Anna

Allowing something still doesn't mean you cause it. Jehovah did not kill Job's children. Satan did.
In any case, what is good and what is bad is subjective. What you consider good, I might think is bad. But Jehovah is the ultimate arbiter who decides what is good and what is bad and that could answer this:
Also, I have noticed that sometimes the Bible writer is not corrected and is allowed to write what he actually feels. And sometimes the Bible does not explain, condone, or condemn something, but it is merely recorded as "a fact that happened".  For example the rape of Lot by his daughters. There is nothing in the account that either condones or condemns this action. It is merely a report on what happened. This is why it is important to really research and know the rest of the Bible in order to make sense of some ambiguous, and sometimes apparently contradictory things.

And they are! All the anointed I have ever known were very active in the ministry and still are. That was their focus. The sisters taking the lead with the younger ones, and the brothers helping the congregation to shepherd the flock as elders. When you were in the congregation, were you not active in the work that Christ commissioned you with, to preach and make disciples?

And they are! All the anointed I have ever known were very active in the ministry and still are. That was their focus. The sisters taking the lead with the younger ones, and the brothers helping the congregation to shepherd the flock as elders. When you were in the congregation, were you not active in the work that Christ commissioned you with, to preach and make disciples?

Yes, @Emma Rose, Tom knows what he's talking about. When he came here a few years ago he was full of positive vibes (not that he isn't any more) but soon realized his patience would be severely tested.
So welcome to the "club". If I may suggest, consider also joining the closed JW forum 🙂

Rats! Caught in the act once more!
Very well. My bluster got the better of me. To clarify, only Srecko is going after God’s people with a machete. 4Jah is using a knife. And Witness, appropriately enough, is using a battle axe 

This club is intended for active publishers associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses only. Anyone who does not fall into this category will be denied membership.

Jehovah will decide that.

Not at all.  Kind David had an illicit affair with a married woman and then sent her husband to the front line in order for him to be killed, he also numbered the people when he shouldn't have.  Jehovah did not depart from using King David to carry out His will.  Jehovah is also aware of the effects of sin and if His people are repentant, He forgives them, He is not unreasonable so as to expect perfection from imperfect people.  I have not found Jehovah's organisation to be lacking in mercy and love.
I don't agree with you about our GB because that hasn't been my experience    I read all of our beautiful Watchtowers and Awakes and savour every word, here is purity in it's finest form.
Over 300,000 baptised...no stumbling block there.  If the 'whole world' is lying in the power of the wicked one, I would not be expecting them to be complementing our organisation.
 

Ah—a breath of fresh air, who handles herself well and is doubtless a loyal Christian. But I hope the breath reflects no naïveté. 
They are doing considerably more than chafing. They are going after Jehovah’s organization with a machete. They are not to be talked out of it. I have not seen one of them budge one iota In all the time I’ve been around. Just so that you should know that.
I can think of a way of cutting down on the minions. Not that you should, of course. That’s for you to decide, and I like your expressions. But know what you’re getting into.

Ah well you would say that wouldn't you   Of course I'm aware of who the anointed are, I personally knew 2 of them, lovely sisters, so humble and it makes me smile to think of them in their heavenly role.
Night night  

Of course there are, how close was Judas to Christ.  Do you think someone who serves Jehovah 'completely' wouldn't be able to discern this?  The scriptures are replete with warnings concerning matters such as these.  Those of us both physically 'and' mentally in know this already.

To Srecko Sostar
There is a substantial difference between Jehovah 'withdrawing' his protection and Satan then testing Job with all sorts of problems and your slant on matters.  This is the issue before all mankind, including you, chafing against it is not going to make it go away    I am tested constantly by the arch-enemy and his minions, that is fine by me as it provides an opportunity for me to prove that I don't serve Jehovah for what I can get and I can make Him rejoice.  Job actually didn't know who was behind what was happening and he still kept his integrity, what a wonderful brother, looking forward to meeting him in the new system, along with his now '20' children and wife.  
None of what you say detracts from everything belonging to Jehovah, he provides both rain and sun for all.

So true in many countries. That's part of what I meant when I said that ...
It seems they've found weasel-words to show that something might look like idolatry but it technically does not fall under their definition of idolatry. This is so different from the words the Bible uses such as "abstain" from idolatry, or "flee" from idolatry, or "guard yourselves" from idols. There's no room left for staying that close to idolatry but using technical definitions to claim it's not.

I used to wonder about Catholic churches being filled with statues and people praying to them. Surely they were aware that idolatry was wrong. So I questioned this and found out that apparently the Catholics do not view their statues as idols, but merely as symbols or reminders of past saints etc. 
The Catholic reasoning is that:
"An image is not an idol unless two things are present… (1)The image, must represent a false god. (2) The image, must be worshiped.
Then what about bowing down and praying in front of a statues of Mary, for example. Is that worship?
According to Catholic reasoning no, it's not because: There are two Biblical requirements of worship (1) full submission, and (2) sacrifice. 
This occurs at Holy Mass when: "This is where we Catholics fully submit ourselves to Yahweh (The Holy Trinity), and offer up the sacrifice of the Eucharist".
Bowing down is an act of respect, and prayer is supplication, not worship.. 
This would all be OK, however, in the case of the Pachamama, the Pope, by calling the statue merely a symbol of something, is watering down his own Catholic principles, because the Pachamama already fulfills the first criteria for an idol in that the statue represents a fertility godess.....not only that, but the rituals that honor Pachamama also involve "sacrifice" where grain and other produce is offered and "The final step of the ceremony is the burning of the offerings so that they can return to their origins, rising into the sky while the remaining ashes are buried in the earth to complete the cycle".
Interesting observation from Wikipedia: After the Spanish colonization of the Americas, they forced conversion to Roman Catholicism. As it is a syncretic religion, the figure of the Virgin Mary was associated with that of the Pachamama for many of the indigenous people.

All are dings, dents, scratches, and pothole damage acquired by driving the cramped and narrow road over the decades. All could have been avoided by leaving the car parked and doing nothing. None are the core teachings of JWs, the combination of such teachings that are found nowhere else.
The Name, the ransom, no trinity, no hell, earthly paradise, God’s kingdom as government, the preaching work, earthly resurrection, the reason God allows suffering explained—all core teachings that have been firmly in place for over a century.
Do you hold all of these core teachings? Do you hold any of them? Nobody knows what you believe. That absurdly long thread you started about money reveals nothing more than what you always reveal—an overriding desire to malign your spiritual betters. 
And just so as to establish that my piety equals yours, I will now cite an entire chapter of Zecharaih:
The word of Jehovah of armies again came, saying:  2 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘I will be zealous for Zion with a great zeal, and with great wrath I will be zealous for her.’” 3 “This is what Jehovah says, ‘I will return to Zion and reside in Jerusalem; and Jerusalem will be called the city of truth, and the mountain of Jehovah of armies, the holy mountain.’” 4 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘Old men and women will again sit in the public squares of Jerusalem, each with his staff in his hand because of his great age.  5 And the public squares of the city will be filled with boys and girls playing there.’” 6 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘Although it may seem too difficult to the remaining ones of this people in those days, should it seem too difficult also to me?’ declares Jehovah of armies.” 7 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘Here I am saving my people from the lands of the east and the west.  8 And I will bring them in, and they will reside in Jerusalem; and they will become my people, and I will become their God in truth and in righteousness.’” 9 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘Let your hands be strong, you who now hear these words from the mouth of the prophets, the same words that were spoken on the day the foundation of the house of Jehovah of armies was laid for the temple to be built.  10 For before that time, there were no wages being paid either for man or for beast; and it was not safe to come and go because of the adversary, for I turned all men one against another.’ 11 “‘But now I will not deal with the remaining ones of this people as in the former days,’ declares Jehovah of armies.  12 ‘For the seed of peace will be sown; the vine will produce its fruit and the earth its yield, and the heavens will give their dew; and I will cause the remaining ones of this people to inherit all these things.  13 And just as you became an object of cursing among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so I will save you, and you will become a blessing. Do not be afraid! Let your hands be strong.’ 14 “For this is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘“Just as I had determined to bring calamity on you because your forefathers made me indignant,” says Jehovah of armies, “and I felt no regret,  15 so at this time I have determined to do good to Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. Do not be afraid!”’ 16 “‘These are the things you should do: Speak the truth with one another, and the judgments in your gates must promote truth and peace.  17 Do not scheme calamity against one another in your hearts, and do not love any false oath; for these are all things that I hate,’ declares Jehovah.” 18 The word of Jehovah of armies again came to me, saying:  19 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘The fast of the fourth month, the fast of the fifth month, the fast of the seventh month, and the fast of the tenth month will be occasions for exultation and joy for the house of Judah—festivals of rejoicing. So love truth and peace.’ 20 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘It will yet come to pass that peoples and the inhabitants of many cities will come;  21 and the inhabitants of one city will go to those of another and say: “Let us earnestly go to beg for the favor of Jehovah and to seek Jehovah of armies. I am also going.”  22 And many peoples and mighty nations will come to seek Jehovah of armies in Jerusalem and to beg for the favor of Jehovah.’ 23 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘In those days ten men out of all the languages of the nations will take hold, yes, they will take firm hold of the robe of a Jew, saying: “We want to go with you, for we have heard that God is with you people.”’”

There are many scriptures that clearly show that not all people will be saved, and what to do to be saved. It also talks clearly about shunning. I won't go into specific details, because you already know them. Of course no man can judge another person, that will ultimately be God. But that doesn't mean JWs can't decide who is approved to become a JW or who no longer qualifies to be JW. No one else but JWs can make that decision, I mean no government will make, or interfere with the decision or constitution of a religion.. And that's part of what religious freedom means. 
What God ultimately decides, is, ..well...up to God.

I think I know what you are insinuating. You might be thinking that the term is too loosely based. What if for example one religion's faith tells them to kill the infidel? In that case, obviously, that kind of religious freedom is dangerous. However, we know what kind of religious freedom Ms. Baran is talking about. She would be referring to religious freedom that does not violate human rights, or takes another persons life. This kind of religious freedom has existed in America since the First Amendment, and seems to be working just fine. Also, she is saying that although Russia supposedly has religious freedom, that can't be true if a peaceful religion such as JWs are banned.

I think I know what you are insinuating. You might be thinking that the term is too loosely based. What if for example one religion's faith tells them to kill the infidel? In that case, obviously, that kind of religious freedom is dangerous. However, we know what kind of religious freedom Ms. Baran is talking about. She would be referring to religious freedom that does not violate human rights, or takes another persons life. This kind of religious freedom has existed in America since the First Amendment, and seems to be working just fine. Also, she is saying that although Russia supposedly has religious freedom, that can't be true if a peaceful religion such as JWs are banned.

Yes. I think that you have hit upon the reason that the quote about peace and security was considered "Satanic." It was haughty in the sense of being far too optimistic and ambitious. Perhaps the words "supremely" and "vision" also give it a religious sense.
"In+ these+ Goals+ and+ targets,+ we+ are+ setting+ out+ a+ supremely+ ambitious+ and+ transformational+ vision.+ We+ envisage+ a+ world+ free+ of+ poverty,+ hunger,+ disease+ and+ want,+ where+all+life+can+thrive.+"
Of course, we know from the context that we are likely trying to read into it things that just aren't there, if we try to make too much of the supremely flowery rhetoric.
But, do we really know what is the demarcation line for calling an organization evil and disgusting? Is it the grand scope of the optimism? The scope of the effort? Is this because they envisage the whole world to be better, not just limiting their efforts to a small country here and there? 
We don't call a school teacher evil and disgusting if he or she spearheads a project for a cleanup of a park, or a tree planting effort. But what if all teachers in several different countries support the idea of an "Earth Day" where several hours of that day every year are used for the promotion of such projects? What if the teachers optimistically claim that such efforts will save the world from a climate crisis? What if it turns out that the funding and promotional materials for these "Earth Day" efforts come from policies and think tanks at a government level, and these governments are haughty enough to think they can achieve these good things without God?
(I noticed that even evangelists like Billy Graham and others have felt a need to counsel their audience that Earth Day is not evil. Here's another:
So should Christians care about Earth Day? Yes.The contemporary environmentalist movement has often been flawed and clumsy and sometimes evil, as any movement made up of fallen sinners tends to be. But, at the core of it, is a concept Christians ought to recognize.
But there is always a conspiratorialist somewhere who will be happy to find evil in anything. Here's an example:
Don Stewart’s letter (News Messenger, April 22, page A5, “Celebrate Earth and not Lenin”) argued that Earth Day is connected to Lenin’s birthday as both fall on April 22. Celebrating Earth Day shows you are a red Communist and plotting much evil in the world of capitalism.
Snopes.com even had to produce an article against that idea, since Lenin had supposedly murdered and "composted" his girlfriend. Other pro-capitalists found other political reasons for calling Earth Day "evil." https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2000/04/earth-day-evil/
The UN policymakers and think tanks look at the world as a bunch of projects. When they look at poverty, they see how some government policies have succeeded in a short amount of time in bringing very poor countries on their way out of poverty, from say 80% below a UN-defined poverty line only 8% still in poverty.  Or other countries bring the meaningful amount of free health care from 50% of their population up to 100%. Or free education of children that was available for 20% of a population is now available to 100%. So the UN recommends some of those same ideas to other member countries in such a way that doesn't bring any specific God or gods into the equation.
But for us, if the UN wants to promote projects they see as good, they will always be seen by some of us as "evil and disgusting." Even if member countries think this is a good thing in the eyes of their God, bringing God into the equation is a sure way of bringing prejudice and sabotage to these projects.
And what if they did bring God into the equation? Wouldn't that just make them more evil and disgusting in the sight of most of us? The United States Supreme Court and other government agencies put up a sign that says "In God We Trust." Does that make them any more or less Satanic in our eyes?
I know we don't tie the term Satanic to all political organizations and entities as we have done in the past, but especially when it comes to the UN, we are apt to use words like evil and disgusting. We can do this, while at the same time praising their efforts.
Rutherford looked at the British armies occupying Palestine in the early decades of the last century and saw them as the "disgusting thing;" "the abomination of desolation." At the same time the Watchtower temporarily praised the League of Nations, using words saying, in effect, that it was the political expression of the Kingdom of God on earth.
I see the United Nations as just another governmental organization about which we need to stay neutral. We can watch it as we would any government on earth. We can see its failures and see its successes. And we can see how people put too much faith in it, and their own governments. But if we start calling it specifically evil and disgusting then we are not neutral. We are not idolizing the UN if we point out its successes, just as we are not demonizing it when we point out its failures. 

One does get the sense that things are coming together quickly. Let me throw just one more bit of speculation into the pot, so that, in case it happens, I will be able to bill myself as a true prophet.
The entire network evening news yesterday consisted of Trump leaving the hospital, flying to the White House via helicopter, and then, just when the news would be signing off—there is was standing framed by the White House door, saluting, and (gasp) removing his mask with defiance. All the whlle the media, who hate him, and who hate the idea of being upstaged by him, must cover him thoroughly and are reduced to saying banal things about projecting strength and such.
”Look, the Man!” I just know that somewhere the evangelical types are going to be saying. I haven’t seen it yet, but it probably is occurring.
And if he dies? I’ll bet you anything he has that base covered to, with a statement, maybe even prerecorded, of going into the great beyond triumphantly and without fear. “Look, we’re mortal,” he will say. Death happens at present. However, I have conquered death. The latter five words will not be his, but if the churchy folks say “Look, the Man!” while he is alive, what will they say when he is dead?
This works on so many levels to satisfy “his base.” His enemies in the press are almost always atheist, or at least heavily skeptic. For them, this life IS all there is, and suddenly they are very interested in stories about 70+ year-olds who initially felt find, but then dropped dead. But his base—whoa—who knows what sort of blasphemous comparisons they might make, elevating a national leader to someone else who gave his life so that others could live without fear.
AlanF, that troll, carried on and on about the “Devil’s deal” between the churches and the President, ignoring, as trolls always do, that it is universal in politics and that his side does the same. I think of John F Kennedy, who faced huge odds gaining the Presidency because he was Catholic. “I don’t know why they make such a fuss over my being Catholic, he said to aides. It’s not as though I’m a very good one.”

In+ these+ Goals+ and+ targets,+ we+ are+ setting+ out+ a+ supremely+ ambitious+ and+ transformational+ vision.+ We+ envisage+ a+ world+ free+ of+ poverty,+ hunger,+ disease+ and+ want,+ where+all+life+can+thrive.+"
 
Our own magazine, the 1995 WT had some good things to say about the UN. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1995720



“For 50 years the United Nations organization has made notable efforts to bring about world peace and security. Arguably, it may have prevented a third world war, and the wholesale destruction of human life through the use of nuclear bombs has not been repeated. The United Nations has provided millions of children with food and medicine. It has contributed to improved health standards in many countries, providing, among other things, safer drinking water and immunization against dangerous diseases. Millions of refugees have received humanitarian assistance”.
The magazine also states the JW position regarding the UN: “Jehovah’s Witnesses view the United Nations organization as they do other governmental bodies of the world. They acknowledge that the United Nations continues to exist by God’s permission. In harmony with the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses render due respect to all governments and obey them as long as such obedience does not require that they sin against God.”

Of course, and this is a given for JWs, like all other governments, the UN will not exist one day. The same magazine goes on to say: “Then Jesus Christ, the “King of kings and Lord of lords,” and his army of heavenly warriors will dissolve all human governments and put to death all who reject God’s sovereignty".

I think what @Arauna maybe had in mind is that without Jehovah, this is an impossible task and that those who try to achieve it lack humility and reliance on God, and it is Satan who is trying to promote that kind of thinking.....the independence from God. After all, this was his original reasoning with Eve.
However, and looking at it realistically, I doubt any of those people who try to implement these good things are even aware that they should look to God for guidance and look to his Kingdom to bring the solution. So I think we should be fair and admit that there are many people who are unwittingly supporting Satan's methods, rather than knowingly trying to devise some evil, diabolical plan. Satan is the master of deception, and he knows that this method works better than outright bidding someone to do evilness. After all, most people have some good in them, and have a conscience, because they were created that way. There must have been a reason why Jesus was fond of mankind, and why he was willing to give his life for them (Proverbs 8:31). Same for Jehovah, who doesn’t desire anyone to be destroyed.

The UN is only evil and disgusting in the sense that it is haughty enough to think that they may achieve all these good things by themselves, without God, thinking they can give themselves credit for something that is clearly not in their capacity to achieve.... imo....

Of course!
Actually, I have gone there off and on and I tell them to be sure to read all my comments. They tell me to....well, they decline my offer.

Yes. This is in the nature of packaging things. It does take time. You think it takes no time if the packaging is done in a parking lot and people have to drive there to fetch it? You think they eat it there in the parking lot because it will take time to transport it home?
Forgive me for this. If you like, you can send a letter to God, supplemented by Bible chapters about feeding and caring, and point out that if he really cared, he would make food that didn’t go bad.
Come, now. You are just flailing away, revealing nothing more than mean jealousy. Why are you like this?
It’s a crime to go the extra mile and bring it to them? What if people don’t have a “waiting car?” Really poor people will not.
In my lifetime I have seen ‘taking care of one’s own’ go from being a laudable trait to a cult-like offense bordering on criminal. Let us rip Galatians 6:10 out of our Bibles, for it is selfish to actually do it: “let us work what is good toward all, but especially toward those related to us in the faith.”
Let us humor you for a moment and grant your premise that Jehovah’s Witnesses are selfish for operating with this verse in mind. Isn’t it the fault of God, who says in this verse that they should begin aid with their own? What really is your beef over this? Aren’t faith-based organizations the ideal distribution channels? Surely you have one. You are the true anointed. Your rivals heading the JW organization are the false ones. Surely there is nothing they do that you don’t do better.
As a person of faith, you will disagree with the premise of this humanist thecounter.org article that we all must bend over backwards to make sure people who reject faith are not offended. You will say let them seek out a faith. That way, if every one does, and especially when they go the extra mile as do Jehovah’s Witnesses, everyone’s needs will be cared for. There will be no poor unattended.
Anyone can apply for this program. All you have to do is be willing to work for others and have your act together sufficiently enough to package and distribute. If Witnesses take the government up on their generous program, truly an instance—they are not all that common, of when government does things right—why do you rail about it? Anyone is invited to do it. There is no excuse for any faith not to, unless there are so few poor in their midst and reach that they are all easily accommodated. So everyone is cared for! And the humanists are not left out either because in abandoning faith they surely have built something better, so they too care for any poor within their midst and reach.
So what in the world is your beef with this? You froth at those who go the extra mile. Why do you not froth at those who do the bare minimum, or even nothing at all?
This is exactly the nasty jealousy that you display at the JW disaster relief program, on the basis that it doesn’t relieve everybody, but operates with Galatians 6:10 in mind. The reason it doesn’t attempt to fix everybody is that it is largely a labor force of volunteers using vacation time. There’s only so much that they can do. What they can do is set the example for others to imitate if they will.
We don’t know how to fix the world’s broken system. People without Bible principles tend not to get along. We don’t know how to help them succeed in the absence of Bible principles, and that is why JWs are primarily a Bible teaching organization. They follow the ‘teach a man to fish’ model, so you will not have to keep giving them fish till the end of time, because we see repeatedly that that model breaks down. 
Now, I personally have no issue with those who operate otherwise. When I pass a soup kitchen I do not mutter bad things about it. I say good things about it. I say that they are focusing on a specific good thing that we are not, and so how can you criticize that? I do not. I may observe that it is a stopgap measure, but that certainly does not make it unpraiseworthy. 
There is in my neck of the woods such an agency called the House of Mercy. It is run by a nun, or maybe a former-nun. I have nothing but praise for it. She shakes down whoever she must to procure supplies and help those who are truly down and out—with feeding and lodging. Recently she was worried that a gigundous shipment of canned goods that she has come to rely upon, supplied by the Latter Day Saints church in Salt Lake City, might not come this year. And then it did. Will you praise the Mormons? I will in this instance. It is a very good deed they do. However they are also the most political of faiths—the most consistently Republican as rated by the same Pew organization that ranks the Witnesses as the most apolitical, and they have a lot of beliefs that take time to get ones head around and that most churches will deride them as a cult almost to the same extent they will deride JWs as one.
I don’t have a problem with someone trying to make this world’s broken distribution system work. However, I will not go so far as to hurl stones at the people who have invented an entirely new channel that does work. The Watchtower has published an apt illustration of parents who hire a babysitter to care for their children, and on returning home they find the children not cared for, as the babysitter is busy painting the house. Even though the house needed painting, they are not happy. Tending to the children was the assigned task. If the babysitter wants to paint the house AND care for the children, that works fine, but that good work cannot be done INSTEAD of caring for the children.
I personally had mixed feelings when I heard this illustration because I had been saying something very similar for a long time and I thought maybe they had stolen it from me. Of course, they are welcome to it, and indeed, it is an obvious enough comparison that it might well occur simultaneously to different people. It actually improved upon mine because mine didn’t involve people. Mine involved hiring a contractor to reroof the house and later find that he has painted it instead. Theirs involves people, which is better, but it is also worse, because hiring a babysitter is always associated with caring for the kids physically. The parents do not hope for the babysitter to care for them spiritually, and usually are relieved to find that he/she hasn’t made that attempt.
The JW organization puts emphasis on caring for ones spiritually, so that in applying Bible principles they will correspond to the man who has learned how to fish. Of course, giving a man a fish also has a place, and as stated, I  am not one to criticize it, as you do the organization that teaches people how to fish. But if you only give them fish you make them dependent upon yourself for life, and the first time you fall down on “your” job, they blame you for it. Better teach them Bible principles that will enable them to fish, and the best foundation for Bible principles to stick is to fortify them with accurate knowledge about God.
And if I feared that the organization has stolen my illustration, it is not so bad as a recent speaker who related how at another Hall he had laid a $20 bill on the speaker stand along with his outline because he meant to use it as an illustration of how counterfeit is so hard to distinguish from real, and that the fact that there is much counterfeit money does not prove that there is no such thing as real money. However, the chairman, upon spotting the bill, removed it to Lost and Found, so that when the speaker took the stand, he could not use his analogy. “He literally stole my illustration,” he told us.
 
 
 
 
 

I don't know what congregation this was but we in ours did not do anything like that. The elders made it clear that the boxes were from the "farmers to families" government aid. Our boxes even had a message from Trump.....The elders had brothers distribute them to families they considered needed it most.
It seems like that congregation was the exception rather than the rule. However, I can understand that since all good things come from Jehovah, someone who was in dire need would have been grateful to God for this government help. 

Does anybody think that way?  We know not everything the UN does is evil. Not everything the Governments do is evil either, as Paul brings out; "Keep doing good, and you will have praise from it;  for it is God’s minister to you for your good". Wanting to do things "green" is a good thing, so there should be no reason for a Witness to lobby against that..