Posts by kepler

76

Anthony Morris III... Did he really serve in Vietnam? Something doesn't quite add up...

by Calebs Airplane in

born in 1950, he apparently became a regular pioneer in 1971.. but wait.... let's just say that he enlisted (or was drafted) in 1968 at age 18.... depending on the branch of service, he would have to complete anywhere from 2 to 4 years of service.

yes, duty in hot combat zones was usually limited to 6-months at a time but you still had to serve a total of 2 to 4 years depending on the branch of service.

assuming he only served 2 years, he would have been 20 years old and discharged by 1970.... how did he get witnessed to, complete a book study, become an unbaptized publisher, get baptized and then become a regular pioneer in less than year???.

kepler

In continued search on this topic, I was able to uncover an official biograph with some elaboration elsewhere:

---------------------

Anthony Morris III

Born in 1950. Brother Morris entered the pioneer service in 1971 in the United States. In December of that year, he married Susan, and they continued pioneering for nearly four years until the birth of their first son, Jesse. In time, they had another son, Paul. Brother Morris reentered the full-time service in 1979 as a regular pioneer. His wife joined him when the boys entered school. The family served where the need was great in Rhode Island and North Carolina, in the United States. In North Carolina, Brother Morris served as a substitute circuit overseer, and the boys took up regular pioneer service. Jesse and Paul were invited to the United States branch at the age of 19. Meanwhile, Brother Morris began circuit work. Then, in 2002 he and Susan were invited to Bethel, starting their new assignment on August 1. Brother Morris worked in the Service Department at Patterson and later as a helper to the Service Committee of the Governing Body. Appointed to the Governing Body on August 24, 2005.

------

Noted elsewhere was an inability to verify that an Anthony Morris III served in VN as a medic at Long Binh; nor, subsequently, that a military courts martial commenced over the issues of serving in that capacity.

It was noted, however:

"A Bethelite has claimed that Morris, Jackson and Pierce became known in Brooklyn's Bethel headquarters as a trinity of three Commanders acting as collective bosses after the death in 2010 of Ted Jaracz."

Since it is noted elsewhere as well that Mr. Morris is of Italian descent, it is possible that Anthony's surname at birth or enlistment was NOT Morris and that any records in the 2000 or so courts martial in FY 1970 were recorded as a proceeding of the United States vs. Tony Mxxxx - or perhaps a last name that begins with a different letter. If it is as recorded in the Awake article above, the name might be repeated within a year or two in legal records. However, it makes no sense that he could be convicted twice for not following the same order. Something else must have occurred.

Since the biographical information also omits the maiden name of Mrs. Susan Morris, one can only conclude that there is a deliberate effort to obscure the background of this member of the governing board. Mr. Morris is clearly not associated with any institutions of higher learning or professional organizations. His personal signature appears on little or no written correspondence and his speech and audio records appear to be brief save for admonitions to prepare for Armageddon. ... His name appears nowhere in the 2011 Yearbook.

There appears to be no one on Earth beside the other members of the board that can give him any vetting.

As a matter of corporate governance and oversight, this is an example of a hi-jacking undertaken in plain sight. Unless there is forth-coming information from co-workers in Rhode Island or North Carolina who had worked with him, evidently people, either born in the movement or who have just left, genuinely have no clue who this individual is!

76

Anthony Morris III... Did he really serve in Vietnam? Something doesn't quite add up...

by Calebs Airplane in

born in 1950, he apparently became a regular pioneer in 1971.. but wait.... let's just say that he enlisted (or was drafted) in 1968 at age 18.... depending on the branch of service, he would have to complete anywhere from 2 to 4 years of service.

yes, duty in hot combat zones was usually limited to 6-months at a time but you still had to serve a total of 2 to 4 years depending on the branch of service.

assuming he only served 2 years, he would have been 20 years old and discharged by 1970.... how did he get witnessed to, complete a book study, become an unbaptized publisher, get baptized and then become a regular pioneer in less than year???.

kepler

Since last post, have seen Cedars' #V video in which Mr. Morris recounts his experience in the war. Whether it was generally understood in this thread or not, it is Mr. Morris who says that

1. He was a medic

2. He was at Long Binh

3. He was sent out into the field to MASH units in the (Mekong) Delta

4. There was incoming mortar fire and some shrapnel broke his footlocker (?).

5. He had hospital duties on 7:00 to 7:00 shifts

6. He was new to the field units, so new that everyone could tell from his uniform

7. He didn't like being under fire. - And I don't think anyone else did either.

So I take all that as given. I assume that Mr. Morris served as an army medic and was in the field. And that based on chronologies elsewhere, this happened between 1968 and 1970. Some of that time was basic military training, and then tech school A VN field assignment thereafter for a draftee being 1 year. If a volunteer, in a special MOS (military "something" specialty) code - And I see no indication that medic was one - then the enlistment would have been longer - because additional the government invested in the soldier additional training. The government might have wanted two years of some kind of service in the field outside of tech school in a 3 year term. Maybe that was the case, but I doubt.

In the account above

...After becoming a Christian, however, he concluded he could not conscientiously ‘live by the sword’ and cause harm to a fellow human. So when called upon to serve another term he declined, and a fine was imposed. Shortly thereafter he was summoned again, and this time he was given a six-month prison sentence. Yet a third time he was called and sentenced to ten months in prison. However, he appealed this sentence to a higher court. For the next two years he was in and out of court, each time preparing himself and his wife for a ten-month separation. "My wife and I said ‘good-bye’ some 13 times in two years, but each time something happened to delay the carrying out of the sentence," he commented.

In the interim, he and his wife became special pioneers, and he was granted recognition as a minister. But the law still required that he serve his ten-month sentence. Finally he received a letter offering a suspended sentence if he would plead guilty. "I told them I could not do that, since I was innocent," explained Tony. He braced himself to go to jail. To his surprise came a letter stating that the justices of the High Court had analyzed the case and had thrown it out of court on a technicality! Tony felt blessed for declining to ‘live by the sword.’

w84 3/1 pp. 13-15 Declining to ‘Live by the Sword’—A Protection

Mr. Morris was about 18 years old when this whole cycle started. Was he already married when he was serving in Vietnam? Since he was serving in a medical field hospital, how was he "living by the sword"? It sounds to me that it was more like living under it while performing unspecified hospital duties. And subsequently, did he serve 6-months for refusing response to ....What? Why would he be convicted a second time? Why would he not be given some sort of discharge?

Since Mr. Morris is lecturing on the illegitimacy of legal governments base on his current theocratic authority, it stands to reason that when he cites his personal experience with the follies of war that we understand all the facts.

It is also interesting to note that in 1971, within one year of release from service, Mr. Morris was "granted recognition as a minister". Now that's an interesting piece of information in itself in the context of raging judicial debates this summer of 2012.

28

Perhaps the cruelest lie of all: resurrection of your loved ones

by King Solomon in

of all the lies espoused by the wtbts, perhaps the most seductive, most cruel and downright evil, is to tell grieving people that their loved ones will be resurrected, and will rejoin them in a paradise earth, forever and ever.

of course, the easiest lie to be accepted is one that people want to believe.. but taking someone when they are at their weakest, their most vulnerable, and offering such a false hope is far more cruel than anything contained even in account of the first sin, with the serpent tempting eve with the forbidden fruit.

that was simply the serpent mucking up the divine plan by appealing to her ego: no harm, no foul.

kepler

Reuniting with departed relatives or loved ones after death is inherent in Christian tradition. Near death experiences of those returned from comatose states seem to give some support to the idea too. But as Baby Doc Duvalier once said about human rights in Haiti, he was in favor, "But they had to be on [his] terms." After the son of my ex passed away, and despite the fact that the elder who presided at the funeral had blamed everything that had happened to her son on her, she made it clear that that was when she decided she would return. Shortly after making that known, I could see by the look in her eye as she spoke of being "reunited" that that was what it was all about. Whether she remembered doctrine or someone had slipped her that message, it was never clear. Obviously she thought reunion was very conditional and had something to do with her being a great pioneer. As time went by, the bar seemed to raise ever higher. Now it's easier to reach people in North Korea.

76

Anthony Morris III... Did he really serve in Vietnam? Something doesn't quite add up...

by Calebs Airplane in

born in 1950, he apparently became a regular pioneer in 1971.. but wait.... let's just say that he enlisted (or was drafted) in 1968 at age 18.... depending on the branch of service, he would have to complete anywhere from 2 to 4 years of service.

yes, duty in hot combat zones was usually limited to 6-months at a time but you still had to serve a total of 2 to 4 years depending on the branch of service.

assuming he only served 2 years, he would have been 20 years old and discharged by 1970.... how did he get witnessed to, complete a book study, become an unbaptized publisher, get baptized and then become a regular pioneer in less than year???.

kepler

I was never a JW, but I did serve in the military in the 1960s, but not in VN. When I listened to the Morris video on neutrality and then looked at the discussion of what was the nature of his service, I did bemome interested in the question and then made a couple of inquiries myself with my own veteran's e-mail group.

Before proceeding any further with this discussion, I should say that there is fellowship as well among veterans of military service. Assuming that Mr. Morris as an 18-20 year old did service in Vietnam, from my perspective he is entitled at least to the benefit of the doubt in that regard and a hearing for whatever formative experience he might have had as a result. As crazy as the careers of the alumni of my own unit turned out to be, or conduct in chain of command, we have exercised the same welcoming attitude in gathering our kindred together after the fact. But still, I've got questions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On another forum, there arose a controversy (imagine that!) about the background of a Vietnam veteran who was born in 1950, served in Vietnam in 1968 to 1970 (?) and then changed to a conscientious objector. Like a lot of us sixty or older, he is a very opinionated gentleman about war and the civil order, serving on the governing board of an organization with a passive-aggressive stance, not to mention its Millerite apocalyptic views...

Anyway, his story never fully adds up. As near as his critics/sceptics can re-construct, he might have served at Long Binh as a medic, but then returned to the States after objecting to a second tour. See the attached article about "Tony" (cited above).

Now my recollection of army terms of enlistment and draft in the 1960s have faded with the decades. But when I heard people wondering about his story, I figured I needed to get my memory refreshed as well.

Could someone get two rotations into Vietnam when they were drafted into the army as described below?

If the guy was a medic, would he have been signed on longer? Three or four years? Could he have enlisted?

Would a military judicial record remain somewhere regarding Anthony Morris the 3rd that would shed more light on this?

"Kepler"

------------------------------------------------

Answer from one of my friends from service days:

From my recollections: You had a six-year committment. If you were drafted, you served two years active, two years active reserve, and two years inactive. If you volunteered, you served three years active and three inactive. If he was a draftee who became a medic, he would have had time to serve one 12-month stint after training and then might have been offered an opportunity to volunteer for a second tour. If memory serves me, one of the benefits(?) of being a draftee was that if you survived one 12-month tour, a return tour was voluntary. I think something else is at play, perhaps akin to Stolen Valor.

If he served, then there are military records on file, but they should be confidential.

--------------------------------------------

Well, this is Kepler again, summarizing.

There is some record of Morris's term in service (born in 1950, in and out supposedly from 1968-1970), but it is mostly hearsay and difficult to verify.

Was he in the service? Was he in the army or marines? Was he in Viet Nam? Was he at Long Binh? Was he a medic?

If he was any of the above, why was he asked to serve a second tour in Vietnam at penalty of prison term?

The only scenario I can think of that fits is that he volunteered for a service with a term longer than two years ( e.g., three) and rotated out of VN after a 12-month tour of duty. From what our two-man consensus is is that he was up for re-assignment, but the Vietnam assignment was optional or voluntary. It would be more likely that at the end of the tour, the individual in this situation said he wanted out - period. Everything else is more conjectural.

During the VN war period there were hosts of incidents such as the one vaguely described - and many of them I remember reading about in local papers as well as the military newspaper Stars and Stripes. While service records are largely confidential, judicial proceedings such as described could reach the light of day.

Clearly, Mr. Morris argues against war or combat, citing his personal experience. But his personal experience is not elaborated in any detail and he relies for argument on the authority of his present position. How an end to everything will allay the fear that he spoke of... well... Has he done that well allaying fear in his own house?

21

Misapplication of Matt. 25:40 in Watchtower Study on Sunday

by The Searcher in

sheep & goats.

jesus said, "truly i say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me".. exactly to whom was jesus addressing these words, and who were his "brothers?.

the subject matter of matthew chapter 25 deals with christ's judgement of all humans, and verses 32 & 33 make it crystal clear that there only two groups standing before him - 'sheep' and 'goats'.

kepler

The restricted interpretation of "brothers" is a typical Joseph Russell raising by one's own bootstraps interpretation that leaves 2000 years of Christianity twisting in the wind.

The authors of the lesson naturally enough assume that there were brothers in the audience before Jesus distinct from some undetermined segment of the audience meeting the sermon's words with deaf ears.

Then, we are led to believe that the institutional church went "apostate" at some temporal point left to the imagination or given rhetorical needs of a moment. With this earthly body no longer Christian, it is then left until Russell and his successors to ride to the rescue in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Thereafter, any charitable or loving consideration among the Rutherford corporate legacy is supposed to be the only legitimate manifestation of what Jesus was referring to. Odd the absence of hospitals and teaching institutions even there. I guess that institutional charity must have been another examle of the apostasy.

Never mind that when Jesus was asked to explain the concept of my brother's keeper, he gave the example of a Samaritan traveller attending to his Judean neighbor beaten and left for dead by robbers; the Samaritan who had no affiliation with Jesus or knowledge of his presumed mission.

Coming from outside the fold, sheep, goats or whatever, my most frequent contact with this passage is an exhortation to participate in mission efforts for people who were stricken by disaster: flood, famine, fire, war or whatever, with only the understanding that the mission could reach them, not whether they could produce a fellowship card.

If that was a misunderstanding, I am not interested in finding out about the correct version - nor passing it on to anyone so wrongfully engaged.

70

New YouTube video - Anthony Morris warns us against the horrors of higher education

by cedars in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzcneuuajvg.

.

cedars.

kepler

Cedars,

I realize that the 1970s US television sitcom "All in the Family" had a trans-Atlantic background, but did I just watch a casting call video for a re-make?

Actually, I liked Carroll O'Connor in that role. He reminded me of a couple of my high school teachers with roots and accents in the Queens. Mr. Morris has something of that but not have the same delivery. The new Archie? "Archie's New Place"?

About points Mr. Morris was trying to make. For sure he didn't like the idea of a youngster enrolling in a higher institute of learning and studying Philosophy I or II. I suppose "I" leads to the other.

Like others posting, I confess I never took a philosophy course in college. But I suspect that many university graduates that Mr. Morris might encounter from day to day, students who went on to study law did. And that's probably where Mr. Morris's lament is based:

"How can you go out and get a decent, case-winning lawyer without having to bear the indignity of dealing with someone who might have had an exposure to philosophy (& ETHICS)? Why can't I find people to staff the legal department who have been trained to do and to think exactly as I say?..." A variation on Diogenes.

Hard enough already; but a pity to think that things could get so de-railed that some kids manage to get nearly all the way through Harvard with the elders standing helplessly by... Tragic.

Like I said, some of my high school teachers, who were also in a non-ordained religious order ('brothers"), used to grouse about us high school students going off to SECULAR colleges and possibly learning hostile viewpoints. But they were at least consoled that there were our religion's non-secular alternatives all over the country. Maybe half of my classmates did actually go to places like Fordham, St. John's, Dayton, Xavier, Notre Dame, etc. Had Morris been a different kind of executive, like the one's that apparently abounded in that "satanic" organization for centuries, then maybe things could have been better all around.

Shoot, it isn't just the RCs. Take a look out what's going on in Utah. And there are certainly other types of parochial schools and private universities around: Lutheran, Presbyterian... people you can knock on the doors and tell them about the Truth from theocratic sources.

You reap what you sow.

Aside from colleges, one of that crop of teaching brothers founded the high school a year or two before I went to it. He and people on staff founded several before they were done. Why doesn't Mr. Morris do that with the resources at his disposal? Oh, I know... Too busy spreading the Truth - and his place in it.

Personally, I think college age a little late for shutting the barn door on becoming "an evolutionist". Circumstances being what they were, I was pretty willing to defend that idea by seventh grade just thanks to the public library. In high school, our freshman year biology was taught by a brother of a teaching order and the text was prepared by writers of similar background, probably priests at one of those institutions fore-mentioned. Between studying Mendel's genetics and classifications of orders and species, it was hard for someone not to draw conclusions other than what alarmed Mr. Morris.

Later on, our freshman year homeroom teacher (religion and English) went off to work at a mission school in Uganda for several decades starting during Idi Amin's reign. Our high school valedictorian went on to a career in biology, teaching and doing research at university level. He then retired on proceeds from turning out editions of his biology texts. A few years ago he told me he s regularly sends to the Ugandan mission a crate or two of his books for our old teacher's classes.

I'd rather that than pamphlets for their laundry room.

109

Early Civilizations and Bible Chronology

by xelder in

kepler

mP,

After mulling it over over night, have a question about your three graphs from the Vostok Antarctica weather station.

I presume that the information for 250,000 years is based on sampling ice cores. In effect you take out a cylinder of ice which at the greatest depth includes samples of water with bubbles of air and dust....

How can you tell what the temperature variation was?

The easiest method that comes to mind is make a backward derivation from the CO2 and dust in the atmosphere, unless there is some way to determine the amount of CO2 in the water when it froze. CO2 in solution is dependent on temperature, but fresh water is going to freeze at 32 F.

If you use the CO2 content to predict the temperature, than the method is definitely going to predict global warming for the climb to the present day at 0 years.

109

Early Civilizations and Bible Chronology

by xelder in

kepler

mP,

Looked at your charts above. I don't understand your last one, but I can draw some conclusions from your charts from Antarctica (Vostok).

Since the present is "zero" on the independent axis and it tracks for about 250,000 (?) years, it appears that temperature and CO2 track very well. Dust seems to do what it wants.

As to other mechanisms, there is a long term eccentricity variation in the earth's orbit, the perihelion shifts in inertial space cyclicly, and the polar axis precesses over about 25,000 years... But the semi-major axis is not wont to change much. So in effect, you can have extremes in the southern and northern hemisphere. Currently we have a near circular orbit, but with northern summer at aphelion rather than perihelion. The measures over 250,000 years could represent some cycles where southern hemisphere summer occurred at perihelion in an eccentric orbit. I don't know that. Yet data I've seen for the 20th century indicates that CO2 levels trace closely at Vostok and Hawaii with summer-winter variations. Also, sea temperature increase results in loss of CO2 storage capacity. And that's one reason for concern.

The trouble is, the chart does not go all the way to the present time. CO2 concentrations are ~380 ppm; not 300. First time I saw that data was in a circa 1978 atmospheric science text starting from the 19th century. Extrapolating to the current day was linear. But if you looked at it on the scale of the graph you supplied, you might call it exponential. I don't know what the Antarctic temperature is currently, but there have been some Rhode Island size icebergs calfing from the ice shelves lately.

109

Early Civilizations and Bible Chronology

by xelder in

kepler

Etude,

After I hit the submit button, I had some of the same thoughts. While there is a lengthy argument in these posts in support of accuracy of Biblical chronology citing dispersions in radio carbon dating, it was not fair to say that the topic is about that specifically. And the further we get into the question of CO2 variations, the closer and closer we get to another topic - global warming. That's one that some of my veteran friends love to argue about, but Biblical chronologies seldom come up in that context.

I should also say that in order to have a debate, you do have to have a pro and a con. And it is fair enough to argue in behalf of a Biblical chronology that is inherently accurate with the best case available. Otherwise everyone that is sceptical is arguing against a very poorly sewn straw man. So I hope that some of my own rhetoric is taken with a grain of salt.

I am writing from a coffee house table right now; so I don't have hard copy references in front of me. But going back to early civilizations and Bible chronology, as important as radio isotope methods might be, I think much of the case pro or con rests with how early civilizations recorded their own events and COMMUNICATED with each other.

Since Egypt, Asia Minor and Mesopotamian civilizations of the mid 2nd millenium communicated with each other in Akkadian and left permanent stone or clay records, these are very compelling arguments pro or con for a Biblical chronology. When I would look for a book on Egypt, Assyria or Babylonia in a bookstore or a library, I noticed that the older the book was, the more likelihood that the chronologies were longer. In the 19th century prior to deciphering Mideast literatures other than Hebrew, it was just generally assumed that the Biblically derived chronologies would bear out once some notion of what was written on obelisks and stellae was worked out. So far as I can tell, that did not prove to be the case.

Just what is a Bible chronology for early civilization is also a moving target. To illustrate, if you compare the assumed chronological appendix in the NWT with say that in the New Jerusalem Bible, you have events in Egypt associated with the Exodus in variance by 300 years. As a result, you have the Exodus arriving in the promised land amidst the Egyptian New Kingdom's empire in that part of the world, stretching into Lebanon and Syria. Egyptian battles of this era are recorded not only by the Pharoahs or kings, but by the veterans of the wars themselves.

One possible reason for the discrepancy is the assertion in Kings that Solomon's temple was commenced four hundred years after the Exodus from Egypt. If all the accounts of the Judges were sequential rather than parallel, it would be possible. But the argument for Biblical chronology assumes that such dynastic confusions could only happen in other places - like Egypt - places where stone records survive.

Eventually, of course, there definitely were kingdoms of Israel and Judea, but how they got started (or with an Exodus), is a matter of controversy. Candidate pharaohs you can find in mummies in museums. You can't find a trace of an Exodus of 100s of thousands that wandered forty years and took off with borrowed pottery and jewels.

Despite divine interventions in Joshua's behalf, and complete eradications of places like Ai and Jericho, the narrative says that Joshua still had much unfinished work in the conquest when he died. The record indicateshe conquered several cities several times. Archeology indicates that Jericho and Ai were not inhabited circa 1200 BC. The stories of their desolation might have been provided as explanations for ruins that had been ruins longer than accurate national memory.

Even by Exodus chapter one, you could argue that the narrator of the book was describing workers who were employed not at Ramses capital but at Neccho II's. And oddly they seemed to be engaged in "royal" construction work more associated with Babylon than with Egypt. They speak none of sandstone or granite, but plenty about making mud bricks.

In Genesis there are supposedly camel caravans and the Philistines were already there. As best we can tell today, Phillistines were part of the Mycenean Greek expansion post Trojan war.

My copy of "What the Bible Really Teaches" says that Job was written about 1500 BC and the NWT appendix, claims it was Moses who was the author. Job had camel caravans too.

One of the things about Babylonian and Egyptian records is that they are replete with commercial transactions. I wonder how many 1000 BC camel caravans they mention?

Does anyone sense any anachronisms in these descriptions?

8

Inconsistency: Tower of Babel vs. space program

by tootired2care in

several years back i remember listening to a public talk.

the title of the talk escapes me; but one of the points (albeit wierd) that was brought out, is that the part of the mytholgy behind the symbol of apollo was defiance of god.

he made this jump by linking apollo with ishtar (nimrods wife) wife somehow...he used this point in connection with the nasa space program to make the point, that the space exploration was a defiant action against god, as a modern day like nimrod account.

kepler

Didn't seem to mind the pyramids either.

Subsonic transport in the stratosphere with turbofans seem to have an approval too.

More by far head for the scrap heap than are downed by angry lightning bolts.

The Bible does not acknowledge a difference between space and the stratosphere.

Nor does it have a proscription against launch of artificial moons.

From a modern perspective, it looks like that if you build a "tower", over specialization of the builders will result in a proliferation of languages. Half the time I didn't understand what my co-workers were trying to tell me...