by thirdwitness 597 Replies latest watchtower scandals
I may be off base here, but this whole UN and JW thing reminds me of this old joke.....A man asks a really good looking girl if she would have sex with him for 10 million dollars. She says yes right away. Then he asks if she will do it for 5 dollars, to which she says NO, and then asks "just what kind of a girl do you think I am?" He replies...."That has already been established. Now we are just negotiating price."
In other words, in for a penny, in for a pound. The Society is a whore.
When it is pointed out that the NGO's with the DPI, according to the UN's own words, do not become members of the UN, auldsoul said: I said they were members of the UN/DPI, not registrants.
Then he tries to make it appear that the WTS is trying to cover up that they were members of the DPI and says: The Society outrightly lies when they mischaracterize the nature of the relationship as one of registrant to registrar.
What did the WTS really say? Did they deny that they ever had a membership to the DPI as Auldsoul contends?
Two quotes from letters sent out by the WTS disproves what Auldsoul is saying:
Quote #1: “Moreover, NGOs are informed by the United Nations that "association of NGOs with the DPI does not constitute their incorporation into the United Nations system, nor does it entitle associated organizations or their staff to any kind of privileges, immunities or special status."
Reasoning on the matter: If the WT was claiming that they were never associated with the DPI why would they quote information form the UN showing that "association of NGOs with the DPI does not constitute their incorporation into the United Nations?
Quote # 2: “After learning of the situation, our membership as NGO was withdrawn and the ID card of the writer was returned.”
Repost for Cabasilas about what ideals of the UN were to be shared.
And as respects sharing the 'ideals of the UN' you are overlooking one little thing.
Even the 1996 resolution by the ECOSOC concerning an ECOSOC NGO’s support of the UN makes the following statement about that type of NGO (remember, the Society was not an ECOSOC NGO):
“3. The organization shall undertake to support the work of the United Nations and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities.”Note that even an ECOSOC NGO, which is in a consultative relationship with the UN, isn't even obligated to support all the work of the UN. It says its support must be “in accordance with its own aims and purposes”. This means that the particular ECOSOC NGO would not support all the aims of the UN, but only those “aims and purposes” in the “scope of its competence and activities.”
In the case of Jehovah's Witnesses, those ‘aims and purposes’ would be in the field of religious freedom and human rights. That is the “scope of its competence and activities.” There is certainly nothing wrong with supporting that type of work and using whatever avenues are available for assistance. Further, if this qualified definition of “support” applied to the consultative-status ECOSOC NGO's, how much more qualified the definition of “support” must be to the DPI NGOs which enjoy no such status.
Of course, one of the main interests of the UN is human rights. If the UN wants to come to the aid of brothers being persecuted for their religious beliefs, should we not support that? The UN has not yet attacked God's people and proved itself to be an enemy of God. Did not Paul appeal to Rome when he was being persecuted? Yes — did he not use the legal system of a government which later proved to be the foretold “disgusting thing”, to advance true worship?
This means that the particular ECOSOC NGO would not support all the aims of the UN, but only those “aims and purposes” in the “scope of its competence and activities.”
Thirdwitness,
Re-edited answer:
There's a difference between supporting the "work of the UN" and agreeing to support the ideals of the UN Charter. A particular NGO might object to a facet of a certain programme being undertaken by one of the agencies of the UN. But, basic to its affiliation would be support for the basic ideals of the UN Charter. An affiliated NGO cannot pick and choose which ideals of the UN Charter it will accept and which ones it will reject. Implicit with affiliation with the DPI/UN was a committment to support the UN Charter's ideals--all of them. Now, an affiliated NGO might object to a particular "work" of the UN--such as support of abortion rights or some other controversial issue. That does not permit an affiliated NGO to reject basic UN Charter goals, however.
As I've said before I was saddened when the publicity came out on this. I think this development was a good thing for the WT Society even if it did violate its basic tenets.
Yeah, the Society did not want to have sex with the UN, they just wanted to watch.
Does any of this really matter, thirdwitness?
A thorough research of the Watchtower Society's own publications reveals deception, flip flopping dogma and unscriptural doctrines.
Most of us who have rejected the self-imposed 'authority' of the liars on the Governing Body will never ever return to the vomit that we left.
Thirdwitnoid,
This one's for you.
1 Cor 15:33
steve
Thirdwitnoid, I will assume you wont repond to this, however, just in case you do: Go to the watchtower web site here: http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/12/8/diagram_01.htm The title is; The Problems of Children THE SOLUTION AT LAST! And explain to us why they praised that organization, quoted back in 2000. steve
Notice the ideals of the U.N. Charter that Thirdwitness endorses are in bold letters. Wonder why he doesn't have in bold letters "to suppress acts of aggression that threaten world peace"? Thirdwitness, do you support the use of U.N. peacekeeping armed forces for Darfur, Africa and in Lebanon? Why or why not?
I said it before in the Gentile Times Reconsidered thread and I will say it here again. The U.N. is not a world government. It is not an acting government within the U.S. government. It's an organization with its headquarters in New York City, but it's not an independent state. I am not a citizen of the U.N. Nor are any of its 191 member states. For the U.N. to become a world government numerous member states would have to give up their sovereignty. It's not impossible, but highly improbable. At least for right now, all member states are independent governments and choose to remain so. That's the problem with Iran. It's a member state, but it's snubbing its nose at the U.N. The U.N. can only use sanctions against Iran that all the rest of its member nations agree to. U.N. has no powers of its own. It has no army of its own. It can only request soldiers from member nations to help maintain peace. The U.N. has many limitations that prevents it from becoming a "superior authority." It can't enforce anything on its own accord without the back up of member nations.
See my post at
Steve, that article at the WT site that you provided, notice how it finishes up.
A Divine Government to Provide the Complete SolutionUnder God's Kingdom humans will be enabled to rear children in a balanced way. ( Job 33:24-26 ) Young folks will be raised in the spirit of peace and universal brotherhood, the ideal set forth in the UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child. ( Psalm 46:8, 9 ) Never again will there be the need for an International Year of the Child or for a Convention on the Rights of the Child. Restoring perfect health to parents and to disabled children will be a simple task for Christ Jesus, the King of this heavenly government. The miracles of healing that he performed while he was on the earth are a guarantee. ( Luke 6:17-19 ; John 5:3-9 ; 9:1-7 ) Even resurrecting dead children and dead parents will not be beyond his power to accomplish!— Matthew 9:18-25 . What a joy to know that the time for God to act in behalf of earth's children is near! | ||
