Wow that UN scandal really DOES work wonders

by osmosis 98 Replies latest jw friends

  • Kaput

    Here's a link to an article in an Awake magazine which praises the UN Commission on Human Rights: (notice it appears on a UN site)

    Here's another link, this one showing a response from the UN re: library card and NGO status: (click on the letter to increase clarity)

  • Kenneson

    Not only has the Watchtower Society lied about its involvement as an NGO, it has gone so far as to disfellowship anyone who has questioned and exposed its lie. I'm thinking particularly of e-watchman (alias Robert King).

  • Victorian sky
    Victorian sky

    Unbelievable, does anyone else remember the series of watchtowers on bab the great, the wild beast and the image of the wild beast back in the spring of 1989? Or the way the UN is portrayed in the revelation book? I preached that garbage to people, little did i know. What makes this religion so repulsive is the dogmatic insistence of obediance to rules they aren't willing to follow themselves. God forbid, you question them or they won't hesitate to cut you off as one 'loving' elder said of my df'ed mom 'cut her off like a rotten limb'. If they were in bed with the UN for nearly a decade how dare they df the r&f for lesser offenses and still claim to be the 'truth' when lies come so easily to them. The gb have a lot to answer for.

  • Victorian sky
    Victorian sky

    os, hope your aunt wakes up, all the best.

  • osmosis

    One thing that is strangely absent from this debate is the fact the the WTS agreed (and has apparently made good on it's promise) to publish refurbished UN propoganda.

    This wasn't just an association, this was a secret deal with obvious consideration for both sides.

    How can the WTS explain distributing regurgitated UN propoganda packaged as "spiritual food"?

  • sf

    [edited to go ahead and include said link: ]

    Dear Osmosis,

    I brought a vital thread back up to the top of active topics earlier today with just what you relate to here in your post above. Please review it carefully, as I will again bring it to the top. It is indeed a very long thread, yet pertinent that you read it thoroughly.

    Sincerely, sKally

  • ringo5
    Administrative Center for Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia

    It seems there is continued misunderstanding about the term NGO. In my opinion, it is critical that everyone who speaks about this matter get clearly in mind that the term "NGO" has no direct correlation to the UN or its agencies whatsoever. I called the UN/DPI NGO Section this morning and confirmed my suspicion that the non-governmental organization (its organizational nature being non-governmental) known as "Administrative Center for Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" is not now, nor has it ever been connected with the UN or its agencies in any way. To state that it has is to lie.



    I still don't think enough people here understand this. The WTS having NGO status is not THE ISSUE. The real issue is their accepting the criteria for association with DPI, NOT simply their status as an NGO. In order to be credible apostates we need our facts straight :)

  • Frog

    I remebering seeing something on a thread to the effect that the WT actually utilised UN resources such as flying into Africa on UN planes and the like. It's probably covered in one of the many links posted on here. Good luck with your granny! frog x

  • Frog

    This thread, has once again given me the fervour to want to stoke the fire again with my dub family members on this issue! Amunition aplenty, I am now off!!!! x

  • AuldSoul

    To hopefully clarify further (and I will start a separate thread on the topic), the term NGO describes any organization which is non-governmental in nature.

    For instance, the KKK is an NGO, despite the fact that the UN would never permit the Ku Klux Klan to join their Department of Public Information.

    Likewise, the NAACP is an NGO—it is an organization and it is non-governmental in nature.

    I chose an extremist organization and a sharply contrasting organization on purpose. Neither of these organizations are associated to the UN/DPI as NGOs, although both are unquestionably non-governmental organizations (NGOs). "NGO" is not a status, anymore than "Caucasian," or "Asian," or "Hispanic," or "tall," or "skinny" is a status. NGO is a neutral descriptor of the nature of an organization. The term NGO has no connection whatsoever to the UN specifically.

    The important point to focus on is that they became an Associate to the UN/DPI. They joined the UN/DPI as an Associate member and later claim they registered.

    I am sure the WTS delights when we are distracted by the term NGO and try to make more of it than is present. That makes their job easy, they can make us out to be misrepresenters of facts which puts us on an equal footing with them, at best. And since they had "the best of intentions" and simply "made a mistake" they can make us out to be intentional slanderers and persecutors of Jehovah's organization.

    Please get these definitions down well if you intend to speak to anyone about this issue:

    NGO: non-governmental organization (which includes KKK and NAACP)

    Associate: A membership type which always means a subordinate organization attaching itself in support of a superior organization. There is no way to semantically confuse an associate membership with a registrant/registrar relationship. They could not possibly register, there was no registrar.

    They changed "applied to become an Associate" to "registered" to throw everyone off the scent and from the looks of things, it has largely worked. Most of the posts I see on this issue freely say they "...registered with the UN as an NGO..." or some variation. Anyone who believes that is what happened bought the WTS lie. Hook, line, and sinker. They became an Associate member of the UN/DPI and if there was no Criteria for Association that act would STILL be gross wrongdoing by their own published standards.


Share this