JW Insider

@Arauna The EU is more favorable towards Islam, for a number of reasons, and is often the most protected, which was very evident with various events that had taken place regarding God (Allah) and Jesus (Isa) in the Islamic faith vs. that of the Christian faith.
Plus, Islam is an increasing faith whereas mainstream Christian belief has been declining for a while now since 2015, ironically enough, Christian minorities are barely touched.
That being said, there are those in Islam that has been doing bad, something of which even those within the faith brought up, especially during the time when people of almost every other faith as well as onlookers use to congregate at Speaker's Corner before the pandemic and protesting.
Well China and Russia are allies and opponents of the US and the UK. The United Nations, although wanting them to somewhat comply, is like that of an anchor in regards to them.
As for these movements, it is a problem, and will continue to do so. Another issue is as with all ministers, even for you Jehovah's Witnesses, as time progresses, gospel spreading will be difficult due to the fact that today's world are normalizing things that even the Bible deems as incorrect and or bad, to the point of brazen conduct, so to find people who want to know about God will be a bit more challenging, as is, mainstream Christianity is also another obstacle, granted they are declining, they have become far more aggressive.
So areas you can preach in, some you cannot, other times, if the person in question and or contact is allowing it, you can visit so and so, something of which I faced in my ministry trips in Africa.
 
 

The quote is not mine, but I wish it were:
Future historians will be asked what quarter of 2020 did they specialize in.

I think you have tried to group me with those who think R.Franz was all bad. I think that R.Franz was also "right" and "useful" in several ways, but I also think he was too weak or passive to stand up for what he was learning to be right. I had thought he might have come to realize some of these things after leaving, but he admits to not having the confidence to stand up to F.Franz, the conservative "guardian of doctrine" in those days. He should have seen the ongoing problems of the "two witness rule" and that scripture did not treat is as so all-encompassing. I don't mean to go off on a CSA tangent but some of that is on R.Franz, for promoting the two-witness rule. He knew things were wrong and didn't kick up much of a fuss. He admits to having learned that the WT was wrong on 607, and therefore wrong on 1914, and therefore wrong about the "parousia" and "generation" theory. I think he bears some responsibility for just allowing the status quo to go on and create the mess it did on that "generation" topic for several more decades. 
But the point is that even the WTS saw some usefulness and things that were right in the book that R.Franz wrote. They changed some things that he had exposed. A person can be partly right and partly wrong, but it doesn't mean their concerns are not useful.
With Furuli, I agree that it's not fair to try to group him with others. But the comparison is very interesting to me because I think I know Furuli's thinking pretty well from reading a lot of his books and even having some back-and-forth with him on academic sites many years ago. And I heard the equivalent of about 70 15-minute talks by Ray Franz at the Bethel morning text over a 3.5 year period. (Don't tell Kosonen, but that's 1,260 days.)
To me, Furuli, like Franz, have some good points and some bad points. (I mean, who really needs to go back to the old 49,000 years of creative days?) But I'm not playing fair if I say that Furuli must have been very thoughtful and useful with his critique of "GB=FDS" just because I agree with him on that, but that he must still be stuck on the weak and beggarly things if he can't get over 607 BCE and the 49,000 years.
So anything I can grasp at to understand his current mindset is of interest to me.
 

Yes. It's the same old record. What the WT represents here is still a possible interpretation, as I've often said. But it contradicts the most likely interpretation of several other Bible verses, and it uses unlikely definitions and interpretations of the original Greek terms.
You already mentioned one of those potential contradictions, where Jesus couches all these "signs" in language about not being misled because even if you are seeing these things, the end is not yet. Of course, at some point in history, it may not be these particular signs, but there will certainly come a time when people will just simply "become faint out of fear, not know the way out." But we know that this is the time of the actual "end" or "synteleia" (the full [destructive] end of all things together.) But the rest of the chapter in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 17 & 21 let us know that people will still be milling, farming, buying, selling, and getting married right up until this point in time. Therefore it comes as a surprise, as if without warning.
It should be of concern to more Witnesses, I think, that 1914 is sometimes defended as follows: Chronology, archaeology, and history say that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. But if we count forward 2,520 years from 587 we reach 1934 and we all know that nothing happened in that year. (Furuli uses this argument in his new book.) Therefore we look to 607 as the destruction of Jerusalem. He can do what he wants with shifting the evidence around to support the 607 date. What is of interest is the defense, 'it can't be 1934 because nothing happened then.'
If nothing happened in 1934, then why do we speak of a time starting in 1914 when critical times hard to deal with will go from bad to worse? If it was bad in 1914, then why wasn't it so much worse in 1934? Why has the persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses been reduced to relatively nothing in 2020, if Satan's anger is based on knowing he has a short period of time? Does Satan no longer have a short period of time? If it all had to happen in 1914, then where were the earthquakes? Why are the most notable ones a decade prior to 1914, and decades after?
The reason is actually pretty clear. The Bible predicted that bad things would be happening in places, as always, but it would still be generally during a relatively peaceful time when people would be likely to take notice of peaceful and secure conditions around them. The Bible said that people, just as they were already doing in Peter's day, would be wondering if this promised spectacular judgment visitation (parousia) was really going to come upon them, precisely because conditions would be a lot like before the Flood when people kept living their life normally. That's what would make the parousia come upon them suddenly, like a thief in the night (and spectacularly, like lightning).
It should also be curious why Jesus spent time on the topic of an invisible visitation (parousia). He promised that the parousia would not be invisible. There is always a tendency of people to want to be seen as prophets or having special insight and discernment. So they will be saying that even though Jesus is not visible in front of you, that he actually has returned, but he's over here or over there, or in some hidden room somewhere. This idea is that someone would claim special insight or knowledge about Jesus parousia that you don't yet have. Jesus indicated that this idea of an invisible parousia is nonsense. After saying not to fall for those persons who say he's here or there, but invisible to you, Jesus said that the parousia would be like lightning that flashes from one horizon to the other. Even the very word "parousia" when used in Greek with reference to a visiting ruler, was not just about the "visititation" which would be enough, but also about the visible spectacle and the parade and the entourage and the trumpeted fanfare. No one has this special insight or discernment of the parousia to claim to others, because everyone can see such a great lightning flash at the same time.
So, you asked for my opinion, and that's it. But what I think is "false" information about it is not specifically the GB's opinion. They inherited it from old "Bible Student" tradition just like all JWs inherited it. Most JWs merely wait on the GB before thinking about changing their opinion on things because it makes for peace and order and unity in the congregation. Such doctrines are not the defining characteristic of JWs.
Also, as far as teaching the GB's teaching on this, the primary purpose of the teaching is to create urgency. There is nothing wrong with urgency. The Bible promotes it, too. Jesus may have begun the "Messianic" kingship in 33 CE, and that was in the distant past. 1914 is in the distant past, too. So it's not a disaster in terms of its effect on our lives. The "GB" teaching is that Jesus is invisibly present. This is not a disaster either, for the same reason: Jesus said he would be invisibly present starting in 33 CE. ("Wherever two or three are gathered in Jesus' name. there he would be (invisibly present) in their midst." Also, as soon as Jesus was resurrected he said: "Look I am with you [invisibly present] all the days until the "synteleia" (the full completion/full conclusion) of the system of things."
The basic message is that Jesus has begun his kingship, he is invisibly present, and he will shortly judge the entire world. This is not so far off, except in its chronology. And chronology shouldn't matter.  It did matter for as long as the WT was teaching that someone born before 1914 who was old enough to see the war in 1914 would not die out before the Judgment/end. This created a chronology error, a false teaching. It's been taken care of now that all those people died already.

I'm no fan. To get to the top of his particular heap, he had to cut a few corners, and cut and paste a lot of video to get some of the ideas across that he wanted to promote. Some of those ideas were lies, and I'm sure this is why he had to name his 501c3, "Veritas."  But there is nearly always some truth in every conspiratorial lie, and therefore I always find some hidden value in them. In the case of these latest undercover videos, the segments were long enough and not prompted by the person taking the video. So although his reasons for exposing them might be unknown (by me, at least), they definitely tell a real part of the story he wants to tell.

I saw this too. The video comes from Oregon.
Oregon, Idaho, Washington state, have already had a lot of trouble with these young white recruits to "Antifa" (which is not at all a homogeneous organization). There have been militias that feed on anti-government conspiracy theories (mixed with plenty of truth) and they end up creating self-fulfilling prophecies about how the government spies on them, infiltrates them, etc.
I think some of the same people who are not ready to join an anti-US militia find it easier to release their anarchist tendencies in group (that meets in a bookshop) that gives them no more than an excuse to bust things up and be violent, using "Antifa" as a kind of "Fight Club."
Washington Post reported (excerpt):
Oregon’s notoriously secretive Rose City Antifa meets regularly “like a business” to train in weapons and tactics, including eye-gouging, as well as how to engage in violence without getting caught, according to a video released Thursday by Project Veritas.
In what may be the first video of Antifa’s inner workings, the hidden-camera footage showed what was described as training sessions — in some cases using PowerPoint — by Rose City Antifa leaders inside a Portland, Oregon, bookshop before a room of apparently young, white recruits.
“Practice things like an eye gouge. It takes very little pressure to injure someone’s eyes,” said a man identified as Nicholas Cifuni in a “recon and tactics” class.
He was also recorded on audio delivering a profanity-laced warning to recruits about being too obvious while engaging in violence lest they draw the attention of police.
 

Yes. It's the same old record. What the WT represents here is still a possible interpretation, as I've often said. But it contradicts the most likely interpretation of several other Bible verses, and it uses unlikely definitions and interpretations of the original Greek terms.
You already mentioned one of those potential contradictions, where Jesus couches all these "signs" in language about not being misled because even if you are seeing these things, the end is not yet. Of course, at some point in history, it may not be these particular signs, but there will certainly come a time when people will just simply "become faint out of fear, not know the way out." But we know that this is the time of the actual "end" or "synteleia" (the full [destructive] end of all things together.) But the rest of the chapter in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 17 & 21 let us know that people will still be milling, farming, buying, selling, and getting married right up until this point in time. Therefore it comes as a surprise, as if without warning.
It should be of concern to more Witnesses, I think, that 1914 is sometimes defended as follows: Chronology, archaeology, and history say that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. But if we count forward 2,520 years from 587 we reach 1934 and we all know that nothing happened in that year. (Furuli uses this argument in his new book.) Therefore we look to 607 as the destruction of Jerusalem. He can do what he wants with shifting the evidence around to support the 607 date. What is of interest is the defense, 'it can't be 1934 because nothing happened then.'
If nothing happened in 1934, then why do we speak of a time starting in 1914 when critical times hard to deal with will go from bad to worse? If it was bad in 1914, then why wasn't it so much worse in 1934? Why has the persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses been reduced to relatively nothing in 2020, if Satan's anger is based on knowing he has a short period of time? Does Satan no longer have a short period of time? If it all had to happen in 1914, then where were the earthquakes? Why are the most notable ones a decade prior to 1914, and decades after?
The reason is actually pretty clear. The Bible predicted that bad things would be happening in places, as always, but it would still be generally during a relatively peaceful time when people would be likely to take notice of peaceful and secure conditions around them. The Bible said that people, just as they were already doing in Peter's day, would be wondering if this promised spectacular judgment visitation (parousia) was really going to come upon them, precisely because conditions would be a lot like before the Flood when people kept living their life normally. That's what would make the parousia come upon them suddenly, like a thief in the night (and spectacularly, like lightning).
It should also be curious why Jesus spent time on the topic of an invisible visitation (parousia). He promised that the parousia would not be invisible. There is always a tendency of people to want to be seen as prophets or having special insight and discernment. So they will be saying that even though Jesus is not visible in front of you, that he actually has returned, but he's over here or over there, or in some hidden room somewhere. This idea is that someone would claim special insight or knowledge about Jesus parousia that you don't yet have. Jesus indicated that this idea of an invisible parousia is nonsense. After saying not to fall for those persons who say he's here or there, but invisible to you, Jesus said that the parousia would be like lightning that flashes from one horizon to the other. Even the very word "parousia" when used in Greek with reference to a visiting ruler, was not just about the "visititation" which would be enough, but also about the visible spectacle and the parade and the entourage and the trumpeted fanfare. No one has this special insight or discernment of the parousia to claim to others, because everyone can see such a great lightning flash at the same time.
So, you asked for my opinion, and that's it. But what I think is "false" information about it is not specifically the GB's opinion. They inherited it from old "Bible Student" tradition just like all JWs inherited it. Most JWs merely wait on the GB before thinking about changing their opinion on things because it makes for peace and order and unity in the congregation. Such doctrines are not the defining characteristic of JWs.
Also, as far as teaching the GB's teaching on this, the primary purpose of the teaching is to create urgency. There is nothing wrong with urgency. The Bible promotes it, too. Jesus may have begun the "Messianic" kingship in 33 CE, and that was in the distant past. 1914 is in the distant past, too. So it's not a disaster in terms of its effect on our lives. The "GB" teaching is that Jesus is invisibly present. This is not a disaster either, for the same reason: Jesus said he would be invisibly present starting in 33 CE. ("Wherever two or three are gathered in Jesus' name. there he would be (invisibly present) in their midst." Also, as soon as Jesus was resurrected he said: "Look I am with you [invisibly present] all the days until the "synteleia" (the full completion/full conclusion) of the system of things."
The basic message is that Jesus has begun his kingship, he is invisibly present, and he will shortly judge the entire world. This is not so far off, except in its chronology. And chronology shouldn't matter.  It did matter for as long as the WT was teaching that someone born before 1914 who was old enough to see the war in 1914 would not die out before the Judgment/end. This created a chronology error, a false teaching. It's been taken care of now that all those people died already.

JB never added things exactly out of nowhere. You always knew what was coming. And I never complained about it. But the complaint was that, no matter what the topic, you always found a way to turn it into a CSA topic. Believe me, there were plenty of others doing things like it. Sometimes a topic was very serious and suddenly 4 Dilbert cartoons would run back-to-back-back-to-back.
Most of us appreciate a good diversion now and then, but they shouldn't always divert to the same old topic.

I had no doubt that YOU knew it. But there are some people here from the UK, like @4Jah2me (assuming of course that he is the reincarnation of @John Butler). And, I'm not so sure that they had any groups like the Beatles over in the UK. 😉

Yes, especially the one about a CSA case JB knew about, wondering about whether some here thought he should report it. This is why I said "rarely." But I'm  hoping to say no more about JB, CSA, 4J except for what might be relevant to this topic. I shouldn't have made the Beatle's joke at his expense, but 4J was the only one I thought of with a particular connection to the UK.
True, and it's a shame how a movement that could have been a simple cry for human for justice, and which had prided itself on an intelligent platform, can be so easily subverted. Not just from the outside, but from irrational people who tend to rise to the top of so many organizations. And even if the non-thinkers don't rise to the top, their voices will surely drown out those who are truly sighing and groaning over this system of things. These types of failures of all governments (to meets the needs of all the people) gives us a renewed impetus to preach our own version of reform. And those sincere among them who join our movement might find some measures of justice already available to them, and at the very least, a true and realistic hope for future justice.
Certain types of governments respond well to this means of creating change and progress. And it really is more difficult for some groups and races to effect needed change in many countries in this world. In some countries, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and many others, real racism is part of their literal constitution; SJWs need not apply. But racism is only a part of the story, smaller than most people think when they see it coalescing around the initials BLM. And those who want to make racism the whole story, are hypocritically using violence to make people see things in their own myopic way.
Exactly. And MSM (mainstream media) is a slippery term, too, these days. Many don't see the connection to the other form of MSM: manipulated social media. HBO's Homeland series did a couple of seasons that exposed media manipulation pretty well, I thought. It should also have come as no surprise that when FB/Twitter/etc decide to make a decision about where HK-related news can come from, they can instantly find tens of thousands of "bot" accounts to eliminate.
I think this is good advice, too. China and India have several border disputes, and anything that can come across as anti-China, especially in the UK or USA, will quickly make a mountain out of a molehill. Then again, a nuclear power can also make just the opposite happen. (BTW, India claims to own  a big part of Tibet, too.) I think India's new fascist leaning government will likely begin to push these issues in several additional ways. (FWIW, FB just loves Modi.)
You make a lot of obscure references, and I suppose I do, too. (Otherwise, posts would be even longer.) But I had to look up both of these ideas. It's a shame, even to many LGB persons in the LGBTQ++++++++ communities, that they see themselves as devalued and even debased by such young participants in their "movements." (And diluted by the extra ++++'s as every new letter wants to join the "expression.") It's a different story in their cases, but to many it's also another case of people thinking they are crying out for justice, and then subverted and sabotaged by SJW and other factions of identity politics.

Yes, especially the one about a CSA case JB knew about, wondering about whether some here thought he should report it. This is why I said "rarely." But I'm  hoping to say no more about JB, CSA, 4J except for what might be relevant to this topic. I shouldn't have made the Beatle's joke at his expense, but 4J was the only one I thought of with a particular connection to the UK.
True, and it's a shame how a movement that could have been a simple cry for human for justice, and which had prided itself on an intelligent platform, can be so easily subverted. Not just from the outside, but from irrational people who tend to rise to the top of so many organizations. And even if the non-thinkers don't rise to the top, their voices will surely drown out those who are truly sighing and groaning over this system of things. These types of failures of all governments (to meets the needs of all the people) gives us a renewed impetus to preach our own version of reform. And those sincere among them who join our movement might find some measures of justice already available to them, and at the very least, a true and realistic hope for future justice.
Certain types of governments respond well to this means of creating change and progress. And it really is more difficult for some groups and races to effect needed change in many countries in this world. In some countries, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and many others, real racism is part of their literal constitution; SJWs need not apply. But racism is only a part of the story, smaller than most people think when they see it coalescing around the initials BLM. And those who want to make racism the whole story, are hypocritically using violence to make people see things in their own myopic way.
Exactly. And MSM (mainstream media) is a slippery term, too, these days. Many don't see the connection to the other form of MSM: manipulated social media. HBO's Homeland series did a couple of seasons that exposed media manipulation pretty well, I thought. It should also have come as no surprise that when FB/Twitter/etc decide to make a decision about where HK-related news can come from, they can instantly find tens of thousands of "bot" accounts to eliminate.
I think this is good advice, too. China and India have several border disputes, and anything that can come across as anti-China, especially in the UK or USA, will quickly make a mountain out of a molehill. Then again, a nuclear power can also make just the opposite happen. (BTW, India claims to own  a big part of Tibet, too.) I think India's new fascist leaning government will likely begin to push these issues in several additional ways. (FWIW, FB just loves Modi.)
You make a lot of obscure references, and I suppose I do, too. (Otherwise, posts would be even longer.) But I had to look up both of these ideas. It's a shame, even to many LGB persons in the LGBTQ++++++++ communities, that they see themselves as devalued and even debased by such young participants in their "movements." (And diluted by the extra ++++'s as every new letter wants to join the "expression.") It's a different story in their cases, but to many it's also another case of people thinking they are crying out for justice, and then subverted and sabotaged by SJW and other factions of identity politics.

Research from the University of Maryland and Michigan State University confirm the results of a more limited study a couple years ago of the Philly Police Dept—that the race of the officer is not a factor in who gets shot. Yet the MSM would all but have us believe that the entire purpose of the police is to shoot back people. One can only wonder at their motive.
https://research.msu.edu/the-truth-behind-racial-disparties-in-fatal-police-shootings/

Asking again, later that evening, a little less politely, from Air Force One.

#jwcovidbrazil #jwcovid19 #Jwbrazil #jw2020 #jwdeaths #jwcoronavirus 
 

Nothing makes sense because demons are performing their signs and mesmerizing the different violent groups who perceive themselves only as victims. Some atheistically have ordained themselves to bring about a revolution in Bolshevik-style and are funded by the usual subversive front organizations. Other victims do not matter...….. the looted shops, burnt buildings, lost businesses etc. The personality traits exhibited remind us of 2 Tim 3: 1-5... they are fierce and without mercy themselves.
Police are being killed and hurt in the riots (I think 27 killed this year and hundreds hurt - and not much attention in the news).  Police also have families they have to provide for, which makes the present police resignations  and retirements so relevant...….. Yes, there is racial injustice but not all whites, and neither are all police, racist. Reasonableness has left the planet.
The iron and clay in governments are acrimonious...…… and whatever happens in the next election in USA - it will not be accepted by the losing side.  This is how far we have moved down the stream of time. Healing of this wound will not happen quickly - it will keep festering.  People have crossed the mark of peaceful protest. 
They are ready to murder each other - brother kill brother....
 

I think a lot of people are surprised at the global spread of the protests and rioting. What might be even more surprising is the support by many media outlets, not just of the protests, but also supporting the rioting and destruction. MLK is quoted where he said that 'riots are the language of the oppressed.' (Which cherry-picks the quote out of MLK's context that did NOT support rioting.) It's also odd that all this happens in the midst of Covid19, which has disproportionately killed more African-Americans than police have for the last 100 years. Yet, there is no protest about the languishing response to that particular part of the Covid19 problem.
Another odd thing to notice about BLM is that one of their major contributors is from a CIA-backed organization. For those who might think this is just a conspiracy, the Ford Foundation has already admitted to giving more than $100,000. The CIA.org website reviews a book called "The Cultural Cold War" sometimes critiquing and sometimes accepting the author's claims:
She also does a fine job in recounting the intriguing story of how the CIA worked with existing institutions, such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, and established numerous "bogus" foundations to "hide" its funding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom and its other covert activities.  
In truth, the Ford Foundation has a long history with the CIA, especially post-WW2 through today. The New Yorker admits a connection, of sorts:
The Ford Foundation . . . The left thought that it was propping up the status quo, and was probably a front for the C.I.A. to boot (and, in fact, the C.I.A. was using other foundations for covert funding).
Books, websites, (in some cases even those written by persons involved with the Ford Foundation) admit to the intended effect of hiring CIA recruits and supporting CIA projects. Summaries of some of these activities are easily found, and not even denied:
Ford Foundation, a philanthropic facade for the CIA
by Paul Labarique
Between 1947 and 1966 the Ford Foundation played a key role in the network of US interference in Europe through the subvention of magazines, scientific programs and non-communist left-wing organizations. The largest philanthropic organization in the world was in fact providing a respectful facade for CIA financial and contact operations. This role was even more possible by the fact that the same persons designed and directed both organizations.
Also here:
James Petras, retired Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York, and adjunct professor at Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, wrote a damning article on September 18, 2002, exposing the Ford Foundation’s sinister choice of beneficiaries of its donations. He accused the CIA of using “philanthropic foundations as the most effective conduit to channel large sums of money to Agency projects without alerting the recipients to their source”.
A quick search on Google shows that even the Washington Post has made the connection as recently as 2018:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2018/08/22/the-cia-funded-a-culture-war-against-communism-it-should-do-so-again/
The CIA funded a culture war against communism. It should do so again.
Magazines like Der Monat and English-American literary-political journal Encounter were not the only activities supported by nonprofit pass-throughs such as the Farfield Foundation and the Ford Foundation. The CIA-backed Congress for Cultural Freedom brought the Boston Symphony to Europe (at the cost of $166,359.84 . . .
It can be just as hard to guess what the CIA's thinking is about BLM. But, based on past uses and abuses of philanthropic organizations, the surreal response should be looked at with some suspicion.
Oh wait, did I promise I wouldn't say things like:  "but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one"? Or,  "They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and they perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war of the great day . . ."

I have never posted a Twitter video before. (Hope this works)  

I had no doubt that YOU knew it. But there are some people here from the UK, like @4Jah2me (assuming of course that he is the reincarnation of @John Butler). And, I'm not so sure that they had any groups like the Beatles over in the UK. 😉

For some reason, when I remember this Beatles lyric, I belt out:
"Wednesday morning at 5 PM on a Saturday."
In this case, my version might work even better for Armageddon watchers.
My kids never had quite the familiarity with Beatles lyrics, and never understood why I had a Beatles lyric ready for many situations, like when they bumped into me:
"You're SOMEthing in the way, SO move! You attack me like your OTHer mother. BMMM! Bmmm! bmmmmm."**
**Not an actual Beatles lyric. The original was: "Something in the way she moves, attracts me like no other lover. BMMM! Bmmm! bmmmmm."

As I said, I see no problem with you or anyone else (even me!) bringing it up, and I never complained. But the complaint from others was that no matter what the topic, JB would turn it to CSA so often, you came to expect it. If it was a discussion of Trinity, JB would turn it to CSA. If the topic was about 1914, JB would turn it to CSA. etc.
It's as if JB had a goal to bring it up everywhere, but he used the methods of an Internet troll to bring it up in anyone else's topic, but he rarely ever started a topic on CSA his own.

As I said, I see no problem with you or anyone else (even me!) bringing it up, and I never complained. But the complaint from others was that no matter what the topic, JB would turn it to CSA so often, you came to expect it. If it was a discussion of Trinity, JB would turn it to CSA. If the topic was about 1914, JB would turn it to CSA. etc.
It's as if JB had a goal to bring it up everywhere, but he used the methods of an Internet troll to bring it up in anyone else's topic, but he rarely ever started a topic on CSA his own.

JB never added things exactly out of nowhere. You always knew what was coming. And I never complained about it. But the complaint was that, no matter what the topic, you always found a way to turn it into a CSA topic. Believe me, there were plenty of others doing things like it. Sometimes a topic was very serious and suddenly 4 Dilbert cartoons would run back-to-back-back-to-back.
Most of us appreciate a good diversion now and then, but they shouldn't always divert to the same old topic.

I had no doubt that YOU knew it. But there are some people here from the UK, like @4Jah2me (assuming of course that he is the reincarnation of @John Butler). And, I'm not so sure that they had any groups like the Beatles over in the UK. 😉

Thanks for the observations. Because my English isn’t very good (which is well seen in my grammar as I write comments:) ), it’s even harder for me to follow the lyrics in the songs. And, I didn't even expect "interventions" in the text of the original to happen. ............... But, that's how it is with "musical" and other interpretations :)))

Had a lot of fun listening with YouTube's attempt at automatic voice recognized "Closed Captions." Here's the translation of Glen Campbell's "Gentle on my mind" where he says in the original: "That keeps you in the back roads by the rivers of my memory that keeps you ever [gentle on my mind]."



I also saw lyrics about "when bus who got nuts and buns" and "Apple hazard pay" and all kinds of lyrical distortions.
Of course, they sound very good. I liked "California." Also, it reminded me of my time in Missouri ('65-'76) where some extended families had plenty of "bluegrass" musicians that would get together on weekends and picnics and just start pickin' and grinnin' for hours.