Evacuated

Even the good old "BEEB" picked this one up. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45815889
Perhaps this is an example of what WT August 2018 p4 pp5 called "an exaggerated and outrageous account" as there appears to be a conflict in the way the story has been spun: Jehovah's Witnesses Are Not Related to Ammunition in Kirov

New research in the USA shows that Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions recover from heart surgery faster and with fewer complications than those who have transfusions.
Patients who are Jehovah's Witnesses had better survival rates, shorter hospital stays, fewer additional operations for bleeding and spent fewer days in the intensive care unit than those who received blood trans­fusions during surgery, a study in the Archives of Internal Medicine shows.
Jehovah's Witnesses undergo extensive blood conservation before surgery, including red blood-cell boosting erythropoietin drugs, iron and B-complex vitamins to guard against anaemia. The practice offered a "unique natural experiment" for scientists to study the short and long-term effects of the blood management strategy and may point to ways to reduce need for transfusions, researchers said.
The study included 322 Jehovah's Witness patients and 87,453 other patients who underwent heart surgery at the Cleveland Clinic from 1983 to 2011. All Jehovah's Witness patients refused blood transfusions. In the other group, 38,467 did not receive transfusions while 48,986 did.
The authors wanted to look at the difference between patients who receive blood transfusions during surgery and Jehovah's Witness patients, who undergo strict blood conservation practices before, during and after surgery, Koch said.
While many patients do not have blood transfusions during and after heart surgery, they also do not undergo the same blood conservation practices that doctors use for Jehovah's Witness patients.
Jehovah's Witness patients had an 86 per cent chance of survival at five years and a 34 per cent chance of survival 20 years after surgery, compared with 74 per cent at five years and 23 per cent at 20 years for non-Jehovah's Witness patients who had transfusions.
https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2012/07/refusal-of-blood-transfusions-by-jehovahs-witnesses-not-always-detrimental-research-finds?fbclid=IwAR2FqyNQ6S_ILvtLzBldwslGcpfBbvJQpk8kbbROMEMmyVsgMQDGMoZvgmU

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33982267
I think most Jehovah's Witnesses are aware that this is the case. But there are still some opposers who like to deny this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45815889
This takes the proverbial biscuit. These are guys that plant Jehovah's Witness publications on................Jehovah's Witnesses!!!
They might be in for a decoration!

Just a little clarification here. There are Jehovah's Witnesses and Jehovah's witnesses.
One group are members of a religious organisation  existing in this early part of the 21st Century.
The other group consists of humans who will witness (literally) the saving hand of Jehovah through a cataclysmic demonstration of his power in destroying a wicked and Satanic system of things at a time of His chosing. 
Membership of both groups is not mutually inclusive.

I'll go along with this.
And as for the rather self indulgent "bantering" in this thread, isn't it time to call it a day and to wake up to what is really happening at this time and place in the history of civilisation?
Just look who's coming to dinner!!!!

I'll go along with this.
And as for the rather self indulgent "bantering" in this thread, isn't it time to call it a day and to wake up to what is really happening at this time and place in the history of civilisation?
Just look who's coming to dinner!!!!

Looks like they all have PMS.
(Penguin Migraine Suits)

These "Wolves in Sheeps Clothing" that abuse children came INTO the truth...as Wolves do...To..abuse children.  They just bided their time...waiting.   A "True" Christian of course, would never do such a thing.  Sign of the Times.   Jehovah IS "Cleaning Up"!   Trust in Jehovah with all your heart.   His "eyes" are everywhere.   He is not a God to be Mocked.

Seems there must be. It's definitely not for everyone, despite it's availability:
2 Tim 3:16-17. "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,  so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work."
Dan. 12:9-10. "Then he said: “Go, Daniel, because the words are to be kept secret and sealed up until the time of the end.  Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will act wickedly, and none of the wicked will understand; but those having insight will understand.
Ps.25:14 "The intimacy with Jehovah belongs to those fearful of him, also his covenant, to cause them to know it"

We probably should not have used such a hard term or "label" for these former JW's.
I would recommend going forward that we just don't respond to them if they appear belligerent or if we are just not inclined to refute them.
It doesn't look good for us to publicly denounce them since we are not in a position in society granted to label others.
and YES>...... I am trying to comply with what @admin is wanting ....
So I say..... let's tone it down as a group to comply?

Every Browser works a little bit different.
 
EXTRACTING VTT SUBTITLES USING EDGE AND GOOGLE CHROME IN MICROSOFT 10.pdf
I use Cliqz (Firefox).
 
Short :
Go to tv.jw.org
Select the video, but do not start it.
Press F12
Press Network Analysys
Press All or XHR
Start the video
after a few seconds a vtt-file appears
(now you can stop the video)
rigtclick on the .vtt
open in a new Tab
Download the file

A little Extra :
Here can you convert vtt to txt (or to srt) :
https://subtitletools.com/convert-subtitles-to-plain-text-online
 
You can open txt with WORD and convert txt to docx.
Here is a hint how to remove blank spaces and blank lines in docx:
https://www.bltech.de/tipps/In-Microsoft-Word-alle-Leerzeilen-entfernen.php

True colours showing now, unfortunately. But the scripture always does that I find. Heb.4:12.
Don't worry. I'll leave you to your quest John Butler. 

Seems there must be. It's definitely not for everyone, despite it's availability:
2 Tim 3:16-17. "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,  so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work."
Dan. 12:9-10. "Then he said: “Go, Daniel, because the words are to be kept secret and sealed up until the time of the end.  Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will act wickedly, and none of the wicked will understand; but those having insight will understand.
Ps.25:14 "The intimacy with Jehovah belongs to those fearful of him, also his covenant, to cause them to know it"

Well, how to make a dog's breakfast out of a basic statement???
Let's untangle this. Let's speak about you. As you have used the personal pronoun "I", "you" features in my response. 
If "you" say something wrong unintentionally, thinking sincerely "you" are right, then this means "you" are not deliberately sinning. It means "you" have made a mistake, misunderstood a matter, made a decision with insufficient or incorrect data etc.
Your point here: "You gave reasoning, I am not deliberately sinning and not made sin" is a distortion of what I said. A statement was made by @John Butler proposing that if the GB endorse something which later is found to be incorrect, this must be deliberate sinning. My response was that this is not sinning as such (deliberate) but is more correctly termed and evaluated as a mistake as described above. A mistake of this type can certainly be termed a"sin" in the sense that it "misses the mark" of truth. But it is not deliberate.
I will not go to such lengths to untangle reasoning of this type in the future, so, respectfully, I request that you give a little more thought to your reponses. ?
 
 
 

1John 5:17:"All unrighteousness is sin, and yet there is a sin that does not incur death."
Sorry, you are not in a position to tell me what Jehovah has or has not promised me.
That is what I mean. You have your odor, I have mine....
 

The last person who was inspired by God or Jesus was the apostle John, on the isle of Patmos, when he wrote Revelation. 
 
 

Well, how to make a dog's breakfast out of a basic statement???
Let's untangle this. Let's speak about you. As you have used the personal pronoun "I", "you" features in my response. 
If "you" say something wrong unintentionally, thinking sincerely "you" are right, then this means "you" are not deliberately sinning. It means "you" have made a mistake, misunderstood a matter, made a decision with insufficient or incorrect data etc.
Your point here: "You gave reasoning, I am not deliberately sinning and not made sin" is a distortion of what I said. A statement was made by @John Butler proposing that if the GB endorse something which later is found to be incorrect, this must be deliberate sinning. My response was that this is not sinning as such (deliberate) but is more correctly termed and evaluated as a mistake as described above. A mistake of this type can certainly be termed a"sin" in the sense that it "misses the mark" of truth. But it is not deliberate.
I will not go to such lengths to untangle reasoning of this type in the future, so, respectfully, I request that you give a little more thought to your reponses. ?
 
 
 

Here lies an underlying feature of this mindset it appears. I do not share this perception of Armageddon that you have. For me, I survived my personal armageddon. This was a day of regeneration with a prospect of life. I can see you have a different perception, whether learned or originated. The big Armageddon for me is also a day of regeneration and of life. For you, I see, it is different.
For me this fits with Paul's words at 2Cor.2:15-16 "For to God we are a sweet odor of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; to the latter ones an odor issuing from death to death, to the former ones an odor issuing from life to life."

Not if they believe what they say. Getting something wrong is not a sin as such. Everybody makes mistakes. I have never subscribed to a GB inspired club.
Armageddon will always be a few years/months (etc) off until it comes. The important thing is to keep in expectation of it, which (for me) means "get your priorities right".  One old brother said to me many years ago "your armageddon came the day you dedicated your life to Jehovah". I found that a very useful viewpoint and consequently (since then), I have avoided "end-time frothing" . By "end-time frothing", I mean emotional debate about the end being near, taking too long, not coming as expected, being falsely predicted, not coming at all....etc.etc.etc.
The whole point of the excercise for me is to live now as we will live once it has come so that it doesn't come as a shock when this old world's structure is no more. Of course that includes making use of the world as it is now, but not to the full. 
Armageddon will only be an account, not an experience, for the majority of humans in the future. So it's significance is not human-centric.

Oh...I see.
A few alternatives to the usual "wages of sin is death"
"Sin pays off with death" CEV
"For sin pays its wage--death" GNT
"For the payoff of sin is death" NET
"But the product of sin is death" Aramaic
Along with:
"for he who has paid the penalty of death stands absolved from his sin." Rom 6:7 (Weymouth)
Seems to indicate that death is indeed the penalty for sin. This was experienced by the first sinners I believe, as they were warned it would. Of course, the scriptures indicate that even now, those who are dead (in sin) can be made alive spiritually thanks to the atonement of Christ's sacrifice, thus enabling a reconciliation with God through him.
But it is apparent that the power of Christ's sacrifice reaches even into the grave in that "neither death nor life.....will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Rom.8:38-39. And "God elevated him to the place of highest honor and gave him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth," Ph.2:9-10.
So for me, sin results in death, figuratively, spiritually, and literally. Life, whilst originally a gift from God dependent on obedience, is still a gift from God, dependent on acceptance of the atoning power of Christ' sacrifice.
As for who will or will not receive the benefits thereof, including victims of suicide, there is "one decreed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone putting faith in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name." Acts 10:42-43. The one decreed by God is best left to the execution of his assigned duties in this regard.

Yes, I discerned this, but this particular crime cannot be separated from the overarching results of mankind's Satan induced rebellion against Jehovahs sovereignty and His means of resolving the related issues.
The partial or combined effect of a range of factors,  Satanic influence, the handicap produced by inherited sin, and the hardening effect on the attitude of those deceived by, and encouraged in, sin's course, produces profound detriment in an individual's personality and life experiences. (Eph.2:2, Heb.3:13, Eph.2:3) This detriment is referred to as a "full recompense" at Rom.1:27, in the sense of an appropriate result of that course, a case of reaping what was sown, even though this may have been as a result of ignorance on the part of many.
Death being the ultimate recompense for sin, it's reversal due to the atoning power of Christs sacrifice and the execution of God's power does not necessarily remove the acquired personality of the individual receiving a resurrection back to life on earth. This of course was demonstrated by Jesus in the resurrections he was empowered to perform. Those whom he resurrected were who they were prior to death, and consequently died again later. Also, even after being brought to life in a spiritual sense, and having died to a former course of conduct, first century Christians were encouraged to "press on to maturity", to "put on the Christ" and as stated above to avoid the hardening power of sin's deception. There were those who sadly fell away from the faith at that time. Additionally, there were outright apostate and unrepentant rebels described at Jude 12 as "having died twice and having been uprooted".
So when humans are resurrected to life on earth as Jesus indicated at John 5:28-29, they will need to "put on the new personailty" and this will be a factor in determining the outcome of that resurrection as to whether it will be for them one of "life or judgement". Once resurrected, those humans will need to "bring every thought into captivity to make it obedient to the Christ" (2Cor.2:10). This may be more challenging for those who have not known or did not comply with God's purposes in their pre-resurrection lives as they respond to the leading of God' holy spirit at that time. However, "when there are judgments from you for the earth, righteousness is what the inhabitants of the productive land will certainly learn". Some will have a head start in this, ("a resurrection of the righteous"), others will have to start a bit bit further back on the blocks due to their personality traits, ("a resurrection... of the unrighteous") Acts 24:15.
The determination of who will experience the resurrection at all rests entirely in the hands of the "Judge of all the earth", and "a man whom he has appointed" (Gen.18:25, Acts 17:31). The outcome for those, including any suicide victims resurrected, will depend on them complying with the direction and encouragement and spiritual healing they receive at that time. 

Bit like the fruitage of the sprit (of which love is mentioned) "Against such things there is no law". Gal.5:23.
Like so many of such questions raised in this forum, this is a matter for individuals to decide. 
 
Dugogodišnja sloboda.

International convention?
Albanian national dress?
Yes, Librarian is a little grouchy today. 
And what happened to the middle lady's other leg? Maybe that's why the Albanians are propping her up.