TrueTomHarley

For example, I just read that Billy Graham died today at 99, the grandpa of the TV evangelists.
I don't recall any financial abuse with him, and his final circumstances appear to be reasonably modest. When he traveled, it was not via VW Beetle and he didn't clip the Pennysaver, but they conducted operations as would anyone else on tour -  I can recall Carlin or someone making fun of his expensive suits, but it is a cheap shot and everyone knows it - even he himself, probably, who was just doing what comedians do.

TrueTom returns to his abode after another hard day fleecing the flock.
 
 

Hmm. It is Pastor Inqfist's wife salivating over her upcoming stay at the resort during the Lutheran minister's retreat, which they colloquially renamed 'stampede.' At long last she can sit around a swimming pool in a two piece bathing suit, sipping a drink, without triggering frowns. But then the befuddled pastor discovered he had mixed up the tickets. He has the expired ones from two years ago. The event this year has already taken place.
 
grumble, grumble... Well...he stayed in a Coleman tent in my back yard when he visited here.
About 3 he knocked on the door to use my bathroom. I told him that there was a perfectly fine outhouse in back. Then I made him pull my millstone, and I wouldn't let him eat off the threshing room floor.

TrueTom returns to his abode after another hard day fleecing the flock.
 
 

He pops them out faster than I can pop popcorn.

The link is to a new technique for mathematically calculating the number of galaxies undetected by current astronomical methods. It adds 900% to the total. 
The following statement strkes me as a bit too much, a bit too pretentious:
“It boggles the mind that over 90 percent of the galaxies in the universe have yet to be studied,” noted Conselice. “Who knows what interesting properties we will find when we discover these galaxies with future generations of telescopes?”
Oh? And the visible 10 percent have been "studied?"

Reports Chivchalov on February 9: (Anton Chivchalov Blog)   "At least 16 dwellings of civilians in Belgorod and 12 dwellings in Kemerovo ... are suspected of continuing the activities of the organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia".   "In the evening of February 7, 2018 in Belgorod, large groups of law enforcement officers, consisting of police officers, the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and armed fighters of the SOBR, simultaneously invaded a number of private houses of local residents. In some cases citizens were thrown on the floor, put to the wall, then all were forcibly taken to the police, in the homes they searched.   "… citizens were confiscated from the Bible, all electronic devices and media, passports, money, in some cases even photos hanging on the wall. Already the next day, interrogations of citizens began, which are in the police on the agenda. It became known that an investigation team was established, consisting of 12 (!) Investigators of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. …   "In Kemerovo, …[an official suspected that] at least 14 local residents continue to profess the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses. The judge of the central district court of the city of Kemerovo, Irina Ivanova, at one point satisfied at once at least 12 of her motions. As a result, a search was carried out in 12 houses of peaceful believers, which continued even during the night. In some cases, armed SOBR officers in masks opened their doors by force, bursting in, putting civilians face to the wall with their arms raised or falling to the floor. The apartment was sometimes invaded by more than 10 people, including police officers, Rosgvardia and the Investigative Committee. Citizens were denied the opportunity to make a phone call or to invite a lawyer; the refusal was accompanied by an explanation of Stanislav Shlagov, senior police officer for particularly important cases: "We are not in America."   "Citizens, including women and the elderly, experience a state close to shock. Many have exacerbated chronic diseases. Telephones, tablets, computers, personal belongings, information carriers are confiscated. It is reported that witnesses who were present during the searches were familiar with the police and actively assisted them, in some cases with their tips."   https://twitter.com/chivchalov?lang=en   Anton Chivchalov has covered the turmoil of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia from before the ban. He tweeted dialogue, at 5-minute intervals, of the April 5th Court hearing leading to ban, at the July appeal, and at the subsequant hearing to ban the New World Translation of the Bible.  His veracity is well-established.

Reports Chivchalov: (Anton Chivchalov Blog)   At least 16 dwellings of civilians in Belgorod and 12 dwellings in Kemerovo were subjected to law enforcement intrusions and searches. Dozens of people have been detained, some have been detained for two days. Citizens are suspected of continuing the activities of the organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia".   In the evening of February 7, 2018 in Belgorod, large groups of law enforcement officers, consisting of police officers, the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and armed fighters of the SOBR, simultaneously invaded a number of private houses of local residents. In some cases citizens were thrown on the floor, put to the wall, then all were forcibly taken to the police, in the homes they searched. … citizens were confiscated from the Bible, all electronic devices and media, passports, money, in some cases even photos hanging on the wall. Already the next day, interrogations of citizens began, which are in the police on the agenda. It became known that an investigation team was established, consisting of 12 (!) Investigators of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. … In Kemerovo, …[an official suspected that] at least 14 local residents continue to profess the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses. The judge of the central district court of the city of Kemerovo, Irina Ivanova, at one point satisfied at once at least 12 of her motions. As a result, a search was carried out in 12 houses of peaceful believers, which continued even during the night. In some cases, armed SOBR officers in masks opened their doors by force, bursting in, putting civilians face to the wall with their arms raised or falling to the floor. The apartment was sometimes invaded by more than 10 people, including police officers, Rosgvardia and the Investigative Committee. Citizens were denied the opportunity to make a phone call or to invite a lawyer; the refusal was accompanied by an explanation of Stanislav Shlagov, senior police officer for particularly important cases: "We are not in America."   Citizens, including women and the elderly, experience a state close to shock. Many have exacerbated chronic diseases. Telephones, tablets, computers, personal belongings, information carriers are confiscated. It is reported that witnesses who were present during the searches were familiar with the police and actively assisted them, in some cases with their tips.  

When you come right down to it, do absolutes ever apply to entire populations? In any group consisting of millions, you will find many examples of anything. It is enough to focus on the preponderance of evidence, the overall pattern, the forest - even when discussing individual trees.

I always exaggerate. 'Never' in MySpeak means 'rarely.' 'All' means 'most.'
But in this case, I hold to the never. It is membership I am speaking of. Everybody's clergy gets outed when they do wrong in this regard, but nobody's membership. It's because nobody has a clue as to what their membership is up to. Nobody feels the obligation to present to God a morally clean people, so they don't bother checking to see what members apply biblical morality and what do not. If a member gets blown in for child abuse, it's not their affair; in fact, they know nothing about it. They are not the 'middleman'  and thus cannot be called to account for whether or not they handled matters in the way deemed acceptable by abuse people today.
So with regard to members, how else are we to know an abuser's religious affiliation? Can we imagine the police or the judge will ask about it? Of course, they will not, so the only membership you will hear about is Jehovah's Witnesses. We have a 'vulnerability' in this regard, and it is vulnerability that stems from doing the right thing. If we ignored the conduct of our members, as others do, we would not have this vulnerability. We also, in time, would not have a congregation looking much different than the world in matters of morality. That is what infuriates former members who are now enemies: our attempt to do so, for many of them were once on the losing end of discipline. 
Our 'clergy' stack up pretty well with regard to abuse, and clergy is the only place where you can compare apples to apples - you can't do it with membership because no one else keeps track.
In 2007,  Watchtower settled a number of abuse cases. This statement was released to the media at that time: "For the sake of the victims in these cases, we are pleased that a settlement has been reached. Our hearts go out to all those who suffer as a result of child abuse....During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the US. In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts. Of course one victim is one victim too many. However, the incidence of this crime among Jehovah’s Witnesses is rare..."
We have a missing puzzle piece here. We know the stats for abuse among our 'clergy.' We know the stats for abuse among the clergy of others. But when it comes to membership, we only know the stats for Jehovah's Witnesses. So as not to be comparing apples to oranges, we need to know the stats for the membership of other faiths. We will never get them because nobody keeps track. So people who know better (and many who don't) will continue to equate the membership of Jehovah's Witnesses with the clergy of other religions.
With a missing puzzle piece that will not be supplied, all we can do is extrapolate. If eleven Witness clergy were sued over 100 years, with only four of them stemming from any culpability from the organization, then I submit that the overall rate among the members will also be low. If it is seen to be high, then the overall rate among memberships elsewhere will be astronomical.  
Of course, we see that it is. Child sexual abuse everywhere is an absolutely out of control pandemic. Like nurturing a seedling plant through inclement weather, apostates promote the idea that the pedophilia problem is disproportionately a Witness problem. It is not. If stats are disproportionate, it is probably the other way, as it is with clergy.

It is a classic example of getting slammed for doing the right thing, and it should not be spun any other way.
The way to avoid such messy critiques is to preach to the congregation on Sunday and let that be the end of it. It's up to them what they do with it. That way, if somewhere down the line a member of a religion is busted for child abuse, leaders can truthfully say, like Sergeant Shultz, 'I know notttthhhhiiiiiiiinnnngg!' 
Let them come to consume religion, and no more. Give no thought to disciplining congregants who misbehave. Construct matters so that you never know about these ones.
Fail in your duty to God to produce for him a people spirituality and morally clean. Tell Him: "What you see is what you get. It's not my problem.'
Surely this explains why we never hear religious affiliation for anyone other than JWs when abusers are found out. Nobody else cares about Scriptural direction to maintain cleanliness as a congregation. Nobody else has a clue what their members are up to. When cops nab an abuser, their religion is never reported because few imagine that today's religions should result in clean people; it's not their job. Only Jehovah's Witnesses take it upon themselves to insist upon clean people.
For the most part, former Witnesses who are now enemies and who push this narrative for all it is worth were disciplined at one time for one thing or another, and are livid over it. It's no more complicated than that.
 

Hmmm. Let us ask @AlanF if he will put in a good word for Mommy Dawkins here. Heaven knows he praises him enough.
Let us direct him to the Atlantic article @Nana Fofana offered up.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/
Now, Mommy Dawkins  regards mild pedophila as no big deal. Since it happened to him as a boy and he survived it to turn out as fine as he has, his experience - having an adult put his hand down a child's pants - seems his definition of mild. Don't make an issue of it, he recommends. 
What you should make an issue of is passing on religion to a child. That, he says, is intolerable child abuse. Putting your hand down its pants is not.
He is in the company of those who he would consider his founding (fondling?) fathers, per The Sibylline oracles, which claims that only the Jews were free from this impurity.  "Phoenicians, Egyptians and Romans, spacious Greece and many nations of other, Persians and Galatians and all Asia." - depend upon it. These ones will have the hots for your children.
But the Jews - and the Christians that derived from them, per 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 - did not go in for that kind of thing. Doesn't matter, Alan sneers - they were young earth creationists. His heroes may make a grab down your child's pants now and then, but at least they know how old the earth is.
 
 
 
 

I am not even willing to accede the moral high ground to these anti-pedophile zealots. Let them claim some progress before we do that. They have succeeded in shaming people, punishing many, and wallpapering the world with sex registry lists. Let them attain some progress in stopping child abuse before we rush to proclaim them heroes.
Though not parallel in all respects, the following is parallel in more ways than not: Nobody claims victory over drugs because many dealers and users have been sent to jail. Instead, they realize that taking out a drug dealer clears the way for ten waiting to take his place. They realize that ever more potent drugs are being devised, and ever more ways to ensnare people. They don’t crow that they are stopping drug abuse; instead, they realize they’re getting their heads handed to them on a platter.
So far, pedophilia is following the same pattern as drug abuse. Ever more sordid and vicious forms are being devised. Persons respected, in various walks of life, are continually being exposed, yet they simply are replaced by others. Those who must track child sexual abuse online in the course of their job describe it as Medusa – one look and it turns you to stone. Moreover, the fight against pedophilia is mostly confined to monied lands. Few care in non-monied lands, as you pointed out.
It is ever like the zealots of this world to charge around loudly, point fingers everywhere, punish some, shame others, and then, on the basis of their good intentions alone, claim victory. Let them actually achieve victory before we hail them as modern saviors.
Let them come to grips with the causes of pedophilia. In a world that relentlessly pushes sex into ever expanding frontiers, crossing same-sex lines, encouraging lifestyles of multiple, ever changing lovers, embracing sexual activity of kids at ages younger and younger, hailing new exciting sexual positions and methods, it is unlikely to find success declaring every form of sex fine and wonderful except ONE THAT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED! The best defense will be the continual Bible training at the Kingdom Hall to keep yourself clean of every sort of fleshly defilement, to be had from the one religion training its members to properly integrate sexuality into their personalities – as neither the focus or life nor something to be frowned upon in its proper context. Ones of that religion should be portrayed as the heroes in this drama (even if flawed), never the villains.
 

The President of the Philippines was interviewed recently by the Russian Times.And boy oh boy, did he ever unload:
MF: Can I ask you a personal question, please? Two years ago, you shocked the media by revealing that you had been molested by a priest when you were 14 or 15 years old. And later, you even identified that priest. He was an American national.
RD: Yes. Not only I – the whole class. Two generations up and two generations down. All of us.
MF: You were 70 years old at that time. Why would you make that confession more than 50 years later?
RD: I said this because of the penchant to keep silent. The abuses of the priests had been filmed everywhere. There was an Italian underground film – I’m sure you saw that – priests were running naked there. And they don’t really bother to investigate. There is no condemnation. Nothing. They show the priests and the religious people doing shenanigans, but it is seen just as part of the show of the night. Is it liberality? Is it because you don’t want to condemn your own countrymen? Or is it because the victims were just natives? Never mind about them. We were considered natives. And sometimes pictured as apes.
In view of the above interview, it is obscene to even include Jehovah's Witnesses in the same discussion of rank pedophilia. It is obscene not to continually slap down persons who would attempt to equate the two. 
Knowing of a case that was not handled 'correctly' is poles apart from being the predator of that case. They would not even have that knowledge if they were like the churches that make no effort to keep themselves clean morally in God's eyes.

I have not found that to be true. Have you found it to be that way?
 
I have not found that to be true, either. It is only the conclusions the Christian organization has reached that you object to, not the means of reaching it. 
An almost universal element of mind control is that the target is separated from all that is familiar. In the year or so it takes to qualify for baptism, the prospective Witness is 95% in the same surroundings he has always been in, at home, at work, among those with whom he is familiar. He goes to two JW meetings a week and has a personal home Bible study.
How does that stack up against, say - college, which is never presented as mind-control but which serves to plant many a foreign notion into the mind of emerging graduates? College, where students are completely separated 24/7 from all that is familiar - made to live in dormitories. 
Don't misunderstand. The point here is not to down college. The point is to show that your allegations of Watchtower mind-control are juvenile nonsense.
Fortunately, I have never been asked to.

A good place to start (and finish, for the most part) is to google: 'wikipedia fair use'

I think we are somehow not communicating. If anyone else is doing wrong, fry him. But I am not.
To reproduce long excerpts from a copyrighted work, you need permission. 
To reproduce short ones - a sentence or two  - you do not. Watchtower publications do it all the time.
 
 

I believe it does, in short segments (a sentence or two) for the sake of commentary. Longer passages would have to be authorized by me. 
Do you think every book or movie reviewer has the permission of the artist?
Nor should you think I am in cahoots with JWI or even sympathetic to his aims. What he is doing, he is doing, and can defend himself if he chooses to. I can answer only to what I am doing.
I knew of "fair use" long before I knew of @JW Insider. It is not something obscure.
Should you want to post anything relevant to law, I will be grateful to you. If it turns out I am doing wrong, I will mend my ways. However, as stated, I would have to search some to find even where I have copied anything of theirs. I mean, I would not challenge that I have done it, but it is not frequent and it is never long. Some here (and everywhere) have reproduced entire articles. I have never done that, believing it to be a violation of copyright unless done with written authorization.
A snippet is something else entirely.

Actually, I don't think so. "Fair use" is a pretty bedrock principle of American law. Otherwise there could be no commentary of anything and most of the news and print and internet media would implode into a black hole. 
Fair use allows for short passages to be quoted. Long segments are another thing entirely.
I try to be careful on this and not abuse what is permissible . While I do have some short quotes (not many, really, at least not in comparison) I have not used the organization's artwork or logo, as though it were my own. 
It is obvious why they would not want a liar doing this. But even a friend - to use their artwork suggests to the casual reader (which is the majority) that you are them. You thereby impute all of your idiosyncrasies to them. (I have none, of course, so this is not a big deal in my case, but all others here are absolute lunatics.  )
 

In the midst of Sunday’s study article on how we might batten down the hatches yet further on wrong conduct, was this frank statement:  ‘We will not be able to do that perfectly.’
No. We will not. Too many beat themselves up trying to do things perfectly. They ought not. Dust yourself off and jump back in the fray anew.
Also from that same study article, considered February 5:
‘For instance, a man tells his boss or fellow workers that he cannot be at work the next day or that he must leave early because he has a “medical” appointment. In fact, his “medical” appointment is merely a brief stop at a pharmacy or a quick visit to the doctor’s office to pay a bill. His real reason for not being at work is so that he can get a head start on a trip or so that he can take his family to the beach. There may have been a grain of truth in his mentioning a “medical” appointment, but would you say that he was being honest? Or was he being deceptive?’
The friends were intrigued over this point and many discussed it at the special Bible study meetings held at individual homes that  night.  Some were distracted, however,  by a football game playing in the background.
Photo: Vic
Tom Irregardless and Me  ***   No Fake News but Plenty of Hogwash

This is why you do not squabble overmuch about 607 or anything else. 'Facts' are unstable building blocks that can be fashioned into palaces or outhouses. You don't blow 607 off as nothing, but neither do you let it spoil your day. Focus on the facts on the ground.
The dispute will be like the food pyramid that stands for decades and is literally turned upon its head. It will be like the generation avoiding fat because the scientists said so only to find that businesspeople had bought science and sugar is the culprit. It will be even be like the mathematical proof that the sum of all natural numbers is -1/12. Or that black holes violate either relativity or quantum physics.
It is the heart one must work to develop, not the head. For every Bible verse there is about the head, there are ten about the heart. Unfortunately, one of the drawbacks of focusing on the heart is that people cannot argue themselves right! - gutting the underpinnings of many a forum.

This is not hard.
It is their material. They want to control its distribution. They have voiced no objection whatsoever to linking to their material. When you do this, it always remains obvious that it is theirs. @Anna
But if you reproduce it - pictures, logo, articles, anything from their art department - it suggests to the casual reader that you are them. And you are not. If you are a liar trying to misrepresent their work, the problem is obvious.
But even if you are a friend you should not suggest that you are them because each of us has his/her own hangups.
I can be crass and sarcastic. I like homeopathy. I comment on things political from time to time (they don't do it at all). If I do this on my own, I am okay. If I do it and include a link to something of theirs, I am okay. If I do it and reproduce the jw.org logo or some picture, I am not okay because I am suggesting I am them and that they identify with my views. The discerning reader will know it is not so, but not all readers are discerning. Most are not.
Many brothers on Facebook reproduce their artwork, thinking it is fine because they are faithful. They shouldn't. I won't say i have never done it before. I don't think I have ever done it here, but I have done it a handful of times on Facebook. I won't anymore. 
Primarily, they are not 'laying down the law' for the vile people. The vile people will not listen to them anyway. They may have to be confronted legally. But it is more challenging to do this when every Tom Dick and Harry of a Witness is also reproducing their work, thinking it is okay because they are friends.
 

Is your beef this time with God or with the organization that does its best to apply what he has inspired to be written?

Who can say what God is thinking? 
Perhaps it is a way a demonstrating he considers marriage a covenant sacrosanct. I can think of two who complied with it for many years before finally becoming free.
Much of it, I would think, depends upon how you regard this life. If this life is all there is, then such a policy is tremendously burdensome. If one regards this life as a forerunner to the real life of 1 Timothy 6:19, then it is less so.

thanks for this. It almost inspires me - maybe I will do it - to give each a try for a week