TAL BACHMAN RESPONDS TO PRESIDENT KEYES

Post by **_Who Knows** » Fri May 02, 2008 6:46 pm

Kinda reminds me of when i told my brother about my 'doubts'. Surprisingly, he said "i feel the same way a lot of the time, and have the same doubts, but i choose to stay in the church - it's good for me and my family."

Of course, I'm not sure he would admit that publicly. And if i announced that he said that to the world, i'm sure he'd deny it.

Post by **_Trevor** » Fri May 02, 2008 6:56 pm

Who Knows wrote:Kinda reminds me of when I told my brother about my 'doubts'. Surprisingly, he said "I feel the same way a lot of the time, and have the same doubts, but I choose to stay in the church - it's good for me and my family."

Of course, I'm not sure he would admit that publicly. And if I announced that he said that to the world, I'm sure he'd deny it.

Thanks for bringing this into the conversation.

Post by **_Trevor** » Fri May 02, 2008 6:57 pm

bcspace wrote:And yet he doesn't. At best, Tal is maneuvering for an opening and they only reason Tal has no opening now is because he's been caught in a lie.

Caught in a lie? Hah! That's a good one.

Post by **_Tal Bachman** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:00 pm

I'm a little unsure what to do. My claims about what Pres. Keyes are not false or exaggerated, and Pres. Keyes knows it. Yet he is publicly claiming that I'm incorrectly reporting much of what he said that night, and I don't like being falsely accused of things anymore than anyone else. Yet I like Pres. Keyes, am grateful he was my SP, and don't want to further embarrass him or hurt his wife. So what am I supposed to do?

The truth is that Pres. Keyes made a couple of other comments that night that, at least since I laid claim to my original "Rosebud" RFM post, that I have never repeated in discussions about that meeting, because I always thought they might just be the camel-breaking straws for him if they were ever noised around - and my point has never been to embarrass him or hurt his wife, but only to tell others what happened to me, so that they can move on from the devastating experience of discovering their lives are built on a fraud.

But if Pres. Keyes really wants to have a big battle royale over this...what then? I don't want to have one of those, more for his sake than for mine (I don't have anything to lose, after all - members probably wouldn't believe it even if I had a videotape of the entire meeting). It's only Pres. Keyes that has something to lose, and...his wife. But I've never wanted to make them lose anything.

So what I would like is for Randy Keyes to stop claiming that I've misrepresented him, when I haven't (nor my wife).

By the way, that he should spend time in his letter complaining about some of the trivial issues he did ought to be a big tip-off to people trying to decide what happened that night. Another tip-off should be his phrase "this is my reality", for it was just that kind of language I heard a lot of that night: "for me, Mormonism is right, it's where I belong, but I don't dispute that another religion may be right for others", etc.

Another tip-off for folks ought to be that I wrote down in my online diary details of what he'd said as soon as I got home, when I was still very much considering staying in the church - I had no sinister motives; I was only shocked and confused about how to proceed. And in fact, one reason I ended up posting that diary entry, still considering becoming a T.S. Ferguson-type, under an alias, was to PROTECT Randy Keyes from possible controversy or church discipline. I even changed a couple of my personal details so that no one would know who he or I was.

Like I said, if Pres. Keyes really wants a battle royale over this, I guess that's up to him; but I feel only a sort of dread about it. He's the only one with something to lose, and unfortunately for him, his denials don't magically become reality just because he makes them. He did say what I mentioned he said. And he also said more. Does he really want to do battle? I sure hope not.

(Edited for typos)

Post by **_bcspace** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:01 pm

And yet he doesn't. At best, Tal is maneuvering for an opening and they only reason Tal has no opening now is because he's been caught in a lie.

Caught in a lie? Hah! That's a good one.

And the only logical conclusion. Tal wants to be free to speak about this event while demanding the SP to be quite. I wonder why? Time for Tal to do us common courtesy and put up or shut up.

Post by **_John Larsen** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:04 pm

Trevor wrote:
bcspace wrote:And yet he doesn't. At best, Tal is maneuvering for an opening and they only reason Tal has no opening now is because he's been caught in a lie.

Caught in a lie? Hah! That's a good one.

It is telling that when a critic and a Church official/apologist disagree, many apologists take it as prima facia evidence of a lie on the part of the critic. If you try to point out it is a matter of opinion/or interpretation--then there is a conspiracy of lies in their mind.

It is amazing that so many of them cannot tell the difference between an intellectual disagreement and fraud. It shows how corrupted their logical thought process as become. It does help preserve their siege mentality--for they are obviously surrounded by enemies who are out to get them through lies lies lies!

Post by **_Tal Bachman** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:04 pm

How daft you sound, BC. I don't want Pres. Keyes to keep quiet about the meeting. I just want him to stop falsely accusing me.

And I do feel that having some sort of battle over this would only increase the embarrassment and regret he may feel, and I don't see any reason for that.

Post by **_John Larsen** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:06 pm

bcspace wrote:
And yet he doesn't. At best, Tal is maneuvering for an opening and they only reason Tal has no opening now is because he's been caught in a lie.

Caught in a lie? Hah! That's a good one.

And the only logical conclusion. Tal wants to be free to speak about this event while demanding the SP to be quite. I wonder why? Time for Tal to do us common courtesy and put up or shut up.

Where has Tal demanded the SP to be quiet?

Post by **_mbeesley** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:09 pm

Tal Bachman wrote:But if Pres. Keyes really wants to have a big battle royale over this...

Seem like you're the one seeking the battle. You have reportedly described what you recall of the incident multiple times over the years. Apparently President Keyes was just recently apprised of your claims, and had a response published in a forum where it is not expected he will respond. And yet, here you are, responding, again.

Why don't you just give it a rest? You claim one thing. President Keyes has responded. Those who believe you will go on believing you. Those who believe President Keyes will go on believing him. The only thing you will accomplish in the long run is open yourself up to more accusations that you are a liar. I very much doubt President Keyes will respond again.

Grow up Tal.

Post by **_Mister Scratch** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:23 pm

Tal Bachman wrote:
But if Pres. Keyes really wants to have a big battle royale over this...what then? I don't want to have one of those, more for his sake than for mine (I don't have anything to lose, after all - members probably wouldn't believe it even if I had a videotape of the entire meeting). It's only Pres. Keyes that has something to lose, and...his wife. But I've never wanted to make them lose anything.

Dear Tal---

I vote that you go ahead and "out" him entirely. If he wants to continue portraying you as a spin-meister and a liar, then why should you feel any obligation to continue protecting him? I mean, you can be sure that if the situations were reversed---i.e., if DCP or some other LDS defender had some "dirt" on you---they would be trumpeting it up and down the Internet. (Heck, not all that long ago we observed incidents in which a pair of apologists attempted to "out" and tattle tale on one of the posters here.) Think about it Tal: how much crap from the folks at MAD have you had to put up with over the years? The endless jabs about your music career, the "Tall Tales Bachman" jokes.... If you don't fully "out" Keyes, then DCP and other apologists are going to continue using this affair as a means of tarring your character. They will continue to use it as a means of claiming that you "misrepresent" the truth. Thus, it seems to me that you have no choice but to fully come clean with all the details.