My JW Brother-in-Law's Crisis of Conscience

by arko_n9ne 26 Replies latest jw experiences

  • arko_n9ne

    Me and my brother in law share a computer at home. We have different accounts and for the life of me, I still don't know his password.
    But it hasn't stopped me from putting "apostate" literature on his desktop screen. I am an amateur IT geek who knows the ins and outs of computers, so I don't look twice at things like passwords.

    Anyway, a few months ago, I slipped three files onto his desktop. Crisis of Conscience by Ray Franz. Shepherd the Flock 2010 Elder's Manual. Pay Attention to Yourselves and the Flock 1991 Elder's Manual.

    Unlike the other "apostate" literature, these three files are still there. He even organizaed them on one side of his desktop, away from everything else. And from the data checkers, he's been reading CoC. Alot.

    I'm happy he is reading the book and whatever the motive for keeping the manuals, at least he's keeping them. They're forbidden to the Rank & File, so he knows he shouldn't have them. But he does, and small victories are victories none the less.

  • smiddy

    Keep us informed as to how things develop

    good for you arko


  • smiddy

    Down the track if you can put Don Camerons "Captive of A Concept" for him to peruse i`m sure that would do the trick.

    just a suggestion


  • transhuman68

    LOL. The Witnesses are weird and unpredictable. I sent my BIL a DVD with a PDF of CoC on it- I can do that kind of sh$t because I was never baptized- and even when he and my sis visited me- not a word was said about it. I think he is an elder, too....

  • Phizzy

    Reading for himself, with no pressure from you, may well be the best way to go, he is only a few clicks of the mouse away from finding out more if he wants, and I am sure he will.

  • steve2

    There's something more than a little unethical about your thread: You're boasting about your skillful dishonesty in accessing your brother-in-law's computer, putting stuff on his desk top without his knowledge and keeping a track of what he accesses? You're a very clever man aren't you? Imagine if this was done to you by a JW putting pro-JW stuff on your computer without your knowledge. You'd be crying foul in no time and using it as evidence of their unscrupulous ways.

    Sounds like you should be the one with the crisis of conscience.

  • arko_n9ne


    You have been insulting me and talking down to me since my 3rd topic post (9th post altogether) and I had to do research on you because I couldn't understand why you're being a colossal turd to me.

    So let me repeat something I said in reply to your first ingratiating response to my topic:
    "if anyone thinks so then please send me an email with the congregation they go to and i will leave an apology with a vow to never reference people and experiences in the experiences section of the forums."

    Well? It's been over a month. Where do they go?

    Let's share guideline 1 for posting on here, shall we? Please avoid "Insulting, threatening, or provoking language."
    You're smart enough to know not to threaten someone because of the legal ramifications, let alone what will probably happen to your account. But you have been provoking me and insulting me almost every time you talk to me.

    Take a look at guideline 4: Please avoide "Breaking the law. This includes libel."
    The definition of libel:
    "libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. This can be also any disparaging statement made by one person about another, which is communicated or published."

    Are you seriously going to tell me that in this post and the Russian Government commentary that you never posted anything similar to the definition of libel?

    I cannot understand why you are singling me out. I truly can't. I would love to see what responses you get in a topic post entitled "Why arko_n9ne bothers me." You have been the sole nay-sayer in the JWN Public's responses to my comments.

    I took you back to gradeschool in our last go-around. Let's see if I can put you back in daycare.


    Steve2 accuses me of:
    "putting stuff on his (brother-in-law) desk top without his knowledge."

    Ryan Kent says:
    "$2000 to the person who can quote me that I put these files on his desktop without his knowledge." I'll settle for "putting stuff on his desk top without his knowledge."

    This is a baseless, uninformed accusation. Putting stuff on his account desktop without his password does not indicate I did it without his knowledge. Nor have I used any words or wording to indicate as such. The closest would be the word "slipped," but in it's private sense, it means to pass something to someone secretly. Again, there is no admission or denial of my brother-in-law's knowledge. For all you and the World Wide Web are aware, he knows but I'm not making a spectacle about it.

    You do not get to make any more false accusations about me @steve2.


    Focusing on the other point of contention you have with my post:

    @steve2 doesn't like that I'm:
    "keeping a track of what he accesses."

    Ryan Kent says:
    "Unless you are under my roof, are a friend of mine, have any idea of the goings on at this house, or see how the story unfolds, then you have no idea why I am keeping track of his actions on the computer."

    $500 to the one who can quote me on who this computer belongs to.
    Extra money to the one who can quote why I am keeping track of my brother-in-law's activity.

    Steve2, you DON'T know the answer to either of those two questions, and because you decided to run your mouth to me on my 9th post, you won't know. Nor will others. I remember some guy who I never heard of using a screen handle that rhymes with "Leave You" talking down to me for posting personal details about others. Despite my challenge for this seemingly uptight individual to expose my error in posting those details, I was being mindful of what he asked of me.

    I don't post intimate details when I write topics now. And now this same guy is making accusations about me, insulting me, based on what I wrote using the guidelines HE suggested.

    I am new and you are established steve2. I got that. I also got from your treatment of me "once a Witness, always a Witness." You are condescending, judgemental, and factually inaccurate in undeserved accusations. I would hate to think that given time, most people on JWN will conform to your "once a Witness" attitude to newcomers.
    Unlike you, I don't pass judgement until someone has wronged me. Your first contact with me was patronizing and judgemental. ANd those colors don't fly in my ocean.

    You have been making strident efforts to discredit me. Why? Only you and God know, but at this point, I don't care. You've been here since the end of 2004. I would have figured you'd realized after all these years that the only way to take someone down is with their own words. Your accusations don't match my words at all. Never have. Never will.

    Instead, you resort to taking liberties (like the WTS) with sentences of mine and providing an empty meaning that suits your need (like the WTS). You (like the WTS) make efforts to dictate the way people talk and when they conform, you hang them with that rope (like the WTS). But with me, you need to have a few extra knots. I've got a thick neck and a heck of a backbone. I don't take well to what you're trying.

    I will leave you with a quote from some random guy on here who seems to think this quote is clever enough for a t-shirt:

    " the JWs wll love you because you are a perfect specimen of how they envisage opposers and/or apostates to be: Sensationalist and unbalanced" -steve2 (JWN Forum, Kelly Jarka Case pg2, 2012)

    And I say that with alot of irony. So if you decide to reply, do understand that the next insult (which I avoided with you) or accusation (which I avoided with you), unless you can hang me with my words once and for all, I'll be sending a PM to the big boss.

    ~Ryan Kent

  • steve2

    Ryan, your impassioned response tells me that my responses to you have significantly upset you. You also write about my language insulting you and then refer to me as a "colossal turd" which probably shows how easily communication between people deteriorates - despite our mutually good intentions. I have no desire to keep engaging in a tit for tat with you - especially now that I can see how upset you are. It was never my intention for my words to have had such a significantly negative impact on you. I called you to task for some of your statements and you hit the roof big time.

    Therefore, the most principled thing I can do is apologize for hurting your feelings and I will think carefully before replying to any of your posts in the future. I would apprecaite it if, under the circumstances, if you would accept my reply. Steve

  • Resistance is Futile
    Resistance is Futile

    I wish my JW relatives would read Crisis of Conscience. Good job arko. Maybe someday he'll escape the Watchtower Cult.

  • moshe

    CoC is the one that really grabs a JW by the cahones.

  • OnTheWayOut

    Steve2, I haven't kept track of any back-and-forth here, but I was thinking your accusation was over-the-top. They share a computer and [he] put a few files there to help his b-i-l. He's able to keep track of the fact that someone takes access to those files. It's not hard for his b-i-l to realize where the files come from and you don't know more than that, yet you say "There's something more than a little unethical about your thread" and go on to say he's using "skillful dishonesty."

    Even if it were "skillful dishonesty," (which I would argue against) it is not your call to say it's unethical.

    If I were to hire Steve Hassan or some cult-exit therapist to sit next to my wife on an 8-hour flight and use some "insider information" about her, in order to help her use her own mind to think for herself, I don't give a crap that someone like you would call that unethical and I would also take offense strongly to any such suggestions.

    If he were leaving pornography on the desktop of a minor, and keeping track of the minor accessing it, okay then. But otherwise, I cannot see Steve2's point here at all. The man is free to address the leaving of files openly, delete the files, ignore the files, or read the files. They are not pornography left for a child. They are propaganda, true. But hurray for their existence.

    I have no problem with one person here feeling that every JW has the right to be a JW without "interference" from others. I also have no problem with someone else (like me) feeling that JW's are in a dangerous mind-control cult and need a bit of help from someone willing to use what you call "skillful dishonesty." It ain't my place to try to call them out in their situation with my ethics layed over their own ethics.

  • steve2

    Thanks OntheWayOut, I appreciate your calmly reasoned response - I had in fact not noticed the reference to a shared computer - your pointing it out led me to re-read the initial post. You make some very good points.

  • arko_n9ne

    Thank you @OnTheWayOut. Very much appreciated for the third-party opinion. It wasn't going to help to have two people at odds without someone watching from outside.


    I want to apologize and explain my grievances. All I have in this world is my son, and my word. My son is untouchable by the world and has no bearing on my issues at home. So on JWN, all that I have is my word. And you sought to discredit me for some reason and that meant attacking the only thing I have outside of my kid.

    I stand by my claim that I feel you were "being a colossal turd to me." As you saw in my last post, I don't like accusations when they aren't true. And I've received several untrue accusations from you on top of trying to discredit me. And I can't get over myself enough to let that go without trying to systematically tear down anyone I feel is an attacker. My responses ARE bold. They ARE aggressive and raged. But again, that goes back to that personal information that you chided me for.

    I live with two Jehovah's Witnesses and my wife (their sister, never been a JW). Six months ago, I'd been living with five JWs for four years. Every one of them critical and obnoxious with their heads so far up their butts. In 2004, I didn't know what a Jehovah's Witness was. By 2008, I was living with them because my wife had me leave a high-paying job. 2009, I found out about the irregularities in the concept of refusing transfusions. It was my first scandal I'd ever heard of. Only a month ago, I joined JWN and found literal scores of information I never knew.

    This was supposed to be the place for me to vent my JW frustrations. Otherwise, who'll hear it? Witnesses? Can't vent to my wife because it'll be seen as complaining about her family. This felt so very much like it could be a new home to me.

    And then the accusations. And then the misunderstandings.

    I didn't handle this as properly as it should have been. I probably could have been more private in our back and forth. Anger issues make me want to try to destroy an attacker in public. It's not healthy.

    As for your posting replies on my topics, I honestly want your replies. I've seen that you are educated in these matters, much more than myself. I've seen how productive and informed you are in other people's posts. Just...I'm not a bad person in any standing of the word. If something I write doesn't resonate with you, please, read it a second time. If you came to the same conclusion, it's more than likely the tone I went for. So call me out then, if you feel it's necessary.

    Going forward with that advice, if there is a reply from you that may offend me, I will understand how you came to your conclusions. I will formulate my opinions or counter points. And I will politely send them in a PM to you for further discussion, so I'm not tearing my shirt off in the JWN forums, dancing around like a chimp.

    ~Ryan Kent

  • skeeter1

    How much would you charge to fix a teenager's computer?

  • arko_n9ne

    @skeeter1 lmao. i get that question alot. what's wrong with it?

  • TD

    This is just a general observation, which is not directed to or at anybody on this thread

    There is a wide spread internet notion that if you own or co-own the computer, you can do pretty do much anything you want with it. When either a husband or a wife suspects the other of cheating, that is invariably the reason given for unauthorized access to user accounts, email and the installation of surveillance software.

    Ownership is not the issue though. Most of us own the phones in our homes, yet recording the conversations of other adults (Including our spouse) without their knowledge is usually illegal.

    As an I.T. person, I've paid good money and gone to seminars presented by attorneys on this subject. In the U.S., unauthorized access of the email of another adult is actionable both civilly and criminally under 18 U.S.C. Sec 2511.

    The courts are split so far on whether this also includes your spouse. The Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have all held that interspousal wiretapping and interception of email is actionable under Title III. The Second and Fifth Circuits have held that Title III does not apply to interspousal relations.

    Sixteen states so far in the U.S. have enacted legislation that under most circumstances prohibits monitoring the electronic activities of another adult. (Law enforcement is a pretty obvious exception) The most aggressive state by far has been Texas, where a few people have actually received prison sentences for installing keyloggers on a computer used by other adult family members

    I haven't mentioned any of this to suggest that arko_n9ne has crossed the line here. Dropping documents on the desktop of another user is not the same thing. I'm just pointing out that there is a line.

  • Knowsnothing

    Yeah TD, what arko did is pretty much child's play. His BIL well could have deleted those files and that probably would've been the end of it. The question is, is it illegal for him to keep tabs of how much CoC is used? I mean, it's basically a shared file, so..... I don't really see the problem?

  • james_woods

    Just as an outside observation - I think I would rather walk the hot coals on a south sea island than share a computer with ANYBODY - let alone with my brother in law.

  • TD
    The question is, is it illegal for him to keep tabs of how much CoC is used? I mean, it's basically a shared file, so..... I don't really see the problem?

    AFAIK there is no problem here at all. What I said was only cautionary. The legal climate has changed so drastically in the last few years, that many I.T. people don't know exactly where the line is drawn anymore.

  • NomadSoul

    That was clever. I would've started the computer in safe mode and logged in as administrator and you can have easier access that way.

    I'll give Steve2 some more unethical things he can whine about. How about leaving your Wireless connection with no password protection and see if your neighbors are dumb enough to connect to it thinking they're getting free internet. Leaving their network wide open. Some even have several computers where they share files. And is not hard to send them a trojan to open a few other ports.

    Hopefully your brother in law wakes up from the cult.

Share with others