HiJolly Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 ...just in case I run out of things to read in my old age... 1
bluebell Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 Is there a link or information available, or something?
HiJolly Posted July 24, 2017 Author Posted July 24, 2017 Well, yeah. Google 'mormon leaks' and see if a link comes up.
ALarson Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 9 minutes ago, bluebell said: Is there a link or information available, or something? Found this through a search: https://mormonleaks.io/newsroom/2017/07/24/introducing-the-mconkie-papers-mormonleaks-releases-37-never-before-published-documents-by-bruce-r-mconkie/ (I have not read any of these yet, just posting the link.) 1
ALarson Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 Just read through this one (miscellaneous questions and answers by McConkie) and found it fascinating to read! https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/a/a1/Chapter_Whatever-SOME_MISCELLANEOUS_QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS-Bruce_R_McConkie.pdf I don't have a lot more time to devote to these today, but may eventually work my way through them. 1
hope_for_things Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 46 minutes ago, HiJolly said: ...just in case I run out of things to read in my old age... Thanks for posting, I read a couple short documents that probably were just drafts of his that were never meant for public consumption. Its interesting for sure, assuming its accurately from BRM. I feel a little bad reading them and I wonder about the provenance of the documents. Its unfortunate that we likely won't have official access to things like this in the future, I think the papers of Leonard Arrington or David O' McKay are exceptions rather than the rule these days. 1
USU78 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 38 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Thanks for posting, I read a couple short documents that probably were just drafts of his that were never meant for public consumption. Its interesting for sure, assuming its accurately from BRM. I feel a little bad reading them and I wonder about the provenance of the documents. Its unfortunate that we likely won't have official access to things like this in the future, I think the papers of Leonard Arrington or David O' McKay are exceptions rather than the rule these days. Yes, by all means, let's partake of the ill-gotten benefits of a theft of intellectual property belonging either to the Church, Elder McConkie's family, or both. You get that this is theft, right? 3
HappyJackWagon Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, USU78 said: Yes, by all means, let's partake of the ill-gotten benefits of a theft of intellectual property belonging either to the Church, Elder McConkie's family, or both. You get that this is theft, right? Do you know that for sure? Are you certain the documents weren't leaked by a BRM family member? Are you aware of church copyright on personal papers for past GA's? I have no idea so I'd love to hear if you have information on this. 3
ALarson Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, USU78 said: Yes, by all means, let's partake of the ill-gotten benefits of a theft of intellectual property belonging either to the Church, Elder McConkie's family, or both. You get that this is theft, right? How would you know that? I wonder who McConkie left these papers to upon his death? Maybe a family member had them or do you think they were left to the church? Until we know, I'm not so quick to label this a theft. Edited July 24, 2017 by ALarson 3
USU78 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 4 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Do you know that for sure? Are you certain the documents weren't leaked by a BRM family member? Are you aware of church copyright on personal papers for past GA's? I have no idea so I'd love to hear if you have information on this. You're making an extraordinary claim there, HJW. And yet you're not. Take a position. If you have information that this was not clandestinely leaked by an unknown person without authority from either the Church or the McConkie family, give it up. 2
USU78 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 5 minutes ago, ALarson said: How would you know that? I wonder who McConkie left these papers to upon his death? Maybe a family member had them or do you think they were left to the church? Until we know, I'm not so quick to label this a theft. The leaker is a thief, unless the leaker has ownership interest and control of its publication. Pony up, please, AL: Take a position. If you have information that this was not clandestinely leaked by an unknown person without authority from either the Church or the McConkie family, give it up. 3
ALarson Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, USU78 said: The leaker is a thief, unless the leaker has ownership interest and control of its publication. Pony up, please, AL: Take a position. If you have information that this was not clandestinely leaked by an unknown person without authority from either the Church or the McConkie family, give it up. Sorry USU, you are the one making the accusation of this being a theft. What proof or evidence do you have that your accusation is true? Until we know who had possession of these papers and if they were willingly donated or not, we simply do not know how Mormon Leaks obtained them. Edited July 24, 2017 by ALarson 3
HappyJackWagon Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, USU78 said: You're making an extraordinary claim there, HJW. And yet you're not. Take a position. If you have information that this was not clandestinely leaked by an unknown person without authority from either the Church or the McConkie family, give it up. You're at least right that I'm not making an extraordinary claim. My position is that I don't know who has the right to these papers so I asked a question. It appears you don't know either, yet you are willing to label it "theft". You are the one making an extraordinary claim without any info to back it up. You might be right but you might be wrong. You really can't be sure either way, can you? Without evidence I don't think I'll label it "theft". You are claiming a crime has been committed. I think you should back that up with some evidence or retract your claim of "theft". CFR for 1- who holds rights to BRM materials and/or 2- that someone other than one of those individual leaked this info. Otherwise you are essentially claiming that Mormon leaks is sharing stolen materials. Edited July 24, 2017 by HappyJackWagon 4
Kenngo1969 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 16 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Do you know that for sure? Are you certain the documents weren't leaked by a BRM family member? Are you aware of church copyright on personal papers for past GA's? I have no idea so I'd love to hear if you have information on this. Unless the family member released the information with Bruce R. McConkie's express permission, it's still theft. But thanks fer playin'! 2
JLHPROF Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 1 hour ago, ALarson said: Just read through this one (miscellaneous questions and answers by McConkie) and found it fascinating to read! https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/a/a1/Chapter_Whatever-SOME_MISCELLANEOUS_QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS-Bruce_R_McConkie.pdf I don't have a lot more time to devote to these today, but may eventually work my way through them. Question: Were spirit children born through the same process as mortal children—meaning through the union of the sexes? Answer: It is obviously so, and I have heard President Kimball say so. (MLM Journal,Feb. 26, 1984). Well, glad to see it wasn't just Brigham who believed this. President Kimball too apparently. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 Just now, Kenngo1969 said: Unless the family member released the information with Bruce R. McConkie's express permission, it's still theft. But thanks fer playin'! That doesn't even make sense. You know that BRM is dead, right? If a family member has rights to BRM's materials and/or was left the materials in a will then they absolutely have permission. And what if there wasn't an explicit will regarding these materials? Would that mean a family member would be stealing for releasing info? For example, if I found letters, diary etc of my deceased grandfather, it's hard to imagine that sharing that info would be considered theft. What about all of the journals of early church members that weren't willed to someone in particular. Are those being shared as the fruits of theft. Come on. Seriously? This thread is quickly deteriorating into silliness because USU and now you want to make silly little claims. 4
ALarson Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 4 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: Unless the family member released the information with Bruce R. McConkie's express permission, it's still theft. But thanks fer playin'! What if these papers were legally passed on to a family member (in a will or other legal document)? Wouldn't the family member then be the legal owner of these papers? 1
ALarson Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: That doesn't even make sense. You know that BRM is dead, right? If a family member has rights to BRM's materials and/or was left the materials in a will then they absolutely have permission. And what if there wasn't an explicit will regarding these materials? Would that mean a family member would be stealing for releasing info? For example, if I found letters, diary etc of my deceased grandfather, it's hard to imagine that sharing that info would be considered theft. What about all of the journals of early church members that weren't willed to someone in particular. Are those being shared as the fruits of theft. Come on. Seriously? This thread is quickly deteriorating into silliness because USU and now you want to make silly little claims. I agree. I'd like to discuss some of what was in the question and answer document in the papers. Who has read through them? I found some of it to be very interesting.... Here's the link again: https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/a/a1/Chapter_Whatever-SOME_MISCELLANEOUS_QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS-Bruce_R_McConkie.pdf Edited July 24, 2017 by ALarson
longview Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 1 hour ago, ALarson said: (I have not read any of these yet, just posting the link.) Read a couple including this: https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/7/71/CHRIST_AND_ADAM-Bruce_R_McConkie.pdf "Evolution is not a science; it is a religion—a false and evil religion. It is not a codification of general truths or laws discovered by research and reason and experimentation. It is a maze of speculative theories and shaky postulates which seek to explain the origin and purpose of life without reference to that God who made man in his own image." "Evolution is a way of worship. Those who believe its doctrines are emotionally involved. They have had a spiritual experience, as it were, and are born anew. What they consider to be reason and logic on their part partakes of a hard core fanaticism which is as glossyeyed as that of any of the cults." 1
USU78 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 The definition of theft: A person commits theft if he: a. obtains or exercises b. unauthorized control c. over the property of another d. with a purpose to deprive him thereof. Unless the leaker (and Mormonleaks) can establish a license or other right from the owner(s) of the McConkie papers, that leaker (and Wikileaks), upon acquiring possession without title, followed by publication without leave, has committed theft. Will the cowardly leaker or the cowards behind Mormonleaks come forward with evidence of title, license or other right to possess and/or publish? This is not an act of bravery. This is a cowardly act of theft. 2
USU78 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 5 minutes ago, ALarson said: What if these papers were legally passed on to a family member (in a will or other legal document)? Wouldn't the family member then be the legal owner of these papers? ... because those who hide in shadows and leak from anonymity always have legal title passed on from/to a family member ... Don't you find?
USU78 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 6 minutes ago, ALarson said: I agree. I'd like to discuss some of what was in the question and answer document in the papers. Who has read through them? I found some of it to be very interesting.... Here's the link again: https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/a/a1/Chapter_Whatever-SOME_MISCELLANEOUS_QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS-Bruce_R_McConkie.pdf Assuming the appropriate value can be established for the theft and publication, these acts are felonies. Silly little felonies. 1
6EQUJ5 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 18 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Question: Were spirit children born through the same process as mortal children—meaning through the union of the sexes? Answer: It is obviously so, and I have heard President Kimball say so. (MLM Journal,Feb. 26, 1984). Well, glad to see it wasn't just Brigham who believed this. President Kimball too apparently. I'm glad that GBH corrected that pernicious false doctrine. 1
6EQUJ5 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) I agree with USU that this is theft. Regardless, the content is a dead giveaway that this is a fake, a scam. It is so full of falsehoods and false doctrine it could not possibly be Elder McConkie. Edited July 24, 2017 by 6EQUJ5
JulieM Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 17 minutes ago, USU78 said: Assuming the appropriate value can be established for the theft and publication, these acts are felonies. Silly little felonies. Either respond to the open CFRs issued to you and prove that, or admit you are making accusations that you have no proof to back up. Do you have any proof and are you going to respond to the CFRs? 3
Recommended Posts