Zev's UN/WTS Scandal Web Site - Part 2

by hawkaw 122 Replies latest jw friends

  • JosephAlward
    JosephAlward

    Hawkaw,

    The press release only states that the NGO DPI concluded that the organization's activities indicated that they accepted the aims and goals of the United Nations; it does NOT say that the organizations themselves signed a statement to that effect. Perhaps the NGO DPI occasionally was merely being hopeful when they guessed that the Watchtower--and probably lots of other organizations--supported the UN's goals.

    Show me a piece of paper on which the Watchtower representatives indicate that they accepted the aims and goals, and that will be something to talk about. For now, all you have is the United Nations DPI office stating their opinion about the Watchtower's beliefs.

    The paper you've been talking about does not exist; it evidently never existed.

    Joseph F. Alward
    "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

    * http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

  • JosephAlward
    JosephAlward

    I agree with Name Witheld completely. The Watchtower should have made itself more familiar with the expectations (hope) of the UN that the approved organizations actually DID accept the UN's goals. The Watchtower was careless and naive, that's all.

    Joseph F. Alward
    "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

    * http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    ummm... Does not the NGO such as the Watchtower have to approach the DPI in writing? Like isn't that signing something that says you want to belong?

    ummm... Don't they have to fill out annual accreditation forms and sign them??? YOu have seen them right????

    I think even the present day "form for application" does not appear to need a signature but they have to submit a letter first no matter what and provide references.

    And don't you think the UN's DPI sends a letter out to the NGO explaining what is required once the committee gives its approval?

    This is unbelievable.

    hawk

  • JosephAlward
    JosephAlward

    I'm sure the Watchtower had to write to the UN to obtain NGO status; if you think that is the act of a traitor, then that's where we disagree. The Watchtower explained why it applied for NGO status.

    Who on this forum actually believes that the Watchtower implicitly or explicitly accepted the aims and goals of the United Nations? That information would be public, and its disclosure would have been perhaps catastrophic. If the "acceptance" of the aims and goals of the UN ever existed implicitly, it seems increasingly clear that this acceptance existed only in the hopeful imaginations of overzealous NGO representatives who wanted to increase the number of affiliations to make it seem that the UN's outreach was succeeding.

    Joseph F. Alward
    "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

    * http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

  • sapo
    sapo

    I am just curious here, and thought someone here may know the answer to a question I’m starting to wonder about.
    At this link:
    - http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/
    2848af408d01ec0ac1256609004e770b/
    66cf0523c6217c4b802567cc002f8b0e?OpenDocument

    this UN document: “Report of the Working Group on Minorities on its fifth session” dated 24 June 1999
    lists the NGO’s, under item 10, that were present as observers. It’s a long list; I cut out all the names except three that reference JW’s.

    10. The following other non-governmental organizations were represented by observers:
    Association of Jehovah's Witnesses,
    European Association of Jehovah's Witnesses for the Protection of Religious Freedom,
    Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia,

    This is the second time I have seen the Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia referred to as an NGO. The other reference is at the link below where they are listed with other NGO’s as protesting reduction of intervention time.
    - http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/english/pressrelease/
    ngo-petition-23-10-2000-osce2000.html

    I saw only the Watchtower listed in the UN directory of NGO’s when they were associated. Do you suppose it’s possible that they have been associating as NGO’s under different names, such as above, depending on the country they were currently getting resistance from in becoming an established religion--then disbanded once their fight was won? Or were these JW NGO’s members of the Watchtower NGO, like the way NGO’s can be members of various UN or Human Rights Organizations-many of which are NGO’s also, such as Amnesty, Human Rights Watch or the OSCE. I noticed on the NGO listing that many countries are listed as NGO’s. The few that had web pages had a link to membership information. Or maybe those are names the JW’s used to become members of these various Human Rights Organizations?

    Joseph you said:
    I tend to believe them is that I cannot imagine WHY they would risk so much for so little; surely they would have known that their application would be public.

    So little?
    In the last ten years the JW’s have toned their fire and brimstone speech regarding governments (satan’s reps), human rights organizations (chasing rainbows), and their blanket condemnation of ALL religions (Were the only true religion w/God’s backing). Why? Their views have not changed.

    There is never any mention as to why this softened tone. Becomes a little clearer though, when considering their UN/NGO association.

    What there is no real change in though, is their proclamation that they are persecuted and hated by the world. Of course, in the industrialized nations the witnesses pretty much enjoy every freedom that other religions enjoy. Not much in the way of real persecution. But it's been ingrained in their minds for decades that they are hated by EVERYONE outside their bubble, that if a person should ridicule their religion, it’s perceived as persecution. Yet, they have disdain for ALL religions.

    But in some developing countries there is definite persecution of the JW religion. There is also definite persecution of Baptist, Catholic, Muslim, Scientologist, Mormon and several others I never heard of. Being the expansionist that they are (the WT) I suppose their UN/NGO association was to better represent themselves in countries that refused them religious status and the benefits that go along with that status.

    They have certainly benefited from many of the human rights organizations such as OSCE, human rights without frontiers, Amnesty International, and governments agencies such as the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (the Helsinki Commission), the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, and The UN’s Special Rapporteur.

    I was under the impression any search for JW on the Internet would turn up an endless number of “apostate” sites. OK, it does turn up quite a few. But a search for Jehovah’s Witnesses, Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, or Watchtower, and then a sub search of one of the organizations previously mentioned, also turns up quite a few finds. Browsing some of these articles it can be seen that these organizations are taking up the JW cause and offering them a hand in overcoming the resistance the WT is receiving in some of these countries, even if it's just through exposing in print some of the obstacles that JW are trying to overcome.

    This is just one example I thought was interesting:
    - http://www.hrw.org/press/2001/06/georgia-religion0607-ltr.htm

    This person from the Human Rights Watch is requesting “information about measures taken to prevent impunity for violent attacks on members of nontraditional religious communities” (specifically JW’s). Then notice how many organization reps are cc’d a copy of this letter—bringing this matter to their attention also.

    Or this article at
    - http://www.house.gov/csce/hearing.htm
    This WT rep is presenting the JW grievances to the CSCE along with the Scientologists.

    I think their associations go much further than just the UN. Too many of these organizations, government and human rights, have taken up their cause. What’s more is that it’s working. They have won their fight in a number of countries already, but they didn’t win it alone.

    I certainly haven’t read about these organizations active participation in exposing the persecution of the JW’s in the Watchtower or Awake. I don’t think it would go over too well that the one and only true religion is fighting right along with Babylon for religious freedom, nor would it be conducive to promoting “The Whole World Hates Us” propaganda.

    This really got long. If you’re still reading, Thinks for taking the time.
    Sapo

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    The WTS have give two different explainations as to why they applied if you bothered to read. Both have turned out to be true lies. Just as big a lie as them saying the criteria had just changed.

    BTW they had to write to obtain "associate" status. They already were and still are an NGO.

    So Hoeffel's letter doesn't cut it for you eh? Nor does the other 1994 Brochure or the press releases or the 1968 resolutions. Well what can I say.

    Tell me did you work for the Clinton Administration?

    hawk

  • JosephAlward
    JosephAlward

    I'll be gone for a few hours.

    Joseph F. Alward
    "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

    * http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    So its okay for a corporation to belong as an "associate" with DPI and you don't have to support the ideals of the UN Charter as long as you don't sign a form that states you support the UN Charter even though that is what as a minimum is expected from you and told to you when you apply and when you get accredited.

    For the last few years I am aware a list of the criteria is sent along with the application form. The applicant doesn't sign the "criteria" form but is given it to be aware of the "minimum requirements".

    If they knowingly knew what was expected, then they have to be held accountable for their actions. No way around it.

    This is pages 6 and 7 in the DPI's 1994 brochure. To be eligible they had to support the UN Charter and they had two years to PROVE they supported the UN. They had to submitt work ever year to DPI.

    Who had to solicit who? It was the WTS who seeked out the UN and not the other way.

    .

    .

    hawk

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Bro Joe

    Have you read the un threads? If you haven't then you should. If you have then the following applies.

    I find inconcievable what you suggest, that the wt would approach its archenemy, make application for attachment, undergo the requisite courses, sign official un application papers and somehow fail to notice the responsibilities that accrued to them. They can hear and see and read as well as anyone. They are running a huge worldwide org, for petes sake. Note joe, that they would approach the un isn't inconcievable, but pledging support is. Ok?

    Up till now, the target of your attacks was the bible. Now it has changed. You are taking a stand which puts you on the wt's side. The evidence that the wt knew exactly what was required of them is very strong. You are making them out to be the victims/dupes of the un. You would suggest that the un changed the rules without notifying the wt. The qualifying information was public, free for anyone to read for at least 30 yrs before the incident. Ngo applicants had to follow courses.

    How do we know that you aren't working for the wt? They have a lot of something you can use - money. As an eitheist, you have standards unique to yourself and your interests. You are likely at the scenter of your values.

    You registered on oct 4th and started posting threads on oct 10. Wasn't that when the scandal broke? You made a bunch of anti bible posts to gain legitimacy among us. Now you could be fulfilling the main part of your mission - exonerate the wt.

    SS hoping it's not true

  • biblexaminer
    biblexaminer

    JosephAlward:

    Until I see a form that the WTS reps signed, until is taste it and smell it's aroma, until the cows fly over the moon with it in their mouths, until Lazurus is resurrected and hands it to me on a silver platter, until George Bush comes to my house and jams it up my big fat ass, I WILL NOT BELIEVE THAT MY BROOKLYN GODS DID ANYTHING WRONG... that is I am still not a JW of course...

    Well Joe, seems you are gonna be waiting longer than you will live.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit