hmmm why is this not on there site??? or is it?
Anonymous Message to Watchtower
by jwleaks 343 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
3dogs1husband
holy crap here it is:
-
life is to short
I have a honest question for you Jamesmahon
If the NSPCC hates the Meghan law so vehemently why is the law still in use? Why have they not done away with it, if as you say it only helps to promote pedophiles and harms the child even worse.
Outlaw does make a good point in that you seem almost in a panic over this list being made public. I counted just from just page 6 on and you have made 25 posts on this subject, very, very, very long posts trying desperately to have this stopped.
You said in one of you very long posts that you have even written to the NSPCC.
I just do not get it. If the Meghan law is so horrible why have it enforced like they do? Why have the police not stopped it?
LITS
-
life is to short
Also thanks 3dogs 1 husband for posting the link. Many do not believe it is real.
LITS
-
3dogs1husband
i had to look for myself too :)
-
Broken Promises
If the list contains the names of convicted pedophiles, then it should be released.
If they haven't been convicted, the names should not be made public but released straight to the police so the appropriate authorities can deal with the information themselves in a legal context.
-
life is to short
I agree Broken Promises. That should calm down Jamesmahon if that would happen.
LITS
-
Balaamsass
jamesmahon;
"We all agree that all allegations should be reported to the police. I don't think witnesses in positions of authority should be removed if accused. They should be reported to the police. Period. An accusation should never in itself be sufficient to punish anyone. Regardless of the crime."
James, frankly I am puzzled by your position. I understand your argument of avoiding a "Salem Witchtrial", but either you have never been actually involved in a JW Molestation judicial situation or you are trying to misdirect.
That list is MORE than just names. It is a list with dates, locations, number of victims, witnesses, CONFESSIONS, Etc.
It is Damming of the guilty. It will OUT those who have moved around and are trying to "Shed" their past identities and PREVENT them from being used. Many of these persons were not convicted BECAUSE of WTBTS conspiracy to conceal crimes and intimidate witnesses with disfellowshipping. Many a police investigation has been derailed by WTBTS instructions to elders.
If you look at Flippers link to the News story you will see the story of the infamous Red Bluff California Presiding Overseer Henderson. His case is on Barbra Andersons site. It is on the PDFs of Molest cases- last case. Pay close attention to the PDFs of the letters between the Circuit Overseer and Bethel. Even with Henderson being on that list, children and young men all over northern California became his victims BECAUSE "his sins were not KNOWN to the congregation". His victims are strewn all over northern California in each congregation he moved to from Colfax, Chico, Red Bluff, Clear Lake and other halls. HAD the list been public countless children would have been protected. I also believe that list would have captured the attention of the California Department of Justice and perhaps the FBI. Perhaps even a RICO investigation.
-
King Solomon
holy crap here it is:
http://anonnews.org/press/item/1656/
Whaddaya know? So there is a press release.
However, the thing to remember is what I suggested earlier, as found on their FAQ page:
http://anonnews.org/static/faq
Frequently Asked Questions
This section will discuss some questions that come up fairly often. If you have any other relevant questions, feel free to join the IRC channel.
How can I join Anonymous?
This question comes up quite often. Anonymous does not have a membership list, and you can't really 'join' it either. If you identify with or say you are Anonymous, you are Anonymous. Noone has the authority to say whether you are Anonymous or not, except for yourself.
How can I talk to Anonymous?
Anons can be found all over the world - and all over the internet. There are no leaders or official spokespersons, and no official websites, IRC networks, or anything else. Basically, if you want to talk to Anonymous, join a random IRC network or forum and start talking to anons! A starting point may be, for example, the AnonNews IRC channel.
Isn't AnonNews just for AnonOps?
No, not at all! Any anon is welcome to post on AnonNews, and there is no active affiliation with AnonOps. You can read more about this issue here.
I don't like this press release! How can I get it removed?
You can't. AnonNews is uncensored (but moderated), and everyone has equal rights to post press releases (or forum posts, or anything else). As long as something is relevant and fits the guidelines, it will be published, regardless of pressure to take it down. There is one exception to this rule, and that is press releases that pretend to be made by the staff of a specific network or operation, while actually being made by an outsider. In this case the network/operation staff can request removal of the press release (this only goes for operations and networks with a defined leadership structure). Other than the aforementioned situation, don't bother trying to get something removed.
Why was my submission rejected?
If your submission doesn't show up after a while, that means it probably didn't fit the guidelines. If you think a submission was rejected in error, you can contact an administrator in the IRC channel. Please don't resubmit your submissions.
How do I upvote a press release?
To upvote a press release, you will have to post a comment that is at least 2 lines long, and at least 100 characters long. This is to prevent pointless '+1' posts just to upvote a press release. Simply enter a comment, and if your comment is long enough, a checkbox to upvote the press release will appear on the captcha verification page.
-
talesin
Thanks for this thread. I had seen the video on f/b, but wasn't sure it was by Anonymous.
And READ THE COMMENTS! It looks like they have found an insider ready to help ... :O
Razzy, I'm gonna alter your sentence a bit .... to reflect my attitude on these matters .... (bold is mine :D)
You said: Groups like Anonymous may not always be doing what is right, but they very well may be doing what is necessary.
I would say: Groups like Anonymous may not always be doing what is legal, but they very well may be doing what is morally right.
ie, what is legal is not always right .
:)
tal