Mormonism's unique culture

Pahoran wrote:

<quoted text>
Is that the best you can do? Evidently it is.
Merely quoting another irrational conspiracy nut does not support your conspiracy theory.
"Lord" Wallace is delusional. On one occasion he ponced into the Tabernacle during conference wearing a white suit, and tried to go up onto the stand to disrupt the meeting. When the ushers moved to block him, his flunkies screamed "Don't touch the Lord!"
He himself was a black-helicopter devotee of your ridiculous conspiracy delusion. He thought his house was bugged. He thought LDS people who were willing to discuss things with him were wearing secret microphones concealed in lapel pins. The guy is, to coin a phrase, "out of his Mormon tree."
Thank you for demonstrating how heavily your hate propaganda depends upon certifiable nut-jobs. Keep it up!
Regards,
Pahoran

Yeah, I'm sure Officer Olsen's death and Kimball's lie about the involvement of the Mormon Church are delusional as well, however golden bibles, Hebrew Lamanites, Nephites, Jaredites, Mulekites, Locktites, Boxkites and Samsonites along with their submarine barges, liahonas, million-man battles with steel swords and chariots and that ridiculous Book of Abraham are entirely credible, at least in the magical Mormon 'mind'.

Dagobert II wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, I'm sure Officer Olsen's death and Kimball's lie about the involvement of the Mormon Church are delusional as well,

Excuse me: but before you accuse a better man than you can ever *hope* to be of lying, you need to back it up. Officer Olsen's feelings about being wounded are not evidence of anything; where is the press release in which President Kimball allegedly lied, and what does it actually say?

This is a call for references, Dagobert. Another shotgun blast of anti-Mormon froth will not do it; sorry.

Regards,
Pahoran

It's so simple even you should be able to understand it Pahoran. Either the Mormon Church demanded the surveillance of Wallace from the Salt Lake City police or it did not.

After first lying about the facts of the case, the Salt Lake City police admitted to having placed Wallace under surveillance without any legal justification for doing so.

Are you alleging that the Mormon Church never denied demanding police surveillance of Wallace or that Officer Olsen didn't know who he was working for? If the later is your assertion, it is about as credible as claiming that Brigham Young was not involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Both events are part of a well established pattern of Mormon criminal behavior that is part of Mormonisms 'unique culture'. Just follow the prophet.

Dagobert II wrote:

It's so simple even you should be able to understand it Pahoran. Either the Mormon Church demanded the surveillance of Wallace from the Salt Lake City police or it did not.
After first lying about the facts of the case, the Salt Lake City police admitted to having placed Wallace under surveillance without any legal justification for doing so.
Are you alleging that the Mormon Church never denied demanding police surveillance of Wallace or that Officer Olsen didn't know who he was working for? If the later is your assertion, it is about as credible as claiming that Brigham Young was not involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre.
Both events are part of a well established pattern of Mormon criminal behavior that is part of Mormonisms 'unique culture'. Just follow the prophet.

Actually, just follow the PROFIT.

I think Lamb Chops is foaming at the mouth again.

PLom wrote:

I think Lamb Chops is foaming at the mouth again.

Just how does a sock puppet catch rabies again?

I liked the late Shari Lewis, though. I do agree that Moron the Jaredite is little more than a sock puppet for his corporation, but equating her with Joseph Smith and Company, Incorporated is a little tough to take. Unless she really WAS a bitch in real life.

Beautiful wrote:

<quoted text>
Just how does a sock puppet catch rabies again?

Especially in New Zealand...they don't have rabies there. But he has definitely gotten it from somewhere.

Dagobert II wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, I'm sure Officer Olsen's death and Kimball's lie about the involvement of the Mormon Church are delusional as well, however golden bibles, Hebrew Lamanites, Nephites, Jaredites, Mulekites, Locktites, Boxkites and Samsonites along with their submarine barges, liahonas, million-man battles with steel swords and chariots and that ridiculous Book of Abraham are entirely credible, at least in the magical Mormon 'mind'.

Not to mention the fact that the Native American tribal languages are all some dialect of Yiddish and that the locals living in what is now Brooklyn Heights all were noshing on Lox and Bagels for breakfast (delivered weekly by horseback every Sunday, along with the Sunday New York Times) 1000 years before Henry Hudson and the Dutch came.

Those poor folks upstate in the Palmyra area hadn't discovered printing yet, though. They were still publishing their Sunday newspapers on gold plates. One guy got smart, though, and thought he'd bury his copy of the Sunday Cumorah Chronicle in a hill outside his hovel, because its glossy inserts had special coupons for cheap steel swords on their Annual November Black Friday wigwam-buster clearance. Alas, his intelligence was short-lived, because he didn't mark the burial location well, and during the annual turkey hunt for the Thursday Harvest Feast the burial site was trampled underfoot, forever obscured until some guy Joe found them 1500 years later.

Dagobert II wrote:

It's so simple even you should be able to understand it Pahoran. Either the Mormon Church demanded the surveillance of Wallace from the Salt Lake City police or it did not.
After first lying about the facts of the case, the Salt Lake City police admitted to having placed Wallace under surveillance without any legal justification for doing so.
Are you alleging that the Mormon Church never denied demanding police surveillance of Wallace or that Officer Olsen didn't know who he was working for?

I'm saying that, as the accuser (Greek _Diabolos_, devil) you have a burden of proof. I've seen the Tanner's recycling of Wallace's material before. The alleged "press release" is invariably referred to and *never* quoted. Why not quote it, if it actually supports the claim?

Dagobert II wrote:

If the later is your assertion, it is about as credible as claiming that Brigham Young was not involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

A very credible assertion then; since Brigham's non-involvement in the MMM is an established historical fact.

Dagobert II wrote:

Both events are part of a well established pattern of Mormon criminal behavior that is part of Mormonisms 'unique culture'. Just follow the prophet.

Translation: Hating Mormons as much as you do -- i.e. about as much as your hero and role model, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, hated Jews -- you will uncritically swallow, and maliciously regurgitate, any falsehood about them just so long as it is spiteful enough to suit your taste.

Regards,
Pahoran

Pahoran wrote:

A very credible assertion then; since Brigham's non-involvement in the MMM is an established historical fact.

LOL! Of course it is, in the minds of Mormons who believe as historical fact Spalding's fictional novel the Rigdon plagiarized into the Book of Mormon. http://www.buryingthepast.com/
http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Prophets-Brigham-...

Dagobert II wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL! Of course it is, in the minds of Mormons who believe as historical fact Spalding's fictional novel the Rigdon plagiarized into the Book of Mormon.

Spaulding's *non-existent* novel, right?

You really couldn't run any sort of anti-Mormon argument without these kinds of red herrings, could you?

Thank you for thus admitting that you know they are bogus.

Incidentally, I've had lots of entertainment from the many absurdities seen on this forum; being lectured on gullibility by a booster of the idiotic Spaulding-Rigdon-Pratt-Cowdery -Harris-Smith conspiracy theory approaches the pinnacle.

Spam snipped.

A fact that you would like to see "buried:" did you know that Bagley's discredited hatchet job was bought and paid for up front? He answered a newspaper ad looking for someone who would promise to reach the conclusion that Brigham did it. Well surprise surprise, "Blood of the Prophets" reaches the conclusion that Brigham did it.

As promised.

Of course, he had to falsify several of his facts, including at least one quote, in order to get there.

http://mi.byu.edu/publications/review/...

Regards,
Pahoran

Pahoran wrote:

<quoted text>
Spaulding's *non-existent* novel, right?

Non-existent? No, that's the golden plates scam you're thinking of. That myth has been busted.

Had Spalding's manuscript never existed, Sid and Joe would have had to either come up with their own manuscript or plagiarize another manuscript. Of course maybe they would have found a more credible manuscript to plagiarize.

Say what you want about L. Rob Hubbard and his cult, but at least he had sufficient talent to write his own fiction without plagiarizing someone else's.

Pahoran said "A very credible assertion then; since Brigham's non-involvement in the MMM is an established historical fact. "

No matter how much you repeat the lie it is not true!

Here is a truthful account of Brigham Young's involvement in the worst religious tragedy ever to occur on US soil:

http://1857massacre.com/MMM/brigham_young_des...

The mormon's are desperate that people believe that Brigham Young is innocent as to admit his obvious psychosis would be to face the flawed foundation of the whole organization!

That they are willing to lie about it is explained here:

http://www.mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

there are many other sites that confirm the nature of this organization.

We all have to get informed and get involved.

Apathy and ignorance are ultimately the only weapon this organization has in their avowed goal to dismantle our Constitutional Republic with a theocracy governed by their false prophet.

Beautiful wrote:

<quoted text>
Not to mention the fact that the Native American tribal languages are all some dialect of Yiddish and that the locals living in what is now Brooklyn Heights all were noshing on Lox and Bagels for breakfast (delivered weekly by horseback every Sunday, along with the Sunday New York Times) 1000 years before Henry Hudson and the Dutch came.
Those poor folks upstate in the Palmyra area hadn't discovered printing yet, though. They were still publishing their Sunday newspapers on gold plates. One guy got smart, though, and thought he'd bury his copy of the Sunday Cumorah Chronicle in a hill outside his hovel, because its glossy inserts had special coupons for cheap steel swords on their Annual November Black Friday wigwam-buster clearance. Alas, his intelligence was short-lived, because he didn't mark the burial location well, and during the annual turkey hunt for the Thursday Harvest Feast the burial site was trampled underfoot, forever obscured until some guy Joe found them 1500 years later.

They do not have yiddish. Do you even know what Yiddish is? It is a combination of GERMAN, MODERN Hebrew and some Russian!OY Gevalt! Learn some linguistics! There was links in the Pomo of Calif to Magyar of Hungary, Norwegian, Icelandic and English. The ONLY document even mentioning yiddish in the url was from Utah and referred to European IMMIGRANTS languages! NOT Native Americans at all.The only resource that tries to tie Israel and the US is a pastor and LDS. The DNA tests by the LDS themselves have proven otherwise. The idea that ANY of those people "discovered" America is a flabbergasting demonstration of hubris. This continent was settled by Native American people more than 4 thousand years before Biblical times (if the times given in the Bible are accurate for the cultural activity-certainly NOT for the earth)Many of the Native American tribes and "states" were more advanced politically and socially than in the middle east and far more stable than anywhere else in the world. The ignorant but militarily powerful immigrants after Columbus like the evil brutes that they were, destroyed something in their stupidity that exceeded their own cultures. It is NO wonder that most people who were taken captive by tribes over the years didn't want to return-except for the few that were taken by the minority of tribes that were not as advanced as their peers. They had to be guarded so they didn't escape back and many committed suicide than live with the Europeans again (where they came from). This is especially true of women who usually fared better in Native American cultures with rare exceptions.

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

Pahoran said "A very credible assertion then; since Brigham's non-involvement in the MMM is an established historical fact. "
No matter how much you repeat the lie it is not true!

First: speaking of lies, thank you for demonstrating that the tactic of accusing one's opponents of lying is *NOT* a Mormon one, contrary to your previous claims.

The only lie in view here is your own. Unlike you, I have valid and legitimate reasons for holding the view that I assert. Accusing me of lying about it is an accusation you *know* to be false.

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

Here is a truthful account of Brigham Young's involvement in the worst religious tragedy ever to occur on US soil:

It was not a "religious tragedy," although it was certainly a tragedy. But anyone familiar with your posting history can see how you use loaded terminology to try to pre-empt discussion of your assumptions.

The most thoroughly researched, scholarly investigation of the MMM ever to be done has debunked, once and for all, the evil old libel against Brigham. You can read about it here:

http://www.amazon.com/Massacre-Mountain-Meado...

Unlike your links, this does not go to any hate site.

That evil old libel continues to be repeated by evil old libellers, but it simply embarrasses them.

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

That they are willing to lie about it is explained here:

That you are relying upon your standard, dishonest tactic of "poisioning the well" is demonstrated here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_we...

Once again, Smurf, I challenge you to give up your dishonest tactics and try, for the very first time, to have an honest, open discussion of the issues.

Will you do it?

Can you do it?

Or do you know, as I do, that your position will collapse if you have to rely upon legitimate arguments?

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

Apathy and ignorance are ultimately the only weapon this organization has in their avowed goal to dismantle our Constitutional Republic with a theocracy governed by their false prophet.

"Avowed" means "openly promised." So, Call for references: from what legitimate Mormon source do you claim to know about this "avowed goal?"

In the evil anti-Semitic forgery,_Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion_, the Jews were accused of having an "avowed goal" of taking over the world, by means of a secret conspiracy. I put it to you, sir, that you are *KNOWINGLY* using *EXACTLY THE SAME* approach in your anti-Mormonism as your heroes and role models, Hitler and Goebbels, did in their anti-Semitism.

And you're really rather proud of that, aren't you?

Regards,
Pahoran

Pahoran said "Unlike your links, this does not go to any hate site"

well, folks, here is how it is done.

The mormons believe that if they lie to us enough we will forget about the horrors of the Mountain Meadows Massacre and let them continue their insane efforts to replace our constitutional republic with a wacky theocracy with their dna denying prophet in charge!

Pahoran is confused about truth. Being in an organization that has a policy of lying to the gentiles to protect the church has had a very disturbing effect on the minds of the followers.

It has worked for many years. I once held in my hands a newspaper account of the massacre that my son's scout master refused to sell to the mormon church. This was in the 1980s before the internet.

The church was quitely buying up any damning evidence and destroying it. They did not get all of it though and more and more keeps popping up every day!

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

Pahoran said "Unlike your links, this does not go to any hate site"
well, folks, here is how it is done.
The mormons believe that if they lie to us enough we will forget about the horrors of the Mountain Meadows Massacre

That's right, folks. We're so determined that everyone should forget about it, that we sponsored a team of academic historians to produce the definitive book on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Massacre-Mountain-Meado...

And if you believe Smurf's version, he has some lovely beachfront property to sell you.

In Arizona.

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

and let them continue their insane efforts to replace our constitutional republic with a wacky theocracy with their dna denying prophet in charge!

The most "wacky" thing here being Smurf's wacky conspiracy theory.

Grandpasmurf952 wrote:

It has worked for many years. I once held in my hands a newspaper account of the massacre that my son's scout master refused to sell to the mormon church. This was in the 1980s before the internet.
The church was quitely buying up any damning evidence and destroying it. They did not get all of it though and more and more keeps popping up every day!

The first part of the story -- that the Church would like to buy original publications relating to its history -- is entirely credible. The Church has a scriptural mandate to do just that.

But the sinister motive -- that it wants to buy such material to "destroy" it -- is pure nonsense, and exists only in Smurf's deranged imagination. The Church collects historical material in order to *use* it. If they had succeeded in buying it, it would have formed part of the material used in researching the book referenced above.

Regards,
Pahoran

Pahoran wrote:

The most thoroughly researched, scholarly investigation of the MMM ever to be done has debunked, once and for all, the evil old libel against Brigham. You can read about it here:
http://www.amazon.com/Massacre-Mountain-Meado...
Unlike your links, this does not go to any hate site.

Your link goes to the site promoting a book written under the auspices of the Mormon Church. All three authors are Mormons, and we all know how 'truthful' Mormons are when it comes to anything that touches on their scam of a 'church'. "There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher Of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not.
Some things that are true are not very useful." Boyd K. Packer, Mormon "The difficult question is whether we are morally responsible to tell the whole truth. When we have a duty to disclose, we are morally responsible to do so. Where there is no duty to disclose, we have two alternatives. We may be free to disclose if we choose to do so, but there will be circumstances where commandments, covenants, or professional obligations require us to remain silent." Dallin Oaks, Mormon, in an address to BYU alumni, 12 September 1993. This is a very interesting date to discuss a topic quite relevant to the whitewashing of the involvement of the Mormon Church led by Brigham Young in the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Dagobert II wrote:

<quoted text>
Your link goes to the site promoting a book written under the auspices of the Mormon Church.

That's absolutely true.

And, at this point, you have two choices: EITHER you could, for the very first time in all the posts I've ever seen you make, address the book in question on its merits; OR you could run true to form, and resort to some version of the _ad hominem_ fallacy in an attempt to marginalise it without actually addressing its arguments.

Let's see how you do:

Dagobert II wrote:

All three authors are Mormons, and we all know how 'truthful' Mormons are when it comes to anything that touches on their scam of a 'church'.

As expected; with all the predictability of a knee jerk, with or without the knee.

Your technique is examined here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_we...

Regards,
Pahoran

Brigham Young, Adolf Hitler and Charles Manson all got a raw deal! They were nowhere near the scenes of the murders carried out by their underlings. They had no idea any of that nastiness was going on and I'm sure they would have chastised their followers severely had they known.

For example, just look how vigorously Brigham Young punished all the killers at the Mountain Meadows Massacre even before the federal government knew of the massacre.