Boy, was I wrong

[_wenglund]

Here's a common "forecast" (as Sock Puppet would call it) from mobsters: "Pay your protection money or you may find yourself wearing cement shoes at the bottom of the Hudson River."

No threat there...LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

Wade, where have I threatened anyone?

[_Chap]

Half a minute.

Wasn't wenglund supposed to show us evidence that someone threatened the Maxwell Institute? Instead he seems to be modulating into an attempt to demonstrate that Schryver was threatened by people pointing out that sooner or later someone would notice his nasty posting style and take a dislike to it in a way that might impact on his plans.

Where is the evidence of a threat to the Maxwell Institute?

[_beastie]

Here's a common "forecast" (as Sock Puppet would call it) from mobsters: "Pay your protection money or you may find yourself wearing cement shoes at the bottom of the Hudson River."

No threat there...LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

There is no comparison to the predictions several of us made with "pay your protection money or you may find yourself wearing cement shoes at the bottom of the Hudson River."

The fact that you seem to think the statements some of us made are comparable to this demonstrates the depth of your delusion on this issue.

I have no idea why you are so emotionally invested in this that you've arrived to that point of self-delusion, but it is quite clear that you have.

So if the LDS church leaders say "if the lax morals of our country do not reverse, our country will experience severe consequences", is that the same as saying "pay your protection money or you may find yourself wearing cement shoes at the bottom of the Hudson River?"

[_beastie]

Then it should be relatively easy to answer my CFR. Good luck with that. (Hint: I must warn you in advance that, as you may recall, I am the ultimate expert of what I am trying to do, and I can assure you that you are seriously mistaken, as usual--not that you are capable of wrapping your mind around such things.)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

No need to reinvent the wheel.

viewtopic.php?p=462375#p462375

Of course, you could follow the example of other defenders of the faith and assert that "being the ultimate expert of what you're trying to do" gives you carte blanche to ignore everything you've stated on the subject. If you're really desperate, you can also demand that your past words not even be quoted.

[_beastie]

Half a minute.

Wasn't wenglund supposed to show us evidence that someone threatened the Maxwell Institute? Instead he seems to be modulating into an attempt to demonstrate that Schryver was threatened by people pointing out that sooner or later someone would notice his nasty posting style and take a dislike to it in a way that might impact on his plans.

Where is the evidence of a threat to the Maxwell Institute?

Oh, Wade, in his usual style, is interpreting the fact that some of us predicted a blow-back on the MI if they associated themselves with Will as a "threat."

It's ridiculous, of course, but this is Wade we're talking about here.

[_Yoda]

Wade, I would really like your response to my questions here:

Same here. I have not threatened anyone. I have expressed my opinion and shown support of MI's decision in this matter. Considering that I was one of the women Will insulted, I think that if anyone is justified to comment, I am.

Please be specific in the types of threats you are referring to, Wade. Since you mentioned my name...what threats have I supposedly made?

And, frankly, what do you think that I could say or do that could possibly influence MI? I have absolutely no connection with their organization whatsoever. Yes, I am an instructor in Higher Education, but in a completely different state, at a completely different school.

My desire in this whole instance has never been to squash Will's publishing efforts. Frankly, I was disappointed that Will's work was not going to be published.

My concern has always been with Will's behavior in an official capacity as an LDS apologist, representing the LDS Church. The LDS Church is MY church, Wade. I have a right to voice my opinions on how those who represent MY church act in a public arena.

Will failed to behave in an appropriate manner AS AN APOLOGIST. My desire as far as action with Will was three-fold:

1. I wanted to see him chastised by those whom he respected and would actually listen to.

2. I wanted him to acknowledge that his actions were inappropriate and apologize publicly.

3. I wanted him to refrain from future inappropriateness.

Frankly, the only action that I have seen come to pass is #1. And, unfortunately, it doesn't sound like Will actually took the chastisement to heart.

It is unfortunate.

As far as MI's decision not to publish Will's work is concerned....I don't agree with their decision, but I do respect it. I think that MI was looking out for their organization's reputation as part of BYU, which is directly tied to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

As I have stated previously, I sincerely hope that Will is able to find another venue for his publication. And, if his work is, indeed substantial, I am sure that won't be a problem.

So, Wade....now that I have repeated for the umpteenth time, my stance in all of this....Why don't you do me the courtesy of answering MY questions?

Who is it that you seem to think I threatened? Why?

Do you have so little faith in MI that you doubt they could investigate this incident appropriately? They don't strike me as the kind of organization that would make a haphazard decision.

Do you really believe that we, at MDB, have such a strong power of influence that we could actually trick writers and administrators employed by Brigham Young University? I, for one, trust their abilities. Why don't you?

Also, how do you explain that staunch defenders of the faith, some who are published and are familiar with BYU and MI agree with the evidence presented in Jack's thread?

[_wenglund]

One finally word before I take off for the weekend. I don't wish to disturb Kevin while he is tilting windmills, and so I was wonder if someone would kindly take him aside and let him know that my objective in posting the various comments wasn't just to lend credence to the perception of a threat, but also to demonstrate that this surreal affair was about more than just getting an apology and improving MD dialogue.

Yes, he should have known that from my clear English statements before, but evidently he is having more than a few challenges grasping simple English, and so I am not sure what language to suggest you use to try and get through to him. Good luck.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_MrStakhanovite]

I don't think Wade responds to people who use Ipads and frankly, I don't blame him.

[_Chap]

Half a minute.

Wasn't wenglund supposed to show us evidence that someone threatened the Maxwell Institute? Instead he seems to be modulating into an attempt to demonstrate that Schryver was threatened by people pointing out that sooner or later someone would notice his nasty posting style and take a dislike to it in a way that might impact on his plans.

Where is the evidence of a threat to the Maxwell Institute?

Oh, Wade, in his usual style, is interpreting the fact that some of us predicted a blow-back on the MI if they associated themselves with Will as a "threat."

It's ridiculous, of course, but this is Wade we're talking about here.

Thanks for helping - of course, I need to take the advice of Marcus Aurelius and ask myself why I am frustrated by wenglund's slippery dialectic. Did I not expect him to behave like that?

Foolish me for finding him provoking. One might as well blame beans for causing flatulence.