First, some background on the following episode (which I sincerely hope complies with Admin's rules of the road).

Given that:

1) a few years have passed since my initial encounters with a one-person-Mormon-apologist show, kicked off by an individual who falsely claimed to be working with legions of fellow believers; and

Given that:

2) this supposedly-committed Mormon attack dog has since fallen silent . . .

I therefore thought it would be interesting, timely and "revealing" (so to speak) to share some of the self-initiated, off-board and unsolicited information that he offered up to me (and, by extension, to RfM, as well).

In laying it out here, certain names and details have been removed (mainly so as to not give Mormonism's holy warriors hints on carrying out "heavenly" harassment hit-'n-runs), but the essence of this scared Mormon apologist's demands have been preserved for the record.

In a nutshell, they were as follows: Agree to take down certain of my RfM postings and a Mormon-crafted "truce" will magnanimously be called.

Seriously (and, no, this earnest would-be broker did not offer to seal his vow by slitting his throat, secret-Mormon-temple-ritual style).

Sorry, pal. No deal.

What follows is this inwardly-doubting Mormon apologist's crazy-combo of head-case claims, confessions, demands, dishonesties and lies. (Hey, as Mormons like to say, the Church is perfect; it's the people who aren't).

Welcome to the worried little world of the conflicted Mormon "believer."

It's proof positive that RfM is working.
_____


--Admitting to Lurking

What a great door approach this guy gave me:

". . . Hello. I’m [name deleted], your not-always-so-welcome-rfm [t-word] . . . We prefer the term ‘anonymous contributor’ . . . for such a just and needed cause."
_____


--Conceding Identity Theft

This desperate Mormon defender 'fessed up to me about posing on RfM under false I.D.s:

“Several days ago I tricked you into believing I was [name deleted], in the process extracting your personal email address enabling me to correspond with you directly.”

[*Note: I knew this deluded-detective wannabe bumblehead was faking it because he misspelled the name that he said he stole, On top of that, my personal emaily addy was already publicly available].
_____


--Confessing to Internal Doubts about the Mormon Church's Versions of Events

This person admitted to me being a returned Mormon missionary who harbored serious questions about the truthfulness of Mormon Church history and who did not regard himself as a Mormon true believer:

"Some background: I’m an active member of the Church, a returned missionary, but a skeptic about early LDS history. In other words, Steve, I don’t claim that all of its history is true, or necessarily has to be true in order for the current Church to be true, therefore I‘m not a ‘TBM’ as you‘ve often assumed.”
_____


--Suppressing Nagging Private Disbelief by Insisting that the Mormon Church is "True" Because It Makes People Happy

Despite this person's confessed weakened faith in the truthfulness of Mormon Church history, he nonetheless told me that he still believed the Mormon Church exerts a positive impact on people’s lives:

“What I am most certain about is that the current Church currently offers its adherents a peaceful, joyful, and prosperous way of life.”
_____


--Lying about Marshalling Mormon Minions While Supposedly Utilizing High-Tech Mormon Mission Control Devices to Win the Battle Against Ex-Mo Evil

This person claimed to me to be working overtime with numerous other Mormons in a cleverly-clandestine and spectacularly-successful effort to counter RfM’s effective exposure of Mormon Church falsehoods:

"I began contributing to the RFM site [sometime] ago, challenging, debating, refuting, falsifying, ridiculing, often disparaging the claims leveled by you and others against the Church. Because of your RFM celebrity status, and your close ties to previous Church leaders, I’ve chosen to direct most of my activities to debunking your posts. But I’m not alone. I collaborate with other anonymous contributors who post . . . as well. . . .

"Want to know the secret of our success? Ok, we use sophisticated dynamic [techniques that allow us the capability of] essentially remaining under the . . . radar, undetected. . . . "
_____


--Acknowledging that RfM Poses a Serious Threat to the Future of Mainstreaming the Mormon Myth

This person acknowledged to me that RfM is a real and present danger to the faith of devout--but unprepared and vulnerable--Mormons:

"The RFM site is heavily visited by Mormons and non Mormons alike. Most active Mormons stumble upon it by accident, more often than not when researching info for talks and lessons. If it weren’t for defenders of the faith offering opposing and alternative views to your claims, this site would be very problematic.

"[Our] goal . . . is to cast enough doubt such that the threads become saturated from top to bottom with opposing views, 'hijacked' as you call it. By the time an observer reads the entire thread, he/she has already forgot what it was originally about. Pretty clever, huh? The 1st amendment enables us to post anonymous, to speak and opine as we so choose. So for this I’ll make no apology. . . .”
_____


--Proposing a Ceasefire (on Mormon terms, of course)

This person then offered me a “truce” if I would agree to certain pre-conditions. These consisted of me ceasing my posting of particular criticisms of the Mormon Church, based on my personal inside knowledge of the LDS Church and its leaders:

"So, the question intrigues…, why am I here spilling the beans about our tactics?

"Well, Steve, in the spirit of cooperation and transparency, I’d like to propose a truce:

”A) You quit posting about the alleged content of the talks you had with General Authorities back in the 90’s. The facts of such content is largely disputed as evidenced by the fact that you contend one thing and they contend another. Neither side will ever agree on what or what not was ever said.

"B) You remember to commit to (A).

"In exchange for your cooperation, [we] will cease posting on the RFM site. This would give you free, unobstructed and uncontested reign to post how and what you wish inasmuch what you post does not conflict with (A).”

In a follow-up email to me, this person continued to press-- with a straight-face--for my acceptance of his Mormon-offered olive branch, boasting all the while of both its (and his) supposed inherent justness and intelligence:

“[What is the] status of [the] proposed truce?

"You don't seem to get it, Steve. Or maybe you do but are too self-serving to care. Either way, my proposition to end our feud was very fair and reasonable . . . .

"I'm going to give you a second chance to consider. . . . I am very calculated, rational, and just. “
_____


--Signing Off with a Personal Attack

This Mormon apologist then launched a divinely-guided ad hominem my way, complaining that I was failing to realize how committed he remained to suppressing details of personal conversations I had had with LDS apostles Dallin H. Oaks and Neal A. Maxwell in the LDS CHurch Administration Building:

". . . [Y]ou edit and twist just about everything, particularly the content of the discussions you had with GA's. You should be ashamed of yourself. It's a good thing you know how to draw. As a journalist, you just wouldn't cut it.”

[*Note: He should have thanked me for editing out his name, for his own good].

******


Insecure closet-doubter Mormon defenders such as this fellow are:

1) clearly in the process of running scared;

2) obviously feeling personally vulnerable; and:

3) desperately beside themselves about the continued and expanding influence of RfM (at least this guy is--with his mighty, cyperspaced, Kolobic, invisible Mormon army to assist him in his galactic, anti-RfM, Star Wars battle for the souls of humanity).

Like I said, this person hasn't contacted me going on a few years now, which could be a good sign.

Maybe by now he's left the Mormon Church and is honestly posting on RfM as a genuine ex-Mo. Ya never know. After all, he privately confessed to me that he really didn't much believe it. Sounds like a lot of Mormon returned missionaries.

Carry on, RfM, carry on! May the force be with you, since the farce is with them. :)



Edited 33 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/2013 12:40AM by steve benson.

awesome post, Steve! i loved where he asked...

"Want to know the secret of our success?"

what on earth gives these people the idea that we think that they're successful?! i can't stop laughing about that one.

i hope that you keep posting about your interactions with the GA's. those posts have the ring of truth about them, which is why, i suppose, they are so powerful.

also, just wanted to say how moved i was by your post the other day about your byu research paper and the letter from your father. thank you for being so open on this forum. i think that it takes an enormous amount of courage to do so.

We are legion. We are...Anonymous.


Errr uh I mean... Okay it's just me and I'm a BYU computer science major with no ability to get dates...

Aww rats. (Spills 44oz pop on keyboard.)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 07:26AM by Yaqoob.

ETA: Bunch of script kiddies. ;-)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 12:29PM by Beth.

How are you supposed to take him seriously if he wouldn't even offer to slit his throat and eviscerate himself?

Interesting.

;o)

Why are you protecting him?

. . . as they pertain to RfM's policy of establishing and maintaining a missionizing Mormon-free zone. Naming him may only serve to feed his ego. He's just a goofy and conflicted little Mormon hobbit with an anti-RfM habit. That said, he does provide a telling window into the split-minded Mormon heart of fear.

Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if he's presently on an inner road to inactivity. If that's the case, giving him cover at this point might provide him the help and space he needs in his tumultuous inner rehabilitation.

Should that be his reality road to recovery, he can always thank me latet. After all, he's got my email. :)



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 10:17AM by steve benson.

steve benson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He's just a goofy and conflicted little Mormon hobbit with an anti-RfM habit.

Hey now... Some of us more respectable hobbits would take offense at being lumped in with such ne'er-do-wells. I'm hiding my silver spoons right after I type this.

Please, more appropriate labels might include "hobgoblin" or "troglodyte." ;-)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 09:52AM by Makurosu.

I notice that he does not even hint at how HE knows what the true content of your conversations was with Oaks and Maxwell, as the basis for claiming that you have misrepresented the facts.

I've been out long enough to start forgetting the correct terminology.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 09:54AM by steve benson.

n/t



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 01:38PM by iris.

"--Suppressing Nagging Private Disbelief by Insisting that the Mormon Church is "True" Because It Makes People Happy"

What? Get OUT! The Mormon church makes people "happy??" Since when?

And really, what kind of fair trade-off is that, his offering to stop posting if you withdraw your troops? Like we care if he posts is "stupidaggini" on RfM?

I keep imagining the Coyote offering the Roadrunner a truce.

"--Suppressing Nagging Private Disbelief by Insisting that the Mormon Church is "True" Because It Makes People Happy"

What? Get OUT! The Mormon church makes people "happy??" Since when?

And really, what kind of fair trade-off is that, his offering to stop posting if you withdraw your troops? Like we care if he posts his crap on RfM?

Apologists are oblivious that their lame insufficient arguments supporting TSCC version of history can make things worse. If you are having a crisis of faith their articles acknowledge the problems but offer only feint reasons to continue to believe.

Imagine being stunned by the story of Helen Mar Kimball, and getting "consummation would not have been inappropriate" from FAIR.

I love the idea that this person believed he and his cohorts (snicker) were able to "hijack" threads to the point that the original point was forgotten. Egocentric much?

He sounds like a relative of mine who sadly has mental illness - which is of course not his own doing - but I think Mormonism makes it worse....

and is really big into conspiracies etc. and will go to almost any length to try to push his points

You know what? This guy DOES seem mentally ill. Now I feel sorry for him.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/2013 12:41AM by snuckafoodberry.

Two things stick out:

1. If this guy is struggling, and most likely doesn't believe (as he admitted), why in the world spend so much time and energy writing ridiculous apologist propoganda? What does somebody gain from that? That baffles me.

2. The idea that he thinks he "hijacks" the threads is ridiculous. Trolls are typically unmasked quickly, and even if they're not, there are 100 ex-mo comments for every 1 apologetic comment. He doesn't have any bargaining leverage whatsoever.

CTRringturnsmyfingergreen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The idea that he thinks he "hijacks" the
> threads is ridiculous. He doesn't have any bargaining leverage
> whatsoever.

That's how I reacted to the thread. I laughed that he thought he had any power on the forum at all and was trying to negotiate a truce, like it's a real war and he's a real threat. LOL

Yes, us exmos can't maintain a consistent train of thought, and we're obviously easily distracted. "Jeepers, Mr. Wilson, did somebody just steal our thread?"

Notice how the unnamed shrew threw the words, "you should be ashamed of yourself"? Mormons numerably throw those words as an attack, to get the person who is opposing them to stop talking. Unfortunately, it works on those who have feelings of guilt.
The LDS church does a great job of eliciting feelings of guilt in their flock. It's easier to control people that way.

'Here is a deal - you stop posting the truth and I'll stop a pointless and futile effort to undermine your and others' freedom of expression'
Not really the head of the debating team is he?!!

It clearly does not apply here. Oh! Its because they've never really read it. So, can we assume that lack of research on this easy to varify point means...?

Somebody is a bit of a self-important, pompous ass. Holy crap.

Your posts are awesome.

That's the kind of guy who puts a slug in a Pepsi machine and damns the soda for holding back.

Well done, Steve.

He sounds like just another doubting TBM freaking out before they accept the truth. Reminds me how grateful I am to have this community and board for support. Just very happy to be on this side. Can I get an Ahem (exmo for amen).