can anyone ask raymond franz what he knows about the un involvement?.
.
kpax
MA,
Ok, so it's not OK. Now what? TJ's solution? Should we get a court order. How about we try to expose him in the press. What next?
LPH
ps: I have it! (in Gilbert & Sullivan tone) Let's tie him to an ant-hill and smear his ears in jam. That should do the trick. The Borg will be brought down.
can anyone ask raymond franz what he knows about the un involvement?.
.
kpax
James,
Excellent points my man! "Still they ask for a sign, but no sign will be given them except ..... "
LPH
ive found the un affiliation threads very interesting, but ive also expressed the view that this issue will have virtually no effect on jw membership.
i have at least two reasons for believing this.. first, after reading w. j. schnells 1957 book, thirty years a watchtower slave, in which the author describes how the watchtower used negative publicity to increase membership, im now of the opinion that continued commentary on this matter may only serve to foster an even greater conviction on the part of rank and file jws that they are being persecuted, and they will increase their efforts to recruit members; this will offset what i think will be a miniscule number of defections by those who will feel betrayed because of the un affiliation.
the reason why i think there will be few defections is described below.. second, i believe that the watchtower can easily defend itself.
Joseph,
I apparently missed your other threads. Your analysis of the UN affair is severely flawed for the following reasons:
(i) The library card defense is a red herring. The 1968 UN resolutions 1296 and 1297 clearly spell out the requirements for a DPI affiliated NGO. It cannot get any simpler than that. It doesn't matter what the WTS's motivations were - by affiliating they were agreeing to support the UN's principles as per those resolutions. Now assume they were somehow unaware of them at the time, they still lied by stating in Gillies letter that the rules had somehow changed. They hadn't. Those are documented facts. Also, in that letter why did they not acknowledge that they had withdrawn because of information published by the Guardian itself - information of which they were, if we take them at their word, unaware? Instead they called the article erroneous when, by their actions, they proved its central point to be absolutely valid. Is that honest?
Actually, they knew of this before it hit the Guardian, but it was only after public exposure that they took the necessary steps. The WTS still has not issued any public explanation public about this matter - if it is innocent then why not do so?
Further, each year - for 10 years - the WTS received information from the UN stating, among other things, what the role of NGOs is. You may say, perhaps they didn't read it. So what, since when has not reading something been a defense? Basically yours is an apology for the WTS by giving them the benefit of the doubt in matters where there is no credible doubt. Could you get out of a speeding ticlet by arguing that you didn't know the speed limit? Perhaps occasionally, but ignorance of the law is no excuse.
If they were actually ignorant of all this then at least an honest apology would be called for - not the tissue of lies in Gillies' letter. A letter, which, incidentally the Guardian's editor refused to publish because it was dishonest.
(ii) The Awake! articles from 1991 on out are strikingly different from those before. While it is true that technically the articles always point to a better way than the UN nevertheless, to the public, they appear favorable not just to the UN but also to UN principles. Pointing to a "better way" is not the same thing as condemning the UN which is what the WTS should be doing according to its own values. A better mouse trap does not imply that the earlier model was crap. To state it differently - quantum mechanics is a better way than classical mechanics. does that make classical mechanics a disgusting thing, or just a "less good" thing?
The WTS was talking up the UN for its own benefit - you can't get away from that. I have rarely read a more convolulted argument than yours as to how those articles were actually condemning the UN. Actually, they were written to appeal to the UN officials but without overtly offending JW sensibilities on the UN.
In reality the WT opposes both the UN and its principles such as free speech for individuals. It's called talking out of both sides of your mouth. No one on thi sboard is so stupid as to suggest that the WTS was actually supporting the UN as you seem to think we are doing. Our point is that they misrepresented themelves to the UN so that, as you have grasped, they could exploit the UN. However, doing that contradicts the WTS's stated positions. In fact, people died in Malawi because they could not buy a party card even though it was a single-party state. In WT land the end does not justify the means for the rank and file. Hence the leaders have a double standard.
(iii) The WTS has condemned in its magazines other religious NGO-affiliates of the UN for using their position to gain influence. However, it has done the same thing and in semi-secret. Why did not rank & file JWs know of the UN affiliation? Merely seeing the WTS on the UN NGO web page is a great shock to most JWs. Why is that if it is as innocent as you say?
(iv) Since the WTS has been shown to lie about many things and to misrepresent the facts on many occasions, why would they draw the line here? You ask, would they be so stupid as to lie about something that is easily checked? That is incredibly naive - of course they would, because JWs are prohibited from checking and the rest of the world doesn't really care.
Joseph, your analysis is superficial, naive and unbelievably myopic.
LPH
ive found the un affiliation threads very interesting, but ive also expressed the view that this issue will have virtually no effect on jw membership.
i have at least two reasons for believing this.. first, after reading w. j. schnells 1957 book, thirty years a watchtower slave, in which the author describes how the watchtower used negative publicity to increase membership, im now of the opinion that continued commentary on this matter may only serve to foster an even greater conviction on the part of rank and file jws that they are being persecuted, and they will increase their efforts to recruit members; this will offset what i think will be a miniscule number of defections by those who will feel betrayed because of the un affiliation.
the reason why i think there will be few defections is described below.. second, i believe that the watchtower can easily defend itself.
Joseph,
Welcome!
The WTS has already lied to defend itself on this issue, so, clearly they cannot now defend themselves without lying.
I'm curious, are you an exJW? If not then you may not be fully appreciative of the impact that the UN affair has had, and will have, on JWs as they get to know of it. Sure, few wil leave directly as a result, but that isn't how it goes. A rather large number of JWs become inactive primarily through discouragement at being unable to achieve impossible goals and constant failed expectations. It's a bit like being on a permanent diet but one that you cannot stick to. Part of the effect will be to cause a further slowing down on the part of individual JWs, and an increased sense of weariness. The UN affair is simply another victory in a long war of attrition.
Since you're a physicist you'll be aware of the quantum adiabatic principle. All of these things accumulate and cause the leaders to effect change but change that is turned on so slowly that most don't notice. Example: write to the WTS and ask them directly how long a creative day is. I'd love to see their answer posted here. You could argue that you need to know because you ocassionally teach JW students who seem unsure if it's 7000 years - as it used to be or merely an unspecifed "thousands of years." The theological adiabatic principle in action!
LPH
can anyone ask raymond franz what he knows about the un involvement?.
.
kpax
kpax,
"It is not his job to decide what we should know or not know!"
That is absolutely correct, and, as far as I know he neither claims that right nor has anyone suggested that he has that right except when it comes to telling what _he_ knows. Just as we all have that right. It _is_ up to him how much he decides to reveal because he has the right to exercise his judgment, as does any author, about what he says. Danny's two posts make some excellent points on this. He has to consider how what he says will affect him, his family, the WTS, JWs and everyone else. Onl he can make that decision.
How do we know that he hasn't revealed all that he knows that can be adequately documented? If he wrote another book then couldn't we claim that there must be even more that he hasn't told us? Where does it end? The simple fact is that it is RF's right to do what he thinks is best. He may be mistaken or he may or not, or, most likely the true situation is somewhere in between. But, short of a Vulcan mind meld we can never know whether he has told us "everything" that matters. It's his call and I don't think it's fair to condemn him based on suspicion.
Part of the problem, I think, is in according RF a position he does not want - he is not the King of the Apostates (a position that does not, and should not exist.) He's just an exJW, albeit an influential one, who has told his story as he sees fit. He's under no obligation to do or say anything. Of course, people have the right to criticize him and others have the right to defend him. But in the end it won't make an iota of difference because RF will do as he sees fit to do. That is unless we decide to go and torture him in his garage till he coughs up. Short of that what's the point of this discussion?
Skally, would you think that RF should, perhaps, reveal details of private conversations with others, even if those details would put the Society in a negative light? I am only speculating, but perhaps that is part of the reason that RF has decided not to say more than he has. Or maybe there really isn't much more of substance to say. My point is that RF knows and he alone.
LPH
can anyone ask raymond franz what he knows about the un involvement?.
.
kpax
An interesting discussion. It's certainly true that RF, as an ex-member of the GB, shares responsibility for the WTS's past actions. However, most of us, in the past, have also done much to advance the cause of the WTS. Are we to be required to devote our lives to opposing the WTS or should we be allowed to do what we can? Should we be hounded to do more because of our past actions? RF's past actions were not criminal and so, whether we like it or not, it is entirely up to him what he will and won't reveal. Just as it is with us.
A point to consider is the following; RF knows the mindset of the Society's leaders and the rank-and-file probably better than anyone posting on this board. Isn't it possible that he, therefore, has a good feel about (a) what should and should not be revealed, and (b) how that should be done for maximum impact. We only need consider how little effect Schnell's book had even though it is a compelling indictment of the WTS. This is not said to defend RF - he is not accused of a crime and so he needs no defense - but rather to point out that there are many possibilities. Without knowledge we can only speculate which is not a particularly useful thing to do.
We should also ask, what good would come from revealing more information, even if RF has significantinformation beyond that which he has already written about? If JWs ignore or won't believe all of the stuff that has already been revealed then why should we expect that even more information would do the trick? The UN matter is a case in point. Despite its being of current interest, even to the press, many JWs discount it. It has had some impact but has generally been ignored by the JW community. They discount much of what RF has written as it is - why would new information about things that happened more than 20 years ago have any effect at all if current scandals don't produce much more than a ripple among the r&f?
The true impact, really is in two places and is less visible than the r&f quitting in droves: (i) an unknown number of people don't become JWs because of their exposure to the abundance of information already available and (ii) the leadership who are acutely aware of (i) and this wil lead to gradual change. Getting relatives "out" is not simply a question of having even more scandal to put their way. If it were then no JW would remain one since we have more than enough facts as it is.
It's important to distinguish the understandable emotional desire to get all the dirt on the WTS and the question of what effect knowing even more "dirt" would have. It might not help, and indeed, it might actually be harmful to the cause of getting the truth out about "the Truth." Revealing juicy but undocumented anecdotes would provide a wonderful opportunity to discredit everything that RF has written.
LPH
tab to bottom of article to read "theocratic warfare" lies from elder>>>.
some churchgoers won't be going to see graham .
by barbara anderson.
Maybe - but the elder also said this "We're Bible students. If this means people are going to take up an interest in God's word and follow through with it, that's a good thing."
it seems to me that the seesaw is tipping away from traditional JW values.
LPH
this is my first post and i must say that i have been lurking here from time to time and have been impressed with the content.
back in college i visited the old h2o site many times and this is definitely superior.
thanks to all for the rich content i've been enjoying.. my great mother was a witness making me a fourth generation.
Perry,
A truly excellent post - rarely does one read something with so much insight - your words,
"All that rejection from door to door trained me to eat rejection and adversity for lunch so to speak."
are very insightful!
Best wishes,
LPH
if you have kids and want to get just one more gift for them, take note.. ok, last sunday while finishing up the shopping i happened to pass a display of a toy i have wanted to get for a long time.
for my nephew...ok for me too.
radio controlled motorcycle!
A truly fun post - ride on!
And Merry Christmas,
LPH
since we have so many right-leaning politically speaking posters, i was wondering what comments they might be willing to offer up on this column i caught this morning.. http://www.observer.com/pages/conason.asp.
i am sure most of those who are quick to criticize anything that even remotely relates to clinton are all whitewater experts by now.
i would enjoy reading what thoughts you may have on the parallels and even how enron makes whitewater look like a trip to the penny candy store.. hoping some conservative can help me feel less screwed by my republican administration,.
I found Amazing's post quite odd - presumably most people know what oral sex involves - so laying it out in such graphic detail was not only uncalled for but a bit salacious to boot. It is quite Amazing how people who pride themselves on independent thinking can be so easily corralled into the appropriate corner when the time comes. That's true for the Democrat or the Republican - the differences between the two parties are somewhat like those between Swift's big-and little-endians. Mainly, they are there to distract the unthinking masses from what's really going on, or so it seems to me.
LPH
