Justitia Themis

Joined

• started 161 topics
• posted 2,529 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Justitia Themis

• 
  61

  Summer reading

  by mrsjones5 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ok folks, it's that time of year.

  school's out, the kids are running around (well actually staring at the video screen), the days are longer and the night are cool.

  with the lazy hot days of summer ahead what's on your reading list?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis
• 
  27

  "Blunders that led to World War"

  by Jeffro in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  on the watchtower.org site at the moment, they are featuring a link to an article that first appeared in the august 2009 awake!

  that purportedly talks about how world war i began.. in jw make-believe land, world war i began suddenly, and was essentially a big surprise.

  so it's interesting to note that the one of the most significant things that led to world war ithe first and second balkan warsare completely omitted from the article.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  I don't see how this can be interpreted as the Watchtower saying that the war just happened, with no run-up...

  ??? I'm not sure of your background or familiarity with JWs Rocketman, but the belief that WWI was unexpected is a cornerstone of JW dogma. When the WTBTS writes generally on the historical subject, it tracks closer to reality because it assumes, usually correctly, that most JWs will not make the link. When it writes about history as applied to them specifically, 1914, and whether they are God's channel, it twists the subject matter.

  Here is one of the first things that appeared when I searched "WWI" on the Watchtower CDrom.

  ***

  g933/22p.10WhySuchEagerExpectationoftheNewWorld?

  ***Near?

  How

  If you are inclined to dismiss all of this as pie in the sky, too good to be true, pause again and reflect. In addition to the features of the composite sign of Christ Jesus’ presence, there is Bible chronology that pointed to 1914 as the beginning of his presence. Jehovah’s Witnesses published the date 1914 as a significant year in the development of Jehovah’s Kingdom rule of the earth, doing so in the WatchTower magazine of July 1879. Many historians and observers of world affairs have noted that the year 1914 ushered in an entirely different and significant period in human history, as the accompanying box indicates.

  These are a few of the quotes from the "accompanying box."

  The whole world really blew up about World War I and we still don’t know why. . . . Utopia was in sight. There was peace and prosperity. Then everything blew up. We’ve been in a state of suspended animation ever since.”—Dr. Walker Percy, AmericanMedicalNews, November 21, 1977.

  Everything would get better and better. This was the world I was born in. . . . Suddenly, unexpectedly, one morning in 1914 the whole thing came to an end.”—British statesman Harold Macmillan, TheNewYorkTimes, November 23, 1980.
• 
  27

  "Blunders that led to World War"

  by Jeffro in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  on the watchtower.org site at the moment, they are featuring a link to an article that first appeared in the august 2009 awake!

  that purportedly talks about how world war i began.. in jw make-believe land, world war i began suddenly, and was essentially a big surprise.

  so it's interesting to note that the one of the most significant things that led to world war ithe first and second balkan warsare completely omitted from the article.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  It's one of the cornerstones of WTS mythology, that WW1 was a complete and sudden surprise, that absolutely no one in the world expected it, that the world was rushing toward a utopian panacea until it just happened.

  The truth is, the roots of WW1 stretched back decades. Most people viewed the war as inevitable. The only surprise was that it lasted as long as it did

  Ditto to Sir82's and JeffT's (check your PMs BTW) comments, but I would add one more surprise. The world was surprised in how it actually started (shot heard 'round the world). JWs quote historians out of context when they speak of this aspect. In undergrad, I was required to take a world history class. I was still 'in,' though very disillusioned, but I felt secure that the 'history' I had learned as a JW was correct.

  Long story short, I was shocked to learn that the war happened BECAUSE it was so expected, contrary to what JWs say. Facing the looming threat of war, countries had formed various protection alliances. Other countries were quickly dragged in dominoe-style because they were sworn to support.

  I heartily recommend that everyone read the books recommended on this thread, or buy an older, used, college textbook that covers 'World History From 1500 On.'

  Misunderstanding world history is critical to the JW myth that they are God's channel. Since world history is a required class for virtually every degree, it's no wonder the WTBTS is railing against a college education.
• 
  78

  Any conspiracy theories you're convinced has some truth to it?

  by MC RubberMallet in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i do.. 1) new world order.

  2) weapons testing.

  3) surveillance, espionage, and intelligence agencies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  We were all conspiracy theorists once, just think about some of the crap we used to believe.

  I think that is the key as to why so many people on this DB tend towards believing them. They clearly have such tendencies in the first place, or they never would have been attracted to JWs.

  Oh. my. God.

  Please everyone, reassure me that you are all sterile and don't vote.

  LMAO!!!
• 
  48

  AJWRB---What Have They Done???

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i still never really understood what these phantoms ever did.

  i've read many praiseworthy comments lauding the site or people behind it.

  but in reality, what major good have they done to change jehovah's witnesses' views on blood?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Still, they have NOT really changed blood policies to the typical Witness. These phantom elders, HLC men, etc. have not made any difference to the average JW who believes they can't take blood.

  What are you arguing? Are you arguing that they have not been successful in changing the official WTBTS position? (blood policies) Or, are you arguing that they haven't been successful in changing the personal position of individual JWs? (average JW)

  I was the "average JW" and their work made a difference to me. Their clear analysis changed my personal position on blood, and after that, I left. That work alone is of significant value.

  Whether they have had any effect on the WTBTS is open to debate, but I do agree with those who think their work and the site was at least partially instrumental in leading to the 2000 changes.
• 
  36

  Today's wt study article quotes a Nazi mass murderer as a reference

  by fugue in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  today's study article, "do not look at the things behind," from the 3/15/12 study edition, which was reviewed by blondie in her thread, has a footnote on paragraph 12.. the original-language word here translated refuse.

  also meant what is thrown to the dogs,.

  dung, excrement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Ad hominem arguments can be appropriate, in response to a person being cited as an authority rather than for his argumentation.

  Perhaps, but in this case it is not appropriate.
• 
  36

  Today's wt study article quotes a Nazi mass murderer as a reference

  by fugue in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  today's study article, "do not look at the things behind," from the 3/15/12 study edition, which was reviewed by blondie in her thread, has a footnote on paragraph 12.. the original-language word here translated refuse.

  also meant what is thrown to the dogs,.

  dung, excrement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Not that I would defend the Watchtower or a killer of Jews, or would try to detract at all from Blondie's analyses (which are beyond me), but I don't see the relationship between the man being a murderer and his being wrong about that particular interpretation of the word.

  Agreed, and it's an ad hominem attack. Clearly, the man's beliefs and actions were reprehensible, but that doesn't automatically make everything he said/wrote/concluded incorrect.

  http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

  1. Person A makes claim X.
  2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
  3. Therefore A's claim is false.

  The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

  Example of Ad Hominem

  1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
     Dave: " Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
     Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
     Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."
• 
  71

  Would you support "Open Carry" legislation in your state?

  by Glander in

  1. social
  2. current

  many states have such laws.

  it is being considered in many others.

  if legal, would you openly carry a firearm?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  The military profiles, as does the CIA, the FBI, and even NY police department. In the situation you describe, you would not be specifically told to look for those individuals, but your commanders would place significantly more troops in those areas to guard against looting than they would in a white, middle-class neighborhood. ; )

  However, you are correct; the crux is statistics. Stereotyping is at one end of a continuum, and demographics is at the other end. I'm not interested enough in the open-carry population to research the statistics, however, I am sure that advertisers have. That is why you will find the reading level on advertisements directed at the open-carry population to differ greatly from the reading level, tone, and graphics on advertisements directed towards doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. Since you are part of the population, you are, of course, sensitive to what you perceive as an attack on them as a whole. But your sensitivity doesn't change the demographic of the whole. So either the advertisers have incredibly misinterpreted their data (unlikely) or the "stereotype" I presented is generally accurate. And for laughs, you might try a Google images search of "open carry supporters." Seriously, you guys need to stop taking pictures at your picnics and posting them.

  BTW, I intend to refine my "stereotyping" skills after graduation, and my industry has volumns of book written about the subject. We use it daily in "peremptory challenges." We use them, and my industry trains in them, because the are generally accurate. The key is to effectivly spot the exceptions. In that sense, we "profile" because our opinions are not biases that are not open to challenge from contrary facts.

  Therefore, if I ever have a case that needs a jury comprised of people with anti-open-carry leanings, and I have a peremptory left, I will bump any guy sitting there in a wife beater, jeans, and cowboy boots, wearing a John Deere cap. And it will simply be called good lawyering.

  I have enjoyed the conversation, but this will be my last post for ~ two weeks due to exams.
• 
  71

  Would you support "Open Carry" legislation in your state?

  by Glander in

  1. social
  2. current

  many states have such laws.

  it is being considered in many others.

  if legal, would you openly carry a firearm?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Significantly, even using the lowest estimate, 76,000 violent crimes are prevented by armed citizens each year. Thus, the number of violent crimes thwarted by armed citizens is about four times the annual murder rate.

  Justitia - the answer to your query.

  I'm not sure the statistics actually do answer my question Glander. "Preventing" is different from "thwarting." Of course, if someone attacks you, it is better to have a gun than less deadly protection. That would be a case of thwarting. Preventing a crime from even taking place is a different matter.

  I admit that I haven't read Mr. Kleck's book, but it appears he researched a third issue because he compared the rates of injury an attacked person experienced with their defensive response.

  http://therealgunguys.blogspot.com/2007/03/point-blank-guns-and-violence-in.html

  And, there is the difference between carrying and open carrying.

  Mr. NCO, was it stereotyping or profiling? Stereotypes of large groups is inaccurate but general profiling of small groups is often quite accurate. An example of stereotyping would be to say that Muslims generally support terrorism; an example of profiling would be to say that a man living in Northern Afghanistan is probably a member of the Taliban. The former is highly subject; the latter is not. That, of course, is why the military profiles.

  Yet, a general profile is just that, generic, and will have exceptions. I would say that the open-carry group is very small when compared with gun owners in general, and even smaller when compared to the population. I think my description probably fits the general demographic of that small group of open-carry enthusiast...but again, there will be exceptions.
• 
  71

  Would you support "Open Carry" legislation in your state?

  by Glander in

  1. social
  2. current

  many states have such laws.

  it is being considered in many others.

  if legal, would you openly carry a firearm?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  I'm sure there are just as many cases where the presence of an armed citizen has been a positive.

  Are you?