Dear Farkel
I just read both your posts, and I'm truly saddened at your loss.
Best wishes and deepest sympathy.
Duncan.
on tuesday, august 4, 2001 at 3:42.a.m.
mst, duane floyd checketts, 77 died in his sleep due to complications from pneumonia.
he is survived by his wife bette and two children, douglas checketts, patty smith, and 8 grandchildren.. duane, who was fondly called duke by everyone who knew him was born in farmington, utah on march 8, 1924. his father floyd, was one of 10 children raised in a tiny house built by his own mormon father who immigrated in the early 1860's from birmingham, england.
Dear Farkel
I just read both your posts, and I'm truly saddened at your loss.
Best wishes and deepest sympathy.
Duncan.
what a day this is!
england beat germany 5 -1 (how about that, eman!).
and ozziepost agrees with fred hall for the first time ever!
FIVE - ONE!!
I've only just come round from last night's mega-fantastic celebration..
I think I'll have another drink.
FIVE ONE !!!
You're not singing anymore!
Incoherent Duncan.
no, you perverts, this thread is not about sex toys!.
all of us have probably experienced sitting in the kh listening to some boring talk when all the sudden the sound system picks up a shortwave, cb, police, ambulance, other type radio transmission.. do we have any electronics experts here that can explain how/why this occurred; what types of stray signals sound systems are most susceptible to pick up; can filters be used to prevent such; etc., etc.. can you imagine the "fun" one could have by driving slowly by your local kh during the public talk, and blasting the sound system with: "if you want the real truth about jws, call 1-800-why-1914.".
of course, i'm sure this violates some fcc reg, but if you only did it once a month at different meetings, you likely would never be id'ed.. bored and ornery.
The best story that I can recall to do with this radio-signal-interfering-with-the-KH-public-address business happened in my local Hall in about 1974.
It was near the end of the Thursday night Service Meeting, which had – as usual – run overtime. It was supposed to finish at 9:15 and it was around 9:25, no end in sight. It was the practice of some single sisters (I mean, husband not a dub) without cars to arrange for a taxicab to take them home….
So brother Whoever-it-was is droning on about some loving provision from Jehovah’s Organisation when all of a sudden, over the loudspeakers and as clear as a bell:
“Two-Seven to Control. WHAT time did you say?”
A second or two of silence (The speaker had stopped, and we couldn’t hear Control’s side of the conversation)
“Well, I’m outside the Kingdom Hall now. There’s no one”
A little ripple of nervous giggling from the audience now, and our intrepid speaker had recovered enough to say something like “I think we have some interference!”
The next line from the cab driver Two-Seven was a killer though:
“Blimey, mate! I’m CERTAINLY not going in there to find out!”
This brought the house down. A huge laugh. I did notice a couple of brothers jump up to go out presumably to talk to Two-Seven. There were no more interruptions.
Everyone was talking and laughing about it all week, but the postscript is, the next week the CO visited and someone had obviously told him this story. He made a pretty damning denunciation of the “brothers in charge of the sound system”
- What if the Worldly Person had used swear words? He asked.
- And - even worse! - What if this person had used swear words, IN THE MIDDLE OF A PRAYER?
We all felt thoroughly ashamed at our immature, faithless laughter the previous week.. This was a serious matter and we had offended Jehovah.
The system got replaced, and I can’t remember there ever being any other similar incidents.
Duncan.
P.S. I’ve just re-read this, and thought to myself - if this was an assembly experience, it would end up with:
“And driver Two-Seven got baptised this morning!”
Sustained heartfelt applause….
supposing england were able to play against manchester united.
who would win?.
ok, i know that you would need a beckham in each side, but just suppose that it were possible, who would you have your money on?.
Mike
The exception being -
( No...must resist...can't give in...)
The exception being -
( can't hold on... overwhelming... too late!)
The exception being Pompey who've never been known to play football!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm sorry, really. I tried to resist the fatal temptation that your set-up line gave me, but I just couldn't.
A shame-faced Duncan.
the fine art of wt-style deceptive writing.
the other day, i happened across this watchtower press release from june of last year, relating to the changes surrounding the blood transfusions df-ing policy.
so far, so good.. paragraph two: .
The fine art of WT-style deceptive writing.
The other day, I happened across this Watchtower Press release from June of last year, relating to the changes surrounding the blood transfusions df-ing policy. I had seen it before, but in re-reading it I was struck by the clever construction.
There are three key paragraphs (which were top-and-tailed with an intro and summary) and all of them ended with the words: “…this position has not changed.”.
In fact a good deal had changed procedurally – from this point on they were no longer actively disfellowshipping a transfusee, but were deeming the transfusion to be a voluntary act of disassociation - which is as every bit as good as a disfellowshipping, but with less legal risk to themselves.
Clearly, though, someone in the PR dept. felt that the tone of the thing should be “no change here, steady as she goes, what’s all the fuss about?” Hence, all the repeated “this position has not changed”.
So how do you introduce fairly major policy change within an announcement while still conveying to the uncritical reader an overwhelming sense of “nothing’s changed” ?
Like this:
Paragraph one says:
The Bible commands Christians to “abstain…from blood.” (Acts 15:20) Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it is not possible to abstain from blood and accept blood transfusions. They have consistently refused donor blood ever since transfusions began to be widely used in civilian medical practice in the 1940s, and this scriptural position has not changed.
So far, so good.
Paragraph two:
If one of Jehovah’s Witnesses accepts a blood transfusion and then later regrets the action, this would be considered a serious matter. Spiritual assistance would be offered to help the person regain spiritual strength. This position has not changed.
This too is true. We are now all nicely set up for the switch, which comes in Paragraph three:
If a baptized member of the faith wilfully and without regret accepts a blood transfusion, he indicates by his own actions that he no longer wishes to be one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The individual is no longer viewed as a member of the Christian Congregation because he no longer accepts and follows the Biblical prohibition to abstain from blood.
They should paragraph-off here and say : (klaxons blaring, lights flashing) “THIS IS THE CHANGE! THIS IS THE CHANGE! This is the new stuff, and the whole point of this announcement!”
…but they don’t. They continue right on in the same paragraph on a slight tangent:
However, if such an individual later changes his mind, he may be accepted back as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. This position has not changed.
So, there they have 3 paragraphs, each of which ends up with the mantra: “this position has not changed”.
Except that in the third paragraph, that crucial phrase relates not to the whole paragraph, but solely to the immediately preceding sentence. The business about possibly accepting someone back into the fold indeed has not changed, but the way that piece of writing is constructed, the casual reader may well conclude that they have just read three paragraphs restating existing policy, no part of which has changed .
You gotta hand it to ‘em. They are very clever, they do know how to do this stuff.
Duncan.
this past weekend, one of the few remaining jw relatives who will still discuss jw stuff with me told me about his recently attending a home bible study being conducted by an elder.
evidently, the study had been told or had picked up some info about the 1975 fiasco.
the elder totally denied that the society had stated or even led people to believe that armageddon would occur in 1975, and he naturally blamed some individual jws for misinterpreting the society's materials.
Mad-A,
I posted this here a couple of months ago, same topic really:
I remembered this just the other day, and thought I’d make a post of it.
Back in 1971, during my first year of pioneering, I was kind of adopted by one of the sisters in the congregation who was keen to get me friendly with her son (a teenage boy just a little younger than myself) with a view to getting him interested in the pioneer service.Kevin spent part of that summer shadowing me everywhere I went, “learning to be a pioneer”, and many times I was invited to meals at his house.
His family had been in the Truth for ever. His parents, Rose and Albert, were absolute congregation stalwarts.
I gradually began to get a bit irritated with them, since it was clear after a few weeks of looking after Kevin, and accepting some (not all, just the minimum number for politeness’ sake) of his many invitations to his house. that they had come to regard me as their property, their own “sponsored pioneer”.
Rose and Albert began to share confidences with me. Who they didn’t particularly care for in the congregation. Some of the gossip and dirt they knew about some of the brothers. Which ones they thought were hypocrites, or the “spiritually weak” ones. I was very uncomfortable with the whole thing.
Well, eventually, the day dawned when they thought they could entrust me with their Big Secret.
They had quite an old house with a cellar. One evening, after another fry-up round their house, Rose said “We want to show you something.”
Me, and Rose and Kevin (Albert was out) went down to their cellar.
Rose showed me this HUGE storehouse of canned food. I mean HUGE. Literally thousands upon thousands of cans of food, obviously stockpiled over many years (decades?) all stacked in crates, labelled up. I remember seeing soup, baked beans and corned beef – no doubt there were many more, but I was just overwhelmed by the scale of it.
“We do it for the Brothers” said Rose “…when Armageddon comes, there’ll be food shortages in one place after another. The Scriptures tell us. That’s why we have all this”
At this point I was actually a bit frightened. These people were clearly mad. I actually at the time myself completely believed in the whole Armageddon thing, but had an idea that, in any difficulty, Jehovah Would Provide. All this was just crazy, but all I managed to say was some kind of weak joke about not forgetting to keep a can opener handy.
******************
Well, Kevin never did become a pioneer – after the summer he got a job at an Electrical shop, selling kettles and washing machines.
As for me, as G R A D U A L L Y as I could, I broke off the connection with Rose and Albert, since they were clearly insane.
Anyone else ever come across this phenomenon of “stockpiling against Jehovah’s Day” ? Or were Rose and Albert unique?
Duncan.
hello britains .
i am trying to get as many uk posters to sign in.
so post up please, whether you love the queen's corgis or think they should be nationalised!.
Ballistic
a coupla times. They were just building it as I was getting out (late seventies, early eighties), so I don't know it that well.
Dunstable I know quite well.
Duncan.
hello britains .
i am trying to get as many uk posters to sign in.
so post up please, whether you love the queen's corgis or think they should be nationalised!.
Hi Philo
Duncan here, from lovely, leafy Hertfordshire.
international of course:.
dave allen, irish standup (sit down drinking whisky actually).
bill cosby, love that fat albert.
No one comes close to Eddy Izzard.
i recently stopped by my father's house to pick up some mail and to drop off my brother's sunglasses.
my father, a zealous dub with 24 years in the collective, asked to talk to me.. for those who don't know, my fiancee and i are having a baby, which for obvious reasons causes some consternation on my father's part: you don't have to be a witness to believe that sex before marriage is wrong.
(if someone wants to discuss whether this is a valid position or not, do it in another thread.
Hey Dedalus,
Thanks for posting this. I think there's plenty of good advice been given in this thread, and I certainly can't think of anything else to add. I'm lucky that this kind of situation has never really occurred in my half-in half-out family.
Anyway, I hope it all works out for you. Maybe, as you say, the birth of the baby might make some difference with him.
All the best
Duncan.