Posts by umbertoecho

In telling me about the Anglicare program that supplied so much food and vouchers, she was sort of..........laughing about it. Not in a nice way either. It was more of a "fooled the wicked system" sort of glee she felt. I was disgusted with her and told her to stop mocking people who are genuinely good. Quick change of subject followed.........I asked her if anyone at their hall had helped out...............No response.

This is quite a common type of attitude I have noticed throughout the years.

21

What are JWs saying about the Royal Commission?

by LexIsFree in

i am wondering if there are any pro-jw blogs/sites that any of you visit and whether or not jws are aware of what is going on in australia.

also, what is there reaction to it?

(i may already know the answer to that last question.

umbertoecho

Yes, they love a good old.........." It's Satan amping up the pressure" ....reminder. And from the platform you say?!!! How lovely for the little children to hear that piece of crap.

They may not make the front page but they will never be able to affirm that they are or were better than all the other institutions in regard to their lying and deceit when it came to protecting the children in their congregations.

It's a matter of record that they are worse in some instances, where child sexual abuse cases came to their attention. That is what makes me very content.....How will they be able to boast of such a loverly paradise on Earth amongst all this wicked eeevil Satan influenced people who stand up for the rights of children and others who are vulnerable..........

Oh!! And those wonderful video's that people made sure were forever held as evidence of WT authorities lying by omission, suffering bouts of amnesia, or just plain lying......

Someone here said " The cat's out of the bag" That summed it up perfectly.

21

What are JWs saying about the Royal Commission?

by LexIsFree in

i am wondering if there are any pro-jw blogs/sites that any of you visit and whether or not jws are aware of what is going on in australia.

also, what is there reaction to it?

(i may already know the answer to that last question.

umbertoecho

I joined a pro JW website. I had refused to initially as I thought it might be way too self righteous for me to take.

I was wrong. This pro JW site is not about hiding facts and although there are some very strong witnesses on this site. This doesn't stop one of the moderators from being highly critical and angry at the practices and bullshit that has been seen on the part of the elders in the RC.

Perhaps I am being lured.........Maybe not. I have read a fair amount of their posts and it is mainly about doctrine and some good discussions happen, such as a loss of belief in the 1914 date.

There is concern about the revelations of the RC. I won't post anything on it in that regard as I am always suspicious. One of the moderators contacted me yesterday asking me about the RC, I said that I had no reason to trust anyone at the moment and therefore the website might be the best place to go for information. I know, a touch of paranoia. But I have been let down so often by people who "promised" to remain very discreet.....

16

Would this be any use to the Royal Commission?

by freddo in

i believe this shows how the org.

doesn't want to be held accountable to secular legal authorities.. in the 1991 green elders handbook (used between 1991 and 2010) there is a blank page (page 143) and at one elders school we were instructed to write six expressions that "should not be used on s77 + s79 forms (df and da forms)".. 1) anything alluding to or naming one of the society's legal advisers.. 2) any mention of the legal desk.. 3) any comments referring to direction from the society.. 4) any comments mentioning anyone other than the committee itself as a possible influence in the decision reached.. 5) any comment that might suggest someone with a critical eye that the committee did not reach its decision on its own but instead somehow yielded to the influence of an outside party.. 6) any comments indicating the elders mishandled the case or committed any error in the investigation or the judicial committee process.. i have in my possession two elders handbooks with these exact words written in each in different handwriting.

.

umbertoecho

Freddo,

This is such a good idea. I think it would be excellent for all who are inclined to save these types of documents. I know that I keep a nice fat file on research and documents that I have found. I also keep some of the old books in incase the WT tries to refute certain teachings.............Then out it comes and I thumb through to the page and give it to them.............I hate it when someone won't own up to being in the wrong or having some capacity to alter wrong actions...............I truly loath it when someone denies ever having said or written something.

16

Would this be any use to the Royal Commission?

by freddo in

i believe this shows how the org.

doesn't want to be held accountable to secular legal authorities.. in the 1991 green elders handbook (used between 1991 and 2010) there is a blank page (page 143) and at one elders school we were instructed to write six expressions that "should not be used on s77 + s79 forms (df and da forms)".. 1) anything alluding to or naming one of the society's legal advisers.. 2) any mention of the legal desk.. 3) any comments referring to direction from the society.. 4) any comments mentioning anyone other than the committee itself as a possible influence in the decision reached.. 5) any comment that might suggest someone with a critical eye that the committee did not reach its decision on its own but instead somehow yielded to the influence of an outside party.. 6) any comments indicating the elders mishandled the case or committed any error in the investigation or the judicial committee process.. i have in my possession two elders handbooks with these exact words written in each in different handwriting.

.

umbertoecho

freddo, I there some way of scanning those parts and emailing them? We all know that the GB or WTBTS is keen to distance itself from anything that could lead them to be accountable and cost them money.....And since the Commission will go on for quite a long time, it will be very valuable to have this sort of info to hand on.

Perhaps you could PM me. Of course if your' not comfortable with that I understand. Yet it's so important to have all the relevant documents to hand next time the RC has it's review of the WTBTS policies.

They will keep it on record you know.

15

New Catholic tribunal formed

by OrphanCrow in

this happened in the month prior to the jws giving testimony for the royal commission - the article was published june 10, 2015. it is interesting to note that this catholic tribunal is for addressing those priests who cover up child abuse.

pope francis makes catholic bishops who cover up for paedophile priests accountable for first time with new tribunal system.

pope francis has taken a major step towards stamping out paedophilia in the catholic church, approving a new system of tribunals designed to make bishops accountable for the priests under them.the new and unprecedented vatican legal mechanism will hear the cases against bishops accused of covering up paedophile priests who abuse children on their watch.the church has previously faced criticism for failing to hold those in higher positions accountable for what goes on in their bishoprics.the vatican said pope francis was presented with the tribunal proposals by cardinal sean omalley, who he appointed as head of a new sex abuse advisory commission in december 2013.francis and his cardinal advisers approved the plans and allocated funding for full-time personnel to staff the new office.the vatican spokesman, rev federico lombardi, said this means there is now a specific process by which the vatican can deal with bishops who are negligent in handling cases of abuse in their territories.canon law already does provide sanctions for bishops who are negligent in their duties, but the vatican has never been known to mete out punishment for a bishop who covered up for an abuser.previously, the closest francis had come was in april, when he accepted the resignation of a us bishop found to have failed to report a suspected child abuser.

umbertoecho

NONE