by kool aid man06 23 Replies latest jw friends
Watching the Watchtower comment
ChristianityToday.com, IL -
One of the most frequent reader responses to David Neff's article on Knocking, the PBS documentary on Jehovah's Witnesses, is that it did not address the (pedophile coverup) ...
This is high rank on the wire and will get a lot of views
It's a simple question:
The newspapers have reported this . . . JWs I've spoken to seem to think it's outsiders making it up . . . is it true or not?
Was anyone troubled by the facts that A. The telephone, on speaker, made no sound as the number was dialed?
I have a Speakerphone. The tones come through when you dial loud and clear when dialing.
Turn up your speakers when he starts dialing at 3:18. I don't know what you're talking about, I can hear them just fine.
B. That the other party was NEVER notified that the phone call was being recorded? I believe this just may be illegal and is certainly unethical
What's to prevent people from drawing the conclusion that this was all faked? I mean he didn't even give the phone number as he dialed to verify. I question the whole thing.
Well, if the operators didn't ask him, is he obligated to tell them?
Furthermore, if you want to ring up the society, you can find the number yourself.
Beep Beep is a WT. defender. So what do we expect?
I have a Speakerphone. The tones come through when you dial loud and clear when dialing.
The tones are there. I can even hear the three 0's at the end. I don't remember the whole number, but it is something like 718-xxx-6000.
j
Here's a Nashville newscast on the subject, watch the elder at the Kingdum Hall. Is obstructive a word? This is amazing, the general public absolutely cannot come away with any other message than what a destructive cult this is.
It's a stinging report all right. Love how that elder reacted when they showed up telling everyone they weren't invited. Thought the invitation was always out for anyone to visit their local kingdom hall for spiritual vomit enlightenment. Can you imagine what it must be like for the dubs there when they go door to door witnessing? Oh to be a fly on the wall!
Beep Beep is a WT. defender. So what do we expect?
While this is true, min, just because he's an apologist doesn't mean that he's automatically wrong. To assume this would be to fall into the same logical ad hominem fallacy that the apologists make about WT apostates. Freed from the WT, I am also free to judge persons on the content of their argument and the rhetoric contained therein; I do not have to shut off my mind as all the Borg drones are trained to do. The only legitimate concern Beep Beep brings up is regarding Fearon's recording of the conversation. It could be illegal, or at least unethical. However, as a private citizen, his duty to inform parties of his recording of conversations is different from that of those who represent corporations or government entities. Without knowing Massachusetts law, I can make the reasoned guess that he is under no obligation to disclose his recording of the call, as I have heard no evidence otherwise. Someone who lives in Massachusetts will be able to answer this question better than I can. Even if Fearon is wrong for recording the call, how does that diminish the results? The representatives were evasive. They wouldn't comment on it, and they wouldn't connect him with someone who could comment on it. It was a simple question: "Is this story true?" They still ducked it.
It's illegal in Mass.
My comments regarding Beep is about the red herring. Instead of dealing with what the Society's men do, he attacks the "apostate".
It's illegal in Mass.
Ok, so Fearon will have to deal with the consequences of recording the call.
My comments regarding Beep is about the red herring. Instead of dealing with what the Society's men do, he attacks the "apostate".
Well, there's another mistake by Beep Beep.
