The Watchtower has a deal with the Navy.

by avengers 159 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • deddaisy
    deddaisy
    this stock would have been dumped on the market long ago.

    Lew, they claim this stock is worthless because this company is profitless......could the WTS, in clear conscience, "dump" worthless stock on the market? I'm sure if we check, we'd find that they've never done such a thing......no, as the JW apologists claim, the poor WTS cannot dump this worthless stock on the market, and they HAD to accept it, no turning down freebie stock.......I guess they can't even return it to McCann.......

    yes, the WTS should stick with this defense, then when the very sincere JW that I know, who had her uncle commit suicide for guilt over not serving in the war with his buddies, questions an elder regarding this matter, he can look at her in disbelief. Then after he contacts the WTS, he can look her in the face and tell her that the WTS says the stock was donated and they can't get rid of it. I'm sure she'll understand. After all, her elderly grandparents, whom are not JWs, have only lived without their son for twenty-seven years or so......

    Edited by - deddaisy on 17 July 2002 11:47:53

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    This is an outrage!!! Are you telling me those poor people at WBTS haven`t made a profit from their bomb parts factory!!! They should be able to make a tidy profit,for helping make bombs to kill people..LOL...OUTLAW

    Edited by - OUTLAW on 17 July 2002 11:58:14

  • amac
    amac

    Outlaw -

    Does this company that they own 50% of actually make bombs? Or parts of a bomb? A bomb being something that blows up, goes kaboom.

    Please do not exaggerate in an attempt to over simplify. This misinformation tends to propagate and, being easily refutable, clouds any real facts.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    They make parts for the bomb....The bomb go`s ka-boom....The bomb kills people.... Is that simple enough for you?...OUTLAW

    Edited by - OUTLAW on 17 July 2002 12:13:22

  • amac
    amac

    They make parts for the bomb....The bomb go`s ka-boom....The bomb kills people.... Is that simple enough for you?...OUTLAW
    No...since the company in question makes a rotary engine which MAY be used in future unmanned military aircrafts by a company they do business with. What you are saying is similar to saying JimBoy's Steel plant that sells steel to General Dynamics is a tank factory.

  • Crazy151drinker
    Crazy151drinker

    AMAC;

    "What you are saying is similar to saying JimBoy's Steel plant that sells steel to General Dynamics is a tank factory."

    JimBoy's Steel plant (to use your example) would obviously know that General Dynamics makes tanks. Plus General Dynamics would be ordering Tank Specific steel. There is no way JimBoy could say "oh I didnt know, I just make steel!"

    Knowing what the Navy's future use of this product may be, how can the JW ORG justify owning a percentage?

  • Crazy151drinker
    Crazy151drinker

    "But we plan to make ceramic lunch boxes for all the JW children!"

  • amac
    amac

    They can't justify it. And that should be the point, that either through
    negligence or hypocricy, they have/had business ties with a military company. 
    Not "THE WT OWNS 50% OF A BOMB FACTORY!!!!" because any moron can see that 
    is not true, refute it, and then dismiss the whole topic.

    Edited by - amac on 17 July 2002 13:29:45

  • LyinEyes
    LyinEyes

    I was thinking about Gravedancer's comment on the WTBS not being about to sell the stock .

    Could they give it as a "gift" to someone eles? If that is the only way to get rid of it in all the legal ways that it needs to be done , why couldnt they give it to some other organization , if it bothered them about sharing in the killing of many. I think because they dont want to!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    If my aunt bought me a lottery ticket and gave it too me as a gift, and I won 200 million dollars, could I accept it, I am not sure what the JW policy is on that? Or what if the local church down the road was raffling off a nice hand made quilt worth a good penny, and my sister bought the raffle ticket for me? And it was a well known fact that the money raised for this raffle was to be used to help in building a brand new church. Now remember this would be a big thing for a small town, and the winner of the lovely handmade quilt from the raffle would have her picture in the local paper , along with the pastor and the ladies who made it. Do you think I would get in trouble with the local elders for this??? I mean it was a gift. I didnt go out and buy the raffle ticket. If this would have really happened to me while I was a faithful JW , I wouldnt have wanted anything to do with being involved in ANY way with the church . Even thou I have never thought that was an evil thing, I just wouldnt want to comprimise my faith. I would have declined and returned the gift , the raffle ticket, and told my sister I wanted her to have the quilt.

    Why can't the WT , do something other than just holding on to it, they sure wouldnt let us get away with a much less minor comprimise, as the above example.

    Oh the double standards they have for themselves, when it comes to the big money.... and well, everything eles.

  • deddaisy
    deddaisy
    A JW inventor named James McCann sold an "exclusive license" to his "ram-cam technology invention" to a non JW named John Robertson.

    ERIEGUY, I asked you for reference to your information regarding McCann, but I guess you're too busy proclaiming your concern for the "pedophile scandal" to answer a legitimate question on this thread..

    If in fact, McCann is a Witness, as you claim, could you ask him why in the world he sold an "exclusive license" to a non JW, as you claim, and in 1993, when it was known that his "ram-cam technology invention" was to be targeted toward the Department of Defense, still went ahead and agreed to terms to "increase" the investment of this non-JW to 51 %? And if his mind was made up to relinquish control of his technology to a non-JW, why didn't the WTS have the foresight to say "look Brother McCann, thanks for the gift but at this point we're going to have to return it." oh, you say JWs can't turn down gifts even if they believe them to be against Bible principle? Maybe the WTS should inform their members of this.

    In the relevant text of Regi's SEC Filing, it certainly seems that McCann was in "agreement" to terms.......

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TEXT OF FILING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
    _______________________________

    FORM 10-KSB

    ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
    THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1934

    For the Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 2001

    COMMISSION FILE NO. 0-23920



    REGI U.S., INC. -----------------
    (Name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

    OREGON 91-1580146
    (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer
    incorporation or organization) Identification Number)

    185 - 10751 SHELLBRIDGE WAY
    RICHMOND, BRITISH COLUMBIA V6X 2W8, CANADA
    ------------------------------------------
    (Address, including postal code, of registrant's principal executive offices)

    (604) 278-5996
    (Telephone number including area code)

    Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act: NONE

    Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

    Title of each class Name of each Exchange on which registered:
    ------------------- ------------------------------------------



    GENERAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

    We were organized under the laws of the State of Oregon on July 27, 1992 as Sky
    Technologies, Inc. On August 1, 1994, our name was officially changed by a vote
    of a majority of our shareholders to REGI U.S., Inc. We are controlled by Rand
    Energy Group Inc., a privately held British Columbia corporation ("RAND"),
    which, in turn, is controlled 51% by Reg Technologies Inc., a publicly held
    British Columbia corporation ("Reg Tech").

    We are engaged in the business of developing and building an improved axial
    vane-type rotary engine known as the Rand Cam/Direct Charge Engine ("RC/DC
    Engine"), which is a variation of the Rand Cam Rotary Engine, an axial vane
    rotary engine ("Original Engine"). The worldwide, exclusive of the United
    States, intellectual and marketing rights to the RC/DC Engine are held by RAND.
    We hold the rights to develop, build and market the RC/DC Engine design in the
    U.S.
    pursuant to an agreement with RAND. Under a project cost sharing agreement
    entered into with RAND effective May 1, 1993, each company funds 50% of the
    continuing development cost of the RC/DC Engine.



    4


    BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY AND PRODUCTS

    Overview and History


    Pursuant to an agreement dated October 20, 1986 between Reg Tech, Rand Cam Corp.
    and James McCann, Reg Tech agreed to acquire a 40% voting interest in a new
    corporation to be incorporated to acquire the rights to the Original Engine. The
    new corporation was RAND. Reg Tech acquired the 40% voting interest in RAND in
    consideration of the payment of $250,000.

    Pursuant to an agreement made as of April 27, 1993 among Reg Tech, Rand Cam
    Corp., RAND and James McCann, Reg Tech acquired an additional 330,000 shares
    (11%) of RAND from Rand Cam Corp. to increase its investment to 51%.

    _____________________________________________________________________________

    Very odd, don't you agree, that REGI (51% WTS) is controlled by Rand (?) who is controlled by REG (51% WTS according to Filing on the "WTS owns war machine" thread)...............It appears, according to these company filings, that the WTS has majority holdings in these companies. If this is not as it appears, then that is because Mr. McCann voluntarily relinguished his majority.....

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit