Al Baird Sends Out Fox Files Statement
Rex Geissler
to the Fox Files video:
Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement...
Three and a half years have passed since MTV, our last negative nation-wide
television show. Now that God is blessing our renewed efforts on college
campuses, persecution can be expected to follow. And it has. Last Thursday
night, FOX Files aired a very negative segment about the International
Churches of Christ (ICC) entitled "Cults on Campus." FOX Files is a
sensationalist, "National Enquirer" type show, as was evidenced by the
sexually explicit segments that we were sandwiched between - "Gay
Gangbangers" and "Pornography on the Internet."
As is typical of every negative program that has been produced about the
ICC, the producers spend several months interviewing people opposed to the
church. Then a couple of weeks before the show airs, they come to us to get
a few sound bites so as to appear to be fair and objective. Even under these
circumstances, getting our few, badly-edited words aired is better than
their being able to say that we refused to comment. FOX Files was the most
negatively biased (14 minutes of negative in a 15 minute show) and dishonest
television program that we have dealt with (Deceitful reporting using lies
and hidden cameras, purposefully creating false impressions through visual
images, not giving us a chance to respond to most of their negative
allegations, and repeatedly editing my answers out of context).
The damage of the program comes from the insidious way that they weave lies,
half-truths and truths. We make no apologies for expecting every disciple to
be totally committed to God and his Kingdom, for helping everyone deal with
every sin, for expecting every disciple to have the purpose of making
disciples, for expecting every disciple to be in a discipling relationship,
and for every disciple to give sacrificially and willingly of their time and
money. However, three of their allegations are outright lies: that we encour
age students to drop out of school, that we try to divide families, and that
Kip McKean lives a rich lifestyle at the expense of sacrificial members.
First, we expect every student to be the best student that he/she can be.
Not only do we not encourage students to drop out of school; we want them to
become better students after they become disciples. In December I received
the results of a study done by Doug Jacoby about the grades of disciples on
the sixty-nine campuses included in the US churches of the Comrades World
Sector. The average cumulative grade point average was 3.0! (2.5 is
considered average.) We are very proud of our students.
Second, the show pictured a distraught mother and father who could not
understand their daughter leaving after her parents tried to have her
deprogrammed. While I, as a parent, hurt for these parents (and we will try
to bring reconciliation when we get more details), it is hard to believe
that they do not understand that their actions scared their daughter away
when they tried to destroy her faith with a deprogrammer. So many
parent-child relationships are dysfunctional in the world. So many
parent-child relationships have been healed in the church. However, Jesus
said that there would still be occasional times of division (Matt 10:34-36).
Thirdly, the most potentially damaging part was the attack on the integrity
of Kip McKean. While showing a picture of the apartment complex where Kip
and Elena live and intentionally and deceitfully presenting the entire
twelve-unit structure as the McKean home, the reporter gave this voice-over,
"We don't know what he is giving (for his church contribution), but he sure
is getting a heck of a lot including this nearly half million dollar home in
LA which the ICC owns and provides him." Once again, like much of the
program, we see the malicious use of half-truths. The church's purchase
price was $483,000, but it has only 2000 square feet and three bedrooms -
not large at all for a family with three teenage children.
To a college student or single adult or someone not familiar with LA real
estate prices, it may sound expensive; but that is just what real estate
costs in West LA and many other parts of LA. The picture implied that it was
the McKean house; in fact, the picture includes twelve apartments. The ICC
purchased the apartment as a parsonage, and the McKeans pay
fair-market-value rent.
Kip and Elena own no real estate. There is an increasing attempt by our
enemies to convince people that Kip and all ministers are living high while
the ordinary member sacrifices to fuel our lifestyle. Earlier last year we
commissioned an independent lawfirm in Washington DC who specializes in
non-profit groups to do a study on our salary and benefits package for all
of our US employees (including the McKeans). Enclosed is a copy of the
letter, dated January 5, 1999, with the results of their study. Let me quote
their closing paragraph.
"During the course of our review we noted that the compensation of your
ministry leadership tends to be less than what is provided for comparable
positions in churches of similar size and location. In addition, we found
that other employees, such as administrative, secretarial, and other staff
positions, were compensated on the higher side of the reasonable range. The
result appears to be a more equitable compensation structure than is typical
of comparable organizations."
The power of this letter is obvious. We have already posted it on the
website along with a link to the latest audited financials of the LA church.
Use this information freely.
As we approach the twentieth anniversary of the Movement and as we approach
the beginning of a new millennium, let us thank God for bringing us this
far. Let us not be distracted by the real enemy, who is Satan; but let us
keep our eyes on the Cross and press on toward the goal of an evangelized
world with renewed zeal and reliance on God. And to him be the glory!
Al Baird
andy...@my-dejanews.com
"Rex Geissler" <r...@greatcommission.com> wrote:
> From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird responded
> to the Fox Files video:
>
> Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement...
>
> Three and a half years have passed since MTV, our last negative nation-wide
> television show. Now that God is blessing our renewed efforts on college
> campuses, persecution can be expected to follow. And it has. Last Thursday
> night, FOX Files aired a very negative segment about the International
> Churches of Christ (ICC) entitled "Cults on Campus." FOX Files is a
> sensationalist, "National Enquirer" type show, as was evidenced by the
> sexually explicit segments that we were sandwiched between - "Gay
> Gangbangers" and "Pornography on the Internet."
>
> As is typical of every negative program that has been produced about the
> ICC, the producers spend several months interviewing people opposed to the
> church. Then a couple of weeks before the show airs, they come to us to get
> a few sound bites so as to appear to be fair and objective. Even under these
> circumstances, getting our few, badly-edited words aired is better than
> their being able to say that we refused to comment. FOX Files was the most
> negatively biased (14 minutes of negative in a 15 minute show) and dishonest
> television program that we have dealt with (Deceitful reporting using lies
> and hidden cameras, purposefully creating false impressions through visual
> images, not giving us a chance to respond to most of their negative
> allegations, and repeatedly editing my answers out of context).
I wonder what Al would say regarding how the ICC chopped up that Singapore
Court ruling to make it more pro-ICC?
A 2,000 square foot condo going for $483,000 WOW, must be one nice area. I
don't know about most other places, but we live in a pretty good area, I
would say nicer than most. However 2,000 square foot homes in this area go
for about half as much.
Just my thoughts
Andy
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
petros
>
> From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird responded
> to the Fox Files video:
>
> Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement...
>
> Three and a half years have passed since MTV, our last negative nation-wide
> television show. Now that God is blessing our renewed efforts on college
> campuses, persecution can be expected to follow.
Again, typical ICC mentality: using the "persecution" label for anything
not favorable to the organization.
> And it has. Last Thursday
> night, FOX Files aired a very negative segment about the International
> Churches of Christ (ICC) entitled "Cults on Campus." FOX Files is a
> sensationalist, "National Enquirer" type show, as was evidenced by the
> sexually explicit segments that we were sandwiched between - "Gay
> Gangbangers" and "Pornography on the Internet."
Yes, it is a sensationalist show, and the other segments were indeed
pretty far-out. There is an overemphasis on sex. But let's discuss the
segment on the ICC.
> As is typical of every negative program that has been produced about the
> ICC, the producers spend several months interviewing people opposed to the
> church. Then a couple of weeks before the show airs, they come to us to get
> a few sound bites so as to appear to be fair and objective. Even under these
> circumstances, getting our few, badly-edited words aired is better than
> their being able to say that we refused to comment. FOX Files was the most
> negatively biased (14 minutes of negative in a 15 minute show) and dishonest
> television program that we have dealt with (Deceitful reporting using lies
> and hidden cameras, purposefully creating false impressions through visual
> images, not giving us a chance to respond to most of their negative
> allegations, and repeatedly editing my answers out of context).
Baird's comments sounded pretty lame, and can't imagine what sort of
"context" they could have been put into that would have made them sound
LESS lame. That said, I wouldn't have minded hearing more from Baird.
> The damage of the program comes from the insidious way that they weave lies,
> half-truths and truths. We make no apologies for expecting every disciple to
> be totally committed to God and his Kingdom, for helping everyone deal with
> every sin, for expecting every disciple to have the purpose of making
> disciples, for expecting every disciple to be in a discipling relationship,
> and for every disciple to give sacrificially and willingly of their time and
> money.
I do wish the segment had focused much more on these aspects of the ICC,
since they are really central to the matter. They are the core reason
why the ex-members are distraught. I doubt that anyone ever left the ICC
because they didn't like Kip's lifestyle, for instance. But you have to
realize these more crucial aspects of the church are not easy to depict
in the format of a twenty-minute tv show.
Much of the abuse and negativity of the ICC lifestyle only comes out
over a long period of time, in close personal contact with disciplers
and leaders. It is impossible to depict nearly any of this given the
contraints of television, especially Fox Files. They would have had to
have a reporter actually JOIN the church, and then follow him/her around
for weeks or months with a hidden camera to record everything. It is
just not possible. Thus the reliance on ex-members, who ought to know
what really goes on inside.
> However, three of their allegations are outright lies: that we encour
> age students to drop out of school, that we try to divide families, and that
> Kip McKean lives a rich lifestyle at the expense of sacrificial members.
I don't get into all of this, because I don't find any of it central to
the issue. I DO think the ICC divides families, by necessity. Members
just do NOT have time to spend with non-member family members. Unless
the whole family joins, there IS division of families on an emotional
and physical level. (Of course, the ICC may argue that it is those
members of the family who REFUSE to join the ICC who are being divisive,
but so be it.)
snip
> Second, the show pictured a distraught mother and father who could not
> understand their daughter leaving after her parents tried to have her
> deprogrammed. While I, as a parent, hurt for these parents (and we will try
> to bring reconciliation when we get more details), it is hard to believe
> that they do not understand that their actions scared their daughter away
> when they tried to destroy her faith with a deprogrammer. So many
> parent-child relationships are dysfunctional in the world. So many
> parent-child relationships have been healed in the church. However, Jesus
> said that there would still be occasional times of division (Matt 10:34-36).
Huh? You "hurt" for these parents, but you say it was "THEIR" actions
that hurt their daughter? How does this defend the ICC against
accusations that IT divides families? And you end by agreeing that there
will be occasional (sic) times of division. So, does the ICC divide
families or not?
> Thirdly, the most potentially damaging part was the attack on the integrity
> of Kip McKean. . . .
Again, I don't really care that much about what McKean's house looks
like. The $480K doesn't make that much difference to me. I heard about
all this LONG after I parted company with the ICC, and I'm sure that
most others did too. I'm sure Kip's lifestyle has VERY little to do with
the life of the average member. But then, WHY do you say this is the
"most potentially damaging part" of the tv story? Is Kip THAT important
in the ICC? Will potential converts really be turned off by seeing
Kip's apartment -- or will they be turned off by the the daily
intrusions into their personal life, the embarrassing coerced
confessions, the restrictions on dating and lifestyle, etc?
Okay, so I was wrong about the house photo. So Kip only lives in an
apartment in a twelve-unit block. Let's say it's an upper-middle class
existence. Whatever. The POWER is the real issue.
The Fox Files story could have been much more in-depth. I would have
LOVED to have seen Baird, or Kip for that matter, confront the
ex-members (like Kwan) in direct dialogue. It would have been great for
more a in-depth observation of what the average member's lifestyle is
like. But the show was negative because life in the ICC for these
people WAS negative.
dance...@yahoo.com
I am posting this response to Al Baird's comments on behalf of Michael Paglia,
who was a member of the Boston, MA and Columbia, SC ICC groups between
1989-1992. Mike does not have consistent internet access at this time, but
he did see the Fox Files report last Thursday -- so I printed Al's statement
about the program and shared it with Mike. Mike then asked me to post his
issues concerning Al's statement in this forum.
Sarah M.
Ex-ICC Triangle (1989-1994)
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/5147
(MIKE'S COMMENTS BEGIN BELOW:)
I agree that the media doesn't always do a fair job in getting both sides of
the story. I was recently interviewed by WGME-TV in Portland, ME for a story
about the ICC that aired on that CBS affiliate in November; Crystal Canney,
the reporter, conducted a three-hour interview with me and less than 60
seconds of that three-hour interview ended up on the air -- and one of my
quotes was taken out of context. 'Gee, I feel your pain, bro.'
I am very concerned about your heart, Mr. Baird. Your statement seems to be no
more than a cover up of some ugly truths which concern the ICC.
Lie #1:
You claim that the ICC encourages students to be their best, and to stay in
school. This has not been my experience with the ICC at all. More
specifically, I cannot even recall the number of times I saw/heard college
students say they'd been "encouraged" [tm] to drop out of school in order to
join the full-time ministry. One such ICC member was a housemate of mine who
attended the University of New Hampshire; he was ALL FIRED UP at being asked
to drop out of school because he had been led to believe being in the
full-time ministry was more important than finishing college. Al, you know
very well that everyone in the ICC is "encouraged" [tm] to "aspire to
leadership," [tm] whether they have the talents for the job or not. And those
who don't aspire to leadership, perhaps recognizing that leadership is not
where their talents lie, are still considered "unspiritual" [tm] in the ICC.
If ICC leadership activities (or any other activities for that matter) are
perceived to be interfering with an ICC member's "seeking first 'the
kingdom,'" well, guess which one has to go? Al, I'm not telling you anything
I believe you aren't very well aware of.
Lie #2:
You claim that the ICC doesn't break up families; besides the myriad examples
which are shared here and elsewhere, I have a personal account to share with
you. My family was already "dysfunctional" before my ICC involvement, but my
involvement in the ICC seemed to make things that much worse.
Before I joined the ICC, I'd been living with my dad; after I joined, my time
was so tied up with ICC activities, that I had hardly any time to spend with
him.(Yeah, he thought I was "too committed." Maybe I *should have been*
"committed" for ever getting involved with the ICC). My dad even came to a
Bible Talk, to check it out, but he saw through the ICC's game -- three years
before I was able to see it. I therefore pushed him away, because he wasn't
interested in being a part of "the 'kingdom'."
My mother is another story altogether. I was "re-studied with," and my
"salvation was on hold" for six months while I was "associated" (loosely, I
guess) with the ICC in Columbia, SC. At the time, I was really 'struggling'
over being strung out for such a long time. At length, my zone leader, Al
Creewell [sp?], being convinced that I wasn't ready to become a member of
"the 'kingdom'," gets out my 'sin list' (you know about those, of course) and
asks me about my relationship with my mother. Al asks me repeatedly if I love
my mother... I kept saying 'yes,' but Al C. knows I have some ambivalent
feelings about my mother because she'd molested me when I was younger (but I
can't say that I 'hate' her). But Al C. *decided for me* that I hated my
mother, and then forced me to go with Tony Zoerb, my "Discipler," to tell my
mother that I hated her -- because Al C. felt that I needed to "confess this
sin" (which I'd kept saying I wasn't feeling) before I could "become a
disciple." I say "forced" me, because in his mind, and consequently in mine,
it was a "salvation issue."No, Al C. didn't hold a literal gun to my head --
he simply portrayed himself as having the authority to grant/withhold my
'salvation,' and I foolishly gave him that power over me. Al B., you know
full well that this stolen "authority" is an integral part of the ICC's modus
operandi. I will never forget the look on my mother's face when, as directed,
I told her that I hated her. Great way to bring families back together, Al.
Remember, my "salvation" was on the line here.
Lie #3:
I'll keep this one short and sweet. Though I left the in 1992, I've been in
ICC leaders' homes in 1998 -- to be specific, the homes of Bob & Laurie
Tranchell and Willie & Tonya Flores. These people seem to be getting by QUITE
WELL. What ever happened to "The One-Suitcase Challenge"??? (I didn't ask
them how they were eating, but I feel certain that ramen noodles weren't on
the menu). Whether Kip is living in an apt./condo in Pacific Palisades or a
mansion in Pacific Palisades -- he IS living in a pretty nice neighborhood.
Would Jesus live there? It's certainly much nicer than most rank-and-file ICC
members will ever be able to afford. The sad part is that it's apparently
financed by the contributions of people who are already unreasonably
'challenged' to keep up with/increase their contributions to the ICC.
I shall be discussing these things and more on my website, as soon as I have
more consistent computer access and can "tweak things up" a bit. These are
hurtful admissions for me, and I find it offensive that you apparently find
nothing wrong with the way authority, and many other issues, are handled by
your so-called "church."
From One Who Wised Up,
Michael Paglia
END
Graham Cluley
> From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird
> responded to the Fox Files video:
>
> Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement...
<snip!>
Hi Rex
Is there an equivalent to the Broadcasting Complaints Commission in the
USA? Maybe you should suggest to the ICC that they lodge an official
complaint to it.
That's what the London Church of Christ did after the BBC Newsnight
investigation a few years ago. Of course, it all went a bit pear-shaped
for them as the evidence mounted up and the hearings were heard (classic
lines from LCC elder John Partington, for example, claiming to the
commission that he'd never read "Shining like Stars"!). You can read the
Broadcasting Complaints Commission's official judgement at
http://www.ftech.net/~hamrag/newsnt.txt
Okay, so the London Church of Christ botched up and perhaps should have
kept their head down. But if Al Baird thinks the ICC has been treated
badly by the media then I think he should make an official complaint to a
body which monitors media activity. After all, if I was a member of the
ICC I would expect Al Baird to know a thing or two about how the media
operates after all the years he has been dealing with them, and I would
expect the ICC to complain in the loudest strongest terms if they feel
they have been treated badly.
Just posting a message on their website which only a handful of people
will see doesn't seem to me to be the way to evangelise the world. The
ICC have got a major media crisis here - a serious public perception
problem all around the world. Joe Public seems to think they're a cult
after hundreds of investigations into the group. That's bad news for the
ICC. When are they going to fix it?
When is Al Baird going to get his act together and start putting the
record straight? If you're looking for a media advisor to replace Al let
me know. I have some experience in these matters.
--
Graham Cluley [email: ham...@cix.co.uk]
For information on the ICC check out: http://www.tolc.org
ICC = International Churches of Christ
Jaz
>One grim day, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>On 28 Jan 1999 19:13:18 -0000, san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley")
>>wrote:
>>
>>> When is Al Baird going to get his act together and start putting the
>>> record straight?
>>
>>
>>> If you're looking for a media advisor to replace Al let
>>> me know. I have some experience in these matters.
>>
>>(TM) whom I'd consider, were I to hire a ranting lunatic. (Sardonic
>>humor appeals to me, I suppose.)
>
>
>Is this a first? The 1997 LA Annual Report (aka PR spin machine):
>
>http://www.kansascity.icoc.org/files/la_annual_report.pdf
>
>(it's an Acrobat file).
>
>Waiting for analysis and comments. When it comes to the ICC, the truth is
>found not in what is said, but in what is not said.
>
>Gintas
Sheesh! What a stooge! You know that annual reports are just puff pieces, to
make the shareholders warm and fuzzy.
Gintas
Jaz
Jaz
>make the shareholders warm and fuzzy.
>
>Gintas
Are you even thinking that ICC members are shareholders? More like suckers at
a carnival. And, BTW, you are right about the annual report--fluff.
Gintas
Jaz
Of course, I'm always right!
Gintas
ch...@icat.com
eng...@my-dejanews.com
> > From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird
> > responded to the Fox Files video:
> >
> > Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement...
>
> me know. I have some experience in these matters.
>
> Graham Cluley [email: ham...@cix.co.uk]
Joe Public *may* be thinking that the wacky people are the ones sponsoring and
fanning into flame the sensationalistic media coverage.
The way Nero treated Christians actually served to change public perception
about Christians-- for the better. People had pity on the Christians and
realized Nero was the nut.
I think Al's doing a great job. Do the critics get all excited that the ICC
was slammed on a show that featured gay gangs and Internet pornography? Does
this lend credibility to the criticisms? Maybe Geraldo will find another Al
Capone vault and the critics can get some air time on that show, too. ;/
(BTW, since you're from "over there," Capone was a Chicago gangster. A sealed
vault was found and Geraldo promosed to open it on live TV with much hoopla.
Would there be bodies? Loot? The day arrived, and the vault was opened, only
to discover *nothing* inside-- except an old beer bottle, if I'm, not
mistaken. Can you say laughingstock?)
Do you really think such media "hit jobs" have any chance of addressing any
significant issues in the ICC? I think they serve to discredit whatever
legitimate criticisms one may have.
John Engler
Denver Church of Christ
Calvin Kwan
Rex Geissler wrote:
> From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird responded
> to the Fox Files video:
>
> Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement..
> Three and a half years have passed since MTV, our last negative nation-wide
> television show. Now that God is blessing our renewed efforts on college
> campuses, persecution can be expected to follow. And it has. Last Thursday
> night, FOX Files aired a very negative segment about the International
> Churches of Christ (ICC) entitled "Cults on Campus." FOX Files is a
> sensationalist, "National Enquirer" type show, as was evidenced by the
> sexually explicit segments that we were sandwiched between - "Gay
> Gangbangers" and "Pornography on the Internet."
Did the other subject titles prove that Fox Files portrayal of the ICC is
anything but truthful? Lets stick to the story on the ICC.
> As is typical of every negative program that has been produced about the
> ICC, the producers spend several months interviewing people opposed to the
> church. Then a couple of weeks before the show airs, they come to us to get
> a few sound bites so as to appear to be fair and objective. Even under these
> circumstances, getting our few, badly-edited words aired is better than
> their being able to say that we refused to comment. FOX Files was the most
> negatively biased (14 minutes of negative in a 15 minute show) and dishonest
> television program that we have dealt with (Deceitful reporting using lies
> and hidden cameras, purposefully creating false impressions through visual
> images, not giving us a chance to respond to most of their negative
> allegations, and repeatedly editing my answers out of context).
Hmmm... 14 minutes of negative in a 15 minute show? Well, that is 1 more minute
than the ICC ever gave me when they "marked" me.
Al Baird is lying here... Fox did not approach Al Baird a couple of weeks before
the show aired. They first try to contact Al Baird about 2-3 week before
Christmas, which would make that more than 1 month before the show aired. They
only interviewed me about a week before they started contacting the ICC.
Furthermore, I spoked to the producers at Fox today. They emphatically told me
that Al Baird even set a time limit for himself. Al Baird told the producers
ahead of time that he would only be interviewed for about 40 minutes. He was
interviewed for about 40 minutes and ended up with about 15-20 minutes of film
footage. And Al Baird has the nerve to accuse Fox of not giving him equal
time? He also refused to give detail answers to the questions asked and instead
he would only give one to two sentence answers. The producers also emphatically
denies editing Al Baird's comments in order to take it out of context. It is
kind of hard to edit a one to two sentence answer.
The interviewer would ask a question regarding the ICC practices and Al Baird
would give a one to two sentence answer denying it, then hidden camera footage
would show that in fact the ICC does practice it. Would Al Baird like to give
us specifics as to which of his answers were taken out of context?
> The damage of the program comes from the insidious way that they weave lies,
> half-truths and truths. We make no apologies for expecting every disciple to
> be totally committed to God and his Kingdom, for helping everyone deal with
> every sin, for expecting every disciple to have the purpose of making
> disciples, for expecting every disciple to be in a discipling relationship,
> and for every disciple to give sacrificially and willingly of their time and
> money. However, three of their allegations are outright lies: that we encour
> age students to drop out of school, that we try to divide families, and that
> Kip McKean lives a rich lifestyle at the expense of sacrificial members.
Who asks them to apologize for expecting every disciple to be totally committed
to God and his Kingdom? Fortunately, the ICC is NOT God and IS NOT HIS
Kingdom. The most I can say is that they are *part* of God's Kingdom. Which
however is still very debatable.
> First, we expect every student to be the best student that he/she can be.
> Not only do we not encourage students to drop out of school; we want them to
> become better students after they become disciples. In December I received
> the results of a study done by Doug Jacoby about the grades of disciples on
> the sixty-nine campuses included in the US churches of the Comrades World
> Sector. The average cumulative grade point average was 3.0! (2.5 is
> considered average.) We are very proud of our students.
Well, I guess the members in the Long Beach campus ministry are less than
average. The cumulative GPA when I left was around 2.2
Fox never claimed that the ICC encourages students to drop out of school. They
only claimed that many have had to drop out because of their involvement with
the ICC. This can be substantiated by many many ex-members and even many
current members. The ICC does not have to encourage it. They might not promote
it verbally but their actions speaks much louder than words.
BTW, I have just asked some current members who is in the campus ministry and
they said that they have never taken such survey. They hadn't even heard of
such study done by Doug Jacoby.
> Second, the show pictured a distraught mother and father who could not
> understand their daughter leaving after her parents tried to have her
> deprogrammed. While I, as a parent, hurt for these parents (and we will try
> to bring reconciliation when we get more details), it is hard to believe
> that they do not understand that their actions scared their daughter away
> when they tried to destroy her faith with a deprogrammer. So many
> parent-child relationships are dysfunctional in the world. So many
> parent-child relationships have been healed in the church. However, Jesus
> said that there would still be occasional times of division (Matt 10:34-36).
This is perhaps the most insensitive and outrageous statement I have ever
heard. Al Baird has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. I was in
Montana with Kyle Degge for that intervention. I have met the parents and the
whole family. What happen was the parents asked the daughter if she would be
willing to speak to some former members. Kyle, I and another former member was
waiting about a few miles away. We were waiting for an okay from the parents to
come over. Kyle made it specifically clear to the family that there will be no
coersion whatsoever. The family needed to get the full consent and agreement
from the daugther and that she has total freedom and control over her
environment. Meaning she can use the phone at anytime, leave the house at
anytime, go anywhere at anytime as she pleases. That would be the agreement
under which the intervention would take place.
The daughter instead ran out of the house bare footed like she was running away
from a rapist. The whole family, grandparents, brother and parents just stood
there in shock and in tears. Her parents is one of the most loving and caring
people I have ever met. When I spoke to them later, it just broke my heart to
see how much they love their child. They could not understand how they could
have lost their daughter to a group of people she barely knew. They had a great
relationship with the daughter prior to her joining the ICC. This was evident
by the testimony of her childhood best friend as well as her brother and
grandparents. Every family has its ups and downs as far as relationship is
concern, however, knowing the Esps gave me the impression that most children
would be blessed to have parents like them. IMO, there aren't enough loving
parents like the Esps in this world.
Afterwards, Kyle, I and the other former member spend days with the family. We
cried together. We talked through the pain and hurt. Kyle did some family
counseling to help them heal through this process. It was hard for all of us.
It was hard for me to witness the heart break of the family. Since I had only
left the ICC for a few weeks, I received a quick reality check as to exactly
what type of destructive group I had participated in.
If any of you must know, the Esps began to worry about their daughter when she
suddenly began to receive terrible grades in school, alienated all of her
childhood friends, and began to be very distant towards the family . All of
these issues would concern just about every parent I know.
"...when they tried to destroy her faith with a deprogrammer"? Give me a
break! Kyle Degge is currently a minister and a very devoted father and
husband. Destroy her faith in what? Kyle certainly would not destroy her faith
in God. A matter of fact, when I participated in this intervention, I had only
left the ICC about a month. I had lost a lot of my faith in God and other
Christians. I almost gave up on God altogether. I thought I would never step
foot in another church again. Kyle was instrimental in restoring my faith in
God. The stories that he would tell about his relationship with God was
inspiring. His knowledge of the bible was such that it helped me have a much
better understanding of God. Those three days that I spent with Kyle was almost
like an exit counseling for myself. Kyle is a very loving and gentle man. He
is a counselor by nature. And Kyle is NOT a deprogrammer. Al Baird knows
better. He is flat out misleading his church!
If anything Kyle would have helped the daughter with her faith in God as well as
her relationship with her parents. Al Baird's response is sickening.
> Thirdly, the most potentially damaging part was the attack on the integrity
> of Kip McKean. While showing a picture of the apartment complex where Kip
> and Elena live and intentionally and deceitfully presenting the entire
> twelve-unit structure as the McKean home, the reporter gave this voice-over,
> "We don't know what he is giving (for his church contribution), but he sure
> is getting a heck of a lot including this nearly half million dollar home in
> LA which the ICC owns and provides him." Once again, like much of the
> program, we see the malicious use of half-truths. The church's purchase
> price was $483,000, but it has only 2000 square feet and three bedrooms -
> not large at all for a family with three teenage children.
You know, I was told many times by various current members that the condo was
purchased by a relative. What ever happened to that excuse? Also interesting
is that Al Baird describes it as an apartment complex. How does one purchase an
apartment unit? And for $483,000? No, it is a condominum complex! Is this an
evidence of "half-truths"?
> To a college student or single adult or someone not familiar with LA real
> estate prices, it may sound expensive; but that is just what real estate
> costs in West LA and many other parts of LA. The picture implied that it was
> the McKean house; in fact, the picture includes twelve apartments. The ICC
> purchased the apartment as a parsonage, and the McKeans pay
> fair-market-value rent.
So, why does Kip have to live in the most expensive part of LA? The homes in my
neighborhood ranges from around $150,000-$250,000. And I think I live in a
pretty nice suburban area. I think even Rex would agree with that, afterall we
are practically neighbors.
And again, twelve apartments? Its a condo! I have actually seen the
neigborhood. Any picture of the condo complex does not serve it justice.
> Kip and Elena own no real estate. There is an increasing attempt by our
> enemies to convince people that Kip and all ministers are living high while
> the ordinary member sacrifices to fuel our lifestyle. Earlier last year we
> commissioned an independent lawfirm in Washington DC who specializes in
> non-profit groups to do a study on our salary and benefits package for all
> of our US employees (including the McKeans). Enclosed is a copy of the
> letter, dated January 5, 1999, with the results of their study. Let me quote
> their closing paragraph.
Why don't Kip disclose his salary and the salary of other ministers in the ICC?
I know exactly how much the minister in my church make. That information is
published and given to all who wish for it. Why won't the ICC do that?
The problem again however is not how much the ministers make per se vs what
other minister in other churches make. As far as I am concern that is
irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that in the ICC every single member is
pressure and brow beaten to give their last penny. Some were told to skip
meals. Some were told to sell their cars and homes. Some were told to sell
their clothes. Some were told to sell blood plasma. At the same time, many top
upper echelon leaders would live in the best neighborhoods in town. Sending
their kids to private schools (Not just Kip, BTW).
I am curious as to exactly how many members currently in the ICC that could
afford to rent an apartment or purchase a home in Pacific Palisades? How about
Manhatten Beach (the McKeans former residence)? In Long Beach, while I was a
member, two of the ministers live in Belmont Shores. I personally only know of
a small hand full of members (maybe 10 out of appro. 200) that could afford to
live in that expensive area in Long Beach. Belmont shores is perhaps the most
expensive and affluent part of LB. It has a beautiful ocean view.
So, as far as I am concern, the number amount is irrelevant. Other churches
don't brow beat members into giving what they can't afford. I have never seen
that in any other churches. And in these other churches, the minister usually
live on par with the congregation as a whole. That however is not the case in
the ICC.
(Snip the rest of Al Baird's garbage)
You know, this is another illustration of typical ICC practice. When criticism
comes their way, instead of addressing the issues and attempting to figure out a
way to change their church for the better, the ICC leadership continues to shift
the blame, question the approach, and attack the messenger. It is always
everyone's fault but their own. Just deny it and ignore the questions asked.
Criticism is persecution and that proves they are "God's Kingdom".
To all of us ex-members, Al Baird's response should not surprise any of us.
Many of us have gone through the same things when we left the ICC. The blame
was shifted to us, our approach was questioned and our character was attacked.
No questions were answered. No compassion towards our experiences was
expressed. No objective look at their own indiscretions. No fair process of
determining wrong doing. We who dare question the status quo are the willing
tool of Satan. Satan has gotten a hold of our hearts and we need not to be
listened to. Our concerns were dismissed and our souls discounted. To them it
is just another casualty, so just move on. This has been the practice of the
ICC since its inception. The ICC has not changed and I doubt it ever will.
Calvin Kwan
====================================================
Research*Examine*Verify*Educate*Assist*Liberate http://www.reveal.org
Organization of Former Members of the International Churches of Christ
Southern California Hotline (562) 496-2691 or Voicemail (310) 990-9517
andy...@my-dejanews.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> When is Al Baird going to get his act together and start putting the
> >> record straight?
> >
> >
> >> me know. I have some experience in these matters.
> >
> >(TM) whom I'd consider, were I to hire a ranting lunatic. (Sardonic
> >humor appeals to me, I suppose.)
>
>
> http://www.kansascity.icoc.org/files/la_annual_report.pdf
>
> (it's an Acrobat file).
>
> Waiting for analysis and comments. When it comes to the ICC, the truth is
> found not in what is said, but in what is not said.
>
> Gintas
I looked at it yesterday, just for a few minutes, I will try to do more this
weekend. Here are some comments:
1. Lets look and contributions, they went up 15.89%. Lets assume that the
average member gives 10% and that average member had an salary increase of 4%
over that period but still gives 10% of income. Also assume that this is all
given based on pretax amounts. To get a 15.89% increase in contibutions we
need an increase of 11.43% in membership.
2. Salaries and related expenses (I will assume that related expenses are
payroll taxes, insurance and other benefits to employees) for management and
general for 1997 was 1,133,000 (down 8.11%), and they list 14 names that
appear to be the staff at the end. Please do the math, but remember that
benefits would be between 20% to 35% of salary. It is interesting to note
that the local ministry salary and related expenses increased by 22.46% in
the same period, from 5.92 to 7.25 million. It would be interesting to see
how many people this really covers.
It is interesting to see that while the church is allegedly growing the
actual support of the church (management and general) is shrinking (in terms
of salaries). But on the otherhand the local ministry (in terms of salary)
increases at a much faster rate. Conventional wisdom would say that the
salaries and related expenses would grow at a slower rate than the church
growth.
Just some observations
Andy
eng...@my-dejanews.com
Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
<snip>
>
> BTW, I have just asked some current members who is in the campus ministry and
> they said that they have never taken such survey. They hadn't even heard of
> such study done by Doug Jacoby.
That's because LA is not a part of the same world sector as Doug. As such, I
don't think they were part of the survey.
So do you think LA should track student grades?
Did it ever occur to you that you could equip her father to simply respect her
daughter's faith and fellowship and not try to undermine it?
She was with her whole family, grandparents, siblings, and with several
ex-members ready to ALL jump her case TOGETHER about her involvement in the
church? HOW IN THE WORLD IS THAT SHOWING RESPECT TO HER!!!!!
DON'T YOU GET IT?
What her family did was humiliate her in front of her extended family, then in
the press, then on national TV.
>
> "...when they tried to destroy her faith with a deprogrammer"? Give me a
> break! Kyle Degge is currently a minister and a very devoted father and
> husband. Destroy her faith in what? Kyle certainly would not destroy her
faith
> in God. A matter of fact, when I participated in this intervention, I had
only
> left the ICC about a month. I had lost a lot of my faith in God and other
> Christians. I almost gave up on God altogether. I thought I would never step
> foot in another church again. Kyle was instrimental in restoring my faith in
> God. The stories that he would tell about his relationship with God was
> inspiring. His knowledge of the bible was such that it helped me have a much
> better understanding of God. Those three days that I spent with Kyle was
almost
> like an exit counseling for myself. Kyle is a very loving and gentle man. He
> is a counselor by nature. And Kyle is NOT a deprogrammer. Al Baird knows
> better. He is flat out misleading his church!
If your point is that he should be called an "exit counselor" and not a
"deprogrammer," you'll have to excuse me for not buying that Al is being
deceitful.
>
> If anything Kyle would have helped the daughter with her faith in God as well
as
> her relationship with her parents. Al Baird's response is sickening.
What's sickening is the thought of a young adult going to her home for time
with her parents and being ambushed by her whole family and potentially at
least 3 strangers who all want to make her involvement in the church an
issue.
I don't doubt that these parents love their daughter, but I'm amazed that
someone could persuade them that this mob scene could do anything but
humiliate, embarass and hurt this young woman.
So how many people were going to be there to cut down the ICC? And how many
were going to be there to defend it?
Instead of blaming the ICC, Calvin, why don't you just recognize that in
situations where parents feel distant from their child, the best policy to to
respect and love the child, and to respect the child's beliefs? Even Rick
Bauer warns about this in his book!
Wouldn't a lot of pain have been saved if this had been done?
By the way, how much money did all of this cost Mr. Esp? Just curious.
<snip>>
> (Snip the rest of Al Baird's garbage)
<snipped the rest of Calvin's ....>
John Engler
Denver Church of Christ
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
mi...@spurgeon.net
gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> >One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> >>One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> >>>One grim day, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>>On 28 Jan 1999 19:13:18 -0000, san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley")
> Of course, I'm always right!
That's why you're a leader...
scha...@gold.tc.umn.edu
eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <36B16D9C...@reveal.org>,
> Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > BTW, I have just asked some current members who is in the campus ministry
and
> > they said that they have never taken such survey. They hadn't even heard of
> > such study done by Doug Jacoby.
>
> That's because LA is not a part of the same world sector as Doug. As such, I
> don't think they were part of the survey.
>
> So do you think LA should track student grades?
What's this "Comrades World Sector"?
Steve
<snipped>
James A. Robbins
> I looked at it yesterday, just for a few minutes, I will try to do more this
> weekend. Here are some comments:
>
> 1. Lets look and contributions, they went up 15.89%. Lets assume that the
> average member gives 10% and that average member had an salary increase of 4%
> over that period but still gives 10% of income. Also assume that this is all
> given based on pretax amounts. To get a 15.89% increase in contibutions we
> need an increase of 11.43% in membership.
>
> 2. Salaries and related expenses (I will assume that related expenses are
> payroll taxes, insurance and other benefits to employees) for management and
> general for 1997 was 1,133,000 (down 8.11%), and they list 14 names that
> appear to be the staff at the end. Please do the math, but remember that
> benefits would be between 20% to 35% of salary. It is interesting to note
> that the local ministry salary and related expenses increased by 22.46% in
> the same period, from 5.92 to 7.25 million. It would be interesting to see
> how many people this really covers.
>
> It is interesting to see that while the church is allegedly growing the
> actual support of the church (management and general) is shrinking (in terms
> of salaries). But on the otherhand the local ministry (in terms of salary)
> increases at a much faster rate. Conventional wisdom would say that the
> salaries and related expenses would grow at a slower rate than the church
> growth.
>
> Just some observations
> Andy
Something that stood out with me was the fact that the ICC
is a separate organization than the LAICC. Who are the
employees of the ICC? Is Kip and employee of the LAICC,
the ICC or is he double dipping as an employee of both?
Note: I have no knowledge of this and am not trying to
imply anything. I'm just curious.
--
James A. Robbins
Senior Design Engineer / Network Engineer
The Ohio State University Chemistry Department
robb...@osu.edu
eng...@my-dejanews.com
>
> What's this "Comrades World Sector"?
>
I don't know. I am fairly sure that the DC church is a part of the "British
Commonwealth" WS. Maybe it's an alias, or a new name.
Jaz
>In article <78spia$pol$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> mi...@spurgeon.net wrote:
>> In article <78reqi$b...@journal.concentric.net>,
>> gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
>> > One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
>> > >One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
>> > >>One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
>> > >>>One grim day, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > >>>>On 28 Jan 1999 19:13:18 -0000, san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley")
>>
>> > Of course, I'm always right!
>>
>> That's why you're a leader...
>
Call 1-900-U-GROVEL and find out!
Gintas
mi...@spurgeon.net
eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Do you really think such media "hit jobs" have any chance of addressing any
> significant issues in the ICC? I think they serve to discredit whatever
> legitimate criticisms one may have.
As long as you explain them as 'hit jobs' and fail to see why they were done
at all, you'll never understand.
Or correct the problems.
And that becomes the problem.
For 30 years.
Mike Spurgeon
TUBEFLAT
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
mi...@spurgeon.net
mi...@spurgeon.net wrote:
> In article <78reqi$b...@journal.concentric.net>,
> gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >>One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >>>One grim day, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>>>On 28 Jan 1999 19:13:18 -0000, san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley")
>
> > Of course, I'm always right!
>
> That's why you're a leader...
Or you're always right because you're a leader...
mi...@spurgeon.net
mi...@spurgeon.net wrote:
> In article <78reqi$b...@journal.concentric.net>,
> gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >>One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >>>One grim day, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>>>On 28 Jan 1999 19:13:18 -0000, san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley")
>
> > Of course, I'm always right!
>
> That's why you're a leader...
Or you *think* you're always right because you're a leader...
mi...@spurgeon.net
mi...@spurgeon.net wrote:
> In article <78reqi$b...@journal.concentric.net>,
> gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >>One grim day, gin...@concentric.net (Jaz) wrote:
> > >>>One grim day, chro...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>>>On 28 Jan 1999 19:13:18 -0000, san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley")
>
> > Of course, I'm always right!
>
> That's why you're a leader...
What *are* the Super-True Churches teachings on this?
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
mi...@spurgeon.net
> By the way, how much money did all of this cost Mr. Esp? Just curious.
Now *you're* being an insensitive S.O.B., John...
You ask people how much their funeral costs, also?
ka...@my-dejanews.com
My understanding is that one is the "corporate office" with administrators
for the world sectors, office personnel, etc. The LA church is like a
"branch office" that just happens to be in the same city as the "corp.
office". I could be wrong, but this is why there are so many "administators"
in LA.
All the regional ICC churches pay homage (and money) to the "corp. office".
I would think that Kip and Al would be paid in this way.
Just my attempt at explaining it in laymens terms, if I'm even right!
> --
> James A. Robbins
> Senior Design Engineer / Network Engineer
> The Ohio State University Chemistry Department
> robb...@osu.edu
>
Kathy
EX-member, Denver COC (ICC)
Test5144
>From: eng...@my-dejanews.com
>Date: 1/29/99 7:27 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <78sjvq$kc1$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
>In article <36B16D9C...@reveal.org>,
> Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
><snip>
>>
>> BTW, I have just asked some
(snipped)
>What's sickening is the thought of a young adult going to her home for time
>with her parents and being ambushed by her whole family and potentially at
>least 3 strangers who all want to make her involvement in the church an
>issue.
>
ha,ha,ha. John, I laughed so loud at this, I think that I woke my 2 year old up
in the next room!!! Your feined affrontery at this loving family intervention
is most amusing. If she were addicted to drugs or alcohol, such actions by her
family would be most reasonable and common place even to you, but when she is
found to have an addiction to ICC churchocity, you complain at her family's
actions!!! How hypocritical!!! You would think nothing of a 10 to 1
confrontation of leaders to one who was thinking of leaving the church would
you??? Can you say 'Breaking Session'??? I knew you could!!
And the funniest thing, was your use of the phrase "make her involvement in the
church AN ISSUE" (my emphasis). Mind you, they did not pelt her with rocks,
nor hack her to peices with a machette, nor riddle her body with gun-fire--they
merely made church involvment an issue!!! AAAAAAhhhhhhh!!!!
My goodness, no wonder she ran screaming from the house barefoot!!!!
John, I would not want you interpreting any Mother Goose stories for my
children. You would give them nightmares, and I would have to shell out mega
bucks for the psycho-analysis that they would need later on.
Your two-faces on this issue are so plain, you should join a side-show as a
'Still connected Siamese Twins Exhibit'.
Talk about scary!!!
testing 1 2 3 ()
Graham Cluley
> In article <78qcse$pa6$1...@plutonium.compulink.co.uk>,
> san...@cix.co.uk ("Graham Cluley") wrote:
> > Rex writes:
> > > From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird
> > > responded to the Fox Files video:
> > >
> > replace Al let me know. I have some experience in these matters.
> >
> > Graham Cluley [email: ham...@cix.co.uk]
>
>
> Joe Public *may* be thinking that the wacky people are the ones
> sponsoring and fanning into flame the sensationalistic media
> coverage.
>
> The way Nero treated Christians actually served to change public
> perception about Christians-- for the better. People had pity on
> the Christians and realized Nero was the nut.
I see a parallel in the way some ICC members (Roger for example?) make
wild barmy allegations about Catherine Hampton and others.
> I think Al's doing a great job.
Yes, so do I. But I'm not sure what side he's working for.
<snipped stuff about Al Capone>
So in a nutshell do you think the ICC should lodge an official complaint
about this broadcast? It would seem a more productive thing to do than
bunging a message up on their website..
--
Graham Cluley [email: ham...@cix.co.uk]
Graham Cluley
> Do the critics get all excited that the ICC was slammed on a
> show that featured gay gangs and Internet pornography?
I haven't seen the programme yet. It sounds like it's a pretty tabloid
TV show. That's regrettable, but that doesn't necessarily mean the issue
it is looking into isn't serious. After all, I understand the ICC
leaders are pretty strong on telling their members to avoid Internet
pornography, and they're well known for their views on homosexuality.
> Does this lend credibility to the criticisms?
I'd be more interested in the evidence presented by the programme rather
than the way it was presented. I heard that there was secret filming of
how disciplers talk to potential new recruits. It's likely that that
shows a truer picture of what goes on in reality than when the ICC know
they're being filmed.
> Maybe Geraldo will find another Al Capone vault and the critics can
> get some air time on that show, too. ;/
>
> (BTW, since you're from "over there," Capone was a Chicago gangster.
> A sealed vault was found and Geraldo promosed to open it on live TV
> with much hoopla. Would there be bodies? Loot? The day arrived, and
> the vault was opened, only to discover *nothing* inside-- except an
> old beer bottle, if I'm, not mistaken. Can you say laughingstock?)
I heard something about this. Sounds like a bit of fun to me. Did you
*seriously* think there would be something interesting inside? This
Geraldo chap sounds like a true showman.
Anyway, lets back on topic shall we?
> Do you really think such media "hit jobs" have any chance of
> addressing any significant issues in the ICC?
Well I haven't seen this programme. But I do know of some extremely good
investigations into the ICC, its practices, and its finances. Take for
instance the BBC Newsnight report. I think they may also alert potential
new members that the ICC is a highly controversial organization - and it
may be worthwhile checking out both sides of the argument before
committing the rest of your life to it.
> I think they serve to discredit whatever legitimate criticisms one
> may have.
The problem is that the easiest people to fix the ICC's problems are in
the ICC themselves. And a lot of these people seem to prefer to keep
their head in the sand and don't dare criticise their leaders for fear of
being rebuked.
If these documentaries help show the average ICC member that Al Baird
thinks its okay to lie and break the law to further the church (see the
Newsnight documentary), that it's alright to get visas illegally to enter
a country (ibid), that it's not a problem to only give 1% (one percent)
of contributions to benevolent causes then I think they will have served
their purpose.
Hmmm.. I wonder if Jesus would be living in Pacific Pallisades?
Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
: John Engler writes:
: I'd be more interested in the evidence presented by the programme rather
: than the way it was presented. I heard that there was secret filming of
: how disciplers talk to potential new recruits. It's likely that that
: shows a truer picture of what goes on in reality than when the ICC know
: they're being filmed.
I didn't see the Fox Files piece, but I'm told there was the usual
"hidden camera" footage where a Fox reporter deceptively posed as someone
interested in studying the Bible. Critics who want to paint an
embarrassing picture of the ICC don't care who they hurt or how many
times they have to lie. (After all, we're just "cult" members and so we
should not be afforded the basic human rights and courtesies that "normal
people" enjoy.)
What's more, this kind of unethical journalism has proven to be
completely unnecessary in the ICC's case. In the "Living With The Enemy"
series on BBC television, the ICC *invited* the cameramen in to film
disciples teaching the study series, above board, with no tricks and
deception.
I have, in the past, called upon TOLC and other anti-ICC groups to delete
from their sites any references, links, or usage of media pieces
involving this type of unethical "hidden camera" footage, or news
accounts where a reporter pretended to be interested in the church, lied
throughout the Bible studies ("So what do you do for a living?"), and
defrauded church members who befriended them--for the purpose of
betraying their trust. If REVEAL, TOLC, etc. disapprove of these
methods, they should take a stand against them.
There is plenty of critical material that has been acquired through
legitimate means; these "undercover" pieces do not add anything new to
the body of anti-ICC literature. There is no loss to your message or
weakening of your campaign. However, by doing this you would go a long
way in saying to the average member, "We respect your privacy and your
dignity, and although we believe your leaders to be practicing deception--
we ICC critics will not condone, endorse, or benefit from deceptive
reporting."
Roger Poehlmann
member, SF Church of Christ
(International Church of Christ)
ch...@icat.com
Poehlmann) wrote:
> I didn't see the Fox Files piece,
Ooh, an admission of ignorance.
> but I'm told there was the usual "hidden camera" footage where a Fox reporter
> deceptively posed as someone interested in studying the Bible.
How do you know the reporter wasn't interested?
> Critics who want to paint an embarrassing picture of the ICC don't care who they hurt
> or how many times they have to lie.
Yet Mr. Baird isn't going to lie, if there's any other way of doing
it.
> (After all, we're just "cult" members and so we should not be afforded the basic human
> rights and courtesies that "normal people" enjoy.)
That's funny, I've seen hidden camera pieces on groups that *weren't*
cults.
There goes your little theory.
> What's more, this kind of unethical journalism has proven to be
> completely unnecessary in the ICC's case. In the "Living With The Enemy"
> series on BBC television, the ICC *invited* the cameramen in to film
> disciples teaching the study series, above board, with no tricks and
> deception.
On the part of the cameraman, at least.
> I have, in the past, called upon TOLC and other anti-ICC groups to delete
> from their sites any references, links, or usage of media pieces
> involving this type of unethical "hidden camera" footage, or news
> accounts where a reporter pretended to be interested in the church, lied
> throughout the Bible studies ("So what do you do for a living?"),
"Want to play a game of volleyball?"
"No, we're not from the ICC."
"We're having an Ice Cream Social."
> and defrauded church members who befriended them--for the purpose of
> betraying their trust.
For the purpose of helping other people.
> If REVEAL, TOLC, etc. disapprove of these methods, they should take a
> stand against them.
Blah, blah, blah.
If *you* disapprove of deception, you should stop being deceptive.
> However, by doing this you would go a long
> way in saying to the average member, "We respect your privacy and your
> dignity, and although we believe your leaders to be practicing deception--
> we ICC critics will not condone, endorse, or benefit from deceptive
> reporting."
And I'm sure the ICC leaders would print out thousands of copies of
the statement and hand it out to the average member, saying, "This
isn't spiritual pornography anymore."
eng...@my-dejanews.com
> So in a nutshell do you think the ICC should lodge an official complaint
> about this broadcast? It would seem a more productive thing to do than
> bunging a message up on their website..
No, I wouldn't bother.
John Engler
Denver Church of Christ
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
dance...@hotmail.com
Are you forgetting, a far worse thing goes on in the ICC every single day!
Test5144 is so right -- you would think NOTHING of 10 relative strangers
ganging up on an ICC member for a Breaking session -- an ICC member would
typically justify it as "concern for that person's soul" or some such drivel!
Even First Principles isn't done one on one, but you must have several other
ICC lackeys to back you up in case the Potential Recruit poses a question
that your own faith doesn't cover! The PR can't voice a dissenting opinion
during his/her study of FP without having the other people in the study there
shaking their heads, tsk, tsk, "are you really making 'the Word' your
standard?" "don't you care about what 'Jesus' [really the ICC] has done for
you?" Puh-leeeze!!! :-(((
John,"Blood is thicker than water." Why should this girl's blood relatives
NOT approach her with their concerns??? And what in the world would have made
that girl so frightened of her own flesh and blood??? Especially when, as the
Esps indicated, they'd always had a very positive relationship before she
joined the ICC???
I think you know the answer, John, and that you are simply in denial about
it. Your "church" is responsible for manipulating this girl, resulting in her
apparently abject fear of her own loving family members!
The Esps' situation is an excellent example of how the ICC so typically
drives wedges between families. The ICC doesn't try to bring families
together -- unless you can get every family member to fall in line behind the
ICC's teachings and practices!
Boy, how extremely infuriating it is that you would have the gall/the balls
to turn on your Mr. Moral Superiority act here, where the Esps are
concerned, and yet turn a blind eye to the SPIRITUAL GANG-BANGING that goes
on every single day in the ICC. I find it sooooooo apropos that the ICC
segment was postioned where it was on "Fox Files"!
Sarah M.
ex-ICC Triangle (1989-1994)
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/5147
terra...@my-dejanews.com
rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:
> Graham Cluley (san...@cix.co.uk) wrote:
> : John Engler writes:
>
> : I'd be more interested in the evidence presented by the programme rather
> : than the way it was presented. I heard that there was secret filming of
> : how disciplers talk to potential new recruits. It's likely that that
> : shows a truer picture of what goes on in reality than when the ICC know
> : they're being filmed.
>
> "hidden camera" footage where a Fox reporter deceptively posed as someone
> embarrassing picture of the ICC don't care who they hurt or how many
> should not be afforded the basic human rights and courtesies that "normal
> people" enjoy.)
>
> completely unnecessary in the ICC's case. In the "Living With The Enemy"
> series on BBC television, the ICC *invited* the cameramen in to film
> disciples teaching the study series, above board, with no tricks and
> deception.
>
> from their sites any references, links, or usage of media pieces
> involving this type of unethical "hidden camera" footage, or news
> accounts where a reporter pretended to be interested in the church, lied
> defrauded church members who befriended them--for the purpose of
> methods, they should take a stand against them.
>
> legitimate means; these "undercover" pieces do not add anything new to
> the body of anti-ICC literature. There is no loss to your message or
> way in saying to the average member, "We respect your privacy and your
> dignity, and although we believe your leaders to be practicing deception--
> we ICC critics will not condone, endorse, or benefit from deceptive
> reporting."
>
> member, SF Church of Christ
> (International Church of Christ)
>
there you (roger) go again, attacking the messenger while ignoring the
validity of the message. this must've been the standard message preached all
this week by all the stateside evangelists to their congregations: deflect
the essence of the broadcast by attacking its delivery without refuting the
charges levied. you know what's sad, most of us bought it...including the
fact the kip lives in a 1/2 mil home by emphasizing that it's not a house,
but a 14-unit condominium while overlooking the fact that it's still a 1/2
mil home he's living in.
KDirks7515
Re: Al Baird Sends Out Fox Files Statement
From: rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann)
Date: 1/30/99 9:57 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <rognmichF...@netcom.com>
Graham Cluley (san...@cix.co.uk) wrote:
:I'd be more interested in the evidence presented by the programme rather than
:the way it was presented. I heard that there was secret filming of how
:disciplers talk to potential new recruits. It's likely that that shows a
truer :picture of what goes on in reality than when the ICC know they're being
filmed.
>>I didn't see the Fox Files piece, but I'm told there was the usual "hidden
>>camera" footage where a Fox reporter deceptively posed as someone interested
>>in studying the Bible. Critics who want to paint an embarrassing picture of
>>the ICC don't care who they hurt or how many times they have to lie. (After
>>all, we're just "cult" members and so we should not be afforded the basic
>>human rights and courtesies that "normal people" enjoy.)
In other words, your response is in total ignorance of what was actually
reported. The entire scenario here you made up in your own mind. You tell
yourself lies that you make up in total ignorance, believe your own lies, and
then you can "honestly" promote these lies that you "believe".
How is someone doing investigative reporting of the ICC by posing as someone
interested in studying the Bible being deceptive? How are they supposed to get
the real evidence?
That would be like asking Clinton if he ever lied.
But let's talk about deception here Roger. How about those fellowship times?
Every time a member acts in any manner that just MIGHT be IMAGINED to cause a
visitor to not return is corrected for his lack of concern for lost souls.
That makes the entire fellowship a deception Roger.
How is camera footage and reporting on what they experienced a lie Roger?
And you were afforded the same rights as "normal people". If what the ICC
practices in the realm of religion were done in the realm of the professional
world, they would go to jail.
Getting hidden camera footage of a dentist who "does things" to female patients
while they are "under", while it should be done by the law, is not "deceptive"
or "unethical" Roger. All they have to do is show "justifiable cause" in order
to get the permission. And in the ICC, they have plenty of that.
And it was the ICC that violated the rights of the reporter. Asking the
reporter if she had ever done oral sex violates her right to privacy in a
manner that should be against the law. If a woman were asked that in a
Psychiatrist's or Psychologist's office, they should have a sexual harassment
lawsuit slapped on them so fast it ain't even funny.
>>What's more, this kind of unethical journalism has proven to be completely
>>unnecessary in the ICC's case. In the "Living With The Enemy" series on BBC
>>television, the ICC *invited* the cameramen in to film disciples teaching the
>>study series, above board, with no tricks and deception.
That was just hilarious Roger. What you are basically saying is that the ICC
does nothing embarrassing on camera when they know the cameras are there.
>>I have, in the past, called upon TOLC and other anti-ICC groups to delete
from >>their sites any references, links, or usage of media pieces involving
this >>type of unethical "hidden camera" footage, or news accounts where a
reporter >>pretended to be interested in the church, lied throughout the Bible
studies >>("So what do you do for a living?"),
Why would the answer to that have to be a lie Roger? Would it really set off
the paranoid "Roger Whiner Alert" if they answered "I work in journalism"?
>>and defrauded church members who befriended them
I didn't see where anyone was defrauded in the report. No one had their
private rights taken away. No member gave the reporters money or property.
All they did was gather information.
Even that one case that people got "up in arms" about where the BTL was
apparently confessing private sins was not that but she was suggesting things
that the reporter might confess. The problem is that the ICC is so ambiguous
and deceptive itself that that was not that clear in the report.
And speaking of all of that, the hidden camera footage was not all that
convincing anyway. I did not record the show but I watched it.
The most embarrassing parts for the ICC were when Al Baird was on camera for an
"open and above board" interview.
And did you ever consider that if the ICC were not unethical, deceptive,
defrauding and so on and were only really being "above board" themselves, there
would be no "hidden camera" footage that could possibly make the ICC look bad
in the situation?
>>--for the purpose of betraying their trust.
No Reger, it is for the purpose of gathering information.
>>If REVEAL, TOLC, etc. disapprove of these methods, they should take a stand
>>against them.
They do so. . .against the ICC.
>>There is plenty of critical material that has been acquired through
legitimate >>means; these "undercover" pieces do not add anything new to the
body of anti->>ICC literature.
Yes they do. They promote public awareness of the problem and hopefully keep
future ICC membership from going up.
You are being double minded here again Roger.
One minute you are saying that there aren't that many vocal people. The next
minute you cry foul (though personally I think it is "fowl") as soon as people
speak up.
The FOX report was indeed oversensationalized. And while I did not want my
kids to see the first and third segments, the sexual perversion aspect did
indeed fit the context.
>>There is no loss to your message or weakening of your campaign.
Every straw on the proverbial camel's back adds to the case.
>>However, by doing this you would go a long way in saying to the average
>>member,
But Roger, if YOU did not watch the broadcast, then why would the average
member.
Besides that, I thought there was no "clergy-laity" system in the ICC.
>>"We respect your privacy and your dignity, and although we believe your
>>leaders to be practicing deception--we ICC critics will not condone, endorse,
>>or benefit from deceptive reporting."
You raise a valid point.
A police officer has to break the law in order to exceed the speed limit to
catch a speeder.
Of course we respect your privacy and your dignity. It is the ICC that does
not do so. That is why we want you to get out.
>>Roger Poehlmann
>>member, SF Church of Christ
>>(International Church of Christ)
I still like the question more from the guy's perspective.
"Have you ever masturbated?"
"Well, there was this one time."
"Go on."
"I was working on this fishing boat where I was put in charge of keeping the
bait on the hooks. So I guess I am guilty of being a master baiting."
"No, I mean have you ever done something when you were by yourself?"
"Well, again there was this one other time when I was in high school."
"Go on."
"I was on the debate team and they wanted to see how we stood up against the
pressure of the entire crowd being against us on a subject. So I have indeed
mass debated."
Well guys, with that it is definitely time to close.
Thank you for listening,
Kevin Dirks.
Kevin Dirks
Calvin Kwan
eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <36B16D9C...@reveal.org>,
> Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > BTW, I have just asked some current members who is in the campus ministry and
> > they said that they have never taken such survey. They hadn't even heard of
> > such study done by Doug Jacoby.
>
> That's because LA is not a part of the same world sector as Doug. As such, I
> don't think they were part of the survey.
Who said anything about LA? Two of the students I talked to are in the East Coast.
> So do you think LA should track student grades?
No, not for the purpose intended. Long Beach actually did track student grades
while I was the administrator. The evangelist in Long Beach asked me to take a
survey of all the campus students regarding their education. A while back I posted
some of the data collected from that survey. One of which was the 2.2 Cumulative
GPA between all the students. After this I expressed concern with the evangelist
and my discipler. They gave one midweek sermon regarding grades and that was it.
Then back to campaign mode.
(snipped)
God forbid if your children ever get involve in an abusive relationship, drugs,
alcohol, and other destructive groups. I would really like to see you *respect*
their descision to do so and not even try to *undermine* it. You can love and
respect your children and at the same time be extremely concern about their
behavior. Most parents would do just about anything to help their children get out
of a destructive situation. The Esps were extremely concern about their daughter's
behavior. Her childhood friends were concern as well. They believe she was in
danger. They believe she was in trouble. There were also a lot more details to
this story that I shouldn't go into here in this ng but it is relevant to why the
Esps feel as if their daughter needed the intervention.
John, you obviously have never been involved in an intervention. The purpose of an
intervention is to give the power back to the person. To help the individual make
an inform descision. Her involvement in the ICC is not what is under microscope.
It is the teachings and practices of the ICC leadership that will be examined. It
is the history of the ICC that will be studied. It is the FP bible studies that
will be analysed. It is the practice of mind control techniques that will be
revealed.
As well, one of the purpose of the intervention is to restore communication between
the family and child. No one would have jump her case together about her
involvement in the ICC. I have been involved in a few of these and just about all
of them were calm discussions about various topics with each member of the family
sharing their true feelings about the situation. The member would also get their
chance to share their feelings as well. It is almost like a counseling session one
would have with a Psychologist but instead it is with a Christian Counselor.
BTW, the success rate of an exit-counseling is around 70-80%. These former members
that were successfully freed from the ICC would have a totally different description
of exit counseling. I personally know of a few people that were exit counseled and
they all describes it as painful at first but they all eventually thanked their
family for setting it up. They have said that they appreciate their family and that
they now understand why they did what they did.
The purpose of having her whole family there is because it is a *family
intervention*. The purpose of an exit couneslor isn't to simply get the person to
leave the Cult. Even if that was the end result, there is still a lot of healing
left to do between the family and child. That is why sometimes even if someone
already decided to leave the ICC, I would still recommend some sort of
exit-counseling. I have recommended either they go to Wellsprings or visit a
Christian Counselor. I would also recommend some sort of family counseling
involving the whole family as well as join a local support group.
> > "...when they tried to destroy her faith with a deprogrammer"? Give me a
> > break! Kyle Degge is currently a minister and a very devoted father and
> > husband. Destroy her faith in what? Kyle certainly would not destroy her
> faith
> > in God. A matter of fact, when I participated in this intervention, I had
> only
> > left the ICC about a month. I had lost a lot of my faith in God and other
> > Christians. I almost gave up on God altogether. I thought I would never step
> > foot in another church again. Kyle was instrimental in restoring my faith in
> > God. The stories that he would tell about his relationship with God was
> > inspiring. His knowledge of the bible was such that it helped me have a much
> > better understanding of God. Those three days that I spent with Kyle was
> almost
> > like an exit counseling for myself. Kyle is a very loving and gentle man. He
> > is a counselor by nature. And Kyle is NOT a deprogrammer. Al Baird knows
> > better. He is flat out misleading his church!
>
> If your point is that he should be called an "exit counselor" and not a
> "deprogrammer," you'll have to excuse me for not buying that Al is being
> deceitful.
Al Baird knows full well the difference between an exit counselor and a
deprogrammer. I think you know as well. A deprogrammer has a negative connotation
that brings images of kidnapping and abusive behaviors. An exit counseling is
voluntary with absolutely no coercsion whatsoever. It involves a free flow of
discussion and sharing of feelings between all those that are involve. The purpose
of depicting exit-counselors as deprogrammers serves one purpose, to bring fear into
the member. That is exactly what happened with the Esps daughter. If she knew what
an exit-counseling really was and that all of the team members are Christians. That
Kyle is a minister, a former evangelist in the ICC, a devoted father and husband.
That her parents love her and was concern about her. I wonder if she would still
have ran out of the house barefooted like she was running away from Satan. I wonder
who put that thought in her head. Al Baird knows full well what he is doing.
> > If anything Kyle would have helped the daughter with her faith in God as well
> as
> > her relationship with her parents. Al Baird's response is sickening.
>
> What's sickening is the thought of a young adult going to her home for time
> with her parents and being ambushed by her whole family and potentially at
> least 3 strangers who all want to make her involvement in the church an
> issue.
Ambushed? Were you there? They were having breakfast and the parents asked her if
she would be willing to speak to some former members. Your choice of words is
exactly the type of scare tactics leaders of your church is so good at. God forbid
if a parent ever bring up a subject that the child is uncomfortable with during
breakfast. Asked her to talk to some people. Boy, what evil are out there!
Give me a break! Ambushed? You are such a hypocrite. Would you have a problem if
a potential recruit walks into a room with two or three other people that they
didn't expect? How about a "struggling" member that walks into a "breaking
session"? At least in this case, the girl was told ahead of time what would happen
and permission was asked.
> I don't doubt that these parents love their daughter, but I'm amazed that
> someone could persuade them that this mob scene could do anything but
> humiliate, embarass and hurt this young woman.
What persuaded the Esps is the actions of your church. The fact that there daughter
was doing poorly in school. Dropped all of her childhood friends. Speak to the
family as if they are strangers and the ICC is her "true" family. As well as other
personality changes that they viewed as detrimental. This is what many parents of
ICC members is up against. This is why many are worried about their children's
involvement in the ICC.
Mob scene? There goes that choice of words again. Are these words used to "warn"
members about their own flesh and blood? Telling members to becareful that they
might get "ambushed" by a "mob"? Maybe kidnapped by their family?
> So how many people were going to be there to cut down the ICC? And how many
> were going to be there to defend it?
There are two sides to every story. With this girl, she has had two years of a one
sided story from the ICC. All the intervention does is give her three days of
another side. The final descision as to what she does with the information is up to
her solely.
How many people are there to spew the ICC doctrine during bible studies and how many
are going to be there questioning it? Give me a break. The hypocracy is
unbelievable.
> Instead of blaming the ICC, Calvin, why don't you just recognize that in
> situations where parents feel distant from their child, the best policy to to
> respect and love the child, and to respect the child's beliefs? Even Rick
> Bauer warns about this in his book!
Why shouldn't I blame the ICC? It is they who have driven this wedge between family
and child.
Kyle, I and the other former member would not have come over to the house without
her permission. She was told that and she still ran away from her parents like they
would somehow harm her in any way. I wonder who put those thoughts in her head?
Who was it that drove that fear of her parents in her?
Respecting and loving the child? It is because they love and respect their daughter
did they feel the necessity of going this length to free her from this destructive
organization. What loving parent would sit back and watch their child ruin their
life? What respectful parents would not communicate information they have gathered
about a destructive group their child belongs to? Would you try to help your
children in any way you can if you feel like they were in trouble or in danger of
any kind? I bet you would at least try.
> Wouldn't a lot of pain have been saved if this had been done?
> By the way, how much money did all of this cost Mr. Esp? Just curious.
I don't know, money was hardly the topic of conversation when I was in Montana.
mj...@my-dejanews.com
Graham Cluley
> In the "Living With The Enemy" series on BBC television, the ICC
> *invited* the cameramen in to film disciples teaching the study
> series, above board, with no tricks and deception.
Yes, and what an interesting programme it was! After years of denying
cameras into London Church of Christ meetings they changed their minds on
this one occasion.
The programme was fascinating (and in my opinion a much more revealing
view of the London Church of Christ than some of the other documentaries
that have taken place).
Of course the BBC weren't allowed to film everything during the
programme. Apparently they were not given permission to film members
spreading out their bank statements on a table for other members to
peruse.
You can read all about it at http://www.ftech.net/~hamrag/convcour.htm
Mark Templar, American leader of the British church, comes over
particularly badly in the programme I felt. At least he was prepared to
chat on camera however - whereas Kip McKean seems to always present his
stooge.
Graham Cluley
> : programme rather than the way it was presented. I heard
> : that there was secret filming of how disciplers talk to
> : potential new recruits. It's likely that that shows a truer
> : picture of what goes on in reality than when the ICC know
> : they're being filmed.
>
> I didn't see the Fox Files piece, but I'm told there was the
> usual "hidden camera" footage where a Fox reporter deceptively
> posed as someone interested in studying the Bible.
How do you know they were being deceptive? Maybe they *were* interested
in studying the Bible? I don't know - I haven't seen the programme or
spoken to the reporter. You haven't either - so I don't know how you can
work out if that was deceptive or not.
> Critics who want to paint an embarrassing picture of the ICC don't
> care who they hurt or how many times they have to lie.
But isn't it Al Baird of the ICC who has defended the ICC's breaking the
law to enter countries? Isn't it Al Baird of the ICC who thinks there
are situations where it's alright to lie? This seems to be what he said
on the BBC Newsnight investigation. Have you challenged Al on this one?
> (After all, we're just "cult" members and so we should not be
> afforded the basic human rights and courtesies that "normal
> people" enjoy.)
No no NO Roger!! I disagree. You *should* be afforded human rights and
courtesies.. especially as you are a cult member and they are regularly
trampled upon by the ICC leaders. I think members of your cult should be
given the freedom to read what they like, to meet whoever they like, to
discuss their concerns about the ICC if they wish. However, it seems
from the many testimonies we have read by former members, that they were
enormously pressured not to meet certain people, not to read certain
books, etc etc..
> What's more, this kind of unethical journalism
Unethical? The use of hidden cameras in investigative journalism is
unethical? Really? Do you have a reference for this? I see lots and
lots of serious investigative programmes that have used hidden cameras,
etc in an effort to discover the truth.
Did you see my message to Rex Geissler? I suggested that if he felt the
programme was bad he should encourage Al Baird (who definitely didn't
like the programme) to lodge an official complaint with the American
equivalent to the Broadcasting Complaints Commission? My giddy aunt -
you guys are trying to evangelise the world... there's no point you lying
down and taking all this persecution! You should fight back and complain
if you feel you were treated unfairly! So Roger you should tell your
leaders to complain about the programme rather than taking all this bad
press.
dance...@yahoo.com
mi...@spurgeon.net wrote:
> In article <78sjvq$kc1$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > By the way, how much money did all of this cost Mr. Esp? Just curious.
>
>
> You ask people how much their funeral costs, also?
Heh heh... maybe we could compare Kyle's fee with the amount of money the
Esps' daughter has given to the ICC. ;->~~
At least they knew what they were getting for their money. How many of us
could say the same of our ICC contributions? You think your contribution is
going for "spreading the Gospel," and later you find out that your leaders
just moved into a new home in a tony suburb. Sheesh.
Sarah M.
ex-ICC Triangle (1989-1994)
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/5147
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
eng...@my-dejanews.com
Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
>
>
> eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > In article <36B16D9C...@reveal.org>,
> > Calvin Kwan <cal...@reveal.org> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >
<snip>
Comparing involvement in the ICC to drugs and other destructive influences is
absurd.
>
> John, you obviously have never been involved in an intervention. The purpose
of an
> intervention is to give the power back to the person. To help the individual
make
> an inform descision. Her involvement in the ICC is not what is under
microscope.
> It is the teachings and practices of the ICC leadership that will be examined.
It
> is the history of the ICC that will be studied. It is the FP bible studies
that
> will be analysed. It is the practice of mind control techniques that will be
> revealed.
This is Clintonian doubletalk. Her involvement in the ICC is of no concern,
but the practices etc. of the ICC are! Yet you have highlighted HER behavior,
which has been attributed to her involvement with the church.
And all the things about the ICC that are being "examined" are being
"examined" from one point of view only, without rebuttal.
>
> As well, one of the purpose of the intervention is to restore communication
between
> the family and child. No one would have jump her case together about her
> involvement in the ICC. I have been involved in a few of these and just about
all
> of them were calm discussions about various topics with each member of the
family
> sharing their true feelings about the situation. The member would also get
their
> chance to share their feelings as well. It is almost like a counseling
session one
> would have with a Psychologist but instead it is with a Christian Counselor.
Restoring communication between parent and child is a noble objective. But I
don't see how bringing in three outsiders helps build trust-- it shows a
*conspiracy* to corner this person.
>
> BTW, the success rate of an exit-counseling is around 70-80%. These former
members
> that were successfully freed from the ICC would have a totally different
description
> of exit counseling. I personally know of a few people that were exit
counseled and
> they all describes it as painful at first but they all eventually thanked
their
> family for setting it up. They have said that they appreciate their family
and that
> they now understand why they did what they did.
I honestly hope they're thankful on Judgement day.
>
> The purpose of having her whole family there is because it is a *family
> intervention*. The purpose of an exit couneslor isn't to simply get the
person to
> leave the Cult. Even if that was the end result, there is still a lot of
healing
> left to do between the family and child. That is why sometimes even if
someone
> already decided to leave the ICC, I would still recommend some sort of
> exit-counseling. I have recommended either they go to Wellsprings or visit a
> Christian Counselor. I would also recommend some sort of family counseling
> involving the whole family as well as join a local support group.
Everyone can benefit from some counseling, IMO. But you present this whole
issue like involvement in the ICC is in the way of one having a decent
relationship with his family. I strongly dispute this.
A deprogramming is a rape, an exit counseling is a seduction. Yeah, I suppose
there's some difference. But the end result is the same.
I'm concerned about the attitude of superiority here. The whole idea is that
the "exit counselor" is right, and he (oops, I mean *they*) will persuade the
mark that he is "wrong."
It involves a free flow of
> discussion and sharing of feelings between all those that are involve. The
purpose
> of depicting exit-counselors as deprogrammers serves one purpose, to bring
fear into
> the member. That is exactly what happened with the Esps daughter. If she
knew what
> an exit-counseling really was and that all of the team members are Christians.
That
> Kyle is a minister, a former evangelist in the ICC, a devoted father and
husband.
> That her parents love her and was concern about her. I wonder if she would
still
> have ran out of the house barefooted like she was running away from Satan. I
wonder
> who put that thought in her head. Al Baird knows full well what he is doing.
I guess it depends if you'd rather be raped, seduced or left to live as
you have choosen.
>
> > > If anything Kyle would have helped the daughter with her faith in God as
well
> > as
> > > her relationship with her parents. Al Baird's response is sickening.
> >
> > What's sickening is the thought of a young adult going to her home for time
> > with her parents and being ambushed by her whole family and potentially at
> > least 3 strangers who all want to make her involvement in the church an
> > issue.
>
> Ambushed? Were you there? They were having breakfast and the parents asked
her if
> she would be willing to speak to some former members.
It was a conspiracy. The father had an agenda that the daughter knew nothing
about. Imagine her hurt to feel "set up" by hger own parents.
Your choice of words is
> exactly the type of scare tactics leaders of your church is so good at.
Calling the ICC an abusive, mind-control cult is the type of tactic you are so
good at. People read this stuff and believe it.
God
forbid
> if a parent ever bring up a subject that the child is uncomfortable with
during
> breakfast. Asked her to talk to some people. Boy, what evil are out there!
Asked her to talk to "some people?" Who flew in from hundreds of miles away.
Hired guns who have made a living out of denouncing the ICC to people,
"straightening out" people who have found God and a great fellowship in the
ICC. Who think they're right and you're wrong. Who have been retained by the
parents to get her out of the ICC.
"Some people?" Don't minimize this, Calvin. you make it sound like they're
talking to his golf buddies.
<snip>
>
> > I don't doubt that these parents love their daughter, but I'm amazed that
> > someone could persuade them that this mob scene could do anything but
> > humiliate, embarass and hurt this young woman.
>
> What persuaded the Esps is the actions of your church.
And what actions are these?
The fact that there
daughter
> was doing poorly in school. Dropped all of her childhood friends. Speak to
the
> family as if they are strangers and the ICC is her "true" family. As well as
other
> personality changes that they viewed as detrimental. This is what many
parents of
> ICC members is up against. This is why many are worried about their
children's
> involvement in the ICC.
>
> Mob scene? There goes that choice of words again. Are these words used to
"warn"
> members about their own flesh and blood? Telling members to becareful that
they
> might get "ambushed" by a "mob"? Maybe kidnapped by their family?
Telling young adults they're brainwashed and in a cult? Calvin, you're one of
hundreds of voices using the sensational language here. I'm one voice stating
another side of the issue.
And don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about being kidnapped.
If someone's had a bad experience in the ICC, I'd like to help them, too. If
a parent feels like their child in the ICC isn't treating them right, I'd like
to help too. But using sensational language doesn't help at all.
>
> > So how many people were going to be there to cut down the ICC? And how many
> > were going to be there to defend it?
>
> There are two sides to every story. With this girl, she has had two years of
a one
> sided story from the ICC.
Sounds like her parents had those two years, plus however many before that, to
have their side, too.
All the intervention does is give her three days of
> another side. The final descision as to what she does with the information is
up to
> her solely.
But if she disagrees with you, she's brainwashed, in a cult, serving the rich
and mean Kip McKean? That's a brainwashing technique-- disrespecting people if
they don't agree with you.
>
> How many people are there to spew the ICC doctrine during bible studies and
how many
> are going to be there questioning it? Give me a break. The hypocracy is
> unbelievable.
That's your defense to ganging up on people-- that someone else does it too,
so it must be ok. Your rage against the ICC has led you to abandon good sense
here.
>
> > Instead of blaming the ICC, Calvin, why don't you just recognize that in
> > situations where parents feel distant from their child, the best policy to
to
> > respect and love the child, and to respect the child's beliefs? Even Rick
> > Bauer warns about this in his book!
>
> Why shouldn't I blame the ICC? It is they who have driven this wedge between
family
> and child.
Read your Bible. S-A-T-A-N. Not the ICC. Not God.
>
> Kyle, I and the other former member would not have come over to the house
without
> her permission. She was told that and she still ran away from her parents
like they
> would somehow harm her in any way.
Maybe she felt scared, betrayed and embarassed. Or aren't "cult members"
allowed to have feelings and a sense of self-worth?
I wonder who put those thoughts in her
head?
> Who was it that drove that fear of her parents in her?
Maybe it was *them*. And their actions that were encouraged by these "exit
counselors."
>
> Respecting and loving the child? It is because they love and respect their
daughter
> did they feel the necessity of going this length to free her from this
destructive
> organization. What loving parent would sit back and watch their child ruin
their
> life? What respectful parents would not communicate information they have
gathered
> about a destructive group their child belongs to? Would you try to help your
> children in any way you can if you feel like they were in trouble or in danger
of
> any kind? I bet you would at least try.
You previously said the issue wasn't her involvement in the ICC. Now you say
it is. Gotcha.
Did they ever get the other side of the story? Did they ever visit the church
and research it with anything other than a jaundiced eye?
>
> > Wouldn't a lot of pain have been saved if this had been done?
>
> > By the way, how much money did all of this cost Mr. Esp? Just curious.
>
> I don't know, money was hardly the topic of conversation when I was in
Montana.
I wonder if the Fox reporter bothered to find that out.
John Engler
Denver Church of Christ
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Mike Spurgeon
eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Calling the ICC an abusive, mind-control cult is the type of tactic you are so
> good at. People read this stuff and believe it.
Eyes and ears, John. I have two questions. I am going to give you a set of
rather well known criteria.
Six criteria.
My questions:
1. During the time period where you are destroying whatever previous faith a
prospective member has, do you do any of the following six things.
2. If you do, why?
Six Conditions for Thought Reform Margaret Thaler Singer, Ph. D.
1.Keep the person unaware of what is going on and how she or he
is being changed a step at a time. Potential new members are
led, step by step, through a behavioral-change program without
being aware of the final agenda or full content of the group.
The goal may be to make them deployable agents for the leadership,
to get them to buy more courses, or get them to make a deeper
commitment, depending on the leader's aim and desires.
2.Control the person's social and/or physical environment;
especially control the person's time. Through various methods,
newer members are kept busy and led to think about the group
and its content during as much of their waking time as possible.
3.Systematically create a sense of powerlessness in the person.
This is accomplished by getting members away from the normal
social support group for a period of time and into an environment
where the majority of people are already group members. The
members serve as models of the attitudes and behaviors of the
group and speak an in-group language.
4.Manipulate a system of rewards, punishments and experiences in such
a way as to inhibit behavior that reflects the person's former
social identity. Manipulation of experiences can be accomplished
through various methods of trance induction, including leaders
using such techniques as paced speaking patterns, guided imagery,
chanting, long prayer sessions or lectures, and lengthy meditation
sessions.
5.Manipulate a system of rewards, punishments, and experiences in
order to promote learning the group's ideology or belief system
and group-approved behaviors. Good behavior, demonstrating an
understanding and acceptance of the group's beliefs, and compliance
are rewarded while questioning, expressing doubts or criticizing
are met with disapproval, redress and possible rejection. If one
expresses a question, he or she is made to feel that there is
something inherently wrong with them to be questioning.
6.Put forth a closed system of logic and an authoritarian structure
that permits no feedback and refuses to be modified except by
leadership approval or executive order. The group has a top-down,
pyramid structure. The leaders must have verbal ways of never
losing.
(Singer, 1995)
Edi...@hotmail.com
> > John, you obviously have never been involved in an intervention. The
purpose
> of an
> > intervention is to give the power back to the person. To help the
individual
> make
> > an inform descision. Her involvement in the ICC is not what is under
> microscope.
> > It is the teachings and practices of the ICC leadership that will be
examined.
> It
> > is the history of the ICC that will be studied. It is the FP bible studies
> that
> > will be analysed. It is the practice of mind control techniques that will
be
> > revealed.
>
> This is Clintonian doubletalk. Her involvement in the ICC is of no concern,
> but the practices etc. of the ICC are! Yet you have highlighted HER behavior,
> which has been attributed to her involvement with the church.
>
> And all the things about the ICC that are being "examined" are being
> "examined" from one point of view only, without rebuttal.
>
I believe that the rebuttal comes from the person's years of experience as an
ICC member. In addition, the person is not expected to decide on the spot
whether or not they will still be a member.
> I'm concerned about the attitude of superiority here. The whole idea is that
> the "exit counselor" is right, and he (oops, I mean *they*) will persuade the
> mark that he is "wrong."
>
(snip)
It's not about persuading the person that they are wrong. It's providing the
other side of the ICC story, the side you won't hear from the ICC. If you
want an attitude of superiority, just look around your church. That is the
predominant attitude in the fellowship.
> All the intervention does is give her three days of
> > another side. The final descision as to what she does with the information
is
> up to
> > her solely.
>
> But if she disagrees with you, she's brainwashed, in a cult, serving the rich
> and mean Kip McKean? That's a brainwashing technique-- disrespecting people if
> they don't agree with you.
>
(snip)
Quit putting words into Calvin's mouth! If she disagrees, then at least she
has been given the whole picture and is making an informed choice to stay in
the ICC. There are people who do that, you know. I'm not sure where you're
coming up with disrespect.
> > Respecting and loving the child? It is because they love and respect their
> daughter
> > did they feel the necessity of going this length to free her from this
> destructive
> > organization. What loving parent would sit back and watch their child ruin
> their
> > life? What respectful parents would not communicate information they have
> gathered
> > about a destructive group their child belongs to? Would you try to help
your
> > children in any way you can if you feel like they were in trouble or in
danger
> of
> > any kind? I bet you would at least try.
>
> You previously said the issue wasn't her involvement in the ICC. Now you say
> it is. Gotcha.
>
(snip)
It isn't her involvement in the ICC that got them worried-it is the changes in
her behavior in response to her involvement in the ICC that they are concerned
about. I believe Calvin mentioned poor grades and cutting off relationships
with family and friends (correct me if I'm wrong). If her parents did not see
these negative changes in her, they would have had no reason to look into the
church she is a part of.
Edie
ch...@icat.com
> I'm concerned about the attitude of superiority here. The whole idea is that
> the "exit counselor" is right, and he (oops, I mean *they*) will persuade the
> mark that he is "wrong."
I'm sure many people have pointed out that one can substitute the FP
studies as appropriate in the previous sentence and still be quite
correct.
ch...@icat.com
> Comparing involvement in the ICC to drugs and other destructive influences is
> absurd.
A unilateral comparison is, certainly.
In some cases, though, I cannot deny that involvement with the ICC has
had destructive side effects.
> And all the things about the ICC that are being "examined" are being
> "examined" from one point of view only, without rebuttal.
And?
Is the daughter allowed the opportunity to be a Berean?
> Restoring communication between parent and child is a noble objective. But I
> don't see how bringing in three outsiders helps build trust-- it shows a
> *conspiracy* to corner this person.
"Conspiracy"
> I honestly hope they're thankful on Judgement day.
"threat of impending judgment"
> A deprogramming is a rape, an exit counseling is a seduction. Yeah, I suppose
> there's some difference. But the end result is the same.
"rape and seduction"
> I'm concerned about the attitude of superiority here. The whole idea is that
> the "exit counselor" is right, and he (oops, I mean *they*) will persuade the
> mark that he is "wrong."
One could change the above sentence to refer to First Principles and
it would read quite correctly.
> I guess it depends if you'd rather be raped, seduced or left to live as
> you have choosen.
"rape & seduction again" vs. "live and let live"
(are we to take it that the ICC practices the latter?)
> It was a conspiracy. The father had an agenda that the daughter knew nothing
> about. Imagine her hurt to feel "set up" by hger own parents.
"conspiracy, agenda, and set-up"
> Calling the ICC an abusive, mind-control cult is the type of tactic you are so
> good at. People read this stuff and believe it.
I have quoted a number of pejorative and loaded terms in your post as
well.
> Asked her to talk to "some people?" Who flew in from hundreds of miles away.
> Hired guns who have made a living out of denouncing the ICC to people,
> "straightening out" people who have found God and a great fellowship in the
> ICC. Who think they're right and you're wrong. Who have been retained by the
> parents to get her out of the ICC.
You don't really want to get into judging motivations, here, I'm sure.
Mr. McKean and Mr. Baird are hardly lily-white if your criteria
include "Does he make a living promoting this?"
> Telling young adults they're brainwashed and in a cult? Calvin, you're one of
> hundreds of voices using the sensational language here. I'm one voice stating
> another side of the issue.
There was plenty of sensational language in your post, as well.
> And don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about being kidnapped.
"rape" and "seduction" and "judgment" and "arrogance" and "conspiracy"
and "agenda" and "set-up" are close.
> If someone's had a bad experience in the ICC, I'd like to help them, too. If
> a parent feels like their child in the ICC isn't treating them right, I'd like
> to help too. But using sensational language doesn't help at all.
What does, then? Could you provide a model for helping?
> But if she disagrees with you, she's brainwashed, in a cult, serving the rich
> and mean Kip McKean? That's a brainwashing technique-- disrespecting people if
> they don't agree with you.
Refer to the words I quoted above.
> That's your defense to ganging up on people-- that someone else does it too,
> so it must be ok. Your rage against the ICC has led you to abandon good sense
> here.
Actually, I believe Mr. Kwan's point is that the ICC has no room to
complain about alleged 'exit counseling' or 'deprogramming' tactics
when, so many times, it employs the *same tactics* in recruiting.
Lewis Johnson
ch...@icat.com wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 06:37:29 GMT, eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > Comparing involvement in the ICC to drugs and other destructive influences is
> > absurd.
>
> A unilateral comparison is, certainly.
>
> In some cases, though, I cannot deny that involvement with the ICC has
> had destructive side effects.
Well,
Being one who was formerly addicted to control substances, I found the
similarities were astonishing. From inception into the cult with the intrigue, the
anxiety of a fix (services), all the way down to the uncontrollable emotions and
mood swings of post acute withdrawal syndrome from exiting the cult. So is comparing
involvement in the ICC to drugs and other destructive influences is absurd? I think
not.
--
In the Light,
______________________
Lewis Johnson
DID 360.816.5346
FAX 360.816.5340
lewis_...@eli.net
http://www.geocities.com/~lewjohnson/ <--- Nutn' on the ICC (YET!)--<<<
______________________
ch...@icat.com
wrote:
>ch...@icat.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 06:37:29 GMT, eng...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> > Comparing involvement in the ICC to drugs and other destructive influences is
>> > absurd.
>> A unilateral comparison is, certainly.
>> In some cases, though, I cannot deny that involvement with the ICC has
>> had destructive side effects.
> Being one who was formerly addicted to control substances, I found the
> similarities were astonishing. From inception into the cult with the intrigue, the
> anxiety of a fix (services), all the way down to the uncontrollable emotions and
> mood swings of post acute withdrawal syndrome from exiting the cult. So is comparing
> involvement in the ICC to drugs and other destructive influences is absurd? I think
> not.
It may not be that way for *every*one, that's all I'm saying.
Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
: On Sat, 30 Jan 1999 17:57:50 GMT, rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle
: Poehlmann) wrote:
: "Want to play a game of volleyball?"
If volleyball is what is being played, what's the problem here?
: "No, we're not from the ICC."
No, I am from the ICC. Yes, we're affiliated with the great Boston
Church of Christ. You bet your bottom dollar we teach that you have to
be baptized to be saved.
: "We're having an Ice Cream Social."
If that's what we're having, then what's the problem? Have some ice
cream. Do I have to tell you my political affiliation, religious
beliefs, bank account number, favorite restaurant, and mother's maiden
name just to invite some neighbors over to have ice cream? Can't I just
be neighborly?
: > and defrauded church members who befriended them--for the purpose of
: > betraying their trust.
: For the purpose of helping other people.
I was not helped, I was harmed. The ends do not justify the means. Sin
is wrong, no matter who does it. Deception is wrong, no matter who
practices it. Will AFF renounce the use of deception in setting up "exit
counseling" appointments? Their literature teaches people how to
deceive and lie to "cultists" and how to justify it to them once caught.
I do not practice deception in my evangelism, neither does the ICC
condone or endorse deception.
Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
: rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:
: there you (roger) go again, attacking the messenger while ignoring the
: validity of the message.
What validity?
: charges levied. you know what's sad, most of us bought it...including the
: fact the kip lives in a 1/2 mil home by emphasizing that it's not a house,
: but a 14-unit condominium while overlooking the fact that it's still a 1/2
: mil home he's living in.
It's amazing that Kip has the time to oversee world missions with all
this home remodeling going on. Last time the critics invaded his privacy
by posting publically his address, phone number, and financial
information about he and his wife, they said it was a 4-BR condo. Now
it's a "14-unit condominium"? That's quite a lot of renovation! What do
they do, live in a unit once every two weeks? It must be quite confusing
for their houseguests--having to knock on 14 different doors looking for
them. Or was it that FOX couldn't get their cameras in to the complex
and just filmed it from a distance, misleading the audience to think that
all 14-units were the McKeans' residence?
All things considered, living in my *house* which my wife and I *own*,
I'm just not impressed by learning that a minister in L.A. lives in a
4-BR rented condo.
Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
: Roger Poehlmann writes:
: > In the "Living With The Enemy" series on BBC television, the ICC
: > *invited* the cameramen in to film disciples teaching the study
: > series, above board, with no tricks and deception.
: Of course the BBC weren't allowed to film everything during the
: programme. Apparently they were not given permission to film members
: spreading out their bank statements on a table for other members to
: peruse.
I wouldn't let the BBC film my bank statements either. Haven't the
critics intimidated enough members on this newsgroup by posting their
financial records and personal information? Haven't ICC opponents gone
through enough dumpsters?
Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
: > usual "hidden camera" footage where a Fox reporter deceptively
: > posed as someone interested in studying the Bible.
: How do you know they were being deceptive? Maybe they *were* interested
: in studying the Bible? I don't know - I haven't seen the programme or
: spoken to the reporter. You haven't either - so I don't know how you can
: work out if that was deceptive or not.
Oh, right, and she just had bad penmanship so she wanted to be able to go
over the study later in video form instead of taking notes with pen and
paper. How silly of me to question the motivation for concealing a
camera while on a journalistic assignment for a tabloid news show.
: > Critics who want to paint an embarrassing picture of the ICC don't
: > care who they hurt or how many times they have to lie.
: But isn't it Al Baird of the ICC who has defended the ICC's breaking the
: law to enter countries? Isn't it Al Baird of the ICC who thinks there
: are situations where it's alright to lie? This seems to be what he said
: on the BBC Newsnight investigation. Have you challenged Al on this one?
No, that was you making wild assumptions and jumping to conclusions based
on one response to a 600+ question interview. Old hat.
: > (After all, we're just "cult" members and so we should not be
: > afforded the basic human rights and courtesies that "normal
: > people" enjoy.)
: > What's more, this kind of unethical journalism
: Unethical? The use of hidden cameras in investigative journalism is
: unethical? Really? Do you have a reference for this? I see lots and
: lots of serious investigative programmes that have used hidden cameras,
: etc in an effort to discover the truth.
It's unethical to lie, deceive, and to betray people. I didn't expect
you to have any conviction about this; I'm just saying that I believe
these things to be sins and I'm calling those who practice them and
condone them to repent. If you think the ICC does evil and you want the
ICC to stop--you would do well not to condone or practice what you accuse
us of doing.
dance...@yahoo.com
> : > *invited* the cameramen in to film disciples teaching the study
> : > series, above board, with no tricks and deception.
>
> : Of course the BBC weren't allowed to film everything during the
> : programme. Apparently they were not given permission to film members
> : spreading out their bank statements on a table for other members to
> : peruse.
>
> I wouldn't let the BBC film my bank statements either. Haven't the
> critics intimidated enough members on this newsgroup by posting their
> financial records and personal information? Haven't ICC opponents gone
> through enough dumpsters?
>
> member, SF Church of Christ
> (International Church of Christ)
(LOL!) Dumpster diving, Roger? Chapter & verse, please (i.e., present
pertinent facts immediately as to when and where you personally observed ICC
opponents going through dumpsters, or withdraw this statement).
Sarah M.
ex-ICC Triangle (1989-1994)
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/5147
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Graham Cluley
> Graham Cluley writes:
> : But isn't it Al Baird of the ICC who has defended the ICC's
> : breaking the law to enter countries? Isn't it Al Baird of
> : the ICC who thinks there are situations where it's alright
> : to lie? This seems to be what he said on the BBC Newsnight
> : investigation. Have you challenged Al on this one?
>
> No, that was you making wild assumptions and jumping to
> conclusions based on one response to a 600+ question interview.
> Old hat.
Have you seen the BBC Newsnight investigation Roger? What did you think
Al meant then when he was presented with the evidence of illegal
activities?
> : Unethical? The use of hidden cameras in investigative
> : journalism is unethical? Really? Do you have a reference for
> : this? I see lots and lots of serious investigative programmes
> : that have used hidden cameras, etc in an effort to discover
> : the truth.
>
> It's unethical to lie, deceive, and to betray people.
Nicely avoided. But lets get back to the subject shall we?
Do you have a reference for your allegation that the use of hidden
cameras in investigative journalism is unethical? I see lots and lots of
serious investigative programmes that have used hidden camers, etc in an
effort to discover the truth.
Was it not the Independent newspaper in London who got hold of a tape
recording of Tommy Chan (a leading member of the London ICC) saying that
foreign mission funds would be diverted illegally into the UK. If
someone had never made that recording I wonder if the malpractice would
have been stopped?
Reference: http://www.ftech.net/~hamrag/tommy.htm
Graham Cluley
> Graham Cluley (san...@cix.co.uk) wrote:
> : Roger Poehlmann writes:
> : > In the "Living With The Enemy" series on BBC television, the
> : > ICC *invited* the cameramen in to film disciples teaching
> : > the study series, above board, with no tricks and deception.
>
> : Of course the BBC weren't allowed to film everything during
> : the programme. Apparently they were not given permission to
> : film members spreading out their bank statements on a table
> : for other members to peruse.
>
> I wouldn't let the BBC film my bank statements either. Haven't
> the critics intimidated enough members on this newsgroup by
> posting their financial records and personal information?
> Haven't ICC opponents gone through enough dumpsters?
You're beginning to sound more desperate than usual Roger. That or you
have an extremely high definition television set capable of spotting a
decimal point at 50 yards. Such a TV set wouldn't be terrible biblical -
unless living in a $500,000 condo in LA of course.
For those who haven't read about this TV investigation there's a report
at http://www.ftech.net/~hamrag/convcour.htm
terra...@my-dejanews.com
> : rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:
> : > Graham Cluley (san...@cix.co.uk) wrote:
>
> : there you (roger) go again, attacking the messenger while ignoring the
> : validity of the message.
>
> What validity?
<----8<----> do you, roger, categorically refute that any of the activities
portrayed by fox do not occur, and have not occured, within the icc? if your
answer is no you can't, then there is validity to the video. <---->8---->
>
> : charges levied. you know what's sad, most of us bought it...including the
> : fact the kip lives in a 1/2 mil home by emphasizing that it's not a house,
> : but a 14-unit condominium while overlooking the fact that it's still a 1/2
> : mil home he's living in.
>
> It's amazing that Kip has the time to oversee world missions with all
> this home remodeling going on. Last time the critics invaded his privacy
> by posting publically his address, phone number, and financial
> information about he and his wife, they said it was a 4-BR condo. Now
> it's a "14-unit condominium"? That's quite a lot of renovation! What do
> they do, live in a unit once every two weeks? It must be quite confusing
> for their houseguests--having to knock on 14 different doors looking for
> them. Or was it that FOX couldn't get their cameras in to the complex
> and just filmed it from a distance, misleading the audience to think that
> all 14-units were the McKeans' residence?
<----8<----> no where, roger, did fox indicate that it was a multi-unit
condominium, in fact it was one of icc's evangelists who revealed that it is
a 14-unit condo, even though public records reveal it to be a four-unit
condo. it's one of your own that seems to not know what they are talking
about, or...stretching truth a bit further to give the impression that kip
lives in an apartment-style unit. <---->8---->
>
> All things considered, living in my *house* which my wife and I *own*,
> I'm just not impressed by learning that a minister in L.A. lives in a
> 4-BR rented condo.
<----8<----> neither am i, but at 1/2 mil price tag that the church owns, and
of which i unknowingly helped pay for, *that* i am surprised, and
disillusioned about. nobody, *NOBODY*, in their right mind can convince me
that Jesus or paul would ever condone such a lifestyle. did not even Jesus
state that the rich have their own to look after them, but that he came for
the poor? mckean's gratitude is misplaced. <---->8---->
>
> Roger Poehlmann
> member, SF Church of Christ
> (International Church of Christ)
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Edi...@hotmail.com
terra...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <rognmichF...@netcom.com>,
> rogn...@netcom.com (Roger/Michelle Poehlmann) wrote:
> > : charges levied. you know what's sad, most of us bought it...including the
> > : fact the kip lives in a 1/2 mil home by emphasizing that it's not a house,
> > : but a 14-unit condominium while overlooking the fact that it's still a 1/2
> > : mil home he's living in.
> >
> > It's amazing that Kip has the time to oversee world missions with all
> > this home remodeling going on. Last time the critics invaded his privacy
> > by posting publically his address, phone number, and financial
> > information about he and his wife, they said it was a 4-BR condo. Now
> > it's a "14-unit condominium"? That's quite a lot of renovation! What do
> > they do, live in a unit once every two weeks? It must be quite confusing
> > for their houseguests--having to knock on 14 different doors looking for
> > them. Or was it that FOX couldn't get their cameras in to the complex
> > and just filmed it from a distance, misleading the audience to think that
> > all 14-units were the McKeans' residence?
>
> <----8<----> no where, roger, did fox indicate that it was a multi-unit
> condominium, in fact it was one of icc's evangelists who revealed that it is
> a 14-unit condo, even though public records reveal it to be a four-unit
> condo. it's one of your own that seems to not know what they are
talking
> about, or...stretching truth a bit further to give the impression that kip
> lives in an apartment-style unit. <---->8---->
I hope to clear up some of this misinformation about Kip's condo and the Fox
Files story. Kip's condo unit has does not have more than 4 bedrooms in it.
When they speak of 14 units, they are speaking of 14 homes which can be owned
by 14 separate parties.
Being a native Californian, maybe the picture did not seem deceptive to me,
but let me explain it for those of you who don't know about condominiums.
Condominiums are groups of dwellings which own the property they sit on in
common among all of the residents. Individual condominium units (homes) may
share walls and roofs with other units (homes). The condominium I live in is
a four-plex, meaning that there are four dwellings, or units, under one roof,
sharing some common walls, but each has its own entrance and you cannot
access your neighbor's home from your home. Apparently, the photo of Kip's
home showed his dwelling, which was attached to other dwellings and was above
the common parking garage. I do not know if the photo showed all 14 units,
but it was quite apparent to me that there was more than one unit attached
together with Kip's. I did not think that he owned the whole thing that was
shown in the picture.
Being a native Californian, I think I know a little bit about the cost of
living here. No matter what the size of your home, the most important factor
is location. The home Kip lives in is located in a very expensive
neighborhood. It appears to be at the upper end of middle class or perhaps a
little more elite than that (after all, the Reagans had a home there). Kip
could take the same amount of money and spend it in a middle class
neighborhood in LA and get a larger home. Conversely, he could buy a home
that is the same size as his current abode, and pay quite a bit less if he
lived in a middle class neighborhood.
I hope this will clear things up for those of you who are interested.
Edie
ch...@icat.com
Poehlmann) wrote:
>ch...@icat.com wrote:
>: "Want to play a game of volleyball?"
> If volleyball is what is being played, what's the problem here?
Bait and Switch is generally considered illegal in your country, as I
understand it.
Certainly unethical.
>: "No, we're not from the ICC."
> No, I am from the ICC. Yes, we're affiliated with the great Boston
> Church of Christ. You bet your bottom dollar we teach that you have to
> be baptized to be saved.
Do you tell Potential Recruits that only people who are in the ICC can
be saved?
>: "We're having an Ice Cream Social."
> If that's what we're having, then what's the problem? Have some ice
> cream. Do I have to tell you my political affiliation, religious
> beliefs, bank account number, favorite restaurant, and mother's maiden
> name just to invite some neighbors over to have ice cream? Can't I just
> be neighborly?
I don't know if you can or not. That's really not the issue, either,
but I'm not surprised that you're changing the subject.
> I do not practice deception in my evangelism, neither does the ICC
> condone or endorse deception.
Does Mr. Baird speak for the ICC or not?
If he does, and if, as you claim, you do not, then I choose to believe
his statements that the ends justify the means more than I choose to
believe your statement above.
anarchist
Rex Geissler wrote in message <78n3hk$m7e$1...@remarQ.com>...
>From http://www.acesonline.org/ and http://www.icoc.org Al Baird responded
>to the Fox Files video:
>
>Al Baird of the LA Church sent out this statement...
>
I see the crybabies are still in high gear.
I remember all the bull you raise about the KipBall picture.
You guys really should see someone about your mental health.
Your responses sound more like something to convince yourself
and other current ICC members instead of a response to the issues
raised in the T.V. piece. I guess if I was in a cult I need some
convincing too!
John "Anarchist" Proctor
anar...@surfree.com
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
-----------== Over 66,000 Groups, Plus a Dedicated Binaries Server ==----------