by OUTLAW 447 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Do any of you remember a thread/post about 20 days ago .... something along the lines of .... if you were satring a new group to go against WT what would you call it and how would you do it ?
Been picking at my brain all day and I can't find it anywhere, I went back through every page to 18 days ago.
Could it of been removed/deleted ????
it's really bugging me now cos I can't find it, and don't know what it was actuallly called to put it in search (tried.. no luck)
The only people that can delete a thread are mods. Do u know any mods who may have done this?
When others pointed out that Cedars uses his pseudonym on AAWA's official articles of incorporation paperwork, and an address which is not his own, but Richard Kelly's (scroll to the "articles of incorporation" box and click the button labeled "document number 04184930"...it's on page 2 of that document), that seemed to me like it couldn't possibly be legal.
It is a felony to misrepresent information on documents submitted to us.
Isn't Cedars outside the US? He probably figures the law can't reach him. Maybe it can't.
If it comes to light however (if the group were ever sued, etc) what could happen is the other members/signers would be found guilty of fraud - as they knowingly and deliberately submitted legal documents with false information.
All the WT has to do is file suit against the group for any reason, and watch the legal mess they made explode.
For the sake of Cedars anonymity, someone else could face a fine and spend up to 2 years in prison, not to mention have felony on their criminal record. Sorry - you don't get to run a corporation or non-profit, take peoples' money, and still remain anonomous. Can you imagine how much fraud their would be if this were permitted?
In the US, if you want to be a respectable, recognized legal entity, you really need to grow a pair of balls and put your name on what you are doing.
From this - I would say that legally, the real person that is behind Cedars isn't even on the board or have any position in the AAWA at all. They are all just pretending he does.
- Lime
and that's not the heavy part of this. When filing for a 501C3 non profit status for your corporation, you have to give all your information. Why? Because that's how terrorist groups were laundering money in this country.
This isn't a joke. I think people need to understand that they should consult professionals when dealing with matters like this. It only fuels the WT propoganda machine about so called apostates
If you click the link and look at the documents, they have an attorney.
MCEVOY, DANIELS & DARCY, P.C.
Rather than armchair litigation, perhaps we ought to just chill a little. I don't know everyone on that board personally but I know several of them and they're not out to screw anyone or hurt anyone or intentionally break laws. They are doing what they feel is the best way to help the most people.
I'm not playing armchair lawyer. I asked the Arizona Corporations Commission (with whom they filed their paperwork) and that is the response I got.
As to whether they're breaking laws and compromising privacy intentionally or unintentionally...that really doesn't matter. They have done it. Given the opportunity to rectify and limit the damage, they have refused. So they may not have intended to before, but now that they are aware, they intend to continue. "I'm really really passionate and my heart is in the right place" is not a defense in court.
Some of us feel sad that AAWA have got off to a bad start with this incident. Others seem to take delight in the fact.
And some of us have said we don't care about the group itself one way or the other, or necessarily think the idea behind it is an awful idea...but we are disheartened by the arrogance and refusal to "make it right"...I only care about them rectifying the privacy issue and removing all of those they have inconvenienced or put at risk who did not consent to membership to their group, and sticking with laws and ethics in the future.
cofty...you have a PM from me..
I think it is a good idea to have a coherent and organised body that can act as a centralised hub for information and strategy and to deal with media issues relating to Jehovahs Witnesses in a professional manner.
I was hoping this might be exactly that and in fact it still could be. But instead of using this fantastic resource of JWN for ideas and smoothing the rough edges before launch it was all hush hush and dumped on us in a like it or lump it fashion. It's been downhill since then.
