ScenicViewer

Joined

• started 10 topics
• posted 1,581 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by ScenicViewer

• 
  13

  Don't believe what you read in the newspapers

  by 1Averagejoe in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  foolish is the man who neverreads a newspaper; even morefoolish is the man who believeswhat he reads just becauseit is in the newspaper .august von schlozer,german historianand publicist (1735-1809).

  i came across this articke in the october 15th wt.

  page 30.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  (W 10-15-2015 Study Edition, p32)
  Even if a report is true, it does not necessarily mean that it should be spread. There may be times when it would be neither right nor loving to distribute true accounts to others. (Matt. 7:12) For example, it is neither loving nor upbuilding to spread gossip, even though the information may be true.

  A tremendous double standard is displayed here by Watchtower. When JWs are guilty of sexual misbehavior such as pedophilia they say it mustn't be gossiped about, but when another religious group is guilty of the same thing JWs say it must be "exposed" to protect the "other sheep."
  

  (W 2-1-1990, p25, par19, 20 - Exposing "the Man of Lawlessness")
  The worldliness of some clergy has even been exposed in the media in recent times, as for example the licentious and luxurious life-styles of some TV clergymen. One modern songwriter composed a song with the title: “Would Jesus Wear a [$10,000] Rolex [watch] on His Television Show?” The song goes on to say: “Would Jesus be political if He came back to earth, have His second home in [luxurious] Palm Springs and try to hide His worth?” In addition, more and more clergymen condone or practice homosexuality. Even now the Catholic Church in the United States is paying millions of dollars in damages to compensate for priests guilty of sexual abuse of children.—Romans 1:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10.
  
  Such wrongdoing cannot be ignored by God’s servants but must be exposed for the benefit of others. The great crowd of other sheep must be protected from those who would try to lead them to break God’s laws. And those “sighing and groaning over all the detestable things that are being done” need to be searched out and gathered to the protective guidance of the Great Shepherd, Jehovah God, and “the fine shepherd,” Christ Jesus.—Ezekiel 9:4; John 10:11; Proverbs 18:10.
  

  
  Notice that sexual predators in other religions "cannot be ignored by God's servants", but they “must be exposed for the benefit of others" while JWs themselves claim to have the protection of Jehovah.

  As it turns out there is no protection whatsoever from sexual predators within JWs. In fact they are as bad as any when it comes to harboring sexual predators.

  It's no wonder they would try to hush the truth about themselves. Only 'Naive persons who believe every word' that Watchtower prints will pay attention to Watchtower's blatant attempt to cover up it's own wrong doing.
  
• 
  15

  After Watching Dr. Monica, I Thought It Appropriate To Bring Out This Gem Again.

  by Magwitch in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  to all bodies of elders.

  re: spiral binding of shepherding textbook.

  dear brothers :.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  The material in the book is confidential, and confidentiality MUST be preserved.

  Hasn't that turned out to be an absolute joke. Watchtower deceives itself.

  
  
• 
  4

  Jehovah's Witnesses say 'Reject media reports.' Really? Not always!

  by ScenicViewer in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  the usual response of jws to negative reports coming from the media is 'don't listen to it.

  it's satan's persecution against us.

  you can't believe a word they say.'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  Vidiot: When virtually every reputable news source on the planet is saying the same thing over and over and over and over, it takes a truly special kind of idiot to not take it seriously.

  Nice observation and very true. When report, after report, after report exposes Jehovah's Witnesses most of them will be in denial, but their Organization will dig for any obscure scrap of information against another religion and report it in their literature. Those same Witnesses will take that information door to door and advertise it world wide. Such a grotesque and hypocritical double standard.
  
• 
  67

  Branch Service Department Manual approves appointing Child molestors as Elders

  by stuckinamovement in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/downloadfile.ashx?guid=7ba22716-556c-43c2-9fc6-76697afad440&type=exhibit&filename=wat.0001.004.0076&fileextension=pdf

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  From the letter, p1, par4: 4. The following questions should be considered when determining whether he qualifies to serve: How many years ago did he commit the sin? What was the extent of the conduct? Was it a
  single incident, or was it repeated? What were the circumstances? What was his age at the time?
  What was the age of his victim? Is there an outcry about him? Were the authorities ever informed of
  his actions? If so, what action did they take, and do they have him listed as a sex offender? How do
  the community and the secular authorities view him?
  

  Cofty's post: At times, information regarding a man is known only to the elders. The fact that they have knowledge of his past sin should not automatically rule out his serving. There may be unusual circumstances that would indicate this is not necessary. At times, the branch office may determine that a man qualifies for congregation privileges, as he is not considered to be a “known” child molester. He may then move to another congregation. In such cases, the elders would not normally mention anything about his past conduct in the letter of introduction unless the branch office has determined that there is reason to do so.

  Critical points seem to be whether or not there is an outcry about him (presumably the outcry comes from the congregation), and whether he is a "known" child molester.

  It all seems a bit silly. How could there be an outcry about him, or how could he be a known child molester if his identity is kept secret from the congregation and the police, which is generally the case?

  This is an incredible example of Watchtower double talk.
  
• 
  84

  Wednesday Hearings LIVE LINK NOW

  by Mad Sweeney in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-study/636f01a5-50db-4b59-a35e-a24ae07fb0ad/case-study-29,-july-2015,-sydney.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  Did he just say that they found "a more serious reason for disfellowshiping"???!!!

  I think so. He was Df'd for leaving his wife, I believe for another woman. No action was ever taken on the child molestation issues which occurred first.
  

  In Ali's mind an act of adultery is more serious than sexually molesting a child.
  
• 
  84

  Wednesday Hearings LIVE LINK NOW

  by Mad Sweeney in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-study/636f01a5-50db-4b59-a35e-a24ae07fb0ad/case-study-29,-july-2015,-sydney.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  OH MY GOD he's justifying dads mouth-kissing their daughters!

  Yes, he said that in some cultures it's nothing more than a sign of affection. Oh dear.

  The child victim was not of that 'culture,' and was clearly disturbed by her Dad's behavior, but Ali is not moved by that.
  
• 
  84

  Wednesday Hearings LIVE LINK NOW

  by Mad Sweeney in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-study/636f01a5-50db-4b59-a35e-a24ae07fb0ad/case-study-29,-july-2015,-sydney.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  They are ripping him to shreds [Dino Ali].

  This current guy, Dino Ali, is talking in circles.

  Yes they are, but I get the feeling that Dino Ali thinks he is being smooth by giving them the runaround.

  Follow this line of questioning and his response:

  By his own notes he had a confession from a child molester, but the committee neither disfellowshiped nor reported to police.

  He was asked, Why not?

  Because we needed corroboration, he said.

  He was asked, Why do you need corroboration for a confession?

  He said, Because he [the confessor] was a know liar.

  Have you ever heard anything more ridiculous?
  
• 
  23

  Stephen Lett's pedophile confession

  by C0ntr013r in

  1. social
  2. humour

  this "confession" should be aired on the tv channel in regards to the investigation into jw's cover up of child abuse.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8cctyxnr-w. quite fitting, don't you think?

  xd.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  That was very good!

  Glad you included this great shot.

  Lett's smile!

  
  
• 
  22

  Did the Governing Body sucessfully fend off this bad news on thier TV Broadcast??

  by Wasanelder Once in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  remember there was a talk about not listening to "false stories" about sexual abuse from apostates on jw's fantasy station?

  did the governing body put it out there as preemptive damage control because they knew this was coming?

  they must have had subpoenas giving them a heads up.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  Documents were requested from Watchtower Australia at least as early as Feb, 2015, so they knew it was coming. And I believe the JW TV broadcast was definitely a preemptive strike against the Royal Commission hearing as well as the BBC 4 radio report from a few days ago.

  Leaving Watchtower generally comes from an accumulation of things, a body of evidence, not just one thing. What we are learning from the RC is shocking, far worse than most of us thought. It is bound to have an impact on JWs who are already bothered by some issues, although they may be silent about them, such as the blood issue, shunning family, or continually being asked for money.

  For other Witnesses it may be the first seed of doubt about Watchtower, and many of them will exit in the future as other cracks in Watchtower's armor become apparent to them.

  As for the JW TV remarks, they were painfully inadequate to fight what is happening in Australia.
  
• 
  4

  Jehovah's Witnesses say 'Reject media reports.' Really? Not always!

  by ScenicViewer in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  the usual response of jws to negative reports coming from the media is 'don't listen to it.

  it's satan's persecution against us.

  you can't believe a word they say.'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  ScenicViewer

  The usual response of JWs to negative reports coming from the media is 'Don't listen to it. It's Satan's persecution against us. You can't believe a word they say.'

  Witnesses react the same way to remarks/judgements by judges, attorneys, the courts, and psychotherapists saying they are all part of Satan's world.

  But not always! When the same media, legal, and medical sources report negative findings about another religion, Jehovah's Witnesses embrace and quote from those reports.

  Below are several paragraphs from an Awake! magazine in which Watchtower has no problem quoting 'Satanic' sources regarding the sexual misconduct of Catholic priests. These are the same sources, and the same reports, that JWs reject when the light is shining on them.
  

  Also, notice how the problems reported are a dead ringer for the Jehovah's Witnesses' sexual scandal today.
  

  Sources quoted
  - U.S. News & World Report (quoted twice)
  - NCR (National Catholic Reporter)
  - Psychotherapist Richard Sipe
  - An attorney (quoted twice)
  - Canadian Press
  
  Problems reported
  - Sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests
  - Many spoke openly about being victimized by pedophile priests
  - Sexual abuse (continually hammered by Watchtower)
  - Psychological abuse
  - Church refuses to listen to victims
  - Church fails to take accusations seriously
  - Protecting the offenders
  - Clergy preserves privilege and power more than serving needs of people
  - Institutional denial
  - Looking the other way re sexual abuse by priests
  - Tolerated sexual abuse by priests
  - Covered up sexual activities of priests
  - Lies about sexual activities of priests
  - Law suits, not surprisingly
  - Victims seek justice thru Church first
  - Law suits are a last resort.

  (Awake 4-8-1993, p31)
  “DURING the past decade, some 400 Roman Catholic priests have been reported to church or civil authorities for sexual abuse of children,” according to U.S.News & World Report. Recently, a national gathering of survivors of such abuse was held near Chicago, Illinois. Many spoke openly of how they had been victimized by pedophile priests.
  
  But NCR (National Catholic Reporter) notes that speakers sounded another theme repeatedly throughout the conference: “The first abuse is sexual; the second and more painful, is psychological.” This second abuse occurs when the church refuses to listen to victims of abuse, fails to take their accusations seriously, and moves only to protect the offending priests. “Fairly or unfairly,” NCR reports, “they portrayed Catholic clergy as belonging to an unhealthy and misguided group more bent on preserving privilege and power than in serving lay needs.” Several speakers made ominous comparisons to the Reformation, which split the church wide open in the 16th century.
  
  According to Richard Sipe, a former priest turned psychotherapist and expert on sexual abuse by Catholic clergy, all this institutional denial reveals “a deep, desperate and knowing personal involvement in the problem.” He added: “The church knows and has known for a long time a great deal about the sexual activity of its priests. It has looked the other way, tolerated, covered up and simply lied about the broad spectrum of sexual activity of its priests.”
  
  Not surprisingly, then, many abuse survivors are suing the church. NCR quotes one attorney who specializes in such cases as saying that there are pedophile-priest cases in each of the church’s 188 dioceses in the United States. He says that out-of-court settlements have run as high as $300,000 per case. U.S.News & World Report says that such suits have already cost the church $400,000,000, a figure that could surge to $1 billion by the year 2000. And the Canadian Press reported recently that some 2,000 survivors of childhood sexual abuse in 22 church-run orphanages and mental institutions in Quebec are suing six religious orders for $1.4 billion in damages.
  
  Interestingly, though, the aforementioned U.S. attorney, who represents 150 victims of pedophile priests in 23 states, says that he has never yet had a client who was eager to go to court. Each one first tried to seek justice “within the pastoral context of the church.” NCR concludes: “Survivors go to the courts, it appears, not as a first resort, but as a last resort.”