A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Juliann exists to worship the ground Daniel walks on.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 21373
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
harmony wrote:Juliann exists to worship the ground Daniel walks on.
Is there a secret infatuation going on there? Is Juliann married? Do you think she might fantasize about being sealed to Daniel in the hereafter?
.
.
.
.
.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Kishkumen wrote:harmony wrote:Juliann exists to worship the ground Daniel walks on.
Is there a secret infatuation going on there? Is Juliann married? Do you think she might fantasize about being sealed to Daniel in the hereafter?
.
.
.
.
.
I wasn't thinking of that, specifically. I just think she admires him to the point of worship, and she uses whatever means she has to smooth his path. Kinda like the handmaidens of old. I don't see the reciprocal. They may be friends; I doubt that they are close friends. They aren't in the same league intellectually (although Juliann's attempts at climbing that ladder are hilarious) or economically.
Juliann's first husband was a nonmember and he passed away following a lengthy illness. I doubt she's married again. She was a student at Claremont for a while, but I think that has gone the way of the economy.
As for the plural wife question, Juliann doesn't like polygamy much so I don't see her thirsting after that particular experience.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4231
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:24 pm
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Doctor Scratch wrote:Gee, for a volunteer organization that is hard-up for funding, this doesn't seem very appreciative! This in particular is a classic: "All donations must be anonymous as far as the public is concerned (you must do it because you believe in what SHIELDS is doing and want no glory for your financial assistance)."...
Doing more web arcive research, their "guidelines for accepting contributions" was added sometime after November 24 2001 and before April 7 2002. That is the same time period when the "In Affiliation with FAIR" logo was removed from the top of the SHIELDS home page.
http://web.archive.org/web/200111240457 ... nancia.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/200204071722 ... nancia.htm
2. All donations must be anonymous as far as the public is concerned (you must do it because you believe in what SHIELDS is doing and want no glory for your financial assistance).
3. All donations must have no strings attached. We will continue to run SHIELDS as we always have.
Clearly the Stan, Gene, and Malin want all of the glory and want to be able to run SHIELDS exactly the way they want to. They explicitly created this policy to refuse donations that would threaten their glory or control within a few months of the FAIR merger failing. Coincidence?
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
-Yuval Noah Harari
-Yuval Noah Harari
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 21373
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
harmony wrote:I just think she admires him to the point of worship, and she uses whatever means she has to smooth his path. Kinda like the handmaidens of old. I don't see the reciprocal. They may be friends; I doubt that they are close friends. They aren't in the same league intellectually (although Juliann's attempts at climbing that ladder are hilarious) or economically.
So, perhaps she hopes for some quid pro quo in the future. She treats Daniel like a king now, and then when the time comes for her to grab for more power, he might remember all of her past good services and so forth. Interesting.
I have no doubt that she is not Daniel's intellectual equal. Although I hate putting anyone down in this way, she reminds me more of Drippy intellectually. She has her pet topic(s?) she has read up on, but when she strays from that limited territory, the quality of her input plummets. Daniel is a well-rounded intellectual.
harmony wrote:Juliann's first husband was a nonmember and he passed away following a lengthy illness. I doubt she's married again. She was a student at Claremont for a while, but I think that has gone the way of the economy.
A moving story, and I don't like to see anyone suffer like this. Maybe she is now "a eunuch for the Kingdom of God" as it were. She has transferred all of the energy of healthy, human passions into her overlordship of MAD and so forth. And now her Claremont dreams have gone up in smoke? Sigh. It is a pity, since I was looking forward to her exposure to real scholarship bringing some balance to her views.
harmony wrote:As for the plural wife question, Juliann doesn't like polygamy much so I don't see her thirsting after that particular experience.
Well, clearly I was mistaken on that account. She has sublimated her passion for Daniel as the alpha male of Mopologetics. It expresses itself in how she "puts out" favors and protects his interests.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Kishkumen wrote:harmony wrote:I just think she admires him to the point of worship, and she uses whatever means she has to smooth his path. Kinda like the handmaidens of old. I don't see the reciprocal. They may be friends; I doubt that they are close friends. They aren't in the same league intellectually (although Juliann's attempts at climbing that ladder are hilarious) or economically.
So, perhaps she hopes for some quid pro quo in the future. She treats Daniel like a king now, and then when the time comes for her to grab for more power, he might remember all of her past good services and so forth. Interesting.
I have no doubt that she is not Daniel's intellectual equal. Although I hate putting anyone down in this way, she reminds me more of Drippy intellectually. She has her pet topic(s?) she has read up on, but when she strays from that limited territory, the quality of her input plummets. Daniel is a well-rounded intellectual.harmony wrote:Juliann's first husband was a nonmember and he passed away following a lengthy illness. I doubt she's married again. She was a student at Claremont for a while, but I think that has gone the way of the economy.
A moving story, and I don't like to see anyone suffer like this. Maybe she is now "a eunuch for the Kingdom of God" as it were. She has transferred all of the energy of healthy, human passions into her overlordship of MAD and so forth. And now her Claremont dreams have gone up in smoke? Sigh. It is a pity, since I was looking forward to her exposure to real scholarship bringing some balance to her views.harmony wrote:As for the plural wife question, Juliann doesn't like polygamy much so I don't see her thirsting after that particular experience.
Well, clearly I was mistaken on that account. She has sublimated her passion for Daniel as the alpha male of Mopologetics. It expresses itself in how she "puts out" favors and protects his interests.
Not all things are sexual, Kish. I think it feels more like comrades in a common cause, with Daniel as the 5 Star Wizard General and Juliann as the Keeper of the Keys to the Dungeon. Dinner at the High Table with the real movers and shakers every couple of years is all that's required for faithful service.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 21373
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
harmony wrote:Not all things are sexual, Kish. I think it feels more like comrades in a common cause, with Daniel as the 5 Star Wizard General and Juliann as the Keeper of the Keys to the Dungeon. Dinner at the High Table with the real movers and shakers every couple of years is all that's required for faithful service.
Sure, harmony.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 8025
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:44 pm
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Kevin Graham wrote:I get the distinct impression that the FAIR powers figured out that Stan is a nutcase and realized it would be better for their own credibility to distance themselves from him.
Possibly. That entire group strikes me as extremely paranoid. They had their own founder, Darryl Barksdale, removed from the organization. Later they sent Richrd Hopkins to outer darkness, claiming he had misused funds, and then of course, they banned me from the FAIR e-list at least two years before I went through apostasy because I made Allen Wyatt look like an absolute fool. One can tell from the way they run their web forum, and the manner in whch they immediately censor posts and muzzle posters they don't like, that they are extremely paranoid.
This has Juliann written all over it.
Kevin, do you by any chance know why Barksdale was forced out? Did the Mopologists have a legitimate reason for booting him, or was it more just a matter of juliann's whim?
It is odd (or fitting?) how the "upper tier," FARMS guys kind of just sit back, playing deus ex machina with all of this intrigue. That is: do they ever actually get their hands dirty in all of this, or do they just sort of sit back, letting them fight with one another, and the come piggybacking in on the "grunts" whenever their spite gland kicks into overdrive?
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 8025
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:44 pm
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Analytics wrote:Doctor Scratch wrote:Gee, for a volunteer organization that is hard-up for funding, this doesn't seem very appreciative! This in particular is a classic: "All donations must be anonymous as far as the public is concerned (you must do it because you believe in what SHIELDS is doing and want no glory for your financial assistance)."...
Doing more web arcive research, their "guidelines for accepting contributions" was added sometime after November 24 2001 and before April 7 2002. That is the same time period when the "In Affiliation with FAIR" logo was removed from the top of the SHIELDS home page.
http://web.archive.org/web/200111240457 ... nancia.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/200204071722 ... nancia.htm2. All donations must be anonymous as far as the public is concerned (you must do it because you believe in what SHIELDS is doing and want no glory for your financial assistance).
3. All donations must have no strings attached. We will continue to run SHIELDS as we always have.
Clearly the Stan, Gene, and Malin want all of the glory and want to be able to run SHIELDS exactly the way they want to. They explicitly created this policy to refuse donations that would threaten their glory or control within a few months of the FAIR merger failing. Coincidence?
Analytics,
Thanks for posting this stuff. It's fascinating. I think that you have pretty clearly established that there was a falling out of some kind between FAIR and SHIELDS. What was it, though? Was it simply a matter of control? Or, were there legitimate arguments pertaining to methods, or what?
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: A Glimpse at SHIELDS' Financing
Doctor Scratch wrote: Was it simply a matter of control? Or, were there legitimate arguments pertaining to methods, or what?
Perhaps it had to do with education and the assumed respect accompanies it that the FAIR/FARMS crew craves like an addict craves his drug of choice? What letters follow Stan and company's names? Any PhD's? In order to be admitted into the Top Tier, one must have a Phud behind one's name.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.