Space Merchant

@Srecko Sostar Unwise to add your own assertions to the events of Tulsa. The religous backing of the rifle baring neighbor was never cited, so assuming he is Christian, be it true or false, is not wise. Brother Hill was cited before, even by JWI. To assume the defense of looters attested to firearms, is unwise also, for people can defend a place of business without deadly force, even in the past, even now. But regardless, we you can see by the examples and cited aritcle, the brothers of the faith mentioned did not harbor any racical hatred between the two. The ExJW thought otherwise; not knowing about Tulsa. It is also noted when those befreind someone of another race, black, in those days, they evade confrontation with Jim Crow mental folk, keep the friendship obsuce to protect their friend and or mate, i.e. a white man who's wife/mate is a black woman, he will do whatever it takes to protect her when force is not neccessary; some events are equated to this in that Era.
That being said, these events took place in the 1900s, do not be like the YouTuber who applied today's thinking to the old days.
Also Hill was mentioned in example to you before, do not twist the narrative.
But it is strange how you muster this reponse because you equated the events to Doctrine rather than History.
Just so you know it was talked about before, @JW Insider cited the same article in regardings to adding futher context as linked here (for the 3rd time)
 
Thank you once again for proving Example 1 from Witness' video is a lie. You are doing more harm to her video source than anyone else here with that regard.

@Witness @Srecko Sostar Because I take pity on the misguided, I suggest you read/look into the following. It does not matter whether you are a former, or current Jehovah's Witness, does not matter if you agree or disagree, but you both have to understand that a re-write of history is an extremely bad precedent; for I stated this to even the Black Hebrew Israelites. This precedent can lead to the category of denial of history/or distortion of the Holocaust. This also goes for the events that took place prior, and the unrelated Gobitis situation involving the American Constitution.
Example one, also refuted via this source
https://www.history.com/news/tulsa-massacre-black-wall-street-before-and-after-photos http://www.dewaynewatts.com/home/the-lost-story-of-love-among-the-tulsa-1921-massacre a source both JWI and I mentioned in the past:
http://reddirtimports.blogspot.com/ Granted both of you often times go to JW.org, here you go - https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2021/1921-One-Hundred-Years-Ago/ Source which refutes Example 2:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/introduction-to-the-holocaust https://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/jehovahs-witnesses Misc:
The Gobitis Case
https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/308/minersville-school-district-v-gobitis#:~:text=Gobitis (1940)&text=School District v.-,Gobitis%2C 310 U.S. 586 (1940)%2C that state legislatures,the First and Fourteenth Amendments.  
On Archives in a public/non-public domain - https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-library-and-vs-archive/  
You do not have to read through all of them, but there are points in there that give detail. As stated, videos and experiences vary, people do give their bias opinion, it does not mean you have to shut off your mind when you are accountable to being a discerning person. It is unknown if neither of you are a genuine Christian, regardless, it would be wise to discern what you are hearing/reading, for Christians have the responsibility to Examine such things, liken to Apostle Paul and those in Macedonia, etc. Do not give in to the Agenda either because it only makes you a viable candidate for the Beast and the Harlot.

Insults do not work against me because Slander is the tool of the loser. Been in debates where I was ridiculed for my race, culture, some even wanted to kill me, police sent after me, but it does not shake me. A couple of former JWs won't do much granted they use every slander move some weak debaters use to deter evidence.
That being said, I guess your new light is the Holocaust was JW affiliated only, granted, you believe the video. More so, as is your assertion which is false about equating Doctrine to the Jim Crow Laws of the Era noted in Example 1.
That being said, the examples showed proves that both you, @Witness blindly accept things without merit, as is defending a falsehood, and when exposed, you cry out with JW/WT remarks.
God and his Christ deal with those who profess truth and call out falsehoods, and use discernment. He does not take favor in those feasting a banquet at the table of demons when it benefits them.
As I told Witness, you yourself should repent, best do it now than wait to confess at the White Throne.
Both of you are heavily misguided, know you actually have time to correct yourself, to Witness, Pearl, to you, a disloyal husband who profits off of ExJWs.

And so it begins, after many of us had spoken about the events of Australia, the EU and Canada, and now this. Some people are distracted by the recent Super bowl, Woke Media, Valentine's Day, etc to not realize this has taken place. That being said, what was mentioned about extreme levels of Civil Disobedience in the uptick time frame, is evidently coming true.
That being said, we now have the start of assassination attempts of political figures in the US after it was called some days ago in correlation with the fabled Civil War many mentioned, The Ball is in the United States Court now.

And so it begins, something of what many of us, from Truthers to Independent Journalist, even Preppers etc. Some in the community has traveled and or on their way to Ottawa.
Justin Trudeau (dubbed a Dictator), the one that we stated to, even called out to be a problem for years down used has invoked the Emergency Act (possibly the first time used in Canada's history) in regards to the Trucker Convoy, of which one of their own was recently arrested in an attempt to break them, moreover, although they are not the threat to Sovereignty and or the like in that regard, seems those in power seems to view them as such in order to maintain their power.
The only reason he is going down this path is because he wants to hold on to power, to remain in the club and not get kicked out permanently. One can see that Justin Trudeau is not backing down, as with his underlings because they truly do not want to be removed.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
That being said, even for Neutral persons or those that do not adhere to the issues caused by the paradigm, who are not involved in Politics, or those not in the Investor's community, such will have an indirect damning effect on the normal working person/family. Children will also be effected.

The issue is the fact you were formerly a Jehovah's Witness, yet, you lack even the basic things of your former faith. You do not even know who was the second leader of the Bible Students; for you did this here to not look foolish, but the reality is, your remarks elsewhere proves you are pushing an Agenda based lie just to save face.
As seen here # 1 Here # 2 JWI even provided some information in which you interacted with him on that. That is Hypocritical.
Everyone, both current, former, as with those who study Religion is aware that Rutherford took over for Russell - case closed.
It is not about care, as with I don't care at all, this it is more so as to exposed, which you walked into that remark on your own when you attested to the remark about religious leaders. You engineered this yourself. Going back to Examples 1, 2 and 3, they are alluded to Rutherford, especially Example 1 because of the events of Tulsa whereas around the time Black Wall Street was getting destroyed, as with blood running in the streets from the violence, you can see convention pictures of Rutherford in old pictures.
Example below which is near a court house, a picture of Rutherford can be seen in the background whereas their was a conflict between White and Black people taking place; events of Tulsa 1921.

Current and former JWs are aware of Pastor Rutherford's conventions, as is his lead of the Bible Students, after all, even in this forum you made remarks of the book which relates to Example 3, but here we see you are pretending to not be aware.
This has to do with you.
Your former faith, as with former members of the faith is aware of who led the Bible Students, the first being Russell. Therefore the fact you play ignorant here but elsewhere you attest to the notation shows you to be a lair, cowardice to your own claim at best.
Rutherford took over for the Bible Students, we all know.
I do not see why you were so afraid to say it.
Technically you do.
I can pull some of your remarks about Example 3 elsewhere, as with other notations to Rutherford vs here when you claim ignorance to pretend you have no idea of who lead the Bible Students. As is you not knowing as to why your forerunner was called a Judge.
Learn your history, you need it, for anyone attempting to re-write history or deny events of the Holocaust, it is problematic, as is agreeing with those who hold such an idea - hence Agenda. You make the Black Hebrew Israelites look like saints, in this regard for they attempted the same thing many times, and people like me refute them as well.
I am a Preacher of the Word, nothing more. As Preachers, we call out the accursed, as with falsehoods and false witnesses, which is called a Refutation. - Galatians 1:1-11. As side for that, anyone that repaints history because of an Agenda, I tend to call that out too.
That being said, it does not matter if you agree or disagree with JWs, even for the fact you were formerly one, an Ex-Deacon of the faith, but at the same time, you should not be this gullible to false witnesses and adhere to it as a truth, it not only makes you look bad, but shows the lack of thinking in regards to historical accounts. Some EXJWs usually go after Jehovah's Witnesses stating they lack critically thinking, likewise with Atheist who says this of all Christians. You should at least shed some responsibility to research anything and everything, even videos such as this, the fact you play the role of a White Knight for someone tainted in this field, only causes more harm, than good, on your part.
As stated before, the video is misleading, and the facts proved this to be the case, facts are everything.

No need to because the issue here is the misleading, so a refutation, however, Dmitar's focus was on Pricvay Act issues, which isn't too different from what you asked before.
Also as a side note, you of all peole should know a Christian should be defending a Truthful Witness, not a False one.
That being said, the disccusion is in regards to a True Witness and a False Witness, whereas the latter has no idea what the video entails.
To give you a breif run down:
Witness claims the video is true, however, the video has misleading information riddled in bias opinions. Witness claims Archives are unknown to people, even JWs because of a logon in Bethel, however, the Archives exist to the public. Srecko aruges, and Witness, about privacy, Dmitar interjected. Witness' video claims Bible Students purposely segregated because they were racist, however, this is not true, for although they had seperate churches due to customs in the United States, as is the laws, they still attempted to risk in a violent enviroment to see their brothers and sisters, black and or white. The events of Tulsa utlimately destorys the bias opinion. Srecko claims to know of the focused Era from Example 1, however, he back pedals form his statement,and attested the notation to human beahavior and doctrine, however, this is not the case. Example 2 is in regards to the Holoscause and Nazism whereas Witness' video attest to the the idea JWs were the sole target, which is untrue, the Nazi went after Jews, and everyone else, JWs, came much later; it is also noted that JWs were tormented differently compared to others, it is because the Nazis wanted them to renouced their faith. The conclusion shows there is indeed misleading information in the video, however, the latter defends misinformation willfully, thus even disrepescting 1 John 4:1 in order to do so. Srecko's Glasgow now effects Witness. The link you provided was brought up in my older disscusion concerning CTR (I am not sure if you even read the link either), as pointed out, not only have ExJWs from that time, 17 years ago, jumble, they state things that are not associated with the truth of the matter; taking information that is true/false and mold it into something entirely different - as seen by opinion riddled comments and so forth for example, i.e. CTR's wife, his beleifs, the Era he is from, Masonic Hall, etc.
The thread also puts the Witness' YouTuber video in an even more compromising spot.
For that website/forum is no different from here. The difference is it is riddled with more ExJWs and Atheists compared to here, granted eyars ago, those who are not fans of God dominate the fourm base, this was the case with the Stack Exchange also.
The irony of it all is that just like the video, the commenters applied today's view of Racisim to the 1900s (and the late 1800s), the same problem the YouTuber has done, therefore leads to the reason as to Witness willfully adhereing to a misleading information, likewise with the Archives, which even in that link some have used (the same Archives Witness attesed to not existing which she uses), as is other events of the 1900s even outside of the United States, i.e. Germany.
Surely you could do better than that, but if I were you, I would not interject, for the issue is in regards to the party who support misleading information being - Witness, Bill, and Srecko. If you get invovled, it would only be a problem for you because there is a chance your tenure may be brought to question concerning Race and World War II and or you being challeneged in a True vs False Witness disscusion. 
This article was brought up, cited before. If people add their own exgesis into it, let alone opinions, as is what we can see by the comments, then the truth in this regard is obsured.
Also your latter statement is incorrect because at the time, it was Bible Students, not Jehovah's Witnesses, i.e. the events of 1921 and prior, Bible Students were in the United States and they only becaome Jehovah's Witnesses years later.
It should be known to you of your former faith that Pastor Russell was succeeded in 1917 by Pastor Rutherford, for even around that time, the new Pastor and the Christains still went under the name Bible Students. It wasn't until much later on the group's name to Jehovah's Witnesses in 1931 to emphasize its members' belief that Jehovah, or Yahweh, is the true God and that the Witnesses were his specially chosen followers. The early events of the Segregation Era, as is Tulsa, which actions of the Bible Students then, disqualfies the fact that the YouTuber attest to them to be adhering to Jim Crow-sque mentality.
If this was indeed the expectation, then the in real life example of the white man risking his life for a black man would be entirely different. More so, if Bible Students gave into the Jim Crow mentality at the time, there is a high chance that
[A] Pastor Rutherford would have been dealt with early on which would erase the coming events of 1931
[B] This would literally prevent Jehovah's Witnesses from existing, as with other events that took place since the Bible Students would end up like some faith groups who vanished from 1914 onward.
[C] even Historical Accounts invovling them would vanish, the situation with the Consitution in 1940, Blood Transfusion, The transation and or collection of various Bibles, etc.
In short - Jehovah's Witnesses would have not existed for those under Jim Crow would have made sure of it, after all, they tried to eradicate all Black people in Tulsa because they assume a black man had sexually assaulted a 17 year old girl, an event that did not occur.
EDIT:
As I said, seems you've  successfully interjected yourself when you coined the entity himself. You've walked yourself into this one.

Perhaps or only in your mind.

Are you a Pastor?

Let us hear how official publication explained why Russell has been called "pastor".
WTJWorg source link is: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1996043?q=pastor+russell&p=par
Jesus gave the congregation “gifts in men,” some as “pastors,” or shepherds, who treat Jehovah’s flock in a tender way. (Ephesians 4:8, 11; King James Version) One of these men was Charles T. Russell, the Watch Tower Society’s first president. He was called Pastor Russell because of his loving and compassionate activities in shepherding the flock under the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ. Today, Christian elders are appointed by the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and care is exercised not to use such terms as “pastor,” “elder,” or “teacher” as titles. (Matthew 23:8-12) Yet, present-day elders do a pastoral, or shepherding, work for the benefit of the sheep of Jehovah’s pasturage.
JW members do not use the term "pastor" for their elders, regardless of the fact that you gave an explanation of the term pastor, so it would follow that it is the same type of activity. Although today's JWs consider Russell a forerunner of the representatives of the true God and also the founder of their religion and organization, they have renounced the use of the term as "pastor" and the like because such terms are in use by other religious communities that, JWs claim, are part of "false religion".
The term “Pastor Russell” was the exclusive name for only one and unique man of the time and as far as I read WTJWorg publications BS and JW did not use the word pastor for anyone other than Russell. Thus, it is a matter of the historical context of the use of the name, not the meaning of the noun pastor.
JW refuse to call their elders pastors. Whenever the word “pastor” appears in a WTJWorg text the publication refers to priests of “false religions”. The only use of the term “Pastor” in a positive context is only in the historical figure of CT Russell. Sure, that attitude of JW members is ridiculous, but it’s because they want it that way.

I’m not petty, but I’m surprised that such an informed and knowledgeable debater like you mistakenly names historical figures from the WT.
Russell was called Pastor, and Rutherford was called Judge.

Along the general topic of the above posts, it’s interesting to note that Superman really is Superman.
He only pretends to be Clark Kent.
Sometimes this is obvious, sometimes it’s not.
 

Yet words have meaning with facts behind it. Not too long ago you speak boldy in regards to facts vs opinion. That said, of which was said, already stated as with the notation of the archives. Why go back now when a critical question to example 2 of the video is now ongoing?
Again, if you believe the video to be true, just as Witness believes it to be true, did the Nazi Regime take the action or not? All of a sudden another point from the video cocnerning history you are avoid it.
 
Why?
As a side note, you mentioned Croatia. The Independent State of Croatia was also invovled in the events of WW II in regards to History pretaining to the Nazi Regime.
All histroical accounts, even the archives pretaining this event, and Germany's dark past, states otherwise.
EDIT:
You can react with a laugh all you want, the question still stands.

No need to because the issue here is the misleading, so a refutation, however, Dmitar's focus was on Pricvay Act issues, which isn't too different from what you asked before.
Also as a side note, you of all peole should know a Christian should be defending a Truthful Witness, not a False one.
That being said, the disccusion is in regards to a True Witness and a False Witness, whereas the latter has no idea what the video entails.
To give you a breif run down:
Witness claims the video is true, however, the video has misleading information riddled in bias opinions. Witness claims Archives are unknown to people, even JWs because of a logon in Bethel, however, the Archives exist to the public. Srecko aruges, and Witness, about privacy, Dmitar interjected. Witness' video claims Bible Students purposely segregated because they were racist, however, this is not true, for although they had seperate churches due to customs in the United States, as is the laws, they still attempted to risk in a violent enviroment to see their brothers and sisters, black and or white. The events of Tulsa utlimately destorys the bias opinion. Srecko claims to know of the focused Era from Example 1, however, he back pedals form his statement,and attested the notation to human beahavior and doctrine, however, this is not the case. Example 2 is in regards to the Holoscause and Nazism whereas Witness' video attest to the the idea JWs were the sole target, which is untrue, the Nazi went after Jews, and everyone else, JWs, came much later; it is also noted that JWs were tormented differently compared to others, it is because the Nazis wanted them to renouced their faith. The conclusion shows there is indeed misleading information in the video, however, the latter defends misinformation willfully, thus even disrepescting 1 John 4:1 in order to do so. Srecko's Glasgow now effects Witness. The link you provided was brought up in my older disscusion concerning CTR (I am not sure if you even read the link either), as pointed out, not only have ExJWs from that time, 17 years ago, jumble, they state things that are not associated with the truth of the matter; taking information that is true/false and mold it into something entirely different - as seen by opinion riddled comments and so forth for example, i.e. CTR's wife, his beleifs, the Era he is from, Masonic Hall, etc.
The thread also puts the Witness' YouTuber video in an even more compromising spot.
For that website/forum is no different from here. The difference is it is riddled with more ExJWs and Atheists compared to here, granted eyars ago, those who are not fans of God dominate the fourm base, this was the case with the Stack Exchange also.
The irony of it all is that just like the video, the commenters applied today's view of Racisim to the 1900s (and the late 1800s), the same problem the YouTuber has done, therefore leads to the reason as to Witness willfully adhereing to a misleading information, likewise with the Archives, which even in that link some have used (the same Archives Witness attesed to not existing which she uses), as is other events of the 1900s even outside of the United States, i.e. Germany.
Surely you could do better than that, but if I were you, I would not interject, for the issue is in regards to the party who support misleading information being - Witness, Bill, and Srecko. If you get invovled, it would only be a problem for you because there is a chance your tenure may be brought to question concerning Race and World War II and or you being challeneged in a True vs False Witness disscusion. 
This article was brought up, cited before. If people add their own exgesis into it, let alone opinions, as is what we can see by the comments, then the truth in this regard is obsured.
Also your latter statement is incorrect because at the time, it was Bible Students, not Jehovah's Witnesses, i.e. the events of 1921 and prior, Bible Students were in the United States and they only becaome Jehovah's Witnesses years later.
It should be known to you of your former faith that Pastor Russell was succeeded in 1917 by Pastor Rutherford, for even around that time, the new Pastor and the Christains still went under the name Bible Students. It wasn't until much later on the group's name to Jehovah's Witnesses in 1931 to emphasize its members' belief that Jehovah, or Yahweh, is the true God and that the Witnesses were his specially chosen followers. The early events of the Segregation Era, as is Tulsa, which actions of the Bible Students then, disqualfies the fact that the YouTuber attest to them to be adhering to Jim Crow-sque mentality.
If this was indeed the expectation, then the in real life example of the white man risking his life for a black man would be entirely different. More so, if Bible Students gave into the Jim Crow mentality at the time, there is a high chance that
[A] Pastor Rutherford would have been dealt with early on which would erase the coming events of 1931
[B] This would literally prevent Jehovah's Witnesses from existing, as with other events that took place since the Bible Students would end up like some faith groups who vanished from 1914 onward.
[C] even Historical Accounts invovling them would vanish, the situation with the Consitution in 1940, Blood Transfusion, The transation and or collection of various Bibles, etc.
In short - Jehovah's Witnesses would have not existed for those under Jim Crow would have made sure of it, after all, they tried to eradicate all Black people in Tulsa because they assume a black man had sexually assaulted a 17 year old girl, an event that did not occur.
EDIT:
As I said, seems you've  successfully interjected yourself when you coined the entity himself. You've walked yourself into this one.

Christmas started early for them, so to speak. The Freedom vs. Compliance situation is only going to increase, the political heads and the people will be at it, and those who are not involved will be caught in the crossfire. People who attempted to go to the Convoy from the US side into Canada, were stopped.
The problem with the freezing of accounts, as is the alternative to GoFundMe is that it enables the tracking of such people, to make matters even worse, we have Extreme Left leading Hackers who is supposedly helping to fight the Freedom Convoy.

Deputy Prime Minister Freeland Invokes Emergency Powers Over Financial Accounts To Seize Business and Personnel Bank Account Funds Without A Warrant | Bitcoin/Crypto Assets Mentioned
 

Rutherford not Russell.

Someone linked this video in the comment section of a fellow Truther, I found this to be very interesting, for it correlates with what I said in 2021:
 

Once again, stellar minds

I happened across an excellent commentary of how the current "system of things" has been affected by Covid19. (linked below) The speaker hits on many of the most salient points and it stands as an excellent review from a perspective that sees a bit beyond just the medical issues. But about 20 minutes into the 30 minute video, I learned some interesting points: Americans owe 1.7 trillions in student loan debt. It was only 500 billion in 2006; up 1.2 trillion in just a decade and a half.
He also says that In bankruptcy court, the only non-dischargable debt is student loan debt. [Therefore, I like the wording you used: "chained on to the individual."]
What's worse, I think, is something he didn't say, but is fairly obvious. Students are still paying their $30,000 to $50,000+  per year, where part of what a student should be paying for is the ability to interact with professors and specialists in their chosen area of specialization. Instead, what they are often getting lately is a hands-off video stream of a professor who can't interact much at all with students. Might as well be video-taped lectures. No one-on-one in-depth guidance towards a specific area of pursuit. No semester abroad in France, UK, or China, or special internships. Only on-line access to the university library for what's been digitized, which is often a small percentage of what would have been available. 
 

Let's not forget the monster sized college debt (and other loans) that is chained on to the individual.

Inconceivable!

Wow!! I guess I should have expected this. 

Nothing in that video pertains to facts, merely opinion and a bit of bias. You won't be able to validate anything because it is pretty clear you didn't do the research on the video of choice, which is common because every time you post a source or link, it is deemed questionable, and it shows you even more you rely on this vs. the ability to attest to legitimate research.
And what I said is true, you do not do the research and accept nearly anything outside without looking into it.
That said, you have to understand the difference between what a fact is and what an opinion is - Facts and Opinions are NOT in the same category in this sense.
This is why this video of yours (which I know you did not review) is being called out in that regard. Just because this person is a former JW Bethel member, it does not mean whatever he deems a big secret is unknown to JWs, granted, numerous JWs (and non JWs, i.e. Reslight) are aware of the things of which this person slaps his opinion and bias on.
There is a difference between The Facts and An Opinion. Some people may think, you included, they are quite similar, but actually, a fact and an opinion are very different ideas, for facts can be verified whereas opinions cannot.
Facts  - are a statement(s) that can be proven true or false.  
Opinions  - are expressions of a person's feelings that cannot be proven. Opinions can attempt to rely on some information deem factual, with inclusion of emotion, however it can be used in a basis based on this notation, which can sometimes be a means to deliberately mislead others. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the whatever it is someone or something is professing, even when it comes to the choice of language and conveyance of said proclamation.  
What are you talking about? For someone who is chosen, you being convoluted, so to speak, in what you are conveying.
Never gave advice, gave a statement, do not confuse things, mainly in regards to something so basic. If you can't do research on things and be a Yes Woman to everything without even critically thinking at all, then that is a problem. In a sense, to a degree, you may seem to be the type to not think for yourself.
That being said, this is why people like me also take issue with those of the paradigm who have some abundance in whatever it is the Agenda is telling them, sad to say, this mentality makes people appear to hypocritical, even those who do not know any better.
I always proclaim facts, so much so I am aware of the events of the 1900s. As for this former Bethel member, he does not, as with you. The irony here you are perhaps older than the me and the former Bethel member, perhaps by a decade and or more, so historical events should not be this unknown to you.
This is irrelevant… Why mention Storm Trooper to deviate from the fact you are attempting to use bias opinion as an absolute truth? For someone who is chosen by God, you are seemingly stumbling near with every step in that regard. As we know already, God isn't the author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33), nor are his chosen.
Your problem is you accept nearly anything and everything videos like this tell you and you yourself do not take the time to either
[A] Review your own material/source and  
[B] accept such things without even doing an ounce of research. This explains why you are attempting to deviate with irrelevant remarks and now going after a profile picture which has nothing to do with what the video is being accused of.
You assuming opinions to be fact, shows you do not do research, let alone apply Discernment as a Christian should – this is not only laughable to those who speak harshly of what is a legitimate Christian (you giving ammunition to those who hate God and Christ), but it is also a tragedy that someone such as yourself, lacks such things.
Again, with the Storm Trooper remark. Everyone knows what a Storm Trooper is factually, in the realm of fiction, Star Wars, unit soldiers of various groups, etc. and in the realm of non-fiction, German Specialized Soldier Units known as the Sturmtruppen in the era of WWI (World War I), for something of this is a known fact for
[A] If you are unaware, people have been taught this elementary knowledge of World War I and events leading to/and the aftermath of it and  
[B] In regards to Star Wars, people know what a Storm Trooper is. That being said, it seems you lack reasoning also because although not that important, I do not simply have the profile picture of a First Order Storm Trooper for no reason, in short, it is in regard to my experience of debating in regards to the gospel; refuting people, hence why I was called a Bible Storm Trooper, and the other, was due to a child who died before the age of 11 because of an infection. For these reasons were already known as to why I have the image, and it was only mentioned when I was challenged and or asked.
Again, deviating only shows that you are not even committed to your source at all despite the fact the spin doctor approach this former JW Bethel member used.
Not really. Stuff like this is elementary, mainly to anyone who knows basic history of World War I, as is with Lore of fictional characters. an 8 year old can research these things and find out what a Storm Trooper is in real life and in fiction.
If I really wore a mask, as you claim, I would be using several accounts and pretending to be something or someone else, unfortunately, I am only one, and how I present myself here, is how I am in present, i.e. dealing with Pearl followers, MSCers, those in the paradigm, etc.
For me to pretend to be someone or something else is a waste of time and energy, no one has time for childish games, as is, have time to make, in your case, an unfounded claim.
Sadly, your appeal to motive does not work, as is your deviation.
Also 1 Cor. 4:5 usage here is irrelevant, makes no sense, but it can be used to exposed your video.
As for the video in question.
Now then, the former JW Bethel member stated that the WT library has a public and private use, which is not a big secret for Institutions be it Government, Educational, even Religious has archive of old publications and or documents of older teachings, practices, etc. as is with the practice of privacy protection laws and the like, despite archives. Regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses, the archive data of old publications. He claims that no one knows of this, however, many, even JWs who look into the past of their faith, are aware, it is evident due many who can cite and or pull up information dating from the pervious years of the 1960s, especially those who archive some, if not most, of the works of Bible Students, mainly in their early years.
His bias opinion to the audience is that this stuff is unknown and or hidden, however, this isn’t the case, everyone is aware institutions have archived information, in which some cases, such information requires a login of some sort.
Even in my eyes, this is nothing uncommon granted I have seen Network Infrastructures of some local businesses and institutions that mirror the same thing when it comes to privacy, keeping said information private despite most of it already been made public and searchable. In addition to that, just because this seems to be the case, does not make it something of some conjured up mystery.
So, is this a Big Secret that the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their religious leaders of keeping from the people, the general public? Not really. The irony of this people in the comment section of that video called out the uploader, however, these people were silenced by the ExJWs (which seems to be the norm) using the YouTube comment options to have their comments marked as spam/removed. So, if the video was in fact true, in your eyes, why was there a need to silence the people who said something else, attesting even? If that is the case, the video is not factual, even on the YouTube layer.
Now we can go on his first example, even though it is the first, he uses bias opinion in the other two examples without factual merit.
The first example is in regard to Racism. If you do not know what that is, Racism is the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another; even in some ways to mock/taunt, i.e. JB (Butler) made remarks that is deemed problematic in the past, and pretends it is no issue, he was called out for it by not only myself, but the Admin who saw escalation.
This former JW Bethel pointed out that everyone, even Jehovah’s Witnesses who adhere to Scripture abhor Racism, as is discrimination of all races, something of which is common knowledge - people indeed hate Racism. The problem here, he went to a 1900s source in regard to the Watchtower, and explained that in those days, Bible Students (since Jehovah’s Witnesses didn’t exist yet) were semi-racist, even going as far as to make remarks that they purposely segregated their churches in regards to that. He gave an opinion here and concluded with it, using this source, but never stated the fact as to why this is.
The fact is from the 1900 to 1939, there was racism and segregation in those days. This is why that year range is noted as The Segregation Era (1900–1939) whereas essentially it was during a time where hell can break loose at any second (literally). The Segregation Era had some intense moments, however, then came The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The Act prohibited discrimination in public accommodations and federally funded programs. It also strengthened the enforcement of voting rights and the desegregation of schools, although some schools have already attempted desegregation (i.e. events of 1954~), it was increases at the time.

 
Now this brings us to the Bible Students (the predecessor of the Jehovah’s Witnesses). The issue with Racism was not unknown to the Bible Students granted them originated from 1881, and the fact that how Racism was before the 1900s. During that time, the Bible Student indeed have segregated churches, but it was not because they held some sort of racist mentality against black people.
For the Bible Students had segregated Kingdom Halls in some places whereas white people congregated in some, and in others, black people congregate. This also goes in regard to people going to people’s homes for worship, Bible Study, or a gathering, etc. In the early 1900s, it was a very, VERY, bad idea to have mixed institutions, even Churches. For any institution caught with a mixed face of people inside or else, it would result in violent and dangerous attacks from those who deem such unification is wrong, in addition, it would trend into the political spectrum of things, which would make it even more damning for anyone who becomes victim.
We already know what happens to the Black folks in those times, they get hit with a high level of attacks, even from those of the Ku Klux Klan (The KKK), as for a white person, they’ve be punished as well, should the opposite sex, Women, be involved, and children, such also get the worse kind of treatment if caught in someway shape or form, likewise with Black Women whereas beatings, scarring, rape and possibility of death is high.
Moreover, the Bible Students themselves did not do this because they believed in segregation (as your video alluded to), they did it because society required them to do so. In 17th and 18th century they probably would have done the same - kept neutrality and adhere to secular laws and customs.
An example of this, which is fact, is prior to, during, and after The Tulsa Race massacre on the Summer of 1921. There were Bible Students who had congregated with each other regardless of skin color (black or white) in some instances, may have helped each other during an extremely violent and bloody time, and when I said bloody, I mean that literally. At the time, since pastor Russell had since expired, it was Pastor Rutherford who was head of the Bible Student group. It is also why when people saw pictures of Rutherford during the Tulsa situation, it drew confusion, so they did the research, I can say much for ExJWs and Trinity believing folks who claim a different narrative.
That being said, facts in this regard can be verified, always has been the case, however, opinions are opinions, they can’t be verified.
Mind you although this is the first of 3 examples from the video, the JW Bethel member used the same spinning of the narrative using his own opinion and bias with his other example, more so, it is silly to apply today's type of thinking in regards to such examples, such as Racism, with how things were in the past. 1919, 1920, and 1921 is vastly different from 2019, 2020 and 2021.
The biggest irony here is February is known as Black History Month, I recommend you look into the events of 1900-1939 instead of believing someone who has his own opinions.

When people are afraid of the government there is tranny, and the government is afraid of the people, there is freedom.
Australia has been disarmed, and is galloping toward totalitarianism.