Posts by ThomasCovenant

33

The Evil Masterminds Behind COVID-19: Charmin and Cottonelle

by keyser soze in

of all the things people decided they needed to stockpile for a potential quarantine.

all of the stores around my area ran completely out of toilet paper this last weekend.

people were piling it into their carts and vehicles as if they were going to be holed up for a year.

ThomasCovenant

''People would have to be shitting continually, but then why use paper - just sit on the toilet and flush it every 10 minutes.''

10

BBC News Article 4th Feb 2020. Jehovah's Witnesses sued over 'child sex abuse'.

by ThomasCovenant in

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51006771.

ThomasCovenant

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51006771

27

New Wuhan coronavirus around.....

by mikeflood in

new coronavirus wreaking havoc.....first case detected in the us one hour ago....six deaths already in china.....hope it gets controlled soon.....

ThomasCovenant

Well I suppose if it manages to wipe out about 6 billion of us we'll be back to the population number of a hundred years ago.

It would certainly help climate change and pollution problems.

7

JW defense fail

by neat blue dog in

it's a little long, but if you have a chance, read this court transcript of a sleazy jw lawyer's interaction with a judge and others.

in the course of defending wt, he uses theocratic warfare non-stop, but the court sees right through him and it's both pathetic and infuriating:.

https://jwsurvey.org/child-abuse-2/breaking-news-watchtowers-defense-collapses-jehovahs-witnesses-reproved-for-failure-to-report-child-abuse-settlement-with-fessler-reached.

Montana Supreme Court will hear the $35M case tomorrow

by Corney in

the montana case enters the home stretch.

the state supreme court will hear oral arguments tomorrow, 13 september, at the northern hotel in billings during the state bar of montana’s annual meeting (announcement 1, announcement 2).

an introduction to the argument will begin at 9:30 a.m., with the argument starting at 10 a.m. (4 p.m. utc, 9 a.m. sf time, 12 a.m. ny time, 5 p.m. london time, 2 a.m. saturday sydney time).

ThomasCovenant

''If I am walking down the street and see someone being raped and in fact have the ability to stop it but I don't, guess what,''..............I'm a fucking bastard.

And if I didn't even bother to report to the police that I had witnessed a rape, well, I'd rather not use the C word.

56

Montana Supreme Court will hear the $35M case tomorrow

by Corney in

the montana case enters the home stretch.

the state supreme court will hear oral arguments tomorrow, 13 september, at the northern hotel in billings during the state bar of montana’s annual meeting (announcement 1, announcement 2).

an introduction to the argument will begin at 9:30 a.m., with the argument starting at 10 a.m. (4 p.m. utc, 9 a.m. sf time, 12 a.m. ny time, 5 p.m. london time, 2 a.m. saturday sydney time).

ThomasCovenant

I've just read the transcript. Thanks for posting the links. Terrible reading.

56

Montana Supreme Court will hear the $35M case tomorrow

by Corney in

the montana case enters the home stretch.

the state supreme court will hear oral arguments tomorrow, 13 september, at the northern hotel in billings during the state bar of montana’s annual meeting (announcement 1, announcement 2).

an introduction to the argument will begin at 9:30 a.m., with the argument starting at 10 a.m. (4 p.m. utc, 9 a.m. sf time, 12 a.m. ny time, 5 p.m. london time, 2 a.m. saturday sydney time).

''I want you to remember the testimony from local Elders talking about how in 2004, once they knew that Max Reyes was a known child molester, they could sit in the front of the local Thompson Falls church and look out on pews, much like we've got right here -- much like we have right here in similar position as you -- and they could see a little girl.

This right here (indicating), that's the little girl they could see and that's what she looked like then. They could see that little girl sitting next to a known pedophile, a pedophile that they're the only people that know the sick things he does.

They could look out and they could see her and they could know that on the weekends she's in the home with a very, very dangerous person. And those folks knew that the authorities had not been alerted and they knew the danger that that known pedophile presented to them.

At the beginning of this trial and through this trial I'm sure the question came to your mind why, why on earth would Elders refuse to follow the law?

What would make a person do such a thing? And now, through the course of this trial, we have the answer. And the answer is we showed what the policies are of the church.

We showed you what the two witness rule is and we showed you their policies on keeping secrets. And where do those policies come from?

Those policies come from the very top. And that tells you what a very powerful organization this is.

You see, this case is not about these folks over here in these pews (indicating) that attend church in Thompson Falls. This case is about the powerful organizations up here (indicating) at the top that are setting the policies, that are exercising the kind of control that would make a person know about a child molester, see him with a child and refuse to follow the law after they know that it's the law in Montana.

Everything that happened in 2004 on this chart was done by the book. Whose book? Their religious books.

It was done according to their plan. It was done exactly the way that these guys up here at the top running things -- their Elders behaved exactly like they wanted them to behave, exactly how they had been taught to behave and exactly how the fear of God had been placed in them for how they should behave.''

144

If You Criticize A Person of Color Are You A Racist?

by minimus in

jw
friends

seriously, it’s getting to a point that you can’t make a negative comment about someone without being charged as a racist, homophobe or sexist!

if you criticize a female, you are obviously sexist.

if you criticize someone who happens to be gay, you must hate homosexuals.

ThomasCovenant

''Khater is an immigrant from Sudan who was granted asylum by the UK authorities.

He has recently been found guilty of attempted murder because he deliberately drove his car at Police and pedestrians. He's been given a custodial sentence.

Am I racist if I criticise this guy?

Am I racist if I say Khater should 'go back to where he came from'?''

Well I'd guess if you were criticising him for being 'of colour' then I'd veer towards a Yes.

If you were criticising him because of his actions then I'd veer towards a No.

If you were saying he should 'go back to where he came from' because you have an aversion to people of colour who were born in Africa then I'd veer towards a Yes.

If you were saying he should 'go back to where he came from' because you think it is simply better to send all criminals back to their country of origin whether it be Ireland, France, Japan etc, with reciprocal arrangements with other countries to return all criminals back to their country of birth as a matter of state policy, then I'd veer towards a No.

144

If You Criticize A Person of Color Are You A Racist?

by minimus in

jw
friends

seriously, it’s getting to a point that you can’t make a negative comment about someone without being charged as a racist, homophobe or sexist!

if you criticize a female, you are obviously sexist.

if you criticize someone who happens to be gay, you must hate homosexuals.

ThomasCovenant

If you rail against the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses direction, go where you will be happier.

If not , then shush.

144

If You Criticize A Person of Color Are You A Racist?

by minimus in

jw
friends

seriously, it’s getting to a point that you can’t make a negative comment about someone without being charged as a racist, homophobe or sexist!

if you criticize a female, you are obviously sexist.

if you criticize someone who happens to be gay, you must hate homosexuals.

ThomasCovenant

''Regarding strive for change, it depends if the change you are looking for is a good change or not. If you want to weaken the country, flout the laws of the land etc... I’m not for that at all. If you want to save babies lives and not destroy them, I’m for that change.''

Again I get what you're saying.

But it could be interpreted, or misinterpreted, that what you are saying is as follows;

If a person is striving to change something that I don't agree with as being a good thing, then they can just leave or shush.

However, if a person is striving to change something that I do agree with as being a good thing, then they don't have to leave or shush.

I could probably see myself agreeing with that sentiment. I think it's human nature to a large degree.