Hawkaw,
You said, "What Bill did is just the same as taking notes of your conversation. Its called a recollection of the facts and is far from being dishonest and in fact can be used in a court of law. It is quite legal for one party to tape or record another party without their knowledge. What is illegal unless a warrant is obtained is for a third party like the government to listen in on a conversation between two parties."
Nothing could be further from the truth. In California, taping a telephone conversation without the consent of the other party is a criminal offense. Many other states have laws similar to California in this regard. Even if it isn't illegal, I disagree with your position about it not being dishonest. If someone did that to me, I would use every legal means at my disposal to punish them for it. They would definitely regret it.
You added, "As for calling it a pedophile paradise - I think most of the 17 victims who were brutilized by Fitzswater and the 42 who were abused by that sicko in Oregon would tend to agree with Bill's comment."
That's not surprising, but I think it's safe to say these individuals are biased in their opinion as they have suffered great harm and are unlikely to be able to look at this issue in an objective manner. It's like asking the families of murder victims to decide the fate of the defendant. Probably 99.9% will choose death.
Finally, you said, "As for your comments on compensation or lack of audited booking practices comments I want to add this - Even though I am not a member of Silentlambs I am not sure if you should have stated what you did until you asked for a copy of their financial statements. . . . Hinting at accusations like that without backing them up is kinda ... well ... not the greatest thing to do .... especially when I watched the man spend 10 grand of his own money at one time on this issue. "
Let's go back to my statement you responded to. gcc2k said, "I'm sure that Bill's mission (or mission in life?) is genuine and heartfelt, and perhaps it is the uphill battle that has him resorting to certain tactics that many do not agree with." I responded, "I'm not convinced of that. I wonder what sort of compensation, if any, Mr. Bowen is receiving in connection with the silent lambs. Do they issue audited financial statements?" I didn't accuse Mr. Bowen of anything in this regard, but apparently you have in your own mind. The questions I raised are valid, notwithstanding your misguided, unsuccessful effort to falsely characterize them otherwise. The fact that most of us here are no longer Jehovah's Witnesses does not mean we shouldn't be skeptical of others who seem to be aligned with our views. A great amount of skepticism was directed at an attorney on this board who offered her services to victims of the cases at issue in this thread. Rather than being offended, the attorney involved took action to allay the concerns. This is an open forum and I hope these questions are answered in a similar manner.
I really could care less what you think is a "great" thing to do. I call 'em as I see 'em.