In Reply to: Re: Hold the phone posted by Passing By on June 12, 2006 at 05:48:46:
"I am not saying that only emotionally negative information ruins the message but also that which lacks contextual information."
This is not a board where information is posted in a GP fashion. It is an ex-member chat board. It is not a place where I have to be a "sample" and worry about how I form every sentence. I can be emotional and not a family automaton. I can't imagine someone surviving the holocaust and trying to give a review of Hitler and Himmler et al while trying to post it so the GP can swallow it. BTW, most of the general public, as hard as it is to imagine human nature twisted so awry, BELEIVE that the holocaust was just what its name implies.
"We have the context, we don't need it and many times don't even see the need. That's why you are asking all of your questions to me."
You can try and frame why I am asking you questions to suit your interpretation but that is futile. I know why I am asking and don't need you to attempt to tell me why.
"That's why you were offended by my words. I hope you are also offended by all the reports that only include factual information and exclude the context so that uninformed people can correctly understand."
This statement is very general. Can you be more specific? What is being said by whom that is coming across and not informing the GP so they can 'correctly understand'? Can you give a specific example rather than gross generalizations?
"You may not see things the same way I do but I am not here to convince you of anything. What we, as exmembers of a cult, need to understand.."
Just a brief insert here: 'WE, as ex-members of a cult' don't 'need' to understand anything according to any one person's dictates anymore.
"..is that most people think the cultís behavior is so bizarre that what we say is unbelievable."
I think you underestimate the general public here since they are now so much more aware of how corrupt and crazy things can get whether with Warren Jeffs, the 'Savage Messiah, roc T.' or with the depths of depravity people can go to as a cult leader or under the influence of one.
"When some donít give TF an inch many others, the general public in particular, give them all the benefit of the doubt. Even some exmembers who should know better fall for that Ė just go around looking in some websites."
I am glad that people like Anderson Cooper and others are not going by your standards of expectation of the public when it comes to their perceived inability to comprehend information about cults. You mentioned Enron as comparative to TFI regarding their corruption. Are you aware that the top execs of Enron were found guilty on many charges which could result in them getting several consecutive life sentences?
"This has been long and I donít expect to have to repeat these things."
Well you don't have to repeat them or use small words. I am not intellectually challenged. ;)
"I have my mind made up about TF. It looks like you are too. I remain skeptical about those who are trying to stay on the fence and be reluctant to inform the public of what they know."
Can you clarify what you are talking about here? What exactly do you mean by saying 'those who are trying to stay on the fence'? Now where have I heard that phrase over and over again?
And who do you think is being reluctant to inform the public of what they know and what are they being reluctant to inform them about?
Your writing style reminds me of Claire Boringwitch.