Publisher ID: leaked video clip 2 of 4

by Fay Dehr 44 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Drearyweather
    I can get the forms tomorrow, which on the REVERSE contain sensitive info about the publisher.

    Yes. But the publisher himself knows that this information is filled by the service committee and he agrees to the following terms when applying for it (A-27 form):

    I hereby consent to the collection and processing of my personal data necessary for the evaluation of my application to serve as a construction volunteer. I further consent to the branch office of Jehovah’s Witnesses that administers the activities of Jehovah’s Witnesses in my geographic area processing and retaining for its use the information found on this application and any additional information that may be submitted in connection with my application by individuals serving as elders of Jehovah’s Witnesses or by me. I understand that the transfer of my personal data to the branch office of Jehovah’s Witnesses and to the ecclesiastical Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses (the “Governing Body”) in the state of New York, United States of America, may be necessary for the evaluation of my application to serve as a construction volunteer. I authorize the transfer to the Governing Body of the information found on this application and any additional personal information that the Governing Body deems necessary regarding my capacity to serve as a construction volunteer.

  • Ruby456


    I personally feel that such data, written about me, would at the very least be sensitive enough for me to have the legal right to read what has been written about me. Watchtower now want publishers to legally revoke their right to access and amend that data.

    yes exactly. Watchtower need your signature to comply if they do not they will be breaking the law as soon as this new legislation comes into force and you will be able to take them to court if you live in the EU even if headquarters are in the USA

    I always find it annoying that when I visit a site I have to give permission for cookies to be stored on my computer. Google and facebook are big business and lets face it info can mean greater revenue via advertising but it can also be misused and your rights can be abused in that way.

    edit: I guess Simon will need to comply too but I don't fully understand what is required yet. The main thing is that the legislature is designed to protect your rights but not absolutely of course.

  • Ruby456

    alos wondering how info re individual disfellowshipping will pan out. Would a disfellowshipped individual be able to take them to court if this info is passed on to another congregation? could people in the EU ask elders to redress info they have spread about one's disfellowshipping? such questions can be put to others on the link above.

    another thing would be sharing info about householders. this would be a biggie for watchtower I think.

    edit: on the issue of disfellowshipping

    suppose that you had asked the wts to delete all references to your disfellowshipping and went to a new congregation and the elders become aware that you are disfellowshipped through your old congregation telling them. could you then take the wts to court?

  • freddo

    Err… Morpheus

    You said the S-77 would have no confidential info. Well – let’s begin with JUST question 1.


    [ ] Specify offence(s) for which disfellowshipped

    Did they confess?

    If no, what evidence …


    [ ] Specify by what actions the individual disassociated himself.

    Now let’s go down to the first of the ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS …

    … … if anything of significance needs to be shared with the branch office do so in a separate letter.

    The individual would see nothing of how this form is completed by the judicial committee.

  • slimboyfat

    Collapse denial, now information denial, close bedfellows.

  • Drearyweather
    suppose that you had asked the wts to delete all references to your disfellowshipping

    The Right to Erasure (Article 17) has certain exceptions that allow an organization to deny an individuals request to delete his personal data. So if a disfellowshipped individual asks WT to delete his personal data, the WT is not obligated to delete the data if they can prove that the data falls under the following exceptions:

    1. for exercising the right of freedom of expression and information;
    2. for compliance with a legal obligation which requires processing by Union or Member State law to which the controller is subject or for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller;
    3. for reasons of public interest in the area of public health in accordance with points (h) and (i) of Article 9(2) as well as Article 9(3);
    4. for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes in accordance with Article 89(1) in so far as the right referred to in paragraph 1 is likely to render impossible or seriously impair the achievement of the objectives of that processing; or
    5. for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims.
  • Ruby456

    drearyweather 1. is a grey areas for the WTS because exercising the right freedom of expression and information is itself somewhat ambiguous. so I wouldn't dismiss this so easily

  • Fay Dehr
    Fay Dehr

    For serious researchers, I recommend this chilling 20 minute TED talk:

  • _Morpheus
    Collapse denial, now information denial, close bedfellows.

    😎😂😂 your a treasure, slim one.

  • Spiral

    Probably the PIMI people in the org care more about who gets what scandalous details than those of us who are out. An old JW friend of mine is really upset about what she imagines was written about her and her family when they moved congregations. Because she can't see the letters and she thinks the elders in the new congregation are looking at them "funny" (paranoid much?) she's all in a twist about it. And perhaps rightly so, who knows?

    If you're out, you really don't care, unless I suppose you were actually accused of something really serious (and real).

Share this