by Gretchen956 19 Replies latest watchtower scandals
I was under the impression that M. Jackson was NOT df'd..........but considered da'd.
If he was df'd - when did this happen? I seriousl doubt that the WT would have wanted to tangle with the money he had at that time. A very powerful inducement to the WT - money.
I think he was handled like the tennis sisters....just leave it alone.
If anyone can show anywhere that M. Jackson was officially df'd - I'd appreciate the link.
waiting
Let me go on record & say I dont think MJ is guilty as charged... I think it is someone grabbing for money again as they did before ...I believe he is weird( it takes one to know one) But I hope the TRUTH about this fellow will come out.. The reason he "paid them" last time was as he said He would have lost MORE money in cancellations of his shows. I believe he still has a WT mind & felt "if they want your overcoat give them your undercoat " or something like that. I do believe Jealousy comes in to play also. Lets face it!!! he is a very clever musician. ( have to have 2 cents dont I ?
http://www.freeminds.org/african/mjackson.htm
This is a form letter sent to the District Convention Committees in the United States to prepare them for a response to the question, "What is the standing of Michael Jackson among the congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses?
http://www.freeminds.org/african/damon.htm Finally Michael became like the rest of us in this group.
Blondie, how do you do it? I mean coming up with the exact reference either from within or outside of the borg.. That is amazing!
Personally , I am witholding judgement on his case, but usually there is no smoke without fire............
I figure a personal cheque in their name might considerably losen this jw's tongue...
hehehe!!
ESTEE
Strangely, my JW in-laws are all very defensive of him, discrediting the accuser and not believing the allegations.
Myself, I think he's a total nut-job, one way or the other.
I think a lot of people forget that this freak Michael Jackson has not been "in the organization" for quite some time.
I really don't think this whole thing will affect the lashing out against JWs for child abuse because he is not a witness, and I hope that it is not lumped in with other cases fighting against the watchtower.
There are a lot of legitimate cases out their of children suffering under the hands of monsters whom have their acts ignored or covered up by the congregation. I think using MJ's case as a soapbox could hurt those that are battling the watchtower.
Michael Jackson is a freak...if he is innocent he was a fool for allowing ANY child that that is not his own to be left alone with him. And any parent that left their child alone with him should have their heads checked. The authorities should have taken his kids away when he held the littlest one over that balcony in Europe.
As far as the JW that defended him...hey thats her right if she knows the guy. I am sure if she is in good standing the elders talked to her about commenting about it on tv. I had two good friends that were in good standing and defended a friend on tv that was a gay teacher that had been arrest for possessing child porn. It turned out he WAS guilty, but they were doing what good friends do when they think their friends are innocent.
If he is innocent I hope that he is cleared because that just wouldnt be right.
However....when you think about it, this could just be karmic justice for him swindling Paul McCartney out of the rights to all the Beatles' publinshing rights.
Any grown man who has paid off families of children before in the face of allegations of child sexual abuse is an egotistical fool to say on a national news program "I sleep with children. There's nothing wrong with that." (paraphrasing - and I saw that news report) And then he laughs.
There's IS something wrong with that - particularily when they're not your children. Think about it - what parent would want their young child sleeping in bed with a *strange* man?
He may not have abused children in the way the average child sexual abuser uses children.....but he's wrong - in more than one way.
waiting
Like ESTEE says, 'I figure a personal cheque in their name might considerably losen this jw's tongue...'
Same as Prince, George Benson, etc. I used to be an entertainer and it was a sin for me to be entertaining people of the world!!! But it would be ok for MJ and friends because look at the money they would be contributing to the org monthly!!!! I would think that the rules would get bent a little for someone of their stature!!!
It figures. Awhile back, I saw an interview in which Firpo Carr, that guy who wrote the books you could get from Stoops about the divine name, also defended him (I have to thank that guy though-his books put it in my head to get a college education). From everything I've read and seen, it seems that the WT policy is to not back off in any manner. They genuinely seem to think they are right.After all, the almighty has ordained them, over all the billions on the planet, to speak for him.
