Angel Eyes,
Ah yes, the protective parent ploy. Wether or not there is mal intent ... which is very difficult to proof since we do not have the documantary trail to back such an assertion up .... the least we can say they, despite perhaps an alleged well intent, which is not been proven either for the same reason, they are stupid. They would fight to the death in order not to hand over any docs that could protect victims of child abuse.They would fight to the death anyone who ever challenged them on their bad policies. Of course they abhor child abuse ..... but their works show different.
O, and what happened to Peter Mosier with his site: quotes? Their reasoning was completely wrong. Unfortunately, mr. Mosiers pockets were not as deep as the WBTS's. It was not about copyright infringement. It was about a logical approach in demonstrating how embarressing their own dogma's are. And they affirmed that in court!
If they were that protective: I wonder why their so famous charitable works are blinding for absence.....
Cheers
Borgia