Blog Song

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Threatening A Person's Job

 
This was copied and pasted from the Opinion page of the Pacific Daily News.  This is the one big reason why many of us remained anonymous.  Tim Rohr threatned Zoltan's job.  Zoltan made a comment to Deacon Martinez's letter to the PDN.  He voiced his own opinion and experience of posting in the jungle.  

But look at Tim's response.  Was Tim discussing anything that Zoltan wrote about?  What does math have to do with religious beliefs?  Since when do people take into account a person's religious beliefs or opinions that has nothing to do with math?  It is clear that Tim Rohr was threatening Zoltan's job by addressing the University Administration with a negative remark about Zoltan as a person they allow to run loose.   Why address the University Administration when that was never the topic of discussion to begin with???? The weblink of their comments can be found here. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------






Zoltán Székely · Works at University of Guam
Dear Deacon Steve, I respect your opinion. However, I have to disagree. Internet blogs can be useful as forums to share thoughts. But there are minimal cultural expectations blogs have to keep in order to be considered worthy to read. In most European and mainland American blogs with wider readership there are some unwritten rules followed that enforce these expectations and make the ensuing conversations possible. These basic rules are simply not followed at JungleWatch.

As a former commenter at Tim Rohr's blog, I was greatly embarrassed to see that many of my comments challenging Tim's position were simply censured out. When I protested, Tim stole my profile picture from social media and posted it on his blog, together with my workplace information including my office location and phone number. It was such an abuse of trus...t that would never ever happen at any of the above mentioned culturally acceptable blog sites.

I warned Tim about a year ago that his methods of managing his blog are intellectually dishonest. You may read about this more here: http://www.johntreed.com/debate.html . Then, a mob of anonymous comment-trolls were unleashed on me, trying to silence and chase me away from his blog. I suspended my comments altogether under these culturally unacceptable circumstances. So it is completely justified to call these kinds of "grey matter" blogs like JungleWatch, that do not follow a required minimum in fairness and conduct, trash blogs and hate blogs as these terminus exactly describe and cover their scopes.

If you, dear Deacon Steve, want to have meaningful exchanges of ideas to happen on blogs, you have to establish one with minimal cultural expectations. In particular, you have to ensure that

1. only registered persons can make comments;
2. anyone who makes a comment is identifiable by IP code;
3. no anonymous comments are possible;
4. there is an unbiased team of moderators who make moderation decisions by consent;
5. common Internet blog protocols on acceptable vocabulary and conduct are enforced.

I wish you good luck in acting on your idea by establishing a suitable framework for further, culturally acceptable exchange of thoughts and opinions.
See More



  • Tim Rohr · Top Commenter · Hagatna
    Dear UOG Admin, take note. This is a person you permit to run loose on your campus courtesy of your payroll and our tax dollars.

45 comments:

  1. UOG is a public organization, open to critcisim and inquiry by the public. I find nothing wrong with Tim's comment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 7:24 a.m.,

      1) Was the topic of discussion about the University of Guam??

      2) Tim Rohr addressed the University administration and stated, "This is the person you permitted to run loose".......is a negative remark about the person to the administration.

      3) When Tim Rohr addressed Zoltan's boss ABOUT Zoltan in a negative manner, that is a threat to his job especially in a forum board that had nothing to do with what was being discussed.

      Delete
    2. Sweetie, you're really desperately trying hard to find anything to write about. Have you seen PDN commentary? It's an open forum, more often than not the commentary can go in any tangent. Take your issue up with the moderators at PDN. And while you're at it, get another calling to do that running this blog. Your intellect is severely lacking in comparison with the Jungle. You act like you're a match of wits for the serious issues that are facing the Church that the Jung Watch seeks to address. Know this, you pathetic brainwashed husk of a human being- We will diminish you and your cult. We are taking our Church back. At best, you and your kind will all be herded into one parish. God willing, you'll all be finally branded heretics and will be forced to finally accept yourselves as closet protestants. Everywhere I go, no one has anything nice to say about your cult. You are a delusional minority, clearly clueless as to the mood of the majority of Catholics on this island. You are an abomination. We cannot wait to be rid of you and your ignorant brood.

      Delete
    3. Oh my, my, my......tsk, tsk, tsk......Was it something I said??? You asked if I seen the PDN commentary? You mean this one below, which I copied and pasted for you??

      "Guidelines: You share in the guampdn.com community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. If a comment violates these standards or our terms of service, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse."

      Delete
    4. Anon 11:37, you talk with self righteous pride, but you overestimate yourself and your capacities. Well, no wonder, your moral standards are coming from the Jungle blog. The Jungle is a transient phenomena at Guam, together with your arch-fundamentalist cry babies, who in a couple of years will be gone and no more. Including your show-business man, the playboy of liberal media, who is visibly overusing his talent - ummm, his un-talent - of making trouble. How sad you cannot just mimic his words and thoughts.

      3 No one can be established through wickedness,
      but the righteous cannot be uprooted.
      5 The plans of the righteous are just,
      but the advice of the wicked is deceitful.
      6 The words of the wicked lie in wait for blood,
      but the speech of the upright rescues them.
      7 The wicked are overthrown and are no more,
      but the house of the righteous stands firm.
      (Proverbs 12)

      Bernie

      Delete
    5. Anon at 11:37 you call Diana "ignorant"?

      Diana responds with "You asked if I seen "

      Delete
    6. To Diana, Zoltan, Bernie, Etc., Etc., Etc.:

      Diana's PDN cut and paste provided THEE SOLUTION to dealing with Tim and Chuck and anybody else who posts comments that offend you:

      "If a comment violates these standards or our terms of service, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse."

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 6:48 a.m.,

      I also highly recommend that we write to PDN, notifying of Tim Rohr's personal attacks and threats against Zoltan's job.

      Delete
    8. Zoltan is a grown up man. By deciding to post his comment, he consented to fighting his own battle. Leave him to it.

      Delete
    9. Dear Anonymous at 7:27 a.m.,

      That does not give anyone the right to threaten his job as Tim Rohr did. Anyone can post his/her comment, but a person should not have his job threatened just because he is exercising his constitutional right to express his opinions.

      Delete
    10. Anon 7:27AM DEFAMATION is not freedom of speech. Got it.

      Delete
  2. My response: Tim Rohr, if this gives you a peace of mind, I am not even on island... Also, you have no business in harassing my workplace. Please, do not do it. UoG has legal means to stop you when you interfere with the security of the workplace, faculty and students. You don't want this to come to a point when you'll be legally responsible in the court of law. The United States is a land of free expression, everyone has a right to voice her/his opinion publicly. You might not be aware but Guam is part of the U.S.!

    I ask the moderation of the PDN, please, do not allow threatening, insinuating or otherwise harassing comments to be published on you site. It is your duty to keep your blog clean from cyber bullies. There are numerous laws and policies that regulate cyber bullying that you should be aware of. I provide a sample here to read:

    http://hermes.webster.edu/browntim/Cyberbullying%20Project/cyberlaws.html

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Zoltan,

      It appears that the two comments made by Tim Rohr about your ability to teach at your job in the University has been removed. I do not see it there in the PDN.

      Delete
    2. Diana, thank God, the comments are still there

      Delete
  3. Shows how low Tim is, he is not MAD but SICK. His family must suffer from ALL this.

    Manuel Ayuyu

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Anonymous at 3:00 p.m.,

    It is always about the money. Money has become their idol.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What kind of person woukd advocate the firing of individuals who have an opposite view of how they chose to follow and worship God? Are they any different from the the murderer's of Christians throughout history? What were their motivations?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 5:16,

      THAT'S NOT WHY HE WAS FIRED.

      Initially, with this incident, it had nothing to do with the NCW. You people just linked it together. There isn't even a Neo priest in Dededo right now.

      The question is what are Tim Rohr's motivations?

      Delete
  6. The hypocrisy of it all. What about Father Paul Gofigan who chose not to follow the Way and gets fired for his different views of what one apostolic church means. This is why people view the way as crazy fanatics who preach one way and does things that are not consistent with Christianity. Jesus's greatest commandment of loving one another as I love you is not being followed by anyone who thinks they are better than anyone else. When the archbishop calls Father Paul down to the chancery to fire him and upon his return to his church only to find out his is locked out where is the Love? He gets fired for forgiving a sinner to show mercy and because the archbishop sees otherwise wants him fired , where is the love? Is the archbishop going to go through every confession and is he going to tell a priest who and what is to be forgiven?. What is the purpose of confession if we cannot forgive wholeheartedly. Yet the archbishop incardinates a priest with a history of child molestation and yet he is able to forgive that just because he is Neo. Then he fires Monsignor James because of so called financial mismanagement when all the other members of the finance council agree with him the archbishop fires them as well. You see the pattern of inconsistencies and hypocrisy? I could care less how you eat the Eucharist because the is between you and God and how you celebrate your mass. But when there is division in the church and you choose to follow someone else besides the Pope then it is time to break away and form your denomination. Isn't that what all protestant churches do? You have the might of the archbishop here bullying priets and using his authority with reckless abandonment to what is right then it is time to move on and don't call yourselves catholics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:33 p.m.,

      There is no hypocrisy. Father Paul is a priest who took an oath to obey the Archbishop. The first commandment of Jesus to love God and to love neighbor is along the lines of obedience. Children obey their parents because they love their parents. We obey God our Father out of love too. So, if a priest loves his Archbishop, he would not be hesitant to obey even if asked to do what he does not want.

      Father Paul got fired because of disobedience; however, he was not stripped of his priesthood. Monsignor James was removed because of financial mismanagement, which will be coming out soon once the Internal Review has finished their job.

      As for the NCW, we follow Christ and His Church.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous, I will like to continue with your comments about Father John Wadeson. The foundation of your arguements needs to be based on facts. Father John was never charged with the offense. No compensation was requested or given. Think about it; if you were a lawyer whose motvations were compensation....money, why would you not take a case to court or jury. No case anonymous. Nada.

      Gofigan on the other hand was harboring a known sex offender. You may argue that it is Gofigans responsibility to take care of this individual but we see the pride and weaknesses of Gofigan. This sex offender needs to lean on God, not Gofigan for his salvation. A priest brings people to God the Father, not Gofigan the priest.

      Delete
    3. 4:33,

      You're argument is invalid.

      Delete
  7. The hypocrisy anonoymous is how the NCW has been blamed for the Benavente and Gofigan incidents. With all their experience and finance history, how can you that Benavente and the finance committee are blameless in their part. People who manage money know how to hide their mistakes. The ploy to sell the seminary to cover their tracks wqs devious. Placing the blame solely on the Arch Bishop is convenient. Benavente motivations maybe is that he will be the next Bishop. Excellent scenerio for timmy rohr who can get his old job back selling $400. Crosses. Peel away at that onion skin and you will begin to expose what is at the center of Benavente's, rohrs and junkgle wwitch motivations. Ambition, money, pride.

    As for Gofigan, his oath first to God is to take care of his people. Gofigan probably was comfortable in just taking care of the people who came to church on Sundays. Never mind the thousands who don't come to church. Anonymous, read about the miracle of the bread when the disciples wanted to turn thousands of people away because there was not enough fish and bread. Jesus then said to his disciples, No, do not turn them away...you feed them. Again we see the blame conveniently placed on the Arch Bishop. Gofigan failed in his weaknesses to follow his oath.

    meaningful dialogue anonymous is what you will find here, You have your opinions, I have mine but lets together peel away at our own onion and affirm what is at the center of our motivations.

    ReplyDelete
  8. With all due respect, I am starting to think that Tim Rohr is obsessed with this. He made his point. Members of NCW made their point. Where will it end?

    He doesn't realize that he can post whatever he wants, but the Archbishop doesn't have to respond to him. All these Tim Rohr (TR) followers continue to deny the fact that the Archbishop is being persecuted. Umm Helllooooooooooooooo he doesn't even fight back with them. He keeps his mouth shut and he is getting attacked even for that. THAT IS PERSECUTION!!!

    Now TR thinks that the Archbishop is trying to send Mosignor James to hell (As we wrote in his recent blog)? I don't understand. Even the archbishop knows that he doesn't have the power. In fact, Tim Rohr, being the intelect that he is, should know this. Is he really Catholic?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey Mr. Rohr,

    RESPECT
    YOUR
    ARCHBISHOP.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "People who manage money know how to hide their mistakes."

    The head of the money-managemet in the Archdiocese of Agana: Archibishop Anthony S. Apuron.

    Where's that financial report? Where's that audit report? Apuron has fought legitimate financial reporting for years.

    -----

    "Gofigan probably was comfortable in just taking care of the people who came to church on Sundays."

    You accused some of hypocrisy and then proceeded to make up things about a priest who stood in the way of Apuron's NCW agenda.

    In the spirit of your style of "meaningful dialogue", let's speculate on the motivations of priests, namely Apuron himself. Here goes:

    Apuron probably recognizes his mortality and is probably removing any non-NCW archbishop candidates who will probably further mask the amount of resources funneled from archdiocese coffers into NCW pockets.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:26 a.m.,

      Do you have any evidence showing that money from the archdiocese has been funneling money into the NCW pockets? Or is this something you decided to make up yourself?

      Delete
  11. Wow this is is certainly an eye opener for the blindness that people have. To Diana, blind obedience is not something that every person despite taking an oathe should automatically do if it doesn't suit them. Who is the archbishop? God? Love is a two way street. Where was the love from the archbishop? Where is the obedience of the pope in sitting down while you consecrate his body? Again hypocrisy.If the Archbishop showed compassion and forgiveness then things would be different. Instead he acts like a Tyrant . He was not stripped of his priesthood although the letter that was given to him told him to seek employment elsewhere and that he wasn't welcomed at his diocese. Fortunately even the archbishop has to follow due process and that is the REAL reason he is still here. Please Diana, we are all adults with common sense. Don't take us as fools. As far as Msgnr. James goes you claim financial mismanagement. Isn't the archbishop's signature on all loan applications? No one is placing sole blame on the archbishop but he is putting the sole blame on Msgnr. James. Hypocrisy!! As far as your claim as followers of Christ and his Church, don't all protestants claim that. Again break away from the Catholic church and have the archbishop and Kiko as your elders.
    For the anonymous who claims that Father Wadeson is innocent because no charges were ever filed. Really? So here is a possible scenario. The altar boy he allegedly molested comes forward and says he was molested by Father Wadeson. The archbishop of Los Angeles then makes a deal not to file charges and we will get rid of him. You can also have the scenario were there was not enough evidence or he said she said scenario. Whatever it may be the archbishop of LA got rid of him. I guess his word doesn't mean much. Hypocrisy. And please HARBORING a sex offender. Father Paul was not harboring anyone. Harboring has the connotation of doing something against the law. The man did his crime over 20 years ago, went to jail is married and has 2 teenage children. He has asked for forgiveness for which Father Paul did. He wasn't hiding . And the assumption that Father Paul was taking too much credit is another hypocrisy. Who are you to determine that? Didn't your leader kiko go to the pope to tell of his wondrous work evangelizing the poor and criminals of Spain. His pride has taken him to such notoriety and father Paul does this and now he is too proud. What a crock of crap you eat. And then finally to the anonymous who quotes the bible and then tries to interpret it his way is just ridiculous. The doubt of the apostles to feed the thousands from a loaf of bread and a basket of fish is the same as placing all the blame on the archbishop? Just because you guys say it ovwer and over again doesn't make it true.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:31 a.m.

      We do not follow blind obedience. When a catechists tells us to do something immoral, it is appropriate to report the catechist to Father Pius. For example, if a catechist tells us to steal, then we can disobey. That is not blind obedience. On the other hand, if the catechists tells a person to give up his girlfriend and return to his wife and work out the problems, then it is expected for the person to obey However, if the person does not obey and continues to commit adultery, there are consequences to his misbehavior, which God will take care of.

      In the case of Father Paul, telling him to remove the sex offender from employment is not immoral. All he had to do was obey. And when he chose not to obey, there are consequences to that disobedience. In the case of Monsignor James, he was given another position. Again, this has nothing to do with morality.

      Anonymous, no one came forward to settle any deal with Father Wadeson. In fact, no one came forward at all. There were simply allegations against Father Wadeson with no one coming forward to make any charges. He was never arrested because no one ever came forward. He never made a monetary settlement with anyone because no one ever came forward. As for the person employed under Father Paul, he was arrested, found guilty, convicted and jailed.

      Delete
  12. Really anonoymous, possible scenerio's? Is that the bases for your comments? Is that the foundation of your intellect? Can you comment on what you know to be factual rather than what you "think" is truth.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "In the case of Father Paul, telling him to remove the sex offender from employment is not immoral. All he had to do was obey. And when he chose not to obey, there are consequences to that disobedience."

    How can you say this and keep a clear conscience? It has been shown that Fr Paul did in fact terminate this man's employment. And the archbishop accepted that evidence, which is why he changed the accusation against Fr Paul to failing to terminate the 'de facto' employment. In other words, he wasn't actually employed! Fr Paul obeyed the Archbishops instruction to terminate employment, but you call that disobedience? Shame on you.

    As Fr Paul's lawyer stated in the appeal to Rome: "The charge against Fr. Gofigan has become an elastic concept. At first it was because he did not obey the direct order to terminate the employment of (name withheld). When the charge proved false, it mutated into allowing him to do volunteer work for the parish. While the case is not identical, the accusation against a pastor in order to remove him from his office is somewhat analogous to the joinder of issues in a contentious trial, and the Code is very strict that such a joinder, once determined, may be altered only under the most rigorous conditions. In this case, the accusation and the basis of the removal was expanded from not terminating the employment to allowing him to helping out in the parish."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:18 p.m.

      The investigation showed that the sex offender was still working as he had been before. The investigation showed that he still had keys to the facilities. The website that I provided showed that he was listed under the staff as a Director in Apirl 2013 - only three months before Father Paul was removed. If he was a volunteer worker, what was his name doing under "STAFF" working for the Dededo parish as a Director rather than as a volunteer worker?

      Termination from employment does not mean to take away only your paycheck. It also means to take away the job description that comes with the paycheck. For example, if I was terminated from my job, I would not be listed anywhere as a staff member in my workplace (even if I decide to come in as a volunteer worker). I would not be in possession of keys to the jobsite nor be doing any of the things that an employee in my capacity should be doing.

      Delete
    2. You are heartless and merciless.. What did Jesus do to Mary Magdalene The worst sinner on the earth who became a Saint. Practice what you preach. Would you condone this man if he were to walk in the Way? Are you condoning him because he is the brother of someone high in the Way whose son is a seminarian?

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 8:05 pm,

      The truth is the man is a convicted and registered sex offender. His sins are forgiven by God when he repented, but that does not remove the fact that that he did commit the crime. Even St. Paul said that he was a persecutor of Christians. He never denied it even when his sin was forgiven.

      Delete
    4. The Archdiocese should also make sure there are also no registered sex offenders attending the saturday night eucharists where both adults and their children are present, there are none right?

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 9:08 a.m.,

      The Eucharist (whether in the Parish or the Way) is open to ALL sinners. Even the sex offender in Dededo is allowed to attend Mass. He is simply not allowed to be hired as a worker in the parish.

      Delete
    6. Would he be allowed to be a "responsible" in the community?

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 11:40 a.m.,

      That depends on God. St. Paul was a persecutor of Christians and God made him an Apostle. So the decision belongs to God.

      Delete
    8. God would allow a registered sex offender to be a responsible, yet a bishop could not allow the same to be a volunteer?

      Delete
    9. Dear Anonymous at 3:03 p.m.,

      Who are we to question God? He does not think like us. After all, God even told Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac and even told the prophet Hosea to marry a prostitute. So, yes, God can allow a sex offender to be a responsible and also not allow a sex offender to be a volunteer. There are reasons why God tells us to do certain things, and those things often lead us to better things if we obeyed God rather than what we want to. Can you imagine if Abraham said no to God when he was told to sacrifice his son Isaac?

      Delete
  14. Blockley weep - MAN UP

    READ IT AND WEEP
    Fr.Matthew Blockley has left a new comment on your post "NEW FACTS FOR "NO DOUBT ABOUT IT"":

    Dear Mr. Rohr.

    Further to reading the post today on Filipino priests and in particular Father Efren Adversario, please allow me to comment.

    My personal staff and I were present at the time when Fr. Efren Adversaio was admitted to the Makati Medical center. Unknown to many, Fr. Efren was not well for some time and I had opened up the guest rooms in my private residence for him. I had also asked the household staff to take care of him, as I would do for any priest who was not well.

    As some informed people know I had also offered to take in a Guam deacon who was sick here in Manila and avail of the same help. As a priest who had experienced difficult situations in the past I did not wish to see any ordained priest without medical aid. I remember the event regarding Fr. Efren very well.

    The staff entered his room to bring dinner and found him laying on the floor in serious condition. Immediately, the staff and I rushed him to Makati Medical Center. It is true that at that point in time he had no medical coverage here in Philippines. He had been in contact with Dominic Kim who seemed to have no interest in assisting him to place him on the insurance of the Archdiocese of Agana, Guam.

    As you can imagine the medical bills were substantial, at least in our money of the Philippine peso. To the archdiocese it would only have been a small cost had he have been on the insurance of the archdiocese. In all,honesty, I paid for those hospital bills. I did so because I believe when you help a priest who is down you ultimately serve Our Lord Jesus Christ in that priest.

    I never expect anything in life, just the Blessings of the Lord are enough for me. On January 7th this year on Father Efren's 25th anniversary, in thanksgiving for helping him, he donated a small altar to my prayer room.

    After Fr. Efren was taken out of hospital for aortic complications, it was Monsignor James Benavente in October 2013 who immediately called Mr. Jerry Calvo to have Fr. Efren placed on the insurance of the Archdiocese of Agana. Msgr. James achieved something in two days which Archbishop Apuron and Dominic Kim were unable to achieve in nine months.

    To further give the facts Tim, I would never accept money from any priest and so Fr. Efren was able to stay here at some ease. But in my quiet times, I would often ask myself what kind of an archbishop leaves a priest with no money, no health insurance, and now very sick? Is this what a bishop does to the priests he has ordained?

    On a further note and in reference to what is true, I also know that Fr. Mike Crisostomo had also given financial help to Fr. Efren. Efren never asked. Fr. Mike just did that because he saw the need.

    No one wants thanks or praise, but God who sees these small acts, rewards in his time. But it seems sometimes, for the common good of all, we do have to let facts be known. So your post is correct.

    Providing that a person in need has honesty, trust, and integrity, my staff and I would willingly assist any priest who found himself in the situation Fr. Efren did.

    Sincerely, Matthew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at Sept. 4th at 9:58 p.m.,

      I see.......so Fr.Matthew Blockley paid the medical bills of Father Efren with his own money?? How did he get the money? Was it from his own stipend or from a parish?

      And then he goes on to say, "it was Monsignor James Benavente in October 2013 who immediately called Mr. Jerry Calvo to have Fr. Efren placed on the insurance of the Archdiocese of Agana. Msgr. James achieved something in two days which Archbishop Apuron and Dominic Kim were unable to achieve in nine months."

      Really?? And how was Monsignor James able to get health insurance for Father Efren without the Archbishop's signature? So, when it's a financial disaster, it is the Archbishop's fault because his signature was on the papers despite that it was Monsignor James who was in charge of that department. And when it was something good, it was given to Monsignor James credit despite that it also had the Archbishop's signature on it. How convenient for them.


      Delete
    2. This Blockley guy is been hiding for almost twenty years, what boggles me why is this guy continue to practice of a priest since he left his post with out any permission?

      Delete
  15. Interesting question for mr white and rohr; you say that you are Catholic but are you Christian? PDN, Coffman should ask that question to both next time they are interviewed.

    ReplyDelete