TrueTomHarley

This is not exactly on topic, but since I included mention of my books along with his, it is.
You said you ‘cringed’ at reading the Pedo chapter of Dear Mr Putin. Can I ask at what, beyond the obvious? 
I’ve said that in my last two books that I am top-heavy with CSA content, because I allowed myself to be driven by what was trending. I may rewrite some things. Already I am prepping Tom Irregardless for audio and in doing so am cleaning some of it up—substituting some ‘they’s where the original has ‘we’. Bit player & one-time hero of mine for his interview skills, Charlie Rose, has been sent out to pasture too, since he turned out to be a perv.
Bear in mind with Pedo that I consider it impossible to appeal to a certain type of person (Butler would be an example) who has suffered it, and so I don’t try. It is like trying to persuade a Trump person on the virtues of Obama, or vice verse. It can so rarely be done that it is a fool’s mission to go there. We are not nearly so rational as we like to pretend that we are.

It was. Sorry. I should have made that clear.

If this was directed at me, it had little to do with specific things you wrote. (There were a couple of things, but not very important in the long run. And I recently addressed a couple of those types of things elsewhere, a few weeks ago.) The topic itself seemed like it should have been treated separately, as it was not a Russia-specific concern. And of course you have also treated this topic separately.
The most common sources of 'cringe' happen because it's too easy to say things that come across as one-sided bias, even if mostly correct.
The most cringe-worthy things we say are things in defense of our process and doctrine (our natural instinct) but which can still come across as insensitive to those who are still suffering. This might be the very reason you mentioned that you can't persuade certain persons who have certain beliefs or experiences, anyway. As you already know, the latter type will not be satisfied with ostensibly "good news" that the WTS has only a percentage of other organizations. Or, a defense that claims that a large percentage of cases were not as serious as rape, etc. 

Another sage statement from JTR—he is firing hot lately, I can hardly believe it—is the above.
Yes. We want our people to be Rhodes Scholars who never misjudge, who easily hold their own among the brightest the university has to offer, and whose every utterance sweeps you away for its sheer brilliance.
What we get is a bunch of yahoos who make all the blunders that yahoos have always made. We should not run from this. We should embrace it. It is because Christians are derived from—the very ones taking the lead were—‘uneducated and ordinary.’ (Acts 4:13) They always remained so, by the standards of greater society.
We should embrace it because that is what God favors—“the uneducated and ordinary.” In the brilliant book ‘Tom Irregardless and Me’ (which, brilliant though it is, cannot touch ‘No Greater Love—How My Family Survived Genocide in Ryanda’) I wrote of how the great ideas of this world’s thinkers
“all sounded good – heaven knows one can spin college degrees from them. But when put to the test – when placed under stress – they don’t work.
One might suppose that the architect of ideas that don’t work would be discredited. Bizarrely, the ‘doesn’t work’ caveat doesn’t matter. It is just the fine print at document’s end which nobody reads....Surely it is the fault of the little people below and not the great idea!’....It is that way with the bedrock ideas upon which this world is constructed. Despite being lauded to high heaven, they don’t work. Those who have earned university degrees in them do not sacrifice any prestige on that account. Instead, they go on to master other ideas that don’t work.
God laughs at the wisdom of this world, and in the passage above we see why. He says: 
“There is a generation that is pure in its own eyes, but has not been cleansed from its filth.” (Proverbs 30:12) Tell them: “Show us the just world that has resulted from your brilliance, and then maybe we can talk.”
So we ought not run from our ordinariness. We should embrace it. When Celsus ridicules 2nd century Christians for being “labourers, shoemakers, farmers, the most uninformed and clownish of men,” don’t run away from that quote. Don’t try to mitigate it (as do most Christian apologists). Instead, say: “You don’t know the half of it!”
A frequent trait of all my writing—which is not appreciated by all Witnesses—is to give away many a fault, particularly faults that make some look ridiculous, as when Tom Irregardless rattles on for ten minutes in that instruction talk about a woman’s ‘ministerial cycle’ because he has forgotten the word ‘menstrual.’ He recalls only cruder terms that he knows would not be suitable for the platform. (This really happened.) There is a joke about the sister who collected $6000 dollars by selling eggs every time her husband gave a bad talk—and brothers collapse upon themselves telling that joke—yet no one will tell it within 300 yards of Tom Irregardless because with him it is no joke—it is reality. You risk hurting his feelings, “Why would anybody ever take that risk? In all your days you will never find a more caring, generous person than Tom Irregardless. If you need help he is there. You can pop in at the Irregardless home anytime; they are delighted to see you. They don’t wonder why you didn’t call first. Tom is an excellent man through and through, but only in Jehovah’s organization would he be a public instructor.”
[Actually, this is not nearly so true as it once was, since in recent years there has been more emphasis on speaker quality and less opportunity for them to mess up]
The point is not to humiliate people. The point is to glorify God. When great things are accomplished and the workers themselves are great, you can say that was the reason. But when great things are accomplished and the workers are yo-yos, the glory goes to God. So not only do I not hide embarrassing things—I highlight and even exaggerate them—always with 2 Corinthians 12:9 in mind: 
“But he [God] said to me [Paul]: “My undeserved kindness is sufficient for you, for my power is being made perfect in weakness.” Most gladly, then, I will boast about my weaknesses...”
I can now come to the main point of this comment, knowing that 4J will have stopped reading long ago and is now working up a retort about my being “long-winded yet saying nothing.” The brothers should have followed this strategy of admitting faults with regard to CSA as well. Rather than hope for the perception that CSA could never ever occur among a people devoted to God, they should have said: “Oh, yeah—tell us about it—we’ve had some of those slime balls, too, and let me tell you they are tough to deal with!” It would have all been good. We would not be having opposers who now carry on as though with the mission statement:
“CSA among JWs is very very serious and must be exposed! CSA among the 99.9% that is everywhere else? Stuff happens—what do we care?”
It would have been better if no one had ever thought it necessary to write that May 2019 article pointing out that the reproach of CSA falls on the abuser and not on the congregation. It’s a great article, and timely, but it would have been better if nobody had ever thought it necessesary.
When I used to be a bad boy and interacted with the malcontents, I would point out that the CSA is not prolific among JWs. They (the more reasonable ones) would respond with: “Oh, so now you are saying that you have the same problems as everyone else!” They accepted my premise, that we do abhor it and it is not prolific—it was the perception of self-righteousness that got them incensed. It would have been better to have given no cause for that perception, and it would be nice if it is a lesson internalized for future guidance.
It is very very difficult to be the required “no part of the world” and not be perceived as self-righteous, because the world automatically takes offense at non-participation. “If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own,” says Jesus. “Now because you are no part of the world, the world hates you.” Still, I think we do unnecessarily bring trouble upon ourselves sometimes, and the above is a prime example.
 

Another sage statement from JTR—he is firing hot lately, I can hardly believe it—is the above.
Yes. We want our people to be Rhodes Scholars who never misjudge, who easily hold their own among the brightest the university has to offer, and whose every utterance sweeps you away for its sheer brilliance.
What we get is a bunch of yahoos who make all the blunders that yahoos have always made. We should not run from this. We should embrace it. It is because Christians are derived from—the very ones taking the lead were—‘uneducated and ordinary.’ (Acts 4:13) They always remained so, by the standards of greater society.
We should embrace it because that is what God favors—“the uneducated and ordinary.” In the brilliant book ‘Tom Irregardless and Me’ (which, brilliant though it is, cannot touch ‘No Greater Love—How My Family Survived Genocide in Ryanda’) I wrote of how the great ideas of this world’s thinkers
“all sounded good – heaven knows one can spin college degrees from them. But when put to the test – when placed under stress – they don’t work.
One might suppose that the architect of ideas that don’t work would be discredited. Bizarrely, the ‘doesn’t work’ caveat doesn’t matter. It is just the fine print at document’s end which nobody reads....Surely it is the fault of the little people below and not the great idea!’....It is that way with the bedrock ideas upon which this world is constructed. Despite being lauded to high heaven, they don’t work. Those who have earned university degrees in them do not sacrifice any prestige on that account. Instead, they go on to master other ideas that don’t work.
God laughs at the wisdom of this world, and in the passage above we see why. He says: 
“There is a generation that is pure in its own eyes, but has not been cleansed from its filth.” (Proverbs 30:12) Tell them: “Show us the just world that has resulted from your brilliance, and then maybe we can talk.”
So we ought not run from our ordinariness. We should embrace it. When Celsus ridicules 2nd century Christians for being “labourers, shoemakers, farmers, the most uninformed and clownish of men,” don’t run away from that quote. Don’t try to mitigate it (as do most Christian apologists). Instead, say: “You don’t know the half of it!”
A frequent trait of all my writing—which is not appreciated by all Witnesses—is to give away many a fault, particularly faults that make some look ridiculous, as when Tom Irregardless rattles on for ten minutes in that instruction talk about a woman’s ‘ministerial cycle’ because he has forgotten the word ‘menstrual.’ He recalls only cruder terms that he knows would not be suitable for the platform. (This really happened.) There is a joke about the sister who collected $6000 dollars by selling eggs every time her husband gave a bad talk—and brothers collapse upon themselves telling that joke—yet no one will tell it within 300 yards of Tom Irregardless because with him it is no joke—it is reality. You risk hurting his feelings, “Why would anybody ever take that risk? In all your days you will never find a more caring, generous person than Tom Irregardless. If you need help he is there. You can pop in at the Irregardless home anytime; they are delighted to see you. They don’t wonder why you didn’t call first. Tom is an excellent man through and through, but only in Jehovah’s organization would he be a public instructor.”
[Actually, this is not nearly so true as it once was, since in recent years there has been more emphasis on speaker quality and less opportunity for them to mess up]
The point is not to humiliate people. The point is to glorify God. When great things are accomplished and the workers themselves are great, you can say that was the reason. But when great things are accomplished and the workers are yo-yos, the glory goes to God. So not only do I not hide embarrassing things—I highlight and even exaggerate them—always with 2 Corinthians 12:9 in mind: 
“But he [God] said to me [Paul]: “My undeserved kindness is sufficient for you, for my power is being made perfect in weakness.” Most gladly, then, I will boast about my weaknesses...”
I can now come to the main point of this comment, knowing that 4J will have stopped reading long ago and is now working up a retort about my being “long-winded yet saying nothing.” The brothers should have followed this strategy of admitting faults with regard to CSA as well. Rather than hope for the perception that CSA could never ever occur among a people devoted to God, they should have said: “Oh, yeah—tell us about it—we’ve had some of those slime balls, too, and let me tell you they are tough to deal with!” It would have all been good. We would not be having opposers who now carry on as though with the mission statement:
“CSA among JWs is very very serious and must be exposed! CSA among the 99.9% that is everywhere else? Stuff happens—what do we care?”
It would have been better if no one had ever thought it necessary to write that May 2019 article pointing out that the reproach of CSA falls on the abuser and not on the congregation. It’s a great article, and timely, but it would have been better if nobody had ever thought it necessesary.
When I used to be a bad boy and interacted with the malcontents, I would point out that the CSA is not prolific among JWs. They (the more reasonable ones) would respond with: “Oh, so now you are saying that you have the same problems as everyone else!” They accepted my premise, that we do abhor it and it is not prolific—it was the perception of self-righteousness that got them incensed. It would have been better to have given no cause for that perception, and it would be nice if it is a lesson internalized for future guidance.
It is very very difficult to be the required “no part of the world” and not be perceived as self-righteous, because the world automatically takes offense at non-participation. “If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own,” says Jesus. “Now because you are no part of the world, the world hates you.” Still, I think we do unnecessarily bring trouble upon ourselves sometimes, and the above is a prime example.
 

At least you will never hear the cry from heaven—‘nobody here but us chickens.’

And don’t get me going on how I read his interactions with JWI:
“Dear JWI: I want to point out that you are wrong, but the trouble is—I don’t really know anything. Please supply some facts so I can tell you how wrong you are about them.” 
And JWI, with unlimited patience that is always hurled back in his face, obliges! 
Or maybe he is just like me—he wants to say what he wants to say, and he is not fussy as to what provides the pretext to say it.

At least you will never hear the cry from heaven—‘nobody here but us chickens.’

‘T.A. Form Application’—the T. A. Is for ‘true anointed.’ It’s the best I can do under the circumstances. 4Jah floats the idea that maybe they are all to emerge from the present JW community. You might even apply yourself if you and I both didn’t know that you would insist upon taking your chickens with you.
The very idea is so preposterous—a true anointed to appear out of who-knows-where at the final moments of this system of things, with just enough time for the true sheep of the earth to recognize, grab hold of them, and thereby save themselves at the final day. It’s just too ridiculous. 
And you emerge from it with some of the sagest remarks I have ever heard you make. This one, for example: “Those who expect perfection of others in all things, I strongly suspect will be judged by God, using those same standards... and their punishment now is having to live in a cartoon world of their ownconstruct, and being oblivious to reality.”
A “cartoon world,” “oblivious to reality,” and all due to expecting perfection in others—it could not be better said.
These extreme critics remind me of ones stuck in Phase 1 of ‘The Six Phases of a Project’
Phase 1:  Enthusiasm
Phase 2:  Disillusionment
Phase 3:  Panic
Phase 4:  Search for the Guilty
Phase 5:  Punishment of the Innocent
Phase 6:; Praise and Honors for the non-participants
And why are they yet in Phase 1? Because they haven’t done anything. Their role is 100% limited to pointing to the faults of others. The moment their plans result in any action, Phase 2 will immediately kick in—at least if history is any guide. (and there certainly is no reason to think it should not be)
What they should do is meditate on the book JWI cites: ‘No Love Greater Than This—How My Family Survived the Genocide of Rwanda.’ They should reflect on the study quoted within: “All the churches active in Rwanda, with the exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses” were involved in the genocide. Let them state how their imaginary ‘true anointed’ is going to improve upon that!
 
And do not let any of these whiners pull a “who needs organization?” question on you. It is as you say, they haven’t a clue as to how “hominoids behave in groups.” Without strong support from a god-fearing organization, there is no way that the individual will stand before the steamroller with the devil at the wheel.
I have reflected upon your words ever since you first wrote them. You could not have said it better. They have judged without mercy. They will have their judgment without mercy. It may be true with other people as well, but it is certainly true with them. And in the meantime they become absurd caricatures of people.
 

And don’t get me going on how I read his interactions with JWI:
“Dear JWI: I want to point out that you are wrong, but the trouble is—I don’t really know anything. Please supply some facts so I can tell you how wrong you are about them.” 
And JWI, with unlimited patience that is always hurled back in his face, obliges! 
Or maybe he is just like me—he wants to say what he wants to say, and he is not fussy as to what provides the pretext to say it.

‘T.A. Form Application’—the T. A. Is for ‘true anointed.’ It’s the best I can do under the circumstances. 4Jah floats the idea that maybe they are all to emerge from the present JW community. You might even apply yourself if you and I both didn’t know that you would insist upon taking your chickens with you.
The very idea is so preposterous—a true anointed to appear out of who-knows-where at the final moments of this system of things, with just enough time for the true sheep of the earth to recognize, grab hold of them, and thereby save themselves at the final day. It’s just too ridiculous. 
And you emerge from it with some of the sagest remarks I have ever heard you make. This one, for example: “Those who expect perfection of others in all things, I strongly suspect will be judged by God, using those same standards... and their punishment now is having to live in a cartoon world of their ownconstruct, and being oblivious to reality.”
A “cartoon world,” “oblivious to reality,” and all due to expecting perfection in others—it could not be better said.
These extreme critics remind me of ones stuck in Phase 1 of ‘The Six Phases of a Project’
Phase 1:  Enthusiasm
Phase 2:  Disillusionment
Phase 3:  Panic
Phase 4:  Search for the Guilty
Phase 5:  Punishment of the Innocent
Phase 6:; Praise and Honors for the non-participants
And why are they yet in Phase 1? Because they haven’t done anything. Their role is 100% limited to pointing to the faults of others. The moment their plans result in any action, Phase 2 will immediately kick in—at least if history is any guide. (and there certainly is no reason to think it should not be)
What they should do is meditate on the book JWI cites: ‘No Love Greater Than This—How My Family Survived the Genocide of Rwanda.’ They should reflect on the study quoted within: “All the churches active in Rwanda, with the exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses” were involved in the genocide. Let them state how their imaginary ‘true anointed’ is going to improve upon that!
 
And do not let any of these whiners pull a “who needs organization?” question on you. It is as you say, they haven’t a clue as to how “hominoids behave in groups.” Without strong support from a god-fearing organization, there is no way that the individual will stand before the steamroller with the devil at the wheel.
I have reflected upon your words ever since you first wrote them. You could not have said it better. They have judged without mercy. They will have their judgment without mercy. It may be true with other people as well, but it is certainly true with them. And in the meantime they become absurd caricatures of people.
 

‘T.A. Form Application’—the T. A. Is for ‘true anointed.’ It’s the best I can do under the circumstances. 4Jah floats the idea that maybe they are all to emerge from the present JW community. You might even apply yourself if you and I both didn’t know that you would insist upon taking your chickens with you.
The very idea is so preposterous—a true anointed to appear out of who-knows-where at the final moments of this system of things, with just enough time for the true sheep of the earth to recognize, grab hold of them, and thereby save themselves at the final day. It’s just too ridiculous. 
And you emerge from it with some of the sagest remarks I have ever heard you make. This one, for example: “Those who expect perfection of others in all things, I strongly suspect will be judged by God, using those same standards... and their punishment now is having to live in a cartoon world of their ownconstruct, and being oblivious to reality.”
A “cartoon world,” “oblivious to reality,” and all due to expecting perfection in others—it could not be better said.
These extreme critics remind me of ones stuck in Phase 1 of ‘The Six Phases of a Project’
Phase 1:  Enthusiasm
Phase 2:  Disillusionment
Phase 3:  Panic
Phase 4:  Search for the Guilty
Phase 5:  Punishment of the Innocent
Phase 6:; Praise and Honors for the non-participants
And why are they yet in Phase 1? Because they haven’t done anything. Their role is 100% limited to pointing to the faults of others. The moment their plans result in any action, Phase 2 will immediately kick in—at least if history is any guide. (and there certainly is no reason to think it should not be)
What they should do is meditate on the book JWI cites: ‘No Love Greater Than This—How My Family Survived the Genocide of Rwanda.’ They should reflect on the study quoted within: “All the churches active in Rwanda, with the exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses” were involved in the genocide. Let them state how their imaginary ‘true anointed’ is going to improve upon that!
 
And do not let any of these whiners pull a “who needs organization?” question on you. It is as you say, they haven’t a clue as to how “hominoids behave in groups.” Without strong support from a god-fearing organization, there is no way that the individual will stand before the steamroller with the devil at the wheel.
I have reflected upon your words ever since you first wrote them. You could not have said it better. They have judged without mercy. They will have their judgment without mercy. It may be true with other people as well, but it is certainly true with them. And in the meantime they become absurd caricatures of people.
 

Is there really a TA-57 form application making the congregational rounds? I’m not sure what the T.A. stands for, but maybe it will be a game-changer.

I have downloaded this on Kindle. First impression very favorable. Much better than any of my ebooks, thoroughly professional grade and disciplined—none of the chattiness and meanderings that is me—much more on the order of good straight journalism—telling a story well that it’s about time somebody told.

https://religionnews.com/2020/02/26/genocide-survivor-tells-of-risk-rescue-and-religion-in-rwanda/
Rwanda’s descent into terror in April 1994 took an estimated one million lives in a mere 100 days. The Genocide against the Tutsi in this overwhelmingly Christian country was horrifying for its intimacy: Killers and victims were neighbors, friends, fellow churchgoers, workmates, even spouses. Murderers carried crude implements—machetes, hoes, nail-studded clubs—and lists of those doomed to die.
Gatineau, Quebec—Tharcisse Seminega was marked for slaughter. With all escape routes seemingly cut off, he, his wife, and their five young children sat helplessly awaiting death.
Seminega, a Tutsi and former Catholic seminarian, taught at the National University in Butare. Extremist Hutu faculty orchestrated the murder of Tutsi professors and students. But just minutes before a Hutu professor arrived with soldiers at Seminega’s house, Hutu friends helped the family flee.
The new memoir No Greater Love—How My Family Survived the Genocide in Rwanda relates how, during the next 75 days, Seminega and his family evaded the machetes with the help of about 20 Hutu rescuers who took unthinkable risks to hide and sustain them. These rescuers knew that if the génocidaires caught them, they faced an agonizing death as traitors to the Hutu cause.
Most of the rescuers belonged to the Jehovah’s Witness community, of which Seminega was a part. His wife, a former nun, feared to join him, knowing that the Witnesses had long been oppressed for refusing to take up weapons or participate in politics.
Because of this apolitical teaching, writes genocide scholar Rhoda Howard-Hassmann, “Hutu Witnesses were impervious to calls for patriotic Hutu to take part in mass killings”; and yet “to do nothing was also against their Christian principles.”
Professor Seminega says that his family’s rescuers and other Witnesses followed Jesus’ “new commandment”—To love one another just as he loved them, even to the death. They sheltered not only fellow believers but others who knew that Witnesses would not harm or betray them.
Of 2,500 Witnesses in Rwanda in 1994, about 400 were murdered, Tutsi as well as Hutu who tried to rescue Tutsi or who refused to kill.
After the genocide, researchers documented widespread complicity among church leaders and members. States one study: “All the churches active in Rwanda, with the exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses” were involved in the genocide.
Now, Professor Seminega speaks with classes via Skype about his family’s story. In paying tribute to his rescuers, Seminega says: “Their selfless acts move me every day to ask, how far will my love reach?”

When did God personally tell you, you were his voice? When did God make you a spokesman for God? Butler!
Whatever channel God choices, he makes it. Neither you, me, TTH, JTR, JWinsider nor especially any ex-witness is going to tell God how to set standards here on earth.
Everyone here doesn't seem to understand, the GB are prepared to die as the apostles did for his name sake. That is in harmony with scripture. The GB are prepared to be imprisoned because of the loud and wild accusations lead before them by disgruntles ex-witnesses and opposers. Rutherford and the board of directors went to prison on the Vatican's influence.
Nothing but nothing will change the hearts of those loyal responsible witnesses. Can anyone here say the same? If you say yes! Rethink your entire life, since this one would be fake. 😁

I kind of like this.
The ol pork chop comes through with the comment of the day, or the week, or possibly even the year.

This is a win-win. Matt gets a nice new home with plenty of space to store his statue, Etsy gets a fine new headquarters, and JWs get to move on to where there is more space.
"[Jehovah’s Witnesses] bought their buildings for their own use, not looking to cash out, at a time when the market was dead and you couldn't give real estate away in this area," said Andy Gerringer, managing director of Prudential Douglas Elliman Developments. "I don't know if it was savvy investing, luck or divine intervention."

I will know it is so when the year text is from the Book of BuffaloSpringfield:
“Step out of line, the man comes to take you away.”

Cats go crazy with the red pointer ones. I’ve seen cats climb halfway up a room wall trying to catch that dot.

(Matthew 24:15, 16) 15 “Therefore, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, as spoken about by Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place (let the reader use discernment), 16 then let those in Ju·deʹa begin fleeing to the mountains.
(Mark 13:14) 14 “However, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation standing where it should not be (let the reader use discernment), then let those in Ju·deʹa begin fleeing to the mountains.
(Luke 21:20-28) 20 “However, when you see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near. 21 Then let those in Ju·deʹa begin fleeing to the mountains, let those in the midst of her leave, and let those in the countryside not enter into her, 22 because these are days for meting out justice in order that all the things written may be fulfilled. 23 Woe to the pregnant women and those nursing a baby in those days! For there will be great distress on the land and wrath against this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled. 25 “Also, there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and its agitation. 26 People will become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 27 And then they will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 But as these things start to occur, stand up straight and lift up your heads, because your deliverance is getting near.”
The words of Mark and Matthew implied that the Romans would have come right up to the Temple to defile it, and that this was the time to leave as quickly as possible. We know from Josephus that Jews read Daniel's "abomination of desolation" to be based on Antiochus IV, who: according to common knowledge had done as follows, 200 years earlier:
In 168 BC, the Greek king Antiochus IV Epiphanes invaded Jerusalem and captured the city. He marched into the Jewish temple, erected a statue of the Greek god Zeus, and sacrificed a pig on the altar of incense. This provoked a revolt in Judea as the Jews fought to remove Antiochus’ sacrilege from the temple. https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/abomination-temple/
But Titus did not do anything akin to this in 66. Although in 70, he did. You can see almost direct evidence of this today by looking at the Arch of Titus.
In that year, the Roman general Titus invaded Jerusalem to crush a Jewish revolt, entered the temple, had the building destroyed, and carried off the lampstand and other temple artifacts to Rome.
So, it seems likely that it was not specifically anything in 66 (in Jesus' prophecy) that would have triggered a fleeing to Pella, nor does anyone who believed in a Pella flight actually time it to 66. Cestius Gallus did plunder the Temple [funds] and it resulted in a counter-attack by the Jews that was mostly successful. So this was an excellent time to leave, and both Jews and Romans got out of the city at that time. Wikipedia says:
The Roman governor, Gessius Florus, responded by plundering the Second Temple, claiming the money was for the Emperor, and the next day launching a raid on the city, arresting numerous senior Jewish figures. This prompted a wider, large-scale rebellion and the Roman military garrison of Judaea was quickly overrun by the rebels, while the pro-Roman king Herod Agrippa II, together with Roman officials, fled Jerusalem. As it became clear the rebellion was getting out of control, Cestius Gallus, the legate of Syria, brought in the Syrian army, based on Legion XII Fulminata and reinforced by auxiliary troops, to restore order and quell the revolt. Despite initial advances and the conquest of Jaffa, the Syrian Legion was ambushed and defeated by Jewish rebels at the Battle of Beth Horon with 6,000 Romans massacred and the Legion's aquila lost.
But at that point, Christians would have many months of opportunities to leave the city between 66 and the actual surrounding of Jerusalem in 70. 66 fits some of what Jesus said, but it was not a case so desperate that one would be unable to even grab a coat from inside your house. That was more like the situation just before Passover in 70. This is probably why Eusebius, who had read both Josephus and knew the Bible very well, believed the fleeing to Pella to be based on an angelic revelation.

Using the quotes extracted from Eusebius and Epaphanius in a Wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_to_Pella
It might be interesting to note that the impetus to leave Jerusalem and go to Pella was not specifically credited to Jesus' prophecy in Matthew/Mark/Luke, but to an angel, or a specific oracle/revelation/prophecy given just before the war. This would put it on par with the prophecy of Agabus (Acts 11:27, 28) . . .In those days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. 28 One of them named Agʹa·bus stood up and foretold through the spirit that a great famine was about to come on the entire inhabited earth, which, in fact, did take place in the time of Claudius.
This is a curious report then by Eusebius, that he doesn't tie it to Matthew 24, or Luke 21, for example. (Epiphanius may have "corrected" this nearly 100 years after Eusebius, when he credited the flight to Jesus warning about the city being surrounded.)
The idea that the command only went to those in the city who were worthy, might also imply that there were reports that some [less worthy] Christians had died in Jerusalem's destruction.   Epaphanius had referenced Jesus' prophecy in his book Panarion, but in "Weights and Measures" he pretty much agreed with Eusebius:  

Unfortunately, this has been going on even from the time that the scriptures were written, or at least from very shortly after the NT was completed. This means that even the very idea that there had been an escape to Pella might just be from persons with their own agenda.
The best evidence that comes down to us is from Eusebius of Caesarea and Epiphanius of Salamis. Eusebius wrote his "Ecclesiastical History" (Church History) between about 300 and 325. Epiphanius would have written "Panarion" around 375. We don't know what, if anything, was written on this topic between 70 CE and 300 CE.
So this might be a little like someone just now trying to make a story about what direction we believe small bands of native Americans (Indians) ran to in 1775 in upstate NY when Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold were capturing the guns at the British Fort Ticonderoga (which would just precede a siege of Boston and the building of a fortification of stakes around parts of that city).
The "American Indians" were not a big part of that story, so there is very little written down about what they did. If someone came up with a new story about it 200 to 250 years later, we might not put much trust in it. But, then again, we might assume that there were some verbal or even written records that could be gathered up from various families in the area, and that there was some truth to such a story.
We have some evidence that the apostles generally stayed in Jerusalem, per Jesus' instructions just after he was resurrected. In Galatians (and corroborated in Corinthians) Paul mentions a period of 14 years after his conversion when he finally goes to Jerusalem to meet with the apostles. If Paul converted before 36, then this refers to a time prior to 50 CE., when at least some apostles were still there. Peter and John are mentioned specifically, and James who was also mentioned had not been considered an apostle. Acts also does not mention any additional apostles (except Peter and James) still alive or around at this time. If there had been an instruction to all the apostles to stay in Jerusalem, for the purpose of forming an apostolic group to study the scriptures and devote themselves to prayer, then it may have already accomplished its purpose and broken up before 50 CE.
We hear of the "The Twelve" in Acts 6, still in Jerusalem, when they send out Stephen and Philip, for example. (Still prior to Paul's conversion.) By chapter 8 of Acts we hear about the group of "apostles in Jerusalem," and how both Peter and John had been sent to Samaria (and we know from Galatians that Peter had gone as far as Antioch). But by chapter 11 of Acts we only hear of some older men in Jerusalem and only one apostle there, Peter. By the time we reach 11:29 we only hear about the effect of the famine on "the brothers living in Judea." This matches about the same timing as Paul spoke of in Galatians and elsewhere when Paul brought collections back to the brothers in Jerusalem "keeping the poor in mind." Then in the next verses of Acts (Acts 12:1-3) we see that Herod has just put the Apostle James (brother of John) to death (not the same James of "James, Peter, and John" in Galatians) and goes after Peter.
After the destruction, we see John the apostle up around the isle of Patmos, but this could have been an exile from anywhere, not necessarily Jerusalem.
So, we really don't know how long the apostles stayed together in Jerusalem, or whether Herod broke that up even prior to the work of Paul and Barnabas, that brought them to Jerusalem (Acts 15). No Bible writer mentions Pella. I don't think there is anyone we know about who mentioned anything about a flight to Pella until 200 years later. There are plenty of letters and stories and other Christian writings between 70 and 300, but no evidence about Pella.
Still, we have the history (through Josephus) of the attack on Jerusalem, and the fact that the Romans started to attack in 66 and then decided to withdraw and not come back until they were ready to wage the war from start to finish in 70. Perhaps no Christians left in 66, although this seems like the time that would fit best. It's possible that most Christians had already left during Herod's persecution. It's possible that most Christians left just as the final approach was being made in 70 around the time of the Passover.
The most "ideal" story says that Christians recognized Jesus warning when Jerusalem was approached in 66, and that they then left and stayed away for about a 3-and-a-half year period until Jerusalem was destroyed with its Temple in 70. But we have no evidence from Josephus or anyone else about that.
It might also be wishful thinking to believe that no Christians were killed during the destruction of Jerusalem, as Epiphanius claimed 300 years later.
As to the idea that John was the only apostle alive after 70, there is an interesting passage in John that seems to refer to his age and the timing of the parousia.
(John 21:20-24) . . .Peter turned around and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, . . . 21 So when he caught sight of him, Peter said to Jesus: “Lord, what about this man?” 22 Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” 23 So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?” 24 This is the disciple who gives this witness about these things and who wrote these things, and we know that his witness is true.
I like your questions and there is much more to say about them, but I'll stop for now.

Which “goals” of Hitler that JR agreed with do you think that he was speaking about?
Was JR referring to Hitler’s goal to bring paradise to the entire earth so that residents could pet the animals?
Was JR referring to Hitler’s goal to bring everlasting life in perfect health to all of his subjects?
Was JR referring to Hitler’s goal to break up the works of the devil and hurl him into the abyss?
NO! he was referring to the feel-good cumbaya boiler-plate goals that every human agency that  comes down the pipe promises and fails to deliver because of their insistence to do it by human thinking and not God’s. JR is doing no more than building a bridge of introduction so that the rest of his communication will not be tossed in the trash, the same as Is universally thought a good thing to do with anybody.
What would you have him say: ‘Dear Rat-face’?
This is why he chose tact at the time and didn’t say: “Dear Rat-face.” He did later on.
Same here: What “high principles” do you think are being referenced?
Was Is the League’s high principle to bring paradise to the entire earth so that residents could pet the animals?
Was Is the League’s high principle to bring everlasting life in perfect health to all of earth’s subjects?
Was Is the League’s high principle to break up the works of the devil and hurl him into the abyss?
NO! he was referring to the feel-good cumbaya boiler-plate high principles that every human agency that  comes down the pipe promises and fails to deliver because of their insistence to do it by human thinking and not God’s!
Certain ones have commented with some disapproval —I think you have been one of them—at the seeming ‘need’ of the organization to diss anything that does not come from them. Here you seem to be holding them accountable for not doing just that.
 

Yes, of course I am using the word “prove” loosely. This is apparent by looking at the other two factors offered as “proof”—that concerning the Drudge item and that concerning the application of torture in Russia. Of course it is evidence, not proof.
Nitpicking. “Persons given authority” I might have said. Average, ‘sit on your rear end’ parishioners—in other words, the vast majority—how many of them have been reported? That is what must be known if we are to suppose that the comparison with JWs is apples to apples.
It seems unlikely to me because if the brothers are as underhanded as you suggest, why not clean all of them up? Of the first 5 elders and MS on the list, one was convicted—of which there will be a public record. Why not “clean the others up?”
In fact, nothing will be proven for anything until we shake down those carrying authority of every organization on earth, squeezing all their documents out of them, and assuming that if they have none, it is because they are covering up! Enough!
What IS proven is that the Boy Scout of America took me camping, taught me how to tie knots, did their best to help me grow up, and in recent days declared bankruptcy because, while they may have striven to get a handle on those who would abuse children, they were not perfect In this regard, some slipped through.. At the time I first wrote of a huge settlement against them, at the time the largest cash verdict for CSA involving a single individual, the Boy Scouts were reported as having a strong anti-CSA policy—which was used against them!
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2011/01/pedophiles-and-smear-campaigns.html
Look, just make it illegal for children and adults to be in proximity of each other! Outlaw it! Just think of how many children will be protected that way!