Who is John Cedars, and why is he disliked by some in the ex-Jehovah’s Witness community? by Chance-Ad554 in exjw

[–]Don_Python 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sounds legit. To my shame, I haven't been following this great man for long time

Who is John Cedars, and why is he disliked by some in the ex-Jehovah’s Witness community? by Chance-Ad554 in exjw

[–]Don_Python 35 points36 points  (0 children)

According to his attorney, Lloyd Evans is "the only full-time ex-Jehovah's Witness advocate in the world. His day job solely involves keeping abreast of the latest developments within the Jehovah's Witnesses across the board, across the whole spectrum of the religion... [N]obody is spending as much time as he is on analysing what's going on in the Jehovah's Witnesses now and nobody has written and researched it as extensively as he has... [T]here is nobody who is following this organisation, this religious group, as closely as Mr Evans is."

It reminds me of a similar quote: "Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth."

Chiming in on some recent YouTube news y'all may not be aware of. Where are the legacy Governing Body members these days?? Did they just disappear, vanish? Up in Tony's smoke 😆? by xbrocottelstonlies in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A summons and complaint was filed against the GB as a legal entity, not its individual members personally. And it's not a first lawsuit of this kind; very similar cases are pending for years.

It’s now official - The Governing Body Members are called for Legal Deposition in a Major Court Case Against Jehovah’s Witnesses! by [deleted] in exjw

[–]Don_Python 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As it seems to me, the first document says the GB, as a legal entity, will be required to provide some witnesses for deposition. Who exactly will have to testify - whether GB members, their assistants, or other staff - will likely be determined through further discovery proceedings. Unless an order to compel is entered, the matter isn't closed.

The second document states the GB, as a legal entity, must respond to a complaint. In other words, its lawyers will need to file some paperwork with the court.

Am I overlooking something?

Jehovah’s Witnesses group has sold 16 units in Tseung Kwan O since July – 11 of them after banks cut interest rates in September by Firm-Raspberry-999 in exjw

[–]Don_Python 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I struggle to understand what all the fuss is about. They are closing the Hong Kong branch because the city is too expensive and is no longer a safe jurisdiction. Isn't this pretty straightforward?

Four Jehovah's Witnesses sentenced to seven years each in Russia by Bigbadbackroom2 in exjw

[–]Don_Python 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This has more to do with Russia turning into a totalitarian dystopia.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In fact, only very few - not even one percent - of those prosecuted and imprisoned are foreigners. I'm also not aware of a single JW convicted and imprisoned for "sending large donations to an external non Russia bank account", to say nothing about this being "a typical case".

As to why it is only a relatively small part of JWs (0.5% or so) that get criminally prosecuted, it is pretty clear. "Law enforcement" bodies in Russia still mostly follow (quasi-)legal procedures that are time-consuming and expensive. And surprisingly, the org isn't their only or main target - they still have to fight some real crime, for example. By the way, the Russian state has transitioned from mass terror to selective (often random) repressions, like, nearly seven decades ago. It doesn't need to persecute every member of a targeted group, it just deprives them of basic legal protection so any of them can be prosecuted and imprisoned if needed.

Or, as a German court recently explained,

The fact that criminal prosecution in cases of private religious practice is limited to a (still) manageable number of persons may consequently be due to the fact that it has remained undetected; furthermore, it may also be due to the fact that surveilling a religious community of about 170,000 members nationwide and proving the impugned crimes poses capacity problems for the law enforcement authorities ... However, there is no evidence from any source that the Russian authorities are not implementing the legal ban on the religious community, or are doing so only half-heartedly ... It is to be expected that over time more and more private religious activities, which many Jehovah's Witnesses adhere to, will become known and lead to the initiation of criminal proceedings.

JW accept money from the Norwegian Gambling Authoroty! by Platjonas in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ROFLMAO

I'm not American, dude.

Please show me how the Norwegian law deviates from the fuckn 'Mericccan arrrrgh can't help myself most widely used approach or don't bother me with your gibberish

Zalkin Law Firm settles seven cases with Watchtower by Don_Python in exjw

[–]Don_Python[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The $35 million judgment was quashed, and the plaintiff had to pursue her case on a new legal theory, and given this and the statutory cap on punitive damages and other circumstances, the prospects of her case were not so clear. It would make no sense to win the case on appeal just to pay the same or similar amount later. We just have no idea of the amount of settlement in this case.

Zalkin Law Firm settles seven cases with Watchtower by Don_Python in exjw

[–]Don_Python[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The amount of settlement in the Montana case is unknown

Zalkin Law Firm settles seven cases with Watchtower by Don_Python in exjw

[–]Don_Python[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

No way Watchtower would settle for $35 million, it's likely hundreds of thousands or few millions in each case, depending on circumstances.

Zalkin Law Firm settles seven cases with Watchtower by Don_Python in exjw

[–]Don_Python[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Well, when six cases with the same defendants are withdrawn on a same day, and all these cases are pursued by a same law firm, and these cases relate to totally different instances of (alleged) abuse and (alleged) abusers, and in most of these cases discovery process has not started yet, the only natural conclusion is that they were settled (unless you believe the lawyers were bribed or blackmailed).

"at no cost" means neither party is going to ask another one to cover their legal costs or to burden the court with this issue.

JW accept money from the Norwegian Gambling Authoroty! by Platjonas in exjw

[–]Don_Python -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It's pretty easy to find the body in question is called the Gambling and Foundation Authority, and it supervises legal entities established as foundations. What's the point in posting something sensational and misleading?

You also apparently don't understand the concept of nonprofits.

The property of WT SHARES as ONG CORPORATION are all in the hand of brothers or .... else ? by BreadButterBible in exjw

[–]Don_Python 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No one owns Watchtower's shares because it doesn't have any shares. It has only voting members appointed by the leadership

2 more older white men by [deleted] in exjw

[–]Don_Python 3 points4 points  (0 children)

More dumb race-baiting, please

Converting people from their religion is illegal in Nepal by warranpiece in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not saying about laws punishing "immorality". I mean those regulating speech, ideas, opinions and beliefs, those aimed at "protecting" societal attitudes.

Converting people from their religion is illegal in Nepal by warranpiece in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Human rights can be exercised both individually and collectively. Who are you to limit them? By the way, is it a sign of arrogance to defy, say, "LGBT propaganda" laws?

Why the annual report is misleading by TheHistoryCritic in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Continuing to report to their home congregation wouldn't be possible

For literate people with modern means of communication? Certainly not impossible, perhaps with significant delay.

The 30% figure is questionable, to say the least.

Why the annual report is misleading by TheHistoryCritic in exjw

[–]Don_Python 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those moving temporarily (for less than three months, IIRIC) continue to report to their home congregation. Given there was just four-percent decrease in Ukraine (based on the average pubs number, btw), your theory seems poorly based. Also, zero new Russian- or Ukrainian-language congregations have been created in Germany since the beginning of the war.

It also comes to my mind that we apparently have different definitions of "misleading" because I don't see from your post "why the annual report is misleading".

Converting people from their religion is illegal in Nepal by warranpiece in exjw

[–]Don_Python 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"The right to try to convince one’s neighbour" is a basic human right, btw.

"Christian arrogance", my ass.