Anonymous Combats The Watchtower Society

Anonymous has taken aim at the Watchtower Society of Jehovah's Witnesses for their policies of secrecy concerning child abusers in that religion. They are also upset about the Watchtower Society practice of allowing and even encouraging known sexual predators to represent the religion in their door to door ministry. This means that they are also negligently putting the public in danger in addition to their own children.

They have produced several videos about this. It appears that they are in the process of trying to hack the official Watchtower websites. They also want to obtain the extensive list of known child abusers that is thought to be kept at Watchtower headquarters. It is thought that some of these known pedophiles are serving in positions of authority as congregation elders or ministerial servants.

The Watchtower Society claims that known child abusers are never allowed to serve in positions of authority. However, private correspondence to the elders shows that they are only referring to people who are known to be child abusers by the congregation or the community. Since they try very hard to keep these cases secret, it is likely that many elders and ministerial servants have a history of child abuse that is known by the Watchtower Society, but unknown by their congregations.

It will be very interesting to see how this develops. Although I'm not able to condone illegal activity, a revealing of Watchtower secrets could pressure the Watchtower Society to reform their dangerous policies and could help to protect many children in the future.

In any case, I'm grateful that awareness of this serious problem is becoming more common outside of the Ex-Jehovah's Witness community. I hope this will either result in change or a decline of the Watchtower Society's influence.

See also this discussion about Anonymous.

Protecting Children Is In The Public Interest

As you may have already heard, the Watchtower Society has gotten into trouble for multiple violations of the Working With Children Act in Australia. For years, they have refused to comply with the law that requires that their ministers get background checks. They have finally begun to comply with the law, but they are still liable for numerous violations over a period of several years.

The authorities in Australia have been reluctant to enforce this law. However, Mr. Steven Unthank has initiated a private prosecution of the Watchtower Society and related corporate entities. This private prosecution has overcome numerous hurdles, including several hearings. There was the hope the the state would take over the prosecution soon.

Now, Mr. Steven Unthank has received word that the Director of Public Prosecutions is interested in taking over the cases “for the purpose of discontinuing them.” It was suggested that prosecuting these cases is "not in the public interest".

I'm dumbfounded that prosecuting individuals and corporations for crimes against children could be considered as "not in the public interest".

I have emailed the Director and tried to convey my disgust over his stand.

A law that isn't enforced is worthless. The children of Australia have a right to be protected by this law. It's a shame that the government has so far avoided its responsibility to protect the children.

It's interesting that the progress so far has been primarily the result of the actions of a single individual who has been doing the work that should be done by the government. I'm amazed that they are willing to drop the cases at this late date after much of the work has already been done and after it has already received international attention and scrutiny.

The world is watching. I hope they will make the courageous decision that protecting children is in the public interest.

See also, this blog post and this discussion.

The Watchtower Praises a "Slaughter of Apostates"

As an apostate, I have to take this seriously. It is a personal and vicious attack on myself and millions of other good people. I never actually expected them to be this extreme (and perhaps careless) in their hate speech. Here are some quotes from their November 15, 2011 Watchtower (study edition).

"Today, no servant of Jehovah uses physical force against opponents of pure worship. “Vengeance is mine,” God says. (Heb.10:30) But to rid the congregation of potentially corrupting influences, Christian elders may have to act with courage similar to that of Jehu. (1 Cor. 5:9-13) And all members of the congregation need to be determined to avoid the company of disfellowshipped individuals.— 2 John 9-11."

"Jehu announced that he intended to hold “a great sacrifice” for Baal. (2 Ki. 10:18, 19) “This is a clever play on words on the part of Jehu,” says one scholar. While the term employed here “generally means ‘sacrifice,’ it is also used of the ‘slaughter’ of apostates.”"

"It is true that Jehu spilled much blood. Yet, the Scriptures present him as a courageous man..."

I don't know what is behind this escalation of hateful speech. A recent Watchtower that describes apostates as "mentally diseased" has received a lot of attention in the news and has resulted in police investigations. I view this more recent Watchtower article as much worse. I ask my fellow apostates to stay safe and report any violent or illegal actions that may result from this rhetoric to the police. It's true that they claim that they don't use physical force today, but the leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses have been known to change their minds frequently. It also appears to be an open invitation for Jehovah's Witnesses to use other forms of intimidation and discrimination that may still be illegal.

See also: More Apostate Hating from the Watchtower

The Watchtower Society Calls me and Other Apostates "Mentally Diseased"

Apostates tend to be an oppressed minority. Such is the cost that sometimes comes from disagreeing with an established religious organization. I'm sure most religions feel uncomfortable with those who leave or express disagreements. Most however, since the dark ages at least, are able to at least remain somewhat civil about the situation without resorting to slander or name calling.

This is not the case with Jehovah's Witness (who are controlled by the Watchtower Society) I know from my experience with growing up in that religion that they often resort to name calling and other criticism of any religion or individual that disagrees with them. Their attitude towards other religions may be harsh, but their view of their own members who leave or express disagreement is far more hostile. I even remember an article in their Watchtower magazine which indicated that apostates should be hated with a "Godly hatred". (Regular hatred might not be so bad, but "Godly hatred" can get pretty scary.

Recently, their Watchtower magazine resorted to calling dissidents "mentally diseased". I didn't pay as much attention to this as I should have when I first heard about it. I have grown somewhat used to this lack of maturity when the Watchtower Society is confronted with any level of disagreement.

I should have viewed this more seriously. After all, it's a personal attack. I would clearly fall into the category of those who they consider mentally diseased. It's also not a small magazine. It is distributed to millions of people and discussed in public meetings around the world. I have a large number of relatives and former acquaintances in that religion who are forbidden to even speak to me, for fear that they will also be shunned. Now they are being told that I am "mentally diseased".

There have been complaints in some countries that this Watchtower article amounts to a hate crime. After some thought, I'm beginning to agree. I'm a big believer in free speech and feel that generous allowances should be made for speech that makes most of us uncomfortable. However, this goes far beyond merely expressing an opinion. It is part of an orchestrated campaign to humiliate, isolate and instill hatred towards a group who are primarily concerned with peacefully exercising their basic human rights to follow their conscience and enjoy freedom of (or from) religion.

I personally feel that the Watchtower Society's treatment of former and even current members is a great crime against basic human rights. It also appears to be prompted by hatred (and probably a considerable amount of insecurity). I look forward to seeing what happens regarding these complaints against the Watchtower Society.

Of course, this is also an extremely insensitive attack on those who suffer from real mental illnesses, so it involves much more than just the Jehovah's Witness community.

For more information, please see this news article from the Independent.

Another Apostate Blog

Jehovah's Witnesses are trained to fear apostates. They are instructed to throw away any literature that is critical of their religion and to shun dissidents. When I was growing up in that religion, the word acquired a certain frightening mystique. Prior to the Internet, apostates and apostate literature seemed to be in rather short supply. There weren't many real world examples to compare to the prejudiced ideas that were encouraged by the leadership.

There is a great irony in this. The ranks of Jehovah's Witnesses are overflowing with apostates. An apostate is simply someone who disagrees with or leaves a certain religious tradition. Apostasy is actively encouraged by their literature and door to door ministry. They want everyone who isn't a Jehovah's Witness to leave their religion and become an apostate! They promote challenging religious authority, as long as you don't challenge their authority.

There is another type of apostate that features prominently in their membership. Many Jehovah's Witnesses disagree with at least some of the official Watchtower teachings. These are apostates and can be expelled and shunned if they are found out. Some of these apostates want to leave, but don't want be shunned by family and friends. Others are still loyal to the Watchtower Society. They realise that Jehovah's Witnesses periodically "refine" their beliefs, so it only makes sense that some of their current teachings are incorrect. They may even feel a sense of satisfaction when they anticipate a change in doctrinal understanding. They probably don't think of themselves as apostates, but if they ever let anyone know about their doubts or differences of opinion, they could find themselves facing a judicial committee.

I was an apostate when I was a Jehovah's Witnesses. I just didn't realise it. I find it liberating to get acquainted with my inner apostate and to declare my apostasy to the world. Being an apostate can be a very good thing. We don't usually deserve the scorn that is placed on us. I view being an apostate of Jehovah's Witnesses as a kind of badge of honor.

Sorry for the long introduction, there's a point to all this. Even though "apostate" is usually meant as a derogatory term, more and more people are realising that it is nothing to be ashamed of. Maybe, it will become socially acceptable some day. In any case, I would like to introduce you to another blogger who doesn't seem to mind the apostate label. Please visit his blog I'm an Apostate of Jehovah's Witnesses-so WHAT?

The Watchtower Society Resorts to Childish Name Calling

The leaders of Jehovah's Witnesses seem incapable of handling disagreement in an appropriate, civilised manner. Disagreement is simply not allowed. A member who disagrees with official teachings will be expelled and shunned. Any member, such as myself, who tries to peaceably withdraw their membership due to disagreements will also be shunned. These policies shield many of their members from ever learning about the sources of these disagreements. It seems that it is a more expedient for their leaders to isolate their members from controversy, than to allow them to analyse the facts and come to their own decision.

In the age of the Internet, it is becoming increasingly difficult to isolate Jehovah's Witnesses from sources that are critical of their beliefs and policies. Their leaders have responded with tactics that go beyond simple avoidance of former members. They have also found it practical to demonise and dehumanise them. Former members who disagree are labeled as apostates. I personally don't mind the word "apostate" as a simple descriptive term. It merely describes my disagreement with the Watchtower Society, a simple fact that gives me no embarrassment. However, the leaders of Jehovah's Witnesses have attempted to convert this simple descriptive term into an abstract bigoted concept filled with loathing and unreasoned fear.

Consider some recent quotes from the April 15, 2009 Watchtower. "Like their father Satan, apostates target people of integrity." Notice the vague generalisations and black and white thinking. They automatically classify any former member who disagrees with them as a son or daughter of Satan. This saves them from having to consider their concerns. It also saves them from having to feel sympathy towards those who are suddenly cut off from their family and friends, often with no other support network in place. They even try to make themselves appear to be the victims by making the blanket claim that "apostates target people of integrity". The article continues by saying, "No wonder servants of Jehovah avoid all contact with them!" The implication is clear. If you have any contact with an "apostate" or show them any mercy, then you aren't a servant of Jehovah.

Here is another quote from the article. "Satan was the first creature to turn apostate. Modern-day apostates display characteristics similar to those of the Devil. Their mind may be poisoned by a critical attitude toward individuals in the congregation, Christian elders, or the Governing Body."

The antics of the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses remind me of a child who has a disagreement with another child and calls him him a poopy face (arguably, a far less offensive insult than calling someone a son of Satan) and stops talking to him.

I would find these tactics to be comical and even pathetic if it wasn't for their tragic consequences. This bigoted attitude compromises the humanity of those who follow the paranoid governing body. Natural human affection is sacrificed in behalf of organisational obedience. Love is gradually replace by hate. Consider the following quote from the Watchtower of October 1, 1993 page 19. (See also this link for more quotes about Jehovah's Witnesses' hatred of apostates.)

"Apostates are included among those who show their hatred of Jehovah by revolting against him. Apostasy is, in reality, a rebellion against Jehovah. Some apostates profess to know and serve God, but they reject teachings or requirements set out in his Word. Others claim to believe the Bible, but they reject Jehovah's organization and actively try to hinder its work. When they deliberately choose such badness after knowing what is right, when the bad becomes so ingrained that it is an inseparable part of their makeup, then a Christian must hate (in the Biblical sense of the word) those who have inseparably attached themselves to the badness."

It's scary the way they equate any perceived rebellion against their organisation with rebellion against God. This seems to justify this hatred in the minds of believers in the Watchtower Society.

Please note that I don't return this hatred. I love Jehovah's Witnesses and have great sympathy for them as victims of an oppressive regime. I have experienced the same inner turmoil that comes from trying to bury my natural human inclinations in service to an organisation that claims to represent God. I understand the fear of trying not to anger the vindictive and vengeful God of the Watchtower Society.

Others have commented on the implications of that Watchtower magazine. You might enjoy reading this discussion at Jehovah's-Witness.net.

Death or Obedience?

Jehovah's Witnesses use the threat of death to enforce obedience to their organisation. Disobedience often leads to expulsion and the threat that the disobedient one will be killed by God at Armageddon if he is still disfellowshipped at that time. In the meantime, the person faces a kind of spiritual and social death as he is denied association with his believing family and former friends.

This enforced obedience includes believing everything that is currently taught by the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses. It makes little difference that their teachings keep changing. They must be accepted until they are changed and then the new teaching must be accepted immediately.

The new blog Death or Obedience explores this subject and asks the question of whether the unique teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses conform to the Bible, logic and reason. It also discusses the consequences when a member dares to question the official teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses.

This blog features a set of audio recordings of Jehovah's Witness elders as they offer "encouragement" to some members who have doubts. The first recording begins at this post. I hope you will check it out.

Are Jehovah's Witnesses Really Preaching the Good News Throughout the Earth?

Matthew 24:14 is an important scripture for Jehovah's Witnesses. Here is what it says in their own New World Translation. "And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come."

This is the Jehovah's Witness mission. They believe they are fulfilling this scripture. (Some say they have already fulfilled it.) They even point to this as proof that they are the one true religion.

What about the Mormons? Aren't they also doing a worldwide preaching work? How about more mainstream Christianity? Haven't they had far greater success spreading the good news throughout the Earth? These would be good questions to ask a Jehovah's Witness. When I was a Jehovah's Witness, my response would have been something like this. The other religions don't really count. They aren't really declaring the good news that Jesus taught and their methods aren't really the same as what Jesus and his disciples used.

So the question arises. Are Jehovah's Witnesses really declaring the good news in a way that resembles the methods of first century Christianity?

First, is their message good news at all? If you ask a Jehovah's Witness enough probing questions, you will discover that their good news includes the idea that Jehovah will soon destroy everyone on Earth who isn't a Jehovah's Witness. Their publications often downplay this teaching by saying things like it is up to Jehovah to decide who will survive and that he will only destroy the irreformably wicked, but at other places it says that only Jehovah's Witnesses have a hope of surviving Armageddon. (Even then there is no certainty. Who knows how many works you have to perform to ensure your survival?)

Imagine two Jehovah's Witnesses knocking on your door and saying with a smile, "We have some good news for you. Soon Jehovah is going to kill you unless you convert to our religion. If you do everything our religion asks of you, you have a pretty good chance of surviving. Most of your wicked family and friends will be killed, including babies who would probably only grow up to be wicked anyways. Wouldn't you like to live in a world cleansed of such wickedness?"

This is their basic message in distilled form. It would normally take months of study with them to finally learn this message. By then, it would be easy to become distracted by numerous other details and justifications of why God would do this. There is nothing good about their "good news".

Also, their good news keeps changing. It's only logical that the good news described in the Bible would have to be true. Otherwise, Jehovah's Witnesses have no business criticizing the "good news" that is declared by other religions that they disagree with.

This is important because it ties in with another belief that Jehovah's Witnesses have about their preaching work. They believe that people are being judged on the basis of how people respond to their message.

Let's consider an example. Suppose a Jehovah's Witness talks to someone in 1994 about Jehovah's "promise" that the literal generation that was alive in 1914 would not pass away until the events prophesied in Matthew chapter 24, including Armageddon, took place. (They might even reference a statement at the beginning of each Awake magazine at the time that says, "Most important, this magazine builds confidence in the Creator’s promise of a peaceful and secure new world before the generation that saw the events of 1914 passes away.")

Suppose this individual generally agrees with what the Witnesses are saying, but just can't accept their statement about the generation of 1914, for whatever reason. Should he be judged negatively for rejecting the good news? No, because the next year the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses admitted that generation teaching was wrong and came up with a whole new teaching about the generation, equating it with the wicked people now on earth. It would be a gross injustice for God to judge someone unrighteous for rejecting a lie.

If the Witnesses come back and explained that their message changed, he might still reject the new teaching. (Now, he might even regard them as false prophets, because they assured him that their former predication about the generation was God's promise.) Well, they changed their teaching about the generation again in 2008, so he couldn't be criticised for rejecting another false teaching.

If we assume that Jehovah's Witnesses now have the right good news, then it implies that they are only just beginning the process of preaching it "in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations". It would take many decades, at least, for them to succeed before the end could come. Of course, that is a silly assumption. I feel confident in predicting that the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses will undergo many more changes in the future. (Their 1914 teaching is especially problematic. I invite you to do a simple Google search. I might address this issue in a future post.)

Are Jehovah's Witnesses at least using the right methods in declaring the "good new"?

This is debatable. It can be argued that Jehovah's Witnesses are working contrary to the recommendations of the Bible. They primarily spread their message by going house to house. Yet, Luke 10:7 says, "Do not be transferring from house to house." It's true that the Bible speaks of teaching in homes, but this wasn't a case of knocking on door after door. They would often stay for an extended time in someone's home, teaching them and then visit someone else in a different town. See this article at Facts About Jehovah's Witnesses for a more detailed discussion.

Door to door preaching is a pretty inefficient way to make converts, especially in areas where few people are home during the day. It is suggested by some that the ministry of Jehovah's Witnesses is designed primarily to keep them too busy to question doctrines and to provide a solidarity of purpose. Jehovah's Witness membership has an alarming attrition rate. It will be interesting to see how long they can keep replacing members with outdated recruitment techniques.

Witness methods seem totally incapable of even giving an appearance of fulfilling Matthew 24:14. They are very poorly represented in many countries with an enormous population, such as China and many Islamic countries. Even in countries where they are better represented, most people don't take door knocking religious zealots seriously, so they don't often take the time to listen to them. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that these people will soon die if they don't respond positively to their message, so they have little excuse for not coming up with better methods.

The Bible does provide numerous examples of Jesus and his disciples preaching where there are actually people, including marketplaces.

The Internet is the greatest marketplace that ever existed. It's the one technology that could play a crucial role in giving a religious message a virtually worldwide distribution, especially when more third world residents get online. Why aren't Jehovah's Witnesses trying to take full advantage of this technology?

They're scared.

They're scared of apostates like me. They're scared that they may run across information that will weaken their faith. Their leaders are scared that their members will learn about their long history of ridiculous and life threatening policies, failed prophecies, and doctrinal flip flops. They're scared that their members will read these things in official Watchtower literature that is no longer published, but is available online. They have actually made online association with former members a disfellowshipping offense.

I don't recall reading that Jesus and his disciples had this kind of trepidation about sharing their faith in public. Jehovah's Witnesses have a comfort zone where they go two to a door and catch individuals unprepared. They have reference books that tells them what to say in certain circumstances. If they are asked tough questions, they will often just terminate the discussion and knock on another door. It appears that the first century Christians were far more fearless. I expect that they were often outnumbered and had to defend their faith in front of an audience. They couldn't just retreat from tough questions without a serious loss of credibility.

I know that the Watchtower Society does have some Websites, but the average member is heavily discouraged from engaging in any kind of Internet proselytism. Some Jehovah's Witnesses disobey this. You can often see them making comments on critical videos or blog posts. Sometimes they will even set up websites. I applaud these individuals, even if I disagree with most of what they believe. They are publicly indicating that the authority of their Governing Body is not absolute, that they should consider the dictates of their own conscience. They may risk expulsion and shunning for this, but this doesn't stop them. I say keep it up. It will expose them to differing viewpoints. This might change their views or it might not. In either case, they aren't limiting themselves to getting information from only one source. As an apostate, I can't ask for anything more than that.

To the other Jehovah's Witnesses who will only knock on doors to mostly empty houses, I say, "If you are not willing to take your supposed scriptural responsibility seriously, I don't see why any of us should take it seriously either."

See also Door to Door; is that what really counts? at The Watchtower Teachings Blog

Will the Watchtower Society Stagnate or Collapse?

Jehovah's Witnesses have enjoyed impressive growth during much of their history. They are still one of the fastest growing religions in many areas. However, their rate of growth is slowing down and they are facing a growing trend of people leaving, reducing their Witness activities, or being kicked out (either for committing some sin on the long list of Jehovah's Witness prohibitions or for apostasy, which basically involves disagreeing with the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, even if they don't actively promote their doubts). It is getting progressively harder for them to replace the members lost through attrition.

They are facing other new challenges. The Internet has advertised their comical history of false prophecies and doctrinal flip flops. The quotes from their own literature can be easily found by anyone with an Internet connection. (See this quotes site as an example.) Most of their remaining growth is now coming from immigrants. This means that the people coming in are often less able to contribute financially, while still using up publications and other resources. Many experienced witnesses are now moving into foreign language congregations to help serve their needs. This is making it harder for the more established congregations to find people to serve as elders or otherwise take care of the congregation responsibilities. It doesn't seem that the younger ones are nearly as eager to do this as they were in the past.

It used to be that the Jehovah's Witness strict expulsion and shunning policies helped to enforce unity. Now, a growing number of members have learned the truth about the organisation and are only staying in to avoid losing contact with family and friends. These are some very disgruntled people who desperately want to leave, and probably will if they can convince enough of their friends and family to come with them. In the meantime many of them are trying to use subtle means to undermine the organisation's authority. This is a tremendous source of potential instability among Jehovah's Witnesses.

It is my opinion that the Jehovah's Witnesses rate of growth will soon drop below the growth of population increase and may even stagnate at zero or become negative. I don't believe that the Jehovah's Witness mindset can long tolerate stagnation. Their worship is based on converting people before the end. I think some sort of catastrophic collapse is a plausible outcome of what is now taking place.

That's just my opinion and I'm sure others disagree. I admit that my perspective may be biased by my concern for friends and family that are still stuck in the cult. I recommend this discussion at Jehovah's-Witness.net. It discusses a British Sociologist's prediction that there may be a collapse in Jehovah's Witness membership and has responses from people who both agree and disagree with that assessment.

Wikipedia Articles About Jehovah's Witnesses

I'm not sure what I think about Wikipedia, except that it is an important and bold experiment in digital communication. It tends to level the playing field, allowing amateurs the ability to compete with professionals in the evaluation and distribution of information. This can be good or bad. Sometimes, experts can benefit from having their complacency challenged. At other times, it gives undue power to troublemakers and idiots. I have heard too many stories of intelligent and knowledgeable researchers abandon the forum of Wikipedia in frustration.

My personal experience with Wikipedia has been generally favorable. Yet it is sometimes an uneasy experience for me. A Wikipedia article is kind of like a football game in slow motion. When I tune in, I don't know who has the ball, or which side is winning or even how many sides there are. In my research, I have found contradictions with more traditional websites, but further research has usually vindicated the information on Wikipedia. I like the way inaccurate information can be challenged and changed, even if it leads to a volatile and unstable situation. I guess my biggest complaint is that I occasionally hear about obscure articles being deleted on topics that are of great interest to me, but apparently of little consequence to the general population.

This situation becomes especially interesting when you deal with very controversial topics like Jehovah's Witnesses and other high control groups and cults. Difficulties arise in researching Jehovah's Witnesses that make Wikipedia a valuable resource. Jehovah's Witnesses believe they are the best source of information on their beliefs and practices. Alas, they are one of the worst. They are not allowed to question or research both sides of their beliefs. If they do, they can be disfellowshipped and shunned for apostasy. Their leadership also hides important information from their members. Their leaders receive confidential letters and guidebooks that contain scandalous policies that the average Witness has no knowledge of. It is also common to revise or suspend the publication of literature when it contains embarrassing information, like failed prophecies or former understandings.

Jehovah's Witnesses are also trained in how to present their beliefs. When studying with potential recruits, they will often avoid or delay difficult subjects until the student is already molded into their way of thinking. Sometimes, people get baptised without a proper understanding of the possible consequences if they commit an unapproved action or began to question official teachings. Jehovah's Witnesses also have a peculiar view of honesty. They employ a doctrine called theocratic warfare. They feel it is proper to withhold or distort the truth if they don't think someone is entitled to it.

This can make it difficult to research a controversial group like Jehovah's Witnesses. The official sites of Jehovah's Witnesses are primarily interested in making converts, so they have a strong incentive to hide or downplay negative information about themselves. I think information from former members is better, because they have seen both sides of the issue. However, many of them have suffered terribly at the hands of the Watchtower organisation, so they may sometimes have a tendency to exaggerate or not fact check everything properly. Many christian churches are critical of Jehovah's Witnesses and may publish some good information, but it often becomes obvious that they are primarily interested in advancing their own theological views.

I think Wikipedia articles can play a useful role in research about Jehovah's Witnesses. There is a process for removing incorrect information and it receives contributions from authors with multiple points of view. I am hopeful that current Jehovah's Witnesses may be more comfortable researching their own religion on Wikipedia than going to an "apostate" site. This would be a great improvement over the Jehovah's Witness habit of getting all their information about Jehovah's Witnesses from Jehovah's Witnesses. So here are some links to some of the more popular Wikipedia articles about Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Society. This does not imply endorsement of the information in these articles and I always recommend reading multiple sources when doing research.

Jehovah's Witnesses
The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom
Controversies Regarding Jehovah's Witnesses
Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses
Supreme Court Cases Involving Jehovah's Witnesses
Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses in Nazi Germany
Jehovah's Witnesses and Child Sex Abuse
Jehovah's Witnesses and the United Nations
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures