TrueTomHarley

Why do I want to create a phony profile (another one!) ... that of a GB member who admits that, deep down in his heart, he knows that Witness is right, that he is utterly ashamed of himself, and that he is astounded by her phenomenal grasp of the scriptures and reasoning ability?

My greatest creation, @JW Insider, has kept them all fooled for the longest time.

Sometimes the chest expanding indicates that the body is breathing. Other times it is the chest contracting that conveys the same idea.

Oh, yeah! It's him all right. 
There he is in a meeting with the rest of the Governing Body, and he keeps them all waiting so as to answer tweets. Or he slaps his laptop right down there at the Bethel dinner table to peck away on Facebook. After all, he knows he must answer 'instantly.' That @Witness is on to something. As she says: 'How do you know until you ask him? What'sa matter? Chicken?'
More likely, the lowlife interrupts his tea party with Witness to anwer an incoming missive.
Let us not be (overly) unkind here, but imo it is a good thing she got outmaneuvered from her true status as annointed. If she ever assumed powerful heavenly position, I would fear for the earth to spin the wrong way.

Back in the days that I call when "each one did what was right in his own eyes," (late 70s or early 80s) there was an one-day special assembly in Niagara Falls, NY. Apparantly, local brothers, if they had the wherewithall, could put together whatever program they liked if they could assemble the speakers.
It is at that gathering that Victor Blackwell spoke and I picked up afterwards his excellent book "O'ar the Ramparts They Watched," which I frequently quote in my own writing.
David McClure also spoke, a circuit overseer, the son of Lucy McClure., who figured in the reversal of Gobitis. He told the story as it would have been seen through a child's eyes. He spoke of regularly getting beaten up walking to and from school. As only Dave McClure could do, he made getting beaten up sound almost like fun.
The third speaker was a brother who essentially spoke about health, the sort of thing that would never be done today. "If you feel good, stay away from them," he said about doctors. He also spoke a lot about nutrution. Dave McClure was sitting not too far from me. Following that 'health talk' he said loudly: "Well, I guess I'm going to go down and get myself a hot dog!"

I was somewhat of a holdout in adapting to the digital formats. But once I did, I passed by almost everyone. Except for the contact cards, specific calls, and invitations, I haven't carried a piece of paper with me in ages.

Thanks for pointing this out. I thought it was unfair for the paper above (from 2017) to have focused on his racing hobby after a car accident that was more likely caused by distracted driving, the article says. His business was window-washing, but his wife apparently brought up the hobby because that's evidently where more people knew him from:
He was well-known in model racing circles, npi. Looking up Jon Grainger Slot Cars on Google will give you pages of articles and images showing how well-known he was to hobbyists and competitors:
Jon Grainger – The Digital Slot Car Association
www.officialdisca.com/2017/11/jon-grainger/   Jan 25, 2018 - Jon Grainger of Norwich, UK, first took part in DiSCA competition in the Pendle Slot Racing hosted Group C series of 2013. Joining the Racing ... Jon Grainger (ferraif40), a life cut short - The Pit Lane - SlotForum
www.slotforum.com › SlotForum › SlotForum Community Forums › The Pit Lane   Nov 14, 2017 - It is with great sadness that I'm sharing the news here that Jon Grainger, know on the forum as ferraif40, has passed away. I'm not aware of the full details of his death other than that he was involved in a car accident yesterday. ... ...So sad and shocking to hear that Jon's life has ...
Merc W196 and Maserati 250F Streamline - Scratch building ... Dec 31, 2015 UK Slot Car Festival pre-1986 Racing British Classics - Page 3 ... May 18, 2014 News from 'Stryker Racing Slot Car Kits - News - SlotForum May 22, 2013 Stryker News; Ferrari 126C2 - Resin Kit - News - SlotForum Jan 21, 2013 His web site probably from about 5 years ago (https://strykerracing.weebly.com/about-us.html ) says the following about his hobby:
About Us

-ABOVE The main shape of the car is formed- Stryker Racing Slot Car Kits specialise in the production of 1.32 scale slot car bodyshells. Stryker Racing is ran by Jon Grainger, an 18 year old slot racer living in Norwich, whos interests lie between building beutifull models and racing them on the track. Hence the cars are not only fantastic models, but also hand picked thanks to their good diemensions, making them perfect for racing.

Some of our models are made using 3D printing, but mainly cars begin their life in the hands of Martin Field, one of the very best model and pattern makers in the world. Martin is well-renowned, and has been employed by some of the biggest firms in the world, and has worked in many different countries.

The main shape of the car is crafted in Ureol, an epoxy modelling board. Further details are soon added, using filler, brass tube and wire, and plastic. This is then
coated in 'self etch' a filler which smooth’s out the shell in preparation for moulding. Further details such as wings, wing mirrors and wheel inserts are also produced by Martin and prepared for casting. The whole master is thinned out so that a two part mould can be produced, perfect for racing, as it keeps its
strength, while losing excess weight.

The finished master is then sent to Steve Francis, a London based caster, who works his magic with silicone and resin, turning the pattern into a resin slot car shell. Its a messy and smelly job, but despite this, Steve produces perfect replicas of the original
master.

Early tweets I saw were unusually vicious, as in "Welcome to hell, Joe"
SOB though he was said to be, though, nobody would have heard of Michael Jackson without him. Raising eight kids in gritty Gary Indiana, where many men walk away; it is not nothing.
One wonders whether his son would have been happier had Joe followed another course. It is one of those "which is better off, a live dog or a dead lion?" deals of Bible verse.
I wrote something of this long ago:
http://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2009/07/the-pundits-michael-jackson-and-joe.html

It is rather a sloppy article but the subject is so visceral that such things are overlooked.
All is told from the point of view of the wronged girl. I don't claim she speaks untruthfully. It is simply that, humans being what they are, we are inclined to remember things the way we remember them...embellish certain points and downplay or forget others. For example, when the judge recalled certain things in a matter-of-fact way, the victim says that's not how she recalled it, and the reporter at that point forgets all about the judge and runs with the victim. I suspect that the judge recollects it more accurately, because he has not carried the emotional baggage for two decades.
When Lett, many years later, speaks of 'apostate lies,' the reporter presents it as though he is calling his old friend a liar. Of course, he is not. No one says that what happened is a lie; it is the spin that enemies (which now seem to include the Inquirer) put on it that is the lie.
I answered at some length the Inquirer's first story and emailed it two two editors and the reporter. It was never acknowledged in any way. Instead, the reporter followed through on remarks he had made on the Reddit forum, that he had more material in the hopper that he considered damning to the Witnesses. Of course, this story that Witness is so thrilled about is what he had in mind.
I take it as evidence that the Philadelphia Inqurer wants this story told one and only one way. If there is anything to mitigate a damning verdict, they do not want to hear it. Of course, they have a story. No one would say that they do not. It is a variation of the "If it bleeds it leads" theme - familiar and not so terrible in itself, but the refusal to consider or even acknowledge a different lens through which the topic might be viewed, is to paint it, imo, as a not very good newspaper. Adding to this perception is that the paper does not seem to have a comment section for its online articles.
Comment sections are not necessarily great, as they attract many a moron, especially on 'hot' topics. But they have become ubiquitous and the fact that the Inquirer does not have one seems but another indicator that they will breach no dissent on what stories they report.
It is the religious version of the shabby journalism that has become the norm today. Reporters of the right or left hype up their view to the point of hysteria, and refuse to look at things that in any way confound their conclusions.
 

No, he doesn't. How can anyone be so naive (or deceitful)?
Anybody can pretend to be anyone on the internet. I, for example, have about ten personas on this forum and @James Thomas Rook Jr. falls for every one of them.
If a Governing Body member were to be on social media, it would be a huge change in method of communication. He would not do so without abundant notice given beforehand on trusted channels.
 

It is rather a sloppy article but the subject is so visceral that such things are overlooked.
All is told from the point of view of the wronged girl. I don't claim she speaks untruthfully. It is simply that, humans being what they are, we are inclined to remember things the way we remember them...embellish certain points and downplay or forget others. For example, when the judge recalled certain things in a matter-of-fact way, the victim says that's not how she recalled it, and the reporter at that point forgets all about the judge and runs with the victim. I suspect that the judge recollects it more accurately, because he has not carried the emotional baggage for two decades.
When Lett, many years later, speaks of 'apostate lies,' the reporter presents it as though he is calling his old friend a liar. Of course, he is not. No one says that what happened is a lie; it is the spin that enemies (which now seem to include the Inquirer) put on it that is the lie.
I answered at some length the Inquirer's first story and emailed it two two editors and the reporter. It was never acknowledged in any way. Instead, the reporter followed through on remarks he had made on the Reddit forum, that he had more material in the hopper that he considered damning to the Witnesses. Of course, this story that Witness is so thrilled about is what he had in mind.
I take it as evidence that the Philadelphia Inqurer wants this story told one and only one way. If there is anything to mitigate a damning verdict, they do not want to hear it. Of course, they have a story. No one would say that they do not. It is a variation of the "If it bleeds it leads" theme - familiar and not so terrible in itself, but the refusal to consider or even acknowledge a different lens through which the topic might be viewed, is to paint it, imo, as a not very good newspaper. Adding to this perception is that the paper does not seem to have a comment section for its online articles.
Comment sections are not necessarily great, as they attract many a moron, especially on 'hot' topics. But they have become ubiquitous and the fact that the Inquirer does not have one seems but another indicator that they will breach no dissent on what stories they report.
It is the religious version of the shabby journalism that has become the norm today. Reporters of the right or left hype up their view to the point of hysteria, and refuse to look at things that in any way confound their conclusions.
 

They do not.
It is your spin on them that they call false stories.
Assuming that it is true, In an ever-changing population of 8 million, there will be examples of anything.

It is rather a sloppy article but the subject is so visceral that such things are overlooked.
All is told from the point of view of the wronged girl. I don't claim she speaks untruthfully. It is simply that, humans being what they are, we are inclined to remember things the way we remember them...embellish certain points and downplay or forget others. For example, when the judge recalled certain things in a matter-of-fact way, the victim says that's not how she recalled it, and the reporter at that point forgets all about the judge and runs with the victim. I suspect that the judge recollects it more accurately, because he has not carried the emotional baggage for two decades.
When Lett, many years later, speaks of 'apostate lies,' the reporter presents it as though he is calling his old friend a liar. Of course, he is not. No one says that what happened is a lie; it is the spin that enemies (which now seem to include the Inquirer) put on it that is the lie.
I answered at some length the Inquirer's first story and emailed it two two editors and the reporter. It was never acknowledged in any way. Instead, the reporter followed through on remarks he had made on the Reddit forum, that he had more material in the hopper that he considered damning to the Witnesses. Of course, this story that Witness is so thrilled about is what he had in mind.
I take it as evidence that the Philadelphia Inqurer wants this story told one and only one way. If there is anything to mitigate a damning verdict, they do not want to hear it. Of course, they have a story. No one would say that they do not. It is a variation of the "If it bleeds it leads" theme - familiar and not so terrible in itself, but the refusal to consider or even acknowledge a different lens through which the topic might be viewed, is to paint it, imo, as a not very good newspaper. Adding to this perception is that the paper does not seem to have a comment section for its online articles.
Comment sections are not necessarily great, as they attract many a moron, especially on 'hot' topics. But they have become ubiquitous and the fact that the Inquirer does not have one seems but another indicator that they will breach no dissent on what stories they report.
It is the religious version of the shabby journalism that has become the norm today. Reporters of the right or left hype up their view to the point of hysteria, and refuse to look at things that in any way confound their conclusions.
 

They do not.
It is your spin on them that they call false stories.
Assuming that it is true, In an ever-changing population of 8 million, there will be examples of anything.

Jesus healed the leper and specifically told him to keep a lid on it. Show yourself to the priests, thank God, and go about your business.   What did the fellow do? He shouted it out everywhere. He messed up the Lord! Jesus wanted to keep visiting the city. He no longer could do it. He had to hole up out in the wilderness!   What could he do? Apart from divinely muzzling the guy or handing him back his leprosy, he was stymied! The Lord!   He adapted, though. The cured fellow raised such a ruckus that everyone had to go out in the wilderness to check Jesus out. Maybe it even worked out better this way; they had to do something.   I think there’s a lesson for us. You want your companions in service to be discreet and to behave in a certain way, and they don’t. You want them to be like the silhouetted fellow in the videos and they are the exact opposite. It’s enough to drive a guy crazy. It was enough to drive Jesus crazy, too, yet he didn’t go crazy. He just adjusted tactics and it turned out okay. And maybe at a later date he even ran across the fellow and said: “You know, you really should have kept your mouth shut. But it all worked out.”  

Back in the days that I call when "each one did what was right in his own eyes," (late 70s or early 80s) there was an one-day special assembly in Niagara Falls, NY. Apparantly, local brothers, if they had the wherewithall, could put together whatever program they liked if they could assemble the speakers.
It is at that gathering that Victor Blackwell spoke and I picked up afterwards his excellent book "O'ar the Ramparts They Watched," which I frequently quote in my own writing.
David McClure also spoke, a circuit overseer, the son of Lucy McClure., who figured in the reversal of Gobitis. He told the story as it would have been seen through a child's eyes. He spoke of regularly getting beaten up walking to and from school. As only Dave McClure could do, he made getting beaten up sound almost like fun.
The third speaker was a brother who essentially spoke about health, the sort of thing that would never be done today. "If you feel good, stay away from them," he said about doctors. He also spoke a lot about nutrution. Dave McClure was sitting not too far from me. Following that 'health talk' he said loudly: "Well, I guess I'm going to go down and get myself a hot dog!"

After the St. Louis convention of August 6-10, 1941, where J. F. Rutherford addressed his largest visible public audience of 115,000, also releasing the new book Children and making known for the first time that universal domination was the great issue . . . https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1955803
*** w69 10/15 p. 637 Appreciating Jehovah’s Mercy and Loving-Kindness ***
And think of the enormous quantities of literature that are distributed within a day or two at our large conventions! This has always fascinated me. At St. Louis in 1941, for example, more than 125,000 copies of the book Children were distributed along with almost half a million of the booklet “Comfort All That Mourn." I'm at my mom and dad's house today in California, helping them pack and move, and just held a copy of the Children book that my father got at this same assembly.
 

Hey!! I placed that Bible with them. And to think I imagined I was going to return and have a nice Bible discussion with them.
http://www.newsweek.com/behind-scenes-newsweeks-international-june-1-cover-art-960456
If I had known they were going to do that, I would have placed with them one of the old green ones (with dinosaur on the inside flap)

I have no doubt that is the real story.
#HowManyJapaneseDoesItTakeToUnscrewALightBulb

Probably by selecting just the right one, you could suggest of any wedding that they will be divorced in two weeks.

Probably by selecting just the right one, you could suggest of any wedding that they will be divorced in two weeks.

The Daily Signal published another photo, taken moments apart:
No particular tension in this one. 

It makes one wonder how much is real and how much is selected just to convey a desired effect.

Oh YEAH??!! Well what about OUR TRUMP?!!!
(No, I am just kidding. I do not regard either of them as “ours,” no any human spokesperson. And I know you do not either; it is but a speechism.)

I'm guessing that in the first picture Angela Merkel is saying: "Did you hear the one about the Japanese man who  . . . . ?"
That could explain the second picture.

Probably by selecting just the right one, you could suggest of any wedding that they will be divorced in two weeks.