Bill Hamblin Posted June 23, 2012 Author Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) I'm writing BYU. No more donations until Gerald Bradford is gone. Regardless of the reasons, it is inexcusable that it happened like this. And it is inexcusable that Bradford leaked the e-mails to the press (if you believe Dan when he said that he (Dan) didn't - I certainly believe him). It is an absolute embarrasement.IMPORTANT NOTE: Bradford did not leak the emails. One of the employees of the Maxwell Institute, which he heads, leaked them. Edited June 23, 2012 by Bill Hamblin
Kerry A. Shirts Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Another important thing is that the apostates who insist on silencing Dan for being ad hominem do so ON PURELY AD HOMINEM GROUNDS: not because Dan is publishing inaccurate for false information, but because Dan is such a mean and nasty person. The hypocrisy of all this is beyond nincompoopery.Oh wow....... what rich irony........ I never thought of it that way.......
Senator Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 And it is inexcusable that Bradford leaked the e-mails to the press (if you believe Dan when he said that he (Dan) didn't - I certainly believe him). It is an absolute embarrasement.Hmm...One perniscious allegation already debunked. Shall we still go ahead with the lynching?? or perhaps give it a little more time to see what other information might surface?
Defender Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Is Bradford's salary paid by tithing dollars? Fortunately, I am not a donor of any sort. I am so disgusted by this incident, and I will really be annoyed if my tithing is paying this guy's salary.
Popular Post Teancum Posted June 23, 2012 Popular Post Posted June 23, 2012 This just up on the MI news:http://maxwellinstit...d=150&type=newsI note, for the record, that none of the editors except Dan has had any direct communication with Bradford about this decision. They were never informed that they have been dismissed. Indeed, Lou Midgley is out of the country on vacation, and does not have internet access, and has no idea what's going on. Even if this change is a good idea, treating people this way, after years of service, is simply shameful.I certainly agree with this. The least Bradford could do was wait till the people are present. And to announce it when Dan is still out of town is shameful IMO. At times in my business, I have to let people go. I hate to do it even when it is deserved rather than a simple lay off. But I would never do it in anyway other than face to face with the person being dismissed. 5
Kerry A. Shirts Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 NONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO OPPOSED THE PUBLICATION HAD ACTUALLY READ THE PAPER!!!!Let me repeat this for clarification purposes:NONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO OPPOSED THE PUBLICATION HAD ACTUALLY READ THE PAPER!!!! Not a single one. And, indeed, not a single one has read it to this day. Bradford expressly told Dan he did not want to read the article.Wow what a come down from the scholarly and powerful days of Jack Welch running the show....... if this dude, Bradford ever gets called to be a General Authority......I can't in all conscience sustain such a closed mind numbskull. How on earth did he ever get the job in the first place? 1
Calm Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Wow what a come down from the scholarly and powerful days of Jack Welch running the show....... if this dude, Bradford ever gets called to be a General Authority......I can't in all conscience sustain such a closed mind numbskull. How on earth did he ever get the job in the first place?I don't know about anyone else, but I've missed you. 1
ERayR Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 I don't know about anyone else, but I've missed you. Ditto
Senator Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Wow what a come down from the scholarly and powerful days of Jack Welch running the show....... if this dude, Bradford ever gets called to be a General Authority......I can't in all conscience sustain such a closed mind numbskull. How on earth did he ever get the job in the first place?Lets see...No only do we have condemned at present we would like to see him condemned for all eternity.Things just keep getting better!
Ares Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Lets see...No only do we have condemned at present we would like to see him condemned for all eternity.Things just keep getting better!No one said any thing of the sort. Stop throwing bombs and trolling for a response.
Ares Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 .I can't in all conscience sustain such a closed mind numbskull. Name calling isn't necessary.
Calm Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Lets see...No only do we have condemned at present we would like to see him condemned for all eternity.Things just keep getting better!Not letting someone become a GA would be considered a favour by some people. (and not being a GA has nothing to do with condemning for all eternity last I checked otherwise hell is going to be very, very crowded)
Calm Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) Name calling isn't necessary.It is for Kerry.....my bad, sorry. He doesn't namecall, he adds ornamentations..... Edited June 23, 2012 by calmoriah
Kerry A. Shirts Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Lets see...No only do we have condemned at present we would like to see him condemned for all eternity.Things just keep getting better!Where on earth did you read in my post that I have condemned him for eternity? I'm just saying I would have no reason to sustain someone who already knows it all without knowing anything and then misusing his power.....that would not a good General Authority make, and I would NOT sustain such an one. I am perfectly free to say no without God's wrath coming to visit me in earthquake, storm and UFO's - GRIN! 1
Kerry A. Shirts Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Thanks Cal and Ray.......... I am really just making enemies on Facebook these days, so I thought I'd come back and see if I can add to the total - LOL! Hey how do I add those cool little face thingy's?
Calm Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Thanks Cal and Ray.......... I am really just making enemies on Facebook these days, so I thought I'd come back and see if I can add to the total - LOL! Hey how do I add those cool little face thingy's?In the middle top of the reply box (unless you are using an IPad or phone) there is a smilie face. Click on that and it gives you a bunch of options to post.
Jersey Girl Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 IMPORTANT NOTE: Bradford did not leak the emails. One of the employees of the Maxwell Institute, which he heads, leaked them.For what reason would an employee of the MI leak the emails? Doesn't Bradford know who's working for him?
ERayR Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Thanks Cal and Ray.......... I am really just making enemies on Facebook these days, so I thought I'd come back and see if I can add to the total - LOL! Hey how do I add those cool little face thingy's?Whatever you want. We can be enemies but I would rather not.
Popular Post Scott Lloyd Posted June 23, 2012 Popular Post Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) True enough, but by the same token the way Hamblin and Peterson have publically responded seems to be intended for the same destroy it also. It's like they are saying, "While I would never say nor do anything to harm the Maxwell Institute, let me tell you about all of the rotten things they did to me. I love the MI and hope it does well, but its new course is a disaster and its director is a mean apostate-lover. While I'd hate for it to happen, I fear they are going to lose all of their subscribers (to cancel your subscription, please call 1-800-327-6715 between 8:30 and 5:00 MDT, or send an email to maxwell_institute@byu.edu)."Part of what I have long admired about Dan is his transparency and candor. It would be entirely out of character for him to clam up now.The remarkable thing is that he retains his loyalty to the Church and the university. That must have the apostates and antagonists somewhat frustrated in the midst of their cackling and glee. Edited June 23, 2012 by Scott Lloyd 5
Bernard Gui Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) Here is a little pertinent history. Brother Dan at his best...http://mimobile.byu.edu/?m=5&table=review&vol=23&num=1&id=815Bernard Edited June 23, 2012 by Bernard Gui 2
BookofMormonLuvr Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 For what reason would an employee of the MI leak the emails? Doesn't Bradford know who's working for him?The person has lost his/her belief in the LDS Church since joining MI- and is now serving as a mole for the anti-Mormon crowd, instead of doing the honorable thing and resigning his/her position.
Calm Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 The person has lost his/her belief in the LDS Church since joining MI- and is now serving as a mole for the anti-Mormon crowd, instead of doing the honorable thing and resigning his/her position.Is this a guess? Or has this been stated somewhere?
BookofMormonLuvr Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) Is this a guess? Or has this been stated somewhere?Why else would you leak info to the enemies of the church you are a member of. For kicks & giggles? Edited June 23, 2012 by BookofMormonLuvr
Calm Posted June 23, 2012 Posted June 23, 2012 Why else would you leak info to the enemies of the church you are a member of. For kicks & giggles?Would depend on whom you leaked it to.
Bill Hamblin Posted June 23, 2012 Author Posted June 23, 2012 The person has lost his/her belief in the LDS Church since joining MI- and is now serving as a mole for the anti-Mormon crowd, instead of doing the honorable thing and resigning his/her position.There is nothing to indicate this.
Recommended Posts