I can think of one very powerful reason Scully (assuming the quote is true): If they say things publicly and it gets proven at a later date that they lied (presumeably in order to do damage control) they would be open to a libel suit. I read this that they are providing "stories" to the flock of their version (presumably to passify them) and they are afraid it could be repeated publically. To me, it implies they know their "stories" are untrue and they could be open to libel.
"Alberta man brings protest to Georgetown"
Happy Guy :)
(assuming the quote is true):
Considering that I heard the talk myself and was part of the "team" that transcribed it, I am quite certain of the veracity of the quote and the entire transcription. Does that make you ... ummm... Happier Guy :) now??
If they say things publicly and it gets proven at a later date that they lied (presumeably in order to do damage control) they would be open to a libel suit. I read this that they are providing "stories" to the flock of their version (presumably to passify them) and they are afraid it could be repeated publically. To me, it implies they know their "stories" are untrue and they could be open to libel.
You are quite correct in your assessment that the WTS is providing "stories" to the flock - although they don't come right out and say it in the talk, it's clear that they are referring to the Dateline and the fifth estate programs regarding the pedophile issue. All you have to do is check the JW media website for the "official policy" regarding child sexual abuse and you can see where they have a huge problem festering... all it would take is for one person to say something "off the record". So they all clam up... for instance in that recent case of murder suicide of an entire family where the father was molesting the daughter. The only thing the congregation elders would say to the press was "No Comment"... they wouldn't even acknowledge that the family was part of the congregation or was loved and would be missed or what a horrible tragedy this was for the community.
I'm curious as to how someone repeating the gist of a 'pacification' letter from the WTS would leave the WTS open to libel, though. I thought libel was the publication of defamatory statements by one individual against another....
I do not believe that it merely has to be a publication. Firstly let me qualify that: I should have said libel and slander. It can be simply a matter of someone making a statement to someone else. If it is proved the statement is false and it is proved that the subject was harmed by the statement then my understanding is that is sufficient. I believe the question becomes proving it was said (obviously it's easier if it's published) and then proving the extent of the harm to ones reputation etc. My past experience, while limited, leads me to believe that even if the press was told "no comment" a story would still be circulated amongst the flock (presumably for damage control). My interpretation from your quote is that there is concern about one of the flock repeating this "damage control story" to the wrong individual and it leading to at least a slander situation.
Don't anyone think that I'm complaining about my lot in life. When I was being interviewed by CBC Newsworld, I only mentioned the small amount of my pension because I was asked.
I agree, you are NOT the complaining type, to your credit, and I appreciate that what you have shared with me me was not a complaint.
If I was in your shoes, I'm not sure I would deal with the situation as well as you are. Indeed, you are an example to others of how to get the most out of life, despite any problems life offers you. I always enjoy talking with you, your optimism is contagious.
Having said that, I think that someone with your bright personality would not be working to make ends meet, but rather working for enjoyment (or doing whatever they choose), had they not given so much to Watchtowerism. The fact that your optimism continues to flourish truly shows what a great and strong person you are -- despite what they have taken from you, which can never be repaid (time).
~Quotes, of the "Clarification" class