Posts by Juan Viejo2

this latest survey is obviously available to all those who voted in last year's survey, as well as to those who have never voted before.. so, what's different?.

Juan Viejo2

Nobleheart,

IP addresses relate to where you tried to log in. Were you at home? Or using a WiFi at a library, fast-food restaurant, coffee shop, or other public place?

Spammers use public WiFi to avoid being traced to their homebase. That's why some sites flag those IPs and block them. Those IPs often show up on international databases and then innocent people try to use them to access protected sites like JWSurvey.org and get blocked.

If you were using a public WiFi, go somewhere else and try again.

If you were using your business WiFi, go somewhere else and try again.

If you were using your home cable or DSL network, try again. If it still does not work and you get that error message, use the contact form on JWSurvey.org (jwsurvey.org/contact-us) and click on "I'm having a technical problem." Indicate that you are being blocked as spam. I'll see your IP address and clear it from our protective database.

If the contact form won't let you through, send me an email at [email protected] and I'll take it from there.

JV

63

The 2012 JW Survey is now online!

by cedars in

i'm delighted to announce that the 2012 annual survey has now been launched and is ready to receive your votes!!.

please visit www.jwsurvey.org and give us your votes at the earliest opportunity.

this latest survey is obviously available to all those who voted in last year's survey, as well as to those who have never voted before.. so, what's different?.

Juan Viejo2

Irondork - I really wanted to add "be" a couple more times to that sentence just in case it needed them, but took your suggestion and eliminated the extra. Thanks for flagging that for us.

BTW - We had voters from literally every corner of the world yesterday. No votes from Antartica, but every other continent was represented. It truly is a 'global' survey after only one day.

I thought Sweeney did just fine in spite of his illness. He's a trooper and we all appreciate that.

JV

16

Saturday, January 28 at 10pm EST - CULT FREE RADIO

by Mad Sweeney in

jw
friends

topics will be jwsurvey.org and the role of women in the borg.

for the live show:.

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/cult-free-radio.

Juan Viejo2

Cult Free Radio is now on line with our good friend Cedars.

16

Saturday, January 28 at 10pm EST - CULT FREE RADIO

by Mad Sweeney in

jw
friends

topics will be jwsurvey.org and the role of women in the borg.

for the live show:.

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/cult-free-radio.

Juan Viejo2

Will be there with my headphones a'blaring!

Saturday at 10PM EST - OK!

JV

63

The 2012 JW Survey is now online!

by cedars in

i'm delighted to announce that the 2012 annual survey has now been launched and is ready to receive your votes!!.

please visit www.jwsurvey.org and give us your votes at the earliest opportunity.

this latest survey is obviously available to all those who voted in last year's survey, as well as to those who have never voted before.. so, what's different?.

Juan Viejo2

Cedars and AnnOMaly -

Thanks for the feedback! That mini-survey question has been fixed. That's the kind of quick feedback that helps me keep everything running smoothly.

Nearly 400 visitors so far this morning from UK, USA, Poland, Croatia, Germany. Many referrals already from JWN. Thanks to everyone who is participating - it makes all of our efforts and the hours spent worth it!

JV

34

A letter from John Steele Re: Menlo Park KH Law Suit

by Devil_Fish in

Juan Viejo2

While reading some of the comments above, I remembered two remarkable incidents that occurred when I was still a JW back in the 1960s. Both of these cases happened in southern California, but in two different congregations.

One brother who was an active pioneer in the Riverside Congregation was arrested for DUI. After spending a few hours in the local jail, he was released with no bail. A sister who worked as a records clerk for the police department (she was given a pass on this by the elders since she was not a "gun-toting police officer") saw the arrest report and called the congregation servant. At the next meeting at the Kingdom Hall, the accused brother did not show up, but the gossip about him and his arrest was all over the Kingdom Hall and, of course, he was assumed to be guilty.

When the brother did not show up for the next service meeting, there was an announcement made that anyone having contact with the accused should call the CongServ. Everyone figured that the accused brother was guilty and was destined to be tried and DF'd forthwith. The only information the elders had was that reported by the sister working at the police station.

A couple of weeks later my father told me that the accused brother had been cleared and WOULD NOT be reproved, placed on probation, or DFd for drunkeness and for bringing shame on the congregation. It turned out that the brother had a blackout while driving due to diabetes. Yes, he had been drinking, but was well under the legal limit (which at that time was 1.0, not the 0.8 that it is now in most states). While the alcohol may have contributed to the event, it was not the cause. The reason that he had not been to meetings was that he had himself hospitalized for treatment - and it was only then that he discovered the cause of his blackout. He was shocked and embarrassed that everyone thought he had been guilty of a crime. After that he was on insulin as long as I knew him and he eventually left the Kingdom Hall and never returned.

The point is, of course, that the sister should never have shared that confidential information. She had no right and broke police department rules. She obviously knew that, but did it anyway. And, of course, the elders took no action against her.

The second case involved the West Hollywood KH in the late 1960s. One of the sisters in the congregation had to have a cesaerean delivery and during the operation she began to hemmorhage. Apparenty everything happened so fast, the the medical team just started giving her blood to stabilize her condition and to save the baby. Her husband was not a JW. A JW sister was working in the hospital at the time, but was not directly involved as part of the medical team. I'm not sure, but my guess is that she was working on the same floor, or at the desk, and learned of the case after the fact. The first call she made was to the congregation servant. The sister was subsequently brought before a committee and charged with voluntarily taking a blood transfusion. She pleaded that she was under anethesia and did not have a believing husband or other JW relative with her at the time. So the doctors treated it as an emergency and took the action they felt was necessary. Although I was not a JW at the time, my wife (who was) told me that they decided to DF the sister anyway, since she had not made it clear before going into surgery that she was a JW and did not want blood. This was in spite of the fact that the doctor and the hospital administrator wrote a letter in her defense saying that in order to save her life (and also to avoid a costly lawsuit) they arbitrarily made the decision to give her blood. She survived and so did her baby, so obviously they made the right decision. They even mentioned in the letter that it had as much to do with their consciences as hers, and they could not just let her and her baby die without taking action.

But again, no one would have known except for that JW nurse who took it upon herself to report this case to the elders. Even then, in the late 1960s, I'm sure that patients had some privacy rights. According to my then JW wife, the sister just told the elders where they could stick their DF and went off and enjoyed the free and wild Hollywood scene with her unbelieving husband.

So I know personally that JWs in critical jobs are willing to break confidentiality and privacy rules in order to report errant JWs - guilty or not.

JV

34

A letter from John Steele Re: Menlo Park KH Law Suit

by Devil_Fish in

Juan Viejo2

As the editor of Ex-Jw.com I have been very close to this case since the beginning, but have never been able to meet with any of the principals of the case. I have another article coming up within a few days that contains the court documents of the depositions of the former CEO/COBOE of the Menlo Park Kingdom Hall. I think you will find an entirely different perspective on the events and individual actions by both the plaintiffs and the defendants.

Yes, as I was doing some editing on the article, I thought that Mr. Steele's presentation of the case may have been a little over the top and leaning a bit much toward picturing the Watchtower as the "Evil Empire." But that is his point of view and he has been shoulder to shoulder with the plaintiffs ever since the beginning. So his is a unique perspective. You can see his frustration in the progress of the case and its final resolution.

But please remember, this case is not really over. For now it has just moved over to the state courts. There is much more ahead for everyone involved.

JV

157

How come "Johhny the Bethelite" has not been exposed?

by hotspur in

i can't believe johnny the bethelite has not been uncovered.

unless, of course, he doesn't exist!

hoping not to give koolaidman any more exposure here but.... .

Juan Viejo2

Rick Fearon - HELLO!!! Are you there? If so, take a moment and please consider what I have to say.

You know that I have supported you many times in the past. I've participated on your conference call a couple of times. I've enjoyed listening to some of your guests like Barbara Anderson, Cochise Pendleton and others. Sometimes your call-in programs are quite interesting. I'd hate for you to lose all your credibility and your audience because of journalistic ineptitude.

Rick, I have asked you, as have many others, to please explain exactly how you vetted JTB. I am asking you again to clearly tell us how you managed to be so convinced that Johnny is legitimate. At one time you were going to meet him near the Brooklyn Bethel, interview him and check his bona fides. But I've searched this site and Six Screens and I can not find a single article or post where you have explained how you managed that. Did that ever really happen?

While the rest of us scratch our heads trying to figure out how JTB can pull off his little anti-JW scam while being a member of the Watchtower's IT team and do it from his room or a Bethel closet using toss-away or flat-fee cell phones (which are not that cheap) - you continue to treat him as if he is totally credible and thus an expert on all things Bethel.

It's not working, Rick. If you think you are not getting a fair shake here on JWN, then I invite you to PM me or email me at editor@ex-jw.com and let me help you tell your story. I think we'd all love to know that there really is a mole at WT HQ that is willing to share insider information and nasty Governing Body secrets. But we also need to be assured that "mole" is not a fake, a flake, or a double-agent trying to get our confidence and then lead us down a path to destruction by feeding us damaged or notoriously false information.

I've been contacted by many persons who have claimed to be JWs or ex-JWs who want to share information with me to "expose the Watchtower." 80% of what I get is simply BS - or someone pushing their own religious quackery - or trying to get me to expose myself to a charge of libel by trying to get me to publish accusations against local elders or specific traveling overseers. On the other hand, as in the case of the Menlo Park Kingdom Hall, I sometimes get proof that is credible and can be verified by talking to people on the phone or in person. Or, as in the case of "Shadow Elder" and his son, I have actually called his Kingdom Hall and verified his existence, his position, and his name and can therefore publish his story with confidence.

Likewise those who publish articles on my websites are personally known to me, have a known reputation on this and other websites, or have confirmed their identities to me to my satisfaction. I won't disclose their identities and won't retain anything that could harm them on my computers, but I feel comfortable presenting their stories on my websites.

So think about it, Rick. Send me a PM or an email and let's discuss how I can help you confirm that Johnny the Bethelite is exactly who he claims to be. If you are willing to give him his own call-in show or let him monopolize hours on your regular show, then I think you should also be willing to take steps to confirm his actual existence to someone else who has established a level of credibility among former JWs. I offer myself to fill that role, but if my reputation isn't strong enough, then consider Paul Grundy or Randy Watters or ???

JV

45

OK, What is this summer's District Convention Theme?

by Quarterback in

jw
friends

got the news this week as to where we are going to be, but, the elder making the announcement couldn't tell us what the da's theme was.. is this now a secret?

.

Juan Viejo2

"Evidently There Are Fewer Active Publishers" district convention