Lawyers who defended Catholic pedophiles are now defending JWs pedophiles

[Pudgy]

That cartoon I posted about the four clergymen testifying before the ARC IS almost nine years old!

Speech balloon #4 is just as cringeworthy today as it was back then.

NOTHING HAS CHANGED

.… and don’t gimmee that crap about it is the Secular Government’s responsibility to change, why haven’t they done more, why haven’t they done more? (BooHooHoo…).

THAT is totally irrelevant.

 

[BTK59]

3 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

think you are definitely wrong because of your imprecise and non-objective view of the problems at WTJWorg. I get the impression, from the comments, that religions like Catholic and JW are under attack from the secular government. So it's as if you're denying the reality of pedophilia within church structures, about which the atheistic-satanic structure is planting false information, slander. You don't mean it? Or? Yes, you really mean it. Terrible.

When the United Nations was approached with the dilemma of child abuse in 2013 by addressing the many aspects of child abuse, which included child labor, child trafficking etc., it became evident that these problems, which had been largely ignored by societies, was gaining greater visibility. As governments began to shift their attention towards religious institutions, the Vatican emerged as the most suitable target due to their visible documented incidents.

I cannot deny the existence of pedophilia, especially when it involves someone accused of it and is well-known and supported by you. Speaking out against denying pedophilia in this situation is irrational and contradictory coming from you.

It is not just the information itself, but the act of singling out that renders it hypocritical and misleading. You are aware that this is a global issue, one that affects all institutions around the world, including those located in your own country or place of origin as well.

Post all of those incidents from all world's institutions and ensure consistent adherence to proper protocols. Has the issue been resolved with the AU commissions inquiry? I have noticed statistics indicating that the problem has escalated since 2015. Has the government taken measures to address it effectively?

Have you truly convinced yourself that over the course of a decade, you have managed to make a positive impact despite your distorted views?

Let's expose the hypocrisy of governments like Australia, Canada, Britain, and Norway who seek selectivity for doing the devil's bidding. We must also address the hypocrisy of those who present secondhand information as fact.

The lack of presence during an incident introduces bias. I've encountered situations where women falsely accused her lover of rape out of vengeance for being dumped, and justice was nowhere to be found for the guy that was arrested and humiliated before the prosecution tossed out the arrest. Such incidents, some involving children, are far too common.

There was another incident where an 11-year-old girl approached a complete stranger and threatened to scream and accuse him of molestation in a mall if he didn't give her 20 dollars. It appears that the misguided perspective lies with you and your friends, who continuously dwell on the same topic without realizing you have no positive impact.

Do those incidents make the news? Are they being tracked by anyone? Should these situations be exaggerated to the point where no single person in society can be trusted? That is exactly what the devil wants. Why are you helping?

I have experienced similar incidents, not only concerning worldly society but also within the Watchtower community by sisters. I could share some noteworthy events, but it would be unkind to engage in gossip and slander. Why should I tarnish the name of God in that manner? Merely to gain friends here, laugh out loud! 
 

[Pudgy]

… The Japanese Empire operated under the Bushido Samurai Code, even in modern times.

It took two Atomic Bombs to effect a change in that system.

BooHooHooHooHoo!   (…not).

What the United States, the United Nations, Australia, Ireland, world organizations, the Boy Scouts or the Interstellar Society of Crippled Penguins does or does not do … or recognizes or doesn’t  recognize is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

To even MENTION them is a blatantly transparent attempt to shift blame… the same way a five year old would.

The fact that it sometimes works is cringeworthy, but more importantly, it identifies the proponent of this as a deceitful con-man who assumes his audience is too stupid to notice.

This is the standard practice of a Grifter … A grifter is a person who engages in dishonest or deceitful behavior, often to scam or swindle others out of money or possessions. Grifters typically use manipulation, persuasion, or trickery to achieve their ends.

They ALWAYS have justification, in their own minds.

 

 

[George88]

Empathy goes beyond merely acknowledging an action by demonstrating an understanding of its impact on a person through the interaction with emotions.

Since the brother spoke sincerely, his word carries more weight than the word itself. Only an illogical mind would fail to see the distinction.

Given that the ARC was attempting corrosion by the language they were using and the fact Jackson could see through that manipulation, it was not appropriate to use that term either, as the commission's purpose was not to gather facts rather than assign blame. Any inexperienced lawyer could confirm this. However, since you are not a lawyer, how could you understand? You are only searching for words and relying on assumptions.

Once again, their hypocrisy is evident in their refusal to employ the same methods when it came to their own government-run facilities in Australia, which you are disregarding. Hence, whether you believe or not that people need to hear an apology, it becomes insignificant until it is justified for everyone, and not solely for the Watchtower that you have developed animosity towards.

As stated, a new law had been passed to deny whistleblower status, imposing imprisonment for anyone who went against the same Australian government that was hiding the facts levied against their own detention centers about child abuse until the media forced the issue. Then the ARC changed its tune. Why blame others but not yourself. Where is Australia's apology to the dedicated workers and the victims in their detention centers? They never received one either, so what's the point? This raises the question: How is this behavior consistent across the board?

Leave the analyses to actual psychologists and legitimate lawyers, rather than those with limited expertise.

[Pudgy]

Exactly the response of an arrogant, narcissistic, grifter who assumes everyone else, except him, is ignorant and stupid.

Your premises are fallacious and your conclusions are wrong.

To belabor the point ……

What the United States, the United Nations, Australia, the Australian Royal Commission, Ireland, world organizations, the Boy Scouts or the Interstellar Society of Crippled Penguins does or does not do … or recognizes or doesn’t  recognize is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

COMPLETELY

IRRELEVANT

To even MENTION them is a blatantly transparent attempt to shift blame… the same way a five year old would.

The fact that it sometimes works is cringeworthy, but more importantly, it identifies the proponent of this as a deceitful con-man who assumes his audience is too stupid to notice.

….. as you have just illustrated.

Even the Emperor of Japan renounced the Evil of World War II that his nation caused, and offered a clear and genuine apology, although he never actually apologized with those words, which royally ticked off the Chinese.

 

[George88]

Yep! Same to you pudgy/James, at least I wasn't accused of being what you are guilty of.

[Pudgy]

Ad-hominem attacks without credible evidence is what you ALWAYS DO.

9 minutes ago, George88 said:

Yep! same to you pudgy, at least I wasn't accused of being what you are guilty of.

[Pudgy]

“Yep! same to you pudgy…” is the response of a five year old being reproved.

[George88]

Your credibility to discuss ad-hominem attacks is nonexistent, given your recent statements. Look up the facts about the ARC and Australia, as they speak for themselves. And as for you, the mugshot tells its own story.

You want to continue to post more lies and rants, go ahead, knock yourself out, lol!

Oops! I completely forgot to mention something. The phrase "ad hominem" The phrase ad-hominem is a code phrase for you people to get people banned. You can't deny it anymore, your false claims about never having anyone banned are inexcusable if your demand is met.

[Pudgy]

6 hours ago, BTK59 said:

Let's expose the hypocrisy of governments like Australia, Canada, Britain, and Norway who seek selectivity for doing the devil's bidding. We must also address the hypocrisy of those who present secondhand information as fact.

The lack of presence during an incident introduces bias. I've encountered situations where women falsely accused her lover of rape out of vengeance for being dumped, and justice was nowhere to be found for the guy that was arrested and humiliated before the prosecution tossed out the arrest. Such incidents, some involving children, are far too common.

Georgie …. your own sock puppet has betrayed you.

[Srecko Sostar]

8 hours ago, George88 said:

Here we witness the distortion spread by Srecko and Pudgy, endorsed by a renowned apostate known as "witness" who overlooks the absence of the word "apology" in the argument. This misrepresentation is a classic example of cherry-picking and distorting information to fit a particular narrative. It's important to consider the entirety of the document from the AU and the context in which it was written before drawing conclusions. 

In the Australian case, a Governing Body member showed empathy towards a victim who was identified as BCG. He acknowledged that more should have been done to support that individual and repeatedly aligned himself with the stance presented by BCG's lawyer. Therefore, attempting to create a negative impression from apostates only serves to provide further grounds for governments to resist being influenced by them.

"I don't know your client, but please, could you convey an expression of my love and concern and reassure her that obviously she has had an opportunity to speak about how she feels, and hopefully this will help the policies and procedures to improve."

Someone who shows this much empathy in their heart definitely feels sorry for the victim. I can sense a hint of remorse for the fact that more hadn't been done. 

The question is: Who wrote the government's privacy laws that the branch office had to rely on?

The GB member even went as far as suggesting that if the AU government made it mandatory for all accusations to be reported to the police, regardless of how trivial they may seem, it would be more advantageous for the Watchtower. This would effectively remove the responsibility from their hands entirely.

What was the Australian government's response? We will make some adjustments to our laws, but we will uphold the clergy privilege, and any form of reporting needs to be proven factual first. What sets apart the burden of proof standards between the Watchtower and the standard placed by the AU?
 
What about the sheer hypocrisy displayed by that commission when they initially "rejected" the idea of investigating the Australian Detention Centers for child abuse? It is truly astounding to think that even the prime minister at that time had passed a new law, forbidding doctors, nurses, or employees from speaking out against these horrific acts.

This flawed attempt to mislead others by the uneducated is yet another example of falsehoods being spread due to the omission of just one word, according to them.

I find it disappointing that some here misrepresent the facts presented by apostates and endorsed by witnesses.

Thanks for reminding me and other of GJ's statement. Can you see real grief from these words? Is there any remorse for inaction, remorse for bad GB instructions? Is there a personal desire to know the victim and show compassion? She is "Client" in GJ's eyes. Not one of "Jesus' sheep, one of the least", one of child in KH who went through horrors ?
GJ's statement was given in court because of the publicity and because of questions from lawyers and the court. The GJ statement was "given under pressure" from the public and the process. Should we consider it a deep feeling from the heart and conscience? We are not naive, if others are.

[Srecko Sostar]

9 hours ago, George88 said:

Given that the ARC was attempting corrosion by the language they were using and the fact Jackson could see through that manipulation, it was not appropriate to use that term either, as the commission's purpose was not to gather facts rather than assign blame. Any inexperienced lawyer could confirm this. However, since you are not a lawyer, how could you understand? You are only searching for words and relying on assumptions.

 

"Any inexperienced JW can confirm where the WTJWorg heavenly chariot is going". lol