Posts by AngryXJW

57

Legal Question: How Strong is Barbara's Case?

by Room 215 in

jw
friends

a question for the legal beagles out there:.

since the watchtower thugs have told the press during the dateline repartee that barbara anderson was not being taken to task for her anti-molestation iniitatives, but alleged that she was being tried for ``allegations or serious sins'' unrelated to her activism, how strong a case would she have in court?.

bear in mind that barbara and the others of the dateline four say they did nothing more than speak for the protection of children and then publicly challenged the wt to publicly state their accusations and evidence, and that they would indemnify them against any charges arising therefrom.. so.... if they call her a sinner, say that her sin has nothing to do with whistle-blowing and is serious enough to merit expulsion -- as serious as adultery or theft, yet refuse to accept her challenge to show the world the basis of their charges if they are held harmless, how is that not libel and therefore actionable?

AngryXJW

Dutchie:____

As you should be aware, it is NOT defamation for the WTS to state that Barb is being "investigated" for "anything", so long as they are doing so.____

Then, when the WTS states that their investigation is directed toward "possible" "serious sins" such as "apostasy" or "causing divisions", such "terms" are defined by the WTS themselves. So, even if the WTS publicly stated that Barb was "guilty" of such acts, how could a secular court question the definitions of such terms when the WTS is authority for such definiions?
____

Again, as you should know, the mere occurrence of "damages" in this situation is irrelevant unless the statments are proven to be lies (intentional statements of falsehood made with the intent to do harm).

57

Legal Question: How Strong is Barbara's Case?

by Room 215 in

jw
friends

a question for the legal beagles out there:.

since the watchtower thugs have told the press during the dateline repartee that barbara anderson was not being taken to task for her anti-molestation iniitatives, but alleged that she was being tried for ``allegations or serious sins'' unrelated to her activism, how strong a case would she have in court?.

bear in mind that barbara and the others of the dateline four say they did nothing more than speak for the protection of children and then publicly challenged the wt to publicly state their accusations and evidence, and that they would indemnify them against any charges arising therefrom.. so.... if they call her a sinner, say that her sin has nothing to do with whistle-blowing and is serious enough to merit expulsion -- as serious as adultery or theft, yet refuse to accept her challenge to show the world the basis of their charges if they are held harmless, how is that not libel and therefore actionable?

AngryXJW

In this instance, ROOM 215 is asking whether Barbara has a "defamation" case against the WTS for their publicly stating that she is being investigated for "serious sins" other than her "activism".

45

DEAR WTS, I love your new director.......

by deddaisy in

another example of gross hypocrisy - do they honestly think that these type of things will never be discovered?

unbelievable.

i suppose their excuse is that the shares were donated as gifts and through wills etc, yet surely they should not accept them if they are not appropriate to the teachings of the organisation.

AngryXJW

When the LEGITIMATE UN-NGO SCANDAL was being uncovered, several folks here were telephoning Brooklyn and UNDPI, and then posting those contacts' responses.

According to prior posts (this issue is brought up so often I don't know whether to call it a monthly or weekly repeat), this issue has been around for several years.

IF THIS IS A LEGITIMATE SCANDAL, why has noone telephoned the WTS or any of the involved Corps to get to the bottom of this?

Could it be fear of discovering "truth"?

17

Attorney's response-Minors-baptism-verbl-cntract

by Cappuccino OC in

jw
friends

this is the response that an attorney, practicing in the state of ca, responded to my question if minors are bound the verbal contract (questions 1, 2 given after the baptism talk).

"nice to hear from you.

in response to your question, although i am not a contracts attorney (i have some knowledge in the area), in my opionion, i don't believe that you can contract with a minor and force a minor to perform under the contract.

AngryXJW

CrockOC:

9

Pontiac, MI Baptismal Stats

by outnfree in

an excerpt from sunday's paper:.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=4386809&brd=982&pag=461&dept_id=467994&rfi=6.

more than 100,000 bible-carrying jehovah's witnesses from 233 congregations scattered throughout the lower peninsula of michigan and northern ohio are expected to attend the 2002 zealous kingdom proclaimers district convention, which began friday and continues through today.. it's a religious pilgrimage that meant a lot for 75-year-old howard anderson of detroit.. he was the oldest of the 169 convention delegates who was baptized into the faith saturday, a total that included 73 men and 96 women ranging in age from 10 to 75 years old.. "this is what i want," anderson said.

AngryXJW

100,000 / 233 = 429 attendees per congregation. Someones math is off. Guestimating an average of 150 x 233 = 34,950 attendees.

Edited by - AngryXJW on 10 June 2002 21:13:44

Edited by - AngryXJW on 10 June 2002 21:14:47

27

Minors bound to jw baptismal contract?

by Cappuccino OC in

jw
friends

are minors legally bound to the wts baptismal contract?

(the two questions that we answer at the assembly before getting baptised).

the following website says no.

AngryXJW

Some of Dutchie's remarks re "contract" law are about as accurate as was her post a couple days ago in which she stated that an elder who perjured himself by denying knowledge of the "Organization" book and/or Elder's Manuel could be sued for "libel".

As for "baptism of minors" in the JW faith being "void" or "voidable" in a legal context, such is nonsense. Who is the "daddy" of this stupidity, and why does it come up at least once per month? Baptism is a "religious practice", within the jurisdiction of the faith in question, and as should be known by now, the US Constitution prohibits courts from treading in this area.

15

New Report Indicates Lesser Audience For DATELINE

by AngryXJW in

this weekly report seems to indicate that dateline did not receive as large an audience as what was indicated by the previously posted reported numbers.

explanation???

http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/networks/020602network.html.

AngryXJW

MY, MY:

Doesn't take much to raise some peoples' blood pressures around here!!!

Considering the DRASTIC DIFFERENCE in the "latest numbers" compared with the "old numbers", it is only reasonable to question such. For all I knew, one set of numbers or the other could have been wrong. Since tv ratings are not something I'm familiar with, for all I know, the latest numbers may be inaccurate, and the first numbers accurate.

Regardless, I see you now add "ad-hominem" to your plate of "red carps". Methinks YOU are the one who is "upset" with the numbers.

AS TYPICAL AROUND HERE, someone needs to comtemplate Proverbs 20:23. Every word from the WTS is parsed for all its worth, BUT let something even "appear" negative to "the cause", and old Hawkaw turns into a "J.R. Brown".

15

New Report Indicates Lesser Audience For DATELINE

by AngryXJW in

this weekly report seems to indicate that dateline did not receive as large an audience as what was indicated by the previously posted reported numbers.

explanation???

http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/networks/020602network.html.

AngryXJW

Hawkaw:

You can drag the "be thankful for what you got" (which I am) "carp/crap" across the "trail" all you want , but that still does not explain my genuine request for an explanation as to why the previous numbers were so drastically reduced.

A million people here, a million people there, and at some point there is a notable difference in how much publicity was received.

IF (I've yet to find any scheduling) MSNBC does in fact show one or more reruns this weekend, such will help greatly, but if NBC stays with SOP, they will probably run during Sat Field Service or Sunday Meeting/FS times.

18

questions on early period (Russell &Co)

by greven in

jw
friends

i am currently doing some research on the early days and struck a few obstacles for which i need some help from anybody.. 1)russell predicted several times the "rapture of the saints".

this meant a visible return of those saints and that russell & co would rise to heaven.

when they failed to return visibly it was concluded that it did happen but invisible.

AngryXJW

Greven:

Your questions can be answered by doing a "search" on the key terms.

Barbour originated very little. He took from predecessors as did Russell.

The Society was originally formed as an "unincorporated association", which is as much a legal entity as is a "corporation". Thus, the Society dates from 1881, not 1884.
So, W.H. Conley was in fact the Society's FIRST PRESIDENT, while Russell is relegated to being the first "corporate President".

The Proclaimers book buries this little tidbit of info on page 576. I suspect that they grudgingly included such since it detracts from Russell's legend.

W.H. Conley was on the Board of Directors of the Third National Bank of Allegheny, The Home For Colored Children, and St. John's General Hospital. Thus, Conley must have been a wealthy, prominent man.

It would be interesting to find out who the other Officers were in 1881, and what was their background.

15

New Report Indicates Lesser Audience For DATELINE

by AngryXJW in

this weekly report seems to indicate that dateline did not receive as large an audience as what was indicated by the previously posted reported numbers.

explanation???

http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/networks/020602network.html.

AngryXJW

This Weekly Report seems to indicate that Dateline did not receive as large an audience as what was indicated by the previously posted reported numbers.

Explanation???

. http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/networks/020602network.html

Top 20 Network Primetime Report

14

DATELINE TU - 5/28(S)
NBC
Tue 8:00PM
Rating: 6.6
Share: 12.0
Audience: 6,970,000
Viewers: 8,923,000