WATCHTOWER AND TOBACCO INDUSTRY???

by chuckyy 97 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Oroborus21

  Greetings!

  It seems pretty clear from the documentation that this is a privately established Trust for the benefit of the Watchtower Society.

  The trust settlor, is a private invidual.

  PUT VERY SIMPLY, THE SOCIETY ACCEPTS DONATIONS IN ANY FORM (and as far as I know does not have any policies about where the money is coming from, although if it were known money from illegal or ill-gotten means, they might refuse the donation.)

  IN this case, the private trust settlor has a number of investments including in Phillip Morris (which incidently also owns Nabisco and a number of other non-tobacco related companies).

  Certainly it is up the person's individual concience as to whether to hold or trade stock in such companies. The proceeds from which are not necessarily "tainted." After all, all money could be viewed as polluted or ill-gotten if you are wanting to draw the line far enough away.

  In any case, certainly the Society is not responsible for the Trust Settlor's business affairs or decisions.

  Botton Line there is no secret connection between the WTS and Phillip Morris and the subject of this thread is misleading and many here who are not bright enough to understand the situation are similarly fooled because it falls in with their anti-witness hatred.

  -Eduardo
• 

  Voyager

  Oroborus21:

  Documentation! Where is it? Don't expect us to rely on (assumptions) and your (opinions)! We want to see documentation! Where is this documentation to back up your statements and claims?

  We have provided documentation! You have not! Your case is weak without it!

  We invite you to write to the Watchtower Society and post for us a letter denying that the Watchtower Society is not, or never has, received donations from Phillip Morris!

  Remember, the Watchtower/1993/Feb/1st/page-30/ states, quote:

  "Tobacco is, in its very name and associations, filthy, and?taking no heed of the harm it does?how can clean, pure, just, moral feelings and actions originate or be developed in the mind."

  So are you expecting us to believe also, that the Watchtower is (not) associated, when their name appears as a beneficary of such a company?

  We will expect that Watchtower letter just as soon as you can get it. OK!

  Thanks!
• 

  Taylor S.

  Oro ...

  ... save that malarky .... there is an obvious connection that cannot be swept under the rug. it's almost like fashion designers who were 'unaware' that their clothes were manufactured in South American sweatshops by the hands of children.

  the society has enough money and resources to know exactly where its money is coming from.
• 

  Voyager

  Taylor:

  Well said Taylor, and my congratulations to you for standing your ground!

  Thanks!
• 

  hopelesslystained

  "In any case, certainly the Society is not responsible for the Trust Settlor's business affairs or decisions." But accorcing to their own rules, they are responsible for whether or not they accept the money from such an investment now held in their name. No different than their telling us we should not even step foot into a curch of Christendom. After all, it would look like we are accepting and associated with their beliefs. Sorry, gotta run, my stomach is turning and my heart is racing...
• 

  jwsons

  If the troll just keep silent and say nothing, I won't post this following. However, because they trying to OBSCURE the matter. So I have to say:

  Everyone, please open any Law or Commercial Dictionary to confirm about the term "Trust" or "Trust Fund" or "Trustee" to know more how much WacoTower and Dark Society involve in this business. The Watchtower should "assign" the Trust Fund to do the job and gain money for her. That's what dictionaries said. In another word, the Trust Fund can not invest in any business which The Benificary (in this case WacoTower and Dark Society) not allow Trust Fund to involve.

  jwsons
• 

  Voyager

  In any case, certainly the Society is not responsible for the Trust Settlor's business affairs or decisions

  Not responsible? I beg to differ! From their own words, see the Watchtower/1983/Dec/1st/page-22/ which states, quote:

  "Donations received by the Watch Tower Society are acknowledged by letter.

  The watchtower knows (exactly) where those donations are coming from, and they correspond by (letter) for each donation!
• 

  Oroborus21

  Greetings!

  I am sorry but you people who are seeing something in this just simply don't know better.

  I will try to address the points that folllow my post...

  "Documentation" : I was referring to the posts of the scans of the Form 990, the tax filing of the Trust. THAT documentation CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE TRUST IS A PRIVATE TRUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE WATCHTOWER AND BIBLE TRACT SOCIETY.

  That goes nicely to something JWS has wrong. TYPICALLY, A trust beneficiary DOES NOT have control over the trust res (assets in the trust) or has the ability to make decisions about the trust res. Those decisions are made entirely by the TRUSTEE, which in this case is apparently the same person as the SETTLOR.

  This is obviously a Non-Revocable Charitable Remainder Trust, thus in this case in particular the WTS has ABSOLUTELY NO CONTROL over the Trust.

  With regard to the point about "acknowleging donations with a letter" (if still policy to do for "significant" donations, they obviously don't acknowledge every dime donated); this does not SAY ANYTHING or PROVE ANYTHING.

  Evidently, the Trust is making an annual contribution to the Society. Assuming that the Society sends a "thank you" letter back, which is what they probably do, this is obviously only going to be a thank you for the money.

  The documents provided are not those documents given to the Society and most probably the Society has no idea about the UNDERLYING investments of the Trust (nor does it care).

  But even assuming that the Legal Dept has reviewed the trust, because management of the trust rests with the Trustee (NOT the WTS) the year to year fluctuations and investment mix are not under its control.

  I will grant that maybe the Society SHOULD CARE about the underlying investments and ask the question of where a dollar comes from that is donated to it BUT again no charity or church does that (that I know of) they don't ask an individual how they made the dollar and in this case the Society can't be blamed for refusing the money or asking about the underlying investments or management of the Trust.

  The Society can only be held responsible for ITS OWN INVESTMENTS reportedly it has millions and millions of dollars invested (mostly in real property) BUT UNFORTUNATELY the records that it has to file with the local, state and federal authorities are protected by privacy rights and are very difficult to come by. There is some public documentation that it has to file as a 401(3)(c) entity but nothing financial that is of public record that I am aware of. that is too bad.

  Getting back to this particular situation, I am sorry to those of you that don't know better but you are barking up the wrong tree on this one.

  -Eduardo Leaton Jr., Esq.
• 

  Oroborus21

  PS VOYAGER:

  You obviously don't even understand the situation or the scans of documents contained at the top of this thread.

  THERE ARE NO DONATIONS FROM PHILLIP MORRIS MADE TO THE WTS!!!!

  What the documentation shows is that the Trust held/holds some stock in Phillip Morris and sold some of it. IT WAS THESE PROCEEDS that came NOT from Phillip Morris but FROM THE TRUST that were donated to the WTS.

  I hope that clarifies it for you.

  -Eduardo Leaton Jr., Esq.
• 

  Taylor S.

  I will grant that maybe the Society SHOULD CARE about the underlying investments and ask the question of where a dollar comes from that is donated to it BUT again no charity or church does that (that I know of) they don't ask an individual how they made the dollar and in this case the Society can't be blamed for refusing the money or asking about the underlying investments or management of the Trust.

  Oro ...

  with all due respect to your legal acumen ...

  you yourself admit they "should care" where the money comes from, no matter how covertly intricately its channeled into the society's coffers. But can you say with a straight face that such a large trust donation is not even given a cursory examination to make sure that there is no chance of the 'appearance of impropriety'? We're not talking blue-haired olds ladies donating 20 bucks here. We're talking a very large (ka-ching!) donation. i'd personally accept it, scream 'hot damn!', dash off to the bank and not care one iota where it came from. But I'm just a gleefully perverted little sinner with bills to pay.

  for an organization as powerful as the belfry Watchtower ... (who smugly profess to be god's sole mouthpiece and receive enlightenment from him in all matters as to how to LORD over their 6 mil slaves worldwide) ...

  .... who have for decades vehemently proscribed the practice of smoking, and if I'm not mistaken, the production of tobacco in general .... to the point of shunning members and even breaking up families around this matter ....

  Yes .... they should care. After all, we are talking Jehovah's Witnesses here, the one true religion, the leaders of which know all when it comes to matters of god ... these very ones ought to be held to a higher standard.

  If you still can't see gross impropriety here ... then you may have bats in your watchtower too.

  tSiluwe