What kind of logic is that? So someone needs to be personally aggrieved by something to have the right to speak out about it? Glad you weren't around during the Holocaust.
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
JoinedPosts by Las Malvinas son Argentinas
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
OK then, let's say for a second that I did try to harm him by saying that in forum. Just to amuse you. Do you realise that you have just accused many others of doing the same thing to him, unless you think that I was the only one bringing it up. As I said before, this did not originate with me. So you are saying that you had and have a problem with everyone who brought this subject up in forum? There were quite a few you know. That brings me back to why you chose not to call me (and others) out at the time of the discussion besides your turd comment. You said you thought we were incorrect at the time. Well were we? OK, no go on that one, so let's go to the messenger... Wait, let's choose one in particular (me) that you have had words with before and have sent angry PMs to in the past on a different matter. I think you are giving the WTS way too little credit to think that there are WT spies just ready to pounce on an idea forwarded by a poster here. If they had a problem with AAWA and wanted to bring it down, they would have done so easily, and with no help from us. This was all public record. In fact, the first thing they probably did in Brooklyn was to look at the public records and find out who was behind this organisation. Richard Kelly? Check. Barbara Anderson? Check. Known apostates. John Cedars? Who the hell is that? Well, let's use this Google tool and find out. So this is a fake name he is using! It doesn't take a whole lot of sleuthing to figure that one out. What we were trying to do was get him to resign his position before the WTS noticed. While there was still time. When he could still realistically say 'aw shucks, I didn't know about Arizona law, in fact I'm not even American'. So if you want to say that I was trying to harm him singlehanded by agreeing with what others were saying about the issue and by using public records that anyone could look at, then you got me.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
If I knew that she was cheating on her taxes, would my dislike of things she's posted here justify me going to the authorities to turn her in, even if I knew that she would never find out that it was me who turned her in?
You still don't get it. No one to my knowledge turned him in or seriously threatened to turn him in. You still cling to your false analogy that talking about it heatedly in forum is the same as turning him in. It's not. HUGE difference between talking about it and out and about ratting on him to the authorities.
He should have never put himself in that position. Maybe it wasn't his call, but it still reeks of horrible judgment to use a fictitious name on a legal incorporation document.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
A marathon runner when you are doing the exact same thing, only that you are just repeating the same things over and over again. Who ever said I am 'running from my conduct'? It's all right there. What I was saying at the time was also in line with what several others on both sides were saying (for your reference, this was right around the time you said our advice was like your turds). So by my conduct I was intentionally trying to cause him harm? So now you can read minds? How do you know what my motives are? I have stated them for the record, but you keep glossing them over and claiming I am either changing the subject, personally attacking you or cedars, or whatever else you are thinking at this time. If you want to embrace the Cedars label then by all means, do so. His train has left and you hardly have any posse of your own. As for my name, I would prefer to be left in a category by myself. But you know, I can't and wont force anyone to acceed to my wishes.
So to your tired old point that I tried to harm Cedars: He did it himself. He signed papers or had people willingly sign them for him that were fictitious. He didn't need me to harm him. He was doing quite a fine job of that himself. I reserve the right to call him and his organisation out on things that I knew to be illegal in forum. It is not up to you to tell me differently. Site management could have shut it down, but they did not. If they did not think it necessary to shut down conversation about the whole alias business, then why should we take you as a moral authority on it?
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
You have a very Cedars-esque way of saying that others are either a) not answering the question or b) changing the subject when you are clearly not having any effect in convincing anyone of your point. Please keep in mind that I did not solicit anything from you, yet you sent me two PMs calling me a coward for my initial idea of fading. Physician heal thyself. Don't get on your high horse and lecture me about being mean or vindictive.
Ok back to the 'subject'. I've been answering it the entire time but unfortunately you are too obtuse to read into it. Cedars gives it and takes it and he has plenty of threads where he has tried to bully people into being silent and/or agreeing with him. My posts weren't so much about him personally, but at AAWA in general and the pompous attitude he had as president of that organisation. But if you must know, I found him to be a real ass when you took a position contrary to his. Live by the sword, die by the sword. You don't get to run ramshod around this forum thinking you own the goddamn place and not expect to get some sort of blowback. Cedars for his part keeps on bringing up my name and then expresses surprise when I respond. I had let it go, but he kept it up by bringing me into it, as he has done twice on his FB thread
You, for your part, just can't get over the fact that we have had words before and you did not like the outcome of it. Which is perfectly fine, I hardly think it's anything worth going over again. But it's hard to escape the inevitable conclusion that you've been waiting to strike back at me. Guess what? You got it right back, pal.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
While you're making notes, please make a note of this: I just quoted what you said to me in the original thread, that our advice was analagous to the 'turds you flushed down the toilet'? Now tell me. How can I be 'personally attacking' you when all I was doing was quoting you? Look at that a little more deeper before you go the 'ad hominem' route. When these 'allegations' were first made, you told us all that they were worthles as your turds were. OK. Your opinion, great to know. A bit childish and silly, but I got your point. Point: You thought our opinion that AAWA being in violation of the law for having a president using an alias was worthless because none of us were Arizona lawyers. Counterpoint: You said nothing about the tone or the allegations aired online then. You for some reason have come out of nowhere to complain about that now. What started off as 'turds' becomes now a pious lecture in what is your ex-JW ideal of togetherness and politeness. You also keep pushing the fact that because I was not personally affronted in the AAWA debacle, I should therefore not have any right to voice my concerns. Is this the kind of psuedo-logic you care to employ against me? You have no right to take these rights away from me here. You are nothing on this board. I take it you think it was impolite. OK, maybe, probably. In case you didn't notice, a lot of things were impolite about that period, and especially any and everything eminating from Cedars. Cedars destroyed himself. I did not have to 'bring him down'. To be blunt here, your opinion doesn't mean [poop] to me either. You speak about much of what you do not know and your posts are quite pedestrian in nature. If that's a personal attack then so be it. You keep droning on about my 'conduct', I should at least have the right to respond to your lame contemplations.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Well, as I remember it, at the time you chose to use language that you always are fond of using when you don't agree with something. By that I mean you like to call things 'poop', 'diarrhea', 'turds', 'toilet', et al. You said something to the effect of that the advice we were giving was worth about as much as the 'turds' you flushed down the toilet. Advice which turned out to not be as 'poopy' as you originally thought. As for the issue you seem to take issue with now (which you initially only referred to as turds), you are suggesting that we 'draw a line' as to making accusations of criminal conduct online. To borrow from your very own poop library, bullshit! I came on JWN for the freedom to express myself. What AAWA was doing with regards to the president was WRONG, and many here were RIGHT in taking issue with it here. As I said before, the PM route didn't work with these people and inevitably this subject was bound to come up. I live my life to a certain moral principle, and being in the profession that I am in, such a stupid thing as using an alias on incorporation documents was something that needed to be hashed out. I don't desire or need you to set imaginary boundaries for me. It's not your place, and really isn't worth the turd that I am about to flush down my toilet right now.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
So what you are suggesting is a 'shoot the messenger' mentality. Got it. For the record, it was actually fizzywiglet who first brought up the matter of the false incorporation documents and had the foresight to contact the ACC and ask direct questions, and even more importantly, to get direct answers. She shared what she found on here, and most of my comments were in response to her revelations. I would love to take credit for discovering this info and adding to the discussion here, but I really can't. Here's a little inside information for you: Someone actually did privately contact both cedars and AAWA about this before the firestorm erupted. Their/his response? Much the same as yours - We got this, thank you very much, but you are not an Arizona attorney and we have one who assisted us in the incorporation, he knows what he's doing, you don't, and why don't you focus your energies elsewhere. We're on the same team remember? So the conversation continued in open forum. I participated in it - yes. On a personal level, I felt it was an incredibly idiotic thing to do. At the time of incorporation there were 8 members of the Board of Directors. 7 out of those 8 all used their real names and could be 'identifiable'. One didn't and you know who that one was. So when it came time to choose a president to present the legal face of this organisation, who was appointed? The ONE and ONLY person out of 8 who was not qualified legally to take upon that duty. Hindsight is 20/20, and surprise surprise, the peanut throwers had a point and AAWA (eventually) acknowledged it. I might as well have called the cops? That is a risible statement. Here again you are equating postings on an internet forum as analogous to calling the cops. Wasn't even close. If I am with a friend at a store and I notice her stuffing things down her shirt, I am going to call her out on it and have no part in it. If she gets away with it, I'm not going to run back into the store and report it. The same goes for Cedars/AAWA. I whined about it here. My right. But I didn't 'call the cops and to suggest that I might as well should have is really stretching it. The allegations are only as good as the veracity of the facts. You see people accuse the Obama all the time of crimes online. If they are true, then the Obama only has himself to blame. If they are false, consider Obama vindicated. Mine and others' allegations turned out to be correct. That's all that needs to be said.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
To try and throw cedars to the 'criminal authorities' would have required much more than a few anonymous postings on an ex-JW discussion forum. All I did was post about it. However, the ACC did in fact invite the other poster to file a complaint. I did not file a complaint. AAWA eventually followed the advice offered, so I view that as a validation of what was said, and not a condemnation of it. Things were getting a bit tense in forum as they always do, but no one called the cops on this one. Try again.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
I beg to differ. I played a part in helping AAWA clear up what could have been a huge problem for them later on down the line. A fact which they corrected later publicly. You don't think the WT lawyers would have went after 'John Cedars' and quickly realised that this was not a real person? Let's be glad that problem was solved before some real damage could have occurred. I never claimed to be an expert in Arizona law (I guess by that you mean an attorney licensed in the state of Arizona), but what I was pointing out was an email from the ACC which stated that it was a Class 6 felony to do so. The ACC doesn't give out legal advice, but they do know a thing or two about Arizona corporate law since they are the governmental entity relating to it. This point is moot since we have an admission by AAWA that they did need to have real people on the documents.