MORMON
CURTAIN
⇒ MAIN INDEX ⇒ MC FAQ ⇒ CONTACT ME ⇒ 288 TOPICS ⇒ EX-MORMON FORUMS |
|
|
 Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign! |
© 2005-2010 Compiled With: Caligra 2.0.1 ALPHA |
|
THE
MORMON CURTAIN
Containing 4,184 Articles Spanning 288 Topics Ex-Mormon News, Stories And Recovery Online Since January 1, 2005 |
|
PLEASE NOTE:
If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an
Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page
(the one you just landed on)
is an archive containing articles on
"STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4".
This website,
The Mormon Curtain
- is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can
read
The Mormon Curtain FAQ
to understand the purpose of this website.
|
|
| Thursday, Feb 8, 2007, at 07:39 AM Inside Confessions And Outside Cover-Ups: Excommunicated Mormon Intellectual Paul Toscano Exposes The Intellectual And Moral Dishonesty Of The LDS Cult's Highest Leaders Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| What is "oxy" about Toscano is the oxygen of ugly truth that blew through Mormon Cult cover-ups in the wake of his unseemly excommunication. Toscano's outspoken support of independent thinking served to expose the intellectual and moral dishonesty of Mormonism's highest leadership. Moves by Mormonism's pyramid-perching leaders to discredit and discipline Toscano for his fiercely-individualistic views eventually led to the public disgracing of Apostles Dallin Oaks and Boyd K. Packer--men who, behind the scenes, had sought to have Toscano muzzled and humiliated, then lied on the record about their efforts to do so. Oaks' and Packer' plottings against Toscano were ultimately unmasked within the larger context of the Mormon Church's 1993 crackdown on dissidents (notably, the so-called "September Six"). Oaks confessed his participation in the efforts to club and then conceal the ecclesiastical clubbing of Toscano in two private meetings I had with Oaks and his fellow apostle Neal Maxwell, in Maxwell's Church office during September 1993. In those confidential meetings, Oaks confessed to the actual circumstances surrounding the excommunication of Toscano, then expected me to cover for him after he lied in public about what we had privately talked in this regard. In an on-the-record interview with a newspaper reporter, Oaks blatantly misrepresented the truth about Packer's involvement in the excommunication of Toscano who, among other things, had caught the scornful attention of Church apostles by suggesting that Church members need not perpetuate a Cult of Personality by standing up when General Authorities walked into the room. Oaks privately owned up that Packer had inappropriately injected himself into local Church action against Toscano--and, in the process, violated Church disciplinary procedures and opening the Church up to a possible lawsuit from Toscano. Referring to Packer as the source of these headaches, a frustrated Oaks told me, "You can't stage manage a grizzly bear." When subsequently asked by the media about rumors that Packer had worked behind the scenes to get Toscano excommunicated, Oaks claimed ignorance and denied that Packer could ever do such a thing. Had I remained silent in the face of these lies, I would have been an accessory to Oaks' falsifications. Oaks had demanded that I not talk about the conversations we had about the Toscano/Packer affair. Oaks had then prevaricated on the record about what we discussed. Finally, once the cat was out of the bag, Oaks had expected me to cover his keister by covering my mouth. A question I posed to Oaks and Maxwell concerned reports that Packer had been behind the excommunication of Toscano. To understand the context of the question, it is necessary to review events at the time, as reported in the press. Packer's suspected entanglement in the excommunication of Toscano became a subject of extensive media coverage in the fall of 1993. Toscano was excommunicated from the Mormon Church on September 19,1993, "for writing and speaking publicly about church doctrine, feminism, the state of the faith's leadership and other issues." At the stake high council disciplinary hearing that ultimately sealed his fate, attention was focused on a Sunstone symposium speech Toscano had recently delivered, entitled, "All Is Not Well in Zion: False Teachings of the True Church," in which Toscano was alleged to have made derogatory comments . . . about general authorities." ("LDS Apostle Denies Ordering Dissident's Excommunication," Associated Press, 11 October 1993, sec, D, p. 1ff; and "Six Intellectuals Disciplined for Apostasy," Sunstone, November 1993, p. 66). With the Mormon Church having recently disciplined the infamous "September Six" for activities relating to scholarship and feminism, speculation was rampant that Packer had been "behind the church's recent crackdown on dissidents." That assessment proved to be well-founded. Five months earlier, Packer had warned a gathering of LDS bureaucrats that some Mormons "influenced by social and political unrest are being caught up and led away" by "the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist movement, as well as the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or intellectuals." ("Cartoonist Says Oaks Lied To Protect Fellow Apostle," Vern Anderson, Associated Press, in Salt Lake Tribune, 12 October 1993, sec. B, p. 1ff; and Boyd K. Packer, "Talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council," transcript, 18 May 1993, pp. 3, 4) Packer, however, vehemently denied that he had been behind the banishment of Toscano. Specifically, he insisted he had not directed Toscano's stake president, Kerry Heinz, to convene a disciplinary council against him. While admitting to having met with Heinz to discuss Toscano, Packer assured the press, "We talked doctrine and philosophy. I absolutely did not instruct him to hold a disciplinary counsel and did not then, nor have I ever, directed any verdict. By church policy, that is left entirely to local leaders. When he [Heinz] left, I did not know what he would do." ("Cracks in the temple: Mormon unity in peril," Paul Brinkley-Rogers, The Arizona Republic, 10 October 1993, sec. A, p 1ff) Packer further revealed to the Church-owned Deseret News that his decision to meet with Heinz had been made through a lower-ranking Church middleman. Contrary to Oaks' claim to me in our September 24th meeting that Packer had independently strayed outside approved channels of authority, Packer insisted that, in fact, he had been advised by "the brethren" to meet with Toscano's stake president. Said Packer, "Even though general authorities of the church are free to contact or respond to local leaders on any subject, I felt there may be some sensitivity about his request. The brethren felt I could not very well decline to see a stake president. I therefore consented." ("Packer Says He Was Concerned by Request for Meeting, But Apostles Endorsed It," Associated Press, in Salt Lake Tribune, 17 October 1993, sec. B, p. 1ff) Toscano was not persuaded by Packer's explanations. Reacting to Packer's admission of meeting with Heinz, Toscano said, "I knew all along that Boyd Packer was behind it. He's behind all this." ("Grandson of President Asks To Be Removed From LDS Church Rolls," Jennifer Skordas, Salt Lake Tribune, 11 October 1993, sec. D, p. 1ff) In my meeting with Oaks and Maxwell, I specifically asked if Packer had, in fact, been involved behind the scenes in the excommunication process against Toscano. Oaks confirmed that Packer had. Oaks told me he was "distressed and astonished" over Packer's decision to meet with Heinz, even though he said Heinz was the one who had called Packer and asked "for the meeting." Oaks said it was "a mistake" on Packer's part to have agreed to meet with Heinz, the latter whom Oaks described as "an old seminary man." (Packer had come up with Heinz through the ranks of the Church education system). Oaks told me that, by meeting with Heinz, Packer had gone outside the bounds of his assigned responsibility. Oaks said one of his own areas of expertise was in legal affairs. Maxwell noted that one reason Oaks had been brought into the Quorum of the Twelve was to help rewrite the manual on Church disciplinary procedure. Oaks expressed concern that Packer's involvement with Heinz might lead Toscano "to sue the Church" over violation of his ecclesiastical procedural rights. In the end, Oaks, with a note of resignation in his voice, said of Packer, "You can't stage manage a grizzly bear." _____ On the heels of my meetings with Oaks and Maxwell, I then accompanied Arizona Republic reporter Paul Brinkley-Rogers to Salt Lake City in early October 1993 to assist him in making contacts with LDS leaders, spokesmen, educators and critics for a story on the recent purge of Church dissidents, notably, the "September Six." On October 1st, Brinkley-Rogers met for a prearranged, on-the-record, taped Q&A session with Oaks in his Salt Lake City Church office to discuss, among other things, recent Church action against the dissenters. I had not arranged the interview and did not join the reporter in it, as I did not think it would be appropriate for me to do so. Moreover, prior to the interview, I did not speak to Brinkley-Rogers about what Oaks and Maxwell had told me concerning the Packer/ Toscano matter in my meeting with them on September 24th. At the conclusion of the interview, I picked Brinkley-Rogers up outside the Church Administration Building and asked how it went. He put the tape into the rental car cassette deck and pushed the "play" button. What I heard astounded--and angered-- me. Much of what Oaks had dished up for public consumption directly contradicted what he had told me in private. I was immediately aware of the bind that Oaks had put me in. He had lied to a reporter about events which he had described to me in much different terms. I had no choice but to tell the reporter at that point that Oaks was attempting to pull a fast one on him. So, there in a rental car in Salt Lake City, for the first time, I revealed what Oaks had shared with me in our September 24th meeting, pointing out the contradictions to what I had just heard on the tape. (see "Cracks in the temple: Mormon unity in peril," Paul Brinkley-Rogers, Arizona Republic, 11 October 1993, sec. A, p. 1ff) _____ During the next five days, I privately struggled with how to publicly deal with Oaks' blatant dishonesties. I was torn between remaining quiet (thereby preserving a confidentiality agreement) or setting the record straight (thereby exposing Oaks' act of calculated deception). I spoke at length with my wife, friends, and colleagues--seeking advice and weighing my options. I wish I could say it was an easy decision--that I saw the road brightly ahead of me from the moment I was confronted with Oaks' deceit--but that was not the case. I was troubled and, frankly, even a bit frightened by the possible consequences of speaking out. I did not relish the prospect of being accused of breaking a promise; at the same time, I could not stand by silently, given what I knew. Most of all, I resented the fact that Oaks had put me in this position in the first place. I finally decided to follow my gut--and my conscience. Oaks' misrepresentations--indeed, his out-and-out lies--prompted me to fax him a letter a few days after the interview. It read as follows: "6 October 1993 Elder Dallin Oaks The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 47 East South Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84150 "PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL "Dear Elder Oaks: "I wish to share with you my concerns relative to our private conversation in the office of Elder Maxwell on September 24th, in relation to your subsequent comments to Arizona Republic reporter Paul Brinkley-Rogers on October 1st." "In our September 24th meeting, I asked you if Kerry Heinz, Paul Toscano's stake president, had had any contact with, or received any instruction from, Elder Boyd K. Packer during the time leading up to Paul Toscano's excommunication. According to my notes taken during our discussion, you acknowledged that Elder Packer met with President Heinz prior to the rendering of judgment by the stake disciplinary council. You said that President Heinz was 'an old seminary man' and friend of Elder Packer during their days together in the church seminary system and that President Heinz 'called and asked for a meeting' with Elder Packer." "You told me that you were 'distressed and astonished' that Elder Packer met with President Heinz. Referring to Elder Packer, you observed that 'you can't stage manage a grizzly bear.' You opined that 'it was a mistake for Packer to meet with Heinz and a mistake for Heinz to ask for the meeting." "You further acknowledged that you later talked directly to Elder Packer and told him that you felt it was wrong and violated church disciplinary procedure for Elder Packer to have been in contact with President Heinz. You said that Elder Packer had no authority or responsibility to participate in such contact and you told me that you strongly urged Elder Packer not to engage in such contact in the future. You added that you fully expected Paul Toscano 'to sue' the church over this breach of procedural authority. " "In contrast to what you told me in private, your public statements concerning the Toscano excommunication process and any participation of Elder Packer in it presented a far different picture. Mr. Brinkley-Rogers asked you: 'In the case of Toscano . . . do you have any evidence that Elder Packer [was] involved in any way in the decision-making process in the disciplining of [him]?" "You responded: 'As for Elder Packer, Elder Packer does not have a specific responsibility for any area in the church . . . So, if Elder Packer is having any conversation with Kerry Heinz, it is outside the normal channel. That's all I can say. I have no knowledge of whether he did. But if he, and if he gave a directed verdict or anything like that, that is contrary to policy, it is irregular and it's contrary to what I know of Elder Packer and the way he operates. Elder Packer is not the least bit inclined to shrink from saying things like in the talk you saw [to the All-Church Coordinating Council, 18 May 1993]. He is a forthright, plain-spoken man, but Elder Packer is far too sophisticated and sensitive a man to call a stake president and tell him what he has to do in a church discipline case. I just don't believe that. What's possible is that a stake president might think he had heard such a thing; nobody can dismiss that possibility . . . that kind of slippage happens in communication. But Elder Packer has no, Elder [Loren C.] Dunn has a natural communications link, though an outdated one; Elder Packer does not. So, that's all I know about that at this point." "Frankly, I find the differences between what you told me and what you told the press to be irreconcilable and ethically troubling. First, by couching your answer to the question of Elder Packer's conversation with President Heinz in the hypothetical, you falsely imply, it seems to me, that you do not know whether he did talk with President Heinz. Second, contrary to what you told me, you explicitly said to the reporter that, in fact, you were not aware if any conversations took place between Elder Packer and President Heinz. Third, your assertion that for Elder Packer to have talked with President Heinz goes against your knowledge of Elder Packer's modus operandi is contradicted by your admission to me that you knew that Elder Packer had talked to him and that you later talked with Elder Packer about it. Fourth, your blanket denial of knowing anything beyond what you told the reporter is completely undermined, I feel, by what you told me." "In other words, you have told the truth in private about the Packer-Heinz meeting, while denying the truth in public." "When you asked that I keep our conversation confidential, I assumed that anything you might subsequently say for the record on the matter would be at least honest, if not complete. However, what you said in public varies significantly from the facts as you laid them out to me. It appears that you have asked me not to publicly divulge our conversation in your hope that my initial agreement to remain silent would keep the accuracy of your public utterances from being challenged." "I have concluded that to remain silent is unacceptable. It would be a cowardly and dishonest act. It would be analogous to having an individual come to me and say, 'Just between us, I killed my wife,' then turn around and tell the press that the next-door neighbor did it. I would have the clear moral obligation to set the record straight, since refusal to act would do violence to the truth and make me an accessory to the crime." "I will not be a party to a cover-up. Your request for confidentiality, I believe, has been superceded by the fact that you have lied in public, contrary to the facts as you know them, and that your hope of confidentiality rests on maintaining the deception. It has been observed that 'a lie is like a blanket of snow. It may cover unpleasantness for a time but, sooner or later, must melt, exposing that which was hidden." "To participate in this fraud would only serve to erode trust and destroy relationships." "I would hope that you would feel it right to publicly set the record straight. Mr. Brinkley-Rogers' phone number is 602-271-8137. If you choose not to do so within the next 24 hours, I will have no choice but to undertake that obligation myself." Sincerely, [signed] "Steve Benson" _____ Hell hath no fury like a cover blown. Oaks responded quickly, calling my home the same afternoon he received the fax, in an attempt to reach me. Our daughter, Audrey--six years old at the time--answered the phone, as Mary Ann simultaneously picked up the line on the other end and listened. "Is your father there?" asked Oaks, in a stern, angry voice. "No," Audrey replied meekly, "He's at work." _____ Oaks did not have my office phone number but he had the reporter's, since I had given it to him. (Oaks needed to do his explaining to the person he had lied to in the interview, not to me). Oaks left a message with Brinkley-Rogers, who returned the call that evening, reaching Oaks at home through the Church switchboard operator (CSO). Below is the full transcript of the ensuing conversation between Oaks (O) and Brinkley-Rogers (BR), taped by Brinkley-Rogers (which he later allowed me to audio-copy and which copy is currently in my possession). It is reported here with permission of Brinkley-Rogers. CSO (choir music in the background): "LDS Church Offices." BR: "Yes, good evening. Uh, this is Paul Brinkley-Rogers calling from Phoenix." CSO: "Yes." BR: "Concerning Dallin Oaks' call. He asked me to call the switchboard." CSO: "Yes. Just a moment, please, while I"-- BR: "Thank you. Thanks a lot." CSO: "Go ahead, please." BR: "Thank you." O: "Hello, Mr. Brinkley-Rogers." BR: "Good evening, Mr. Oaks. How are you?" O: "Thanks for calling back." BR: "Well, thanks for calling me." O: "Let me put the robe on and go in another room, where I can be comfortable." BR: "OK, sure." O: "Thank you for calling back." BR: "All right, sir." O: "Somebody has called me a liar and I don't like to (inaudible) to that on a charge like that." BR: "Oh, all right. How did that happen?" O: "Uh, well, let me explain. I received a very disturbing letter from Steve Benson." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "He compares what I said to him in a confidential setting, relating to Church issues, with a transcript of the interview that I had with you"-- BR: "Yes." O: --"and accused me of lying." BR: "Hmm." O: "And I'm a truthful man and I care for my integrity and, uh, and I, I take no, uh, no little, uh, concern for something like this." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "Before I talk with you about it, let me ask you a question"-- BR: "Sure." O: --"so you'll understand why I need to ask that before I speak about this." BR: "All right, sir." O: "What I would like to know is the relationship between you and Steve Benson in this matter. Specifically, was Steve on a reconnaissance for you when he asked about two weeks ago for a Church interview and came into an interview, in an ecclesiastical setting, which is the occasion of this comparison?" BR: "No, I, I had no idea that he even did that." O: "I didn't think so." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "Uh, let me ask a follow-up question." BR: "Sure." O: "Uh, is, are you involved in any kind of an effort that Steve is now making to extort information from me--and I use the word 'extort,' uh"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"advisedly." BR: "Yeah." O: --"to extort information from me in behalf of you?" BR: "No. I'm not aware of any such thing." O: "Now, he had, the reason I had to ask that is that he had the manuscript that was our interview." BR: "Yeah." O: "And he was comparing that with notes he'd made earlier when he had a conversation"-- BR: "Oh, I see. No, I played the tape for Steve of, uh, our interview, you know, after the interview and I noticed that he looked sort of surprised by it." O: "OK, well, then, I, I take that at face value." BR: "All right." O: "And, and you, what I'm going to tell you why, I, uh, oh, why I was aroused by this." BR: "Uh-huh." O: "Now, I assume, as I told you at the time, that you're a professional journalist"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "I assume, I take The Arizona Republic at, at face value. Uh, uh, it seems to me like it's been very professional and, and I deal with you in that light." BR: "All right, sir." O: "And I assume that neither you nor The Republic want to be used in Steve's grievances against, and controversies with, his Church"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"that are rather considerable, uh, uh, controversy with his Church." BR: "Uh-huh." O: "I was trying to do, to deal with that in having a confidential interview with him." BR: "OK." O: "And now he, he has drawn in this letter to me, he's drawn these two things together"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "And I'd rather deal with you separately"-- BR: "You mean this conversation with you, uh, compared"-- O: "His conversation with me"-- BR: --"compared with the tape?" O: "Compared with the tape, and that's, uh, what I'd like to do, is deal separately with you." BR: "OK." O: "And I assume that you don't want to get involved with Steve's controversies with his Church." BR: "No." O: "I assume that that's part of your professional approach to this and if I, if I can deal separately with you, independent of Steve Benson"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"then it's, then it's much easier for me to (inaudible) my problems." BR: "All right, so let's go ahead on that basis." O: "OK, good. Now, when (cough) I received this letter from Steve, which was, uh, a very accusatory letter"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"and, uh, I presume that you don't know about its contents"-- BR: "Right." O: "But when I received this letter, which I did this afternoon about 5 o'clock"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"I got the transcript out and reviewed it very carefully, the transcript of my interview with you." BR: "Yeah." O: "When I did that, I saw one sentence in my interview with you--and only one sentence--that I would say overstated the truth." BR: "OK." O: "And that sentence I want to correct." BR: "All right, sir. Fine." O: "And I am sorry for it, but in a, in a, our, our interview was 60 minutes long and, you know, I was shooting from the hip (inaudible) along"-- BR: "Yeah." O: --"and it was one of those things, which called to my attention, is inaccurate and I want to correct it." BR: "All right." O: "The, the, the only thing I can see that I want to correct." BR: "OK, sir." O: "And this is a, is a, uh, oh, about one-fourth of the circumstances that, uh, that, uh, Steve cites in his letter, because I looked, uh, I looked at the others and, and, uh, I think that, uh, I, I don't, uh, feel any necessity under my commitment to integrity to make any change in what I said." BR: "OK." O: "But in this one instance, I do." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "The sentence is, is toward the end of the interview." BR: "Yeah." O: "It is the, the last paragraph of the interview." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "I'm looking at the transcript that was made from the recording when made here." BR: "Yup." O: "It's, uh, it's in this talk about the Kerry Heinz matter"-- BR: "All right." O: "And the sentence is this, about having a conversation: 'So, if Elder Packer is having any conversation with Kerry Heinz'"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"'it is outside the normal channel'"-- BR: "Yeah." O: --"'that's all I can say. I have not'—"my transcript says that. It must be 'no'"—'I have no knowledge of whether he did.'" BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "That's the sentence that should be stricken." BR: "OK." O: "If you'd just strike out, 'I have no knowledge of whether he did'"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"then I'll stand by the transcript of things that I said to you, but that statement, 'I have no knowledge of whether he did'"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"was, uh, as I looked back on the transcript, I think that's inaccurate and I want to withdraw that." BR: "All right. Now, um, I guess my question is, do, do you have knowledge that he did that, in that case?" O: "Now"-- BR: "Is that what we're getting to here?" O: "Let me just, uh, let me just say this"-- BR: "All right, sir." O: "Uh (clears throat), when I met with Steve Benson"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"Uh, I was trying to help Steve Benson in a matter, a Church matter, that does not concern the subject of our interview." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "In the course of doing that, I spoke to him confidentially and in a privileged relationship"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"and, uh, I think his letter and the things he says in his letter, abuse that privileged relationship, uh, in a really, uh, well, I'll stop there." BR: "OK." O: "And, and I, uh, [Steve] also says some things in his letter which he may share with you, I don't know"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "But he, he claims to have notes of things that I've said in the, in the conversation with him"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "I don't affirm his notes." BR: "OK." O: "If he shows you a copy of his letter"-- BR: "Uh-huh." O: --"I certainly don't affirm his notes"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"and I'm not either admitting or denying things that I, I was speaking there in a privileged relationship and I don't think that it's fair for Steve, uh, nor is it fair for me"-- BR: "Yup." O: --"to go into a privileged relationship"-- BR: "Hmm-mm." O: --"and for me to affirm or deny his notes, so I, I simply stand silent on what he claims took place"-- BR: "Right." O: --"in a privileged conversation and, as a journalist, you'd understand the privilege." BR: "Uh-huh." O: "I think his notes are quite self-serving, but that's, that's simply my, my perspective." BR: "OK." O: "But what I am saying is that I just don't choose to go, uh, I don't choose to be—what's the word I'm looking for?—leveraged"-- BR: "Hmm." O: --"into saying anything more than I said to you in the interview by Steve Benson's use of privileged information." BR: "Hmm-mm." O: "So, to answer your question, I'd say that I just don't choose to affirm or deny." BR: "OK." O: "But I do wish to withdraw a sentence which, as I read it on the transcript, is inaccurate." BR: "All right, sir." O: "So, I, if you will do me the favor of striking out that, you do whatever you want with what remains." BR: "All right, sir." O: "And I'm glad to defend whatever remains, but I cannot defend that sentence." BR: "All right. Well, it's clear to me." O: "All right. And I appreciate that and I appreciate the opportunity of being able to speak to you as a, on a professional basis and I, I must tell you that I make this phone call because it distresses me when somebody claims that I lie." BR: "All right. Well, all right." O: "Because I don't do that." BR: "OK, sir." O: "Well, I appreciate the opportunity to visit with you and thank you for calling." BR: "Thanks for calling me." O: "OK." BR: "Bye-bye." O: "Bye-bye." _____ I was not immediately informed by the reporter of the details of the above conversation, being initially told only that Oaks had called to clarify the record. Assuming (as it turned out, naively) that Oaks had come completely clean, I faxed him a letter the next day, which read: "7 October 1993 Elder Dallin Oaks The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 47 East South Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84150 "PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL: SECOND TRANSMISSION" "Dear Elder Oaks: "I want to personally thank you for calling the Arizona Republic reporter, Mr. Brinkley-Rogers, to clarify your earlier statements. "May I emphasize that I came to you with no hidden agenda. My sincerity of motive, I believe, was evidenced by the fact that, given the problem I faced with reconciling your public and private comments, an opportunity was provided for you to set the record straight. "Again, thank you. "Regards, [signed] "Steve Benson" I had spoken too soon. When Brinkley-Rogers permitted me to listen to the full tape of the phone conversation between himself and Oaks, I realized I had been duped. Oaks had not come close to coming clean, as I had hoped and expected he would. His apology was cagey, hesitant, defensive and limited. He had lied by omission and commission, but somehow had talked himself into believing he had done the right thing. Moreover, Oaks' subsequent statements to the press in ensuing days were far from forthright. I was not about to sit by and let him get away with it. I went to the press, laid out the entire story and submitted my letter of resignation from the Mormon Church. In the meantime, Oaks was dribbling out half-hearted confessions. Five days after the phone conversation with the Arizona Republic reporter, Oaks publicly admitted that he had not been truthful about his knowledge of Packer's involvement in the Toscano episode. In an Associated Press wire-story appearing October 12th in The Salt Lake Tribune, veteran Utah reporter Vern Anderson wrote: "Elder Oaks admitted late Monday he 'could not defend the truthfulness of one of the statements' about Packer, who is considered by many to be behind the church's recent crackdown on dissidents . . . "Oaks told Arizona Republic reporter Paul Brinkley-Rogers on Oct. 1 that he had 'no knowledge' of whether Packer had met with Kerry Heinz, the local ecclesiastical leader for Salt lake lawyer Paul Toscano, before Heinz excommunicated Toscano on Sept. 19. Toscano was cited by Heinz, his stake president, for criticizing church leaders and acting contrary to the role and order of the church. "However, in a 'personal and confidential' letter to Oaks on Oct. 6, Benson reminded the apostle that in a private meeting Sept. 24, Oaks had told Benson he was 'distressed and astonished' that Packer had met with Heinz. "He quoted Oaks as saying of Packer, 'You can't stage manage a grizzly bear,' and added that 'it was a mistake for Packer to meet with Heinz and a mistake for Heinz to ask for the meeting.' "Benson also wrote that Oaks 'further acknowledged that you later talked directly to Elder Packer and told him that you felt it was wrong and violated church disciplinary procedure for Elder Packer to have been in contact with President Heinz.' "Benson said he was making his letter to Oaks public because he was fed up with church leaders shading the truth. Last summer, he criticized the faith's hierarchy for claiming his 94-year-old grandfather was still involved in important church decisions. "In an interview Monday evening, Oaks declined to confirm or deny most of Benson's assertions about a pair of private interviews the church prophet's grandson had in September with Oaks and Elder Neal Maxwell, another member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, a body that advises the church's presidency. "However, Oaks, a former Utah Supreme Court justice, acknowledged that his single statement to reporter Brinkley-Rogers about having no knowledge of the Packer-Heinz meeting was one 'I could not defend. It was not a truthful statement.' "Benson's letter to Oaks had warned the apostle that unless he set the record straight, Benson would feel under no obligation to honor the promise of confidentiality he had earlier given Oaks and Maxwell. "Oaks called the Republic's reporter that night and retracted the 'I have no knowledge of whether he [Packer] did' statement. The Republic's story, minus the statement, appeared Sunday. It quoted Packer as admitting he had met with Heinz about Toscano's case, but he denied having pressured the stake president to excommunicate Toscano. "Oaks did not retract other statements in the interview with Brinkley-Rogers that Benson had alleged--and Oaks denies--were false or deliberately misleading. Nevertheless, Benson faxed Oaks another letter Oct. 7 thanking him for having called Brinkley-Rogers to 'clarify your earlier statements.' "Oaks said he had assumed by Benson's second letter that he was satisfied. He stressed that Benson at least three times had assured him and Maxwell that their meetings--initiated by a kindly letter to Benson from Maxwell—were confidential and would never be publicly discussed. 'I think that Steve Benson is just going to have to carry the responsibility for whatever he relates about a confidential meeting,' Oaks said. "Benson said he felt acutely the moral dilemma of having promised confidentiality, but then having seen deliberate efforts to mislead the public about Packer's role in the Toscano affair. 'I had to decide to be a party to the cover-up or be faithful to my own convictions,' Benson said. 'I had to let Elder Oaks walk a plank of his own making.' "Toscano, who is appealing his excommunication, said he loves the church, but doesn't confuse it with 'individual leaders who are kind of running amok in a vacuum.' "He said that if Ezra Taft Benson were capable of managing the church today, his eldest grandson's plea would not have gone unheeded." ("Cartoonist Says Oaks Lied To Protect Fellow Apostle," Vern Anderson, Associated Press, in Salt Lake Tribune, 12 October 1993, sec. B, p. 1ff) By now the fireworks were lighting up the Temple Square skyline. Rather than agitate Oaks even more, however, I tried a softer, more conciliatory approach--even as I again chided him for refusing to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help him God. In "an open letter" dated October 15, 1993, I wrote: "Dear Elder Oaks: "Given the events of recent days, I feel it important to communicate to you the reasons why I believed it necessary to speak openly about our conversations concerning the Packer-Heinz-Toscano affair. "I understand your displeasure with the fact than an agreement of confidentiality was abrogated. I also understand your reasons for being upset that I went public after having expressed appreciation for your calling the press in an effort to clarify your earlier statements. "Yet, even in your subsequent revision, you did not correct what I believe to have been other deliberate misrepresentations. I could not, therefore, in good conscience, let them remain unchallenged, when both you and I knew better. You were provided with an opportunity to set the record straight completely. You chose only to correct one of the three falsehoods. I do not consider myself responsible for your decisions not to be fully honest. "As I noted in earlier correspondence, I feel you lost the benefit of confidentiality when you knowingly dissembled in public about what you told me in private. In so doing, I feel you violated the trust and faith between not only you and me, but between the church leadership and the members at large. I therefore felt it my moral obligation to break the silence that otherwise would have served only to perpetuate falsehood and false faith. "I have done so because I see so many people in the church hurting under the crushing heel of ecclesiastical abuse. It is time to lift the heel and start to heal. "The scriptures tell of another apostle--a man of God and servant of the Master who, because of weakness and pressure--also lied three times. Yet, he admitted his mistakes, repented of them and became not only one of the Lord's mightiest witnesses, but an example to the rest of us imperfect souls of what It means to be honest and true in Christ. "You now have the opportunity to shine your light in the darkness and warm us all through your spiritual courage. Please use the purity of your spirit, intellect and testimony to help us heal together. "Sincerely, [Signed] "Steve Benson" I didn't hear back from Oaks, except when I read what he was now saying to the press. Oaks next went to the Church-owned Deseret News to air his grievances. On October 16, 1993, the following article appeared: "Sitting in his office in the LDS Church administration building, Elder Dallin H. Oaks carefully reads a news report that says he admitted to 'falsely telling' a journalist he had no knowledge of an event involving the excommunication of a church member. "'Life isn't fair,' Elder Oaks said. 'Somebody said that time heals all wounds. But it's also true that time wounds all heels.' he added in jest. "But in a serious tone, Elder Oaks, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' Council of the Twelve, said he feels 'wounded' by an Associated Press story that he said dwelled on his admission that he made a statement he couldn't defend, and downplayed his efforts to promptly correct his unintentional error. "'It impugned my integrity and seriously distorted the account of the facts as it was presented,' Oaks said in an interview this week. "The apostle said he didn't willfully mislead a news reporter. He explained that he had misspoken during an hour-long interview and when he was notified of that he called the reporter to retract a 'statement I could not defend.' "The story was published four days later in the Arizona Republic newspaper, without the statement. "Meanwhile, in Phoenix, Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Steve Benson expressed frustration over what he sees as high-ranking church officials twisting the truth and deceiving members. "'I'm tired of playing this little game,' he said in a phone interview from his office at The Arizona Republic. 'The church needs to respect its members . . . It wants to muzzle its members.' "Benson, a sixth-generation Mormon and grandson of church President Ezra Taft Benson, wants no longer to be a 'muzzled' member. On Sunday he announced he had requested his name be removed from the rolls of the Mormon Church. The next day, he disclosed to the Associated Press details of confidential conversations and correspondence between him and Elder Oaks. "The subsequent news story published locally in Tuesday's Salt Lake Tribune was the latest episode in a saga surrounding recent disciplinary action taken against six prominent Mormon scholars and feminists. Five of them--one who was disfellowshipped and four who were excommunicated--said they were disciplined for apostasy and are victims of an orchestrated purge. "Earlier this month, Elder Oaks spoke with an Arizona Republic reporter about the recent string of disciplinary councils. During the interview, they discussed whether Elder Boyd K. Packer, also a member of the Council of the Twelve, talked with local stake president Kerry Heinz, who later presided over a disciplinary council that excommunicated church critic Paul Toscano. "In the interview, Elder Oaks said he had no knowledge of whether Elder Packer met with the stake president. According to The Arizona Republic story, Elder Oaks also said that if Elder Packer told the stake president what action to take against a church member, it would violate church policy and 'be contrary to what I know about Elder Packer and the way he operates.' "Benson claimed that Elder Oaks told him a different story during their confidential discussions held two weeks earlier. Benson would not say why he had a private talk with Elder Oaks. But he said that during their talk Elder Oaks disclosed that Elder Packer and Heinz were old friends who did get together at Heinz's request and that such a meeting was a mistake. "Benson added that Elder Oaks referred to Elder Packer when saying, 'You can't stage manage a grizzly bear.' "Oaks declined to discuss what Benson said took place in their private discussion. 'Even though I could defend myself by affirming or denying those things, I don't feel free' to do that without violating a pledge of confidentiality, he said. "The dispute over what Elder Packer said in a meeting with Heinz has attracted news media attention because some of those disciplined and their supporters had claimed Elder Packer was personally conducting a crackdown on church dissidents. "In a statement issued Friday, Elder Packer said, 'In late June, President Kerry Heinz asked his regional representative if he could arrange an appointment with me. We had served together in the seminary program 35 years ago.' "'Even though general authorities of the church are free to contact or respond to local leaders on any subject, I felt there may be some sensitivity about this request,' Elder Packer said. 'I, therefore, in a meeting of the Council of the Twelve Apostles raised the question of whether I should see him. The brethren felt I could not very well decline to see a stake president. "'I therefore consented but asked President Heinz if he would feel all right about his file leader, President Loren Dunn, being present. He readily agreed,' Elder Packer said. The meeting was held Sunday, July 11, 1993. "'We talked doctrine and philosophy,' Elder Packer said. 'I absolutely did not instruct him to hold a disciplinary council and did not then, nor have I ever, directed any verdict. By church policy that is left entirely to local leaders. When he left, I did not know what he would do.' "In his interview with the Deseret News, Benson said what Elder Oaks told him didn't square with what was said to the reporter. So he transmitted a confidential letter to Elder Oaks pointing that out. Benson said he also warned that if the apostle did not 'set the record straight' he would no longer feel obligated to keep their discussion confidential. "After receiving the letter, Elder Oaks said, he reviewed the transcript of his interview with the reporter and found he couldn't defend his comment about having no knowledge of Packer meeting with Heinz. "'How do you make a statement like that? I can't give any better explanation than the fact that I was talking a mile a minute and I just said something that on mature reflection I (concluded), "I can't defend the truthfulness of that,"' Elder Oaks said. But he let his other statements stand 'because I could defend those,' he said. "While Elder Oaks said he was glad to correct his misstatement, he didn't like Benson's methods. 'He has taken a confidential meeting where he had repeatedly assured me that he would never speak of subjects we were discussing . . . and now he has written me a letter using that confidential meeting to pressure me. And I deeply resent that.' "Benson said he had no hidden agenda to corner a church authority. He said he wrote Elder Oaks before the story ran, thanking him for retracting a statement and explaining his intention was to give Elder Oaks a chance to set the record straight. "But after later learning that Elder Oaks left intact the other comments that troubled Benson, Benson said he followed through on his threat to go public. "In a followup letter transmitted Friday to Elder Oaks explaining why he decided to speak openly about their confidential conversations, Benson said, 'I feel you violated the trust and faith between not only you and me, but between the church leadership and the members at large. I therefore felt it my moral obligation to break the silence that otherwise would have served only to perpetuate falsehood and false faith.'" ("Elder Oaks says news story 'seriously distorted' facts, LDS apostle calls his error unintentional. (Cartoonist says church twists truth," Matthew S. Brown, The Deseret News, 16 October 1993, sec. A, p. 1ff) _____ Oaks next turned to the Salt Lake Tribune, to further defend his honor. In a highly unusual commentary written for that newspaper, published on October 21, 1993, he declared: "On October 12, 16, and 17, the Salt Lake Tribune gave prominent and extensive coverage to wire-service stories on cartoonist Steve Benson's charges that I 'lied' to an Arizona Republic reporter in an interview on current controversies over church discipline. I have no desire to prolong this controversy, but feel it necessary to set the record straight on some important matters omitted or obscured in this attack upon my integrity. "My dictionary defines lying as being 'deliberately untruthful' and a 'lie' as 'a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive.' I did not 'lie' to the reporter and, contrary to the wire-service story printed in the October 16 Tribune, I did not 'admit' to 'falsely telling' the reporter something that was untrue. "I withdrew one sentence I had spoken in a long interview, and I did so three days before the article was published because I realized when I saw the written transcript, that this single sentence was not 'truthful'(meaning 'accurate' or 'correct'). When a newspaper publishes something that it later realizes to have been incorrect, does it apologize to its readers for 'lying' or does it just print a correction? My statement to the reporter was corrected before it was published. "The sequence and timing of various events is important. "On Sept. 9 Elder Neal A. Maxwell and I met with Steve and Mary Ann Benson for about two and one-half hours to discuss their questions. Because he was a newspaperman, we sought and he gave solemn assurances that our discussions would be confidential. We continue to honor that confidence. "On Sept. 10, Steve Benson wrote us a letter expressing gratitude for 'being able to talk freely in an atmosphere of trust,' reaffirming his commitment to 'honor completely the confidentiality of our conversation, in not speaking, or even alluding to, for the record anything said by either of you,' and asking for another meeting to deal with 'some follow-up questions.' "On Sept. 24, we met again with Steve Benson for about an hour and a half. "On Oct. 1, a reporter for the Arizona Republic interviewed me for about an hour on a wide variety of subjects pertaining to current controversies over church discipline. Though Steve Benson works for this paper, he did not arrange this interview and was not included in it. "At about 4:30 p.m. on October 6, I received a 'personal and confidential' letter from Steve Benson. Relying on his personal notes of our confidential conversations, he charged that I had 'lied in public' in my interview with the reporter and stated that unless I 'publicly set the record straight' by calling the reporter within 24 hours, he would do so himself. "I immediately studied the lengthy transcript of the Oct. 1 interview (16 pages single-spaced), received the previous day. I was distressed to find one statement to the reporter I could see was not accurate ('I have no knowledge of whether he did'). I am sure I did not speak that sentence with intent to deceive, but whether it was an inadvertence or a result of forgetfulness in the context of a long and far-reaching interview, I cannot be sure. But the important thing was that I could recognize that this sentence was not correct. (Three other statements challenged by Steve Benson required no correction.) "That same evening (Oct. 1) I reached the reporter, advised him of the circumstances, and asked to withdraw the single sentence. He agreed. "On Oct. 7, I received another 'personal and confidential' letter from Steve Benson thanking me for calling the reporter 'to clarify your earlier statements.' His letter did not even hint that he thought further clarifications were necessary. "The Arizona Republic article appeared on Oct. 10. It made no mention of the sentence I had withdrawn. There was also a separate story about Steve Benson and his wife seeking to have their names removed from the records of the Church. "On Oct. 11, Steve Benson sent a copy of his 'personal and confidential' letters of Oct. 6 and 7 to the Associated Press in Salt Lake City. He also gave TV and radio interviews on this subject. "In summary, when I found that I could not defend the correctness of one brief sentence in a long interview, I immediately contacted the reporter and withdrew that sentence, doing so more than three days before the story was scheduled for publication. When the publication honored that correction and made no comment on it, Steve Benson accused me of lying in public and participating in a cover-up, and the wire-service coverage of this episode has inaccurately portrayed me as deliberately making false statements in public. "My perception of this matter is simple. I have been the victim of double-decker deceit: 1. betrayal of promises of confidentiality, and 2. false accusation of lying. "My heart goes out to all who have suffered from this painful sequence of events." ("Oaks: 'I've Been A Victim of Double-Decker Deceit," Dallin Oaks, Salt Lake Tribune, 21 October 1993, sec. A, p. 19) _____ Faced with Oaks' full-court press aimed at damage control, I determined it was time to push back. Four days after Oaks' article appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune, my own commentary followed in the same newspaper, giving a somewhat different perspective on events: "Mormons are admonished to be honest. Unfortunately, Apostle Dallin Oaks chooses to deny important truths relating to Elder Boyd K. Packer's involvement in the excommunication of Paul Toscano. "On Sept. 9 I met with Elders Oaks and Maxwell. In a Sept. 10 letter, I promised them I would not speak on the record about the contents of that meeting. I have kept that pledge. "On Sept. 24, we met again and confidentially discussed the Toscano excommunication. Confidentiality agreements are valid only when the parties involved remind truthful, whether publicly or privately. Oaks broke that ground rule, thereby releasing me from any obligation of silence in the Toscano cover up. All else on that date has remained confidential. "In that meeting, I asked Oaks if Kerry Heinz, Toscano's stake president, had any contact with Boyd K. Packer prior to Toscano's excommunication. "According to my notes taken during the meeting, Oaks admitted that Heinz 'called and asked for a meeting' with Packer. Oaks said he was 'distressed and astonished' that Packer agreed to the meeting. Referring to Packer, he said, 'You can't stage manage a grizzly bear.' He said that 'it was a mistake for Packer to meet with Heinz and a mistake for Heinz to ask for the meeting.' "(One wonders why the conflict between Oaks' surprise over the Packer-Heinz meeting and Packer's public statement that the Twelve authorized that meeting.) "Oaks said he later talked with Packer and told him he felt Packer had violated procedure by meeting with Heinz, noting that Packer had no authority or responsibility in this area. He said he strongly urged Packer to avoid future such meetings, adding the he expected Toscano 'to sue the church.' "On Oct. 1 an Arizona Republic reporter asked Oaks if Packer was 'involved in any way' in the disciplining of Toscano. "Oaks replied: '. . . If Elder Packer is having any conversation with Kerry Heinz, it s outside the normal channel . . . I have no knowledge of whether he did. But if he did, and if he gave a directed verdict . . . that is contrary to policy . . . and it's contrary to what I know of Elder Packer and the way he operates . . . So, that's all I know about that at this point.' "Oaks' answer contained several clear-cut falsehoods which point to a larger pattern of deception. "First, by couching the Packer-Heinz meeting hypothetically, he falsely implied personal ignorance of whether it occurred. Oaks left this on the record. "Second, Oaks said he had no knowledge that Packer met with Heinz. "Commendably, Oaks later retracted this statement. "Third, Oaks claimed that if Packer met with Heinz, it ran contrary to Oaks' knowledge of how Packer operated. Oaks left this on the record. "Finally, Oaks claimed he knew nothing more. He left this falsehood on the record. "Upon hearing Oaks' attempted cover for Packer, I was dismayed and faxed Oaks a letter on Oct. 6, detailing what he told me on Sept. 24, juxtaposed against what he told the reporter on Oct. 1. I highlighted his false on-the-record statements, so that there could be no misunderstanding. "I informed him that our confidentiality agreement was void and offered him 24 hours to set the record straight, advising him that if he did not, I would. "It is critical to understand that Oaks did not initiate any corrections for the record. Only after receiving my Oct. 6 letter did he contact the reporter to issue a limited retraction. "Initially, I was pleased to hear from the reporter that Oaks had corrected himself. On Oct. 7, I faxed him a second letter, thanking him for taking the opportunity to clarify his earlier statements. "That thank-you note proved to be premature, because I was unaware at the time I wrote it that Oaks had not retracted all his falsehoods. Upon discovering that he had left most of them intact, I concluded he had been provided ample opportunity to set the record straight and had not. "When Oaks chose to publicly dissemble, he violated my trust and that of the church at large. May his heart go out, not only in love, but in reconciliation, to those who have suffered from this abuse of ecclesiastical power." ("Benson Replies, Charges Oaks With Dissembling," Steve Benson, Salt Lake Tribune, 25 October 1993, sec. A, p. 5) _____ Oaks also took his "Battle of Wounded Me" to the Brigham Young University campus, where attention focused on keeping the hearts and minds of the rising generation in line. The same day his defensive commentary ran in The Salt Lake Tribune, it also appeared up in the Church-owned campus newspaper, The Daily Universe. ("News reports distorted facts, Elder Oaks Says," Dallin Oaks, the Daily Universe, 25 October 1993, p. 3) In the interest of equal time, I contacted the Universe and requested that my response to Oaks (the one also originally printed in The Salt Lake Tribune) also be published in the B.Y.U. student newspaper. I was told by a Universe faculty adviser that Oaks' version of events had been published in the Universe at the direct request of the First Presidency. He further informed me that the school paper was already having problems "up the road" with the Church. He said that if The Universe printed my reply, "the General Authorities might shut us down." It was becoming clear that if Church members were going to get the truth on this messy affair, they couldn't depend on the Church for help. I turned to an off-campus, supposedly independent student publication, Student Review, and spoke with its student editor, requesting that he publish a letter to the editor from me about the controversy. The editor replied that if the Review published my piece, it would be perceived as being a critic of the Church and "lose advertisers." Still holding out hope, however, I faxed a cover letter, along with the letter to the editor, to Student Review, wishing for a change of heart. The cover letter read: "October 29, 1993 TO: Brian Waterman FROM: Steve Benson RE: publishing the attached letter in Student Review "Dear Brian: "Thanks for the opportunity to talk with you yesterday. I appreciated your explanation of the current situation with Student Review. I sincerely hope that arrangements can be made to publish my letter in your paper. "It would be unfortunate if the letter is killed for fear that your publication would somehow be considered 'anti-church' or that it would be bad for business. Truth is ultimately our best defense and the best way of doing business. Shying away from forthrightly informing readers on matters of public importance only guarantees that wrongs will be perpetrated and, in the long run, serves only to hurt the church. "I would not object to having Elder Oaks' version of the events printed alongside my letter. In fact, that format might provide the best opportunity for readers to determine for themselves the facts of the case. "Thanks for your consideration. "Sincerely, [signed] "Steve Benson" The accompanying letter to the editor read, in part, as follows: "On October 25, the Daily Universe, reportedly acting on a request from the office of the First Presidency, published an article by Elder Dallin Oaks, claiming recent news reports had falsely accused him of lying about Elder Boyd K. Packer's involvement in the excommunication of Paul Toscano and alleging that I had broken a confidence in making that charge. "In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I requested that The Universe provide me an opportunity to reply. That request was denied. "The reason given by Universe staff was that opinions contrary to that of Elder Oaks would not see print, because of expected opposition from Salt Lake. Fear was expressed that if the Universe published contrary to the wishes of the Brethren, it might be shut down. "Given these unfortunate circumstances, I approached Student Review, hoping that fuller access to the facts would allow readers to make informed and intelligent judgments. "Those facts are as follows [the letter then covered ground already noted above, with these additional observations]: "On Oct. 1, Elder Oaks gave a carefully-worded, tape-recorded interview to The Arizona Republic, where he was asked if Elder Packer was 'involved in any way' in the disciplining of Paul Toscano. "Elder Oaks now admits that one of his answers to the reporter was untrue but blames it on 'inadvertence' or 'forgetfulness.' He insists that other challenged statements he made 'required no correction.' "These explanations are simply not persuasive. Four of his on-the-record answers are quoted below, paired with contrary facts he provided me in the Sept. 24 meeting, during which I took notes. Examined together, they point to a deliberate pattern of deception. "First, by framing his answer in the hypothetical, Elder Oaks falsely implied that he did not know whether Elder Packer had talked with Paul Toscano's stake president, Kerry Heinz. He told the reporter, 'If Elder Packer is having any conversation with Kerry Heinz, it is outside the normal channel.' "In truth, Elder Oaks acknowledged to me that they had met, saying President Heinz 'called and asked for a meeting' with Elder Packer. "Second, Elder Oaks falsely claimed ignorance of whether Elder Packer conversed with President Heinz. He told the reporter, 'I have no knowledge of whether he did.' "In reality, Elder Oaks did know the discussion took place--as evidenced by the fact that he later retracted this statement. "Third, Elder Oaks misleadingly insisted that for Elder Packer to have had contact with President Heinz ran counter to Elder Oaks' personal knowledge of both Elder Packer and his approach. He told the reporter, 'If he did . . . it's contrary to what I know of Elder Packer and the way he operates.' "In actuality, Elder Oaks knew how Elder Packer operated and did not like what he saw. Speaking of Elder Packer, he told me, 'You can't stage manage a grizzly bear.' He said he was 'distressed and astonished' that Elder Packer met with President Heinz, noting 'it was a mistake for Packer to meet with Heinz and a mistake for Heinz to ask for the meeting.' "(Elder Oaks may want to explain the contradiction between his claim of being surprised by the Packer-Heinz meeting and Elder Packer's claim that the Twelve gave prior approval for that meeting). "Elder Oaks also told me he later spoke directly with Elder Packer, advising him that Elder Packer's meeting with President Heinz violated disciplinary procedure and that Elder Packer had no authority or responsibility in this area. He said he strongly urged Elder Packer to avoid such meetings in the future and admitted he expected Paul Toscano 'to sue the church' (This also contradicts Elder Packer's claim of prior approval). "Fourth, Elder Oaks summarized his knowledge of the Packer-Heinz-Toscano case by once again falsely pleading ignorance. He told the reporter, 'So, that's all I know about that at this point.' "As he admitted earlier to me, he clearly knew more . . . "In conclusion, while Elder Oaks portrays himself as an innocent victim in this regrettable affair, he has (1) admitted privately the facts concerning the Packer-Heinz-Toscano case, (2) falsified publicly about those facts, (3) retracted one of his untrue statements under threat of exposure and (4) refused to disclaim other statements of his that are demonstrably untrue. "This dispute has been a painful one. It could, and should have been avoided if Elder Oaks had originally told the truth . . . "Steve Benson" The letter was not published. _____ Finally, I turned to Provo's community newspaper, The Daily Herald, hoping for a sympathetic ear. To the credit of its editor (who happened to be Catholic), the paper published the letter to the editor that Student Review would not touch, along with the following "Editor's note": "News stories earlier this month dealt with the resignation from the LDS Church of Arizona Republic political cartoonist Steve Benson. Benson is a grandson of LDS Church President Ezra Taft Benson. "Following Benson's resignation from the LDS Church, he made charges that LDS Apostle Dallin H. Oaks was less than truthful in some statements made concerning Apostle Boyd K. Packer's involvement in the excommunication of Mormon dissenter Paul Toscano. There were several Associated Press wire stories detailing Benson's allegations and responses from Oaks. "On Saturday, the Daily Herald printed, on the front page, the complete text of a letter from Oaks explaining his position and actions on the matters. On Sunday, Benson called this paper's managing editor at his home and requested the opportunity to respond to Oaks' letter. Benson's response follows." ("Benson responds to Oaks' letter," Steve Benson, The Daily Herald, 26 October 1993, sec. A, p. 1ff) The above is an extensive account of events involving the Toscano-Packer-Heinz-Oaks affair. If only Oaks had told the truth, it would have been a lot shorter. Mark Twain once observed, "Truth is the most valuable thing we have. Let us economize it." Twain's words would be an appropriate replacement for the Mormon motto: "The glory of God is intelligence." |
| Friday, Mar 9, 2007, at 06:32 AM Source Material On Smith's Possession Of The Jupiter Talisman At The Time Of His Death Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Joseph Smith, Jupiter Talismans and the Occult Connection
"It is no secret that Smith was infatuated with occultic practices. Durham states, "All available evidence suggests that Joseph Smith the prophet possessed a magical Masonic medallion or talisman, which he worked during his lifetime and which was evidently on his person when he was martyred." Mr. Durham describes this as "perhaps the strangest, the most mysterious, occult-like, esoteric, and yet Masonically oriented practice ever adopted by Joseph Smith" ("No Help for the Widow's Son," 1980, pg. 22, in Bill McKeever, "Masonic Influence in the Endowment Ceremony," at http://www.mrm.org/topics/mormon-temp...). "In 1974 Dr. Reed Durham, who was director of the LDS Institute of Religion at the University of Utah and president of the Mormon History Association, made a discovery that was so startling that it caused great consternation among Mormon scholars and officials. "Dr. Durham found that what had previously been identified as the 'Masonic jewel of the Prophet Joseph Smith' was in reality a 'Jupiter talisman.' "This is a medallion which contains material relating to astrology and magic. Dr. Durham, apparently not realizing the devastating implications of his discovery, announced this important find in his presidential address before the Mormon History Association on April 20, 1974: "'. . . I should like to initiate all of you into what is perhaps the strangest, the most mysterious, occult-like esoteric, and yet Masonically oriented practice ever adopted by Joseph Smith. . . . "'All available evidence suggests that Joseph Smith the Prophet possessed a magical Masonic medallion, or talisman, which he worked during his lifetime and which was evidently on his person when he was martyred. His talisman is in the shape of a silver dollar and is probably made of silver or tin. "'It is exactly one and nine-sixteenths in diameter, . . . the talisman,. . . originally purchased from the Emma Smith Bidamon family, fully notarized by that family to be authentic and to have belonged to Joseph Smith, can now be identified as a Jupiter talisman. "'It carries the sign and image of Jupiter and should more appropriately be referred to as the Table of Jupiter. And in some very real and quite mysterious sense, this particular Table of Jupiter was the most appropriate talisman for Joseph Smith to possess. "'Indeed, it seemed meant for him, because on all levels of interpretation: planetary, mythological, numerological, astrological, mystical cabalism, and talismatic magic, the Prophet was, in every case, appropriately described. "'The characters on the talisman are primarily in Hebrew, but there is one inscription in Latin. Every letter in the Hebrew alphabet has a numerical equivalent and those numerical equivalents make up a magic square. By adding the numbers in this Jupiter Table in any direction . . . the total will be the same. In this case, on the Jupiter Table, 34. . . . "'There is the one side of the talisman belonging to the Prophet Joseph Smith. You can see the Hebrew characters . . . you see on the margins, at the bottom is the Jupiter sign. . . . The cross at the top represents the spirit of Jupiter, and you will see the path of Jupiter in the orbit of the heavens, and then again the Jupiter sign. "'I wasn't able to find what this was, for--as I said--two months; and finally, in a magic book printed in England in 1801, published in America in 1804, and I traced it to Manchester, and to New York. "'It was a magic book by Francis Barrett and, lo and behold, how thrilled I was when I saw in his list of magic seals the very talisman which Joseph Smith had in his possession at the time of his martyrdom. . . . "'To the Egyptians, Jupiter was known as Ammon, but to the Greeks he was Zeus: the ancient sky Father, or Father of the Gods. . . . "'In astrology, Jupiter is always associated with high positions, getting one's own way, and all forms of status. And I quote: "Typically a person born under Jupiter will have the dignity of a natural ruler. . . . He will probably have an impressive manner. . . . In physical appearance, the highly developed Jupiterian is strong, personable, and often handsome. . . . the Jupiterian influence produces a cheerful winning personality, capable of great development." . . . "So closely is magic bound up with the stars and astrology that the term astrologer and magician were in ancient times almost synonymous. The purpose of the Table of Jupiter in talismanic magic was to be able to call upon the celestial intelligences, assigned to the particular talisman, to assist one in all endeavors. The names of the deities which we gave to you, who could be invoked by the Table were always written on the talisman or represented by various numbers. Three such names were written on Joseph Smith's talisman: Abbah, Father; El Ob, Father is God or God the Father; and Josiphiel, Jehovah speaks for God, the Intelligence of Jupiter. "'When properly invoked, with Jupiter being very powerful and ruling in the heavens, these intelligences—by the power of ancient magic—guaranteed to the possessor of this talisman the gain of riches, and favor, and power, and love and peace; and to confirm honors, and dignities, and councils. "'Talismatic magic further declared that any one who worked skillfully with this Jupiter Table would obtain the power of stimulating anyone to offer his love to the possessor of the talisman, whether from a friend, brother, relative, or even any female ("Mormon Miscellaneous," published by David C. Martin, vol. 1, no. 1, October 1975, pp.14-15).' "Reed Durham was severely criticized by Mormon scholars and officials for giving this speech. He was even called in by Mormon President Spencer W. Kimball, and finally found it necessary to issue a letter in which he reaffirmed his faith in Joseph Smith and said that he was sorry for the 'concerns, and misunderstandings' that the speech had caused. "We feel that Dr. Durham's identification of Joseph Smith's talisman is one of the most significant discoveries in Mormon history and that he should be commended for his research. "That Joseph Smith would own such a magic talisman fits very well with the evidence from his 1826 trial. W. D. Purple, who was an eye-witness to the trial, claimed it was reported that Smith said certain talismanic influences were needed to recover a box of treasure: "'Mr. Thompson, an employee of Mr. Stowell, was the next witness. . . . Smith had told the Deacon that very many years before a band of robbers had buried on his flat a box of treasure, and as it was very valuable they had by a sacrifice placed a charm over it to protect it, so that it could not be obtained except by faith, accompanied by certain talismanic influences. . . . the box of treasure was struck by the shovel, on which they redoubled their energies, but it gradually receded from their grasp. One of the men placed his hand upon the box, but it gradually sunk from his reach. . . . Mr. Stowell went to his flock and selected a fine vigorous lamb, and resolved to sacrifice it to the demon spirit who guarded the coveted treasure ... but the treasure still receded from their grasp, and it was never obtained ("The Chenango Union," Norwich, N.Y., May 3, 1877, as cited in "A New Witness For Christ In America," vol. 2, pp.366-67).' "Dr. Durham was unable to determine just when Joseph Smith obtained his talisman, but the fact that he was recommending 'certain talismanic influences' around the time of the 1826 trial is certainly interesting. "The Jupiter talisman is probably the type of talisman a money digger would be interested in because it was supposed to bring its possessor 'the gain of riches, and favor, and power.' "Regardless of when Joseph Smith obtained his talisman, we do know that he possessed it up to the time of his death. "He must have felt that it was very important because the Mormon scholar LaMar C. Berrett reveals that 'This piece was in Joseph Smith's pocket when he was martyred at Carthage Jail' ("The Wilford C. Wood Collection," 1972, vol. 1, p.173). "Wesley P. Walters says that 'Charles E. Bidamon, who sold the talisman to the Wood collection, stated in his accompanying affidavit: "Emma Smith Bidamon the prophet's widow was my foster mother. She prized this piece very highly on account of its being one of the prophet's intimate possessions' (Charles E. Bidamon Affidavit. Wood Coll. #7-J-b-21)." (Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Joseph Smith and Money-digging," Chapter 4, in "The Changing World of Mormonism," at http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/chang...) "Before the medallion was properly identified, it was known as the 'Masonic Jewel of the Prophet Joseph Smith.' In the shape of a silver dollar, the piece measures exactly 1-9/16 inches in diameter and is probably made of silver or tin (see photo). A copy of the Jupiter talisman can be seen in Francis Barrett's occultic book "The Magus," p. 174. . . . "Apparently, nobody really knew what Joseph Smith's 'Masonic Jewel' was before April 20, 1974. It was on that day that Dr. Reed Durham presented his discovery in his address before the Mormon History Association. "As President of the Association and Director of the LDS Institute of Religion at the University of Utah, Dr. Durham probably had their full attention when he spoke: "'. . . I should like to initiate all of you into what is perhaps the strangest, the most mysterious, occult-like esoteric, and yet Masonically oriented practice ever adopted by Joseph Smith. . . . All available evidence suggests that Joseph Smith the Prophet possessed a magical Masonic medallion, or talisman, which he worked during his lifetime and which was evidently on his person when he was martyred.' "After describing the medallion, Dr. Durham then added, "\'. . . [the talisman] originally purchased from the Emma Smith Bidamon family, fully notarized by that family to be authentic and to have belonged to Joseph Smith, can now be identified as a Jupiter talisman. It carries the sign and image of Jupiter and should more appropriately be referred to as the Table of Jupiter.' "Dr. Durham was correct. The table, also called the Kamea, can be depicted in either English numbers (as shown in the talisman found in The Magus) or in Hebrew (as used by Smith). According to Barrett, the table '. . . consists of a square drawn into itself; it contains sixteen particular numbers, and in every line and diameter four, making thirty-four; the sum of all is one hundred and thirty-six. There are over it divine names, with an intelligence to that which is good, and a spirit to bad; and out of it is drawn the character of Jupiter and the spirits thereof; if this is engraven on a plate of silver, with Jupiter being powerful and ruling in the heavens, it conduces to gain riches and favor, love, peace and concord, and to appease enemies, and to confirm honors, dignities, and counsels.' "Mormon History Association President Durham admitted, '. . . in some very real and quite mysterious sense, this particular Table of Jupiter was the most appropriate talisman for Joseph Smith to possess. Indeed, it seemed meant for him, because on all levels of interpretation: planetary, mythological, numerological, astrological, mystical cabalism, and talismatic magic, the Prophet was, in every case, appropriately described. . . . In astrology, Jupiter is always associated with high positions, getting one's own way, and all forms of status . . . Talismatic magic further declared that anyone who worked skillfully with the Jupiter Table would obtain the power of stimulating anyone to offer his love to the possessor of the talisman, whether from a friend, brother, relative, or even any female.' "Dr. Durham did not determine just when Smith obtained his talisman, but states that its description was discovered ". . . in a magic book printed in England in 1801, published in America in 1804, and I traced it to Manchester, and to New York [where Joseph Smith grew up]. It was a magic book by Francis Barrett and, lo and behold, how thrilled I was when I saw in his list of magic seal the very talisman which Joseph Smith had in his possession at the time of his martyrdom.' "The fact that the talisman was on Joseph's person at the time of his death has been absolutely established. Mormon scholar LaMar C. Berrett tells us, 'This piece was in Joseph Smith's pocket when he was martyred at Carthage jail.' "According to the Charles E. Bidamon affidavit (who sold the talisman to the Wood collection), 'Emma Smith Bidamon the prophet's widow was my foster mother. She prized this piece very highly on account of its being one of the prophet's intimate possessions. . . . I certify that I have many times heard her say. when being interviewed. and showing the piece. That it was in the prophets pocket when he was martyred at Carthage Ill.' "Even though Dr. Durham was a very influential Mormon Historian, his honesty regarding the truth behind Joseph Smith's magic talisman must be applauded. It caused him a great deal of difficulty with the Mormon hierarchy, however. . . . " (Larry Hall, "Joseph Smith's Magick Talisman," at http://www.luciferlink.org/mmagick.ht...) "Dr. Reed Durham, former president of the Mormon History Association, and Professor of Religion at the University of Utah, in a 1974 lecture revealed that at the time of his death Joseph Smith was wearing what was formerly thought to have been a 'Masonic jewel' was actually a 'Jupiter talisman.' "This proves that Joseph Smith was engaged in occult practices until the end of his life in 1844. "A talisman is an object engraved with astrological signs believed to have possessed power to avert evil and bring good luck. Such pieces are clearly identified with occult magic. This lecture, although true, brought the wrath of then President Spencer W. Kimbell down upon Dr. Durham. The talisman is currently kept in the LDS Archives." (Allen Harrod, "Who Was Joseph Smith," at http://www.watchman.org/lds/whoisjose... "Mormon author D. Michael Quinn writes that Joseph Smith had at the time of his death, '. . . a silver Jupiter medallion constructed according to the instructions for making "Magic Seals, or Talismans," in Barrett's 1801 'The Magus' (Quinn, 'Early Mormonism and the Magic World View,' p.66)." (James Walker, "Enemies of the Cross," at http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/t...) |
| Wednesday, Mar 14, 2007, at 06:47 AM Hamblin The "Butthead-Calling" Hypocrite: Calling Out Mormon Apologists On Their Childish Tantrums Against Ex-Mormon Critics Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Recent reference has been made on the Recovery from Mormonism board to LDS Cult apologist William Hamblin's assaults on those who post here.
In this regard--and in a stunningly hypocritical hit piece entitled, "Their 'Little Corner of Cyberspace,'"--pro-Mo apologists on the so-called "FAIR" board have attacked "the vehemence with which its detractors approach anything having to do with the [Mormon] Church'. . . [on the] the popular Recovery from Mormonism message board, which receives up to 1,000 posts per day by a disgruntled collection of Mormon dissidents." How is this known by the faithful? Hamblin, his FAIR supporters confess, acknowledges "lurking on the 'Recovery' board for a while," where he claims to "have really been astonished by what I've seen [t]here." Among other complaints, Humpty Grumpty Hamblin waxes whiny about the "arrogance" he says exists on RfM, as so declared in his following observation: "For many on this board, it seems that once your mind is freed from the shackles of Mormonism you are suddenly capable of being absolutely right about absolutely everything. "When I find a cartoonist pontificating with absolute certitude about the history of religion, for example—on topics where mere mortals with PhDs have spent lifetimes of study and still are unable to resolve disputed issues—you will have to forgive me for being dubious about the intellectual rigor required by many on this board." http://www.fairlds.org/Anti-Mormons/T... Oh, pleeeeeze. People like Hamblin are in no position to point fingers at the supposed lack of credibility of ex-Mormon critics when, in fact, Hamblin himself has been guilty of astonishingly juvenile antics in blasting those critics in ways that cause adult students of Mormon studies to drop their jaws in utter disbelief. Mormon apologists, reviewers and "researchers" in Hamblin's backwater bush league are notorious for savaging critics of the Mormon Church for supposedly being puerile and unsophisticated in the conclusions these skeptics reach about LDS doctrine, practice and history. Case in point: FARMS premiere offensive lineman (and we do mean "offensive") Hamblin--in ridiculing Jerald and Sandra Tanner's work, "Covering up the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon"--pompously asserted: "[T]hey [the Tanners] simply refuse to deal with recent serious Latter-day Saint arguments . . . a perfect picture of the Tanners at the height of their ineptitude . . . completely fails to deal with [current LDS scholarly] interpretation of the Book of Mormon geography and archaeology . . . incapable of seriously dealing with academic studies and issues surrounding questions of archaeology and geography of either the New or old World. . . . [they should] stick to their . . . facile, ad nauseum demonstrations that Latter-day Saint doctrine bears little relationship to fundamentalist Protestant doctrine." http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=1... Hamblin is the last person to be chiding others for not being serious. Hamblin himself is about as serious as a whoopie cushion in a church pew. John Weldon, writing for the "Apologetics Index," points to the stupidly childish FARMS case of "Metcalfe Is Butthead," which exposed Hamblin's breathtaking immaturity in dealing with Mormonism's critics: "FARMS is, as we know, an acronym for the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies. "Unfortunately, after reading their reviews, etc., and examining their methods, an acronym equally suited for FARMS would often be: 'Frequent Artless Ridicule Made Simple.' "This is particularly so in light of the 'Metcalfe is Butthead' acronym fiasco, and similar matters. We mean no disrespect toward the more balanced FARMS writers, but FARMS style and antics are often less than scholarly." http://www.apologeticsindex.org/cpoin... Just what, exactly, was this "fiasco" and how was Hamblin involved in it? An answer to that question exposes the FARMS boys as engaging (and eventually being caught in) some of the most infantile, imbecilic antics imaginable. Lecturer John Hatch, in an address at a Sunstone symposium entitled "Why I No Longer Trust the FARMS Review of Books," detailed this extremely unprofessional and embarrassing moment in the history of FARMS's juvenile and scurrilous attacks on Mormonism's critics: "Mormon book collectors know there is one issue of FARMS Review of Books that is extremely rare. It is the first statement of issue 6:1, the issue that was almost entirely dedicated to reviewing Brent Metcalfe's book, 'New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology.' "The amount of space spent reviewing Metcalfe and his book is almost three hundred pages. "However, the important point for book collectors is the review by William Hamblin. In his review, Hamblin originally included an acrostic. An acrostic is something of a code or puzzle hidden within a set of paragraphs or lines. When one takes the first or last letter of the line or paragraph and puts them together, they form a word or phrase, similar to an acronym. "In this instance, by taking the first letter of every paragraph in the first few pages of Hamblin's review the phrase, 'Metcalfe is Butthead' was formed. After the publisher of the book threatened a lawsuit, FARMS reprinted the issue rewording several of the paragraphs. "It was an incredibly unprofessional and downright immature move on the part of FARMS. Again, the question of 'why' springs to mind. Why is such a childish and personal attack necessary? "Another disturbing facet of this story is the fact that the reviewer obviously spent the vast majority of his time trying to form the code that would spell out 'Metcalfe is Butthead' rather than trying to formulate a competent, persuasive review. "Why? "That is the question I have for FARMS that has never been answered. Why do they feel that scholars, church members, and even human beings can act the way they have at times and still be taken seriously and have the respect of others?" http://www.signaturebooks.com/sigstor... As Hamblin the Hypocrite so amply demonstrates, walking through a FARMS review is like attempting to cross through a farm's barnyard. You're quite likely to get some unwelcome material on the bottom of your boots. |
| Monday, Mar 19, 2007, at 08:59 AM "Destructive Cults Also Use Deception To Recruit New Members." And Other Excellent Quotes Applicable To Mormonism From U.s. Cult Expert, Steven Hassan Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| From Hassan’s book, “Releasing the Bonds: Empowering People to Think for Themselves”:
“…the [U.S.] Constitution does not give people or institutions the right to engage in behavior that violates other people’s rights or the laws of the land, even if they claim religious motivation.” (p. xx) “…if the effect of their actions [those of leaders of a cultic group] is to make the person dependent and subservient, then I believe it is hurtful and people’s rights are being violated.” (p. xx) “In order to safeguard our personal and collective freedom, it is imperative that people learn more about how the mind can be positively and negatively influenced. People must learn to know themselves and take responsibility for their own beliefs, values and behavior.” (p. xxiii) “…destructive cults are distinguished by their use of deception and mind control techniques to undermine a person’s free will and make him dependent…” (p. 3) “In essence, a destructive cult is an authoritarian group that is headed by a person or group of people that has near-complete control.” (p. 4) “…cult leaders often make extreme claims of divine or “otherworldly” power to exercise influence over their members.” (p. 4) “A group becomes destructive when its leader [leadership] actively uses such power to deceive members and to rob them of their individuality and free will.” (p. 4) “Destructive cults also use deception to recruit new members.” (p. 4) “What make this all so insidious is that members often speak and act with the greatest sincerity because they have been subjected to the same mind control techniques that they use to recruit others.” (p. 4) “Finally, destructive cults use mind control techniques to keep members dependent and obedient.” (p. 5) “…cult mind control can be understood as a system of influence that is designed to disrupt a person’s authentic identity and replace it with a new identity.” (p. 5) “By immersing people in a tightly controlled, high-pressure social environment, destructive cults gain control of their members’ behavior, thoughts, emotions, and access to information. They take over their minds.” (p. 5) “What ties these [cultic] groups together is their focus on religious dogma and spiritual practices. In many Bible-oriented groups (Jewish, Christian, Muslim), leaders claim to be a Messiah, Prophet, or Apostle. In some, an elite group of several people, the “governing body,” claim to know the real meaning of Scripture.” (p. 5) “Unethical therapists can become the leaders of cults when they make their patients dependent on them, rather than empowering them to become functional and independent.” (p. 7) “…relationships that are based on manipulation, deception, dependency and isolation can be very destructive.” (p. 13) ‘You know, a cult member is like an actor who has been given a role. But unlike actors, cult members actually come to believe the “role” is reality.”’ (p. 16) “Everyone is vulnerable to cult mind control.” (p. 17) “The leaders of destructive cults don’t treat everyone the same way.” (p. 17) “…the group will extract as much money as they can…” (p. 17) “Cults want people to be isolated and dependent.” (p. 19) From Matthew, who was born into a cult: “I wanted the freedom to learn and read without threats and punishment.” (p. 19) Characteristics of a Mind Control Environment:
“Doctrine over person: The imposition of group beliefs over individual experience, conscience, and integrity.” (p. 34) “Loading the language: The use of vocabulary to constrict members’ thinking into absolute, black-and-white, “thought-terminating clichés” understood only by insiders.” (p. 34) Social influence processes (p. 35): “In the 1930s, an early social psychologist named Kurt Lewin explained about his “field theory,” which described how behavior is related to both a person’s personality and his environment:” A quote from Lewin in Hassan's book: “Each person, in this view, is surrounded by a “life space” or dynamic field of forces within which his or her needs and purposes interact with the influences of the environment. Social behavior can be schematized in terms of the tension and interplay of these forces and of the individual’s tendency to maintain equilibrium among them or to restore equilibrium when it has been disturbed.” “Lewin was also interested in how a person’s attitudes are changed by his being a member of a group that reaches a collective decision, and how such a person will tend to hold fast to that decision while ignoring later information that conflicts with it.” (p. 35) “It is human nature to adapt to what is perceived to be “correct” behavior.” (p. 37) “If mind control techniques are used to empower an individual to have more choice, and authority for his life remains within himself, the effects can be beneficial. Mind control becomes destructive when it is used to undermine a person’s ability to think and act independently.” (p. 38) “…mind control seeks nothing less than to disrupt an individual’s authentic identity…” (p. 38) “Cult mind control is a social process that encourages obedience, dependence, and conformity. It discourages autonomy and individuality by immersing recruits in an environment that represses free choice. The group’s dogma becomes the person’s only concern. Anything or anyone that does not fit into his reshaped reality is irrelevant.” (p. 38) “The key to mind control’s success lies in its subtlety, the way it promotes the “illusion of control.” The individual believes he is “making his own choices,” when in fact he has been socially influenced to disconnect his own critical mind and decision-making capacity. In other words, he believes that he has freely chosen to surrender his free will to God or to a leader or ideology. When one steps back and objectively evaluates the vast amount of social influence used to get him to “surrender”, the degree of manipulation becomes very obvious.” (p. 40) Cognitive dissonance: “If you change a person’s behavior, his thoughts and feelings will change to minimize the dissonance.” “…”dissonance” is the psychological tension that arises when a person’s behavior conflicts with his beliefs.” (p. 40) “When you control the information that a person is allowed to receive, you limit his capacity for independent thought.” (p. 42) The four main components of cult mind control “promotes dependency and obedience to some leader or cause.” (p. 46) “Mind-controlled cult members can live in their own apartments, have nine-to-five jobs, be married with children, and still be unable to think for themselves and act independently.” (p. 46) “Cults often impose an oppressive time schedule on their members’ lives in order to control behavior. When members are not engaged in cult rituals and indoctrination activities, they are typically assigned specific goals that restrict their free time and behavior—anything to keep them busy. In a destructive cult, there is always work to be done.” (p. 46) Cult members are “bound together by group rituals, which may include mannerisms such as speech, posture, or facial expression.” (p. 47) “The pyramid-shaped structure of cults allows leaders to enforce a strict system of rewards and punishments…” (p. 47) Information control (p. 43): - Use of deception (deliberately holding back information, distorting information to make it more “acceptable”, outright lying) - Access to non-cult sources of information minimized or discouraged - Compartmentalization of information (outsider vs. insider doctrines) - Extensive use of cult-generated information and propaganda (magazines, newsletters, videos, audio tapes, and other media; misquotations, statements taken out of context from non-cult sources) - Chanting and other techniques are used to stop members’ doubts about the cultic group and/or the doctrine (p. 51) “The human mind cannot function properly without information. By controlling the flow of information and people’s ability to process it, cults prevent them from making sound judgments about their own lives or the group’s actions.” (p. 48) “Information control begins during recruitment, when cults withhold or distort information to draw people in. People don’t join cults—cults recruit people.” (p. 48) Cults “don’t tell people up front who they are, what they believe, and what they want from them.” (p. 49) ‘By compartmentalizing information, cults keep members from seeing the big picture. People are given only the information they are deemed “ready for”’ (p. 49) “Cult ideologies allow for many levels of “truth,” including “outsider” and “insider” doctrines. The more moderate outsider material, which contains diluted versions of the group’s beliefs, is given to the general public and new converts. Recruits who ask questions are often told that they are not yet mature enough to know the whole truth. Insider doctrines are reserved for people who have already been thoroughly indoctrinated. In this way, assessments of cult doctrines are delayed until the recruit’s ability to make them objectively is impaired.” (p. 49) “A common form of information control involves blocking out any critical or negative points of view. Some cults simply forbid members to have access to any non-cult material – such as newspapers, magazines, television, radio, and the Internet – while others have more subtle ways of controlling information.” (p. 49) “Looking at a group’s attitude toward information is the fastest way to evaluate whether it is using destructive mind control. A legitimate organization will allow people the freedom to think for themselves, read whatever they like, and talk to whomever they choose in order to arrive at their own decisions, whereas a destructive mind control group will want to do the thinking for people.” (p. 49) “In a mind control cult, the group’s doctrine is seen as absolute “Truth” and the only answer to people’s problems. Cult doctrine teaches its members to think: “We are the way! We are the truth! You who are not in the group are lost. We know, and you do not know.” It preaches black-and-white thinking, dividing the world into simplistic dichotomies—good versus evil, us versus them. The cult doctrine is reality. Believers have a hard time approaching the doctrine as a mere map or set of guidelines that are open to interpretation as well as alternatives.” (p. 50) “Many cults have their own “loaded language” or coded symbols and expressions, including buzz words, clichés, and trite platitudes that are used to shut down the thought process.” (p. 50) “In the majority of destructive cults, most of the techniques members learn are not taught directly or consciously, but rather through the process of behavioral modeling. They learn by watching older members, listening to the leader[s], and modeling themselves after their behavior. Eventually, they unconsciously pick up some of the leaders’ behaviors, including speech patterns and gesticulations.” (p. 50) “Cult members are taught that the leader[ship] is always correct, and are not allowed to doubt or question him…Thoughts that go along with the leader[ship] are good…Any negative feelings are always blamed on the individual. Any disillusionment means the member is doing something wrong: “You are not really committing yourself to God,”…No room is left to say, “Maybe the leader[ship] is wrong,”…Consequently, the member’s ability to reality-test is suppressed.” (p. 51) “Nobody sets out to join a group with the intention of being deceived and manipulated.” (p. 52) Cultic groups employ “Fear! Lots and lots of fear! Although the group’s message starts out with love and idealism, once a person gets indoctrinated into the inner levels, his world becomes one of fear—fear that the planet will explode, fear of nuclear holocaust, fear that he will lose his spiritual connection, fear that he will be possessed by the devil. Cults instill fear to bind members to the group…” (p. 53) “A phobia is an irrational fear reaction to someone or something…Phobias often immobilize people and keep them from doing the things they truly want to do. Indeed, phobias can rob people of free choice, and in mind control cults, phobias are methodically implanted to keep members from feeling they can leave the group and be happy.” (p. 53) When assessing “spiritual” groups, “…what matters the most is the overall impact [of cult indoctrination] on a particular individual, on his free will and ability to think independently.” (p. 54) “In a benevolent group, influence processes are positive and ethical and the locus of control remains within the individual. Influence is used only to promote independent thinking and decision-making, self-awareness, and self-control. Individuality, creativity, and free will are respected and promoted. People recognize and understand the influences around them. Access to diverse information sources is encouraged.” (p. 55) “In a destructive cult, the locus of control shifts to the group or its leader[ship]. The new recruit abdicates his ability to make decisions. A pseudo-identity is created which suppresses the authentic self and surrenders control. Individuality is submerged, and free will subverted. People are kept in the dark, and the very processes that influence them are made to seem mystical or spiritual.” (p. 55) “Cult mind control dissociates a person form his authentic identity, and makes his new cult identity dependent on the group. From a mental health perspective, cult mind control splits elements of an individual’s psyche into another distinct personality. The cult members actually comes to exhibit symptoms of a “dissociative disorder”, as defined in the diagnostic manual for the American Psychiatric Association (300.15) the DSM-IV.” (pp. 55, 56) “When you are talking to someone in a mind control cult, it is especially difficult to talk on a rational level.” (p. 56) “Everyone has an authentic self. Although a healthy individual will grow and mature over time, his personality type should never change. Changes in personality type often indicate unhealthy social pressure that forces a person to act as if he were someone else.” (p. 60) “Even people who are born into cults have an authentic self that was suppressed at birth. It is the strength of the authentic self that makes it possible to rescue people from cults years, even decades, after becoming involved in the group.” (p. 60) |
| Tuesday, May 22, 2007, at 08:16 AM I Am Sometimes Asked How Much Mormon General Authorities Make, Or Receive, In Terms Of Financial Compensation From The LDS Church Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| For the record, I do not know specifics in that area from any personal or inside knowledge base--either as it relates broadly to the General Authority hierarchy or, specifically, to my grandfather Ezra Taft Benson's financial circumstances and support from the Mormon Church.
With regard to the latter, I don't keep my family's financial books. Nor did I keep those of my grandfather's. Nor was I informed, directly or indirectly, as to the precise money flow, in terms of amounts or sources, that supported and funded my grandfather's or the other General Authorities' lifestyles. However, this much I do know from observations over the years based on my personal and direct experience: As I have noted here on this board before, my grandparents Ezra Taft and Flora Amussen Benson lived in upper middle class comfort in quarters operated and furnished by the Mormon Church. Before moving into Church-run living quarters, they lived in a well-furnished, spacious, two-story home in a well-to-do section of Salt Lake City known as Parley's Way. After my grandfather became President of the Quorum of the Twelve, he and my grandmother relocated to the Bonneville Towers high-rise apartments near downtown Salt Lake City, near the Avenues. Later, when he became President of the LDS Church, they were moved to the Eagle Gate apartments, in an upper-level floor, overlooking nearby Temple Square. There they enjoyed round-the-clock, double-doored security service and 24/7 domestic help. They also were favored with Church-provided first-class air travel and limo-comparable ground travel; as well as wardrobe, food and other living expenses covered for them by the Mormon Church. They certainly were not hurting financially but (at least from my vantage point in spending time with them and visiting their living locations on many occasions), they did not seem to be living in a blatantly extravagant manner. That said, I never personally knew, or was made aware of, the money-changing details of how their lifestyles were precisely financed via channels of Mormon Church money connections and benefits. I will say, however, that a couple of years ago, I was informed that one of ETB's children brought some of ETB's old suits and other clothes into a used Mormon bookstore, inquiring as to what kind of price they might fetch in the Mormon collectibles market. I also was told by reliable sources that my grandfather lost tens of thousands of dollars in a get-rich-quick scheme, supposedly involving a special machine touted as being able to convert material into super-efficient energy. This poor investment, it was reported to me, resulted in ETB having to sell the Benson family cabin which he owned up in Salt Lake City's Mill Creek Canyon back in the 1960s. I have also heard rumors--never confirmed--that ETB allegedly invested in the unproductive so-called "Dream Mine," located in Utah's Wasatch Front mountain range, visible from the I-15 freeway. If I knew more, I'd say so. But since I don't, I won't. As a sidenote, I have also been asked if I received any kind of tithing inheritance from my grandfather. The answer is no. For the record, again, Grandpa did pass on to me in death, or earlier gave to me, a small piece of the Berlin Wall, a decorative license plate from Dwight D. Eisenhower's presidential inaugural parade ceremonies, a small metal elephant paperweight that ETB used to keep on his government office desk when he was Ike's Secretary of Agriculture and a guest lapel ribbon from eventually-impeached Arizona Mormon governor Evan Mecham's own swearing-in ceremony, along with a copy of Mecham's inauguration program. Oh, and over the years he also gave me some nice framed Japanese artwork and a Samarai warrior helmet that Japanese Mormons had initially gifted to him when he was touring through Asia. Also when I was a youngster, Grandpa gave me a Boy Scout weather barometer featuring a plaque bearing his name that had been first given to him (which I really liked, since I once wanted to be a meteorologist). He also gave me a small pocketknife when I was a kid, along with some cufflinks, some belt decorations from a National Boy Scout Jamboree and a necktie with a bunch of Angel Moronis sewn into it. In addition, he gave me a tie clasp that said "Hold to the Rod," that had originally been given to him by Spencer W. Kimball, as well as a zippered suit traveling bag when I left on my mission to Japan. In my early 20s, he also gave me approximately $4,000 to purchase my first car, a small, lime-green Datsun F-10. He also gave me a ton of books over the years, largely from his personal library and relating to either the Mormon Church or far-right politics--most of which I have since gotten rid of. Years ago, he also subscribed me to wacky John Birch magazines--all of which I have thrown away. A lot of the remaining knick-knack stuff is in a cigar box in storage, the artwork is hanging up in my house and the rest of it is packed away somewhere, including in places I haven't re-discovered yet. Maybe I could use a peepstone to find it--and then get back to you. As far as a tithing inheritance that ETB stole from the rest of the Church membership and then supposedly passed along to me, nope, never saw any of that. Sorry to disappoint in that regard. :) |
| Tuesday, Jul 10, 2007, at 07:22 AM Plop, Plop, Fizzle, Fizzle: The Personal Testimonies Of Two "Special Witnesses For Christ" Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Back in the final days before I resigned my membership in the Mormon Church, I met behind closed doors with LDS apostles Neal Maxwell and Dallin Oaks in personal, off-the-record meetings.
In the privacy of Maxwell's Church office in downtown Salt Lake City, I asked them both to bear me their personal testimonies that formed the basis for their knowledge that they had been called by God as apostles in Jesus Christ's one and only true church. Hell, why not? I figured if I was expected by them to accept in faith what they were telling me about the Mormon Church being, like, the one and only, then I wanted to hear--for myself, from their own lips--the basis for their claim to their own awesome, ultimate and unique God-given power, authority and knowledge as members of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles. Indeed, I wanted Oaks and Maxwell to bear their personal testimonies to me, letting me know how they had come to know for themselves that they had earned the right to the high and holy calling of "Apostle of the Lord, Special Witness for Jesus Christ." Hence, my final question to them: What personal spiritual experiences have you had which gave you your testimonies as Special Witnesses for Christ? In response, Oaks summoned up memories of his days as a college student at the University of Chicago. Back then, he said, he though he "knew a lot" about the Gospel. He admitted, however, that he had "questions about the Church"--although he did not elaborate for me exactly what they might have been. Oaks said a local LDS Institute teacher helped him work out the answers. Maxwell hearkened back to his days as a boy, when he said he observed his father give a healing "priesthood blessing" to Maxwell's young sibling, whom Maxwell thought was dead. That, ex-Mo brothers and sisters, was the sum total of their answers--answers that I did not need to travel 700 miles to Salt Lake to hear. I could have saved myself and them a lot of time and trouble if I had just stayed home, gone to the next fast and testimony meeting at my local ward and listened to regular members bear personal witness to the same kind of average, in-the-pew person experiences. Trouble is, those tearful testimonial tales wouldn't have been nearly enough to qualify them to then be anointed as "Special Witnesses" of the "A-Is-For-Apostle" variety--just run-of-the-mill, shoulder-to-the-wheel, accept-the-entire-spiel, pay-at-the-till Mormons. There was no testimony bearing from these modern-day James and John of personal visits, in the flesh, from the Father or the Son. There was no telling of any "road to Damascus" story. There was no recounting of angelic visitations. There was no description of rushing winds or flames of fire. Nothing like Joseph Smith or Moses or Peter, Paul and Mary. It was all about college-level Mormon institute answer-guy help on Gospel questions and watching your dad give a blessing to a sick member of your family when you were a kid. Whoopty-apostle-doo-doo. In short, there was "no 'there' there." In the name of "Jesus Christ, is that all there is?--then let's quit dancing." Amen and Heineken. |
| Thursday, Jul 12, 2007, at 08:58 AM The Pope Is Only The Pope When He Speaks As Such Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Donchya just love it when God's Pope receives "modern day revelation" to reverse the apparent mistakes of past versions of God's Popes?
It's, like, so Mormon. :) Examples: "Pope: Only One 'True' Church, Second Statement In A Week TAKING IDEOLOGICAL STEPS AWAY FROM VATICAN II" (emphasis added) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/0... "U.S. author and scholar George Weigel said that as a young theological expert Father Ratzinger understood a crucial truth about Vatican II: that 'aggiornamento,' OR CHURCH UPDATING, must be based on 'ressourcement,' a return to the sources of Christian wisdom and a deepening of the church's understanding of itself." (emphasis added) http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stor... "Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches. "Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. "It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church. "On Saturday, Benedict revisited another key aspect of Vatican II by reviving the old Latin Mass. Traditional Catholics cheered the move, BUT MORE LIBERAL ONES CALLED IT A STEP BACK FROM VATICAN II." (emphasis added) http://www.wral.com/news/national_wor... "Vatican Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone recently confirmed to Le Figaro newspaper that this 'motu proprio,' OR PERSONAL INITIATIVE OF THE PONTIFF, will allow any priest to say the mass according to the old Tridentine rite (which is delivered in Latin with the priest facing the altar, his back to the congregation), rather than have to seek approval from the local bishop as is now required." (emphasis added) http://www.time.com/time/world/articl... We thank thee, oh God, for a Pontiff, to guide us in these latter days . . . |
| Wednesday, Jul 25, 2007, at 06:49 AM Mormon Apostles Deny That The LDS Church Is Making Its Historical Documents Inaccessible Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| (*Note: The asterick indicates certain exceptions apply)
In September 1993, in private meetings with Dallin Oaks and Neal Maxwell in Maxwell's downtown Salt Lake City office, I asked them (among a myriad of other things) why the Mormon Church was not more open with its own historical documents. I inquired as to what this reluctance had to say about the Mormon Church's confidence in its own history, specifically as it related to the Church's increasingly restrictive access to is archives by historians and members alike. Maxwell insisted that the Mormon Church values the accurate keeping, and sharing, of historical records. He handed me a photocopy from "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith," featuring red underlinings in a section entitled, "Importance of Records": "After prayer by President Joseph Smith, Jun., he said, if we heard patiently he could lay before the council an item which would be of importance. He had for himself, learned a fact by experience, which, on recollection, always gave him deep sorrow. It is a fact, if I now had in my possession, every decision which had been had upon important items of doctrine and duties since the commencement of this work, I would not part with them for any sum of money; but we have neglected to take minutes of such things, thinking, perhaps, that they would never benefit us afterwards; which, if we had them now, would decide almost every point of doctrine which might be agitated. But this has been neglected, and now we cannot bear record to the Church and to the world, of the great and glorious manifestations which have been made to us with that degree of power and authority we otherwise could, if we now had these things to publish abroad." (p. 72) Maxwell asserted that the Mormon Church is "very free" with its historical documents and evidence. He insisted that if one went to the Church archives and asked for documents, "75% of the time you would be allowed to see what you had asked for." With regard to the remaining 25%, Maxwell said denial was based on the requestor's identity, as well as what was being researched and why. Maxwell said restrictions on access to Church documents are also due, in part, to their physical fragility. He said, "We don't want a group of Girl Scouts coming down and handling everything." Besides concern about Girl Scout troops, Maxwell admitted that denial of access is also based on content. Documents falling into this category, he said included "sensitive matters involving people who are still alive." Maxwell said, further, that it would "not be appropriate or in their best interest" to reveal the names of people who may have confessed to Church leaders about adultery or other past sins, when they had "children who are still alive." Other confidential materials, he said, included minutes of Quorum of the Twelve meetings. Oaks, however, remarked that as documents become older, there is "less sensitivity" about them. Nonetheless, he added that many of the papers pertaining to Ezra Taft Benson's tenure as Secretary of Agriculture and "financial matters" would not be opened at this time to public scrutiny. As far as constructing and presenting Church history, Maxwell compared it building a tile floor. He said that the act of history writing is frustrating, complex and incomplete. He handed me a photocopy of a sermon (The sermon had been delivered by him, although there was no title or author given on the single sheet he provided me. The address had appeared in the November 1984 General Conference issue of the "Ensign,." 11. Maxwell's copy contained several passages which he had highlighted in red ink). Quoting from a "Tribute to Neville Chamberlain," delivered in the British House of Commons, November 12, 1940, the sermon declared: "History with its flickering lamp stumbles along the trail of the past, trying to reconstruct its scenes, to revive its echoes, and kindle with pale gleams the passion of former days." The sermon then addressed what Maxwell had described for us as the definition of history: a collection, he said, of "floating mosaic tiles": "The finished mosaic of the history of the Restoration will be larger and more varied as more pieces of tile emerge, adjusting a sequence here or enlarging there a sector of our understanding. "The fundamental outline is in place now, however. But history deals with imperfect people in process of time, whose imperfections produce refractions as the pure light of the gospel plays upon them. There may even be a few pieces of tile which, for the moment, do not seem to fit . . . "So, belatedly, the fullness of the history of the dispensation of the fullness of times will be written. "The final mosaic of the Restoration will be resplendent, reflecting divine design and the same centerpiece—the Father's plan of salvation and exaltation and the atonement of His Son, Jesus Christ." ******** Huh? |
| Wednesday, Jul 25, 2007, at 06:51 AM "Come, Come, Ex-Saints": Anthem To The Persistent Ex-Mo Believer Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Come, come, Ex-Saints, no spoiling fables here, Stick with God, he’s the way, Though hard to you the end of life appears, Close your eyes, let us pray. 'Tis better far if Christ’s alive, The fear of death from us to drive; Do this and buy what churches sell: All is well! All is well! Why should we mourn or try to think too hard? Tis not so; too uptight, Why dare to think that science has it right? Lookie there--Tunnel of Light! Gird up your loins and just have faith, Our God belief we cannot shake; And soon we'll chant new magic spells-- All is well! All is well! We'll find a place where from the facts we're spared, Far away, in our breast. Where they can't come to hurt or make afraid; In our bliss, we'll be blessed. We’ll make believe for Christ our King, Shout praises to our new-found thing. Above the rest these tales we'll tell-- Heaven's real! (and so is Hell!) And when we die, when all our fears come true, That’s the end. Darn, oh, well . . . We then are dead, with all the rest we’re through, In the dirt we shall dwell. But when our lives are ended then, To hell with those who told us when That when we croak, we’ll rot and smell— No, we won’t! All is well! |
| Saturday, Nov 10, 2007, at 02:46 AM Using Donny Osmond For Dunking Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| On my mission in Japan back in the 1970s, would go out to shopping malls and other places where the younger crowd hung out and instead of flooding the Earth with the Book of Mormon, we would instead pass out to every Japanese school kid we could corner (usually young teenage girls and boys) photographs of the grinning-for-God Osmond family holding up Kanji copies of the Book of Mormon.
We had no shame. A few kiddie baptisms were produced as a result of this hormonal approach to spreading the Restored Gospel, but judging from retention levels, it would be safe to say that not many of them stuck. "I would like to bear my testimony of Donny and Marie's teeth" just isn't going to be much of a iron rod to hold on to throughout one's life . . . |
| Monday, Nov 19, 2007, at 08:33 AM I Am Not Making This Up: Attempts Are Underway To Capture Cain / Bigfoot With Pasteries Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Sounds like something Mormons might try, doesn't it? Maybe they could do what they do best: trap him with an invite to ward party refreshments and then teach him the discussions.
First, some background: Do Mormons believe that Bigfoot is Cain? A claimed sighting of Cain/Bigfoot was made by early Mormon missionary David Patten: " . . . David W. Patten, during his mission in the South . . . reported that, as he rode his horse, a large black man covered with hair appeared beside him and told him that he was Cain and was going to destroy his mission." http://en.allexperts.com/q/Latter-day... While some Mormons might question whether LDS missionaries have actually spotted Cain/Bigfoot, Spencer W. Kimball, in his book, "The Miracle of Forgiveness," pp. 127-28, describes Patton's encounter with Cain in decidedly Sasquatch-like terms: "On the sad character Cain, an interesting story comes to us from Lycurgus A. Wilson's book on the life of David W. Patten. From the book I quote an extract from a letter by Abraham O. Smoot giving his recollection of David Patten's account of meeting "a very remarkable person who had represented himself as being Cain: "'As I was riding along the road on my mule I suddenly noticed a very strange personage walking beside me. . . . His head was about even with my shoulders as I sat in my saddle. He wore no clothing, but was covered with hair. His skin was very dark. I asked him where he dwelt and he replied that he had no home, that he was a wanderer in the earth and traveled to and fro. He said he was a very miserable creature, that he had earnestly sought death during his sojourn upon the earth, but that he could not die, and his mission was to destroy the souls of men. About the time he expressed himself thus, I rebuked him in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by virtue of the Holy Priesthood, and commanded him to go hence, and he immediately departed out of my sight. . . .'" Others--non-Mormons, even--have referenced Kimball's account as evidence that Cain is, in fact, the legendary Bigfoot, as "told time and time again within the Mormon religion." Bigfoot buff Michael Nave writes: "My work takes me all over the United States for many different training seminars and conferences. Recently, I met up with several people of the Mormon faith. One of these people, knowing of my interest in Bigfoot, suggested that I look into the 'Mormon connection.' The following story comes from my research on this topic. "David Patten was a Mormon Priest who traveled and preached the Mormon gospel from 1832-1838. In author Spencer W. Kimball's book entitled "The Miracle of Forgiveness, 'there is a passage where David Patten is quoted regarding his meeting with 'a very remarkable person who had represented himself as Cain.' The following passage from the book is quoted from Mr. Patten's own rendition of the story: "'As I was riding along the road on my mule I suddenly noticed a very strange personage walking beside me. . . . His head was about even with my shoulders as I sat in my saddle. He wore no clothing, but was covered with hair. His skin was very dark. I asked him where he dwelt and he replied that he had no home, that he was a wanderer in the earth and traveled to and fro. He said he was a very miserable creature, that he had earnestly sought death during his sojourn upon the earth, but that he could not die, and his mission was to destroy the souls of men. About the time he expressed himself thus, I rebuked him in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by virtue of the Holy Priesthood, and commanded him to go hence, and he immediately departed out of my sight. . . . '(Lycurgus A. Wilson, 'Life of David W. Patten' [Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1900], p. 50., as quoted by Spencer W. Kimball, 'The Miracle of Forgiveness' [Salt Lake City, Bookcraft, Inc.]18th printing 1991 p.p. 127-128). ". . . The fact that so many people from so many backgrounds have experienced Bigfoot and in many cases woven this creature into their folklore tells us that there must be more to this elusive creature than meets the eye. "Sources: . . . http://sasquatch.i8.com/mormonconnect... http://archives.zinester.com/16335/62... Will Cain/Bigfoot ever be caught? Now comes word that efforts are being made to capture this fallen, apostate beast with--you heard it here first, folks--donuts: http://www.wjla.com/news/aploader.htm... Just think of it: Bringing Cain to Christ through Krispy Kremes. The Lord works in mysterious ways. |
| Tuesday, Dec 11, 2007, at 06:48 AM Nephi And His Fellow Trolls : The True-Believing Mormon's Scriptural Justification For Lying To Ex-Mormons Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Mormon trolls justify sneaking on to the RfM board under false pretenses in order to do the will of their God, using their super hero Nephi as their role model.
Let us follow the Book of Mormon storyline on this, so that we may understand Troll Tactics 101: 1 Ne 4:19 "And after I [Nephi] had smitten off his [Laban's] head with his own sword, I took the garments of Laban and put them upon mine own body; yea, even every whit; and I did gird on his armor about my loins." Mormon trolls don this fake outer costume in order to gain unsuspected entry into RfM, with the hopes of raiding the place and carrying away ex-Mormons to LDS salvation: 1 Ne 4:20 "And after I had done this, I went forth unto the treasury of Laban. And as I went forth towards the treasury of Laban, behold, I saw the servant of Laban who had the keys of the treasury. And I commanded him in the voice of Laban, that he should go with me into the treasury." Mormon trolls deliberately engage in their misrepresentations in an attempt to deceive their ex-Mormon enemies: 1 Ne 4:21 "And he supposed me to be his master, Laban, for he beheld the garments and also the sword girded about my loins." Mormon trolls, in this premeditated plan among true believers, pretend to speak the language of ex-Mormons, with the intent of tricking them into thinking that the trolls are one with the ex-Mormons: 1 Ne 4:22-24 "And he spake unto me concerning the elders of the Jews, he knowing that his master, Laban, had been out by night among them. "And I spake unto him as if it had been Laban. "And I also spake unto him that I should carry the engravings, which were upon the plates of brass, to my elder brethren, who were without the walls." Mormon trolls conspire in efforts to get ex-Mormons to follow them, hoping that the ex-Mormons will be persuaded to believe that the trolls are ex-Mo sympathetic--all the while, of course, continuing their deceptive and trollish ways: 1 Ne 4:25-27 "And I also bade him that he should follow me. "And he, supposing that I spake of the brethren of the church, and that I was truly that Laban whom I had slain, wherefore he did follow me." "And he spake unto me many times concerning the elders of the Jews, as I went forth unto my brethren, who were without the walls." Mormon trolls reassure their fellow Mormons who are observing this carefully-crafted charade that it is all an act (under God's command, of course), and not to worry about their true identity or purpose: 1 Ne 4:28-29 "And it came to pass that when Laman saw me he was exceedingly frightened, and also Lemuel and Sam. And they fled from before my presence; for they supposed it was Laban, and that he had slain me and had sought to take away their lives also. "And it came to pass that I called after them, and they did hear me; wherefore they did cease to flee from my presence." Once ex-Mormons realize that they are in the presence of Mormon trolls who are attempting to mislead, misrepresent and lie to them through their dishonest door approaches, the desperate Mormon trolls attempt to exert control over the ex-Mormons by threatening them with God's punishment-- including death--if they do not return to the LDS fold forthwith. (Some relatively new ex-Mormons are momentarily shaken by this strong-armed, heavy-handed approach): 1 Ne 4:30-33 "And it came to pass that when the servant of Laban beheld my brethren he began to tremble, and was about to flee from before me and return to the city of Jerusalem. "And now I, Nephi, being a man large in stature, and also having received much strength of the Lord, therefore I did seize upon the servant of Laban, and held him, that he should not flee. "And it came to pass that I spake with him, that if he would hearken unto my words, as the Lord liveth, and as I live, even so that if he would hearken unto our words, we would spare his life. "And I spake unto him, even with an oath, that he need not fear; that he should be a free man like unto us if he would go down in the wilderness with us. "And I also spake unto him, saying: Surely the Lord hath commanded us to do this thing; and shall we not be diligent in keeping the commandments of the Lord? Therefore, if thou wilt go down into the wilderness to my father thou shalt have place with us." At this point, however, ex-Mormons diverge from the prepared text of the RfM-invading Mormon trolls. They call out Nephi and his band of fellow two-faced trolling liars, kick them in their collective butts and head into town for drinks. THE END. |
| Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007, at 07:05 AM Two Prominent Mormon General Authorities Who Knew And "Fessed Up" That Joseph Smith Was A Fraud Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| HUGH B. BROWN
When it came to the supposed truthfulness of LDS scripture, Mormon Apostle and First Presidency counselor Hugh B. Brown, according to Jerald and Sandra Tanner, admitted to Mormon amateur archaeologist Thomas Ferguson that Smith couldn't translate ancient Egyptian. From Ferguson's letter to the Tanners: "According to Mr. Ferguson, Apostle Brown had also come to the conclusion that the Book of Abraham was false and was in favor of the church giving it up. A few years later Hugh B. Brown said he could 'not recall' making the statements Thomas Stuart Ferguson attributed to him. Ferguson, however, was apparently referring to the same incident in the letter of March 13, 1971, when he stated: 'I must conclude that Joseph Smith had not the remotest skill in things Egyptian-hieroglyphics. To my surprise one of the highest officials in the Mormon Church agreed with that conclusion . . . privately in one-to-one [c]onversation.'" http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no69.... B.H. ROBERTS Quorum of the Seventy member B.H. Roberts, after extensive personal study prompted by questions from a missionary in the field, concluded that the Book of Mormon was a plagiarized invention of Smith's immature mind. Roberts' own writings in his landmark work, "Studies of the Book of Mormon" (which remained unpublished until decades after his death) reveal his own serious doubts about Smith's Book of Mormon claims: "In light of this evidence, An imagination, it could with reason be urged, which, given the suggestions that are to be found in the 'common knowledge' of accepted American Antiquities of the times, supplemented by such a work as Ethan Smith's, 'View of the Hebrews,' would make it possible for him to create a book such as the Book of Mormon is. . . . " . . . [T]here is a certain lack of perspective in the things the book relates as history that points quite clearly to an undeveloped mind as their origin. The narrative proceeds in characteristic disregard of conditions necessary to its reasonableness, as if it were a tale told by a child, with utter disregard for consistency. . . . http://www.ils.unc.edu/~unsworth/morm... "Is this all sober history . . . of an immature mind, unconscious of what a test he is laying on human credulity when asking men to accept his narrative as solemn history." http://www.neirr.org/bomdiff.htm Roberts clearly had severe reservartions regarding the veracity of Smith's assertions that the Book of Mormon was of divine origin: "A General Authority's Own Findings " . . . [T]wo manuscripts [were] written about 1922 by the Mormon General Authority and apologist Brigham H. Roberts. "It is startling to find this defender of the Mormon faith arguing relentlessly that Joseph Smith could well have authored the Book of Mormon himself. Roberts' family has now allowed serious examination of these two manuscripts that have been in their possession since his death in 1933. "They have been published by Mormon scholars in a book titled 'Studies of the Book of Mormon' (University of Illinois Press, 1985). "Roberts makes four major points in the 375-page study. He observes in his first manuscript, 'Book of Mormon Difficulties,' that the book's account of the ancient Americans is in conflict with what is known about them from recent scientific investigation. The Book of Mormon represents them as having an Iron Age culture, while archaeology has shown them to have advanced only to a polished Stone Age level at the arrival of European ('Studies,' pp. 107-112). "The situation, he found, was further complicated by the Book of Mormon's declaration that the original settlers came to the New World when it was uninhabited. The Jaredites came 'into that quarter where there never had man been' (Ether 2:5) and fought themselves to extinction. The Nephites likewise came to a land 'kept from all other nations' (II Nephi 1:9-11). "Since the latter group's arrival is placed at about 600 B.C., it would not allow sufficient time for the development of the 169 known New World language stocks, each with its varying dialects. Roberts confessed he had no answers to such discrepancies. 'The recent accepted authoritative writers,' he says 'leave us, so far as I can at present see, no ground of appeal or defense — the new knowledge seems to be against us' ('Studies,' p. 143). Archaeology to this day has uncovered nothing to overturn his findings. "Having shown the book is at variance with recent scientific knowledge, Roberts shows in his second manuscript, 'A Book of Mormon Study,' that the book agrees with the "common knowledge" believed about the American aborigines in the early nineteenth century. "This agreement included even the erroneous ideas that the Indians were descended from the 'Lost Tribes' of Israel and that they had once enjoyed a high degree of civilization. "The 'common knowledge' was well summarized in 'almost hand-book form' in a book by the Rev. Ethan Smith. That work, 'View of the Hebrews,' was in print in its second, enlarged edition five years before the Book of Mormon was published. "Moreover, it was published in the same small town where Oliver Cowdery was living. Cowdery was a cousin of Joseph Smith Jr. and his assistant in producing the Book of Mormon. In an analysis running nearly 100 pages, Roberts shows that Ethan Smith's book contains practically the 'ground-plan' of the Book of Mormon ('Studies,' p. 240; 151-242). "Both books present the natives of America as Hebrews who journeyed here from the Old World. "Both claim a portion broke away from the civilized group and degenerated into a savage state. The savage portion completely destroyed the civilized one after long and terrible wars. "Both books attribute to the civilized branch an Iron Age culture. "Both represent these settlers of the New World as once having had a 'Book of God,' an understanding of the gospel, and a white messianic figure who visited them. "Both regard American Gentiles as having been singled out by prophecy to preach the gospel to the Indians who are the remnant of those ancient American Hebrews. "Roberts hauntingly asks concerning these and the other parallels he found, 'Can such numerous and startling points of resemblance and suggestive contact, be merely coincidence?' ('Studies,' p. 242). "As his third main point, Roberts establishes the fact (using Mormon sources exclusively) that Joseph Smith had imaginative powers of mind sufficient to have produced the Book of Mormon. "He describes Smith's creativity as being 'as strong and varied as Shakespeare's and no more to be accounted for than the English Bard's' ('Studies,' p. 244). "Roberts rounds out his case for the human origin of the Book of Mormon with a 115-page discussion of the errors that result from Joseph Smith's untrained, though creative, mind. "Roberts points to the impossibility of Lehi's three-day journey from Jerusalem to the shores of the Red Sea — a 170-mile trek on foot, with women and children along. "He cites their arrival in America, the land 'kept from all other nations,' where they unaccountably find domesticated animals — 'the cow and the ox [oxen are neutered bulls], and the ass and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat' (I Nephi 18:25). "Roberts finds an amateurish repetition of the same plots with only the character changed. The book, he notes, attempts to outdo the Bible miracles and presents some incredible battle scenes. In one instance, 2060 "striplings" fought wars over a 4 - 5 year period without one being killed (Alma 56-58). This leads Roberts to ask: "'Is all this sober history . . . or is it a wondertale of an immature mind, unconscious of what a test he is laying on human credulity when asking men to accept his narrative as solemn history?' (Studies, p. 283). "The question appears to need no answer. Roberts also points out how typical of the revivalism of Smith's time are the swoonings and religious 'falling' found over and over in the Book of Mormon. "At this point Roberts' manuscript breaks off, but not before he has made us conscious of how heavily the Book of Mormon depends upon the culture of its day for its content and style ('Studies,' p. 308). http://www.irr.org/mit/Book-of-Mormon... For more on General Authority B.H. Roberts' conclusion that the Book of Mormon was of human origin, see: http://www.irr.org/mit/ho-bom2.html |
| Thursday, Dec 20, 2007, at 06:19 AM Desperate Mormons Have Now Been Reduced To This In Defending Their Racist Religion Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Pathetically pointing out that, gosh, lots of other churches were racist, too.
Well, so much, then, for a "latter-day living prophet of God " who, despite a supposed pipeline to heaven, just couldn't overcome societal bigotry here on earth to offer unconditional godly love and equality to black people. Mormon munchkin Ken Jennings makes this absolutely laughable "argument" in a whiny, whimpering, woe-is-me, wail of a skin pale tale: "It's true that, prior to 1978, blacks could not be ordained to the Mormon priesthood. But here, too, a more nuanced view is helpful. Joseph Smith is now known to have ordained African-American men in the 1830s and 1840s. The prohibition evolved in later decades, propped up by a series of racist folk doctrines.http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2... That's one hell of a defense there, Brother Jennings: The bigots made me do it. |
| Friday, Dec 21, 2007, at 06:48 AM Media Pushback Time: "Editorial Cartoonist Reacts To Reaction Received For Ripping Romney" Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Barraged by complaining Mormons in the wake of my recent interview with the national trade journal "Editor & Publisher" on the presidential candidacy of Mormon Mitt Romney, "E&P" contacted me again today and asked for a response.
For the original interview, see: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ean... For the hysterical Mormon reaction to that first interview, see: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blo... https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blo... Below is today's follow-up interview: "'Steve Benson, Editorial Cartoonist, Reacts to Reaction He Received for Ripping Romney' "By Dave Astor Published: December 20, 2007 5:20 PM ET "NEW YORK: When editorial cartoonist Steve Benson criticized current Mormon Mitt Romney in an E&P story earlier this week, reaction was fast and furious. "Many blog posters backed Benson, but many others blasted the grandson of former Mormon Church President Ezra Taft Benson. "For instance, they asked why the Arizona Republic/Creators Syndicate cartoonist didn't also criticize Mormon politicians such as Democrat Harry Reid, and they said Benson's 1993 switch from Mormonism to ex-Mormonism made him as much of a 'flip-flopper' as he accused Republican presidential candidate Romney of being. "E&P called Benson again today to get his response. "Benson -- who contended in the earlier story that a devout, 'temple-endowed' Mormon U.S. president can't be truly independent of the Mormon Church -- said he didn't criticize Reid because the Senate Majority Leader 'is not making an issue of his Mormon devotion. He's not standing up in a carefully orchestrated stage play and explaining his religion to the American people. Romney's speech was a tactical move to woo fundamentalist Christians in the hotly contested Iowa political caucus. He invited this scrutiny. And, unlike Romney, Reid's not running for the most powerful position in the free world.' "The cartoonist continued: 'Besides, it doesn't seem that Harry Reid's religion is as strong an operating force in his life or decisions as it is for Romney.' Benson added with a laugh: 'How could it be, given the conservative politics of most Mormons. Hell, Reid's a Democrat!' "Responding to the flip-flop charge, Benson said he left Mormonism because church leaders were misrepresenting his aged grandfather's health and because of the 'sexist, racist, and homophobic' aspects he saw in the religion. But Romney, said the 1993 Pulitzer Prize winner, has jettisoned liberal positions out of 'political expediency' as the former Massachusetts governor tries to convince conservative GOP voters to make him their presidential candidate. "'I'm not running for political office,' said Benson. 'I left Mormonism with no pretense of remaining devout -- and I didn't do the Romney act of staying in while changing my spots faster than a leopard on steroids.' "When asked his reaction to the negative e-mails he has received and the critical blog posts that have been written since the E&P story, Benson said he isn't surprised that Mormons are very defensive about his comments. "'One of my Mormon critics called me a "turncoat,"' Benson e-mailed after today's phone interview. 'So I asked him to be a good Christian, do what Jesus would do and give me his own coat. Haven't see the coat yet. Anyway, like the old saying goes, "hit pigeons flutter."' "But the cartoonist feels no one has disproved anything he said about Romney or the nature of Mormonism's secret temple oaths and rituals. 'The proof is in the pudding,' Benson said in the e-mail. 'The trouble is, the Mormon Church doesn't want anyone to go poking around in its pudding.'" http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ean... |
| Friday, Dec 21, 2007, at 06:51 AM Evangelical Red Alert Video: "Mitt Romney And Mormonism" A "Jesusnotjoseph.com" Production Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| http://mittandmormonism.com/2006/12/1...
Christian evangelicals issue a verdict on such Mormon matters as:
At least that's their story and they're a-stickin' to it. :) |
| Friday, Dec 28, 2007, at 08:05 AM Tracking You Down And Excommunicating You As You Seek To Find Your Way Out Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Received this interesting letter today from a former Mormon (identity protected):
"Dear Steve-- ". . . I suspect that you followed the path that many who have left followed in your defection. First one recognizes that 'all is not well in Zion,' then one tries to right the wrongs from within. And, eventually, finding all efforts are in vain, you leave. "My wife and I followed a similar pattern. For the first part of our lives we were diligent -- no! -- we were more than diligent in our efforts to 'build up Zion.' . . . [W]e were always way out front and leading the parade. We actually believed the stuff! When others were following the prescribed path of emigration to 'Zion' we thought that we should stay behind to prepare 'for the coming of the Lord.' "What garbage we can believe when it's drummed into our young minds as infants. "I was establishing some prestige for myself in [our] . . . town, both as a business man and the leader of a small but growing congregation of Mormons. But finally we were persuaded to 'come to Zion.' It wasn't a smart move! I guess the view is always better from a distance. Up close, . . . our perspective changed considerably. It took only a few weeks to realize that this was not -- judged by any criteria -- 'the product as advertised.' "However, I had to be completely certain that the claims were false before disrupting my family's life. I read everything I could find on the subject. The most revealing book was the original copy of the Book of Mormon. "When I had satisfied myself on the fraudulent nature of Mormonism, I continued to pursue the matter to what could be described as its basis: the New Testament. And when I was satisfied about the nature of that book I moved on to its origin: the Old Testament. I spend over ten years in this study. "Ultimately, my wife and I decided to quit the church. "During the time of my uncertainty I had been ''called' to preside over a new ward . . . . But I declined . . . Eventually I did agree to be on the high council in our stake . . . after my wife and I had discussed the situation thoroughly to see if we might do what we knew many other Mormons were doing: disbelieving but complying. "We tried it for a year but the strain was too great. This was not how we wanted to live our lives. We decided to move . . . without telling any of our fellow stake members the real reason for the move. "Ten years later when they finally realized what had happened I received my 'graduation letter.' Failing to show at the trial when summoned, I was notified by mail that I had been excommunicated from the church." |
| Thursday, Feb 21, 2008, at 07:58 AM Fidel Castro, LDS And Ezra Taft Benson : One Thing The Old Commie Coot Had Over His Fellow LDS Cult Dictators Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| At least he knew when to leave office.
Speaking of the homegrown Havana despot, my grandfather used to privately complain to me that despite the New York Times' hailing of Fidel Castro as "the George Washington of Cuba," ETB knew that he was an unrepentant Communist to the core. My grandfather further told me that he warned then-U.S. president Dwight Eisenhower (under whom my grandfather was serving in the Cabinet at the time) that Castro was as Red of a Red as Red could be and would manifest his true Commie colors in no time. Even as he told me this, however, he shrugged in resignation, noting that he was merely the Secretary of Agriculture, not the Secretary of State, and that no one was bothering to listen to his warnings. So strongly was my grandfather opposed to Castro that he felt the United States should have invoked the Monroe Doctrine to keep foreign countries out of our self-declared sphere of influence (i.e, the Western Hemisphere)--meaning that we should have launched a military invasion of Cuba to drive out the Soviets. Parroting the line of his hero and founder of the John Birch Society Robert Welch, my grandfather also told me that Eisenhower's refusal to topple Castro led him to conclude that either Ike was a Communist dupe or a knowing Communist agent. ETB also wrote to me via personal correspondence, declaring that outside the Mormon Church, the Birch Society was the most effective tool on the planet fighting the worldwide Communist menace. Sigh . . . those were the days. Holy Hulabaloo Hysteria: the words of Mormon scripture mingled with the words of Mormon men. :) |
| Monday, Mar 10, 2008, at 07:11 AM Pulp From Inside The Cult: Rules For Interviewing God's Prophet And Treatment Of Utah's Gays Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Going through my Mormon-related files recently, I came across a single-sheet, unsourced document headlined in bold, underlined letters, “Protocol for Media Interviews with President Hinckley.”
Before outlining the specific contents of that document, however, it is interesting to note that I also discovered along with it a letter appearing to be from Glen Murray, identified on the letter's stationery as the mayor of the Canadian city of Winnipeg. The letter, featuring on its left margin the embossed seal of the city, listed under the seal the following information as to the letter's possible origination: "GLEN MURRAY MAYOR * MAIRE "CITY OF WINNIPEG CITY HALL 510 MAIN STREET R3B 189 (204) 986-2196 FAX: (204) 949-0566 "VILLE DE WINNIPEG HOTEL DE VILLE 510, RUE MAIN WINNIPEG (MANITOBA) R3B 189 (204) 986-2196 TELEC.: (204) 949-0566 "WEB SITE/SITE WEB http://www.city.winnipeg.mb.ca" The text of the letter read as follows: "January 19, 2001 "FILE NO: 449 "Mr. Bruce Olsen Managing Editor Public Affairs Department The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 15 [sic] East South Temple Street Salt Lake City Utah, U.S.A. 84150-6200 "Dear Mr. Olsen: "Thank you for your letter regarding the upcoming Olympic Games and the most beautiful calendar which you enclosed as well. "I am concerned about how my family and I would be treated given Utah's record and attitude towards Gay & Lesbian people. "We just hosted the Pan Am Games and tried to ensure all were welcome. "How are the rights of Gay & Lesbian people protected in your State? "I look forward to receiving your response. "Yours very truly, [signed] "GLEN MURRAY, MAYOR. "W:/WPDOCS/WILSON/MA.YOR/OLSEN.LTR" Now, back to the list of instructions which I found with the above letter (also seemingly directed to Mormon Church PR officials, but this time from the Mormon Church itself) for determining the granting of media interviews with the LDS Church president. If authentic, this directive indicates that those in the LDS high command overseeing the Mormon Church's public relations department are apparently unconvinced that the gift of divine revelation claimed to be guiding the LDS prophet of God is sufficient enough of a shield and a protection to safeguard said prophet against inappropriate, freely-asked, open-ended, ill-designed and uncontrolled probes from a potentially pernicious press. The strict rules for leading and limiting the media when considering and ultimately granting audience with the Mormon Lord’s anointed are outlined as follows in the directive (quote): **** “1. Public Affairs personnel and Secretary should met before the interview "Background of writer Motives and interest of writer, focus of the story Origin of request for interview “2. Writer should be well prepared before the interview "Doctrinal orientation Explanation of the scope of the interview – limitations “3. Questions should be pre-approved "Focus on present and immediate past and future Avoid philosophical, historical and theological questions Focus on the President, his personal experience, his ministry “4. Limit interviews to 15 – 30 minutes “5. Public Affairs personnel and Secretary should be active in guiding the interview and assisting the President and the writer "Deflection of inappropriate or repetitive questions Timely conclusion of the interview” **** Hmmmmm. We thank thee, oh God, for a prophet, to be guided by his handlers in these latter days as to the press and gays . . . ? |
| Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008, at 08:39 AM Idea For Next Temple Square Visitors Center Film - Salt Lake City's Historic Red Light District And Cigar Factories Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Organizing my files on Mormon-related matters, I came across the following excerpts which detail the sly and happy history of the LDS capitol's devious dance with Sodomic sins of the flesh.
Perhaps a recounting of the wink-wink toleration of certain entertainment spots in the heart and history of Salt Lake City's business district would help underscore the late LDS president Gordon B. Hinckley's insistent claim that Mormons are not a "weird" people after all and that, hey, folks should visit more often: "[A still-standing Salt Lake building] is one of three . . . remaining on Regent Street . . . [that] were houses of prostitution in Salt Lake City's red-light district. "From the mid-1870s until the late 1930s, Regent Street, then known as Commercial Street, operated under the tacit approval of the police department as a 'resort of gamblers and fast women.' As such, it is deeply woven into the fabric of the community and documents one aspect of the social and political history of Salt Lake. "Native Salt Laker John Held, who became nationally known for his drawings of the 'Roaring Twenties' in the United States, provide an interesting description of Commercial Street: 'Within the street were saloons, cafes and parlor houses, and cribs that were rented nightly to the itinerate "Ladies of the Calling." Soliciting was taboo, so these ladies sat at the top of the stairs and called their invitation to "come on up, kid." 'The parlor houses allowed no such publicity. There was no outward display to gain entrants to a parlor house. One pushed an electric bell and was admitted by a uniformed maid or an attendant. 'The luxury of these houses always included a "Professor" at the piano. There was none of the brashness of the mechanical piano; those were heard in the saloons and shooting galleries of the street. 'The names of two of the madams are engraved on my memory, just as they were cut on the copper plates that Dad mmde for printing the ladies' personal cards. In Dad's engraving shop an order for cards from the madame was always welcome. They demanded the finest and most expensive engraving, and the cards were of the finest stock, pure rag vellum . . . 'One of the madams called herself Miss Ada Wilson. Hers was a lavish house on Commerical Street. Another gave her name as Miss Helen Blazes. Her establishment catered to the big money, and in it only wine was served. In other houses beer was the popular refreshement, at one dollar a bottle, served to the guests in small whiskey glasses.' "This building was constructed in 1898 for Gustave S. Holmes. A prominent Salt Lake City businessman, he owned the fashionable Knustford Hotel, was a director of the National Bank of the Republic, had extensive mining interests, and in 1909 was reported to be the fifth or sixth largest taxpayer in Salt Lake County. "From the time it was built until at least the late 1910s the upper floor of the building housed a brothel, while a legitimate business, the Leader Cigar Factory, occupied the ground floor." The Research Center of the Utah State Division of Archives and History, under the heading "Markers and Monuments," reports the following concerning the notorious past of Salt Lake City's Commercial Street biz and fizz district: "This site [COMMERCIAL STREET 167-169 Regent Street] . . . originally housed two buildings used as brothels on Salt Lake City's busy Commercial Street during the late 1800's and early 1900's. "Commercial Street was created in 1871, one of the first streets to be cut through Salt Lake City's large city blocks. Commercial Street originally contained legitimate businesses but by the 1880's the 'Salt Lake Tribune' referred to the street as 'a resort of gamblers and fast women' and, according to the 'Deseret News,' the occupants of Commercial Street were 'the demi-monde, the male parasite, the dope fiend, the gambler and the begger.' "In 1893 a two-story structure was built by Gustav S. Holmes at 167 Regent Street and in 1899 a similar structure was built by Stephen Hayes at 169 Regent Street. The second floor of each building was a 'parlor house,' so named because prostitutes ordinarily received their customers in a common parlor or sitting room. The large center room was surrounded by 10 rooms, or 'cribs,' just large enough for a bed, wash stand, dresser, and a chair or two. "The architect of the site at 169 Regent Street was Walter E. Ware, one of early Salt Lake's prominent designers. Commercial Street, now known as Regent Street, is the center for publishing of Salt Lake City's two daily newspapers. Presses have been running on the street since the early 1900's." http://history.utah.gov/apps/markers/... |
| Thursday, Apr 3, 2008, at 08:12 AM Fraud Of The Gaps: Richard Dawkins' Accurate Answer To A Creationist-Concocted Kooky Q Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Creationists have howled like a barrel of monkeys about a purported "stumping" of noted evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins on a question regarding the transition of lifeforms from simple to complex over time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi... Truth be told, Dawkins wasn't stumped at all; cognitively cramped creationists are merely incapable of cranially comprehending or honestly explaining actual science. In a well-grounded response entitled, "Creationist crankery flashback: Richard Dawkins stumped?," the following salient points (ignored by Bible-simplified creationists) are put forth in a scientifically solid way in order to place Dawkins' answer in proper, factual context: "Richard Dawkins talks about intermediates, and the common fallacy that we are descended from modern animals. From what I gathered when I first watched the clip, I gathered Richard Dawkins was trying to ascertain the premise behind the question he was asked. "Indeed, his question does address the modus operandi of the creationists who ask these kinds of 'God of the gaps' questions. The creationist finds an area where a scientific theory has not been fully researched, points to the gap in knowledge and claims victory by default (the victory being short lived once the gap is filled in with the results of research; see where 'irreducible complexity' meets the sea sponge.) "If the intermediates that Dawkins talks about were alive today alongside their modern counterparts, we could easily undertake genetic research into their differences and the 'increases in information.' However, the reality that they aren’t around makes research in evolutionary biology difficult and inevitably means that there will be gaps in our knowledge of the genetic history of life on Earth. "Indeed, if we are to turn the creationists’ absurdity back on themselves so that we could 'win by default' and take advantage of practical obstacles to research, we could ask all sorts of silly questions. 'Creationist, are you aware of any genetic testing directly confirming the paternal status of Adam to any modern member of the human race?' "The 'no example of an increase in information' meme is just another in the series of 'God of the gaps' canards doing the rounds by means of the uncritical parroting of a faithful but unthinking and opportunistic movement. Dawkins’ response, while awkward, is actually on topic, although you may be forgiven for thinking otherwise. . . ." http://thinkerspodium.wordpress.com/2... While Dawkins answered the question in a scientifically credible way, too bad the interview was tampered with. In an expose' of the creationist propaganda ploy that resulted in the Dawkins set-up, entitled "Creationist Deception Exposed" ("The Skeptic," Vol. 18, No. 3), author Barry Williams writes: "A small apprehension often lurks in the back of the mind of any Skeptic who has ever given an interview for later publication or broadcast; 'What if the interviewer wants to show me, or the Skeptics, in a bad light?' With the technology now available to the media it would not be at all difficult to rearrange the words one has used to change one's meaning completely. "Perhaps we should mention here a little about the technicalities of the TV interview. In any news or current affairs type interviews, pre-recorded outside a studio, a small technical deception is not uncommon. Normally only one video camera is used, and that camera is usually focused on the interviewee, but if the interview is played like that, with disembodied questions coming from `off camera', it tends to make the subjects look like they are talking to a wall. So, at the end of the interview, the camera changes places to focus on the interviewer, who then asks some of the questions again, or gives their reactions to something the interviewee has said. These are known as 'reaction shots' (or 'noddies' in the vernacular) and are designed to include the interviewer in the final product. This is technically a deception, but it is a harmless one used to make the segment more viewable. In documentaries, however, this quite often does not apply, and it is usual for the people speaking to be seen expounding theirviews without the intervention of interviewers. "Of course, in all such cases there must be an element of trust between the interviewee and the interviewer. It would be quite simple, technically, for the interviewer or the tape editor, to record a totally different set of questions and splice them together with the interviewee's answers, thus making the interviewee look like a complete idiot. However, to do so would be a gross breach of a journalist's professional ethics, and it doesn't happen often. Personally speaking, I have usually found that those ethical rules are scrupulously observed. I don't believe I have ever been misquoted, nor taken out of context, in the many interviews I have given, although I might sometimes feel that my main point has not received the prominence it deserves. That is only personal opinion, however, and usually good editing has often made my answers sound more coherent and less prolix than I am sure they deserved, and they have always retained the sense of what I said. "Some exception to the rule may be made in the case of comedy programmes, where some prominent identity is seen as giving answers to some question the host throws up, for example, his genuine answer to a complex economic question might be seen as a response to a query about his sex life (Clive James uses this to good effect in his late night talk show). This is all good clean fun and is hardly likely to cause the respondent any serious heartburn, because it can clearly be seen to be a deliberate manipulation of data for comic effect. That this is not always the case is exemplified by a recent experience of Richard Dawkins. "Richard Dawkins is the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is one of the world's leading evolutionary biologists, the author of several highly regarded books on evolution through natural selection, including 'The Selfish Gene,' 'The Blind Watchmaker' (to my mind, the very best explanation of evolution for the lay person), 'The Extended Phenotype,' 'River out of Eden' and 'Climbing Mount Improbable,' and is constantly in demand as a public speaker, and by the media as an advocate for good science. "Given his position and his professional expertise, it is hardly surprising, then, that he is also a cogent and trenchant critic of the anti-scientific dogma that masquerades under the title "creation science". "The Background ". . . Professor Dawkins contacted the 'Skeptic' office, seeking assistance in locating an Australian TV production company. His story will demonstrate the depths to which the creationist movement will stoop in order to try to discredit its critics. " . . . Professor Dawkins had been made aware of a video tape being circulated in creationist circles, in which he appears, and on the cover of which is his photograph. 'Titled From a Frog to a Prince,' it is distributed in the Australia by 'Answers in Genesis,' of Acacia Ridge, Queensland and in the USA by 'American Portrait Films,' Cleveland, Ohio. Copyright is held by 'A.I.G. - I.C.R. - Keziah' and it was produced by 'Keziah.' "AIG, as regular readers will recognise, refers to 'Answers in Genesis,' the new trading name of the Queensland based Creation Science Foundation; ICR is the 'Institute of Creation Research,' a prominent US creationist outfit, and the source for much of what passes for information in such circles; 'Keziah' was then unfamiliar to us. "Prof. Dawkins was puzzled, and not a little perplexed, to be informed by a Christian contact in the USA that his appearance on the tape included a question being posed to him, whereupon he pauses for 11 seconds, and then answers an entirely different question. His contact, having viewed the tape, and having noticed the long pause and seeming evasion of what was a pretty simple question about evolution, was convinced that it had been a set-up. "As he hadn't then seen the tape, it was difficult for Richard to comprehend the full details, but he was suspicious of the circumstances, and sought our assistance in tracking down 'Keziah,' which he thought was an Australian company. We had no information about Keziah, though we did recall a request from a woman purporting to represent American Portrait Films, for an interview with Richard while he was in Australia as our special guest at the 1996 Australian Skeptics annual convention in Melbourne. Subsequently, we managed to track down Keziah Productions to Peregian in Queensland. "The set-up "Prof. Dawkins then acquired a copy of the tape and became even more incensed as the details of what had been done to him became clearer. In correspondence to me (published here with his permission) he recounts what had happened: 'As a preamble, I should explain that, following the advice of my colleague Stephen Jay Gould, I have a policy of not granting interviews to creationists or flat earthers. This is not because I cannot answer their arguments, but because I have better things to do with my time and I do not want to give them the oxygen of publicity. 'On September 16, 1997, Keziah Video Productions, in the persons of Gillian Brown and Geoffrey Smith, came to my house in Oxford to film an interview with me. I had agreed to see them, on the misapprehension (as it later turned out) that they were from a respectable Australian broadcasting company. I had no idea they were a creationist front and I would not have granted them an interview had I known this, because of my policy as mentioned above. 'The interview began. I have considerable experience of television work, and I was initially surprised at the amateurishness of their filming technique, but I carried on without voicing my surprise. As the interview proceeded, I became increasingly puzzled at the tone of the questions. Puzzlement gave way to suspicion that Keziah was, in fact, a creationist front which had gained admittance to my house under false pretences. 'The suspicion increased sharply when I was challenged to produce an example of an evolutionary process which increases the information content of the genome. It is a question that nobody except a creationist would ask. A real biologist finds it an easy question to answer (the answer is that natural selection increases the information content of the genome all the time - that is precisely what natural selection means), but, from an evolutionary point of view, it is not an interesting way to put it. It would only be phrased that way by somebody who doubts that evolution happened. 'Now I was faced with a dilemma. I was almost certain that these people had gained admittance to my house under false pretences - in other words, I had been set up. On the other hand, I am a naturally courteous person, especially in my own house, and these were guests from overseas. What should I do? I paused for a long time, trying to decide whether to throw them out, and, I have to admit, struggling not to lose my temper. Finally, I decided that I would ask them to leave, but I would do it in a polite way, explaining to them why. I then asked them to stop the tape, which they did. 'The tape having stopped, I explained to them my suspicions, and asked them to leave my house. Gillian Brown pleaded with me, saying that she had flown all the way from Australia especially to interview me. She begged me not to send her home empty handed, after they had travelled such a long way. She assured me that they were not creationists, but were taking a balanced view of all sides in the debate. Like a fool, I took pity on her, and agreed to continue. I remember that, having had quite an acrimonious argument with her, when I finally agreed to resume the interview I made a conscious effort to be extra polite and friendly.' "Now perhaps it could be argued that Prof Dawkins' memories of the events might have deteriorated with the passage of time since the interview, so let us consider the general plausibility of what the tape purported to show. A question was asked relating to 'evolutionary process which increases the information content of the genome.' This question was not asked of just anyone, but of a biologist whose speciality is precisely in that field, who has been teaching biology at Oxford University for 27 years, and who is very experienced in answering the far more complex questions of some of the best students in the world. It beggars belief that someone of Richard Dawkins' stature in the field would have been stumped by such a simple question or would have evaded it. "Anyone who has ever been interviewed will recognise that 11 seconds of silence is an inordinately long hiatus in any interview. Even if one is not an expert in the field, or is unfamiliar with the question being asked, the normal human reaction is to say, 'Well, I don't know much about that ...' or 'That's an interesting question ...' or to generally waffle on a bit, while arranging one's thoughts. What one does not do is just sit there saying nothing. Even in the case of a total media neophyte, stricken by 'mike fright,' they might react that way, briefly, but it is highly unlikely that anyone would remain mute for such a length of time. However, Richard Dawkins is far from being a media neophyte, having been the subject of hundreds of media interviews, and he was not asked a question he couldn't answer, merely a question he regarded as being put in an ill-informed way. "Richard puts it into better context in his letter: 'As it happens, my forthcoming book, "Unweaving the Rainbow," has an entire chapter ("The Genetic Book of the Dead") devoted to a much more interesting version of the idea that natural selection gathers up information from the environment, and builds it into the genome. At the time of the interview, the book was almost finished . . . . That chapter would have been in the forefront of my mind, and it is therefore especially ludicrous to suggest that I would have evaded the question by talking about fish and amphibians. 'If I'd wanted to turn the question into more congenial channels, all I had to do was talk about "The Genetic Book of the Dead." It is a chapter I am particularly pleased with. I'd have welcomed the opportunity to expound it. Why on earth, when faced with such an opportunity, would I have kept totally silent? Unless, once again, I was actually thinking about something quite different while struggling to keep my temper?' "If it had been left at that, it might merely have been evidence of professional incompetence on the part of the producer and editor of the tape. Further evidence of incompetence includes the tape showing the male 'interviewer' in a completely different room from the Dawkins' drawing room where the interview took place, and with entirely different lighting. Moreover, the person who interviewed Prof Dawkins was named as Geoffrey Smith, while the 'interviewer' shown in this clip is identified as Chris Nicholls, the narrator of the entire tape. However this, of itself, is not evidence of malice. While it is doubtful if any professional video producer would inadvertently leave a silence of that length in a tape, the fact that the long silence ends with an answer to an entirely different question, one about fishes, amphibians, and common ancestry, speaks strongly of malicious intent. "This becomes even more apparent when one views the tape, particularly if one has had the pleasure of spending any time in the company of Richard Dawkins, as I did as his Sydney host during his Australia in 1996. "Throughout this tape, Richard Dawkins speaks about his field of expertise in his usual polite and informative way. Then, suddenly, we see the interpolation of an 'interviewer,' quite obviously inserted at some later stage of production, posing a question directly to Richard . . . The tape then cuts directly to Richard and holds on him for 11 seconds, while he is shown looking uncomfortable, then cuts back to the 'interviewer' briefly, while Richard begins to (seemingly) answer an entirely different question, during which the tape cuts back to him. "There are several clues pointing to deceptive intent here. Nowhere else in the tape is an interviewer shown directly asking a question of any of the other four people who speak, nor is an interviewer seen posing any questions to Richard in his previous pieces. Richard does not react as one would expect him to, had he merely been asked a difficult question; his reaction is much more believably one of someone who has just realised he has been conned into giving an interview he would not normally have given, ie he doesn't look nonplussed, he looks angry. To compound this, there is another brief insert of the 'interviewer' with Richard's voice coming from off camera, before returning to Richard, looking as urbane and polite as ever. Such is the dramatic change in Richard's demeanour between the two segments, that it is utterly inconceivable that the second piece of tape followed immediately after the first. "Quite clearly, this tape has been manipulated, and rather ineptly done at that. But by now it is asking too much to blame it all on simple incompetence; it begins to reek of deceitful intent. "Stronger evidence of this has subsequently come to light. In an advertisement in 'Creation' magazine, the official mouthpiece of 'Answers in Genesis,' the tape 'From a Frog to a Prince,' is touted as a 'brilliant new documentary' and contains the following excerpt: ' . . .Then the documentary shows a question put to the highly fluent evolutionist Dawkins, which is really the crucial question: can he point to any example today in which a mutation has actually added information? (If there is such an example, surely an Oxford zoology professor, promoting neoDarwinism around the world, would know of it!) This is actually the dramatic high point of the whole presentation. 'We think that the Dawkins response on screen (we won't spoil it for potential viewers) makes a more powerful point against evolution than volumes written by Creationists! Even a ten year old watching it in our Brisbane office, got the point.' "And we also get the point. Because their volumes of unscientific dogma are having no effect in the scientific debate, they resort to trickery in order to denigrate their critics, and to mislead unsophisticated minds. "The nature of the plot "It was mentioned earlier that some comedy programmes use the interposed question for comic effect, but the 'Keziah' tape is not being sold as a comedy tape; it purports to be a serious discussion of a scientific issue; it purports to show that there is no biological evidence for evolution. By selectively editing this tape, the producer clearly seeks to show: "a) that Richard Dawkins, an eminent biologist, was unable to answer a question he was asked about biology; and "b) that he then evaded the question by answering a completely different one. "This tape seeks to denigrate Professor Dawkins' professional reputation, and it is difficult to believe that it was not deliberately done. "It begins to look, then, that this is a piece of crude propaganda . . ., deliberately manipulated to give the false impression that the fact of evolution is seriously under scientific question, and that the fanciful notions of creation 'scientists' are contributing to that debate. "There is further evidence that this is the line being pursued in creationist circles. In recent times, both the Australian Skeptics web site and at the 'Skeptic' office, we have fielded questions from a number of individuals who have posed questions couched in the terms, 'Can you give one example of new information being added to the genome by mutation today?' We have no way of telling whether the callers are asking this question because they have seen (and been misled by) this deceitful video tape, or because creationists have been otherwise spreading the word that it is 'a question evolutionists cannot answer.' It does, however, seem too much of a coincidence that it should all be happening in such a short space of time. "From our experience of answering such questioners, it becomes clear that they have little knowledge of biology, and when asked to clarify what it is they are asking, they invariably flounder around the point. Clearly this has not been a question that just popped into a selection of enquiring minds all at once; it seems obvious it is something they have been told will 'baffle the evolutionists.' . . . "Professor Dawkins has taken steps to reduce the harm done by the 'Keziah' tape, both to his reputation and to the public understanding of science. . . . [H]e wrote to the 'Institute for Creation Research' in California, pointing out in detail how the tape had dishonestly misrepresented his position, and requesting that the Institute investigate his complaint and immediately withdraw the tape from circulation. At the date of publication, he ha[d] not even received an acknowledgement from the ICR. Nor can we be entirely surprised by this. As the titles roll at the end of the tape, we see that Dr John Morris and Dr Carl Wieland, chief executives respectively of the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis, are shown as 'consultants.' "So much for the supposed impartiality of Gillian Brown, the producer of the tape, or for her protestations of 'balanced view,' of which she assured Professor Dawkins when seeking to continue taping in his home. "What does it mean? "So what is one to infer from this exercise? This tape, 'From a Frog to a Prince,' purports to be a serious discussion of a scientific issue, but how is a scientific issue addressed by what clearly appears to be a deliberate misrepresentation of the position of one of the protagonists? That is not the way science works, and anyone who makes any pretence of being engaged in scientific discourse should be well aware of that. But then, science has very little to do with what creation 'scientists' are about. "This is, sadly, typical of the less-than-honest political propagandist approach creationists use in their 'mission.' Unlike genuine scientists they conduct little, if any, scientific research in support of their contention that the natural processes of the world are as a direct result of a supernatural creation event within the past 6-10,000 years, and of a global flood some 3,000 years ago. What they do seek to do is to attack the credibility of evolutionary (and other) theories that show up their claims for the poorly thought-out and simple-minded religious dogma they really are. Because they are not engaged in scientific research, and thus cannot hope to succeed on the scientific level, they resort to ad hominem attacks on the genuine scientists who have exposed their myths. "What are the effects? "What effects will the dissemination of this particularly egregious example of that tactic have in the real world? What effect would it have, for example, on Richard Dawkins' professional reputation among his scientific peers? We would suspect practically none, because no professional biologist, nor any other competent scientist, would be hoodwinked for a moment into thinking that Prof. Dawkins had been baffled by such a crudely easy question. "But that misses the point of the tape. This propaganda is not aimed at professional scientists who would not be fooled by the implied message. Richard Dawkins' academic chair deals with the 'Public Understanding of Science' and, as such, he is among those academics who are sometimes referred to as 'public intellectuals,' those scientists, and others, who make their expertise and knowledge available and comprehensible to the public. "So what of his public reputation? Less scientifically literate members of the public, who have the misfortune to be subjected to this propaganda, may be led to believe that he had been stumped by a simple question and, as a consequence, they might be misled into believing that creationists are actually engaged in scientific debate. Nothing could be further from the truth - their purpose, pure and simple, is political. "There is yet another consequence - in some ways more serious. There are many people whose strongly held religious beliefs make them prime targets for creationist propaganda. Should these people see this video tape, and, by it be encouraged to believe that creation `science' has found a fatal flaw in the theory of evolution, then they have been cruelly deceived by people they have been led to believe they can trust. "Most scientifically literate people, and even many of those whose understanding of it is slight, have long recognised creation `science' for the infantile religious dogma that it is, so this crude propaganda is unlikely to have a great deal of lasting effect on them. But those who have little understanding of science, and particularly those who have trusted the creationists' claim that they are engaged in science, have had their trust betrayed. The nature of the calls we have received from people who have seemingly swallowed this line leave us in no doubt that that is precisely what has happened. "This is not the way of science - it is the way of political propaganda - yet another blatant example of 'telling lies for God.' . . ." http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/19... |
| Sunday, Apr 6, 2008, at 08:52 AM Backway Passages, Teleprompters, Food Fests And Church Security: "Insider" Memories Of Gen. Conference Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| As we all bask in the blissful baloney (or other appropriate word inserted here) of General Conference, I'd like to share a few reposted recollections on having experienced it all "from the inside," so to speak (with apologies to those who have heard them before).
Teleprompted by the Spirit At General Conference time, members of ETB's family (along with the relations of other GAs) were provided special, nontransferable passes--identified as such by family name--for admission into the sessions. They were issued to us through ETB's office manager and used to access the old Tabernacle at a designated portal {#7, as I recall). We'd cut in line, flash the ticket and be escorted to our seats. It wasn't fair or right, but neither concept regularly operates in Mormonism. One of the more interesting vantage points for viewing Conference was sitting high up in the dome, behind the Tabernacle Choir, next to the white plastered walls and massive organ pipes. To get there, the ushers would lead us through a low-ceiling wood-paneled carpeted area behind the dais, to a back passageway and up a narrow stairwell to the crow's nest. From there, I could look down over the bald spots of the fellows in the men's section, directly on to the pulpit. While it provided a unique view, it was also as hot as hell. There were big, colored lights up where we sat, used for shining on the smooth, blank walls behind us for special effect. Sitting there in our Sunday best, we did a slow cook--but it wasn't due to any burning in the bosom. During the last few times I sat up there, I would read anti-Mormon literature that I had been handed at the gates of Temple Square a few minutes earlier, since it was often more interesting than the GA sermons. From high atop the Choir lair, I could see the GAs reading from their teleprompted scripts. The texts would scroll across a screen embedded in the top of the pulpit and then reflect up on panes of glass strategically positioned in front of the speakers. Not only were the sermons teleprompted, I witnessed the Lord's anointed getting cues on their prepared prayers by artificial means. Everything was tightly timed, with the GAs supposed heartfelt petitions to heaven, as well as their ostensibly Holy Ghost-inspired sermons, precisely orchestrated and slotted into the overall script, so that the camera operators could, on cue, cut to commercial breaks, or to warm and fuzzy Red Square (er, Temple Square) vignettes, or to the chime of the Nauvoo Bell. We Thank Thee, Oh, God, That We're Related to the Prophet--and Can be Seen at General Conference in These Latter Days When Benson family members weren't perched up behind the Tabernacle Choir, we could sit in specially roped-off benches, front and center, on the main floor of the Tabernacle, along with the other family and friends of the "we're-so-special" GA crowd. Speaking personally for my own part of the family, we became increasingly uncomfortable with what we considered to be an arrogant arrangement and so decided that we would remain behind and simply watch Conference on TV at the Salt Lake home of my parents. Upset was expressed when we let our decision be known. ETB, it was insisted, desired that his family to be with him--in the Tabernacle--during Conference so that he could look down from the dais and see us all there on those hard, fake wood-stained benches as a sign of our love and support. I replied that if this was what my grandfather wanted, then we would sit there in the Tabernacle until ETB got up and left. That meant that because he was now pretty old and frail, his assistants would often escort him out of the Conference session at the hour break--during the rest song, when everyone would stand up, stretch and sing a hymn before dropping back on their faithful posteriors for the second half of indoctrination. So that's what we did. ETB would be escorted out during the break, waving weakly, and we would likewise exit (without waving, by the way). We would meet up with him in the back area, out of sight behind the dais, where we would join him and his handlers in escorting him through an underground tunnel over to his Eagle Gate condo that was across the street from Temple Square. Or, if his assistants got ETB out ahead of us, we would simply make our own way out of the Tabernacle and go over to his apartment. By then, ETB's staff had wheel chaired him into his small, private study, where they would place him in a soft, leather reclining chair. They would then either turn on the TV for the second half of Conference or merely play soft music for him to listen to. I, and other members of the Benson clan, would join ETB here for the duration of the Conference session. I would sit by his side, holding his hand and occasionally speaking to him softly. He would smile, squeeze my hand and sometimes say a word or two. But most of the time, he would not say or do much of anything, but just sit there. Inside the Tabernacle, Trying to Talk to Church Security When we did sit in the Tabernacle's seating area set aside for GA family members and Church-designated dignitaries (like Senator Orrin Hatch), I would often spot a friend of mine, with whom I had grown up and played as a boy in Salt Lake City. His name was Doyle. Doyle (now known as "Duff") had morphed into a buff, jut-jawed dude with a microphone screwed into his ear. Doyle, you see, had landed a job working the Church security Conference detail. I would sit there on the benches and observe him standing silently down in front of the plush seats for the GAs, intently scanning the audience. Prior to the kick-off of the Conference sessions, as we made our way to our seats, I would say hi to Doyle. He would respond with a tight-lipped smile, nod briefly and not say much more. We later exchanged some polite correspondence but nothing of substance emerged from it, other than Doyle saying he didn't agree with my decision to leave the Mormon Church. GA Gluttony It used to be a tradition among the "perkified" that between breaks of the Conference morning and afternoon sessions, GAs and their families were treated to a sumptuous lunch, high atop the Church Office building. The GAs relations (as well as friends and dates brought along by, say, their grandchildren) would gather at large tables, where they would be served heaping plates full of hot food, brought to them by young, crisply dressed girls. It was a place to eat, to be seen and to impress. Meanwhile, during this GA food fest, we could look out the windows of this Great and Spacious Building, down at the lawn directly outside the Tabernacle, where the "great unwashed"--those LDS "little people"--were clustered on blankets brought from home, eating cheap box lunches which they had bought or food they had packed themselves--waiting and hoping to get into the afternoon session. With our bellies full and burping pleasantly, we would eventually make our way down to the Tabernacle where we would again flash our passes, cut into line at the last minute ahead of people who had been waiting for hours, and make our way into "our" special seating. One year, after returning home to Arizona from Conference, a member of our ward mentioned that they had seen us at Temple Square as we maneuvered our way into the Tabernacle, where this member and their family had long been waiting, trying to get in by standing in line. It was an uncomfortable encounter for us--and we knew the arrangement was not right. So we determined that we had had had enough of this kind of undeserved treatment and therefore decided in the future to wait in line with everyone else. If we couldn't make it into the Tabernacle because seating ran out, we would go over to the Assembly Hall and listen to Conference being piped in from across the way. With General Conference playing this weekend and the prophets, seers and teleprompters imparting to the Saints their words of wisdom, I look back on those former days and did what I decided needed to be on one of those glorious Conference Sundays: I went and got a flat tire on my truck fixed. |
| Sunday, Apr 6, 2008, at 08:53 AM General Conference Showdown: "Heated Discussions" And A Personal Encounter With Church Security Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| At the invitation of the Ex-Mormon Foundation, back during the first weekend of October 2001 I went to Salt Lake City during LDS General Conference weekend to perform at the Salt Lake public library a "Tunes and Toons" show with ex-evangelical preacher-turned-atheist Dan Barker of the Freedom from Religion Foundation.
The Ex-Mormon Foundation's own alternative conference was being held that same weekend in conjunction with the semi-annual LDS bizarre bazaar on Temple Square. (For a recap of the ex-Mo event, see Richard Packham's travelog entitled, "Visiting the Sacred Sites of Mormonism," at: http://packham.n4m.org/travelog.htm) Myself, Dan and a couple of other friends decided to take a tour of Temple Square during our visit, the first stop being the Visitors Center. Wearing a black shirt with white lettering sporting the word "Godless" (either that one or another black-and-white favorite of mine reading "No Gods, No Masters"--can't remember which, although I've got a photo somewhere of us a few minutes later standing in front of the Christus statue upstairs), I entered the Visitors Center/public relations sanctuary with my heathen, hell-bound buddies. Immediately upon coming through the doors, we were approached by a pair of neatly-dressed, attractive, friendly, doe-eyed sister missionary greeters with glued-on, big bright smiles. (I was later told by a comely ex-Mormon woman who had herself been a sister missionary assigned to the Temple Square beat that it was indeed the purposeful practice of the Church to place the good-looking lady missionaries on Temple Square in order to draw in the crowds). One asked me in a chipper voice if I knew anything about the Mormon Church. I replied that I knew a little. She began giving her stock floor approach so to avoid an unnecessary waste of her time and mine, I gently informed her that I was the grandson of the former president of the Mormon Church, Ezra Taft Benson. Her surprised response was, "Didn't you say something on TV that rhymed?" I answered in the affirmative. (She was referring to my April 1996 interview on CBS's "60 Minutes" with Mike Wallace, where I observed that the duty of faithful Mormons was to "pray, pay and obey"). At that point we began a polite, measured conversation about LDS beliefs, standing there inside the Visitors Center entryway at the base of the carpeted stairs on the first level. Our conversation was further propelled by the sister missionary's next question. How could one explain, she asked, the feeling in one's heart that the Book of Mormon is true? I kept my answer short and respectfully to the point by replying that religious feelings could actually be accounted for as a combination of a personal desire to believe, along with neurological and chemical reactions in the temporal lobe of brain, which result in what people often interpret as so-called "spiritual" sensations or experiences. I quickly saw that this response wasn't registering with the sister missionary. At this point, a serious-looking young man in his late 20s or early 30s, dressed in a dark suit with an earpiece screwed into the side of his head, approached me and the sister missionary. He interrupted us and said, "We are told that you are having a heated discussion and heated discussions are not allowed here." The sister missionary with whom I had been conversing in temperate tones turned to the Church security goon and said firmly, "We're not having a heated discussion." The security dude didn't say anything, ducked his head slightly, fiddled with his earpiece and walked away. Later that afternoon, my younger brother phoned me to tell me that he had been walking across Temple Square that day himself, when he said he was approached by a Church security guy who recognized him and who told him that I had been asked to leave the Visitors Center because I supposedly had been disruptive. I explained to my brother that, in fact, I had not been disruptive, that the conversation which I was having with the sister missionary (before we were rudely interrupted by the Mormon Church) was initiated by her, that we were politely talking with each other and that when the security hound approached us the sister missionary herself informed him that we were not engaged in a heated discussion. Welcome to Red Square on Temple Square--where square-headed Church security snoops are constantly on the look-out for those evil "heated discussions." What really happened that October General Conference day was that an episode of honest, open and cordial disagreement raised the body heat of Mormon secret undercover, underweared control freaks. Hear the strains of the Tabernacle Choir floating through the air on Temple Square: "There is beauty all around when ex-Mos go home . . ." |
| Friday, Apr 11, 2008, at 08:24 AM Why There Haven't Been More Prosecutions Of Utah Polygamists: Not Enough Faithful Utah Prosecutors Posted By Steve Beson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| With Utah attorney general Mark Shurtleff reportedly now seizing credit for the Texas raid on Warren Jeff's polygamous compound, questions are naturally raised about why (if Utah was supposedly such a good example to Texas when it came to going after polygamists) did it take Utah law enforcement authorities so long to actually start rounding up and prosecuting its still largely untouched boatloads of abusive, law-defying multi-wifers?
As Shurtleff critic Holly Mullen recently wrote in a scathing article, "Lone Star Justice: Why Isn't Utah as Bold as Texas about Polygamy?": "Utah was never so bold [as Texas, which recently raided Jeffs' cattle yard concubined compound near Eldorado and, in the process, rescued over 400 children]. "When we [Utahns] had our chance to clean up a similar mess over decades, our blessed state wimped out. Legal authorities have fussed and fretted for more than a half-century, since the infamous 1953 raid on Arizona’s Short Creek, where 160 children were rounded up and kept in state custody for two years. "It’s been Utah’s policy--forged in the past eight years, primarily by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff--to work slowly and practically with FLDS communities and in prosecuting men who groom little girls to be their sex partners and take them as underage wives. . . . "For . . . many . . . , polygamy remains just another element of Utah’s wacky religious back-story—like inexplicable liquor laws and closing off public access to Main Street. And that means that as time passes, polygamy and the outgrowth of child abuse come to be seen as silly cultural icons worthy of only an eye roll. . . . "At least Texas [has taken] a stand and turned an ear toward a population that should matter most but seldom does: children. Their fathers can scream all day about their rights; at least they have a voice. "Utah should be such a busybody." http://www.slweekly.com/index.cfm?do=... From my own experience with the mindset of defenders of Utah's foot-dragging on polygamous-preached and -practiced child and wife abuse, the rationalizations can be as disturbing as they are stunning. I had my own run-in with excuses offered up in behalf of derelict Utah state law enforcement authorities a few years ago, as Utah was about to host the 2002 Winter Olympics. Allow me to set the scene: In the run-up to the Salt Lake City-hosted Games, polygamist child rapist, wife abuser, deadbeat dad and welfare cheat Tom Green suddenly discovered himself to be the very publicly prosecuted target of then-Juab (Utah) County Attorney David Leavitt (brother of Utah's then-governor Michael Leavitt). After much media hooplah, Green was convicted in 2001 of raping his child bride/first wife Linda Kunz, when she was 13 years old. Green (who claimed four other wives and 33 children) was also found guilty of bigamy and welfare fraud--the latter for criminal non-support related to his failure to provide for his many vulnerable underage offspring. Green was sentenced to five years to life (the lightest sentence the judge could hand down) and was released on parole after serving only six years behind bars. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/05/1... http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/supo... http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/07/poly... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/0... Prior to Green's prosecution, there had not been a single significant Utah law enforcement crackdown on polygamy for some 50 years--despite the fact the polygamy has been expressly prohibited by the Utah state constitution for some 112 years--and despite the additional fact that there are upwards of an estimated 50,000 practicing polygamists in Utah. http://www.ruralwomyn.net/polygamy.ht... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/0... In light of the Green conviction and its attendant focus on Utah's not-so-secret ugly undercurrent of polygamy, I drew a cartoon showing the state's bobsled team barreling down the run with a Brigham Young-looking character at the controls, whip in hand, with the sled crammed full of bonneted women and children. A sign next to the run declared, "Welcome to Utah: No cigarettes, no booze but all the wives you can choose." A couple of Utah Olympic officials were standing off to the side surveying the scene, with one noting to the other that if they wanted to improve Utah's image, they'd have to do something about their bobsled team. Awhile later, I happened to be in Utah, where I spent an evening visiting with a personal friend of Jacalyn Leavitt, the wife of Utah's then-governor Michael Leavitt. This person told me that Jacalyn Leavitt had seen the cartoon and was quite upset with it, on the grounds that she thought it unfairly suggested there had been political considerations involved in the decision to make an example of Green through the olympian, albeit pre-Olympic, prosecutorial efforts of the governor's sincere crime-fighting sibling. This person further informed me that the governor's wife wanted to speak with me in order to make her case in this regard. (We never did speak, even though I indicated at the time that I would be happy to hear from her). This personal friend of Utah's First Lady also denied, as well, that there had been any political motivation behind David Leavitt's decision to go after Green as the world (clearly non-coincidentally, I thought), was turning its all-seeing international eye on Utah and its hosting of the Winter Games. I asked why (if, in fact, political considerations had not played a role in this sudden spring into action by Utah lawmen against Green) had there been no meaningful investigation and prosecution of Utah polygamists in the last half-a-century? The straight-faced response was that until David Leavitt came along, there was no county attorney in Utah righteous or courageous enough to prosecute polygamists--meaning, therefore and of course, that the state's hands were tied. Really, now. If, in fact, David Leavitt was such a righteous man, then why did the Mormon God reward him for his successful efforts against the evils of Tom Green's criminal multiple wifery by allowing Leavitt to subsequently be defeated for re-election a mere three months after winning Green's conviction? Leavitt later hinted that his election loss was due the to pro-polygamist devotions of the local populace: "A small town prosecutor has a little bit of a shelf life," Leavitt said. "Quite frankly, I'd prosecute Tom Green again if I had the same decisions to make and I knew that prosecution would cost me my job." http://www.davidleavitt2008.com/newsr... Let me get this straight: The Mormon Jesus chose--and then guided--a brave and rare individual in the person of Utah County Attorney David Leavitt to throw political caution to the wind and, instead, wage a bold, pure, courageous, brave, clean, reverent and ultimately successful fight against a notorious child-raping Utah polygamist. Then, as a reward for such daring devotion to duty, this same Jehovah sat back and allowed Leavitt to lose his re-election bid, thereby denying this Latter-day Lone Ranger the opportunity to continue his heroic one-man crusade against the evils of plural marriage? Hmmmmm. Something tells me that the Mormon Jesus and his devoted Utah Saints aren't hell-bent against polygamy after all. |
| Monday, Apr 14, 2008, at 09:30 AM LDS Church Choking Over Actual Headline: "Polygamists Bar Police From Entering Mormon Temple" Posted By Steve Benson STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Choke, choke, chortle, chortle. :)
Below is the link to and excerpts from the article in question--published by "Yahoo! Asian News"--which features a color photograph of the Salt Lake City temple, complete with a statue of Brigham Young in the foreground: "'Polygamists bar police from entering Mormon temple' "FORT WORTH, Texas, April 5, 2008 . . . [Agence France-Presses]: Police and members of a polygamist sect under investigation for possible child abuse are locked in a standoff over access to a Mormon temple where a suspected victim was believed to be held, local media reported. "'In preparing for entry to the temple, law enforcement is preparing for the worst,' Allison Palmer, an assistant district attorney told 'The San Angelo Standard Times' on Saturday. . . . "A complaint filed by a teenage girl was reportedly the trigger for a massive police operation late Friday, during which authorities removed 52 girls between the ages of six months and 17 years from a compound in Eldorado, Texas, owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints (FLDS). "However, sect members have refused to allow Texas Child Protective Services access to the compound's temple, reports said. "Non-Mormons are barred from entering Mormon temples under the church's doctrine. "'It appears to be of great concern to them if a person from outside their congregation even attempts to step inside their place of worship,' Palmer is quoted as saying. . . . "The raid on Friday was triggered by reports that a 50-year-old man had illegally married and had sex with a girl that is currently 16 years old and has an eight-month-old child, 'The Standard-Times' reported. "Social workers determined that 18 of the 52 girls had been abused or were at immediate risk of future abuse, 'The Houston Chronicle' reported. . . . "The ranch, in the town of El Dorado about 414 kilometers (255 miles) southwest of Dallas, Texas, is linked to Warren Jeffs, an avowed polygamist who is now behind bars. His Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) owns the sprawling ranch property. "Jeffs, who was considered to be the sect's prophet, was arrested near Las Vegas in 2006 and sentenced to life in jail for being an accomplice to rape. He also faces federal charges in Arizona and Utah. "The vast Texas ranch was bought by the sect in 2003 and has been kept under surveillance by the authorities. "The mainstream Mormon church -- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- renounced polygamy more than one century ago as a price of Utah's admission to the United States. "It now excommunicates members who engage in the practice and disavows any connection with the FLDS church." "During the trial of Warren Jeffs in St. George, Utah, last year a woman tearfully told the court how she had been forced into marriage aged 14 at a ceremony he had conducted at a motel in Nevada in 2001. "The woman, identified only as 'Jane Doe IV,' said Jeffs performed the wedding despite her protests at the choice of husband. . . . "Prosecutors said Jeffs instructed the girl to 'multiply and replenish the earth and raise children in the priesthood.' "After Doe's older husband had sexual intercourse with her, she asked Jeffs to end the marriage, saying she hated having 'husband-wife' relations with him. "According to Doe, Jeffs told her to 'go back and do what he tells you to do.' "Two of her sisters testified during the preliminary hearing that Doe had been 'forced' to have sex with her husband. . . . "Members of the FLDS church are known to live in Utah, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Colorado, South Dakota and British Columbia." http://asia.news.yahoo.com/080406/afp... |