|
The
Jeff Bowe situation
Mr. Bowe,
So
far we have regarded you as merely an irritating diversion. However we
are now starting to agree with our advisors who have warned us that
treating with compassion someone who is either a bully or paranoid or
both is a waste of time.
On the 18th June on your Tibetan Way blog you stated,
"Further information has emerged which questions the claim"
Why
do you not quote your source? If it was Dr. Thomas in the Rick Ross
Forum then Mr. Farmer replied to that post but, as happens so often
with that forum, the reply disappeared. Mr. Farmer stated that while
many of the facts in that posting were correct the conclusion drawn
from those facts was erroneous.
You also state,
"As was reported previously the herbal ingredients of its 'formulations' do not derive from, or are found in, Tibet"
Your
statement is written in such a way that an innocent observer might
conclude that you have discovered something of great significance. But
there is nothing to discover. Our site makes it crystal clear that the
products are not created using Tibetan ingredients and we explain why.
Mr Farmer has pointed this out to you repeatedly and yet you still
behave as though you have discovered some hitherto unknown fact when
that information has been on the website since day one in black and
white for all to read.
You ask:
"What is the customer of Tibetan Way to make of this?"
Had
you contacted us prior to launching your unwarranted and ridiculous
attacks on us then you would have known what to make of this. Many
potential customers contact us with questions and they receive replies
as we, unlike you, have nothing to hide.
One
of the most striking features of your attacks on us is that at no time
have you made any attempt to contact us and put your questions to us.
Unlike you Mr. Bowe, we allow people to contact us and, again unlike
you, we give them replies. On your various websites you have either
made it impossible to contact you or you have deleted replies that do
not suit your book. Who is the honest and straightforward person here
Mr. Bowe?
It
is clear that you will only accept replies and information that support
your warped and paranoid view and ignore and even delete facts that
would destroy your fantasy world.
You go on to write:
"Doctor
Willard's site was prominently linked on Christopher Hansard's website
http://www.bonmedicine.co.uk/Links.htm and elsewhere there has been
some speculation if indeed Doctor Willard was more closely associated
with Hansard, and possibly the originator of his 'health formulations'?
I have no personal opinion on such speculation"
Even
if your speculation is correct what does this have to do with the far
more important issues being discussed in the Rick Ross Forum? You and
your lieutenants have speculated about the formulations and even
suggested that they may have been acquired illegally but now you
mention that Hansard was displaying a prominent link to the site that
you have 'discovered'. If there was any suggestion of any illegality
would the culprit then highlight the connection? In the real world they
would not but in your parallel dimension of existence who can tell what
is possible?
You state,
"Whatever
the facts, many people will be asking if there exists a curious thread
connecting Hansard's health (sic) programme, the specific herbal
products of Trophic/Wild Rose and the formulations being sold by
Tibetan Way? Possible connections which seem to go beyond a
conventional understanding of coincidence?"
Your
use of the expression "Whatever the facts" is striking and, in our
view, underlines the malevolent nature of your motives. What is clear
is that whatever facts and explanations are given to you, you will
persist in attacking people for no valid reason except to convince the
gullible that you have some sort of secret knowledge.
You
then ask a number of questions that you should have asked us directly
before launching your attacks of the past few weeks. The fundamental
problem for us is how to present you with a reply. In the interests of
your odd perception of free speech you have prevented anyone, apart
from your "team", posting comments on your blogs. None of your blogs
have any email addresses that would allow us to contact you directly.
Once
again the foregoing demonstrates the lie behind everything you write;
you ask questions but you do not really want any replies and use every
effort to ensure that no-one can respond to your spurious allegations.
As a result your accusations remain floating around the Web creating
the appearance that your victims have no defence to your claims. Your
behaviour borders on the evil and we cannot even begin to imagine what
pleasure you derive from your malicious actions.
You
present yourself as relatively intelligent and you clearly have a great
deal of time at your disposal so why don't you do something useful to
help Tibet? While you talk about that and then run away when asked to
do anything concrete; we are actually taking what action we can. Part
of the revenues from the Tibetan Way site are used to help charities
that are helping the Tibetan people. That side of our activities would
have increased significantly over the past month were it not for the
fact that we, and our advisors and consultants, have had to spend time
dealing with the rubbish you are posting. You may think that attacking
us is some form of game but in reality you are taking hard cash away
from the Tibetan people; the very people you claim you are supporting.
So may we ask you some questions?
Is
it the Tibetan people you support or the Chinese government? You appear
to share that government's view of free speech and you are going out of
your way to prevent us from helping Tibetan causes.
Are you really pursuing us and others as a result of your interest in Bon or are you operating to some private agenda?
Given that you operate so many blogs you have every opportunity to reply to these questions.
In
the meantime we suggest you leave us alone and let us get on with
actually helping Tibet while you daydream about your "knowledge" and do
nothing to help anyone. Our patience with you really is wearing rather
thin.
|
|
|
|
