REPROOF FROM THE PLATFORM

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

On 5/21/2019 at 4:48 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

On 5/20/2019 at 9:07 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

WDS

 

Right the internet gives lots of different meanings to this WDS idea.

So please explain what exactly you mean by it as it could be one of many things. 

WDS is similar to TDS, and DDS.

[Srecko Sostar]

Wikipedia source:

Etymology[edit]

Coined in 2003 by Charles Krauthammer as Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) in The Washington Post article "The Delusional Dean".^[1]

Noun[edit]

Derangement Syndrome (plural Derangement Syndromes)

1. (idiomatic, colloquial) The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal and balanced people triggered by the mention of a specific topic

:)))  in otherwise normal and balanced people  :)))))

[Anna]

On 5/21/2019 at 11:33 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

I noticed this question, and I know you were asking TTH, but I would like to say no, I do not believe that this has ever been the case. Now if Jehovah's Witnesses were a child porn ring in disguise, then I might believe it. You, as a reasonable person, and I am assuming you are reasonable, has to see that no human organization (unless it is what I mentioned) will knowingly and purposefully condone child molestation.

[TrueTomHarley]

58 minutes ago, Anna said:

Now if Jehovah's Witnesses were a child porn ring in disguise, then I might believe it. 

Oh, is THAT what he was implying? Sorry. I missed that.

[JOHN BUTLER]

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Oh, is THAT what he was implying? Sorry. I missed that.

No Tom it was not what i was implying at all. Anna seems to to have a vivid imagination.

Maybe my wording wasn't as it should have been or maybe English English is different to American English, or different to the American way of thinking. 

I was not suggesting that JW Org was a porn ring in disguise, though it is possible that there could be small porn rings within the JW Org Earthwide.  After all it has been suggested that some people join the JW Org for just that reason, to abuse young children.

However back to what I was saying originally. I will reword it.

Original comment : 

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

Revised comment : Do you believe any of the cases of child abuse within the JW Org, from any country in this earth ? Do you believe that any of the Elders that did continuously abuse children in the JW Org were known to be doing so ?  Do you think it was possible for those Elders to continue to abuse children because they were allowed to keep their position as Elder even though it was known they had abused children in the past ?  OR do you think that every complaint against every Elder concerning child abuse, is a lie by apostates ? 

TTH I don't expect you to answer any of these questions, but Anna might  as she seems to think it involves her. 

As for Anna's comment : " You, as a reasonable person, and I am assuming you are reasonable, has to see that no human organization (unless it is what I mentioned) will knowingly and purposefully condone child molestation."

2 Kings 16 v2.

Aʹhaz was 20 years old when he became king, and he reigned for 16 years in Jerusalem. He did not do what was right in the eyes of Jehovah his God as David his forefather had done. Instead, he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and he even made his own son pass through the fire, following the detestable practices of the nations that Jehovah had driven out from before the Israelites. 

2 Kings 21 v 6 concerning Manassah 

 ⁶  And he made his own son pass through the fire; he practiced magic, looked for omens,m and appointed spirit mediums and fortune-tellers.n He did on a grand scale what was bad in Jehovah’s eyes, to offend him.

But of course JW Org is much better than the Nation of Israel    isn't it.  Or maybe not .................

 

[TrueTomHarley]

21 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

Accusations against elders are very rare—the rotter in San Diego being a notable exception, as is brought out in the following post.

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/02/the-reproach-of-child-sexual-abuse-falls-on-the-abu.html

[JW Insider]

On 5/21/2019 at 11:33 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

Yes, I believe there have been a few. I don't want to give the impression that I think this happens often, or as much as so many ex-JWs and previously abused Witnesses seem to imagine. I have just recently read a couple of statements by activist ex-elders who have sat on judicial committees for several years in their congregations and never personally encountered a case or accusation of child sexual abuse. (I'm responding as if you said "on a repeated basis" rather than "on a regular basis" since the term "regular" is open to interpretation.)

I answer your question to the best of my ability however because I believe this is one of those terrible things that, if true, MUST be exposed so that more of us are alert to the potential extent of the problem. Things done in darkness must be brought to light, no matter the pain and embarrassment to the organization. After all, it's not the organization's fault that these men exist; they bring reproach upon themselves. It's this old belief that they are bringing reproach upon the organization that has led to *a few* amazing cover-ups by "organization men" who thought they were doing the right thing.

However, before responding, I just recently read through a private discussion from a person who says he is now ready to go to the police, now that he has completed collecting a lot of evidence and speaking with corroborating witnesses. (Not to his own abuse, but to other persons abused by the same elder.) He knows his case is strong, but he believes the status of the accused will make it difficult to get very far based on the way that other victims of the same accused have been treated. He already brought his case to the elders a few years ago, before the most recent reporting arrangements were consistent. So he wants to have done all the due-diligence before presenting his accusation to authorities.

Also, in general, I think the evidence is strong that the higher up a person is in the organization, the more he has been protected from scandal, because that scandal was thought to reflect so badly when it is someone known by all the Witnesses of a specific country or, at least once in the past, even internationally. That said, I only know about three cases, in three different countries, that would fit this criterion. Two of the accused brothers are now dead. I have been told about a few others that I am too skeptical to believe, although I might be ready to add a fourth name to my list. (A circuit overseer who was finally disfellowshipped for homosexual behaviour with JW and non-JW "young men" and who, according to his wife, continued with non-JW "young men" after he was DF'd.) The length of time it has taken for several elders' cases to finally be settled, after other accusers come forward, over a several-year period, is also circumstantial evidence that most elders never really knew how to handle such cases in years past. This lack of consistency can easily allow for "abuse-of-power" cases to be swept under the rug. But it doesn't prove that these types of cases were rampant.

Of course, there is a wide range of activity that has been lumped into the term child sexual abuse and some of this activity on the more violent end of the spectrum would be expected to produce immediate discipline. What were considered lesser crimes were more easily dismissed or rationalized away. But, of course, as this thread has pointed out, (in the past especially) many of the vulnerable persons in the congregation were never warned if the elders were assured that true repentance had taken place after a disciplinary period, no matter how bad the crime was.

I am very happy for the more explicit correction in the recent Watchtower that can help change the "culture" about where the reproach really lies.

[JOHN BUTLER]

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Accusations against elders are very rare—the rotter in San Diego being a notable exception, as is brought out in the following post.

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/02/the-reproach-of-child-sexual-abuse-falls-on-the-abu.html

Ah but why in the past have accusations against elders been very rare ? Maybe because congregants were told to keep their mouths shut and not report it. Maybe because victims were disfellowshipped for 'slander' even though what they said was true. Maybe because of the two witness rule, where victims were not taken seriously.

But I think there have been proven cases here in the UK too. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-46131196

7th November 2018.

A Jehovah's Witness elder has been jailed for five years for sexually assaulting a "terrified" schoolgirl.

Brian Jenkins, who is now 75, groped the girl when she was aged between 12 and 14, while she was part of his congregation in Brecon, Powys.

Jenkins, from Redditch, Worcestershire, was found guilty of six charges of indecent assault dating back to the 1970s at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court.

The court heard Jenkins was jailed for 21 months at Worcester Crown Court in 1991 for a series of similar sex offences.

Rare is it Tom ? 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

8 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Ah but why in the past have accusations against elders been very rare ? Maybe because congregants were told to keep their mouths shut and not report it.

It hasn’t stopped any accusations of the rank and file and allegations that elders are trying to “cover it up” has it? If they are not hesitant to accuse of cover-up, why not accuse them of doing it, which is juicier? No, John, you are reaching for straws, trying to manufacture a “reality” that does not exist.

Why do we hear nothing about bestiality of members, or of elders? Hmm? What sort of shenanigans is that?

Possibly because it doesn’t happen. Duh

[JOHN BUTLER]

Quote  JW Insider  "Also, in general, I think the evidence is strong that the higher up a person is in the organization, the more he has been protected from scandal, because that scandal was thought to reflect so badly when it is someone known by all the Witnesses of a specific country or, at least once in the past, even internationally..... " 

@JW Insider Thank you for a very well thought out and sensible comment. Very balanced. 

I particularly liked, and laughed at, this quote above. You are not really''fanning the flames' of my thoughts though as I've felt that it was that situation for a long time. Even the GB may have skeletons in their closets. 

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley  "No, John, you are reaching for straws, trying to manufacture a “reality” that does not exist. "

Um, well I've just given an example that it does exist Tom. 

And investigations are now going on in many countries so it may show that it has existed even more than you like to think. 

Cases have been going to court for a few years now, it's not exactly new news.

And if you read @JW Insider comment you may notice why the higher ups 'appear' squeaky clean.  But it seems you need to serve your GB and it's Org so you are blinding yourself to reality. So be it Tom but I think you will have to face the truth one day. 

[JW Insider]

23 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Even the GB may have skeletons in their closets. 

I have not heard the slightest hint of scandal about any current members of the GB. I can't say I know any of them on a personal level, either. But surely with all the attention being given this topic, and with thousands of vocal ex-JWs, you'd expect some smoke if there was fire. Yet no one has made a claim (or "made up" a claim) about any of the GB members, as far as I know.