Biased report of JW trial in Russia

by Citizenfour 8 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Citizenfour
    Citizenfour

    I'm pretty sure most of us are keenly following the trial in Russia via twitter or perhaps some other means, and are awaiting the results of the trial. After the weekend, and what I presume to be a memorial break, the hearings resumed today. I noticed however that unlike previous days, when it finally got to the prosecutor's moment to examine 4 ex-witnesses testimony on extremist behavior, the twitter feed relaying the trial information "suddenly" lost contact. I'm referring to this guy in particular https://mobile.twitter.com/SimonBotes?max_id=852182695388082175 and the JW Russian website he reports from. Does anyone else find this a tad bit weird? Does it seem like selective information about the JW trial in Russia is being let out? Your views #tiredandangryjw

  • Damascus
    Damascus

    I found this interesting an d apparently will resume on 19th April

    Jehovah’s Witnesses former members tell court they were subjected to ‘total control’

    World April 12, 19:53 UTC+3 MOSCOW
    In its lawsuit to outlaw the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Justice Ministry pointed to various violations in the organization’s activities revealed during a surprise inspection



    More:
    http://tass.com/world/941007

  • steve2
    steve2

    Excerpt from the report in tass:

    For their part, representatives of the Jehovah’s Witnesses said the witnesses had been prepared in advance for their testimony in the court.

    "We see that the witnesses are giving testimony based on written materials, repeating the arguments of the so-called sectological literature. Some of them are mentioned in public sources as activists of the movements that are struggling with the Jehovah’s Witnesses," a lawyer for the defendants said.

    More:
    http://tass.com/world/941007

    __________________________________________________________________________________________

    My response: Russia JW defense team allege - shock, horror - that the ex-JWs who provided testimony against the organization were "prepared witnesses". And that these ex-JWs were "repeating arguments of the so-called sectological literature."

    Huh?! That's the JW defense team's response? I would have thought that, since this is before one of the highest Courts in Russia, the JW defense team would actually address the ex-JWs' testimony rather than state the obvious. How does being "prepared" to provide testimony against JW organization and "repeating arguments aired elsewhere" negate or call into question that testimony? It doesn't . This is the kind of predictable counterarguments advanced by JW apologists: Don't address the testimony - just cast those providing testimony in the most negative light short of slander.

  • Citizenfour
    Citizenfour

    Thanks @Damascus and Steve2, notice how more detailed your links are than the filtered crap they posted on twitter?

  • darkspilver
    darkspilver

    Actually I just thought that @SimonBotes was tweeting in English a summary of what was being posted in Russian on jw-russia.org??

    He doesn't appear to be tweeting anything 'original' including the photos he's tweeting??

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow

    Damascus, thanks for those links to Tass site.

    Today's testimony from the exJWs appears to have put shunning directly on the table.

    Other issues too.

    And I like the photo at the end of the article

    It looks like a crow was checking in on things over there...


  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    steve: My response: Russia JW defense team allege - shock, horror - that the ex-JWs who provided testimony against the organization were "prepared witnesses". And that these ex-JWs were "repeating arguments of the so-called sectological literature."
    Huh?! That's the JW defense team's response? I would have thought that, since this is before one of the highest Courts in Russia, the JW defense team would actually address the ex-JWs' testimony rather than state the obvious. How does being "prepared" to provide testimony against JW organization and "repeating arguments aired elsewhere" negate or call into question that testimony? It doesn't . This is the kind of predictable counterarguments advanced by JW apologists: Don't address the testimony - just cast those providing testimony in the most negative light short of slander.

    "repeating arguments aired elsewhere"

    I am so glad they brought that up. Doesn't that allow every "apostate" and exJW story, of those who have been harmed, to be entered into evidence?

    I would say that adds weight to the Ministry of Justice's case. I have a feeling that the JWs are going to be facing the same fate as Scientology did. They will be declared a cult that harms people. A harmful organization.

    The report from the Moscow news agency fills in the gaps that the JW report left out. The reporting coming from that source has painted the Russian judiciary system as being ill-prepared. I think they are just getting started.

    One thing is for certain. The Russians have have satisfied the two witness rule.

    I wonder what the Russian courts would think if they knew that the night before, the JWs had all met and only special ones had been allowed to partake of the blood of Christ?

    The viewpoint/argument has been made that the Russian Orthodox Church is the biggest influence on these proceedings. If that is indeed, the case, refusing the blood of Christ would be a difficult doctrine for those of the Orthodox faith to understand. Jus' sayin'

  • ScenicViewer
    ScenicViewer
    "We see that the witnesses are giving testimony based on written materials, repeating the arguments of the so-called sectological literature. Some of them are mentioned in public sources as activists of the movements that are struggling with the Jehovah’s Witnesses," a lawyer for the defendants said.

    I suppose "activists of the movements that are struggling with the Jehovah's Witnesses" refers to apostates and "sectological literature" refers to apostate literature.

    Why in the world would JWs try to defend themselves in a court by saying, in effect, "they are apostates your honor, you can't trust them, they are mentally diseased?" That is the kind of arguments that JWs use among themselves, elders counseling publishers for example, but what makes them think the court cares about such nonsense?

    Seems like this is Watchtower shooting itself in the foot, since a defense like that will end up giving credibility to the apostates.

    Bad move.



  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    dsp: Actually I just thought that @SimonBotes was tweeting in English a summary of what was being posted in Russian on jw-russia.org??
    He doesn't appear to be tweeting anything 'original' including the photos he's tweeting??

    That sounds like Watchtower approved tweeting only.

    Nah, not cult-like...