Church Surveillance

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

Mister Scratch wrote:

Oaks, via Richards, admitted that BYU security had been engaged in tracking down and "staking out" homosexuals. Feel free to post the full-text of the article, Bob.


Do you possess the two articles you quote? Again, I charge you with citing sources as if they are primary. Because, I know for a fact that one of the sources does not support your assertion about Oaks admissions.


Really? But they're both related to the BYU spy ring....


Totally unrelated. The BYU spy ring concerned communists. Wilkinson was the President. The homosexual purge occurred when Oaks was the president. The two incidents are separated by many years. Or, perhaps you have become confused in the vernacular of Church controversies.

Hmmm..... I have to say, your claim that the spy ring was "student-run" may land you in some very hot rhetorical water, counselor.... This may be as grave a slip-up as your MMM article omission.


There was no MMM article omission. I don't know what you are talking about.

You are confused in your "spy ring" vernacular. The so-called "spy ring" had nothing to do with BYU security and was entirely student-run. You are confusing terms and incidents.

I continue to assert that you are extremely thinly-read. You possess Quinn's works (which except for the book on Clark ARE NOT PEER-REVIEWED) and seemingly nothing else -- in particular, two newspaper articles which don't support your contention about Oaks admissions. Your sterling rhetoric sometimes comes apart, and here and now is the time for that.
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Post by _Trevor »

Mister Scratch wrote:Yes; the documentation is all there. The Church itself has admitted to the existence of the SCMC. The Church itself has admitted to the BYU spy ring. And, further, we have Nehor here admitting that the Church "hunts down" people it wants to discipline. Thus, these claims of "tinfoil hats," and the general pooh-poohing away of stuff which has been admitted to by the Church itself, points to some very deep insecurity and worry on the part of TBMs. But what is the root of this worry? Is it a fear that outsiders will think badly of the Church? Fear that this kind of stuff genuinely exists within the Church (and in a secretive fashion to boot)? Or, is it a fear of having to acknowledge that they willingly sustain an organization that engages in this obviously questionable behavior?


Regardless of the facts of a particular case, I would say there is a definite "cloak and dagger" aspect to the LDS Church's image. Some of this suspicion is undeserved; some of it is well deserved. At the very least this warrants some suspicion on the part of people who quite publicly run afoul of the Church's standards and objectives, particularly when it comes to breaking the 11th commandment (thou shalt not publish). It seems pretty obvious to me that those who have absolutely no reason to fear Church discipline would not credit the seeming paranoia of apostates and those who break that 11th commandment.

But there are certain patterns in the LDS Church's behavior and image that could reasonably cause its critics to worry. Here is a list off the top of my head:

1) Danites: I don't think we need to worry about Danites, but what is worrisome is the precedent such people set for zealous Mormons who see it as their personal mission to protect the Church and its leadership.

2) Mountains Meadows Massacre: this is an excellent example of the kind of tragedy that once occurred when paranoia and zeal got the best of decent Mormons.

3) There is enough evidence to suggest that some folks, whether acting officially or unofficially, have taken it upon themselves to harass critics of the LDS Church. We know of occurrences on the net.

4) The Committee for Strengthening the Membership.

5) The Church practice of collecting all criticisms, perceived criticisms, or too independently minded publications. At times this has amounted to an orthodoxy patrol used to fire BYU professors and excommunicate independent thinkers.

6) Church cooperation with the government in collecting information on polygamists.

7) BYU administrators entrapping homosexuals and placing spies in classes to monitor the orthodoxy and political opinions of professors.

8) The government's tendency to recruit Mormons for the CIA, FBI, and NSA.

9) Foreign suspicion that Mormon missionaries work for a US intelligence agency.

10) Howard Hughes's use of Mormons for his personal security.

11) The similarity between Church security and the Secret Service, and the use of ex-FBI and ex-CIA Mormons in that capacity.

12) The involvement of prominent members like Ezra Taft Benson and Cleon Skousen in fringe, hyper-patriotic, and jingoistic political groups.

13) The common Mormon perception that a Mormon who publicly disagrees with a policy of the First Presidency or the Twelve is an "enemy" of the LDS Church.

14) The meddling of members of the Twelve in local disciplinary actions, and then ordering stake presidents to lie about said meddling.

15) Unusually close strictures on information about the LDS Church, even keeping things secret from its own members.

16) Church's efforts to monitor member-critics' activities online.

I am sure many more interesting things could be brought up. Not everything here can be laid directly at the feet of the LDS Church. Some of this is also about perceptions. But, to attribute unreasonable paranoia to those who suspect the LDS Church of cloak and dagger tactics is itself unreasonable. The LDS Church has definitely acquired such an image, and it is not surprising that some would fear the organization for that reason. In the movie Hoax, starring Richard Gere, the shadiest character in the main character's imagination was a Mormon. Is that simply anti-Mormonism at work? Maybe in part, but one has to ask what prompts such things. It doesn't come from thin air.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

rcrocket wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
Oaks, via Richards, admitted that BYU security had been engaged in tracking down and "staking out" homosexuals. Feel free to post the full-text of the article, Bob.


Do you possess the two articles you quote?


Do you? If so, why are you asking me to provide you with a pdf?

Again, I charge you with citing sources as if they are primary. Because, I know for a fact that one of the sources does not support your assertion about Oaks admissions.


The prove it.

Really? But they're both related to the BYU spy ring....


Totally unrelated. The BYU spy ring concerned communists. Wilkinson was the President. The homosexual purge occurred when Oaks was the president. The two incidents are separated by many years. Or, perhaps you have become confused in the vernacular of Church controversies.


This thread is about "Church Surveillance," Bob. Both articles pertain to this subject. The only confusion here seems to be emanating from you.

Hmmm..... I have to say, your claim that the spy ring was "student-run" may land you in some very hot rhetorical water, counselor.... This may be as grave a slip-up as your MMM article omission.


There was no MMM article omission. I don't know what you are talking about.

You are confused in your "spy ring" vernacular. The so-called "spy ring" had nothing to do with BYU security and was entirely student-run. You are confusing terms and incidents.


Ah, so you're referring very specifically to the attempt to ferret out "dissident" professors. Okey-doke, though I really see no problem in describing the "anti-homosexual" task force which engaged in use of electronic surveillance devices, warrantless searches, and stakes outs as a "spy ring." It doesn't really matter. There seem to have been other incidents in which "dissident" profs. were booted out thanks to "tattle-tales," or various other kinds of Church skullduggery.

I continue to assert that you are extremely thinly-read. You possess Quinn's works (which except for the book on Clark ARE NOT PEER-REVIEWED) and seemingly nothing else -- in particular, two newspaper articles which don't support your contention about Oaks admissions. Your sterling rhetoric sometimes comes apart, and here and now is the time for that.


The articles support my contention about the Oaks-related debacle. Feel free to prove me wrong, counselor.
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

Mister Scratch wrote:Particularly in light of the fact that you have provided no print sources for your claims regarding BYU spying, nor have you provided the names of these professors you supposedly interviewed.

Some interesting reading on the topic of BYU and homosexuals:

http://www.affirmation.org/learning/in_ ... .shtml#BYU

http://www.affirmation.org/memorial/hom ... yu_1.shtml

http://www.affirmation.org/memorial/hom ... yu_2.shtml
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

Scratch, you obviously do not possess the two newspaper articles you claim as primary sources. What follows this quote? "But, when President [Dallin] Oaks got involved, he said." Pres. Oak's response does not support your assertion of an admission of ethical lapses.

Why should I trust somebody who has only Quinn in her library, cites from it without attribution as if one has the primary source? Why, oh why?

The topic may be church surveillance, but you are using a term from the 1960s controversy -- "BYU Spy Ring." Cite me to a place where Quinn uses that term in the context of a purported purge of homosexuals. Just one page, please. You are thoroughly confused.
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »


Another good article, but very long (the part about BYU and Oaks is about 2/3rd's of the way down).

http://connellodonovan.com/abom.html#BM116
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

Trevor wrote:
Regardless of the facts of a particular case, I would say there is a definite "cloak and dagger" aspect to the LDS Church's image.


So much comes from lips of critics. I'll bite on your list.

1) Danites: I don't think we need to worry about Danites, but what is worrisome is the precedent such people set for zealous Mormons who see it as their personal mission to protect the Church and its leadership.


One of my ancestors was called to be a bodyguard for the Prophet and joined the Danites in the 1830s. His journal, John L. Butler, has been published. Nowhere after the Gallatin incident does he mention any functioning of the Danites. What is the best source (member of the church or former member of the church) who admitted to being a Danite in the Nauvoo or Utah period?

2) Mountains Meadows Massacre: this is an excellent example of the kind of tragedy that once occurred when paranoia and zeal got the best of decent Mormons.


No issue there. However, Brooks says that BY was not an accessory before the fact. Bagley says that he was, but cites only rumor.

3) There is enough evidence to suggest that some folks, whether acting officially or unofficially, have taken it upon themselves to harass critics of the LDS Church. We know of occurrences on the net.


What would you say is the very best example of that in the modern era? Something other than a sermon.

4) The Committee for Strengthening the Membership.


What is your very best evidence that it exists today to ferret out dissidents? Or that it has ever been used to ferret out and discipline dissidents (the latter may be easier to find, but I am really interested in the former).

5) The Church practice of collecting all criticisms, perceived criticisms, or too independently minded publications. At times this has amounted to an orthodoxy patrol used to fire BYU professors and excommunicate independent thinkers.


This is mandated by the D&C. Nibley wrote somewhere (I have lost the cite, unfortunately) that he would visit this archive and could see that it received little use. In other words, the D&C demands that the Church compile this stuff as a future testament, but then employs nobody to do anything about it. Cites to the contrary would be appreciated. I don't consider BYU professors doing independent research in these archives as significant.

6) Church cooperation with the government in collecting information on polygamists.


As well the Church cooperated with U.S. Attorney Howard Sumner in the MMM prosecution in 1876. If criminal activity is involved and children are at risk, I don't see what the problem might me.

7) BYU administrators entrapping homosexuals and placing spies in classes to monitor the orthodoxy and political opinions of professors.


According to the affected professors I've interviewed, at least three of whom are still angry over the incident, they see it as students doing the spying on professors and Wilkinson taking unfair advantage of it. That isn't the Church, and the Church righted that ship. As far as entrapment of homosexuals, BYU Security in the 1970s (as well as today) are commissioned peace officers in Utah. They are as legitimate a police force as the Provo P.D. At the same time this was going on, the Utah County Sheriff's Department was arresting homosexuals with undercover agents at rest stops on the freeway, a practice that continues in almost all states. When Oaks learned what was going on, he put a stop to it.

8) The government's tendency to recruit Mormons for the CIA, FBI, and NSA.


As well as Arab speakers and former military. I don't see how the church is to blame for this.

9) Foreign suspicion that Mormon missionaries work for a US intelligence agency.


And, so?

10) Howard Hughes's use of Mormons for his personal security.


The Church is to blame?

11) The similarity between Church security and the Secret Service, and the use of ex-FBI and ex-CIA Mormons in that capacity.


Hmm. The University of California also employs ex-cops, ex-CIA and ex-FBI.

12) The involvement of prominent members like Ezra Taft Benson and Cleon Skousen in fringe, hyper-patriotic, and jingoistic political groups.


I think that speaks to Mormon plurality more than anything else. As well a liberal democrat can be a member of the First Presidency. (Brown; Faust).

13) The common Mormon perception that a Mormon who publicly disagrees with a policy of the First Presidency or the Twelve is an "enemy" of the LDS Church.


Common Mormon perception is that Coke is forbidden. I look to the priesthood rather than what the news reporters report.

14) The meddling of members of the Twelve in local disciplinary actions, and then ordering stake presidents to lie about said meddling.


What is your best cite for the proposition that stake presidents were ordered to lie?

15) Unusually close strictures on information about the LDS Church, even keeping things secret from its own members.


What is the best-known secret kept from members?

Code: Select all

16) Church's efforts to monitor member-critics' activities online.


What would you say is the very best cite for this contention?
_LifeOnaPlate
_Emeritus
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:50 pm

Post by _LifeOnaPlate »

rcrocket wrote:
The Nehor wrote:Please stop calling me 'my dear'. It creeps me out.


Scratch is a woman. Deal with it.

Serious? I think I just might buy into that theory.
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*
_silentkid
_Emeritus
Posts: 1606
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:50 pm

Post by _silentkid »

LifeOnaPlate wrote:
rcrocket wrote:
The Nehor wrote:Please stop calling me 'my dear'. It creeps me out.


Scratch is a woman. Deal with it.

Serious? I think I just might buy into that theory.


Does it matter?
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

rcrocket wrote:Scratch, you obviously do not possess the two newspaper articles you claim as primary sources. What follows this quote? "But, when President [Dallin] Oaks got involved, he said." Pres. Oak's response does not support your assertion of an admission of ethical lapses.


It does. Oaks himself did not come out and say, "Yeah, we were guilty of this stuff, and we're sorry." Rather, he sent his lackey, Paul Richards, to go and deliver a statement to the press. I have stated elsewhere that Oaks', in essence, admitted that these "cloak and dagger" activities had occurred, and this NY Times article is evidence that, yes, in fact, Oaks acknowledged that this stuff was taking place. The fact that (according to Richards) Oaks supposedly said "Cut that out right now" is proof of this acknowledgment.
Post Reply