by yxl1 44 Replies latest jw friends
oh btw, to break them of the "lie" arguement, tell them this one.
"The Watchtower has some of the most powerful lawyers in the world. They've won case after case in the US Supreme Court to go door to door. If all of these websites and newspapers are lies, why does the Watchtower not sue them for libel?"
that question is sure to get their panties in a twist. supalawya!
Well done YX - really good to hear that you managed to make the most of the occasion !
Eventually, I expect that the majority of JWs will hear about the UN hypocrisy.
It was this scandal that helped us to see the WT in a different light. We even telephoned New York UN and got it confirmed first hand, as well as in letter form.
DustyB has a very good point, if it wasn't true then surely they would use their lawyers
Twinkletoes
where did you get this information from? You know, the internet is run by apostates/debil and they will make up lies in an attempt to stumble us.blah blah blah
Like a trained parrot.
dusty -
You got my wheels spinning! What if..... (we had all the money in the world AND...!) we got together and sued the WT for falsely accusing us of being liars in regards to their involvement in the UN? A little defamation of character lawsuit, libelous comments, slanderous comments - the whole shebang.
Hmmmmph. A pie-in-the-sky thought, but fun to think about anyway!
Blondie -
I am so glad you posted that link. It reminds me of a couple of questions I've had that I haven't been able to find the answers to on the UN website. The WT/UN affiliation is by far my favorite WT topic, and I want to make sure I have my facts straight. I know how well you research, so I thought you would be a good source to come to with my questions.
Here they are:
The link you provided gives specific criteria for an NGO to gain Consultative Status with the ECOSOC (Economic and Social Counsel) but not the Department of Public Information (DPI). My questions are:
1. It was my understanding that the WT affiliated itself with the DPI. If this is so, were they also associated with the ECOSOC? Or - Does the DPI disseminate information for all departments and/or councils of the UN, including the ECOSOC? Or have I missed the mark on something here?
2. It was also my understanding that the WT did not have Consultative Status, only the lowest possible status, or "affiliate status" (or something titled similarily). Does that sound right to you? However, I know they had to submit documentation (Awake! articles) showing their compliance with DPI requirements in order to maintain their status. I've copied and pasted a link below from an ECOSOC NGO FAQ page which provides a table that compares the different statuses available. The crazy thing is that this table does not show "Consultative Status" or "Affiliate Status", so I am thoroughly confused. Do you have any light to shed on this?
Q. | What is the difference between General category, Special category and Roster? A: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Organizations wishing to apply for General Category must be "concerned with most of the activities of the ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies". These tend to be fairly large, established international NGOs with a broad geographical reach. Special Category is granted to NGOs "which have a special competence in, and are concerned specifically with, only a few of the fields of activity covered by the ECOSOC". These NGOs tend to be smaller and more recently established. Organizations which "can make occasional and useful contributions to the work of ECOSOC or its subsidiary bodies" are included in the Roster. These NGOs tend to have a rather narrow and/or technical focus. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No need to go digging around on this if you don't know the answers off the top of your head. I can call the UN and find out myself. I just thought I'd ask in case you knew.
Thanks for helping to clarify!
growedup
growedup you little ball of fire....
What if..... (we had all the money in the world AND...!)
Can we slip a Global apostafest in Cancun into the budget
The library card excuse is one of the best examples of "plausible deniabilty" I have ever seen. They use that tactic even better than politicians.
Dino
Thanks for posting the site where the article occured in the UK. I copied it here so people can read the original article
Love Orangefatcat
UKBusinessOnlineWorld dispatchThe WrapWeblogTalkSearchThe GuardianWorldNews guideArtsSpecial reportsColumnistsAudioHelpQuiz | | | | |||||||||||
| Jehovah's Witnesses link to UN queried Sect accused of hypocrisy over association with organisation it has demonised. Stephen Bates, religious affairs correspondent Monday October 8, 2001 The Guardian The United Nations is being asked to investigate why it has granted associate status to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the fundamentalist US-based Christian sect, which regards it as the scarlet beast predicted in the Book of Revelation. Disaffected members of the 6m-strong group, which has 130,000 followers in the UK, have accused the Witnesses' elderly governing body of hypocrisy in secretly accepting links with an organisation that they continue to denounce in apocalyptic terms. The UN itself admitted yesterday that it was surprised that the sect, whose formal name is the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, had been accepted on its list of non-governmental organisations for the last 10 years. A former member said: "There is a glaring inconsistency which has emerged between the WTBTS's frequent portrayal of the UN as an evil organisation and its behind-the-scenes attempts to curry favour with that organisation. Were individual members to be aware of any formal link they would be devastated. "By no stretch of the imagination could the WTBTS be considered to share the ideals of the UN charter unless you suppose that destruction of the UN by God is consistent with that charter." The Witnesses, most frequently encountered by non-members when they attempt to make doorstep conversions, have faced accusations of bad faith before. These have been most notably over the hierarchy's insistence that members should not accept blood transfusions and over accusations that sexual abuse of children by Witnesses' ministers in the US have been covered up. Followers who criticise the Witnesses' leaders or question their decisions are routinely "disfellowshipped" which means fellow members including their families must shun them. An obscure and ill-publicised decision by the hierarchy in New York last year modifying the prohibition on transfusions by deeming that God had revealed to them that transfusions of some blood components might be acceptable, providing there was later repentance, has come too late for many hundreds of followers known to have died because they refused blood. In child abuse cases, the hierarchy insists there must be two independent witnesses - an almost impossible stipulation - before accusations are investigated. The Watchtower Society has been denouncing the UN and its predecessor the League of Nations for 80 years, believing them to be a world empire of false religion, predicted in the Book of Revelation. A recent publication since the organisation obtained its recognition describes the UN as "a disgusting thing in the sight of God and his people". In an internal document, the WTBTS describes its policy as a "theocratic war strategy". It claims: "In time of spiritual warfare it is proper to misdirect the enemy by hiding the truth. It is done unselfishly; it does not harm anyone; on the contrary it does much good." Being a recognised NGO with the United Nations - as more than 1,500 organisations are - gives status though not grants. To qualify, organisations must show that they share the ideals of the charter, operate on a non-profit basis, "demonstrate interest in UN issues and proven ability to reach large or specialised audiences" and have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes about UN activities. Disaffected Witnesses believe that the association, which has not been publicised to followers, is intended to increase the cult's respectability to sceptical governments, such as France's, which have refused to recognise it. Paul Gillies, the Witnesses' spokesman in Britain, said: "We do not have hostile attitudes to governing bodies and if we are making representations on issues to the UN we will do so." "There are good and bad bodies just as there are good and bad politicians. We believe what the Book of Revelation tells us but we do not actively try to change the political system." A spokeswoman for the UN said: "I think we may not be aware of their attitude, which seems to be really strange." Special report Religion in the UK Comment and analysis 28.09.2001: Polly Toynbee: Behind the burka 28.09.2001: Martin Woollacott: Muslim societies need to deal with failure Printable version | Send it to a friend | Save story
| |||||||||||||
All it takes is seeds of doubt. Start with the UN, then onto other things.
Shotgun -
growedup you little ball of fire....
What if..... (we had all the money in the world AND...!)Can we slip a Global apostafest in Cancun into the budget
*loudly* OOOOOOOOH! How fun would that be?! If we all had plenty of notice, it sure would be fun to hijack our own personal beach for 5 or 6 days! Cancun would NEVER be the same! I wonder how many would consider making the trip?!
Shotgun, I am so sorry to tell you this, but me thinks YOU are the ball of fire! You go around planting ideas like this into the minds of innocent posters.....!
Oh! Now you've got my mind turning this possibility over and over.....!
growedup
Edited to add: MAYBE we could form the "National Apostate Association" and have our first meeting in Cancun. Meeting agenda to be: should we sue the WT for defamation of character, libel and slander? It could be a write off for all of us....... Quick! Get me some WD-40! The gears need some greasing!
hawkaw Well done but remember the WTS did not "join" the UN. Only countries "join" the UN.
very good point. If they bring this point up, I'll set them straight
Blondie Thanks for the URL. I wanted to mention a website, but couldnt think of one that wasnt apostate. Where best to start than at the source
freedom9 All it takes is seeds of doubt. Start with the UN, then onto other things.
Agreed. I have two options when talking with dubs. First is the UN issue, and second is the creation/evolution book. I've studied that book in depth and can show any witness all the lies and misquotes. Both of these options will plant seeds of doubt without relying on apostate sites/literature
*edited to add that this should have appeared at the end of this post*
