AUSTRALIA – Artemis Legal launches inquiry into group and class action lawsuits against Jehovah’s Witnesses

by jwleaks 63 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  umbertoecho

  I am not asking for any personal information. You posted that people should beware because this company isn't on some official list.

  Answer: Yes you were.! No matter how you tried to sweeten that up.. You wanted to know about the RCs approved list. I said you could not have it..

  It now seems that you are saying there is no official list. I don't understand the concept of an official list that no one can access.

  Answer: Oh that 's priceless. You are almost stamping your feet and it just won't work

  So what was the big deal? Why couldn't you just say that when first asked? All you had to say was "there is no official list of law firms that people are limited to dealing with". That is what I was asking - whether there was and if so where people could find it.

  Answer: There is. It's just none of your business. Ring the RC and see how far you get. You will be stonewalled.
  
  

  Answer: Any lawyer that wishes to create a class action will seek this information.

  Everyone has the right to ask anyone else to explain or expand on what they said

  Answer: That does not give them and especially you, the right to get these particulars. You may have set this site up, but you have no right to this information. Call the RC for it and see what happens.
  What on earth are you on about? I was simply asking in order to help you to explain yourself better.

  Answer: Not true. You thought you had the right to this information and you are angry because I will not give it to you. Moderator or not. You are still just a person who is not actively involved. You really showed your high-minded approach because I said it's..... None of your business.

  Who is assuming that? If someone choses to go to a law firm and give then information then that is their concern

  Answer: This is exactly the sort of limited thinking that someone like you would support. And it is exactly what should not be encouraged. It will do harm.
  
  

  So what was the big deal? Why couldn't you just say that when first asked? All you had to say was "there is no official list of law firms that people are limited to dealing with". That is what I was asking - whether there was and if so where people could find it.

  Answer: Because you asked me for information about this. Or should I say you wheedled on about information and "clarity". You thought you had the right to ask and now you can't handle being told to butt out. So we are back to square one. You are not giving any testimony. You think you deserve to ask, then when rejected.........you go all out to undermine....Brilliant show of stupidity.

  And who the hell are you anyway. You have a site. But zero insight and just want trashy headlines. Who are you that I should trust a pseudonym?

  Back off.
  
  
• 

  nicolaou

  Calm down dearie x
• 

  Dumplin

  "dearie" sounds a little condescending to me. All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and sea creatures are being tamed and have been tamed by man, but not one can tame the tongue... It is restless....at least I've been told. You may be different.
• 

  nicolaou

  "dearie" sounds a little condescending to me

  Glad you got that, I thought condescension was preferable to honesty in this case.
• 

  never a jw

  Umbertoecho,

  From whatever little I read in your past posts you have the right to be angry, very angry... at the Watchtower. Don't take it on someone who gives you a voice and has given thousands a voice, even helped them find freedom from the stronghold of the Watchtower. In the big picture, Simon and many here are on your side. You are acting just like the Watchtower leaders, arrogant and derisive towards those who simply disagree or know less than you do. Calm down! Don't escalate this more than you have.
  
• 

  Witness My Fury

  Whatever good you've done is being undone by allowing your ego to inflate to massive proportions.
• 

  umbertoecho

  Enough said.

  However. Could you give me your personal details for you have mine? Your safety is in your anonymity. Nothing to be afraid of considering you initiated this site. What's your real name Simon, email address, photo..... details please
• 

  Simon

  I am not asking for any personal information. You posted that people should beware because this company isn't on some official list.
  Answer: Yes you were.! No matter how you tried to sweeten that up.. You wanted to know about the RCs approved list. I said you could not have it..

  Can you show me where you think that happened? If the mere mention of the approved list is so very secret then why were you blabbing about it?

  It now seems that you are saying there is no official list. I don't understand the concept of an official list that no one can access.
  Answer: Oh that 's priceless. You are almost stamping your feet and it just won't work

  You obviously have a reading or comprehension problem or are simply overly emotional and interpreting things incorrectly because of it. I've tried to explain to you the impression that your statements gave to me and why I asked you the reasonable question based on your original claims.

  So what was the big deal? Why couldn't you just say that when first asked? All you had to say was "there is no official list of law firms that people are limited to dealing with". That is what I was asking - whether there was and if so where people could find it.
  Answer: There is. It's just none of your business. Ring the RC and see how far you get. You will be stonewalled.
  Answer: Any lawyer that wishes to create a class action will seek this information.

  If it's none of anyone's business then how is it an official list that controls who people should deal with?

  Everyone has the right to ask anyone else to explain or expand on what they said
  Answer: That does not give them and especially you, the right to get these particulars. You may have set this site up, but you have no right to this information. Call the RC for it and see what happens.

  As I said, you are not reading things right. I said everyone had the right to ASK a reasonable question.

  What on earth are you on about? I was simply asking in order to help you to explain yourself better.
  Answer: Not true. You thought you had the right to this information and you are angry because I will not give it to you. Moderator or not. You are still just a person who is not actively involved. You really showed your high-minded approach because I said it's..... None of your business.

  Please show me where you think I have been angry. As I explained, I tried to help you communicate better and clarify what you were saying and you have taken that as an attack. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt because you are obviously emotionally invested in this. However, you don't get to make up lies about me or my intentions.

  Who is assuming that? If someone choses to go to a law firm and give then information then that is their concern
  Answer: This is exactly the sort of limited thinking that someone like you would support. And it is exactly what should not be encouraged. It will do harm.

  Stating that someone has a right to make their own choices is not the same as encouraging them to do something. It is simply stating a fact as it appears (in the absence of some official mandate saying they are limited to some phantom official list).

  So what was the big deal? Why couldn't you just say that when first asked? All you had to say was "there is no official list of law firms that people are limited to dealing with". That is what I was asking - whether there was and if so where people could find it.
  Answer: Because you asked me for information about this. Or should I say you wheedled on about information and "clarity". You thought you had the right to ask and now you can't handle being told to butt out. So we are back to square one. You are not giving any testimony. You think you deserve to ask, then when rejected.........you go all out to undermine....Brilliant show of stupidity.

  As I've explained, I didn't think your attitude and language is appropriate or warranted especially when the question for clarification is an obvious follow up to what you posted.

  And who the hell are you anyway. You have a site. But zero insight and just want trashy headlines. Who are you that I should trust a pseudonym?
  Back off.

  Again, my name is Simon and no, I don't want trashy headlines. We've made this site available to help people get support and share information for over 15 years. I think I have some insight even if it's just a little.

  However. Could you give me your personal details for you have mine? Your safety is in your anonymity. Nothing to be afraid of considering you initiated this site. What's your real name Simon, email address, photo..... details please

  You have my name and my email when you registered. I won't be sharing anything else with you as I think you are unstable and again, I'd urge you to calm down, get some help and look at things again and maybe you'll see that you have exploded over nothing.
• 

  Stealth

  Does this "list" have the names of victims on it? If no, I don't see where any personal information was asked for. I don't see where anyone asked for your personal information on this thread.

  I got the impression the "list" is a list of preferable law firms to work with.

  As long as ALL of the victims have access to this "list" then what really is the point of the OP? Warning the victims not to work with a specific law firm that in not on the "list" that apparently they already have access to?
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Wow.

  There sure is a lot of miscommunication on this thread. And misunderstandings. Stealth, you have not read the OP correctly or followed the thread.

  On this thread, we have had the information from someone involved in giving testimony to the RC that there is still two more years of testimony, etc. to collect.

  Instead of flying off the handle and start demanding "proof" of an "official list of legal representatives" and all those things that confrontational people like to demand, why not use your head?

  If the RC, which has done such an excellent job so far, is still involved in the collection of personal information from victims, and is also giving assistance to those victims in their pursuit of civil litigation...what is a private firm doing soliciting for business at this stage in the game? The RC is not even finished and yet a law firm, without access to the private information that the RC has, is going to be the solution that everybody jumps on?

  Get real...use your heads and quit viewing this as a way to "get back at the Watchtower". This is far more serious than just random exJWs on a random forum thinking that child abuse is the vehicle for their personal revenge against the WT. The child rape victims are being sidelined here for the sensational news of "Oh! Look at what is happening to the WT!!! Yaya!"

  Everybody needs to give their head a shake and realize that there are real victims who deserve real justice here. This is not a side show selling tickets on how fast and big the boom will be when the WT falls.