From My Informant: DCP & Schryver Ordered to Stand Down

[_Paul Osborne]

Your assignment is simple. Do intertain us all. Write a one paragraph apologetic excuse for the following picture.

Uh....someone felt their glasses needed augmentation?

No, I don't think that is what President Kimball was thinking, bcspace. Your lack of faith in the vision of the First Presidency is just what I wanted to hear before retiring for the night. Thank you for the pleasure.

Paul O

[_bcspace]

And my "informant" has been saying for close to a year now that the apologists were being ordered to "Turn Chapel" by the Brethren. In light of all that, this seems like yet more confirmation as to the veracity of the allegations.

According to my own informants at the CoB, some of them want me to present my hypothesis on evolution and why it fits with LDS doctrine in the form of writing an article for the Ensign.

Still, I urge skepticism and caution.

This is very good advice for those of you without non-official cover.

No, I don't think that is what President Kimball was thinking, bcspace.

His use of a magnifying glass proves it is exactly what he is thinking at the moment.

[_Paul Osborne]

His use of a magnifying glass proves it is exactly what he is thinking at the moment.

No, bcspace. The check the church handed over to Mark Hoffman was the end result to poor Kimball's fried brain cells.

Do you think that will ever register in your little brain?

Paul O

[_bcspace]

His use of a magnifying glass proves it is exactly what he is thinking at the moment.

No, bcspace. The check the church handed over to Mark Hoffman was the end result to poor Kimball's fried brain cells.

Do you think that will ever register in your little brain?

So what need to provide apology for?

[_The Nehor]

Again one of Scratch's 'most reliable' informants has information that Scratch refuses to commit on. One wonders how much trust Scratch puts in his 'less reliable' informants.

The reason I consider this particular informant "reliable" is because his/her allegations have been the sort of things that would be remarkably easy for the Mopologists to disprove via real, solid, concrete evidence.

Yes, it would. Of course you're such a vapid idiot you then twist the evidence and go off on another tangent and throw out a new accusation. What would be the point?

And yet they never do. For instance, it was alleged that FARMS would suffer heavy financial cutbacks. All DCP had to do in order to dispel the rumors was post the MI's budget. Did he do that? No.

Mostly because you have no right to have access to the budget. You can prove to me that you're not the overweight WOW-addicted nutcase I think you are very easily by posting a picture of yourself, sending me all your credit card and bank statements, and providing the testimony of three qualified mental health experts declaring you sane.

Yet you haven't....why? All you need do is provide real, solid, concrete evidence.

Later, it was claimed that FAIR president Scott Gordon met with Elder Oaks. Did they meet? Yes, they did--a fact which the apologists admitted after dodging and denying for close to 72 hours.

Your standard intentional misunderstanding of the actual events.

Now we get a claim that Schryver and DCP have been forbidden by the Brethren from getting into anything resembling a discussion on MDB. This would be stunningly easy to prove false.

Yes, all they'd need to satisfy you would be round the clock video recordings of all the brethren and the apologists in question to show that no communication of that type ever happened. You'd also probably need sworn peer-reviewed testimony of all their friends and loved ones that were there. Even then I'd expect you'd say the communication was non-verbal even if they never met. You're crazy enough.

The 'stunningly easy to prove false' would be simple for the average person to accept. They would just say it never happened and, absent evidence to the contrary, accept that. You have proven time and time again that you will take a denial as additional evidence. Hence the whole 'you being insane' thing.

But with every minute, hour, day, and week that goes by, my "informant"'s claims receive more and more validation.

As do my theories about your mental health.

I'm happy for the claims to be proven false, but for whatever reason, the apologists refuse to do that.

Because they're tired of trying to prove a negative to you, a difficult or impossible task. Particularly when dealing with an illogical and insane nitwit such as yourself.

Even you would probably have given up due to public scorn if you didn't have a pack of simpering lackeys so desperate to justify their hatred that they treat your insane ramblings as plausible.

Carry on my deranged friend, carry on.

[_Joseph]

The reason lds-inc is telling these two to back off is that another 'informant' has told the Brethren they both have ordered Chad Hardy's Mormon Men on a Mission Calendar.
Boyd and the boys don't want them in public if they may 'lust in their heart' or have un-named tendencies that are or are not inborn.

[_schreech]

Yes, it would. Of course you're such a vapid idiot you then twist the evidence and go off on another tangent and throw out a new accusation. What would be the point?

Mostly because you have no right to have access to the budget. You can prove to me that you're not the overweight WOW-addicted nutcase I think you are very easily by posting a picture of yourself, sending me all your credit card and bank statements, and providing the testimony of three qualified mental health experts declaring you sane.

Yet you haven't....why? All you need do is provide real, solid, concrete evidence.

Your standard intentional misunderstanding of the actual events.

Yes, all they'd need to satisfy you would be round the clock video recordings of all the brethren and the apologists in question to show that no communication of that type ever happened. You'd also probably need sworn peer-reviewed testimony of all their friends and loved ones that were there. Even then I'd expect you'd say the communication was non-verbal even if they never met. You're crazy enough.

The 'stunningly easy to prove false' would be simple for the average person to accept. They would just say it never happened and, absent evidence to the contrary, accept that. You have proven time and time again that you will take a denial as additional evidence. Hence the whole 'you being insane' thing.

As do my theories about your mental health.

Because they're tired of trying to prove a negative to you, a difficult or impossible task. Particularly when dealing with an illogical and insane nitwit such as yourself.

Even you would probably have given up due to public scorn if you didn't have a pack of simpering lackeys so desperate to justify their hatred that they treat your insane ramblings as plausible.

Carry on my deranged friend, carry on.

Is this what 30+ years of virginity does to a person? sad...so much hostility and anger when someone suggests that the organization that has denied you sexual fulfillment might be a hoax...its got to be even more frustrating knowing that the founder of your abstinence base pseudo-religion got freaky with any woman that would fall for the "flaming sword" spiel...I, unfortunately, know several single Mormons who are too old to attend the singles wards in their area (my own brother included)....they all seem so bitter and angry (much like yourself)...I am sad for you....

[_Joseph]

The real reason some are way over 30 and still not married to a 'daughter of zion' is because they are on Boyd K Packers 'sh*t list* for their inclinations, even though no one knows if this is a choice or is inborn.

Look carefully at those like the dirty old man poster who has never been married and you will probably see the longings whenever he sees old Walter Brennan movies.

[_schreech]

The real reason some are way over 30 and still not married to a 'daughter of zion' is because they are on Boyd K Packers 'sh*t list* for their inclinations, even though no one knows if this is a choice or is inborn.

Look carefully at those like the dirty old man poster who has never been married and you will probably see the longings whenever he sees old Walter Brennan movies.

The thought that he might be a closeted homosexual makes me even sadder for him...I wonder if my brother has homosexual tendencies as well...He is trying to adhere to the standards of the LDS "church" but its obvious that it is making him miserable...he has even turned down dates with several non-lds women who where very interested (and hot) because he couldn't take them to the temple...He hates when i suggest that the LDS church is based on a work of fiction and that the founders where nothing more than a bunch of opportunists using religion to further their own desires...wonder why?

[_The Nehor]

Is this what 30+ years of virginity does to a person? sad...so much hostility and anger when someone suggests that the organization that has denied you sexual fulfillment might be a hoax...its got to be even more frustrating knowing that the founder of your abstinence base pseudo-religion got freaky with any woman that would fall for the "flaming sword" spiel...I, unfortunately, know several single Mormons who are too old to attend the singles wards in their area (my own brother included)....they all seem so bitter and angry (much like yourself)...I am sad for you....

I'm really interested to know what studies you have that observing that illogical idiocy is idiotic relates to the observer's recent sexual activity.

Of course this is really an inane insult that amounts to:

"I have no idea how to rebut what you said but I'm guessing you haven't had sex lately. Hurf! Durf!"

Truly a flaccid argument. I'm guessing that this flaccidity is not limited to your arguments.