randalm wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 5:56 pm
Can you provide some proof to your claim of "almost daily emails telling what to include in the book," and "the multitude of individuals?" To quote the editor of this book---"This statement is objectionably false."
It’s an interesting question, Ernie do you actually know this? Or are you speculating?
I heard that this was indeed the case. Randal says the statement is false. So I guess the jury is out on this one.
I have no horse in this race and will be glad to learn if there was "not a multitude of individuals and almost daily emails". I will also be glad to learn whether any opinions and insinuations in the book (apart from the known atrocities) are indeed from the author.
My goal in life is to not form a conclusion until I have heard the whole matter, and to keep compiling information until then.
I'm all for transparency and holding organizations accountable.
It is fascinating to see the modus operandi here... Shift the focus off the facts to undermining the credibility of the author. Oh that's right, I almost forgot you haven't even read the book yet. Fascinating, having a life goal of not forming conclusions until hearing the whole matter, and jumping in to a discussion like this without having read the book or having a horse in this race. But wouldn't working for CAM be considered a horse in this race? If this is the Ernest I think it is, you either used to or still do work for CAM. Come on, no horse in this race? This response is aimed to turn the spotlight back where it needs to be. Unless you can, with imperical and unarguable evidence, prove that the statements you made regarding this author are true ( which I'm fairly certain you will not be able to do honestly), then you are now re-victimizing this victim telling their story and defaming them as a person. It is more of the same. Until you apologize and begin turning the spotlight where it needs to be, what else can we believe from you? Or from CAM?
just_thinking wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:13 pm
It is fascinating to see the modus operandi here... Shift the focus off the facts to undermining the credibility of the author. Oh that's right, I almost forgot you haven't even read the book yet. Fascinating, having a life goal of not forming conclusions until hearing the whole matter, and jumping in to a discussion like this without having read the book or having a horse in this race. But wouldn't working for CAM be considered a horse in this race? If this is the Ernest I think it is, you either used to or still do work for CAM. Come on, no horse in this race? This response is aimed to turn the spotlight back where it needs to be. Unless you can, with imperical and unarguable evidence, prove that the statements you made regarding this author are true ( which I'm fairly certain you will not be able to do honestly), then you are now re-victimizing this victim telling their story and defaming them as a person. It is more of the same. Until you apologize and begin turning the spotlight where it needs to be, what else can we believe from you? Or from CAM?
Soloist wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 5:59 pm
It’s an interesting question, Ernie do you actually know this? Or are you speculating?
I heard that this was indeed the case. Randal says the statement is false. So I guess the jury is out on this one.
I have no horse in this race and will be glad to learn if there was "not a multitude of individuals and almost daily emails". I will also be glad to learn whether any opinions and insinuations in the book (apart from the known atrocities) are indeed from the author.
My goal in life is to not form a conclusion until I have heard the whole matter, and to keep compiling information until then.
I'm all for transparency and holding organizations accountable.
It is fascinating to see the modus operandi here... Shift the focus off the facts to undermining the credibility of the author. Oh that's right, I almost forgot you haven't even read the book yet. Fascinating, having a life goal of not forming conclusions until hearing the whole matter, and jumping in to a discussion like this without having read the book or having a horse in this race. But wouldn't working for CAM be considered a horse in this race? If this is the Ernest I think it is, you either used to or still do work for CAM. Come on, no horse in this race? This response is aimed to turn the spotlight back where it needs to be. Unless you can, with imperical and unarguable evidence, prove that the statements you made regarding this author are true ( which I'm fairly certain you will not be able to do honestly), then you are now re-victimizing this victim telling their story and defaming them as a person. It is more of the same. Until you apologize and begin turning the spotlight where it needs to be, what else can we believe from you? Or from CAM?
just_thinking wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 4:35 pm
Great question. Does Ernest know the author?
The Ernie you went after in your post doesn't sound like the Ernie I know personally. Perhaps reading what he has written about this saga would be advisable before responding to one post and insinuating things about him. And please don't construe any of this to say that I'm questioning anything about the book or the author.
Last edited by GaryK on Tue Dec 20, 2022 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We could make a movie
