Governing Body Summoned For Jud Hearing

by silentlambs 213 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  JT

  I just want to say that I support Bill.

  %%%%%%%%%

  I Have seen this same post on many threads and it is very interesting, to the poster i ask__

  Are you saying for those who expressed a concern over the manner/tone of this "letter" that somehow now such ones don't support bill?

  the reason i ask is from my perspective i merely see folks asking bill to use caution in his approach - but not saying that they don't support the goals and purpose of what he is trying to do.

  even bible believers are quick to quote that one needs to be "cautious as a serpert"

  and how much more so when such an issue as sex with kids and being protected by a corp the size of wt that brings in Billions of $$$ a year .

  one of the first thing any image consultant will tell you - you fight your battles in the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION AS WELL AS THE COURT OF LAW

  and you must walked the mine fields of each, many of us have just merely expressed out concern that if not carefully bill could set a mine for himself. that was the only point i got from all the poster who offered a word of CAUTION i didn't see anyone saying that they didn't support bill-

  i think one needs to be carefully for Blind Allegence is easy to do. and it can be to anyone and anything

  while most of us were in we had blind allegence, we see that when we try to ask our family and friends to consider if the soceity could be wrong on a issue and ususally we get i don't care if they are wrong i'm with them hell or high water,

  and for folks to merely raise the possiblity that this ONE tactic may not be the most advantatgous- i see what appears to be folks lining up into 2 camps- how sad-

  EITHER YOU ARE WITH US OR AGAINST US MINDSET is what i see and that is too bad
• 

  arachnia

  :I know the Mormon's practice baptism of the dead. But come on a judicial hearing to accuse 5 members of the GB....3 unable to answer the accuser???? What's up with that?

  Heh...they could follow in the footsteps of the Catholic Church.

  The Cadaver Synod

  I know, I know...I'm just sayin'. hehehe....

  Cheers,

  Arachnia
  Trickster Class
• 

  lisaBObeesa

  JT said:

  Are you saying for those who expressed a concern over the manner/tone of this "letter" that somehow now such ones don't support bill?

  Not all of them, but some of them for sure. Some have SAID they will no longer support him. And some people seem to be trying to convince others to not support Bill. And that is ok. People dont HAVE to support him if they think how he is doing this is wrong.

  I just wanted to say that I am giving Bill the benefit of the doubt here because so far he has done a fine job.

  Some people dont think Bill has done a fine job because he squealed his tires, or threw a stuffed lamb. Some people actually think Bill expects these letters to be taken seriously by GB members. Actually, it seems like a LOT of people think this. I just wanted to add my thoughts, that are a bit different.

  I hope that is ok!

  and for folks to merely raise the possiblity that this ONE tactic may not be the most advantatgous-

  LOL. You have a flare for understatement! If that was all that was said, I wouldnt have felt the burning need to share with the board on three different threads that I am giving Bill the benefit of the doubt and that I still support his efforts. I mean, I can even agree with your above statement. Especially the MAY part. However, this nice-and-pretty-wrapped-with-a-bow and oh-so-reasonable statement was NOT what I was reading on the threads that prompted me to share my feelings of support for Bill.

  EITHER YOU ARE WITH US OR AGAINST US MINDSET is what i see and that is too bad

  I AGREE with you here 100%.

  As the number of thread critical of Bills letter grow and the views and posts to them go through the roof, I wanted to say that I dont agree with the majority(?) here on this one. Should I have just kept quiet, or what?

  -LisaBObeesa

  Yeah, I know I put that post on three threads. I hope you understand.
• 

  abbagail

  BeelzeDub (LOL @ your name!) Great scripture, Titus 1:7 (on page 1). Thanks for the reminder.
  ---
  I'm with Farkel, LizardSnot (eek! whatta name!), Nativeyr23. You gotta love it!
  ---
  Neonmadman - I agree; and good question at the end of your post (page 1).
  ---
  Where has IslandWoman been? Did she not read the 6-6-02 letter to the GB? Is IW always so pessimistic?
  ---
  LOL @ TTBoy! And I'm with you, UNDf'd, and TR. (Good try, though, UNDf'd on the 5 names!)
  ---
  GO Seagull and NANCEE PARK! You are reading my mind, all the way.
  ---
  GREAT OBSERVATIONS queereality! (page 5)
  ---
  Wise comments, LisaBObeesa (page 6). Yes, it SHOULD be OBVIOUS if everyone would stop and think for a nanosecond that "there is another reason for this letter, obviously."
  ---
  Good idea Trauma_Hound re: the charter and the rules. I'd be curious to read that myself.
• 

  abbagail

  How does DannyBear know the accusations are UNSUBSTANTIATED? (Assumption). --- If you REALLY wanted answers from Bill, why post questions to the forum? Call Bill, like Hawk said. You think Bill has time to sit and read the forum all day? When will people start THINKING, please, just a little!??? And, to your other post, it does not MATTER what the GB thinks of BILL. It's what BILL thinks of BILL. Get it???
  ---
  Has Kelsey007 ever heard of something called POSITIVE THINKING? (guess not). How is it you are assuming the "media has grown tired of silentlambs" when every 2-3 months there are major news programs being aired, and in between the newspaper articles keep rolling off the presses!? -- And since "Mr. Bowen" was a JW for 43 years, I'm sure he is well aware of what he is up against. --- For all we know, media and Bill have been in touch, and all will be present on 10-27-02 with the witnesses/accusers. And if the GB does not show (like we figure they will not), then the media will get their names and stories. And, hey, maybe the "fuzz" will be at the JC hearing too, to pick 'em up if the GB does show up and "confess" to their sins. -- The point is: UNTIL WE KNOW, WHY ASSUME THE WORST? --- I love all of you people who say you are so concerned with the silentlambs movement, and then all you do is criticize it. Sounds a tad hypocritical to me. --- Your last long post sounds like you would rather none of us even try. Would you prefer we just throw in the towel now and forget about it?
  ---
  To LogansRun, page 2: Why would you assume Bill would do all this without having WITNESSES & PROOF? What a total waste of time that would be.
• 

  abbagail

  Long on rhetoric - short on evidence.

  
  HS, Funkyderek, etc.: It is ONLY LOGICAL to conclude there ARE WITNESSES & EVIDENCE that no doubt will be present to the GB at the JC -- IF they will come to it. If they don't, their choice. At least silentlambs is giving them the opportunity to hear their accusers.

  And who in their right mind really expects Bill to elicit the details/evidence on this forum? Is this REALLY the place for the DETAILS, the testimony/evidence of the accusers? Have you guys not read before that BB says he will NOT give out details until the time is right (since the WT DOES have people monitoring these sites?) If he should reveal all the women's names and their evidence here on this forum, what do you think the Dick Tracy Squads will try to do to them?

  Also, what person in their right mind would turn over the evidence to a forum? Surely you guys have better sense than to think that is the way to go about it. (Hasn't anyone ever played POKER on this board??? Do you want to "show your hand" while the cards are being shuffled or wait for the poker-game to begin?) The evidence will be present at the proper time, whether it be in a JC, or in a mediation, or during discovery after lawsuits are filed, or charges brought, etc. Play It Forward (in your minds and THINK), sheesh!
• 

  hillary_step

  I can only speak for myself.

  To suggest that I may be influencing others not to support Silentlambs is preposterous.

  I made two comments regarding this issue which Bill, in a long, and it has to be stated very aggressive note last evening tried to explain. IMHO he was not succesful in his explanations, and I speak not from the territory of offense but from the territory of common-sense.

  I am not interested in personalities, I am interested in the issue of Truth and justice. I have never been a team-player either within or without the walls of the WTS and I am not about to start now. Silentlambs needs to be de-personalized to preclude the very things that have happened on this Board in recent days.

  Bill needs to start passing ALL his comments and letters through the hands of a professional political lawyer, after his personal note to me I am even more convinced of that. That is ALL that I have suggested in ALL my posts on this topic. To try to suggest that I am not supporting the CAUSE of Silentlambs is scurrilous nonsense. It is time to think with the head and not the heart.

  That is all I have to say about the matter.

  HS

  Edited by - hillary_step on 5 October 2002 13:5:56
• 

  abbagail

  The child-abuse issue needs to be depersonalized and statements issued only through a Slientlambs appointed lawyer.

  Are you buying, HS? Please see PayPal button at Silentlambs' website to send your $5,000 retainer for a Silentlambs-appointed-attorney-
  spokesperson.

  As far as depersonalized statements. Silentlambs can't win for losing. There are those who want everything done via the non-personal-legal-beagles. Then the others would cry that the victims are not being cared for and "depersonalized" and that it's all for the money, etc. etc. and not for the help/healing of the victims. So if the victims get to do what THEY need to do, i.e., STAND UP & SPEAK OUT ABOUT THEIR PERSONAL ABUSERS, then others, like yourself, don't like it.

  ...but somehow this smacks of plain sensationalism. Once we appear to be just out for vengeance - which is how this could well be interpreted IMHO - we cease to be of any use to the very people that Silent Lambs are there to protect.

  See there? Then there are those who think having lawyers go after the WTS is "vengeance" and "greedy." --- Why is it so hard to see there are SEVERAL THINGS silentlambs is in the process of accomplishing?
  1. A place for the lambs to get together, share stories, heal, bond, counseling, etc.
  2. Seek "theocratic" justice for those who have been harmed and hurt, AND for those who have been DF'd unfairly, AND change of WT policy re: abuse (hence, the March and the letters to the GB).
  3. Lawsuits on behalf of individual lambs, change of state statues re: mandatory reporting, etc.
  4. Investigation by law enforcement/FBI or whoever re: the WT database.

  It looks like fanatical religous people that are now fanatical ex-religious people.

  See? What did I say above? Half this crowd cries for the lawyers to take over the job. And the other half, like amac there, feels if lawyers are on the wagon with silentlambs, filing lawsuits, etc., that the lambs are all greedy little monsters.

  Can't win for losin' ...
• 

  Solace

  For years the governing body has been sending letters similar to this one to witnesses who they feel are offending the society in some way. In a way, Bill has given them a taste of their own medicine.

  Edited by - heaven on 5 October 2002 13:32:4
• 

  Dutchie

  Over the past century bus loads of ex jw's have marched on the WT. They have gone to Brooklyn and to conventions. These attacks on the WT are both childish and non productive. It is no wonder that the media has grown tired of silent lambs- they have proven themselves to be just another group of ex-jws who are disgruntled and angry. The WT is not afraid of Mr Bowen nor are they afraid of lawsuits. They have been in more courts around the world than Mr Bowen could imagine.

  You're right about that Kelsey.

  However, it may surprise you to know that Bill's Silentlambs march made more of an impression on the Governing Body than you may realize. Do you know that it was rumored that this march was the largest, most well-organized protest on the watchtower organization?

  Are you sure that the Watchtower is not afraid of Bil Bowen and that they believe that what he is doing is of no consequence? Do you mean the same Watchtower organization that was so concrned about his march that they took the time to prepare a statement in regard to such and invite the press in specifically to tell their side of the story.

  I would not be so quick to dismiss Bill or his "antics" simply because he marches to the beat of a drummer that is different that yours.