Please help me edit for correct facts. I want no misrepresentation here.

by AK - Jeff 24 Replies latest jw experiences

  • freedom96
    freedom96

    Even if your friend doesn't "see the light" I hope he remains your friend.

  • MidwichCuckoo
    MidwichCuckoo

    Gosh, you're good. I wasn't even aware of the Mexico thing -

    The truth is Jehovah’s witnessed could have been declared an official religion in Mexico during any of that time. The real reason that it wasn’t until recently that religious organizations could own property, it was considered the property of the state. Once the law changed, the organization registered and kept it’s holdings.
  • LouBelle
    LouBelle

    Jeff your letter is great - it isn't a blantant hateful attack at the society - you've dealt with a select few issues about the society. I pray your friend gets well & I pray that he/she has the courage to investigate.

    MidwichCukoo - The mexican thing has been going on for decades & yet the poor brothers in Malawi are getting raped,killed, beaten because they can't buy a political card - the elders there in Malawi knew about the mexico thing and tried to draw comparisons, but the WTBTS refused to budge. It's all in the COC book by R . Franz

  • MidwichCuckoo
    MidwichCuckoo

    Thanks LouBelle (and ''hello'' ) - I have recently learned about the hypocritical stance you mentioned -

    The mexican thing has been going on for decades

    Is it still current? The quote I wasn't aware of was about the Society being very astute in property ownership (sod any ''religious'' stance) - are the 2 related?

  • greendawn
    greendawn

    In Bulgaria they should really pursue a case should the WTS attempt to expel someone for accepting blood. Would they risk conflict with the government there by violating the agreement?

    I thought up to now, they really meant what they signed.

  • TonyT
    TonyT

    I don't think this board is big enouph for two tigers.

  • LouBelle
    LouBelle


    Jeff was the tiger first....

    Mid: Their stance on the property in Mexico? Under the government no religious organisation could own property, They called themselves something else & their meetings were not called meetings, bought quite a bit of property under some other name. They had nothing to tie them to a religion. But in the 90s' (I could be wrong here) when the law changed, the society stooped in, registered and kept all their property. Talked about being deceitful.

  • MidwichCuckoo
    MidwichCuckoo

    Loubelle - regarding Jeff's bullet points above - I have RECENTLY been made aware of point 2, but didn't know point 3 until NOW - the 2 look unrelated to me.

    The part I quoted was point 3 - the Society putting property ownership before religious stance for financial gain. You responded point 2 (I have recently learned this - is it still ongoing?)

  • AK - Jeff
    AK - Jeff

    MC - Yes the two are unrelated to each other.

    Point two is that they have allowed with knowledge the bribery of officials to get the brothers listed as having completed military training. Two issues here; bribery and falsified documentation that gives the brothers the right to obtain passports,ect. The Society has known about this all along according to Franz in COC and ISOCF books.

    Point three is that that society has deprived the brothers of worship [at least in the watchtower sense of worship] for the sake of maintaining property rights. These worshippers never sang a song, opened a Bible, or had prayer in these 'cultural' meetings for decades. To the society ownership of the buildings was apparently of greater concern than the 'spirituality' of the brotherhood there. Further, those of us in other lands were lead to believe that the brothers in Mexico were just being oppressed religiously. Such was not true - they could have registered anytime as a religion there, but would have surrendered property rights to the 'cultural centers'. Greed over spiritual interests.

    Jeff

  • pennycandy
    pennycandy

    Great letter. Concise but contains specifics.

    The one thing I would mention is the wording on the first point. Only countries can "join" the UN. Technically, the WTS aligned or associated themselves with the UN's Department of Public Information. Semantics, I know, but if a witness is looking to discredit information however he can . . .

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit