Misleading the Readers

On November 14th, Tim Rohr posted the following photo with the title "Might as well start selling indulgences" on his blog: 

The title and photo of his blog misled SOME readers into believing that it was the Archbishop who placed the sign and collection box up.  However, some people who knew the sign had been there for a long time even when Monsignor James was there finally spoke up.  Under that thread, Tim Rohr made the following statement (the bold is mine): 

Correct.  It's not new.  And if Msgr. James had put up the same sign there wouldn't have been anyone who gave it a second thought.  The sign is not the issue.

http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/11/might-as-well-start-selling-indulgences.html 

Of course, the sign is not the issue because some people recognized that the same sign was there during Monsignor James' time at the Cathedral. Therefore, Tim said that the 20 million dollars debt was the real issue. According to Tim Rohr (bold is mine): 

Yes. And it was not a problem. I posted this because I want people to think about why it is now a problem. 

The archdiocese is 20 million in debt. The VG Is shaking down the insurers. Apuron just hit up "let the babies die Lou" for nearly another million bucks. and while the cathedral begs for dollars he hands over a mega million dollar asset and wings off to Colombia for some fun and frolic with his boytoys. 

That 20 million dollar debt is NOT new.  In fact, that debt goes back to the time when the former finance council was still there. In January, 2015, Tim Rohr wrote (bold is mine):  

$20 million is the figure estimated by the former AFC.  Note that the remainder of the debt incurred by the renovation of the Cathedral and the Cemeteries, a project overseen by Msgr. James, is only 1.7 million.

http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/01/setting-record-straight-really-straight.html

That 1.7 million incurred by Monsignor James was later increased to 7 million dollars on July 31, 2015.  According to Tim:  

The Archdiocese is 20 Million dollars in debt which means that even if Apuron can blame 7 million dollars of that debt on Msgr. James, the remaining 13 Million is all on Apuron.   The truth is of course that even the 7 million dollars that Msgr. James was tasked with paying back was actually Apuron's loan, not Msgr. James', for the simple reason that Msgr. James has no authority to sign for a loan.

http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/07/picking-on-second-thing.html#more

Furthermore, Tim Rohr stated:  "And if Msgr. James had put up the same sign there wouldn't have been anyone who gave it a second thought." Why did he make this statement especially when he already admitted back in February 1st that the collection box to charge the tourists $1.00 was his idea????  According to Tim's statement in February 1st:  

The idea for the collection box for the visitors at the Cathedral originated with me.

http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/02/the-ministry-of-bathroom.html#more  

A collection box charging the tourists was placed at the entrance of the Cathedral, and some people were blaming the Archbishop and Monsignor David for putting it there.  Some commenters came out and said that it was Monsignor James who put it there.  But Tim Rohr admitted in his blog that he was the one responsible for the collection box.  It was his idea.  

The question is why make an entry post with the photo of the collection box and a title that misled readers into thinking that the Cathedral is so much in debt that they are NOW RESORTING to charging $1.00 from the visiting tourists?    

UPDATE!!!!!!!  

Now, this is getting lovely.  This was published in the jungle under the thread "Might as well start selling indulgences" (the bold is mine): 

AnonymousNovember 15, 2015 at 9:39 AM

Was the donation box your idea in the first place Mr. Rohr? One that maybe you pitched to Msgr. Benavente?

Reply

1. 
   TimNovember 15, 2015 at 9:57 AM

   LOL. Stupid. The sign is in the cathedral, not the gift shop - or at least that's where it was when I was still there over 2 years ago. And my job was only to manage purchases. The cathedral had a policy which charged tourists $1 to use the bathroom, and even that was a policy I opposed. LOL. Thanks for that. Shows me your side has NOTHING. But then we know that. LOL.

Mr. Rohr stated on November 15, 2015 at 9:57 am that the cathedral had a policy which charged tourists $1.00 to use the bathroom, and that he was OPPOSED to this policy.  However, on February 1, 2015, this is what Mr. Rohr wrote in his blog:  

The idea for the collection box for the visitors at the Cathedral originated with me. When I became affiliated with the Gift Shop in 2009, I became aware of the problem of "bathrooms". The Plaza de Espana and the Cathedral was a major tourist stop and sometimes there would be several buses of tourists frequenting these locations..............

However, I know how important having access to a restroom is when you're on a bus tour, so I proposed "the ministry of the bathroom".   It worked like this:

• A flyer was made in Japanese with a map to the bathroom.
• A key would be provided.
• A dollar would be charged to cover maintenance.
• Some form of ID would be left at the Gift Shop counter.
• The ID would be returned when the key was returned.
• The maintenance person would be made aware of the use of the bathroom and would continually check it to make sure there were always enough paper supplies and that the bathrooms would be clean throughout the day. 

Obviously all this took time. The cashier at the store often had to interrupt a sale in order to process the request for the key, a request which could occur several times with the sudden presence of 30 to 40 tourists. And the maintenance and the paper supplies would require the maintenance person to service the restrooms several times a day. 

We tried this for awhile but it really did become a burden. At the same time there was a need to police the tourists inside the cathedral. Tourists would often go up on the sanctuary to have their pictures taken. Security cameras inside the Cathedral would alert which ever staff was on duty and one of the staff would have to stop doing what they were doing to go and ask the tourists to stay off the sanctuary. (The tour guides were supposed to do this but usually they did not.)

To fund the extra costs of running a public restroom for several busloads of tourists on a daily basis and to assist with the costs of constantly monitoring the activities of the tourists in the cathedral, it was decided that it would be easier to set up a donation box at the entrance of the Cathedral rather than task the Gift Shop employees with having to charge $1.00 every time they were asked about a bathroom. 

http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/02/the-ministry-of-bathroom.html#more

As anyone can see, Tim Rohr stated today in his blog that he OPPOSED the $1.00 fee to use the bathroom.  Yet, nine months ago, he admitted in his blog that he was the one who proposed the $1.00 fee to use of the bathroom.  This is very deceptive.