldn't take you seriously. Read back... At least on two letters you wrote the same thing"I'll answer you shortly", then you don't answer the question but show up with more trash...

    Thanks warning us about that it is actually a habit. :-)

    Cheers

    Scorpyo

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit