Jehovah’s Witnesses link to UN queried

Sect accused of hypocrisy over association with organisation it has demonised.

The United Nations is being asked to investigate why it has granted associate status to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the fundamentalist US-based Christian sect, which regards it as the scarlet beast predicted in the Book of Revelation. Disaffected members of the 6m-strong group, which has 130,000 followers in the UK, have accused the Witnesses’ elderly governing body of hypocrisy in secretly accepting links with an organisation that they continue to denounce in apocalyptic terms. The UN itself admitted yesterday that it was surprised that the sect, whose formal name is the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, had been accepted on its list of non-governmental organisations for the last 10 years.

Stephen Bates, religious affairs correspondent Monday October 8, 2001 The Guardian

In 1992, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York applied to be a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Associate Member of the United Nations Department of Public Information (UN DPI) and remained so until 2001. This is the closest relationship an NGO can form with the UN. The application was renewed annually and is a matter of public record.

This involvement has stumbled many brothers due to:

>The double standard the Watchtower holds for itself when compared to its members
>Such membership being hypocritical considering the Watchtower history of condemning Christendom for doing so
>The dishonest information the Watchtower has released in attempting to explain the situation to its members

As of January 27th 2007, an official UN letter describing this status appeared on the United Nations website at http://www.un.org/dpi/ngosection/pdfs/watchtower.pdf

The letter outlines that the Watchtower was an associated NGO and to become associated required the Watchtower to accept the following:

>that the NGO share the ideals of the UN Charter;

1.have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach target or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;
2.have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programs about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting cooperation of the media.

Since the United Nations 1945 formation, associated NGO’s have been required to “support the work of the United Nations”. This was reiterated at the 1968 Economic and Social Council.

“In 1968, the Economic and Social Council, by Resolution 1297 (XLIV) of 27 May, called on DPI to associate NGOs, bearing in mind the letter and spirit of its Resolution 1296 (XLIV) of 23 May 1968, which stated that an NGO “…shall undertake to support the work of the United Nations and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities”.” un.org (1 Jun 2010)

A copy of the 1991 application form that the Watchtower filled in shows that there was a yearly requirement to provide information to the United Nations. It states;

“provide us with proof of your organizations non-profit status and with an annual report on its activities related to United Nations.”

Opening paragraph of application form

Page 1

Page 2

Page 3
*link to the application forms active via http://jwfacts.mobi/watchtowers-united-nations-association/*

Shown later are several Watchtower articles from the 1990s that praise the efforts of the United Nations, an apparent attempt to comply with the above requirements.

Double Standard

Application to the United Nations is a double standard when compared with the Watchtower principles enforced upon the members. The Watchtower has made very clear that any role of employment or simple membership with a disapproved organisation is considered apostasy, and results in judicial action.

The Bible condemns things such as stealing, idolatry and the misuse of blood, so a Christian could hardly engage in work where he directly promoted such things. Would doing the work so closely link a person with a condemned practice that he would be a clear accomplice? Even a janitor or a receptionist at a blood bank or a plant making only weapons of war is directly linked with work contrary to Gods Word. Watchtower 1982 July 15 Box on p.26 Employment Factors to Consider

Is it true that for religious reasons Jehovahs Witnesses may not become members of the YMCA (Young Mens Christian Association)?

Yes, that is so. We have long recognized that the YMCA, though not being a church as such, is definitely aligned with the religious organizations of Christendom in efforts to promote interfaith. In joining the YMCA as a member a person accepts or endorses the general objectives and principles of the organization. Membership means that one has become an integral part of this organization founded with definite religious objectives, including the promotion of interfaith. Hence, for one of Jehovahs Witnesses to become a member of such a so-called Christian association would amount to apostasy. Watchtower 1979 Jan 1 pp.30,31 Questions from Readers

Involvement in political affairs is considered being non-neutral and listed in the elders manual as a course of action by which a Witness indicates they have disassociated themselves from the congregation.

“Jehovah’s Witnesses maintain neutrality with regard to the political and military affairs of the nations. (John 17:16; rs pp. 269-76) … Since true dedicated Christians are “no part of the world,” if a member of the congregation unrepentantly pursues a course in violation of his Christian neutrality, he thereby disassociates himself from the neutral Christian congregation. (John 15:19; 17:14-16; w82 1/15 p. 31)” “Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock” p.140

With these statements in mind there can be no question that the Watchtower Society violated its own rules when applying for affiliation with the United Nations.

Condemnation of Christendom

Christendom has regularly been condemned for its involvement with the United Nations, being pictured as the Harlot that rides on the back of this prophetic scarlet beast.

“Such dwellers on earth wondered admiringly at the revived scarlet wild beast. Much reliance was placed in its ability to be a power for world peace and security. Great expectations were held out for it, and it was given designations that were really blasphemous from the standpoint of the Holy Bible. How so? In that to this wild beast powers were ascribed and tasks were assigned that really belong to Gods kingdom and its Messiah or its Christ. Back in 1919 the scarlet League of Nations had been seriously called the political expression of the Kingdom of God on earth. And now the United Nations, the successor of that League, has been called the best means for peace, yes, even more than that, the last hope for peace. So today we can see in actuality what the apostle John saw in symbol, that that scarlet-colored wild beast is full of blasphemous names. Those expressions of admiration for it turn false religionists, not to the worship of Jehovah God the Creator, but to idolatry of a man-made creation, the worship of a political image, the worship of an international organization for world peace and security.Rev. 17:3.” Watchtower 1963 Nov 15 p.697


Babylon The Great Has Fallen! Gods Kingdom Rules (1963) p.577

“The United Nations is actually a worldly confederacy against Jehovah God and his dedicated Witnesses on earth.” Watchtower 1987 Sep 1 p.20

As late as the 1991 June 1 p.17 issue of the Watchtower, Christendom was condemned for its involvement with the United Nations

If Christendom had sought peace with Jehovahs King, Jesus Christ, then she would have avoided the coming flash flood.Compare Luke 19:42-44. 10 However, she has not done so. Instead, in her quest for peace and security, she insinuates herself into the favor of the political leaders of the nations this despite the Bibles warning that friendship with the world is enmity with God. (James 4:4) Moreover, in 1919 she strongly advocated the League of Nations as mans best hope for peace. Since 1945 she has put her hope in the United Nations. (Compare Revelation 17:3, 11.) How extensive is her involvement with this organization? 11 A recent book gives an idea when it states: No less than twenty-four Catholic organizations are represented at the UN. Several of the worlds religious leaders have visited the international organization. Most memorable were the visits of His Holiness Pope Paul VI during the General Assembly in 1965 and of Pope John Paul II in 1979. Many religions have special invocations, prayers, hymns and services for the United Nations. The most important examples are those of the Catholic, the Unitarian-Universalist, the Baptist and the Bahai faiths.

The partial quote above is from a New Genesis Shaping a Global Spirituality by Robert Muller (1982) chapter 6. The preceding sentence stated

All major world religions are accredited to the United Nations as non-governmental organizations. For example, no less than twenty-four Catholic organizations are represented at the UN.

This shows the Watchtower condemning Churches for NGO accreditation less than 12 months before lodging their application to the UN and starting weekly visits to its library and public meetings.

Changing Tunes

When the League of Nations was initially established the Watch Tower praised and espoused its virtues.

We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the League of Nations… Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble. Watch Tower 1919 Feb 15 p.51

Later, the Watchtower became vocal in regular condemnation of the League of Nations and United Nations, referring to it as a blasphemous and idolatrous organization and labelling them the scarlet wild beast of Revelation.

True, the 138 members of the United Nations organization know that Jehovahs Christian witnesses are no part of Christendom, no, no part of harlotrous Babylon the Great as a whole. They know that Jehovahs witnesses have not messed themselves up with the dirty politics of this world and have not tried to ride the symbolic scarlet-colored wild beast having seven heads and ten horns. Mans Salvation out of World Distress at Hand! (1975) pp.339-340

Human governments have schemed to form the most brazen and defiant conspiracy against divine rule that has ever existed. (Compare Isaiah 8:11-13.) They have done so, not once, but twice, creating first the League of Nations and then the United Nations. Awake! 1990 Dec 8 p.24

It was somewhat surprising when in the 1990s a number of complimentary articles were written praising the work of the United Nations.

THE preamble to the United Nations Charter expresses these noble aims: …
Did the UN accomplish these aims? Did it get the nations to unite their strength and maintain peace and security? No, not so far, although the UN has sincerely tried to be a significantly better way than the League of Nations.
Jehovahs Witnesses firmly believe that the United Nations is going to play a major role in world events in the very near future. No doubt these developments will be very exciting. And the results will have a far-reaching impact on your life. We urge you to ask Jehovahs Witnesses in your neighborhood for more details on this matter. The Bible clearly paints a picture showing that the United Nations will very shortly be given power and authority. The UN will then do some very astonishing things that may well amaze you. And you will be thrilled to learn that there is yet a better way near at hand that will surely bring eternal peace and security! Awake! 1991 Sep 8 p.10

The Watchtower 1995 Oct 1, Awake! 1998 Nov 22, and Awake! 2000 Dec 8 devoted numerous pages to discussing the fine efforts of the United Nations.

The turnaround in Watchtower discussion on the United Nations during the 1990s conveniently coincides with the UN application requirement for affiliated NGOs to publicly support their Charter.

Dubious Justification

In 2001, the UK Guardian ran the introductory article that brought to light the Watchtower involvement with the United Nations, resulting in shock amongst many Jehovah’s Witness. Two days later, the Watchtower Society indicated its guilt by withdrawing its UN membership. The Watchtower went on to release information justifying its actions with reasoning ranging between irrelevant to out right dishonesty.

In a letter to the Branches, membership was explained away as the Watchtower’s research department requiring access to United Nations library, claiming that in 1991 it became necessary to register as an NGO to have continued access. It also claimed it left on learning the “criteria for association as an NGO’s” had changed. A similar letter was sent to the Guardian.

Letter to Branches

Letter to Guardian

*active link @http://jwfacts.mobi/watchtowers-united-nations-association/*

The letter to the Guardian and to the Branches is quite untruthful. There was no change requiring NGO’s to become associated in order to gain a library card. There are over 400 UN libraries worldwide that can be accessed by anyone. Since 1946, these libraries have had the same access rules, with no change in access requirements in 1991.

“Since 1946, the Dag Hammarskjold Library of the United Nations Secretariat in New York has arranged for the distribution of United Nations documents and publications to users around the world through its depository library system. At present, there are more than 400 depository libraries in over 140 countries maintaining United Nations material from the date of designation as depository to the present. The general public can consult the material free of charge at any depository library.” www.un.org

Witnesses writing to the United Nations for clarification regarding library access have received replies such as the following letter. This letter explains that NGO status is not required in order to access the library.

Letter from UN regarding Library Access
*active link @ http://jwfacts.mobi/watchtowers-united-nations-association/*


More importantly, there have been no changes to the requirement for NGO’s being required to agree to “support” the ideals of the United Nations. This is stated in the following letter to an enquirer in 2002 and also a press release from 1992.

2002 UN letter to Enquirer

1992 UN press release
*http://jwfacts.mobi/watchtowers-united-nations-association/*

Even if it were true that access to the UN library required becoming an affiliated NGO, the Society has made quite clear to its followers that membership with a political organization is never justifiable and certainly access to a library is the poorest of excuses.

The Watchtower justification fails at many levels.

Library access is not an acceptable reason for breaking its own rules
There was no requirement to join the UN in order to access the library
There was no change to the application process specifically in 1991
The Watchtower was required to lodge annual applications between 1992 and 2001
The UN affiliation was only revoked due to media publicity. If a Witness confesses only after their sin is public knowledge there is high probability elders will not see their confession as a sign of repentance
If a Witness can be disassociated for membership with political organizations, the same standard should apply to the Watchtower Society

What was the real reason that the Watchtower Society affiliated itself with the United Nations? Without an honest statement from the Watchtower this can only be speculated, though most likely it was in order to gain political favour to enhance Watchtower rights in countries under ban. This was explained in an interview immediately following the Guardian article. The Watchtower spokesman in Portugal stated that United Nations registration was to assist gaining recognition in developing countries. In a newspaper interview on Saturday 20th October 2001, the Watchtower’s Portuguese representative stated:

“Registration as a Non Governmental Organisation was only done because you can give humanitarian aid and protect human rights in various countries around the world,” says the PUBLIC Pedro Candeias, spokesman for the Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Portugal. In Portugal, however, a relaxation of registration is not yet known officially by the AJW, which represents nearly 50,000 believers.

The official says the religious group to which he belongs has had an “important role” in helping the populations of countries like Angola, Bosnia, Georgia, Rwanda and other African or Latin American. “Reaching out to these countries was complicated and therefore it was necessary to register” the WTBTS in the United Nations. But this registry, he says, did not compromise the Jehovah’s Witnesses to “any political involvement” with the UN.” (web.archive.org as on June 24 2010 – translated with the assistance of Google Translate)

It was 2 days after this interview that the Watchtower changed its official position by releasing the October 22nd letter, contradicting the above statements and claiming it only applied for library access.

Conclusion

Barbara Anderson explains that when she was part of the writing department in 1992, Ciro Aulicino told her he would go to the United Nations on Wednesday afternoon to pick up material for the Writing Department and attend meetings that required a special pass (see Ciro Courts the United Nations). It was also Ciro that wrote the Awake! 1991 Sep 8 magazine cover series. Members of the Governing Body were aware of the association because the Writing Committee members at the time – Barry, Barr and Klein – authorised the United Nations articles. Jaracz would also have been aware as Robert Johnson, whose signature appears on the accreditation forms, reported to Jaracz in the Service Department. Page 244 of the 1993 NGO directory listed Barry as the Watchtower representative, Ciro as the Main Representative and Johnson as the Alternative Representative.

In the 1960s, the Governing Body decreed that Malawian Witnesses were not to hold a political card in a one party state. This resulted in many thousands of deaths, rapes and displacements of innocent Witnesses between 1963 and 1992. (Yearbook 1999 pp.149-223) Whilst these atrocities were occurring to followers of Watchtower regulation, their headquarters were ignoring the same regulation by being politically affiliated with the United Nations. Watchtower leaders freely wield their power to disfellowship constituents for associating with or working for organisations that are acting contrary to Watchtower principles, and praise followers who die upholding Organization regulation. Yet they violated their own principles; for library access. Never has there been an apology or admission of wrongdoing, rather there has been no more than a brief and dishonest attempt to make this indiscretion appear justifiable. Is it any wonder that Witnesses have left the Organization in disgust at such hypocrisy?

RECOMMENDED LINKS
randytv.com/secret/unitednations.htm

watchtowernews.org/wt_unpressrelease.htm

SOURCE: http://jwfacts.mobi/watchtowers-united-nations-association/

Tags: BERNIMORE

Small small, satanic organizations parading as Christian organization will begin to reveal who they truelly are.
Covertly, they have been woeking for the anti-christ. Very soon, their Mask shall fall off.

What in the fat bishes of a phenomenal
Eahrrgnügen is wrong with this sadistic and
failed 53 year old saint wannabe?

If stupidity were in bricks, i swear you would be
the great wall of China.
You're too mentally degenerated to see
beyond your fat pinocchio nose

You spend half of your miserable life trying to paint the JW bad

What did they ever do to you bro?

Just look at all your topics man, 90% of em is bout the JW....

you are a mongolian dumbtard. If there's anywhere resembling hell in the afterlife, I have no single doubt you would be sucking lucifer's balls right there while you are being fisted by 20 ewoks!

Get a life, you dimwit!

The supposed jw's are in bed with the beast-riding the beast

It's on'y fitting that the watchtower society be a member of the U.N.-scarlet beast
their highrachy know who they really are
in any case God knows, and has them where they belong for now
and Christians know too.

johnw74:
The supposed jw's are in bed with the beast-riding the beast

It's on'y fitting that the watchtower society be a member of the U.N.-scarlet beast
their highrachy know who they really are
in any case God knows, and has them where they belong for now
and Christians know too.

Cc themall

johnw74:
The supposed jw's are in bed with the beast-riding the beast

It's on'y fitting that the watchtower society be a member of the U.N .-scarlet beast
their highrachy know who they really are
in any case God knows, and has them where they belong for now
and Christians know too.

you cant expect me to pay you to think . the level at which hatred is killing you ehn, Olorun nikan lo maa saanu e. the bold is a big LIE!!! LIAR.

to set the record straight ...


NO, we did not become a member of the UN as some haters and losers want you to belive . we were a DPI NGO, Which the UN itself stated doesnt constitute membership. .

what that did WAS TO ALLOW US ACCESS TO RESEARCH FACILITIES

Currently, we have Withdrawn, why ? there was a change in policy and more because people were making accusations against us, so withdrawing was wise to prevent those lies.


here is a scanned copy of the official Letter explaining why we registered and why we Eventually Withdrawn.

^^^ Jessicha

I guessed you were not smart enough to realize that libarary status is not required to join the UN, here is an excerpt from the UN website;

“Since 1946, the Dag Hammarskjold Library of the United Nations Secretariat in New York has arranged for the distribution of United Nations documents and publications to users around the world through its depository library system. At present, there are more than 400 depository libraries in over 140 countries maintaining United Nations material from the date of designation as depository to the present. The general public can consult the material free of charge at any depository library.” www.un.org

Many of your JW brothers and sisters wrote to UN for clarification regarding library status and here is a scanned copy of document from the UN debunking that governing bodys lies, explaining that library status is not a requirement to have NGO status with the UN:

More importantly, there have been no changes to the requirement for NGO’s being required to agree to “support” the ideals of the United Nations. This is stated in the following letter to an enquirer in 2002 and also a press release from 1992.

Even if it were true that library status was a requirement to join the UN, the watchtower has NO EXCUSE for joining, because she made it clear to members that membership with any political association is NEVER JUSTIFIABLE.



BERNIMORE watchtower society spokesman on nairaland where are you oh!

One of your members is about to leave the watchtower please do something fast!!

Open a yooguyz, paulGrundy thread,

paulGrundy:


In 1992, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York applied to be a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Associate Member of the United Nations Department of Public Information (UN DPI) and remained so until 2001. This is the closest relationship an NGO can form with the UN. The application was renewed annually and is a matter of public record.

This involvement has stumbled many brothers due to:

>The double standard the Watchtower holds for itself when compared to its members
>Such membership being hypocritical considering the Watchtower history of condemning Christendom for doing so
>The dishonest information the Watchtower has released in attempting to explain the situation to its members

As of January 27th 2007, an official UN letter describing this status appeared on the United Nations website at http://www.un.org/dpi/ngosection/pdfs/watchtower.pdf

When the Antichrist shows up, the Watchtower organization shall hand over power to him. We shall see.

Let's examine what Bethel is claiming in the First letter concerning the reason for becoming a DPI NGO, in two of the letters from Bethel claims it was:


“...for the sole purpose of getting access to the extensive library of the United Nations. This enabled a writer who received an identification card, to enter their library for research purposes and to obtain information that has been used in writing articles in our journals about the United Nations.”


“Our purpose ... was to have access to research material available on health, ecological, and social problems at the United Nations library facilities .”


Some claim the above statements are lies. They claim that absolutely anyone could have accessed the libraries and that there was absolutely no need to gain NGO status. Bethel acknowledged that their explanation is not believed by the critics. They said:


“Although critics may claim that access to the libraries could have been obtained without the need to register as an NGO, that is not what our research personnel were told at the time. They found it necessary to present an authorized pass [size=26] to gain access to those specific areas , which were off limits to the public.” [/size]

The critics often quote statements from the United Nations that the main library, the Dag Hammarskjold Library and it's depository libraries, were accessible to absolutely anyone prior to September 2001. You can read e-mails from the UN itself saying this exact thing.

However, if that is completely true we wonder why the 1994 NGO brochure stated that:


“For NGOs associated with DPI, the United Nations provides: ... use of the Dag Hammarskjold Library .”

If absolutely anyone could use the entire facilities, we wonder why the brochure advertises use of that library as a perk of being a DPI NGO. Of course, if we look carefully we can see that the Watchtower Society did not say they merely wanted access to the “main library”. Bethel said that it was “necessary to present an authorized pass to gain access to those specific areas ”. Yes, Bethel never claimed it needed a pass to access the Library itself, but to “specific areas” of that library and specific “library facilities”. A quick investigation reveals that there is far, far, more to the United Nations libraries than simply a main library full of books — and far, far, more than simply the Dag Hammarskjold building.
The library facilities of the United Nations, under the Department of Public Information, includes the following

conferences

film screenings

commemorations
concerts

the DPI NGO Resource Center

To access the full range of these facilities you need a DPI NGO pass. Prior to September 2001 you may have been able to simply walk into the
Dag Hammarskjold Library as the opposers correctly say — but it is entirely misleading to say all the “library facilities” were available to anyone, because they were clearly not. An NGO pass was required to access everything — otherwise why would the 1994 brochure advertise full access to that library as an NGO privilege? There is only one logical reason: because around 1991 the DPI was making further facilities available at the library, but only to those with an NGO pass.

^^^ there is even more evidence to prove that watchtowers NGO status with UN was not for library pass.

To have an NGO status with the UN there are certain requirements

As the letter outlines, the Watchtower was an associated NGO and to become associated required the Watchtower to accept the following:

1.that the NGO share the ideals of the UN Charter;

2.have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach target or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;

3.have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programs about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting cooperation of the media.

The opening paragraph of the 1991 application form, which the Watchtower was required to submit, contains an instruction to provide information yearly to the United Nations. It states;

" provide us with proof of your organizations non-profit status and [size=16pt]with an annual report on its activities related to United Nations[/size]."

^^^ and the watchtower did just that! , her 1998 Awake was devoted to that.

In 1998, the Awake! discussed the topic of Human Rights, dedicating a number of pages to the United Nations.


“FIFTY years ago, a grandmotherly-looking woman spoke up, and the world listened. It happened in Paris on December 10, 1948. The United Nations General Assembly was gathered in the recently built Palais Chaillot when the chairwoman of the UN Commission on Human Rights rose to give a speech. In a firm voice, Eleanor Roosevelt, the tall widow of former U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, told those assembled: “We stand today at the threshold of a great event both in the life of the United Nations and in the life of mankind, that is the approval by the General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” … Since its adoption, the Universal Declaration has been translated into over 200 languages and has become part of the constitutions of many countries. Today, however, some leaders feel that the Declaration needs to be rewritten. But UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan disagrees. One UN official quotes him as saying: “Just as there is no need to rewrite the Bible or the Koran, there is no need to adjust the Declaration. What needs to be adjusted is, not the text of the Universal Declaration, but the behavior of its disciples.”” Awake! 1998 Nov 22 pp.3,5
The United Nations website referenced this Awake! at www.unhchr.ch/udhr/materials/articles.htm, giving good reason to believe it was one of the articles the Watchtower sent to the United Nations as part of its annual reporting requirement. Though this UNHCHR page no longer exists, an archived copy can be been seen at web.archive.org as of 1 Aug 2013.

To mislead their readers, many critics of Jehovah's Witnesses quote from the current version of the DPI's NGO brochure and falsely claim that those requirements are what the Watchtower Society originally signed up to in 1991.

The requirements given by the brochure for the DPI's NGOs include the requirement that the NGO should support the UN. 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?

No. The critics are lying. They simply hope that you won't think too much about it, and that you won't delve a little deeper and discover the evidence that the NGO world has changed considerably since 1991. We do not have the brochure from 1991, but we do have a copy of the 1994 brochure, which is considerably different from the current version which the apostates quote.
A new relationship

In fact, the 1994 brochure even testifies to the very fact the requirements and expectations of the DPI's NGOs were changing. Page six of the 1994 document says this:


“A new relationship between the UN and NGOs is now being created. We have seen this new relationship begin to mature . NGOs are taking on important new responsibilities .”

Indeed, the above statement proved accurate. For if we compare the current (2005) brochure to the 1994 brochure, we see major changes. For example, the 2005 brochure says the following:

“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;”

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. On the contrary, in the 1994 brochure we find that the above statement has replaced the following original statement:



“Who is eligible for association with the DPI? Non-profit organizations which: share the ideals of the UN charter;”

Notice the difference. In 2005, NGOs must
support the principles of the UN Charter. In 1994, the NGOs must simply share the same ideals . Just what are those ideals?


“to maintain international peace and security; to suppress acts of aggression that threaten world peace; to encourage friendly relations among nations; to protect the fundamental freedoms of all peoples without discrimination based on race, sex, language, or religion; and to achieve international cooperation in solving economic, social, and cultural problems."

Does the Watchtower Society and Jehovah's Witnesses share those same ideals ? They most certainly do — and have done so for years before the UN formed! It is understandable why NGOs should share these same ideals, for the UN would not want to assist or help any organization which promotes contrary ideas. For example, the resolution which gave the DPI power to associate NGOs elaborates on this desire:
“...the Secretary-General [should] ensure that the Office of Public Information [DPI], while reviewing the status of present organizations or considering new applications, excludes all those organizations whose aims or practices tend or contribute to the propagation of nazi ideology and racial and/or religious discrimination;”
We now have a better idea of why the 1994 requirements for being an NGO should stipulate that any associated organization should share the same ideals as the UN charter. They must share the same ideals of religious and racial tolerance and should not in any way promote contrary, racist or discriminatory ideas.

The Awake! 2000 December 8 devoted a number of pages to discussing the fine efforts of the United Nations and the Awake 2001 July 22 discussed the benefits of volunteering for the United Nations, along with their need for more volunteers.

                 

The turnaround in Watchtower discussion on the United Nations during the 1990s conveniently coincides with the UN application requirement for affiliated NGOs to publicly support their Charter.

[size=18pt]hence they didn't just gain "library pass" they also promoted the ideals of the beast in your "meat in due season" and even renewed their status with the beast[/size]



Little wonder BERNIMORE fights me a lot whenever open this thread, dammn!!!

That's why I love Jehovahs witnesses, once they realise all this lies , twisting and fake propaganda from haters who cant do anything with their lifes excepting spying on an organization they claim they are not interested in. most of this haters eventually become atheists, agnostics or just NFA .

the wise decision has been done. they cancel their NGO status. praise Jah

And the NGO status was cancelled 3 days after stephen bates exposed them.

@Jessicha, your defence is shaby, its like saying that the watchtower registered with Catholic society and write articles of the Pope on areas you have common ideals in awake! And watchtower



You are truly very intelligent!!

analice107:

When the Antichrist shows up, the Watchtower organization shall hand over power to him. We shall see.

Don't be suprised if they still have a secret alliance with the anti-christ. All this points to the fact that the rapture is near, after which the man of lawlessness shall be revealed.

paulGrundy:


Don't be suprised if they still have a secret alliance with the anti-christ. All this points to the fact that the rapture is near, after which the man of lawlessness shall be revealed.

Is it not obvious? Someone who calls himself a christian, who believes resurrection but doesn't believe in after life. The fight the issue of hellfire rigorously and deny Jesus' divinity. Anyone still in doubt now, I pity him.

analice107:

Is it not obvious? Someone who calls himself a christian, who believes resurrection but doesn't believe in after life. The fight the issue of hellfire rigorously and deny Jesus' divinity. Anyone still in doubt now, I pity him.

There is more, and also claims that it is loyalty to their society that will save you, not faith in Jesus.

paulGrundy:




Cc themall

busted
cc: PaulGrunchy, PaulGrundy and johnw74,5,6: please supply more of your aliases

Am not even reading, am just doing cut and paste as learnt from our pastor paulgundy
From you fellow bloggers:

Part 1:

In the Beginning
In October 2001 The Guardian newspaper in the United Kingdom accused Jehovah's Witnesses of hypocrisy for being registered with the United Nations’ (UN) Department of Public Information (DPI) as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). The newspaper claimed that all NGOs must support the United Nations, therefore Jehovah's Witnesses were guilty of hypocrisy because of teaching the United Nations is the prophesied “disgusting thing” of Revelation.

The Watchtower Society, the legal corporation used by Jehovah's Witnesses, immediately withdrew the DPI NGO membership. They explained that the requirements for being a DPI NGO had changed since they first signed up in 1992, and they then thanked The Guardian for bringing the matter to their attention.
More to it?

However, since that time many former disgruntled Jehovah’s Witnesses and other opposers have claimed that the NGO requirements never changed. Conspiracy theorists claim the Watchtower Society knew they were supporting the United Nations and kept it a “secret”. They even go so far as accusing the Watchtower Society of having deliberately distributed pro-UN propaganda in issues of the Awake! as “part of the deal” with the UN.

One conspiracy theorist has gone a step further, declaring the Watchtower Society has turned “apostate” and committed “spiritual adultery”, and is now part of a global conspiracy to promote a totalitarian world government under the UN. They claim that the letters of explanation from the Bethel are full of “lies” and “cover-ups”.
An investigation

What really happened? Are these accusations based in fact? Does the paper-trail of evidence support these claims? Do the records held at the UN corroborate the Watchtower Society’s story? Furthermore, are the ones making these allegations trustworthy?

This work will demonstrate, using evidence directly from the United Nations records and the Watchtower Society's publications, why we believe such accusations are without merit. We will endeavor to show that the “evidence” presented by conspiracy theorists is often highly selective, grossly misleading, and often has mistakes. Furthermore, we will also inform you about those who make these claims yet know full well that their arguments have serious flaws, and how they have openly tried to censor and cover-up this information.

If you have previously read the claims of such men, we implore you to set aside all prejudice and any other emotions, to fairly and dispassionately consider the other side of the argument without any preconceived ideas, and be happy to change your views if necessary. A judge in a court of law would not make a decision before considering the arguments of the defense, and neither should you. A truly humble person would do so.
Summary

The Watchtower Society became associated with the United Nations Department of Public Information (DPI) as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) in 1992.
The Guardian's report led to the Watchtower Society ending the membership in 2001.

For plagiarizing pastor paulgundy and busted double

Part 2: For The Busted
Know Your NGOs!

When you hear that the Watchtower Society was registered with the United Nations as an NGO, you may not be aware that there is actually more than one kind of NGO. This fact is important, and is often deliberately obscured by those who try to condemn and criticize the Society.

In the United Nations system, there are NGOs who are associated with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and there are also NGOs associated with the Department of Public Information (DPI). The Watchtower Society was of the latter kind — associated with the DPI.

However, many websites and at least one book deliberately misleads their readers by quoting rules and stipulations to ECOSOC NGOs, and then pretending that those resolutions and rules apply to DPI NGOs, of which the Watchtower Society was one. This tactic is grossly dishonest and many of those who make this claim know full well they are misleading their readers. Let us now examine the true differences between the NGO types, which apostates and other opposers often try to keep hidden.
What’s the difference?

The difference between the two types is quite stark. The online political magazine Insight has this to say on the matter:

“For an NGO to be recognized by the United Nations, however, there are requirements, and even two statuses for which an NGO might apply. The DPI status is under the authority of the U.N. Department of Public Information (UNDPI), which controls U.N. archives and research facilities...

“The other status for which the NGOs may apply is ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council) status. The U.N. Website says that to obtain ECOSOC standing an NGO must prove that its work is directly relevant to U.N. goals. With ECOSOC standing an NGO may enter into a formal consultative relationship with access to officials of U.N. member states and must provide useful or special information to the U.N. Economic and Social Council...”

Notice how DPI NGOs are under a department which controls “archives and research facilities”, yet on the other hand ECOSOC NGOs have a “formal consultative relationship” with the United Nations, and it's work must be “directly relevant” to the UN's goals. In other words, the ECOSOC NGO consults with the UN on it's policies and helps it achieve it's political aims and direct it's policy-making.

This is exactly what apostates are accusing the Watchtower Society of doing. Yet, this is not a description of the type of NGO the Watchtower Society was, but it is a description of the other type of NGO — that associated with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

The Watchtower Society was a totally different type of NGO associated with a different UN department — the Department of Public Information (DPI). Accusers deny this, and claim the differences are “irrelevant facts”, when we can clearly see that is not how the UN feels about the matter. Let us now examine the original Resolutions of the United Nations to show the difference between ECOSOC and DPI NGOs.
General Assembly Resolution 13

This is a resolution from back in 1946 concerning the purpose and activities of the DPI. The resolution states:

“General Assembly Resolution 13( I ). Organization of the Secretariat (The DPI) ...”

“2. The activities of the Department of Public Information should be so organized and directed as to promote to the greatest possible extent an informed understanding of the work and purposes of the United Nations among the peoples of the world. To this end the Department should primarily assist and rely upon the co-operation of the established governmental and non-governmental agencies of information to provide the public with information about the United Nations...”

As shown by the resolution the purpose of the DPI is to: “promote to the greatest possible extent an informed understanding of the work and purposes of the United Nations among the peoples of the world.” They are to use NGOs to “to provide the public with information about the United Nations”.

Thats it. It is not a resolution about NGOs supporting the charter of the UN. It is not a resolution about NGOs supporting the goals of the UN. There is not even a resolution that NGOs must share the ideals of the UN charter. And there is certainly no resolution that NGOs are part of the UN or the UN system. The purpose of DPI-associated NGOs is merely to “to provide the public with information about the United Nations”.

Now, in contrast, lets take a look at the resolution concerning NGOs associated with the ECOSOC.
Resolution 1296 of ECOSOC

The idea of creating NGOs associated with ECOSOC was actually first written into the United Nations charter, where it says:

“The Economic and Social Council [ECOSOC] may make suitable arrangements for consultation with non-governmental organizations which are concerned with matters within its competence. Such arrangements may be made with international organizations and, where appropriate, with national organizations after consultation with the Member of the United Nations concerned.” —Article 71 of the United Nations Charter

Later, ECOSOC adopted a resolution concerning NGOs, which says, in part:

“The Economic and Social Council [ECOSOC],
Having regard to Article 71 of the Charter of the United Nations, Recognizing that arrangements for consultation with non-governmental organizations provide an important means of furthering the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Considering that consultations between the Council and its subsidiary organs and the non-governmental organizations should be developed to the fullest practicable extent, Approves the following arrangements, which supersede those set out in its resolution 288 B (X) of 27 February 1950:” —ECOSOC Resolution 1296 (XLIV) Arrangements for Consultation with Non-Governmental Organizations; 23 May 1968

This same resolution goes on to state that an ECOSOC NGO “...shall undertake to support the work of the UN.”

Yet, those infamous words often quoted by apostates as “proof” that the Watchtower Society agreed to support the United Nations were actually words penned by ECOSOC in one of their resolutions — talking about their NGOs — not those of the DPI which is a separate UN department.

These words of resolution 1296 never applied to the Watchtower Society as they were never an ECOSOC NGO. However, the ECOSOC also made another resolution, 1297. What does that say?
Resolution 1297: “...bear in mind the letter and spirit...”

In their next resolution, 1297, the ECOSOC gave the Department of Public Information, the DPI, it’s power to associate it's own NGOs. The resolution says, in part:

“[ECOSOC] [r]ecommends that the Secretary-General bear in mind the letter and spirit of Council resolution 1296 (XLIV) governing consultative status, in associating international and national non-governmental organizations with the Office of Public Information [DPI];”

This is often quoted as proof that, although the Watchtower Society was not under the previous resolution (1296) which says the NGO must “support the work of the UN”, this next resolution did apply to the Watchtower Society — and this resolution says it must “bear in mind the letter and spirit of Council resolution 1296”.

Yet, is that really what it says? No. The resolution is giving an instruction to the “Secretary-General” — not to the NGOs themselves. It does not say that “the NGO must bear in mind the letter and spirit of Council resolution 1296”. No — it is an instruction to the Secretary-General, and to no-one else.

This fact is reflected in the original forms which the Watchtower Society completed in 1991 to become a DPI NGO. If you carefully examine the forms, you will notice that it nowhere says that the Watchtower Society should “bear in mind the letter and spirit of Council resolution 1296”. Why? Because as said, the instruction was to “the Secretary-General” — just as it says in the resolution — and not to the NGOs at all. —See the original 1991 application forms

If, in fact, it had been a requirement, you would imagine that it would have been on the forms somewhere. Perhaps the forms would have said something like, “You agree to bear in mind ECOSOC resolution 1296” or perhaps even say, “We hereby agree to support the UN and it's charter”, followed by a dotted-line for a signature, legally confirming that the NGO agreed to those terms. Yet, that is not what we find anywhere. Nowhere does it say anything about supporting “the work of the UN” on any of the forms, nor does it mention the ECOSOC resolution. In fact, there doesn't seem to be a single part of those forms which says anything which may compromise our Christian beliefs.

So we can see that the Watchtower Society never agreed to be subject to Resolution 1296 of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) where it says NGOs must support the UN. That resolution only applied to ECOSOC NGOs — of which the Watchtower Society has never been. The next resolution was an instruction to the Secretary-General, and to no-one else, and neither was it reflected in the forms that the Watchtower Society completed.

However, as part of the application process to become a DPI NGO, it is claimed that the NGO must agree to the DPI’s criteria. The criteria, it is claimed, includes writing articles praising the UN and supporting the UN and it’s charter. Is this true? Please read the next chapter to see the evidence for yourself.
Summary

The Watchtower Society was registered with the DPI, not ECOSOC.
DPI-associated NGO's have access to research materials of the UN.
ECOSCO NGO's have consultative status with the UN .
ECOSOC's resolution stating it's NGOs should support the UN applied to it's own NGOs.
ECOSOC's next resolution advised the Secretary-General to keep in mind the spirit of it's previous resolution — not the DPI's NGOs.
The forms the Watchtower Society signed did not say anything to compromise Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs, nor did it mention ECOSOC's resolutions.

Part 3
Did we agree to praise the UN?

Conspiracy theorists claim that the Watchtower Society agreed to meet special criteria to “become an NGO”. They say this was part of the application process and included the requirement that they must “print articles praising the UN” to “keep their NGO status”. Is this true? Did the Society have to do anything special or agree to do certain things, to be registered with the DPI?

First of all, because the accusers don’t really know what they’re talking about, we must clear up a mistake they all make. We did not agree to “become an NGO” because we already were an NGO. A Non-Governmental Organization (“NGO”) is simply a name for an organization which is not part of a government. The name “NGO” is not only used by the UN. It is a term used all over the world by many different governments. There are an estimated 2 million NGOs in the United States alone, for example. So the Watchtower Society was already an NGO, always has been an NGO, and always will be an NGO.

Therefore the accusation, when properly phrased, is: Did the Watchtower Society agree to meet any special criteria to become associated with the DPI?
The answer

The DPI website describes the application process for NGOs to become associated with their office. Must NGOs, like the Watchtower Society, agree to a special list of criteria? Let us see.

“Application Procedure

I. For NGOs that are currently NOT associated with DPI:

The association process takes three to six months. The DPI Committee on NGOs that decides on association and disassociation meets twice a year, in June/July and December. Interested NGOs that meet the criteria should follow the steps:

Send an official letter of request to be associated with DPI, provide a brief description of the organization and at least six samples of recent information materials.”

...upon receipt of [these] documents, [we] will determine whether the formal application process for association can proceed. If the NGO Section finds that the NGO meets the criteria, the application form... will be sent to the NGO.”

Notice that the first thing an NGO must do to be associated is surprising. They do not fill out an application form. No, the first thing they must do is send them “at least six samples of recent information materials”.

Next, the DPI examines the material and decides whether the NGO meets their criteria. In other words, no NGO can say “I agree to meet your criteria”, or “if we are allowed to be associated with you, we will sign a statement agreeing to your criteria.” They can’t, because no such agreement exists. That is not how the application process works.

Note that this is the process as of late 2007. So when the DPI has said in recent years that associated NGOs must “support the UN charter” or “share the ideals of the UN”, whether an NGO does this or not is determined by the DPI itself, and no one else. An NGO cannot state they agree to those terms, the DPI itself has the job of deciding if the NGO supports the same ideals as the UN and it’s charter, such as support for human rights, freedom of worship, etc.

Only if the DPI decides that the NGO falls within the DPI’s criteria, do they send out an application form and a list of other required materials (such as proof of non-profit status). Evidently, the DPI must have determined that Jehovah’s Witnesses did meet the criteria because of our support for human rights and freedom of religion. So, we could not have “agreed to meet the UN’s criteria” because it doesn’t work that way. It seems, in fact, that an NGO does not have to “agree” to do anything, because the DPI itself examines the NGO and decides whether they meet the criteria or not.

Therefore the accusation that the Society had made some sort of legal agreement to “write articles praising the UN” is nonsense. No such agreement exists, nor can it exist. Besides, we published balanced articles on the UN decades before we became DPI associated, and continue to do so, six years after ending the association (see the chapter Awake to Propaganda for more information). If Jehovah’s Witnesses had, for some reason, suddenly stopped writing anything about the UN, the DPI would simply have cancelled the association, like they have with other NGOs. In this case it would be because we would no longer be using the DPI’s facilities, and there would be no point in keeping us on the register.
Step by step

This is the association process as we understand it from looking at the DPI’s own website:

Step 1: An NGO sends copies of their printed articles to the DPI proving they are interested in UN issues and would make good use of their extensive library facilities to educate the public on UN issues.

Step 2: A few months later, the DPI will examine the articles and decide whether the NGO appears to share the ideals of the UN charter, that it isn’t racist, etc. They probably also decide whether the NGO is big and important enough to make good and proper use of their facilities, such as their conferences and film screenings, etc, which would be wasted resources on insignificant NGOs.

Step 3: Upon deciding that the NGO is suitable for association, the DPI sends the NGO an application form to complete and return, along with a list of any other materials they need.

Step 4: The NGO completes the application form. This did not require a signature back in 1991 when the Watchtower Society became associated, nor did it mention anything about “supporting the UN charter”, etc. (the scans sections has a copy of this form)

Step 5: The DPI receives the completed application form and related materials back (like proof of non-profit status, etc). Once processed, the DPI issues library access passes to the NGO’s representatives.

This completes the application process. There is no “agreement” or contract stipulating what the NGO has to do from that point onwards. Provided the NGO remains within the DPI’s guidelines for associated NGOs, then the association will continue. That is why no signature was needed on the old 1991 application form, nor on the old accreditation forms.

Later, however, it becomes time to complete a new accreditation form (a copy of this is in the scans section) and to supply articles to the UN as proof that they have indeed used the DPI’s facilities. If the NGO cannot produce any such proof, they would be removed from the DPI’s NGO association register due to lack of use. No agreement to do anything was necessary or required.
To illustrate...

We can compare this situation to a man applying for a job in a company. The company might have criteria that has to be met. For example, lets say the criteria states that the man must be married, between the ages of 21 and 35, be a law-abiding citizen, and have a valid drivers license.

So a man could submit his drivers license, birth certificate, marriage license, and whatever other documents are needed. The company then decides he meets their criteria. If they decide that he does meet the criteria, then an application is sent to him. He can’t say, “I agree to meet the criteria”, or “I am willing to sign a statement saying that I agree to meet the criteria.” The company determines if he meets their criteria or not.

The company may discover that he once received a speeding ticket, and decides that they cannot view him as “a law abiding citizen”, so he does not meet their criteria. On the other hand, the company might reason that even though he has received a speeding ticket in the past, they still consider him “a law abiding citizen”, and thus he does meet their criteria. Perhaps he is married, but in the process of getting a divorce. The company would have to then determine whether he still met the criteria based on that information. That is for the company to determine.
The DPI determined it

In our case, it was the DPI who determined that Jehovah’s Witnesses met their standards, or criteria. Why? Because we are non-profit. We are for civil liberties and religious freedom. We are not racist. We have the means to disseminate information to a wide audience, so we wouldn’t be time-wasters taking up their resources, we would be important researchers for popular international publications. The DPI is the one who determined all this.

Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society never said, “I agree to meet your criteria” because they could not. They never signed something saying “We will meet your criteria”, because no NGO can determine that for themselves, only the DPI office can. Further, we never agreed to publish articles praising the UN. That is just comical.

We have more proof of this. One opposer of Jehovah’s Witnesses was so determined to find damning evidence against us that he contacted the UN’s DPI via telephone. He talked to information officer Oleg Dzioubinski. Unfortunately for him, the conversation backfired on him and proved that Jehovah’s Witnesses are telling the truth. Here is part of his conversation which he admits:

Question: Some friends of mine are concerned over the Watchtower not saying nice things about the UN. Is this a problem?

Answer: You can criticize the UN. But, we would take offence if they were using the UN name to raise money or they were saying they were a UN organization when they really are not.

Clearly, complete agreement with the UN was never a requirement of DPI NGOs, and is not today. It was not part of their criteria. It is the DPI who decides whether NGOs meet their criteria based on what they say. Never does an NGO have to agree to only say good things about the UN, or publish articles praising the UN, or other such nonsense. No such “agreements” or “secret back room deals” (as one crackpot apostate tried to characterize it) have ever existed.

where are you paul? Maybe we should ask His Holy Eminence Jorge Mario Bergoglio