Posts by ozziepost

112

30 Minute Public Talk-CONFIRMED

by stillajwexelder in

i can confirm (as there seems to be some doubt) at the service meeting last night during the item about the new watchtower, a letter was read by the po.

the public talk is to be 30 minutes long.

this is to allow for more association and ministry.. lengthy negative introductions about the state of the system of things/deep last days etc are to be heavily curtailed.

ozziepost

H.S.

G'day back at ya!

Former 'friends' of twenty years duration

Would that be our mutual friends by any chance?

cheers, ozzie

86

So non-flat-earthers - what do you think of those who accept a flat earth?

by AlanF in

no firestorms please.

but be honest.

do you think that we are of a lower level of intelligence than those who accept round-earthers' theories?.

30 Minute Public Talk-CONFIRMED

by stillajwexelder in

i can confirm (as there seems to be some doubt) at the service meeting last night during the item about the new watchtower, a letter was read by the po.

the public talk is to be 30 minutes long.

this is to allow for more association and ministry.. lengthy negative introductions about the state of the system of things/deep last days etc are to be heavily curtailed.

ozziepost

I would have thought they would be better cutting down the length of the WT study before cutting the PT.

Surely they must do something about the WT Study which universally has to be the most boring gathering of any religious group!

18

Mary Lou and Joyce shunned me - so I shunned them back.

by AK - Jeff in

i used to carry a 'no shunning' policy.

i would not tolerate those who acted toward me like they did not know me after 30 years as a jw.

i would force them to speak - or embarrass the living hell out of them if they didn't.

ozziepost

G'day Jeff,

I made sure they heard us laughing and in happy conversation, while they sat sadly in the corner and hoped that soon Armageddon would kill me so they could watch the local carion pick out my eyes. How dare I enjoy life? It saddened me to see these friends look so sullen and serious and without a smile. I can't imagine this is what God intended for humans.

I had a similar experience over the past week or so and yes, I thought the same, they look so miserable! Come to think of it, whenever i see a dub these days they're looking so miserable. reminds me of pictures of Cambodians in the time of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. All the faces seem so sad and bear that 'vacant' look.

Another totalitarian regime, the WTS, also has its slaves, just like the Khmer Rouge and just like the Khmer Rouge they never seem to be happy.

Of course, christians would say that they lack joy.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/138083/1.ashx

Cheers, Ozzie

Freedom means never having to wear a tie.

13

Any Tour de France fans out there?

by Open mind in

ozziepost

13

Wearing a suit at the beach on a desert island

by ozziepost in

just came back home from visiting some south pacific islands.

you know how it is - balmy winds blew through the palm trees, soft white sandy beaches, azure seas.

then there were the natives - men with faces painted, spears in hand reminding us that it was only a generation ago that they were cannibals.. and they wore.....well, not much!.

ozziepost

G'day besty,

Branch Office in Tel Aviv in 1989 and was impressed by the TMS Overseer conducting the meeting without a tie, and a short-sleeved cardigan with open neck shirt

That's interesting to read; from what I see in the media that happens in a land where that socially would be acceptable. Interesting..

13

Wearing a suit at the beach on a desert island

by ozziepost in

just came back home from visiting some south pacific islands.

you know how it is - balmy winds blew through the palm trees, soft white sandy beaches, azure seas.

then there were the natives - men with faces painted, spears in hand reminding us that it was only a generation ago that they were cannibals.. and they wore.....well, not much!.

ozziepost

G'day Wiz!

On a vacation, there is no room for spending it all on service (otherwise, it is not a vacation).

Actually they weren't doing the witnessing thing - they were there for the vacation. The thing is, they're stuck to wearing the 'uniform' no matter where they are.

Their custom dictated little or no clothing: modesty might have been served by wearing a neat pair of shorts and a T-shirt that was in good condition.

Yes, indeed! Fashion's such a silly thing, isn't it? After all, when you look at it, a business suit is hardly the most practical of designs - and as for those ties, well! Ties are simply throwbacks to the time when the well-to-do needed to blow their noses! hardly an auspicious start for such a hallowed piece of men's formal dress!

As you say, imposing a style of dress on another culture as if God is pleased with that seems crass in the extreme to me. It also portrays the God they claim to 'represent™ ' in a totally false light. As if God cares what you wear!!!

They've clearly learned nothing from all their meetings.

13

Wearing a suit at the beach on a desert island

by ozziepost in

just came back home from visiting some south pacific islands.

you know how it is - balmy winds blew through the palm trees, soft white sandy beaches, azure seas.

then there were the natives - men with faces painted, spears in hand reminding us that it was only a generation ago that they were cannibals.. and they wore.....well, not much!.

ozziepost

G'day Jeff,

I still don't get it - why was this elder wearing 'service clothes' while on vacation.

No, I don't 'get it', either. Day after day after day it went on. It never changed. Funny thing is that there were shipboard 'events' that called for change of dress, like a formal night or two, an island night, a country & western night, etc etc but still there was no change. Must be always ready for "theocratic™" activity, I s'pose.

I don't know what looked more of a 'stand out' the native man dressed in nothing but his penis sheath or the 'elder' in his meeting clothes!!!!!!

Cheers mate, Ozzie

4

Extremists........Should we follow Australia's lead

by fifi40 in

just received an email concerning this news item................... http://headlines.sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=13924046.

so do you agree with australia's stand and would you welcome the same in your own country.

ozziepost

Australia "leads", eh? That's nice. It's true though that the government is simply expressing the views of themajority downunder where we have a land that's known for its tolerance of many views and backgrounds.

The basic facts of the article are correct (if a little dated) but I'm not sure the article's 'objective'.

Take for example, this:

its small Muslim community

How small is "small"? It appears to be quite a big "small" from where I sit!

You may be interested in this news item of this evening: (Note that both Opposition and Governement agree on this course of action.)

Monday July 16, 07:44 PM
Haneef challenge 'may be successful'
Experts say a legal challenge to Immigration Minister Kevin Andrew's decision to cancel Indian doctor Mohamed Haneef's visa may prove successful.
But while civil libertarians and the minor parties said the government's controversial move undermined the rule of law, Labor gave Mr Andrews its support.
Mr Andrews revoked Haneef's 457 temporary skills visa on Monday afternoon on character grounds - just hours after Brisbane Magistrate Jacqui Payne granted him bail on a charge of providing support to terrorism.
The Migration Act allows a visa to be cancelled if a person fails to meet a character test, including whether they are suspected to have links to a criminal organisation.
The decision means the Gold Coast Hospital registrar will be held in Villawood immigration detention centre while his court case is pending.
He is yet to enter a plea.
Human rights lawyer Greg Barns, a former Howard government adviser, said the decision "looks bad".
It appeared as though the government had used the Migration Act to keep Haneef in detention when the bid to stop him being granted bail failed, he said.
Mr Barns said he doubted Mr Andrews' decision to cancel the visa could be considered "reasonable" - the terminology required under the Migration Act.
"Mr Andrews' decision can be challenged on the grounds of bias or taking into account irrelevant considerations in making his decision - this includes political considerations," he said.
"It is doubtful that Mr Andrews' decision is reasonable as he suggests, given the weakness of the case against Dr Haneef and that he is (an) innocent man."
Haneef's lawyer Peter Russo said he would lodge an application with the Federal Court to review the decision within days.
Senior University of NSW constitutional law lecturer Andrew Lynch also predicted Haneef would have a case to appeal against the decision.
He doubted the government was basing its decision on any extra information, saying police would have used all the evidence in their unsuccessful application for Haneef's bail to be refused.
The decision to cancel Haneef's visa seemed to be based on him being a relative of men implicated in the UK terrorism attacks, which was "unsatisfactory", he said.
And he rejected Mr Andrews' assertions that the decision to cancel his visa was not prejudging Haneef's guilt or innocence.
"He's saying that Haneef's visa's cancelled because he's caught up in this, whereas the bail was granted because of a judicial finding that it wasn't," Dr Lynch told Sky News.
Cameron Murphy, the secretary of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties (ACCL), said the government was undermining the independence of the court system.
"The reason we have an independent court system is so these incredibly important decisions are made for the right reasons, and aren't subject to political interference," he said.
Mr Murphy said it was not the first time the government had acted in such a way, likening it to the case of Melbourne man Jack Thomas, who last year had a control order placed on him days after the Victorian Court of Appeal quashed his terrorism-related convictions.
Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett said the decision was a perversion of the Migration Act and a clear contempt of the court.
"A country where justice is not allowed to take its course and the presumption of innocence is reversed on a government whim is not a democracy - it's a dictatorship," he said.
But Labor said it supported Mr Andrews' decision to cancel Haneef's visa.
Opposition immigration spokesman Tony Burke said based on the information that had been made public, Mr Andrews has acted in the proper manner.

13

Wearing a suit at the beach on a desert island

by ozziepost in

just came back home from visiting some south pacific islands.

you know how it is - balmy winds blew through the palm trees, soft white sandy beaches, azure seas.

then there were the natives - men with faces painted, spears in hand reminding us that it was only a generation ago that they were cannibals.. and they wore.....well, not much!.

ozziepost

G'day jwfacts!

'owyergoin mate?

often it makes them look conspicuously wierd.

Yes, I'm seeing tht more and more. We didn't realise so much perhaps when we were 'in' but now we are able to be on the outside looking at them, the more they are looking quite ridiculous.

The other week, we saw a witnessing group (musta been a CO visit!!!) of about a dozen slowly walking down the street and really they looked stupid, all done up in what to the community are strange clothes.

I suspect that over time the more the gulf will widen. Rather like the Amish community in the States. That's my gut feeling, anyway.

Ironically, it's the very 'casualness' of christian groups (as the WT has put it) that has made them identify with the community and remain relevant.

The Dubs are more and more an irrelevancy.

Cheers, ozzie