Posts by JosephAlward

I spoke to the librarian at Dag Hammerskold library in New York this afternoon. She tells me that "since time immemorial" access to the UN library requires a "grounds pass," (they're not called "ID cards") which allows one into the building. Once past the guard at the door, access to any material inside is possible. Grounds passes are obtained by submitting requests on "raised letterhead" from the institution you represent, and these requests must present evidence that there is a legitimate "research need" that will be met by library access; generally "one, or two, or three" persons only from that institution may use the grounds pass. Grounds passes are not issued when one becomes affiliated with the DPI because the DPI does not issue grounds passes; the security department of the library issues those. NGOs affiliated with the DPI would still have to submit a request for a grounds pass on raised letterhead, but the fact of the affiliation would stand as evidence of a legitimate research need, so no further evidence would be necessary.

Thus, patrons who are not staff members of the UN or delegates must apply for a grounds pass to get into the library. Ground passes are granted to institutions which have a legitimate research need, such as universities or humanitarian organizations; NGOs which are affiliated with the DPI are assumed to have such a need.

Many have accused Paul Gillies of lying when he said that affiliation with DPI was made only for the purpose of accessing UN materials. Look at what Gillies said:

In 1991 one of our legal corporations registered with the United Nations as a NGO (non-governmental organization) for the sole purpose of gaining access to the extensive library for research purposes…

The information presented to me this afternoon supports what Gillies said.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

78

Watchtower Propaganda

by JosephAlward in

jw
friends

many have argued that articles in awake!

in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.

i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!

JosephAlward

My intent in making these posts is to explain why an objective observer might believe that some critics of the Watchtower are deliberately exaggerating that organization's hypocrisy.

One of the exaggerations is the allegation that the Watchtower agreed to accept the principles of the United Nations. Most of the members of this forum, I believe, at one time falsely believed that the Watchtower agreed to accept the aims and goals of the United Nations; there is at least one person on this forum who still continues to insist that this is a fact.

It is not a fact, as far as I can see.

Paul Hoeffel said that the "By accepting association with the DPI, the organization agreed to meet criteria for association, including support and respect of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations," but this does not mean that the Watchtower agreed to anything of the sort. All Hoeffel is saying is that if the DPI accepts the NGO for affiliation, it first will have assumed that the organization supports the UN's principles, based on the organization's description of its activities. Nobody on this forum believes that the Watchtower agreed to accept the principles of the UN. The UN just assumed that this was so, but that does not make it true.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

78

Watchtower Propaganda

by JosephAlward in

jw
friends

many have argued that articles in awake!

in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.

i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!

JosephAlward

My purpose in making posts about the accusations leveled against the Watchtower is to explain why I think that too much of what has been said on this matter has been hyperbole. Well-meaning current and former Witnesses are exaggerating the misdeeds of the Watchtower, in my opinion. I certainly could be wrong, but based on the evidence I've seen, I don't think so. Until I see better evidence, I will not believe, for example, that the Watchtower submitted an application or reapplication form on which they agreed to accept the aims and goals of the UN, nor will I disbelieve the Watchtower's claim that they believed they had to be affiliated with the DPI in order to fully access all of the UN's material (I interpret this to mean that they wished to remove materials from the library.)

When I first read in this forum and on Randy's site the allegations of hypocrisy, I was given the impression that the Watchtower accepted the aims and goals of the United Nations when they submitted their application form in 1991, and then reaffirmed their acceptance of these goals when they submitted reapplication forms. One forum member flatly stated that such a form existed, signed by the Watchtower, and many others led me to believe that this was true. When I looked more closely into these claims, I found that there has never been a requirement that the applicants for affiliation with the DPI sign a statement saying they accepted the principles of the UN.

While it's true that the UN expected that NGOs accept the UN's principles, the determination of whether this was true seems always to have been left up to the ones reviewing the application form. The determination was based on the organization's description of its activities; if, in the judgment of the reviewer, the activities seemed to be consistent with the goals of the UN--or at least, some of the goals--then it was just assumed that the organization accepted the aims and goals of the UN. There is no evidence whatsoever that the Watchtower accepted the goals of the UN; the UN may have thought they did, but what they thought, and what was actually true are two different things.

Thus, it is not true, as so many were claiming, that the Watchtower accepted in secret the aims and goals of the UN; all they did was allow the UN to believe whatever they wished to believe; to disabuse them of this notion would hamper the preaching work of the Watchtower, so not divulging the truth in this matter was entirely consistent with their teaching. At all times they must be very careful not to divulge any information to the enemy that he could use to hamper the preaching work. --The Watchtower, May 1, 1957, p. 285-286

I've also seen no credible evidence in rebuttal of Gillies' claim that the application was made to enable the Watchtower's writers access to UN material. Many on this forum have accused Gillies of lying about this, but I don't see enough evidence yet to justify this assertion. While it's no doubt true that much of the UN's material is available to the general public, why would an ID card not be required for those patrons who wanted to take materials out of the library? Gillies said the Watchtower's writer had an ID card, which was returned after the scandal broke; why would he lie about something that could so easily be checked? Has anyone checked this out? Is it true that certain materials could be removed from the library only by patrons carrying an ID card, and is it true that one way to obtain such a card is to become affiliated with the DPI?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

78

Watchtower Propaganda

by JosephAlward in

jw
friends

many have argued that articles in awake!

in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.

i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!

JosephAlward

The reason the WT requested affiliation with the DPI was to get information about the UN’s failures so they could write articles about those failures; as a condition of affiliation, they were expected to publicize the UN’s work, something they happily would have agreed to do--since that is the very reason they wanted affiliation in the first place.

The Watchtower was exploiting the UN, not helping it. It was using the UN's resources to collect data which documented its failures, and then wrote about those failures, and happily presented to the UN samples of their writings. What JW could be unhappy about this? Isn't this exactly the type of efforts against the UN the governing body is expected to be making? If not, why not?

Some have argued that full access to the UN library would have been made available without affiliation, but the Watchtower says affiliation was necessary to obtain an "ID card." Many on this forum have called this a lie, saying that no such card was necessary. I have two big problems with this accusation: First, every library I've ever been to has required its patrons to have a library card before they're granted the right to take library material home; why would the UN library not have had a similar policy? Second, why would the Watchtower lie (see the Paul Gillies letter--link below--to The Guardian) about its "writer" having an ID card? Would they really be so stupid as to lie about something that could easily be checked?

Gillies letter:

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

78

Watchtower Propaganda

by JosephAlward in

jw
friends

many have argued that articles in awake!

in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.

i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!

JosephAlward

Many have argued that articles in Awake! in recent years show that Watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the United Nations in its writings. I can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in Awake! that refer to work done by the United Nations or its affiliated organizations. However, if readers look carefully, they will see that while the Watchtower never directly condemns the United Nations in any of these articles, the consistent theme throughout virtually all of them is that the world is in terrible shape, and its getting worse, even though good people (like Eleanor Roosevelt, for example) are doing their sincere best to help.

The articles generally make it clear that the United Nations and other world-wide governmental organizations are just not getting the job done, and that sincere and thoughtful readers who want to help bring world peace should turn to the Watchtower instead of relying on the United Nations. At the end of most of these articles, or not far from the end, is the invitation to the reader write to the Watchtower to learn how to really make a difference. The intent seems clear: to let the doorknockers point out to the householders articles which show the UN's failures to try to convince them that there's no hope without Jehovah.

Rather than disseminating UN propaganda with "favorable articles," as Randall Watters and others have claimed, the Watchtower seems merely to be highlighting the United Nations' failures while it points to the need to embrace Jehovah and the Watchtower, which teaches that the only truly effective world-wide government, the only one which will truly bring world peace, is Jehovah's Kingdom worldwide government.

Those who are quick to claim that the articles are propaganda for the UN fail to see the truth, in my view; these articles are not propaganda for the UN; they're propaganda for the Watchtower. Since these articles make the UN look bad and the Watchtower good, they would have been written even if the Watchtower had not applied for affiliation with the DPI. Thus, the two events--being affiliated with the DPI, and writing the articles about the UN, are not necessarily connected.

I conclude from this that the Watchtower was only doing what it should be doing: pointing out the failures of the United Nations. Rather than be condemned for this activity, Jehovah's Witnesses everywhere should applaud it, shouldn't they?

A discussion and analysis of the content of some of these articles is found in my article, "Watchtower Propaganda," which describes why some of the allegedly pro-United Nations articles are really anti-United Nations and pro-Watchtower. The link to this article is provided below:

* http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Watchtower_Propaganda.htm

I would welcome any constructive comments.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

122

Zev's UN/WTS Scandal Web Site - Part 2

by hawkaw in

jw
friends

http://www.geocities.com/plowbitch69/.

over 1,440 hits in a few weeks..

woooooohoooooo!!!!!

JosephAlward

Does anyone know if any literature accompanying the reapplication forms stated that the re-applicant was expected to accept the aims and goals of the United Nations? If such literature exists, does anyone have URL where it may be seen?

Likewise for any literature accompanying initial applications forms in 1991? Does anyone know if something like this existed? Does anyone have a URL?

I'll call Isolda Oka (Oca?) on Monday and ask her these questions if no one has yet done so.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

122

Zev's UN/WTS Scandal Web Site - Part 2

by hawkaw in

jw
friends

http://www.geocities.com/plowbitch69/.

over 1,440 hits in a few weeks..

woooooohoooooo!!!!!

JosephAlward

Hawk,

Readers unaware of Watchtower theology would read those articles and get a generally favorable impression of the UN, but they would also understand that the challenges facing it are great, and that it has little to show for its efforts.

I certainly agree that the UN gets something out of the articles; at the very least, it gains sympathy from readers who see that sincere, dedicated people are working to try to make a difference, but are largely not up to the challenge. The repeated invitations for non-JW readers to consider an alternative approach to solving the world's problems would suggest to the readers that the writers of the articles don't believe that the UN is the answer, but Jehovah is.

Now, what about the JWs who will also read the articles? There's no doubt that all of them will know that the articles are telling them that Satan is failing; this serves to increase their faith and motivate them even more. This works to the great benefit of the Watchtower. Furthermore, these articles will be shown by the doorknockers to the householders, and the JWs at the door will use the failures described in the articles as a proselytizing tool; again, the Watchtower benefits greatly.

In summary, both the UN and the Watchtower benefit from the articles, but I believe that overall, the Watchtower gets much more out of them then does the UN. Thus, it is clear to me that the Watchtower would have written these articles even if there were no requirements that NGOs promote the UN in its writings. Thus, we cannot take the references to the UN in Watchtower articles as evidence that they knew that they were required to accept the aims and goals of the UN.

The UN very likely would think that the Watchtower was disseminating favorable information about the UN, but if they better understood the Watchtower, they would be able to read the hidden messages, the implied criticisms; I think then they might conclude that they were being used by the Watchtower to further the aims of the Watchtower.

P.S. The Human Rights Declaration on Page 5 of the November 22 Awake! article--missing in my first draft of my article, "Watchtower Propaganda"--has just been added.

* http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Watchtower_Propaganda.htm

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

122

Zev's UN/WTS Scandal Web Site - Part 2

by hawkaw in

jw
friends

http://www.geocities.com/plowbitch69/.

over 1,440 hits in a few weeks..

woooooohoooooo!!!!!

JosephAlward

there's an important point in your argument that the non-provision of the forms signed on by the Watchtower cannot be taken as evidence that such really exist.

I don't understand what you're saying in the sentence above, Gozz. Will you please explain?

Those articles served their purpose excellently, part of which was simply to disseminate information about the UN.

Yes, I certainly agree that the articles contain information about the UN, but since they are completely absent of praise for the UN, their existence does not represent evidence that they were fulfilling some kind of bargain some critics think it made when it applied for NGO status. These articles would have been written even if the Watchtower had not enjoyed such status, in my opinion. The UN is the great enemy of the Watchtower, so it is completely natural for it to be speaking out against it. To the Watchtower's credit, in my opinion, it now seems not to be striking out as hysterically against the UN in its Awake! articles as it once might have, but it nevertheless is making sure that its readers know that the UN is failing to solve the world's problems, and it seldom overlooks and opportunity to hint to its readers that the problems will only be solved by Jehovah and his followers. I think that while information about the UN is definitely getting out through, this is not evidence that this was one of the goals of the Watchtower. It would have been impossible to point out the failures of the UN without mentioning it, isn't that true. Thus, the only thing that is virtually beyond dispute is that these articles are propaganda for the Watchtower; much less clear is whether the Watchtower was trying to satisfy a requirement of the UN.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

24

Any thoughts on this quote from the Bible?

by siegswife in

in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?

it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".

i've been thinking about this.

JosephAlward

I think the "leaven" of the New Testament is the "meme" of today, a behavior-altering, self-propagating idea. Just as genes are propagated through humans, so are memes. Memes, like viruses, can remain dormant for long periods, start off as small as a mustard seed and then rapidly infect a society, transmitted from one human to another.

Just as yeast expands the dough, so do memes expand through society as persons share the idea with others. Some memes explode exponentially into a population, as one person tells two, the two tell four, then the four tell eight, and after twenty replications a million have been infected. Some memes are good, others bad; they can be corrupting, or correcting, informing, concealing, inspiring, or enlightening; they can be suppressed, purged, or planted, and they can be used to subdue. Thus, the Kingdom is God is compared in the Bible to a meme, a spirit-altering idea, small as a mustard seed, which eventually becomes spread over the entire earth.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html