Posts by Chaserious

19

MAJOR-Revelation Climak book critiqued

by Refriedtruth in

this is a major find and holding top ranked will get tens of thousands of hits.

get your licks in comments and vote up the good guys.

10 observations about jehovah's witnesses and the book of .... huffington post-it is argued repeatedly that only jehovah's witnesses are truly faithful to god and so they are uniquely situated to understand the contents of ....

Chaserious

This book was a lot better than most of the other book study books for drawing in when you are a JW kid. I got in trouble for giving John some tats in the picture of him in shackles, as well as I think a flag on his head. And that was before you even get to the wild beasts, two horned beasts, and harlots. The cut and paste inserts did take a while, but wasn't that just because they finally got too lazy/cheap to make a 4th edition within 20 years of release?

And Julia, that is so true, the trumpet blasts representing WT conventions in the US is so bizarre, yet you never think of it when you're in. Can trumpet blasts include false information, like "Millions Now Living Will Never Die"? Does anyone know if that is still the current teaching about the trumpet blasts?

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

Juan,

Thank you for the clarification. I mean no disrespect to the Contis. Although I think it has been overlooked, a main theme of my comment and responses is that that question should not have been asked and/or Simons should not have allowed her to answer it. A secondary opinion is that if they did choose to answer it, it would have been better to be more direct, although apparently I am in the lone minority in the opinion that the answer was not direct. Again, I noted that they did not actually state whether there was selling of drugs or involvement with stolen property, so I don't see how everyone can assert that she fully answered the question, although of course she is not obligated to.

So my question is why, in light of what you say here:

<<Those kinds of questions completely miss the point of the case: The women are not on trial for any actions they may have taken or events in their lives.>>

why the question about prostitution was even asked. Perhaps you cannot answer this since you said you didn't come up with the questions. I ran a google search and I couldn't find a single page on the internet linking Ms. Conti to prostitution. So who are the "apologists" even making this accusation, and do you know why it was asked?

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

I have no need to state my credentials, because calling them into question is a cop out.

What do you mean, my concern about apologists speaks volumes? It says in big red letters in the video that those accusations are from apologists. Why would the video give apologists a voice, if the answer was not meant as a rebuttal to them? I merely questioned how effective of a rebuttal it was.

Besides, what lie is it that you keep saying I am perpetuating? Is receiving stolen goods a lie? Is selling drugs a lie? I wish I knew, and I suspect at least the stolen goods accusation is, but the intro made me want to know the answers to these questions that I didn't think much about before. Why raise questions and pique people's interest? You cannot with any degree of objectivity watch the video and find a direct answer to these questions, unless I have missed something. In which case I welcome someone to point it out.

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

OK, Rip, you are right. Rick Simons can do no wrong and everything he does is beyond questioning.

How do you know what my qualifications are to make these observations? Usually when someone attacks the person and not the argument, it is a crutch. If you read and comprehended what I said, you would not need to put words in my mouth and make nonsense straw man comparisons between me and the WT. I clearly said in my first post on this topic that these accusations are "blame the victim" tactics.

I have no agenda other than objectivity.

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

Cedars, maybe I'm off since everyone else seems to disagree. But what was the answer to the questions about selling drugs and receiving stolen property? I honestly want to know. I watched the video a couple of times and I couldn't figure it out. Perhaps I am missing something that you all who note that everything was answered clearly picked up upon.

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

Show me where I chastized or blamed the victim, Rip. I'm sorry that I'm not allowed to look at this objectively and state an opinion that I think her lawyer made a mistake with the handling of that question. My point is that what they said is probably not going to satisfy an apologist who has heard these rumors but is open to having his or her mind changed. Will it satisfy the exJW community? Yes, but so what. We were satisfied already. I don't mind if you disagree with me, but I will call you out every time you keep mischaracterizing what I'm saying.

20

local memorial attendance

by outsmartthesystem in

jw
friends

so i have a friend that is still "in" because of his elderly parents.

he attended the memorial and reported back to me what i thought was encouraging.

we have two congregations in the city i live in.

Chaserious

I think last year might have been the beginning of a decline. I suspect the decline may have started a few years earlier in the U.S. if just counting English congregations. My suspicion is that declines in English have been masked by increases in foreign language groups for a while.

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

If I'm perpetuating the lie, then making her answer the question on the interview is perpetuating the lie. I don't understand why Simons would have her answer these questions that have nothing to do with the case. Maybe it is more of a denial than I originally conceded. But the direct denial is from Simons, and there is a big difference between denying something and your lawyer denying it. There are no consequences if the lawyer is wrong.

Also, the question included allegations about stolen goods and selling drugs. I still don't know exactly what their position is on these two things. Candace only denied the "last thing", which I assume means the prostitution, but Simons' statement also seems to deny anything non drug related, which I assume means receiving stolen property as well. And neither of them said anything about selling drugs, as opposed to just using them. Personally, I don't care if she did any of these things. She is a brave victim regardless and deserves compensation. It just seems like a bad PR move by Simons to take that question that she is not obligated to answer and then not really fully answer it in the end.

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

Rip - I disagree that it would have been used in the trial. Under evidentiary rules, usually only convictions are allowed to be introduced to discredit a witness. So if she was convicted for drug crimes, it could be asked, but (and totally hypothetically) if they had evidence she engaged in prostititution they probably would have not been allowed to ask about it at trial since there are no convictions. I am not reading anything into it or perpetuating anything. I'm just pointing out that before I saw the interview I would have thought the accusation was totally BS, but the way she answered it seemed very strange to me. I agree 100% that it doesn't change the facts of the case. That's why I said I would not have dignified it with an answer.

Cedars - The more unequivocal way that I would expect most people to answer a false charge like that is something like "That is a lie. I have never engaged in prostitution." Don't you think that would have been more clear and simple? I agree that Rick was very direct, and certainly different people might perceive it differently.

Mindblown - I don't know what postings you are referring to, if any, other than this one. You can suspect me all you want. Just pointing out my own observation.

54

Part 2 of the 2013 Conti and Simons interview now on YouTube (questions posed by JWN members)

by cedars in

part 2 of the interview series has now been uploaded to youtube.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmewxug3kck.

for those who are unfamiliar, this is the second part of a series of videos covering an interview with candace conti and rick simons where the questions were posed by members of this forum.. questions answered in this video are.... .

(to rick, asked by hoffnung) why was watch tower bible & tract society of pennsylvania, together with more watchtower corporations, not sued as well?.

Chaserious

Thanks! Perhaps I am being a bit cynical here, but I can't help but wonder why Candace did not directly answer the prostitution question. She answered it by saying she got good grades in school and she was in a relationship with the same man for 8 years and she made mistakes because it was a way of coping with the weight of the abuse, and made an oblique reference to "that last thing" being "the farthest thing from the truth." And then Simons categorically denies that there is any evidence of the prostitution allegation. Again, perhaps this is cynicism, but it comes across that she answered the question in a very coached manner, perhaps so as to avoid giving a clear answer that she could be confronted with in court in the event a new trial is ordered. Her lawyer of course, cannot be questioned on his denial. I just don't understand why if they choose to take that question, she doesn't issue a categorical denial herself.

Of course, it's totally understandable that whatever mistakes she made were certainly heavily influenced by the horrible abuse she suffered. I wouldn't even have dignified those "blame the victim" allegations with a response.