UN/WTBS - WTBS answer to all JWs

by beroea 32 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  waiting

  Hello **sarcastic beroea,

  Always glad to see your posts. Hope it's going well for you and your family?

  You, poor baby, have been hangin' with us too long. Our sarcasm has entered into your very soul. The problem is - it never leaves, just becomes more prominent. Not me, of course, - however, Norm is a perfect example.

  I appreciate your letter - it seems to show that the WTBTS is taking the worldwide stance "Gee, it's a LIBRARY CARD, people!"

  “The society was in 1991 registered as an NGO organisation only to get access to the Library of UN. This makes it possible for our writers - who get an ID-card - to use the Library of UN for research reasons to get information for articles about the UN. No secret about that.

  Does not say that the Society DIDN'T use the UN's worldwide political clout for themselves in other areas.

  In that time for the original apply it wasn’t even a demand to sign an implication form.

  Hawkaw proved that this is a lie by posting the application requirements even in years prior to the WTBTS solicitating the UN. If memory serves me - no doubt about it - the WTBTS is lying.

  In the years after that – without the knowledge of the GB – UN make it official that as an NGO organisation you was demand to support and work for the purpose of UN.

  That would also be a lie because a member of the GB signed the application - every year. And the WTBTS knew the demand to support and work for the purpose of UN - because it was in the UN requirements before the WTBTS became a DPI.

  I also (if I understood Hawkaw correctly) believe that the WTBTS had been a NGO because all it meant was a Non Governmental Organization - which they were.

  When the WTBTS applied with the proper credentials (Awake! articles of UN endorsement and signed application) to become a DPI - they were accepted by the UN.

  Go figure - the Watchtower being an active political associate of the United Nations. In bed with The Image of the Wild Beast of Revelation.

  Weren't we taught that before Armageddon that those who were approved by the Wild Beast would have the mark of the Wild Beast upon them - and that ones who didn't have the mark wouldn't be able to buy and sell? The Mark most likely being the numbers of 666.

  Isn't it good to know that the WTBTS will, most likely, have that mark and therefore, will be protected so that they can preach (sell) to the world about God's bringing peace to the earth by killing 99.9% of the earth's population?

  The Good News to Mankind - comfort at the right time.

  waiting
• 

  MadApostate

  Waiting:

  You said:

  When the WTBTS applied with the proper credentials (Awake! articles of UN endorsement and signed application) to become a DPI - they were accepted by the UN.

  You also made a similar statement in a different thread.

  DPI is the UN's Department of Public Information. There are 1000s of NGOs by definition. The UN Charter provides for qualifying NGOs to officially affiliate/associate with the UN's various sections/departments. The WTS requested and received "associative status" with UNDPI.
• 

  bluesapphire

  Mad, I think if we're going to be specific, it would be to our advantage to call it a "partnership" status instead of "associate" status. Using the word "partner" is also truthful since the DPI also uses such terminology to describe the relationship. And it has much greater impact to the JW mindset.
• 

  waiting

  Howdy Mad,

  I will preface with "duhhhhhhhh" on my part.

  You also made a similar statement in a different thread.

  I have no idea at this point where I made such a similar statement.

  DPI is the UN's Department of Public Information. There are 1000s of NGOs by definition. The UN Charter provides for qualifying NGOs to officially affiliate/associate with the UN's various sections/departments. The WTS requested and received "associative status" with UNDPI.

  Gotcha - but don't have a clue to what you actually said. Are there 3 areas of association?

  NGO
  DPI
  UNDPI

  And to which did the WTBTS actually apply for association to - and disassociated themselves from?

  I'm breezing on my wine - and you're not able to disrupt me efficiently. But your expertise would be appreciated anyway.

  Luv ya.

  waiting
• 

  MadApostate

  Blue:

  My wording was both correct and precise. The WTS requested and was granted "associative status" with UNDPI. UNDPI refers to its associated NGOs as "associates" and "partners". All of this terminology comes from UNDPI webpages.

  -------------------------------

  Waiting:

  Me thinks you are doing more than "breezing" on that wine.

  The WTS is a NGO (non-governmental organization) by definition.

  The WTS "was" associated with UNDPI (United Nations Department of Public Information).
• 

  waiting

  Howdy Mad,

  Me thinks you be right, sweetcheeks. Lord, I'll feel bad about this in the morning. However, to think of MadApostate and sweetcheeks in the same sequence of thought ain't so bad, eh?

  The WTS is a NGO (non-governmental organization) by definition.

  Gotcha. I think I said that, didn't I?

  The WTS "was" associated with UNDPI (United Nations Department of Public Information).

  Gotcha'gin. (That's southern for "I understand once again," btw.) So........the WTBTS wasn't a DPI. They were a UNDPI?

  waiting
• 

  MadApostate

  .....helping Waiting up off the floor....

  No, Sweetheart, the WTS was not a DPI nor a UNDPI.

  The WTS was a NGO formally associated with UNDPI.

  Now, have a good nite's sleep.
• 

  hawkaw

  You know I have read this thread and what the WTS said they didn't know about the criteria.

  This flys in the face of Paul Hoeffel's UN letter that is posted in one of the big UN threads

  This flys in the face of 1992 Press Releases that the Wendy received and I got posted at Kent's site that clearly show the UN criteria.

  This flys in the face of Resolutions 1297 and 1296 made in 1968 by the ECOSOC committee for the UN. Read principal 2 and 3 in Res. 1296.

  Its all there in the two big UN thread and at Kent's site as well as Randy's site.

  Finally, Mad Apostate is bang on in tis. Look at the DPI 1994 Directory that is also posted too. All three groups - the GB, writing department and the service department are involved. It was for political purposes.

  hawk
• 

  Pathofthorns

  Hawk,

  You ommitted Mr. Gillis' comments to the Guardian where he stated that they "were making representations on issues to the UN" and the Portugese article where the WT rep states that membership was "solely for humanitarian purposes".

  I consider these two comments very important, because likely they were made before the Society made the decision to use the "library card" spin and in their haste to make some sort of comment to the media, the innitial comments were more honest than the present one.

  Path
• 

  hawkaw

  Path,

  Yes you are right ....

  ....and I also left out the "Yearly accreditation form" that I posted and the fact that in the front of the 1999-2000 DPI Directory listing all the NGOs (that is given to each NGO including the WTS) clearly gives the criteria.

  hawk (who thinks there is a hell of a lot of evidence)