|
In Reply to: Re: James Seemore Invitation posted by James Seemore on October 30, 2005 at 05:20:29:
Dear James- Thanks for your reply. My issues are actually with you and your generation in TFI. For me, the crux of the matter is this; Your parents will not, or cannot hold themselves accountable for the crimes that they committed against my children. I look to you and your generation to make sure that the history of the criminal behavior of TFI does not continue unchecked and unaccounted for in the future. Just as in the larger community surrounding you, crime cannot be cured or prevented altogether. This is why we have adopted a rule of law.
I had taken the time to read all of your posts on this site before I extended you the invitation. It is precisely your reliance on TFI’s rule of law (Charter) that I am speaking directly to you. Please understand that Mo, Maria, Peter, and the current leadership of older First Generation members of TFI are not my intended audience. You are. I agree with you that former members who have been abused by current members of TFI should direct their claims and remedies of the abuse to their perpetrators. I agree with you that those of you who have not abused former members should not have to answer for those crimes. Your children should not have to suffer the wrath of the communities you live in because of the sins of your fathers. I also agree with you that it is disingenuous of former members, who may have committed the same crimes they accuse Mo, Maria, Peter, and other First Generation members of, to demand retribution and restitution under the rule of law when they themselves are unwilling to make the same.
Where we seem to be in disagreement is in regard to your (TFI) rule of law. Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that if a crime against a child is committed (ie: sexual or physical abuse defined not by the community’s rule of law where you actually reside, but rather, by those definitions included in your Charter), your rule of law provides for the perpetrator’s excommunication from your community without any due diligence. In other words, from what I understand, your charter makes no provisions for informing me or my community, where you reside, of the excommunication of the perpetrator, or the reasons why the excommunication was deemed necessary by your community.
James, I have long ago given up on your fathers and mothers to change this inadequacy in your organization’s rule of law. I am looking to your generation to make these necessary changes. So, please understand that you become a more important “spokesperson” for TFI than Claire Borowik, or boilerplate Family responses from the top. The recent media since Ricky’s and Angela’s deaths are just the beginning of so much more to come, at least here in America. Others and myself will cover the circuit of talk shows across the country. These programs are an opportunity for me to express my concerns about the danger that your charter imposes on our communities. They are also an opportunity for you to exercise your freedom of speech and defend your charter. Please reconsider my invitation. It will always be open to you.
Sincerely, Jim.
