It may take awhile, but my guess is that is WT put the Furman st complex up for sale they would indeed get a hefty sum for it. There are any number of companies that would like its port access and metro location. Its prime property IMHO. Any big sale takes awhile, but they'll get plenty for it. They can rebuild in (cheap) upstate NY where the cost of nearly everything is less and pocket the difference. Their factory builings and residences will definetly have buyers too. I think this is the reason for the relocation efforts.
FreeWilly
JoinedPosts by FreeWilly
-
8
Religions Create Unsaleable Properties
by metatron inreligions create unmarketable properties.
i can well remember how they tried to find a way to get rid of the facility that.
oral roberts tried to build in oklahoma.. advertisements for "the bible speaks" property ran in the wallstreet journal after they lost a bundle in a court case.. likewise, i believe an auction was advertised to get rid of ambassador college ( armstrong's plain truth).. .
-
-
-
17
Breaking Up is Hard to Do...
by joe_from_kokomo inmy wife and i just left the wts after some 6 years of involvement (5 1/2 as baptized jws).
it has been a painful experience, i must tell you, but also one that has been filled with great joy and relief, too.
the agony and the ecstasy, you could say.
-
-
FreeWilly
Great post Joe!
Leaving is like removing a wart. It hurts at the time, but the comfort you get once evrything heals makes it well worth it!
I am a couple of years gone. It's all about the freedom. The freedom from man made pressure, the ability to judge people as individuals, time to pursue MY interests, time with family, new real friends, not having to turn every conversation into some kinda sales pitch, etc, etc - Yep - no regrets.
I sympathize for those still trapped inside (like my folks). It sucks the life right out of them. :(
-
25
Tell me why I bother?????
by asleif_dufansdottir in(i used to be a truck driver.
trust me.
i have the vocabulary).
-
-
FreeWilly
asleif,
I read your posts on beliefnet all the time. If you notice when a thought is logically and factually presented it is only the stubborn, hardcore JW's who will persist in justifying the Society at all costs. All JW's are not that stupid. They can see (by reading the illogical JW replys) how ridiculous it is to try to justify the crap put out by the Society. That’s why many refrain from posting when the facts are clearly presented. They would have to put on an idiot suit to try to defend some of this stuff. For example, look at all of the justifications made over the Society's UN involvement. I'm quite sure that if the average JW knew all of the facts they would do some serious rethinking. I think it is just as powerful to see how unreasonable they are expected to be in order to defend the Society's position. Oldgrm, Blindshutter and others are precious to me. They illustrate vividly what many of us say all the time.... You have to be a knucklehead to believe everything that comes from the Society.
-Nuetrino
-
37
Confused
by jusastudy ini have been reading your posts at work.
i have been studing with the witnesses for about a year this last time.
i have almost completed the knowledge book.
-
-
FreeWilly
Just a study,
Some advice. You are in a fork in the road. IF you decide to get baptised you are putting your family, your friends and your own well being at risk. The changes that come along with becoming a witness are subtle but brutal should you decide to leave later. The decisions you make NOW concerning JW's are important and could have a profound impact on your life! Don't be complacent or passive. Examine both sides of the story before you take a plunge !
The situation you are in right now is relatively benign. You can choose not to commit yourself to this publishing company and avoid the retributions it reserves for baptised members.
PS.... Would you ever buy a car after listening to ONLY the salesman?? - Get the whole story.
-
37
Confused
by jusastudy ini have been reading your posts at work.
i have been studing with the witnesses for about a year this last time.
i have almost completed the knowledge book.
-
-
FreeWilly
Just a study,
Some advice. You are in a fork in the road. IF you decide to get baptised you are putting your family, your friends and your own well being at risk. The changes that come along with becoming a witness are subtle but brutal should you decide to leave later. The decisions you make NOW concerning JW's are important and could have a profound impact on your life! Don't be complacent or passive. Examine both sides of the story before you take a plunge !
The situation you are in right now is relatively benign. You can choose not to commit yourself to this publishing company and avoid the retributions it reserves for baptised members.
PS.... Would you ever buy a car after listening to ONLY the salesman?? - Get the whole story.
-
11
WT meeting comments - on "media reports"
by FreeWilly inwell i went to a meeting while visiting my family.
i was particularly interested in the comments from the wt paragraphs that medioned recent "media reports" in it.. first off, i found it rather clever the way the wt worded the paragraphs regarding media reports.
they asked "how do you feel when you hear reports about jws in the media that are distortions or outright lies"?
-
-
FreeWilly
Hi everyone,
Well I went to a meeting while visiting my family. I was particularly interested in the comments from the WT paragraphs that medioned recent "media reports" in it.
First off, I found it rather clever the way the WT worded the paragraphs regarding media reports. They asked "how do you feel when you hear reports about JWs in the media that are distortions or outright lies"? I find it clever because they are not actually saying that recent media reports are distortions or lies. They are simply asking how one feels when the come across reports that are deceptive. There is only one reasonable answer to that question - a lie or distortion cannot be good (even I would agree to that). YET, in the context of the rest of the paragraph and the surrounding article it is clear that the message they want to convey is that recent reports on JWs have been lies. I think they purposely didn't come out and say it plainly because the facts of most media reports are readily availible to those who want to dig them up. Thier wording gives them an "out" to anyone who would discover the veracity of reports in the media.
So what were the comments from the congregation on these paragraphs? The intended message was definetly recieved. One brother who was from England mentioned the Panorama episode and told how shaken some of the publishers were over it. Many didn't want to go out in service for a few weeks until it calmed down. Yet he went on to relay how a householder said: " I saw that episode and knew that these acusations had to be lies - you people are just not like that". In conclusion he commented how Satan controls the media and will cause them to spread lies about JWs.
Another comment alluded to programs that aired in America. Again it was stated that the program contained nothing but lies against 'Gods people' and these lies are to be expected.
So the subtle message of the WT article was recieved (at least by some) as intended - believe nothing that portrays JW's in a bad light.
I personally felt that some may have doubts to the claim that its all lies. There were not allot of hands raised like there were in the other paragraphs. Those who did comment were obviously not informed whatsoever. Nor was there any discussion about the supposed lies away from the meeting (as I have heard before when there have been TV programs about JW's). I think most feel uncomfortable about the who issue and wish it would go away. I think the availibility of info on the internet has hindered the WT propaganda machine. Maybe thats just my wishful thinking though.
-
30
Newbie question about the NGO story
by gcc2k ini've seen the reproductions of evidence in the ngo story.. let's say i was to discuss this matter with a local friendly elder.
i imagine that the following criticisms would ensue:.
1) that is not a real letter sent by the society (saying it was just for a library card, or as the version from portugal said, to gain favor in certain nations).. 2) the reply from the librarian at the un saying that becoming an ngo is not a requirement for a library pass is not real.. my main concern is with the latter.
-
-
FreeWilly
What did the WT have to gain by becoming an NGO? - Legitimacy and leverage
I believe the WT "showed their hand" in the first few days of the scandal. I think it was the Portuguese branch that answered inquiries with a letter that listed some benefits JWs worldwide might receive in the human rights arena. The Awake! article (that was apparently submitted to the UN in fulfillment of the NGO requirement to "Promote the interests of the UN") was about the Human rights aspects of UN programs. Considering the backlash JW's have undergone particularly in former Soviet republics, it would be advantageous for the WT to use its leverage as a UN affiliate. Many of these countries are seeking acceptance in the world community. Human rights is definitely a issue for some of them. UN membership gives the WT a legitimacy and a voice that these countries may be compelled to listen to.
WT has made moral compromises before. When they were attempting to gain acceptance in Bulgaria the modified their position on Blood transfusions to make it appear that there would be no sanctions against JWs who opted for a transfusion. This shows me that getting registered in foriegn countries is pretty important to them.
Becoming a registered religion is definitely advantageous to WT. Aside from the tax benefits, it cuts down on the cost of distribution of literature and organizing assemblies. Also they can proselytize more publicly. There are probably other benefits that we aren't aware of.
But If you ask me, this is what UN membership buys for them - legitimacy and leverage.
-
30
Newbie question about the NGO story
by gcc2k ini've seen the reproductions of evidence in the ngo story.. let's say i was to discuss this matter with a local friendly elder.
i imagine that the following criticisms would ensue:.
1) that is not a real letter sent by the society (saying it was just for a library card, or as the version from portugal said, to gain favor in certain nations).. 2) the reply from the librarian at the un saying that becoming an ngo is not a requirement for a library pass is not real.. my main concern is with the latter.
-
-
FreeWilly
Try to get them to commit first. "If these accusations were true, do you see how someone would think the WT was hypocritical?" or "You think these accusations are fabricated - why, whats so bad about joining the UN?" If you can get them to take a position before introducing them the evidence then maybe they won't be so quick to back-pedal once they have the evidence. Either way its a real long shot.
If they still doubt it, call the UN info line (the number is listed Randy's website) and ask them to send you an information packet - to the JW's address. Let them get it in the mail!
PS... Hi RHW -Nuetrino
-
9
Dating dilema - help!
by FreeWilly inok here's the deal.
(girl # 1) i've gone out with this one woman for the past couple of weeks - probably 5 times total.
i have a great time as does she, but i really don't want a relationship right now.
-
-
FreeWilly
Well I have a whole range of opinions here. Thanks!
OK, I think I'm gonna go with Robyn, Joanna, and Xena with a twist of LB. You girls sound reasonable, and LB seems to always be 'on the money'.
I'll see # 1 this week. I'll let y'all know how it turns out. I just want to make sure she makes the right "assumptions" from the get go.
JH, I'm not really trying to "Run two at once" I really don't want to get involved with anyone too heavily. I just think it would be nice to go out on the weekend with someone other than my buddies at work and meet new people. But if their not of the same opinion I guess i need to find out.
-
9
Dating dilema - help!
by FreeWilly inok here's the deal.
(girl # 1) i've gone out with this one woman for the past couple of weeks - probably 5 times total.
i have a great time as does she, but i really don't want a relationship right now.
-
-
FreeWilly
OK here's the deal.
(Girl # 1) I've gone out with this one woman for the past couple of weeks - probably 5 times total. I have a great time as does she, but I really don't want a relationship right now. I want to be single and not get too dependant on anyone in particular. I would like to continue to go out with her but not necessarily exclusively or if it's going to cause her to get too attached and hurt her down the road.
(Girl # 2) Also there is another girl I asked out to dinner. She is nice too. Again, I not interested in anything too deep right now, but I'd like to get to know her as well. So my dilema is...
Should I tell Girl # 1 that I don't want anything serious so she if she discovers I have dated someone else it won't be a big deal? (keep in mind telling her could make it awkward between us thereafter)
- or -
Should I just do as I please and "cross that bridge when it I get to it" since we have only gone out a few times and there's no commitment implied at this stage? (she actually mentioned she was "commitment phobic" on our 2nd date but I'm a little worried about her getting attached despite this) Afterall I may not like #2 and would hate to blow it with #1 for nothing.
-or-
Should I abandon the whole concept of casual dating and date only one person at a time ? (which is too much like a commitment for me) In my mind I wouldn't mind if I found out she went on another date.
My neighbor is her best girl-friend so she will likely find out eventually if I dated someone else. My neighbor (her friend) also dates casually so I kinda think #1 would be OK with it too.
OK Fire away