James Thomas Rook Jr.

I chuckled when I first heard him referred to as the "Magabomber"......
talk about using a word for spin.....
The new media is a MASTER of spin.

On The Morals of Chess by Benjamin Franklin
 
The game of Chess is not merely an idle amusement. Several very valuable qualities of the mind, useful in the course of human life, are to be acquired or strengthened by it, so as to become habits, ready on all occasions.
1. Foresight, which looks a little into futurity, and considers the consequences that may attend an action; for it is continually occuring to the player, 'If I move this piece, what will be the advantages or disadvantages of my new situation? What use can my adversary make of it to annoy me? What other moves can I make to support it, and to defend myself from his attacks?
2. Circumspection, which surveys the whole chessboard, or scene of action; the relations of the several pieces and situations, the dangers they are respectively exposed to, the several possibilities of their aiding each other, the probabilities that the adversary may make this or that move, and attack this or the other piece, and what different means can be used to avoid his stroke, or turn its consequences against him.
3. Caution, not to make our moves too hastily. This habit is best acquired, by observing strictly the laws of the game; such as, If you touch a piece, you must move it somewhere; if you set it down, you must let it stand. And it is therefore best that these rules should be observed, as the game becomes thereby more the image of human life, and particularly of war . . .
And lastly, we learn by Chess the habit of not being discouraged by present appearances in the state of our affairs, the habit of hoping for a favourable change, and that of persevering in the search of resources. The game is so full of events, there is such a variety of turns in it, the fortune of it is so subject to sudden vicissitudes, and one so frequently, after long contemplation, discovers the means of extricating one's self from a supposed insurmountable difficulty, that one is encouraged to continue the contest to the last, in hopes of victory from our own skill, or at least of getting a stalemate from the negligence of our adversary . . .
If your adversary is long in playing, you ought not to hurry him, or express any uneasiness at his delay. You should not sing, nor whistle, nor look at your watch, not take up a book to read, nor make a tapping with your feet on the floor, or with your fingers on the table, nor do anything that may disturb his attention. For all these things displease; and they do not show your skill in playing, but your craftiness or your rudeness.
You ought not to endeavour to amuse and deceive your adversary, by pretending to have made bad moves, and saying that you have now lost the game, in order to make him secure and careless, and inattentive to your schemes: for this is fraud and deceit, not skill in the game.
You must not, when you have gained a victory, use any triumphing or insulting expression, nor show too much pleasure; but endeavour to console your adversary, and make him less dissatisfied with himself, by every kind of civil expression that may be used with truth, such as 'you understand the game better than I, but you are a little inattentive;' or, 'you play too fast;' or, 'you had the best of the game, but something happened to divert your thoughts, and that turned it in my favour.'
If you are a spectator while others play, observe the most perfect silence. For, if you give advice, you offend both parties, him against whom you give it, because it may cause the loss of his game, him in whose favour you give it, because, though it be good, and he follows it, he loses the pleasure he might have had, if you had permitted him to think until it had occurred to himself. Even after a move or moves, you must not, by replacing the pieces, show how they might have been placed better; for that displeases, and may occasion disputes and doubts about their true situation. All talking to the players lessens or diverts their attention, and is therefore unpleasing.
Lastly, if the game is not to be played rigorously, according to the rules above mentioned, then moderate your desire of victory over your adversary, and be pleased with one over yourself. Snatch not eagerly at every advantage offered by his unskilfulness or inattention; but point out to him kindly, that by such a move he places or leaves a piece in danger and unsupported; that by another he will put his king in a perilous situation, etc. By this generous civility (so opposite to the unfairness above forbidden) you may, indeed, happen to lose the game to your opponent; but you will win what is better, his esteem, his respect, and his affection, together with the silent approbation and goodwill of impartial spectators.

Heresy Detected .mp4

I read your posts very carefully and never miss a syllable, so as to give instant razor sharp analysis. But with anything else it is possible for me to recall something inaccurately. I don’t think so in this case, but I have misremembered things before. 
At any rate, I just searched a government Look database and came up emptyhanded. Possibly it is just the titles, and Jehovah’s Witnesses were not in the headline. New World produced nothing. So I gave up.
I wonder if Joel Engardio would have tabs on it as background material for his film Knocking?
Besides Covington, it covered the huge conventions of the 50s along with the makeshift kitchens assembled and then disassembled that would feed tens of thousands. If I recall correctly, it began with arrangements about to be ruined by rain, but then the sun came out with but a short time to spare, and the brothers in charge responded as if to say ‘But, of course.’
Needless to say, the writer was sympathetic to the cause.

You mean like they do in the movies?

Overruled.
How is that people are not suppose to know anything about such groups when it is in their faces and all over the place and embedded in their communities, specifically, urban communities? They donate and gain resources to send out - do they not? They receive donations, monetarily - do they not? They flaunt this in the faces in the public so I ask you, how is it that no one is aware or suppose to know things?
Goodwill, The Salvation Army, and a list of others are not too shy from doing exactly the same thing as others are doing in clubs churches and schools.
Perhaps the rock you are under is way too big, Shiwiii, you have to see that people are aware of these types of clubs and any branches in connection to them. Nice try though.

@Gone Away Well that explains why some are seeing double.

easy tiger,
sarcasm, with a little taste of wt to go with it. 

Because knowing ... when others do not ... is what has given, scam artists, flim-flam men, shamans, priests, and ecclesiastical tap-dancers  power prestige, and money, and position in various societies, since four guys went hunting for animals, and OG, the caveman,  supposedly was the only one who knew where the best hunting grounds were.
You do not actually have to BE a wise man, or in the case of Punxsutawney Phil, a weather predicting Groundhog in Gobbler's Knob Pennsylvania .... you only need the REPUTATION !
Clergy by ANY nomenclature are trained experts at "knowing the mind of God".
It's their Busine$$.
 
 

At a relative's house, their 4 year old daughter showed the same appreciation, and asked if she could "say grace" at dinner.
She bowed her head, put her fingers together, and prayed
"Our Father, who art in heaven, Howard be thy name ..."

Because knowing ... when others do not ... is what has given, scam artists, flim-flam men, shamans, priests, and ecclesiastical tap-dancers  power prestige, and money, and position in various societies, since four guys went hunting for animals, and OG, the caveman,  supposedly was the only one who knew where the best hunting grounds were.
You do not actually have to BE a wise man, or in the case of Punxsutawney Phil, a weather predicting Groundhog in Gobbler's Knob Pennsylvania .... you only need the REPUTATION !
Clergy by ANY nomenclature are trained experts at "knowing the mind of God".
It's their Busine$$.
 
 

The vast majority of Witnesses have the expectation that the WTS will always try to do what is right, no matter what the topic. But like all institutions, reputation is paramount. The WTS is full of people who want to enhance the reputation of the WTS. This is a problem, but also natural --almost expected-- if we are also sure that we have the most life-saving message, and that this message will likely be rejected if our reputation is sullied. A college or sports organization will be just as guilty of protecting their reputation through maneuvering, or even more so, when the motive is as mundane as staying in business.
We've been through these ideas before, but it's quite possible that TTH is correct in assuming that the WTS/JWs have made great strides in protecting young ones from abuse. I notice that the media has tended to move from "Catholics only" to "Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses." But part of that perception is the fact that we Witnesses have our ears "tuned" to listen to anything the media says about JWs. We will sometimes think we are being bashed when we are actually being treated fairly, just because we perceive we are being ganged up on. It could just as easily be true that only a small percent of our own sexual abuse issues make the news, but the exposure of Catholic clergy and institutions has made Catholics might be highly overexposed by the media.
I was Googling, "Barbara Anderson" and also picked up a short booklet on Amazon that she had written (or it looks like someone wrote for her). But I noticed that she has also said that the problem is not something for which the media should focus on just Catholics and JWs. I found a quote where she said that Billy Graham's son, a well-known Protestant preacher, said that the problem of child sexual abuse is greater in the Protestant religions, especially the mega-churches. I noticed that some Catholics in Australia had no problem finding numbers from the "Commission" (ARC) that proved that the problem among JWs and another set of religions was shown to be much bigger among these non-Catholic religions. 
But another couple quotes from Barbara Anderson also said something about seeing a court document, not shared publicly, that could explain why the "GB should keep so much info . . . all to themselves." For one thing she says that many of these cases involve incest and an exposure of the names of either victims or perpetrators when combined with the crime could bring another level of public hurt upon the victim. Also I saw a quote from her that said that it really was true that quite a number of persons for which the WTS admitted that their pedophile status was known was through our prison outreach program. When persons locked up for child sexual abuse are baptized and then released, or released and then baptized, this inflates the number of persons listed in the WTS records even if they have not ever been known to commit a sexual abuse crime after leaving becoming a JW.
Another point that I sensed from combining a few ideas she wrote about is this. The WTS lists contain a wide range of abuse crimes, and some of them truly are those from which a sensible person would not think right to expose to the court and law enforcement (risking also the leaks to the media). A 17 year old, for example, might have done things in high school that have truly not been a problem for the last 40 years. Of course these same lists have been shown now to have contained heinous crimes that were covered up and should obviously be exposed to law enforcement. But starting this process creates a slippery slope to a decision-making process where the WTS can't trust itself to always "redact" correctly, and the WTS has never trusted the world to handle anything correctly, especially where it relates to protecting their own reputation. So, it's the old dilemmas: "between a rock and a hard place" / "between the Devil and the deep blue sea" / "between the Pharoah and the deep Red Sea."
This is probably true. Even here no system is without potential loopholes in justice. But it's back to the idea that the WTS would potentially give up control of its reputation to "the world." In these cases its something that should absolutely be done. It's not perfect, but it's much better, and a culture in which this is expected will result in a much better sense among all of us that it should have been done this way all along. I referenced a website which TTH has quoted from, and noticed that the general point of this entire website is that reporting ALL accusations is a culture change that all institutions need to begin, religious and non-religious.

Because knowing ... when others do not ... is what has given, scam artists, flim-flam men, shamans, priests, and ecclesiastical tap-dancers  power prestige, and money, and position in various societies, since four guys went hunting for animals, and OG, the caveman,  supposedly was the only one who knew where the best hunting grounds were.
You do not actually have to BE a wise man, or in the case of Punxsutawney Phil, a weather predicting Groundhog in Gobbler's Knob Pennsylvania .... you only need the REPUTATION !
Clergy by ANY nomenclature are trained experts at "knowing the mind of God".
It's their Busine$$.
 
 

Because knowing ... when others do not ... is what has given, scam artists, flim-flam men, shamans, priests, and ecclesiastical tap-dancers  power prestige, and money, and position in various societies, since four guys went hunting for animals, and OG, the caveman,  supposedly was the only one who knew where the best hunting grounds were.
You do not actually have to BE a wise man, or in the case of Punxsutawney Phil, a weather predicting Groundhog in Gobbler's Knob Pennsylvania .... you only need the REPUTATION !
Clergy by ANY nomenclature are trained experts at "knowing the mind of God".
It's their Busine$$.
 
 

We don't really care, or shouldn't care as much what God had in mind in Genesis, Exodus, or Leviticus. But we should care what James and Peter had in mind when they gave an edict "abstain from blood" to Paul and Barnabas to spread among the Gentile believers.
Even so, I think you are right -- assuming that we truly believe that the intent of the edict "abstain from blood" referred to any means of taking it into the body. And this is exactly what we believe, whether by medical procedure or by consumption through the mouth.
I always imagined it like this:
Let's say Adam and Eve had been told to abstain from eating from a certain tree of the garden and let's say that this tree had been, for example, a banana tree, and there was only one of these trees in the whole garden. So they proceed to pick the fruit and find ways to make food products from it: banana puree, banana wine, banana sugar, banana jam, dried banana chips, banana powder, banana oil, including products from banana peels, banana leaves, banana tree bark, and banana tree roots. Satan appears in the form of a tarantula spider and tells them that all these products are just fine because they aren't really eating from the tree, they are eating byproducts from the tree. Satan says that as long as you process and smash and dry and mix and powder and recombine with other products, it's not really the same as eating from the banana tree. Just don't eat the whole banana fruit at once,  or the whole leaf, or the whole root, or the whole peel. Otherwise, it's just a matter of conscience.  I should add, however, that in the last couple of years, I've changed my mind on just how far one could apply this specific illustration. And now --based on something very specific and clear that the apostle Paul wrote-- I think that the whole blood issue is entirely a matter of conscience. Due to conscience, I might personally view the matter more strongly than another believer, or less strongly. But I would not wish to impose my own conscientious view on others.

No. The red liquid is not technically referred to as cow bovine. It is bovine in the same way that a cow's hide is bovine, or a baseball glove is bovine, or a leather chair, or a kind of saliva, or a certain type of sound, or a kind of meat, or a specific kind of hoofprint in the mud, or a certain kind of "mudpie"/"patty"/"buffalo chip"/etc.
In other words, the milk I drank this morning was bovine, but it did not contain any bovine. The meat I ate last week was bovine, but it did not contain any bovine. There is no such phrase as "cow bovine" as far as I know.

This is ANOTHER classic example of why Piers Morgan' opinions on any subject whatsoever is completely divorced from reality.
He is a classic and consistent bad example of human thought processes, and what happens when they are affected with that most insidious of all mental aberrations ... Liberalism.

Since the evidence supports that, and without your denial or affirmation, I will take that as a "yes".
Not that I care at all ... just a matter of trying to correctly understand where you are coming from.

Billy:
Your writing style has changed dramatically.
Did a committee write that for you?

Billy:
Your writing style has changed dramatically.
Did a committee write that for you?

John Wayne was for 20 years buried without a headstone, but he was buried after death. in Corona Del Mar, California.

For an actor, timing is very important!

If you have an early Sunday Morning meeting, you know that you have to race away from the Kingdom Hall as soon as possible to get to the Golden Corral before the Baptists show up like a plague of locusts!

I didn't see a Swiss address last month when I contributed online.  *My statement or receipt said Wakill, NY, but I'll check on that later this month when I make another donation.

Laughing at the idea that we are 'helping Jehovah' by setting aside a specific, pre-planned amount of money in advance every month so that we don't forget to donate -- and automatically get a receipt. "Because this way, I can help Jehovah every month" a sister says at 2min20sec into the tutorial video.
We can help Jehovah's people, help Jehovah's organization, even help Jehovah's "cause" in a sense. But only persons who have an extreme ego, or who confuse Jehovah with the organization believe they are "helping Jehovah." 
*** w91 12/1 p. 31 How Can We Repay Jehovah? ***
Such giving is not restricted to a tithe, or tenth, and there may be circumstances in which an individual is moved to give more to advance Kingdom interests.—Matthew 6:33. The apostle Paul said: “Let each one do just as he has resolved in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” (2 Corinthians 9:7) If you give cheerfully and generously in support of true worship, you will fare well, for a wise proverb says: “Honor Jehovah with your valuable things and with the firstfruits of all your produce. Then your stores of supply will be filled with plenty; and with new wine your own press vats will overflow.”—Proverbs 3:9, 10. We cannot enrich the Most High. To him belong all the gold and silver, the beasts on a thousand mountains, and valuable things without number. (Psalm 50:10-12) Never can we repay God for all his benefits to us. But we can show our deep appreciation for him and for the privilege of rendering sacred service to his praise. And we can be sure that rich blessings flow to those who give liberally to promote pure worship and honor the loving and generous God, Jehovah.—2 Corinthians 9:11.