Allen Long

I grew up with deep roots in NTM. My grandparents were the very first NTM Bible Institute graduates. I was born into NTM and my parents were ‘die hard’ NTM missionaries. I never thought that NTM was the perfect mission. But I did grow up believing that the leadership of NTM were godly men, worthy of their jobs. At that time, I still believed they were interested in TRUTH, for the sake of godliness.

Immediately after I graduated from high school I enrolled in NTM’s Bible Institute in Waukesha, Wisconsin. I got married during that time and my wife and I eventually completed the NTM training and arrived in Thailand as missionaries in early 2001.

We soon joined the work in the Yellow Leaf tribe, where my parents were serving at that time. Then on June 30, 2003, based on my parents’ resignation from NTM, the NTM (Thailand) leadership felt that my wife and I should move to a different work, or even a different country. They expressed their full support for us in relocating somewhere within the NTM family. Instead, my wife and I decided to resign from NTM and continue to work with the Yellow Leaf tribe independently of NTM.

For reasons that NTM has never explained, on August 23, 2004 – more than one year after my voluntary resignation in good standing from NTM – NTM (Thailand) sent a letter to the Chairman of the Evangelical Fellowship of Thailand accusing me of insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting the Field Committee. They cited these things specifically as the reason they had to have me leave NTM.

This letter was also sent to the Religious Affairs Department of the Thai Government.

On September 8, 2004 I wrote a letter to NTM (Thailand) asking them to offer some proof of their allegations. I believed the letter they wrote was a misunderstanding of some sort; I had no prior knowledge that they felt that way. They NEVER responded.

On September 16, 2004 I wrote a letter to Asia Coordinator for the Executive Committee of NTM informing him of the situation and asking for his help. He NEVER responded.

After NTM spent two years defending their letter in criminal court, they offered me a cash settlement and a letter retracting the other one. The letter they wrote in settlement of my complaint completely contradicted the letter they had so brazenly defended, not only in court but also to my pastor! And after all that, no one in NTM found it in their heart to say they were sorry for what they had done; there was no apology – not in their letter, and not anywhere else.

The real truth is they are NOT sorry. They just couldn’t keep it under the rug any longer.

I am writing this now in hopes that someone will be able to help me reconcile with them. I have always been willing to reconcile and restore fellowship. But, that requires a similar desire on both sides.

47 responses to “Allen Long

  1. interesting… not surpising at all but interesting.
    I believe the leadership of NTM has been following the devil for a while now…. sounds extreme but if you’re not following God then there isn’t many other options are there?

  2. where’s the “post to facebook” linky on the stories. =)

  3. good call on the social bookmarking. i’m on it.

  4. So, I thought this blog was about the Fanda Abuse situation. Is it now becoming a place to air our (unrelated to Fanda) dirty laundry about NTM? If it is, I’m sure I could dig up some stuff…

  5. Hello anonymous,

    Great comment. Allow me to answer.

    This blog is about how NTM leadership failed us, and continues to. No, it isn’t a place to air our dirty laundry as you say, but it is a place to bring a voice to Godly people who have had none thus far.

    This is beyond the abuse we suffered at the hands of pedophiles and child beaters, but about the abuse of leadership that condoned it, in fact turned the other way and ignored it.

    This is about how NTM leadership is not accountable to anyone, they are a law unto themselves, and it a place for us to dispute that law using Biblical standards.

    If you have a story about the same leadership style, which we have no reason to believe was limited to Fanda students and the Senegal field, please find here a safe place to talk.

    If you simply want to air grievances, do it on your own blog. Thank you.

  6. Hello Anonymous IV,

    I agree with Kari’s response. I would also like to ask you for any advice or help to bring about reconcilation. Thank you for your consideration.

  7. Allen, it sounds like you’ve been treated very poorly and with no cause. I respect your desire for reconciliation. I pray that you receive it.

  8. Maybe some people missed the connection between Allen Long’s story and the Fanda Eagles. As Kari says, it is about how the NTM leadership has failed people. But, maybe that isn’t clear enough.

    The NTM Field Committee in Thailand reported Allen Long to the authorities for what heinous crime?

    For ” insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting the Field Committee.”

    We knew it wouldn’t be for child abuse, because they don’t report that to the local authorities… except in the US, where it is required by law. And, where they have their bank accounts.

    Now do you see it, Anonymous IV?

  9. A note of “correction” to Anonymous IV:
    Get a clue! It isn’t Allen Long’s “dirty laundry” that is being aired…..It is New Tribes “dirty laundry”!
    There are a number of types of abuse. I know for a fact that what New Tribes put Allen and his entire family through can only be described as “abuse”, clear and simple!
    Thanks to all those who responded with understanding to Allen’s letter.

  10. Nothing surprises me in regard to the NTM leadership. When the work takes priority over children and their safety not only biblical fundamentals are ignored but just honest to goodness right and wrong. Those outside Ntm and the church deal more justly with the situations than the “righteous”. Shame on NTM who chose to ignore the truth and protect the evil.

  11. Thai Guy, you stated it beautifully. What heinous crime is “insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting the Field Committee”. Well, evidently, Allen thought it was a heinous crime that NTM wrote this letter and that is why he apparently brought criminal charges against NTM. That is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Are you telling me, Allen, that you filed suit against NTM in criminal court because you didn’t like them telling the authorities why they encouraged you to “voluntarily” leave NTM? In any civilized society, not only would this not be chargeable criminally, but there would be no civil cause of action. And now you are stating that you want “reconciliation”? Well, nice start. Maybe bashing NTM in a public forum like this will give you a nice start. You apparently are a dirty player. A bitter player. As for the child abuse that has gone on, that is a different story. That is criminal, and people need to be held accountable.

  12. submitted by thai guy

    Anonymous, of course, I think the point of similarity is being missed here. NTM has never reported child sexual abuse to the authorities on any field. They did report Allen Long (according to his story). This is a good study in contrasts as to what they consider important.

    As a Thai, I think that it is not your part to decide that my country is not civilized just because we treat libel as a criminal offense. If your country did, you probably wouldn’t be calling people “dirty players” and hiding behind an alias.

  13. Hello Anonymous, of course,

    Thank you for your obvious concern and for the questions you raised. I agree, the sexual abuse that those poor children went through is GODLESS and criminal. I want to call on NTM to quickly give their full and undivided attention to those issues and SOLVE it. If they don’t, that is the craziest thing I’ve ever heard!

    The lawsuit I filed was only as a last resort. If they had simply been gossiping to fellow believers I would never have been forced to take action. But they chose to take the matter before unbelievers, the Thai government and a para-government religious organization! Even so, once NTM agreed to tell the truth, the charges were dropped. The crazy thing is it took them two years to tell the truth!!!

    I want to assure you that I want reconciliation with them. Do they want it with me? I can be at their Thailand office in four hours to begin the healing process.

  14. From the Fanda Eagles blog:
    Anonymous on 07.31.09 at 8:15 pm
    Praise the Lord that this is not the attitude/position of NTM anymore, as I would not be a missionary with NTM, as I am now.

    Anonymous, praise the Lord if you have not experienced this attitude/position in NTM.

    In January 1997, the Executive Committee of NTM apologized for “the autocratic system” that they had practiced up to that time. They told the “NTM family” that they were “determined not to go back to the fear, suspicion, and heaviness of our former militaristic leadership style.” Your positive experiences show that they have had a measure of success in that endeavor.

    The Fanda Eagles’ experiences have shown that NTM leadership has failed in many important ways. That is obvious to anyone who reads the blog.

    Please review the experiences of Allen Long. This was a failure even to live up to the standards of the “former militaristic style of leadership.”

    Months after he had resigned from NTM, the Thailand Field Committee reported him to Royal Thai Government officials for “insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting the Field Committee.” They accused him of no moral failing, no abuse of children, no legal infraction of any Thai law. They have never said why they did this.

    This is how NTM leaders, under the new style of leadership, treated a former missionary who had resigned months before! Of course, since he wasn’t in NTM, maybe they didn’t feel a need to follow the new method of gracious dealing with him.

    How does this compare to the subject of sexual abuse of children? Is it possible that they have never reported a single instance of child abuse to local government authorities in the nations where they serve?

  15. Allen, I am just giving my perspective. I am not an NTMer or an ex NTMer. Nor am I an NTM fan. Regarding sexual abuse, those issues must be dealt with and the relevant people brought to justice to the extent possible. Your story, however, does not have the total ring of truth to it, but maybe it is true. Are you telling me that, out of the blue, with no provocation, request, or any other “extra” motivation, NTM wrote that letter. So, one day a year after you resigned somebody just decided when they got up one morning to write this letter.

    Now on to the substance of the letter…it doesn’t take much investigation to determine that Thai law regarding defamation is very liberal. But, the law is the law. But, just because there is a law, does not mean that you should seek to prosecute under it. Why did you seek to prosecute under this law? I mean, if it were a crime to be a Christian in a certain country, would you go around reporting people for breaking that law? The letter merely states an opinion. I have people say worse about me all of the time.

    You stated you received a cash settlement and that NTM wrote a letter contradicting its earlier letter. Putting two and two together, I would assume that they wrote the letter because you required them to as a condition of the settlement? I mean, if you were dangling me over a bridge and threatened to drop me unless I erased this post and said nice thing, I would do that as well.

    Regarding my hiding behind this anonymity. Well, it certainly is not out of fear of prosecution. I am not in Thailand and the law here in the U.S. would be of no avail to you.

  16. I know this sounds crazy but I have never been told why NTM wrote that letter. In regards to the substance of the letter, I personally read their letter and it is not merely an opinion. Interestingly enough, three days after NTM wrote their letter, I was accused of illegally doing Christian ministry in another letter referencing NTM. And that is one of the reasons I had to seek protection. NTM wrote the letter of retraction and paid for damages of their own free will. The point now is reconciliation.

  17. Anonymous of course,
    Are you calling Allen a liar? That is so sad. I have been called a liar my entire life. Just because a story seems unbelievable does not make it untrue. When are people going to realize that the things that have happened within NTM ARE unbelievable, but true?
    Do you believe the bible? Because there is a very unbelievable story in my bible. An innocent man, perfect beyond question was viciously and violently put to death, and the most unbelievable part? He rose again!!! Was he lying?

  18. On August 17,2004, I got a letter from NTM thanking me for my years of service that I had given to NTM. Six days later they sent quite a different letter out! Now isn’t that the craziest thing you ever heard?

  19. Anonymous, of course said: “Regarding sexual abuse, those issues must be dealt with and the relevant people brought to justice to the extent possible.”

    Yes, how very well said. Sexual abuse of children is not a trivial matter. We would hope that were it to occur in any boarding schools operated by NTM, NTM would treat is as very important. Even an atheist would be outraged at these things, and would hurry to report it to the authorities in the country where the crime occurred. An atheist would do that with no provocation, request, or any other “extra” motivation at all, beyond their revulsion at the offense.

    Has NTM ever reacted in that way? Have they ever reported these things, which you condemn in such unambiguous language, to the police in a foreign country? Have they ever willfully NOT reported it?

    NTM has never explained to us why they reported Allen. Any sane person would expect that they did not just wake up one morning and decide to do it. They must have had an awfully good reason to report it, considering their record of reporting child abuse.

  20. It is also a mystery to me why NTM leadership has never reported such incidents to the local authorities. But what is just as remarkable, is that apparently nobody else reported these abusers to the local authorities either? Is that for the most case true? It is not only NTM leadership that could report the crimes, but all others with such knowledge as well.

    Regarding seeking justice today for crimes that occurred 10, 20, or 30 years, ago…frankly, in most cases it is not going to happen. Think about it…Person A alleges that Person B committed a certain crime in Country X in year Y. In year Y+20, neither Person A nor Person B live in country X, witnesses are scattered throughout the world and quite frankly, the authorities are not going to take on the case because it would be nearly impossible to prove it to the extent necessary. There would be jurisdictional problems and there would be burden of proof problems.

    So, what are we left with from a practical standpoint. Well, for any sexual abuse that has occurred recently, I encourage anybody with such knowledge to report the crime to the relevant authorities to the extent that doing so would have some utility or that not doing so would be illegal. In addition, for crimes that occurred long ago for which prosecution is unlikely, and even if prosecution took place, would likely not be successful…at the very least NTM should acknowledge its errors, be forthright regarding the incidents, apologize sincerely to all those affected and offer to help in any way possible. (and, of course, NTM should immediately terminate the offenders’ employment. Most importantly, NTM should do all that is possible to ensure that this type of thing never happens again, and that if it does happen, NTM will deal with it swiftly and cooperate with any authorities to the fullest extent possible. Our children are our first priority and they are our ministry. Our children do not take a back seat to our ministry. Our children should be given the benefit of all doubt when they report any such activity. Our children should be asked by persons with whom they feel comfortable if any such activity has taken place or is taken place. I would recommend that no dorms have all younger children…that if there are no older children who inherently look out for the younger children, then there should be some type of monitoring system. Dorm “fathers” should never enter into a girls room alone when the girls are present, period. Each MK school that contains a dorm should always have at least one child advocate employed to whom a child is entitled to call at any time for any reason in complete confidentiality and who has the right to show up at the dorm, unannounced, at any time, for whatever reason, for purposes of ensuring that the children are being treated properly. This “advocate” so to speak would also be required to be present at all disciplinary actions involving the child and would have the right to veto any disciplinary action pending some sort of further review. I would question whether any discipline at all should be administered by the dorm father (especially spankings). Quite frankly, dorm parents are not really “parents” with respect to their dorm kids. (not to say that some great dorm parents haven’t earned that title in they eyes of some of their dorm kids). Their boundaries are not the same as the boundaries of actual parents. Dorm fathers do not need to be hugging and kissing their dorm daughters good night in their bedroom at night. No one on one discussions behind closed doors.

    Listen, there are a lot of great dorm parents out there…probably more so in recent years than in the 80’s and early 90’s. That notwithstanding, all must be restricted so as to protect the children from the few inevitable perverts that infiltrate any organization’s midst.

    We need a well thought out dorm children’s bill of rights and we need a well thought out system that would eliminate these things from happening.

    I was happy to hear that on one particular field in the early 90’s, dorm parents were asked to leave the dorm after it was reported that the dorm father had lost his temper on a couple of occasions and upon the leadership hearing that the dorm kids were afraid of him. The leadership just did not want to take any chances with this guy. The problem is, that most of the time, these kids are not given ready access or a ready ear from leadership…either directly or indirectly, so their voices are neither given a forum to be heard…nor are they heard when given a forum, because the forum involves a deck that is squarely stacked against them.

    Alrighty then, should I continue, or should I call it a night. Call it a night it is.

  21. To Anonymous, of course

    Your gender is not apparent from your chosen screen name, so I will address you as K. Anon OC. “Anon OC” for brevity; “K.” is an abbreviation for a Thai word meaning “honorable” which we use irrespective of gender.

    On one of your posts, you mentioned that Alan Long felt compelled to file criminal charges against NTM because they accused him of “insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting the Field Committee.” You said, “I have people say worse about me all of the time.”

    You have, perhaps unintentionally, pointed out a big difference between American and Thai culture and customs.

    There are people like you in Thailand, too; people who have bad things said about them all the time. However, in Thailand, we would not publicize that about ourselves; we would be too ashamed. We would try to find out the causes of it, and we would try to remedy the problem at the source.

    “Insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting” one’s superiors is very serious in Thailand. Remember, K. Anon OC, we even address one another as “Honorable.” It is important to us to show respect to others. We think it is nice, attractive and a reflection of our moral values as a people. Insulting people is considered bad form. We try to express disapproval in more oblique ways.

    Our laws, in fact, even reflect our moral standards. Your country has a primarily Judeo-Christian heritage. That may be why you value the freedom to express yourself, even in ways that might be offensive to others. Or, in ways intended to be offensive to others, to insult them, to demean and malign them. I do not agree with that, but I do not criticize you for it. I don’t think you have to do things the Thai way to be civilized.

    You described our defamation laws as “very liberal.” I think that you meant to say, “very strict.” Some people would call them “draconian.” Please try to understand how other people feel about things, K. Anon OC. We value free speech, too. It’s just that we have certain constraints on it. You have almost none. It is impossible to have laws that give priority to both freedom and decorum at the same time.

    Thai people do not speak with respect and courtesy because we have strict defamation laws. We have strict defamation laws because speaking respectfully and courteously is something we value highly. There is a big difference.

    You value freedom of expression highly, as can be seen from your posts, K. Anon OC. In one short post, you accuse Alan Long of being a bitter player, a dirty player, and bashing NTM in a public forum because he was mistreated by NTM leaders. You mock him as considering the charges brought against him as heinous.

    Were you happy to leave it at that, to use hard and unkind words towards this man? No, you took the time to insult sixty millions of Thai people, implying that they are uncivilized crazies. You exult that you are outside the reach of Thai law, so it is fine to flaunt it and demean people, not by the thousands, as NTM has done, but by the millions for the heinous crime of having strict defamation laws.

    You did not apologize for your remarks; you simply ignored them and continued to post. I understand, K. Anon OC, that that is the way American Christians handle things. I read the letter from Graham Church, written to Alan Long in language that Thai people would blush to whisper. I am sure a Thai person could be provoked to write something like that, but he would rush to apologize for it.

    Christians in Thailand are in a minority. We would be afraid that acting like that would besmirch the Name. We try to have our speech “seasoned with salt.” But, that is an eastern custom, and may not thrive in your land.

    You tell Alan, “I am just giving my perspective.” You did do that, and you did it in ways that are very embarrassing and uncomfortable for Thai people to read. I know you did not try to hurt anyone’s feelings. You were just giving your perspective in the way that you customarily do. I merely suggest that that might not always be appropriate. But, I am not trying to impose my standards on you.

    K. Anon OC, Alan Long is not the only person reading this blog. Neither are Americans. English is an international language, and people from every nation can read it. Do you realize how heart wrenching and humiliating it is for citizens of countries where NTM works to read that their laws are not respected in cases of child abuse? Thailand is not as developed as your country, K. Anon OC. But we love and value our children as much as American missionaries value theirs. We are not savages.

    Some will blame the Fanda Eagles for publicizing NTM’s failures in how they have handled child abuse. I think most people in Thailand would blame the American “Christian” leaders for hiding it, whether in Thailand or other countries. Many people would see it as an example of an imperialistic, superior attitude, unaccountable to the authorities in the countries where they work, irrespective of the level of civilization attained.

    K. Anon OC, that’s my perspective. I hope I was able to share it in a respectful way, showing respect to all people.

  22. To Anonymous, of course

    You have some good ideas, but appear biased in many ways. I went to an MK boarding school where we ranged in ages from 6 to 18 in the same dorm. Some of the older kids were more to be feared than the dorm parents. I know of several cases of my contemporaries being forced into homosexual acts by older boys.

    Between the ages of 6 and 8 I woke up several times in the middle of the night to find the school nurse (a female) in the process of “inspecting” me by flashlight. Most of the physical punishment meted out to us in the dorm was from the dorm mothers, not the fathers. So segregating gender roles is not the answer, nor is there safety in mixing ages.

    The real issue is the leadership as every organization takes on the flavor of its leadership. That is what this discussion is really about. Have the new generation of missionary leaders really changed?

  23. “Anonymous, of course” said: It is also a mystery to me why NTM leadership has never reported such incidents to the local authorities. But what is just as remarkable, is that apparently nobody else reported these abusers to the local authorities either? Is that for the most case true? It is not only NTM leadership that could report the crimes, but all others with such knowledge as well.
    [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

    I hope NTM will answer that question. Acting on one’s own without prior approval of God given leadership was frowned upon when I was in NTM. “God given leadership is ordained by God,” I was told. I took that to mean that they were in charge, and I was not.

    In any case, NTM should state, without qualification, whether or not they have ever discouraged the family of a victim from reporting sexual abuse in a foreign country.

    After all, they say in their manual about child abuse reporting procedures, “There is concern with regard to what authorities on some foreign fields of service might do to the offender.”

    Concern for consequences is only valid before the offense is committed.

  24. Son of Mamau,

    I listed in my former post some ideas that may or may not be beneficial for reducing abuse in dorms. The reason that I implied that most abuse has come from dorm fathers (rather than dorm mothers, although there would be some complicity involved) is because nearly all of the stories that I am personally aware of involve men, not women…and most of the stories that I am personally aware of occurred in dorms where there were only girls and no boys and usually only younger girls. However, you are quite correct that abuse can be inflicted by both men and women and that having “older” kids in the dorm does not necessarily stop abuse. However, I do think having some older kids “can” cause some measure of reluctance to behave in certain ways because the likelihood of being reported is higher. Having said that, you are probably quite correct that having older kids may not stop abuse.

    As a disclaimer, I am merely mentioning ideas and possibilities…with the intent to open up discussion on various ways to improve the situation.

    Regarding the issue being about NTM leadership rather than the abuse itself, I think the two may be inextricably intertwined.

    Remember, NTM is not a person. NTM is an infrastructure of institutions and various macro and micro organizational structures. “NTM” itself, therefore, cannot correct any wrongs or prevent any wrongs. It is certain people within NTM that should take certain actions…but let’s not let the inaction of many taint the remainder. What I mean by that, is one could easily bring a law suit against NTM itself and if enough suits were brought and enough hell was raised, NTM could be taken out of business…but taking NTM out of business would not take the individual perpetrators out of business because they could always find another infrastructure in which to operate. NTM may be a legal entity, but that which is deemed and that which in reality exists may not be the same. Once again, I am merely proposing ideas here for the sake of discussion.

  25. Thai Guy,

    There is some truth to the cultural differences of which you speak, but I think in general the Thailand of which you speak is one that exists only for purposes of your argument against my post.

    On another note, I did think the article below was, at the very least, interesting.

    A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

    To uphold the Constitution of Thailand, axe criminal libel

    In an announcement this week, Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand stated that the proposed reform of some hundreds of the country’s laws would concentrate on those that violate its 1997 Constitution. Perhaps it can be concluded from this announcement that criminal defamation will be among the laws in breach of both the Constitution and fundamental human rights that will be wiped from Thailand’s statute books.

    Among the provisions of the Constitution, article 39 states, “A person shall enjoy the liberty to express his or her opinion, make speeches, write, print, publicise, and make expression by other means.” No better example of a law that violates this provision of the Constitution exists than section 328 of the Penal Code of Thailand. Section 328 allows for criminal defamation, punishable by a fine of up to 200,000 Thai baht (US $ 5000) and two years’ imprisonment. This regulation does nothing to encourage enjoyment of liberty to express an opinion. On the contrary, it does everything to stifle it.

    Criminal libel regulations have been removed from the statute books of civilised societies, where it has been recognised that a properly framed and restricted civil defamation law is sufficient. However, in Thailand not only is criminal defamation still to be found on the books, it is also used routinely by powerful persons to intimidate and silence critics. The prime minister, by proxy, is among them, as his family business Shin Corp is engaged in a suit against media-reform campaigner Supinya Klangnarong.

    Times have not been good for persons in Thailand hoping to exercise their article 39 rights. In a recent report to the UN Human Rights Committee, the Asian Legal Resource Centre, sister organisation of the AHRC, expressed deep concern over the persistent concentration of broadcast media ownership there. Community radio stations that were started under the new Constitution have in some instances been shut and others threatened with closure on the grounds they are “illegal”, even though it is the government that has failed to introduce a licensing regime as required. A new media monopoly is also emerging between the commercial and government sectors, as concessions issued to businesses close to senior politicians, most notably the prime minister himself, defeat the purpose of constitutional reforms. Shin Corp now totally dominates all sectors of the commercial media in Thailand, with 24 companies running telecommunications, television, radio, internet, satellite and other communications throughout the country, and even into neighbouring Cambodia, Laos and Burma.

    Threats against journalists and independent media have also increased. Since the 2003 ‘war on drugs’, many journalists in Thailand have narrowed their reporting in response to overt and covert government intimidation. Reporters who criticised the government campaign at that time were accused of being in the payment of drug dealers. Editors of newspapers and magazines have also expressed fears over the loss of millions of dollars of advertising fees from companies connected to the government, particularly Shin Corp. As a consequence, self-censorship is being practiced more widely. Broadcast media programme managers, producers and hosts are reported threatened against critical reporting of the government, by way of warnings in person and writing to be more ‘cooperative’. During late 2004, executives of radio stations were reportedly told not to say anything negative about the escalating violence in the south. At least one radio host was taken off the air after the Supreme Command, which owns the frequency, ordered that ‘extreme caution’ be exercised in reporting security and political issues. Numerous warnings were also issued, and raids conducted, in relation to distribution of video footage of the killings in Narathiwat in October 2004.

    Under these circumstances, it is vital that proposed legal reforms address the antiquated laws that violate the principle of free expression established both under the Constitution of Thailand and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Thailand is a party. Foremost among these is the criminal defamation law, which should be abolished without further ado, and the existing civil defamation law reviewed to bring it into line with international standards, in particular, to make claims for compensation proportionate to the harm done, and not punitive. Many other changes will yet be needed to reassure people in Thailand that they can speak, broadcast and publish freely, but the removal of this law will be an important step that would earn the government much goodwill at home and abroad. Failure to remove it at a time that so many other laws will be going under the axe may rightly raise many questions over the government’s actual intentions.

  26. Anonymous, of course, you have some very good thoughts here on mission boarding schools and the reporting/ non-reporting of sexual abuse of children. Why don’t you edit them and repost on the boarding school part of this blog ( I find myself in general agreement with a lot of what you have said, but our thoughts are not going to get the hearing that they deserve (LOL) on this section of the blog. Or, send them to and let the Eagles find an appropriate place to insert them.

    Please feel free to post any further questions, comments and observations you have about Allen Long’s experiences here. I don’t find myself in as much agreement with what you have posted on that subject, but a blog is not just for one side to talk.

    Allen and I maintain that NTM has never explained why they took the extraordinary step (possibly unprecedented step) of reporting him to the Thai government, months after his resignation from NTM. We do not maintain that they had no reason, only that we don’t know what it was and that they have never told us.

    You think that sounds incredible, and I agree. But that does not make it false. Who would have believed the things that have come to light about the sexual abuse of children in the NTM boarding school dorms and the way it was dealt with by the leaders in NTM?

    Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.

  27. Bonnie,

    I am not calling Allen a liar. Perhaps intentional non-disclosure of material facts with respect to certain assertions, but maybe I am wrong.

    Do I believe that Allen wants reconciliation? I have no idea, but absent knowledge of additional facts, I would state that certain comments appear to be inconsistent with this assertion. And, if the suit was in fact brought in bad faith, then the eollection of settlement money would, to me, be more consistent with extortion, than anything else. If somebody had extorted money out of me, then turned around and wanted reconciliation…well, you and I both know what the obvious first step should probably be.

    Do I believe that NTM sent a letter out of the blue to the Thai authorities? Well, it doesn’t seem likely to me, but that doesn’t mean that it did not happen.

    Do I believe the comments in the letter warrant criminal prosecution? Well, on its face, no…because I think the potential punishment could far outway the crime. Do I understand why somebody may feel compelled to seek criminal prosecution to protect themselves…well, perhaps. But to me, on its face, this smells somewhat of bad faith and “dirty playing” as I stated before. But, like I stated before, I could understand the desire to do so.

    Regarding NTM voluntarily retracting their earlier letter and offering a cash settlement. Do I truly believe this was “voluntary”? Assuming NTM did this after 2 years of Allen pursuing criminal prosecution would leave me to believe that they did this only to avoid possible criminal sanctions and that they probably did this as part of a settlement agreement…which always contain certain terms and rights and obligations of both parties. I could imagine a situation in which Allen stated that he would not settle unless NTM retracted their letter and paid him X amount. (although if the settlement agreement was confidential, I’m sure Allen can neither affirm or deny the above).

    Listen, I am no fan of NTM. I think its organizational, management, and leadership structure has historically allowed for many flaws and inefficiencies. Having said that, I am not simply going to jump on the bandwagon regarding any anti-NTM story that comes across my perception.

    You could, perhaps, convince me that I have too quickly jumped to incorrect conclusions regarding the likelihood of certain assertions.

  28. “I don’t have all the facts yet, but the police acted stupidly.” – a famous American

    Maybe you should call on NTM to say whether or not the settlement was confidential. They have much more credibility than Allen Long.

  29. “Do I believe that NTM sent a letter out of the blue to the Thai authorities?”

    Who has said that? Not I. Not Allen. We have only said that WE DO NOT KNOW why they did it and they have never told us.

    You should ask THEM to come forward and commit themselves. I would welcome that.

  30. I don’t have all the facts yet, but it appears the police acted in good faith. – me (and probably you)

    I don’t have all the facts yet, but it appears Allen did not act in good faith. – me

    I don’t have all the facts yet, but I can smell a rat even if I can’t see one. – me

    I don’t have all the facts yet, but I can spot inconsistencies in the “facts” provided. – me

    I don’t have all of the facts, but the existence of some facts naturally lead to the conclusion of the existence of other facts. – me

    I think we could all find a quote to suit our need at a particular time. Regarding confidentiality, I don’t think it is relevant except to my earlier comment that I would not expect Allen to be able to affirm or deny my initial thoughts…although he did open the door to the discussion by stating what NTM did and that he received cash.

    Regarding the “out of the blue” comment, you are correct. However, it was somewhat implied by stating the time period that had elapsed between the time of resignation and the time of the letter. I don’t know how the time period would be relevant if not to suggest that the letter came out of the blue.

  31. Regarding the “out of the blue” comment, you are correct. However, it was somewhat implied by stating the time period that had elapsed between the time of resignation and the time of the letter. I don’t know how the time period would be relevant if not to suggest that the letter came out of the blue.
    [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

    It certainly came without warning. I affirm that.

    I would imagine there was a reason behind it. I do not know the reason. I was not contacted by NTM before the letter was sent.

    No warning, no contact, no explanation before or since. Reasonable people want to believe there was a reason, something more important than sexual abuse of children. Curious people wonder what it was.

    I am curious, Anonymous, of course.

  32. i feel like both of sides of this argument is becoming ridiculous as no one knows the whole story here and the blog is simply reporting what it was given. however, that said, i would so far tend to side with the longs because a. i have dealt with ntm and know how seriously they take “disrespecting the field committee” and b. they were at least brave enough to not be anonymous. also, why would ntm agree to pay money if they could indeed back up the letter that was sent?

  33. I did not extort them. And NTM does not give in to extortion, even when lives are at stake. NTM invests a lot of money in their claims to be reaching the tribes with the message of reconciliation. They are even willing to let their members risk their lives for this cause! The whole point of this is that I want reconciliation. Why wouldn’t they want to reconcile with me?

  34. In all fairness to NTM, they have probably never been called upon to defend themselves against defamation in Thailand before, so they probably didn’t even realize that what they said was a violation of Thai law. So, they just did what they always did and said whatever they wanted to about a former missionary with no thought of consequences. That is understandable.

    In contrast, they did know (at some point in time, I don’t see a date) that child molestation is a “serious criminal offense in most countries.” ( But, they just did what they have always done – and did not report it? According to their own manual on handling charges of sexual abuse of children, “There is concern with regard to what authorities on some foreign fields of service might do to the offender.” In this case, they thought carefully about consequences. That is understandable, too. (

    Allen must have done something very serious for them to report him to the Thai authorities.

  35. Gary Taylor, Sentinel Staff Writer March 15, 2008

    The families of five Florida-based missionaries kidnapped and slain by Colombian terrorists filed suit this week against Cincinnati-based Chiquita Brands International , accusing the well-known banana grower of providing the killers with money, guns and ammunition.
    Chiquita entered into a plea agreement that included a $25 million fine. The company maintains that a former banana-producing subsidiary was forced to make payments to paramilitary groups to protect the lives of its employees.
    His company voluntarily came forward with information about the payments in 2003 when it was discovered that changes in federal laws made such payments illegal, Loyd said.

    (Gary Taylor can be reached at

    A subsidiary of Chiquita Bananas gave in to extortion demands to protect the lives of its employees and Chiquia was consequently fined $25 million dollars. It seems from the story that it is illegal to pay extortion demands to terrorists.

    Now they are also being sued by the families of the slain missionaries. I’m glad.

    NTM would not pay extortion, and would never support your evaluation. Please ask them.

  36. Okay, perhaps I should have said that what appears to have happened is “akin to extortion”…Dangling NTM over a bridge and telling them you will drop them if they do not pay you money and retract a letter.

    Judging by Allen’s other posts, including one on the sister site regarding whether dorms were legally registered, etc. it appears that he is more interested in stirring up more trouble than he is in reconciliation. Next thing you know he will be reporting undercover missionaries in China to the authorities based on the fact that their activities are illegal.

    What I have learned from reading various posts on this site is that any NTM bashing is welcome and any questions regarding those who bash NTM is not welcome. But, let me put something this way. Assume that in year 2012, Dorm Dad A abuses Girl B. NTM has seen the light by that time and immediately terminates Dorm Dad’s A membership with NTM and reports Dorm Dad A to the authorities. Dorm Dad A then files a criminal complaint against NTM, the successful prosecution of which would result in jail time for NTM leadership. Dorm Dad A says he will drop the suit if NTM pays him cash and retracts the facts on which the reporting to authorities was based. Because of some archaic law, it appears Dorm Dad A has a good chance of winning the suit against NTM and subjecting its members to criminal sanctions. NTM eventually pays some cash and retracts their statement when it appears that not doing so may result in serious jail time for some of its members (for reporting child abuse as we all say we want NTM to do). Now, I would imagine most people on this site would side with the child abuser in this case, and not NTM. Am I correct?

  37. Anonymous, of course: “Assuming NTM did this after 2 years of Allen pursuing criminal prosecution would leave me to believe that they did this only to avoid possible criminal sanctions and that they probably did this as part of a settlement agreement…”

    It could just as easily lead to other reasonable conclusions.

    If NTM actually had proof supporting their allegations against Allen, they could have presented it in court, won their case and Allen would have had to pay all court costs. NTM would not have had to feel obligated to give him even the very modest sum they did. They had fought it for two years; how much more time did they think it would take?

    If, on the other hand, NTM had made these allegations against Allen without any proof, or if Allen had proof that what they said was not true, then it might be safe to think that they were not counting on any libel charges being pressed. They had never had this experience before, and it never entered their minds.

    Instead, they were counting on their word carrying more weight than Allen’s word. They knew that if, say, five worthy men on the Field Committee said one thing, and Allen said something else, they would be believed and would need offer no proof beyond their word.

    How could Allen ever get a fair hearing from, say, you? To borrow your metaphor, that would “involve a deck that is squarely stacked against him.” Before an impartial tribunal, however, Allen’s word would have equal weight against NTM’s.

  38. I’m with you Allen. You were treated unjustly.

  39. Quote from Anonymous, of course: “Judging by Allen’s other posts, including one on the sister site regarding whether dorms were legally registered, etc. it appears that he is more interested in stirring up more trouble than he is in reconciliation. Next thing you know he will be reporting undercover missionaries in China to the authorities based on the fact that their activities are illegal.”

    The ‘dorm’ question is a valid one. Why would anyone not register their dorm? I want reconciliation. I’m not asking for anything NTM doesn’t already claim to believe in. Please give me a chance! I would never report undercover missionaries to the authorities. I’ve had it done to me by an organization that claimed the cooperation of NTM. Isn’t that the craziest thing you’ve ever heard?

  40. Alrighty then, I am willing to give Allen the benefit of the doubt regarding his desire for reconciliation and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he was treated poorly by NTM. My larger point really was whether he should have sought criminal prosecution against NTM/members of NTM for its letter rather than keeping to a civil complaint. (maybe some of you don’t know the difference) It was that fact than gave me some suspicion of bad faith rather than genuine attempt at recovery/dispute resolution. But, I will leave it at that. I think whether some of you admit it or not, if you think objectively for a second, you could at least see why seeking criminal trial could give rise to my tentative conclusions. And I still think if Allen would like reconiliation, especially right after a couple years of pursuing criminal charges, it may be wise to restrain himself from posts such as the one he started above because, at the very least, it may be perceived by some as though he is not genuinely interested in reconciliation. But, that is just my opinion, and I could be wrong.

  41. I just reread Allen Long’s story. He resigned in good standing. He was not dismissed.

    New Tribes Mission reported him to the Thai authorities almost a year AFTER HIS RESIGNATION! He must have done something awfully bad. . . According to Allen’s story, it was for “insulting, looking down on, not obeying and disrespecting the Field Committee.”

    Does this mean they took some matter between them and Allen Long before unbelievers, I Corinthians 6 notwithstanding?

  42. another thai guy

    Allen really ought to clarify who took whom to court – leaving it vague like this, and not taking the effort to set at least that part of the record straight just isn’t right.

  43. Another thai guy, according to the story, NTM first took their “issues” with Alan Long before the unbelievers.

    Or does “law” in I Corinthians 6:1-8 only mean “court”?

  44. I think it would be much better for NTM to share their side of the issues here. Did they really send a letter to about Allen to a Thai government agency? Why did they do that?

  45. You guys crack me up. Equating writing a letter to “unbelievers” (the Chairman of the Evangelical Felowship of Thailand, no less) to then seeking criminal prosecution just confirms my thoughts on the situation.

    Then, reading Allen’s original post a little closer, he does say that NTM wrote this letter as an explanation as to why they asked him to leave NTM. Did you inadvertantly admit that they asked you to leave NTM? Or are you saying that that was another grounds for criminal prosecution. Listen, we all are not stupid. We know how these things work…people are given the chance to “voluntarily” resign or meet certain conditions and stay…if the conditions are not met, they will be involuntarily terminated. If one party is not willing or able to meet the conditions, they can “voluntarily” leave. We could argue all day what “voluntary” means, but don’t insult our intelligence.

    Then to argue who took what to unbelievers first just makes you sound like a little brat. “Johnny, why did you hit Suzy over the head with a club?” “Well, she said something mean about me first, so I had to to defend myself.”

    I’m not one that believes this passage even applies to the situation at all. I think the probability is that the passage is instructing members of the same church that with respect to disputes between members of the same church, those disputes should be determined by that church. I don’t think there is anyway two missionaries on the field who are not part of the same church could ever settle a dispute according to that passage because they would never be able to agree on which believers should settle the dispute (they are not part of the same church…and NTM is not a church).

    Having said that, it appears that you do believe the passage applies and that because NTM broke the rules, you could break the rules. You seem obsessed with the fact that NTM took the matter to unbelievers first, and in doing so, opened the door to any and all retaliation desired.

    Actually, now that I think about it, you sound alot like some of those old school NTMers that were so able to twist scripture to mean whatever they wanted it to mean and to justify their actions however they saw fit.

    Man, you guys are a real piece of work. I do have a question though. Did Allen intend all along to pursue criminal prosecution all the way to the point at which members of NTM would have gone to Thai prison for writing this letter? (I’m not familiar with Thai criminal sanctions). If so, of what utility would that have been? Or, was it your intent to settle all along and just bring seek prosecution to scare them into giving you money and retracting the letter.

    That is why, in most civilized societies, criminal and civil sanctions are separate…so one can’t use criminal prosecution as a means of duress. Actually, YOU could go to jail for doing that here.

  46. arguing back and forth about the same issue gets tiresome and i think we’ve hit a wall here. we will post your issues about NTM, because none of us have had a fair and public forum to do so. sometimes the fault lies with NTM, sometimes it doesn’t.

    we cannot investigate every claim posted here, but we do know that leadership was abusive in this time period. the correspondence from the EC was abusive and the propaganda was abusive. however i would like everyone to consider that this is not a forum about the longs, it’s a forum about NTM leadership. please keep to that topic. if you feel that the longs handled the slanderous letter from NTM inappropriately, that’s your prerogative. at some point can we just agree to disagree and take any further back-and-forth communication off-site, which would be much easier to do if everyone would use their real email addresses.

  47. Specific questions can be sent to me at this blog:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s