stonewall, then claim that there wasn't enough investigation -- RSQUBF discussion forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 00:52:36 03/10/05 Thu
Author: Joe
Subject: stonewall, then claim that there wasn't enough investigation
In reply to: Forum co-admin 's message, "Clarification" on 15:37:09 02/22/05 Tue

>In their brazen-faced "media statement", among other
>things, UBF lies that RSQUBF uses mass emailings.
>RSQUBF has never used mass emailings in the past. Just
>as a clarification.

There's irony aplenty in the UBF "media statement." (So much for UBF being "silent like Jesus when accused.") They claim that Ron Enroth and others have not done enough investigation, but it is apparent that they did not cooperate with the 10TV investigation, declining to self-investigate or comment on the specific cases mentioned in the 10TV report, though it appears from the date of the UBF "media statement" that UBF was aware of the planned report for more than a month. They--in particular, Barry--also refused to cooperate with the NAE's attempt to investigate them. They stonewall and then claim that others did not investigate them enough.

I can remember the 1994 CBS Channel 2 Chicago news report about UBF. I remember the footage of the CBS reporter knocking on Sam Lee's home door, and S. B. Choi peeking out and claiming that Lee "wasn't home." Always one to hide, Lee sent Barry before the CBS cameras in 1994 to issue the same denials that are in this year's "media statement." And contrary to another UBF claim in the "media statement," I remember nothing that Barry said being taken "out of context" by CBS to try to "portray UBF as a cult." Read the 1997 NBC Channel 5 report transcript. I see no attempt by Channel 5 to take anything said by Hembekides "out of context."

In anther incident related to me, before the 1992 publication of "Churches That Abuse" by Ron Enroth, a different Christian leader/author attempted to investigate the charges of abuse by Sam Lee and was rebuffed by Sam Lee. And Lee gave orders to physically assault that Christian leader/author if he ever came to the Chicago headquarters.

So, it's not that people and organizations and media don't try hard enough to investigate UBF, but it's that UBF has so much "weirdness" that it needs to try to hide.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: UBF hypocricy -- PECAS, 11:10:24 03/10/05 Thu