So because Monica Applewhite (a 'worldly' right?) was asked questions which exposed poor understanding of the Royal Commission as she put herself into a position of defending the WT, rather than working with the bigger picture - that is to uncover bad practices and improve procedures in child abuse cases - the angry 'JW ' then claims Applewhite was 'attacked'... She was not attacked, she was asked to explain her report and findings - and in the light of truth, had to admit problems.
And Angus was influenced by apostates? Actually, it seemed to me that he was influenced by an unrelenting drive to not take any Bull.
The JW testimonies exposed a tendency to lie, duck and dive.
Does anyone remember McKellrns reaction when they discovered that Jackson was NOT just a leader in the translation department who would have no value to add to the 'discussions' but an anointed GB member who votes on ALL scriptural decisions - a guardian of doctrine.
They told one lie after another - I watched it all.... and not as a biased apostate whatever that is - but with 'clean' ears. The JW team exposed themselves and did not leave anyone with a sense of trust in their honesty or transparency.
I was so ashamed.