Invitation to Dr. Ronald Federici
In my previous post and in a number of other places, I have invited Ronald Federici to identify at least one statement I have made regarding him or his work that he believes to be factually false and provide me with a factual rebuttal. So far, no response, so just in case my invitation got lost among my writings and was missed, I am making it the topic of this posting. My only conditions are that they have to be statements that I actually made with the link to the statement proving that I made it and the statement has to be of a factual nature rather than an opinion that cannot be absolutely proven true or false or some controversy where there are opinions both pro and con.
My intention is to provide truthful information in my writings and so if I have unintentionally gotten any facts wrong, I am very open to correction and should a factual rebuttal be presented to me, I would be more than willing to correct it.
I have also been accused of hate speech by some of Federici’s supporters (see the last two postings in the discussion that occured on an adoption site, for example). To me, it sounded like this unidentified individual was wanting the moderator of the board to suppress any discussion that did not agree with that person’s point of view by labeling it as having ulterior motives, being condescending, hateful, etc. and quite frankly I found it highly presumptuous that this person would presume to speak for all adoptive parents in a number of states since there appears to be a diversity of opinion among adoptive parents about the issues that were being discussed. Nevertheless, I invite Federici’s supporters to provide me with specific examples of statements I have made that they consider to be “hateful”.
I do not hate Dr. Federici or anyone else and again, as I stated several months ago in describing the purpose of this blog, my sole intention is to provide truthful information and not to make any specific recommendations. I recognize that I cannot force anyone to do anything and so my sole intention is to provide information. What people decide to do with that information is up to them.
There are also insinuations being made, linking to an anonymous WordPress blog that describes an alleged lawsuit by Federici (I say alleged because none of us have been served with the papers posted on that blog) that I am being “paid to defame”. This is false on both counts. First of all, I sincerely believe that nothing I have written qualifies as defamation. Criticism is not defamation unless it makes maliciously intended false statements. Second, I can state with complete honesty that I have not made or tried to make any money at all from my criticisms of Dr. Federici’s work, my service on ACT’s advisory board is strictly pro bono and I have no conflict of interest business-wise as I am not running any kind of business related to adoption or anything that could be considered competitive with what he does. There are anonymous postings claiming to be me that lie about this, saying that I am offering adoption services but these are lies and forgeries and as soon as I became aware of them, I took immediate steps to correct this false impression by posting a forgery alert on the website that these anonymous postings linked to. Obviously someone wants to make it seem as if I have a business conflict of interest when I do not.
That anonymous posting also contained false innuendo that I was in some way linked to HAMAS, which I am not, nor is the individual named, from what I know although I have never met that individual and prior to discussions where my name was being linked with his, had never even heard of him, nor he of me. Interesting that I would be accused of both being linked to HAMAS and being a Quran burner, all in the period of one month, both of which are, of course, false allegations.