Response to Dan Peterson
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:54 pm
Dan, since I know you're reading, I'll go ahead and respond to your post at MAD.
Dan, you know very well this is no “vendetta.” I have questions that need answers. I have been critical of all scholars in the Church, some more than others. I have been a uncritical follower of BYU/FARMS “scholarship” for years, so it is natural that I take a keen interest in uncovering errors I have come across. I know you don’t like it, but if I am wrong you shouldn’t be worried. If I am right, you should welcome the criticism and try to do better. What you shouldn't do is persist in this relentless victim hood complex. The fact is you are the most outspoken of all the scholars. My interest in the Gee/Ritner fiasco is grounded in my current struggle with the Book of Abraham. The fact that it was you, and not Gee, who was broadcasting for six years this rumor that effectively discredits anything Ritner has to say about the Book of Abraham, is a circumstance that I didn’t ask for. It is something you chose to do.
In short, my email to Ritner was about getting to the truth about his bias towards Gee. It wouldn’t have mattered if it was you, Gee, Hamblin, Bokovoy or Charity who was spreading the rumor over the years. I still would have emailed Ritner to verify the information. I won’t apologize for that. I don’t regret it. My only crime here is to search for truth; something I always understood to be a bedrock principle in Mormonism. I guess not.
Oh really? What other “episodes” have there been? You must be referring to the early debates involving Islamic issues, which were sparked the moment you “traduced” me for being spiritually and intellectually deficient (while hiding by the pseudonym “Free Thinker”). Do you want your audience to know the “personal history” behind that incident as well? Didn’t think so.
Dan I provided links to every single citation I provided. How the heck could I have misrepresented you when I merely quoted you? You condemn yourself with your own words. It will be left up to the readers to decide if you have been misrepresented. They can read it for themselves, and don’t need you to make up their minds for them. Well, I assume they don’t anyway.
Well just listen to yourself. You sound mad. I don’t know how else to say this, but be a man and take responsibility for your own actions and stop trying to blame me for your errors; even if you turn out to be right and Ritner has no case, it was obviously an error on your part to broadcast these credibility-damaging rumors about a world class scholar. But there is no campaign against you. Your six year stretch of discrediting Ritner based on a private experience you heard about second-hand, is the closest thing that resembles a campaign.
There is no desire to see you sued. Not on my part anyway. Ritner’s comments to that effect surprised me. As far as I know you were right all along and Ritner really was some rabid anti-Mormon who was just being mean to Gee because he was LDS. But hell Dan, I could sue you myself if that is all I wanted. After all, like you said, it wouldn’t matter a hill of beans if I had a case. You’d still have to give up time and money and suffer professionally, which, according to you and your disciples, is all I am after. Of course, this is all absurd. And why don’t you mosey on up the board and see what your buddy sent to the moderators. You’ll find that John Gee has threatened to sue any critic who calls him incompetent.
Oh wait a minute, no you won’t read that because the MAD moderators decided to EDIT THAT PART OUT once Ritner’s email was made public. Why did they edit it out? Because the board decided to act though lawsuits would be the last thing any of them would consider. Can’t really complain about a possible Ritner lawsuit when you have Gee threatening to sue any common Joe who calls him incompetent now can you? You guys really are a sad bunch of hypocrites.
Speaking of hypocrisy, it wasn’t too long ago I made a comment about Kent Jackson’s with drawl in criticizing Nibley. Within hours you posted an email from Jackson which tried to call me a liar. Do you deny this? It is all right there in black and white for people to verify. Don’t you find this hypocritical in the slightest? You don’t think non-scholars and non-academics have lives that are just as real and precious as your own? Do you think my wife doesn’t occasionally pop on here to read what people say about me? My family back home, the LDS family who introduced me to the Church, my ward members, etc? I can assure you that your negative comments about me over the years have had more of an impact on my life than my comments could ever have on yours. But hey, real people and real lives only matter when we are talking about professors in the field, right?
What’s with the quotes? You’re not citing me, so why pretend this is something I said?
You’ve had more power than you’re willing to admit. If you have the power to discredit him in LDS circles, you can have an impact on his career. I mean good grief, look how you are acting and nobody has said anything as offensive as what you have been saying for years about Ritner. Of course in your defense you’re only going by what Gee has told you. How does it feel to finally be a victim to Gee’s lies? How does it feel to know that Ritner has saved email correspondence proving that it was Ritner who tried to get someone else to do the job, and that Gee simply did what Ritner had suggested he do? You know the repercussions if this turns out to be true – which it probably will – but you cannot blame me for your premature gloating about how your buddy was smart enough to “successfully” have Ritner “removed” from his position.
You’ve hidden behind numerous monikers just the same. In fact, the first time you started spreading this rumor you were posting as “logic chopper.” You’ve posted using three different names on my forum and only God knows how many on RFM.
According to Ritner, mind you, who is actually in a position to say so. You have been trotting through the forums ridiculing anyone who would challenge you on this point because, as you put it, “it helps to actually know what you’re talking about.” And you assured everyone you knew what you were talking about. Is Ritner not in a unique position to say what actually happened?
Then I'm sorry "defending" John Gee was more important than considering the welfare of your children. Are you going to tell your kids it was my fault, or will you at that point finally admit you were irresponsible? Somehow I doubt your inheritance-free children will blame me.
Enough with the drama. If all I wanted was you sued, then I’d do it myself. As you said, it wouldn’t matter if I had a case or not.
And only a fool would put that kind of money into a case that is such a sure thing. The case with Van Gorden is completely different than anything that would ensue from the Ritner fiasco.
Yes we know this song too well. “Forever persecuted, never held accountable.” This must be the slogan for BYU professors. You probably have it nailed above your office doors.
I find "Kevin Graham's" personal vendetta against me (and, increasingly, against any and all believing Latter-day Saint scholars) entirely unaccountable.
Dan, you know very well this is no “vendetta.” I have questions that need answers. I have been critical of all scholars in the Church, some more than others. I have been a uncritical follower of BYU/FARMS “scholarship” for years, so it is natural that I take a keen interest in uncovering errors I have come across. I know you don’t like it, but if I am wrong you shouldn’t be worried. If I am right, you should welcome the criticism and try to do better. What you shouldn't do is persist in this relentless victim hood complex. The fact is you are the most outspoken of all the scholars. My interest in the Gee/Ritner fiasco is grounded in my current struggle with the Book of Abraham. The fact that it was you, and not Gee, who was broadcasting for six years this rumor that effectively discredits anything Ritner has to say about the Book of Abraham, is a circumstance that I didn’t ask for. It is something you chose to do.
In short, my email to Ritner was about getting to the truth about his bias towards Gee. It wouldn’t have mattered if it was you, Gee, Hamblin, Bokovoy or Charity who was spreading the rumor over the years. I still would have emailed Ritner to verify the information. I won’t apologize for that. I don’t regret it. My only crime here is to search for truth; something I always understood to be a bedrock principle in Mormonism. I guess not.
(This is merely the latest episode.)
Oh really? What other “episodes” have there been? You must be referring to the early debates involving Islamic issues, which were sparked the moment you “traduced” me for being spiritually and intellectually deficient (while hiding by the pseudonym “Free Thinker”). Do you want your audience to know the “personal history” behind that incident as well? Didn’t think so.
I am being traduced, and my character and behavior grossly misrepresented.
Dan I provided links to every single citation I provided. How the heck could I have misrepresented you when I merely quoted you? You condemn yourself with your own words. It will be left up to the readers to decide if you have been misrepresented. They can read it for themselves, and don’t need you to make up their minds for them. Well, I assume they don’t anyway.
It seems, moreover, that I'm now in a "meltdown,"
Well just listen to yourself. You sound mad. I don’t know how else to say this, but be a man and take responsibility for your own actions and stop trying to blame me for your errors; even if you turn out to be right and Ritner has no case, it was obviously an error on your part to broadcast these credibility-damaging rumors about a world class scholar. But there is no campaign against you. Your six year stretch of discrediting Ritner based on a private experience you heard about second-hand, is the closest thing that resembles a campaign.
There is no desire to see you sued. Not on my part anyway. Ritner’s comments to that effect surprised me. As far as I know you were right all along and Ritner really was some rabid anti-Mormon who was just being mean to Gee because he was LDS. But hell Dan, I could sue you myself if that is all I wanted. After all, like you said, it wouldn’t matter a hill of beans if I had a case. You’d still have to give up time and money and suffer professionally, which, according to you and your disciples, is all I am after. Of course, this is all absurd. And why don’t you mosey on up the board and see what your buddy sent to the moderators. You’ll find that John Gee has threatened to sue any critic who calls him incompetent.
Oh wait a minute, no you won’t read that because the MAD moderators decided to EDIT THAT PART OUT once Ritner’s email was made public. Why did they edit it out? Because the board decided to act though lawsuits would be the last thing any of them would consider. Can’t really complain about a possible Ritner lawsuit when you have Gee threatening to sue any common Joe who calls him incompetent now can you? You guys really are a sad bunch of hypocrites.
Speaking of hypocrisy, it wasn’t too long ago I made a comment about Kent Jackson’s with drawl in criticizing Nibley. Within hours you posted an email from Jackson which tried to call me a liar. Do you deny this? It is all right there in black and white for people to verify. Don’t you find this hypocritical in the slightest? You don’t think non-scholars and non-academics have lives that are just as real and precious as your own? Do you think my wife doesn’t occasionally pop on here to read what people say about me? My family back home, the LDS family who introduced me to the Church, my ward members, etc? I can assure you that your negative comments about me over the years have had more of an impact on my life than my comments could ever have on yours. But hey, real people and real lives only matter when we are talking about professors in the field, right?
since my crusade to "destroy the career" of Robert Ritner
What’s with the quotes? You’re not citing me, so why pretend this is something I said?
(whom I don't know and have never met, toward whom I have not the slightest personal animosity, and over whose career I have no power whatsoever)
You’ve had more power than you’re willing to admit. If you have the power to discredit him in LDS circles, you can have an impact on his career. I mean good grief, look how you are acting and nobody has said anything as offensive as what you have been saying for years about Ritner. Of course in your defense you’re only going by what Gee has told you. How does it feel to finally be a victim to Gee’s lies? How does it feel to know that Ritner has saved email correspondence proving that it was Ritner who tried to get someone else to do the job, and that Gee simply did what Ritner had suggested he do? You know the repercussions if this turns out to be true – which it probably will – but you cannot blame me for your premature gloating about how your buddy was smart enough to “successfully” have Ritner “removed” from his position.
has been exposed by Senhor "Graham" (a.k.a. "dartagnan," etc.)
You’ve hidden behind numerous monikers just the same. In fact, the first time you started spreading this rumor you were posting as “logic chopper.” You’ve posted using three different names on my forum and only God knows how many on RFM.
since my allegedly unethical behavior has now
According to Ritner, mind you, who is actually in a position to say so. You have been trotting through the forums ridiculing anyone who would challenge you on this point because, as you put it, “it helps to actually know what you’re talking about.” And you assured everyone you knew what you were talking about. Is Ritner not in a unique position to say what actually happened?
(and this is not quite a joke, at least not a very funny one) placed my home, my life savings, and the future inheritance of my children at potential risk from a law suit on the part of Professor Ritner.
Then I'm sorry "defending" John Gee was more important than considering the welfare of your children. Are you going to tell your kids it was my fault, or will you at that point finally admit you were irresponsible? Somehow I doubt your inheritance-free children will blame me.
Enough with the drama. If all I wanted was you sued, then I’d do it myself. As you said, it wouldn’t matter if I had a case or not.
("Graham"/"dartagnan" mocks my concern at this -- and minimizes his responsibility as a sower of strife -- on the grounds that I have nothing to fear if I'm innocent. But this is not true. Even a successful legal defense can cost tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars. My successful defense against the Rev. Kurt Van Gorden certainly did.)
And only a fool would put that kind of money into a case that is such a sure thing. The case with Van Gorden is completely different than anything that would ensue from the Ritner fiasco.
I'm accustomed to having my career, my professional competence, my character, and even the quality …
Yes we know this song too well. “Forever persecuted, never held accountable.” This must be the slogan for BYU professors. You probably have it nailed above your office doors.