Daniel Peterson Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 So, the Carla Ogden fax that Greg posted isn't the document; rather, it's "another apparently official document" that fortuitously replicates the original "Watson letter" sent to Bill and which is now lost!?Evidently.It's certainly not the document that I saw.It wouldn't surprise me, though, if there were some fairly standard boiler-plate language that went out on this subject for a time.*good grief!*This is what we've been waiting for?I haven't been waiting for it. I haven't lost a moment of sleep over this Titanic Issue in years. Ever, as a matter of fact.After all the years of convoluted claims about this, um, "letter"There've been no "convoluted claims" from me.Bill Hamblin received a letter, I supposed (and still suppose) in response to something from him. It came from Michael Watson, in the office of the First Presidency. We cited the text in toto in the FARMS Review. Bill subsequently lost his copy of the letter. That's it. An epic saga that fairly sears the screen! Intrigue! Drama! Suspense! Romance!
Brent Metcalfe Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Dan,Well, perhaps all this will motivate Bill to scour his vast library to see if he can at last locate his personal correspondence with the office of the First Presidency. I suspect that most folks
Daniel Peterson Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Well, perhaps all this will motivate Bill to scour his vast library to see if he can at last locate his personal correspondence with the office of the First Presidency. I suspect that most folks
Brent Metcalfe Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Dan,And he cares even less about this ridiculous manufactured "controversy" than I do.No doubt.Happy holidays, Dan. (And you missed e pluribus unum in your copyright notice.)My best,</brent>http://mormonscripturestudies.com(
Greg Smith Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 We are now at day 14. Two weeks. Has the snail-mail bundle even now failed to arrive? Or, is there some other explanation that doesn't impugn the mail service?You obviously know NOTHING about Canada Post. As soon as I found out it was ground shipped, I knew this would happen. [i live in southern Alberta. Given the brilliance of Canada Post bureaucracy, parcels and the like will go from Utah, to Calgary [3 hours north of me], where they are sorted, then back to Lethbridge, then out to me.]I wouldn't call myself a doubter as to the authenticity of the 2nd Watson Letter, but surely you are much more concerned about the status of this delivery than I am, as it was shipped to you 14 days ago. Trust me, you were FAAAR more concerned about its status than I was. No one asked me to announce ahead of time that I was getting a copy. I did that on a whim 'cos I saw this thread. So, a sting that would require a great deal of luck, it seems.I see no annotations on the fax. You must mean the cover letter from Brent Hall? Now, is Brent Hall a member of the First Presidency? Or a member of Q12? Or a Seventy? Could be. I dunno.No, the snippet of text I was quoted was the cover letter; I assumed they were annotations. All I knew is that they were describing the conversation with FM Watson.I note too that there was a bit at the very top that had that "where did the fax come from" printing in faint letter that didn't scan well. It reads "Apr 23 '93 12:25 PM FIRST PRESIDENCY SLC P.1". I've added this to the transcript.And, so, the Second Watson Letter, apparently, remains ever elusive, I suppose. O, my prophetic soul...... :-)GLS
Greg Smith Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Over on his message board, my Malevolent Stalker is now suggesting that Greg Smith and/or Matt Roper and/or Brent Hall may have forged this document or some document or done something horrible or (good grief, I couldn't bear to do more than skim the idiocy) and speculating that one or more of them may be in imminent danger of excommunication. I'd say that you can't make this stuff up. But, clearly, he can.Well, I hope someone reports me forthwith.That way, they will never know the true story. FARMS snuck an operative into the Office of the First Presidency, and faxed themselves a letter. [Really, "Ogden" as a last name? What's next, is Joe Provo going to send a fax next week? Not even clever guys.] "Brent" Hall (a clear slam on Brent Metcalfe) then faked up a conversation with F. Michael Watson. They then got Dan to swear he'd seen a signature on it, and then to keep things quiet published the whole thing in a journal staffed by several employees of the Church's flagship university.They then sat on the forgery for about 15 years or so, and then "found it," and sent it to your gullible author, gentle reader.==It seems to me it would settle the matter for the critics to write to the First Presidency, and ask about it. Then they'd doubtless get a brand-shiny new letter on letterhead with a recent date stating that the first letter is the Only True Letter on the face of the earth, and they could then forward evidence of FARMS' perfidy to the Office of the First Presidency, Sandra Tanner, and Fox News.Indeed, I find it hard to believe that some critic somewhere hasn't tried this. And, given that we've yet to see such a letter, that seems sort of like the Fermi paradox of Cumorah doctrine.But, CK wields a mean keyboard. I recommend you settle this matter on behalf of all the worried, huddled masses and write to SLC via air mail and straighten it all out.
Brent Metcalfe Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Dan,It wouldn't surprise me, though, if there were some fairly standard boiler-plate language that went out on this subject for a time.Sorry, I missed this in your previous post.You may want to rethink your retelling of Bill's "letter."Are you seriously claiming that Bill Hamblin was sent a letter on the very day
Daniel Peterson Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Dan,Sorry, I missed this in your previous post.You may want to rethink your retelling of Bill's "letter."Are you seriously claiming that Bill Hamblin was sent a letter on the very day
Brent Metcalfe Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Dan,I've never before heard of a fax sent to Brent Hall, and know nothing whatever about it. I saw a letter from Michael Watson. I can only report what I remember seeing.My Malevolent Stalker and his always-zany disciples are cooking up a real potboiler over at his message board, creating a plot that absolutely brims with intrigue, deceit, and brazen Mopologist criminality. I hope you're looking in on the antics there. You'll really enjoy their work. Great stuff.Memories tend to fade, no matter how much we chase them.I don't focus much on online drama; my BoAbr project occupies my "spare" time. I only chimed in on this thread because of the years-long claims about Bill's correspondence with the First Presidency.I haven't been waiting for it. I haven't lost a moment of sleep over this Titanic Issue in years. Ever, as a matter of fact.Interesting ... coming from someone whose last post was after 1:00 a.m. Utah time. (It's only after midnight my time.)(And your copyright notice is still missing e pluribus unum.)Regards,</brent>http://mormonscripturestudies.com(
Calm Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Are you seriously claiming that Bill Hamblin was sent a letter on the very day
Wiki Wonka Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Well, I hope someone reports me forthwith.That can be arranged...Greg, if you get excommunicated, can I have all of your keys to access the secret, restricted parts of the FAIR Wiki before you go?WW
Kevin Christensen Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Just like DanGB says, Kevin, there are no such cases.Not in his world anyway. I'm reminded of the experiment Thomas Kuhn describes in Structure, when subjects were asked to identify cards from a deck that had a few anomalous cards, like a red Jack of Spades. The subjects typically had a hard time being able to perceive what the did not expect to see. Once they can actually imagine the possibility, perception can catch up.Kevin ChristensenPittsburgh, PA
Daniel Peterson Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Dan,Interesting ... coming from someone whose last post was after 1:00 a.m. Utah time.Regards,</brent>I never go to bed before 1 AM.LOL. My Malevolent Stalker and his groupies are now dancing a jig over at the Compound, joyfully predicting that I'll never be able to recover from this disaster -- whatever "this disaster" is supposed to be.
Wiki Wonka Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 I never go to bed before 1 AM.LOL. My Malevolent Stalker and his groupies are now dancing a jig over at the Compound, joyfully predicting that I'll never be able to recover from this disaster -- whatever "this disaster" is supposed to be.
Daniel Peterson Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Since I do not read Latin, I am copying the message above simply as a test to see if anything happens...Has anybody seen Wiki Wonka in the past few minutes? There was a bright flash of light, and, seconds later, a resounding peal of thunder, and then . . . silence.
Greg Smith Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 That can be arranged...Greg, if you get excommunicated, IF??can I have all of your keys to access the secret, restricted parts of the FAIR Wiki before you go?They'll take my secret decoder ring from my cold, dead hands.Greg© GL Smith 2009. Is est quoniam ego operor non agnosco mediocris utor
cksalmon Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 Hi Greg--I wrote:And, so, the Second Watson Letter, apparently, remains ever elusive, I suppose.You responded:O, my prophetic soul...... :-)DCP wrote re: the document you provided:It's certainly not the document that I saw....I've never before heard of a fax sent to Brent Hall, and know nothing whatever about it. I saw a letter from Michael Watson. I can only report what I remember seeing.It appears that I was correct, prophetic insights notwithstanding. Best.cks
Daniel Peterson Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 Yup. This doesn't appear to be the document that I saw. Unless I'm seriously, seriously misremembering -- and it's been more than fifteen years, I think -- what I saw was a letter, on letterhead, from Michael Watson, not a fax. But so what?And the text is the same. That's a mystery, I suppose. But not a very interesting one. And probably a pretty easy one to figure out, if one were so disposed. (I'm not. It doesn't matter to me.) I think it likely that there was some standard language developed to deal with this question, and that both the letter and the fax may well have gone out on the same date. (Why not?) I would guess that the Office of the First Presidency sends out scores of letters and other communications each and every day.Over at my Malevolent Stalker's compound, they've been chortling over what a miserable time this must be to be me. But I find the thought bizarre. I've had a perfectly fine day. Got some solid work done, visited with some important folks in the early afternoon, went Christmas shopping and then out for a bite to eat with my wife, met some old friends that I hadn't seen in several years, just spoke at length on the phone with my nephew . . . I know that this manufactured pseudo-issue, to the hive-mind over at the Compound, represents my downfall, or some such ridiculous and (to them, surely) redundant thing, but I have utterly no idea why. They think I've been caught in a brazen lie, but I didn't lie, and only a small demi-handful of message board critics have even suggested such an idiotic idea. They think I'm in a panic, but I'm absolutely not. The topic is scarcely even on my mind. (I'm much more excited about the "Mormon Scholars Testify" website, and about a possible really, really big project that I'm working on in connection with some really, really important people in the Middle East. This silliness isn't even a minor blip on the radar.) I feel perfectly fine.
Hamba Tuhan Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 This silliness isn't even a minor blip on the radar.) I feel perfectly fine.You do realise, of course, that this assurance is all the other blokes will need to bray about how you're protesting too much out of panic or some such thing? <sigh> Sometimes one truly can't win....
Daniel Peterson Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 I know. I know.It's like slapping the tar baby, in the Uncle Remus story. (Watch. They'll brand me a racist, now, for citing Uncle Remus.) The more idiotically it grins at you, the more you hit it, and the more you hit it, the more you get stuck. I simply can't pass up this masterpiece, though, from my Malevolent Stalker, posted over at the Compound, in which, after his customarily bizarre fashion, he, er, responds to what I posted immediately above:So, he is dodging a bullet here, and tossing Wiki Wonka, Matt Roper, Greg Smith, and others under the bus, essentially branding them all as brazen liars. It needs to be pointed out that Prof. Peterson took a good 24 hours or so deliberating over this. Only now is he really weighing in and declaring that the fax is not the "letter" that he remembers. He probably spent all that time really measuring out his options, deciding whether it would be best to say that they'd screwed up a bit and called the "fax" a letter, and whether it would be better to essentially declare all these lower-tier apologists to be liars.This is all remarkably callous and heartless, especially given that it's the holiday season. DCP says it would be "pretty easy to figure out," but is he going to lift a finger? No. He is going to sit on his butt, gloating about his stupid Mormon Scholar testimony site, and boasting about his "big deal" venture in the Middle East. If I were Greg Smith & Co., I would be awfully upset with him, and rightfully so. I abjure thee, Wiki Wonka, and all thy works! I abjure thee, Matt Roper, and all thy works! I abjure thee, Greg Smith, and all thy works! LOL. Great stuff.
volgadon Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 Well, the big Middle-East deal is that DCP hired a bus and driver from Tafila, Jordan, for throwing Wonka, Smith and Ropper under it.
Calm Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 I do not understand what the issue is. The point of the Watson letter was not that a particular person communicated in a particular way on a particular date, but rather the content.The content has been confirmed and not only confirmed, but done so for the appropriate time period. Even if it isn't the identical letter, why does that matter? In fact, this appears to be an additional confirmation, a plus. It seems to demonstrate that this was a standard reply which means it wasn't a off the top of a head remark, but likely one researched out and prepared, so it's somewhat semi-official if so.
Daniel Peterson Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 I do not understand what the issue is. The point of the Watson letter was not that a particular person communicated in a particular way on a particular date, but rather the content.The content has been confirmed and not only confirmed, but done so for the appropriate time period. Even if it isn't the identical letter, why does that matter? In fact, this appears to be an additional confirmation, a plus. It seems to demonstrate that this was a standard reply which means it wasn't a off the top of a head remark, but likely one researched out and prepared, so it's somewhat semi-official if so.You're being too reasonable and rational, calmoriah. Stop it!And can somebody please throw that bus into reverse and run Wonka, Roper, and Smith over again? Like, now?
Wiki Wonka Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 I know. I know.It's like slapping the tar baby, in the Uncle Remus story. (Watch. They'll brand me a racist, now, for citing Uncle Remus.) The more idiotically it grins at you, the more you hit it, and the more you hit it, the more you get stuck. I simply can't pass up this masterpiece, though, from my Malevolent Stalker, posted over at the Compound, in which, after his customarily bizarre fashion, he, er, responds to what I posted immediately above:I abjure thee, Wiki Wonka, and all thy works! I abjure thee, Matt Roper, and all thy works! I abjure thee, Greg Smith, and all thy works! LOL. Great stuff.It's worth getting "thrown under the bus" just to see the names Matt Roper, Greg Smith and .... Wiki Wonka .... all on the same line. Now that's priceless.
mfbukowski Posted December 18, 2009 Posted December 18, 2009 Unbelievable. Some secretary writes a letter of no importance and little note 17 years ago, and it is remembered differently by different people.Give me a break. How many cumulative hours have gone into this silliness?What is the point of being a critic if you get no converts? Who would possibly be swayed one inch by this drivel?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.