New York Times June 22, 1918 (page 2)

I'd like to make a general plea when it comes to scans though; These kinds of scans are OK by me personally, but used in an effort to convince active JWs I think they'd be virtually 'worthless'. I wish all scans would be made in a way where one could actually see the texture of the paper page. It would be harder to forge, and thus more convincing. Just a small pet peeve of mine.

I appreciate the efforts though.

IMustBreakAway

In the old Revelation book it mentions that Rutherford and his gang of crazy kids were "exonerated" off all charges. Which was wrong.. Recently when they started studying the revelation book again they released a list of "adjustments" to be used in conjunction with the old book.. (shows the budget crunching instead of releasing new books they just sent this list to everyone). One of the "adjustments" was that the charges were "dropped" not that they were "exonerated" which makes a huge difference. I was wondering with all the great scans and such that you have found if anyone has seen press releases relating to their release from prison?

BONEZZ

The eight men sank into their chairs, Rutherford was the most affected of all. His body and hands twitched convulsively and his face grew red. A buzz of comment passed over the courtroom

What a brave brave man he was. Probably wet his pants just thinking of going without a drink for that long!

-BONEZZ

Fatfreek

Thanks, Nathan, for leads toward those specifics.

Awakened07: I'd like to make a general plea when it comes to scans though; These kinds of scans are OK by me personally, but used in an effort to convince active JWs I think they'd be virtually 'worthless'. I wish all scans would be made in a way where one could actually see the texture of the paper page. It would be harder to forge, and thus more convincing. Just a small pet peeve of mine.

I, too, understand and even somewhat sympathize with your remarks. However, I believe any honest-hearted person will accept as more credible any attempt at a scan vs. some copy and pasted electronic transcription.

Nathan's scan, at the very least, shows the character of the text fonts, the irregularities and imperfections of the typeset. Sure, there are some Paint Shop Pro people, Photoshop people, who could replace a word here or there. Hey, if you give me (an amateur) a scan -- even showing the texture and color of the paper it rests on -- I could probably do the same. Either are vulnerable to cheating. The fact is, it's a very difficult job to do other than replace a word or two with another of equal length(s).

However, if I were some honest-hearted JW who looked at some scan that could be incriminating toward the WTS, a deal-breaker when it comes to my faith -- and if the integrity (or lack of) of some scan was all that stood in the way, I'd make every effort to contact the source of the scan and ask if I could personally see the original. That could mean some expensive travel to a distant city and state.

I don't know of any person on this board, Nathan included, who possesses some source material and who'd deny that person a look at the source material. I'd even buy that traveler their lunch.

This begs two questions -- and I don't pretend to know the answers --

If you spotted some series of early Watch Tower incriminating quotations on the internet, scans or otherwise -- would you be able to go to the Watchtower headquarters and be permitted to look those quotations up there?
To save travel expense, would you be able to send such incriminating quotations to headquarters and ask for verification? Even for a fee. (Um -- I guess know the answer to this one since I did it by way of a neighbor, in her name and address, back in 1978 -- she never heard back)

Some day, perhaps there will be a system of digital verification (an equivalence of today's notary public system) where some scanned page is subjected to second and third party verification. Then, some public internet log showing, say, the scanned page, the name and location of the original owner, name of witness to the scanned integrity of the page, and some electronic notarization identifying number. Even this would satisfy some but never the WTS.

Len

Leolaia

Rutherford and his pals should have thanked their lucky stars (particularly, Alcyone and the other Pleiades) that their secretary refused to identify a rubber stamp.

Whodathunkit? A rubber stamp of all things!! A rubber stamp that their secretary would have used on a daily basis. Of course the judge was incredulous.

It's like Paris Hilton saying, when handed her cellphone/PDA, "What the heck is this thing? I've never seen it before in my life?!"

But thanks to that remarkably undistinguishable rubber stamp,

.....one that could have easily confused with anybody else's stamp (despite the name "JF Rutherford").....

Rutherford and the boys get to go home! :)

And the rest, as they say, is history.

Pahpa

It should not be forgotten that individual rights as citizens are often overlooked in the fervor of "war fever." We often see the abuse of civil rights during the time of war. (Just look what has happened recently.) I think Rutherford and his fellow inmates were probably victims at this time. The fact that the court exhonorated them afterwards indicate that cooler heads prevailed.

We may not agree with Rutherford and his ruthless methods used to gain control of the Watchtower Society. But we should not "rejoice over evil" regardless the person/persons involved.

Poztate

The fact that the court exhonorated them afterwards indicate that cooler heads prevailed.

Although the WT at first claimed that they were exhonorated they have since backed away from this claim.

I believe the Government just let the case drop when the war ended.

I am sure some one with complete facts and details will be here soon to back this up.

Nathan Natas

Pahpa, I don't agree with you at all. Tossing around meaningless phrases like "war fever" (is that a medical condition? What are the symptoms and treatments?) doesn't help your case.

The "prime directive" of any entity is SURVIVAL. Now, there may be some (perhaps you are among them, Pahpa) who feel that when faced with a hungry tiger they are obligated to become lunch, but fortunately for our species that philosophy is self-limiting.

In times of war, as was the case in 1918 and as is the case now, a nation is obligated to fight for its survival. The alternative is oblivion.

Rutherford & Company were actively subverting the efforts of the US military to mount a defense of this nation. Perhaps you are not familiar with the actual court case. Maybe you have only been exposed to Watchtower hand wringing and whitewash. If so, read the trial transcripts.

In 1919 the war was over, and the government saw pressing the case as a waste of time. Too bad the original sentence didn't stick. If they were given their freedom in 1938, some of them would have already died in prison and Joe Rutherford would have likely been among them, seeing that his delicate constitution was unable to tolerate the air inside the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. Nathan Knorr would never have taken the reins from R. J. Martin and would probably have become a manager at MACY*S instead. The world would have been better off.

Fatfreek

From that earlier link of Nathan's of the New York Times, June 21, 1918: "...Letters were also found, written by Rutherford and others in the organizations, advising drafted men to reject military duty of any kind. In one letter bearing the stamped signature of Rutherford, the applicant for advice was told to resist any orders given by army officers even if his refusal led to his being shot or imprisoned."

I think it's fair to say that you will not find such direct advice in any WT publications since then. This is active, not passive, resistance.

Remember, up until the simple passive announcement, " ... soandso is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses", there was the distinction of disfellowshipping and disassociating. One of the prime reasons for disassociating (I learned this at elders school in the early 70's) was to keep the corporation doors open during patriotic fervor.

All I can do is paraphrase what we were then told, "brothers, we cannot disfellowship someone who joins the military service. If we did, they'd shut down Brooklyn because of treason. The other word, disassociation, works in our organization exactly the same way, it has the same consequences. We're not saying we cut them off -- they're telling us they quit."

I have seen nothing to indicate they've changed this position of passive advice in regard to military service.

Len Miller

New York Times June 22, 1918

Share this