OK, here's the deal, so to speak.
For quite some time I have been puzzled at how people can actually doubt that George did what he did, both in reference to the sexual sins, and the myriad other problems associated with his ideas and agenda.
If you read my words, you will see that I never deny that the "women" exist, and I come right out and say that they all came forward and told what happened to the Fullerton leadership last January.
I said this:
I am not making up any of my claims, although I can do nothing to prove them, without "outing," some women who don't want that. The Fullerton elders who excommunicated George did so after firsthand testimony with his sexual partners.
What I am saying is that I have no way of proving what I know to be true, because although I have spoken to two of the "women," I am not at liberty to share what I know. Therefore, I can't prove anything.
Then I said this:
Nevertheless, Matt, you are correct. 99.9% of the people have no evidence to suggest that any of this actually took place other than me telling them it is so. If I were you, I wouldn't believe it either. Or at least I would seriously question the validity of it.
All of a sudden, upon reading your post, I feel like the scales fell off my eyes, and I can understand what has motivated you in many of the things you have said.
I owe you an apology for many things.
Matt is stating facts, to the best of his knowledge, in his post. He hasn't seen or heard any evidence that George had "improper sexual contact," other than the fact that I reported it, and others repeated it, on a website. I assume he read the sentence in George's excommunication letter as well.
All he has to go on is some guy's word, on a website! I think it is safe to say that Matt doesn't have much respect for me, and that he is generally negative in his opinion of what I say and what I have done. So why should he believe any of this?
Now, I understand what has motivated Matt, and I am making the leap to say that this is probably what is at the root of others who don't believe that George did anything wrong in this area. Matt, and others, have no proof whatsoever that anything happened.
The Fullerton leaders have said exactly nothing about this. Sure, they may have uttered some words in Fullerton at one time, but they continue singing the hymns and praying the prayers, and doing itinerate ministry and outreaching on the campus, and having doorkeepers etc. and they haven't made a single public statement that a guy like Matt can look at and say, "hey, I guess it is true."
I don't blame Matt for being skeptical one bit.
Now, George's side of the story, which has been heard as far North as San Francisco and Sacramento, and as far South as Riverside is that it is all a lie, and that a palace coup has occured.
George is one of the parties named in the sexual impropriety, and he has told his side of the story. Others are repeating it.
The other side of the story has indeed been told.....but it might as well have been told to the bottom of the sea! No one knows for sure if it happened at all, and people like Matt doubt if the "women" even exist.
Silence on the part of the "women" and silence on the part of the Fullerton leadership means George is innocent.
I never said George didn't do it, neither did I ever say the "women" don't exist. I also was quite clear in saying that I didn't make up any of my claims. What I came to realize is that Matt has a very valid objection, based on the fact that he knows nothing about any of this, and has nowhere to go to find out what really happened, because of the Code of Silence.
Matt, I apologize to you for branding you in a negative light, when all along you had valid doubts about this aspect of what I was saying.
I accused you of ignoring the truth, when in fact you were only exercising healthy skepticism.
I also understand a good part of the reason why people in San Francisco, Riverside and Sacramento believe George's side of the story.
There really is no other side due to the fact that the "women," and those they spoke to haven't given any information to the contrary.
George has said that Mark Miller and some "other Brethren," trumped up charges against him, and drug a sister out of the past in order to build a case against him in order to take over the ministry. He also named his son Timothy "Absalom," in reference to David's son who conspired with Ahithophel, David's chief counselor to usurp the throne.
That is George's story and if you look in Fullerton, Placentia, West LA and Goleta you see that the men George named are leading their Assemblies, with Tim Geftakys back on the campus at Fullerton College, just like the old days.
Perhaps this represents what is being said by Assembly sympathizers, "If things were so horrible, what are they doing by continuing to meet? It looks to me like George's story is true, because they certainly haven't said anything to contradict him."
Again, regardless of whether or not George did anything wrong, he is innocent, because no one has said anything to substantiate the accusations against him.
I also heard today that the Fullerton leadership are "hurt" by what I have said, saying they aren't to be trusted and made things up.
I guess they could clear up a few things if someone down there would actually say something. But they won't, because they don't want to shake the house of cards they are so carefully tending. At least that is my opinion.
I do know that George's sin was explained in great detail by those women. However, Matt doesn't know this, and I can't give him any proof.
Others can, but they don't, for one reason or another.
I said this:
Just because I know it to be true doesn't make it so. Afterall, I never had sex with him.
Yes, I do know that George did something wrong. I know it is true. However, he didn't do "it" to me personally, so I can't prove anything. Therefore he is innocent.
OJ is also innocent. He is free to come and go where he pleases, even though it is pretty plain that he committed murder. Notwithstanding, he is innocent. Same with George.
So, why am I saying all this?
It's because I want people to understand that as long as they remain silent with the truth, people like George have free reign to whatever they want and say whatever they say.
People like Matt are absolutely correct in being suspicious.
People like me are taking risks by saying something I can't prove. (perhaps I could prove it if I forced the women to testify via a subpoena, but that is extremely unlikely to happen)
Now, to Poker.
Am I playing a game? Yes and no.
My objective since day one has been to expose the unfuitful works of darkness that surround Geftakys and his group.
To use Poker terminology, I was being dealt great hands and drawing full houses on the flop.
Now, due to the silence coming out of Fullerton, and the understandable reluctance of the women involved to say anything, I am holding an unsuited 7,2, and my opponent appears to have a high pair in the pocket.
What do I do?
I hope to draw a winning hand, but I might have to fold. I could always bluff, but I might get called. I could bet in order to see what the other side has and then make my decision...
or perhaps I have a miracle hand and I am sandbagging. Which is it?
We don't know yet, do we.
Until something is said that lends credibility to the accusations of George's adultery, he is innocent.
Now, if it should come out that he is indeed guilty, it's another story altogether.
I didn't stary this topic over here, and I would really like to get back to what I was doing before ASAP, but I will be happy to answer questions if anyone has them.
Brent
