Extremely difficult situation the .Org is in

by Lemonp in

as far as i can imagine, the .org is in a lose, lose, lose situation right now.

if jackson shows to the rc, and policy chages, then bible interpretation was changed sans-holy spirit.

policy change is an admission of guilt, not helpful in future civil court cases.

Splash

This organisation has more spin than a plate balancing act.

I'm expecting the rumour mill to go into action, creating more urban myths around how the RC learned so much from JW's, that the elders were commended for being ahead of even the secular experts, how every objection was overturned by the scriptures and how the conclusion of the whole Royal Commission was that JW's have the best systems they have ever seen, and oh so much better than the Catholics.

Truth counts for very little in these circumstances and JW's are desperate to hear this. When they do it will settle every concern they have and will be the go-to response to any discussion about it.

17

A Limerick for Geoffrey

by JustVisting in

there once was a man from down under,who's speech was thought of like thunder,.

but when pops came dow ill,.

geoff flew in with a pill.

Splash

An anointed Australian called Geoffrey
Was part of a group called the GB
With lawyers and money
He thought it was funny
To avoid being seen at the RC.

But a Senior Counsel called Stewart
On a mission to expose every pervert
Thwarted all Geoffrey's plans
Put some cuffs on his hands
Brought him into the court, made him take part.

The evidence he gave was revealing
That JC's were harsh and unfeeling
From the lies which abounded
The Judge was dumb founded
And witnesses worldwide left reeling

So GB, please listen and know
There's no hiding place you can go
Thick elders cannot
Protect all you lot
In the end you will reap what you sow

34

Mr Jackson declines to appear in RC

by StarTrekAngel in

http://www.jw-archive.org/post/125844213823/geoffrey-jackson-declines-to-appear-before#at_pco=cfd-1.0&at_ab=per-15&at_pos=0&at_tot=14&at_si=55c27690475c6bb3

Splash

They already paid $10,500,000 to protect Losche from taking the stand.

This was the punitive judgement element of a $13,500,000 abuse payout against the WTB&TS.

22

Can disassociated ones get reinstated without proving repentance?

by maksutov in

one of the jw high-ups questioned by the australian royal commission (i think it was o'brien) stated that those who had disassociated (as opposed to being disfellowshipped) do not have to undergo a lengthy reinstatement procedure of proving repentance over many months, but can simply ask to be reinstated immediately.

is this true?

has anyone heard of this ever happening?.

Splash

You are said to DA yourself if you do any number of things, including taking a blood transfusion.

If it were as easy as O'Brien makes out, you could DA, take a blood transfusion, then get reinstated.

That would not be allowed to happen.

5

The WTBTS has had insurance that possibly includes cover for Child Abuse since 1984

by Listener in

this is in a statement made by the australian branch committee member o'brien, the insurance is held by the wtbts pennsylvania.

no doubt the cost of that insurance would be astronomical the more claims they are making against it but it would greatly influence the way they deal with court cases and potential court cases, including settlement.

if they are covered for these claims then their concerns would be more about publicity than the amounts awarded or paid to the victim.. although o'brien states that the cover could possibly include any australian claims he would not have said so or even thought there was a need to reveal the information if the organization hadn't already made claims under their insurance.

Splash

I wonder if those contracts and policies were dependent upon the WT giving a full and free disclosure of the risks being insured against, and the known cases at each time the policies were negotiated.

I would not be surprised if the insurance companies were deceived by withholding information, and can find clauses to exempt themselves if need be.

17

Angus Stewart - Captions Please

by cofty in

angus stewart's facial expression says what he thinks about rodney spink's prevarication.... .

.

Splash

Derrrrrr Dah!
Derrrrrr Dah!

DUN dun DUN dun DUN dun DUN dun .......

81

Did you hear that!? His Honour is insisting that Jackson attend the Royal Commission

by umbertoecho in

i actually started clapping at that point, as his honour explained to the wt type creep sycophantic slithery lawyer that........" i understand that we all have issues to face in life and .....that is a part of life...........however it has become obvious that this man ....is in such a position to assist with this investigation.....".

it boils down to the fact that stewart outright accused the latest witness of misleading the royal commission and this lead to some document searches which led his honour to conclude that they had been protecting mr jackson.

this was a warm and fluffy moment folks.................brilliant stuff!!!!!

Splash

Putting GJ on the stand is the JW equivalent of questioning the pope!

I hope Angus realises this is a once in a lifetime chance that anyone will ever get to ask questions directly and publicly of a GB member!!

I have to say, if I want to see anyone asking the questions then it's Angus.

27

Theocratic Warfare

by stuckinarut2 in

no doubt we noticed the royal commission ask vin toole (and i think terry o'brien) about the expression "theocratic warfare"?.

they were asked to explain it and what is meant to witnesses.. vin outrightly lied when he said he "had never heard of that expression!".

i remember him using that term in conversations and talks many times!!

Splash

I posted this in a different thread, but it fits better here.

IS IT OK TO BE DECEPTIVE?

YES - Watchtower Oct 1, 1954, par 21, 25
"No harm is practiced by withholding incriminating information from one who is not entitled to know."

YES - Watchtower May 1, 1957 Page 285 - 286.
"So in time of spiritual warfare it is proper to misdirect the enemy by hiding the truth."

YES - Watchtower June 1, 1960, pages 351-352
"We must tell the truth to one who is entitled to know, but if one is not so entitled we may be evasive."

YES - Insight On The Scriptures, Volume 2, 1988 pages 244-245.
"While malicious lying is definitely condemned in the Bible, this does not mean that a person is under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it"

YES - w07 2/1 p. 6 Why Be Truthful?
So while Jesus did not utter an untruth, he gave them an incomplete answer in order to limit the possible harm they could do to him or to his followers.

Theocratic warfare has long been a feature of the WT's dealings with worldly authorities.

34

Mr Jackson declines to appear in RC

by StarTrekAngel in

http://www.jw-archive.org/post/125844213823/geoffrey-jackson-declines-to-appear-before#at_pco=cfd-1.0&at_ab=per-15&at_pos=0&at_tot=14&at_si=55c27690475c6bb3

Splash

After hearing witness after witness quoting a scripture to tell the Commission that JWs obey the superior authorities because that's what God commands, it would be an incredible own goal to demonstrate their contempt for their own rules by GJ not appearing after being told to do so.

It would call into question every statement they've made, and prove them to be untrustworthy, deceitful and self serving.

38

Samuel Herd 3 min video - the most misogynistic words I ever heard from a "godly man"

by paradisebeauty in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=72&v=9vvqxf9uwu0.

Splash

I think Sam Herd is just reacting to his own life experience whereby every woman he ever met was more capable and mentally astute than he is.

Splash

Posts by Splash

IS IT OK TO BE DECEPTIVE?