Drearyweather

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 764 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Drearyweather

• 
  11

  What criteria does Russia use to label a religion as extremist?

  by sparky1 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  check this out on the russian ministry of justice webpage.

  the governing body is going to have to do some fancy footwork to get around this criteria:.

  http://minjust.ru/deyatelnost-v-sfere-nekommercheskih-organizaci/missionerskaya-.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  AnonyMous,

  From yesterday's trial:

  3:20:

  The Ministry of Justice in its suit confirms the necessity of liquidation of religious organizations due to the fact that organizations, in their opinion, violate the rights of citizens. The court asks the representative of Borisov the next clarifying question: which rights of citizens are violated? Borisova says that this is the right to receive medical treatment. According to their data, organizations prevent citizens from receiving medical treatment. In response to a rumble in the hall, the judge asks those present to restrain emotions. The judge asks if the Ministry of Justice has evidence of their allegations about medical treatment. The Ministry of Justice is not ready to provide them. The judge is again puzzled, because the Ministry of Justice most recently conducted a large-scale inspection of Jehovah's Witnesses and, if such facts were, they should have been identified.

  4:19

  Zhenkov clarifies whether it is known to the Ministry of Justice that literature has not been imported to Russia for two years. The Ministry of Justice knows this. Then there is a natural question, why exactly in 2017 the Ministry of Justice raised the issue of liquidation. The Ministry of Justice can not provide facts confirming that during the last 12 months the Management Center distributed "extremist" literature.
• 
  14

  Victims of "political repression"

  by biblexaminer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  political repression is the persecution of an individual or group within society for political reasons, particularly for the purpose of restricting or preventing their ability to take part in the political life of a society thereby reducing their standing among their fellow citizens.[1][2].

  so, the governing bastards feel that putin is trying to keep jehovah's witnesses out of politics.

  interesting.... all the russians had to do is to ask watchtower one question.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  restricting or preventing their ability to take part in the political life of a society thereby reducing their standing among their fellow citizens.[1][2]

  In constitutional terms, active political and social life of the society does not mean just being a member of a political party. It means fostering an environment where all citizens have equal opportunities without discrimination. The state or the government is a part of the social and political life of the society, because the constitution gives rights to the government. The citizens of the country have the complete right to choose which government or party they want to be in their life. Other way, citizens also have a right not to choose to be a part of a political party. There are loads of people apart from JW's who don't have to do anything with politics.
• 
  70

  Apologists saying that the JWs shouldn't be banned, what the hell!??

  by Crazyguy in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.

  i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.

  they are an extremist group!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  biblexaminer, regarding your comment:

  You must first be viewed as having a "political position" or "party" before you can be designated as suffering "political repression".

  Come on! You don't need to be part of a political party to become a victim of political repression. If a citizen is deprived of his basic rights or brutalized by a ruling state, you become a victim of political or state repression, irrespective of your political stand.

  Read about the political repression undertaken by Stalin during The Great Purge in 1937-38. It was not just against some communist parties, but also against millions of peasants and ethnic minorities. Nearly 1-2 million people died during the purge and the red terror attack. All these people are rightly designated as victims of political repression. They were normal citizens.
• 
  14

  Victims of "political repression"

  by biblexaminer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  political repression is the persecution of an individual or group within society for political reasons, particularly for the purpose of restricting or preventing their ability to take part in the political life of a society thereby reducing their standing among their fellow citizens.[1][2].

  so, the governing bastards feel that putin is trying to keep jehovah's witnesses out of politics.

  interesting.... all the russians had to do is to ask watchtower one question.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  biblexaminer,

  It would be good if we go beyond the Wikipedia definition and read about the meaning of Political or State Repression from legal sources.

  "Political or State Repression is the application of state power that violate First Amendment–type rights, due process in the enforcement and adjudication of law, and personal integrity or security."

  - The Annual Review of Political Science 2007

  "Political Repression is often evidenced in the form of human rights violations, surveillance abuse, police brutality, imprisonment, involuntary settlement, stripping of citizen's rights, lustration and violent action such as the murder, summary executions, torture, forced disappearance and other extrajudicial punishment of political activists, dissidents, or general population. Where political repression is approved and coordinated by the state, it may represent state terrorism, genocide, politicide or crimes against humanity."

  -US Legal Definition

  Any citizen whose basic human rights are violated by the government or the state, he becomes a victim of Political Repression. A person can remain neutral with regards to political activities; but if he is a citizen who pays taxes and has legal verifiable public records, then he is entitled for his civil liberties.

  If the citizen, regardless of his political affiliation, is deprived of his basic rights by the ruling state, he becomes a victim of political repression. You don't need to be a part of a political party to be termed as a victim of political repression.
• 
  70

  Apologists saying that the JWs shouldn't be banned, what the hell!??

  by Crazyguy in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.

  i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.

  they are an extremist group!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  OrphanCrow

  No. They didn't have to "change the blood doctrine" because it wasn't there when they got banned.

  The blood doctrine (concerning blood transfusions) was developed, in and around 1945,

  What about the witnesses in restricted countries now (30 or so lands where they are outlawed). May be like Eritrea? Have JW's abandoned their blood doctrine there?

  the point that I was trying to make is, JW's won't change their policies if they are banned. They will go underground and control their members, the way they did during the WW2 days.
• 
  70

  Apologists saying that the JWs shouldn't be banned, what the hell!??

  by Crazyguy in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.

  i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.

  they are an extremist group!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  So I understand you to support watchtower trampling my right to practice my religion and exercise free speech....

  No. I'm not supporting the Watchtower. In my post I clearly mentioned that Government should adopt other ways to punish the WT, but not banning and criminalizing rank and file. If you are disfellowshipped, is that added in your public records? When you go for interviews, does your employer verify your religious status by contacting your local congregation? Many of us move ahead in life after getting disfellowhipped and try to forget the past. But thats not the case with a criminal record. If the ban goes through in Russia, individual JW's risk getting criminal records which goes with them wherever they go. This is wrong and is more dangerous than the Watchtower shunning.

  Ah, hell yes it does. If they are banned then they can't cause me to be shunned. And if I sue their sorry backside for defamation then the judge isn't going to site religious privilege to avoid getting involved.

  so do you mean that if Russia bans JW's, the witnesses will start socializing with disfellowshipped and disassociated ones? Will they change their policies? i and my family have spent considerable time in a country where JW's are banned/restricted , and yes, nothings different with regards to policies and doctrines.
• 
  70

  Apologists saying that the JWs shouldn't be banned, what the hell!??

  by Crazyguy in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.

  i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.

  they are an extremist group!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  bibleexaminer, regarding your comment:

  I'll tell you who the hell gives the religion it's authority. THE GOVERMENT

  Some points what I feel:

  1. Religions have predated all existing governments. In fact, many governments are formed and have imbibed religious tenets in them. Come to India and see how religion plays a part in government policies. Has any government authorized or changed any doctrine from the religious text of their local religions?

  2. Government is Government, not God. They are selected to their positions by the citizens of the country. And the citizens have a right to throw out a government if they feel that their rights are trampled on rather than being protected. See what happened in Libya, Tunisia, etc. Would you want the ISIS rule over you?

  3. Citizens give AUTHORITY to the Government through mandate. A person who pays taxes has the complete right to enjoy his basic civil liberties. If the government feels that it can ban a religion and criminalize its adherents just for meeting or praying together, then that's not governance, that's dictatorship. If a government feels that a religion is harmful, then educate the masses by providing conclusive proofs and evidences.

  Watchtower uses its granted authority to persecute fellow believers.This is an abuse of the authority granted. It needs to be removed.
  

  Banning religions does not take away any authority. JW's in China, Kuwait, Saudi, Yemen, etc still disfellowship and shun ex-jw's and DA'ed individuals. Banning JW's in Russia won't change their basic doctrines. They won't meet or preach the way they did earlier. But underground, everything else would continue the same, including shunning and blood transfusions. Do you know any period when Jw's gave up their shunning practice or changed their blood doctrine during bans?

  'm willing to wait and see Blues. But I have a hard time believing a ban will have the same effect today.

  Today's dubs...

  Don't want to work, lazy bunch.

  Don't want to suffer.

  Skip houses in FS.

  May be your local congregation. JW's have a core bunch of Rutherford type dubs who can keep the organization going even under such bans. It doesn't take long to ignite the persecution complex in the JW's.
• 
  25

  RUSSIA: (6 April 2017) Day 2 - Jehovah's Witnesses hearing under way

  by jwleaks in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  tighter security today and much greater police presence.

  great weather.. .

  lunchtime view over moscow.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  4:53

  Questions to the Ministry of Justice are asked by the lawyer Omelchenko. He asks if there is a department in the Ministry of Justice capable of answering when a particular book appeared on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. The Justice Ministry believes that the answer to this question can be obtained through a judicial request.

  4:56

  Omelchenko asks about federal forensic centers under the Russian Ministry of Justice. He points out that these centers came to diametrically opposite conclusions about the presence or absence of signs of extremism. Question of Omelchenko: how could this be possible. The representative of the Ministry does not know. The next question is: why did the Ministry of Justice support only negative conclusions of experts and did not support positive ones? Unknown. Was the Ministry of Justice initiating a review of the decisions in cases when there was such a contradiction? Representative of such facts are unknown.

  4:58

  Omelchenko recalls that earlier today the court asked the Ministry of Justice whether the ministry initiated a review of the list of extremist materials after the amendments were made to the law, for example, that the Bible and quotations from it can not be recognized as extremist materials. There were no such initiatives on the part of the Ministry of Justice.

  5:07

  Questions to the representative of the Ministry of Justice are given by the representative of the defendant Maxim Novakov. He is trying to find out if the Ministry of Justice knows the circumstances of those events that are attributed to Jehovah's Witnesses as "extremist activity". For example, do they know why for the searches of Jehovah's Witnesses the special services were de-energizing whole blocks in which the liturgical buildings are located. The Ministry of Justice does not know the facts. There are no other questions on the part of the defendant to the Ministry of Justice.

  5:13

  The court announces a break in the court session until April 7, 2017 10:00. The entrance to the building will be open from 9:00
  
• 
  25

  RUSSIA: (6 April 2017) Day 2 - Jehovah's Witnesses hearing under way

  by jwleaks in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  tighter security today and much greater police presence.

  great weather.. .

  lunchtime view over moscow.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  4:37

  Toporov tries to find out, whether under the law on extremism can be taken out to "structural division" without the organization itself. The Ministry of Justice is forced to admit that a warning must be issued to the entire organization.

  4:40

  The logical question of Toporov: if a warning was issued to a local religious organization and not issued to the Management Center, then how can this local organization be the "structural unit" of the center? No way.

  4:42

  The Ministry of Justice now believes that issuing a warning to the "structural unit" is not prohibited by law, which means that the prosecutor's office could do it. What is not forbidden is allowed. The judge clarifies with the representative of the Ministry, were any of the notifications of the religious organization (the management center) then directed at least? There is no information that such notifications are sent.

  4:46

  A new question from Toporov to the Ministry of Justice. Does the law on combating extremism provide for the possibility of liquidating a "structural unit" without liquidating the organization itself? The representative of the Ministry of Justice: "According to your interpretation, does not provide". The judge asks the plaintiff to accept the answer of the ministry in this form.
• 
  25

  RUSSIA: (6 April 2017) Day 2 - Jehovah's Witnesses hearing under way

  by jwleaks in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  tighter security today and much greater police presence.

  great weather.. .

  lunchtime view over moscow.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Drearyweather

  4:30

  The representative of the defendant Yuri Toporov is trying to find out what the Ministry of Justice puts into the concept of "the structural subdivision of the world organization of Jehovah's Witnesses". What is a "world organization"? Is this some sort of legal entity? The Ministry of Justice believes that no, it is a question of a certain canonical concept. What is a "structural unit"? Is this a legal concept? No, rather a canonical connection. The next question is: in what sense then does the Ministry of Justice use this term in relation to the LRO, saying that they are "structural subdivisions of the Management Center"? In canonical or legal? The representative of the Ministry of Justice believes that this is the same.