Jump to content

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Jack Ryan -
Space Merchant -
29
1610

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


I was under the mistaken opinion that the Isaiah 2 quote had been removed somehow (my ignorance).  So, after doing a little digging, I came up with this quote, which tells me the U.N. never was involved “with putting that text in big letters on that wall”.

“The complex is also notable for its gardens and outdoor sculptures. Iconic sculptures include the "Knotted Gun", called Non-Violence, a statue of a Colt Python revolver with its barrel tied in a knot, which was a gift from the Luxembourg government and "Let Us Beat Swords into Plowshares” ", a gift from the Soviet UnionThe latter sculpture is the only appearance of the "swords into plowshares" quotation, from Isaiah 2:4, within the complex. Contrary to popular belief, the quotation is not carved on any UN building. Rather, it is carved on the "Isaiah Wall" of Ralph Bunche Park across First Avenue.

Ralph Bunche Park is a small municipal public park in the Turtle Bay neighborhood of New York City, on First Avenue between 42nd and 43rd Streets.. It was named in 1979 for Ralph Bunche, the first African-American to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

The park is across First Avenue from the United Nations headquarters. (This stretch of First Avenue is also known as "United Nations Plaza".)

It was built and dedicated in 1948 during construction of the U.N. headquarters and has the famous quotation from Isaiah 2:4: "They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more" incised into its wall. Known as the Isaiah Wall, it was rededicated in 1975 and had the name "Isaiah" added under the final word.

Because of its proximity to the United Nations, the peace theme of the Isaiah Wall and Peace Form One, and Bunche's career as a peacemaker, the park is a popular site for demonstrations and rallies concerning peace and other international issues. In 1985 the park was dedicated as New York City's first Peace Park

Loesch:  “Before true peace and security will come to the earth…there will be a time when people will think they have achieved it, but they will be in error”.

What people would that be, really? 

’For the law will go out of Zion, heavenly Zion today, and the word of Jehovah out of Jerusalem.  And then in verse 4 it says that they will beat their swords into plowshares their spears into pruning shears, nation will not lift up sword against nation nor will they learn war anymore.’”  Well, wonderful prophesy.  When will this prophesy be fulfilled? 

 ***It’s been already fulfilled in Jehovah’s people***

So, we are part of the fulfillment of this prophecy.”

Which part of prophecy?

“When they say, “Peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them, like labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.”  1 Thess 5:3

“because when this will be fulfilled it could be some catching announcement, or it could be a series of such announcements about peace and security – it must be something special because they always in the past been talking about peace and security, but we expect something special to be ***announced*** and then (?) the Watchtower expressed that this reflects the wrong assumption of the people…”

JWs, to assume that the law will go out of Zion through an organization waist-deep in lawsuits, and an elder rule having power to judge another as spiritually “dead”, is sheer blindness to God’s righteous decrees.

Personally, I felt Loesch seemed quite uncomfortable at times when giving this talk. For a polished speaker, there must be some underlying reason for his attempt not to choke on his own words.  Perhaps he was lying.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had spelled G. Losch's name right, then changed it to "Loesch".   Once I realized the first spelling was right, I tried to change it, but the edit option seems to have disappeared.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Equivocation said:

Well the UN can not be trusted. Have you seen what their loyal NGO who applies their goals are doing in Africa?

I really don't know, but speaking of NGO, here is some food for thought.

 

“A MISSION TO AFRICA”

Jehovah’s Witnesses should not be naïve to the fact that the Watchtower Society acquired a measure of political stature with the United Nations after becoming an associate NGO. Ostensibly, the purpose was to muster support in behalf of Jehovah’s Witnesses facing difficult situations in various countries throughout the world. And evidently partnering with the UN has not gone unrewarded, which is betrayed in small ways by the organization itself, such as the following brief report that appeared in the July 22, 2001, Awake!

“One newspaper in Congo (Kinshasa) praised the humanitarian work of Jehovah’s Witnesses as “practical rather than formal.” Officials of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) have likewise expressed their support. One UNHCR official in the Democratic Republic of Congo was so pleased with the orderliness of the relief efforts carried out by the Witnesses that she put her vehicle at the disposal of the volunteers.”

To what extent has the Watchtower received help directly from the United Nations? It is hard to say. However, it turns out that it was much more than the use of a vehicle on one occasion. In trying to get to the bottom of the Watchtower’s dealings with the UN, this researcher has discovered that the Watchtower has spawned nearly a dozen subsidiary NGOs in various European nations. For instance, prior to the Watchtower gaining associate NGO status in 1992, in 1990, an NGO called Aidafrique was set up in France. What was its intended purpose? The Zambia Daily Mail of June 17, 1999, under the heading: “French NGO officials, jet in to help Congo DR refugees,” reported the following:

“Two officials from the Aid Afrique are expected in the country today to provide additional humanitarian support to thousands of refugees who have fled trouble-torn Congo DR… The relief supplies are being provided by congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Belgium, France, and Switzerland. Aid Afrique is a European-based international humanitarian organization founded in France in 1990 with the objective of bringing relief to critical areas of Africa. Through the UNHCR efforts in Tanzania, the organization last year distributed over 20 tonnes of food and medicine to refugees in the Kigoma region. In 1997, Aid Afrique spent US$820,000 in humanitarian aid to the former Zaire.”

The Zambian news reveals that it was only through their cooperation with UNHCR that the Aidafrique NGO was able to accomplish its humanitarian objectives. But if the secular media in Africa openly reports on Aidafrique’s cooperative ventures with various agencies of the United Nations, why is not the Watchtower more forthright in informing Jehovah’s Witnesses about their accomplishments? If the Watchtower’s relationship with the United Nations is such an honorable arrangement, why not publicize it—as they have so many other UN-sponsored programs? Most likely the reason subsidiary NGOs like Aidafrique were set up in the first place was in order to keep the more familiar Watchtower brand name in the background and off the front page.

Interestingly, a few years ago Jehovah’s Witnesses in France independently published a brochure entitled “A Mission to Africa.” In it, they explained in detail the activities of the Aidafrique NGO. On pages 9-10, the revealing comment was made:

“Our activity was often hindered by difficulties particular to the region. Distances are vast and lines of communication almost nonexistent. The best form of travel, if not the only one, is the airplane. Often we used the H.C.R.’s (United Nations High Commission for Refugees) planes. Administrative formalities also held us up”

Certainly, no one is questioning the motives of Jehovah’s Witnesses in seeking to render lifesaving emergency aid to the long-suffering brothers in Africa. It was the right and Christian thing to do. But the question is—at what price? Is it worth cutting a deal with the Devil to save a soul? Jehovah’s Witnesses in Malawi did not think so. They were not even willing to buy a 25-cent political ID card, even though they're not doing so unleashed a horrific pogrom against them.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JehovahsWitnesses/comments/7sqjc4/the_watchtower_societys_secret_partnership_with/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Equivocation said:

Well the UN can not be trusted. Have you seen what their loyal NGO who applies their goals are doing in Africa?

Indeed, mainly with the coming of their agenda, what took place in California regarding the fires and onward.

As for Africa, with what went down in the months that came to pass was regarding migrants, moving them into European countries whereas NGO were teaching the migrants to lie.

I can go far in depth on this but that will be like 2 pages, coupled with a transcript of legitimate information regarding this.

The NGOs in question, who are doing the bidding of the UN are the ones who are sponsored by them.

It is not just Africa alone per-say, but also the Greek Islands whereas NGO partake in legal aid, coaching, etc and told where they would go in the EU or Athens, so forth. They are aided by officials of the government in question of where this has been taking place, moreover, this has gone about regarding 15,000 people already and more; essential industrialized legal aid, so to speak, even Universities such as Cambridge, Denver and Oxford are involved, linked with the international Bar association.

But yes, only being breif here but for now, this is but a cookie out of the jar for you.

image.jpeg

This information you would not be able to find on normal media granted that this was available months ago until it was being shot down by various MSM sources. This is why it is good to save what little information you can before it is wiped out totally.

 

@Witness This has already been debunked, any NGO that is associated with the UN will have met the criteria, they would also have an ECOSCO and or an equivalent as a sponsor.

The fact you are ignorant of this information proves that your claim that is like snow has touched flames before it can go on any further, and I say this because as someone who has watched the UN for nearly a decade, know who among the NGOs is for and or not for the UN, and so forth.

 

Do the research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

 This has already been debunked, any NGO that is associated with the UN will have met the criteria, they would also have an ECOSCO and or an equivalent as a sponsor.

How and where was this information from @Witness debunked? I thought that some of the claims had been exaggerated, but this was just my opinion. I also saw an attempt to debunk these claims that was little more than a collection of opinions.

11 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

I say this because as someone who has watched the UN for nearly a decade, know who among the NGOs is for and or not for the UN, and so forth.              Do the research.

I assume then that you have the research?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

The fact you are ignorant of this information proves that your claim that is like snow has touched flames before it can go on any further, and I say this because as someone who has watched the UN for nearly a decade, know who among the NGOs is for and or not for the UN, and so forth.

 

You are so right, SM, I am “ignorant” of UN’s worldly dealings, since I try earnestly to be “no part of the world”.  If it has been debunked, perhaps YOU can share this with @Equivocation as ‘food for thought’.

In the meantime, some things are just so blatant, they can’t be “debunked”.   This is for Equivocation to explore Watchtower’s worldly ties in Europe, even after it was revealed the organization had been a member of the NGO in the US for nine years. 

 It begins around 8:48

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChGGzgeP9d0

https://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session7/EG/EAJCW_UPR_EGY_S07_2010_TheEuropeanAssociationofJehovahsChristianWitnesses.pdf

Here’s just one example of their involvement, reaching out to the UN instead of God for support.  There are many more.   In fact, Watchtower’s historic court battles are always fought on the worldly front.  If a case is won, they say God is responsible for their victory.  However, Russia steps in and wipes out their material holdings, and JWs begin fleeing the country.  The case presented by JW’s lawyers just didn’t save them, much to their surprise.  Where was God’s helping hand during that time?  To mitigate the conundrum, Russia is now prophetically proclaimed  by the GB as the “King of the north”.  Ah, that remedies their problem of dealing with mass hysteria.  Apparently, God will step in soon and save the Watchtower idol.

No.

"This is what the Lord, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel says:

I am the Lord your God,
who teaches you for your benefit,
who leads you in the way you should go.
18 If only you had paid attention to my commands.
Then your peace would have been like a river,
and your righteousness like the waves of the sea.
19 Your descendants would have been as countless as the sand,
and the offspring of your body like its grains;
their name would not be cut off
or eliminated from my presence."  Isa 48:17-19

Membership is dropping, simply because the Watchtower is bolstering a lie and people don't want to hear it.

 

Another example.

https://www.osce.org/odihr/340991   

Statement by the European Association of Jehovah's Christian Witnesses – Tajikistan    13 September 2017

                            Only registered representatives of participating States, Partners for Co-operation, OSCE Institutions, NGOs, think tanks or others can submit documents to the ODIHR Documents Distribution System for distribution during the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting. ODIHR bears no responsibility for the content of such documents received for distribution, and circulates them without altering their content. The distribution by the ODIHR Documents Distribution System of documents received does not imply any endorsement by ODIHR and is without prejudice to OSCE decisions, as set out in documents agreed by OSCE participating States.

 

There is one thing that I know that you don’t know, SM.  I can recognize Watchtower’s deception.  You are ignorant of its power.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By Jack Ryan
      International anthem of the United Nations
    • By Jack Ryan
      Loesch, Barr in the middle, Barry in the foreground
    • By Arauna
      Interesting article and video.....
      On 11 December most countries will sign the UN Compact in Morocco.  It is part of the "Agenda 21" plan for the 21 st century  started in 1992.  Read up about Agenda 21, agenda 2030 and about this Compact for Migration which will criminalize anyone saying anything against the UN plan.  Those countries who signed are obliged to assist migrants financially and basically all people have a right to migrate....(no more borders).   About 20 nations are now fighting  it and will be forced by fines for not complying.  It is part of the UN plan for one world government...  Is this real? Or a conspiracy.... ? Watch this little video and give comments of the implications.    I have the original documents and on this Youtube link you can also download the UN document "agenda 21".   NGOs have already been receiving funds to implement it for the past 20 years and both republican and democratic governments has been changing laws to implement is..... It has been going on  under our noses and the general public does not know.  My interest in this is the fulfillment of prophecy which indicates the UN or coalition of governments to rule for short period of time before Armageddon.  There are huge implications to this .... but first watch this little video to begin the discussion....   here is the link.....
       
       
    • By Jack Ryan
      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [1 of 9]


      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [2 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [3 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [4 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [5 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [6 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [7 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [8 of 9]

      2016 Hong Kong Branch Meeting [9 of 9]

      Enjoy!
       
    • By JW Insider
      Sometimes, the Watchtower publications have pointed back to a time when the Watchtower predicted World War One (WWI) in 1914 and then also predicted that the United Nations would rise up to replace the League of Nations. These two "predictions" have even been paired together and presented nearly back-to-back in our publications. They were even brought up again at the 2014 convention and the 2009 convention. The reason the Watchtower has reviewed these two ideas from our history is probably already obvious and clear, and it has been clearly stated, too.
      One of the most recent reviews of the history of Jehovah's Witnesses contains very similar claims, and is found in one of the videos, now also available on tv.jw.org: https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/VODOrgHistory/pub-ivfa2_x_VIDEO
      These online transcripts appear fairly accurate:
      Video Transcript Jehovah's Witnesses Faith in Action Part 1 Out of Darkness.pdf Video Transcript Jehovah's Witnesses Faith in Action Part 2 Let the Light Shine.pdf Here is the relevant part about 1914:
      —Geoffrey W. Jackson—
      They realized that 1914 had a significance, —Gerrit Lösch—
      When World War I broke out in July, they felt vindicated and it strengthened their faith in the Bible, and in Jehovah’s prophetic Word. Also, it enhanced their trust that Jehovah was using Brother Russell and his friends to explain truth to others. —Anthony Morris III—
      Just looking at the sign of the times that Jesus told us to look at is enough, but it's still significant that they could pinpoint that year. That's phenomenal. Here is the relevant part about the UN and League of Nations:
      —Narrator—
      . . . And soon, they would boldly proclaim a Bible prophecy that pointed to the outcome of that war. ——Chapter 4: "Taught By Jehovah"——
      —Narrator—
      The year was 1941. Having taken the lead for 25 momentous years, J. F. Rutherford had become seriously ill and was about to make his final public appearance. . . . The second World War was raging. Some felt that these events could lead directly into Armageddon. In spite of this, in 1942, Nathan H. Knorr—the one next appointed to take the lead among Jehovah's Witnesses—spoke at a convention about a Bible prophecy that indicated that significant events had to occur first. —Knorr (reenactment)—
      This international war is not 'the battle of the great day of God Almighty.' Before Armageddon comes, the Scriptures show, a peace must come. —John Wischuk—
      There was no peace on the horizon, and yet we said, "Peace—Can It Last?" —Narrator—
      Knorr centered attention on Revelation 17:8, which indicates that a figurative wild beast would come into existence, would cease to exist, but then would come back to life. Knorr then drew his listeners' attention to the defunct League of Nations. —Knorr (reenactment)—
      The League is in effect in a state of suspended animation and needs to be revived if it is ever to live again. It has gone into the abyss of inaction and ineffectiveness. It "is not." Will the League remain in the pit? Again the Word of God gives answer: The association of worldly nations will rise again. —Narrator—
      That association did rise again three years later as the United Nations. —Anthony Morris III—
      They didn't know it was going to be called the United Nations, and we don't make that claim. But they knew it was coming out.  
      [Should be noted that Morris is claiming something that they "KNEW" in advance but he is also correcting a common claim that not only did Knorr predict the rise of the League of Nations three years ahead of time, but that he even used the term "United Nations." As one person writes on a website "Knorr prophesied in 1942 that the League of Nations would rise out of the abyss. Knorr used the expression 'United Nations.' How could he have known the exact name of the new incarnation, when it wasn't established until 1945?"]
      Witnesses got these ideas about a correctly predicted prophecy from an article published a few years later under Knorr's administration in 1960. These quotes should be compared with the actual transcript of the speech Knorr made on September 20, 1942, which was made available as a booklet, and can be found here: http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/booklets/peace.html
      The July 15, 1960 Watchtower, page 444, said this:
      "In 1942 the “faithful and discreet slave” guided by Jehovah’s unerring spirit made known that the democracies would win World War II and that there would be a United Nations organization set up." You can also see a reference to the 1942 event in the Revelation book (p.248) on WOL at jw.org: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988034
      You can also read the following about it in the April 15, 1989 Watchtower, p.14 https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988034
      By divine providence, Jehovah’s Witnesses received enlightenment on that mystery in 1942. . . . Nathan H. Knorr, president of the Watch Tower Society, gave the public talk, “Peace—Can It Last?” Therein he reviewed Revelation 17:8, . . . . Was that Bible-based forecast fulfilled? Truly it was! In 1945 the international “wild beast” emerged from its abyss of inactivity as the United Nations. See also the Kingdom Come book  kc chap. 17 pp. 162-173 and and interesting version of events found in a 1981 Watchtower about why this "insight" was given w81 12/15 pp. 28-30
      The Proclaimers book states it like this on page 192-3 (  jv chap. 14 pp. 188-201 )
      This time, it involved the United Nations, successor to the League. While World War II was still under way, in 1942, Jehovah’s Witnesses had already discerned from the Bible, at Revelation 17:8, that the world peace organization would rise again, also that it would fail to bring lasting peace. This was explained by N. H. Knorr, then president of the Watch Tower Society, in the convention discourse “Peace—Can It Last?” Boldly Jehovah’s Witnesses proclaimed that view of the developing world situation. In 1993 the idea was stated as follows:
      “The Disgusting Thing” 12, 13. What was “the disgusting thing,” and—as foreseen by the faithful and discreet slave—when and how was it reestablished? 12 When the end of the second world war was in sight, there was another development. “They will certainly put in place the disgusting thing that is causing desolation.” (Daniel 11:31b) This “disgusting thing,” which Jesus also mentioned, had already been recognized as the League of Nations, the scarlet-colored wild beast that according to Revelation went into the abyss. (Matthew 24:15; Revelation 17:8; see Light, Book Two, page 94.) It did this when World War II broke out. However, at the New World Theocratic Assembly of Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1942, Nathan H. Knorr, third president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, discussed the prophecy of Revelation 17 and warned that the beast would rise again from the abyss. 13 History bore out the truth of his words. Between August and October 1944, at Dumbarton Oaks in the United States, work was begun on the charter of what would be called the United Nations. The charter was adopted by 51 nations, including the former Soviet Union, and when it came into force on October 24, 1945, the defunct League of Nations in effect came out of the abyss. There are several more examples, but this should suffice. I am struck by how often the point is emphasized that these were Knorr's words, "his words" and that they were a Bible-based forecast "foreseen" and "discerned" and "known" in advance through "divine providence" and "enlightenment" and men being "guided by Jehovah's unerring spirit." This is an odd focus on the insights and discernment of men. These expressions are also dangerously presumptuous in that they are so often applied to the one or two times when it seems something was foreseen correctly, but there is no balanced way of discussing the reasons that literally dozens of predictions were made incorrectly and have been dropped as "old light."
      But, as many Witnesses already know, there is something even deeper that is wrong with these claims of accuracy in discernment. The claims are inaccurate! It turns out that this was not really even predicted in advance. A close look at the original transcript of Knorr's talk actually solves the mystery of why he used the term United Nations in his speech. It's because he gave the speech AFTER official work on the United Nations had already begun.
    • By The Librarian
      Listen to "The United Nations Will Soon Act Against Russia, South Korea, Singapore and Eritrea for Human Rights Violations Against Jehovah's Witnesses" on Spreaker.
       
      Jehovah's Witnesses have long been persecuted as a religious minority but the United Nations is telling Russia, Singapore, South Korea and Eritrea that time is up! Listen to investigative journalist Joseph Bonner break down the facts.
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      'Mismanagement' keeps UN from reaching full potential, Trump says in debut speech
       
       
    • By The Librarian
      Our Brother Bill Underwood wrote an interesting article in the newspaper:

       

      If you had to choose between Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech, which would you choose?Now, you’re thinking, ‘I don’t have to choose, I already have both.’ Are you sure?Last August, the central district court of Tver – the oblast or ‘state’ in which Moscow resides, banned a religious website, jw.org. They did this secretly, not notifying the owners of the website until the day before the ban was to go into effect – January 22, 2014. Had they prevailed, their rationale would have been to claim, as they have in the past, that the ‘free speech’ on jw.org defames other religions. Jw.org won that battle in the court of appeals, but the foundation on which the attack was based still exists.In 1999, Pakistan brought a resolution to the UN calling for a ban on “Defamation of Islam.” Cooler heads prevailed and, after much discussion, the Commission on Human Rights passed instead a resolution banning “Defamation of Religion.”Over the years from 2000 to 2009 the resolution was added to, revised, strengthened, and re-worded, but it was consistently approved. Aside from the lack of elections, U.N. politicians are no different from any other type. It would have been politically incorrect to be seen as anti-Muslim, especially after 9/11, so passing a bill to protect them from defamation seemed like a good idea. Typical was the vote of the UN General Assembly in December, 2007: 108 for, 51 against, and 25 abstaining.In 2009, however, Pakistan pushed again. Their resolution that year stated that they were concerned that defamation of religion led to “the creation of a kind of Islamophobia in which Muslims were typecast as terrorists." They weren't opposed to freedom of expression, oh no. They merely wanted to ban "expression that led to incitement.”They said the hatred of Muslims was just like the hatred of Jews that Hitler had whipped up in pre-WWII Germany, and look what that led to. Has there been a Muslim “krystallnacht” that I didn’t hear about...the night of August 9, 1938 when Germans destroyed over 7,000 Jewish businesses and over 1,000 synagogues? Even in the days after 9/11 when there was enormous outrage against Muslims, the level of hatred never approached that.Pakistan’s proposed resolution said basically that freedom of speech sometimes has to yield in order to maintain peace. Governments such as Russia, Pakistan, and most of the middle east are quick to use this argument: some opinion or expression of yours is causing distress to others; therefore, instead of telling the ‘others’ to grow up and get over it, they tell you to stop expressing your opinion.In any case, this was a step too far, and the pendulum began to swing back. Pakistan’s argument was recognized for what it was, and over 200 civic groups, some Muslim, some Christian, some atheist, demanded that the UN push back.Over the preceding 10 years, the UN had assigned a “special rapporteur” to analyze the subject of defamation of religion and report back. The rapporteur’s report in 2009 included this telling statement:
      “[We] encourage a shift away from the sociological concept of the defamation of religions towards the legal norm of non-incitement to national, racial or religious hatred." Three months later when the United States and Egypt introduced a resolution which condemned "racial and religious stereotyping," EU representative Jean-Baptiste Mattei said the European Union "rejected and would continue to reject the concept of defamation of religions." Significantly, he said:
      "Human rights laws did not and should not protect belief systems." And the representative from Chile pointed out that,
      "The concept of the defamation of religion took them in an area that could lead to the actual prohibition of opinions." A month later, at a human rights meeting in Geneva, the United States representative admitted that defamation of religion is “a fundamentally flawed concept.” The rep from Sweden repeated what the Frenchman had said earlier: international human rights law protects individuals, not institutions or religions.By 2011 the backlash was complete. The UNHRC declared that "Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with” the charter of the Human Rights Committee.In the years since then, any proposal in the UN attempting to ban ‘defamation of religion’ has been shot down. Freedom of speech has trumped freedom of religion.Last week, far from worrying about ‘defamation,’ the UN came out loudly and publicly chastising the Vatican.
      This has never happened before. Their purported justification for doing so went like this: The Vatican is a signatory of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 34 of which reads in part:
      “Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.” The UN accused the Vatican not merely of failing to protect children, but of actively endangering children by their policy of moving pederasts to new parishes where they could continue their predations, and of obfuscating all attempts by law enforcement agencies to find and prosecute the offenders.Now, here’s where it gets really interesting: The UN went further. They also condemned the Church’s doctrines regarding homosexuality, abortion, and ‘reproductive rights.’Chastising a signatory of a contract for failing to abide by the contract is one thing; Attempting to dictate to a church what their doctrines should be is something else. Where is the UN’s authority to do that? Yet they did it anyway.If, as the UN says, religions and belief systems are not protected by human rights - and I agree, they clearly are not – what prevents them from taking the next step: deciding that religions and belief systems are nothing more than ancient superstitions that are doing more harm than good, and that it’s time to ban them?It’s too bad the UN doesn’t have any teeth. Do they? We'll Investigate that next.
      Bill.underwood@mail.com
      Source
    • By admin
      The UN should create a set of international rules to help stop the pandemic of fake news and Cold war-style disinformation, Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said during a session of the UN Committee on Information in New York.
       
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      Bolivian Ambassador Remembers The U.S. Saying Iraq Had Chemical Weapons!


      World News
    • By Kurt
      GENEVA (4 April 2017) – Moves by the Russian Government to ban the activities of Jehovah’s Witnesses using a lawsuit brought under anti-extremism legislation have been condemned as “extremely worrying” by three United Nations human rights experts*. 
      “This lawsuit is a threat not only to Jehovah’s Witnesses, but to individual freedom in general in the Russian Federation,” the experts said. 
      “The use of counter-extremism legislation in this way to confine freedom of opinion, including religious belief, expression and association to that which is state-approved is unlawful and dangerous, and signals a dark future for all religious freedom in Russia,” they stressed. 
      The condemnation follows a lawsuit lodged at the country’s Supreme Court on 15 March to declare the Jehovah’s Witnesses Administrative Centre ‘extremist’, to liquidate it, and to ban its activity.  
      A suspension order came into effect on that date, preventing the Administrative Centre and all its local religious centres from using state and municipal news media, and from organizing and conducting assemblies, rallies and other public events. 
      A full court hearing is scheduled for 5 April and if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the authorities, it will be the first such ruling by a court declaring a registered centralized religious organization to be ‘extremist’. 
      Concerns about the counter-extremism legislation have previously been raised in a communication by the three experts to the Russian authorities on 28 July 2016.  
      The Suspension Order imposed on 15 March is the latest in a series of judicial cases and orders, including a warning sent to the organization last year referring to the ‘inadmissibility of extremist activity’. This has already led to the dissolution of several local Jehovah’s Witness organizations, raids against their premises and literature being confiscated.  
      “We urge the authorities to drop the lawsuit in compliance with their obligations under international human rights law, and to revise the counter-extremism legislation and its implementation to avoid fundamental human rights abuses,” the UN experts concluded. 
      (*) The experts: Mr. David Kaye (USA), Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. Maina Kiai (Kenya), Special Rapporteur on freedoms of peaceful assembly and of association, and Mr. Ahmed Shaheed (the Maldives), Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief.  
      The Special Rapporteurs are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. Special Procedures, the largest body of independent experts in the UN Human Rights system, is the general name of the Council’s independent fact-finding and monitoring mechanisms that address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.  
      UN Human Rights, country page: Russian Federation  
      - See more at
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      The Clean Seas campaign was launched last week, aimed at eliminating major sources of marine plastic and changing shopping habits.
      The United Nations has declared war on plastic. In an unexpected announcement that emerged from the Economist World Ocean Summit in Bali last week, the UN officially launched its ‘Clean Seas’ campaign. The goal is to eliminate major sources of pollution, including microplastics in cosmetics and single-use disposable plastics, by pressuring governments and individuals to rethink the way goods are packaged and their own shopping habits.
      Erik Solheim, head of UN Environment, stated:
      “It is past time that we tackle the plastic problem that blights our oceans. Plastic pollution is surfing onto Indonesian beaches, settling onto the ocean floor at the North Pole, and rising through the food chain onto our dinner tables. We’ve stood by too long as the problem has gotten worse. It must stop.”
      It’s a problem that must be dealt with as aggressively as possible. Scientists say that the equivalent of a dump truck load of plastic is deposited in the world’s oceans every minute, and this quantity will only increase as consumption and population grow, too. By 2050, it’s said there will be more plastic than fish in the seas. The UN writes, “As many as 51 trillion microplastic particles – 500 times more than stars in our galaxy – litter our seas, seriously threatening marine wildlife.”
      On the campaign website, people can commit to certain actions to combat their personal plastic pollution, such as not using disposable grocery bags, bringing their own coffee cup, avoiding cosmetics with microbeads, and pressuring firms to reduce excess packaging. The campaign’s press release says it will make announcements throughout the year, highlighting advances made by countries and companies to reduce disposable plastics.

      Some countries have taken noteworthy steps, with ten already signing onto the #CleanSeas campaign. Indonesia, for example, has pledged to reduce marine litter by 70 percent by 2025, and Costa Rica says it will “take measures to dramatically reduce single-use plastic through better waste management and education.” Other nations are turning to taxes on plastic bags.
      The UN Clean Seas campaign is a good place to start, as it will spread the awareness of a little-known problem much further afield. Awareness, however, is just the first small step. It must translate into real lifestyle changes in order to make any sort of difference. It requires people to think ahead – request no straw with a drink, pack containers and bags when going to the store, trade in the diaper wipes for a washcloth, kick the bottled water habit – and it requires municipal governments to take a strong, often unpopular, stance.

      Just as microbeads are being eliminated in many places, plastic shopping bags should be, too; or at least the tax should be high enough to deter anyone, say $5 a bag, instead of 5 cents. Every town should have a bulk food store where the use of reusable containers is incentivized. Styrofoam and plastic takeout containers should be made illegal. Places to return packaging directly to manufacturers should be built alongside recycling facilities, based on the successful model of returning wine and beer bottles for refund in the province of Ontario. Schools need to start teaching children to care proactively for the Earth and to live with a reduced footprint, much like the strong anti-littering messages taught in Japan.
      Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard quotes Wang Yang Ming in his book, Let My People Go Surfing: “To know and not to do is not to know.” Hopefully the Clean Seas campaign will be that crucial first step toward informing greater swaths of the world’s population and inspiring them to further action.
      http://www.treehugger.com/environmental-policy/un-says-its-time-tackle-plastic-pollution-aggressively.html
    • By The Librarian
      United Nations Building, New York City
      Photo Credit: Flash 90
       
      For years, critics of the United Nations have been calling on the U.S. to defund and even quit the world body. Some have urged that a rival or successor organization be established. Now, the empty sheet of bitter discontent with the UN has been filled in with a new name and a new movement calling to “defund and replace” the troubled organization with the Covenant of Democratic Nations. This writer has been a participating witness to the birth of this movement.
      Just days after the passage of UN Resolution 2334, which declared, among other things, that Israel’s Jewish connection to the Western Wall was effectively illegal, concrete replacement action began. It has started with a conversation of ideas proposing an official international conference that would carefully propound a multilaterally-signed diplomatic convention to be ratified by countries as a binding treaty that would juridically forge the covenant into operational reality.
      The entire process would be limited to nations governed by democratic principles. Each member would or could defund the United Nations while it labored to construct a successor entity dedicated to world peace along democratic principles with equal respect for all people regardless of religion, gender, race, identity, or national origin, as well as formulating a mechanism to resolve disputes.
      A prime mission of the new world body would be to re-ratify, amend, or nullify all acts and resolutions of the United Nations and its agencies such as UNESCO. Thus, the Covenant would create a new body of long-overdue, reformed, clarified, and updated international law. Sensibly, most CDN nations would remain as vestigial members of the UN overseeing its collapse from economic and bureaucratic processes as was done when the League of Nations was dissolved after World War II and replaced with the present UN.
      Clearly, the history of world bodies, fluttering high-minded banners of peace on earth following wars that scorched the world and scarred all humankind, is not a good one. The League of Nations was born after World War I out of a quest for revenge by the victors, laced with a visionary desire to end colonialism and empower self-determination among nationally awakened peoples, so long as the whole business conquered the oil fields of the Mideast, lubricating the machinery of the post-Second Industrial Revolution West—and the multinational corporate palms that controlled it.
      Countries were invented that had never existed, carved and chipped off the toppled Turkish and German empires, with handpicked kings and sovereigns put into place who could legally sign lucrative petroleum contracts. Backstage, oil companies got the oil. But the flaccid League of Nations – which never included the United States –proved its utter uselessness during the Hitler regime.
      After World War II, the League was replaced by the United Nations. Although enshrined as a democratic enterprise, profoundly undemocratic and scheming governments penetrated the organization from its inception. Civil war-torn China and a tyrannical and hegemonic Soviet Union joined France, Great Britain, and the United States to create the Security Council. Expansion, inclusion, and extension eventually enrolled 193 nations, including such egalitarian democracies as North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia. The world body began as a sick organ and deteriorated from there.
      The Covenant conversation launched in earnest on January 23 when a panel of like-minded voices assembled in a crowded Gold Room of the Rayburn House Office Building. Representative Trent Franks (R-AZ,) who currently supports a bill to defund the UN, opened the Covenant Launch proceedings by declaring, “This is a critically important issue. The United Nations started out with a noble charter…but the United Nations has not only failed their charter, they have distinctly moved in the opposite direction and done actual harm…. They have become an anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-democratic, anti-freedom mob…. We need some type of alternative – a Covenant of Democratic Nations…. We need to repeal and replace.”
      Sarah Stern, founder of the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), pinpointed America’s 22 percent share of the overall UN budget. Stern said America was not getting what it pays for when “despotic, ruthless, tyrannical regimes” such as Syria “could pass judgment on the one democracy in the Middle East.” The UN has, she said, proven to be “abysmal” and added, “It is now time to begin having this conversation about dissolving the United Nations and replacing with a Covenant of Democratic Nations that share our common values…of tolerance, human rights, and the rule of law.”
      Famed constitutional attorney Nathan Lewin, who has worked on 28 Supreme Court cases, proclaimed to the room, “The United Nations deserves an obituary…because the United Nations committed suicide when it adopted Resolution 2334. It wrote its own death warrant…. Today I am happy to join a group that would spell the end of the United Nations, the end of its funding, it presence and significance in the world order.”
      The Covenant launch in Washington was only the beginning. Additional panels and town hall meetings will convene in several locales in the coming weeks. The conversation has begun.
      Edwin Black
      About the Author: Edwin Black is the author of several books including “ IBM and the Holocaust” and the initiator of the Covenant of the Democratic Nations effort. For his prior efforts, he has been awarded the Moral Courage Award, the Moral Compass Award, and the Justice for All Award.
      http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/replacing-the-un-with-the-covenant-of-democratic-nations/2017/02/02/
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      UNESCO has intervened in the long-running Israeli-Arab conflict over Jerusalem's holy sites of the Temple Mount and the Western Wall. It passed a resolution for the sites to be referred to only by their Arabic names - Haram al-Sharif and the Buraq Wall - thereby ignoring any Jewish connection.
       
  • Forum Statistics

    62,038
    Total Topics
    116,675
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,534
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Marek Markus
    Newest Member
    Marek Markus
    Joined




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.