And your point is......
piztjw
JoinedPosts by piztjw
-
12
TV.JW.ORG
by piztjw ini tried to, out of curiosity, watch tv.jw.org this morning.
i barely could stand to make it seven minutes before i had to quit.. of course there were at least two, maybe three mentions in that short time of the expense incurred and the subtle begging for money to "support" the televangelism effort.
a time lapse video showed the construction of the tv set.
-
-
-
14
Tv.jw.org - Here we go, "with your support" mentioned in the first 10 minutes of broadcast!
by 4thgen insee minute 6:25 "with your support....".
http://tv.jw.org/#video/vodmonthlyprogramming/pub-jwb_e_201410_1_video.
.
-
-
piztjw
I noticed the term "trial basis" also. And as was mentioned in another thread, IF it has Gee-HOE-vah's blessing, then why would they only have it up on a trial basis. Second guessing God? IF it is only a trial basis, then it obvioulsy cannot have God's blessing.
-
26
JW broadcasting now at tv.jw.org
by Gorbatchov inthe jw broadcasting is now at the subdomain tv.jw.org.
goes live today.. g.. .
.
-
-
piztjw
Within the first minute Lett is asking for your $upport!
I managed to make it seven minutes into the video before I had to shut it iff. I beleive I counted three appeals (although subtly worded) for $$$$$.
-
-
-
piztjw
I get it too.
New light = blank page.
-
32
If JW's message is so urgent and Armageddon is imminent..
by PopeOfEruke inthen why do the walk so slow when out in field service?????????.
honestly, i saw some dubs out witnessing yesterday and they have invented the "worlds most incredible slow walk".
it makes a glacier look like a speeding avalanche.
-
-
-
12
TV.JW.ORG
by piztjw ini tried to, out of curiosity, watch tv.jw.org this morning.
i barely could stand to make it seven minutes before i had to quit.. of course there were at least two, maybe three mentions in that short time of the expense incurred and the subtle begging for money to "support" the televangelism effort.
a time lapse video showed the construction of the tv set.
-
-
piztjw
I tried to, out of curiosity, watch tv.jw.org this morning. I barely could stand to make it seven minutes before I had to quit.
Of course there were at least two, maybe three mentions in that short time of the expense incurred and the subtle begging for money to "support" the televangelism effort. A time lapse video showed the construction of the TV set. Office workers were booted out of their location to make room for the set. They bragged about them clearing out in a very short time. Of course they bragged about how Gee-HOE'-vaahhhh blessed the work, because, "an industry expert said, 'It would take over one year,' to build this set, and WE did it in only TWO MONTH'S." Followed by another veiled plea for money, and the explanation that the GB did this because everything would be moved to Warwick in two years, and everything used on the set would be used, "for YEARS to come."
No Armageddon in the very near future I guess!
If anyone else can stomache more than six or seven minutes I am sure that I and others would appreciate your thoughts.
-
207
Is the AGM today?
by hamsterbait inanybody going or who can give us the noolite hot from the gb a$$?.
.
.
-
-
piztjw
Even if that is successful, it is self limiting. You can find maybe 4 or 5 interesting experiences. What are you going to do after that?
Lie?
-
-
-
piztjw
that most times women are demeaned by brothers because other men in the congregation do no stand up for women. What about your congregation (s)?
That is very true. Also another reason that "men" in the congregation do not stand up for women who are being treated in a demeaning fashion is because IMO they are not worthy of being called men! The are insecure, small "men". They are small intelligently. They are small emotionally. They are small in every way a male can be.
That does not though say ALL women in the congregation are deserving of being stood up for. There are also a pretty fair number of JW women who are just as small and petty in their own ways as the "men".
It's a product of the indoctrination of the JW's.
-
22
I FIND THIS TROUBLING . . . DISTURBING . . . PUZZLING . . .
by Terry ini stumbled on to this on youtube.. i began watching it.
at first i thought it was funny.. then, something changed.
i began to realize two things.. first of all, there are 2 sides to this, and both sides have a point.. if law enforcement does not have a legal right to stop and question you .
-
-
piztjw
By way of continued comment. The suggestions I mentioned work. I was stopped at a DUI checkpoint and when asked, "Have you had anything to drink?" I replied, "Yes. I had several glasses of water through the day. Two cans of Coke. I Gator-ade, and some milk with supper...." He interupted me and yelled, "That's NOT what I meant, and you know it! Have you had anything alcoholic to drink?" I replied, "Well I have been of legal age now for over forty years. And yes, in that time I have had alcoholic drinks on a number of occasions." He got really pissed and told me to pull over and take a breathalyzer. I refused to do so. After a twenty minute detainment going round and round about the legality of that test, or any other field sobriety tests, his supervisor came over and asked what the hold up was. When the young punk cop told him the supervisor asked me if I would take a breathalyzer. I politely, yet very firmly told him no. End result? I was sent on my way without showing ID or any further questioning, and didn't take any of their DUI tests either. Then again I NEVER drink alcohol and then drive so standing up for myself and the rights I have under the Constituion of The United States of America is a given.
Same way a person should stand up for themselves when confronted by eldurrs.
-
22
I FIND THIS TROUBLING . . . DISTURBING . . . PUZZLING . . .
by Terry ini stumbled on to this on youtube.. i began watching it.
at first i thought it was funny.. then, something changed.
i began to realize two things.. first of all, there are 2 sides to this, and both sides have a point.. if law enforcement does not have a legal right to stop and question you .
-
-
piztjw
The only thing I find troubling is the ever increasing antaonistic attitude that LE displays toward law-abiding citizens.
It is just as imperative for American citizens to know, and then politley yet firmly, assert their legal rights. Unless that is done the continued erosion of so-called personal freedom will continue to disappear. Courts have ruled that there is no inherent need to converse with LE. In the videos when asked if they were US citizens however they should have said, "Yes." Nothing more, nothing less. Any further questioning should be answered with, "Am I being detained, or under arrest?" If the answer is, "No," then leave. If the answer is, "Yes," then SHUT UP without an attorney. People get nervous, and as a result begin to get chatty. That is a big mistake. Remember, anythng you say CAN and WILL be used AGAINST YOU. You have no obligation to say where you have been, where you are going, what you are doing. The only thing you need to say is similar to the military...NAME...RANK...Serial Number...THAT"S IT!
LE is really no different than the JW eldum...always suspicious and looking for any little reason to harass and bust your ass for even imagined crimes/sins.