JW.org reports on the Sandy Hook shooting...

by cedars 112 Replies latest jw friends

  • cedars

    Looks like brave Sir Shadow has bravely run away!!

    Brave Sir Robin


  • scotoma


    You have committed the logical fallacy of “Improper Accent”.

    You took the following words out of context and used them to convey an understanding that
    cannot be proven to represent the intentions of the statement.

    “Initial reports indicate that at least two Witness youths were at the school during the shooting
    but were not injured.”

    Your premise is:

    SINCE- The article references the fact that two Witness youths were at the school ...
    THEREFORE- the Watchtower was giving “irrelevant information”.

    There was nothing said to detract from the deaths of the 27 people. Here are some things that
    could have been said that WOULD have been disturbing.

    Thankfully, the two Witnesses that went to that school are alive and safe. (Gloating)
    We can thank Jehovah for protecting the two Witness youths who were at the school during the
    shooting. (Attributing divine intervention)

    Lacking is any elaboration on how JW ought to feel about the survival of the two Witness youths.

    Journalists are expected to give consideration to how relevant a news story is to the audience in
    question. Cedars, you are assigning your own criteria of relevance. That’s propaganda.

    The very “short” report led with the statement of the number who were killed without sensationalizing it. The
    statement about the Witness youths was thereby assigned a secondary position. Position of
    statements is very important in jounalism. By lifting the statement about the two JW children
    out of such a short announcement you are ignoring the relevance of the fact that the
    announcement was made on a JW web site where the audience would have a unique interest in
    whether their were any JW victims. In fact that information WAS relevant especially in this age
    of “narrow casting”. You are ignoring the fact that JW’s are a small and close knit group and it
    is likely that there may be dispersed associates of that local group that would be comforted to
    know that some of their acquaintances were not suffering such a terrible loss.

    Their statement, by virtue of being short, indicates their intention was NOT to repeat what you
    could get on any conventional news media outlet.

    So, Cedar you tried to direct the readers of your thread toward an improper conclusion by taking
    portions of the Watchtower.org statement out of context in a way that conveys a meaning that
    you can’t absolutely prove was the intended meaning of the writer.

  • Indian Larry
    Indian Larry

    Well put.

  • Knowsnothing

    Cedars, you can be a bit sensationalist at times. This should be a non-issue. Let's focus on the real issues of the WT, such as false prophecy, totalitarian regime, shunning, quote mining, etc.

    I would have to agree with Scotoma. The announcement was mainly intended for informing JWs about their bretheren.

  • OnTheWayOut

    I have read the first three pages and will reiterate these important points before my brain forgets them:

    ‘Jehovah's Witnesses and the WT Society ALWAYS, ALWAYS print WT or Awake articles patting themselves on the back talking about their own relief efforts of helping MAINLY Jehovah's Witnesses as if to indicate that somehow, someway NOBODY else on planet earth is helping people in disasters ! They are a smug, self serving bunch of people who are taught that people outside of the JW religion are " worldly " and not worth saving unless they show an interest in the WT Society.’

    I think that deserves another post.

    This one also:

    And underneath it all, the solution they are cheering for, whether they admit it or not, is for Big J to load his guns and start slaughtering every human that isn't a JW... or even some JWs that haven't been preaching enough. Very soon now, they expect to celebrate the ultimate global terror campaign of all time.

    JW's mention that a couple of kids were JW's because that allows them to get sympathy if those kids died, and to credit Jehovah for watching over JW's and not others if the kids were unharmed. It's not so cold to post it on their website, because the rest of the world outside of JW's and bitter ex-JW's doesn't care about their website and official statement.

    They go on to mention their offer of comfort. I guarantee it won't be at a church funeral. Their brand of comfort involves recruiting and pioneers counting their time and "placing" literature.

    The propoganda piece about Japan needs to be viewed as just that. WTS is making money off that disaster, as they are real exerts at that now.

  • sd-7
    It is better to keep your attacks to concrete doctrinal issues. Attacking an organization's culture is a distraction. It only affects those who already have left.

    Hey, pick up an issue of Awake! sometime, will ya? You may have noticed a similar pattern in there against 'Christendom'. And a similar effect on those who have already left other Christian religions...so JWs and ex-JWs are probably two sides of the same coin, in terms of the obsession with stickin' it to each other. Whereas JWs who visit here to argue are on a different plane of existence altogether (which I say with no insult intended), as they straddle the two worlds to debate with ex-JWs. That's an interesting dynamic, though, and provides good opportunities for open debate on legitimate issues.

    But this back-and-forth is all so pointless, really. As far as JWs are concerned, this is essentially a social issue, a situation where charity could be shown, and really, that ain't their cup o' tea. That said, I do think people could be comforted by the scriptures in a situation like this, and JWs might even help in that regard, to an extent. To the extent that any comfort is brought to those who lost children and friends in this tragedy, it would be a good thing.

    To the extent that such people are recruited into a cult, though, it would be a bad thing. Just so we're clear. This sort of article shouldn't surprise anyone, and is no more cold than any of the other approaches the organization has had to external events. Dude. We're talking about people who will send kids to their deaths based on splitting hairs on the blood issue. You expect them to pour out their hearts in a compassionate display of warm, Christian love for non-JW kids? Right. "You picked the wrong house, bub!"


  • MrFreeze

    We all know WT only really cares about the WT. The WT loves when stuff like this happens. It helps their recruiting efforts when they use it as a sales pitch. When disasters strike the WT is all in to help non-Witnesses with the essentials. Like the WT comic books.

    Their "comfort" is the same kind that those TV psychics use to scam people out of their money.

  • cedars


    So, Cedar you tried to direct the readers of your thread toward an improper conclusion by taking
    portions of the Watchtower.org statement out of context

    I quoted the statement in full, so how can I be accused of using anything "out of context"? Please go away and research what "out of context" means.

    By lifting the statement about the two JW children
    out of such a short announcement you are ignoring the relevance of the fact that the
    announcement was made on a JW web site where the audience would have a unique interest in
    whether their were any JW victims.

    Yes, it is a JW website, but no JW kids were harmed. And (unless they are EXTREMELY paranoid) JWs wouldn't be frantically checking the site to see if one of the kids WAS a JW. If 20 kids get shot in a school, what are the chances that one will be a JW? Granted, it would be newsworthy for JW.org to report if one of them WAS a JW, but that wasn't the case. Therefore, I maintain that the fact that two kids who attended the school were JWs but they were unharmed is irrelevant against the broader picture, which is that 27 people tragically lost their lives that day at the hands of a madman.

    I don't know why I'm answering your points anymore. I've already explained on a previous page how your analogy of a national news media taking interest in one of its citizens doesn't apply in this scenario, but you're strangely quiet in answering that point.

    I've also answered another poster by giving an example of how JW.org could have used the brief statement to convey sympathy for the families of the victims, but it didn't. Why? Because, frankly, it doesn't care. If the victims' families decided to ditch their worldly ways and embrace the JW cult - THEN they would start "caring" about them. Until then, they're effectively future Armageddon casualties anyway.

    You keep maintaining that the statement DOESN'T reflect the fact that the organization is self-absorbed when it comes to only caring about Jehovah's Witnesses when tragedies occur. That's your opinion, and you're entitled it. I just fail to understand your apparent obsession with trying to ram it down my throat.


    Cedars, you can be a bit sensationalist at times.

    And you can make sweeping generalizations at times.

    If you don't like my posts, ignore them.


  • soft+gentle

    scotoma - I appreciate your input on this thread and you make some excellent points.

    Imo the brief jw.org report is not as suggestive of the points you are making cedars but I don't object to your activism or to your contextualisation. Imo the statement on its own doesn't reflect self absorbtion but reflects more what scotoma is saying - connection. The fact that JW.org says that initial reports suggested that there were 2 jw children who were at the school but who were not injured makes the shooting more personal for jehovahs witnesses whilst they absorb the greater tragedy which can seem like mindless, wasteful loss of life when contextualised by newspapers alongside other shootings or alongside gun control debates for example (not saying it's wrong to do so btw).

    Other religious bodies are doing the same as Jehovahs witnesses - trying to help their own people to make a connection and also then thinking about how they can help the community which is what the jw.org report also does.

    But I am not trying to dampen your activism (or anyone else's) as we xjws are aware of the spin Jehovahs witnessses will put on this event a spin with which we have had a connection and which we want to air. so kudos to you for doing so. But this does not mean dismissing scotoma's view.

    edit: why don't you just ignore him? I like his comments and yours too so I will ignore neither.

  • Bangalore

    Here is a thread about the Sandy Hook shooting from a JW forum.



Share this