CONGRESS, CAPITAL HILL or WARWICK BETHEL

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

I was wondering which has the most physical security ? 

It seems to me that people can and did just 'walk into' the Congress building, but, I think Warwick has security gates and 'guards'.   

I wondered also if Warwick has a stash of 'arms & ammo' as I remember a couple of 'brothers' having a 'house full' of firearms and almost bragging about it.  I did hear rumour that Warwick has bunkers too. And I would think they have a large amout of food storage. 

Um, add all this up with the fact that the GB have said that JW's must obey instruction, even if they do not understand it. 

Now all that may sound OTT, but, i was also wondering what laws the USA has on what level of security a 'religion' is allowed to have.  If i remember rightly, some years ago, a religion in America had a building full of guns and fought with the police. The Waco Siege. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege#:~:text=Total%3A 82 killed&text=The Waco siege%2C also known,28 and April 19%2C 1993.

I would think that since then the US goverment would have put in place some kind of restrictions to prevent that happening again. So I'm wondering just how secure Warwick is, and how secure it is allowed to be by law. 

[Srecko Sostar]

13 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

bunkers

In some countries, building regulations may require that a shelter be built inside a new building.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

@BillyTheKid46 @BillyTheKid47 @César Chávez   and any other aka. 

You wanna me to say Capitol Building or maybe Capitol House. You is what we in UK call a plonker.  You do what we call splitting hairs. Basically you try to distract from the real meaning of something by using what you think is inteligence, but in reality it shows your stupidity.  

One thing i find funny is I mentioned QAnon on here going back last year and most people had no idea. Now QAnon seem to be mainstream news. But that is off topic  

[Matthew9969]

Here in the United States, (although they are not very united these days), we have the 2nd amendment which allows people to own firearms. But not people who have federal felonies on their record. Most of the churches that I have attended congregants volunteer to do security for the church during services and/or working hours. Some of those volunteers do carry a firearm on their person and is legal for them to conceal it as long as they have a required license to  do that. States differ on concealed carry laws.

The jw's are so secretive and subversive it'd be hard to speculate how far they would go with their security, I can imagine though they have a lot of camera's covering every square inch of the place.

[Srecko Sostar]

44 minutes ago, Matthew9969 said:

The jw's are so secretive and subversive it'd be hard to speculate how far they would go with their security, I can imagine though they have a lot of camera's covering every square inch of the place.

They could hire a security guard whose conscience allows the use of weapons. WT Lawyers and Legal Department for sure can justifies that.

[Space Merchant]

On 1/9/2021 at 4:21 PM, 4Jah2me said:

I was wondering which has the most physical security ? 

It seems to me that people can and did just 'walk into' the Congress building, but, I think Warwick has security gates and 'guards'.   

This alone shows you do not know what took place and watched what the MSM is feeding you.

If my memory serves me right, the W faith's mainstay simply have cameras and gates.

On 1/9/2021 at 4:21 PM, 4Jah2me said:

I wondered also if Warwick has a stash of 'arms & ammo' as I remember a couple of 'brothers' having a 'house full' of firearms and almost bragging about it.  I did hear rumour that Warwick has bunkers too. And I would think they have a large amout of food storage. 

They do not have arms, claim that one of Witness' contacts brought up, which was proven false by even ExJWs, I need not quote that evidence here. There some however, who joined the faith that were military, police, hunters, etc. but that does not mean their depositary is somehow in a faith's mainstay.

As I told you in the past, be very careful with rumors. Not too long ago, back in 2017, people claimed JWs to be with Soros and ANTIFA and it resulted in someone getting the beating of his life. Therefore we need to be very careful.

As for ANTIFA, like BAMN and Qanon, I have a strong disdain for.

On 1/9/2021 at 4:21 PM, 4Jah2me said:

Um, add all this up with the fact that the GB have said that JW's must obey instruction, even if they do not understand it. 

I am sure they explained it to them, as there has been those talking about the vaccine and a list of other things.

On 1/9/2021 at 4:21 PM, 4Jah2me said:

Now all that may sound OTT, but, i was also wondering what laws the USA has on what level of security a 'religion' is allowed to have.  If i remember rightly, some years ago, a religion in America had a building full of guns and fought with the police. The Waco Siege. 

This was in Waco Texas, and the religion in question was a legitimate cult (which differs from an actual Abrahamic Faith due to the fact of accursed teachings being taught). That said, many people believe the situation itself had some fragmented intel, with FBI involvement and other information not being made known to the public, therefore, some are skeptical as others believe to be a setup.

However, comparing Waco's situation to the faiths today does not make any sense. And I can list many reasons, and how much of a danger it can be to the unware that can succumb to consequences. As people of God, we do not want to make an innocent bystander a target.

On 1/9/2021 at 4:21 PM, 4Jah2me said:

I would think that since then the US goverment would have put in place some kind of restrictions to prevent that happening again. So I'm wondering just how secure Warwick is, and how secure it is allowed to be by law. 

They won't granted the people can setup their own security measures, be it a home, a building, even federal. As for churches in general, likewise, example - Mississippi Church Protection Act (§ 45-9-171).

On 1/10/2021 at 8:27 AM, 4Jah2me said:

You wanna me to say Capitol Building or maybe Capitol House. You is what we in UK call a plonker.  You do what we call splitting hairs. Basically you try to distract from the real meaning of something by using what you think is inteligence, but in reality it shows your stupidity.  

One thing i find funny is I mentioned QAnon on here going back last year and most people had no idea. Now QAnon seem to be mainstream news. But that is off topic  

That being said, is there anything you would like to know? Granted many of us Truthers are getting bombarded with what took place, we knew it was going to happened regarding the escalation, to which I addressed years ago.

As for Qanon, I had explained to you what they are, however, a small remnant of Qanon, even Jake the Horn guy, were part of it. But, the Majority that breached the Capitol were Crazed Trump Supporters. The irony in all this, not ALL Trump Supporters went to the capitol, in fact, some fought their own to prevent them from entering.

As you can see, which I make clear that the actions of one does not define everyone, but you see the MSM is doing the opposite, thus branding every Trump Supporter as a Terrorist, and now Big Tech is involved.

 

FYI, you did not mention Qanon years ago, you mentioned in a couple of months ago; last year

 

I also mentioned them and the other groups years ago, in 2018, as is with the escalation that led up to this catalyst

 

[Space Merchant]

20 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

Here in the United States, (although they are not very united these days), we have the 2nd amendment which allows people to own firearms. But not people who have federal felonies on their record. Most of the churches that I have attended congregants volunteer to do security for the church during services and/or working hours. Some of those volunteers do carry a firearm on their person and is legal for them to conceal it as long as they have a required license to  do that. States differ on concealed carry laws.

The jw's are so secretive and subversive it'd be hard to speculate how far they would go with their security, I can imagine though they have a lot of camera's covering every square inch of the place.

There is nothing wrong with cameras, granted cameras are non-lethal and many have benefited from them. Not everyone has to have a firearm for security, that is, unless you continue to press groups and or institutions as soft targets to a crazed person.

As for the 2nd Amendment, that is correct, someone who knows a section within the amendment; the constitution.

That being said, the focus on the the Capitols as of recent, since both the Left and the Right has come out to play. Meanwhile Alt-Left/Right media and the MSM is confusing people.