Truth ...,
We can rightly state that the WTS's NWT does not correctly represent the text that has been provided to it by Christendom. We can rightly say that it has allowed its theology (study of God) to influence its rendering. And for this it stands condemned - and this is a practice it follows regularly across citations of others.
However, we must always keep in mind that in amending the Scriptures according to its prejudices, it is following the practice of Hebrew and Christian redactors for at least 2500 years.
As a scroll was copied (there were not only perishable, they were in constant use), the texts were deliberately amended to make them suit the views of the period. About the 2nd century, the Jews removed all variants they did not agree with but by this time that text was severely corrupted. When the Masoretes invoked their regime of precise copying about 1000 years later, they set the corrupted text in concrete.
The text of the NT is likewise subject to opinion and interference. The Greek text used by the NWT comes from two 19th century Anglican Bishops. The KJV used a different Greek text - the "Textus Receptus". And the WTS is fully aware of disputed passages, which it does not include in its NWT. This shows how throughout the past 2000 years, people have misused their authority to get people to believe what they want the people to believe.
Further, when the 4th century Christian Church decided to create a list of accepted Scriptures, they selected those writings which it decided fitted in with their beliefs. So again we have an example of doctrine influencing the text.
The WTS is not justified in misrepresenting the text it has accepted, but it does follow millennia of tradition of playing with the text to make it say what the editor (redactor) wanted it to say.
Doug