Russia Bans Jehovah’s Witnesses As An "Extremist Organization"

Tyler Durden's picture

Russians will no longer have to dread the doorbell.

On Thursday, Russia's Supreme Court ruled that Jehovah's Witnesses was an "extremist" organization after the justice ministry applied for an order to shut down the group's national headquarters near St Petersburg, Russian TASS news agency reported. Russian authorities had put several of the group's publications on a list of banned extremist literature, and prosecutors have long cast it as an organization that destroys families, fosters hatred and threatens lives, a description the organization says is false.

In its lawsuit the Justice Ministry mentioned various violations, exposed by a snap check of the organization’s activities, including those of the federal law on resistance to extremist activities. The Justice Ministry wanted the organization and its 395 local chapters to be declared as extremist and outlawed and its properties to be confiscated.

The Administrative Center of Jehovah’s Witnesses told TASS it found this affair very worrisome, because a future decision would concern 175,000 practicing believers. ACJW spokesman Ivan Bilenko said the organization was prepared to seek protection of its rights in courts of any instance.

A court in Moscow on October 12, 2016 warned Jehovah’s Witnesses over what it ruled was extremist activities. Under Russian legislation the religious organization in question is to be closed down if it fails to eliminate the exposed violations within the required deadline or if new evidence of its extremist activities come to light. The Moscow City Court on January 16, 2017 upheld the warning over extremism handed to Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses group in Russia has said it will appeal against the court’s ruling.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
in4mayshun's picture

Then he was an idiot or he was lying to you

cats rule's picture

your friend is a sad little thing

HRClinton's picture

Leave the Unbeavers alone!

Even though there are no Unbeavers in foxy holes. 

ParkAveFlasher's picture

...unless the rats are playing possum!

tmosley's picture

That this comment is getting downvotes is a testament to the sjw shills that have infiltrated ZH.

These are the people pushing the "Trump betrayed us!" meme. People really should try not to fall for it and use their own heads.

meditate_vigorously's picture

Islam and Judaism should also be banned as extremist supremacist religions.

There is nothing redeeming about Jehovas Witnesses. They are a control scheme with no redeeming qualities that could benefit its adherents.

Religion should always be tested for wether it promotes positive mental health and spiritual growth rather than suppression and repression of natural and healthy behavior patterns. The paradigm where our nature needs to be suppressed to avoid destructive behaviors is completely backwards.

Creative behavior is best promoted through growth and understanding (positive reinforcement) rather than control. I don't have time to get into it right now, but I think we need religion, we just don't need it to be a control system where men dominate over other men in the name of God. That is simply feudalism. Of all the formal religions I think Buddhism is the most positive for individuals and communities.

Sick Underbelly's picture

Which Buddhism gets you to Nirvana (Cessation) with ejaculation?  Which "flavor" of Buddhism do you prescribe for ending the Karmic and Samsaric cycles of "future rebirths" in this life, right now, quick-like?

If you state "practice Tantra, and you can have sex" have you *really* read source texts that allow, at the highest and most-transcendental levels, the release of ejaculate?

If you can actually believe "preservation of the seed" is NOT "suppression and repression of natural and healthy behavior patterns" then I have little more to discuss, as you are clearly delusional.

ALL...every...fucking...one...of...them, ALL, religions are bondage-inducing, at the core.  Control mechanisms.

Regardless of whether you look at ESOTERIC or EXOTERIC doctrine, there are always restrictions, this "suppression and repression of natural and healthy behavior patterns", if you want the dangly carrot these religions promise.

Keep playing whatever "game" you like.  Experience whatever bondage you want.  Live it up this time.  Eventually, you will get tired of "this" and "what's here" and stop coming back for the "experience".

I refer you to the three books by Bob Monroe, the Monroe Institute Website, and leave it up to you to dig as you see fit.

land_of_the_few's picture

Ah come on now everyone knows Buddhists spooge out of the top of their heads like dolphins. Then they storm Tibet and demand all progress and creature comforts for the plebs is eliminated in favor of indentured slaves carrying their TVs and VoA satellite dishes for them on their heads in the traditional style.

Teja's picture

To ban a religion is actually free advertising for that religion. That's why civilized countries avoid banning religions, only "hindering" them a bit on their course. If I were a young rebel, hating all my teachers and parents represent, I would look for the most strongly banned religion or ideology around and follow that to the letter. In an age where your parents might love Heavy Metal or smoke dope, Islam is one of the best ways to rebel against them.

N0TME's picture

No, "Radical Islamic Terrorism".

There, fixed it for ya.

 

And I believe they have banned that.

mrtoad's picture

I think your referring to wahabists.

Pandelis's picture

it is probably the biggest sign the fight is real ...

GUS100CORRINA's picture

Title: Russia Bans Jehovah’s Witnesses As An "Extremist Organization"

My Response: AMEN, AMEN, AMEN and AMEN!!!!!!!!

MarsInScorpio's picture

Gus:

So what's your problem with the JWs?

Or are you just into hate because of other psychological afflictions?

MarsInScorpio's picture

And you know this because the super natural occurrence that created the universe sent you an email to let you know that about the JWs?

Akzed's picture

M.Div here. Means nothing to you obviously, but PRO TIP: they purposeful misinterpret the Bible. Even if you care nothing about that, there's a right way and a wrong way.

 

MarsInScorpio's picture

Akzed:

M.Div. here also! PCA seminary, now Apostolic Christian. Theological researcher for a number of international information organizations of excellence. Published in numerous First-Tier general circulation newspapers, international magazines, host of three regional radio talk-shows. I'm published in 127 countries. On my way to a Th.D. Yeah, Akzed, I have a clue, but thanks for the condescending "PRO TIP" anyway.

So here's a tip back at you: There are literally a thousand interpretations of the Bible. Many interpretations are mutually exclusive; they may all be wrong, but they can't all be right.

So when the NIV drops "virgin" for "young woman," which makes an incredible differencee vis a vis the issue of the Virgin Birth. Who did the "misinterpretation" - those who hold fast to virgin, or those who changed it to young woman? Which interpreted it the right way, and which did it the wrong way?

And when you say they "purposeful" (sic) misinterpret the Bible," does that mean it's your position they sat around and said, "Let's misinterpret the Bible on purpose!"

Frankly, I doubt you actually have an M.Div. - because you'd never say what you did if you got it from a seminary of reputation.

Akzed's picture

 

Your hostile comments regardng Christianity do not match a claim to an M.Div., so pardon me for taking you at your word. And thanks for condescendingly calling out my spelling, that's really important.

Alma was translated "young girl" in the RSV and others, but not the NIV. It is translated in the LXX as parthenos.

Yes, the JW's actually decided to falsify the Christian faith by making carefully selected eroneous translations to deny the divinity of Christ. There are many examples but but He. 1:8 and John 1:1 come to mind, in the latter instance they chose to add the indefinite article when there are hundreds of anarthrous usages of theos in their own "Bible" that didn't get the article, so their selectivity gives them away.

I was in parish ministry for twenty years. If you doubt my credentials go jump in a lake.

Bigern's picture

Probably because they changed the Bible significantly from the original Greek. They change little things here and there that create drastically different paradigms. They changed the wording of John 1:1 from:

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

Into this:

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a God."

 

The addition of one little "a" changes everything. And that is just one example.

MarsInScorpio's picture

Bigern:

Thanks for a coherent comment.

Actually, if you are a strict Trinitarian, that change is accurate; Father, Son, Holy Ghost, each acting as a separate person in harmony with one another's purposes and desires.

I count 3 gods there, so that is an accurate description of one of the three Persons of the Trinity; each of the 3 is "a God."

The truth is that Trinitarianism is nothing but tri-theism. But then what do you expect to hear listening to a pagan traveling from Libya to Rome to define the nature of God?

Evidence that Trinitarianism is a misinterpretation of the Bible rests on this simple question: Have you ever met a Trinitarian Jew?

We know that the Jews embraced the Apostolic Christian message, therefore we know that the Apostolic message was compatible with First Century CE Jewish theology. Never, ever, has Judaism advocated a multi-person nature of god theology.

Therefore, we know that Trinitarianism is not what the Apostles taught as Halaca.

If you want to understand the true Nature of God as did the Apostles, you have to ditch Trinitarianism.

But don't beat up on the JWs for merely stating clearly what Trinitarian Christianity actually teaches in that passage.

Rikky's picture

>>I count 3 gods there, so that is an accurate description of one of the three Persons of the Trinity; each of the 3 is "a God."

You obviously don't understand one of the core tenets of Christianity.

God has manifested himself in 3 persons yet they are all the same.  Think of H2O having 3 forms water, mist and ice.  All 3 have different characteristics but its the same H2O.  Another good one is a pizza pie that's 3 slices.  Each slice has its own uniqueness yet its all part of the same pie.

UselessEater's picture

No The Holy Trinity is NOT a pizza, but we get your drift, LOL. God has provided his Son and the Holy Spirit to allow us to reach Him, in accordance with our needs and abilities on the day. This is the Grace of the Trinity.

Akzed's picture

Oh ok. So your PCA education was for nothing.

Teja's picture

The interesting fact is that there once was a strong non-trinitarian Christian school, the Arians. Lost against the Catholics, though.

Bigern's picture

The Arians were mostly defeated by the Eastern "Antiochene" wing of the church. The Western "Alexandrian" wing actually supported the Arian position. This is what led to many of the power struggles that frustrated Constantine. This battle over the divinity of Christ drug on for several centuries before it was universally accepted that he was co-equal. The Western church re-ignited mass controversy at the Council of Toledo when they unilaterally inserted language into the Creed, declaring that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The Eastern wing was not consulted or sought out for agreement. This primarily is what led to the division of Roman Catholic from Eastern Orthodox in 1054.

zippedydoodah's picture

You bang on about your credentials and then spout forth the fucking fairytales from a long time ago when people were even more gullible than they are now.

You would have been a lot less deluded if you were taught by somebody with a scientific mind who had not contracted the God virus and heeded the following, The Bible is a fairytale and is just as likely to be true as the beliefs of a Pastafarian.

I'm not here to debate, just realise that a lot of very intelligent people know that your head is full of academic studies and no more than that.

 

 

cornflakesdisease's picture

King James was a Trinitarian.  Funny, he forgot to chage the bible in it's original Greek here:  John 28: 6 

 

4  When the foreign-speaking people caught sight of the venomous creature hanging from his hand, they began saying to one another: “Surely this man is a murderer, and although he made it to safety from the sea, Justice did not permit him to keep on living.” 5?However, he shook the creature off into the fire and suffered no harm. 6?But they were expecting him to swell up or suddenly to drop dead. After they waited for a long time and saw that nothing bad happened to him, they changed their mind and began saying he was a god.

 

 

Akzed's picture

That would be Acts 28, not John. Malta was full of pagans, so it is not clear why their polytheistic belief would be something King James would want changed, since it did nothing to counter the Trinitarian understanding of God Almighty. And James had nothing to do with the actual translation of the KJV, he just ordered an English version for use in the Church of England and committees were formed consisting of churchmen who did the actual work.

GUS100CORRINA's picture

Question: So what's your problem with the JWs?

My repsonse: THEY ARE A CULT!!!

in4mayshun's picture

By definition all churches are a cult. All organizations claim to "interpret" scripture to some degree, and if a human in the church takes it upon themselves to try and apply a scripture according to their understanding or particular view and other member accept that view, it is a cult.

cornflakesdisease's picture

We owe most of our religious freedoms to them thanks to their numerous trips to the supreme court.

Bigern's picture

Or you could say they have been greatly reduced by numerous hearings at the "supreme" court. A court, should we remind all, that affirmed slavery(Dred Scott), segregation (Plessy vs. Ferguson), imprisonment and property theft of Japanese Americans (Korematsu), and issued itself the authority to create law (Marbury vs. Madison).

MarsInScorpio's picture

Raffie:

Why do you want to "kick them out of America too"?

Care to reveal a history of your interaction with them, and exactly what they did that deserves your hate?

Or are you just doing this because you have the need to feel as though you "fit in" with a certain niche of the ZH community in order to validate your existence?

MarsInScorpio's picture

The mark of exposing intellectual bankruptcy in ZH is down-arrows without a comeback - an intellectually coherent comeback that is, which excludes the insane rants that some think are either cute or elevating . . .

So for you who down-arrow without rationale, I say think you, and E S & D.

Implied Violins's picture

They brainwashed my step-grandmother into signing over all her property to them after my grandfather died and had written in his will that it was to go to me and my brother after she died - and then they hit US with a defamation lawsuit that we had no recourse to fight since they had all our resources when we hired a lawyer to try to take it back...

so, FUCK YOU TO GODDAMM HELL YOU FUCKING MOTHER FUCKER and I hope all Jehovahs BURN IN HELL FOREVER

MarsInScorpio's picture

Implied Violins:

Oh, I get it: You're pissed because you planned to get everything your step-grandmother owned because somehow you were "entitled" to it - most likely because you can fog a mirror.

But instead of satisfying your greed, she decided to do what she wanted to do with her property - imagine that; she exercised her right to control her own property however she chose to control it! - and ended up giving it to the people who actually cared for her physically, emotionally, and spiritually.

In other words, she showed her love for those who loved her.

And where were you during this era of her life? Did you take her into your home so she wouldn't end up in a nursing home, or die in a hospice? Did you visit, or call her daily? Did you discuss eternity, and give her a reason to believe that her life wasn't just a waste of time on Earth, and that she would spend eternity with those before her that she loved? Did you go to worship with her, and respect her decisions about Truth?

Exactly what did you do to EARN her inheritance?

All I see is a greedy slime-bucket pissed because she died without giving you something for nothing. If you had given her life the fullness the JWs gave her, then you would have been there every step of the way, and no one could have immorally influenced her decisions - which is not to say they did immorally influence her decisions. I'm saying she did what she wanted to do with her property, based on her life experiences and choices, and your failure to care for her.

Do Earth a favor: E S & D.

UselessEater's picture

You make some mighty assumptions that indicate you do not have experience with such cult like faiths. Either that or your are acting as a true believer who must slam down down anyone with a terrible experience. Your vitriol & blanket condemnation suggests the latter.

zippedydoodah's picture

I agree. The apparent astrologist should eat shit and die.

He clearly only believes in Christiantiy and "knows" that any other belief is factually wrong, he's not even good enough to be a fucking asshole.

Implied Violins's picture

You really don't fucking get it, do you?

She was my STEP-grandmother, who married my grandfather late in life, and who was to KEEP the property for as long as she lived. She collected his pension after he died, and was completely cared for, for more than twenty years after he died. We would not have gotten the property until the early 2000's.

Plus, it was property that was actually in MY DAD'S NAME, but he died long before my grandfather retired, so our names were put on his will in his stead.

THAT PROPERTY WAS NEVER HERS to begin with. All his other belongings were hers to do with as she willed, and that included a house in San Francisco, as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of other items. So in essence, she FUCKED us out of TWO INHERITANCES, that if they didn't go to us, should have AT LEAST gone to my REAL grandmother, who was still alive at that time.

SO again, FUCK YOU and your fucking WORTHLESS religion that is and ALWAYs has been about POWER AND MIND CONTROL...just like all the others.

UselessEater's picture

MarsInScorpio

A little off topic but I am curious why you question someones right to an inheritance and what they did to earn it? Is that not a contradiction in terms? How can one earn and inheritance built up before their time? Only Communists resent non-Jewish families preserving their wealth for future generations.  Jared Kushners daddy is ia crook and yet Jared gets the benefits of daddies debt laden wealth as his son......anything that was  left to implied violins family was unlikely to be of the blood sucking real estate mafia pro Israel crowd that own Presidents at the age of 36 for doing NOTHING OF VALUE TO THE GOYIM.

UselessEater's picture

You have my genuine sympathy. Few look deeply into their history, they are a product... manufactured and distributed to pollute.

 

cornflakesdisease's picture

If you had listened to them you'd know their is no buringing hellfire:  Eccl. 9:5: “The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.”

Just saying

steelhead23's picture

Having had The Watchtower literally shoved in my face and had them declare the "one true church" to be the Whore of Babylon, extreme is about the nicest thing I could say about them.  Russia would be smart to ban them.

crossroaddemon's picture

Make that 100%. Religion is a crutch for the weak-minded.

fbazzrea's picture

Religion is a tool for the strong-minded.

ParkAveFlasher's picture

There are political and social cults that masquerade as either major religions or party to the major religions.

Bear in mind that the faithful may not fall into line with any large group or aggregation.

fbazzrea's picture

I commented further below, but I suspect the Biblical usage of the term "sheep" is most typically misinterpreted by the "faithful."

I have no problem with the followers, since they are mostly well-meaning individuals seeking spirituality or avoidance of "eternal damnation" as propagated by their "shepherds." However, the organizations known as denominations or "churches" are nothing more than tax-exempted businesses peddling post-life rewards in return for 10% in this life. They have yet to receive any complaints from their customers in the afterlife. Must be true.  /sarc