Defamation: The Apostate Grand Strategy?

[Bill Hamblin]

I posted the following on my blog:

http://mormonscriptureexplorations.wordpress.com/2012/07/13/defamation-the-apostate-grand-strategy/

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.

[cinepro]

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.

Frankly, sending such letters is a pretty pathetic thing to do. It would be interesting if you could get copies of them and post them on your blog.

I can't understand what someone would hope to accomplish by doing that, but I'm a live-and-let-live kind of guy, and not inclinded towards activism generally speaking.

Edited July 14, 2012 by cinepro

[Evangeline]

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.

This reminds me of an experience I had where a family member secretly made an appointment with my Bishop to divulge private information with the intent to make my husband and I look bad (let me make it clear we had done nothing wrong). During the appointment, thankfully my Bishop realized the malicious intent of the visitor and told the person that he would hear no more and that they needed to leave. He told my husband and I about the appointment after the fact. Instead of him thinking any less of my husband and I, he came away with disgust for the choice that this other family member made. Essentially, this person's attempt to defame my husband's and my character backfired.

However, the experience did cause my husband and I a great deal of pain and did some damage to a family relationship.

I hope that most people will be able to see through this kind of behaviour, but unfortunately some won't. I don't know how a different Bishop would have reacted in my own situation.

This kind of behaviour is appalling. I would be ashamed of myself if I did something similar and I'm very sorry that you and others have been victimized. My heart goes out to you.

[why me]

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.

I agree. What has happened to you, Will and Dan is a disgrace. It shows just how tormented the antimormons are with the choices they have made. One thing to remember Bill is the saints of yesteryear who were persecuted by those who were church members at the time of Joseph Smith. They experienced their homes being burned, murder, verbal hostilities etc.

The latest apostate tactics are just in line with all the other tactics they have tried during church history. They need to reevaluate their actions and see them for what these actions are: disgruntled, childish, and mean-spirited.

[why me]

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.

Frankly, I felt that Will was left alone without anyone to defend him in these constant attacks about him. He defended himself but I still felt that he was left out to dry. But now, I hope that as more experience character assassination we can see a plot developing as you stated in your blog. And the fight back can begin.

[jwhitlock]

Spot on, Bill. The "kill the messenger" methodology, without addressing the message, is become more and more prevalent in our society. Not a particularly heartwarming trend.

[Bob Crockett]

There is nothing to do about anonymous assaults, particularly if you are a public figure and wade into a public issue. I mean, look at this thread. You have anonymous commentators.

[yootaw]

Anonymous commentators don't seem to have the corner on acerbic comments. Yes I am anonymous, I see the irony.

[Senator]

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.

Have you personally received such letters?

[Senator]

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.

I'll agree with you. It is an ugly arena in which you have enlisted.

But in all honesty, unless those who you've asked to take up your cause have access to the content of said letters, they are simply relying on your word that indeed the letters are defamatory and not, say for instance, letters of protest. Is there anyway of making public such letters? If not, due to their private nature, then perhaps you should privately persue legal redress under defamation or libel laws.

Edited July 14, 2012 by Senator

[robuchan]

Bill, I've thought for years the tone from you and others in your camp have been unnecessarily aggressive. On the flip side, the Mormon Stories movement doesn't appeal to me much, and I find most of their complaining to be annoying.

I have a few comments.

1. You and your friends seem to create a lot of enemies. I think you are proud of that, and equate it to some sort of evil vs righteousness thing. I think it would be good for you to challenge that assumption and look internally at the possibility that it is a negative thing not a positive thing.

2. I'm not sure you have a good perception of your enemies. It could be a guy sitting next to you in Gospel Doctrine, attending church, paying his tithing, doing his home teaching, struggling with his testimony, reaching out to an online anonymous community where he can get emotional support from other people in similar situation. The range of people who are involved with online communities or who are sympathetic to the individuals you attack is very wide. A lot of them are the same people that would be in a trench with you if it came down to truly choosing sides the church vs its true enemies.

3. When you start a fight with someone, you should be prepared for your nose to get bloodied. You can't always control everything in a fight. Your opponent might do things you think are ethically and morally wrong. Chances are they think you're doing things ethically and morally wrong, also. That's why it's a fight. It appears you're losing this fight, so I recommend thinking through a new strategy.

Edited July 14, 2012 by robuchan

[wenglund]

These letters are always anonymous and/or secret. Their victim rarely knows what is said about him by the apostates.

These kinds of underhanded tactics remind me of two fictional characters: Grima Wormtongue and Uriah Heap, and says a lot about the quality of the forces marshalled against Christ's Church.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

Bill, I've thought for years the tone from you and others in your camp have been unnecessarily aggressive. On the flip side, the Mormon Stories movement doesn't appeal to me much, and I find most of their complaining to be annoying.

I have a few comments.

1. You and your friends seem to create a lot of enemies. I think you are proud of that, and equate it to some sort of evil vs righteousness thing. I think it would be good for you to challenge that assumption and look internally at the possibility that it is a negative thing not a positive thing.

2. I'm not sure you have a good perception of your enemies. It could be a guy sitting next to you in Gospel Doctrine, attending church, paying his tithing, doing his home teaching, struggling with his testimony, reaching out to an online anonymous community where he can get emotional support from other people in similar situation. The range of people who are involved with online communities or who are sympathetic to the individuals you attack is very wide. A lot of them are the same people that would be in a trench with you if it came down to truly choosing sides the church vs its true enemies.

3. When you start a fight with someone, you should be prepared for your nose to get bloodied. You can't always control everything in a fight. Your opponent might do things you think are ethically and morally wrong. Chances are they think you're doing things ethically and morally wrong, also. That's why it's a fight. It appears you're losing this fight, so I recommend thinking through a new strategy.

I am wondering if this kind of blame-the-victim post may inadvertantly betray the source of one of the anonymous letters, or at the very least give indication of the type of person with whom the anomous letters might work?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited July 14, 2012 by wenglund

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Common tactic...if you cannot kill the message, kill the messenger.

[robuchan]

I am wondering if this kind of blame-the-victim post may inadvertantly betray the source of one of the anonymous letters, or at the very least give indication of the type of person with whom the anomous letters might work?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

OK, nevermind. Have your pity party. You're not interested in hearing another view on this.

[mapman]

never mind

Edited July 14, 2012 by mapman

[robuchan]

I am wondering if this kind of blame-the-victim post may inadvertantly betray the source of one of the anonymous letters, or at the very least give indication of the type of person with whom the anomous letters might work?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

PS, could it be defamation to imply I'm a writer of one of these anonymous letters?

[yootaw]

I am wondering if this kind of blame-the-victim post may inadvertantly betray the source of one of the anonymous letters, or at the very least give indication of the type of person with whom the anomous letters might work?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Do you not find any truth in the substance of Robuchan's post? It seems like you have attacked his character, rather than what he has said.

[robuchan]

One more comment.

Once again, it appears the MI crew is angry at church leaders and taking it out on the apostates.

Bill says Will Schryver, Greg Smith, Dan Peterson have already been taken down by these tactics. But what are the tactics exactly? Writing anonymous letters or otherwise appealing to these men's bosses and other church leaders. Not exactly war crime material.

Only an incompetent church would listen to the apostates and punish these good men for it.

You're railing at the wrong group.

[wenglund]

OK, nevermind. Have your pity party. You're not interested in hearing another view on this.

I listened carefully and asked investigatory questions. I even understand your defensive, if not projective reaction.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[robuchan]

I listened carefully and asked investigatory questions. I even understand your defensive, if not projective reaction.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

lol, OK my bad for being defensive. The answer to your investigatory questions is "No".

[wenglund]

PS, could it be defamation to imply I'm a writer of one of these anonymous letters?

I am not sure how someone posting anonymously can be defamed, particularly by a non-presumptuous question.

But, I am pleased to now see that you have at least some capacity for concern about defamation, even if only when you may be in the crosshairs.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

OK, nevermind. Have your pity party. You're not interested in hearing another view on this.

When the other view condones anonymous e-mails and letters to someones employment superiors, to do disrupt their professional life, what other view is their? When a defense of the church is met with this kind of animosity what other approach is there? When a refutation of error induces a campaign of slander and libel what other approach do you suggest.

Attempted destruction of someones life for a doctrinal disagreement doesn't seem like reaching out for help and if they are doing it while maintaining the guise of a faithful believing member then I would call that hypocrisy

When you go to what you think is a discussion and the other party turns it into a war behind the cloak on anonymity it is unexpected in its ferociousness.

[robuchan]

When the other view condones anonymous e-mails and letters to someones employment superiors, to do disrupt their professional life, what other view is their? When a defense of the church is met with this kind of animosity what other approach is there? When a refutation of error induces a campaign of slander and libel what other approach do you suggest.

Attempted destruction of someones life for a doctrinal disagreement doesn't seem like reaching out for help and if they are doing it while maintaining the guise of a faithful believing member then I would call that hypocrisy

When you go to what you think is a discussion and the other party turns it into a war behind the cloak on anonymity it is unexpected in its ferociousness.

1. Nowhere did I condone this type of behavior.

2. I don't see this as a "defense of the church". After all, it was the church that fired these men.

[Senator]

There's a lot emotionally ladened accusation infused with all this. It would be nice to be able to cut through it and assess what has actually been said and done.