Re: [ZION] Goodbye
Stacy, I am not interested in joining a list that only discusses one topic, although it might be interesting. I am really interested in a group of committed LDS that can discuss and suggest and gently critique the thoughts of others. There are a lot of questions that I feel need to be discussed - more as a way of checking my own understanding as well as sharing my insights with others. Most lists that say they want to do this allow Anti-Mormons to get on and dominate with their horrible comments. Or allow one person with an extreme, or even a not so extreme but unyielding view, to dominate. Too often one person will not be willing to discuss anything of real meaning because He/She already has the answer. I would like to find a list that does not have that problem. B H Roberts said: In essentials, let us have unity. In non-essentials, let us have liberty. In all things, let us have charity. (If not an exact quote it is close.) That would be a nice standard for any list. George - Original Message - From: Stacy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Goodbye George, I guess I'm still here. I thought I had unsubscribed, but maybe I got sidetracked. There's been so much going on in my life I don't always check to see what lists I'm on anymore. What kinds of things do you wish to discuss? Eternal progression? Exaltation? What will happen to each one of us? I'm not sure I know the answer to the last question as my entire life hasn't come up for review yet. I know I'll have some regrets about the way I've handled my last working situation and I'm afraid I'm going to be in hot water over that one, since I can't right every wrong I committed in that situation. That's my one big regret and I honestly worry I'm going to lose out on that one. Stacy. At 07:29 PM 06/14/2003 -0600, you wrote: I had great hopes of finding a list where I could discuss gospel topics with true believers and not have the anti -Mormon baiters always jumping in with their obnoxious comments. It would be nice if the fellow participants would be willing to discuss without being judgmental if we happen to disagree a bit. I am still looking and would be interested if one of those 10 might fit the criteria. Otherwise I will likely just give up and go back to my study and figure it all out by myself. George - Original Message - From: Bill Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [ZION] Goodbye When you consider why people leave certain lists, I find you must consider the other lists (if any) a person may review. Although, I consider myself a lurker, I'm a member of about 10 other mormon related lists, and I like this one the best. When you consider what is being said on some of the yahoo groups, like thinker, polygomy, libertarian, etc; this is the most tame one that I have come across. Scott McGee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steven asked: Why leave the list because of the few? I completely understand Gary's reasons for leaving. Once upon a time, this list was place where we met together with friends and discussed the gospel and all kinds of other things. It was a great source pleasure and an opportunity to meet many new friends too. Now, however, the list has changed to be more of a debating society. It is a place where people come to debate and contend with each other about gospel related (usually) subjects. Like Gary, I have thought of leaving the list. The major reason I have not is that there continue to be a number of good friends (like Gary, also JWR, ELF, Grandpa Bill, and many others) who post occasional notes. I enjoy this association with them, even though it is often hidden among the other posts. I would probably have already left the list if volume weren't so much lower than I can afford to wade through the rubbish looking for my friends. The list, as a whole, brings me no more of the joy it once did. I just loath losing touch with my friends. Oh, one more point. I used to read each and every post to the list. Even when there were were hundreds a day! When you start skipping threads and such, however, you start to lose interest in most of the day to day chatter that makes up the list. THat is the biggest problem with those who say if you don't like this discussion, just delete it! Once you start that, the list becomes just a list of email messages, not a community to you. That is what has happened to me, and why, one day, I will likely leave too. Scott -- I'd rather be riding! - Scott McGee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) web site: http://themcgees.org/scott/ /// / // /// ZION LIST
[ZION] Lies about Iraqi museum just tip of iceberg
By Charles Krauthammer It took only 48 hours for the museum to be destroyed, with at least 170,000 artifacts carried away by looters. New York Times, April 13 You'd have to go back centuries, to the Mongol invasion of Baghdad in 1258, to find looting on this scale. British archaeologist Eleanor Robson, New York Times, April 16 WASHINGTON Well, not really. Turns out the Iraqi National Museum lost not 170,000 treasures but 33. Baghdad Bob was more accurate. You'd have to go back centuries, say, to the Mongol invasion of Baghdad in 1258, to find mendacity on this scale. What happened? The source of the lie, Director General of Research and Study of the Iraqi State Board of Antiquities Donny George, now says (Washington Post, June 9) that he originally told the media that there were 170,000 pieces in the entire museum collection. Not 170,000 pieces stolen. No, no, no. That would be every single object we have! Of course, George saw the story of the stolen 170,000 museum pieces go around the world and said nothing. Indeed, two weeks later, he was in London calling the looting the crime of the century. Why? Because George and the other museum officials who wept on camera were Baath Party appointees, and the media, Western and Arab, desperate to highlight the dark side of the liberation of Iraq, bought their deceptions without an ounce of skepticism. It played on front pages everywhere and allowed for some deeply satisfying antiwar preening. For example, a couple of nonentities on a panel no one had ever heard of (the President's Cultural Property Advisory Committee) received major media play for their ostentatious resignations over the cultural rape of Baghdad. Frank Rich best captured the spirit of antiwar vindication when he wrote (New York Times, April 27) that the pillaging of the Baghdad museum has become more of a symbol of Baghdad's fall than the toppling of a less exalted artistic asset, the Saddam statue. The narcissism, the sheer snobbery of this statement, is staggering. The toppling of Saddam freed 25 million people from 30 years of torture, murder, war, starvation and impoverishment at the hands of a psychopathic family that matched Stalin for cruelty but took far more pleasure in it. For Upper West Side liberalism, this matters less than the destruction of a museum. Which didn't even happen! What now becomes of Rich's judgment that the destruction of the museum constitutes the naked revelation of our worst instincts at the very dawn of our grandiose project to bring democratic values to the Middle East? Does he admit that this judgment was nothing but a naked revelation of the cheapest instincts of the antiwar left that, shamed by the jubilation of Iraqis upon their liberation, a liberation the Western left did everything it could to prevent, the left desperately sought to change the subject and taint the victory? Hardly. The left simply moved on to another change of subject: the hyping of the weapons of mass destruction. The inability to find the weapons is indeed troubling, but only because it means that the weapons remain unaccounted for and might be in the wrong hands. The idea that our inability to thus far find the WMDs proves that the threat was phony and hyped is simply false. If the U.S. intelligence agencies bent their data to damn Saddam, why is it that the French, German and Russian intelligence services all came to the same conclusion? Why is it that every country on the Security Council, including Syria, in the unanimous Resolution 1441, declared that Saddam had failed to account for the tons of chemical and biological agents he had in 1998? If he had destroyed them all by 2002, why did he not just say so, list where and when it happened, and save his regime? If Saddam had no chemical weapons, why did coalition forces find thousands of gas masks and atropine syringes in Iraqi army bunkers? And does anybody believe that President Bush, Secretary Rumsfeld and General Franks ordered U.S. soldiers outside Baghdad to don heavy, bulky, chemical-weapons suits in scorching heat an encumbrance that increased their risks in conventional combat and could have jeopardized their lives to maintain a charade? Everyone thought Saddam had weapons because we knew for sure he had them five years ago and there was no evidence that he disposed of them. The WMD-hyping charge is nothing more than the Iraqi museum story Part II: A way for opponents of the war deeply embarrassed by the mass graves, torture chambers and grotesque palaces discovered after the war to change the subject and relieve themselves of the shame of having opposed the liberation of 25 million people. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html
RE: [ZION] Goodbye
I wish I knew who it was that said, In essentials let there be unity: in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity. But if I ever knew who said it I cannot now remember who it was, and I don't know that it matters, because the beauty and truth of the utterance is self-evident. It is one of those things which the world has accepted into its literature as being true and sensible, and it matters little who said it since it does not require other authority than the thing itself to commend it to men. (B.H. Roberts, Conference Report, October 1912) // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^
Re: [ZION] Lies about Iraqi museum just tip of iceberg
It took only 48 hours for the museum to be destroyed, with at least 170,000 artifacts carried away by looters. New York Times, April 13 You'd have to go back centuries, to the Mongol invasion of Baghdad in 1258, to find looting on this scale. British archaeologist Eleanor Robson, New York Times, April 16 WASHINGTON Well, not really. Turns out the Iraqi National Museum lost not 170,000 treasures but 33. Baghdad Bob was more accurate. The New York Times has had a credibility problem for years. This particular news item is only the tip of the iceberg. Walter Duranty was one of the worst lie-mongers at the Times. Right now there is a real effort by several Ukrainian-American groups to revoke his Pulitzer prize for lying about Stalin's man-made famine (claiming there wasn't one when he clearly from the evidence knew there was), in the Ukraine which killed at least 10 million Kulaks. Other errors made by the Times was that Fidel Castro was the George Washington of Cuba and not a communist, and that Mao was merely an agrarian reformer and not the committed Marxist-Leninist that he was. -- Steven Montgomery [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper . . The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in a situation to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day. I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens, who reading newspapers, live and die in the belief, that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time . . . General facts may indeed be collected from them, such as that Europe is now at war . . . but no details can be relied on. (Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Norvell, June 11, 1807) // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^
Re: [ZION] Goodbye
At 10:16 AM 6/14/2003, Scott wrote: Like Gary, I have thought of leaving the list. The major reason I have not is that there continue to be a number of good friends (like Gary, also JWR, ELF, Grandpa Bill, and many others) who post occasional notes. I enjoy this association with them, even though it is often hidden among the other posts. I would probably have already left the list if volume weren't so much lower than I can afford to wade through the rubbish looking for my friends. What? I was not included in your list of good friends grin? My suggestion--start such a list of friends. Perhaps you can name it the ZION-FRIENDS list. I would certainly enjoy such a list but then you may not like my association. -- Steven Montgomery [EMAIL PROTECTED] The overall performance of the college graduates in the Convention of 1787 speaks forcefully for the proposition that Latin, rhetoric, philosophy, and mathematics can be a healthy fare for political heroes.Clinton Rossiter // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^
Re: [ZION] Goodbye
Well, the trouble unfortunately is that when man gets together with his fellows there is usually bound to be some contention somewhere once in a while. I don't know how the Nephites were able to do it for so long except that once Christ makes an appearance it usually works for a long period of time. Unless He makes such an appearance it doesn't work. We've now had a little over two thousand years to prove this fact since the last appearance of Christ. Stacy. At 10:34 AM 06/15/2003 -0600, you wrote: Stacy, I am not interested in joining a list that only discusses one topic, although it might be interesting. I am really interested in a group of committed LDS that can discuss and suggest and gently critique the thoughts of others. There are a lot of questions that I feel need to be discussed - more as a way of checking my own understanding as well as sharing my insights with others. Most lists that say they want to do this allow Anti-Mormons to get on and dominate with their horrible comments. Or allow one person with an extreme, or even a not so extreme but unyielding view, to dominate. Too often one person will not be willing to discuss anything of real meaning because He/She already has the answer. I would like to find a list that does not have that problem. B H Roberts said: In essentials, let us have unity. In non-essentials, let us have liberty. In all things, let us have charity. (If not an exact quote it is close.) That would be a nice standard for any list. George - Original Message - From: Stacy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Goodbye George, I guess I'm still here. I thought I had unsubscribed, but maybe I got sidetracked. There's been so much going on in my life I don't always check to see what lists I'm on anymore. What kinds of things do you wish to discuss? Eternal progression? Exaltation? What will happen to each one of us? I'm not sure I know the answer to the last question as my entire life hasn't come up for review yet. I know I'll have some regrets about the way I've handled my last working situation and I'm afraid I'm going to be in hot water over that one, since I can't right every wrong I committed in that situation. That's my one big regret and I honestly worry I'm going to lose out on that one. Stacy. At 07:29 PM 06/14/2003 -0600, you wrote: I had great hopes of finding a list where I could discuss gospel topics with true believers and not have the anti -Mormon baiters always jumping in with their obnoxious comments. It would be nice if the fellow participants would be willing to discuss without being judgmental if we happen to disagree a bit. I am still looking and would be interested if one of those 10 might fit the criteria. Otherwise I will likely just give up and go back to my study and figure it all out by myself. George - Original Message - From: Bill Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [ZION] Goodbye When you consider why people leave certain lists, I find you must consider the other lists (if any) a person may review. Although, I consider myself a lurker, I'm a member of about 10 other mormon related lists, and I like this one the best. When you consider what is being said on some of the yahoo groups, like thinker, polygomy, libertarian, etc; this is the most tame one that I have come across. Scott McGee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steven asked: Why leave the list because of the few? I completely understand Gary's reasons for leaving. Once upon a time, this list was place where we met together with friends and discussed the gospel and all kinds of other things. It was a great source pleasure and an opportunity to meet many new friends too. Now, however, the list has changed to be more of a debating society. It is a place where people come to debate and contend with each other about gospel related (usually) subjects. Like Gary, I have thought of leaving the list. The major reason I have not is that there continue to be a number of good friends (like Gary, also JWR, ELF, Grandpa Bill, and many others) who post occasional notes. I enjoy this association with them, even though it is often hidden among the other posts. I would probably have already left the list if volume weren't so much lower than I can afford to wade through the rubbish looking for my friends. The list, as a whole, brings me no more of the joy it once did. I just loath losing touch with my friends. Oh, one more point. I used to read each and every post to the list. Even when there were were hundreds a day! When you start skipping threads and such, however, you start to lose interest in most of the day to day chatter that makes up the list. THat is the biggest problem with those
