Posts by Max Divergent

28

Ozzie's Weekend Poll #19

by ozziepost in

jw
friends

to mark this weekend's district convention in sydney, australia, we are asked to cast our minds back in time and remember those district convention days with a certain nostalgia.

so, are you ready to begin that walk down memory lane?

settle back with a cuppa with me and reflect awhile.

An evolutionary process for me... The first 15 years were a combo of sleeping and playing on the floor or drawing on my program, then from ages ~16 to 26 I became the hardest working Attendant ever! But in summary, then I:

Didn't listen.
Checked out the talent ~~through my binoculars~~ close up while...
...I was the attendant.
Looked around, wondering "Why?"

If I couldn't get an official job and got kicked out the Attendents Office where I'd sit minding my own business for hours on end, I'd go on my 'Independent Corridor Patrol' using my attendent badge to do whatever I liked! Often I'd find a scaly mate who was on duty and 'consult' with them over the disgracfully immodest nature of the sisters garments in recent years or (in the absense of fluff) the general stupidness of the people thereabouts (arrogent prick I was). In later times I just hid.

If all that failed or my legs got a bit tired I'd go back to whomever I was sitting with (wife, family etc) to their consoling looks and urgings to not 'work so hard, there are others who can help...'. Well, nothing else could help me get the hell away from listening to the program or sitting in those damned chairs, so I had to acknoledge the burden of service was great!

Now, it's definatly: 'Stay at home'.

I'd be curious to go to one again sometime in the future just to see it all from a different perspective, but I'll have to cultivate a non-JW look first so I can do whatever I please without being subject to being growled at by all the bored Attenedants just looking for somthing to lift the tedium of trying to look busy for three days...

I could also probably bemuse myself by getting followed by the Security Brothers, the secret intellegence division of the Attendents Department that conducted (not so) covert survailence on potential 'troublemakers' at the convention. Now I can be the quarry!!!

Cheers, Max

Edited by - Max Divergent on 8 September 2002 4:20:32

10

TO: Defender - Wars, ex-JWs, and stuff

by Amazing in

jw
friends

hi defender: .

first and foremost, the silly little watchtower god they call by the english name jehovah plans to kill billions of people at their battle of har-megeddon.

thier little god supposedly has already killed every human and land animal save noah and company about 5,000 years ago.

Max Divergent

Hi KingPawn - Saddam is of course dangerous and should be challenged. The issue is whether or not the American (and British) people have the authority through their President (and Queen) to remove soverignty from Iraq by invasion and occupation without either a specific UN mandate or actually suffering a military attack from Iraq becuase they are concerned they may come under threat of WMD.

I'll just say that you being in Australia makes this an easy position to take. Has he made threats against Canberra, Perth, Brisbane, or Syndey?

To the best of my knowledge, there aren't any US cities under specific credible threat either.

I have close family who live wthin 150 miles of the Iraqi border. In fact, a ruin 100 meters from their home was finally demolished last week after being hit by a Scud in 1992. This focuses the mind.

No. You'll never get that [mandate] from the UN. How many "no" votes would it take to make an endorsement of force by the UNSC "ambiguous?"

US and UK aircraft bombed Iraq yesterday under authority of fairly unambiguous UN resolutions.

If the West can't convince the UNSC with evidence and political imputus to authorise an invasion and occupation of Iraq, then maybe the evidence and political imputus dosn't really exist. Always good to 'Take a Bex and have a good lie down' before engaging a power presumed to have WMD that has a track record of bombing a nuclear power (the currenty grumpy Israel) when theatened.

And would you, for example, advocate the same kind of political lobbying in the UN should Australia face a similar danger?

Yes. If Australia was actually threatened, I'd damn well expect the support of the UN.

A case in point: When Australian values were threatened by Indonesia's actions in East Timor recently, Australia sought and recieved political and military backing from the UN before the military entered Indonesian territory under UN mandate.

Path put it really well...

No one can claim to live by certain ideals and then expect credibility when they abandon them when put to the test.

If Elder Jones lashed out when threatened, we'd righty critisise him for failing to live up to Christain principle. Likewise, the West must live up to Western principles even when (especially when?) worried about being hurt.

I say, 'Put Iraq under pressure, sure... But don't actually invade or attack without authority and just cause'.

Cheers

Edited by - Max Divergent on 7 September 2002 11:8:48

10

TO: Defender - Wars, ex-JWs, and stuff

by Amazing in

jw
friends

hi defender: .

first and foremost, the silly little watchtower god they call by the english name jehovah plans to kill billions of people at their battle of har-megeddon.

thier little god supposedly has already killed every human and land animal save noah and company about 5,000 years ago.

Max Divergent

Hi Amazing - Based on the evidence that's been made public so far and notwithstanding the points you've made, I still have concerns about the authority for any proposed action against Iraq and (presumably) any states that give support to Iraq.

The West has (nearly) always sought to be seen to have the unquestioned high moral ground before taking military action. It's the actions where the proper authority has been doubted that has undermined the West the most (the A-bombs, Vietnam, Grenada).

Conversely, where the West's authority has been undoubted, their authority has been enhanced (WWI, WWII, 92 Gulf War, imposition of the No Fly Zones, East Timor).

In this case, the higher moral ground is ambiguous if the Commanders-in-Chief of the attacking powers act on their own authority given to them only by the people of their own countries at a past election. (Opinion Polls are just so irrelevant on these issues in a Representative Democracy!)

The question here is not of proportional response to hostile action or violation of a UN Resolution (Iraq is already being bombed almost daily under UN authority for violation of the No Fly Zone rules), or selective strikes on weapons plants to which access for inspection has been denied - it's a bloody, pre-emptive first-strike and invasion and prolonged occupation that's being advocated.

In my view, there needs to be proper higher authority, like an unambiguous UN Security Council resolution, for the West to use its military supremacy to invade anywhere. If that authority is granted, then there's a horrible job to go and do against an evil and powerful dictator.

The alternative to proper higher authority IS to wait for an Iraqi attack on the West. If that means waiting for an Iraqi Weapon of Mass Destruction to be launched at or detonated in the city I live in, well obviously thats a horribly bad thing for me and my neighbours, but it's that kind of 'bad thing' that gives just cause for an invasion of a country by the 'Good Guys'.

That's the same kind of clear authority given by Hitler's invasion of Poland, Japan's attack on Pearl Harbour, Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, or the September 11 attack that gave authority to the campaign in Afghanistan (but is irrelevant to invading Iraq except for the hawkish mood its put the West in).

As I understand it, Liberal Democracies were not built to withstand being the 'bad guy' or being above attack by their enemies. On that basis I say its bad for the West to invade Iraq without a clear and valid mandate from a higher authority (like from the UN) or in direct response to overt military or proved terrorist action by Iraq.

The West needs moral supremacy as much or more than military might if it's to survive and thrive as the dominant culture in the world. I think were in serious danger of loosing that status.

Cheers

Divergent, Max

Edited to repair punctuation damaged in flight

Edited by - Max Divergent on 7 September 2002 6:36:24

42

Hello Everyone! This is my 1st Post

by UnDisfellowshipped in

jw
friends

i have been reading this board since right before dateline.. i want to say thanks to simon for this great website!

i want to thank bill bowen, sheila bowen, barbara anderson, joe anderson, the pandelos, erica rodriguez, and all of the other silentlambs who have spoken out!.

i have some questions.. does anyone have any information about a circuit overseer named orval ellis (he used to be the co in arkansas, and then oklahoma, and just now colorado).

Max Divergent

Undisfellowshipped... UnDis...UnDF... UDF... Ulster Defence Force!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!! We have a Irish terrorist in our midst!!!! Bring out the PATRIOT Act and send him to Cuba NOW!!!!!!!! Orvil Ellis... Ellis Island... Irish immigratnts..... Arghh... You're going to bomb somthing near Ellis Island... that's near Brooklyn Heights... OMG!!! Settle down... we don't need that sort of thing happening... they're nice people really....

Sorry... :-) Welcome. Enjoy. Had an idle moment.

25

H20 vs JWD

by Amazing in

jw
friends

h20 was a smashing success for a long time, even with many moderators.

the board rules were basically good common sense, and expressed some issues as to matters of law, such as not violating copyright, etc.

i don't understand why h20 went down the tank.

Max Divergent

H2O was fantastic in its day. Kind of an idiosyncratic place that really helped me when I started going there about 1996. It really saddened me to see the other post about Simon and moderation, it's what started to happen on H2O. This forum has an edit feature that H2O never did, so self-moderation is possible once you've recovered from a rush of blood!

H2O got to be really silly when the focus of the place went to it's internal politics instead of JW issues. Eventually I tired of the nonsense and stopped going. A year or so ago somthing brought the good things of it back to mind and I hunted and hunted for H2O eventually finding this unfamilier place. I did more hunting and found this place with pleanty of familier names and a good feel. So I started reading and occasionally posting and now read it each day posting when I feel like it.

I hope this place dosn't decend into such a mess. I doubt it will.

Cheers, Max

9

What I figured on Jehovah...

by Max Divergent in

jw
friends

when i was leaving i figured that jehovah is one of these things: .

2. exists but is different to how the wts describe him (her, them, it...), .

3. exists as the wts describes him and is deeply saddened and angered by the inequities and sins committed by his name people but extends to them benevolence and forgivness unconditionally, .

Max Divergent

When I was leaving I figured that Jehovah is one of these things:

1. Non-existant,

2. Exists but is different to how the WTS describe Him (Her, Them, It...),

3. Exists as the WTS describes him and is deeply saddened and angered by the inequities and sins committed by His name people but extends to them benevolence and forgivness unconditionally,

4. Exists just as the WTS says and His character is well and clearly demonstrated in the operation of the 'Spiritual Paradise on earth today' and by the conduct of His earthly representatives.

1 or 2: If true, I resoned that there's no point in being a JW - it'd make no difference in the end

3. Is the espoused teaching of the WTS. If true I'd be buggerd at armageddon unless there's a lot of unconditional forgivenss to go around,

4. This is the teaching in practice of the WTS, and I can't stand living under this tyranical, far-right rulership now, why should I beat myself up for the privilage of living under it FOREVER??? I should leave NOW!!!

And that's what I did! Since then I haven't found anything much the WTS taught me to be true or useful, so on that basis I reckon 1 or 2 are the go and all this religion carry-on just dosn't matter.

What do you think?

Max,

'If W is going to invade Iraq to depose an undesirable dicator, maybe he should check out Brooklyn Heights first?'

20

NY TIMES ARTICLE - Read it Here!

by Salud in

jw
friends

for those who can't wait till sunday...

ousted members contend jehovah's witnesses' abuse policy hides offenses

by laurie goodstein

Max Divergent

Two lines yell out from this:

...leave it in Jehovah's hands....Since there weren't two eyewitnesses, they said there wasn't much they could do."

But Jehovah's hands* have brought about: reporting laws from Ceaser that set out a basic christian principle - protect the weak from the strong; case studies in the Catholic Church et al; many 'spiritual men' within the organisation who've brought matters to attention through the proper channels...

Dang!!! He even provided his Son's life to remove the two witness rule provided to the Isralites in Duteronomy that would otherwise have prevented them acting as 'reasonable men' do in these matters!

After all that work, what's left for an all-powerful God to do but to appeal to the New York Times?

In these cases we are not going to be vindictive because these are our brothers, and we would hope that they would change

Oh, so... right... So you're concerned that there may be a measure of 'vindictivness' in DFing and reporting your brother the child rapist, so to be kind you do next to nothing?

So... When people are accused of/confess to consentual sex acts (like fonding the breasts twice, or whatever), the elders can deal with this without vindictivness and there's no chance of horny teenagers or anyone else changing, so it's OK to DF. However if it's child abuse, strong action might include a measure of vindictivness and hamper personal development, so better just have a little chat...

Umm... a lot could be said about that attitude, but an obvious thing is that the JW's substantive punishment for consenting sex is greater than for raping children^.

Thank you for making that clear JR Brown.

Cheers, Max

* Alternative views include: 1. Jehovah dosn't exist, or 2. He exisits but is very different to what the WTS make him out to be, or 3. He is exactly what the WTS say he is and we're all hoping like hell that we don't have to live forever under the kind of rule currently enjoyed in the 'Spiritual Paradise'.. (btw, can W invade Brooklyn?)

^ For more insight to the careless, uncaring, ignorant way the GB/WTS deals with peoples sexuality (and lives generally), just refer to CofC, p.41-50. This mob still make life harder for horny teenagers and consenting adults than they do for child rapists.

23

HOW MANY HERE HAVE HAD JUDICIAL ACTION?

by minimus in

jw
friends

many of the posters here have been in the organization for years.during the time that you have been associated, have you ever had to go before a commitee?

did you confess to something or were you confronted by the elders?

were you ever accused of something but it couldn't be proven?

Max Divergent

Yeah, and probably had a unique experince for it! The result was reversed!!! I was a real goody-two-shoes and had a guilty conscience about somthing I though was fairly minor about five years earlier. There was a local needs talk that kicked me in the guts and I confessed expecting a bit of council and nothing much more.

BANG!!! 'There will be a Juficial Committee and you may be Disfellowshipped.' was the flat reply - I was absolutly shocked and was physically ill. Anyway, it played out and I got a public reproof and removed as an MS. I was horrified coz 1. I believed it was unjust and unchristian, and 2. I was a self-righteous prick and didn't cope too well with being brought down 25 pegs!!!

But I was also tight with the CO. He had a look at it, told me I was a bad boy, looked up the article in the '75 KM that says if you did somthing 'bad' more than 3 years ago and it wasn't in the WT at the time that it was a DF offence and have been appointed by holy sprit to a position in the meantime, then you can't be put in front of a Judicial Committee for it. He put that to the Committee who reversed their decison and the paperwork was torn up (apparently). (I understand this was written so as to avoid mass DFings of E/MS when the smoking rules came in).

So, I was a reproved & removed, then the first thing I did after that was respond to the CO's call from the platform for me to close his Sunday meeting in prayer!!! That fucked them up! So I got to be even more self-righteous for a few years before eventually walking away from it on my own terms.

It was a life changing experience.

Cheers, Max

18

From the mouths of babes (post your funnies)

by Cappuccino OC in

jw
friends

a couple of years ago during the km meeting the day of the memorial was announced, location and time.

the announcement was followed by a km article review re: the memorial (question & answer).

my daughter was 5 at that time and had been dozing off & on.

Max Divergent

A young son of an uber-Elder was doing a demo about his school Witnessing and in a very serious and intense voice said, 'I explianed to him about the paradise ... and he took it well'.

Maybe you had to be there, but the whole congo just cracked up!

17

A Gap In My Knowledge.

by Englishman in

jw
friends

i have a gap in my knowledge re some of the procedures that come into play when someone decides that they simply don't want to be a witness any more.

just to explain:.

in my dub years, there were any number of ex-witnesses around.

Max Divergent

I guess stories like: "I'm outraged! The elders left me alone and didn't do anything after I fobbed them off about not going to meetings for a month/year/decade", or "Can you believe what happened!! I didn't get a shepherding visit/judicial committee/third degree on schedule after I quietly and politely slipped away causing no ripples" aren't very memorable and don't leave the impression the more dramatic stories of inequity do.

My recollection from the Shepherding work was that there were quite a few people around who no longer believed but lived quiet lives and caused no problems just as you described. We just called on them out of duty and (an odd form of) courtesy.

Those you describe who just dont believe probably dont talk about it much.

Cheers, Max (who did a rapid-fade, and now lives a quiet life in the country away from the urban hurly-burly where those three might meet again to revisit battles neither lost nor won...)

(Edited to replace punctuation that vanished into the ether)

Edited by - Max Divergent on 4 August 2002 1:2:16