William Hamblin is a Pathetic Coward

[_Kevin Graham]

http://mormonscriptureexplorations.word ... -strategy/

Defamation: The Apostate Grand Strategy Jul 13
by Hamblin of Jerusalem

Defamation of the church and its members is hardly anything new. It began, in fact, before the church had even been formally organized in 1830, and has continued more or less unabated until today (see, for example, Givens, Viper on the Hearth, 1997). The current political campaign sometimes includes a subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) anti-Mormon undertones.

As I was walking on my way to class today, my department chairman laughingly told me he had received letters from several people denouncing me regarding the recent scandal at the Maxwell Institute–”the blogosphere is afire” he chuckled, adding he had ignored the letters. I suspect the same, or similar letters have also been written to my dean and the university president, and perhaps even a general authority.

What I find interesting about this brief encounter is that it represents what seems to have become a new standard operating procedure of apostates and anti-Mormons. If anyone dares to criticize them, publish a negative review, respond to their claims, or stand up to their attacks against the church and its members, the new standard apostate tactic is to relentlessly defame that person on their message boards, and to send defamatory letters to general authorities, work supervisors, editors, journalists–anyone who might listen to them. Their clear goal in this matter is to silence their critics by whatever means possible.

These letters are always anonymous and/or secret. Their victim rarely knows what is said about him by the apostates. The victim likewise has no chance to respond to the defamation. The apostates and anti-Mormons don’t, in fact want to engage the issues and ideas of their critics; their goal is to suppress and censor the publication of ideas they dislike, while defaming the authors. Indeed, the last thing they want is for the issues discussed openly and publicly in the marketplace of ideas. They rarely respond to the actual arguments; instead they claim their critics are nothing more than ad hominem bullies and liars.

They continue to do this because they believe these tactics have been successful in the past year. They have done it to Will Schryver, Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, and are now trying it on me. Undoubtedly anyone else who dares criticize them will be subjected to similar tactics in the future, because the apostates believe their tactics work. And perhaps they do.

On the other hand, I have obviously been critical of Jerry Bradford’s activities at the Maxwell Institute. However, I published my criticisms under my own name in a public forum, to which Bradford has had a full opportunity to respond if he’d like. I sent no letters to Bradford’s superiors at work, nor to any general authorities. I would never think of doing so. This simply represents a serious difference of opinion regarding the policies of the Maxwell Institute, playing out as an extended open public rational discourse and argument, not secret attempts at censorship and defamation.

My concern is not about public criticism of me by apostates and anti-Mormons. That is an integral part of the academic enterprise. The problem is the secret (and often anonymous) defamation of people through poison pen letters sent to general authorities, work supervisors, or journalists designed to suppress debate and censor and silence people who disagree with and criticize the apostates. In my opinion, these practices need to be publicly exposed and vigorously opposed.

[_beastie]

Why does he assume that it's "apostates and anti-mormons" writing these letters? There have been plenty of faithful Mormons who also object to the old-school tactics, and have expressed that dissatisfaction. In fact, I would tend to assume they are the letter-writers, because I doubt enough apostates care that much about it. For me, personally, it's mainly been entertainment.

And, given the history of personal attacks with the old-schoolers, there's a good reason to remain anonymous in these criticisms.

[_Kevin Graham]

Why does he assume that it's "apostates and anti-mormons" writing these letters? There have been plenty of faithful Mormons who also object to the old-school tactics, and have expressed that dissatisfaction. In fact, I would tend to assume they are the letter-writers, because I doubt enough apostates care that much about it. For me, personally, it's mainly been entertainment.

And, given the history of personal attacks with the old-schoolers, there's a good reason to remain anonymous in these criticisms.

It is what he needs to believe beastie because it makes it easier for him to address it by simply dismissing it as apostate or anti-Mormon. These idiots just can't seem to grasp the fact that they are their own worst enemies and the people who are getting them in "trouble" with Church authorities are in fact, other Mormons. I mean really, why would any apostate expect Church authorities to care what they think?

This just goes down as another example of Bill's pathetic denial. And of course, he can't just let things die down. He has to keep bringing attention to himself as some kind of poor persecuted martyr.

I love the way he relays his unverifiable account of yet another BYU scholar laughing at those idiot anti-Mormons/apostates. He pulled this crap on Facebook too, claiming that whenever he talked to Bradford, all he does is talk about how anti-Mormon apostates are just a bunch of idiots who don't deserve their attention. He said this on Kerry Shirts' Facebook wall. When I asked him if Bradford would appreciate him speaking on his behalf in such a manner, he immediately shut his pie hole and told Kerry that he needed to "defriend" me.

I mentioned this to Brian Hauglid and he said he is friends with Bradford, and that he has never known him to act or speak that way about apostates/anti-Mormons and Bill's account is completely out of character for him. Bill is such a pathetic soul.

Bill is trying so hard to get support from other BYU scholars outside the Maxwell misfits.

[_sansfoy]

What does any of this matter unless Hamblin also believes that general authorities and BYU administrators are taking advice from "apostates and anti-Mormons?" Are his leaders too stupid to recognize the origin of these letters?

Or, more likely, does "apostate and anti-Mormon" simply mean "someone who disagrees with William Hamblin?

[_Kevin Graham]

These letters are always anonymous and/or secret.

Always? How would Bill know this?

Their victim rarely knows what is said about him by the apostates.

Then how can you call yourselves victims if you admittedly don't know what's being said?

The victim likewise has no chance to respond to the defamation.

What defamation? Please name me a single thing that has been said about you, Dan or Schryver, taht is patently false. Just one thing.

The apostates and anti-Mormons don’t, in fact want to engage the issues and ideas of their critics

That's laughable coming from a "scholar" who is so afraid of his shadown thaat he refuses to post anywhere except MAD. He hides at MAD like Romney hides out at FOX News. Has anyone ever known Bill Hamblin to be a man interested in engaging the issues? In my experience he is a pathetic coward who runs away whenever he is proved wrong. And I have the examples to prove it. His only response is to try to get other Mormons to disown me as a friend, while claiming he has me on permanent ignore.

their goal is to suppress and censor the publication of ideas they dislike

On the contrary, we've been trying to get your buddy William Schryver to publish his BS for years now. By compaarison, John Gee reviewed Chris Smith subsequently published article, lying about what Chris has actually said therein. He did this so it wouldn't be published via the MHA, and he succeeded.

while defaming the authors

No one is defaming you Bill. Stop pretending to be a victim and be a man. You look like a pathetic weakling acting this way.

Indeed, the last thing they want is for the issues discussed openly and publicly in the marketplace of ideas.

That's false, and we can prove it. We're the ones here waiting for you and your ilk to man up, step up to the plate and defend your idiotic arguments without MAD moderators. But your efuse to do it because you need them to constantly censor the exchanges so you appear to be winning. That's a cowardly way to approach the issues if there ever was one.

They rarely respond to the actual arguments; instead they claim their critics are nothing more than ad hominem bullies and liars.

Because it is true. You are a bully and a liar.

They continue to do this because they believe these tactics have been successful in the past year. They have done it to Will Schryver, Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, and are now trying it on me.

Stop trying to give yourself a sense of relevance Bill, you're really not that important.

Undoubtedly anyone else who dares criticize them will be subjected to similar tactics in the future, because the apostates believe their tactics work. And perhaps they do.

Keep deluding yourself Bill. The fact is you and your ilk are an embarrassment to the Mormon Church, so there is really no need for any "apostate" to send letters trying to censor you. You are your own worst enemy.

[_LDSToronto]

Ya, I'm sure Jerry Bradford is reading Hamblin's stupid blog and and visiting MADB for updates.

What a dick.

H.

[_Kishkumen]

Ya, I'm sure Jerry Bradford is reading Hamblin's stupid blog and and visiting MADB for updates.

What a dick.

H.

Bingo.

This is just the latest piece of propagandistic dribble that relies on the same old tired tactic:

If you don't agree with me, you are an anti-Mormon coward.

If you don't like my tactics, you are an anti-Mormon coward.

Let me add that if I ever write a letter about Bill Hamblin to anyone in order to complain of his juvenile behavior, I will sign it with all the joy and flourish of John Hancock.

Fortunately, I have better things to do with my time.

[_MsJack]

I think I'll be responding to this one on my blog.

I've very tired of this "anti-Mormons smeared and defamed William Schryver into not having his work published" narrative.

[_sansfoy]

I think I'll be responding to this one on my blog.

I've very tired of this "anti-Mormons smeared and defamed William Schryver into not having his work published" narrative.

How is that even possible? Do the people on this board have editorial oversight into MI/FARMS publications?

As an alternative explanation, maybe he isn't published because he has poor academic credentials, poor writing skills, and has performed no original research.

[_Aristotle Smith]

Maybe I'm missing something. Is there any evidence that Willy Schryver has ever actually written anything in the form of a publishable article? And I don't mean by "publishable" good. I mean ink on paper of a sufficient length to be considered an article.

Barring evidence to the contrary, I still maintain that the joker hasn't written a thing. In a perverse way, MsJack's scuttling of his publication was the luckiest think that ever happened to Willy. Now he can cry persecution and have popcorn parties with DCP, Hamblin, and Skousen while simultaneously never having written anything. Willy gets what he wants, insider status, while never having to do anything to earn insider status, i.e. never having to write anything for publication.

Plus the rest of the FARMS crew gets to cry like the babies they are for forever. They can fundraise for their forthcoming apologetics ventures based on "anti-Mormon persecution" from "hypocritical Evangelicals" just like they did in the good old days. They are reliving their glory days, days that have passed and most likely won't ever return. I'm almost tempted to suggest letting them relive their last pathetic adventure in peace, because after that is going to come a long night of loneliness for them. Almost.