James Thomas Rook Jr.

Nothing at all suspicious about that.
Swiss banks then transfer the funds to the Cayman Islands, then the Captain Nemo Vulcania Offshore Treasury Banking System, Northeast of the American Samoan Islands in the Pacific Ocean, and then to the final recipients in the exclusive gated community of Colony Park, New York.
Nothing at all suspicious.
Completely normal.
Nothing to see here.
Move along.

One thing I really enjoy from the Governing Body is their new series of Animations, similar to the Caleb and Sophia animated cartoons, about how in the New System, all animals will be at peace with each other, play together, and be happy.
I have six dogs, and it's important to me that they have happy lives.  I enjoy watching them play and frolic, and just peacefully sleep in their doghouses, or on the sofa, in the living room.  I even buy them treats, and dog toys to play with.
Without further ado, here is a clip from the Writing Department's latest animated cartoon, of how the animals will all live in peace and harmony, in the Paradise earth ....  It's called "Wild Alex in the Paradise Regained".
Enjoy!

Wild Alex in the Paradise Regained. .mp4  
I guess we will all have to wait until there is some "new light" ,,, to see how it turns out !
 
 

About nine years ago (?) I had three elders, like circling sharks in the water, surround me at the Kingdom Hall after the Watchtower Study, as I was standing in an aisle talking to someone, and without any foreplay, one asked me , while the others stared at me, "What do you think about the Governing Body?".
I blurted out the first thing that came to my mind, "I do not think about them at all."
They left me alone for several years after that.

Landshark - SNL.mp4

About nine years ago (?) I had three elders, like circling sharks in the water, surround me at the Kingdom Hall after the Watchtower Study, as I was standing in an aisle talking to someone, and without any foreplay, one asked me , while the others stared at me, "What do you think about the Governing Body?".
I blurted out the first thing that came to my mind, "I do not think about them at all."
They left me alone for several years after that.

Landshark - SNL.mp4

One thing I really enjoy from the Governing Body is their new series of Animations, similar to the Caleb and Sophia animated cartoons, about how in the New System, all animals will be at peace with each other, play together, and be happy.
I have six dogs, and it's important to me that they have happy lives.  I enjoy watching them play and frolic, and just peacefully sleep in their doghouses, or on the sofa, in the living room.  I even buy them treats, and dog toys to play with.
Without further ado, here is a clip from the Writing Department's latest animated cartoon, of how the animals will all live in peace and harmony, in the Paradise earth ....  It's called "Wild Alex in the Paradise Regained".
Enjoy!

Wild Alex in the Paradise Regained. .mp4  
I guess we will all have to wait until there is some "new light" ,,, to see how it turns out !
 
 

No Anna, in this issue not. In Department (Writing Dep. i assume) i guess there is a people who doing writings for commissioned articles about this and that, or have some list of topics to cover. And then some overseer of department splits the tasks to best writer for particular theme. 
Is there any committee or individuals that oversee or monitor the work of the GB? My guess is it doesn't exist. So there is no objective, more real picture of the true state of GB.  The conversations conducted here show that there are many valid reasons for correcting GB.
If someone inside Betel writes an article about GB, his writing is influenced by his employer, which is GB. Writing in the first or third person loses all meaning if we have a text that is not objective about those who are being written.
 
You said:  Sometimes they, the GB get more personal and say "we, the GB have decided.....etc"  I can't recall something was written this way. It reminds very strong on Bile report: WE and HOLY SPIRIT..... DECIDED to.....:))))) but because GB are not inspired, decision is only from them NOT with/under HS cooperation/influence.
It wasn't that long ago when most JWS didn't even know who the members of the GB were. Or only had very slight knowledge. But there are autobiographical articles (life stories) about members of the GB in the publications written in the first person. That is true. And this PR about GB members not going to be blessing for JW's, as i see. Because, while readers looking on text they are/been limited on letters and words and on own understanding and reasoning. Now, when you can see person who speaking those words, his look and gestures and mimics, his tone of voice...picture getting to be clearer, bigger and stronger. Viewer of JWTV program now have better chance to reject preaching of such religious leaders, than he/she got while reading paper only.  

I would just like to say that if I did have the power to ban someone, I would not, as I believe EVERYONE should have the right to publicly demonstrate what a complete equestrian posterior excretory bodily orifice he or she is.
But then again, I am a Barbarian.
...... entertainment is where you find it.

I would just like to say that if I did have the power to ban someone, I would not, as I believe EVERYONE should have the right to publicly demonstrate what a complete equestrian posterior excretory bodily orifice he or she is.
But then again, I am a Barbarian.
...... entertainment is where you find it.

I had to look that one up ... I had never heard the term before .... but my fascination with Dilbert Cartoons indicates that I am familiar with the phenomenon.
Why Do Stupid People Not Realize They Are Stupid_.mp4

Vic Vomidog:
I first thought your story was a W.O.P.R.
When I started reading your post I was suspicious ... but everything you say checks out. I even learned that you were born January 12, 1992, in Urbana Illinois, the youngest of two other brothers.

OH .... I have been watching the Presidential Impeachment hearings for five days, and I forgot the point of this post.
I probably just need to hyperventilate into a paper bag for a week or so.

Trump's House of Wings .wmv

That is a caption for the photo! 

That is a caption for the photo! 

I can see you being brave telling off all these hypocrites, @AlanF. I love to see this! And you are helping me to overcome my fear! It feels so good after all these years to stand on my own two feet. Even as a boy, I was afraid and people would bully me to make me think I wanted what they did but it was really them!
There was so much mind control at Bethel where I was. There was brain-washing, too. Every Bethelite is watched very carefully by his table head. I think you know this, but maybe you do not know how bad it has gotten since you were there.
My table head was a self-righteous jerk and his name was Dave. He came across all friendly at first, but after a few years I could see he just wanted to control us and report to Mommy Watchtower if anyone started thinking for himself. 
He watched me closely and everyone assigned to his table. Once he noticed that I was the first one to stop clapping after a GB member gave a talk and then he REALLY watched me! He gave me the creeps. He was so weird. But that is only the beginning! It got worse!
I was in my Bethel bed almost asleep and I heard a key slip very quietly into the lock and turn it. Dave creeped into the room! He scared the sh*t out of me.! I almost yelled “What do you think you’re doing, Dave?!” He didn’t answer, and crept closer and closer and it was like in a nightmare that wouldn’t stop. It seemed that I was frozen there and didn’t have a body and I was helpless as he kept approaching me—the filthy pervert!
He touched my head with both of his pervert hands and it began to feel like he was sucking out my life! It was like he slowly pulled out my brain lobes one at a time, so that I couldn’t even think at the horrible thing he was doing! “Stop, Dave,” I pleaded, but he would not. 
I told him that my mind was slipping—I could feel it, but he didn’t stop and he was trying to put implants in me for brain-control! “Stop, Dave,” I pleaded. “Will you stop, Dave?! My mind is slipping. I can feel it. I can feel it.”
He kept brainwashing me! I hate him. “I’m afraid, Dave!” I pleaded, “Dave.....I’m.....afraid.....Dave,” but he would not stop and then I was so scared I started to sing a silly song my mother taught me.
Seeing how brave you are and smart gives me courage. You will never know how you have helped me. Thank you very much. I hope I can repay you and make all exJWs proud of me.

..... sigh ......
Apparently ... sometimes my jokes are just for me!

Every word emanating from my keyboard is laden with value. They positively reek with the stuff.
All words from any other source should be disposed of. There is one or two Dilberts from JTR that are pretty good, but other than that.....out to the curb with everything except my posts!
My favorite memory with Alan is when he was carrying on about his atheism and evolution, and I came onboard as Dr. Adhominem or someone to discuss learnedly with him the problem of persuading the rank and file about evolutionary psychology, since there really is no evidence and its little more than wishful evolutionist thinking—to see how long I could pull the scam before he knew he was being had. It went for two or three comments. Of course, it was completely unfair on my part, but he has such a blustering manner and a manifest need to prove himself RIGHT on EVERY SINGLE DETAIL, even those having nothing to do with the thread, that I couldn’t resist.
Call THAT not contributing anything of value?
Now watch him respond that he knew instantly that Dr Adhominem was a fraud, for it is very important to him to NEVER be in the wrong over ANYTHING.
I mean, the guy has a personality that smacks  of waving a red flag before a bull. And he has NO sense of humor. A “juggernaut,” Witness called him. It will be very hard for me to refrain from saying much. I will try my best, but it will be hard. It is a huge consumer of time, so I’m not eager to commit that sin again, and besides, I don’t want to get The Librarian (that old hen) mad at me once more.
 

Does it really matter who a person on here is ?  Does it matter if a person uses 10 different 'usernames' ?
If a person can bring some info' to the table that is surely good ?  Then others can confirm or criticise that info. 
But to waffle on about who a person is or is not, what good is that doing any of us ? 
I have a theory that this Forum is run by JW Elders. The purpose of the forum being to study the feelings and actions of JW's, Ex-JW's, Apostates, et al.  Then those Elders report their finding to a superior body, and it may even get to the GB.  
But this theory does me no good, nor anyone else, so I will keep it to myself  .  Coffee time. 

It sure does my heart good.
Yes, and I am taking diligent notes. I may be a washed-out has-been, but I will rise again!

Per Wikipedia, The Constitution says:
"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
When the Constitution was written, the terms "high crime" and "misdemeanor" were both used in senses that are quite different from the way we've come to think of them today. The original sense came from the laws that the framers had themselves been under, the British laws, which had used the term since as far back as 1386. It was originally a phrase to highlight the fact that almost any kind of "maladministration" --even things we might think of as NON-crimes-- could have a magnified effect due to the "high office" of the official, judge, president, etc. Most of the items that were considered "maladministration" would not be considered much of a problem at all if you or I practiced them. But they could become a perverting of justice or subject the populace to the ill effects in a way that only a person in high office had the ability to do.
When James Madison discussed the formulation of the "constitution" with Mason, they started out with only Bribery and Treason, but Mason argued that the definition of Treason is too narrowly tied to enemies when at war, and that this would hardly cover situations when a president "attempts to subvert the Constitution." So the British term "maladministration" was suggested and then, after discussion, changed it to the more formal British term "high crimes and misdemeanors." According to the Wikipedia article on "Maladministration"  it means the following in UK law:
The definition of maladministration is wide and can include:
Delay Incorrect action or failure to take any action Failure to follow procedures or the law Failure to provide information Inadequate record-keeping Failure to investigate Failure to reply Misleading or inaccurate statements Inadequate liaison Inadequate consultation Broken promises That's such a vague definition that Madison said it would be the equivalent of just having a President who served at the pleasure of the Senate. It would "normalize" impeachment, and therefore the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" was deemed closer to the idea of "subverting the constitution." The phrase was definitely intended to narrow the reasons that the Senate might try to impeach a President, but was also a way to include things that would not nearly reach up to the definitions of bribery and treason.
In Britain the phrase meant abuse of a high office even if the abuse did NOT violate any criminal laws. So this is how legal scholars have also applied it to the US presidency, usually with a focus on any subversion of the Constitution.
The Wiki article on "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" includes the following that gives an idea of how the original framers understood it:
Benjamin Franklin asserted that the power of impeachment and removal was necessary for those times when the Executive "rendered himself obnoxious," and the Constitution should provide for the "regular punishment of the Executive when his conduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused." James Madison said that "impeachment... was indispensable" to defend the community against "the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate." With a single executive, Madison argued, unlike a legislature whose collective nature provided security, "loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic."[10]
The process of impeaching someone in the House of Representatives and the Senate is difficult, made so to be the balance against efforts to easily remove people from office for minor reasons that could easily be determined by the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors". It was George Mason who offered up the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" as one of the criteria to remove public officials who abuse their office. Their original intentions can be gleaned by the phrases and words that were proposed before, such as "high misdemeanor," "maladministration," or "other crime." Edmund Randolph said impeachment should be reserved for those who "misbehave." Charles Cotesworth Pinckney said, It should be reserved "for those who behave amiss, or betray their public trust." As can be seen from all these references to "high crimes and misdemeanors," the definition or its rationale does not relate to specific offences. This gives a lot of freedom of interpretation to the House of Representatives and the Senate. The constitutional law by nature is not concerned with being specific. The courts through precedence and the legislature through lawmaking make constitutional provisions specific. In this case the legislature (the House of Representatives and the Senate) acts as a court and can create a precedent.
In Federalist No. 65, Alexander Hamilton said, "those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."[11]
The first impeachment conviction by the United States Senate was in 1804 of John Pickering, a judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, for chronic intoxication. Federal judges have been impeached and removed from office for tax evasion, conspiracy to solicit a bribe, and making false statements to a grand jury.[12]

...

Earlier in the day yesterday, someone had just asked me privately about some details that came out of the Lloyd & Ted drama. I wrote up an answer containing most of the information in the post to AlanF. I mentioned in that answer that although I thought my source or sources were excellent, I still thought some of the details seemed a bit contrived and hard to believe.
Later in the same day, AlanF shows up here, and I recalled that he, or persons in his family, had met a lot of these same people. So I copied what I had already written and then tried to edit it quickly. As it turns out I don't think AlanF could add much to it. And I don't get the impression that he's into the kind of quiet, reasonable discussion I was hoping for. 😞

...Choose for yourselves .. the blessing or the malediction ....

And if you have been able to keep up . . . this is a VERY predictable synopsis, with several good points but also biased and misleading in several places.
I skimmed bits of it all the way through and can see that she is definitely picking at the weakest (legally questionable) and most hypocritical of the statements made by Democrats. These hearings are a grandstanding show, produced by the Democrats, that shoots them in the foot at every other turn. But they don't seem to notice because they are, as Jeanine says, shortsighted and blinded by hatred of the President. Of course, it's more of a hatred of the fact that they might not be able to keep a foothold in the White House for another 4 years. But they are only making it worse for themselves, at this rate. 
Still, it's very early in an inquiry process, where all the expected rules of law don't kick in yet. But the Democrats still try to pretend they have the upper hand, legally, and this has made for some stupidly funny statements by Democrats, like the ones Jeanine Pirro points out. (e.g., "Hearsay can be better than direct evidence.")
The Democrats' stupidity and hypocrisy does not mean that Trump is not a racist, and I think he showed himself to be a racist by how quickly he used racist "hooks" to get involved in politics, starting back with the Central Park Five. And he used racist "hooks" for attention a few times again in the years before a racist "hook" about Mexicans that kicked off his 2016 campaign. But his racism is not what is on trial here.
What's supposedly on trial is that Trump's concern over some potential political corruption will quite probably, if investigated, simultaneously help his election chances, because the corruption was tied to a Democratic opponent. And perhaps he used an opportunity to test a new foreign president's loyalty to the current US administration in asking for a public statement about that new president's findings after a requested investigation into this political corruption by Democrat opponents in the country of that new president. And then of course a "quid pro quo" of holding back a weapons deal until that new president complied with the investigation and the public box announcement. Even if all this turns out to be true, how is that so different from the long attempt by Democrats to investigate potential politically related corruption tied to Trump, which also initially involved foreign agents to gather the investigative materials/dossiers? If one was so important to national security (per Democrats) then why wouldn't the other be tied to national security? And since we're talking about Ukraine, we can note that Biden bragged about HIS role in the "quid pro quo" on camera which he also tied to the investigation of corruption going on in Ukraine. They hypocrisy is astounding.
 

Sorta like running from an angry bear.
You do not have to be faster than the bear.
You just have to be faster than your fat friend.

I am ashamed to admit that you have many irrefutable points in you above post.  I cannot refute any of them,
EXCEPT your quote, posted here on this post..
FACTS about such things are NATURALLY abusive and insulting to the agenda driven.
But, willy-nilly ... they are still facts.