Rattigan350:
Because the fact is that he is not the mediator for all. Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant for the 144,00 only. Not a GB doctrine, but a biblical one.
Not according to this:
(1 Timothy 2:3-6 NWT) 3 This is fine and acceptable in the sight of our Savior, God, 4 whose will is that all sorts of men should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all—[this is] what is to be witnessed to at its own particular times.
The "For" (Greek gar) in verse 5 makes verse 5 an explanation or reason for the statement in verse 4.
In verse 4, "God's will is that all men should be saved." (Cmp. 2 Pet 3:9 for a similar thought on God's desire for universal salvation.) Verse 5 explains how he is attempting to accomplish that - by using Jesus as a mediator (thus, implying a covenant) "between God and men." "Men" is anarthrous. It is referring to humans in general, not a special small subgroup.
This corresponds with Matthew 26:28, that the wine of the Lord's Evening Meal represents "my ‘blood of the covenant,’ which is to be poured out in behalf of many for forgiveness of sins." "Forgiveness of sins" is exactly what is needed for 'all men to be saved.' (Cmp the parallel in Luke 22:20 where this refers to the "new covenant.")
The only way the WT can get what you said out of these verses is by explaining that they don't mean what they actually say. That is the WT's theology in a nutshell - explaining why simple statements don't mean what they say.
If Peter "stood condemned" for supporting a division among Jewish and Gentile Christians, all the more so does the GB stand condemned. (Gal 2:11-14)
And simply stating something is a fact doesn't make it so (except for the GB, of course).