Did the “relationship” with the UN infringe JW “neutrality” with worldly governments?
(1) The NGO agreement was to support the principles of the UN charter and its work, but ONLY as defined as being “in accordance with” the WTS’ own “aims and purposes.
The UN itself informs the NGOs that "association of NGOs with the DPI DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THEIR INCORPORATION INTO THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM!” (Cf. ECOSOC Resolution 1296; Part II,12.) The position of the NGO’s is only consultative; it only aids and promotes the UN’s gaining it’s objective in that the NGO advises and informs in areas which are of concern to the NGO.
(2) God is going to use the UN to destroy false religion so why shouldn’t JWs use it to promote religious freedom and human rights.. Jws can promote it’s “ideals” without promoting it as a replacement for God’s Kingdom, which is what the religions of many apostates have blasphemously done.
(3) The Society has stated: “Registration papers filed with the United Nations that we have on file contain no statements that conflict with our Christian beliefs.”
Was the “library excuse” a lie as some apostates have claimed?
example: The Dag Hammarskjöld Library is a special library . . . permission to use the Library is also given for short periods of time to advanced_level researchers who have found that materials required to complete their research are UNAVAILABLE AT DEPOSITORY LIBRARIES."--The Dag Hammarskjöld Library"
http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/services.htm#access which states in part: "The Library offers Secretariat and Mission staff, members of delegations and accredited representatives of NGOs an extensive training programme, which includes courses in the use of its online catalogue UNBISnet , of the United Nations Official Document System and of UN-I-QUE (UN Info Quest) , a ready-reference file which facilitates identification of symbols/sales numbers of hundreds of thousands of UN documents."
UN libraries include DPI photo, film and audio libraries. Access to the NGO Resource Center which offers current UN documents. Access to selected meetings, briefings, seminars, conferences, film screenings, and language courses. An accredited NGO pass is required to access these library resources. It is a deliberate untruth to state that these facilities can be accessed by "anybody" , or without registering as a NGO.
Is simply being described as an NGO wrong , as alleged by some opposers?
An NGO is simply a non-governmental organisation - an acronym. It confers no political status. It could apply to any non-government organisation - a listed or unlisted company , a club , association or any religion , Christian or otherwise.
Was there really no change in NGO status or responsibilities as some apostates claim?
Quoting from the brochure: “After three years of negotiation, ECOSOC reviewed its arrangements for consultation with NGOs in July 1996. One outcome was ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31, which revised the arrangements for NGO consultation with ECOSOC....A second outcome...Decision 1996/297, which recommended that the General Assembly examine, at it 51st session, the QUESTION OF THE PARTICIPATION OF NGOS IN ALL AREAS OF WORK OF THE UN...Subsequently, in the General Assembly Working Group looking into the STRENGTHENING OF THE UN SYSTEM a sub-group on NGOs was formed.” Summary: During 1994 - 1996 , a new framework evolved to encourage NGOs to become more engaged with promoting the UNs ideals. This was not communicated directly with existing NGOs who simply had their renewals rubber stamped (a process so automatic that the UN had Lloyd Barry on the paperwork as the primary WTS contact several years after his death!). When the WTS became aware of the changed situation & criteria , they ended the association.
Did the WTS “spice up” its articles during 1991 - 2001 in favour of the UN?
An honest hearted reader would read , for example (by no means a conclusive list)
w97 5/1 13 No Peace for the False Messengers!;
w95 10/1 3 Fifty Years of Frustrated Efforts;
w95 10/1 5 A World Without War_When?;
All of them point out that the UN is a failure at fulfilling its stated purpose and will be removed by God’s government.
What are the motives in apostates hyping up and misrepresenting the UN “issue”?
Apostates are aware that most Jws view the UN in negative terms , influenced by the representation and identification in Revelation as a “Scarlet coloured wild beast.” In reality , the UN broadly has positive goals and purposes and has promoted freedom of worship and human rights in many lands , defending basic freedoms. Jws also believe that the UN will be used by Jehovah as an agency in the future to destroy false religion.. Nevertheless , any story of a link between the WTS & the UN will , at first glance , appear damaging to Jws. Misrepresentation and vigorous promoting (just look how many threads there are on this issue in "the best-of" section) has affected certain weaker ones. Other apostates , while admitting that the UN is a bit of a non-issue , view it as part of a multi attack process , linking it with Rand Corp , Philip Morris , $740 billion wealth , subliminal images and other similar non-stories to create a “no smoke without fire” / “buy enough tickets and you will win the raffle” approach.
Do apostates offer any real alternative to a worship of Jehovah based around an association with Jehovah’s witnesses?
No. Apostates simply wish to destroy the faith of active JWs. If they then decide to worship trees , pray to the Devil or build an idol of Benny Hill and bow down - great. The key word is “freedom” - as used in Genesis 3. The aim is to break down & destroy rather than build up.