http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
He is quoting the then-current 2004 requirements for a DPI NGO. Notice how he fails to say those were the requirements back in the early 1990's.
Did you ask him about this? You said he's misleading the public. Did you ask him if there was any evidence to show that the requirements had not essentially changed? Or, did you just come up with that conclusion on your own without asking him if they had changed or not?
for informational purposes, there is a searchable database of the writings of charles taze russell at http://www.ctrussell.us/.
this site has a complete copy of studies in the scriptures, his watchtower articles from about 1897 through 1916 and various other of his works.
just thought you might be interested!
Actually, it wasn't suspended but the headquarters was moved back to Pittsburgh for awhile.
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
Thirdwitness,
Your site says this about Mr Hoeffel (the DPI chief):
Of course, now the UN is suddenly being very clear about their requirements — over ten years too late. Therefore it begs the question, why did Mr Hoeffel not make it plain and state that the 1991 forms did not include such requirements? We wonder if the DPI is trying to cover-up their own ineptness for not putting such a statement on the original form when it, perhaps, should have been. The chief of the DPI is being misleading — either by intentionally trying to cover his department's failings or from simply making an honest mistake. He is quoting the then-current 2004 requirements for a DPI NGO. Notice how he fails to say those were the requirements back in the early 1990's. Why does he not make it clear that the original applications said nothing about supporting the UN charter, as we can see for ourselves today? Who really is being untrustworthy and trying to “hide the facts”? Is it the Watchtower Society, whose explanation agrees with the 1991 evidence? Or is it not the DPI, who has wrongly insinuated that the criteria to support the UN as a DPI NGO was on the original application — when we know for a fact that it was not?It continues on in a similar vein.
Did you contact Mr Hoeffel with these questions before publication or have you since? Or, did you decide to attack him publically based on your undestanding of the "evidence" without the courtesy of contacting him?
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
Thirdwitness,
A serious question. You have a chapter which attacks the "chief" of the DPI:
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/hailtothechief.html
Have you contacted him either before publishing your information or since?
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
We can say this because the evidence shows that the DPI was changing toward NGOs and their policies toward them
Thirdwitness,
The "evidence" you cite on your site is no real evidence. I've cited and linked the 1992 press releases from the DPI (which you've not commented on yet) which clearly show that the standard was essentially the same. Steve and myself have cited the data from Internet Achive which shows what the 1995 brochure was saying. Will you comment on these?
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
I have looked at the brochure on page 6 and 7 from 1994. The part that the essay was honing in on was how apostates use this statement in the current brochure claiming that the WTS agreed to support the UN's charter. It reads:What are the Criteria for NGOs to become associated with DPI? The NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the UN and have a clear mission statement that is consistent with those principles;”
Rather than making this statement the 1994 brochure said: Who is eligible for association with the DPI? Non-profit organizations which: share the ideals of the UN charter;”
As for what the 1994 brochure says on page 7 it really doesn't matter.
Your presentation misrepresents what the UN brochure was saying. So you will continue to leave out page 7 from your presentation?
1. We are not sure what the 1992 brochure says or if the WTS was even sent one. Rather than enclosing a 1992 brochure when addressing the issue Hoeffel refers to the current brochure. It would have been helpful if he would have provided the 1992 brochure instead.
The press releases from 1992 are very clear. You have not commented on these also. You are, in effect, saying that the DPI/UN is engaged in some sort of conspiracy to either cover their "mistakes" or perhaps to embarrass the WT. Who is the greater conspiracy theorist?
2. Furthermore as we have shown the word support can mean many different things and in the case of the words in the 1994 brochure on page 7 it is evident that the word support means to furnish corroborating evidence. It is, after all, the purpose of the DPI to give information about the UN and its programs.
What kind of support was expected?
"Since the founding days of the United Nations in San Francisco, NGOs have made valuable contributions to the international community by drawing attention to issues, suggesting ideas and programmes, disseminating information and mobilizing public opinion in support of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Association with DPI constitutes a commitment to that effect. Associated NGOs are expected to devote a portion of their information programmes to promoting knowledge of the United Nations' principles and activities. They are also expected to keep the DPI/NGO Section abreast of their activities by regularly providing samples of information materials." (Emphasis added)
3. Whatever anyone says or pulls out of their hat doesn't matter. The WTS never signed an agreement to support the UN as the application clearly shows. They never went through the rigorous review process instituted after they withdrew. The only documents the WTS signed was the document showing who would be the representatives for the coming years and what fields they were interested in.
And to maintain their associated status with the DPI/UN they submitted articles from several Awake! issues. So, a signed form is not necessary to show that the WT Society agreed to "promoting knowledge of the United Nations' principles and activities" "mobilizing public opinion in support of the United Nations and its specialized agencies." The Society left enough evidence that they were following through on their end of the agreement in those Awake! articles.
True, those Awake! articles did point to God's Kingdom as the ultimate solution. But did ANY of those articles ever state that the UN was considered to be the "image of the wild beast"? Did ANY of those articles explain how God was going to use the UN to destroy religion and that God would destroy the United Nations?
does anyone know exactly how many man-made rules there are for bethelites when they enter the holy of holies (brooklyn bethel)?
i thought i remembered reading somewhere that there's several hundred, but i want to make sure before i do my thread.
thanks for any info on this.
The rules that were in existence in 1974 can be found here:
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
Of course, now the UN is suddenly being very clear about their requirements — over ten years too late. Therefore it begs the question, why did Mr Hoeffel not make it plain and state that the 1991 forms did not include such requirements? We wonder if the DPI is trying to cover-up their own ineptness for not putting such a statement on the original form when it, perhaps, should have been.
There is no proof of changing requirements. To the contrary, the press releases from 1992 that I linked above and page 7 of the 1994 brochure which you've ignored show that there has been no real change.
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
Thirdwitness,
Your site said the 1994 brochure did not say anything about the need for associated NGOs to support the UN. I pointed out how you left out page 7 of that brochure and only cited page 6. Will you update your website to correct the error?
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
I just wanted to emphasize this point. Thirdwitness' website quotes the 2005 brochure put out by the UN DPI about the criteria for association of NGOs. His argument is that these criteria have likely changed over the years and that the 1994 UN DPI brochure does not speak of NGOs having to support the UN as part of the criteria for association.
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/thechangingworldofngos.html
Critics quote this brochure as the “proof” that the Society secretly knew they were supporting the United Nations. They claim that this requirement was in place since before 1991, and has remained unchanged ever since. Is this claim true?Critics quote this brochure as the “proof” that the Society secretly knew they were supporting the United Nations. They claim that this requirement was in place since before 1991, and has remained unchanged ever since. Is this claim true?
He then says about the critics:
No. The critics are lying.
He quotes the 2005 brochure and then claims the 1994 brochure does not require "support of the UN":
“What are the Criteria for NGOs to become associated with DPI? The NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the UN and have a clear mission statement that is consistent with those principles;”This page from his site links to page 6 of this 1994 brochure and yes there is nothing on page 6 of that brochure that speaks of the necessity of associating NGOs supporting the UN. Yet, page 7 of this 1994 brochure is not mentioned here by Thirdwitness. It specifically does say that associating NGOs must prove "that they support the United Nations." See:Apostates often use the above quote, and repeat it endlessly as “proof” of the Watchtower Society's support of the UN. Yet this appears in the 2005 brochure, do we know if it appears in the older brochures? We already stated that we have a copy of the 1994 brochure, so does that phrase appear there? No, not at all
http://www.randytv.com/secret/DPI%20NGO%20Brochure%201994%20page%207.jpg
The exact language regarding associating NGOs is:
"can prove during the initial 2 years of association with DPI, that they support the United Nations by featuring U.N. information in their publications and outreach activities."
Did the literature published by the UN during the time of the Watchtower's association say that associating NGOs were required to "support the UN"? Most definitely.
