Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN. (page 24)

badboy

THIRDWITNESS, ARE YOU SAYING THE UN ARE A GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION?

cabasilas

We can say this because the evidence shows that the DPI was changing toward NGOs and their policies toward them

Thirdwitness,

The "evidence" you cite on your site is no real evidence. I've cited and linked the 1992 press releases from the DPI (which you've not commented on yet) which clearly show that the standard was essentially the same. Steve and myself have cited the data from Internet Achive which shows what the 1995 brochure was saying. Will you comment on these?

stevenyc

For the record, thirdwitnoid is absolutly correct when he says they didn't 'join the UN'. They didn't. You have to be a counrty to 'join the UN'. What the Watchtower Society did was establish a formal 'association with the UN'. And, the requirement of that association was, in part, to agree with the UN charter, and to disseminate information PROMOTING the works of the UN.

steve

cabasilas

Thirdwitness,

A serious question. You have a chapter which attacks the "chief" of the DPI:

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/hailtothechief.html

Have you contacted him either before publishing your information or since?

Kenneson

Please! Take a look at the 2006 accreditation form and tell me if it says anything about supporting the U.N. Charter. Why would you expect that it or any prior form to be the only information an NGO receives? You make it sound like all an Ngo has to do is sign a form and they're in. Get real.

http://www.un.org/dpi/ngosection/pdfs/accreditationform2006.pdf

stevenyc

Come on kennison, this has been posted MANY times already in this thread. Read through it again and you'll see.
steve

thirdwitness

Suppose you filled out an application to be a member of blockbuster so you could have access to their movies, games, etc and in the application it said you must submit articles that you have written about blockbuster to continue you membership. Suppose you did not sign anything but just gave them your information and in return they gave you a pass to rent items. And so you rent movies etc from them for a while and you send them articles that you have written about them.

But then someone says, "Hey look here. You agreed to rent porno movies and support the porno industry when you became a member of blockbuster. Look here at this press release from blockbuster. It says that all members agree to support the ideals of the porno industry. And look here, this is a brochure (printed after you became a member) that blockbuster gave to all its members telling them that they must rent porno movies and support and share the ideals of the porno industry. And look here, here is a letter from the head of blockbuster saying that all members agree to support and rent porno movies"

Did you really agree to these terms just because they say that all members agree to that? If you didn't sign saying you agreed to those terms then you did not agree to those terms. And when it is pointed out to you what blockbuster is saying you could simply say, "NO, I did not and I do not agree to those terms. Here is your card back."

And that voids all the arguments you could possibly make against the WTS.

jayhawk1

Funny, I've never published anything against Blockbuster claiming how evil they are. But you know something funny, Thirdwitness, the Watchtower Corp has published books and magazines saying the UN is the wild beast in Revelation. That would make the UN a condemned org along with any org. that chose to associate with it.

badboy

SHOUL A JW EVEN ENTER THE UN BUILDING IN VIEW OF ITS CONNECTION WITH THE BEAST

stevenyc

Thirdwitnoid, use your example except chage 'blockbuster' for 'Gay Porno Goats for Nazi's inc.' Would your conscience still be in the clear?
steve

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

Share this