Zagor, I have a rectum if thats what you are asking. So I guess part of me is a 'asshole'. As for your question I have a lot of people writing stuff and I am trying to answer them. If you would state your question over again when calling me names I could then see what it was and answer it. That is much easier than trying to search for it thru all the past pages.
thirdwitness
JoinedPosts by thirdwitness
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
AlanF said: When the Watchtower Society agreed to all of the requirements necessary to obtain Associated NGO status in 1992, did it agree to the following basic criterion?
"The NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the UN and have a clear mission statement with those principles."
Your refusal to answer will indicate that your is answer is Yes. All else follows.
I have already clearly answered this question and proven that the answer is true. The answer is no. The WTS did not agree to do a single solitary thing. No agreement was necessary and the DPI was not seeking an agreement from the WTS. All a person has to do is look at the application and look at the accreditation form and the truth is revealed. There was no agreement made between the UN/DPI and the WTS. The WTS gave the DPI the necessary paper work, name, address, interestes, information that they were non-profit, had many constituents reading their articles, supplied copies of past articles about the UN, etc. The DPI determined that they met the criteria and they were approved by the DPI, and issued a pass.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
AT last here is the truth. Love it or hate it.
The reason that the DPI did not require an NGO to sign an application agreeing to support the UN or write about the UN is not because of their own ineptness. It is because they were not requiring nor were they wanting an NGO to agree to do anything.
An NGO sent the DPI their information along with the articles they had written about the UN. If the DPI determined that the NGO met their criteria then they recognized them as an associated NGO and gave them the library passes. They didn't have any requirements as to what an NGO had to do from that point onward.
It is not necessary for us to explain what the DPI meant by 'support the UN charter' or 'share the ideals of the UN' because the DPI committee is the one that would determine what they themselves meant and whether they felt the NGO did that or not. Their accepting or not accepting a certain NGO determined what the DPI meant by the statement. If they decided that the fact that the WTS favored human rights and liberties and thus met the criteria so be it. There is nothing the WTS agreed to in order that they would accept them. If the DPI decided that a Nazi organization met the criteria or a racist organization met their criteria that would be their determination. There is nothing the NGO could agree to do in order for the DPI to determine that the NGO met the criteria.
But four years later when it became time to fill out the new accreditation form and supply the articles that had been written during the past 4 years, then the UN would simply remove the NGO if they hadn't written the articles. If they had written the articles then they would once again be issued their library passes and passes for other facilities. Of course the WTS has always written articles about the UN since it began so this was no problem at all. No agreement was ever necessary or required to do anything. That is why no signature was ever necessary and why no agreement appeared on the application or accreditation forms and no agreement appears on those forms even at the present time.
Whether the NGO criticized or dissagreed with certain things the UN did was up to the determination of the DPI as to whether that would disqualify the NGO or not. Never did the NGO have to agree to say only good things about the UN. In fact, the NGO did not have to agree to one single solitary thing. They didn't even have to agree to write articles about the UN.
It really was just a library pass. Thats it.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
It is funny how when apostates are faced with the facts staring them plainly in the face they still will try to make some off the wall argument to avoid admitting the truth.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
Notice from the DPI comes this:
Associated NGOs undergo a specifically designed evaluation and review process, which is two-fold.
- The DPI Committee on NGOs, which decides on association and disassociation, meets twice a year, in June/July and December. The Committee reviews new applications and decides on the status of currently associated NGOs that no longer meet the criteria.
What does this mean? Does the NGO write the DPI and say, "We can no longer sign an agreement saying that we support the ideals of the UN."? NO, the DPI committee determines whether they believe the NGO meets the criteria or not. If the NGO supports human rights and liberties and non-discrimination then the committee will probably determine that this is good enough to meet the criteria.
Just face it. Apostates have misled you. The WTS never agreed to support the UN or its charter or even its ideals. The DPI decided and determined that the WTS met the criteria whatever it was at the time.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
AlanF, Your reasoning was blown out of the water just before you posted it.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
Question: Did the WTS agree to support the UN?
Answer: NO, the DPI made a determination, after looking at their information, that the WTS supported the UN. Rather than there determination being based on whether or not the WT would criticize them or disagree with them it was based on the fact that the WTS supports human rights, liberties, and non-discrimination. Since the WTS supports these ideals of the UN charter then the DPI determined that the WTS met the criteria.
Of course the DPI also determined that the WTS was non-profit and had the means to disseminate information thus they met the criteria.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
And guess what else. It is the DPI that decides whether an NGO meets the criteria. The WTS does not write and say, "Hey we will agree to meet your criteria and support the UN in all its endeavors if you make us an NGO." No, it is the other way around. An NGO sends in their information and then the DPI makes a determination if the NGO meets their criteria:
Criteria for association with DPI
- the NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the UN and have a clear mission statement with those principles
- the NGO must be recognized nationally or internationally
- the NGO should operate solely on a not-for-profit basis and have tax-exempt status
- the NGO must have the commitment and the means to conduct effective information programmes with its constituents about UN activities
- the NGO should have an established record of continuity of work for a minimum of three years and should show promise of sustained activity in the future
- the NGO should have a satisfactory record of collaboration with UN Information Centres/Services or other parts of the UN System prior to association
- the NGO should provide an audited annual financial statement, conducted by a qualified, independent accountant
- the NGO should have statutes/by-laws providing for a transparent process of making decisions, elections of officers and members
The DPI after receiving the information apparently believed that the WTS supported their charter in that the WTS is for freedom of religion and human rights and are against discrimination etc. It has nothing to do with the WT agreeing to meet the criteria. The DPI looks at the application and determines that. There is no signing anything by the NGO saying we agree to meet the following criteria. If the DPI decides that the WTS meets the criteria so be it. Apparently the criteria does not require total support in every way imaginable as apostates would like us to believe. There are two reasons why we know this:
1. The DPI accepted the WTS as an NGO and the WTS does not support every endeavor that the UN takes part in.
2. The UN officers have stated that NGOs can criticize the UN and can disagree with the UN.
The only thing the WTS agreed to is what is stated by the DPI as responsibilities of the NGO.
Here it is:
NGO responsibilities
Associated NGOs through their information programmes are expected to
- promote knowledge of the principles and activities of the United Nations
- disseminate information about the United Nations and its work to their constituencies
- keep the DPI/NGO Section informed about their UN-related activities by submitting a report every four years
- fill out an accreditation form every year
Please note that association of NGOs with DPI does not constitute their incorporation into the United Nations system, nor does it entitle associated organizations or their staff to any kind of privileges, immunities or special status.
None of the responsibilities of an NGO with the DPI compromises our Bible principles. It does not say that all information disseminated must be good things only about the UN. Oleg and the other woman officer of the DPI confirms this saying that NGOs can criticize the UN and that some NGOs who dissagree with the UN have become associated with the DPI.
It is clearer than ever that the WTS did nothing wrong and could even continue to be an NGO with the DPI without compromising Bible principles if they so chose to do so and if the DPI determined that the WTS met the criteria.
If I, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, were an owner of a big non profit organization that wrote articles about human rights, religious freedom, and the future of mankind, I would have no second thoughts whatsoever about becoming an NGO with the DPI in order to access all their facilities if they determined that we met the criteria.
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
Done4good: Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the WT's CHOICE to become an NGO?
This question could be asked about anything to do with government.
Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the CHOICE to use the government to mail a letter?
Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the CHOICE to use the government to defend your rights in court?
Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the CHOICE to use the government to educate your children? You could send them to a non governmental private school.
Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the CHOICE to become a lawyer in association with governmental judicial system?
Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the CHOICE to become a teacher associated with a government sponsored school?
Where does the concept of "subjection" come into play with the CHOICE to use the government to obtain unemployment compensation, food stamps, workers compensation for injury?
-
597
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness inhttp://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/
-
-
thirdwitness
Steve, in answer to your last post about the resolution you quote.
In 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.