Because of the "good old boys" network, Uchtdorf didn't make the final cut on this cattle call go round.

Since he is/was the darling of the Mormon masses, that he will be missed is an understatement.

And yet the church rationalizes away its decision making process to its own detriment. It is caught in its own sanctimonious act of putting the cart before the horse to keep its stooges happy.

They are a tired old bunch of men. Uchtdorf is too much for what they lack in testosterone. He was the light on the hill that is no match for the dimness in themselves.

Rationalizing and justifying their decisions gets them where exactly? As more and more LDS send in resignations for this and other reasons, with each passing day - it gets more Mormon lighter by the minute.

“Elder Uchtdorf is a great man of the people,” Brian Neff wrote. “Having him out of the office and back traveling the world is a great move, and one that — as I see it — is orchestrated through revelation.”

[Rationalizing a really bad decision as "revelation."]

Yes, Neff said, Mormons will miss hearing from Uchtdorf more.

“But if you believe in the work, as he surely does,” he said, “you’ll know that mixing with the people of the world will be a much richer calling for him. And much richer for the rest of us.”

Excuse after excuse. When it's nothing more than poor judgment on the part of the church and its "good old boys club." And "Group Think." Lest any man should boast, they are all very much the same. That Uchtdorf deviated in personality, charm, charisma, and IQ was too much for their fragile egos to handle.

"https://www.sltrib.com/religion/local/2018/01/17/many-mormons-are-not-high-on-uchtdorfs-lower-profile/

So... You're sad?

Can't speak for Eyring, but Nelson and Oaks have been close friends since '65.

With that in mind, I get why he wanted Oaks.

I think I understand the politics here.

Everyone knows the new boss (same as the old boss) isn't going to be around for long. At least not mentally. So it makes sense to tee Oaks up, give him experience with the long irons (I'm feeling metaphorical as well as allusive). Oaks can gradually assume control so the next transition goes smoothly. Perhaps there is a sense that the church needs younger and more dynamic leadership and Oaks is the most promising candidate in that regard. He has to succeed.

The question then is who gets booted from the Q3? It can't be Eyring, the respected and well-connected elder statesman. So Uchdort is ousted since he is young, junior in seniority, and an outsider. It would have been substantially more shocking to the core membership, I'd think, if Eyring were demoted.

If this is right, the personnel change was more about consolidating Oaks's position than it was about Uchdorf. I suspect everyone more or less likes the silver fox; it's just that he doesn't seem as important to the Q15 as he does to the membership.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think I understand the politics here.
>
> Everyone knows the new boss (same as the old boss)
> isn't going to be around for long. At least not
> mentally. So it makes sense to tee Oaks up, give
> him experience with the long irons (I'm feeling
> metaphorical as well as allusive). Oaks can
> gradually assume control so the next transition
> goes smoothly. Perhaps there is a sense that the
> church needs younger and more dynamic leadership
> and Oaks is the most promising candidate in that
> regard. He has to succeed.
>
> The question then is who gets booted from the Q3?
> It can't be Eyring, the respected and
> well-connected elder statesman. So Uchdort is
> ousted since he is young, junior in seniority, and
> an outsider. It would have been substantially
> more shocking to the core membership, I'd think,
> if Eyring were demoted.
>
> If this is right, the personnel change was more
> about consolidating Oaks's position than it was
> about Uchdorf. I suspect everyone more or less
> likes the silver fox; it's just that he doesn't
> seem as important to the Q15 as he does to the
> membership.

If the church were in need of young and dynamic leadership (with "young" being a relative term) leaving Uchtdorf in place would have made far more sense than did moving Oaks into the Top 3. Furthermore, Peterson wasn't moved into the first presidency in anticipation of taking over as Grand Wizard imperial. In some ways, the President of the Q12 probably assumes more leadership than does a counselor in the first presidency.

Dieter is too popular for his own good as far as Peterson is concerned. Better to move one of his cronies into the presidency and demote Uchtdorf to a position where he can be dispatched out of sight and out of mind.

Despite being 77, with his healthy lifestyle, Uchtdorf may one day beat the odds and ascend to the top spot if Bednar doesn't poison his sparkling water.

Who is Peterson?

I didn't get that, either.

The only Petersen I am aware of when it comes to being a GA was Mark E Petersen.

I don't think he was ever a member of 1st Prez nor President of the 12

Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who is Peterson?

Peterson is Nelson. You know one Scandinavian, you know 'em all. The names are interchangeable.

Plus he has been dead for 3 decades.

I think this is an unusual situation. I think they are setting up Oaks as a regent, much like Hinckley was for about 20 years before assuming the presidency. Much as I despise the man, Oaks has a sold political base in the Q12 and is intelligent and relatively vigorous. So he gets a chance to consolidate power and gradually take the reins from Nelson and the church gets its first competent president in at close to two decades.

Uchtdorf may be popular with the membership, but he doesn't have a base in the Q12. Nor is he anywhere near getting elevated the presidency, so investing in him at this point is a waste.

The church membership (and we) may think Uchtdorf is really important, but I'm pretty confident the Q15 doesn't view him that way. To them he is young, inexperienced, lacking in institutional support, and a foreigner. If his peers view their internal politics as more important than public relations, moving him back to the Q12 is not a costly gambit.

I'm not saying that as a general rule the presidents set up their successors. I'm saying that right now that may be the rationale. Oaks is an especially capable man (again, much as I despise him). He is more like a young(ish) Hinckley than a Monson or a Nelson.

On rare occasions, the church has set up regencies. Hinckley was the last; he was competent until his final years. Oaks may be the next. It would be institutionally sagacious of Nelson to support Oaks in that way.

Uchtdorf has no power in the Q12. Since power there is largely factional, he's not at this point a big advantage in the Q3.

I just hope you haven't underestimated Peterson!!!

LOL!! this is easily the best post of the week.

Thank you. Maybe I'll take the rest of the week off!

I never underestimate Peterson. I think of him every time I get in my Cadillac.

^^^^^ SNORT!!!!

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------
>
> The church membership (and we) may think Uchtdorf
> is really important, but I'm pretty confident the
> Q15 doesn't view him that way. To them he is
> young, inexperienced, lacking in institutional
> support, and a foreigner. If his peers view their
> internal politics as more important than public
> relations, moving him back to the Q12 is not a
> costly gambit.

Most members of the Q15 are likely jealous of Uchtdorf. He's probably smarter, definitely more presonable and articulate, and certainly better looking than the rest of them, and knows how to work a crowd.

It reminds me of footage I saw from a long time ago of Prince Charles and Princess Diana greeting the masses as they walked down a crowd-lined street. Charles took one side, while Diana interated with those on the other side. Thiose on charles' side were noticeably disappointed. Diana was the clear star of that show, just as Dieter is the rock star of the Q 15.

I can personally attest to the fact that he is a nice guy who isn't full of himself in casual situations. I don't want to give too many details, but he visited a nonmember in my family in the hospital when there was no expectation for him to have done so, and was gracious to everyone present.

Oaks is 85 years old. By the time Nelson dies and Oaks becomes president, he wont be alive for very long.

What I'm saying is that Oaks will be the power behind the throne--hence regent--in two or three years.

It's been done before. And Nelson and Oaks are close friends. Nelson bumped Uchtdorf to bring Oaks into a position of power, much like where Hinckley was in the decade before his assumption of power.

There is a difference between formal title and actual influence.

Uchtdorf has charisma and good looks. The others look cadaverous next to him.

I think jealousy and envy were behind this "revelation." Sadly, foolish Mormons will accept it at face value, even if that face has a rictus grin.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2018 08:05PM by donbagley.

donbagley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>rictus grin<

Great use of words!

I had to look that one up! Well done. I first assumed it had something to do with rigor mortis. That would have been applicable too. LOL!

It is not unusual to have more than 2 counselors.

They could have kept everyone and added Oaks. No harm no foul.

I sent Mr. Uchtdorf an urgent plea asking his personal help for a family broken due to Hate, Greed, & Lies, all knowingly approved by tscc; his response:

Nothing, nada, Crickets.

Anyone claiming that he stood to turn things around in Morland should chat with me...

We all know he's a company man. If he stood to turn things around he did it for the personal fame and glory. It certainly wasn't because he cared about those hurt by the lies and deceit of the church.

And that is what burns him now. He invested so much. His only solace is that he's much younger than those currently in charge. He's a patient man. I'm guessing he'll wait this out. But his sex appeal will last only so long . . .

Their staff are directed to eliminate all communications from rank and file members or low level prickhood leaders.

I spoke with a gal in his office who promised me that D.U. would personally get my message.

LOL

I chuckle at our arrogance. We think we can actually read these men's minds. We think we really know what their intent is.

We must have never let go of our Mormon egos when we left.

We are ego kind of people! We got nerve! We got game!

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We are ego kind of people! We got nerve! We got
> game!


Yes we are! We can own it! :)

Angela,

All speculation is, as you note, speculation. But you can intuit a lot from an understanding of people's and institutions' interests on the one hand and their actions on the other. That is the basis of most human interaction in daily life and in fact when dealing with businesses and organizations.

What are this company's interests? How do their actions further their interests?

No thanks, I don't want to buy this used car.

Who's standing next to whom, and all that--lots of fun for Kremlinologists!

DonB, I remember coming across a meme with a picture of Uchtdorf and the caption, "Charisma has silver hair and speaks with an Austrian accent."

I don't follow this stuff much, but my take is that we should be happy that Uchtdorf is NOT in the 1st Presidency, let alone President. His personal appeal would probably induce fence-sitters to stay with the cult. But what do I know? :-/

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
His
> personal appeal would probably induce
> fence-sitters to stay with the cult. But what do I
> know? :-/

This is my point exactly.

The church aka cult has done an anathema by demoting him to the Q12. Akin to a denunciation, in the name of God and everything holy to prop themselves up as they deem fit for the sake of the good old boys club, of which he is still only an outsider.

He is the foreigner among them. Like Saul of Tarsus. He is too good for the likes of those old fogies. They are no match for him, and they know it. Jealousy, not revelation, is their judgment call of the day.

It isn't convincing of their efficacy. Rather, their ineptness. Uchtdorf the German as the next prophet to be? Can't be. He's a golden convert. But the men now making up the presidency are local born multi-generational LDS stodges.

Okay, so Uchtdorf's father was a Nazi.

Can't have him in the presidency or the president of the church with that shadow hanging over his legacy. His.father.was.a.Nazi.

Nuff said.

His dad helped to murder six million Jews during WWII. Why wasn't he prosecuted as a war criminal?

That they converted to Mormonism in Germany during that time speaks volumes. Mormons were complicit in helping the Nazis and were Nazis themselves.

Holy sh*t Uchtdorf!

Please don't blame a man for the errors of his father. Please have a little more compassion than that. Look at many folks on this site. Many of us suffered horribly at the hands of our parents. But we didn't follow suit. We climbed out of the holes.

It is a cloud that will hang over him forever (at least in this lifetime.)

You can't claim/feign to be a godly man, let alone a prophet of God, when his own father was a murderous Nazi who served under Adolf Hitler. Not that any of the men are truly prophets. But his legacy adds to the fallacy instead of diminishing it.

It's a shadow of six million souls hanging over his head, it is.

Who is Uchtdorf really? Aren't they all actors to some degree? He is just a better actor with more charisma than the others. Hitler had charisma too. And he was wily like a fox. They have that in common.

Is Uchtdorf a racist or anti-Semite? I don't know and I don't care. Learning that about his father is enough for me. I've lost respect for him because of his father's crimes against humanity. Add it is mentioned nowhere in his biography other than his father "served in the German army." Another attempt by LDS Inc to whitewash its past.

Isn't going to work. Once the cat's out of the bag, the gig is up Uchtdorf. That German Mormons were complicit in murdering Jews is another fact the church has surreptitiously tried to hide and gloss over - if not for historians bringing it to the light of day.

This is the same sort of nonsense that you applied to people with subcontinental accents. Since they may have been Pakistanis, they were thieves and supporters of ISIS. Since Uchtdorf's father was a NAZI, Uchtdorf is forever tainted.

You really must stop this guilt-by-association, Amyjo. Judge people on their own merits.

He's forever tainted by his ongoing association as a Mormon henchman. His legacy is his own, not his father's.

You wouldn't understand. Nor do I get your association with accents and Pakistanis. Sounds like you're a lot more judgmental than I am.

Based on what motivates you other than rivalry, I don't know.

One thing for certain is you are argumentative to a fault.

Let me refresh your memory.

Catnip had a conversation with a telemarketer. She thought the accent was Pakistani. You said that you were an expert in the field and that Pakistani telemarketers are thieves and support ISIS with their revenues. I accused you of speaking like a racist. You took great offense. I am confident you do indeed recall that very extensive exchange; you can look it up if you want, since most of that thread will still be available.

I really don't care if you deem me argumentative. You should stop blaming people for their associations with others. You had no idea whether the person who spoke to Catnip was Pakistani, nor whether s/he was based in Pakistan, nor whether that person had any relationship with Shia terrorists in Iraq and Syria. You likewise have no insight into Uchtdorf's personal political views and should be ashamed at blaming him for his father's sins.

You are smarter and more humane than what you sometimes post.

I work in Consumer Protection.

Many of the scammers we deal with are Pakistani.

That is factual. Not racist.

You are an ignorant woman to repeat yourself without knowing the facts.

Yes, I am ignorant. I am ignorant of the nationality of the person who spoke to Catnip. I am ignorant of the place where that person was working when s/he spoke to Catnip. I am ignorant of whether that person personally supports ISIS let alone whether that person actually contributed money to ISIS.

But you know what? You are equally ignorant on all those scores. The difference between you and me is that I acknowledge my ignorance and you act as if you know it all when you cannot possibly.

Oh yes, there is also that question of personal responsibility. I maintain that each person bears the onus for his or her own choices and actions. You insist that they are guilty for the sins of their race, religion, or parentage.

Those are the differences.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, I am ignorant. I am ignorant of the
> nationality of the person who spoke to Catnip. I
> am ignorant of the place where that person was
> working when s/he spoke to Catnip. I am ignorant
> of whether that person personally supports ISIS
> let alone whether that person actually contributed
> money to ISIS.
>

Catnip understood the person's accent was Pakistani. I believe Catnip over you. She had the exchange. You did not.


> But you know what? You are equally ignorant on
> all those scores. The difference between you and
> me is that I acknowledge my ignorance and you act
> as if you know it all when you cannot possibly.
>
> Oh yes, there is also that question of personal
> responsibility. I maintain that each person bears
> the onus for his or her own choices and actions.
> You insist that they are guilty for the sins of
> their race, religion, or parentage.
>
> Those are the differences.

You can't possibly know what I do for a living. Or the intricacies of not only consumer protection across the globe, but how ISIS and Al Qaeda have a multi-billion dollar enterprise set up in the art of the con of Americans. They target us through scams, to launder that money into international terrorist operations to deploy against us in their jihad on the west.

Not that you would appreciate knowing any of that. Trying to talk sense to you is like talking to a brick wall.

As for Uchtdorf's religious choice, you're damn right he's guilty of that sin not only of his father but his own volition. He made his bed alongside his father. He can lie in it.

He's become a wealthy apostle from living a lie. That his father was a German Mormon Nazi before Uchtdorf was one himself speaks for itself. Uchtdorf could have changed his stripes if he'd wanted to.

He has not.

For whatever he may have had going for him, the one thing he cannot undo is his past or the Nazi cloud that the church cannot erase anymore than it can erase Joseph's polygamy. It will always be a part of his history. On that basis alone, the church aka cult will brush it under the carpet as it demotes Uchtdorf to a Q12 position from the First Presidency.

Amyjo, you write that Uchtdorf is "guilty of that sin not only of his father but his own volition."

That is an appalling sentiment. No one is guilty for the sin of his or her father.

Uchtdorf is guilty of his own sins. And sin by association with Nazis. Including that of his own father.

He has not denounced his association with Nazi Mormons. Never.

"Uchtdorf is guilty of his own sins. And sin by association with Nazis. Including that of his own father."

I think you will find that few educated and compassionate people share that view.

Frankly, I can’t imagine anyone really being capable of parsing her phrases and coming up with a clear picture as to what she’s trying to say, other than “Uchdorf bad man”, which causes scratching of the head, given that she started this thread with backhanded praise for the man.

Nor has Uchtdorf climbed out of "his hole." He's made his livelihood serving the Mormon Nazi master.

The Mormon Church is not NAZIs. They are evil and detestable but on a small scale. They come nowhere near what Hitler and his cronies did.

You trivialize global tragedies with this drivel.

Then you haven't studied the history of Nazism and Mormons.

Your bad.

You may have “studied”, but the consensus is that you have failed to learn. Isolating a few facts to support a belief does not satisfy being learned.

One thing I'm pretty sure of, Amyjo, is that I have generally studied more than you. And yes, that probably does include the association between the Mormon Church and the NAZIs in the 1930s. I know that you keep raising that connection, as if it were a mantra bringing you closer to God, but repetition does not render an idea more or less true.

I also know that Uchtdorf was five years old when World War TWo ended. He had no meaningful involvement with, or responsibility for, either Nazism or Mormonism during the NAZI era. He consequently should not be smeared with those two movements.

And no, I sincerely do not consider you a rival.

His father was a Mormon Nazi.

Uchtdorf converted when his parents did to Mormonism.

He has remained loyal to his parents and Mormonism for his lifetime. It has never been discussed that his father murdered Jews during the Holocaust because it was carefully glossed over by the Mormon church in its whitewashing of history.

Ring familiar much? It does to me.

It doesn't get him off the hook however. He is complicit too, by his silence.

You act like a rival.

No, I don't consider you a rival. I don't think you understand what I mean when I say that, but I assuredly do not see you in that role.

I generally try to avoid interactions with you. But I take individual responsibility, and ethnic and cultural generalizations, seriously. So I join with those who ask you politely not to slur people for the actions of others.

Uchtdorf is not responsible for what his father may have done when he was three years old. No one is guilty for the sins of his or her father.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, I don't consider you a rival. I don't think
> you understand what I mean when I say that, but I
> assuredly do not see you in that role.

You act like one. I don't follow you around attacking your posts like you do mine.

>
> I generally try to avoid interactions with you.
> But I take individual responsibility, and ethnic
> and cultural generalizations, seriously. So I
> join with those who ask you politely not to slur
> people for the actions of others.

That is laughable because it is a bold faced lie. You jump right into my threads to take your pot shots. I'd say that's leaping.

>
> Uchtdorf is not responsible for what his father
> may have done when he was three years old. No one
> is guilty for the sins of his or her father.

No, he is responsible for his own sins of omission and his silence to his father's crimes against humanity. Where is his outrage?

It is missing. That in itself is egregious.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 04:18AM by Amyjo.

And no, I doubt you have studied more than I have.

Other than you pretend to act like a know-it-all. You seem pretty ill informed based on your suppositions, conjectures, and flying off the handle like you do.

For you to even say such a thing denotes your insecurity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 04:09AM by Amyjo.

Well, that's me. Insecure.

You nailed it.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Because of the "good old boys" network, Uchtdorf
> didn't make the final cut on this cattle call go
> round.

So, some one who was part of the LD$ inc good old MORmON boys network, some one who has ALREADY REAPED INCREDIBLE EVEN OBSCENE REWARDS FROM BEING PART OF THE LD$ Inc good old MORmON boys network supposedly got cut down by the LD$ Inc good old MORmON boys network .....what a tragedy!!!! ........HOW LONG are we supposed to cry about that one ??????

You make it sound AS IF Uctdorf was fired/ dismissed. He was NOT !!! He is still an ASSpostHOLE. He is still going to get his great big fat LD$ inc paycheck that they will NOT talk about. He is still an LD$ Inc exec. People who are looking will STILL be able to see him as a face representing LD$ Inc.


> Since he is/was the darling of the Mormon masses,

Hey, Guess What !!!! -All of them, each and every one of THE MORmON ASSpostHOLES are the darlings of the MORmON masses, to one extent or another, to various factions with in MORmONISM.
Who the favorite is depends on which MORmON member is being spoken to....

.....but it sounds AS IF *some one* has a special particular interest in Uctdorf......


> that he will be missed is an understatement.

NOW, you make it sound like Uctdorf died. That was Monson that passed away ! NOT Uctdorf!

>
> And yet the church rationalizes away its decision
> making process to its own detriment.

THE (MORmON) church rationalizes LOTS of things, (some to its own detriment, FAR more to the detriment of its members who will put up ......and pay for LD$ inc garbage) MOST of which are far more grievous than the nearly inconsequential / nearly meaningless minor shuffling of their executive stooges below the very top position at LD$ inc. Besides Monson departing, Nelson ascending to THE very pinnacle of LD$ inc, and a new vacancy for THE 12 ( really 15 plus or minus 1 or 2 ) being created, Not much has really changed. And for those that do not really care about (the trifling nuances of) MORmON internal affairs -the vast majority of people, still nothing of real consequence has happened.

(if/as related?)

the bigger picture is tscc's complete contempt & disregard - disconnect from the rank & file.

I'm not buying that D.U. noticed that, let alone was interested in resolving it, but that fragrance seemed to follow him, at least to moi.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> They are a tired old bunch of men.


AS IF Uctdork is a young guy !!!!! He is only young in comparison to his very over the hill comrades.

> Uchtdorf is too
> much for what they lack in testosterone. He was
> the light on the hill that is no match for the
> dimness in themselves.

You seem to have forgotten that you despise testosterone. and yet, There you are seemingly longing for it. .....Inconsistent much ????

>
> Rationalizing and justifying their decisions gets
> them where exactly? As more and more LDS send in
> resignations for this and other reasons, with each
> passing day - it gets more Mormon lighter by the
> minute.

and the current uctdork deal really has so VERY LITTLE to do with the decline of LD$ Inc and the MORmON religion.

Again. LD$ inc indulges in lots of blunders. The uctdorf thing is an utter trifle!!!! compared to other stuff that LD$ inc does. Especially as it can be endlessly argued whether it was a good move, or not, just as the newspaper article does, even as LDS inc is certainly in decline and will remain that way. Regardless of what happens with uctdork. .....even as LDS inc indulges in LOTS of blunders!!!!

I've changed my position since I began this thread.

Uchtdorf deserved his demotion. The church wants to hide his history from more bad publicity during a time it is bleeding members.

The church aka cult cannot serve two masters. But it does. It presumes to serve God while instead it serves mammon.

Uchtdorf is collateral damage the church can afford to demote in its "latter days."

wow.

Funny. I read that book but for some reason I do not recall it saying that children are responsible for the sins of their parents.

I must have missed that chapter.

Dieter Uchtdorf is complicit in his silence.

The Uchtdorf family joined the church when Deiter was a kid, via a grandmother. Karl, his dad, is said to have been drafted into the German army in 1940, and is reported to have been anti-nazi, which does not strain credulity, given that only one in ten men in Germany joined the Nazi party.

As it stands right now, you seem to have done an about-face on Deiter in less than 12 hours. Did you buy and read your cited book in that time? If not, where did you learn that his dad was a nazi and killed Jews?

My source was the only red*dit citation on page one when you ask Google for info on Karl Albert Uchtdorf.

I just know I’m going to be fascinated with your reply.

He couldn't have served in the German army without being complicit in the murder of innocent Jews during the Holocaust.

Brilliant analysis.

And every young man who was drafted and sent to Vietnam is complicit in the American atrocities in that war. And every soldier alive during the Nazi era or the Communist era in Russia or China was guilty as well.

But you go further when you state that a four-year-old Uchtdorf bears responsibility for the murder of Jews in Germany because his father may (or may not) have had a role in the Holocaust. How old were you during the Vietnam War?

Were your parents alive when the US interned the Japanese Americans? If so, are they complicit in that? Wouldn't that mean, by the logic you apply to Uchtdorf, that you are guilty of that internment because your parents were complicit?

Your inter-generational logic effectively condemns every living human, all of whose ancestors were complicit by dint of consanguinity in some atrocity.

Original sin, that is.

The Mormon German Nazis murdered Mormon Germans for being Resistance Fighters.

Mormon Germans uncovered Jews for the Nazis to execute in the concentration camps.

Mormon German Nazis placed swastikas on their churches banning Jews from entering.

Other people resisted. Why were the Mormon Germans so complicit?

Do you even care that they were responsible for the murder of innocent Jews, men women and children? Or homosexuals? The disabled? You are complicit if you think that was alright or excused for any reason. It was genocide.

That some people had the rectitude to resist and risk their lives to save others speaks for itself.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 05:09AM by Amyjo.

Ah, now we are "complicit" in the Holocaust because we disagree with you.

That's a pretty egocentric view of reality, isn't it?

No, it's in your defending those who were responsible that's reprehensible.

So... Every soldier in the Wehrmacht was in on killing innocent Jews!

Fascinating, but not true, not by a long shot. It’s very interesting, and revealing, that you would flaunt this belief.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 04:50AM by Amyjo.

A strange quotation in the context of our discussion. Are you being ironic?

Burke was a staunch critic of the French Revolution and its blanket condemnation and execution of entire classes of people due to their "guilt by association." He argued that it was morally and practically wrong to blame people for the sins of their fathers, which is precisely the argument you produced ad nauseam above.

Can you explain that contradiction? Because you surely have read Reflections on the Revolution in France.

This saying has been adapted to the atrocities of the Holocaust. Not that you seem to understand history. Elie Wiesel's' adaptation should suffice. It means the same. And no it isn't for the sins of the fathers. It is the sins of omission of people like Dieter Uchtdorf, or you, or others to turn your back on basic humanity.

“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing.” ~Elie Wiesel.

You have changed your argument. Above you said, several times, that Uchtdorf was guilty by dint of parentage. Now you are, wisely, retreating.

But your new argument is equally specious. You quote Burke, whose foremost proposition was precisely the opposite of yours. Apparently you didn't know that because you didn't read Reflections on the Revolution.

Wiesel offers you no better purchase. Have you read Night? If so, you'd know that he insists on individual responsibility and rejects blanket "guilt by association."

The bottom line is you are not going to find highly ethical people who advocate what you wrote so stridently above. Why? Because it is not ethical.

Uchtdorf is complicit by his silence.

You lack reading comprehension.

His inaction and inability to denounce what his father did or the Germans did to the Jews is a sin by omission.

He has had ample opportunity to denounce and become a spokesperson for good to undo that which was done or attempt to.

Instead he has used his position for self-gain and his livelihood built on the back of his German Mormon Nazi father. He has to know he's living a lie.

On many fronts.

The silence of people who, as children, did no wrong does not render them guilty. That you would assert that it does, and that the standard for rehabilitation is whether the person demonstrates enough public self-criticism to satisfy you personally, is egocentric nonsense.

As for my reading comprehension, I evidently did better with Burke and Wiesel than you did. That offers me some consolation in the dark days of your disapproval.

That quote by Burke and Elie Wiesel has been in wide circulation because of the Holocaust, not the French Revolution.

It just went right over your head because you still fail to grasp its significance or how it applies to Uchtdorf.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 05:29AM by Amyjo.

You’re being too polite...

Amyjo is trying to bully her way it of the mess she made by being contentious, apparently never having accepted the notion that “Oops, my bad!” is perfectly acceptable in polite society.

There is nothing polite about you old dog, or your sock puppet.

She did it again!

Thank you, Amyjo. I take it as a compliment to be associated in any way with a man whose intellect (and actual, rather than feigned, experience in investigation and law enforcement) are so impressive.

You are too kind.

Aw, Jesus! As if she wasn’t pissed off enough as it was!!

If I reply to your post, does that mean you are talking to yourself?

AmyJo, you are over thinking this.

Occum's razor. Oaks and Nelson have been good and close friends since 1965. Way before they were made apostles. Oaks is next in line. It makes sense for both of these reasons that Nelson would want to work with him. And they have been serving in the Q12 together, while Uchtdorf has not been serving with them.

If anything, because of Uchtdorf charisma, he is now even more free to travel freely and talk to the membership face to face, as oppose to these past years, especially the past few, he has had to stay centralize in SLC as a member of the 1st President.

It's been said that the youth love him. Well now he is going to have more time to try and help keep them involved.

Angela, we’re way beyond that...

Thanks Angela for your input. At least you aren't trying to hijack my thread unlike a couple of others are. That's how they get their jollies.

Your rationale is the one the church is using. I read that. It was upon the closer reading of Uchtdorf's biography that there was more there than would see on a first inspection. His German Nazi background is something that has become more important these past several years because the historical book about Mormons and the Swastika was published in 2015. No one knew about the Mormon connection to Nazism before then.

But thank you for your feedback. That is exactly what the church is saying as to why he was 'demoted.' :)

I think if you were to go back and review the posts above, you would see that it was you who, with your guilt by association contention, "derailed" your thread. Everything since then has been a discussion of your explicit claims.

So please don't blame us for the derailment. All we did was disagree with an egregious predilection for condemnation of whole groups of people rather than consideration of each individual on his or her own merits.

I've learned long ago that you are an appendage here.

I don't have to agree with you or you with me. It is not I chasing you around trying to heckle you.

That is your schtick, not mine.

Whatever gets you through the night.

I have better things to do than heckling others.

Apparently not.

LOLOLOLOL.

But, but, but... If you stand by and do nothing, evil will triumph!!

No one wants that to happen, including Lot’s Wife and myself, even though we are only appendages.

And there is frankly nothing "jolly" about this. Your blanket statements about Pakistanis and Germans are patently racist and hence offensive as hell.

I for one am not going to stand by and watch while you exhibit the mentality that feeds Jim Crow in the best of times and pogroms in the worst. This is not argument for argument's sake. It's about common decency.

You are offensive, salty one.

You don't know the first thing about what has been shared by either catnip or myself as to scammers. It isn't racist to call a spade a spade. When you get contacted by a scammer you learn to look for the warning signs. It isn't a race. It can be a voice or an accent, yes. It is more a pitch as to what they're trying to rip you off for. That is the giveaway.

So stop with your judgmentalism, and grow up why doncha?

Instead of remaining a juvenile delinquent for life. Get over yourself already.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 05:40AM by Amyjo.

"Juvenile delinquent?" That hurts, Amyjo, it really does.

I can't imagine you hurting anywhere in your body over anything at all. You're desensitized.

I am not desensitized enough to tolerate the condemnation of whole groups of people based on parentage, race, or accent. That, at least, still gets through.

You've condemned yourself to me.

I do not condemn anyone based on parentage, race or accent. I judge people by their actions, their character, and their integrity.

That's the key difference between us. You judge others unfairly.

I consider people on a case by case basis, without categorizing.

That you lack character, integrity, or virtue. That much is apparent to me.

Amyjo writes that "I consider people on a case by case basis, without categorizing." Amyjo should read her comments above about everyone in the Wehrmach being guilty, by association, of the Holocaust; and about Uchtdorf being guilty of Nazi atrocities by dint of his parentage.

Amyjo writes to me that "That you lack character, integrity, or virtue. That much is apparent to me." She apparently thinks she knows me. She apparently also thinks her judgment and condemnation matter to me.

She is mistaken.

I'm not mistaken.

You are over and over again.

That makes you a dufus to continually criticize me as you do.

So you like being my enemy. Fine with me.

If you like being at war, wail away.

From reading your posts I know all there is to know about you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 05:57AM by Amyjo.

Again, that comprehension problem. . .

When I say you are mistaken, the antecedent in the preceding sentence. So, "Amyjo is mistaken when she assumes I care what she thinks of me." That's grammar. That's how it works.

As for calling me a "doofus," that really hurts. It's like when you called me a "juvenile delinquent" or a "sock puppet." I haven't been so humiliated since the third grade.

I frankly don't care whom I am arguing with. If someone spouts racist, ethnocentric, egocentric views, I will criticize that vigorously. If that means I am a "doofus" who should "bite my ass," so be it.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Again, that comprehension problem. . .
>
> When I say you are mistaken, the antecedent in the
> preceding sentence. So, "Amyjo is mistaken when
> she assumes I care what she thinks of me." That's
> grammar. That's how it works.

Of course you don't care. Who would think such a thing? I never thought you did.
>
> As for calling me a "doofus," that really hurts.
> It's like when you called me a "juvenile
> delinquent" or a "sock puppet." I haven't been so
> humiliated since the third grade.

I can't imagine you hurting over anything since it is you trolling this thread. Since third grade? Were you a sock puppet in third grade? Did you even have a computer in the third grade? Aren't you a little old to make that claim?
>
> I frankly don't care whom I am arguing with. If
> someone spouts racist, ethnocentric, egocentric
> views, I will criticize that vigorously. If that
> means I am a "doofus" who should "bite my ass," so
> be it.

And I will rail against anti-Semites and those who are complicit in the murder and annihilation of the Jews. You've called me plenty of names on this thread. Of which I am not a racist or a bigot. I love all people except racists and bigots, and if that includes you so be it. Because you can't hate the Jews and not be a bigot.

A quick review finds that Lot's Wife has not called you any names. Where am I amiss? Because if you were called any names, I want to see if they are appropriate or not. I don't like inappropriate name calling.

Amyjo, anyone who says that a Pakistani telemarketer is by definition an ISIS financier is a racist. Go back and look at what you said in that thread. It was appallingly racist.

Likewise, anyone who says all Germans, or all German solders, and their children are guilty of the Holocaust is a racist. She is saying that consanguinity equals shared guilt. That is a barbaric standard that the Jews rightfully rejected around 600 BCE.

Your bringing in anti-semitism is a red herring. You are trying to shift attention away from your own racial and cultural prejudices. Are we really to believe that someone who views sin and guilt as communal in nature would not be an anti-semite if she grew up a Palestinian, for instance?

Just because there are one or two ethnic groups that you view as virtuous does not mean you are free of prejudice. The question is how you look at others. And for some reason, rather than acknowledging an error, you keep doubling down on the communal guilt that you think characterizes Germans and Pakistani Moslems.

Your record on this board is racist. One can only hope you grow out of that.

I am calling her a racist now.

And I'm calling you an asshole.

Yes, yes. You have called me a "juvenile delinquent," a "know it all," a "doofus," a "sockpuppet," a "bully," a "coward," and a number of other things. All without knowing anything about me.

Now you call me an "asshole." That particular epithet may be true. But again, you don't know me well enough to say that.

I do, however, know that you treat people as groups--at least people you don't like--and condemning the lot of them for the sins of others in that particular group. You have insisted on that many times on several threads.

Do you know what we call people who criticize others based on their ethnic, linguistic, or cultural identities? Yes, I think you know.

You call me a racist; it's the least I can do since you're a bold faced liar.

Because that's what you are - look at how you've been harassing me on my own thread.

She'll get a mod to scrub it. She has a pattern of getting her crap removed, thinking that her character thus remains hidden.

You mean your crap, old dog. You've been crapping all over the place.

I don't have a pooper scooper big enough to pick up all your droppings.

"crap" and "droppings" again, as she criticizes us for juvenile or barnyard behavior.

I do hope they leave this up for a while, Amyjo. You have embarrassed, or should have embarrassed, yourself on numerous fronts.

Hahahahahahaha. Leave your crap up for mods to find it?

LOLOLOLOL. Too funny. It's your mess. Clean it up!

Yes, I know. Pretty much whenever she gets pissed off, she gets the offensive material removed although her insults and rants stay up. I realized an hour ago that this--my comments and yours--would go away.

I don't really care. The point I was making about implicit racism has been made. Some have read it, most won't.

I just get exercised when people use Detroit and Compton as synonyms for Black people, or condemn Germans for something over which they had no control, or announce to the world that Pakistani telemarketers funnel their money to ISIS, or make racist statements about Moslems or Jews. It is worth it to me to point out the idiocy, and frankly the invidiousness, of such statements.

Most of what I have posted will go away in the morning. I'm still glad I called this "spade a spade," if we must use Amyjo's borderline racist terminology, since I made my point.

And besides, I was called elderolddog's sockpuppet again. . . One day I'll tell my grandkids about that!

Uchtdorf is complicit in his silence and by his omission that his father was a Nazi German served in the German army during the Holocaust and was therefore complicit in the murder of millions of Jews.

If Uchtdorf really had a conscience he'd have spoken out about it, and be outspoken is why I now believe he doesn't have a place at the table to be a spokesman for good or he would have already.

What you don't understand to your detriment was no reason to sabotage my thread.

Karma is the energy force that returns kind in kind.

You sabotaged your own thread when you produced your racist screed, as slskipper said. We found your racism and your guilt by association offensive.

If you didn't want the discussion to go that way, you should not have taken it there. It's as simple as that.

You trolled your own thread.

Uchtdorf is guilty by his silence. That makes him complicit in the coverup of the crimes of his father. Period.

What crimes? What are the charges? What facts support the charges?

You just hauled off and convicted him and then demanded that his son apologize, and then convicted him, too, because you've never heard him talk about the issue.

You are a liar, a racist. And an anti-Semite.

As far as I'm concerned that makes you scum to me for making false accusations against me calling me a racist when it's the furthest thing from the truth. It tells me more about you.

I'm writing about the Holocaust and the genocide of millions of innocents at the hands of Nazi Germans. And you have the gall to call me a racist on trumped up, falsified reasons in your imaginary world.

Wrong.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 06:59AM by Amyjo.

Again, you call me an anti-semite on no grounds other than the fact that I disagree with you. You realize that is not an argument, right?

I have been accused many times on this board of making it unpleasant for white people because I complain of explicit and implicit racism. That makes me an anti-racist, not a racist.

But you are way past the point of logical discussion: you are throwing out epithets. That's all. Have at it.

No, I said catnip's telephone scammer calling from Pakistan was a telemarketing scammer. That doesn't make me a racist anymore than it does you.

But you are an ignoramus to falsely accuse me as well as a troll.

In other words, a loser who doesn't have anything better to do throw darts around like the jerk that you are making your false accusations against me.

Silly person.

You did not know if the person was a Pakistani; catnip surmised he was but you never heard the voice. You did not know whether that person was based in the US or any other country: you just assumed he was in Pakistan. You did not know whether that person sympathizes or supports ISIS, but you asserted it as an obvious conclusion.

The only way you could possibly have arrived at those conclusions is by assuming that the telemarketer fit a pattern, belonged to a group that was evil. That pattern was, by your own account, based on racial stereotype. It was therefore racist.

You did the same thing with Germans. You evidently believe that generalizations based on race are accurate, which makes you a racist. Put simply, if you assume personality, politics, and banking habits simply on an impression of race, you perforce are not seeing people as individuals.

No one is hiding the ball. If you don't like the image you portray, change it either by hiding your racism or, better yet, reconsidering those views.

Holey Moley, Amyjo, this person used the word "perforce"!! And used it correctly!!

I know the word and have used it and am thus impressed, which is to say, I like myself, and this new person as well.

...just wanted to get that off my chest. Thank you.

That's not true.

Based on my work, where I work we deal with Pakistanis on a regular basis as scam artists.

We educate the public as to what to watch out for. Since you think you are better informed, good luck with that.

My field is helping to educate people how not to become victims of scams.

It only works when the people we try to reach are teachable.

As for Germans, it was a Mormon Nazi German I was discussing. Nothing more, nothing less.

A Mormon Nazi German.

What part of that did you miss?

No, it was assuredly NOT a Nazi you were attacking. You were attacking a boy, five years and younger, whose father was drafted into the Nazi army. You were blaming a child for the Holocaust. You did it on the basis of the boy's race and parentage.

Visiting the sins of the fathers on the heads of the children is a retrograde morality; it is evil. You should be ashamed to have promoted it so aggressively.

I did no such thing.

I merely said he is complicit by his silence and that in itself is a sin of omission.

You really lack reading comprehension!

Well, since you ask, I missed the part where Deiter and/or his dad, Karl, were linked to nazism and culpability in the Holocaust. Now obviously young Deiter did not kill anyone during the war and likely did not swear allegiance to nazism, which leaves the dad.

So far the only evidence put forward was what I found, indicating that Karl was drafted into the Wehrmacht in 1940 and that there was an indication that he was anti-nazi.

In the face of this offering, you said that anyone serving in the Wehrmacht was guilty of being involved in the Holocaust. And that Deiter was a bad man for not doing something (I don't know what!) about it. If he didn't believe his dad to be a nazi and didn't believe his dad was involved with killing Jews, why would he need to expiate any guilt? This is where you went off the rails.

NB: For the record, this thread went way over the 60 post limit as it was fast moving and no mods saw it in time to close it before it received over 100 replies.

Also, Admin does not "scrub" a thread at a poster's request. Moderator action is only taken when merited by board guidelines not being observed.

Re this thread, which developed into a contentious topic, some name-calling (against board rules) was left in to avoid distorting context.

Thread now closed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2018 02:30PM by Maude.

The reason we left some posts up in this thread that may otherwise have been deleted (eg: name-calling) was to preserve context, as I previously mentioned. We think the topics of racism and "sins of the fathers" are important ones to discuss re Mormonism and life in general. We ask that all posters focus on the topics and not on arguing with each other about them.

If you don't think going on the attack is trashy, that's your opinion.

I find most of your posts on this thread to be derogatory, and you intended them to be that way. Why else did you hijack my thread with your sidekick?

It was a meritorious topic for me to discuss. Not to get into a brawl over with you and dusty.

You're retired though, and don't seem to mind.

I found it noteworthy that Uchtdorf's father was a German Nazi/Mormon. Very noteworthy, and merited discussion.

Yes, it does merit discussion.

But you didn't want to discuss that topic. You asserted group responsibility for sin, a repugnant notion. Then you defended that notion ad nauseam and, in extremis, resorted to your usual third-grade insults.

You trolled your own thread. We followed your lead right into the morality of stereotyping. If you didn't want to talk about that, or to defend it, you shouldn't have raised the topic.

You should have taken slskipper's advice and have steered away from your racist assignment of guilt to everyone of a specific nationality.

There was no discussion, only condemnation.

And no one but you has called Karl, the dad, a nazi mormon. Maybe he was, but I've yet to see any evidence.

Deiter's grandmother was the person who got the family on the road to conversion, when he, Deiter, was a kid, during the war. No one in the family was mormon up until then. So it's not logical to assume that the dad, away in the army, was a mormon nazi. He was likely neither!

Discussions based on available data are much more productive, compared to condemnations based on emotion.

That's the coverup.

Good grief. For all the Mormon coverups, this is just one more.

Both Dieter and the cult have been whitewashing that history for as long as he's been an apostle.

Doesn't matter if his grandmother joined first. His dad did. And so did Dieter. His dad served in the Nazi war machine. What more is there to say? He's complicit in war crimes.

Dieter is complicit by his silence.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2018 07:19AM by Amyjo.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's the coverup.
>
> Good grief. For all the Mormon coverups, this is
> just one more.
>
> Both Dieter and the cult have been whitewashing
> that history for as long as he's been an apostle.
>
>
> Doesn't matter if his grandmother joined first.
> His dad did. And so did Dieter. His dad served in
> Nazi war machine. What more is there to say? He's
> complicit in war crimes.
>
> Dieter is complicit by his silence.


Okay, got it. Served/drafted, doesn't matter, he is complicit in the deaths of six million Jews. What a bastard! And Deiter has not apologized. He's as bad as his dad!