robinedgarsucks

Archive for July, 2010|Monthly archive page

What Really Happened at the Montreal Church?

In Uncategorized on July 26, 2010 at 6:24 pm

We have so frequently heard Robin Edgar’s account of what happened at the Unitarian Church of Montreal, both from him and from UCM members who have posted the church’s official response here.  Now we have received the following:

“Robin Edgar keeps saying this all started when Ray Drennan dismissed his claims of revelation as ‘psychotic’.  Not true!  It began well before that.  You are right that Robin was attempting to use office materials and equipment without church permission, and that he lost control when told that he could not.  He even threw a chair, frightening one of the staff members.  It was after this and other incidents that Reverend Ray Drennan decided to meet privately with Robin, to share the concerns of UCM staff and members.  After this meeting, Robin began to target Ray Drennan with accusations of misconduct, claiming that he would not listen to him and so on.  When the church did not respond as he wanted, then he escalated his actions, and the rest is history.”

We should note that we have no way of corroborating these details, short of other witnesses at UCM concurring.  As for the meeting between Robin Edgar and Ray Drennan, unless one of them actually recorded this conversation, we cannot know for sure what exactly transpired between them.

But, consider the pattern of Robin Edgar’s online behaviour.  He is careful to omit mention of incidents which would cast him in a negative light, supporting the concerns mentioned by those against whom he so frequently lashes out.  Then, when somebody else brings such incidents to light, he will either deny them as “Big Fat U*U BS”, or he will rationalize his behaviour on the grounds that, since he believes UUs treated him badly, then his offensive reactions are somehow “legitimate.”

For years, Robin Edgar has tried to portray himself as the victim of a witch-hunt, denying that his outrageous and even threatening behaviour has anything to do with his being expelled from UCM, or with the drawn-out course of events which has since followed.  He keeps tracing this back to Ray Drennan’s alleged misconduct.  Now we are given reason to believe that Reverend Drennan was in fact attempting to address an existing conflict, and the concerns of church staff and members, in his pastoral capacity.  Perhaps he was trying to share how others viewed Robin as a consequence of his behaviour.  Perhaps he was provoked into an angry confrontation, as Robin has done with others (and, of course, then blames on the other person).

We cannot say with certainty.  Even if Reverend Drennan were to share his account of that meeting, all we would then have are two conflicting testimonies.  But, as we have said before, there is other evidence to consider, and that is how Robin Edgar has treated others, and how he refuses to admit that he has, or can ever do, anything wrong.

Advertisements

Robin Edgar’s Demands

In Uncategorized on July 22, 2010 at 5:00 am

For years now, many people who have come across Robin Edgar on the Internet have asked him a very simple question: What exactly do you want?  Unfortunately, they do not always get such a straightforward answer.  They get Robin Edgar telling them that he has already told the whole wide world what he wants, and that it should be very easy for the questioners to find it themselves.  When they tell them that they have been looking, and still can’t find any list of demands posted by him anywhere, he just tells them to try harder.

So, we did.  Lo and behold, we found a list of four demands, buried in a thread of almost a hundred comments in response to a post on Topix.com in 2008.  “Easy to find” indeed!

Let’s forget the fact that Robin Edgar could have simply included a link to the comment which includes this list, as he loves to do in so many of his comments.  Let’s forget that he could have copied and pasted the list anywhere over the past two years, as he does with so much of his long-winded correspondence.  Here are his four basic demands – and our questions following each:

“1. The Unitarian Church of Montreal, and the UUA, would finally get around to responsibly acknowledging the legitimacy and seriousness of my original grievances against Rev. Ray Drennan and subject him to appropriate disciplinary action for his clergy misconduct. Obviously, in that Rev. Drennan has resigned as minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, there may not be much in the way of disciplinary action that the UCM can subject him to now but the UUA`s Ministerial Fellowship Committee is certainly capable of doing so.”

Well, Mister Edgar, how are they supposed to do that after all these years?  First you demanded that Ray Drennan meet you privately in your apartment, so you can explain your vision to him (although failing to explain why you couldn’t do so anywhere else) and then when you do not like what he has to say, you demand that other UUs punish him.  Considering that this was all said in private, how can we be sure that your version of events is indeed accurate?  For all we know, Ray Drennan was trying to convey how your behaviour affected others in the church (and, with what we have seen of your behaviour, this is just as plausible a scenario).

“2. The Unitarian Church of Montreal, and the UUA, would responsibly acknowlege that they responded to my original grievances against Rev. Ray Drennan in manner that was negligent, effectively complicit, and unjustly punitive. They would also jointly and/or severally (as appropriate) acknowledge all of my additional legitimate grievances that arose as a result of their negligent responses to my original grievances.”

Are you forgetting, Mister Edgar, the Canadian Unitarian Council, which has had direct oversight over the UCM the entire time.  Oh, yes, you did in fact complain to them, too.  Not to mention the Quebec Human Rights Commission, which dismissed the complaint as being without merit.  Time and again, you have complained and complained, and now you are complaining about how people respond to your complaints.  Just how did they respond?  Well, basically they said you didn’t have a case.  Then when you lashed out, they asked to you stop.  Then when you wouldn’t stop, they took what action they could to keep you at arm’s length.  Now, after all of these years, most of the UU movement has chosen to ignore you.

“3: The Unitarian Church of Montreal would responsibly acknowlege that the punitive expulsions that I have been subjected to constitute a perversion of justice and would overturn the permanent expulsion that I was unjustly subjected to on November 22nd, 1999. It would also subject those UCM church leaders who are most responsible for these unjust expulsions and/or other negligent and punitive responses to my grievances, such as the false arrests that I have been subjected to, to appropriate disciplinary action.”

So we should forget the fact that your expulsion was the result of a lengthy dispute, where you were suspended twice, only to come back and engage in more disruptive behaviour?  Like dipping your spit-covered fingers in the water communion bowl, then arguing how justified it was?  Or throwing a temper tantrum when you wanted to use office materials without authorisation?  Not to mention constantly picketing the church, harassing its members, and even traveling all over the continent to picket UU events and locations just to draw attention to yourself?  Your outlandish behaviour should be seen as “legitimate”, while the relatively restrained course of action taken by the UCM’s leadership ought to be punished?

“4: Both the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the UUA would open full inquiries into what happened, and fully disclose all pertinent documents and other records and information pertinent to this conflict, towards the end of ensuring that this kind of negligent and complicit response [to] clergy misconduct is not repeated within the U*U ‘religious community.’ “

Wait a minute, Mister Edgar, aren’t you putting the cart before the horse?  We would think that a fair approach would be to “open full inquiries” before pronouncing sentence.  Yet here you are demanding an admission of guilt before the inquiry, because in your mind the accused are already guilty.  No surprise, of course, as it observes your number one rule, that you are never wrong and can never do any wrong.

We have a proposal of our own for Robin Edgar – that an independent committee looks over the entire matter, and the conduct of all parties, and renders a decision with recommendations.  We do not expect Robin Edgar to agree to this, of course, considering how he has constantly and consistently tried to rationalize and justify his own outrageous conduct.  That includes, we should remind our readers, his refusal to accept Reverend Ray Drennan’s apologies, showing that, even when an effort is made to meet his demands, it will never ever be enough for him.

“The Emerson Avenger”: A Tiny, Declining, Fringe Blog?

In Uncategorized on July 17, 2010 at 5:21 am

Robin Edgar used to blog and comment with manic fury, finding even the most bizarre reasons to lash out against Unitarian Universalists for not paying attention to him.  Now, his posts have been reduced to once a week, and focus on selected Google hits among the billions floating around out there (not to mention searched on Ask.com, Bing, Yahoo, and so on).

We have said before that Robin Edgar has not had anything new to say for a long time.  His whole message could be reduced to Robin Edgar good, UUs bad – UUs won’t listen to Robin Edgar, whose complaints and grievances are always valid, and who’s really a nice guy if those “remarkably foolish Big Fat U*U Clowns aka Ass Clowns” could just look past the humour of his “Emerson Avenger”  persona.  Well, sir, if you’re so good, and UUs are so bad, why don’t you offer anything constructive?  Instead of repeating that Unitarian Universalism is a “tiny, declining, fringe religion,” for example, if you think you are so smart, and if we should be listening to you, why can’t you offer something worth hearing?

Now we see him reduced to reporting on selected Google searches and hits leading to his blog – such a desperate attempt to get attention.  Interesting how he is no longer reporting on the total number of Google (and other) hits he has been getting.  Could it be that Robin Edgar’s so-called satirical alter ego is itself on the decline?  If so, then maybe he needs a new act.  Or just plain retirement.

Slowly, Slowly, the “Avenger” Goes?

In Uncategorized on July 9, 2010 at 3:06 pm

Looks like Robin Edgar is running out of steam.  His posts are less frequent, and he is running out of things to say.  We would think he would have something to say about the recent UUA General Assembly in Minneapolis, but instead he comments about somebody in Wichita, Kansas finding one of his posts on Google.

Why would Robin “The Emerson Avenger” Edgar consider such a thing more important than the most important annual event for Unitarian Universalists?  Other bloggers commented on everything from the resolution for a “Justice GA” in Phoenix in 2012, to the banner parade and the text of the opening chalice lighting.  But, for Robin Edgar, it’s more important for him to tell the world that somebody in Wichita looked up one of his posts.

Apparently, it’s more important for Robin Edgar to get attention, than to actually engage in thoughtful, constructive discussion of issues important to Unitarian Universalists.  Any attention, even the negative attention that comes from insulting and lashing out at people; he has even admitted to being obnoxious so as to draw attention to himself.

But it looks like he’s running out of material.  He couldn’t use anything that happened at GA to draw attention to himself, so he desperately reached for something else.  It’s not surprising, really.  After his years of harassing and insulting and alienating UUs, people have grown weary of his “act”, and refused to feed his craving for attention.  Combine that with how utterly repetitive and unimaginative he is, and it makes sense that his posts should become both less frequent and less relevant.

Good news?  We can’t be sure.  It all depends on how he responds to the decreasing amount of attention being paid to him.  Either Robin Edgar will try to find a constructive channel, or will grow so desperate for attention that he will do anything to get it.