JD, that thread you linked to is 5 years old. Why bring it up now?
Using Illegal Means for Righteous Activism
So I shouldn't bring up anything that is over a certain number of years. What is the number of years is the maximum that I should be allowed to bring up?
OMFG, you are really frustrating. You know that, JD?
JD: So I shouldn't bring up anything that is over a certain number of years.
Did I say that? NO.
Did I suggest it? NO.
Did I in any way imply it? NO.
Read what I asked. I made an factual observation and then I asked a question that arose in my mind as a result of the time that has passed. I want to know YOUR REASON(s) for bringing it up. No one has even posted on that thread in five years. So why now? It's a simple question.
If you can't or won't answer it, then just drop it.
Either way: PLEASE, Do NOT insert/attribute/project motives and or intentions that I have not explicitly expressed and do not have. It's really fucking annoying.
When someone in normal English conversation says "why would you bring that up?" that is usually a rhetorical question of why would you bring that up it has nothing to do with anything. If that is not what you meant I am sorry. I was using that in common English vernacular of what I have heard all my life.
So why did I bring up a thread from 5 years ago? Well if we all think that Watchtower's old feelings on things is fair game so is everyone's else's old feelings on things. But this is a clear example of how some people think that it is perfectly ok to align themselves with people who will commit crimes or aid people who will commit crimes if the outcome they feel is noble.
Some people may have changed their minds in the last 5 years and after Zalkin and the ARC have received the records and have seen that legal means can work just as effective. Some people may not have changed their view or have become even more hardline that all means, including those that are illegal, must be used to fight the fight. It is a legitimate use of a previous post.
JD, well that was a bit of a word salad that frankly I could not digest. But I appreciate that you at least attempted to answer my question to apparently the best of your ability.
John Davis once wrote on this forum that he wasn't Richard Oliver and said he had never heard of him.
John Davis isn't a very good liar and he is also a very good Richard Oliver.
I love how if someone has a different opinion than the popular opinion then they must be evil or be someone else. How do you want me to prove that I am not this Richard Oliver please tell me and I will prove it to you.
You've done plenty to prove that you are.
Well then you have already made up your mind without any actual evidence. Good for you.