What motivates a man like Gerald Bradford

[_Equality]

Hmm. I just can't envision them doing that. For one thing, they have never seemed to believe that anything that do is a "hit piece." They don't even seem to understand if/when their rhetoric crosses over into problem territory. Plus, given the "leaks" at the Maxwell Institute, they would have to be wary of a case where an "enemy" already had a copy of the original on hand for the sake of comparison. If they tried to revise it and publish a "watered down" version, and this original copy were to surface, it would be tacit admission on their part that they were aware of their rotten tone, and knew they needed to address and eliminate it.

But I'm still going with my initial assessment, which is that they are afraid of pissing off a General Authority in the Q12. None of the other speculations re: trying to fix tone, etc., seems as likely to me.

Just my .02.

I actually agree with you. I just thought it was fun to draw the parallel to the Lost 116 Pages. They are tone deaf and wouldn't know which parts of it reasonable people would view as objectionable. Still, one wonders why, if they are so proud of it, they wouldn't find a way to publish it. If a GA told Smith not to do it, surely he could find a way to get it in the hands of someone who could, say, secretly send it to DCP's so-called Malevolent Stalker. These guys have got to be smart enough to let it leak out and maintain plausible deniability in the event that such illicit publication raises the hackles of the GA. I think perhaps they are actually embarrassed by the thing, and don't really want it out there. That way they can continue to call Dehlin and his suporters liars for suggesting it's a hit piece, and they can spin it as benign and scholarly, etc. while playing the victim card arguing they are the victims of the Dehlin/GA/Bradford conspiracy.

[Guest]

-

[Guest]

-

[_Doctor Scratch]

I think that they truly believed that it would be published at the MI, but later in the year. It is obvious that DCP viewed the issue of the review as ready to be published. From the correspondence they appear to view Bradford as being the only person standing in their way.

Ah, I'm not so sure about it. Bear in mind that DCP CC'ed some 18 additional people on the email. If an apostle had intervened, I would guess that this is something that Dan wouldn't want to get out. And if an apostle was involved, how likely is it that Prof. P. would have admitted this to all 18 people on the list? Something like this is, in my opinion, a "need to know" sort of thing.

I think he thought it would be published this year, maybe when things had died down. I also think they view FAIR as being a step down from MI at BYU. The review has more gravitas and appears to be more official than an online article at FAIR. If they still believed that it would be published in the review then I doubt they would post it online.

Agreed. But now that they've all been canned, there is nothing stopping them. It's been over a week since the emails went out, and yet still no sign whatsoever of the text. Several people have it, too: DCP definitely has a copy. Hamblin has read it. If I recall correctly, Schryver has read it. (And good grief, what's stopping Schryver from posting it?) Smith himself is a high-ranking FAIR participant, so he could post it, too.

At one point, John Dehlin said on the boards that he wrote to FAIR President Scott Gordon in order to advise him against publishing the article, saying that if he did, it would be in clear opposition to GA orders.

I don't think DCP saw this coming and so didn't plan for it.

Well, perhaps. My impression is that he suspected it would happen (hence his remarks about what his wife said), but was merely surprised that Bradford happened to do it at that particular time. He may have thought that he still had some usable tricks up his sleeve as well.

Even now I think the article will be published but through the new review that they create rather than through FAIR. I also think that the whole fiasco created enough material for them to create an appendix to the original article that could exceed the 100 original pages by itself. If on the other hand, it is never published or posted online, then I would have to agree with your evaluation above. I just think it's too soon to make that call yet. This happened quickly and unexpectedly their next move will be really revealing.

Thanks,

Hasa Diga Eebowai

Oh, I agree. It's just worthwhile/entertaining to speculate sometimes. Regardless, they could instantly prove us wrong by posting the piece.

ETA: It's worth pointing out that one of my best "informants" also told me that GAs were summoned to intervene in the FARMS "hit piece" on Rodney Meldrum. Meldrum himself disavowed any knowledge of GA involvement (in a conversation with Dr. Shades), but I was told that some of them were acting in concert with certain MI Mopologists (specifically Midgley).

[_lulu]

Hmm. I just can't envision them doing that. For one thing, they have never seemed to believe that anything that do is a "hit piece." They don't even seem to understand if/when their rhetoric crosses over into problem territory. Plus, given the "leaks" at the Maxwell Institute, they would have to be wary of a case where an "enemy" already had a copy of the original on hand for the sake of comparison. If they tried to revise it and publish a "watered down" version, and this original copy were to surface, it would be tacit admission on their part that they were aware of their rotten tone, and knew they needed to address and eliminate it.

But I'm still going with my initial assessment, which is that they are afraid of pissing off a General Authority in the Q12. None of the other speculations re: trying to fix tone, etc., seems as likely to me.

Just my .02.

I actually agree with you. I just thought it was fun to draw the parallel to the Lost 116 Pages. They are tone deaf and wouldn't know which parts of it reasonable people would view as objectionable. Still, one wonders why, if they are so proud of it, they wouldn't find a way to publish it. If a GA told Smith not to do it, surely he could find a way to get it in the hands of someone who could, say, secretly send it to DCP's so-called Malevolent Stalker. These guys have got to be smart enough to let it leak out and maintain plausible deniability in the event that such illicit publication raises the hackles of the GA. I think perhaps they are actually embarrassed by the thing, and don't really want it out there. That way they can continue to call Dehlin and his suporters liars for suggesting it's a hit piece, and they can spin it as benign and scholarly, etc. while playing the victim card arguing they are the victims of the Dehlin/GA/Bradford conspiracy.

Your's was my first reaction too. Mormons get all twitching on the topic of missing and alterable manuscripts.

[Guest]

For me the single biggest piece of evidence concerning an apostle's involvement in L'affaire Dehlin is the fact that the Greg Smith "hit piece" still hasn't been published. I mean, what's stopping them? It would take mere seconds to upload the thing to FAIR. Is Greg Smith worried that he won't have the same massive audience he enjoyed via the Review? Is he concerned that it won't carry the same air of authority? If the purpose of the piece was (as has been suggested) to show everyone that Dehlin is a "wolf in sheep's clothing," then you would think that these guys would feel a certain sense of urgency, and yet.... Nothing. They are probably terrified of getting in trouble with the Q12.

I am thinking it now resides on the same shelf as William Schryvers game changing forthcoming soon to be published piece about...well...I've kind of forgotten what it was going to be about but I'm sure it was something important...

It seems the hit piece was successful in removing a wolf in sheeps clothing...just not the one they aimed it at...

[Guest]

-

[_Equality]

It seems the hit piece was successful in removing a wolf in sheeps clothing...just not the one they aimed it at...

Brilliant.