fighting looters and throwing rocks at young school girls.??

[_Mercury]

I have always thought that rcrockett was and odd duck.

This confirms it.

in my opinion, the guy really has some internal issues that will eventually burst out.

A perfect example of the model anti-Mormon. Beleive a hoax, repeat it, and add to it.

You are a caricature of Mormonism.

[_Mercury]

I realize what this is merc, and styleguy. You are trying to divert from the egg on the faces of all the posters who jumped in without having read the entire post. thought they found something against a Mormon, and popped in.

And why am I supposed to cite an example when styleguy just shoots from the hip and accuses LDS of doing this without any examples?

My response back was more rhetoical. He said LDS do that, I said non-LDS would do that, too.

Are you constitutionally unable to post without insulting at the same time?

A. What egg on who's face, besides yours?
B. As if you do not with every one of your idiotic posts have a kneejerk reaction and deny deny deny.
C. Even rhetorical bull needs to be accounted for. C F R
D. Those who do not use honesty and don't approach the subject with even a hint of ethics need to be called out on it. I insult you on every post because you deserve it.

[_Jason Bourne]

I saw the this is a hoax at the end and this did not comment any on the thread. Charity had that right.

[_Mercury]

I saw the this is a hoax at the end and this did not comment any on the thread. Charity had that right.

I saw it was a hoax without reading 1/3 the way into it. Why bolster up such a bitter vinegary hag?

[_Who Knows]

Won't work. You get caught with your pants down , you should pull them up before you start mocking somebody else.

Can't you guys just say, "Oops, I was wrong. Sorry. I will be more careful in reading the link provided before I jump off a bridge with a premature opinion."

Wow. Talk about hypocrisy. You did the exact same thing on the charitable contributions thread. You started slamming the RMH AZ for 'only spending 10%'. However, you clearly did not research this before deciding it was a-ok to slam them. Then, when i 'caught you with your pants down', you just completely ignored it. Couldn't you just have said "oops, i was wrong, sorry. I will be more careful in reading the link provided before I jump off a bridge with a premature opinion."?

[_charity]

Won't work. You get caught with your pants down , you should pull them up before you start mocking somebody else.

Can't you guys just say, "Oops, I was wrong. Sorry. I will be more careful in reading the link provided before I jump off a bridge with a premature opinion."

Wow. Talk about hypocrisy. You did the exact same thing on the charitable contributions thread. You started slamming the RMH AZ for 'only spending 10%'. However, you clearly did not research this before deciding it was a-ok to slam them. Then, when I 'caught you with your pants down', you just completely ignored it. Couldn't you just have said "oops, I was wrong, sorry. I will be more careful in reading the link provided before I jump off a bridge with a premature opinion."?

I must have lost interest in the topic, or missed your post. I got the information off a website which monitors charitable organizations and the RM AZ appeared on their list of charities which were not expending their funds. If there was a legitimate reason for that, I apologize to them. I will also evaluate my reliance on the orgnaization which maintains that website.

[_Who Knows]

I must have lost interest in the topic, or missed your post. I got the information off a website which monitors charitable organizations and the RM AZ appeared on their list of charities which were not expending their funds. If there was a legitimate reason for that, I apologize to them. I will also evaluate my reliance on the orgnaization which maintains that website.

I'll accept that, though I must admit I'm a bit skeptical about you having 'missed my post'. It was on the first page, well before you 'lost interest' (though I would get rid of the last word).

[_evolving]

I was clearly drawn in by a Hoax -- Yes -- I am freely admitting that I still hold an un-healthy respect for Bishops, and to this day, I do not expect them to Lie, or create hoaxes to expose others lack of discernment, for their entertainment no less (way to go bob!)- it probably has something to do with my upbringing.. do I have egg on my face because I was drawn in -- I don't think so - I have a whole list of hoaxes I was once drawn in by, which I now see for what they are - a list of fairy tales, perpetuated by good people for hundreds of years.. but just hoaxes --

I am all together too trusting -- but on the flip side my hoax cycle is reducing - it only took me about 25 minutes once I posted the OP to uncover it --

for Charity - I just started a clock - I wonder how long you will believe in your current version of Book of Mormon Historicity, or that Treasure seeking was just a training period for Joseph Smith, or whatever mind numbing compartmentalization you have gone through to justify your belief in seer stones. now those are hoaxes worth tracking --

[_skippy the dead]

I really needed a good laugh this morning.

Someone posts a hoax. The first few posters on the thread didn't even care enough to read the link and that it was a hoax and jumped in with criticisms of a Mormon based on the hoax. I call it to their attention. And then they try to turn it around on me.

Won't work. You get caught with your pants down , you should pull them up before you start mocking somebody else.

Can't you guys just say, "Oops, I was wrong. Sorry. I will be more careful in reading the link provided before I jump off a bridge with a premature opinion."

The first few posters jumped in with criticisms of a Mormon based on the hoax? Let's take a quick look at how the thread progressed:

- Evolving posts the link with comments (I couldn't exactly tell if Evolving was in on the joke, myself)
- Sethbag takes a look, notes that it sounds bizarre and there's probably another side to it (he didn't swallow it whole)
- thestyleguy comes in, notes there's no arrest record and says something is fishy (also not buying it)
- I look at the link, see that the references to Crockett just don't seem to fit in (I didn't actually make it to the bottom), so I look up the source article on the Signal online, and of course it doesn't mention anybody throwing rocks at little girls, so I comment accordingly (the tongue-sticking-out emoticon was intended to indicate I figured out the joke)
- Blixa notes that it would have been more authentic if a simulated news clipper generator was used (no insults to Crockett there!)

So far, I don't see anybody jumping in with a criticism of Crockett in these "first few posters". What thread were you reading?? In fact, seems to me that most of us didn't find it believable at all, and that should be seen as favorable to Crockett, don't you think? Perhaps it's a good time for you to say "Oops, I was wrong. Sorry. I will be more careful in reading posts in thread before I jump off a bridge with my Mormon persecution complex."

[_karl61]

charity wrote

"And why am I supposed to cite an example when styleguy just shoots from the hip and accuses LDS of doing this without any examples?"


Who checked the county jail? who checked the news paper? Like I said on previous posts I seek the truth. Some just seek the feelings. Besides, there is nothing wrong with shooting from the hip if you hit your target.