so my wife and i were curious so i researched some financial links and found records indicating that the wt society has been operating at a loss since the year 2012. as you read the links it shows a loss of 10 million $$$ in 2012, about 16 million $$$ in 2013, and a whopping loss of 56 million $$$ in 2014 - where the expenditures exceeded the revenues for each of those years in the amount i've mentioned.
also there is a link on this same website with the sec records indicating that the wt society and it's representatives funneled 40 million $$$$ into hedge funds in the cayman islands as early as 2007. if you look online on other sites you can see evidence that indicates the wt society attended hedge fund conferences to look into more shadiness in 2011 and isn't it curious that by 2012 the wt society started showing losses.
anyway here is the link : https://www.watchtowerlies.com/the_watchtower_revenue.html .. feel free to check this link out and other links on that link indicating the cayman island connection.
@Flipper- Well I guess this confirms what I heard from my contact at Bethel that they were bleeding money for some time and going into fire sale mode to save the ship before 2017 turns out to be the year of "restructuring." It's all so clear NOW!
The best part is that they will NEVER admit that they are losing money and going broke! Nobody will ever know until the lights are out and we read it in the New York Times!
Jehovah is speeding things up! New light! NEW LIGHT!
background information.
i myself am in full fade mode with an overly active jw wife, who refuses to discuss any point whatsoever.
a friend who is not a jw nor has ever been a jw; he studied for a few months, then realized what an evil cult it is and stopped.
@Heaven- I am not sure on the geographical limitations but since this is a petition for the US attorney then probably. But I honestly don't know. But sign it anyways. If not then they will kick it back stating so.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cutting-edge-leadership/201510/4-dirty-psychological-tricks-used-bad-leaders.
1. in-group/out-group bias.
2. demanding unquestioning obedience to authority.
Very good!
Now with that in mind, here are the key factors of a cult- sound familiar?
What is a cult?
background information.
i myself am in full fade mode with an overly active jw wife, who refuses to discuss any point whatsoever.
a friend who is not a jw nor has ever been a jw; he studied for a few months, then realized what an evil cult it is and stopped.
link.
why do the republicans seem to have a monopoly on this behaviour?.
@LoveUnuHateexams- Thank you. My question was actually rhetorical, but yes, as you pointed out, western law makes it so, which is again based on our own cultural constructs. If the world fell into anarchy, what was once acceptable may no longer be, and vice versa.
I too hope the MENA people grow up out of their 7th century barbarism and step into the modern age. But I doubt it. Their populations are exploding.
link.
why do the republicans seem to have a monopoly on this behaviour?.
Yes it does.
Studies have shown that people are born gay. Other behaviours are simply people wanting to take advantage of other people's youth (usually with their wealth) but if both are able to consent ... it's up to them (more of a cultural construct).
The other things you mention are most likely the result of abnormal development, experience or some trauma - no one is born with such desires IMO. The fact that 99.999% of people find such things repulsive shows they are different.
But whatever the case, you simply don't get to lump those together with gay people and claim they are all the same and equal. They are clearly not.
I agree that gays are born that way- that's old news. But I'm sorry to inform you, those other "deviant" acts are also in the genes- all of them. Whereas zoophilia, pedophilia and necrophilia are now categorized as psychiatric disorders and homosexuality is no longer, the fact remains that gene expression and chemical imbalances are now recognized as the underlying causes of those acts. You'll have to do your own due diligence and catch up with the "new light." LOL
link.
why do the republicans seem to have a monopoly on this behaviour?.
link.
why do the republicans seem to have a monopoly on this behaviour?.
I think lumping a sexual orientation in with deviant / perverted behavior will anger many people and is grossly unfair. They are not equivalent things by any stretch.
Simon, the line you are walking is very thin with that statement because as I said, the rabbit hole goes deep on the philosophical aspect of this subject. It's quite relative to everything. For example, Western culture finds marriage to a 10 year old girl disgusting but in MENA it is quite common and acceptable.
Why would a 70 year old man dating a 17 year old girl be disgusting to you not someone else or vice versa? WHO says what is acceptable and not?
A homosexual might find a zoophile disgusting and vice versa. Using similar reasoning, a homosexual might find a heterosexual relationship disgusting for the same reasons a heterosexual finds homosexuals repulsive. Who is to say what is deviant and not? What is the standard to judge this on?
This topic has no clear answers.
link.
why do the republicans seem to have a monopoly on this behaviour?.
I think that is a little unfair. Just because someone says they don't want the lifestyle pushed in their face doesn't make them homophobic or closet gay.
I have no problem with people being gay, having gay pride parades, getting married, having all the same rights everyone else does or whatever they want but I also don't think it's appropriate to deliberately try to shock / disgust other which is what some few do - that is what I take having the lifestyle pushed in your face to mean. There's nothing wrong to say we don't like that - the fact is I don't like loud people in general or whoever it is doing what I consider to be inappropriate things in the wrong setting, gay or straight.
It's this militant / black-white / for-us or against-us type of rhetoric that really undermines sympathy in people's situation. When people go out looking to offend so they can claim they are being persecuted and unfairly treated if they succeed.
Just act like everyone else who honors the social norms. I don't care if two people walk down the street holding hands whether they are gay or straight. If I dislike a couple making out in public on a park bench it's not because of whether they are gay or straight, it's because I think it's inappropriate.
Equality is being treated equally which also means having your behavior judged just the same as everyone else.
@Simon- Thank you for the bit of sound reasoning. I could not have said it better myself. Being at work limits my multi-tasking ability writing on this forum but as you said, some make it so blatantly obvious for the sake of making other irritated. Reminds me of this disgusting individual who suffered from some terrible intestinal disease which caused him to produce vast amounts of excess, putrid gas. He knew we all hated it so he purposely did it at the conference table, in the cafeteria, in the cubicle, just anywhere he knew it would annoy us.
link.
why do the republicans seem to have a monopoly on this behaviour?.
@Vidiot- I didn't leave the JW cult because they were not "conservative enough" (as if that is a bad thing) or "authoritarian enough" (too much is a bad thing) but rather because it is a family destroying cult built upon lies and interpretations of a few old senile narcissists.
When I was in the Borg, I always pondered the thought of "God" making people gay and then judging them based on their defective genetic material. No loving "God" would have allowed that.
See you have me all wrong. We are ALL just victims of the roll of the cosmic dice. I certainly don't hate gays! Just because I find their sexual affinities, shall we say, "repulsive" doesn't mean I hate them as a human.
BTW, the rabbit hole goes very deep with this one. The case made that pedophiles, homosexuals, necrophiliacs, zoophilics etc are all captives of their genetic material cannot be denied, nor should it. So the question is, which is acceptable and which is not?
