First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Since: Feb 07

RI

#163 Sep 19, 2013
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
Now its the entire library:
http://ask.un.org/a.php...
But 20 years ago, I don't know.
<quoted text>
I don't think they were SO important but they had been in the habit of using those parts for some years before they were told they would need to register with the DPI to continue using them.
What is interesting to note is that they did NOT have to actually become an NGO/DPI member:
Due to security constraints in place at the New York UN Headquarters complex, the Library is not open to the general public. The vast majority of recent documentation is available to everyone electronically. Members of the public are invited to visit depository libraries located worldwide if they are in need of documentation in hard-copy format.

UN documents can be retrieved using the following databases:

UNBISnet, the Library's catalogue
ODS, the UN Official Document System
UN Member States on the Record
UN-I-QUE (Info Quest)
All they needed to do to get information was log in to one of the databases.

I think you need to try again.

Since: Feb 07

RI

#164 Sep 19, 2013
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
Now its the entire library:
http://ask.un.org/a.php...
But 20 years ago, I don't know.
<quoted text>
I don't think they were SO important but they had been in the habit of using those parts for some years before they were told they would need to register with the DPI to continue using them.
According to the link you sent, the ONLY restrictions on PHYSICALLY accessing the library were put in place AFTER 2001, but, even then, they didn't need to register as an NGO/DPI member in order to "use" the library information, but solely to physcially ENTER the library.

Perhaps the WT legal department was very, very confused? Perhaps they didn't know how to access an online database?

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#165 Sep 19, 2013
RedhorseWoman wrote:
All they needed to do to get information was log in to one of the databases.
And you know this how?

Remember this was over 20 years ago. You have no idea what they did and did not have access to back then.

Since: Feb 07

RI

#166 Sep 19, 2013
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
And you know this how?
Remember this was over 20 years ago. You have no idea what they did and did not have access to back then.
Did you read the information on the link YOU posted? Prior to 2001, the general public could physically access the library. They did NOT have to become NGO/DPI members.

To simplify for you, WT representatives could have applied for a grounds pass, just like any normal citizen, and accessed the physical library.

NOW they would have to access the online databases, and, since they do seem to have an online these days, I highly doubt that there would be a problem.

So, your argument is, as usual, moot.

Since: Feb 07

RI

#167 Sep 19, 2013
should be "do seem to have an online presence"

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168 Sep 19, 2013
RedhorseWoman wrote:
<quoted text>
According to the link you sent, the ONLY restrictions on PHYSICALLY accessing the library were put in place AFTER 2001, but, even then, they didn't need to register as an NGO/DPI member in order to "use" the library information, but solely to physcially ENTER the library.
Perhaps the WT legal department was very, very confused? Perhaps they didn't know how to access an online database?
The WTS researchers were in the habit of using the library when certain restrictions were put in place that required registration to enter certain parts of the building.

That's the deal. No sinister gunpowder plots going on.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#169 Sep 19, 2013
RedhorseWoman wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you read the information on the link YOU posted? Prior to 2001, the general public could physically access the library. They did NOT have to become NGO/DPI members.
To simplify for you, WT representatives could have applied for a grounds pass, just like any normal citizen, and accessed the physical library.
NOW they would have to access the online databases, and, since they do seem to have an online these days, I highly doubt that there would be a problem.
So, your argument is, as usual, moot.
You don't know any of this because we are talking about over 20 years ago.

Unfortunately the site doesn't give us any information what the deal was back then.

But there is absolutely no reason to doubt what the WTS has stated about the incident. They had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to gain from registering with the DPI other than INFORMATION/ACCESS to the library.

“Life is short, enjoy life.:-).”

Since: Aug 13

Iraq

#170 Sep 19, 2013
the Watchtower was an associated NGO and to become associated required the Watchtower to accept the following:

that the NGO share the ideals of the UN Charter;
- have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach target or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;
- have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programs about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting cooperation of the media.

The complete documents can be found easily on the net......

“Life is short, enjoy life.:-).”

Since: Aug 13

Iraq

#171 Sep 19, 2013
Who cares if it was for a library card., or even to use the WC at UN headquarters....
They associated with the Beast that's all there is to say........

Since: Feb 07

RI

#172 Sep 19, 2013
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
The WTS researchers were in the habit of using the library when certain restrictions were put in place that required registration to enter certain parts of the building.
That's the deal. No sinister gunpowder plots going on.
What restrictions were these and what parts of the building were affected? Also, what was there about those supposed "parts of the building" made them SO vitally important to the WTS? Also, when were these "restrictions" put in place and what were they?

Since: Feb 07

RI

#173 Sep 19, 2013
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know any of this because we are talking about over 20 years ago.
Unfortunately the site doesn't give us any information what the deal was back then.
But there is absolutely no reason to doubt what the WTS has stated about the incident. They had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to gain from registering with the DPI other than INFORMATION/ACCESS to the library.
What? That link states that now, because of security reasons, physical access is being restricted. If it was ALWAYS restricted for the general public, why would they have to CHANGE the access policy because of security reasons?

There is absolutely EVERY reason to doubt what the WTS has stated. They lie constantly, but JWs just swallow and smile and then turn themselves inside defending those lies.

Can you prove that being an NGO/DPI member serves ONLY to give an organization access to the library? Why all of the conditions if this is ALL those organizations can get? And why are so many organizations signing up for physical access to a library that carries multiple conditions that need to be met when they could access that library without conditions through online databases?

Please...let us know the reasons.

Since: Feb 07

RI

#174 Sep 19, 2013
MarcelB wrote:
the Watchtower was an associated NGO and to become associated required the Watchtower to accept the following:
that the NGO share the ideals of the UN Charter;
- have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach target or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;
- have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programs about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting cooperation of the media.
The complete documents can be found easily on the net......
And, according to Gareth, for all that, all they get is physical access to the library that they could access online without conditions.
Stan

Colorado Springs, CO

#175 Sep 19, 2013
RedhorseWoman wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think the statute had run out in this case, but Ms. Conti did originally say that her intent was to force the WTS to change their policies, which couldn't have been done in a criminal case.
If that was her intent, then good for her for being effective at exposing them.
UNchained

Loudon, TN

#176 Sep 19, 2013
MarcelB wrote:
Who cares if it was for a library card., or even to use the WC at UN headquarters....
They associated with the Beast that's all there is to say........
They threw a saddle on its back and rode around after midnight when everyone was asleep for over 9 years.

Then one day they forgot to turn around in time to get back to the beast's lair before daylight and got caught.
jace

Upper Marlboro, MD

#177 Sep 19, 2013
"Aneirin"

"Because she decided to sue who she thought she could get the most money from."

That is what a civil suit is for

Duhhhhhhh

"She's just looking to con money away from Jehovah's Witnesses.

THAT is what anyone who actually knows about the case sees.

At least if they don't have a separate agenda against Jehovah's Witnesses."

@@@@@@

So the jury has an agenda against JW ??

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#178 Sep 19, 2013
Rev book chap 28 page 195 par.31
31 Since World War II, the image of the wild beast—now manifested as the United Nations organization—has already killed in a literal way. For example, in 1950 a UN force took the field in the war between North Korea and South Korea. The UN force, along with the South Koreans, killed an estimated 1,420,000 North Koreans and Chinese. Similarly, from 1960 to 1964, United Nations armies were active in the Congo (now Zaire). Moreover, world leaders, including popes Paul VI and John Paul II, have continued to affirm that this image is man’s last and best hope for peace. If mankind fails to serve it, they insist, the human race will destroy itself. They thus figuratively cause to be killed all humans who refuse to go along with the image"

Luke 16 :10 “He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What it boils down to 18 min Brother P 28
Why Are JW's So Unhappy? 57 min Brother P 276
Phil. 2:11 hits every JW like a brick! 59 min Passerby 52
To the Forum 1 hr Pam 1
Poll 1919 WTS doctrinal changes 1 hr CED 15
Praise Jehovah (Jul '13) 1 hr Pam 2,728
Churchoids are so FULL of... 2 hr Pam 2
Why is the GB member Stephen lett admitting ..? 4 hr Covered 336
how bout a subject jws wont discuss? 6 hr RedhorseWoman 69
Christian Trucker and OSAS Doctrine 6 hr ihveit 845
fbi ic3 5/20/2015 6 hr MENE MENE Tekel U... 58
More from around the web