TrueTomHarley

Of course he said it. He is now trying to walk it back because, despite all his blustering, he couldn’t quite make it stick.
It is as you say. The nearness of the end has been impressed upon Witnesses from their inception, but the only specific date in anyone’s lifetime today is 1975. They burned their fingers on that one so badly that they resolved never to do that again. So far they have kept to that resolve. Every subsequent pronouncement has been generic, and is in harmony with Jesus’ counsel to “keep on the watch.” 
Alan’s just upset that they have not said not to keep on the watch. In fact, he’s probably upset that they have not denounced God, for he writes that he has “disproved” him.
If you can distract the Librarian for a moment, I wrote long ago of another such revision that Alan has no doubt chronicled. If by some miracle he missed it, it is another that he can throw on the stack:
Paragraph 18 [of the Revelation book] on page 94 states "some scientists forecast mathematically that an accidental nuclear war is virtually certain to take place within the next 25 years - let alone a planned nuclear conflagration!" The updated version, however, yanks this phrase for the blander: "some scientists speak of the possibility of an accidental nuclear war - let alone a planned nuclear conflagration!"   [!]
The reason the publishers have done this is because Tom Barfendogs has marked on his calendar (to the day, hour, and minute) exactly when 25 years from the first book's publication expires. He is praying, hoping, pleading that there is no nuclear war within that time frame (after that is okay) so he can launch into yet another false prophetscreamfest.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2007/07/will-the-real-a.html
I wrote the post 12 years ago and it stands up reasonably well. The line that I like most is “after that is okay.” It is the same with Alan. The prospect of nuclear war isn’t as disturbing to him as the horror that JWs might get credit for warning of. It is the same with countless other factors that have this world teetering on the brink. He doesn’t think it is in any great trouble, or if he does, he certainly doesn’t want anyone looking anywhere else outside of human answers for the remedy.
In this sense  he is the biggest hypocrite of all. He rails against Jehovah’s Witnesses, but it is really God, the Bible, and specifically the notion of his kingdom coming that rankles him.
 
 

The way the Bible expresses it is: “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called “knowledge.”  By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith.” 1 Tim 6:20
The verse you are looking for is: “The wisdom of this world is such that God could learn a thing or two from it if he wasn’t so brain-dead.”
Let me know when you find it.

@James Thomas Rook Jr. is such a wuss. We all know it.
Given how, at the drop of a pin, he lauds Trump to the high heavens, and given how Alan is unambiguous in denouncing that luminary, @Anna and I thought we had front row seats for the battle of the century! They are both pugnacious. Neither knows the meaning of holding back in the slightest detail. How could we go wrong?
We sold tickets to the event. We lined up vendors. We had programs printed. And what happens?
A LOVEFEST! “You have never disappointed me, James,” Alan coos.
It has cost us serious money in refunds—and I had most of my money spent pampering Mrs. Harley!
WELL, IT IS NOT HAPPENING AGAIN!!!!
”Man-induced climate warming” is a problem that “may well” end the world, Alan says—and WHO has raged on and on that global warming is a HOAX to fool the GULLIBLE sheeple for the sake of left-wing politics, the politics that Alan adores? JTR - THAT’S who. By all rights, this ought to be the mother of all wars, even greater than the Trump/no-Trump war!
But he punted on that war!
He will punt on this one, too—the big wuss. Anna, keep your counsel to yourself! I am NOT going to print up tickets, again.
 

I have some time today ... so i’m moving a few posts not related to the title of the topic

@James Thomas Rook Jr. is such a wuss. We all know it.
Given how, at the drop of a pin, he lauds Trump to the high heavens, and given how Alan is unambiguous in denouncing that luminary, @Anna and I thought we had front row seats for the battle of the century! They are both pugnacious. Neither knows the meaning of holding back in the slightest detail. How could we go wrong?
We sold tickets to the event. We lined up vendors. We had programs printed. And what happens?
A LOVEFEST! “You have never disappointed me, James,” Alan coos.
It has cost us serious money in refunds—and I had most of my money spent pampering Mrs. Harley!
WELL, IT IS NOT HAPPENING AGAIN!!!!
”Man-induced climate warming” is a problem that “may well” end the world, Alan says—and WHO has raged on and on that global warming is a HOAX to fool the GULLIBLE sheeple for the sake of left-wing politics, the politics that Alan adores? JTR - THAT’S who. By all rights, this ought to be the mother of all wars, even greater than the Trump/no-Trump war!
But he punted on that war!
He will punt on this one, too—the big wuss. Anna, keep your counsel to yourself! I am NOT going to print up tickets, again.
 

No. You are preoccupied with this, and @4Jah2me lives and breathes it. But anyone else takes into account that there is no sizable organization on earth where CSA is not an issue, and no one that is not being sued—and in most cases, it is the leaders who are the abusers, something very rare with JWs, whose leaders are just accused of not reporting.
Don’t misunderstand. I would rather that even that were not so, but it is considerably less serious than the leaders being the abusers. Most people can get their heads around that, out of 8 million people, not every single one will be blameless—especially since CSA is the scourge of the planet. Most people can also get their heads around clergy/penitent confidentiality, even if it is being legally reinterpreted, same as they have understood doctor/patient and lawyer/client privilege. I say the following only because I am addressing you, JTR, and I know your political leaning: Most ordinary Americans cannot quite get their heads around quid-pro-quo and if you explain it to them they are not quite sure why it is the huge deal Trump’s opponents make it out to be.
We’ll see how it turns out. It may be something to the Witness organization’s lasting shame. Or perhaps a sense of proportion will, in time, assert itself.
I do sometimes wish that there was a little more PR pushback from them. At present there is only a “we abhor child sexual abuse.” True enough, but in the face of court actions and vehement accusers, reporters go to where they can get a story. They can get one from accusers, but nothing specific from the defense, so they naturally gorge themselves on what the accusers have to say. That’s what reporters do.
There is a limit to how much you can malign people. The decency of Jehovah’s Witnesses is well-attested. They are not flower-selling robe dressers but they are neighbors and coworkers. True, they eat Bible sandwiches, but they are honest, industrious, law-abiding, and harmless. Usually when there are laudable people, it is understood to be because of their leaders, not despite them.
You hang out here too much, JTR, with people who are obsessed over this, in some cases people who are fervently hoping for an outcome detrimental to JWs. “Can’t see the forest for the trees” is the pit some fall into. Again, because of your political leanings—it is like media whipping people into a frenzy over Trump day after day, praying that every tiny development proves to be the torpedo that sinks him. From the moment of his election this has been the case—even from before his election. Close one Mueller investigation with not much to show for it, and immediately open another. 
At least half the country concludes that it is his enemies grasping at straws. 

Of course he said it. He is now trying to walk it back because, despite all his blustering, he couldn’t quite make it stick.
It is as you say. The nearness of the end has been impressed upon Witnesses from their inception, but the only specific date in anyone’s lifetime today is 1975. They burned their fingers on that one so badly that they resolved never to do that again. So far they have kept to that resolve. Every subsequent pronouncement has been generic, and is in harmony with Jesus’ counsel to “keep on the watch.” 
Alan’s just upset that they have not said not to keep on the watch. In fact, he’s probably upset that they have not denounced God, for he writes that he has “disproved” him.
If you can distract the Librarian for a moment, I wrote long ago of another such revision that Alan has no doubt chronicled. If by some miracle he missed it, it is another that he can throw on the stack:
Paragraph 18 [of the Revelation book] on page 94 states "some scientists forecast mathematically that an accidental nuclear war is virtually certain to take place within the next 25 years - let alone a planned nuclear conflagration!" The updated version, however, yanks this phrase for the blander: "some scientists speak of the possibility of an accidental nuclear war - let alone a planned nuclear conflagration!"   [!]
The reason the publishers have done this is because Tom Barfendogs has marked on his calendar (to the day, hour, and minute) exactly when 25 years from the first book's publication expires. He is praying, hoping, pleading that there is no nuclear war within that time frame (after that is okay) so he can launch into yet another false prophetscreamfest.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2007/07/will-the-real-a.html
I wrote the post 12 years ago and it stands up reasonably well. The line that I like most is “after that is okay.” It is the same with Alan. The prospect of nuclear war isn’t as disturbing to him as the horror that JWs might get credit for warning of. It is the same with countless other factors that have this world teetering on the brink. He doesn’t think it is in any great trouble, or if he does, he certainly doesn’t want anyone looking anywhere else outside of human answers for the remedy.
In this sense  he is the biggest hypocrite of all. He rails against Jehovah’s Witnesses, but it is really God, the Bible, and specifically the notion of his kingdom coming that rankles him.
 
 

I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about zebras. Coming from the Master of Rationality, I’d say that this bit of “evidence” is rather weak.
Another bit of proof!
It IS true that, as they were dropping the 1999 New Year’s Eve ball in Times Square, the brothers were dropping an identical one at Bethel: “Four...three....two....one....IT’S THE NEW SYSTEM!!!! ......Oh.....Still the same?.....nuts!”
What is wrong with you? There is 1975 and only 1975 in anyone’s lifetime. And, as stated, even that one is arguable.
You’re just steamed that there has not been counsel: “Remember, brothers, how Jesus said ‘Keep on the watch?’ He’s nuts. Fogedaboutit!”
This speech is shocking! Who can listen to it?
It is on a topic having nothing to do with the theme of this thread! How could you?!
Put it up on another thread. Start one if there is not one already! Same with Alan with his dates. A completely different topic. Start a new thread!
How can you people be so insensitive to the wishes of @The Librarian (that old hen)? She has made it clear that she wants order. We must be considerate of her and not just think of our own selfish desires. Otherwise she will throw everything in one master thread where the focused energy will cause it to explode like a supernova, blowing us all to Kingdom Come!
(maybe that’s how The End comes about)

The way the Bible expresses it is: “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called “knowledge.”  By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith.” 1 Tim 6:20
The verse you are looking for is: “The wisdom of this world is such that God could learn a thing or two from it if he wasn’t so brain-dead.”
Let me know when you find it.

Protestors against any cause are a common sight today, and they have a way of getting in your face if unregulated. “Why don’t you just pop them one?” said a local cop about some particularly aggressive ones from several years ago. People come to any event because they want to attend that event in peace. They don’t go because they want to be told that they are nuts to be there. 
“Information Control”—give me a break! This is just a page from the David Splane of left-wing anti-cult leaders, Steven Hassan, who has originated the BITE model that his followers are all gaga over—Behavioral, Informational, Thought, and Emotional “control.” Mr Hassan’s latest book is entitled, “The Cult of Trump—A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control.” When you think that half the country has fallen under cult influence, it is strong evidence that you have drunk too much of the Kool-Aid yourself. I, too, find it useful to explain away anyone who disagrees with me as a cult victim.
There have been such corridors at our Regionals, too, in recent years, and I appreciate the efforts to free friends from the harassment. Despite your crying, I can see that sign that you are asserting is blocked, and those attendants do, too—all morning long if they are on both sides of the corridor, as they usually are. Often there are megaphones, too.
Last year, the Regional Convention in Rochester was cancelled with three weeks to go because new management took control of the arena, refused to recognize previous terms, and stonewalled negotiations until the last minute, maybe figuring that groups would feel boxed in by then and just do whatever new terms were stipulated. Disney on Ice also pulled out, as did Monster Truck Rally. A Fortune 500 company did not pull out, but instead sent in their lawyers to enforce the original terms. (The City wanted us to do that, too, I am told—we have very good relations with them & of course, they like the added business for restaurants and hotels—but we declined)
We ended up going to Wilkes-Barre for a convention on the same dates, utilizing an arena that had already hosted several conventions. If it had been a disaster, arranged at the last moment and all, you would have been gloating, Jack, but in fact in went very smoothly, and so it is necessary for you to attribute that to being “cult-like.” That facility is on a large parcel of private property that includes parking, and I confess that I did not cry over the absence of protesters. I even wrote up that event, the Love Never Fails convention. It was tied in to Phoenix for several talks, and one of your allies even factors into the story: 
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/08/at-the-wilkes-barre-love-never-fails-regional-convention.html
A lineup of 100 slovenly dressed “apostate”guards to seal off a couple of old ladies with a small literature cart? Actually, I would like to see that spectacle, Jack. Why don’t you set that up? Surely that will help you to be seen as rational people.

Put in another thread. Start one if you have to. Your hostess, the Librarian has (repeatedly) requested it.
Is consideration for the wishes of the web owner too much to ask?
Do you pull off your muddy boots before entering someone’s living room?

I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about zebras. Coming from the Master of Rationality, I’d say that this bit of “evidence” is rather weak.
Another bit of proof!
It IS true that, as they were dropping the 1999 New Year’s Eve ball in Times Square, the brothers were dropping an identical one at Bethel: “Four...three....two....one....IT’S THE NEW SYSTEM!!!! ......Oh.....Still the same?.....nuts!”
What is wrong with you? There is 1975 and only 1975 in anyone’s lifetime. And, as stated, even that one is arguable.
You’re just steamed that there has not been counsel: “Remember, brothers, how Jesus said ‘Keep on the watch?’ He’s nuts. Fogedaboutit!”
This speech is shocking! Who can listen to it?
It is on a topic having nothing to do with the theme of this thread! How could you?!
Put it up on another thread. Start one if there is not one already! Same with Alan with his dates. A completely different topic. Start a new thread!
How can you people be so insensitive to the wishes of @The Librarian (that old hen)? She has made it clear that she wants order. We must be considerate of her and not just think of our own selfish desires. Otherwise she will throw everything in one master thread where the focused energy will cause it to explode like a supernova, blowing us all to Kingdom Come!
(maybe that’s how The End comes about)

This is not rocket science. Pay attention to existing court action. With rare exception it focuses on families in which there was child sexual abuse—often step-families—and elders are involved only in that it was not reported to authorities.
”Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA.“
I know it for everyone else, though. It is every case that comes to trial—and there are no end of them involving leaders of anything.
When was the last time you read of court action against a priest because there was child sexual abuse going on among a family of his parish and he did not stop it? 
When was the last time you read of the Boy Scouts getting sued because there was child sexual abuse going on in a Scout’s family and the Scoutleader did not stop it?
When what the last time you read of child sexual abuse involving the UN that centered around workers discovering CSA in a family and not reporting it?
This one is almost too stupid to answer. How can you be so childish?
“Shining as illuminators in the world” is also comparing Christians to the world. To acknowledge that within your ranks you have the same issues that afflict the rest of mankind, but that overall, they are far less serious (in not involving the leaders, whereas that is the pattern elsewhere) is hardly the evil that you make it out to be. 
It’s “The LORD.” Better get used to saying it. The only ones wanting anything to do with the Name is JWs, which you have left because it is not perfect. Get cracking on your replacement organization—you who have said that God could raise up a “genuine, pure” anointed within about ten years before the end comes. Shoot me a text when that has happened.

One in a lifetime, I said.
It is 1975 in the case of anyone (over 45) living today. For anyone under 45, there is nothing at all.
The rules allow for it. It is a concession to human imperfection.
1941 and 2000 is straining gnats, as you know. It is you trying to retroactively puff up the stats. Nobody at the times thought those years were consequential.
Even 1975 is arguable for the certainty expressed, but for the sake of argument, I’ll let it stand.

This is not rocket science. Pay attention to existing court action. With rare exception it focuses on families in which there was child sexual abuse—often step-families—and elders are involved only in that it was not reported to authorities.
”Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA.“
I know it for everyone else, though. It is every case that comes to trial—and there are no end of them involving leaders of anything.
When was the last time you read of court action against a priest because there was child sexual abuse going on among a family of his parish and he did not stop it? 
When was the last time you read of the Boy Scouts getting sued because there was child sexual abuse going on in a Scout’s family and the Scoutleader did not stop it?
When what the last time you read of child sexual abuse involving the UN that centered around workers discovering CSA in a family and not reporting it?
This one is almost too stupid to answer. How can you be so childish?
“Shining as illuminators in the world” is also comparing Christians to the world. To acknowledge that within your ranks you have the same issues that afflict the rest of mankind, but that overall, they are far less serious (in not involving the leaders, whereas that is the pattern elsewhere) is hardly the evil that you make it out to be. 
It’s “The LORD.” Better get used to saying it. The only ones wanting anything to do with the Name is JWs, which you have left because it is not perfect. Get cracking on your replacement organization—you who have said that God could raise up a “genuine, pure” anointed within about ten years before the end comes. Shoot me a text when that has happened.

This is not rocket science. Pay attention to existing court action. With rare exception it focuses on families in which there was child sexual abuse—often step-families—and elders are involved only in that it was not reported to authorities.
”Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA.“
I know it for everyone else, though. It is every case that comes to trial—and there are no end of them involving leaders of anything.
When was the last time you read of court action against a priest because there was child sexual abuse going on among a family of his parish and he did not stop it? 
When was the last time you read of the Boy Scouts getting sued because there was child sexual abuse going on in a Scout’s family and the Scoutleader did not stop it?
When what the last time you read of child sexual abuse involving the UN that centered around workers discovering CSA in a family and not reporting it?
This one is almost too stupid to answer. How can you be so childish?
“Shining as illuminators in the world” is also comparing Christians to the world. To acknowledge that within your ranks you have the same issues that afflict the rest of mankind, but that overall, they are far less serious (in not involving the leaders, whereas that is the pattern elsewhere) is hardly the evil that you make it out to be. 
It’s “The LORD.” Better get used to saying it. The only ones wanting anything to do with the Name is JWs, which you have left because it is not perfect. Get cracking on your replacement organization—you who have said that God could raise up a “genuine, pure” anointed within about ten years before the end comes. Shoot me a text when that has happened.

This is not rocket science. Pay attention to existing court action. With rare exception it focuses on families in which there was child sexual abuse—often step-families—and elders are involved only in that it was not reported to authorities.
”Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA.“
I know it for everyone else, though. It is every case that comes to trial—and there are no end of them involving leaders of anything.
When was the last time you read of court action against a priest because there was child sexual abuse going on among a family of his parish and he did not stop it? 
When was the last time you read of the Boy Scouts getting sued because there was child sexual abuse going on in a Scout’s family and the Scoutleader did not stop it?
When what the last time you read of child sexual abuse involving the UN that centered around workers discovering CSA in a family and not reporting it?
This one is almost too stupid to answer. How can you be so childish?
“Shining as illuminators in the world” is also comparing Christians to the world. To acknowledge that within your ranks you have the same issues that afflict the rest of mankind, but that overall, they are far less serious (in not involving the leaders, whereas that is the pattern elsewhere) is hardly the evil that you make it out to be. 
It’s “The LORD.” Better get used to saying it. The only ones wanting anything to do with the Name is JWs, which you have left because it is not perfect. Get cracking on your replacement organization—you who have said that God could raise up a “genuine, pure” anointed within about ten years before the end comes. Shoot me a text when that has happened.

No. You are preoccupied with this, and @4Jah2me lives and breathes it. But anyone else takes into account that there is no sizable organization on earth where CSA is not an issue, and no one that is not being sued—and in most cases, it is the leaders who are the abusers, something very rare with JWs, whose leaders are just accused of not reporting.
Don’t misunderstand. I would rather that even that were not so, but it is considerably less serious than the leaders being the abusers. Most people can get their heads around that, out of 8 million people, not every single one will be blameless—especially since CSA is the scourge of the planet. Most people can also get their heads around clergy/penitent confidentiality, even if it is being legally reinterpreted, same as they have understood doctor/patient and lawyer/client privilege. I say the following only because I am addressing you, JTR, and I know your political leaning: Most ordinary Americans cannot quite get their heads around quid-pro-quo and if you explain it to them they are not quite sure why it is the huge deal Trump’s opponents make it out to be.
We’ll see how it turns out. It may be something to the Witness organization’s lasting shame. Or perhaps a sense of proportion will, in time, assert itself.
I do sometimes wish that there was a little more PR pushback from them. At present there is only a “we abhor child sexual abuse.” True enough, but in the face of court actions and vehement accusers, reporters go to where they can get a story. They can get one from accusers, but nothing specific from the defense, so they naturally gorge themselves on what the accusers have to say. That’s what reporters do.
There is a limit to how much you can malign people. The decency of Jehovah’s Witnesses is well-attested. They are not flower-selling robe dressers but they are neighbors and coworkers. True, they eat Bible sandwiches, but they are honest, industrious, law-abiding, and harmless. Usually when there are laudable people, it is understood to be because of their leaders, not despite them.
You hang out here too much, JTR, with people who are obsessed over this, in some cases people who are fervently hoping for an outcome detrimental to JWs. “Can’t see the forest for the trees” is the pit some fall into. Again, because of your political leanings—it is like media whipping people into a frenzy over Trump day after day, praying that every tiny development proves to be the torpedo that sinks him. From the moment of his election this has been the case—even from before his election. Close one Mueller investigation with not much to show for it, and immediately open another. 
At least half the country concludes that it is his enemies grasping at straws. 

The dopes. It is 7500 if it is a day.

No. You are preoccupied with this, and @4Jah2me lives and breathes it. But anyone else takes into account that there is no sizable organization on earth where CSA is not an issue, and no one that is not being sued—and in most cases, it is the leaders who are the abusers, something very rare with JWs, whose leaders are just accused of not reporting.
Don’t misunderstand. I would rather that even that were not so, but it is considerably less serious than the leaders being the abusers. Most people can get their heads around that, out of 8 million people, not every single one will be blameless—especially since CSA is the scourge of the planet. Most people can also get their heads around clergy/penitent confidentiality, even if it is being legally reinterpreted, same as they have understood doctor/patient and lawyer/client privilege. I say the following only because I am addressing you, JTR, and I know your political leaning: Most ordinary Americans cannot quite get their heads around quid-pro-quo and if you explain it to them they are not quite sure why it is the huge deal Trump’s opponents make it out to be.
We’ll see how it turns out. It may be something to the Witness organization’s lasting shame. Or perhaps a sense of proportion will, in time, assert itself.
I do sometimes wish that there was a little more PR pushback from them. At present there is only a “we abhor child sexual abuse.” True enough, but in the face of court actions and vehement accusers, reporters go to where they can get a story. They can get one from accusers, but nothing specific from the defense, so they naturally gorge themselves on what the accusers have to say. That’s what reporters do.
There is a limit to how much you can malign people. The decency of Jehovah’s Witnesses is well-attested. They are not flower-selling robe dressers but they are neighbors and coworkers. True, they eat Bible sandwiches, but they are honest, industrious, law-abiding, and harmless. Usually when there are laudable people, it is understood to be because of their leaders, not despite them.
You hang out here too much, JTR, with people who are obsessed over this, in some cases people who are fervently hoping for an outcome detrimental to JWs. “Can’t see the forest for the trees” is the pit some fall into. Again, because of your political leanings—it is like media whipping people into a frenzy over Trump day after day, praying that every tiny development proves to be the torpedo that sinks him. From the moment of his election this has been the case—even from before his election. Close one Mueller investigation with not much to show for it, and immediately open another. 
At least half the country concludes that it is his enemies grasping at straws. 

No. You are preoccupied with this, and @4Jah2me lives and breathes it. But anyone else takes into account that there is no sizable organization on earth where CSA is not an issue, and no one that is not being sued—and in most cases, it is the leaders who are the abusers, something very rare with JWs, whose leaders are just accused of not reporting.
Don’t misunderstand. I would rather that even that were not so, but it is considerably less serious than the leaders being the abusers. Most people can get their heads around that, out of 8 million people, not every single one will be blameless—especially since CSA is the scourge of the planet. Most people can also get their heads around clergy/penitent confidentiality, even if it is being legally reinterpreted, same as they have understood doctor/patient and lawyer/client privilege. I say the following only because I am addressing you, JTR, and I know your political leaning: Most ordinary Americans cannot quite get their heads around quid-pro-quo and if you explain it to them they are not quite sure why it is the huge deal Trump’s opponents make it out to be.
We’ll see how it turns out. It may be something to the Witness organization’s lasting shame. Or perhaps a sense of proportion will, in time, assert itself.
I do sometimes wish that there was a little more PR pushback from them. At present there is only a “we abhor child sexual abuse.” True enough, but in the face of court actions and vehement accusers, reporters go to where they can get a story. They can get one from accusers, but nothing specific from the defense, so they naturally gorge themselves on what the accusers have to say. That’s what reporters do.
There is a limit to how much you can malign people. The decency of Jehovah’s Witnesses is well-attested. They are not flower-selling robe dressers but they are neighbors and coworkers. True, they eat Bible sandwiches, but they are honest, industrious, law-abiding, and harmless. Usually when there are laudable people, it is understood to be because of their leaders, not despite them.
You hang out here too much, JTR, with people who are obsessed over this, in some cases people who are fervently hoping for an outcome detrimental to JWs. “Can’t see the forest for the trees” is the pit some fall into. Again, because of your political leanings—it is like media whipping people into a frenzy over Trump day after day, praying that every tiny development proves to be the torpedo that sinks him. From the moment of his election this has been the case—even from before his election. Close one Mueller investigation with not much to show for it, and immediately open another. 
At least half the country concludes that it is his enemies grasping at straws. 

It is five weeks away. That is when the JW schedule of weekly Bible reading hits Revelation 22, and it would be too inconvient to make them start all over again at Genesis.

Protestors against any cause are a common sight today, and they have a way of getting in your face if unregulated. “Why don’t you just pop them one?” said a local cop about some particularly aggressive ones from several years ago. People come to any event because they want to attend that event in peace. They don’t go because they want to be told that they are nuts to be there. 
“Information Control”—give me a break! This is just a page from the David Splane of left-wing anti-cult leaders, Steven Hassan, who has originated the BITE model that his followers are all gaga over—Behavioral, Informational, Thought, and Emotional “control.” Mr Hassan’s latest book is entitled, “The Cult of Trump—A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control.” When you think that half the country has fallen under cult influence, it is strong evidence that you have drunk too much of the Kool-Aid yourself. I, too, find it useful to explain away anyone who disagrees with me as a cult victim.
There have been such corridors at our Regionals, too, in recent years, and I appreciate the efforts to free friends from the harassment. Despite your crying, I can see that sign that you are asserting is blocked, and those attendants do, too—all morning long if they are on both sides of the corridor, as they usually are. Often there are megaphones, too.
Last year, the Regional Convention in Rochester was cancelled with three weeks to go because new management took control of the arena, refused to recognize previous terms, and stonewalled negotiations until the last minute, maybe figuring that groups would feel boxed in by then and just do whatever new terms were stipulated. Disney on Ice also pulled out, as did Monster Truck Rally. A Fortune 500 company did not pull out, but instead sent in their lawyers to enforce the original terms. (The City wanted us to do that, too, I am told—we have very good relations with them & of course, they like the added business for restaurants and hotels—but we declined)
We ended up going to Wilkes-Barre for a convention on the same dates, utilizing an arena that had already hosted several conventions. If it had been a disaster, arranged at the last moment and all, you would have been gloating, Jack, but in fact in went very smoothly, and so it is necessary for you to attribute that to being “cult-like.” That facility is on a large parcel of private property that includes parking, and I confess that I did not cry over the absence of protesters. I even wrote up that event, the Love Never Fails convention. It was tied in to Phoenix for several talks, and one of your allies even factors into the story: 
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/08/at-the-wilkes-barre-love-never-fails-regional-convention.html
A lineup of 100 slovenly dressed “apostate”guards to seal off a couple of old ladies with a small literature cart? Actually, I would like to see that spectacle, Jack. Why don’t you set that up? Surely that will help you to be seen as rational people.

This is true in my congregation, too. None of them are any good—not even four. They are all villains. They are so hypocritical that they smile at me and say Hello but their scheme doesn’t work. I know they are all backstabbers. It used to stymie me but I have learned to whirl around like Chuck Norris and take them out with a kick to the head when they are doing this, which is always.
 
Today I read that the US population is not having enough babies to reproduce itself, so those pushy Witness elders you speak of must have influenced a lot of people!
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10439803/babies-born-30-year-low-america-fertility/
Every time I meet someone who says, “I would never bring a child into this crazy world,” I curse those Witnesses—making so many people think (through “mind-control!”) that this world is a hotbed of problems when everyone should know that there are none to speak of.
 
This is why cop shows are so prolific on television for the last 40 years. Viewers cheer at cops chasing down all those wicked Witnesses who are doing evil things.
(Notice how the above reproduces as: “AlanF said: ‘I was a sister for 34 years.’” Notice how I refrained from saying, “So THAT is your problem! Notice the commendable self-control.)