Jehovah's Witnesses are considered a dangerous cult in many European countries and definitely under investigation because governments are concerned by the mind manipulation, child molestation cover-ups, breaking up of families due to shunning, as well as other atrocities taking place within the religion. Victims of Watchtower hard-line organizational policies are speaking up to government officials about their experiences and they are responding with assistance.

Lifelong Jehovah's Witnesses dissident speaks out on JW belief system . A) They are at your door to recruit you for their watchtower society corporation,they will say that "we are just here to share a message from the Bible" this is deception right off. B) Their 'message' creed is a false Gospel that Jesus had his second coming in 1914.The problem with this is it's not just a cute fairy tale,Jesus warned of the false prophets who would claim "..look he is here in the wilderness,or see here he is at the temple." C) Their anti-blood transfusion ban against *whole blood* has killed thousands. D) once they recruit you they will "love bomb" you in cult fashion to also recruit your family & friends or cut them off. ---- Danny Haszard Jehovah's Witness X 33 years

Jehovah doesn't exist because they claim he appoints elders and many of them are abusive of fellow members including children. Jehovah's don't pay tax in france, transfer equipment to avoid taxes...they are Hypocrites who teach one thing and practise another.

Send him to Agdam. Case Closed.

Jehovah's Witnesses and WW 2 Nazi 'persecution' For the record it is true that Jehovah's Witnesses will not fight for their country and they didn't fight 'against' Hitler either.They were interned in Nazi concentration camps that were then liberated by young allied men who died to set them free. Note:JW's didn't support the Allies either and despise the same governments that protect their freedoms.

I don't understand your convoluted argument(s) First you say "As for Jehovah's Witnesses and other minority sects like them, they are often in opposition to governments...They have no particular respect for any government, despite any claims they make otherwise." THEN you say "AS long as you did not ask them to go against their Bible you could get them to do absolutely anything as they are brainwashed into obedience to the state!" JW's may be different but they are not as confused as the people who attack them!

As for Jehovah's Witnesses and other minority sects like them, they are often in opposition to governments. Their members don't join the military, and are discouraged from taking on alternative service in countries where conscription is in operation. They have no particular respect for any government, despite any claims they make otherwise. In short, their stance is an unpopular one with some governments, and while I hate to see discrimination on the grounds of belief directed against any group, it's easy to understand why some governments can become frustrated by the Watchtower's blatant disregard for their authority.

Jehovah's Witnesses need to believe that they are the True religion and they only believe this because they think they are special and the ONLY ones persecuted. Persecute them enough, and you could get them to obey anything except denounce their faith. This was why JWs were the lackeys in the concentration camps. AS long as you did not ask them to go against their Bible you could get them to do absolutely anything as they are brainwashed into obedience to the state!

Many destructive cults forbid their followers to join military service they don't want members to be indoctrinated by 'another' boot camp. Get away from the cult milieu and into the marine corp and you find out they are some *normal* good buddies and you don't need cult teachings anymore. Bye bye cult

No true Christian participates or contributes in anyway to a nations military. This was the case in the First Century when Christs followers were persecuted and killed for not participating or contributing in any way to a nations (Rome) military. Tertullian attests many times to that fact. In The Early Church and the World, one historian tells us that “up to the reign of Marcus Aurelius at least [161-180 C.E.], no Christian would become a soldier after his baptism.” In The New World’s Foundations in the Old, another says: “The first Christians thought it was wrong to fight, and would not serve in the army even when the Empire needed soldiers.” Martin Niemoeller, a foremost Protestant leader in Germany before and after World War II, wrote: “It may be as truthfully recalled that Christian Churches, throughout the ages, have always consented to bless war, troops and arms and that they prayed in a very un-Christian way for the annihilation of their enemy. “All this is our fault and our fathers’ fault, but obviously not God’s fault. And to think that we Christians of today are ashamed of the so-called sect of the serious scholars of the Bible [Jehovah’s witnesses], who by the hundreds and thousands have gone into concentration camps and died because they refused to serve in war and declined to fire on human beings.” as 295 C.E., Maximilianus of Theveste, son of a Roman army veteran, was conscripted for military service. When the proconsul asked him his name, he answered: “Now, why do you want to know my name? I have a conscientious objection to military service: I am a Christian. . . . I can’t serve; I can’t sin against my conscience.” The proconsul warned him that he would lose his life if he did not obey. “I won’t serve. You may behead me, but I won’t serve the powers of This World; I will serve my God.”—An Historian’s Approach to Religion, by Arnold Toynbee. Therefore based on facts noted no human being involving himself in any activity supporting a nations military can profess he or she is a Christian.

http://wri-irg.org/node/9172 European Court of Human Rights fails to uphold international human rights standards Joint statement of European Bureau for Conscientious Objection, Quaker United Nations Office, Geneva, and War Resisters' International on the ECtHR Third section judgement Bayatyan v. Armenia (Application no. 23459/03, 27/10/09) In the case of a Jehovah's Witness who was sentenced to two and a half years in prison following his refusal of military service on the grounds of conscientious objection, a Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has stated categorically that conscientious objection to military service is not protected under the European Convention on Human Rights. In the judgement, the Chamber appeared, in its interpretation of Article 9 of the European Convention, to overlook the international human rights standards and jurisprudence . The United Nations Human Rights Committee addressed precisely the same issues in relation to the equivalent provision of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in the case of Yeo-Bum Yoon and Myung-Jin Choi vs Republic of Korea1. In that case (January 2007) the Human Rights Committee specifically interpreted Article 18 of the International Covenant (the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion2) as protecting conscientious objection to military service. The Human Rights Committee stated that the reference in Article 8 para 3 of the International Covenant to “any service of a military character and, in countries where conscientious objection is recognised, any national service required by law of conscientious objectors” as exceptions to the prohibition of forced labour “itself neither recognises nor excludes a right of conscientious objection”. By contrast the Chamber judgement claims that the equivalent provision on forced labour in the European Convention3 trumps the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion in this respect, even stating that States are not prevented from punishing conscientious objectors. It is important that the Grand Chamber agrees to hear an appeal in order to bring the European Court's position in line with international jurisprudence. EBCO, QUNO Geneva, WRI Budapest, 1 November 2009 Background The case The case concerned Armenian conscientious objector Vahan Bahatyan, born in 1983, who lives in Yerevan, Armenia. He is a Jehovah's Witness who for reasons of conscience refused to perform military service. In 2001 he was sentenced to a prison term of one and a half years. His sentence was increased by one year after the Prosecutor appealed for a harsher sentence, claiming that his conscientious objection was “unfounded and dangerous. When this decision was confirmed by the Armenian Supreme Court, Bayatyan took his case to the European Court. The European Court has now ruled against him even though it did “not doubt that the applicant's objection to compulsory military service was based on his genuine religious convictions”. Situation in Armenia On accession to the Council of Europe in 2000, Armenia committed itself “to adopt, with three years of accession, a law on alternative service in compliance with European standards and, in the meantime, to pardon all conscientious objectors sentenced to prison terms or service in disciplinary battalions, allowing them instead to choose, when the law on alternative service has come into force, to perform non-armed military service or alternative civilian service”4. The Alternative Service Act of 17 December 2003 introduced a right to conscientious objection, and a substitute civilian service. However, this law, and the substitute civilian service, are not in conformity with European and international standards, in particular because the substitute civilian service is under the control of the military. According to Jehovah's Witness sources, there are currently 71 conscientious objectors who are Jehovah's Witnesses in Armenia in prison for their conscientious objection to military service5. International Human Rights Standards The Human Rights Committee has interpreted the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as encompassing the right to conscientious objection in individual communications, General Comments, and Concluding Observations6. In addition, the former United Nations Commission on Human Rights7 and its Special Procedures, in particular the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion and Belief8, and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention9 have all addressed the right to conscientious objection to military service. Notes 1 Yeo-Bum Yoon and Myung-Jin Choi vs Republic of Korea (CCPR/C/88/D/1321-1322/2004, 23 January 2007) 2 Article 18 of the ICCPR is the equivalent of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: “1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. 2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice. 3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. 4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.” Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights: “1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. 2. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” 3 Article 8 para 3 of the ICCPR: “(a) No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour; (b) Paragraph 3 (a) shall not be held to preclude, in countries where imprisonment with hard labour may be imposed as a punishment for a crime, the performance of hard labour in pursuance of a sentence to such punishment by a competent court; (c) For the purpose of this paragraph the term "forced or compulsory labour" shall not include: (...) (ii) Any service of a military character and, in countries where conscientious objection is recognized, any national service required by law of conscientious objectors;” Article 4 para 2 and 3 (b) of the European Convention of Human Rights: “2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour. 3. For the purpose of this article the term forced or compulsory labour' shall not include: (...) (b) any service of a military character or, in case of conscientious objectors in countries where they are recognized, service exacted instead of compulsory military service;” 4 Opinion No. 221 (2000) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE): Armenia's application for membership of the Council of Europe, 28 June 2000, http://assembly.coe.int//Main.asp?link=http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/TA00/eopi221.htm, accessed 31 October 2009 5 Jehovah's Witnesses, Office for Public Information: European Court ruling fails to protect the right of conscientious objectors in Armenia, 27 October 2009, http://www.jw-media.org/frames/091027.htm, accessed 31 October 2009 6 See for example: The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion ( Art. 18) : General Comment No 22, 30/07/93. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4, http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/9a30112c27d1167cc12563ed004d8f15, accessed 31 October 2009; Concluding Observations COLOMBIA, CCPR/CO/80/COL, 26 May 2004; Georgia, CCPR/CO/74/GEO, 19 April 2002; Viet Nam, CCPR/CO/75/VNM, 26 July 2002; Estonia, CCPR/CO/77/EST, 15 April 2003; Morocco, CCPR/CO/82/MAR, 1 December 2004; Tajikistan, CCPR/CO/84/TJK, 18 July 2005; Yemen, CCPR/CO/84/YEM, 9 August 2005; Republic of Korea, CCPR/C/KOR/CO/3, 28 November 2006; Chile, CCPR/C/CHL/CO/5, 17 April 2007; Russian Federation, CCPR/C/RUS/CO/6, 29 October 2009; Frédéric Foin v. France, CCPR/C/67/D/666/1995, 9 November 1999; Yeo-Bum Yoon and Myung-Jin Choi vs Republic of Korea (CCPR/C/88/D/1321-1322/2004, 23 January 2007) 7 UN Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1998/77, ‘Conscientious Objection to Military Service’. This resolution brought together in a single text the various elements of resolutions 1989/59, 1993/84, and 1995/83 and was subsequently reaffirmed in Resolutions 2000/34, 2002/45 and 2004/35. 8 See for example: Report submitted by Mr. Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur, in accordance with Commission on Human Rights resolution 1999/39, 15 February 2000, E/CN.4/2000/65, para . 87, http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/80f0e46fc1648260802568ba004b44bf/$FILE/G0011063.pdf; Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Asma Jahangir - Summary of cases transmitted to Governments and replies received, 27 March 2006, E/CN.4/2006/5/Add.1, paras . 10-11, 25-26, 138 and 305, http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=E/CN.4/2006/5/Add.1&Lang=E; Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Asma Jahangir - Addendum - Mission to Turkmenistan, 12 January 2009, A/HRC/10/8/Add.4, paras 50-51, http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/10/8/Add.4&Lang=E 9 Working Group on Arbitrary Detention: Opinion No 36/1999 (Turkey); Opinion No 24/2003 (Israel); Recommendation No 2, Detention of conscientious objectors, E/CN.4/2001/14; Opinion No 8/2008 (Colombia); Opinion No 16/2008 (Turkey)

Traitor, everyone is obliged to serve in the military, let it be christian, atheists or jehova's witnisses. You are not more important than others, and must not get any priviliges. Unfortunaly they set him free, if it's up to me they must get a minimum of 10 years WORKING CAMP sentence without parole.