Were Gillies/WTS UNLetters honest - JW Perceptions

by Lionel_P_Hartley 5 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Lionel_P_Hartley

  There is an interesting discussion going on at http://www.touchstoneforum.org/~dchoi/dcforum/DCForumID1/186.html#1
  about the UN. It bears on the question - just what perception has the various WTS letters - i.e., Gillies's and the recent letters from HQ, actually created. Is it an accurate one?

  JW "wrench" writes in reference to JW "Corvus's" post:

  Corvus says...
  >Thay did't have to agree to anything, neither did thay have
  >to support anything the UN does, or promotes...
  >
  >WRONG see web site below... [comment by critic skiingcowboy]

  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
  It seems as though I may have heard that this charter was not in place when they first became an NGO. It was adopted later as a policy and when the WT learned of the stipulation they cancelled their membership. Do you deny this chain of events?
  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  Now, take a look at UN resolutions 1296/1297 which were resolved in 1968. They clearly show - as does Paul Hoeffel's letter - that the requirements to support the UN charter and promote UN goals were in place well before the WTS affiliated. There are two flavors of NGO - resolution 1296 applies to the first while 1297 extends it to NGOs affiliated with the DPI.

  These two links show clearly what the responsibilities of NGOs affilliated via the DPI were in 1968 http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/ngo-un/info/res-1296.htm and http://www.un.org/partners/civil_society/docs/ngo1297.htm

  So, were Gillies' letter and subsequent WTS statements honest? Is it honest to let this misperception continue even after Stephen Bates pointed out to Gillies by email the above resolutions?

  You be the judge!

  LPH

  edited for clarity:
• 

  hawkaw

  LPH,

  Most JWs don't have a clue about this scandal.

  But not only are the 1968 ECOSOC resolutions important but I think the 1992 UN press release and the 1994 UN pamphlet on how NGOs get "association" status with DPI are just as damning.

  The one thing people rarely talk about in this whole mess is that the Watchtower had to VOLUNTARILY SOLICIT the UN and VOLUNTARILY AGREE to the criteria, established in 1968 by the two resolutions. These requirments included - support the goals and aims of the UN Charter and of course promote the UN.

  Lionel provides excellent URL locations for where the ECOSOC resolutions are on the Internet. The actual copies of the ECOSOC resolutions are found only in one place - References 13 and 14 in the essay at Zev's site http://www.geocities.com/plowbitch69/

  The 1994 pamphlet on how NGOs become "partnered" with DPI and the 1992 Press releases are also found at Zev's site. The 1994 UN pamphlet provides the reasons in easy English as to why Resolutions 1296 and 1297 are important.

  Oh yeah, did I mention the Resolutions were located in one of those pesky UN depository libraries and not in the main UN library.

  Lionel, I am formulating a post for this db - I should be ready by tomorrow.

  hawk
• 

  Nassau

  Most of the JWs do not want even to care or hear about this scandal as they say it is only fake stories to descredit the WTS. To all those JWs I have contacted they say it will not have even any tiny impact into the Org. structure!!
  Bah...
• 

  DIM

  I agree...my mom refused to believe me and laughed me off. she thought i was insane.

  i'm sick and tired of hearing things from uptight-short-sighted-narrow minded hypocritics. all i want is the truth just gimme some truth - John Lennon
• 

  hawkaw

  Hey Zev or Chad!!!! I can't do it because my account is not activated on the new db. Try linking the following files that I have attached below to the db. It may help a little. Right click and save and then you can up load them to the other db.

  The rest of the documents that make up this essay can be found at Zev's site http://www.geocities.com/plowbitch69/

  One argument that one of the guys is now making is that the actual Resolution does not have a clause that requires associated NGOs to support the UN Charter. He tries to talk about article 3 in Resolution 1296 but completely forgets to tell the db that article 2 requires an NGO to support the Charter. And then he tries to use the "respect" clause of what JWs consider as a non-neutral activity, to justify the "support" of the UN Charter (which is a "nonneutral activity - Read the Oct 1/95 Watchtower magazine). Give me a break.

  Then he starts talking about the UN Charter as nothing out of line for a Witness - it falls under "respect" and neutral activties in his mind. I guess he forgets that Chapter 7 of the UN Charter allows for military action (example Korean War). So guess what - the WTS actually "supported" war!!!! Hello!!!

  So Zev or Chad, try linking this to that web site and see what happens. No doubt the "true blue" JWs will close their minds but there may be the odd one he may see through the "haze".

  hawk

  .

  .

  .

  .

  .

  .

  .

  .

  hawk
• 

  outnfree

  Hawkaw,

  YOU ROCK!!!

  After I finish with the British Elders Letter, I know what my next piece of distribution will be! Very succinct and the JWs can let their own "fingers do the walking" so to speak.

  Thanks,

  outnfree

  It's what you learn after you know it all that counts -- John Wooden