Cynical? No, just realistic.
Also did the self test:
You're in the right place. Welcome, fellow cynic!
Que sera sera...!
i can be pretty bad - but who is the most cynical on this board?
Cynical? No, just realistic.
Also did the self test:
You're in the right place. Welcome, fellow cynic!
Que sera sera...!
is there a directory of lawyers who have experience in helping jw's with judicial df'ing issues?
what i mean by helping, is a lawyer who knows the df procedure, and will inform the elders that he/she will be attending the judicial meeting with the person etc.
if the elders refuse point blank to allow it, then a lawyer who knows how to pressure them so that they cannot announce the disfellowshipping or ever speak about it, as it would be slander would be very useful.. i think that there should be (may already be) lawyers out there who up to speed on this, and if they aren't, they should be brought up to speed by us, the ex jw community on what to expect from judicial meetings, and on the whole jw procedure of disfellowshipping etc.
*** w85 6/1 p. 30 Subjecting Ourselves to Jehovah by Dedication ***
At the close of the convention baptism talk, the baptism candidates will be in position to answer with depth of understanding and heartfelt appreciation two simple questions that serve to confirm that they recognize the implications of following Christ?s example. The first question is:
On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?
The second is:
Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah?s Witnesses in association with God?s spirit-directed organization?
Having answered yes to these questions, candidates are in a right heart condition to undergo Christian baptism.
they always have photographs of brother righteous and his theocraptic family!
the report on the convention has clearly been fed to the editors by some wt pr department to try and portray the fundies as a sane group of christians that you might like to join [shudders].. well if any of you can dig out the names of these papers and a contact address, fax or email then i'd be happy to work on short but revealing 'press release' that can be submitted for inclusion in the same issue of the paper 'in the interests of fairness and balance'.
most editors might actually welcome an opposing and controversial point of view.. what do you think?
nicolaou,
I think it's a great idea, in theory.
Remember, the 'Convention Report' is simple a front and back page wrap-around the regular edition of the newspaper. Even then, it's rarely the national newspapers which go in for these sorts of stunts, but the local 'rag' that's deperate for any way to sell a few more newspapers.
The 'Convention Report' is there for one purpose, and one purpose only. Not to provide a fair and balanced critique of the convention programme, or Witness beliefs, or any of that nonsense. In these situations, newspaper editors don't give a fig for fairness and balance---it's only about selling a thousand extra papers each day.
steve2 is absolutely correct. It's PR 'fluff.' Any words or pictures that might alienate this potential readership are Definitely Out.
Perhaps the most that one could hope for would be to write a letter to the editor and hope it might get published in the main paper. On the other hand, local newspaper editors are also part of the local community, and in spite of their skinflint ways, even JW conventions bring a lot of money into those communities which they would not want to jeopardise...
hey folks,.
an era in the ex-jw history is over.
kent steinhaug's site http://watchtower.observer.org is being shut down.. it was the first of it's kind, and to this day probably still the largest anti wt site on the net.
Hi Kent,
Have you now received at least the $500 that was pledged by everyone?
hey folks,.
an era in the ex-jw history is over.
kent steinhaug's site http://watchtower.observer.org is being shut down.. it was the first of it's kind, and to this day probably still the largest anti wt site on the net.
Kent,
Just to try to keep track of what's happening: I make it that we've now sent you $355.
Is that about right?
hey everyone,.
i have been a lurker on this site for a couple of years.
i made a few posts about a year ago and forgot my log on information so i started new.
LOL
hey folks,.
an era in the ex-jw history is over.
kent steinhaug's site http://watchtower.observer.org is being shut down.. it was the first of it's kind, and to this day probably still the largest anti wt site on the net.
I've just sent my $50 to Kent.
hey folks,.
an era in the ex-jw history is over.
kent steinhaug's site http://watchtower.observer.org is being shut down.. it was the first of it's kind, and to this day probably still the largest anti wt site on the net.
Simon wrote:
I don't think Kent has used it much (at all?) so may not realise that he doesn't have to do anything - all the payments will build up and he can then use it 'in one go'.
There is another problem if we do it this way: so far, we have had pledges of $675.
So, does everyone that has pledged send their money to Kent? If not, who does and who doesn't? And how much do we decide to send to Kent?
Would it not be better if someone here, who was going to be part of the 'new' Watchtower Observer project and has pledged money themselves, gathered the money from everyone else who has pledged and can then let Kent have what he needs to pay Saxotech, once he knows how much they will charge?
Then the balance that has been collected is available to start us off with our first month's hosting fees.
Or am I just overly complicating matters?
hey folks,.
an era in the ex-jw history is over.
kent steinhaug's site http://watchtower.observer.org is being shut down.. it was the first of it's kind, and to this day probably still the largest anti wt site on the net.
Simon first wrote:
And yes, if nothing else is arranged then send the money to me and I will either forward it on or arrange payment directly (if Kent can let me know which he prefers).
But then said:
Just to clarify though ... Kent has said he has a PayPal account so it would be better to send it straight to him IMO.
It makes no difference to me, but Kent wrote:
The best would be, of course, if it all came in one go.
So Kent would prefer if one of us collected the funds then sent them to him all "in one go."
Not only that, I suggest we'll need a 'treasurer' anyway to hold our funds (small as they may be) to pay for hosting, etc..
So, thanks Simon.
Within the next few days, would everyone who has pledged funds please:
(Important: In the 'Category of Purchase' box, select either 'Goods' or 'Service': do not select 'Quasi-Cash' or you are likely to be charged a fee--in the UK, anyway!)
Thanks again to everyone who's making this possible.
hey everyone,.
i have been a lurker on this site for a couple of years.
i made a few posts about a year ago and forgot my log on information so i started new.
If you're a Bethelite and your girlfriend or fiancee is visiting your room, Bethel rules require your door to be pegged open at all times.
Though I did hear of some who pegged it open with only a half-inch gap!