Prime

Joined

• started 2 topics
• posted 80 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Prime

• 
  17

  Talking to a JW extremist

  by Kool Jo in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so i had a conversation with a jw whom i communicate with via skype...the conversation went like this:.

  kool jo: hey there, how have you been keeping?.

  they're imperfect, but we need to obey them regardless.. kool jo: ok, i see.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  Who are you comparing this hypothetical person to?
• 
  51

  Symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates"

  by Prime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "there is a symposium with a talk about "human apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-jw blogosphere up in arms over it.".

  if a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.. .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  No doubt that Rutherford presented one side to the US and another to the German authorities, a proud tradition of the WT that continues to this day.

  That is why you pull quotes from newer Awakes that make Rutherford look like he was all against the Nazis from the start, quotes that imply a total opposition that is at odds with the letter to Hitler and the Declaration of Facts.

  He was trying to kiss up to Hitler, and threw the Jews under the bus in the process; he calls them out by name and repeats the old insults about the business Jew, the Jew banker.

  Yes, it was not far under the surface of many christian religions of the day, but of course the WT is the TRUTH, the WAY; it should have known better and the revisionists at Bethel have misled the rank and file on this one; they made us all think that the WT was totally righteous during the Nazi run up to power.

  The letters to German authorities and the Declaration of Facts speak for themselves, Prime; if they don't convince you that Rutherford tried to cozy up to Hitler nothing I can say will change your mind; if the anti-semitic references in his writing aren't obvious to you, nothing more to be said.

  The Watchtower Society's opposition to National Socialism was made known before Hitler was granted dictatorial powers.

  The Golden Age and Consolation magazines often drew attention to the militaristic stirrings in Germany. In 1929, more than three years before Hitler came to power, the German edition of The Golden Age boldly stated: “National Socialism is . . . a movement that is acting . . . directly in the service of man’s enemy, the Devil.”
  
  There's several indicators that Adolf Hitler and his henchmen (men that served directly under Hitler and Himmler in the Schutzstaffel (protection squadron)) were wired into the occult prior to becoming a political party.
  
  “Old insults” was not the foundation of Nazism. Amongst other things, the Third Reich was on a deadly quest for "human perfection."
  
  http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/deadlymedicine/
  
  From 1933 to 1945, Nazi Germany carried out a campaign to "cleanse" German society of individuals viewed as biological threats to the nation's "health." Enlisting the help of physicians and medically trained geneticists, psychiatrists, and anthropologists, the Nazis developed racial health policies that began with the mass sterilization of "genetically diseased" persons and ended with the near annihilation of European Jewry.
  
  Deadly Medicine: Creating the Master Race inspires reflection on the continuing attraction of biological utopias that promote the possibility of human perfection.
  Nazism: biological racism, political extremism (fascism) is not ingenious with anything published by Jehovah's Witnesses now or early in the twentieth century. They were non-political.

  The letter to the Third Reich was nothing other than what was stated by the United States holocaust museum.

  http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005433
  
  Initially, leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses sought to find a way to work with the Nazi government.

  If they're so wrong, maybe you should e-mail them and explain things. I'm sure they'll yank the whole article and dishonor the memories of martyrs just like you and your cronies do.
• 
  51

  Symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates"

  by Prime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "there is a symposium with a talk about "human apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-jw blogosphere up in arms over it.".

  if a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.. .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  Nice try, Prime.

  Rutherford was no different than other anti-semites of the day. Was he gassing them? No. But he was no better than the churches he later loved to revile for doing nothing about the holocaust; they looked the other way while the 'jews' who ignored JESUS got their punishment.

  Rutherford didn't look the other way in response to the holocaust and neither did JWs that withstood the same physical force exacted on the Jews.

  g95 8/22 pp. 9-10 The Evils of Nazism Exposed

  “In Germany the common people are peace-loving,” Rutherford proclaimed. “The Devil has put his representative Hitler in control, a man who is of unsound mind, cruel, malicious and ruthless . . . He cruelly persecutes the Jews because they were once Jehovah’s covenant people and bore the name of Jehovah, and because Christ Jesus was a Jew.”

  Do you have anything to back your assertions other than generalizations, profanity, low-grade propaganda and “because I said it?”

  “By clever and persevering use of propaganda even heaven can be represented as hell to the people, and conversely the most wretched life as paradise.”—ADOLF HITLER, MEIN KAMPF
• 
  51

  Symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates"

  by Prime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "there is a symposium with a talk about "human apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-jw blogosphere up in arms over it.".

  if a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.. .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  That letter went further than that excerpt indicates; it uses the canard of Big Business and the International jew, stating that the WT believed the same as the Nazi party did.

  Check it; Rutherford was as anti-semitic as many in the day, so being the head of the FDS apparently didn't help him get over his racism.

  "Be it known once and for all that those profiteering, conscienceless, selfish men who call themselves Jews, and who control the greater portion of the finances of the world and the business of the world, will never be the rulers in this new earth. God would not risk such selfish men with such an important position" The Golden Age 1927 Feb 23 p.343
  
  "Jews [are] no longer important to God. … the Balfour Declaration, sponsored by the heathen governments of Satan's organization, came forth, recognized the Jews, and bestowed upon them great favors. The Jews have received more attention at their hands than they really deserved."

  And from the Declaration of Facts, 1933:

  " It has been the commercial Jews of the British-American empire that have built up and carried on Big Business as a means of exploiting and oppressing the peoples of many nations. This fact particularly applies to the cities of London and New York, the stronghold of Big Business. This fact is so manifest in America that there is a proverb concerning the city of New York which says: The Jews own it, the Irish Catholics rule it, and the Americans pay the bills."

  Rutherford stoked hatred for Jews and Catholics.

  Know anyone in your hall in their 80's who seem like relics, who hate and denigrate doctors, are anti-semitic?

  Rutherford may be the reason.

  There's no association with Rutherford and “racism.”
  
  Racism is the belief that one race is inherently and biologically superior to another. There's of course no scientific evidence to support such a doctrine.
  
  http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007307
  
  The doctrine of racism asserts that blood is the marker of national-ethnic identity and postulates that innate, inherited characteristics biologically determine human behavior.
  
  Certain doctrines are however associated with specific lineages. The doctrine of Judaism is associated with hereditary Jews, because Judaism is populated with more hereditary Jews than any other lineage.
  
  Would it be racist to denounce the doctrine of Judaism? A person may denounce Jews because they're in opposition to Judaism. Not all hereditary Jews remained static to Judaism. The apostle Paul is good example of this.

  http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/church/persecution/after.html
  
  Persecution of Jews over the Centuries | European Anti-Semitism After 1800

  • The antipathies of Poles, Germans, Russians and others against Jews are often explained as if they were religiously based in the patristic and medieval manner. From the early 19th century on, however, anti-Jewish sentiment of Catholic and Protestant Europe, itself increasingly secularized, had other roots no less mythical. The proper term for it is anti-Semitism. Its target was Jewish ethnicity. It was primarily politically and economically motivated. Demagogues, however, were only too happy to put the ancient Christian rhetoric of anti-Judaism in its service.
  
  • Germany was populated with more Jews than any country in Western Europe when Hitler came to power. It also had the same ugly heritage of anti-Jewish sentiment as all Christian Europe. The short-lived Weimar Republic could not deliver Germany from the severe economic hardships it experienced after World War I. Jews had been the Republic’s strong supporters and a few of them were the architects of its constitution, a fact that Hitler capitalized upon. Huge inflation in 1923 and the depression of 1929 increased Germany’s problems. Some leading capitalist families, gentile and Jewish, managed to escape these problems, but the eyes of the angry populace were trained on the Jews rather than the gentiles.

  I don't know how much truth there is to it, but there was a common perception of hereditary Jews and business malfeasance early in the 20th century.

  Nazi ideology went well beyond economic issues when denouncing hereditary Jews. Nazis depicted Jews as biologically diseased, race polluters.

  Rutherford saying something negative about Jewish business practices is no different than denouncing Judaism.

  Associating anything Rutherford said with racism, Nazi ideology (that blood is the marker of national-ethnic identity) is distorting the facts. Anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism resulted in the persecution of hereditary Jews. There's certainly no evidence whatsoever that Rutherford approved of that.
• 
  51

  Symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates"

  by Prime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "there is a symposium with a talk about "human apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-jw blogosphere up in arms over it.".

  if a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.. .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  That letter to Hitler from Rutherford seems pretty much supportive of his ideals and regime.

  If a tyrannical dictator starting victimizing certain ethnicities or creeds under the guise of “nationalism,” trying to reason with an unreasonable person to get him to stop, will likely be ineffective. It's sort of paradox so no, Rutherford didn't tell the Third Reich what he really thought.

  g95 8/22 p. 6 The Evils of Nazism Exposed

  On the eve of Hitler’s taking power, The Golden Age of January 4, 1933, said: “There looms forth the menacing promontory of the National Socialist movement. It seems incredulous that a political party so insignificant in its origin, so heterodox in its policies, can, in the space of a few years, develop into proportions that overshadow the structure of a national government. Yet Adolf Hitler and his national socialist party (the Nazis) have accomplished this rare feat.”
• 
  51

  Symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates"

  by Prime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "there is a symposium with a talk about "human apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-jw blogosphere up in arms over it.".

  if a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.. .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  Then this talk describes very few. And if it describes very few who've left the religion, then why even have the talk?

  Few or many, there are individuals that have done things described in the talk.
  
  "For instance, in one country a news report instigated by apostates falsely stated that Jehovah’s witnesses supported Hitler’s regime during world war two."

  http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/hitler-nazi.php

  When the Watchtower's German operations came under attack by the Nazi government in 1933, Rutherford sent a Letter and Declaration to Hitler, in which he could rightfully praise Hitler for his anti-Anglo/American campaign and his stance against the Jews.

  http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005433
  
  Initially, leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses sought to find a way to work with the Nazi government. In October 1934, the leadership sent a letter to the Reich government, explaining the Witnesses' core beliefs and their commitment to political neutrality. The letter stated that Jehovah's Witnesses "have no interest in political affairs, but are wholly devoted to God's Kingdom under Christ His King." German authorities responded with economic and political harassment. Witnesses who continued to missionize or who refused to participate in Nazi organizations lost their jobs and their unemployment and social welfare benefits, or were arrested.
  
  In response to Nazi efforts to destroy the group, Jehovah's Witnesses became an island of spiritual resistance to the Nazi demand for absolute German commitment to the state. The International Society of Jehovah's Witnesses fully and publicly supported the efforts of its brethren in Germany. At an international convention in Lucerne, Switzerland, in September 1936, Witness delegates from all over the world passed a resolution severely condemning the Nazi regime. The international organization also produced literature denouncing Nazi persecution of Jews, Communists, and Social Democrats, criticizing the remilitarization of Germany and the Nazification of its schools and universities, and attacking the Nazi assault on organized religion.
• 
  51

  Symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates"

  by Prime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "there is a symposium with a talk about "human apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-jw blogosphere up in arms over it.".

  if a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.. .

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  "There is a symposium with a talk about "Human Apostates" that is very slanderous and defamatory and has the ex-JW blogosphere up in arms over it."

  If a person doesn't fit the description outlined in this talk, the talk isn't referring to you.
• 
  40

  Post 6: My brother turns on me now - Possible Legal advice

  by sosoconfused in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  this is a letter i received today with my brother turning on me based on something that was told to him by my crazy mother.

  he works for me, yet has not spoken a word to me in months because he is a self-righteous little dick.. .

  what i would like to know from someone who knows the law, is it possible i can sue him if he pressures people to not work with me because of my religious beliefs????

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  You won't have any problems from anyone who's a JW that works for you because of private communications with your family. Discontinue talking about religion and/or politics with your family for the time being. There are varying degrees of tolerance. Know when to draw the line.
• 
  212

  Candace Conti v Watchtower Society | June 3, 2013 | Respondent's Brief - prepared by Rick Simons | A136641

  by jwleaks in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  jw leaks has published the respondent's brief prepared by rick simons in the case: candace conti v. watchtower bible and tract society of new york & fremont congregation of jehovah's witnesses.

  (90 pages).

  http://jwleaks.org/candace-conti/.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  "mind blown," You keep a mental record of monikers and associated personal problems? You must have little contact with three dimensional people. Why don't you start a new thread with your personal problems and not derail this one?
• 
  212

  Candace Conti v Watchtower Society | June 3, 2013 | Respondent's Brief - prepared by Rick Simons | A136641

  by jwleaks in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  jw leaks has published the respondent's brief prepared by rick simons in the case: candace conti v. watchtower bible and tract society of new york & fremont congregation of jehovah's witnesses.

  (90 pages).

  http://jwleaks.org/candace-conti/.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Prime

  Prime, your Wikipedia-informed understanding of vicarious liability is still incorrect. Contrary to what you suggest, any theory of liability that has anything to do with reporting anything is not vicarious liability; it's regular duty-based liability. The whole idea of vicarious liability is that the entity against whom the liability is being asserted didn't have to do anything wrong at all - not even negligent hiring, supervision, monitoring, reporting, or training - rather, it is held liable merely because its agent (usually an employee) committed a tort. No one in the Conti case, not even Rick Simons, has suggested that Kendrick was an agent. Similarly in the Penn State case, Penn State would probably not be vicariously liable merely because an assault occurred, even though an "agent" committed the act. Although England and many U.S. states have started holding employers vicariously liable for sexual assault, Pennsylvania still follows the traditional common law view that a sexual assault is not within the scope of employment, and therefore vicarious liability does not attach. That is why the issue of what Penn State officials knew about and reported is important in the civil cases related to Sandusky.

  From reading your posts, it seems like you are trying to show that you have some kind of superior knowledge of legal theories by introducing terms like vicarious liability into the discussion although you don't fully understand them.

  From reading my posts, you would think you'd arrive at the conclusion that my assertions are based on common sense. The one time I use a technical term, the conversation gets technical as you've demonstrated here, especially if the law is interpreted differently depending on what state you live in.