by MacHislopp 501 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Hawkaw,
I know you provided a contact number. I have it printed out. But I thought posters were concerned about the UN's DPI office getting a barrage of calls that would force them to turn away all requests. So they were going to somehow get organized about it. Also,I thought perhaps someone may have already obtained the info in question. But if not, OK. Just wanted to check.
Troubled,
Last time I checked - it was a free country. Plus, you may find out something that is different. Verifying facts is good and that is what I have stressed to you over and over.
I can assure you that they needed 4 references back at the time of the application and they are on the WTS form. I can assure you of the criteria. Was the from different? Good question but the thrust of the matter is that the WTS solicited the beast and agreed to th beast's charter.
hawk
hi troubled,
However, a few questions are eating at me:I know the requirements to apply for NGO status are outlined on the UN's website, but it's unlikely the UN even had a website back in 1991. (If I'm wrong, correct me.)
Assuming that the UN didn't have a website, can it be verified that the current requirements for NGO status listed on the UN's website (i.e., supporting the ideals of the UN charter, etc.) were stated or implied in the application package at the time Lloyd Barry applied for membership? I don't see anything to that effect in the current application form. Also, has the form changed in the last 10 years? What exactly was in the application package in 1991?
I know these are side points, and the large picture is really whether or not the WTBTS should even be listed as an NGO. But in the intersts of getting our facts straight, I think it's important to have answers to these questions. To find out exactly WHAT the application package consisted of (and WHAT explicit requirements for NGO membership were agreed to) 10 years ago at the time Lloyd Barry applied for membership.
I have not seen what the membership requirements were 10 years ago, though I'm sure a phone call could confirm it. Think of it this way, however:
1. Why would NGO membership have changed drastically? Wouldn't the purpose of it be the same?
2. There was no web site for it 10 years ago, but the UN had information offices, and the WTS would have had to find out the requirements and met them, web site or no web site. The only difference the web site makes is it provides a window into what the UN is doing in a more accessible manner than we have had in the past.
troubled, I'm sure this UN connection is bothering you as much as it is surprising to all of us. There are certain lines you never expect the WTS to cross. It would be like finding out they recited the Pledge of Allegiance at morning worship at Bethel -- people would exit the organization in droves at that news.
As we have seen in this thread, and others on the subject, some Witnesses have responded to this news by downplaying it. "The WTS is not actually a member of the UN," they say, and that's true, for the WTS is not a country and therefore cannot be a member. All they can do is associate with the UN as an NGO, and that they have done.
"It is a requirement," other Witnesses have said, but that's not true. It is expedient, that's all. Instead of relying on Jehovah, as they used to do when faced with government opposition, and taking their lumps in the meantime in the form of persecution, in recent years the WTS has been sidling up to the governments and playing nice. This UN information is the most extreme example yet. They have chosen to associate with the beast. We all know what would happen to a Witness who chose to do that individually.
Now, there are loopholes involved. I know that Witnesses in New York City are and have been allowed to work at the UN, as long as they are doing clerical work, not direct governmental work. For instance, there are Witnesses who come to New York as part of the diplomatic mission to the UN from their country. That's always been considered fine (or at least for the last 30 years), as long as they weren't the actual diplomat, but merely support staff. I know this for a fact, for I knew several of these brothers and sisters, and the elders knew it too, including some Bethel heavies.
I am sure the WTS will try to weasel out of this by claiming something similar: they are not directly involved with the UN, but merely applying for assistance, or something like that. But they can't erase the fact that they willingly chose to associate with the beast, as part of an organization pledged to uphold the ideals of the UN, and to speak well of it, and that they have done in their magazines for the past decade. All while never telling the friends what they had done. It doesn't smell right, and all long-time Witnesses will know it.
Hi Troubled and others,
I telephoned Ms. I. Oca at the UN's DPI (11:15am Oct 3, 2001). I have her at another telephone number today 1-212-963-8305.
Here is the latest.
She indicated that the "Critera" has likely changed since 1991. However, the two most important critera to the WTS - supporting and respecting UN charter and commitment to effective information programes about the UN - have not changed since 1991 and no matter what they have to meet today's Criteria if they want to be an "associate" of the DPI. Also the WTS had to solicit the UN and not the other way around.
She also indicated that the application form may have changed slightly but was still about the same and the WTS had to include at least 4 references as is required today.
Finally she indicated that, the NGO in question, the Watchtower, is under a DPI/UN investigation as we speak. This is major news folks. This means the DPI had a meeting and now the UN has decided to investigate.
She indicated that the United Nations is reviewing the "NGO's" (Watchtower's) status. Since the NGO's status is under review, no further information (ie. the application form) will be given out at this time according to Ms. Oca.
This is what I expected but as she indicated to me they, the DPI will have to release something on the conclusion of their investigation. This would be huge and would help get it into the press.
The DPI is very concerned about this. I wonder if it is clicking in their heads that they were "snookered".
Once the investigation is completed the NGO/DPI office will report their findings on the UN's internet site according to Ms. Oca.
It looks like we had some affect folks. She also indicated that they have been inudated with information from a number of concerned people.
I say - send more stuff to the United Nations DPI if you have forgotten anything or if you have not sent it yet. Tallyman should send one of his scarey WT pictures - that one of the city getting smoked would be a hoot - picture is worth a thousand words.
By the sounds of this, this is a big time incident in their office.
I forgot to ask about the press involvement - rats.
Maybe you can ask about the press "troubled" seeing my long distance bill is through the roof.
hawk
p.s. - anyone who Emailed the UNs DPI should have gotten an Email back saying they received your Email and are taking your Email into consideration with this NGO. That's code for we are investigating the occurrence.
Thank you, Seeker, for your thoughts. Yes, it is upsetting to me. And I'm just trying to get a handle on what exactly is going on. Something doesn't sound right. And unless I can get a good, logical explanation for what they've done, I might have to bring it to the elders and/or write to the Society or both in an attempt to figure it out.
Hey Troubled:
Greetings! You raised some obvious questions. Are the CURRENT NGO-DPI application requirements the SAME as they were in 1991 when the WTBS applied?
Only the UN can truthfully answer this, however, bear in mind that most organizations (for business, for government, or non-profit) do NOT "re-invent the wheel" and create new policies and procedures of operation simply because they are launching a web-site.
On the contrary, web developers are continually challenged to find ways to display and deliver an organization's current message and services in the web design process. What may change is the manner of delivery, the method of delivery, but the message and core content is usually the same.
Troubled,
Did you manage to telephone and ask about the press being involved etc?
212-963-1859 or 212-963-8305
hawk
hawk
Has the NGO-DPI Office already been sent samples of the WTS's (pre-2000 --or was it 1999?--- QFR) directives forbidding JWs' voting and all other political/community involvement? Would such be helpful in their "investigation"?
Side note: Like many of you I wondered incessantly what was up with that QFR voting doublespeak. Now, of course---in light of the revelation of the WTS's tie with the UN---, I get it. Likewise I've now again read the 7-22-2001 Awake article on volunteerism and the UN Year of Volunteers. I was astounded the first time I read [parts of] it at the implied commendation of the general spirit and act of volunteerism that had nothing to do with getting WT literature in the hands of the public. I couldn't begin to imagine what had prompted such an article. Obviously I read it now with much greater understanding, having been recently enlightened.
I vacillate daily between fury and sadness, deep regret and back again to fury as "new light gets brighter" about the religion I once trusted as the one and only truth.
-AMNESIAN
Thanks to Cyberguy, jschwehm, Chester and dungbeetle I want to repost for those who are talking to those Brain Dead Witnesses who have suggested it is okay for the WTS to "associate" with the United Nations. This article, found in the Oct. 1/95 WT Rag, (which was posted elsewhere on this board) clearly shows the Watchtower's position on the UN as being the same as any other political organization or government. Thus, if you, as a Witness, voluntarily decide to wave the UN flag or voluntarily support its charter etc. you get disassociated. Compare this to the WTS's stand taken back in 1991 to voluntarily associate with the beast and support the beast's charter without telling the Rank and File. Its an eye opener to me anyway.
hawk
*** w95 10/1 5-7 A World Without War-When? ***
A World Without War—When?
THE Charter of the United Nations went into effect on October 24, 1945. It is the most comprehensive strategy for world peace ever to be designed by humans. With its original 51 member States, the United Nations became the largest international organization in the history of the world. Also, for the first time ever, an international organization would have access to an army to enforce peace and security and bring about a world without war.
Today, with 185 member States, the United Nations is stronger than ever. Why, then, has the most powerful international organization in history failed to accomplish its noble objectives fully?
Religion—A Great Hindrance
One major complication is the role that religion plays in world affairs. True, ever since the inception of the United Nations, the principal religions of the world have pledged their support to that organization. Referring to its 50th anniversary, Pope John Paul II spoke of the United Nations as “the instrument par excellence for promoting and safeguarding peace.” His sentiments are shared by a global community of religious leaders. But this tactful liaison between religion and government cannot hide the fact that religion has been a hindrance and a nuisance to the United Nations.
For centuries religion has played a prime role in promoting or supporting nationalistic hatred, wars, and genocides. In recent years, under the cloak of religious fervor, neighbors have killed one another. The term “ethnic cleansing” has been widely used in connection with the war in the Balkans. However, the violent hatred that many there have for one another is based on religious affiliation rather than on race, since most of them have the same ethnic roots. Yes, religion must accept much of the responsibility for the bloodbath in the former Yugoslavia, and the United Nations has not been able to stop it.
Appropriately, a college professor of religion recently stated that “in a post cold-war world of increasing religious militancies, an examination of religion and genocide may be one of our more pressing priorities, despite the discomfort it engenders.” A new awareness of how religion is impeding the efforts for world peace is evident today.
A 1981 UN declaration stated: “Concerned by manifestations of intolerance and by the existence of discrimination in matters of religion or belief still in evidence in some areas of the world, Resolved to adopt all necessary measures for the speedy elimination of such intolerance in all its forms and manifestations and to prevent and combat discrimination on the ground of religion or belief.”
In harmony with their declaration, the United Nations has declared 1995 to be the Year for Tolerance. Realistically speaking, though, will it ever be possible to achieve peace and security in a world divided by religion?
The Future of Religion
A prophecy in the Bible book of Revelation provides the answer. It speaks of a symbolic “great harlot” that sits as “a queen” and has “a kingdom over the kings of the earth.” This harlot lives “in shameless luxury” and has relations with the world’s governments. These governments are depicted as “a scarlet-colored wild beast,” upon which the harlot rides in comfort. (Revelation 17:1-5, 18; 18:7) Known as “Babylon the Great,” this powerful and immoral woman is named after ancient Babylon, the cradle of idolatrous religion. Appropriately, today the harlot represents all the world’s religions, which have mingled in with the affairs of governments.
The account goes on to say that, in time, God will put it into the hearts of militaristic components of the wild beast to take action. These “will hate the harlot and will make her devastated and naked, and will eat up her fleshy parts and will completely burn her with fire.” (Revelation 17:16) Thus Jehovah God himself will have taken the initiative by maneuvering powerful nations into a campaign to remove false religion. The worldwide religious system, with its luxurious temples and shrines, will be completely devastated. Religious hindrance to establishing peace and security will then be out of their way. But even then, will there be real peace and security on earth?
Imperfect Human Nature
Is there any guarantee that eliminating religion will really clear the way for a world without war? No. The United Nations will continue to face an ironic situation. On the one hand, people want peace and security. Yet, on the other hand, it is people who pose the greatest threat to peace and security. Hatred, pride, egotism, selfishness, and ignorance are human traits at the root of all conflicts and wars.—James 4:1-4.
The Bible foretold that in our day people would be “lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride.”—2 Timothy 3:1-4.
Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali acknowledged that “the world is suffering from a social and moral crisis which, in many societies, is of immense proportions.” No amount of diplomatic maneuvers can neutralize the harmful traits of imperfect human nature.—Compare Genesis 8:21; Jeremiah 17:9.
Jesus Christ—The Prince of Peace
Clearly, the United Nations does not have the ability to bring world peace. Its members and supporters are all imperfect humans, notwithstanding their lofty goals. The Bible says that “to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.” (Jeremiah 10:23) Furthermore, God warns: “Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs.”—Psalm 146:3.
The Bible foretells what Jehovah will accomplish through his Son, the “Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6, 7 states: “There has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. To the abundance of the princely rule and to peace there will be no end.”
The nations of the world have been wearied by 50 years of frustrated efforts. Very soon they will destroy harlotlike religious organizations. Then Jesus Christ, the “King of kings and Lord of lords,” and his army of heavenly warriors will dissolve all human governments and put to death all who reject God’s sovereignty. (Revelation 19:11-21; compare Daniel 2:44.) By this means Jehovah God will bring about a world without war.
[Footnotes]
For an in-depth study of the prophecy of Revelation regarding Babylon the Great, see chapters 33 to 37 of the book Revelation—Its Grand Climax At Hand!, published in 1988 by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.
[Box on page 7]
THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE UNITED NATIONS
In Bible prophecy, human governments are often symbolized by wild beasts. (Daniel 7:6, 12, 23; 8:20-22) Hence, for many decades the Watchtower magazine has identified the wild beasts of Revelation chapters 13 and 17 with today’s worldly governments. This includes the United Nations, which is depicted in Revelation chapter 17 as a scarlet-colored beast with seven heads and ten horns.
However, this Scriptural position does not condone any form of disrespect toward governments or their officials. The Bible clearly states: “Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. Therefore he who opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will receive judgment to themselves.”—Romans 13:1, 2.
Accordingly, Jehovah’s Witnesses, who are maintaining strict political neutrality, do not interfere with human governments. They never foment revolution or participate in acts of civil disobedience. Rather, they recognize that some form of government is necessary to maintain law and order in human society.—Romans 13:1-7; Titus 3:1.
Jehovah’s Witnesses view the United Nations organization as they do other governmental bodies of the world. They acknowledge that the United Nations continues to exist by God’s permission. In harmony with the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses render due respect to all governments and obey them as long as such obedience does not require that they sin against God.—Acts 5:29.
bump...
http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/12/8/article_01.htm
FROM its very inception, the United Nations organization has been interested in children and their problems. At the end of 1946, it established the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) as a temporary measure to care for children in areas devastated by war.
nelly
