Posts by thirdwitness

85

Has anyone read this article..

by earthtone in

it broke my heart to read about someone having to paying court fee's after wining a sexual abuse case against the wtbts.

she ended up winning 5,000 dollars but has to pay 220000 dollars in court feee to wtbts and for her lawyer.

crazy!.

thirdwitness

In Canada, Vicki Boer brought a civil lawsuit against the elders of her former congregation and the WTBTS asking for $700,000 dollars concerning her child abuse at the hands of her father who was one of Jehovah's Witnesses claiming they were negligent, breached their duty, advised her against contacting the authorities, and against seeking professional help. What did the court find?

Presiding Judge Anne Molloy ruled that the WTS and elders were not at fault and did not contribute to or promote in any way the child abuse that took place. The court said, "There is no foundation on the facts to support an award for punitive damages. Most of the allegations against the defendants have not been established on the facts. The defendants who interacted with the plaintiff did not bear ill will toward her. They accepted the veracity of her account, were sympathetic to her situation and meant her no harm. The claim for punitive damages is dismissed."

As respects her findings as to whether the elders advised Boer not to tell the authorities and not to seek professional help the judge stated very clearly her findings:

The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff not to get medical help. She chose not to seek professional help herself against the advice of the elders and Mr. Mott-Trille. The defendants did not instruct the plaintiff that her father?s abuse should not be reported. On the contrary, the defendants directed Mr. Palmer (the abuser) to report himself to the C.A.S. and then followed up directly to ensure he had done so.

Judge Molloy also examined similar cases from the United States and candidly stated in her ruling: I conclude that had Ms. Boer?s action been brought in the United States, it would likely be subject to summary dismissal based on these cases.
However, despite this, the court did award her $5,000 for the trauma caused her in confronting her father at a investigative meeting stating, "There was, however, psychological harm to the plaintiff as a result of the December 29, 1989 meeting. She was in a very vulnerable state at the time as she had just begun to deal with the effects of her father?s abuse. I accept the evidence of the various experts, including Dr. Awad, that this confrontation made things worse for the plaintiff."

But the flip side of the ruling is that the same court ordered Vicki Boer to pay the WTS $142,000 dollars in legal fees. Thus netting the WTS a sum total of $137,000 dollars as a result of the civil suit brought against them. It seems the Canadian courts do not take lightly cases based on "frivolous charges" and forcing someone to defend themselves "against false or unprovable charges."
How much do you suppose that the Boer's spiritual counselor, Bill Bowen and his Silent Lambs organization, was willing to contribute to help the Boer's pay their own legal fees of over $90,000 that were incurred as well as the $137,000 that they were ordered to pay to the WTS? Apparently whatever they contributed, if anything, was not nearly enough because Scott Boer commmented, "We've pretty much exhausted our finances pursuing the case this far, and now we're to the point where we simply couldn't afford an appeal. We going to simply have to accept the judgment and if we have to declare bankruptcy for a victory, then we have to declare bankruptcy." It seems that Silent Lambs by encouraging such lawsuits are contributing to further financial victimizing of the already abused victims. We have to wonder if it is concern for the abused victims that motivates Bowen's organization or their obvious agenda to discredit the WTS that motivates and consumes them.

Generously, showing no ill will or lust for revenge (in contrast to the picture that apostates try to paint of a greedy, money-loving corporation) the WTS agreed to call it even and did not insist that Vicki Boer pay the $137,000 awarded to them by the court. It seems that in the end the WTS actually helped out the Boer's financially more than the Silent Lambs organization.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

It is a sad thing that Brant Jones spent 45 years serving Jehovah and thru it all away because he took the word of apostates over the word of his brothers. The WTS did provide the information for you. They told you that they did not sign anything that compromised their principles and that has proven to be the truth when examining the application and accreditation forms but you would not accept the explanation of the brothers and insisted that they were lying wrongdoers. What do you expect?

It is sad that you believe that you wasted 45 years of your life serving Jehovah with Jehovah's people. The truth of the matter is that those are the only years you didn't waste.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

Outlaws last few posts directed at me written in blue: 3rd Witness..AlanF is right,you are both gross and disgusting..WBTS did exactly what they were told to do,by the United Nations.That,makes you a liar too..I see no insult..You continue to defend the indefenceable..Without a doubt,you are one of the most dishonest posters this board has ever seen.....AlanF beat the crap out of you in your last debate with him..AlanF is gonna beat you up so bad on this thread,your Grandma`s gonna have a black eye..LOL!!...OUTLAW 3rd Witness it is your comments that are irrevelant..WBTS should have had nothing to do with the United Nations..Your going to get your dishonest ass beat up on this thread Troll..WBTS has no excuse,you have no defence..Your both screwed..LOL!!...OUTLAW 3rd Witness..You are selectivly stupid..That makes you dishonest..JW`s are to have nothing to do with the United Nations..Nothing!!..Do you know who made those rules Moron?..The WBTS..Imbecile!!...OUTLAW Jayhawk1..The picture you posted,of the whore riding the wild beast..The first time I saw that picture I couldn`t read yet,I was preschool.It was in the "Paradise Lost"book.My mom explained to me what the picture meant..She thought the Paradise book was a good childrens book..LOL!!.............................................3rd Witness..Have a look at that picture.What do you see?..A Whore riding the Wild Beast..Thats what JW children have been taught from childhood.Thats what I was taught..There is no excuse,the WBTS should have had nothing to do with the United Nations..I`m reading your posts,you still think you can defend the indefenceable..Do you have any idea how stupid you look to the rest of us?...OUTLAW Which I finally responded with these 2 lines.

Outlaw: Do you have any idea how stupid you look to the rest of us?...

Hey, Noah, Do you have any idea how stupid you look to the rest of us?...

Hey Christian fleeing to the mountains in 70 CE, Do you have any idea how stupid you look to the rest of us?...

3rd Witness..Wrong again..WBTS teachs any involment with the United Nations is wrong..Any involvement with the Untited Nations makes that religion a Whore..Thats really hard for you to understand eh?..Have you ever met a Jehovah`s Witness?..You certainly don`t know what they`ve been taught about having any association with the United Nations..You don`t know what your talking about,and your too dumb to learn..What are you doing here?..Can you play Patty Cake without drooling on yourself?..LOL!!...OUTLAW 3rd Witness..Congratulations!!..That was absolutly the stupidest reply I have ever recieved on this board..Really!..Not even Fred Hall posted anything that stupid..What does Noah,have to do with the WBTS association with the United Nations?.Nothing Moron.What does 70ce Christians fleeing into the mountains,have to do with the WBTS association with the United Nations?.Nothing..Those arn`t even strawmen.Those were the ramblings of an Idiot..What the F**K is wrong with you?..The WBTS should have had nothing to do with the United Nations..Nothing!!..Do you understand what No Association means?..It means NO ASSOCIATION!....You may never win a debate but you will always be recognized as an Idiot..Your not a Winner!..LOL!!...OUTLAW 3RD Witness you destroy your own arguement by opening your mouth..Only an Idiot would have started this thread.I guess you were the man for the job..LOL!!..I will ask you again: What does Noah have to do with,the WBTS association with the the United Nations?..What does the 70CE Christians fleeing into the mountains,have to do with the WBTS association with the United Nations?..We both know the answer,Nothing!..You really are a pathetic debater..And there`s a team of you..LOL!!..It takes you and your team,to be an Idiot?? ..LOL!!...OUTLAW 3rd Witness..Having trouble debating??..What does Noah,70CE Christians,or AlanF have to do with your ability to understand:"The WBTS should have had nothing to do with the United Nations"?..Go ahead pick a topic..Noah,70CE Christians or AlanF and explain what any one of them has to do with,the WBTS association with the United Nations?..Every time you say something stupid you will be called to account for it..You and your team of Idiots put your heads together and try to come up with an intellegent reply...OUTLAW Then he finally directs something approaching civil to me: 3rd Witness..That AlanF,what a great guy eh?..He even showed you how to beat him in this debate..I can hardly wait till you post your evidence straight from WBTS Head Quarters..LOL!!.....WBTS should have had nothing to do with the United Nations.For every true and faithfull Jehovah`s Witness,that really is the point..You know it,we know it,every faithfull Jehovah`s Witness knows it..Once again hillary-step cuts through the crap with wit:"Checkmate"..LOL!!...OUTLAW 3rd Witness..I have repeatedly asked you a question..Then you threw AlanF into the mix and I let you..I added him into my question to you..I realize it`s a hard question to answer,because if you do,you will look dumber than you do now..If thats possible..LOL!!..The question remains the same,are you going to answer it?.....If you trash our Board Mod`s again,I`m going to jump all over you...OUTLAW Me: Outlaw you apparently know nothing about the situation as shown by your posts above. You are a blind follower of AlanF and apostates. All you can do is throw insults. I'm sure that the lurkers can see the childish mentality of apostates such as yourself which is: just throw out childish insults and make false statements, no need to prove anything.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

Quandary in italics.

Mary-this is the crux of the matter. Thirdwitness wishes us all to believe that the WTS was naive and was merely duped into thinking that they needed to sign documents in order to have a library card.

Thirdwitness has never claimed that the WTS was duped into signing anything. Thirdwitness claims only what the paper trail of facts show. The WTS did not sign an agreement to support the UN. The WTS did not sign an agreement to even disseminate information. The language of the criteria did indeed change between 1994 and 2001 we know for a fact.

I was always taught to read the fine print before I signed anything. The WTS always likes to sound authoritative, well researched, well informed. Yet they quickly signed documents without looking at all the ramifications first?

False statement. Please show us the agreement that the WTS would have signed. If you can't you make yourself a liar and you join the ranks of AlanF.

In fact, several higher ups signed? No discussion of how this would look? No investigation into the requirements? Just put their name on documents that had the heading of UN at the top?

Please show us this signed agreement. Or even the agreement that the WTS would have signed in 1991.

Obviously, they never thought anyone would find out. They had become bold in thinking that they were so far above the rank and file that they had carte-blanche to do anything they wanted. Who was there to "check their hand?"

What a crock of lies you put forth.

If this was no big issue, if it is great news that the WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with the UN, I ask again, why disfellowship people merely for talking about it? Does thirdwitness answer this? No. So obviously it IS A BIG ISSUE TO THE WTS, ONE THAT THEY ARE DESPERATELY TRYING TO PLAY DOWN AND COVER UP!!

Yes, thirdwitness can answer this very easily. The WTS does not df people for merely talking about the NGO/WT/DPI situation. They DF people for slandering the WTS as you just have.

The mere fact that thirdwitness posted a thread with this title shows that in his mind he knows many feel that the WTS is indeed prostituting itself. An organization that does things above board does not draw its actions into question nor need defenders.

The mere fact that you have to put forth lies to make your case proves that you know that the WTS did not committ spiritual adultery. I am merely pointing out those lies to others who might be reading and believing such falsehoods. You shouldn't have to resort to lies to prove wrongdoing.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

Association or Registration

Some opposers of JWs are quick to point out that the WTS uses the word registration when referring to their association with the DPI as an NGO . They point to these phrases in the letters that the WTS wrote explaining the situation:

We had been using the library for many-years prior to 1991, but in that year it became necessary to register as an NGO to have continued access.?

?Registration papers filed with the United Nations that we have on file contain no statements that conflict with our Christian beliefs.?

Then they point out that it was not a registration that took place but rather that the WTS applied for association with DPI . Their claim is that the WTS is hiding and attempting to mischaracterize it as a registration not an association. As one opposer stated, "They did not register, there is no such thing as a registrant/registrar relationship between NGOs and the UN / DPI .... The Society outrightly lies when they mischaracterize the nature of the relationship as one of registrant to registrar."

But does this argument hold any merit? Or are the opposers trying to split hairs over the meaning of words?
Exactly what did the WTS really say? Does the WTS attempt to mislead with their letters by mischaracterizing the nature of the relationship as opposers contend?

Please take note of two quotes from letters sent out by the WTS :

Quote #1: ?Moreover, NGOs are informed by the United Nations that "association of NGOs with the 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."

Reasoning on the matter: If the WT was claiming that they were never associated with the DPI why would they quote information form the UN showing that "association of NGOs with the DPI does not constitute their incorporation into the United Nations?

Quote # 2: ?After learning of the situation, our membership as NGO was withdrawn and the ID card of the writer was returned.?

In this quote from one of their letters they speak of their membership being withdrawn. There is no mischaracterization here at all. But could the WTS have just as accurately used the phrase "our registration as NGO was withdrawn" as they did in some letters?

From the UN .org site comes this. http://www.un.org/reform/pdfs/hlp9.htm

UN SYSTEM AND CIVIL SOCIETY -

AN INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF PRACTICES

May 2003

Under the heading: Accreditation with ECOSOC :

Comes this quote about NGO association:

"It does, however, provide a number of practical benefits, such as obtaining passes to enter UN grounds, attend meetings and interact with governments or secretariat staff (as does being on DPI Register)."

And under the heading: Accreditation with the Department for Public Information

Comes this quote: "Currently about 1400 NGOs , mostly Northern, are accredited with DPI ...................... The DPI NGO Section has recently been weeding out the inactive ones from its register..."

Opposers of JWs have been trying to make such a big deal about the difference in the WT 's use of the word registration as opposed to association but apparently, according to this UN document, it is not as big of deal as they would lead us to believe. Apparently it can correctly be stated that the WTS registered as an NGO associated with the DPI . Then as they said, they later withdrew their membership or their registration.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

Ozziepost, I am not ohappyday. Check his past ip addresses and note how often it changed. I PMed him but he has not responded to my PM.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

Sorry to disappoint everyone but I am not ohhappydays nor do I know ohhappyday nor has he or anyone used my computer today except me. I have PMed him and ask him why the ip address is the same. Look at his other posts and you will see how his ip address keeps on changing. This is obviously someone who has the ability to freak the system. Perhaps the administration knows. Or maybe this is a scheme to finally get rid of thirdwitness for his exposing the apostates.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

AlanF's words in italics.

The fact that the Society itself admits knowing the details of the 1991 application criteria, and the U.N. itself notified the Society that its acceptance of Associated NGO status constitutes accepting all of the acceptance criteria -- including agreeing to support the ideals of the U.N. Charter, proves my point. You are the liar.

No you, sir, are a liar. The 1994 brochure does not say 'support the ideals of the UN Charter' as you just said. So that was not the criteria in 1994 as set forth in the brochure much less 2 or 3 years earlier. As I pointed out in a previous post yes the WTS knew the criteria when they registered as an NGO with the DPI and the wording clearly had changed by 2001 when they asked to be removed. Again note:

Language used after 2001: “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;”

Language used in 1994: “Who is eligible for association with the DPI? Non-profit organizations which: share the ideals of the UN charter;”

Language used in 1992: Don't know and there is doubt that the WTS even received a brochure.

How can you call the WTS a liar with no evidence. In fact, the paper trail shows that they were telling the truth. Ask yourself: Did the language change between 1994 and 2001?

All of this was fully established nearly five years ago. My memory of the details of the application and accreditation forms is obviously imperfect.

Obviously. We agree. Thanks for the admission that you do not know the facts at all. Can you imagine what AlanF would say to someone that made such a comment as this. Let me translate this for you in the AlanF language:

I, AlanF, am an idiotic, lying moron who doesn't know what the hell I'm talking about.

The fact is that Barry did sign the original application form and later yearly accreditation renewals. That constituted repeatedly agreeing to uphold the U.N. Charter.

The fact is that you have just made yourself out to be a clear and proven liar. Unless of course you will provide us with the original application signed by Lloyd Barry. It is by no means a fact that Barry did sign the original application form. The fact is that the original application did not even require a signature just as the WTS honestly and truthfully stated. You have just proven yourself to be what you so loosely accuse anyone who dissagrees with you as being, a moronic liar.

Calling you a liar is a simple statement of fact. So is stating that I find such gross liars disgusting. You constantly use the pejorative term "apostate". Pot, kettle, black. Remove that term from your website and from future posts, and I will refrain from calling you disgusting.

You are an admitted apostate. Not only are you an apostate from JWs. But you have committed apostasy against the Bible by claiming that it is not the word of God. And you have even committed apostasy against Jehovah by claiming he is some mere tribal god of the Jews no different from the false gods of Babylon, Egypt, Assyria etc.

No honest hearted worshipper of Jehovah would ever listen to, much less believe, the likes of you.

597

Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.

by thirdwitness in

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

thirdwitness

After the application is reviewed by the DPI, the DPI determines for themselves if the NGO meets their criteria or not.That is a separate issue. Both the UN/DPI and the NGO separately agree that NGO meets the acceptance criteria. Otherwise the NGO would not bother to apply -- unless, of course, the NGO was attempting to deceive the DPI into granting it Associated NGO status while knowing full well that it did not meet the criteria. You actually seem to be arguing that the Watchtower engaged in such deception of the DPI. Nevertheless, the DPI's issuance of a letter of acceptance constitutes its acceptance of the NGO's submitted evidence that it meets the criteria, and the NGO's acceptance of the acceptance letter constitutes its acceptance of the DPI's judgment that it meets the criteria.: The NGO does not agree to meet their criteria.Nonsense.

You are partly correct. If an NGO feels like it meets the criteria they ask for an application. If the DPI determines that they do indeed meet their criteria then they send them an application. It is the DPI that makes the final determination. Thus in 1994 it was the DPI that made the determination as to what they themselves meant by 'sharing the ideals of the UN'. In 2001, after the language or wording had changed, they would have made the determination as to what they meant by 'supporting the principles and charter of the UN'. In 1992 they would have made the determination based on the then criteria.

Did they ever mean an NGO must agree with everything the UN does? No, because as Oleg and the woman officer stated NGO's can criticize and even NGO's that dissagree with the UN have registered with the DPI. Does it mean the NGO's must support the UN in everything they do? No, they share their ideals in only the fields which are "in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities.” That is what the UN/ECOSOC has said. The DPI has never said anything different and have apparently even accepted NGO's which dissagree with and criticize them. They accepted the WTS didn't they? The DPI apparently felt that since the WTS shares the ideals of human rights, liberties, and non-discrimination, that they met the criteria.

I did not say that Barry signed a document specifically agreeing to support the U.N.

It is a good thing or you would have shown yourself to be even more of a liar.

I said that he signed an application document, the signing of which is an implicit agreement to support the U.N. Charter, according to all materials given to applicant NGOs by the DPI.

Yes, you did say that and you have not provided that application document. Are you a liar? Where is this promised document? AlanF, is it time to call you a liar. Can you even show us an application that required a signature where Lloyd Barry would have signed his name?

But you know what? I can provide an application for NGOs with the ECOSOC which the WTS did not fill out because they did not apply for association with the ECOSOC. And on that application there is a place for a signature with an agreement of support. Let me show you. http://www.un.org/esa/coordination/ngo/ Click on forms and documents and then click on application in English.

The first page says:

United Nations Nations Unies
NGO SECTION, DESA
1 UN Plaza, Room DC1-1480, New York, NY 10017
tel: (212) 963-8652 / fax: (212) 963-9248

Application for Consultative Status
with the Economic and Social Council
The last page says:

I/we declare that I/we have answered the questions contained in this form to
the best of my/our knowledge.

I/we declare, that if granted consultative status, my/our organization will act
in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and ECOSOC
resolution 1996/31.
The undersigned signature/es is/are duly authorized to sign this declaration.

(Signature)
Name(s) and position(s)

Surely if I can find the application for NGOs with the ECOSOC with this agreement on it you can find the application for NGOs with the DPI with the agreement on it. Or at least the application with the place for Lloyd Barry's signature. You have an army of apostates desparately searching for it, don't you? You said that you saw it. Did you? Or are you a bald-face liar? In case anyone is wondering, here is the application for NGO's with the DPI in 1991 according to apostates:

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/scans/1991application.html

Where is the place for the signature where Lloyd Barry signed his name?

This is part of your never ending stream of strawmen.Nevertheless, as of this writing I cannot find the document that Barry signed, but am working on it.

And AlanF you will never find an original application signed by Barry because it does not exist. You as usual are the one off to see the wizard with your scarecrow strawman.

In any case, both GB member Lloyd Barry and Writing Staff member Ciro Aulicino are listed in the 1999-2000 Directory of NGOs ( http://www.randytv.com/secret/alphalist334.jpg ) as the Watchtower Society's representatives. Furthermore, their names are listed in various earlier documents, along with one Robert Johnson, a high-ranking Service Department official. Where do you think the U.N. got those names?

No kidding. Do you think the WTS has evern denied this. Please take a look at this form and you will see why that is the case. http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/scans/2000accreditationform.html and then read this:

Periodically, the DPI required its NGOs to sign the Accreditation Form to state who its representatives would be — to allow them to gain access to the DPI's extensive facilities at the United Nations in New York.

Here we have a copy of the Accreditation Form as it appeared prior to 2002 — before the renewal process began and before the form was changed to become a renewal application. See the form for yourself at this location. As you can see, this earlier version of the form says nothing about supporting the United Nations. The form is merely there to allow representatives of the NGO to access the DPI's facilities. The form itself clearly states:

“This form should be used to confirm your currently accredited representative and/or to authorize newly appointed representatives.”

The form the Society signed each year was obviously not a renewal application. To deny this and continue to insist that they did renew their status each year, would be senseless. Interestingly, also appearing on this earlier form is the following question:

“Please indicate your organization's main area(s) of interest (e.g. development, disarmament, religion, environment, human rights, conflict resolution, women, etc.)”

Some apostates have found lists of UN NGOs where the Watchtower Society is listed, complete with items such as “human rights”, and “women” listed as the Society's areas of interest. They have noticed how these areas of interest have changed in the records from time to time. Therefore, they have argued that it “proves” the Society must have annually renewed their NGO membership because the “areas of interest” kept changing. Yet, as we can clearly see from the form, that question did not appear on a yearly renewal form at all — but on the form to get the representatives their access passes.

It is clear, then, that the Watchtower Society did not reapply for it's NGO status each year, and that the Accreditation Form (prior to 2001/2002) which the Society did sign periodically, was simply to state who it's representatives would be along with their areas of interest for accessing the DPI's facilities.

It is also clear that the Watchtower Society was being truthful when it said “At the time of the initial application no signature was required on the form”, and that the forms signed by the Society really did not conflict with Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs. We can see the evidence for ourselves.