As a former member of the INC I can understand the desire of critics to remain anonymous on the Internet especially in light of the Ross Tipon lawsuit I would like to point out that the gentleman raising this claim is anonymous himself as he has not signed his post and if it is who I assume it is then he is using a pseudonym which negates his claim If the one who posted this claim wants to be taken seriously then he should start by revealing his true identity and motivation 4 July 2005 17 52 UTC