Posted by Say NO to Tim-Peter Bull on March 22, 2011 at 17:38:06
In Reply to: Re: He won't answer because he can't posted by John Rose on March 19, 2011 at 07:30:46:
Hello Mr. Tim-in-disguise,
To answer your question, yes, I have risked my life many a time to help others. Even if I hadn't, that does disqualify me from having a valid critical opinion of Peters. One does not have to be a chef to know what is good or bad food.
Whatever good Tim Peters may have done or is doing is certainly tarnished by his name game. Sure he wants to be known only for the good he might be doing, and sure, he, like every other dedicated member of the Family International, wants to sweep all the bad under the carpet and conveniently say it was "all in the past," and to conveniently say that just because "a few errant individuals" perpetrated crimes, it doesn't make him guilty by association. Sure, and I wish I had five million dollars under my pillow too, but reality doesn't work that way.
Peters is tied to a cult with a history of severe human rights abuses yet to be redressed. As a public figure, he has proudly associated himself with them and refused to cut ties with their front organization the FCF, and refused to publicly disavow its teachings which include anti-semitism and bold-faced lying. Like all dedicated undercover members of the Family International, he uses subterfuge and has an obfuscating nature. Only recently, he was on record praising the FCF and TFI.
I don't for one minute believe Peters is the big white-man "hero" he makes himself out to be. "According to a TIME magazine article, the operatives working inside China, South Korea and Laos are critical to the work on helping North Korean refugees escape to freedom. Apparently, the border between the Koreas is impossible to pass. The only smuggling of refugees that can take place is done by fishermen or other very clandestine operations. Could it be that the real heroes of the day are the South Korean relatives and indigenous Chinese Christians who do the real work, but for their own safety, must remain in the dark and away from publicity? What does Peters really do for them, and more importantly, what does he do with the money he raises for the cause?"
There is a big difference between armchair criticism and scrutiny. Peters is being criticized mainly for his inability to hold up to scrutiny. He is a public figure soliciting donations, the public has a right to know what his true agenda is and how he is using their money.
Peters has an agenda to further the cause of TFI and to recruit new members. He is no hero in my book, just a liar who wants to live off of donations and who won't even publicly account for how he spending them, even in general terms.
Replies to this Post:
Post a Reply