What Does It Mean?

I just read a Salt Lake Tribune article about the moral departure of Willie (R.) Jessop from Warren Jeffs.  What does this mean?  Jessop was quoted as saying, "I came to the point where Mr. Jeffs’ conduct was indefensible and have chosen not to defend it publicly or privately."  Jessop said also, " . . . but what came to light in Texas is morally indefensible.”  What does he mean?  Does Texas law enforcement have critical information about Jeffs that the rest of us have not yet seen?  What is in the "millions" of pages of discovery documents Texas seized?  Did Jeffs confess to actually having sex with 12-year-olds?  Does someone have information about sex with 12-year-olds which corroborates the discovery documents?  Have the general members of the FLDS communities been shielded from access to such information?  Are they vouching for Jeffs only because they have been kept oblivious of the truth?

If Texas has damning evidence about foul acts on Jeffs' part with pre-pubescent girls, can it be made public before the trial?  Will the trial be delayed until Jeffs' attorneys have had a few years to read the "MILLIONS OF PAGES" of discovery?  Is Jessop revealing this now because, if he doesn't, it could be a long time before it comes to light?  How many other people know the information?  Did Jeffs expel other people because he learned that they had discovered his (allegedly) "indefensible conduct" and didn't want them to come forward with it?

So many questions !!!

I say Jeffs (like all Americans) has a constitutional right to a fair trial (a thing which the other Texas defendants likely did not get).  It was long claimed that Jeffs' twelve-year-old "marriages" went unconsummated until the girls were older - which begs for the production of more evidence.  Nevertheless, I also applaud Jessop's courage in speaking what he apparently believes to be the truth in what some are claiming is an atmosphere of secrecy and fear.  This is a delicate situation, because one would not want to see a fair trial be derailed because of revelations made by a former defense-team-member.

I don't envy the Commerce Division (or the court) who may soon be tasked with the job of deciding who is the rightful holder of the position of Corporation of the President of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Somehow it seems that it should no more choose the religious leader of the church than Diseased Pousse Lintbag should have re-written the Trust's religious intent language.

It makes me want the truth to be made clear very soon, so that the good people of the FLDS congregations can "choose the right" and have their Trust and normal lives restored.  After all, is that not what they want?  Is that not what the State always wanted?

I also echo the sentiments of Mary Bachelor who, in June of 2008, wrote this post.  If it is demonstrated that Jeffs is truly guilty of the (I say - capital) offenses alleged, will the community eventually conclude that Jeffs' leadership was fraudulent and morally bankrupt from the start, and that many families should not have been forcibly dismantled?  What does all this mean?

Good Luck

Today, I learned that the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked Judge Dee Benson's order to return control of the UEP Trust to FLDS leader(s).

I have never hidden my passionate desire for the Trust to go back to the people who built it.  Maybe, right now, that isn't possible.  A wise man once opined that, if the Short Creek folks got themselves straightened out, it would be easier and more likely for the Trust to be returned.  We shall see.

I am a little surprised at the 10th Circuit's decision.  If it was, in any way, an emotionally-driven move, it might surely have been the result of much sensational, silly and not-so-silly media coverage about fantasy book-burnings and child molestations.

In the Court's temporary stay, Wisass is forbidden from making any significant changes (read - selling Berry Knoll) until the appeal is fully heard.  His complaint about being in an impossible place is once again true.  He has to run the Trust, but he cannot be paid to do so.  He can just run his meter vainly. The Court has made further extensive litigation inevitable, which litigation will likely go unfunded on both sides.  The money - any money - must ultimately come from the already depleted pockets of the FLDS people.  This is a monumental mess, and the enemies of the FLDS are jubilant.  God constructs and Satan destructs.

So, to Wisass, I say, "Good luck.  Have at it!  See how much more damage you can do.  Pour the coals on your own head."  To the 10th Circuit I say, "Be careful what you do. Yes, the FLDS are not perfect; perhaps they are even naive.  Nevertheless, remember that Judge Benson was right. Despite the failings of a tiny few, the blatant violation of the Constitutional rights of the many was wrong."

The exquisite truth about this chaotic situation is that it compels each observer individually to weigh and assess the facts and the principles involved. It is complex enough that one must drill down and judge very carefully. 

For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Matthew 7:1)

Good Luck!

Out Of The Best Books

I have a lot of opinions. A lot of my opinions are religious in nature.  I believe in God. I believe in the resurrection.  I believe in guaranteed salvation through Jesus Christ.  I believe in exaltation through emulating our Father, Michael.  I believe in teaching my (37) children to study good principles out of the best books.

Sometimes my children don't want to hear what I have to say. Sometimes they cannot be coaxed into sitting and reading the books I want them to read.  They exercise their own free agency and read other materials I did not choose for them.  They occasionally politely decline the materials I offer them.  Sometimes I have caught them giving my very important materials to others.  This makes me very, very irate.  It makes me want to scream from the rooftops about how awful my children are, for not studying and preserving the materials I choose for them and provide for them at great personal sacrifice (along with others who think the same way I do).

So here is my plan.  This week I will chain my children to the desks in our schoolroom.  I will put their heads in clamps so that they cannot turn away from the lesson material on the desk, and I will clip eye specula to their eyelids so that they cannot look away.

I'm sure that after doing this for a while, I will be able to correct any waywardness or improper thinking they may have developed.  If that doesn't work, I will entertain more forceful measures to ensure compliance.

Waco - Eldorado - Short Creek

I watched a CNN documentary tonight about the destruction of the Branch Davidian community in Waco, Texas, (in 1993).  I was (predictably) disappointed with CNN's portrayal, since it failed to tell much of the real truth.  I found a YouTube video which gives an alternative narrative of some of the events surrounding the horrific deaths of at least 76 Branch Davidians.  I have looked at similar material before, and it is beyond compelling.  Two items which have perpetually stood out in my mind are as follows:

1.  In the first ATF attack, three agents climbed on to the building's roof and entered David Koresh's bedroom.  A fourth agent fired automatic gunfire into the bedroom shortly thereafter.  The three agents inside all died.  It was later learned that all three had been bodyguards for Bill Clinton during his presidential election campaign.  Some of those bodyguards were preparing to give testimony in court against Clinton.

2.  There are (easily available) videos showing clearly how the tanks which poked holes in the building on the day of the fire were shooting out a stream of flames as they pulled out of the holes in the walls, setting fire intentionally.

The raid on the Davidians had been planned and rehearsed for months, despite government claims to the contrary.  Watch this video, too.  The extent of the official cover-up is astonishing.  The FBI ran the whole show.

Similarly, despite claims to the contrary, the May 2008 raid on the YFZ ranch in Eldorado, Texas, was also planned for many months.  Detractors such as Flora Jessflop and Prannon Shice were intimately involved in the preparations and the aftermath.  The government was apparently sufficiently prepared for the invasion, that it enlisted ATF sharpshooters and the "Midland County" tank (see photo) to be at the ready - ready to shoot and kill.

The FBI was sufficiently involved that it had placed Warren Jeffs on America's "Top Ten Most Wanted list"!  One would almost wonder if there might be truth to the suggestion that the FBI is partly an arm of the LDS Church as it strives to put down its adversaries.  I have also heard that the FBI recently doubled the size of its offices in St. George, Utah.  What does the FBI have planned next?  There have already been a string of raids and invasions in the sleepy little towns of Hildale and Colorado City.

Even if there may have been some maltreatment of some underage girls in the community, do we really want another catastrophic showdown?  Is it not time for cooler heads to prevail?  I appeal to all of those who in a position of power or influence to find ways to collaborate, to sit down together and work out peaceful solutions.  Thinking back to the Ruby Ridge murders and the Singer-Swapp siege, I sense that our government has a profound allergy to isolated religious communities.  Two phenomena become apparent - 1.) the government ALWAYS runs out of patience; and 2.) the government ALWAYS cooks up some fraudulent pretext to justify storming in and acting like a murderous bull in a china shop.

Somebody must have been saying his prayers during the YFZ invasion because, in that disaster, nobody was shot.  The young men sang hymns, and the itchy ATF trigger fingers went unsatisfied that day. 439 innocent children were kidnapped but (thanks to God and two angels [Balovich and Chisholm]) were later returned.

So, my prayer tonight is that true principle and righteousness will win out in this tense and crazy, border-town situation and that the lessons of Waco and Eldorado will have been learned by BOTH sides. I ask every one of you to offer the same prayer.

Head Scratch

He's cuter than she is !!!

I'm still scratching my head.  I heard a news reporter last night pose the question of whether, in the history of our nation, two different sovereign courts have ever gotten into such a tussle as the one currently escalating between the Utah district court (Pousse Lintbag) and federal district court (Dee Benson).

Today, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay on Judge Benson's order to return FLDS documents (at least until it can be briefed on the controversy).  I told you - polygamy gets people all lathered up. If this thing gets any more crazy, I think the world could split in two.  Actually, worse than that, the FLDS might not get their trust back.

The court wants more hearings and who knows if the attorneys are getting paid? Brutal Wisass is about to be disqualified as an evil trespasser, and, worse still, the internal squabble over FLDS leadership threatens to derail the return of the trust to its rightful owners - the FLDS people.

Looking at the big picture, I seriously doubt that Shortlaff and crew want to keep their fingers in the UEP Trust pie for very long. It has brought them nothing but expense, frustration and humiliation.  Maybe some people just want to see it destroyed - wiped off the map.

I think it's time for the parties involved who are stupid, wrong, selfish or evil to back off and realize that the community was created by decent, honorable people, so it should only be controlled by decent, honorable people, and not by liars, plunderers or outsiders who care more for themselves than for the welfare of the people.

However, as I scratch my head, I think of the feud that lasted years in Northern Ireland between virtual kinfolk - the Irish Protestants and Catholics.  They bombed and murdered each other until the children could no longer remember what the original argument was about, or who hit whom first.  I wonder - does it need to get that bad?  Do these kinds of battles help the participants to show their true colors and their true nature?  Did we come to earth (or to the Rocky Mountains) to show God whose side we are on (as evidenced by the way we treat our fellow man [or woman])?

I believe this war has been about religion and authority - whether Monson or Jeffs or Wisan or someone else is the true holder of the keys of leadership in the restored church.  Do we truly want to come to blows over a theological nuance (or has it been about money and control all along)?

More Insanity

Last week, our nation was perched on the brink of destruction . . . . . NOT !!!!   We fell off that cliff already in 1865 (or earlier).

The debate raged on for weeks, splitting angry hairs over several partisan issues.  The argument hinged on approximately $38.5 billion in deficit cutting measures.  The current (2011) deficit will be larger than last year's regardless, so what did we gain?  In fact, the 2011 deficit is really seventeen hundred billion dollars ($1.7 trillion).  The New York Times blasted the Republicans for jeopardizing the health and welfare of the old and the poor.  The liberals are so hell-bent on running up America's indebtedness, that there can be no doubt that they are determined to crash the economy and bring about a fundamental (new world order) regime change (the inevitable outcome of national insolvency).  Not long ago, the International Monetary Fund announced that in the "new order", capital will need to be driven more by the state than by the market.

I heard politicians from both sides of the aisle today saying that if we do not let the federal debt ceiling be raised next month, the nation will default on its debts and face "cataclysmic" repercussions.  This one hurt my brain, so I pondered on it and realized that what they mean is that we must agree to secure a higher "credit limit" because we need to be able to borrow more money -------- IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO PAY OUR DEBTS BACK !!!!   Go figure !!

Here in Arizona, we waited with bated breath today for a state judge to FINALLY find Brutal Wisass guilty of felony criminal trespass but, lo and behold (and despite promises to the contrary), the ruling did not come today - - - - and what happened instead was that Diseased Lintbag issued a smug ruling and thumbed her nose at the federal district court, forbidding Wisass to turn over the previously ordered documents to the FLDS UEP trust representatives.  One has to wonder if Lintbag and the Arizona judge are colluding somehow, or if quiet money is changing hands.

A wise man pointed something out to me last week - something I was embarrassed not to have realized on my own.  Over the years, a string of abuse allegations have been leveled at the FLDS community.  Every community has its black sheep - a percentage of bad seeds, abusers, cheats and charlatans.  Look at any large or small city or even at the Mormon Church!  It would actually be a bizarre aberration if the FLDS people (the vast majority of whom are humans) DID NOT have a statistically predictable fraction of perpetrators in their midst.  Why, then, must detractors, politicians and reporters focus SO MUCH of their attention on that remarkably small percentage of troubled adherents in a single fundamentalist Mormon congregation and extrapolate from their failings that the ENTIRE community is crooked, perverted and evil - and that it must be eradicated?

This is just more insanity to me.

  7.   Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you, and ye shall be hated of all nations, for my name's sake;
  8.   And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another;
  9.   And many false prophets shall arise, and shall deceive many;
  10.  And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold;
  11.  But he that remaineth steadfast and is not overcome, the same shall be saved. (Matthew 1, [JST])

An Observation

In Canada's polygamy reference case, since the attorneys general have had so little success demonstrating real societal harms created by the practice of polygamy, they have also resorted to echoing the lamentations of a handful of disaffected ex-members.  Weeks of courtroom time were devoted to the woeful stories recounted by those who had chosen to leave and become crusaders (many of whom called nonetheless for decriminalization).

These were the "star" witnesses - people whose complaints might soon crimp the lifestyle of tens of thousands of current and aspiring future polygamists.  Their testimonies dripped with compelling horror stories, inspiring many a scholar and pseudo-scholar to view their narratives as incontrovertible truth.

Let me just make an observation.  A handful of "happy" current Fundamentalist Mormons (some FLDS and some not) piped up and spoke in earnest about their sincere commitment to their polygamous lifestyle.  They are a just a tiny fraction of the tens of thousands of other devout adherents whose voices were not heard.

Despite the AGs' insistence that the testimony of the ex-members must be believed and trusted, the words and expressions of the faithful current believers had to be trivialized and discounted.  After all, why would we listen to a bunch of criminals?

Just an observation . . . .

Not Messing Around

He's not messing around!  Yesterday, Judge Dee Benson followed through on his promise to give the UEP trust back to the FLDS.  He accepted the settlement compromises negotiated by the Utah Attorney General's office, and removed Brutal Wisass as manager of the trust, requiring him to turn over all pertinent documentation.  Read the AP article.

The FLDS have agreed to comply with the stipulations (not to kick out the ex-members who were given leases, not to sell off UEP trust property, etc.).

Wisass is claiming to be owed (along with Shields) some $1.5 million for his activities in recent years.  "Pay me for the abuse I inflicted on you!" he says.  So, here's what I think - - the fiduciary was hired by the Utah AG's office, and he did the bidding of the AG's office (one would assume).  The UEP trust is a land-holding entity.  It does not have "liquid" cash.  It even allegedly still owes back property taxes.  For Wisass to be paid, there would be three options.  Get ready to select an option - -


1.  Take more money from the FLDS people (GOOD LUCK WITH THAT !!!)
2.  Sell more of the UEP trust property (Benson forbade that, didn't he  . . . . ?)  - - or
3.  Have the Utah AG's office pay him for the spectacular work he did for it.

I vote for number 3.  Is there a fourth option?

I'm Shocked

Last year, Obama, Reid and Pelosi shoved Obaminacare down Americans' throats.  The people are still barely learning the extent of the fraud and insanity built into the health care "reform" scam.  One as-yet-unimplemented provision of it is that, when you go to sell your house, you will have to pay a 3.8% tax on the transaction to pay for this nightmare.

I remember that when it came to crunch time, several Democratic congressmen would not vote for the bill if it contained any provisions to use public funds to pay for abortions.  These representatives were placated by a (weak) promise that the President would issue an executive order to forbid that from happening.  I remember some pundits commenting that such an executive order could end up having no teeth.

So it has come home to roost.  All this week, the two parties have been tussling over how much to cut the budget deficit ($60 billion or $100 billion).  As I write this tonight, the media are reporting that the sticking point is the several hundred million dollars previously set aside to support Planned Parenthood (90% of whose funding goes to kill unborn babies).  Republicans are refusing to agree to any budget compromise that would allow federal money to continue to go to the baby-killers.

The Democratic politicians are blasting the Republicans for using this issue to hold up the agreement and for risking a government shutdown.  They say that the Republicans are jeopardizing the "health of women" (some Planned Parenthood offices perform medical screenings).

I'm shocked that so many Democratic politicians are so stridently pro-abortion, and that they are so desperate to keep the money flowing to Planned Parenthood, that they are willing to let the government shut down over it.  Shame on you!  How do you sleep?

Who Will Be Hurt?

North and south of our northern border, there are scores of political folks who have almost made it their life's mission to make sure that plural marriage will never be decriminalized.  If you pay any attention to the hysterical pleadings of the Canada A.G.s and their pseudo-expert scholars, you'll notice their fears that the decriminalization of polygamy will cause our modern western cosmopolitan society to come to a grinding halt - a vision akin to the plight of Will Smith's character in the "I Am Legend" movie.

If polygamy is decriminalized in British Columbia and Utah, will several of the nuclear reactors in the U.S. melt down?  Will half the population succumb to AIDS?  Will Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama win a second term?  Will the Federal Reserve be forced to agree to be audited?  Will the sex offenders on your street rape your daughters?  Will the sky fall in?  Will God be found to have died in the sixties as was once alleged?  Will the honeybees die off entirely?  Will California fall into the ocean?  Will crops cease to grow?  Will it be revealed that the 9/11 attacks were plotted by U.S. government insiders?  Will Mormons all lose their temple recommends?  Will it be discovered that no LDS Church president had a revelation from God after 1889?  Will the federal government run out of our money?  Will half of the Arab world be on our doorstep tomorrow?  Will the judicial system crumble under the sheer weight of family confusion?

Seriously, though, if polygamy is decriminalized (like homosexuality was in 2003), what bad stuff will happen?  Who will be hurt?  Will more teens be molested - or fewer?  If you hate polygamy, tell me what bad stuff will ensue as a result of decriminalization.  Will the government lose its ability to persecute us?  Will politicians have no more minorities to exploit?  Will Latter-day Saints have no one left to be creeped out about?  Will the Church have to stop marginalizing and vilifying us?  Will Thomas F. Monsoon have to start solemnizing pliggy weddings in the temples? - - - - - - Naahhhh !!!

I'm sorry, it would be one thing if there weren't already tens of thousands of polygs having virtually no bad impact on society - - if the politicians were really sincere in their criticism of us and actually had the courage to follow through with their threats and prosecutions. 

Frankly, I think the whole decriminalization argument is silly.  The question is not just - who would be hurt? - but rather - what would even change?  We won a de facto decriminalization with the gays through Lawrence in 2003.  The only thing that could change would be that people would not be so quick to call us criminals, to call us "polyg"s, to refuse us employment, to invade our schools, to confiscate our livelihoods, to snatch our children, to patronize us, to accuse us of being welfare cheats, to accuse of being child molesters, to laugh at our clothing, to accuse us of racketeering, to deny us the opportunity to be public servants, to spread silly rumors about us in the media without evidence, and to view us as lower than Nazi war criminals . . . . . . . . OR would those things change?

I say that not much would change, and no one would be hurt.  So, you decide.

One Argument

I have been surprised by the sheer volume of material presented and submitted at Canada's polygamy reference trial - - hundreds of affidavits, dozens of witnesses pro and con, months of live testimony, and now weeks of closing arguments.  I pity the poor judge who has to sit there and listen while hired gun lawyers jabber on endlessly about the supposed evils of polygamy.  I can't think of a similar situation in all of history.  The poor judge also knows that after he makes his solitary ruling, it will get appealed to the national justices above him.

In recent weeks, the anti-polygamy legal team has leapt into high gear, racing and begging to get recent sensational media narratives admitted into evidence.  The recent news has dozens of teen girls being trafficked across the U.S./Canadian border (in both directions) for the purpose of plural marriages.  There are also allegations that Warren Jeffs consummated his relationships with very young teens, too.  Stay tuned for the July trial in Texas.

As I have thought through the sheer barrage of pleadings submitted by B.C. A.G., Craig Jones, I have wanted to parse the arguments he and his posse have advanced.  Here is an exhaustive list of his arguments:

Polygamy is an evil concept
Polygamy is bad for humans
Polygamy is harmful to society
Polygamy causes most of the harms in the world

To bolster this vast and diverse set of arguments, Jones has striven desperately to parade an interminable list of all the wrongs ever committed or alleged to have been committed by Mormon Fundamentalists. In a recent post, I challenged the haters to come up with statistics of crimes committed by polygamists in the last 100 years - like domestic violence, murder, rape, etcetera.  I am not oblivious of the allegations regarding young marriages (for which several men remain incarcerated in Texas), but really, the list of crimes committed by polygs is statistically insignificant. This means that 99.999999942678153% of the crimes committed in modern America have been committed by monogs (insulting epithet for monogamists).

So, clearly, Jones' argument can be condensed as follows:

"I think polygamy is bad, so I want it eradicated. so I will endeavor to show that since some polygamists have done some bad things, then no Canadian should ever be allowed to be a polygamist again."

That's it.  That's his whole argument.  The frantic rush to pile on a mounting litany of alleged bad acts is merely an attempt to SHOUT HIS ONE SINGLE ARGUMENT SEVERAL TIMES LOUDER AND SEVERAL TIMES OVER !!!!!

So, Jonesy-boy, you have hitched your wagon to this sole central premise.  If your argument holds water, you should win.  If not, then you lose.  Take a look at my BRILLIANT argument now:

"I think monogamy is bad, so I want it eradicated. and I can show that since many monogamists have done many bad things, then no Canadian should ever be allowed to be a monogamist again."

How do you like that, Jonesy-boy?  My point is this - you have confined yourself to ONE ARGUMENT (mainly because no other argument exists), and your argument is myopic, condescending, disingenuous, insulting and downright illogical [remember my satirical discussion about banning knives].  Honestly, I believe there must be a lapse in your integrity continuum.  You are being paid close to $200,000.00 a year, so you are prostituting yourself to advance for the province an argument which any first-year law student could shoot spit-wads through.  Clearly, you have not learned the flaws in the pseudo-science of basing conclusions on ANECDOTAL DATA. Pretty soon you will be parroting the novelists of the 1800s who insisted that a child born into a Mormon family was likely to be mentally retarded (scientific research be damned).

So, British Columbia Chief Justice Robert Bauman, all eyes are on you.  Can you see through Jones' poppydash, horsewash, hogpucky and baldercock?

The Amicus, George Macintosh, and his illustrious colleagues have responded with these brilliant closing arguments  - - - - - - and these, too.