|
|
 |
|
Getting Out : Media Reports
The Cult's Response to the Rolling Stone Article | from Anthony - Thursday, June 23, 2005
accessed 5503 times As posted on FamilyYouth@yahoogroups.com.
I could be wrong, but I don't think the Family is particularly fond of the recent Rolling Stone Article. I haven't read said article yet, nor all of the reply below; however, Peter Wilkinson must have hit the dog who now howls.
Regards,
Anthony (Note: Please forward this to any fellow-SGAs who you know would like to be
involved in sending a protest letter to Rolling Stone Magazine. Thanks!)
Dear SGAs,
GBY! We love you so much! We're happy to report that the hit dog howled, and
Rolling Stone Magazine mentioned our Rapid Media Response in their article!
(Thanks so much to all of you who participated in writing them.) The article
was very biased, negative & inaccurate, basically a forum for our hostile
ex-members to vent. The reporter only gave Claire one line from a one hour
interview. Peter Wilkinson, the author of the article, mentions the RMR
team responses he received in a negative light and basically passes them off
as part of "the Family's spin machine." But praise the Lord, He causes the
wrath of man to praise Him! Below you can read the excerpts of the article
that mentions our Rapid Response, and followed by Claire's rebuttal to the
entire article.
Please feel free to write a protest letter right away to Rolling Stone
magazine, and any and all SGAs are welcome to likewise blitz Rolling Stone.
Call on the keys for wisdom in how to personally respond, and please keep
the regular pointers in mind for writing the media (refresher list at the
end for your easy reference).
"Satan's roaring is silenced by the keys."
"Call on the keys and they will be turned to swords, cutting the Devil's
monsters to pieces, and all the lies that they spew out against you."
Thanks for your prayers and your participation. We love you!
Lots of love,
Anaik for the RMR team
***
Excerpt from Rolling Stone article:
...Family leadership immediately began a public campaign to disparage their
dead Messiah, portraying him as falling under the spell of disgruntled
ex-members.
Spokeswoman Claire Borowik called Ricky "an obviously disturbed young man
acting out his misplaced anger."
As this story went to press, the Family's spin machine, based in Washington,
D.C., swept into overdrive. A flurry of e-mails arrived at ROLLING STONE'S
offices, purportedly from members around the world, extolling the group. "I
have everything that my heart could desire, and throughout the course of
life, living as a missionary has taught me many priceless lessons," wrote
Nyx Martinez. "I count myself luckier than other twenty-four-year olds."
Lorie Richards, 29, who has lived in fifteen countries, wrote, "I have been
blessed with a type of `world education' that few have the opportunity to
enjoy."
Stilted and robotic in their writing, the messages also reeked of denial.
Wrote Vas Myers, from Mexico City, "I think the allegations of abuse
[directed at Family leaders] are absurd and unfounded."
Rebuttal:
From: Claire Borowik for The Family International
(202) 298-0838, or publicaffairs@thefamily.org
Re: In response to your article, "The Life & Death of the Chosen One"
by Peter Wilkinson
June 21, 2005
Letter to the Editor
The recent article "The Life & Death of the Chosen One" published by
your magazine was by far the most biased, inaccurate & pejorative account to
date of the tragic events that took place January 7th, 2005, involving Ricky
Rodriguez and Angela Smith. It's apparent that the author did not make the
slightest effort to affirm the veracity of his sources or to avail himself
of impartial information, choosing instead to "spin" a tale of scandal,
rumor and hearsay. The voices of current second generation members of the
Family International, which tell a very different story, are callously
dismissed as part of "the Family's spin machine." The 1,700+ young people
serving in the Family as Christian missionaries, many in third world
countries, had a right to be heard and afforded the same respect and
credibility the author afforded to former members. Professionalism required
balanced coverage of the subject matter, with all sides fairly represented.
One would conjecture from reading this article that the author
condones and even relishes the murder of Angela Smith as some sort of
necessary evil. The position and purpose is obvious from the onset:
"Angry as Ricky was, he also seemed relieved. Finally, he'd get some peace,
some revenge and expose his mother, Karen Zerby." Angela Smith was a
beautiful person who had the same rights as any other citizen in this
country. By allowing this article to be published in your magazine, am I to
understand that the magazine condones or justifies murder as a means to an
end?
This article also refers to the Christian fellowship, the Family, as
"one of the most secretive and destructive religious cults of the past forty
years.operat[ing] in the shadows around the world." This statement is
absolutely ludicrous. Members of The Family International have carried out
missionary works in over 100 countries around the world, leading millions to
the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, as well as providing active assistance
in a multitude of humanitarian aid projects in poor third world countries.
Clearly, activities of this nature are hardly carried out in "the shadows."
Prevalent through out this article is a vicious intent to malign and
demonize Karen Zerby (administrative and spiritual leader of the Family).
Court findings and internal Family publications paint a very different
picture of Karen and the efforts she has made to ensure the safety and
well-being of Family members, both young and old. Justice Ward made note of
this role in his custody ruling: "I am now totally satisfied that The
Family, I would think largely at Maria's prompting, has since 1986 made
determined and sustained efforts to stamp out child sexual abuse and to
prevent any inappropriate contact between adults and children whether young
children or teenage children. I have no evidence that child sex abuse is
presently prevalent any more within The Family than outside it." (Family
Division, Case W 42 1992, London, England, October 19, 1995).
Although the Family International in the past has, as you stated, confronted
allegations of sexual and physical abuse in the early 1990's, courts on 3
continents found these allegations to be false.
Over 600 Family children were examined by court appointed officials and not
one of them was ever found to have been physically, emotionally, or
psychologically abused in any way. That is a fact--which your article sorely
lacks.
I consider that one-sided reporting of this nature foments
discrimination and the demonizing of minority religious movements such as
The Family, seriously endangering every precept of religious freedom and
basic human rights. In order to set the record straight and in interest of
fairness, I ask that you print this response.
Claire Borowik
for The Family International
The Family International, formerly known as the Children of God, is a
fellowship of Christian missionaries dedicated to preaching the Gospel
around the world. Members have received Jesus Christ as their personal
Savior and live and work together in small communities.
Founded by David Brandt Berg (1919-1994) in Southern California during the
late '60s, the Family has expanded into an international missionary
fellowship located in over 100 countries around the world.
(www.thefamily.org)
****
Rolling Stones e-mails to write:
General - letters@rollingstone.com
Will Dana (Managing Editor) - will.dana@rollingstone.com James Kaminsky
(Deputy Managing Editors) - james.kaminsky@rollingstone.com Joe Levy (Deputy
Managing Editors) - joe.levy@rollingstone.com Reporter--Peter
Wilkinson--Peter.Wilkinson@rollingstone.com
****
PS: As a brief refresher on your media response note, here are a few points:
-- Address your message header specifically to the reporter and his magazine
and ideally include your name in the header (ie: "from Jill" so it doesn't
look like spam)
-- keep your note short and to the point--respectful
-- don't forget to include at the top of your note the important details of
your full ame/age/country of location, and your profession
-- Include a brief statement (a few sentences max ideally) about yourself
and your upbringing in the Family, or whatever else the Lord shows you to
say.
-- feel free to also include a link to your myconclusion.com letter online,
if you feel it'd be relevant to the reporter.
-- Please e-mail a separate copy of your letter to nabroadband@abmc.net.
Thanks so much.
-- Last but not least, we'd recommend that in addition to specifically
asking the Lord what to put in your e-mail, and confirming with the Lord
that the letter hits the target before you hit the "send" button, that you
also ask a mature/dependable person in your Home to briefly look over your
letter as a second opinion, to highlight anything that might be unclear or
that might be taken and quoted out of context (something the media is expert
at). You might ask the CS monitor in your Home, or someone else who you know
will be prayerful and give you useful feedback. You could explain to them
that your goal is to stick to your personal life story, to be proactive,
brief, and clear, and ask them to evaluate if your letter is and does all
those things.
--Please send a cc of your letter to nabroadband@abmc.net (or if you'd
prefer, a one-liner mentioning that you wrote a letter), so we're aware of
how many letters were sent in this Rapid Media Response. Thanks, we
appreciate it.
***
If this is your first time receiving an invitation to participate in a Rapid
Media Response, and you'd like to participate in future, please jot an
e-mail nabroadband@abmc.net, and include your name/age/country. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from lala
Friday, July 29, 2005 - 18:27
(Agree/Disagree?)
Whats this "keys" thing "keys will turn to swords" HUH? Stay away from that stuff for awhile & its so freaking kooky! I tell ya...insane
(reply to this comment)
| from Shaka
Sunday, July 03, 2005 - 11:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'M BAAAAAACCCKKK!!!!!!
Hi all, just got out of boot camp and I'm in Alabama for the next nine months for AIT. I can check my mail now so feel free to write. Glad to see TF is still being reamed by the media. Drop me a line, people.
John
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from tuneman7
Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 17:58
 (Agree/Disagree?)
Where's the group's “Rapid Victim Restitution” team?
I think that's much more needed that this "Rapid Media Re-Victimization" crew they've got going on.
Talk about misplaced priorities.
(reply to this comment)
| from afflick
Monday, June 27, 2005 - 07:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
Both Mike and Justin are in "ministries" that are fully funded by TFI. As fathers with three children, the financial support that the cult provides for them allows for them to live comfortably. Therefore, it is difficult to reason with them in the same way you would a field father or a man supporting his family himself. They depend on the money they receive every month and they are used to an upper middle class lifestyle by this time. To suggest changing the structure of the group puts their living situation in extreme jeopardy. Working on computers in a rent free home is preferred to hawking Family goods on the streets. It is not difficult to understand why they would stay loyally by the party line no matter what.
(reply to this comment)
| from afflick
Monday, June 27, 2005 - 07:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
Both Mike and Justin are in "ministries" that are fully funded by TFI. As fathers with three children, the financial support that the cult provides for them allows for them to live comfortably. Therefore, it is difficult to reason with them in the same way you would a field father or a man supporting his family himself. They depend on the money they receive every month and they are used to an upper middle class lifestyle by this time. To suggest changing the structure of the group puts their living situation in extreme jeopardy. Working on computers in a rent free home is preferred to hawking Family goods on the streets. It is not difficult to understand why they would stay loyally by the party line no matter what.
(reply to this comment)
|  From perspective anyone?
Monday, June 27, 2005, 09:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
Imagine if they had to work 8 hours a day, pay for their own lunch, come home and hope their wives cooked dinner, pay their child care, pay for their cars, pay for their food (all of it), pay for their hospital bills, pay for their gas, etc... They have it pretty easy, who would want to go against the perfect life they have? Who cares if it means stepping on others to get what they want.(reply to this comment) |
| | From jez
Tuesday, June 28, 2005, 18:53
(Agree/Disagree?)
If I was after an easy life I would've stayed within the cult, however my conscience got the better of me. It doesn't take the brains of an archbishop to realise what a messed up bunch of weirdos our parents are to have allowed us, their children, to grow up in that sort of environment. They merit no respect, treat them as the sperm/egg donours to Berg(may he rot in hell) that they are. Parenting seems to be a responsibility they happily renegged, for the sake of their own 'freedom'.
Should you be another of the unlucky ones, who's parents have achieved the dubious status of 'leader', I feel for you, as I would willingly divorce myself from biological parents who are content to fleece hard working (albeit stupid) people through selfrighteousness, in order to fund their lifestyle,(proportionate to the level of leadership attained) which most approximates that of the'system'.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from tuneman7
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 16:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
"The hit dog that howls"?!!!
What utter nonsense.
Also you see the "loving and caring" nature of Zerb and her little perv posse. Notice that no effort is made in the rebuttal to defend Sara Davidito? The reason for this is simple; people are completely expendable to Zerb and her little "Pervs Incorporated" inner circle.
"So sweet of you to work on our staff for all these years. Yeah, thanks by the way for whoring out your own children and other people's children (including Don's sister) to the perverted desires of Berg and my own pedophile ring. So good of you to viciously beat your own daughter for not 'being more willing and enthusiastic', during her rape sessions with Berg, Zerby, Peter Amsterdam, Gary and whoever else we told you to offer her up to."
"We love you and your reward in great in Heaven. -- But. ... We're not going to make any effort to defend you other than making sure you have a few measly dollars to flee the country real quick next time one of the young people you have committed crimes against at our instruction comes forward."
"P.S. We also recommend that you virulently deny any statements of truth which your daughter or her friends make. If you can find it within yourself to get your home to pray against your daughter and her friends that would be great. Also, demonizing her and her friends to her siblings is always good as well."
"P.P.S. Also after praying and hearing from the Lord we would like to suggest that you use the term(s) virulent, vitriolic, vindictive, apostate, liar, forces of Satan, deceitful, vandari, enemy, persecutor and other such terms liberally when referring to your daughter, Don's sister, and other victims of your crimes or their friends."
"Love in our Husband and with the power of the Keyes,"
"Mama".
Let their treatment of Sara D. be a lesson to any first generation members who thing their loyalty is going to be rewarded by their criminal leadership structure. Everyone is disposable to them, especially victims.
Count on a cult to be a cult.
Take it easy,
Tuneman7
(reply to this comment)
| From Folie-a-Deux
Monday, June 27, 2005, 09:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
"...people are completely expendable to Zerb and her little "Pervs Incorporated" inner circle." So true! I keep wondering when Claire & Marc are going to be seen as too much of a liability to be kept in their current positions as Family spokespersons. Claire's aggressive public defense of TFI may actually be a way of maintaining her own survival in an organization that will view her as more of a liability than an asset the minute a well-documented account of Claire & Cacho's Argentine child trafficking operation shows up in a major U.S. publication. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from Nick
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 15:38
(Agree/Disagree?)
Whatever! Look, at the end of the day the only ones that think this was "The hit dog that howled" is themselves!
I mean no matter how you slice it that article was damaging to them and the leaders know it. They just try to spin some crapy prophecy’s and turn it around so that the followers actually believe they won this round.
Kinda pathetic if you think about it.
I am sure that no matter how many "testimonies" are sent in to the editors, they can see the real truth! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the truth in this case and no amount of "In 1986 we put out a policy to stop fucking underage girls", will be able to hide the truth from these writers and editors...
OK, it's 5:30 on a Friday.... Drinking time..... So I am gonna take my systemite ass and sit in a systemite bar with systemite systemites and have a few systemity drinks.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | from seeker
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 13:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
When you think about it -- it's amazing. The Family has deliberately developed a Rapid Media Response strategy founded on the assumption that Family Members should publicly comment on articles they have not even read. They are simply told that the article is bad, given a few sound bites, and encouraged to go to it.
And for them, this is perfectly normal -- standard operating procedure. No one seems to think that this is odd, much less outrageous. Curiouser and curiouser.
Sure sounds like a lame attempt at a spin machine. And it is yet another glimpse into the utterly disconnected and unethical world that Family Members live in.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | from thinker711
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 10:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
A perfect SGA letter to the RS editor:
to the editor of roling ston:
I am a 26 year old person in the Family. I have lived in mexico, equador, japan, and the us. I receved a exselant educashun grooing up in the Family. I receved a world educashun sinse I moved all around the world. I woodn't change any thing about my life. I was never abused as a child. Sure I had sum loving encownters with sum realy sweet men, but it was not abuse. after 1986 there was no more sex alowed between adults and minors (under 12 years old). And the corts have proven this.
i am writing you to tell you that i am apawled that you wood publish that article. Mama Maria and King Peter are the most loving and sweet peeple in the whole world. i no this is true, even tho i have never met them and i have no idea wher they live and i have only seen picturs of them on the internet.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From thinker711
Monday, June 27, 2005, 10:16
(Agree/Disagree?)
Did my mock letter hit a little too close to home for you flutterfly? Sorry about that. While the letter itself was a fake, it’s content was not, in that it accentuated the mental state and lunacy of many Family members. Many of them are convinced that they were never abused, and that Zerby and Berg are the exemplars of loving, caring leaders. This is because they do not think for themselves (nor are they permitted to). Additionally, many “horribly depressing” movies are excellent movies that serve a purpose. Would you prefer it if all movies were fantastic comedies that did not reflect reality? Anyway, don’t feel bad about calling me stupid; I am not offended and have been called worse (e.g., things that hit closer to home). (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From sarafina
Friday, June 24, 2005, 16:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh chill out already, I thought it was funny. So what if he wants to make a mock letter, people on here do it all the time. I know his letter put me in a better mood then your derogatory comment did. Why would you feel the need to call someone stupid when they were just having a little fun?
Speaking of spelling, lets look at your own grammar for a min “He was trying to funny,” was this an attempt of your own at trying to funny? Or was his "trying to funny” the cause of your “making a funny”? Either way, it was all funny.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | from frmrjoyish
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 08:08
(Agree/Disagree?)
This was a gutsy and powerful article. Bravo to the author for the raw and truthful portrayal of the horror that was poor Ricky's life. We should all write them and express our support to counteract the overwhelming BS they are no doubt getting from TF now. Great job to all involved.
(PS: "Glamourous redhead" is one of the best descriptions of Sara I've ever heard! Go girl ;)!!)
(reply to this comment)
| from minime
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 05:41
(Agree/Disagree?)
I can't believe they're still lying about doing charity work. If Rolling Stone prints her rebuttal, they should include the detailed instructions given to the youth still in TF on how to write a response.
(reply to this comment)
| from Lance
Friday, June 24, 2005 - 02:09
(Agree/Disagree?)
This should be rolling stones response: "So sue us?"
I mean seriously, nothing would bring me more satisfaction then for the family to TRY to sue rolling stone for libel. That would force them into the public eye and give us and the media a glarring target.
Claire Borowick, if you have a problem, get a lawyer and sue. Because that's the american way... whats that? You can't sue because the article was actually true? Well then shut the fuck up!
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from Wolf
Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 23:46
(Agree/Disagree?)
To: Claire Borowik
Re: in response to your response to the article “The Life & Death of the Chosen one” by Peter Wilkinson
Your response to the recent article “The Life & Death of the Chosen one” was by far the most mindless, inaccurate & pejorative rebuttal you have written to date. It’s apparent that you did not make the slightest effort to address the real issues brought up in the article or to avail yourself of impartial information, choosing instead to focus on a lame effort to insinuate that the author sympathizes with murderers. The first-hand testimony of hundreds of former members of the Family International is callously dismissed by you as “rumor and hearsay”. The thousands of young people who were born in your group and consequently mentally, physically and sexually abused and denied an accredited education have a right to be afforded much more respect and credibility than the individuals who abused them.
One would conjecture from reading your rebuttal that you are aware that Karen Zerby raped her son and David Berg molested Davida Kelly, since you make no mention of these very important issues. By ignoring these and the many other first-hand accounts published in the article, am I to understand that you condone such behavior as a means to an end?
As a former member, I find “one of the most secretive and destructive religious cults of the past forty years, operating in the shadows around the world” to be a very accurate description of the Family International. Addresses of family communities are not made available to the public, and family members falsely and illegally solicit donations in over 100 countries around the world, misleading millions to believe that they are actually part of a charity organization, and even soliciting donations from the needy in poor third world countries. Clearly, activities of this nature can only be carried out in “the shadows.”
Since Karen Zerby did not appear before Justice Ward I see no reason why you consider his conjecture as evidence of Zerby’s good character. The Family International has only managed to win court cases by coaching its children to lie, hiding evidence and bribing witnesses. The actual number of children physically examined by court appointed officials is much smaller than 600, and each of those examined was told in advance that they would be taken away from their parents if they divulged the truth to court authorities.
I suggest that instead of piously pretending to be helping those in need, the Family International should pool its resources to provide assistance to the young people who have been abused by Family members, and to insure that the abusers face justice. Additionally, in order to set the record straight and in interest of fairness, I ask that you open web sites such as www.myconclusion.com to comments from the public, to enable the young people who are currently trapped in your group to hear both sides of the story.
(reply to this comment)
| from Nancy
Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 20:45
(Agree/Disagree?)
"seriously endangering every precept of religious freedom and
basic human rights."
What does Claire Borowik or the cult know about basic human rights?! What a hypocrit. What of the basic human rights of thousands of children to be free from physical, mental and sexual abuse and exploitation?
Notice she doesn't deny any of the details of the article. She can't, especially the part about Zerby's pedophilia.
"600 children" huh? That number keeps growing over the years. Some of the few children she claims to have been "examined" were actually never examined and it is documented in GNs. Had they been "examined" they would have found the children had been raped. Claire knows all too much about it.
The Family was not cleared in Argentina by any court. There was never a court case, judge or jury. There was only an investigation by a military judicial system left over by a dictatorship.
This is just more denial that truly reeks. Trust a cult to be a cult.
And if they really had any real basis for complaint, then let them bring it in a court of law. Hear me Claire?! If you or your cult was defamed, then sue. Your whiny complaints and lack of action reveal that there is no claim. You and your cult leaders know full well you could never avail yourself of any legal claim because you have none. Freedom of speach is a beautiful thing and a fundamental right. What's more truth is an absolute defense against defamation. You're maligned and defamed and "demonized"? Then, shut up and sue. State your cause of action in a court of law. Why no legal action? Because you have no legal claim. If any of their complaints were legitimate, they would have sued long ago. They don't because they would suffer the ultimate defeat and exposure as the sexually and physically abusive cult they are. So, they run and hide in the shadows and complain and whine from behind the emails of young adult cult members. No sign of any leaders. They're all hiding in Peru and Mexico, or falling off roofs is more like it, just like their leader Zerby and Kelly. They don't even fight their own battles. They ask kids to do it. "Hey all ya'll, send email saying you didn't like this article. Don't actually read it though, as it could cause you to think, I mean doubt."
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | from monger
Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 20:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
A few initial Family blog posts about the article:
http://hobbyns.net/index.php?title=rolling_stone_hacktacularity
http://hobbyns.net/index.php?title=moss_grows_fat_on_our_rolling_stone
http://www.mikeandnina.net/2005/06/21/181/
(reply to this comment)
| From Lance
Friday, June 24, 2005, 18:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
Thanks to everyone who posted responses to these blogs! I had was a bit concerned that people where going to be excessively rude and hostile, but the comments that were left represented some good points without become uncivilized.
But of course they locked us out anyway; in typical cult style. I'm sure they're now congratulating themselves on how much they told us off.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From monger
Sunday, June 26, 2005, 21:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Well, Justin A. (hobbyns.net) removed all comments from and locked one of his Rolling Stone -related posts, and it looks like Mike removed at least two comments from the blog post linked to above.
That's most certainly their prerogative to do so, but I'm just pointing out that they haven't simply "locked out," they've chosen to erase the dialog.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Big Sister
Sunday, June 26, 2005, 22:21
(Agree/Disagree?)
I don't know that many Family members except for my own family. So it is interesting for me to read the writing and thoughts of current TF members. As an outsider, my impression of reading these blogs: 1. few Family members have read the Rolling Stone article 2. fewer still want to or are capable of comment 3. even fewer want to make a comment that is approved by an older home member first, and 4. current Family members are unfamiliar with debate and discussion of issues and so they find it threatening when it doesn't go their way.
Most sad and telling, is this comment by Justin about why he does not need to formulate his own understanding of the Rolling Stone article: "I feel I can safely say that what he [Mike] says is what I want to say too, so I don't have to try and craft my own response." But actually Justin, you do have to try and craft your own response, because that's what being a grown up is!(reply to this comment) |
| | From Blondie_B78
Monday, June 27, 2005, 01:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
I used to know Justin and his family quite well. From reading his comments on his blog - deleted and still posted - I think that he probably has read the full Rolling Stone article and he is simply choosing not to comment further. He has made a choice, even though most of us would find it a poorly informed and bizarre one.
It's a shame that current SG members can't see beyond the media sensationalism to the core facts. Ricky claimed his mother sexually abused him. There are witnesses. Doesn't Zerby's silence on the issue bother them?
My questions to Fam Bloggers are:
What would change for you personally if Zerby came out and admitted that Rickys' claims were true?
If you chose to continue on as a missionary would you want to do so under her leadership?
How can you be sure that Rickys' and others claims were false if Zerby refuses to address them thoroughly?
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From folie-a-deux
Monday, June 27, 2005, 10:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
You've hit the nail on the head. The core issue is Ricky's claims about his mother, which have been corroborated by Davida. The story of Maria's rape of her son is either a lie or it is true. If Rick told a lie in attempt to destroy his mother, why did he hate her so much in the first place? Isn't she supposed to be a living saint? And why that particular lie, which is a terribly shameful thing. How many people go around saying, "I had sex with my mother" because it's a good way to discredit a parent with whom they are angry? If it is the truth, wouldn't suicide look like a reasonable way to escape that kind of memory? All the evidence and common sense suggest Rick told the truth. BTW, didn't Berg prophesy that Rick wore a Magic Green Shirt (of truth-telling) as his spiritual birth-right? If Rick was a pathological liar, what does that say about Berg's spiritual discernment and prophesy?
You see, all roads lead to one conclusion: If there's something rotten at the top of TFI and the founder has a documented history of pedophilia, what does that say about my decision to follow Zerby & Peter's leadership? (reply to this comment) |
| | From true
Monday, June 27, 2005, 19:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
yea he had a green shirt of truth and started to tell the truth to every one in bergs dream. sick people dream about what they wish will happen. so it shows that berg felt bad about what he did and wanted the truth to get out. or the family just need to see that every thing he said in the letters is wrong and a lie. he is not realy the one voice of god......
zerby is how ever evil and will stop at nothing to fufill her greed and her heat to have sex with any one because now she has the power. she already fucked her own son.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From roxal
Monday, June 27, 2005, 10:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
Exactly!
And wouldn't this question require an answer in order for you to be able to continue following their beliefs for your entire family and the families around you?
Personally, if there was a doubt as to whether the pastor in my church was a pedophile, I would want a straight answer, investigation, and court case before continuing to believe with total faith in everything they say. I would stop all tithes, and discontinue all beliefs derived from him until I got a straight answer, yes or no. there are many other questions I believe would need to be answered as well; was Berg a drunk, did he have repeated sex encounters with his family and underage kids, was there a sexual sharing schedule in Bergs house, etc… There are way too many questions I would need answers to.
Logically thinking everyone, if our president, mayor, governor, school superintendent, boss, pastor, neighbor, father, mother, friend, lover or anyone we know was accused of pedophilia, or any of the accusations mentioned, at any point in their lives wouldn’t you want a straight answer in order to continue your relationship with them? I think people need to start thinking logically; they are so blinded by their unconditional faith in these people that they have stopped using the one thing everyone was given at birth to help us get through life, brains! We all have them and no one was intended to shut them off and unconditionally follow the way someone else thinks!(reply to this comment) |
| | From Wolf
Monday, June 27, 2005, 20:46
(Agree/Disagree?)
I suspect that most individuals who are still in TFI are aware that Berg had sexual relations with his daughter Faith, and somehow they’ve worked out an explanation that satisfies them and enables them to go on living a lie. If Berg’s incest doesn’t phase them, I don’t see why Zerby’s would.
My French step-father’s explanation is really funny: “But you zee, Berg was so eavanly zat ee ad one foot in eavan all zee time. Zat’s why ee did zome unusual zings.”(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | from Groan
Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 19:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
Someone needs to send this to Rolling Stone, and for that matter to the media in general.
I think it's hilarious how they complain about being called "the Family's spin machine" but then they go on to give this instruction:
"...we'd recommend that in addition to specifically asking the Lord what to put in your e-mail, and confirming with the Lord that the letter hits the target before you hit the "send" button, that you
also ask a mature/dependable person in your Home to briefly look over your letter as a second opinion, to highlight anything that might be unclear or that might be taken and quoted out of context"
This entire article IS an example of The Family's spin machine in action. It shows how their basic strategy is to hide behind our peers who are still in the Family, and send them out to take the heat for the leadership's crimes.
(reply to this comment)
| From roxal
Thursday, June 23, 2005, 19:41
(Agree/Disagree?)
It makes me sick!
She's pretty much saying, write whatever responses you think god would want you to write, and before you send it, make sure one of the leaders of your home agrees with what you put.
If they wanted to write something, they probably would have, they don't need to be told to. If they decide to write something, it should come from them, they don't need an outline for a letter that should be their own individual opinions. And last but not least, if they do write emails they don’t need anyone’s approval or censorship to do so.
Do you people ever get tired of manipulating kids into doing what you think would be best for you? Do you even realize what kind of control freaks you are?
(reply to this comment) |
| | From xolox
Friday, June 24, 2005, 00:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
TFI continuously steps on it's own dick. All that will result from a stupid directive like that is they'll get hundreds of cookie cutter letters, with everything looking and sounding identical and rehearsed. Oh yeah! Those poor dumb bastards at Rolling Stone will never see through that one! For fucks sake, all TFI needs is enough rope, they'll hang themselves.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From roxal
Thursday, June 23, 2005, 20:13
(Agree/Disagree?)
lol, We should all write them ourselves and thank them for the article. Keep it balanced.
Plus, when has Tf ever published anything unbiased? LMAO, TF = Unbiased? Oxymoron if you ask me.
When they have written all those letters about us “apostates” did they bother publishing our side of the story? How can she accuse the author of the article of being biased when he’s obviously someone who is on neither end of this story (not a current or ex member)?
If they are going to accuse anyone of being biased, it should be themselves. I have not seen a single article, letter, or prophecy ever published by anyone in TF that wasn’t completely biased.
Oh the delusional…..truly pathetic.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
(
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]