What ever happened to homosexual GB member Leo Greeenlees, is he dead now?

by chiddy 54 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  jayhawk1

  I keep thinking about this...

  One thing that does not make sense to me is, how can Ray Franz be disfellowshipped for having lunch with a disfellowshipped man while Leo Greenlees was simply dismissed? And then Alan says this...

  I'm sure that Greenlees knew where a lot of skeletons were buried. Whether this was explicitly acknowledged during the GB's judicial proceedings against him or not, they all knew it and would have slanted their judgments accordingly. That Ray Franz had recently blown the whistle on a lot of organizational shenanigans was fresh in their minds.

  Could be...

  Makes me wonder what the others are/was hiding.
• 

  Leolaia

  I also wonder about this statement that caused quite a stir at the time:

  *** w86 1/1 p. 13 Days Like "the Days of Noah" ***

  Shocking as it is, even some who have been prominent in Jehovah’s organization have succumbed to immoral practices, including homosexuality, wife swapping, and child molesting.

  Who was "prominent in Jehovah's organization" that engaged in "child molesting"? I don't think this phrase could refer to mere congregational elders but at a higher level, e.g. district or branch overseers and higher up. When read in light of the Greenlees reports, it certainly has an explanation at least in part. It also is close in timing to the 1984 removal.
• 

  AlanF

  timetochange wrote:

  : I think it's rather arrogant for someone to say Ray Franz is in denial over something that he most likely would know more about than anyone outside of Bethel.

  How could Ray know anything about what happened at the highest levels of Bethel in late 1984, when he had left the place in early 1980?

  : How about Ray Franz has a difference of opinion?

  How about you're speculating about something you know nothing about?

  : To say he is in denial is to remove any respect for his opinion, which being contrary to the posters claim must be dismissed and discounted as "in denial" in order to prove their point.

  Ray has expressed his opinion privately to quite a few people, including me. Since I have information directly from two prominent Watchtower officials about this, and Ray was not in Bethel at the time, I trust my sources when they contradict Ray's uninformed opinion. In an email several years ago, I asked Ray for his opinion about Greenlees' pedophilia. He said he really doubted it due to his personal experiences with Greenlees. He also said that he couldn't say more, since he had no insider information since leaving Bethel. That Ray would have this opinion of Greenlees says nothing at all about Greenlees as a child molester, because child molesters are notoriously good at hiding their perversion from most people. That's why they usually get away with it for decades.

  : Since when has stomping on the head of someone like Ray Franz to prove a point become acceptable?

  To say that someone is uninformed about some topic is not stomping on them. Ray Franz has produced probably the most effective printed antidotes to Watchtower nonsense on the planet. But Ray is not God, and on the topic of Greenlees' molesting a young boy, he is simply uninformed, which he admits.

  I suspect that you are also uninformed.

  AlanF
• 

  timetochange

  Dear Mr. Alan F,

  "To say that someone is uninformed about some topic is not stomping on them. Ray Franz has produced probably the most effective printed antidotes to Watchtower nonsense on the planet. But Ray is not God, and on the topic of Greenlees' molesting a young boy, he is simply uninformed, which he admits."

  Excuse me, but you did not say Ray Franz was "uninformed", please get your adjectives and/or accusations correct. What you said was that Ray Franz was "in denial" an accusation that you conveniently did not address in your retort. Instead you danced around everything but the very thing I objected to. I wonder why? Indefensible, I suppose.

  How nice it would have been if you had simply said, "To say Ray was "in denial" was not entirely accurate and I retract it," but no, that did not suit your agenda which apparently is to disgrace Greenlees at all costs even to say that Ray Franz is in denial which is really another way of saying the man is fooling himself and doesn't know what he's talking about.

  Are there any other things you feel Ray Franz is in denial about? Don't hold back, enlighten us.

  Angry
• 

  AlanF

  timetochange, does it really have to be spelled out for you that an uninformed person who denies the facts after being informed of the facts is in denial?

  If you think Greenlees was not a pedophile, then do as I suggested to others: call Brooklyn Bethel, ask to speak to someone in authority, and ask him directly about Greenlees. Then report your findings here. If you won't do that, or cannot otherwise provide information, you're just blowing smoke.

  I've already spoken to appropriately informed Bethel officials, so I know of what I speak.

  AlanF
• 

  timetochange

  Mr. AlanF,

  "If you think Greenlees was not a pedophile,"

  I see you are hard of hearing. Two posts I have made here and on both I have objected to you saying that Ray is in denial. Yet you insist on charging forth with a mythical argument. I don't give a hang about what you say concerning Greenlees, I leave any defense of Greenlees to those who were his friends. Turn up the hearing aid, my objection has nothing to do with Greenlees!

  "Appropriately informed Bethel officials," spoke to you, an xJW? If you believe them, fine. It is your self-aggrandizing words I object to when saying of Ray that he was "in denial," that was unnecessary but it served to discount his opinion and validate yours.

  Let me repeat because it seems you are hard of hearing, my only objection to your post were the words that Ray was in denial, an unnecessary portrayal that is most self-serving not to mention unkind.

  I hope you are able to finally understand the point of my objection, but from your last few posts I have deep reservations whether your perceptive abilities will actually hear the chord I'm playing. Perhaps I should try percussion, the vibrations may make a greater impression on you since your hearing is obviously impaired.

  Not likely, though.
• 

  AlanF

  Let me repeat myself, o hard of hearing timetochange: does it really have to be spelled out for you that an uninformed person who denies the facts after being informed of the facts is in denial?

  The only reason I can see that you object to my saying this is that you deny the fact that Greenlees was a pedophile. Hence, my additional comments.

  AlanF
• 

  Arthur

  timetochangehisdiaper wrote:

  I hope you are able to finally understand the point of my objection, but from your last few posts I have deep reservations whether your perceptive abilities will actually hear the chord I'm playing. Perhaps I should try percussion, the vibrations may make a greater impression on you since your hearing is obviously impaired.

  For heaven's sake, please spare us all the trite platitudes. If you have a beef with AlanF, please take care of it through a process of PMs. Too often, threads such as these get detoured off course by people who have a personal grievance against a fellow poster; and attempt to have a "shoot out" over trivial matters.

  By the way; why don't you check out further info. on Leo Greenless. Go to the website of Randall Watters (former Bethelite who was there at the same time) who's website will confirm much of what has been posted here.

  Randall Watters' website:

  http://freeminds.org
• 

  timetochange

  Arthur,

  If I have irritated you, I sincerely apologize. I simply find myself unable to understand how people who have benefited from Ray's hard work both when he was in the Organization and now out of it can be so hardhearted as to call him "in denial" simply because he does not agree with them. To say he had a "difference of opinion" would have been kinder and in consideration of his lifelong work to help others. Is kindness alive here?

  If that is the stupid rantings of an old man, it is not my first believe me!

  My last comment on this thread.
• 

  jookbeard

  another bump for further reading about the pervert Greenleas