Is there really a letter about Jehovah's Witnesses on the UN website?

Question

If there is, would someone PLEASE tell me how to find it on there?

TeeM

You mentioned a 'previous chapter'. I feel like I'm in the dark here. What is that about?

Also, what was the criteria in 1992? Can you post it? And who was the representative?

Answer 1

Go to UN.org

Click Welcome

Click About the United Nations

Click NGO Section

Click Relevant Documents and Events

Click: Watchtower Bible & Tract Society



Here is the text, but I suggest you look it up for yourself and see it on the United Nations letterhead.


4 March 2004

To Whom It May Concern,

Recently the NGO Section has been receiving numerous inquiries regarding the association of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York with the Department of Public Information (DPI). This organization applied for association with DPI in 1991 and was granted association in 1992.

By accepting association with DPI, the organization agreed to meet criteria for association, including support and respect of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes with its constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities.

In October 2001, the Main Representative of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York to the United Nations, Giro Aulicino, requested termination of its association with DPI. Following this request, the DPI made a decision to disassociate the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York as of 9 October 2001.

Please be informed that it is the policy of the Department of Public Information of the United Nations to keep correspondence between the United Nations and NGOs associated with DPI confidential. However, please see below the paragraph included in all letters sent to NGOs approved for association in 1992:

“The principal purpose of association of non-governmental organizations with the United Nations Department of Public Information is the redissemination of information in order to increase public understanding of the principles, activities and achievements of the United Nations and its Agencies. Consequently, it is important that you should keep us informed about your organization's information programme as it relates to the United Nations, including sending us issues of your relevant publications. We are enclosing a brochure on the “The United Nations and Non-Governmental Organizations”, which will give you some information regarding the NGO relationship.”

In addition, the criteria for NGOs to become associated with DPI include the following:
• that the NGO share the principles of the UN Charter;
• operate solely on a not-for-profit basis;
• have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach large or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;
• have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting the cooperation of the media.

We expect that you will share this information with your concerned colleagues, as we are unable to address the scores of duplicate requests regarding the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society that are being directed to our offices.

Thank you for your interest in the work of the United Nations.

Sincerely, Paul Hoeffel Chief NGO Section Department of Public Information

FYI - The Watchtower disassociated on October 9, 2001 which was ONE DAY after the Guardian newspaper exposed their involvement with the UN

EDITED TO ADD:

I would like to respond to TeeM's argument, but I couldn't follow it very well. He seems to be saying that Mr. Hoeffel is lying or misleading us, but how would TeeM have any more knowledge of the NGO association procedure in the early 90's than Mr Hoeffel had? If he indeed has such knowledge, I am certainly open minded enough to consider it.

I can address a couple of things, though. He seems to make a point of saying that the WT didn't sign anything that would agree to support the UN. I don't believe that Mr. Hoeffel ever suggested that they signed anything at all, so that is really a non-issue.

The Blockbuster analogy was totally irrelevant. If you sign up with a video rental store, it's assumed you want to rent videos. If you apply to be associated with the UN DPI, it's assumed that you do not have any principles or beliefs that would prohibit you from associating with the UN.

Let the Watchtower speak for itself:

March 1, 1950 "The UN has become a graven image"

Feb 15, 1951 p. 110 "So instead of going along with this world, supporting its schemes and ideas, and working for and building up its tower of Babel, the confusing United Nations structure, these people of God keep themselves separate from the world"

Sep 15, 1951 page 567: Refusing to enter partnership with the abominable League of Nations or the United Nations, these devoted servants of God went forth"

Oct 15, 1951 p.613-614 "They do not realize it, but the hurried efforts of the rulers...pooling their strength in what they call a United Nations - all of such schemes having welded the nations together into a solid bloc in opposition to Christ's kingdom - are in direct fulfillment of of divine prophecy long ago recorded..."ASSOCIATE yourselves, O ye people", the prophet declared, "and ye shall be broken in pieces".

June 15, 1955 p. 360 "The United Nations therefore is also an antichrist. Since the destiny of all who comprise the antichrist is destruction at Armageddon, it follows that all who would escape that end must separate themselves from antichrist."

June 15, 1961 p. 360. "It advocates making an "image to the wild beast" to serve as a MOUTHPIECE FOR SATANIC PROPAGANDA. The Leageue Of Nations and its successor the United Nations have proved to be the image of Satan's entire visible organization.

*** w58 4/15 p. 237 The Time to Sing the New Song ***

But though they are the remnant of a nation, the new nation of spiritual Israel, we do not find them joining the United Nations organization as one of its members, the way the recently formed nation of modern Israel has joined the United Nations. The eighty-two members of the United Nations show they do not want the holy new nation in, but the remnant of Jehovah’s nation under Christ have never applied to get in.

Would Jehovah's Witnesses not recognize this as hypocrisy if it were anyone but themselves?

Answer 2

I truly ought to say that i in my opinion locate the affiliation of the Watchtower agency with the United international locations to be hypocritical. for decades, they decried the evil of the League of international locations and that is stick with-up Beast the UN. I imagine the those who're protecting this action by nitpicking words and declaring, 'Oh nicely the WT isn't a u . s . so it can not be a member of the UN.' The above persons don't realize that the mere affiliation with the Scarlet colored Wild beast is BLASPHEMY in accordance to what the WT taught for decades. right here's an excerpt from the WT of 12/15/1978: THE “large CROWD” OF REVELATION 7:9-17 16 in the course of the perfect 4 years of the existence of the League of international locations as a peacekeeping agency the foretold “large crowd” began to style of adult women and men those who were made happy by the dominion fruit that changed into held forth by the branches of “the authentic vine.” the harsh hardships and trials imposed on them throughout global warfare II because of their affiliation with the anointed remnant did not rigidity them to dissociate themselves from those bearers of Kingdom “fruit.” They knew that, to be unswerving to the enthroned King who's “the authentic vine,” they had to be unswerving to his “branches,” his non secular brothers. (Matt. 25:31-40) alongside with Christ’s “brothers,” they refused to settle for the revived agency for global peace and safe practices contained in the range of the United international locations agency. instead of advocating this revived replace for Jehovah’s Messianic kingdom, they kept on preaching alongside with the remnant of Kingdom heirs as Jehovah’s Witnesses. i tips interpreting the completed article titled, "the fashion of Fruit Bearing That Glorifies God". I even ought to ask, WHY on earth did not the WT tell their followers about the involvement with the UN and then after 10 years even as it changed into stumbled on they on the on the spot ran to close their club in the adventure that they did no longer something incorrect? we opt to be like the Bereans of Paul's day and ASK QUESTIONS and study. we are all responsible for our own salvation.

Answer 3

You might want to check this website;
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower%2Dun%2Dngo/

this defends Jehovah's Witnesses about the UN issue.

Thanks

Answer 4

I found this to be interesting.

Hail to the Chief
After the Guardian story broke, the United Nations DPI was inundated with many requests for information on the matter, especially from former Jehovah's Witnesses. Hence, Paul Hoeffel, the chief of the DPI's NGO section wrote an open letter on the matter to anyone who is interested in the subject.

Many persons refer to this letter as further “proof” that the Society's NGO relationship was inappropriate, and that the Society lied about the situation. Is this true? What does the letter say, and just why is it important? Let us examine this letter closely and find out for ourselves.

It begins with:

“4 March 2004

To Whom It May Concern,

Recently the NGO Section has been receiving numerous inquiries regarding the association of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York with the Department of Public Information (DPI). This organization applied for association with DPI in 1991 and was granted association in 1992. By accepting association with DPI, the organization agreed to meet criteria for association, including support and respect of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes with its constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities.”

This seems like pretty damning evidence. However, we must remember that these statements were made in 2004 and after the fact. As we saw earlier, in no place on any of the forms signed by the Society was anything said about “support and respect of the principles” of the UN charter. Those statements simply are not there on the original forms. Some may deny it, but the facts speak for themselves.

Of course, now the UN is suddenly being very clear about their requirements — over ten years too late. Therefore it begs the question, why did Mr Hoeffel not make it plain and state that the 1991 forms did not include such requirements? We wonder if the DPI is trying to cover-up their own ineptness for not putting such a statement on the original form when it, perhaps, should have been.

To illustrate, imagine you join a video-rental store, such as Blockbusters. The membership form you completed when you join is simple and straightforward, entitling you to access any of the videos you wish. Strangely, it doesn't even require a signature. Then, 10 years later, the video store turns around and says, “Oh, by the way, although it wasn't on your membership form, and you haven't signed anything to this effect, you have agreed to rent pornographic videos on a regular basis.” Say what? No, that cannot be. No one can turn around and say “you agreed to this, you agreed to that” a decade later — especially since you never signed any form stating such things. Yet this is the exact scenario with the Watchtower Society found itself in with the DPI and their changing requirements.

The chief of the DPI is being misleading — either by intentionally trying to cover his department's failings or from simply making an honest mistake. He is quoting the then-current 2004 requirements for a DPI NGO. Notice how he fails to say those were the requirements back in the early 1990's. Why does he not make it clear that the original applications said nothing about supporting the UN charter, as we can see for ourselves today? Who really is being untrustworthy and trying to “hide the facts”? Is it the Watchtower Society, whose explanation agrees with the 1991 evidence? Or is it not the DPI, who has wrongly insinuated that the criteria to support the UN as a DPI NGO was on the original application — when we know for a fact that it was not?

“redissemination of information”
Mr Hoeffel's letter continues:

“In October 2001, the Main Representative of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York to the United Nations, Giro Aulicino, requested termination of its association with DPI. Following this request, the DPI made a decision to disassociate the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York as of 9 October 2001.

Please be informed that it is the policy of the Department of Public Information of the United Nations to keep correspondence between the United Nations and NGOs associated with DPI confidential. However, please see below the paragraph included in all letters sent to NGOs approved for association in 1992:

“The principal purpose of association of non-governmental organizations with the United Nations Department of Public Information is the redissemination of information in order to increase public understanding of the principles, activities and achievements of the United Nations and its Agencies. Consequently, it is important that you should keep us informed about your organization's information programme as it relates to the United Nations, including sending us issues of your relevant publications.””

Notice how he now quotes from 1992 requirements. He quotes the part that the “principle purpose of ... [DPI NGOs] is the re-dissemination of information in order to increase public understanding ... of the United Nations”. The Watchtower Society was already interested in doing exactly that — and had been doing so for decades, ever since the UN was formed.

During World War II the League of Nations had, for all intents and purposes, ceased to function in any practical or meaningful way. However, The Watchtower magazine reckoned on the re-emergence of the League of Nations in a new form, after interpreting the contents of the prophecies in Revelation. Yes — the Watchtower Society was interested in educating the public on the United Nations and how it will play a part in Bible prophecy — even before it was formed! Ultimately the Society has been interested in educating the public on how the UN, along with all other governments, will be replaced by God's Kingdom under the rule of Christ. Yet the UN and it's activities are still not very well-known by the General Public. Hence, the Society is very interested in educating the public about the “principles, activities and achievements of the United Nations and its Agencies.” Hence, we know the Society would be happy to continue to do something it was already doing.

As for the rest of this part of the letter, it is more interesting when we look at what it does not say — or what it should say if the critics were correct — rather than what it actually does say. What do we mean?

Mr Hoeffel is happy to quote that particular fact from the 1992 form, so why does he not quote from it more often? Why does he not quote from a part which says the DPI NGO application required support of the UN and it's charter? This would have been definitive proof that the Watchtower Society knew what they were doing. Yet he cannot make such a quote from the 1992 requirements because no such statement exists. Instead, he quotes from the 2004 requirements, then selectively quotes from the 1992 requirements afterwards. This gives the wrong impression that the current criteria was in place in 1992 — when we know it was not. Incidentally, we also notice that Mr Hoeffel got the name of Bethel's representative wrong.

The wrong brochure, the wrong requirements
Returning to the letter, we read:

“We are enclosing a brochure on the “The United Nations and Non-Governmental Organizations”, which will give you some information regarding the NGO relationship.”

Why does Mr Hoeffel not enclose a copy of the 1992 brochure, clearly showing that there was criteria to support the UN and it's charter in that year? Why did he not take the opportunity to confirm the point? Perhaps it is because the 1992 brochure said nothing of the sort. We know the 1994 brochure does not say such a thing, and therefore have no basis for thinking it was in the 1992 brochure either, if one was even sent.

Finally, Mr Hoeffel outlines the criteria for organizations who wish to become DPI NGOs:

“In addition, the criteria for NGOs to become associated with DPI include the following:

* that the NGO share the ideals of the UN Charter;
* operate solely on a not-for-profit basis;
* have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach large or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;
* have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting the cooperation of the media.


We expect that you will share this information with your concerned colleagues, as we are unable to address the scores of duplicate requests regarding the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society that are being directed to our offices. Thank you for your interest in the work of the United Nations.

Sincerely,

Paul Hoeffel
Chief
NGO Section
Department of Public Information”

Much of the criteria listed above is, again, not found in the initial application, nor the annual forms for representative passes. In other words, not in anything we are aware that the Watchtower Society was sent or signed during it's DPI NGO tenure. So here we have another misleading statement from the DPI.

Notice the statement that the NGO must “share the ideals of the UN Charter”. We discussed this briefly in a previous chapter, however it might now be appropriate to again ask, ‘In what way can true Christians share the ideals of the UN charter, and if the Society did agree to support the UN, would that compromise our beliefs?’

Summary
The DPI's NGO chief quotes from the 2004 requirements, not the 1991/1992 requirements which the Watchtower Society has on file. The Watchtower Society was granted DPI NGO status as they were already educating the public on the activities of the United Nations and it's Agencies. The DPI provided a copy of the 2004 brochure, which we know had changed since 1992 and did not include the requirement that DPI NGOs must support the UN and it's charter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer 5

Why ??? its a cult you know