Chapter 14 – THE PARTNERSHIP

O​​n October 8, 2001, Stephen Bates, the religious affairs correspondent for The Guardian newspaper in London, originally broke the story revealing the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society was registered with the United Nations Department of Public Information (DPI) as an officially recognized NGO (non-governmental organization). Unbeknownst to millions of Jehovah’s Witnesses, it turns out that the Watchtower had been secretly affiliated with the United Nations for nearly a decade. No doubt anticipating a tsunami wave of criticism and perhaps even an official UN investigation, the Watchtower quickly requested that its NGO affiliation with the DPI be terminated. Shortly afterwards, Paul Gillies, the Watchtower’s spokesman in London, released a statement to The Guardian saying that it had been necessary to register the organization as an NGO so that Bethel’s research staff could have access to the Dag Hammarskjöld library at the United Nations headquarters in New York City, and that was all there was to it. However, following the anticipated flood of inquiry from Jehovah’s Witnesses around the world—many of whom read the story on the Internet—a few weeks later, the Governing Body also issued a more detailed “explanation” to inquiring Watchtower field offices. The official branch letter implied that the Watchtower’s NGO relationship was not secret at all. In the opening sentence, the Watchtower states:

“Because of published allegations by opposers that we have secret links to the United Nations, a number of branches have inquired about the matter and we have replied.”

In view of the fact that the Watchtower has never publicized its NGO connection to the UN in any of its publications, prior to the Guardian exposé, none of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the field were aware of the relationship, not even numerous branch overseers of the Watchtower, who themselves inquired about the matter. Surely then, it was disingenuous for the Governing Body to casually dismiss the matter as being mere “allegations by opposers that we have secret links to the United Nations.” (Click here for the UN’s official response to inquiries.)

Even to this day, the vast majority of Jehovah’s Witnesses are still unaware of the extent of the Watchtower’s NGO partnership with the U.N. Contrary to their carefully crafted press release, the Watchtower’s connection to the United Nations was, and in many respects still is, secretive. And let it be known that even though the partnership was officially dissolved in 2001, the Watchtower still incessantly quotes from the UN and its plethora of offices and agencies. After all, can a leopard change its spots?

“IT BECAME NECESSARY TO REGISTER AS AN NGO”

The letter to the branches reiterates the Watchtower’s original claim that they sought membership as an NGO solely to gain access to the United Nation’s library. Specifically, the Governing Body stated:

“Our purpose in registering with the Department of Public Information as a non-a governmental organization (NGO) in 1991 was to have access to research material available on health, ecological and social problems available at the United Nations library facilities. 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.”

Bethel has assuredly made extensive use of the UN library. The Watchtower and Awake! Magazines are loaded with hundreds of statistics and facts drawn from dozens of UN agencies and officials. Also, many photos published in magazines are credited to the UN/DPI archives. So, there is no question that the Watchtower has been using the UN archives for many years, as they truthfully state. But, upon investigation, it turns out that admittance to the United Nations’ library was not restricted to NGOs at all, as the Watchtower claims—at least not before September 11, 2001.

According to a direct e-mail response from the head librarian’s office at the Dag Hammarskjöld Library, temporary passes were granted to qualified scholars and researchers without requiring them to be representatives of an organization with associate NGO status. Only recently, as a result of increased security in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks in New York City, has the UN disallowed all but UN officials from accessing the facility; associated NGO representatives are the exception. Of course, the Watchtower was associated with the United Nations as an NGO long before 9-11, and only disassociated itself one month afterwards.

Besides the fact that the Dag Hammarskjöld Library was not restricted to approved NGOs during the decade the Watchtower was officially associated with the UN, there are numerous other ways that individuals and organizations can gather information about the United Nations. One way is through the provision of over 400 UN-sponsored depository libraries worldwide.

Depository libraries are typically university libraries with a small section devoted to archiving UN materials. In addition to depository libraries, the UN also maintains a network of Information Centers (UNICs) around the world; these serve as field offices for the DPI. Their purpose is to make information available to journalists and researchers who do not have access to the Dag Hammarskjöld Library. Not only that, but in recent years, the United Nations has made an enormous amount of documents available online. There are also numerous UN publications available for purchase. The assertion that in 1991 “it became necessary to register as an NGO” is verifiably not true. The Governing Body’s letter to the branches goes on to state:

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

The branch overseers were led to believe that becoming an associate NGO was simply a matter of filling out a few registration forms and that there should be nothing objectionable to the Christian consciences of Jehovah’s Witnesses. However, there was much more to becoming an approved NGO than merely signing a few registration forms. This writer directly contacted the DPI by email and was informed by that office that, in 1992 (the year the Watchtower was accepted as an NGO), it was standard procedure for the DPI to send new members a brochure and welcome letter restating exactly what was expected of NGOs. Among other things, the letter stated:

“The principle purpose of association of non-governmental organizations with the United Nations Department of Public Information is the re-dissemination 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.”

Contrary to the Watchtower’s denial, the information provided to them by the DPI clearly does contain statements that “conflict with our Christian beliefs”! Are Jehovah’s Witnesses expected to believe that the Watchtower’s Legal Department failed to scrutinize these documents or that the two required signers of the registration application committed the entire organization to a political alliance with the United Nations without any consideration or discussion of the ramifications?

Even more unsettling, the Watchtower implies that the United Nations changed the criteria of association and the language of the application without their knowledge, after the Watchtower had originally applied to become an NGO, so that the registration papers they had on file were not up to date. The branch letter states:

“Still, the Criteria for Association of NGOs—at least in their latest version—contain language that we cannot subscribe to. When we realized this, we immediately withdrew our registration. We are grateful this matter was brought to our attention.”

This statement also appears to be false. If not, then let the Watchtower produce the original documents they have on file that supposedly do not contain language that conflicts with the faith of Jehovah’s Witnesses. According to the Department of Public Information, the criterion for NGOs was originally established back in 1968. Under the subheading, “When did the DPI Relationship with NGOs begin?” it states:

“In 1968, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), by resolution 1297 (XLIV) of 27 May, called on DPI to associate NGOs, bearing in mind the letter and spirit of its resolution 1296 (XLIV) of 23 May 1968, which stated that an NGO “…shall undertake to support the work of the UN and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities.”

By innuendo, the Watchtower seeks to give the impression that only the “latest version” of the UN’s “Criteria of Association of NGOs” is objectionable. But the facts show otherwise. For an organization that seemingly doted on the UN’s every utterance in recent years to claim to be ignorant of the basic relationship between NGOs and the DPI is simply incredible.

The Watchtower is also neglecting to acknowledge that every NGO must choose at least one category of NGOs with which they wish to be associated, and NGOs are also regularly required to update their NGO application and state their particular field of interest. And in so doing, in 1997, the Watchtower expanded its interest in the UN to include human rights issues. What is the significance of that?

This indicates that Bethel knew that their association with the DPI meant that the UN and numerous other NGOs would recognize the Watchtower as having an interest in promoting specific UN-related issues. And the facts show that the Watchtower did exactly that.

It stretches credulity beyond the limit to believe that key officers of the Watchtower innocently registered the organization with the United Nations as an NGO, unaware that it violated their political neutrality.

But did the Watchtower actually engage in a political partnership with the United Nations? To answer that question, it is necessary to establish what an NGO is. So, what exactly is an NGO anyway?

There are literally tens of thousands of non-governmental organizations worldwide. However, most of them do not have NGO status with the United Nations. Some NGOs are highly influential—enjoying what is called “consultative status” with the United Nations’ upper echelon. Another category of NGOs is less influential—they are given “associate status” by the UN’s Department of Public Information. In 2001, there were only about 1,400 NGOs that were associated with the DPI. By the UN’s own definition, an NGO associated with the DPI is a non-governmental organization that works in partnership with the United Nations. As an example, on the United Nations DPI-NGO website, the then-Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, states concerning the purpose of NGOs: “If the UN’s global agenda is to be properly addressed, a partnership with civil society at large is not an option, it is a necessity.”

“NGOS HAVE BEEN PARTNERS OF DPI SINCE…1947”

NGOs are intended to facilitate that partnership between the United Nations and civil society. The DPI/NGO Section of the United Nations’ website, as it existed in 200,2 explains in greater detail the vital role NGOs play:

“NGOs have been partners of DPI since its establishment in 1947. The NGO Section of DPI is part of DPI’s Outreach Division, and acts as its liaison to the UN. It provides a range of information services to civil society and other partners, including the academic community, educational institutions and the public at large.”

The Department of Public Information is a division of the vast UN bureaucracy and is responsible for disseminating information on behalf of the United Nations. To that end, the DPI has enlisted the help of a wide variety of non-profit citizens’ groups that have an interest in supporting the United Nations’ global agenda. According to the DPI, qualified organizations serve in a political partnership with the United Nations. How do NGOs and the DPI cooperate? The DPI asks and answers that very question:

“The DPI/NGO Section oversees partnerships with associated NGOs to better support the work of the UN. NGOs that have the commitment and the means to conduct effective information programmes with their constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities may apply for association with DPI. NGOs may disseminate information through newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, radio or television programmes, or through public activities such as conferences, lectures, seminars or workshops.”

According to the statements taken directly from the United Nations website, all accredited NGOs are expected to cooperate with the Department of Public Information by using their own resources “to conduct effective information programmes with their constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities.” In other words, bluntly, NGOs are required to propagandize on behalf of the United Nations. The Watchtower’s letter to the branch offices even quotes from the very same UN document cited above, which outlines the purpose of NGOs. However, the Watchtower only selectively quotes from a footnote, saying:

“Moreover, NGOs are informed by the United Nations that association of NGOs with DPI does not constitute their incorporation into the United Nations system…”

Of course, indeed, NGOs are not incorporated into the United Nations governmental system. NGOs, as the name implies, are non-governmental organizations. If they were “incorporated into the United Nations system,” they would become governmental organizations. The Watchtower is merely obfuscating the issue. The issue is not whether NGOs have a grant of governmental authority from the United Nations. The crucial point is that all NGOs associated with the DPI are considered to be in a political partnership with the United Nations.

Seeing that the Watchtower quoted from the very document that outlined the criteria for NGOs to become partners with the UN, again, it is inconceivable that Watchtower officials were unaware that the DPI considers all NGOs to be in partnership with the UN.

Is it possible that the DPI would have granted the Watchtower associate NGO status simply because the applicant wanted to use the UN library, without also requiring them to meet their contractual obligations? No, that is not reasonable. For one thing, as previously stated, access to the library was not restricted to NGOs. According to the DPI, the reason NGOs are encouraged to use the library and given access to other facilities, briefings, and so forth is to make those organizations more effective in educating the public about the UN’s activities. That is also why the DPI closely scrutinizes all applicants so that only a small fraction of those who apply are actually accepted.

The suggestion that the United Nations knowingly granted the Watchtower an exemption from the obligations of their partnership is pure fiction. Here is a contextual quote attributed to Paul Hoeffel, the head of the DPI in 2001, taken from Insight on the News website, which sheds light upon the review process:

“The DPI status is under the authority of the U.N. Department of Public Information (UNDPI), which controls U.N. archives and research facilities. To obtain it, according to Paul Hoeffel, chief of the DPI/NGO Section at the United Nations, an organization must have been in existence for at least three years and provide evidence of having worked with the United Nations in some cooperative way. The financial records of the organization must be turned over to the UNDPI for review, and the ideals and philosophy of the organization must not conflict with broad U.N. missions and policy. “We have to be careful who we accept,” Hoeffel says. The benefit of this status, he says, is that NGOs gain access to all U.N. facilities and conferences and may gather information on their areas of interest at the U.N. library. Currently, he says, about 250 organizations apply for DPI status a year, with 40 to 50 of these being accepted. There now are 1,400 NGOs with DPI status.”

Not only does the DPI carefully screen all initial NGO applicants, there is also an annual accreditation process. DPI disassociates NGOs that no longer qualify. Below is a quote from a UN official stating that NGOs undergo “rigorous examining” and those that no longer meet the criteria are disassociated.

“Raymond Sommereyns, Chair of the DPI Committee on NGOs and Director of DPI’s Outreach Division, noted that the semi-annual meeting welcomes a new group of highly qualified NGOs to work with the United Nations. ‘At the same time’, he said, ‘we are rigorously examining those NGOs that no longer meet the criteria for association with DPI.’ A list of disassociated NGOs will be available in February 2003.”

Had the Watchtower not actually abided by the terms of the agreement, they would have probably been disassociated by the DPI. However, the Watchtower served as an NGO from 1992-2001 and was only disassociated upon their request, not because they failed to meet the requirements of association.

“AGREED TO MEET CRITERIA FOR ASSOCIATION”

According to Paul Hoeffel the Watchtower was granted associate DPI status because they agreed to meet the established requirements for NGOs. Below is an excerpt from the United Nations’ official response to inquires on the matter. It is posted specifically for Jehovah’s Witnesses on the United Nations’ DPI website:

“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 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 for 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.”

Contrary to the Watchtower’s assertion, the application process for NGOs requires much more than a mere signature on an application form. Provided that an organization meets the criteria—having the means to reach a broader audience and a commitment to the political ideals of the United Nations—each prospective NGO is required to follow the procedure below, as prescribed on the DPI/NGO website:

The required application materials include:

• A completed Application Form for Non-Governmental Organizations
• A completed Summary of Application
• A copy of the organization’s constitution/charter or by-laws
• Official proof of not-for-profit status, issued by public authorities, and tax exemption
• A copy of the organization’s most recent audited annual budget or financial statement, conducted by a qualified and independent accountant.
• Evidence of an active information programme relevant to the UN: at least six (6) different types of samples of the organization’s most recent information materials (e.g. newsletter, periodicals, tapes of radio or television programmes, conference reports, website, news clippings)
• Two (2) letters of recommendation from organizations (UN or others)
• References (see question 21 in the application form)

In view of all the above, the evidence is incontrovertible that the Watchtower had to demonstrate its ability and ongoing commitment to conduct an information campaign on behalf of the UN. There is no other conclusion to draw except that the Watchtower’s explanation of the NGO affair is a total fabrication.

Since NGOs are evidently required to also periodically submit samples of their work to the DPI as proof of their ongoing commitment to the UN—if not annually, at least quadrennially—this necessitated the use of a very subtle pen on the part of Watchtower writers; so as not to arouse the suspicions of Jehovah’s Witnesses, who, as grassroots ministers, were unwittingly duped into distributing literature that subtly praised the UN as a worthy institution, while alternatively condemning it as a satanic fraud.

“WHAT IS HAPPENING AT THE UNITED NATIONS?”

It seems that the first detectable shift in attitude towards the UN came in 1985. That is when the Watchtower began to call attention to the United Nations’ upcoming “International Year of Peace” in 1986. Jehovah’s Witnesses naturally took an interest in the International Year of Peace because it seemed to be leading into the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. So, at the time, it did not seem out of place for the Watchtower to praise the United Nations’ noble (but futile) efforts to bring peace. Needless to say, the International Year of Peace passed uneventfully.

However, in 1991, the very year the Watchtower originally applied to become an associate NGO, the Awake! magazine published a baffling piece that seemed intended to give the unwary reader the impression that Jehovah’s Witnesses actually endorsed the political objectives of the United Nations. The September 8, 1991, Awake! article was entitled: “What is happening at the United Nations?” The opening sentence stated:

“Something is happening at the United Nations. Startling developments are taking place that are going to affect your future. World leaders are very optimistic about them.”

To what “startling developments” was the Awake! referring? The article went on to cite how the nations began to promote the UN after the end of the Cold War in the optimistic belief that it might finally live up to its own ideals. Indeed, the Awake! seemed to lend credibility to the notion that the reason the UN had failed to bring world peace was that individual nations had not fully cooperated with the United Nations. The article seemed to echo the call for the UN to be given more power in order to enforce its edicts.

What was noticeably missing from the three-part series, however, was any reference to the United Nations being the symbolic scarlet-colored wild beast of Revelation or the “disgusting thing.” Absent, too, was any mention of the UN being a modern idol or a counterfeit of Christ’s Kingdom. In fact, there was not even a single word about how God’s government is going to replace all existing governments on earth. Instead, praising their “noble aims” and sincere efforts, the Awake! spoke hopefully of the possibility that a retooled UN might actually succeed in bringing a measure of peace and security to a war-weary world.

Unquestionably, the September 8, 1991, Awake! was a noticeable departure from the Watchtower’s previous writings on the UN. The concluding paragraph on page 10 typifies the ambiguous double-speak, which was obviously cleverly crafted to leave uninformed readers with the impression that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe, perhaps like the UN-promoting Baha’i faith, that the United Nations is an instrumentality of God to bring peace. Carefully note in the following quotation how the unfamiliar reader could easily form the impression that the United Nations might accomplish political objectives other than what Jehovah’s Witnesses have come to expect.

“Jehovah’s Witnesses firmly believe that the United Nations is going to play a major role in world events in the very near future. No doubt these developments will be very exciting. And the results will have a far-reaching impact on your life. We urge you to ask Jehovah’s Witnesses in your neighborhood for more details on this matter. The Bible clearly paints a picture showing that the United Nations will very shortly be given power and authority. The UN will then do some very astonishing things that may well amaze you. And you will be thrilled to learn that there is yet a better way near at hand that will surely bring eternal peace and security!”

If the reader were to actually follow the Awake! magazine’s suggestion and ask one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in their neighborhood “for more details on this matter,” surely they would find out that the exciting developments Jehovah’s Witnesses are anticipating have to do with the United Nations fulfilling its role as the prophetic eighth king of Revelation, the 17th and 18th chapters. The Watchtower has in the past written reams about how the nations will soon empower the UN to become a militarized tyrant, and thereafter, it will initiate a horrific holocaust that will annihilate all organized religion from the earth—including Christendom.

Those are the “astonishing things” Jehovah’s Witnesses are anticipating in the future! But why didn’t the Awake! writers simply say that?

The Awake! article is only comprehensible in light of the necessity for applying NGOs to submit samples of their commitment to the ideals of the United Nations. In that knowledge, it becomes abundantly clear why the concluding paragraph was ambiguously worded to appear to Jehovah’s Witnesses one way, while adroitly giving unfamiliar readers (such as DPI reviewers) an entirely different impression.

In view of the Watchtower’s shameful legerdemain, instead of considering the question “What is happening at the United Nations?” the more relevant question for thinking Jehovah’s Witnesses to ponder is—What is happening at Bethel?

“FIFTY YEARS OF FRUSTRATED EFFORTS”

After being accepted as an associate NGO in 1992, the staff writers for both the Watchtower and Awake! apparently wrote a number of articles that were specifically intended to demonstrate to the DPI that Jehovah’s Witnesses share the same political ideals as the United Nations.

As an example of how the Watchtower Society further carried out its obligation to the DPI, on the 50th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, in 1995, the October 1 issue of the Watchtower carried an article entitled: “Fifty Years of Frustrated Efforts.” The following quotation is a sampling of the high praise the Watchtower magazine lavished upon the “disgusting thing”:

“For 50 years the United Nations organization has made notable efforts to bring about world peace and security. Arguably, it may have prevented a third world war, and the wholesale destruction of human life through the use of nuclear bombs has not been repeated. The United Nations has provided millions of children with food and medicine. It has contributed to improved health standards in many countries, providing, among other things, safer drinking water and immunization against dangerous diseases. Millions of refugees have received humanitarian assistance.”

For an institution that claims to be politically neutral, it certainly seems as though the Watchtower was biased in its tribute to the United Nations. Ask yourself: When has the Society commemorated the birth of an individual nation on the anniversary of its inception? Why not, for instance, celebrate the birth of the United States on the Fourth of July?

And why single out the humanitarian aid provided through the United Nations, as though it was doing something unique in the world? As evidence of their partiality, according to the Global Policy Forum the UN’s total expenditures were over $13 billion. Of that amount, about 7 billion dollars is listed as “voluntary spending,” presumably used for humanitarian purposes. However, in 1995, the Japanese government alone contributed over 14 billion dollars to overseas development causes—more than double the contribution of the United Nations—yet the Watchtower praises the generous humanitarian efforts of the UN while omitting any commendation of individual nations or organizations for their charitable works.

The Peace Corps, for instance, is certainly an outstanding example of a praiseworthy humanitarian organization. It has trained and deployed thousands of volunteers from the United States to assist in the development of Third World countries. Why is it, though, that the Watchtower has not so much as once even acknowledged the laudable contributions of the American Peace Corps to the betterment of mankind? There are literally hundreds of references in Awake! and Watchtower magazines informing the public of United Nations programs and not one word of commendation for the Peace Corps. Why is that? How can the Watchtower claim to be politically neutral when it has gone to such lengths to extol the virtues of the United Nations, lauding the efforts and accomplishments of its myriad agencies and programs, while completely ignoring other organizations that do similar things?

But it goes even deeper than that. While seemingly criticizing the United Nations for failing to unite the world in peace thus far, the Watchtower actually echoes the “criticisms” of the UN’s most ardent supporters! In what way?

The primary architects of the United Nations originally intended that the UN should eventually replace the nation-state system with a non-democratic, socialist world government. For instance, the British author, H.G. Wells, wrote a book back in 1932 called The Open Conspiracy, in which Wells calls for the abolition of traditional religions, as well as nation-states. Here is a quote from the book:

“The fundamental organization of contemporary states is plainly still military, and that is exactly what a world organization cannot be. Flags, uniforms, national anthems, patriotism sedulously cultivated in church and school, the brag, blare, and bluster of our competing sovereignties, belong to the phase of development the Open Conspiracy will supersede. We have to get clear of that clutter.”

Following the Open Conspiracy’s outline for world government, the globalists’ propaganda in recent decades has incessantly attacked nationalism as the scourge of mankind, what Wells called “competing sovereignties.” To that end, the Watchtower has lent its own credibility to the globalists’ cause by biblically reinforcing the call for the abolition of religion and the nation-state system and the creation of a new world order. For a certainty, the similarity of the Watchtower’s “kingdom message” and the globalists’ propaganda makes for easy counterfeiting. That is why we can discern the faint echo of H.G. Wells’ propaganda in the same Watchtower that commemorates the UN’s 50th anniversary. Here is a quote:

“As powerful as the United Nations may appear to be, its efforts are often thwarted by politics and the media. The United Nations is powerless if it lacks the support of its members. But without the public’s approval, many UN members will not support the United Nations.”

So, it would appear that the Watchtower supports the argument that populism and stubborn nationalism are the real reasons the United Nations has thus far failed to create utopia. The Watchtower also apparently agrees that the United Nations is powerless if it does not have public support. And unbeknownst to its readers, the Watchtower was doing exactly what was expected of NGOs associated with the DPI.

The article indicts false religion as the fomenter of war and disunity, and while making mention of the fact that Bible prophecy foretells the destruction of false religion at the hands of the beast-like eighth king, it does not directly connect the UN to prophecy, as the Watchtower had on many occasions prior to becoming an associate-level NGO.

It is most telling that the 1995 Watchtower subtly shifts from their previous interpretation that the scarlet-colored wild beast specifically symbolizes the United Nations; instead, now the beast merely represents the non-specific “governments” that will turn upon religion. As an example of how the Watchtower has adulterated their own prophetic interpretations—ostensibly to assuage the UN—we read on page 6:

“These governments are depicted as “a scarlet-colored wild beast,” upon which the harlot rides in comfort. Known as “Babylon the Great,” this powerful and immoral woman is named after ancient Babylon, the cradle of idolatrous religion. Appropriately, today the harlot represents all the world’s religions, which have mingled in with the affairs of governments.”

Perhaps most disturbing, though, is that in a separate box of the same issue, the Watchtower admits that in the past they have identified the United Nations as the scarlet-colored beast, but the purpose of the auxiliary information has nothing to do with confirming Bible prophecy. Instead, the additional information is a shameless attempt to scripturally justify their own pandering to the United Nations by making a special point to remind Jehovah’s Witnesses that God commands Christians to show respect to the governmental “superior authorities”—particularly the United Nations!

It would appear as if the Governing Body used its ecclesiastical authority over Jehovah’s Witnesses to allay any suspicion that may have arisen as to the appropriateness of the Watchtower’s friendlier relationship with the United Nations. Under the heading of “The Christians’ View of the United Nations,” Jehovah’s Witnesses are informed:

“In Bible prophecy, human governments are often symbolized by wild beasts. Hence, for many decades the Watchtower magazine has identified the wild beasts of Revelation chapters 13 and 17 with today’s worldly governments. This includes the United Nations, which is depicted in Revelation chapter 17 as a scarlet-colored beast with seven heads and ten horns.”

However, this Scriptural position does not condone any form of disrespect toward governments or their officials…Jehovah’s Witnesses view the United Nations organization as they do other governmental bodies of the world. They acknowledge that the United Nations continues to exist by God’s permission. In harmony with the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses render due respect to all governments and obey them as long as such obedience does not require that they sin against God.”

But by deliberately applauding the UN’s achievements and advertising its multitude of programs and agencies, the Watchtower has gone far beyond merely acknowledging and respecting the United Nations. Being in subjection to the governmental “superior authorities” does not require Christians to propagandize on their behalf, does it?

“THE INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF…”

There are other examples that give evidence that the Watchtower diligently sought to cooperate with the DPI. For instance, Bethel seemed especially keen to make mention of the UN’s special year declarations. So, in keeping with its obligation to inform the public of a broad range of UN-related issues, the July 22, 1999, Awake! featured a series of articles on aging. It just so happened that 1999 was also the UN’s “International Year of Older Persons.” Not surprisingly, the Awake! published the following announcement:

‘“Having turned 60 myself… I am now counted among the statistics I cited earlier,’ said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan recently during the launching of the International Year of Older Persons…To help policymakers meet the challenges created by this ‘demographic revolution’ and to get a better appreciation of “the value of old age in society,” the UN General Assembly decided in 1992 to designate 1999 as the International Year of Older Persons.”

The Watchtower Magazine, discussing family problems, conveniently drew attention to the fact that 1994 also just so happened to be the UN’s “International Year of the Family”:

“The family—the United Nations tried to make it the focus of world attention. How? By declaring 1994 the “International Year of the Family.” Although world leaders, sociologists, and family counselors have been quick to lament such things as the rise in illegitimate births and skyrocketing divorce rates, they have been slow to come up with workable, realistic solutions to such problems.” (9- 15-95)

1995 was to be the “Year of Tolerance”—as declared by the United Nations, of which fact the October 1 Watchtower of that year dutifully informed their readership:

“In harmony with their declaration, the United Nations has declared 1995 to be the Year for Tolerance. Realistically speaking, though, will it ever be possible to achieve peace and security in a world divided by religion?”

The year 1998 was the UN-declared “International Year of the Ocean,” which the Awake! mentioned in two separate issues that year. The June 8, 1998, Awake! also informed its readers that the UN declared 1997-2006 as the Decade for the Eradication of Poverty.”

The January 1, 2001, Watchtower belatedly announced that 2000 had been declared as “The International Year for the Culture of Peace.” The year 2001 was designated by the United Nations as the “International Year of Volunteers.” So, just a few months before the Watchtower was exposed and forced to hastily dissolve its NGO membership, the July 22 Awake! Magazine was devoted to volunteerism. While not surprisingly touting the volunteer work of Jehovah’s Witnesses around the world, the Awake! also gave the United Nations “International Year of Volunteers” a plug too:

“The UN hopes that IYV 2001 (International Year of Volunteers) will result in more requests for the services of volunteers, in more offers from people to serve as volunteers, and in more funding and facilities for volunteer organizations to tackle society’s growing needs. A total of 123 governments have joined in sponsoring the objectives of this UN resolution.”

But the Watchtower did not merely commemorate and publicize current UN special-year crusades, such as the International Year of Volunteers; it also informed the reading public about the UN’s past initiatives. For example, the UN declared that 1979 was the “International Year of the Child.”

More than likely the December 8, 2000, issue of the Awake! magazine was also one that Bethel sent to the DPI reviewers as proof of their ongoing support for the United Nations’ global agenda. That particular issue of the Awake! is devoted to praising UNICEF and publicizing the “International Year of the Child.” The article entitled “An Ongoing Search for Solutions” opens by enthusiastically endorsing UNICEF:

“FROM its very inception, the United Nations organization has been interested in children and their problems. At the end of 1946, it established the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) as a temporary measure to care for children in areas devastated by war…The needs of children were given greater prominence in 1959 when the United Nations adopted a Declaration of the Rights of the Child…So in recognition of the continuing need to solve the problems of children and in accord with its declared goals, the United Nations designated 1979 the International Year of the Child. Government, civic, religious, and charitable groups all over the world were quick to respond to the search for solutions.”

Perhaps the Watchtower’s most blatant propagandizing in support of the United Nations was the November 22, 1998, issue of Awake! It seems the Watchtower willingly did its part in commemorating the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by writing a ten-page article to publicize the event.

While the average Jehovah’s Witness attached no importance to the occasion, the Office for the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR) certainly did—and so did the Watchtower. The OHCHR website promoted the 50th anniversary by publishing a list of “More than Fifty Ideas for Commemorating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

The website offered suggestions for governments, schools and youth groups, and yes, NGOs. The following were three suggestions for NGOs:

• Redefine daily life/work in human rights terms.
• Educate membership and the community on how an organization’s activities relate to human rights.
• Distribute information and educational materials (e.g., publicity posters, fliers, calendars showing human rights events, UN pictures) to constituencies.

It is evident that the Watchtower undertook to implement at least two of the suggestions for commemorating the Declaration. Undeniably, efforts were made to distribute information, including UN pictures, in order to educate both the “membership and the community” about the “organization’s activities” related to human rights. The Awake! even published the basic tenets of the Declaration of Human Rights as if they were the Ten Commandments. That was understandable, though, in view of the fact that the year before, the Watchtower registered with the DPI as an NGO with special interests in the field of human rights.

As with other compromising articles Bethel has published, the Awake’s cleverly designed flim-flammery is obviously intended to pacify Jehovah’s Witnesses by making a token reference to Jehovah, while at the same time giving the uninitiated reader the impression that Christ’s Kingdom has some abstract connection with the UN. The human rights article concludes with a formulaic reference to God’s proposed solution:

“Just as the Bible shows that the Creator is the source of the faculties that underlie human rights, it also informs us that he is the source of a world government that ensures them. This heavenly government is invisible but real. In fact, millions of people, perhaps unwittingly, pray for this world government when saying in what is commonly called the Lord’s Prayer: “Let your kingdom come.”

The Awake! does not inform the reader that God’s Kingdom is no part of the present political establishment. Nor does it make any mention of the fact that God intends to eliminate human rights abuses and war by destroying all earthly political institutions—including the United Nations. Instead, the reader is left with some vague New Age notion that God is the source of human efforts to establish a world government.

“A VIEW FROM THE 29TH FLOOR”

In a brazen violation of Christian neutrality, Bethel went so far as to send a representative of the Watchtower to the UN headquarters in order to interview a human rights official for the special anniversary issue. Knowing that Jehovah’s Witnesses were unaware of the NGO connection at the time, the Watchtower seemingly flaunted their spiritually adulterous affair by publicizing the fact that the illicit liaison took place high up on the 29th floor of the UN headquarters. The Awake! interview, entitled “A View from the 29th Floor,” is prefaced with the following remarks appearing on page six:

“When you step off the elevator onto the 29th floor of the United Nations building in New York City, a small blue sign shows the way to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). This liaison office represents the headquarters of the OHCHR in Geneva, Switzerland—the focal point for UN human rights activities. While Mary Robinson, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, heads the OHCHR in Geneva, Greek-born Elsa Stamatopoulou is chief of the New York office. Earlier this year, Mrs. Stamatopoulou graciously received an Awake! staff writer and looked back on five decades of human rights activities.”

The article fails to mention that, as a representative of the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mrs. Stamatopoulou “graciously received an Awake! staff writer” (Probably Ciro Aulicino) in her New York office is no doubt because the Watchtower Society was an active human rights NGO at the time. And as has already been established, NGOs are in a partnership with the United Nations and therefore are granted greater access to UN facilities. Had the Watchtower Society not been an accredited NGO at the time, the Awake! writer likely could not even have been permitted admittance to the 29th floor of the United Nations tower. (This also indicates that Bethel knew that their associate-level NGO status gave them more than just access to the United Nations’ library.)

To put things in perspective, though, as to the inappropriateness of the celebratory article on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration, and also the unseemliness of the personal interview with a UN official in the very bowels of the United Nations headquarters, we simply have to ask why Bethel has never arranged to interview, say, a US senator or congressman on the anniversary of the signing of the United States Declaration of Independence; perhaps on the steps of Capitol Hill, or something of that nature. Such a thing, of course, would be offensive to the sensibilities of many of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Yet, obviously, the Watchtower did not consider commemorating the UN’s special occasion as a violation of their political neutrality.

In keeping with the spirit of the “Decade for Human Rights Education,” a few months after commemorating the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Human Rights, the January 8, 1999, Awake! Magazine published yet another series of human rights articles, this time transparently pandering to the United Nations to protect the rights of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Most offensively, the human rights segment concluded by obscenely declaring that Jesus’ so-called Golden Rule was the inspiration for “some of the values” in a proposed UN declaration.

It seems that many of the articles in the Awake! that discuss the world’s many health, social, and environmental problems, only offhandedly mention the Bible’s solution to such problems, almost as an afterthought. There seem to be few social ills that the Awake! discusses that are not also used as an opportunity to quote some UN official.

But besides the featured articles heralding the UN’s message, which periodically appeared in both the Watchtower and Awake! magazines, the “Watching the World” segment of the Awake! is littered with facts and trivia taken from a plethora of UN agencies. On average, each and every issue of the Awake! refers to the United Nations or some UN agency at least once. Granted, most references are innocuous, but keep in mind that the Watchtower’s primary obligation to DPI was to disseminate information about the United Nations, no matter how bland.

“FRIENDSHIP WITH THE WORLD IS ENMITY WITH GOD”

In view of the facts presented here as to the criteria for NGOs published by the UN itself, and the abundant evidence that the Watchtower was most assiduous in fulfilling its obligation as an associate-level NGO, the Watchtower’s deceit and hypocrisy is laid bare.

Regardless of the seemingly noble motive for such political involvement, does acting in behalf of humanitarian or even theocratic objectives ever justify making friends with the world? Where is the trust and fear of God? If it is “Jehovah’s organization,” as it is purported to be, the consequences for the Watchtower’s duplicity in spiritually prostituting itself cannot be understated. The Bible speaks very plainly to Christians on the matter at James 4:4, which reads: “Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.”

But were the Watchtower’s activities as an NGO really as serious as all that? Yes, at least according to the Watchtower, it is! Here is what the January 1, 1978, Watchtower said about Christendom giving its support to the UN:

“Christendom’s works have included her giving support to man-made schemes for peace, whereas Jesus taught true Christians to pray for God’s kingdom as the instrument for bringing peace to this earth. Catholic and Protestant leaders alike have hailed the United Nations as ‘man’s last hope for peace.’”

As has been shown, all NGOs associated with the UN are required to lend their support by conducting information campaigns on behalf of the United Nations, which the Watchtower has incontrovertibly done. That means that the Watchtower, and by extension all of Jehovah’s Witnesses, indirectly are guilty of supporting a manmade political scheme. Ironically, in its condemnation of Christendom, the Watchtower inadvertently condemns itself with the following statement from the November 1, 1972, Watchtower:

“Logically, then, Christendom, by belonging to the United Nations, is for human (not divine) rulership…Christendom has belied her name, and there is no excuse for it.”

If Christendom is inexcusable and has belied her claim of being Christian “by belonging to the United Nations,” how much more so is the Watchtower’s partnership with the United Nations inexcusable? At least the churches have been open and honest about their support for the United Nations, whereas the Watchtower is guilty of treachery and gross hypocrisy. Those who presume to be the virgin bride of Christ have behaved more like an immoral adulteress, sneaking surreptitiously in the shadows and lying when found out. Admittedly, these are strong words. Is it really fair to accuse the Watchtower of practicing idolatry, spiritual prostitution, and hypocrisy?

Again, according to the Watchtower’s own words in condemnation of Christendom, the answer is yes:

“Christendom’s perpetual friendliness with the politicians, and military forces and the big business profiteers of this world is a public scandal… The religious sects of Christendom have committed spiritual adultery also “with their dungy idols.” One of the latest and biggest things to be idolized by her is the “image” of the symbolic wild beast of world politics, namely, the United Nations, to which most of the professedly Christian nations belong.”— The Nations Shall Know

While the Watchtower may not have blasphemously proclaimed the UN or League of Nations to be the political manifestation of the Kingdom of God on earth, as some of the clergy of Christendom have done; yet, if the United Nations is really the “disgusting thing” of prophecy, does not the Watchtower’s constant attendance to its every utterance amount to glorifying a “dungy idol,” as Jehovah expressed it?

The fact is that the Watchtower became a willing political partner with an agency of Satan’s world, and the evidence abounds, testifying that the organization has subserviently carried out the obligations of that partnership. Not only that, but in their service to the United Nations, the Watchtower has misappropriated resources—both human and material—that had been dedicated exclusively to Jehovah God.

According to Jehovah’s judgment, that amounts to spiritual prostitution, idolatry, and apostasy. There are unavoidable consequences for such wickedness.

In 1951, the September 15th issue of the Watchtower boasted that Jehovah’s Witnesses were “refusing to enter partnership with the abominable League of Nations or the United Nations.”

O how things have changed! No wonder Jehovah expresses his own disappointment and astonishment at the deplorable hypocrisy of his organized people, saying at Isaiah 1:21: “O how the faithful town has become a prostitute!”

In view of the Watchtower’s practicing the very thing they have roundly condemned Christendom for doing, it can be better understood why Jehovah long ago stated at Ezekiel 7:27: “According to their way I shall act toward them, and with their judgments I shall judge them; and they will have to know that I am Jehovah.”