No Change in 1991 - Library Card

Lionel_P_Hartley

I received the folowing two emails from Dana Loytved who is Senior Reference Librarian at the UN library in NYC.

In view of her first reply I asked her what procedure the WTS used to access the library before 1991. Her second reply is a bit cryptic but she states with confidence that there were no changes in procedure. I don't want to pester these kind folks any more.

****************

The procedure for a library pass is the following: the interested party needs to fill out an application form and supply a letter of recommendation in support of the research. If the needed material is not available in a UN depository library (the list of depository libraries is posted at: http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/deplib/countries/), the application is approved and sent to UN Security. UN Security checks the application and, if approval is granted, instructs the Pass Office to issue a library pass for the applicant.

The issuance of a library pass is independent of NGO status or any other status. There has been no change in the library pass policy.

NGO representatives with UN grounds pass do not need to apply for a library pass since the grounds pass will allow them to use the UN Library.

Best regards,
Dana Loytved

Senior Reference Librarian
UN/SA Reference Desk
United Nations Library, New York
E-mail: [email protected]

Senior Reference Librarian

**********

Second email:

**************

I have been at this library since 1985 and confirm again that there was no change in 1991.

Best regards,
Dana

UN/SA Reference Desk
United Nations Library, New York
E-mail: [email protected]

AMarie

Lionel:

I haven't been keeping up with the UN thing lately, so please correct me if I am wrong. But, are they saying that to have access to a library card, you DO NOT have to be listed as an NGO with the UN?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. Please let me know.

AMarie

Lionel_P_Hartley

That's exactly what they are saying - this is not new information but Alward wanted a letter from someone who was there in 1991. Now he has one. If you look in the gilwarrior thread there's lots of discussion. Also see some recent posts on the main board today for links to other info. on this.

LPH

Hmmm

Thanks LPH,

I have no doubt that most JWs will call this an apostate lie, but when they're ready, they'll have proof that a) the rules did NOT change after 1991; and b) NGO affiliation was NOT necessary to keep access to this all-important library.

Thank you for keeping the ball rolling on this,
Hmmm

Lionel_P_Hartley

Joseph Alward also stated:

Will someone provide the written evidence showing that there definitely were no changes put in place in 1991? If that's provided, then I will be quick to agree that either the Watchtower was lying about the change in 1991, or else they are just hoping that that is what happened; either way, the Watchtower will look very bad indeed. On the other hand, if it's not provided, then forum members should stop accusing the Watchtower of lying about the requirements for entrance to the library.

So the question is, Joseph, is the above unambiguous statement by the Senior Reference Librarian enough to convince you - for it satisfies all of your criteria.

LPH

JosephAlward

I think there may be a distinction between a "library pass" and a "grounds pass," which is what the Watchtower had. Loytved has different things to say about each. Here is what she said about the library pass (emphasis added):

The procedure for a library pass is the following: the interested party needs to fill out an application form and supply a letter of recommendation in support of the research. If the needed material is not available in a UN depository library (the list of depository libraries is posted at: http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/deplib/countries/), the application is approved...NGO representatives with UN grounds pass do not need to apply for a library pass

Thus, Loytved is saying that if one is not looking for specific information which might be found at a depository, then one applies for a "library pass" into the main library. This type of pass would seem to be much less convenient than a pass which lets one into the main library at any time without having access approved.

Loytved seems only to be affirming what she wrote in the prior post: she confirms that she was there in 1991 and that there were no changes in the rules for the issuance of library passes. We still need to have a definitive declaration about the grounds pass.

By the way, I received today the same letter Hartley did, but I wrote back asking for clarification.

If it turns out that there is no difference between a "grounds pass" and a "library pass," then I will accept the Loytved statement and agree that either the Watchtower was deliberately lying, or else they were misinformed; either way, that wouldn't look too good for an organization that is led by Jehovah.

Time will tell. I will let you know what I find out as soon as Loytved responds.

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

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

Lionel_P_Hartley

The grounds pass is a separate issue - it is not issued by the library. The question Alward raised was access to the library not access to the grounds, for he demanded a letter from someone in the library. He stated:

Show me a letter from someone who was at the Dag Hammeskold Library in 1991 and who would have been in a position to know about any changes in admission requirements,

Thus Alward wanted information about access to the library by someone who was there in 1991 and I supplied it. Now Alward is now talking about convenience of access and not the possibility of access. That is called shifting the argument. In itself that is not a central issue for the argument but it does show how Alward operates - much as does the WTS itself. It also demonstrates how Alward initially misread and misunderstood the WTS statement since, by the quote above, he incorrectly assumed - and still assumes - that the WTS was talking about access to the library - as opposed to access to research materials in general.

Note carefully what the WTS says

Our purpose in registering with the Department of Public Information as a nongovernmental organization (NGO) in 1991 was to have access to research material available on health, ecological and social problems at the United Nations library facilities. We had been using the library for many years prior to 1991, but in that year it became necessary to register as an NGO to have continued access

Taken literally this statement is talking about access to research material as opposed to access to the library specifically. Research material might include, for example, conferences which NGOs would have access to in addition to the library. The WTS throws in the clause about the library to ensure that that connection is made by the reader, but it does not say "access to the library" it says "access to research materials" and the second reference to access clearly refers to the first.

In the limit, the WTS statement is true - for NGOs obviously have access to information that non NGOs don't. And, it might have become necessary to get such information for reasons internal to the WTS - reasons having nothing to do with the UN. By these devices any carefully worded statement can be literally true while actually misleading the reader.

What Alward doesn't understand is that such deception is actually lying. It is a childish, but effective, trick. For example, I have observed JW elders lierally step outside the house in a rainstorm when the phone rings - just so that the wife can say truthfully; "he's not in."

Alward simply does not understand how the JW mentality operates. No one can fault him for that - but he can be faulted for his arrogance in assuming that he does understand the minds of JWs and exJWs. He does not - few do who have not been JWs.

LPH

outnfree

Thank you, Lionel, for this important information.

Your illustration of the elder stepping outside into the rain so that his wife could claim that he was not literally home was perfect, too! I am decrying how many, many JWs employ 'truth' in a deceitful way such as that. I know my children and I became masters at this kind of 'technical truth telling' whenever we believed we were doing God's will when such conflicted with my unbelieving mate's desires. Sad, but true. (REALLY true -- lol)

Joseph,

Give it up! The WTS are Past Grand Masters of Deceit and continue to be. The letter they issued is deceitful on purpose. To those of us who have been JWs and understand how this kind of 'technical truth telling' was not only practiced, but encouraged, when dealing with non-believers, the lie behind their cagey words fairly jumps off the page.

outnfree

It's what you learn after you know it all that counts -- John Wooden

biblexaminer

Thanks Lionel for that research.

As for Alward, any thinking mind quickly figures out that he is ignorant and trying to defend the Watchtower liars with anything in his bag, including the same manipulation of words that the WTS uses herself.

It seems to me that Alward is really a JW troll who would willingly commit any act to defend the tower. He is sick.

hawkaw

Hey bx - how is it going?

This LPH dude has been doing some seriously good work.

Of course Joe just keeps flogging the whole thing and in a way that is great - he just keeps dragging the process on so more people are exposed to this scandal.

hawk

No Change in 1991 - Library Card

Share this