|
In Reply to: Re: To Sam posted by Sam to Jules. on August 28, 2003 at 09:03:53:
I’ve been following with some interest the dialogue between Sam A. and Jules, and as someone who has been involved both in the effort to bring TF to answer, as well as in the effort to provide assistance to those young people who need it, I would like to add a few observations to this discussion.
Sam,
I did say that I would see TF Family in court. I am working towards that and I believe we will With varying degrees of intensity, there are many who believe that something should be done about the past actions and policies of TF/COG. These areas of agreement notwithstanding, there are many areas where there is room for disagreement. I hope I am not over simplifying your mission when I say that it appears to be one of exposing and destroying The Family at any time, anywhere, and regardless of the consequences. While there is a certain perseverance inherent in that mission that I find commendable, there is a sort of “slash and burn approach” that I see as possibly harmful to those who suffered.
If your goal is simply to destroy TF, then I suppose that there is no need to take into consideration the effects of your efforts on the victims.
For my part, I cannot in good conscience berate The Family for their crimes (which I believe are many) and then in the next breath pursue a course of action that harms the very individuals whom I am seeking answers for (myself included). I have found myself taking the long route towards my goals when I have determined that the easy way would necessitate causing further pain to someone who would rather be left to heal at their own pace, in their own way, and at their own time. In short, I am not in the business of exploitation, no matter how noble the cause I am espousing.
I don’t intend to use this as a forum to discuss the efficacy of your longstanding efforts with respect to TF. I will say however that it seems to me that given the wide range of experiences, beliefs, personal goals, histories, and personalities of all those who are involved in this question, it is unreasonable to demand any commonality of thought or action. It stands to reason that those with the closest goals, and most similar visions for where they want to go with things, will find each other. It may be that they will choose to work with each other at the exclusion of others. It may be that they will take strong exception to the methods and motives of others and wish to try a new way, or a new thing entirely.
As a person who has no interest in the question of a god’s existence, I am nonetheless troubled by any suggestion that there may be a religious component to efforts targeted at TF. The only time when religious beliefs should be an issues are when those belief are clearly illegal and harmful to a person’s health, and well-being. Otherwise, religion should be off the table. If chosen as a basis to go after TF, I would submit that it guarantees failure from the onset.
Another issue is the forum. It seems to me that many of the details of how you go after TF are publish on public forums such as this one. While this is the forum that you have chosen, I hope it can be appreciated that many others prefer to work sub Rosa, as it were, given the often-reactive nature of TF. It may be that there are those who like yourself take strong exception to the Davidito book, or to abuses they suffered. I believe however it is unfair to them to demand a public statement on their beliefs and histories as a weapon for your arsenal is they have not volunteered it.
One must not be offended at exclusion from this group or that group. After years of forced assembly, I suspect that most of us fiercely guard our right to freely interact with those of our choosing.
To conclude: it is ironic, I have variously been called a foot solider and disciple of yours, perhaps because TF cannot accept the concept of individually generated disgust and anger at their actions. I hope that whatever our missions, we try to do as little harm to those who deserve their peace.
