Tuesday, May 17, 2016

LET'S HAVE SOME FUN WITH THIS PHONY

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "APURON CALLS ROY QUINTANILLA AND HIS FAMILY LIARS": 

Sorry but we have to be objective to this and someone has to play devil's advocate on this side of the fence. I just feel these facts are too convenient for Roy:
#1 It has been 40 years since this alleged molestation occurred 
#2 The only person you supposedly confided in about the abuse passed away years ago
#3 Only after dates and locations of Apuron's priestly assignments were released did this man come forward

Additionally, there are others I spoke to that used to spend personal time with Apuron that feel this allegation is false, it is just not like him and they never felt this 'sexual' vibe from him. I just find it too convenient for Roy.

To be honest this is the perfect time to make fast cash off the Church. Even I can go up there on the Hill and do the same thing, people will believe me because there's nothing to prove that it didn't happen. 

To be clear: I am against the actions of our Church leaders these past few years. I just feel this guy is a phony.

Just my two cents. 



*****

#1 It has been 40 years since this alleged molestation occurred 

Uh, so. Apparently you know nothing about pedophilia nor the last twenty years of the exposure of pedophilia amongst Catholic clergy. Like this story from Hawaii, many if not most of the victims were molested as far back as the 50's, which is 20 years longer than Roy's experience. Educate yourself. 

#2 The only person you supposedly confided in about the abuse passed away years ago. 

That doesn't mean he hasn't confided in others, does it? Good thing you didn't put your name on this or I would have had as much fun with you as I did with this Taimanglo guy from Talofofo who made fun of my autistic son. 

#3 Only after dates and locations of Apuron's priestly assignments were released did this man come forward

You don't know that either, do you? The first ad came out on May 7. Roy came out today, May 17. So I had 10 days to locate Roy, raise money, fly him here to Guam from Hawaii, convince David Lujan to take him on as a client, organize a press conference, contact the family, and set everything up for today. And LOL: the ad didn't run in Hawaii. 

The fact is this has been many months (even years) in the making. It was my idea to run the ad just prior to Roy's coming forward to provoke Apuron and his goons to do exactly what they did: make a really stupid and provocative statement. It was perfect, and if you noticed, I played it up big yesterday on the news shows and I got Apuron do say exactly what I wanted him to say: that he "100% denied any and all allegations of sexual abuse." The timing was so perfect it had to be the work of the Holy Spirit! LOL. Talk about "WALK INTO THIS!!" 

I knew exactly what was coming less than 24 hours after Apuron said that. Checkmate! My only fear was that he wouldn't say anything after Roy's statement. But (Thank you, Jesus) my fears proved unfounded as Apuron (after being whipped by Pius) came crawling out of his roach hole to read what Pius wrote for him. PERFECT! Now I have him exactly where I want him: on stage for all the world to see while we undress him lie by lie (pardon the visual). What's more, we got him to call Roy a LIAR. Roy can now sue him for defamation. How's that for strategy!!! Oh, I am so proud of myself. So excited, so excited, so excited!!!

And as far as the rest of your two cents, LOL. Others you talked to? Who didn't feel the sexual vibe from Apuron? You have no idea. P.S.  YOU're  "the phony." 



16 comments:

  1. Daaaaammmnnn!! Go Tim! You're right. The movie is going to be a blockbuster

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yep, this was a good one.
    This is the school we have seen before over the last three years.

    Always starts and end the same.

    First you have a reasonable, even friendly statement to bait the reader.
    Then of course, you have the planting of the seed of doubt.
    Before finally putting in the destructive statement, putting in question the validity or the integrity of the subject or person in question.

    I have coined this the "Zoltan tactic". Not of course because he invented this tactic, but because he was the first one to try this on this site.

    We have seen it used by the Guile, as well as a couple of less talented writers.

    In fact this tactic is typical neo, and is being used by all their Cathechist, including the Putrid himself.
    The putrid, the master of deception and intimidation, has been very quiet since the "welcome" at the airport of his lord and master.
    But he is there in the shadows, sending his minions to do his bidding.
    The only way you can tell, is because of the sulfur smell.

    So here Anon, is coming with the same true and tried tactic, to vilify Mr Quintanilla.
    Unfortunately, we have become better adept at identifying and denouncing these fake "reasonable" pretenders.

    At least Guile and Zoltan have the balls to sign their name.

    Thank you Tim, for destroying that fake argument.
    Hopefully more readers will become better equipped to see these frauds on their own.

    God Bless

    ReplyDelete
  3. Each person is entitled to his opinion. Listen to what people have to say and decide whether to believe it or not.

    Would anyone say that the scandal in Boston was a hoax? Maybe the abuse in Los Angeles never happened. How about Chicago, Orange County, Palm Beach, Philadelphia, Portland, etc.? Can anyone say, "This is all made up."?

    April 2003 Vatican Conference on Sexual Abuse

    Why would the Vatican have a sex abuse conference?


    Does anyone believe this statement? There has never been abuse of any kind in the Catholic Church.


    People are free to wear rose colored glasses. People are free to keep their heads buried in the sand. People are free to look the other way and let horrible things happen. People are free to ignore the cries of the innocent. People are free to close the door and let it all go away. People are FREE. What about the children?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Temple priests say nothing good comes from Galilee. I say that nothing true comes from the Chancery. Lies, lies, lies. Just wondering, does the statute of limitation apply to an ongoing criminal coverup?

    ReplyDelete
  5. During the years of the (in)famous PedoPriests scandals, we saw many false allegations and even innocent priests committing suicide because of the stress they took.
    At first it sounds reasonable to entirely approve mr. Brother Phony statements. But... why should we preemptively absolve Brother Tony?
    Does the treatment for fr.Gofigan vs fr.Camacho mean anything?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Can the family of Ray Quintanilla sue apuron for defamation? If so, can all the other abuses of apuron in favor of the Neos be brought out when apuron is deposed for a defamation trial?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't know for sure. But calling Roy a liar may open up a legal path. I'm sure he will pursue it.

      Delete
  7. You are openly spreading your hate in the hope that something good will come of it. Hate is far from love, and God is love. Nothing good will come from hate because hate is not of God.

    Beware of the path that you walk on. For the sake of your soul, the souls involved in this battle, and out of love for our savior, let go of your bitterness. Let go of your hate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Typical Kiko. Because they are mind-numbed savants who are told how to think and how to feel they think they can guess how I think and feel. This has been one long labor of LOVE for me. Love for the truth. Love for Justice. Love for those who have been harmed unjustly. Love for the oppressed. Love for those who have been broken and literally "screwed" by Anthony S. Apuron. Now, go find another place to pretend you are somebody. Bye.

      Delete
    2. LOL, not even 24 hours, since I predicted this type of intervention. Hilarious, and sad at the same time.

      The Bible quoting idiot, giving us his narrow and skewed view.
      Of course we are the haters.
      These people are always preaching for the sins their followers are guilty of.

      Look at the torrent of garbage and hatred we got yesterday on this site, and all the attempts to tarnish the victim and his family, and you tell me where the hate comes from...

      You cannot fix stupid.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous May 18 @ 9:50 AM, read your comment in front of a mirror and look at yourself. What do you see? Do you see someone that is full of the Holy Spirit or a kikobot that's been wired to repeat the same hogwash during desperate times? I pick the latter. If you don't agree with me, do it a couple more times and maybe, just maybe, you'll see what I'm talking about. Peace!

      Delete
  8. Mr. Rohr, we do not know if this is totally true or not. It seems odd Mr.Roy slept at his house. Im sure the parents would have remembered or they would have been really concerned? I would've checked on my 12 year old son and I would not let him sleep over at the priests house. I personally have went through an incident with someone working at the church and the Archbishop had him removed to protect me....I am sure that you can agree that he helped me tremendously from someone who was causing abuse in the parish. I am trying not to be biased. but I really would like to just wait and see how this plays out before I say anything or think anything. Thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roy’s original statement was three pages long. It was edited for the purposes of the press conference. I have a copy of Roy’s original statement and will get his permission to publish it if he wants me to.

      In that statement, Roy describes how on the way home from the movies when Roy was alone in the car with Apuron, Apuron insisted that Roy stay at the rectory so he could help him with some work around the church in the morning. Because Roy lived only a few blocks away, he protested saying he wanted to go home and would be at the church in the morning. Apuron kept insisting that Roy stay with him.

      After Roy protested some more, Apuron then said he would ask Roy’s parents. Apuron took Roy to his house and asked Roy's parents if Roy could stay the night at the rectory. Roy’s parents gave their permission because of course Apuron was a priest and the pastor of the church. What could possibly be dangerous about that!!!

      Roy mentioned in the letter that his father was strict and knew that there was no way he could protest the decision in front of his father and Apuron. So he went with Apuron. Roy then picks up on the story in his reduced version of the testimony where Apuron made him sleep in his bed even though Roy protested several times that he wanted to sleep in the living room.

      As for this playing out, it cannot play out. It's over. There will be no legal action. The statute of limitations on the crime has expired. Roy cannot press any legal charges. Apuron is denying everything. You'll have to decide on what you see. Roy has ZERO to gain by this except for closure. Just remember what Roy said in his public testimony: that the reason he did not speak up before was because he believed he was the only one. That's a clue.

      Delete
    2. True. but I will still need a little bit more time to decide based on what I See. But the Archbishop protected me from a predator and I am grateful to God for that. and RIP to the guy who did those things. When he passed, he received his absolution from the priest of that parish at the time.

      Delete
    3. Do whatever you want. Your experience is your experience. It has nothing to do with what happened to Roy Quintanilla. What is true and what I can and have demonstrated over and over is that Apuron is a serial liar. And I have documents I haven't even posted yet. I'm saving those for when Apuron sues me. The fact that he won't sue me will be evidence that he is afraid to. And he is afraid to sue me because of what he knows I know.

      Note to Apuron: Sue me. I'll win. And you'll go to jail. Then I'll get that Equus. My Versa has almost 100k miles on it. I'll be needing a new car soon. I'd like that half a million dollar pad you have in Mangilao too. Maybe I'll give it to Roy and his family. The clock is counting.

      Delete
    4. To Anon at 10:05am. Nice try, but then again perhaps "not too nice". Had you not asked the question whether or not Roy's parents had known of Roy's staying overnight "with" the archbishop, it might have been a good question for the archbishop's lawyer to ask that in cross examination. But you have stolen the attorney's "thunder", because you had already asked the question, and Tim had given you the answer! Perhaps it would have been better if you had kept your mouth shut! No?

      You wrote "I am trying not to be biased...". Your bias was fully demonstrated simply by asking the question! No?

      So what other "tricks" have you got in your bag? Perhaps I shouldn't have asked you that, because you might have to rack your brain (?) to come up with another one. Try another gambit; that one would have led to checkmate!
      Suggestion: how about taking Roy's testimony at face value, and seek the truth from there? Or, start off with a "tabula rasa", instead of with a loaded bias question.

      Final observations. Though you did not give your name away, you gave your identity away by leaving your fingerprints behind:
      1)"Im sure his parents would have remembered..." What grade school did you go to (never mind high school, college, or seminary). Did you mean to write "I'm sure"? Im sure you did! No?
      2)"I personally have went through an incident..." Say that again! My second grader would have gotten an "F" for not using the correct participle - "gone". No?
      3)"I would not let him sleep..." You're talking about something that would have happened in the past; no? A grade school grammar teacher would have corrected it to "I would not have let him sleep..." no?
      4)You wrote: "I personally have went through an incident..." I'll save you further embarrassment, and make the correction myself: "I personally had gone through an incident..." by using the pluperfect tense. Have you ever come across that tense?

      Kudos to you for not giving your real name! For myself, I use Anonymous here because I am simply having some fun. Go ahead and use the "f" word on me - just make sure you spell it right! No?





      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch