|
|
|
|||
|
| Re: Wow, a bit lost for words here. |  | ||
| Re: Wow, a bit lost for words here. -- aunt bea | Top of thread | Post Reply | Forum |
|
AB - Where are you quoting from? Is that from the transcript that was posted here? Or have you heard the recording? T - The transcript AB - Because I have heard the recording and you are grossly distorting and misrepresenting what was said. For example, it wasn't a discussion about a parent innocently touching a child's genitals to wash or dress them for example, but rather"inappropriately" and repeatedly doing so. A lot more is said about this referring to both sons being victims and both parents being the abusers. T - Amar denies that Rawat abused him. Who then is telling the truth? T - It is quite shocking and Prem Rawat does indeed admit to knowing what he did was wrong. T - Please connect me to the audio. Rawat admits to the possibility that Hans is negatively effected by Rawat touching him. B - So I have to wonder what your intention here is. If you feel uncertain because you lack the full picture, why would you so vehemently defend Prem Rawat over the very clear accusations coming from his adult son that it was indeed abuse. Why would you jump to the defence of an alleged child abuser rather than at least remain impartial? T - Because Amar denies the he was abused by Rawat. That makes Hans or Amar a liar Why believe Hans? He's at war with his parents, his sister and his brother. AB - Or are you not playing with an open deck here? It is just bizarre, like you are Prem's defence lawyer in a trial. In any case, you clearly seem like you are on a mission not to find out the truth but rather to vindicate Prem Rawat at all costs. T - Prem said what he did was common and accepted in his culture. Hans has told him he has been negatively affected by it. Rawat is surprised. but now accepts that Hans is being negatively affected by it. |
| Previous | Current page | Next |
| Replies to this message |
|
