Converted
1973 age 21
1989 (completely, had not been in a KH for almost a year)
16 years in
hi people,.
i want as much data as possible on the effect of the internet on the time captured by the cult.. please answer the three following questions about yourself or about someone you know (for example, if your parents or grandparents were jw's and left).
1) were you raised as a jw, or did you convert?.
Converted
1973 age 21
1989 (completely, had not been in a KH for almost a year)
16 years in
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/articles/2015/12/3/breaking-news-jehovahs-witnesses-put-brooklyn-heights-headquarters-sale.
.
according to ttdtt post I was correct I think? So maybe the reason their broke or cash poor is they we're unable to sell this property back in 2013, deal fell through. If this is true, then again it would explain one of the many reasons their cash poor and shutting down projects.
This would make a lot of sense. If they were planning on a big cash hit that didn't go through, then they'd be strapped for cash. When this money comes in, they'll have the money they originally planned on, PLUS all the money they've shaken out of the congregations. What a loving provision from Jehovah. /barf/
san bernardino california.
up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.
disabilities.
Just ran across some interesting numbers. The post-1950 murder rate peaked in 1980 and has been coming down ever since. It's now about half of what it was at the peak.
i took another look around the new website ( https://www.watchtowerbrooklynrealestate.com/ ).
first they have two properties listed here 124 columbia and 85 jay street.
these have to be worth a lot of money.
I took another look around the new website ( https://www.watchtowerbrooklynrealestate.com/ )
first they have two properties listed here 124 Columbia and 85 Jay street. These have to be worth a LOT of money. My overall impression, having done a lot of commercial real estate, is that it is a professional effort. Since none is listed, I assume they the are not using an outside broker. I'll guess they conned some dub with experience to handle this for them.
They no doubt control all variations of the domain name, which means setting up websites for properties in Seattle or Timbuktu or whatever are much easier, probably also using the same template.
I think that we may be seeing the launch of a real estate investment group disguised as a religion. If that is the case, it may explain some of the current antics with begging for money, insisting everything is fine and cutting back expansion. They're starting the rebranding the business end of the religion. They're asking for money and cutting back to solve a short-term problem while the new org comes on line.
They may not be successful at this, I've watched more than one outfit turn a big pile of money into a little pile of money in a hurry doing this. Nevertheless it would explain a lot.
here is a great site in case anyone is interested in acquiring wt property in brooklyn heights.
https://www.watchtowerbrooklynrealestate.com/.
Confidentiality and non disclosure agreements are standard in large real estate deals. You don't want potential buyers slipping information to each other.
I thought this website looked very professional, whoever put it together knows what he's doing. Either they have more NYC properties to sell than what they're show casing right now, or maybe the plan to start selling Kingdom Halls through this group. The sure have enough property around the country.
san bernardino california.
up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.
disabilities.
I don't think its being disingenuous. Simon asserted that rights are not absolute (in general I agree by the way). The question is, does that apply to all rights? Any attempt to place any restriction on abortion is quickly turned into a fight over a fundamental right. Yet pretty much the same people think other rights can be restricted. Which is it? My question is theoretical , as with gun ownership, the Supreme Court has spoken.
Back to the main topic, here's some interesting numbers. Out of 12,000 plus murders per year, rifles are used in about 300. I don't see that an assault weapon ban will move those numbers by very much.
Also from what's on CNN right now, this is looking more and more like a terrorist attack, not a work place shooting. They had bombs and thousands of rounds of ammo in their house.
Also I'm hearing rumors that they purchased the guns legally in California, which has some really strict gun laws, including an assault weapons ban. I haven't been able to confirm if they did fact buy the guns in CA.
PS I do not currently own a gun.
san bernardino california.
up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.
disabilities.
That's a ruling. They need to make a better one.
The constitution can be amended and / or re-interpreted and laws change all the time.
The right has already had conditions placed on it ... just add some more. Nothing mandates the type of arms or the quantity. Are people allowed nukes? No - that would be crazy. We just need to find a better line of where "crazy" starts. An arsenal of weapons is crazy.
It just needs some political will.
I have no problem with some restrictions. Background checks are reasonable. Here in Washington State it's illegal to take a gun into a bar even if you have a concealed carry permit. I've known since I was a kid that guns and alcohol don't mix. This is a reasonable restriction.
Food for thought, how do the members of this board advocating reasonable restrictions on guns feel about reasonable restrictions on abortion?
san bernardino california.
up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.
disabilities.
the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia
i.e. the only ones that have the right to bear arms.
2nd amendment doesn't need to be rewritten or changed, just applied as intended instead of being perverted by the gun lobby.
Simon, this is not correct. The U S Supreme court has ruled that the 2nd amendment confers a right on individuals, not the militia. The organized militia, as defined in the statute, did not exist when the amendment was written and ratified into the constitution. Like it or not, this is the current state of the law here.
san bernardino california.
up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.
disabilities.
What needs to happen is that every gun is tracked from manufacture to sale.
Read Adjusted Knowledge's post above. This is already done, per federal law.
Also, I have no problem with requiring a gun owner to have liability insurance, but don't expect it to cut down much on gun ownership. I have a one million dollar umbrella liability policy that costs twelve bucks a month.
While we're at it, the "gun show loophole" doesn't exist. If you are in the business of selling guns, you have to do the federal paperwork no matter where the sale takes place. If you are only conducting "casual" sales you don't have to file the paperwork no matter where you are. The obvious solution to this is to require that everybody file a report of sale.
san bernardino california.
up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.
disabilities.
Where is the well regulated militia and are they required?
Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)