by thedepressedsoul 68 Replies latest watchtower bible
I won't believe he's testifying until I hear/see him testifying.
I'd be shocked if he shows. His father may be sick but I think that was a cover for him being in that country. He's overseeing behind the scenes. They'll use his father to fight until their last breath. They already tried to immediately after they suggested him coming.
The father excuse came up too quickly to not be planned ahead of time.
thedepressedsoul - "The father excuse came up too quickly to not be planned ahead of time."
Agreed.
That being said, they must be weighing the pros and cons of him testifying vs. refusing to.
I am sure an "emergency situation" will arise that requires him to return to New York.
The lawyers will "regret" that he couldn't attend but the GB needed him in NY to update policies on birthday parties
Is it still a birthday cake if there are no candles ?
If the cake only says Happy but not Birthday is it still a Birthday Cake ?
Can you just cut the cake but not partake ?
When Happy Birthday is sung if you remain seated and only hum along would that be acceptable ?
Is giving a gift card OK all long as it is not wrapped ?
I am sure the Commission will agree with us that that is a much more pressing issue than dealing with the less urgent matter of the handling of child sexual abuse cases. In the future a short E-Mail might be sent from G Jackson addressing some of the Commission's concerns so be sure to check your Spam folder in case it gets diverted.
Marvin Shilmer - "Either he shows up and lets himself be questioned or else he fails to show up and deceit will be demonstrated."
I think you mean, "Either he shows up and gets eviscerated on the stand, or else he fails to show up and undermines the GB's credibility even more"... :smirk:
Either he shows up and lets himself be questioned or else he fails to show up and deceit will be demonstrated. It's that simple.
That's exactly it. Damned if he does, but f-ed if he doesn't.
I just can't believe he'd have the gall to skip town.
He can refuse to appear, are there consequences for doing so? Can he be held in contempt?
If he doesn't show up after getting a summons then the monetary compensation for victims is going to soar just like it did when Loesch refused to appear when called. What's Lett going to say at their next "we're not passing the plate" donation drive, that we need more money because the Gobbering Body doesn't appear before secular courts?
I think he'll show up at the RC, I really want to see him answer the questions since he and the 6 others are supposedly God's Only Channel on Earth.
This is what I would love to hear.
Angus: What I'm suggesting is that you, and by extension, the Governing Body, believe that Jehovah, via Holy Spirit, directs your decisions. Would that be a fair assessment of how procedures and policies are decided upon?
G Jackson: Yes, that is my belief.
Angus: Let me ask this: Did Jehovah, via Holy Spirit, direct the Governing Body to interpret the "two-witness" rule as currently understood, and inact policies based upon that interpretation?
G Jackson: That is my belief, yes.
Angus: Can you understand how disfellowshipping a child abuser, yet not informing the "Superior Authorities" could lead to the further abuse of children as there would be no warning given, espescially for non-witness children? Can you see the difficulty in giving needed help to the abuser as well? Their chances of repeating the offense would be higher without needed help, would it not?
G Jackson: I suppose it could be higher, yes..
Angus: Would it be fair to say that the current policies as regards child protection have, shall we say, flaws, in that they can allow seemingly repentant or unrepentant abusers to repeat the offense, due to lack of involvment with the Superior Authorities and the failure to warn non-witnesses, or cause difficulties in getting the abuser needed help?
G Jackson: ..... Improvements could be made.
Angus: In cases where decisions are incorrect, procedures flawed, and children harmed, would it be fair to say that the Governing Body are at fault? Or would it be Jehovah's fault? Is it possible that the GB mis-interpreted key passages in regards to the "two-witness" rule, or they did not clearly hear Jehovah?
G Jackson: ............... Errrrrr.....ummmm.... ( Looks for hand signal from Legal.)
DD
I find it hilarious that they've been trying so hard the last few years to distance the GB from any "responsibility" to the public, while making themselves more god like internally.
Jw's may not see past the BS, but guess what, the courts are. They are seeing you're responsible no matter how you legally try to set yourselves up.
Two faced organization. Want all the glimmer and the power without the responsibility or accountability. It's about time everyone sees it.
