It certainly is a reasonable conclusion about “connecting the dots” between TM’s dismissal and the flurry of significant changes.
I don’t so much buy the argument that the changes are “merely semantic”, however. This is a pretty seismic policy shift in how df-ing, er, “removal” will be done. As written, pretty much the only people who will ever be “removed” from this point forward are brazen apostates and those who really really REALLY want out.
What’s more interesting to me is the implication of how precarious the financial situation of the WTS must be.
Power is the cocaine of the WTS in general and the GB in particular. Power over their adherents’ lives. For a certain subset of humanity, control and power are far more desirable and pleasure-inducing than money, sex, drugs, glamour, fame….combined.
For them to give up what really is a significant chunk of that absolute control is noteworthy. And for what? 1.5 million dollars a year from a little Scandinavian country?
Are they really so economically fragile that the removal of 1.5 million dollars coerces them to loosen their grip on the one thing they crave more than anything else?
Maybe it’s not so much the actual 1.5 million, maybe it’s, as mentioned toward the end of the video, fear of other countries doing <something> for similar reasons. Maybe removing their tax exemptions?
But again, if your business model is fully dependent on “free government money” and/or “complete and total tax exemption”, such that you nearly completely decimate your primary control element over the flock (fear of being “removed”)…..it’s not much of a robust business model, is it?
How bad off are they, financially?