by Amazing 148 Replies latest jw friends
Sam,
Nah, not crucifying at all. Just a natural reaction from people who are feeling disappointed. If BB came here and admitted sincerely to his mistakes and apologised - like many of us do when we make a mistake - the vast majority here would wish him well.
Englishman.
Wow, here we go again.
I'm still amazed that there are folks who are still viewing this as a disagreement between Ray and Bill. This wasn't a disagreement between these two men. It was an attack on Ray Franz by Bill Bowen while Ray was minding his own business. The fact that Ray spoke to that was only facilitated by Amazing's caring for him and wanting his voice heard in this ridiculous mess. I would venture a guess that had Amazing not done that, Ray wouldn't even have spoken at all. He was under no obligation to do so simply because Bill was speaking of him.
Evidently, at one point in time, Bill asked Ray for his backing of silentlambs and Ray declined for whatever reasons. And those reasons are Ray's own business and he owes NOONE an explanation of them. The absence of an explanation does not, nor did it ever mean any of the things Bill Bowen attached to him. The point is that Ray Franz is under no obligation to support silentlambs or any other organization. It appears that Bill wasn't happy about Ray's decision and in a knee-jerk reaction to his frustration over that, decided to assume some pretty negative things about what Ray's decision meant in the whole scheme of things and then set about to share those "opinions" on a message board. Bill had no right to do this and it amounted to slander IMO.
If someone decides to attack me with outright falsehoods, does my silence make them true? And if someone speaks to me about it and my voice/ the truth is then heard through them, does that mean that there was a disagreement between me and that person? NO! It's not a relational problem that I was part of, it was an attack that my voice was added to.
Waiting:
Well, to be honest, I'm stumped on this one. Neither man has lost credibility in my estimation. I think if we center on the man more than the cause.............the cause will suffer because the man most likely won't live up to our expectations. Just human nature.
With all due respect, is it really just human nature to slander someone on an internationally public message board because you don't like that they won't back your cause? I hope not. Ray Franz's credibility was never in question here until Bill decided to banter it around in his temper tantrum over the lack of support he had hoped for.
Perhaps that's the primary reason that people with money don't speak directly to people a lot of time. Perhaps if Bill and/or SilentLambs received more money, then he could have a PR person give a canned response for him - keep him out of all the side commotion.
then we deal with the Real Bill. If we want PR, then we give enough money so that someone speaks for Bill...but then we don't get the Real Bill.
You are kidding right? We should pay Bill to act like a decent person and deal with others with respect and not slander them? And if we give him more money this will happen? But it won't happen because Bill isn't doing it anymore, it will happen because he is being kept out of the public because he doesn't know how to act out here? Bill shouldn't need a PR person. If he is worthy of being the leader of this movement or any other, then he should act like a leader. I for one will not give him any extra money to buy that type of common decency or professionalism. If this is "The Real Bill" it speaks volumes.
your response to Valis:
Did you ever think Bill just doesn't want to answer you? If he uses the same sarcasm as you do....you'll perhaps judge him insincere, once again. Perhaps he thinks he's in a no-win situation. I'm beginning to think that.
Did you ever think that Ray Franz didn't want to answer Bill? This, I believe was one of Valis' and Reborn's points in asking the questions they did. Bill felt that because HE, Bill Bowen was asking questions of Ray Franz the earth should stop and Ray should answer the questions. Yet, it's okay if Bill doesn't want to answer the questions posed to him? What is good for one is good for the other don't you think? Bill was calling Ray Franz out, making up questions and demanding answers of Ray and putting seeds into the minds of others about what it meant if the questions were not answered. Yet he answers no questions himself? Arrogance. In light of Bill's allegations against Ray- Valis and Reborn's questions were valid. And they were and still are-unanswered. Amazing got some answers for the few naysayers around here regarding what Ray thinks- from Ray. Yet Bill is above even having someone else answer for him in this instance. Ironic isn't it? If Bill Bowen thinks he's in a "no-win" situation, he placed himself there- noone else did.
This was never a "disagreement" between Ray Franz and Bill Bowen. It was a slanderous attack on Ray by Bill while Ray was having tea or watching Jeopardy. Blindsided. And I find it sad that so many jumped on the bandwagon and said "oh, they've talked things out and it's all good now" Ray shouldn't have needed to talk to anyone about it and for me, it's not all good.
Follow him? No, I'm sorry, I can't. And my decision is based on leadership, it has nothing to do with how I feel about the victims of abuse. And please don't try telling me that I don't support victims because I no longer can support Bill Bowen. From the outside, the organization is it's leader.
XW
Edited by - xenawarrior on 16 October 2002 16:8:31
Edited by - xenawarrior on 16 October 2002 16:10:2
Edited by - xenawarrior on 16 October 2002 16:11:40
I agree with most of the comments posted here. I have been a suporter of SL in the past both with contribution and mostly by telling others about the web-site. This can be one of the biggest ways to offer support. If I tell 3 people and they tell 3 people and so on.. and so on... my 3 references grows to a great number in the long run.
It can be stated that the JW religion has valid goals and ideals.
- bring people into a relationship with god
- A world wide brother hood
- A solid hope for the future
These are all good ideals, however when people who question or do not agree with the WT leaders 100% are vilified as evil, slandered, lied about,..... how is this any different than the SL movement if it's leader acts the same way as the GB of Jehovahs witnesses?
I would like to see BB step up to the plate and do the right thing here. If Bill does care about the cause and victims then I am sure he will do the right thing and show some humility. If it does not happen then I see BB as no different than the GB of Jehovah's witnesses and only cares more about his image than he does for the movement and victims and I will no longer give support to his orginization.
I will chime in here with my own thoughts. I think the Silentlamb cause is very important. I think Bill stuck his foot in his mouth worse than I've seen in a long time. I would hope TO GOD he is really ashamed of what he has started. And hopefully when he comes back into the country (whenever that is) he will extract that foot as cleanly as is humanly possible.
My only worry is,,, I just got one of those great bumper stickers from freeminds. ( I wanted to make an outward statement supporting Silentlambs) I just put it on my front door for all the Jehovah's Witnesses to see when they come a knockin'. What if he has screwed up so bad that the site goes under? Well, I know it is sorta selfish, but I'd hate to be sayin' na na na and thumbin' my nose at them, and the site isn't even there anymore. You know what I mean?? That would really make them feel superior and I can't stand the thought of that at all. You know their first thought would be "Hum, I guess Jehovah took care of THAT one!! HAHA!!!"
For that reason (as selfish a reason as it is) I'm a little peeved, and I sure hope that BB can clean up this mess when he gets back.
-P(J)
I think people read far to much into everything and analyse things too much. While what was said can't be 'unsaid', I do think it was a momentary lapse of jusgement by someone who has probably been overworking for a lot of people.
Perhaps we can leave it for now and start moving on - I'm sure both parties involved do not want to see it being debated forevermore.
simon,
i think that may be sage advice. Time to ponder
mac
Hi Sam Beli:
Maybe this thread should be titled "Crucify in Abstensia."
Well, I don't see anyone trying to crucify Bill. There are a lot of good opinions stated above, some more passionately than others ... but many fair minded views have been presented. As for "Abstensia" (Absentia) it seems that Bill is not barred from making statements. The last I heard, his hands are not broken, his eyes still function, and his PC is working, and he has not been deactivated ... so he is certainly free to join the discussion (crucifixsion) ... and not be absent.
Simon makes a good point that we all have churned this issue a lot, maybe even enough ... except that since we have kept it most civil, then I hope this thread will not get locked in case there are some additional comments, or maybe Bill wishes to make some remarks.
It's funny.. in 1983, the WTS sort of offered a well-worded statement of regret for some statements that were "more definite than advisible" regarding expectations for 1975. But it never really was an apology.
Sure they were "over-optimistic" several times in the past too. But they are only human aren't they? And look at all the good they did. God knows we wouldn't have learned these "wonderful truths" on our own.
The greatest thing is that people's memories are not that great and they quickly forget. If we don't talk about it, they will soon forget it ever happened. And years from now when someone brings it up we will label that person a troublemaker.
Path
Not every leader, every businessman, every politician is skilled in getting his points delivered to the public. They lapse now and again, as humans are prone to do. Public Relations people are paid not to let that lapse happen, or repair it pronto.
I really don't think it's a crime for a small yet growing, worldwide movement like SilentLambs to have professional public relations people do the public speaking - or the writing behind the speaking. They are trained. Perhaps Bill isn't trained in every, single, solitary, way to be The Total Seen Weight of the SilentLambs movement? Or perhaps it's just gotten too damned much for one person to shoulder. We know his business has suffered because of his stand. Who takes care of his home & family business when he's in Britain, Canada, Germany, many different states? We know he has several children and a wife. Perhaps we should ask Sheila how much of their private/business burden has been put upon her shoulders?
If xjw supporters want a professional movement to challenge the WT, why is it deemed unnatural to act like many professionals do - have professional help with public relations?
Perhaps it's time to look into a public relations professional - at least for guidance. What would be the harm? If it's already being done - fire them and get another one. They're not keeping pace with situations.
Other than that, ......adios hopefully to this situation. I agree with Simon - we can analyze this situation until it kills someone.
Back to the ol' Live and Let Live.
waiting
Edited by - waiting on 16 October 2002 18:39:37
