Posts by Hmmm

8

This forum costs UK Businesses millions

by ballistic in

jw
friends

jehovahs-witness.com costs uk business millions .

the discussion forum jehovahs-witness.com known as "jwd" may diminish corporate productivity and network bandwidth, and be ultimately costing businesses a conservative 5,000,000 a week due to employees watching the 24-hour hot debate, flame wars and meaningless fluff through their workplace networks.. an independent study recently discovered that more than 2 million unique visitors hit the "ex-witness" site during the last week, with huge surges in visitors occurring sporadically.

it is estimated the multi-million pound figure based on the average visitor spending 15 minutes per visit.

Hmmm

Ballistic,

You should talk. Your map of the UK thread is costing online map sites millions, possibly billions!

Now where is that map of the US?

67

NEW JW POLICY POSTED!!!

by amac in

i don't know if anyone has posted on this already but there is a new press release at http://www.jw-media.org/releases/default.htm?content=bg_molestation.htm that defines the current jw policy and i believe it has taken a step in the right direction!.

although they have not literally changed it to require reporting to the authorities in all states, they have finally put into print the following: "additionally, the victim may wish to report the matter to the authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so.".

i am glad to see, straight from the wt, acknowledgement that the adults involved have every right to go to the police.

Hmmm

amac,

I was trying to make a point of how this new policy can be used by the average witness. They usually equate WT speak with indirect guidance from Jah. So if the policy says "reporting is A-OK" and an elder goes against that, an average JW has something to back them up that the elder is sinning in trying to punish them.

I suspect that you have NO experience with WT-style "justice", which is a good thing. However, that allows you to make statements like the above, which simply have no connection to reality. This policy was put up as a PR move for the consumption of the general public. If this turned out NOT to be the case, it would be a first in the history of the WT, methinks.

Let's assume that Joe Publisher's daughter is abused by Mike MS in the congregation. Joe goes to the elders and reports him. The elders say there were not two witnesses, thus there is nothing they can do. Joe understands that, and announces his intention to go to the police. The elders tell him not to. He says that official WT policy allows him to go to the police. If the elders are quick on the draw, they say this only applies to molesters that have been proven guilty in a judicial committee. If they're not prepared, they just say, "Don't go to the police, OR ELSE...."

Now Joe Publisher may have the words on a web site ostensibly on his side. But the end result is the same. He will be DFd for slander and/or causing divisions in the congregation.

Will this scene play out EVERY time? No. You'll ocassionally get a group of brave elders, willing to buck the oral instructions they received from the CO.

If this policy helps even one victim get justice, I think most would call it a step in the right direction. But most on this thread are more familiar with the WTs history of redefining words, and their notion that "persecution" justifies any degree of deceit, and they want to make that clear.

I agree with your post, but to me that is an entirely different subject, that of a criticism of the WT policies of control. In a strict interest of protecting children (which is what some on this board claim is their only agenda, despite Path's truthful observation)

So Path's truthful observation is that the SOME who claim this as their only agenda are lying? That means that NONE have it as their only agenda? Are you sure you want to put those words in Paths mouth? (This ignores the fact that all this talk of "agendas" with diabalical undertones is silly. EVERYBODY has an agenda.)

SOME on this board may not care about the children at all; they just want to hurt the WT. SOME only care about the children, and if hurting the WT is the only way to help the children, so be it. I suspect that most fall in the middle.

Hurting the WT is not my reason for being on this board. I come here for fellowship with people who know the crazy things I've seen and been through. I think the WT is dangerous for MANY reasons. They destroy lives through their policies of blood, neutrality, abuse, and others. If the media in focusing on abuse right now, is it WRONG for people interested in getting loved ones out of this dangerous cult, or preventing others from joining, to point out the horrible policies the WT has in place?

I stand behind my statement that this policy clarification is a step in the right direction. In line with what you have pointed out. It is much harder to perpetuate an unwritten/oral law when there is a written law against it. My mind is not so inane as to think this general written statement is circumspect. BUT AS A GENERAL RULE, THIS WILL HELP.

You shouldn't call other people inane, when they have more experience with the "general statements" of the WTS than you. The fact that so many are skeptical of this vague statement should clue you in that there is a pattern and history of this kind of obfuscation.

As a general rule, this could help... unless it takes the focus off the WT and they don't make any real changes. Then it would hurt. Open yourself up to that possibility.

Hmmm

9

Dateline vs 60 Minuites

by Beans in

i think dateline was easy on the dubs!

i firmly believe that if 60 minuites would have done this coverage it would have been better and more directed and clear!!!.

beans

Hmmm

Beans, I tend to agree with you. 60 Minutes is more hard-hitting. But Dateline had a lot more info than they aired. My suspicion is that they didn't want to air it without more corroboration (they didn't have two witnesses?)

Alexis, I'll try to put it up on Morpheus tomorrow. For now, go here for the transcript

http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org/dateline.htm

3

Q? Is violence a product of logic, or emotion?

by raven101 in

is violence a product of logic, or emotion?

for example the guy who stomped the old gentleman to death in a parking lot, the men who beat their wives, children, and stepchildren to death, the barroom brawls, and gang activities .

are these acts of cool, unbiased logic?.

Hmmm

Your sample is too small (now where have I heard that before?)

What about the battlefield general who calmly orders the execution of prisoners. Or the 19-yr-old weapons tech who, on orders, pushes the button that launches the missile that kills 100,000 people? What about the businessman who hires a hitman to kill his wife or business rival?

Is violence a product of logic or emotion? Yes.

Hmmm

49

WT Public Information-Position On Murder

by silentlambs in

jw
friends

how would the wt public information explain their position on other crimes such as bank robbery, rape, or even murder?

would they present their position in the same way as child molestation?

if so here is an example for wt media to post with the proper changes.. .

Hmmm

"However, if two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony may be deemed sufficient to take action."

So is it safe to assume that we wont be learning of any letters from COs that a man had murdered 17 people, but nothing was done because there were not two eyewitnesses to a single act? This sin allows separate testimonies to be considered? Interesting.

Hmmm

22

Who's Saying What?

by Psychdigg in

i have been reviewing my tape of the dateline program and i will make some comments in depth.

however i have a question?.

in the call to the legal department at the watchtower did the person representing the watchtower identify himself by name?

Hmmm

keep your e-mail account open, WT legal will want your help with this for sure.

Six, you're cracking me up, man.

I think Psych is on to something. It's clear now that some intern at Dateline (under demon possession, no doubt) "accidently" switched the labels of who was saying what.

What really happened is Bill called WT Legal. He spoke to a secretary, at first. But when the "official" got on the phone, Bill started giving the official advice on how to handle an abuse case in Bethel. The official was saying "yup, yup, yup" to Bill.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

BTW, IIRC, it is legal to record a conversation (without a warrant) as long as ONE of the people knows it is happening.

10

"The Truth" simplified, Gary Busselman

by Celia in

jw
friends

someone was asking for a copy of a watchtower from january 1, 1989.. so i went looking in a suitcase full of thes magazines.

i have one from 1989, but it is october.

most of the mags i have are 1998, 1999 and 2000.. anyway, as i was going through the stuff in that suitcase, i found a copy of an article i printed from the net, when i was writing a paper for a class in college.... it's called, the truth as i see it, or "the truth simplified" by gary busselman.

Hmmm

Ah, yes. The "Truth" summed up on seven succinct sentences.

21

Interesting JustJW Post

by Francois in

jw
friends

the following is a post dealing with dateline and pedophilia in the borg.

i predict that the guy who wrote this post may show up here one day before too long.

get a load of this:.

Hmmm

Bugs,

Welcome to the boards.

I could barely make it through the irrelavent dronings of that first post. I noticed that you edited out the scriptures quoted. For that you are my hero. I don't think I would have survived that.

What is the source of your sig quote? How appropriate.

Hmmm

20