From: The Bolen Report
Tim Bolen is a Crisis Management Consultant, and a Health Advocate, in the Health Care Industry. He also runs a website The Bolen Report on which he rallies against an organised assault by a group, against companies, and practitioners, who offer alternative medicine and treatments.
Tim Bolen has a bee in his bonnet about Skeptics.
In a recent post Bolen accuses the international Skeptic organisation of being an organised hate group.
The rape, mutilation and death threats against Meryl Dorey, President of the Australian Vaccination Network. (AVN) make a very clear statement about the reality of the international “skeptic” organization. The activities of Australian Skeptics, with their Stop the AVN subsidiary attacks, took the lid of off their formally secret plans.
Tracing the Die in a Fire” and “Just burn” phone calls back to top Australian skeptic leader, shoe salesman Daniel Rafaelle, the Stop the AVN head’s home telephone, brought everything out into the open. Remember, the Australian Skeptics, at their own “Amazing meeting” in 2010, gave Rafaelle their Top Award for his activities against Meryl Dorey and the AVN.
Meryl Dorey is gearing up for another round of attacks, this time, most likely violent disruption of AVN meetings, by the shoe salesman Daniel Rafaelle’s strike team. But this time, Dorey has advice, and support, from very tough Australian attorneys eager to engage Rafaelle and his “skeptic” ilk.
Earlier this year a magistrate in Ballina granted interim Apprehended Violence Orders (AVOs) against Daniel Rafaelle, creator of Stop the AVN and Dan Buzzard, an active member of the same organisation. The judge declined to grant an interim AVO against the third defendant, Peter Bowditch, but evidence will be provided and there will be another court appearance in November of this year. On the basis that Meryl Dorey, head of the Australian Vaccination Network notorious in skeptical circles for it’s anti-vaccination propaganda, had received threats via email and phone.
My violent threat was to say that someone who encouraged people to contact my family and tell them I have mental health issues should leave my family alone or I might respond and they might not like the response.
In his latest article Bolen talks about Daniel Rafaelle and repeats the allegation that several threatening phone-calls were made to Ms Dorey by Mr Rafaelle. However there is little reason to believe this allegation to be true. It’s my understanding that the police investigated and found insufficient evidence to support any accusation against Mr Rafaelle.
Buzzard also points out that Bolen makes a number of remarks on his post that could be construed as threats of his own:
In short, if played right, the stalking “victim” can lure the predator into a dark place, so to speak, where angry friends are waiting (quietly) to make the equivalent of a “citizen’s arrest.” And, they are allowed to wait there quietly, armed with the equivalent of a baseball bat, or two, or three, to be used to “subdue, with reasonable force” the stalker, holding them for the local law enforcement. Now ask yourself “What exactly would YOU, as a reasonable person, define “subdue, with reasonable force?” considering, first, that this “stalker” has, already threatened “rape, mutilation, and death by fire?”
Of course, with the threat level what it is, in Australia (rape, mutilation, and death by fire), a prudent person would have one, or more, friends with Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, experience along so that if a weapon appeared in the hands of the stalker… Use your imagination.
Here Bolen seems to advocate entrapment and physical assault which seems far more deserving of an AVO than the accusations levelled against Australian Skeptics.
But worse than that Bolen has far more hateful views on Skeptics believing us all to be “angry male homosexuals masquerading as atheists” and “whose management has a significant interest in paedophilia its promotion and protection”. These are libellous statements but they are sadly not uncommon in certain quarters of the alternative and complementary medicine world. He accuses skeptics of wanting to institutionalise those with cerebral palsy, autism and traumatic brain injury and that skeptics concerns about unevidenced and potentially dangerous alternative medicine treatments are simply them redirecting their self loathing at the world.
Tim Bolen clearly has something of a skewed view of skepics, a view skewed by hate and anti-gay bigotry, and is clearly taking advantage of the fact that skeptics will stoop nowhere as low as he is willing to address his claims.
Bolen invites us to judge a man by the content of his character. If we are to do so than we have to judge Bolen harshly as he supports dangerous quackery that turns loving parents into child abusers and is happy to lie and defame his opponents rather than support his own position with reason and evidence.
We have to conclude that Bolen is a very nasty man.