TrueTomHarley

They never take the signs down out in the backwoods. From last year:
 

It may be that she said something nasty to the Pres and she has been tagged for ‘Abuse.’

Does she have to wear that A around her neck for the rest of her life?
(Not sure if that's a reference to Samuel Taylor Coleridge or Nathaniel Hawthorne. I guess it all depends on what the meaning of "A" is.)

We are famously loyal. Here’s what happens to the home of whoever says we are not:

This reminds me of an apocryphal story of a brother all nervous because he was to be working with the circuit overseer, and he wanted everything to be just so, something he never would have cared about otherwise.
So he pressed his suit, but got distracted.
”Brother, don’t you have a suit jacket other than this one?” said the CO later in service, glancing behind at the heavy black iron mark on the coat’s back. Maybe this brother did the same with his best white dress shirt.

We are famously loyal. Here’s what happens to the home of whoever says we are not:

We are famously loyal. Here’s what happens to the home of whoever says we are not:

This reminds me of an apocryphal story of a brother all nervous because he was to be working with the circuit overseer, and he wanted everything to be just so, something he never would have cared about otherwise.
So he pressed his suit, but got distracted.
”Brother, don’t you have a suit jacket other than this one?” said the CO later in service, glancing behind at the heavy black iron mark on the coat’s back. Maybe this brother did the same with his best white dress shirt.

I can’t answer for Billy, but my aliases don’t bother me at all.
Except for Top Cat O’Malighan. I caught fleas from him

I think that JWI’s intentions are obvious - to demonstrate how modern printing methods improve upon typewritten lists.

I haven’t admitted all of them.
There is actually nobody here that is not me. Even you are.

I haven’t admitted all of them.
There is actually nobody here that is not me. Even you are.

They are all renegade sheep that have bolted from the fold. I am here to lasso them, kick their butts, and make them behave.

In.a review of the movie Inside Job, I wrote the following:
As one senator (Ron Paul) pointed out, since the total bank bailouts eventually came to $17,000 per person, with no discernable economic benefit, you might have just given the money directly to the individual Americans. The results could hardly have turned out worse, and might well have turned out better. Debts would have been paid down, new purchases made, small businesses started. 
There is a reason that Big Business used to be counted in the triumvirate with religion and politics. 

When the online study feature first appeared, a local brother said: “I think it means that we’ve been fired.”
I have been wondering when the organization would put it to some use. So far they have not specifically done anything with it. Here is an application I hadn’t thought of. It also works for persons who you find once and never again, also persons who other family members intercede for.
Me - I am looking forward to saying to someone: “I don’t want to study the Bible with you. Do it yourself” 
The timing and circumstances will have to be just right, of course. But I would not mind a scenario in which I escape from trying to spoon feed persons one elementary scripture at a time. Most can do the basics themselves, which permits the publisher to engage with them at a higher level, say that of application, or that of specific questions.
Frankly, I think it keeps us babes as well—always focusing on the basics. I’d rather farm that out to the extent possible and enjoy a ministry based on Bible 201, 301, and not necessarily just 101.
 

Okay, lets suppose I and my posse storm Warwick, round up the GB, and send them packing.
Now what?

I think that JWI’s intentions are obvious - to demonstrate how modern printing methods improve upon typewritten lists.

Specifically, what would you change were it in your power to do so?

Let me revisit this. 
Why would it be wrong to say ‘celebrate?’ It exactly fits. 
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/celebrate
Christ bestowed the greatest gift that can be given and he willingly offered his life in sacrifice so as to do it. Yes, of course it is proper to say ‘celebrate.’ 
Should I have said ‘Be kind to yourself, Lord. You will not have this destiny at all?’
Not to be mean, because you were not to me, but this smacks of a certain false piety to me, a certain sanctimoniousness, and a certain eagerness to harp over trifles. There is nothing wrong with the term so that you must correct it.

First, it may be well to catch up with Part 1: 
https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/70655-is-it-time-for-jehovahs-witnesses-to-apologize-part-1/
Jehovah’s Witnesses did fail in this regard. Let us admit it. They failed to ‘go beyond the law.’ The stakes are so high that law is thereafter reinterpreted to mean that they did violate it. Why did they fail? Ms. Chuck accurately states that any Witness victim or family of victim was always free to report child sexual abuse and that congregation justice did not preclude outside secular justice. Arguably, then, they failed because they were insular, as she says, and they may not realize just how firmly she has put her finger on the reason. They were not inclined to air their dirty laundry before the public.
It is not hard to understand. In some cultures, the concept of ‘saving face’ is so firmly entrenched that your efforts to communicate are doomed to failure if you ignore it. The very reason there is an expression ‘skeletons in the closet’ is the universal human instinct to keep them there. It is even found in the scriptures that Ms. Chuck acknowledges underlie everything Witnesses do. Decrying the spectacle of early Christians taking one another into court over personal disputes, the apostle Paul writes: “I am speaking to move you to shame. Is there not one wise man among you who is able to judge between his brothers? Instead, brother goes to court against brother, and before unbelievers at that!” If Jehovah’s Witnesses today are ‘insular,’ it is because Christians back then were ‘insular.’
In this case, however, insularity, and the failure to ‘go beyond the law’ has resulted in child abusers who did not take their turn in the police lineup, as well as victims thereby deprived of justice. Whether they would have received justice otherwise is arguable, for no end of persons manage to evade the wrath of the law. But that is not the point. They should have been turned over to police, the argument goes, for the latter to either nail them to the wall or let them beat the rap. The victims want justice. Like victims anywhere, they don’t always get it. But don’t get in the way of their quest for it. Since the Witness organization is perceived to have gotten in the way, with law being reinterpreted so as to more damningly point to that conclusion, should they apologize to victims or issue a public statement of regret? You could certainly build a case for it.
When the cop speeds in hot pursuit and a horrific accident results, pointing out that he had permission to speed only goes so far. There are times when only a sincere expression of regret stems the tide of outrage, for who is going to dismiss a run-over pedestrian as ‘just one of those things’?  At such times legal matters become technicalities and you look tone-deaf if you harp on them. Best to say that, in pursuing one’s mission, even within existing rules, a terrible tragedy has resulted for which there is sincere regret.
Were the Witness organization to ever do that, it would cut them no slack with the Reddit group. They would merely drop down a notch on their list to highlight the next reason they hate their former religion before surfacing briefly again to declare the statement insincere. No, there will be no placating these folks. But it might very well clear the air for all other persons, who know very well, simply through personal experience, that Jehovah’s Witnesses are very fine people. Even arch-enemy Barbara Anderson concedes this, as she somehow manages to insinuate that this is despite their evil governing body, rather than the much more reasonable ‘because of it.’
Not because of it solely, of course, for Witnesses’ decency stems from the God they worship. But in the sense that the Witnesses’ governing body keeps them clearly focused on the Bible, the source they signed on for, they surely deserve credit, not condemnation. Almost all other faiths have swayed with the changing winds of contemporary culture. Witnesses have not. They merely update now and then, as they have with their procedures of child sexual abuse investigations. Is it intimidating for a victim of child sexual abuse to appear before the three men of a investigatory committee? Well, they never thought of that. Maybe they should have. So now it is that a child’s recorded testimony can serve itself as the witness and he or she does not have to appear personally. If he or she does, it can be with any congregation member they choose, whether male or female. The religion’s fiercest critics say they will never stop opposing until Witnesses fix their child abuse policies. Arguably, they already have, since almost all cases tried are from 20-30 years ago.
Not everyone likes Jehovah’s Witnesses. Probably more do not than do. But people are mostly fair. A statement of regret would go a long way for them to say: “Oh, I see. They did screw it up, but now I can see why. They really do abhor child sexual abuse over there.”  Otherwise, their enemies find it a cakewalk to portray those in leadership positions among Jehovah’s Witnesses as ‘arrogant,’ and in some cases, careful cultivators of child sexual abusers. They are probably the least arrogant people on earth, but that does not mean they cannot be painted that way.
They do Bible education work. They do it extensively and effectively. In the developing world, a person is stuck with some 200-year old turkey of a Bible translation that he can neither afford nor understand because nobody other than Jehovah’s Witnesses thinks it is inappropriate for Big Business to handle distribution of the Word of God. The Witness Governing Body does think it is inappropriate and they have invented an entirely new production and distribution channel so that the person can obtain a modern Bible at minimal cost, or even free. That accomplishment is not nothing.
They do not do all of this personally, of course. Detractors routinely spin it that Witnesses are ‘controlled’ by ‘eight men in New York.’ It makes no sense. They are modest persons. Many of them cut their teeth performing their trademark door-to-door ministry in the developing world, carrying out a work more lowly than that of the ones they ultimately lead. They have a certain knack at administration, as with any effective organization, but other than that, they have little expertise in anything. But they know where to find it when they need it. From a field of eight million members, where there are no paywalls nor turf battles, they can quickly assemble whatever they deem necessary.
Their latest offering in the field of Bible education consists of an online, self-guided, and anonymous course of Bible study offered on the front page of their website, JW.org. The Bible offers convincing answers to important questions of life, Jehovah's Witnesses feel, questions not readily answered anywhere else. The course is all available online for free, now. After each lesson there is the option to 1) go deeper, for the presentation is necessarily simple, 2) attend a group study at the Witnesses’ Kingdom Hall, 3) request a personal instructor, or 4) say ‘none of the above’ and proceed to the next lesson. It’s a relatively new feature. I don’t know how it will be incorporated. But with only some exaggeration, I am looking forward to saying: “I don’t want to study the Bible with you. Do it yourself. If you have any questions or want to go a level more, I’ll be around.” With only slightly more exaggeration again, the new feature illustrates that, if need be, the main Bible teaching component of the Witnesses’ work could be run out of a server in someone’s dorm room.
They always will be ‘insular,’ or to put in their terminology, ‘no part of the world.’ Surely, they must be permitted to be, for the alternative is to snuff out the type of Christianity that existed in the first century, arguably the most 'true' model. Snuffing out this model in favor of societally evolved ones would be a very fine outcome in the eyes of today’s ‘anti-cultists,’ who will allow that religion can have a place only so long as it is clearly subservient to contemporary life and leaders. Anything not meeting this description they are inclined to label a ‘cult’ that ‘brainwashes’ people through ‘mind-control.’ Those of that spirit of Western anti-cultists have used exactly that reasoning to fuel the furor that has banned Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia and confiscated all of their property, with many other faiths shaking in their boots that they will be next. Of a prominent Russian anti-cultist, Alexander Dvorkin, who shares Western connections via an French NGO, a human-rights expert has said: he “enjoys disseminating inflammatory narratives and hate speech.” It is no less with anti-cultists here, who further their goals through whatever avenues present themselves.
It may well be time to acknowledge that this avenue, this one involving child sexual abuse reporting, is one that became riddled with axle-bending potholes, express sincere remorse, help out to whatever extent is necessary to fill them in, so as to move on with the overall program.
End of Part 2. Part 3 to follow.

@BillyTheKid46, You seem to spend an inordinate amount of energy trying to provoke persons into fighting with you. It is as though you have a NEED to fight. I have seen this from you (and yours) for quite a while now. In a recent thread about Brother Morris visiting a liquor store, I agreed with you completely that the post was irrelevant and irreverent and it tried to make something scandalous out of a potentially innocent activity without 100 percent proof. (And I thought your pun was good, too. See page 4 of that topic.) You and Melinda Mills spoke about the Venezuelan economic issues under Maduro. You helped to clarify the picture that Melinda posted, the one with worthless money in the gutter, when you provided a link to the explanatory SNOPES article. I mentioned that I appreciated that same SNOPES link you provided because it gave details about how and when those pictures came about, and I quoted verbatim from your link. 
Then you inexplicably decided to reject the explanation from your own link, and claim that I was somehow attacking the vision that your mother had told you about in the 1960's. What made this so odd was that I had already agreed that the picture was related to that same expectation. My own mother referenced that point from Ezekiel 7:19, as did Melinda's.
You said:
BTK: "What was fasinating to me, My mother pointed it out to me in the '60s as a devout JW that would happen, and it sure the hell did. There is no photoshop on that. It's not a tale." To which I responded, that in spite of the propaganda use that was presented in SNOPES that, Yes. . . :
JWI: "It was still related to Maduro, and is still related to money becoming worthless. It is still supportive of the idea that people will be throwing their money (even their gold) in the streets, because money is of no value as a savior in the day of Jehovah's fury. It shows how bad things can get." To which you responded:
BTK: "I understand you are trying desperately to delegitimize my mother’s vision. Do that with your own mother, lay off mine." I didn't bother to respond, after which you added:
BTK: "Its unfortunate someone like JWinsider decided to insult and denigrate a relative, and James thinking it’s funny to do just that, makes them the biggest AH’s in this forum." I'm sure that a few people didn't realize that you had made up the whole thing about someone "denigrating a relative" just to provoke a fight in the same way worldly people do when they hurl insults about each other's mother, and call each other "AH," which has been used as an abbreviation for a**hole. When you provoke and the other party doesn't respond in kind, I'm sure it can be frustrating. But please don't bring these same worldly attitudes and posturings into every topic. You end up discrediting yourself instead of your target.
"A slave of the Lord does not need to fight." (2 Tim 2:24)

Very well. Bob and Alice Goodenov, pioneers in a city in Estonia, caught the two Russian journalists, actually named people, so you know they are credible, recording a congregation meeting to see if there was any way they could rearrange things to make JWs look nuts, and blew them into Estonian intelligence, who banned them for five years.
https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/topic/78948-estonia-cancels-visas-of-russian-television-journalists-over-a-discriminatory-film-about-jehovah-witnesses/
Another way to look at it is that it is the play that the HQ brothers are following, not the actors in the play. You don’t have to know the names of the actors to follow the play. It can even be a distraction if you do.
Best regards,
One person who writes in the United States 

Very well. Bob and Alice Goodenov, pioneers in a city in Estonia, caught the two Russian journalists, actually named people, so you know they are credible, recording a congregation meeting to see if there was any way they could rearrange things to make JWs look nuts, and blew them into Estonian intelligence, who banned them for five years.
https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/topic/78948-estonia-cancels-visas-of-russian-television-journalists-over-a-discriminatory-film-about-jehovah-witnesses/
Another way to look at it is that it is the play that the HQ brothers are following, not the actors in the play. You don’t have to know the names of the actors to follow the play. It can even be a distraction if you do.
Best regards,
One person who writes in the United States 

I could be wrong but I think Jack has a video of Caleb and Sophia swilling liquor at the store, and he is wetting himself with glee at the thought of posting it.
If he does, I will counter with my video of TM III dumping his ice cream cone in the trash so he can put still another dollar in the contribution box.

This is true and it lets the air out of the balloon of these morons.
Whenever I buy my liquor, Jack or Srecko, were they to chance to see me, would think they had met Groucho Marx.