gfnslave

As for this portion of your comment, my response to the question is quite simply No!
I see many wearing crosses today either as jewelry or body art  who see it purely as a decorative item. Some of them are professed atheists.
I myself wore a cross as a piece of jewelry long before I became a Christian. Worship of it was the furthest thing from my mind at that time.
Incidentally whilst visiting a capital city in Europe recently, I witnessed a street fight over an automobile incident. One man was attempting to beat another with a large golden crucifix on a chain that he had been wearing at the time. I had no assumption that he was worshipping that item.

Even jw.org tattoos have been suggested! Certainly crosses feature quite prominently in body art.
The same book you quote, same page, shows that over the years, the realization of the unchristian origins and use of the cross symbol made it not just unnecessary but objectionable, so these pins are no longer used. 
So the issue was not over the use of a badge or pin, but more about the cross symbol incorporated in it's design.
With regard to the jw.org logo, I do note the proliferation of cottage industry including the logo in various paraphernalia offered for sale. Possibly a distasteful development for some. Maybe a copyright infringement, others assert, but I would leave that evaluation to more qualified legal minds.
However, I have yet to see any evidence presented to equate it with false religious idols from ancient times. 
So for me, apart from the obvious use of the logo for branding of media and property belonging to the official organisational entities of Jehovah's Witnesses, all these other private uses of it remain for now, simply a matter of personal choice, governed by good taste and conscience.

Yes, al this discussion is great. Much information, yet done conclusive to make a valid point but one, we still have to wait! No one knows but the Father. That is the only true fact we have. Only the one alive will see any of this occur.,another true fact. The ones alive, 'that generation' saw the promised land, right? Not the ones who had died. So it is true right now. Whoever is alive will see all that will happen as the Bible proposes it to happen. Jesus told us to be awake to see it, stay alert; so whenever it does happen we will not be caught off guard. Not trying to know the day or the hour, that information is for cowards, who want to skate and slide in at the last hour. No, salvation is not for you. I said that, I approve of what I just said, for it is the truth. That is why not even Jesus knows, but only Jehovah knows. He has the final say when all this takes place. No leaks will help any of us. We will either be ready or asleep at the wheel. It will come even if it seems as if it is delayed, but it will not be late.
So we should not be impatient like Sarah and begin trying other things to speed it up or even circumventing it. It will come in its due time as Jehovah sees fit, my friends. So a generation, will be alive when all things take place however long or short that is. That math, our math is irrelevant. Only Jehovah's is. His counts. Agape.

Can't find myself saying that anywhere.
 
Now this is interesting. "Honestly now... you really don't take money for what you do?"  
In the early 1980s, when I was pioneering in a predominantly Greek Cypriot populated area, I (and many other witnesses) had exactly the same words directed at us a number of times!. Many of the Greek Cypriot men particularly were convinced we were paid for preaching and made money from getting converts. Later, some who became witnesses revealed that they were told this by the priests in their church who objected to our preaching work in "their" community.
The inference is as baseless now as it was then.
 
Not sure what point is made here, but my impression is that the dipped bread identified Judas as the traitor. Other pieces of bread shared by Jesus were likely undipped.
 
This appears to be out of context and only a partial, condensed quote, so I am not clear on the purpose of its inclusion.
Anyway, before this thread gets too far from the original question.
It seems that the debate on the nature of the bread and the timing of this meal is pretty old. Alfred Edersheim appears to refer to it as ongoing in his book, Jesus the Messiah, first published in 1883 (p481-482 in the 13th impression).
I am satisfied for now with the points made in  w73 3/15 p.175 - Is the Date for Celebrating Passover Important to Christians? and the article Preparation -   Insight on the Scriptures Vol 2 p.676 which I quoted in earlier posts. These provide sufficient information for me so far to conclude that Jesus used unleavened bread as an emblem in his instituting of the Lord's evening meal, directly after the Passover meal on Nisan 14, and that his followers today are correct in following his example and instruction on this matter. For me, the original question, as raised, is sufficiently resolved, the answer, basically, being... No!
So I will withdraw from the thread for now, although I will note any further substantiated contributions to the discussion.

Also:
*** ka chap. 16 p. 296 par. 7 Completion of the Foretold “Sign” Nears ***

"Counted from the year of Jesus’ prophecy on the subject, the Jewish system of things had thirty-seven years yet to go, less than a generation with a life-span of forty years." 
 
*** it-1 p. 540 Wilderness Wanderings of Israel ***

"This brought Jehovah’s swift judgment: Forty years would pass before the nation would enter the Promised Land. By then, the faithless members of that generation would have died off."
So the questions are, 
Could there be a flaw in the Org's eschatology? If so, what is it? Could there be more than one flaw? This would be a fruitful research project for you, Sarah. 
 

Is it scripturally correct to press the brothers in the congregation to remove all facial hair (beard) except the mustache?

Love.....love was the teaching of Christ. 

Is it Christian NOT to accept someone who comes to the congregation and asks for forgiveness ?  Asking for forgiveness is not the only criteria as John the Baptist made clear at Matt 3:8.
"Thank you Eoin, But I am sure you have an opinion of your own" you said. Well here is my opinion:
If a person is sick, they need medical attention. If their sickness is contagious, additional precaution must be taken to avoid infecting others and this may include isolation until the sickness is no longer contagious. Sadly, some do not recover despite the best medical attention.
In the case of patients who respond to medical attention, those with the appropriate training and experience will manage the recovery of afflicted ones and their rehabilitation to the community. Although the process may be lengthy and procedures unpleasant, a successful outcome will outweigh temporary difficulties. Interestingly, although the  process has become sophisticated in modern times, something similar is well outlined in Leviticus 13. 
Spiritual sickness needs spiritual attention. In the case of unrepentance over serious sin, this is a symptom of serious spiritual sickness. This spiritual sickness needs the additional precaution of isolation from others to avoid infecting them, hence the disfellowshipping arrangement. Although a severe measure, this has the aim of restoration to spiritual health. James 5:14 applies in principal to the recovery process, with the latter part of Jude 23 indicating the need for caution in handling such matters. Managing the spiritual recovery and rehabilitation of spiritually sick ones is the responsibility of those with "spiritual qualifications" (Gal 6:1) and is best left to them. Sadly, some do not recover despite the best spiritual attention (Ph 3:18).
However, for those who are restored to spiritual health and are reinstated, then Ecc 7:8 applies to their experience, or for more detail, Heb 12:11.
I am sure you will understand in the case of physical sickness as described above, well intentioned, but inappropriate, contact and action on the part of untrained friends and relatives outside of the medical parameters would only serve to put the afflicted one and themselves at risk. However, once recovery has been confirmed, then there is no limitation. No less so in a spiritual context.