by Celtic 37 Replies latest jw friends
HS,
Yup, he will be a formidable adversary. I heard him on BBC Radio 2 a couple of years ago when he was discussing the blood issue. He came across as a very warm and reasonable person, oozes bon homie. Totally unruffled by anything. He could convince anyone about anything, so please do not underestimate him.
Mind you, maybe his writing skills aren't so hot!
Englishman.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be....
Gillies is smooth because the press have never gone after him. Gee I could make Bush out to be a real nice innocent fellow too if I just listened to his crap.
Steve Bates "bitched slapped" that idiot. If more of the press wakes up - look out.
You have caught the bozo in an outright lie in his letter (the Criteria was not available until many years after 1992). The Governing Body could put his ass in a sling and fire him off to France for using the word "membership" too.
hawk
p.s. - dung - I love your new picture!!!!!
Hawk,
Gillies brief would have been to confuse the issue in the minds of the public and damage limitation with the R&F.
The WTS is not interested in winning battles with the 'apostates', their PR cannons are always trained towards confusing the public first and the rank and file JW next.
Gillies has succesfully clouded this issue enough to have the public and the average JW walk on by. Most people on this planet care very little about JW's, apostates, the WTS and its comical villification of the UN, or any other such issues and WTS PR knows this well.
Steve Bates seemed in his reply to the WTS imho, to be more upset that the WTS questioned his reportage style than the issue at hand.
I agree with E'man - cunning to burn, do not underestimate your enemy - HS
I called Crooklyn today, I wanted to hear what they would say about what Paul Gillies said. I talked for close to 1/2 hour with a person there. We discussed this entire issue, and I told him I wanted an explanation for the deciet by saying a signature was not required. I told him even if I applied for a library card in my town I would need a signature, and I highly doubted that obtaining a library card with the UN would be any different if anything else it would be harder to do.
I was told, "IF you are looking for an admission that the WTBTS has been in association with the UN for over 10 years and did not notify it's members, you aren't going to get one," I told him I didn't need that, we already have proof that was so. What I didn't want was a ridiculous comment such as Pual Gillies gave and be expected to believe it.
After he realized the extent of my knowledge on this matter, he changed tunes.I told him I knew they had followed their part of their agreement by publicizing for UN and UN activities. I was then told "We agree with what the UN is doing, we support them in their efforts" I said you do? "Yes we agree that the UN is a good thing, and we support them" I said Uh huh. Well could you explain why all of the negative comments are made concerning them? He told me that was part of the bible prophecy. Well I reminded him that part of that doctrine was anyone associated with them as well. He was so confused, I really felt sorry for him. He admitted that having all nations united was a wonderful thing, and that was what they agreed with. But I reminded him that their belief is under God, not under man's rule. So the agreeeing with UN was way off. I honestly saw him change his answer like 5 times.
We then went into the YMCA analogy. I asked him if it was ok for a JW to be associated with the YMCA. He did not answer me, so I kept talking, saying that I like the part of the Ymca that provides swimming lessons for children so they don't die. But if I was an active JW I wouldn't be a member because I do not hold their ideals. And this was no different than the WTBTS involvement with the UN. He did not have a reply to that one. But agreed how I could see that.
Anyway, it boiled down to he will call me if there is an official press release from Brooklyn.And I told him he better do a better job than UK at explaning this. Because there are many out here like myself that know more about the UN than we want right now. And lies are easily uncovered with an organization that has a huge paper trail.
wendy
Blind faith can justify anything.~Richard Dawkins
ummmm.....
H_S
I hate to tell you but the Guardian and Bates never published nor will they publish Gillies letter - So it is pretty hard to "cloud" the public when you don't get your letter published. What Bates did was publish the letter here, on this Board, and get some good amo to smack Gillies back in the face. I don't think Paul was thinking of this Board when he sent the letter to Steve.
Gillies lies and "accusations" gave, not only Bates, but now the Guardian editor (Steve's Boss) an interest in keep this story alive and well.
The WTS needs this article out of the paper and not in it. The WTS would have been smart to just let Bates write another article and say nothing. Now Gillies has his attention and it will cost the WTS another embarrassing article on this mess.
Wendy, That was great.
hawk
Mommy - you ROCK! This account and the former one about your calls to Patterson were awesome.
If I was hiring a sales associate, you would be the one. Very tenacious - I salute you!
All best,
Makena
Bryce in Brooklyn acknowledged the letter to Steven Bates. Actually I called the first time and explained why I called. I was told I would have my call returned or I could call back. I assumed he was trying to get his hands on the letter.
One other thing to point out. The reason for no USA press release is that no USA paper has picked up the story. If we get it in a paper he assured me they would have something to say about this.
wendy
Blind faith can justify anything.~Richard Dawkins
Go Mommy! Make 'em sweat!!
On another note, if Mr. Gillies letter was published (as is) in response to Mr. Bates' article, his immediate goals will be accomplished. I looked at that letter once. The first thing I noticed was how he said Mr. Bates' articles had some mistakes in it (I'm paraphrasing from memory). This will be the first thing witnesses latch on to. Innacuracies or Mistakes in the article. So, if Mr. Gillies letter is published as is, it will look as though Bates' article is riddled with mistakes. The fact that Mr. Gillies letter is riddled with mistakes, if not outright lies, will not be addressed in a letter to the editor type of forum. Bates would have to take him on in a written debate in order for Bates' counter-points to be heard.
I'm not familiar with the guardian, but I would be interested to see how they will make use of Gillies statements. A letter to the editor type reprint of Gillies letter would be very problematic as a direct response from Bates wouldn't usually be included in that sort of forum. However, if Bates' incorporates Gillies response into another article it could be quite helpful.
In other words:
If letter from Gillies published in letter to editor forum: points go to gillies for scoring the last word(even though he's lying through his teeth).
If Bates takes him on in his column: points to Bates (cause Gillies is lying through his teeth).
Does anyone know what sort of use Bates will have for this response letter? Will it appear as written in the paper?
Detective,
Good to see you again.
Note my response above on the Gillies/Bates affair wrt to not releasing the letter!
hawk
Hi Hawk,
I hate to tell you but the Guardian and Bates never published nor will they publish Gillies letter
I appreciated this, the inclusion of my comments regarding Bates was to underline the feeling I had that his response to Gillies seemed more personal than theological. The WTS/NGO fiasco is but a speck of sand in a world of issues - except to a few thousand XJW's - the WTS PR departments well know this and trim the PR to suit.
Best regards - HS
