Posts by AngryXJW

80

Was Russell a freemason and an adventist?

by wholewheat in

jw
friends

was russell a freemason and was he a member of the adventist church?

AngryXJW

RR:_____

Your reply surprises me. You acknowledge that the Russells were Second Adventists without any hesitation._____

Actually, as I know you are aware, Storrs was NOT a member of the Advent Christian Church. Despite his temporary association with the Life and Advent Union, he is probably more accuracy described simply as just a general Second Adventist._____

Since you put so much stock in Charles Taze Russell, I am interested in your opinions as to how CTR tried to minimize, if not flat out deny, his association with the Second Adventist movement._____

Maybe you woud like to comment on:_____

1. Russell's portrayal that he "just happened" to walk into Jonas Wendell's service in 1868-9._____

2. Russell's statement that the SAs led him to "no truths" (technically correct)._____

3. Russell's failure in his later years to fully and truthfully explain his relationship with Stetson and Storrs._____

4. A.H. Macmillian's obvious lack of understanding of the real historical situation despite his misconception that CTR had filled him in sufficiently to write regarding such, including CTR misleading AHM to the point that AHM thouht that CTR had published "OBJECT" in 1873._____

Edited by - AngryXJW on 29 June 2002 8:56:14

Edited by - AngryXJW on 29 June 2002 8:57:47

Edited by - AngryXJW on 29 June 2002 8:58:46

5

Amarillo newsroom invites your comments.

by nicolaou in

AngryXJW

.

4

SCONH AFFIRMS GREGORY BLACKSTOCK CONVICTION

by AngryXJW in

) erred by: (1) denying his motion to dismiss on the basis that the state presented insufficient evidence to prove that he touched the minor's genitalia; (2) ruling that if he cross-examined c.b.

" after the defendant touched her, c.b.

and that he had never touched her.

AngryXJW

.

3

WBTS NOW MAY COURT CHALLENGE PRISON'S POLICY

by AngryXJW in

AngryXJW

4

SCONH AFFIRMS GREGORY BLACKSTOCK CONVICTION

by AngryXJW in

) erred by: (1) denying his motion to dismiss on the basis that the state presented insufficient evidence to prove that he touched the minor's genitalia; (2) ruling that if he cross-examined c.b.

" after the defendant touched her, c.b.

and that he had never touched her.

AngryXJW

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

To prevail on appeal, the defendant must demonstrate that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, no rational trier of fact could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. Graham, 142 N.H. 357, 360 (1997). In the present case, C.B. testified as to the assault and so long as her testimony suffices to establish a prima facie case, no corroborating evidence is needed. Id.

. . . .

The defendant later confessed "to his . . . elders at the . . . Jehovah's Witness [sic] church" that he had also acted improperly with the aunt's two children. C.B.'s aunt knew of the defendant's confession regarding her children and had discussed the matter with the police. However, she did not tell the police about the defendant's confession regarding C.B. until September 2000.

5

Ida Eisenhower and Jehovah's Witnesses

by Kenneson in

jw
friends

marley cole in 1955 wrote "jehovah's witnesses the new world society," which includes a photocopy of a letter ida eisenhower wrote in 1943 to j.w.

lawson of long island, n.y. therein, she stated that she had been in the truth since 1896 and naomi engle who stayed with her was also a witness.

since she died the next year, mrs. eisenhower apparently died as a faithful jehovah's witness.

AngryXJW

IKE was reared in a family of loyal "Bible Students". He entered West Point in 1911, which was the same year that General William Hall served as Chairman at the opening session of the annual BS Convention._________

5

Amarillo newsroom invites your comments.

by nicolaou in

AngryXJW

Questions to email the Editor:

2. Why does Munsch fail to question the CVB's ridiculous estimate of how much JWs spend at a DC?

The CVB's estimate amounts to $120 per person per day, which means that a family of 4 would spend $1440 to attend a DC.

Ridiculous!!! That's how the CVB justifies paying the WTS's rental bill.

Even if EVERY family drove in on Thursday, the 3 night's motel bill would likely run about $200 for one room, and only $400 if two rooms were booked.

Three breakfasts at a whopping $5.00 each is $15.00 for the weekend.

Three dinners at a whopping $10.00 each is $30.00 for the weekend.

Three "sack lunches plus snacks" at an average cost of $5 each is $15.00 for the weekend.

One gasoline fillup of $20.00 before returning home.

So, for a family of 4, that is roughly $660 per weekend. Factor in some miscellaneous incidentals, and it still amounts about HALF of the CVB's estimate used to justify its use of PUBLIC TAX DOLLARS to fund the WTS Convention.

19

ALERT ON BLOOD REFUSAL CASE/ALBERTA/SHUNNED FATHER

by hawkaw in

as all should be aware, lawrence hughes daughter has leukemia and is in the 4th and final stage of treatment.

the jws are still fighting to have the daughter declared an adult instead of a minor so she can kill herself instead of receiving a life saving blood transfusion.

now lawrence's lawyer refuses to help anymore even though 1 case is on appeal at the supreme court and a second trial is starting in alberta on monday june 17, 2002. .

AngryXJW

Bumping this thread from page 5.

Want to make sure everyone has an opportunity to see "all the good work" the "Jah/Free Christians" are doing on behalf of this DB.

Editing to copy NP's copy of email reply just in case it disappears.

Subject: Hughes Legal Case
Re: READ NOW

I suggest that you be accurate if you are going to widely disseminate information. Mr. H. has never asked me to nor retained me to represent him on this aspect of the case and this was determined in February and has remained the same since then.

The Crown is conducting this trial and Mr. Hughs determined that he would rely on that.

For your info we have carried over $180,000 in time and given a good deal more free time and over 4 months of time to the substantial exclusion of other clients.

There are reasons why certain decisions are made and proceedures followed that are privileged to Mr. H and me.

However I have never abandoned him and still have a godd deal of work to do for him both before the Queen's Bench and the Court of Appeal and potentially elsewhere depending on various applications that are outstanding.

Trying to threaten me to do something that is between my client and me is inappropriate and your position inaccurate and unfair.

----------------------------------

I wonder if that last sentence was really the "last sentence"?

Edited by - AngryXJW on 15 June 2002 11:8:0

57

Legal Question: How Strong is Barbara's Case?

by Room 215 in

jw
friends

a question for the legal beagles out there:.

since the watchtower thugs have told the press during the dateline repartee that barbara anderson was not being taken to task for her anti-molestation iniitatives, but alleged that she was being tried for ``allegations or serious sins'' unrelated to her activism, how strong a case would she have in court?.

bear in mind that barbara and the others of the dateline four say they did nothing more than speak for the protection of children and then publicly challenged the wt to publicly state their accusations and evidence, and that they would indemnify them against any charges arising therefrom.. so.... if they call her a sinner, say that her sin has nothing to do with whistle-blowing and is serious enough to merit expulsion -- as serious as adultery or theft, yet refuse to accept her challenge to show the world the basis of their charges if they are held harmless, how is that not libel and therefore actionable?

AngryXJW

Dutchie:____

As you should be aware, it is NOT defamation for the WTS to state that Barb is being "investigated" for "anything", so long as they are doing so.____

Then, when the WTS states that their investigation is directed toward "possible" "serious sins" such as "apostasy" or "causing divisions", such "terms" are defined by the WTS themselves. So, even if the WTS publicly stated that Barb was "guilty" of such acts, how could a secular court question the definitions of such terms when the WTS is authority for such definiions?
____

Again, as you should know, the mere occurrence of "damages" in this situation is irrelevant unless the statments are proven to be lies (intentional statements of falsehood made with the intent to do harm).

57

Legal Question: How Strong is Barbara's Case?

by Room 215 in

jw
friends

a question for the legal beagles out there:.

since the watchtower thugs have told the press during the dateline repartee that barbara anderson was not being taken to task for her anti-molestation iniitatives, but alleged that she was being tried for ``allegations or serious sins'' unrelated to her activism, how strong a case would she have in court?.

bear in mind that barbara and the others of the dateline four say they did nothing more than speak for the protection of children and then publicly challenged the wt to publicly state their accusations and evidence, and that they would indemnify them against any charges arising therefrom.. so.... if they call her a sinner, say that her sin has nothing to do with whistle-blowing and is serious enough to merit expulsion -- as serious as adultery or theft, yet refuse to accept her challenge to show the world the basis of their charges if they are held harmless, how is that not libel and therefore actionable?

AngryXJW

In this instance, ROOM 215 is asking whether Barbara has a "defamation" case against the WTS for their publicly stating that she is being investigated for "serious sins" other than her "activism".