JW Insider

Good point. And to Arauna's point, most "Westerners" view the world only through "Western" eyes. The news about various countries in the world sounds almost the same in France, UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, US, Germany, etc.
And probably get taken in much less than the overall world due to neutrality, disinterest in low priority secular things, general avoidance of non-JW Internet sites. We've got our own priorities to be concerned about. (Although I'm sure this forum would make many wonder about myself and others.)
Important point about Russia not being as belligerent as America. This has been true for decades. While America hyped Russia's conflicts in Afghanistan and Georgia and now Ukraine, America would never hype the fact that America has been caught fomenting trouble in Ukraine, Iraq, Iran, even Hong Kong with CIA operatives, while amassing bases and missiles and ships all along the borders in Eastern Europe, the Mideast, the southern border of North Korea, creating coups and wars in Africa, Central and South America, etc. Another irony is that while deploring Russia's involvement in Syria, America doesn't report (except once accidentally and then quickly walked back) the number of US troops that had already invaded and who have been sitting inside Syria's borders all along, uninvited, based in the oil-rich areas of Syria, where America has been (and still is) controlling the flow of a majority of Syria's oil. America constantly discusses the threats of various other countries, while America is already overrunning and bombing countries to create death, chaos, and instability. Now, one of the problems is that it turns out that military lobbyists have been pushing various planes, radar systems, and defensive weapons that don't work very well. And while this was always a way to keep countries buying upgrades, now some of those buyers are looking to buy from Russia and China for various defensive weapons, because they don't trust the American weapons as they once did.
You must be like a "Beroean" on Twitter. Too bad there is no perfect method. And then there are the bots which flood one end or the other of your polar opposites and try to create trends and skews. There is another method of ruining any method of gathering accurate news sources, which many hope to get through Twitter/FB, and that's the inclusion of purposeful creation of "chaos" disguised as plain and simple truth in mainstream media. (Trump tweets, NYTimes, Vox, Vice, CNN, Fox, MSNBC) 
Much more to be said on this. Might come back to it later.
I'm sure I sounded a bit harsher than I meant to. If I made it sound like a big problem, I didn't mean to. For me this is not a controversy. Rutherford was just plainly wrong on this. Doesn't change the fact that he was right on so many other things. But I have to ask. Do you really think any of this information is applicable to paragraphs 8 and 11 of yesterday's Watchtower? Those WT paragraphs were about "lies" and "apostate lies." This is just information, hopefully honest and unvarnished. Also, one of the scriptures in the Study was Isaiah 54:17:
17  No weapon formed against you will have any success, . . .
A shield of knowledge will help us blunt the effect from anyone who tries to weaponize this information. But sometimes the actual shield for our faith will merely take the form of honesty and humility, and accepting the humanity of those taking the lead among us. If something turns out to be true, we don't want to be too quick to just reject is as false because we don't like the sound of it. 
I was only referring to the principle of not accepting something as true without multiple "witnesses" of evidence, documentation, speeches, etc. For me it meant that I wouldn't want to put something out here as fact unless I had personally done a good amount of due-diligence. It wasn't about whether anyone else should read and accept what someone puts on this forum and accepts it just because it includes multiple instances of evidence. Until someone already "knows" or looks up evidence for themselves, all they have looked at here is just someone's opinion about the evidence. 

I don't either. I try to get information from original sources when possible, leaks, info from FOIA requests, even those we are not supposed to see, anti-Chinese criticisms that come from pro-Chinese sources, and pro-Chinese admissions that come from generally anti-Chinese sources. The best "gems" come from researching items that come from sources which apparently slip up and accidentally admit the opposite of their usual agenda. (Such as the Bolton interview I heard.)
Here's an innocuous example: Let's say that a person who generally writes anti-Chinese propaganda says something like, "well it's true that China has a 5 percent GDP growth rate this year, but this already represents a slowdown and presents a better picture than it can probably maintain, because [trade tarriffs, high debt, etc. etc.] . . . " 
In the above, we can be pretty sure that the 5 percent growth rate has a high chance of being correct, or even understated, because it was admitted to be true, even when the person probably didn't want to admit it. Further research would show that the actual rate had been 6 percent, and that it really was a "slowdown" -- but a slowdown that is still twice as fast as the US growth rate. International financial newspapers and magazines which I used to get at work all the time were always full of "surprises" like this to help you build up a picture from such items. A reader has to be skeptical at all times, of everone on every side of an issue, and do this a lot, to get a better overall picture. 

They didn’t just say lies. They said lies and distortion of facts.
Is it outright lies that we deal with here? Not so much. Is it distortion of fact? For the most part, yes.
”Distortion of fact” encompasses a lot and much of what it encompasses is in the eye of the beholder. If a point, in the overall scheme of things, is really quite insignificant, and it is made to seem all-important, is that not a distortion of fact? 
Suppose the spies that I have sent out under Allen’s prompting report back to me with a dossier of JWI’s private life that includes a few exasperating habits of his, like nose-picking. Suppose too that he has had one of two regretful episodes in his life that he would rather not broadcast. Suppose he flunked out of some school or was fired from some job. Suppose he made a few judgements as family head that blew up in his face—not only his face but the faces of those in his family. Suppose he let down brothers in the congregation at one time or another, and even stumbled one or two.
”Ah, here comes Allen, now.....Hi Allen, what do you have?....hmmmm......oh my...yes....hm......whoa! look at that. Looky looky looky” 
Now suppose with my voluminous commenting privileges I never again fail to focus on one or all of these blunders, and I dismiss as inconsequential whatever good others point out that he has done, even though these matter plainly be what defines his life. Am I not distorting facts? Have I told any lies? No. Have I distorted any facts? I have done nothing else.

They are incestuous, with execs freely migrating from regulatory agencies to the companies they are supposed to monitor, and then back again.
A favorite piece of interview from the movie ‘Inside Job’ about the 2007 Great Recession is an interviewer asking a business professor why, several years later, no exhaustive inquiries have been undertaken.
”Because then you will find the culprits,” the fellow said.
They go to the same country clubs and belong to the same social strata. They are not interested in turning upon one another. Do a little to have something to present the masses and then ‘on with the show.’

Extreme socialism does become communism. But extreme capitalism does not look like communism, it's the definition of fascism. Capitalism defended by a militaristic state is fascism.
You have likely been listening to a lot of the same propaganda that now has most of the world in its thrall. I listened to it, too, for most of my life. The problem with your theory is that the United States, through dozens of once-secret sources, which are now in the open, prove definitively that the United States was deathly afraid of communism because it brings poor people out of poverty much quicker than capitalism ever has. This is the reason that communism is a "threat" and has to be interfered with and sabotaged constantly. It's the reason that the United States has chosen to destroy nations like North Korea and Vietnam and Libya and Syria and Venezuela and Nicaragua and even much smaller nations, more defenseless than those.
The United States has been running scared for decades, because of the theory that people might notice that communism, at least Marxist communism, is a scientific approach to the economy such that more poor in the population rise above the poverty level.
Russian communism, in spite of two world wars, and a couple of very paranoid leaders, managed to build itself up from a very poor economy with most of the population in poverty, to the second biggest economy in the world in just the 40 years from about 1917 to 1957. US Capitalism, for example, though a much richer country, barely moved the bar on the percentage of people it could bring out of poverty in any 40 year period.
China's communism is creating an economy that has now very likely become the number one economy in the world. And it was and still is a poor, overpopulated country.  In the years since its revolution in the late 1940's it has managed to bring more persons out of poverty than all other nations put together. There is a rumor that they might have completely raised virtually everyone above the poverty line by late 2020 or 2021. And this is what's reported by Western journalists, not just Chinese sources. And China has done this without bombing countries for their resources or using the US/IMF/WorldBank tactics of creating loans to be defaulted on so that the leverage on those loans allows rampant stealing of resources, trade for military bases, pipelines, etc. In fact, John Bolton was angry at China for using tactics in Africa that made local populations "prefer" China over America when it came to doing business for their valuable resources (rare earth metals, etc). Those "tactics" include NOT using loans for leverage, NOT using military proxies to murder uncooperative local populations, NOT promoting civil war to weaken the country, NOT attempting regime changes, NOT building infrastructure that is clearly for the purpose of American military bases, NOT using a majority of Chinese persons as workers in these lands to hurt the local economies, etc.
These "tactics" have worked so well, that almost everything the United States has done to make themselves unpopular in the world is projected onto China to try to make China look worse. Even the surveillance initiatives that you have often brought up are only in the testing stages and are still chaotic and experimental. They have been tried in only a few test areas and cities in China and they are not nearly as pervasive as such surveillance systems are in the United States.
Don't get the idea that I think Communism is a proper solution for the world, or that I think that these countries can do no wrong. They are led by humans, influenced by Satan, and will make dangerous mistakes just like every other nation. The only true solution to human governments is a government by God, God's Kingdom under Christ.

You may have noticed that the last time this came up on the forum, I stayed away from these details of the JFR/Hitler discussion, but I thought I remembered that you had already made a similar point in a previous discussion:
I wanted to show the reasons that this particular case should not be compared (in my opinion) with a practice of dissing just anything that doesn't come from the organization. These details were in response to the idea that Rutherford might have been referring just to the feel-good principles and promises of a typical politician. I took the above quote to that effect as your "defense" of Rutherford's specific actions in this regard, even if it wasn't particularly what you were trying to do.
I'm not at all trying to condemn Rutherford generally. Listening closely to his speeches and known writings, you can tell he has a love for Jehovah, and a strong faith that Jehovah will act on behalf of righteous people. Most everything I read from his writing and speeches is perfectly fine. But I am trying to condemn this conduct shown "here" on this matter. Absolutely!
By his own words he condemns his own actions here, on this particular matter.
We should never use two different scales, even when judging matters of this life about a distinguished and respected member of the Governing Body.
Isn't this the very reason that Galatians 1 and 2 is part of Scripture, and therefore beneficial for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness? In Galatians, Paul showed how Peter stood "condemned" in this matter of showing favoritism for one race or national group above another. Earlier Paul had just shown how we might go wrong for showing favoritism for a leader just because that person might be distinguished and respected.
There is nothing particularly wrong with bringing an accusation against an older man as long as we are conscientiously following the principle of not just making accusations wildly because of what we have heard from only one source, or unreliable sources. I think, or hope at least, that I am following the advice of Paul here:
(1 Timothy 5:19-21) 19 Do not accept an accusation against an older man except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 20 Reprove before all onlookers those who practice sin, as a warning to the rest. 21 I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus and the chosen angels to observe these instructions without any prejudice or partiality.  

Extreme socialism does become communism. But extreme capitalism does not look like communism, it's the definition of fascism. Capitalism defended by a militaristic state is fascism.
You have likely been listening to a lot of the same propaganda that now has most of the world in its thrall. I listened to it, too, for most of my life. The problem with your theory is that the United States, through dozens of once-secret sources, which are now in the open, prove definitively that the United States was deathly afraid of communism because it brings poor people out of poverty much quicker than capitalism ever has. This is the reason that communism is a "threat" and has to be interfered with and sabotaged constantly. It's the reason that the United States has chosen to destroy nations like North Korea and Vietnam and Libya and Syria and Venezuela and Nicaragua and even much smaller nations, more defenseless than those.
The United States has been running scared for decades, because of the theory that people might notice that communism, at least Marxist communism, is a scientific approach to the economy such that more poor in the population rise above the poverty level.
Russian communism, in spite of two world wars, and a couple of very paranoid leaders, managed to build itself up from a very poor economy with most of the population in poverty, to the second biggest economy in the world in just the 40 years from about 1917 to 1957. US Capitalism, for example, though a much richer country, barely moved the bar on the percentage of people it could bring out of poverty in any 40 year period.
China's communism is creating an economy that has now very likely become the number one economy in the world. And it was and still is a poor, overpopulated country.  In the years since its revolution in the late 1940's it has managed to bring more persons out of poverty than all other nations put together. There is a rumor that they might have completely raised virtually everyone above the poverty line by late 2020 or 2021. And this is what's reported by Western journalists, not just Chinese sources. And China has done this without bombing countries for their resources or using the US/IMF/WorldBank tactics of creating loans to be defaulted on so that the leverage on those loans allows rampant stealing of resources, trade for military bases, pipelines, etc. In fact, John Bolton was angry at China for using tactics in Africa that made local populations "prefer" China over America when it came to doing business for their valuable resources (rare earth metals, etc). Those "tactics" include NOT using loans for leverage, NOT using military proxies to murder uncooperative local populations, NOT promoting civil war to weaken the country, NOT attempting regime changes, NOT building infrastructure that is clearly for the purpose of American military bases, NOT using a majority of Chinese persons as workers in these lands to hurt the local economies, etc.
These "tactics" have worked so well, that almost everything the United States has done to make themselves unpopular in the world is projected onto China to try to make China look worse. Even the surveillance initiatives that you have often brought up are only in the testing stages and are still chaotic and experimental. They have been tried in only a few test areas and cities in China and they are not nearly as pervasive as such surveillance systems are in the United States.
Don't get the idea that I think Communism is a proper solution for the world, or that I think that these countries can do no wrong. They are led by humans, influenced by Satan, and will make dangerous mistakes just like every other nation. The only true solution to human governments is a government by God, God's Kingdom under Christ.

That's a very bad question if you are trying to exonerate JFR here.
I'm sure you already know this, but Hitler didn't come out of the blue. The goals of the Hitler's Nazi party had already been made clear in the 1920's. Hitler was actually becoming important in internal political and military circles in 1918/9, when the first swastika flags were seen even at the tail end of WWI. He had been an intelligence officer in WWI. Also as a political operative he was not speaking just for himself, but amassed more political power by standing for popular ideas about remilitarizing to prove the true superiority of the Teutonic race, and that they would have won WWI, except for the UK and of course Jewish Bolshevism. Even before 1920, the foundations of the Nazi party were already "coming into their own."
Because the Nazi party was very anti-Socialist (in spite of its name), it also grew in parallel with Italian fascism under Mussolini, whose party also gained power from the end of WWI. Mussolini was a "social Darwinian" racist (white supremacist), but not nearly as anti-Jewish as Hitler's party. Still it was a clear that Italy fascist party and Germany's fascist party (the Nazis) were trending in the same direction. Mussolini was breaking unions, was pro-capitalist, for privatizing businesses,etc. Both Nazism and Italian Fascism were seen as the "Anti-Revolution Revolution" or "Revolution of the Right" opposing the leftist Leninist style revolution of the left. The Russian revolution was spreading its ideology in some ways across Europe, as already seen in Finland and Romania and Ukraine, and Nazism was the cure. 
When Hitler staged his premature coup to get power in 1925, of course, he was caught and sent to jail, where he wrote Mein Kampf. By the mid-to-late-20s, Mein Kampf had made very clear all the basic components of his ideology. His goals were to bring Germany back into WWI to win it this time. He also made clear that lying and backstabbing and false propaganda were going to be necessary "tools." The book along with his speeches promoted rabid anti-Semitism in the 1920's which he toned down only by the early 1930's to be more electable and respectable. He was visited by many Americans before he took power, being seen as a celebrity. Many others in the party did not control their anti-Semitic rhetoric in their political speeches. Not that it mattered, because it started to come back with a vengeance through Hitler himself within months of his election.  
So his goals were clear from the 1920's. His party would be built on German imperialism, racial supremacy, fascism/nazism, and in his rise to prominence, he had used this rhetoric of revenge (over WWI, Treaty of Versailles) to push German even the socialist workers to the right. (Through inflitration and lying propaganda whenever necessary.)  He wanted to erase the shame of WWI, blaming the loss on Britain and Jews. German society saw the rhetoric rising but still assumed he could never become electable. But with rising industrialization, Hitler made fascism seem feasible. The premonitions in his rhetoric of the early and mid 20's made it seem realistic that that Germany should re-arm and conquer the world. The rationale for making war on the west was Jewish Bolshevism and the fact that they were blockaded by Britain, and obviously it was Russian-Jewish Bolshevism in the east since 1917.
If I haven't repeated myself enough already above, he was already a scary, militaristic, fascist, anti-socialist, anti-British, anti-Jewish, white supremacist. So I don't know what goals Rutherford thought were identical, but he already would have known much of the above history because I'm sure he had been reading the writing of a Jewish person who had already reported this by early 1933. But this same Jewish man had also written in April 1933 that Hitler's party, even though ostensibly pro-Catholic, didn't care anymore and had been breaking up not just socialist and communist meetings, but Catholic meetings, too.
Perhaps this is why Rutherford thought it was safe to include the following in his letter:
The Brooklyn headquarter of the Watchtower Society is pro German in an exemplary way and has been so for many years. . . . These two magazines, "The Watchtower" and "Bible Student" were the only magazines in America which refused to engage in anti-German propaganda . . . . In the very same manner, in course of the recent months the board of directors of our Society not only refused to engage in propaganda against Germany, but has even taken a position against it. The enclosed declaration underlines this fact and emphasizes that the people leading in such propaganda (Jewish businessmen and Catholics) also are the most rigorous persecutors of the work of our Society and its board of directors. This and other statements of the declaration are meant to repudiate the slanderous accusation, that Bible Researchers are supported by the Jews.
And the "Declaration" letter at the the same time included the following statements. The WTS was apparently not ashamed of them because they even printed them in English in the 1934 Yearbook, p. 134-138. The support for Hitler's Nazi principles are aligned with Hitler's propaganda against Jews and the British nation, and Rutherford admits his anti-Catholicism, too (which might NOT have aligned with Hitler's principles).
It is falsely charged by our enemies that we have received financial support for our work from the Jews. Nothing is farther from the truth. Up to this hour there never has been the slightest bit of money contributed to our work by Jews. We are the faithful followers of Christ Jesus and believe upon Him as the Savior of the world, whereas the Jews entirely reject Jesus Christ and emphatically deny that he is the Savior of the world sent of God for man's good. This of itself should be sufficient proof to show that we receive no support from Jews and that therefore the charges against us are maliciously false and could proceed only from Satan, our great enemy. The greatest and the most oppressive empire on earth is the Anglo-American empire. By that is meant the British Empire, of which the United States of America forms a part. It has been the commercial Jews of the British-American empire that have built up and carried on Big Business as a means of exploiting and oppressing the peoples of many nations. This fact particularly applies to the cities of London and New York, the stronghold of Big Business. This fact is so manifest in America that there is a proverb concerning the city of New York which says: The Jews own it, the Irish Catholics rule it, and the Americans pay the bills.

The present government of Germany has declared emphatically against Big Business oppressors and in opposition to the wrongful religious influence in the political affairs of the nations. Such is exactly our position.

Instead of being against the principles advocated by the government of Germany, we stand squarely for such principles, and point out that Jehovah God through Christ Jesus will bring about the full realization of these principles and will give to the people peace and prosperity and the greatest desire of every honest heart.

A careful examination of our books and literature will disclose the fact that the very high ideals held and promulgated by the present national government are set forth in and endorsed and strongly emphasized in our publications and show that Jehovah God will see to it that these high ideals in due time will be attained by all persons who love righteousness.

The letter that Rutherford wrote to Hitler around June 25, 1933 uses pretty much the same logic that the Watchtower had used for supporting the League of Nations. The idea is that the Bible Students stood for the same ethical goals as the Nazi government under Hitler, and that they were in full agreement with them. Hitler's goals were just a political expression of purely religious goals of the Bible Students. The letter says:
The conference of five thousand delegates also noted - as is expressed in the declaration - that the Bible Researchers of Germany are fighting for the very same high ethical goals and ideals which also the national government of the German Reich proclaimed respecting the relationship of humans to God, namely: honesty of the created being towards its creator.

The conference came to the conclusion that there are no contradictions when it comes to the relationship between the Bible Researchers of Germany to the national government of the German Reich. To the contrary, referring to the purely religious and unpolitical goals and efforts of the Bible Researchers, it can be said that these are in full agreement with the identical goals of the national government of the German Reich.
Of course, Hitler and his government had done very little by that point in 1933 to show how they would go about executing those "same ethical goals." But it was risky for Rutherford to claim they were identical. It's like giving Obama a Nobel Peace Prize just before he expands the current wars and takes the United States into some new ones.

All cards must line up.  They are not complete yet....  but things can change overnight.
In the time of Israel, way back then, Syria was part of northern coalition as a country.  In the global fulfillment of this proohecy leading up to a global Armageddon it refers to  the kings which are all aligned with the king if the south (Anglo-American interests with its allies)
The king of the north is Russia and China and all its other allies which does include Syria-  which are expanding rapidly.
I see you like the prophecy of Daniel. Read Daniel 11:40.  This economic pushing seems to be going on right now between north and south. Later the north controls all the wealth of the world..... read to end of chapter in Daniel 11.
This I believe is happening now because China and Russia has infiltrated Africa and south America, has taken over the south China sea with 15 islands and building a fleet of ships capable of putting trade embargoes in place. 
There are too many things going on at present which indicates a world-wide fulfillment of prophecy.
Communism does uplift people  during the distribution of wealth phase  - but it tends to always turn into a dictatorship. I come from Africa and first hand saw this. Most African countries are communist (their cultures love socialism) and suffer hardship because of communistic dictatorships. Africa cannot proper due to its human governments which immitate communism.
Capitalism is not any better. While it allows freedom to prosper and gives more opportunities -  unchecked capitalism leads to monopolies, then global corporations which become dictators. These corporations use their money to lobby to become more powerful and in the end it looks like a dictatorship by corporations or the individuals behind the corporations.  Google is now dictating policy by removing independent reporting from internet...... and supporting Chinese surveillance system..... Global corporations can become evil - think of the history of Monsanto.....  

@Arauna, I think it's just like @TrueTomHarley already indicated. Some conspiracies are going to turn out to be true. And, like I said before: almost all conspiracies have a lot of truth in them or they wouldn't work; they wouldn't get very far. Making up a counter-conspiracy is often the way to hide a true conspiracy.
And conspiracies should never surprise us if we are aware of the "machinations" of the Devil.

That's a very bad question if you are trying to exonerate JFR here.
I'm sure you already know this, but Hitler didn't come out of the blue. The goals of the Hitler's Nazi party had already been made clear in the 1920's. Hitler was actually becoming important in internal political and military circles in 1918/9, when the first swastika flags were seen even at the tail end of WWI. He had been an intelligence officer in WWI. Also as a political operative he was not speaking just for himself, but amassed more political power by standing for popular ideas about remilitarizing to prove the true superiority of the Teutonic race, and that they would have won WWI, except for the UK and of course Jewish Bolshevism. Even before 1920, the foundations of the Nazi party were already "coming into their own."
Because the Nazi party was very anti-Socialist (in spite of its name), it also grew in parallel with Italian fascism under Mussolini, whose party also gained power from the end of WWI. Mussolini was a "social Darwinian" racist (white supremacist), but not nearly as anti-Jewish as Hitler's party. Still it was a clear that Italy fascist party and Germany's fascist party (the Nazis) were trending in the same direction. Mussolini was breaking unions, was pro-capitalist, for privatizing businesses,etc. Both Nazism and Italian Fascism were seen as the "Anti-Revolution Revolution" or "Revolution of the Right" opposing the leftist Leninist style revolution of the left. The Russian revolution was spreading its ideology in some ways across Europe, as already seen in Finland and Romania and Ukraine, and Nazism was the cure. 
When Hitler staged his premature coup to get power in 1925, of course, he was caught and sent to jail, where he wrote Mein Kampf. By the mid-to-late-20s, Mein Kampf had made very clear all the basic components of his ideology. His goals were to bring Germany back into WWI to win it this time. He also made clear that lying and backstabbing and false propaganda were going to be necessary "tools." The book along with his speeches promoted rabid anti-Semitism in the 1920's which he toned down only by the early 1930's to be more electable and respectable. He was visited by many Americans before he took power, being seen as a celebrity. Many others in the party did not control their anti-Semitic rhetoric in their political speeches. Not that it mattered, because it started to come back with a vengeance through Hitler himself within months of his election.  
So his goals were clear from the 1920's. His party would be built on German imperialism, racial supremacy, fascism/nazism, and in his rise to prominence, he had used this rhetoric of revenge (over WWI, Treaty of Versailles) to push German even the socialist workers to the right. (Through inflitration and lying propaganda whenever necessary.)  He wanted to erase the shame of WWI, blaming the loss on Britain and Jews. German society saw the rhetoric rising but still assumed he could never become electable. But with rising industrialization, Hitler made fascism seem feasible. The premonitions in his rhetoric of the early and mid 20's made it seem realistic that that Germany should re-arm and conquer the world. The rationale for making war on the west was Jewish Bolshevism and the fact that they were blockaded by Britain, and obviously it was Russian-Jewish Bolshevism in the east since 1917.
If I haven't repeated myself enough already above, he was already a scary, militaristic, fascist, anti-socialist, anti-British, anti-Jewish, white supremacist. So I don't know what goals Rutherford thought were identical, but he already would have known much of the above history because I'm sure he had been reading the writing of a Jewish person who had already reported this by early 1933. But this same Jewish man had also written in April 1933 that Hitler's party, even though ostensibly pro-Catholic, didn't care anymore and had been breaking up not just socialist and communist meetings, but Catholic meetings, too.
Perhaps this is why Rutherford thought it was safe to include the following in his letter:
The Brooklyn headquarter of the Watchtower Society is pro German in an exemplary way and has been so for many years. . . . These two magazines, "The Watchtower" and "Bible Student" were the only magazines in America which refused to engage in anti-German propaganda . . . . In the very same manner, in course of the recent months the board of directors of our Society not only refused to engage in propaganda against Germany, but has even taken a position against it. The enclosed declaration underlines this fact and emphasizes that the people leading in such propaganda (Jewish businessmen and Catholics) also are the most rigorous persecutors of the work of our Society and its board of directors. This and other statements of the declaration are meant to repudiate the slanderous accusation, that Bible Researchers are supported by the Jews.
And the "Declaration" letter at the the same time included the following statements. The WTS was apparently not ashamed of them because they even printed them in English in the 1934 Yearbook, p. 134-138. The support for Hitler's Nazi principles are aligned with Hitler's propaganda against Jews and the British nation, and Rutherford admits his anti-Catholicism, too (which might NOT have aligned with Hitler's principles).
It is falsely charged by our enemies that we have received financial support for our work from the Jews. Nothing is farther from the truth. Up to this hour there never has been the slightest bit of money contributed to our work by Jews. We are the faithful followers of Christ Jesus and believe upon Him as the Savior of the world, whereas the Jews entirely reject Jesus Christ and emphatically deny that he is the Savior of the world sent of God for man's good. This of itself should be sufficient proof to show that we receive no support from Jews and that therefore the charges against us are maliciously false and could proceed only from Satan, our great enemy. The greatest and the most oppressive empire on earth is the Anglo-American empire. By that is meant the British Empire, of which the United States of America forms a part. It has been the commercial Jews of the British-American empire that have built up and carried on Big Business as a means of exploiting and oppressing the peoples of many nations. This fact particularly applies to the cities of London and New York, the stronghold of Big Business. This fact is so manifest in America that there is a proverb concerning the city of New York which says: The Jews own it, the Irish Catholics rule it, and the Americans pay the bills.

The present government of Germany has declared emphatically against Big Business oppressors and in opposition to the wrongful religious influence in the political affairs of the nations. Such is exactly our position.

Instead of being against the principles advocated by the government of Germany, we stand squarely for such principles, and point out that Jehovah God through Christ Jesus will bring about the full realization of these principles and will give to the people peace and prosperity and the greatest desire of every honest heart.

A careful examination of our books and literature will disclose the fact that the very high ideals held and promulgated by the present national government are set forth in and endorsed and strongly emphasized in our publications and show that Jehovah God will see to it that these high ideals in due time will be attained by all persons who love righteousness.

(Revelation 17:8, NWT 1984)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The NWT says above that some would "wonder admiringly" about this beast. The Watchtower in 1919 came out with an article that appears to be a commentary on that same phrase the Federal Council of Churches had used, but they also managed to use words that showed they "wondered admiringly" calling the ideals of this League both wonderful and admirable. But the Watchtower article also compared the League's ideals to show that they were essentially the same as the ideals of God's kingdom, and was even suggesting that this League might be involved in the initiation of the outworking of God's kingdom on earth. Just as the Federation of Churches had done, however, the Watchtower was not saying it was the same as God's kingdom, only that it was a "political" expression of those goals. Just like many in the Federation of Churches, it was realized that it would take more than political goals to actually achieve the full outworking of God's kingdom.
Here are some snippets from the first, last and a middle paragraph of a short article in the Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51, with a more complete text of the article below:

 

 
We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.
So the Watchtower claimed that the Peace Conference and the "virtual reality" of the League of Nations were not merely the evolution of human progress, but were were strides of Jehovah's divine providence. They were a part of Jehovah's day of preparation for the Messianic Kingdom. In a small way this idealistic League of Nations was a political expression of what God's Kingdom would complete on earth.
In fact, one point of the article is that the wonderful and admirable League of Nations is more than just a political expression of God's kingdom, but a social and economic expression of the ideals of God's kingdom on earth, too.

The letter that Rutherford wrote to Hitler around June 25, 1933 uses pretty much the same logic that the Watchtower had used for supporting the League of Nations. The idea is that the Bible Students stood for the same ethical goals as the Nazi government under Hitler, and that they were in full agreement with them. Hitler's goals were just a political expression of purely religious goals of the Bible Students. The letter says:
The conference of five thousand delegates also noted - as is expressed in the declaration - that the Bible Researchers of Germany are fighting for the very same high ethical goals and ideals which also the national government of the German Reich proclaimed respecting the relationship of humans to God, namely: honesty of the created being towards its creator.

The conference came to the conclusion that there are no contradictions when it comes to the relationship between the Bible Researchers of Germany to the national government of the German Reich. To the contrary, referring to the purely religious and unpolitical goals and efforts of the Bible Researchers, it can be said that these are in full agreement with the identical goals of the national government of the German Reich.
Of course, Hitler and his government had done very little by that point in 1933 to show how they would go about executing those "same ethical goals." But it was risky for Rutherford to claim they were identical. It's like giving Obama a Nobel Peace Prize just before he expands the current wars and takes the United States into some new ones.

The letter that Rutherford wrote to Hitler around June 25, 1933 uses pretty much the same logic that the Watchtower had used for supporting the League of Nations. The idea is that the Bible Students stood for the same ethical goals as the Nazi government under Hitler, and that they were in full agreement with them. Hitler's goals were just a political expression of purely religious goals of the Bible Students. The letter says:
The conference of five thousand delegates also noted - as is expressed in the declaration - that the Bible Researchers of Germany are fighting for the very same high ethical goals and ideals which also the national government of the German Reich proclaimed respecting the relationship of humans to God, namely: honesty of the created being towards its creator.

The conference came to the conclusion that there are no contradictions when it comes to the relationship between the Bible Researchers of Germany to the national government of the German Reich. To the contrary, referring to the purely religious and unpolitical goals and efforts of the Bible Researchers, it can be said that these are in full agreement with the identical goals of the national government of the German Reich.
Of course, Hitler and his government had done very little by that point in 1933 to show how they would go about executing those "same ethical goals." But it was risky for Rutherford to claim they were identical. It's like giving Obama a Nobel Peace Prize just before he expands the current wars and takes the United States into some new ones.

(Revelation 17:8, NWT 1984)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The NWT says above that some would "wonder admiringly" about this beast. The Watchtower in 1919 came out with an article that appears to be a commentary on that same phrase the Federal Council of Churches had used, but they also managed to use words that showed they "wondered admiringly" calling the ideals of this League both wonderful and admirable. But the Watchtower article also compared the League's ideals to show that they were essentially the same as the ideals of God's kingdom, and was even suggesting that this League might be involved in the initiation of the outworking of God's kingdom on earth. Just as the Federation of Churches had done, however, the Watchtower was not saying it was the same as God's kingdom, only that it was a "political" expression of those goals. Just like many in the Federation of Churches, it was realized that it would take more than political goals to actually achieve the full outworking of God's kingdom.
Here are some snippets from the first, last and a middle paragraph of a short article in the Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51, with a more complete text of the article below:

 

 
We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.
So the Watchtower claimed that the Peace Conference and the "virtual reality" of the League of Nations were not merely the evolution of human progress, but were were strides of Jehovah's divine providence. They were a part of Jehovah's day of preparation for the Messianic Kingdom. In a small way this idealistic League of Nations was a political expression of what God's Kingdom would complete on earth.
In fact, one point of the article is that the wonderful and admirable League of Nations is more than just a political expression of God's kingdom, but a social and economic expression of the ideals of God's kingdom on earth, too.

(Revelation 17:8, NWT 1984)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The NWT says above that some would "wonder admiringly" about this beast. The Watchtower in 1919 came out with an article that appears to be a commentary on that same phrase the Federal Council of Churches had used, but they also managed to use words that showed they "wondered admiringly" calling the ideals of this League both wonderful and admirable. But the Watchtower article also compared the League's ideals to show that they were essentially the same as the ideals of God's kingdom, and was even suggesting that this League might be involved in the initiation of the outworking of God's kingdom on earth. Just as the Federation of Churches had done, however, the Watchtower was not saying it was the same as God's kingdom, only that it was a "political" expression of those goals. Just like many in the Federation of Churches, it was realized that it would take more than political goals to actually achieve the full outworking of God's kingdom.
Here are some snippets from the first, last and a middle paragraph of a short article in the Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51, with a more complete text of the article below:

 

 
We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.
So the Watchtower claimed that the Peace Conference and the "virtual reality" of the League of Nations were not merely the evolution of human progress, but were were strides of Jehovah's divine providence. They were a part of Jehovah's day of preparation for the Messianic Kingdom. In a small way this idealistic League of Nations was a political expression of what God's Kingdom would complete on earth.
In fact, one point of the article is that the wonderful and admirable League of Nations is more than just a political expression of God's kingdom, but a social and economic expression of the ideals of God's kingdom on earth, too.

(Revelation 17:8, NWT 1984)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The NWT says above that some would "wonder admiringly" about this beast. The Watchtower in 1919 came out with an article that appears to be a commentary on that same phrase the Federal Council of Churches had used, but they also managed to use words that showed they "wondered admiringly" calling the ideals of this League both wonderful and admirable. But the Watchtower article also compared the League's ideals to show that they were essentially the same as the ideals of God's kingdom, and was even suggesting that this League might be involved in the initiation of the outworking of God's kingdom on earth. Just as the Federation of Churches had done, however, the Watchtower was not saying it was the same as God's kingdom, only that it was a "political" expression of those goals. Just like many in the Federation of Churches, it was realized that it would take more than political goals to actually achieve the full outworking of God's kingdom.
Here are some snippets from the first, last and a middle paragraph of a short article in the Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51, with a more complete text of the article below:

 

 
We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.
So the Watchtower claimed that the Peace Conference and the "virtual reality" of the League of Nations were not merely the evolution of human progress, but were were strides of Jehovah's divine providence. They were a part of Jehovah's day of preparation for the Messianic Kingdom. In a small way this idealistic League of Nations was a political expression of what God's Kingdom would complete on earth.
In fact, one point of the article is that the wonderful and admirable League of Nations is more than just a political expression of God's kingdom, but a social and economic expression of the ideals of God's kingdom on earth, too.

There is always some truth in half-truths, and conspiracy theorists always deal in half-truths. I have usually found, or I should say "always found" that whenever I hear about the dangers of a certain UN initiative, that the person promoting the theory is often virtually unacquainted with the original documents, and is getting their information from another place, rather than the UN source.
I think that any human organization can be dangerous, even inadvertently. People make stupid and dangerous decisions without thinking of consequences. It happens all the more with persons of influence and power who make dangerous decisions, sometimes on purpose, and sometimes while trying to do the right thing. So I'm not at all surprised about bad things coming out of the UN, NATO, the EU, the White House, Russia, China, etc.
And I'm not surprised that persons, even Rutherford, in 1918 on up through 1940, '41, '42, '43, '44, '45, etc., also held conspiratorial views of the League of Nations and the UN, and that these views influenced some of those extremely inaccurate predictions about them. Inaccurate predictions about them are found in the Watch Tower publications and also on the pages of many other religions and political, secular organizations, too.  
Initially, of course, the Watchtower praised the League of Nations, as if it were some sort of political expression of God's kingdom on earth, just as Rutherford initially praised Hitler's Nazi government as if it were some sort of political expression of God's kingdom on earth. Of course, in neither case did this view last very long, and it was never expressed as if these two political expressions (the League and Hitler) could ever be looked upon as any kind of replacement of God's kingdom. 
I doubt that this site is very accurate, but I agree with much of what is said on this wikipedia-style article at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/United_Nations
It includes among its member nations not only parliamentary democracies, but also human rights abusers mainly concerned with their own power. Because unanimity among the Big 5 (the USA, France, UK, Russia and China) is needed for any action involving the Security Council, things rarely get done, and UN sanctions can be pretty much ignored by all nations great and small. That's okay, though, since the countries like the US that are meant to fund it systematically starve it of funding, so the UN can't do much anyway.[note 1] On some small scale activities, it can do some good, but any attempts at actual peace-keeping usually fall apart. What should then be a cause for peace and brotherhood instead just becomes another bureaucratic nightmare.
. . .
The UN and conspiracy theories
As an international body, the UN has predictably attracted the attention of conspiracy theorists. Due to conservatives' dislike of the institution, the conspiracy theories tend to come from the far-right wingnut camp, although said theories often cross over into the loony left fringes as well.
League of Nations
UN conspiracism grew out of the Paris Peace Conference at the end of the First World War as liberal internationalists like Woodrow Wilson pushed for an international body that would promote global peace and national self-determination. Opponents of the plan, most notably Wilson's nemesis Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge (R-MA), argued that joining the League of Nations would cause the US to become entangled in malignant international politics, that the US might have to commit troops to wars it didn't want to fight, and that the League would infringe on national sovereignty.[4] Despite the fact that the US ultimately failed to join the League of Nations — and that its failure was one of the major causes of World War II — conspiracy theories about world government began to spring up in fringe circles. Often, these were vague murmurings about shadowy international dealings, though some conspiracy theories began to take on racist overtones. Father Coughlin, for example, alleged that the League was a tool of the Jews to prosecute a "sacred war" against the US.
As a side note: One of the few positive things that the League of Nations accomplished was issuing "Nansen Passports," the first internationally recognized form of Refugee Documents for stateless people.[5]
Formation of the UN
Conspiratorial themes about the League of Nations transferred over to the newly formed United Nations during the post-war era. The John Birch Society (JBS) was (and still is) most famous for pushing conspiracy theories about the UN being a front for a communist world take-over. The JBS also implicated the UN in plotting to institute one world religion to supplant Christianity. This was to be done through subtle means, such as a "War on Christmas" in which religious Christmas decorations would be replaced by UN iconography.[6]
The New World Order and other current theories
Current conspiracy theories about the UN usually portray it as the heart of an alleged "New World Order" (NWO), or at least implicate it as a major player in said Order. The UN effectively acts as a Rorschach test for political cranks to project their paranoia onto. Some more recent conspiratorial notions include:
The UN is in cahoots with [insert favored bogeyman here]. (Popular choices include the Jews, the NWO, communists, environmentalists, "globalists", corporo-fascists, Illuminati, the Catholic Church, Freemasons, Reptoids, Them, etc.).
The idea of the UN instituting a world religion or the UN being a vehicle for the Antichrist has become a common trope among the rapture ready set. Jack Chick was fond of this one.[7] This idea is also shared to some extent by Jehovah's Witnesses, who consider UN to be the "image of a wild beast" from Revelation 13 and the "disgusting thing that causes desolation" mentioned in Matthew 24:15, which will soon act to destroy all other religions, and finally turn against JWs. The UN has also been accused of being the Harlot being described as "Sitting atop the Nations, Multitudes, Languages, and Tongues" (sitting atop the tongues, what an image!).
The UN has launched smaller projects such as the "North American Union" to gradually erase national borders.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the UN increasingly became the target of anti-environmentalist conspiracy theories, primarily the notion of a power-grab using climate change as a cover. This is due to the UN's institution of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to produce consensus reports on climate change. Conspiracies vary from the "softer" side (the UN is simply cooking the books to enrich itself) to the extremely alarmist (the UN is angling for world domination via alleged "junk science" and the machinations of Al Gore). Another element in this view is that the commies infiltrated the environmental movement after the fall of the USSR and are now using the UN as a tool via environmental policy.[note 2]Christopher Monckton is a proponent of this theory.[8]
Agenda 21, the most recent UN-related conspiracy theory, also centers on a non-binding environmental agreement. If you want to know more, Glenn Beck wrote the book.[9]
Mix the second and the fourth conspiracies and you get the idea that the UN is attempting to enforce a global Earth-worshiping pagan hippie cult where everyone is forced to sing the praises of Gaia.[10][note 3] This one, at least, could provide some amusement if it were true.
Sometimes related to the environmental conspiracy theories (usually global warming) is the idea that concern about overpopulation is being used as a scare tactic to lay the groundwork for a genocide or eugenics scheme to kill off the "useless eaters." As if the world's population isn't currently growing at an alarming rate.
The UN is under the control of Arab/Muslim states and attempting to (a) enable terrorists, (b) usher in the "global caliphate", (c) subtly insert sharia into the American legal system, or (d) all of the above.[note 4]
The UN Arms Trade Treaty is an attempt of an "end run" around the Second Amendment to take away everyone's guns. Just guess the factual accuracy of that one.[11]
Left-ish circles have their own conspiracy theories. Most common is the claim is that the UN is merely the pawn of the United States and its imperialistic schemes. This sometimes plays into fears about globalization (WTO, duh).[12] This seems to ignore the complete antipathy to the UN and other international organizations that some US administrations have shown in the past.[note 5] The War in Iraq also demonstrated that the US doesn't need no stinkin' UN to carry out imperialistic schemes.

There is always some truth in half-truths, and conspiracy theorists always deal in half-truths. I have usually found, or I should say "always found" that whenever I hear about the dangers of a certain UN initiative, that the person promoting the theory is often virtually unacquainted with the original documents, and is getting their information from another place, rather than the UN source.
I think that any human organization can be dangerous, even inadvertently. People make stupid and dangerous decisions without thinking of consequences. It happens all the more with persons of influence and power who make dangerous decisions, sometimes on purpose, and sometimes while trying to do the right thing. So I'm not at all surprised about bad things coming out of the UN, NATO, the EU, the White House, Russia, China, etc.
And I'm not surprised that persons, even Rutherford, in 1918 on up through 1940, '41, '42, '43, '44, '45, etc., also held conspiratorial views of the League of Nations and the UN, and that these views influenced some of those extremely inaccurate predictions about them. Inaccurate predictions about them are found in the Watch Tower publications and also on the pages of many other religions and political, secular organizations, too.  
Initially, of course, the Watchtower praised the League of Nations, as if it were some sort of political expression of God's kingdom on earth, just as Rutherford initially praised Hitler's Nazi government as if it were some sort of political expression of God's kingdom on earth. Of course, in neither case did this view last very long, and it was never expressed as if these two political expressions (the League and Hitler) could ever be looked upon as any kind of replacement of God's kingdom. 
I doubt that this site is very accurate, but I agree with much of what is said on this wikipedia-style article at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/United_Nations
It includes among its member nations not only parliamentary democracies, but also human rights abusers mainly concerned with their own power. Because unanimity among the Big 5 (the USA, France, UK, Russia and China) is needed for any action involving the Security Council, things rarely get done, and UN sanctions can be pretty much ignored by all nations great and small. That's okay, though, since the countries like the US that are meant to fund it systematically starve it of funding, so the UN can't do much anyway.[note 1] On some small scale activities, it can do some good, but any attempts at actual peace-keeping usually fall apart. What should then be a cause for peace and brotherhood instead just becomes another bureaucratic nightmare.
. . .
The UN and conspiracy theories
As an international body, the UN has predictably attracted the attention of conspiracy theorists. Due to conservatives' dislike of the institution, the conspiracy theories tend to come from the far-right wingnut camp, although said theories often cross over into the loony left fringes as well.
League of Nations
UN conspiracism grew out of the Paris Peace Conference at the end of the First World War as liberal internationalists like Woodrow Wilson pushed for an international body that would promote global peace and national self-determination. Opponents of the plan, most notably Wilson's nemesis Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge (R-MA), argued that joining the League of Nations would cause the US to become entangled in malignant international politics, that the US might have to commit troops to wars it didn't want to fight, and that the League would infringe on national sovereignty.[4] Despite the fact that the US ultimately failed to join the League of Nations — and that its failure was one of the major causes of World War II — conspiracy theories about world government began to spring up in fringe circles. Often, these were vague murmurings about shadowy international dealings, though some conspiracy theories began to take on racist overtones. Father Coughlin, for example, alleged that the League was a tool of the Jews to prosecute a "sacred war" against the US.
As a side note: One of the few positive things that the League of Nations accomplished was issuing "Nansen Passports," the first internationally recognized form of Refugee Documents for stateless people.[5]
Formation of the UN
Conspiratorial themes about the League of Nations transferred over to the newly formed United Nations during the post-war era. The John Birch Society (JBS) was (and still is) most famous for pushing conspiracy theories about the UN being a front for a communist world take-over. The JBS also implicated the UN in plotting to institute one world religion to supplant Christianity. This was to be done through subtle means, such as a "War on Christmas" in which religious Christmas decorations would be replaced by UN iconography.[6]
The New World Order and other current theories
Current conspiracy theories about the UN usually portray it as the heart of an alleged "New World Order" (NWO), or at least implicate it as a major player in said Order. The UN effectively acts as a Rorschach test for political cranks to project their paranoia onto. Some more recent conspiratorial notions include:
The UN is in cahoots with [insert favored bogeyman here]. (Popular choices include the Jews, the NWO, communists, environmentalists, "globalists", corporo-fascists, Illuminati, the Catholic Church, Freemasons, Reptoids, Them, etc.).
The idea of the UN instituting a world religion or the UN being a vehicle for the Antichrist has become a common trope among the rapture ready set. Jack Chick was fond of this one.[7] This idea is also shared to some extent by Jehovah's Witnesses, who consider UN to be the "image of a wild beast" from Revelation 13 and the "disgusting thing that causes desolation" mentioned in Matthew 24:15, which will soon act to destroy all other religions, and finally turn against JWs. The UN has also been accused of being the Harlot being described as "Sitting atop the Nations, Multitudes, Languages, and Tongues" (sitting atop the tongues, what an image!).
The UN has launched smaller projects such as the "North American Union" to gradually erase national borders.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the UN increasingly became the target of anti-environmentalist conspiracy theories, primarily the notion of a power-grab using climate change as a cover. This is due to the UN's institution of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to produce consensus reports on climate change. Conspiracies vary from the "softer" side (the UN is simply cooking the books to enrich itself) to the extremely alarmist (the UN is angling for world domination via alleged "junk science" and the machinations of Al Gore). Another element in this view is that the commies infiltrated the environmental movement after the fall of the USSR and are now using the UN as a tool via environmental policy.[note 2]Christopher Monckton is a proponent of this theory.[8]
Agenda 21, the most recent UN-related conspiracy theory, also centers on a non-binding environmental agreement. If you want to know more, Glenn Beck wrote the book.[9]
Mix the second and the fourth conspiracies and you get the idea that the UN is attempting to enforce a global Earth-worshiping pagan hippie cult where everyone is forced to sing the praises of Gaia.[10][note 3] This one, at least, could provide some amusement if it were true.
Sometimes related to the environmental conspiracy theories (usually global warming) is the idea that concern about overpopulation is being used as a scare tactic to lay the groundwork for a genocide or eugenics scheme to kill off the "useless eaters." As if the world's population isn't currently growing at an alarming rate.
The UN is under the control of Arab/Muslim states and attempting to (a) enable terrorists, (b) usher in the "global caliphate", (c) subtly insert sharia into the American legal system, or (d) all of the above.[note 4]
The UN Arms Trade Treaty is an attempt of an "end run" around the Second Amendment to take away everyone's guns. Just guess the factual accuracy of that one.[11]
Left-ish circles have their own conspiracy theories. Most common is the claim is that the UN is merely the pawn of the United States and its imperialistic schemes. This sometimes plays into fears about globalization (WTO, duh).[12] This seems to ignore the complete antipathy to the UN and other international organizations that some US administrations have shown in the past.[note 5] The War in Iraq also demonstrated that the US doesn't need no stinkin' UN to carry out imperialistic schemes.

This claim is about the talk by Knorr in Sept 1942 and the booklet by the same name "Peace - Can It Last?"
Knorr, didn't anticipate it. He knew about the formation of the United Nations because it had already been announced for the past 9 months before the talk. President Roosevelt himself had called it the "United Nations." Knorr even stated in the talk that the name "United Nations" had already been announced by a member of the President's cabinet. Listening to the talk, and reading the booklet, you can see therefore, that this was never a prediction, nor was it presented as a prediction.
It was not spun as a prediction until 1958 when Fred Franz wrote the book "Your Will Be Done On Earth" and this portion implying a prediction was requoted in the 2/1/1960 Watchtower. By July 15, 1960 the claim had become very explicit:
*** w60 7/15 p. 444 par. 19 Staying Awake with the “Faithful and Discreet Slave” ***
. 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. Such wakefulness was concerning events that unerringly took place three years later. At the 1958 Divine Will International Assembly amazing advance information in connection with Daniel’s prophecy was given about events to occur in the immediate future. Such evidence of spiritual foresight is recorded for us in the book “Your Will Be Done on Earth.” Once again the “faithful and discreet slave” has been tipped off ahead of time for the guidance of all lovers of God. Surely one’s present security depends on his staying awake with the “faithful and discreet slave.”
The Watchtower had been predicting that the NON-democracies, the AXIS powers would win WWII, at least up until 9 months before the talk. But then Knorr had also repeated a prior idea that the war would be stopped by treaties with no real winners. Then by the time of the talk, the idea was that the Vatican would compromise but that the win by the Allies would not last long BECAUSE the cry of peace and security after the war would be the immediate end of peace due to Armageddon being triggered. (using 1 Thessallonians 5). Also, this "win" would be declared by the new TOTALITARIAN world order under the totalitarian armies of the UN. The Watchtower was interpreting this situation to support the idea that it would now only be a matter of a very short time for the Kingdom to take over, compared to the length of the war itself. The idea that Armageddon was only MONTHS away, instead of years, was a common theme for the remainder of the war.

That was partially answered in the previous post. But there were more quotes of course.
The first is from the Watchtower, September 15, 1941, p. 288
Receiving the gift, the marching children clasped it to them, not a toy or plaything for idle pleasure, but the Lord's provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon.
Sometimes it was even a matter of "days." The following is from Consolation (lka, Awake!) April 27, 1942, p. 13
Proof is now submitted that we are now living at the end of the days, and we may expect to see Daniel and the other mentioned princes any day now!
And the following was already quoted from "Universal War Near," 1935:
. . . during the few remaining months until the breaking of that universal cataclysm the powers that rule the nations of the earth will continue to make treaties and tell the people that by such means they will keep that world peace and bring about prosperity.

It started mostly in Rutherford's acceptance of conspiratorialist half-truths from some anti-Catholic sources back in 1938. There were strong rumors that the Catholic Church wanted to use the opportunities brought about by the war to control the entire world through a kind of Catholic caliphate. Rutherford could easily tie fascist Italy to the Vatican through Mussolini, and Hitler's concord with the Vatican had already been exposed, too. Communist Russia was not perceived as an "Axis" power of course, as it would become the country that would go on to defeat Hitler almost single-handedly, but joining with the "Allied" powers, to complete it. But he looked to information about how Communist party sources were trying to reach a hand out for peace with the Vatican. And he followed rabid anti-Catholic sources to prove that the Catholic church was looking to rule the entire world.
Therefore, in 1938, in the booklet, "Face the Facts" he predicted that the 'Axis' powers and communists would form a Catholic "combine" to finally take over America and Britain.
When Mussolini marched to Rome to take possession thereof he was an avowed atheist, opposed to God and his kingdom, and would not tolerate anyone who supports God's kingdom or advertises the same. He was then opposed to all religious organizations. But in 1929 Mussolini and the pope, the head of that mighty religious organization, entered into an alliance by which temporal power in Italy was restored to the pope, and Mussolini became a devoted Catholic, and therefore a supporter of religion. Likewise the dictator of the totalitarian rule of Germany has entered into an alliance with the pope, and he is an avowed Catholic and supports the Catholic religion, and protects it within that arbitrary government.
Recently Mr. Forbes, executive secretary of the Communist party, proposed mutual co-operation between Communism and the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in state affairs. In answer thereto the pope, acting through his cardinal and authoritative representative (Verdier), at Paris, made reply to the Communist party in these words: "If this gesture of the outstretched hand from your side expresses the wish to become better acquainted with your Catholic brothers in order to give better respect to the religion which inspires them to their convictions, their feelings, their works, then the church will not refuse to carry out this work of enlightenment and you will recognize that this can contribute greatly to the happiness of all." To such generous offer from the pope the Communist party responded in these words: "The outstretched hand of the Communist party to the Catholic people remains outstretched." (New York Times, July 26, 1938) True, the Catholic Press of America, since the Hierarchy's connection with the Fascists was exposed in Australia, in Seattle, Washington, and in other places, has had much to say about a possible break between the pope and the Fascists. Such publication is merely a political trick to keep the people deceived and in the dark while the Totalitarians march on and seize control of America and England.
The indisputable facts are that the Roman Catholic Hierarchy has stooped wholly to political methods to gain control of the world, and concerning such an honest Catholic of New York has written a book entitled "Rome Stoops to Conquer", and therein submits the proof that Vatican City's chief objective is to rule the world in conjunction with radical powers. The Hierarchy has placed its trusted men in the key positions of political office in practically every nation of the world, which men are first Catholic and, regardless of the just rights of the people, always carry out the will of the Hierarchy in political governmental affairs. These facts, which cannot be disputed, disclose the Roman Catholic Hierarchy's determination to act as a kind of spiritual super-government over the dictators of the world, forming a part of the monstrosity, and which violently opposes Jehovah and his kingdom under Christ Jesus. The monstrosity moves onward! . . .
When the totalitarian Catholic combine gains control of the British Isles, which it is certain to do, then all liberties of the people will be at an end. . . .
The totalitarian combine is going to get control of England and America. You cannot prevent it. Do not try. Your safety is on the Lord's side; but there really will be but a short time that the combine will hold sway, because it is written in the Lord's Word, at 1 Thessalonians 5: 3, that when this crowd says, 'We are now at peace and safety,' the Lord sends sudden destruction upon them, and they are at their wits' end, and they shall find no way of escape.
Rutherford spoke of Armageddon coming against a world of totalitarian nations, and this is what he meant. The totalitarian combine would have already taken over England and America when Armageddon arrives. The nearness of this time was expressed in many ways. One of them, in the same booklet, echoed the Millions campaign, which was NOT just about the great crowd, but about the world in general. This time it was more specifically about the "great crowd" [Jonadabs]. The doctrine had changed so that ONLY the Jonadabs would survive Armageddon.
Would it be Scripturally proper for them to now marry and to begin to rear children? No, is the answer, which is supported by the Scriptures. Referring to the prophetic picture: Noah's sons and their wives had no children before or during the flood, and none were born of them until after the flood was dried up, and the record is that it was two years after the flood before children born are mentioned.. . . Those Jonadabs who now contemplate marriage, it would seem, would do better if they wait a few years, until the fiery storm of Armageddon is gone,. . . The only ones who will survive Armageddon will be God's faithful children . . . . .The kingdom is here, and certain and complete victory will crown the King, Christ Jesus, and those who stand with him. The earth is to be filled with a righteous people, and those faithful Jonadabs now living shall not die, but shall have a part in the performance or work of populating the earth with righteous people, and all these things to the eternal praise of Jehovah and the vindication of his name.
Since 1935, Rutherford had been saying that we were in the time "immediately" before Armageddon, and that it would therefore NOT be scriptural to get married and have children either immediately before or immediately after Armageddon. That this meant a matter of only "months" had been made clear, too. This next quote is from the booklet and talk "Universal War Near" from 1935
. . . during the few remaining months until the breaking of that universal cataclysm the powers that rule the nations of the earth will continue to make treaties and tell the people that by such means they will keep that world peace and bring about prosperity. (Universal War Near, 1935, p. 3, 26-27)
For a few years, the idea had been that there would be NO winners of a war before Armageddon, because nations would keep a tentative peace through treaties until Armageddon broke out. But this had changed by 1938 (above) and by December 1941 the idea that the totalitarian (axis) powers would win had been around for about three years. But only in December 1941 had the idea been added that the totalitarian, axis powers (the Catholic Vatican Nazi Fascist combine) had managed to take over Belgium, France, and others, but would be ready to compromise and therefore not gain full control of America and Britain, but would manage their "win" through the taking away of freedoms.
You'll notice too that the idea of a "new League of Nations" was already in quotes from secular sources.
[December 1, 1941 Watchtower, p.357-362]


It was no longer a full "military" victory to be expected by the king of the north. But the king of the north would be the one to extend its rule over all the nations of the earth.

Note that Rutherford concludes the article the same way. He hasn't really given up on the idea that that totalitarian (Axis) rule would still overrun all the nations of the earth.


Only if the totalitarian rule would overrun all the nations of the earth would it be possible for the cry of Peace and Security to come from the "king of the north" rather than the "king of the south." Therefore, it was earlier in the same article where this had been stated (more than once):

 

That was around 1985? The Watchtower ran several Armageddon covers back-to-back that year. The following is from February 1, 1985, p.6.

Also, a lot more of the artwork turned cartoonish and amateurish between 1982 and 1985, for some reason. I was part of the art deparment from 1976 to 1980 and worked on other projects until 1982, so I had nothing to do with the above. Gotta love magenta lightning and those realistic puffs of smoke, though!
I believe the one you are thinking of was in color and focused more specifically on the UN building. I recall it very similarly, but don't remember if it appeared in a booklet or just where. It wasn't in a Watchtower that I remember.

This claim is about the talk by Knorr in Sept 1942 and the booklet by the same name "Peace - Can It Last?"
Knorr, didn't anticipate it. He knew about the formation of the United Nations because it had already been announced for the past 9 months before the talk. President Roosevelt himself had called it the "United Nations." Knorr even stated in the talk that the name "United Nations" had already been announced by a member of the President's cabinet. Listening to the talk, and reading the booklet, you can see therefore, that this was never a prediction, nor was it presented as a prediction.
It was not spun as a prediction until 1958 when Fred Franz wrote the book "Your Will Be Done On Earth" and this portion implying a prediction was requoted in the 2/1/1960 Watchtower. By July 15, 1960 the claim had become very explicit:
*** w60 7/15 p. 444 par. 19 Staying Awake with the “Faithful and Discreet Slave” ***
. 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. Such wakefulness was concerning events that unerringly took place three years later. At the 1958 Divine Will International Assembly amazing advance information in connection with Daniel’s prophecy was given about events to occur in the immediate future. Such evidence of spiritual foresight is recorded for us in the book “Your Will Be Done on Earth.” Once again the “faithful and discreet slave” has been tipped off ahead of time for the guidance of all lovers of God. Surely one’s present security depends on his staying awake with the “faithful and discreet slave.”
The Watchtower had been predicting that the NON-democracies, the AXIS powers would win WWII, at least up until 9 months before the talk. But then Knorr had also repeated a prior idea that the war would be stopped by treaties with no real winners. Then by the time of the talk, the idea was that the Vatican would compromise but that the win by the Allies would not last long BECAUSE the cry of peace and security after the war would be the immediate end of peace due to Armageddon being triggered. (using 1 Thessallonians 5). Also, this "win" would be declared by the new TOTALITARIAN world order under the totalitarian armies of the UN. The Watchtower was interpreting this situation to support the idea that it would now only be a matter of a very short time for the Kingdom to take over, compared to the length of the war itself. The idea that Armageddon was only MONTHS away, instead of years, was a common theme for the remainder of the war.