It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

by Newly Enlightened 7836 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Toblerone5
  • Vintage
    Vintage

    Am I hearing this right? Kim Silvio is in Wikipedia? Kim is famous!!

  • Toblerone5
    Toblerone5

    I'm going to release the menopause kraken here. You have to be very vindictive to promote a youtube video that is not even available no more! I double check, Like is JWwatch site, IT'S NOT THERE ANYMORE! But he just did that to Humiliate Kim ! How would he feel if someone put His January video on that site? sorry, i should have wrote ,who care how he feel, is there a way to put that video on that site? Or at least to have that removed from that site? That's low..

  • KIMSILVIO
    KIMSILVIO

    Was that out there recently?

    edit: he does not have my consent to publish that video.

  • AudeSapere
    AudeSapere
    Toblerone5 wrote: But he just did that to Humiliate Kim ! How would he feel if someone put His January video on that site? sorry, i should have wrote ,who care how he feel, is there a way to put that video on that site?

    This is Lloyd's MO. Post a comment. Stir some shit. Delete *his* post and let readers think people are attacking him for zero reason.

    It's a chicken-shit way to behave on any forum.

    It's a chicken-shit way to be a human.

  • AudeSapere
    AudeSapere

    From watching Lloyd Evans, I see a pattern with many people who talk like they have the answers to EVERYTHING - and demand anyone within ear shot (screen shot) take heel.

    This is usually teenage behavior (maybe early 20's). Highly idealistic and no real plan for real implementation in the real world.

    Most of these people really do not know how to live their own lives with decency, decorum and respect for other people.

    Many live in their parents' homes. Or in their in-law's homes.

    Some pan-handle. Some beg for support on internet sites. Some steal.

    Nearly all of the people with endless time to bang away on their keyboards about how everyone who does something different than the author's own insightful plan - seems nearly all of those keyboard warriors have never, never EVER been responsible for taking control of their own lives by earning a living and doing all the work to keep their own basic life needs on track.

    Most do not deal with the drudgery of showing up for work - on time, every day, no excuses.

    Most do not pay their own full rent from the wages they earned from showing up for work everyday.

    Most do not cook their own meals, wash their own clothes, clean their own homes, change their own sheets.

    They talk a big talk but cannot take the very basic steps needed to take responsibility for their own lives.

    And for the ones who cannot get and keep their own lives in order to lecture, insult, and shit-stir to then delete their own offensive comments in a post - GTFO.

  • Diogenesister
    Diogenesister
    Kim S He may have wanted the data however IICSA said no. To continue pressing and criticizing iicsa for not insisting WT provide the data, isn’t a great way to endear iicsa to your cause.

    I'm not sure if iicsa gave a reason for not requesting the data. It may be that they did not have the power, did not have the remit, or....and this is my theory .....that in their view the 'numbers' were not that relevent.

    What I mean by that is that if Watchtower policies are the cause of abuse going unreported and children suffering, it should not matter how many kids are affected. Even one child is bad enough. If it was just the data that was important, if it was just about numbers, at what figure is the trigger point for action to be taken? Is it 50 children? 100? 1000? That would be an obscene concept - to say that 49 children 'sacrificed' to Watchtower is acceptable, but 50 isn't. In that sense I can understand why data wasn't important to iicsa.

    I mean don't get me wrong, it makes for good headlines. Which may have been his priority?

  • Toblerone5
    Toblerone5

    Fun fact about the IMDb is that you can created an account FOR FREE. then you can write reviews ,the requirement characters : 600... The bad thing is that the administration have to approve it before the public can see it... You can also rate it with stars 1\10... And if that is not enough you can send to the contact licensing Department a nice complain about some of there member who is falsely promoting a Imaginery interview video that does not exist anywhere anymore... If little French women with bad spelling can do all that ANYBODY can do that too. just saying... cause he did that to Insult an Humiliate Kim Silvio again...NOT ON MY WATCH...HELL NO! A SUIVRE...

  • Thisismein1972
    Thisismein1972
    I think Wikipedia has clear rules on smearing a person so it might be a good idea to pop them an email.
  • Las Malvinas son Argentinas
    Las Malvinas son Argentinas
    I think Wikipedia has clear rules on smearing a person so it might be a good idea to pop them an email.

    Especially for an active “criminal” lawsuit. Very one sided for something that hasn’t been adjudicated yet.

    Wait for the lawsuit to fail. It shouldn’t be too much longer as I doubt the Sisak court authorities care to have such a BS case take up space on their docket for much longer.

    Then it should be a simple task to request an edit to include information that the case was found to be without merit and dismissed.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit