First Presidency letter
On October 18th, Zo-ma-rah blogged about a First Presidency letter that was read in his sacrament meeting. He wrote:
This Sunday was interesting. After opening the meeting we were greeted with a nice letter from the Brethren™. The letter instructed us to not participate in self help groups. Specifically they instructed [us] to avoid groups that:
1. Challenge Church™ teachings.
2. Advocate confrontation with spouse as a means for self improvement.
3. Imitate the sacred rites and rituals of the Church™.
4. Involve physical contact with others.
5. Meet late in the evening or early in the morning.
6. Involve confession.
7. Involve pairing of spouses with others.
These points might be a bit generalized, but I was taking notes [as] fast as my little hands could write, and that’s the gist of what was said.
To this I responded:
Some of the points on that list may be pointing to some of the stuff I’ve written (#’s 1, 3, and 7.) I wonder if my blog is under church surveillance (along with certain other bloggers)?
Later, a second person told me that this same First Presidency letter was read in their sacrament meeting and as they listened, all they could think about was that this letter was talking about me and the LDS Anarchy blog.
The lone wolf
A friend of mine, who believes in “the powers that be” (TPTB), once told me that what TPTB most fear is a lone wolf, someone who operates outside of the normal channels, who doesn’t give a damn what people think of him and so is not overly concerned of the consequences of his words and actions. Such a man, this lone wolf, is not restrained by normal customs and protocols, but can operate independently from institutional controls, inflicting great harm on existing systems. As he has no ties to organizations that can constrain his actions or influence his behavior, he is unpredictable. Predictability is extremely important to control methods.
Now, I’m not saying that I’m a lone wolf, but the Lone Wolf and Cub movies are some of my all-time favorite flicks. 😉
Anyway, if this blog has been assigned lone wolf status and the Brethren are taking measures to steer the membership away from the principles set forth here, I thought it would be beneficial to explain exactly what the Brethren can do to people who implement some of these ideas. Specifically, I wish to address point #7, “the pairing of spouses with others.”
Serious consequences
There are serious consequences to consider before attempting to establish a tribe using the multihusband-multiwife marriage system. If it is learned that you are even planning such an activity, you will be disciplined. The two ways of discipline in our religious institution are disfellowship and excommunication, however, because entire Mormon families are typically plugged into Mormonism, there will be further repercussions from one’s family and perhaps even friends as they spurn and/or pity you when they learn of your “apostacy.”
All of this must be weighed in the balance when considering exiting out of the confines of monogamy. There is also the law of man to consider, which does not allow polygamy. This means that to obey the laws of the state, one must practice polygamy without a state marriage license. If you attempt to marry more than one spouse using a marriage license for each one, that puts you under the jurisdiction of the bigamy laws.
Marriage without a state license is approved of God, so the state’s jurisdiction can be entirely by-passed, but the church still poses a problem if they find out what you are doing. The question then is whether the church can be kept out of one’s tribal business. To that end, I thought it would be beneficial to review some marriage scenarios to determine how easy or difficult it would be to practice the multiple spouse marriage system without the church finding out.
Marriage scenario #1: Two single people
First, let’s talk about a single man and a single woman who desire to marry. If they marry without a marriage license, by covenant between themselves only, and start living together, chances are that word is going to get out one way or another that two “unmarried” people in the church are living together (living in sin). Now, living together does not equate to having sex, but we all know how people think.
If the couple attends church and continues to partake of the sacrament, while living together, chances are that they will be asked to come in to the bishop’s office for a chat. The bishop will surely inquire about the circumstances of this highly irregular event.
Probably the first thing he will ask is if this couple is married. It is a possibility that the couple has gotten married in secret, in a civil ceremony. Perhaps they eloped to Las Vegas or something.
There are two ways that the couple can respond to questions about their marriage. They can say that they are married, which would be the truth as they entered into a covenant of marriage with each other, or they can say that they aren’t married, which would be the truth as they aren’t married in the eyes of the state because they never got a marriage license.
If they say that they aren’t married, there will be inquiries about whether they are still living the law of chastity, about the living arrangements they have made, with pressure to separate, repent, etc.
If they say that they are married, there will be inquiries about the details of their marriage. When and where they got married, wedding pics, the bridal dress, etc. If the couple divulges the details of the marriage, that it was by personal covenant-only, the bishop, the members, their family and also many other people will not consider it a bona fide marriage and the church will consider them living in sin and take action accordingly. If, however, the couple plans to keep the details secret and arranges circumstances so that it appears that they “left town,” eloped and returned married, the membership and leadership will more readily accept that, (though they will be chided for not getting a temple marriage.)
For example, a man and a woman can arrange their affairs so that they are both free on a certain date. They can leave their homes early and go off to some faraway place where others they know would not look for them and then they can enter into their marriage covenant. They can stay away for a sufficiently long time to allow for an apparent elopement to Vegas and back. When they return, the man and the woman can sport wedding rings, move in together and live their lives from that moment on as husband and wife.
When asked about their wedding, they can say they eloped. When asked when they were married, they can say the date that they entered into their marriage covenant. When asked where they were married or if they can show pictures or, for the really nosy ones, a marriage certificate, they can say, “We wish to keep the details of our elopement private, which is why we eloped in the first place.” For proof of their marriage, they can show their wedding rings. As long as they project to the public that they are married, the public will consider them married, including all church officers.
The drawback to this will be a denial of a temple wedding sealing. The Brethren will not allow them to be sealed without a valid state marriage license or certificate, so they will have to wait until the work for the dead is done for them for their time marriage to be turned into an eternity marriage.
Marriage scenario #2: A married couple and a single individual
In the case of a married couple that wishes to add another spouse to its marriage arrangement, by covenant-only without a state marriage license, which is the only non-illegal way it can be done anyway, the man or woman who is to be married to the second spouse, with permission of the first spouse, can have a private meeting with the second spouse, in which they enter into a marriage covenant. Living arrangements can either remain as is, with the new spouse living alone in their own dwelling, or the family can be combined under one roof.
If the two husbands or two wives have separate dwellings, nothing out of the ordinary would be noticed. If the two husbands or two wives live under the same roof, church members may notice and begin inquiring or report what they see to their bishop, who may end up calling these three members into his office.
During a bishop’s inquiry, a couple may simply say that they, the couple, invited so-and-so to come live with them. This would be the truth. If asked why the invitation, they could say, for a stay-at-home second wife, “So-and-so is helping around the house.” For a working second husband, “So-and-so is helping us out financially.” All of this would be the truth.
If there are suspicions that more than that is going on and that there is an affair happening, any one of them can instruct the bishop to ask them the temple question. The temple question concerning relationships is, “Are you living the law of chastity?” To which can be answered, yes. As long as the question remains on the law of chastity, and whether any of them is living it, answer the question honestly with yes. If the bishop tries to slip a, “Are you having sex with this man/woman?” answer, “I am not breaking the law of chastity.” Bring everything back to the law of chastity.
Without witnesses of wrongdoing, a bishop cannot pursue the matter further. As long as neither one of the three married individuals divulges information about the non-licensed marriage, the bishop cannot build a case against them. He either needs witnesses or a confession to act.
Like the situation with the two single individuals, the only penalty the Brethren can use towards these people is to stop them from getting the marriage sealed in the temple. They will have to wait until the work for the dead is done for them to be sealed eternally.
Marriage scenario #3: Two married couples
If two married couples wish to marry each other, making an interconnected marriage arrangement with two wives and two husbands, by covenant-only without a marriage license, this can be easily done by private meeting among all involved, whereby they covenant with each other to be married. They can then live their lives in their separate dwellings, but visit each other as they please as husbands and wives. In this case, it is doubtful that church members would notice what is going on unless they are around one of the newly married men and his new wife and saw them carrying on romantically. Were that to happen, word would surely get to the bishop, who would call the suspects into his office.
Again, the way to handle this would be to answer all questions in terms of breaking the law of chastity, and that’s it. Is the law of chastity being broken? Nope. That’s all the bishop needs to know.
As with the other scenarios, only the temple marriage sealing can be denied to the newly weds, that is until the work for the dead is done for them.
Children
The children of one or more of the spouses can cause trouble for the non-licensed married couple if the adults are presenting to the world that they are not married (using the state’s definition). For couples that do tell people they are married, such as two single individuals coming together, children pose no problem. But for marriages involving three or more people, in which no one but the spouses themselves know they are married, children might need to be kept in the dark, at least initially, so that they don’t go blabbing to church members or officials about the non-church sanctioned marriage.
Conclusion as to what the Brethren can do
If those entering marriage in this manner plan it right and understand how they are going to present it, or not present it, to the public, the church and their children, the Brethren can’t do a damn thing about it. They can’t stop the marriage from happening, they can’t discipline the newlyweds without evidence, witnesses and/or confessions, and they can’t keep the parties unsealed (because eventually all these marriages will be temple sealed.)
The Lord has, essentially, opened the way for any of His sons and daughters to establish themselves tribally, without repercussions from the state or from the church. The only ones who have power to stop it from happening are the wives.
Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist
29 Comments
LDS Anarchy 
You have finally fallen off your rocker
The Lord has, essentially, opened the way for any of His sons and daughters to establish themselves tribally, without repercussions from the state or from the church. The only ones who have power to stop it from happening are the wives.
I second the statement that the way is, in fact, open. And it is open for a reason. Surviving the coming years will take familiarity with the gifts of the spirit and activated tribal functions.
Great post. This furthers the work of consolidating these truths into practical application.
I think we can see that if we will set up our tribal organizations as outlined in this blog then we have no reason to fear what the bishop and church can do. they can not separate us from the ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I would like to know if the words of Zo ma rah were a direct quote in the part which says, “Imitate the sacred rites and rituals of the Church”. I would not be surprised if the letter from the first presidency does say the word church there.
Well guess what those rites and rituals do not belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They belong to the gospel of Jesus Christ. They are part of the eternal gospel and did not spring in to existence in 1830 and are not under the control of the organization which did come into existence in 1830.
What is under control is the holding of LDS church meetings or performing ordinances of the LDS church (confirmation as a member of the LDS church etc). So we don’t hold an LDS church sacrament meeting. We can hold a tribe sacrament meeting and other tribal ordinances (blessings, namings, ordinations etc).
Can the LDS church regulate what happens in the Bapitist church? No.
As far as authority of God did Jethro have the priesthood? Yes. Was he part of the church as organized amongst the tribes of Israel? No. He had his own tribal organization.
I suppose I ought to explain what brought about this post.
I firmly believe that no man, state or church has a right to interfere with tribal affairs. History is replete with examples of the misery that has resulted among the American Indian tribes because of the interference of the United States government. Ananas has written articles on how even Mormon church members’ interference with these tribes has devastated them and raped their land. This reminds me of an All in the Family episode I saw recently in which Archie Bunker was explaining to Meathead or Gloria or Edith, I forget which one, that the way of the Christian is force. The Christian ministers forced the Africans to convert to Christianity. “They dragged them from the trees to the river and held them under the water until they converted to Christ,” said he. “Then,” he continued, “when they were on the slave boats to America they had someone to pray to for help.” It was all right in his eyes.
Only tribal members have a right to get involved in tribal affairs. Everyone else should keep his nose out of their business. It was a statement someone said to me recently about how the Brethren are pre-emptively taking measures to stop tribal formations among the LDS that caused me to pre-emptively spell out what the Brethren can do to stop tribal formations, namely, diddly-squat.
After writing the above, I went and watched a movie called God’s Outlaw: The Story of William Tyndale. Tyndale’s “crime” was that he was smuggling English-language Bibles into England from Germany so that the average person could read it in his own language. This was contrary to both the law of man (the king) and the church, for the scriptures were only legal in Latin so that only the clergy could read and interpret them. (Does this sound familiar? Is there any other book a certain church doesn’t want its members getting a hold of? Hmmm..?) The church had to authorize new translations and would not give Tyndale permission to make an English translation for the people, so he did it anyway because he felt that God’s word was more important than what the priests said. In the end, they killed him for “heresy”. So, was Tyndale the Smuggler and Unauthorized Translator a hero, or a criminal?
LFILDSAB=Losing Faith In LDS Anarchy Blog. Just so everyone knows.
Dear LFILDSAB a friend of mine and I read this blog together. And we did recignize it was you even before LDSA pointed it out. I wanted to comment on your comment but ended up just commenting on the post and its wonderful content.
Your comment brought to my mind this scripture found in Mosiah 13:1 aimed at Abinadi,
And now when the king had heard these words, he said unto his priests: Away with this fellow, and slay him; for what have we to do with him, for he is mad.
To which Abinadi replied:
4 But I must fulfil the commandments wherewith God has commanded me; and because I have told you the truth ye are angry with me. And again, because I have spoken the word of God ye have judged me that I am mad.
And then these scriptures from John chapter 8 came to mind.
47 He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
48 Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
And then after that these verses from 3 Nephi 12:
11 And blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake;
12 For ye shall have great joy and be exceedingly glad, for great shall be your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets who were before you.
Your reaction kind of puts a stamp of approval on LDSA’s teachings here.
Yes I’m sure that, “Imitate the sacred rites and rituals of the Church” is pretty close to what was originally said. I’m pretty(99%) sure they didn’t say Gospel.
We had this letter read in our ward last week. I think it is just a repeat of the 2001 First Presidency letter that was also read over the pulpit — it is reproduced here.
From the first paragraph of that letter is the concern that commercial enterprises are implying Church endorsement. For that reason, some members feel the letter refers to self-help groups such as Landmark, which are very popular in Utah.
Interesting response you have here, though! 🙂
Ah, thanks for the clarification, BiV!
I’ve always thought it was strange that the LDS church puts doctrinal weight on legal, civil marriage. Specifically (as you point out in this article) the difference between sex being fine vs. being a sin-next-to-murder is a legal contract that varies from one country to another. What if you’re from a culture where “common law” marriage is the norm (instead of starting the marriage with a formal contract) or if you’re from a country that legally recognizes polygamy or gay marriage? Either such people are considered married (by Mormon standards) or the civil contract shouldn’t figure so prominently in the Mormon definition of which couples are sinning and which aren’t. Joseph Smith didn’t teach that the state’s stamp of approval defines a marriage; quite the opposite.
Specifically (as you point out in this article) the difference between sex being fine vs. being a sin-next-to-murder is a legal contract that varies from one country to another.
It’s true chason — if only more LDS could get the message that permission from principalities and powers do not justify things in the sight of God. As LDSA wrote:
Joseph Smith didn’t teach that the state’s stamp of approval defines a marriage; quite the opposite.
No one from this site will disagree with that.
Not quite sure where the best place to put this is, but here goes:
Muscular Mormonism
David Knowlton in his Sunstone article explains the following on the duality between American images of masculinity and Mormon masculinity: ”And though there are many American discourses on masculinity – including Mormonism’s – there are a number of common themes that infuse our minds because we have all learned about and interacted with the stereotype they comprise. We find these in American movies, television, and literature. Guy Corneau writes, “As I explored the theme of masculine identity with a group of men, it became apparent to me that each one of us was grappling with a model of masculinity that he could not live up to. They will take the forms of mythic characters such as Superman, Rambo and the Incredible Hulk”.
Are we replacing those American mythical male super-heroes with our own Book of Mormon spiritual and (violent) giants, such as Ammon fighting off the robbers by slashing their arms, Mormon and Moroni leading the Nephite armies into battle as young generals, a muscular Nephi confronting his brothers because of their murmuring, the 2000 young stripling warriors who responded the call to fight when their families were threatened: MEN (with capital letters) who did not shy from using violence as and when ‘dictated by God’ (or not). The question must however be, when does God dictate and justify the use of violence? There is a moral issue at stake.
Sexuality of the Mormon Male
Furthermore, David Knowlton talks of the sexuality of the Mormon male in his article, which is somewhat relevant to the movie: ”Everywhere men are surrounded by images of male virility, everywhere sexual representations are suffused with the power of the phallus. It should not surprise us, therefore that we unconsciously symbolize male virility in the Church office building. It rises, like a powerful, towering phallus, from a nest of two smaller, rounder buildings. Although this association suggests an unreflected and unproblematic relationship among Church authority around masculinity and sexuality, in reality we find crucial structural tensions right in the middle of this powerful biological drive connected with our sense of ourselves as men and our relationship with Church authority”.
.
“As adults we learn and fear the sudden death aspect of “improper” sex since it will trigger Church authorities to punish us, possibly cutting us off from the body of the Church and from our families and friends. We learn to feel ambivalent about our penises. The penis is a symbol of male power and our own masculinity, yet it can fail us in sex, and it can cause us to be ostracized from the kingdom”.
“As we seek the purity and spirituality desired by the gospel, we enter into powerful conflict with our libidos and our sense of manhood, given the way [the American] discourse defines it. Mormonism exacerbates this conflict with its focus on sexuality as the major defining criterion for purity. Sexuality can [therefore] define us further as good Mormon men or cause us to lose our salvation. It represents the degree to which we hold to Church teachings and to which we accept the power of our Church leaders. As a result, we organize anxiety, fear, faith and hope around our penises, our libidos, and our sense of ourselves as gendered and religious beings”.
I tend to agree with Knowlton.
Scriptural masculinity seems to revolve around faith. The masculine strength of men is always described as weakness when compared to men of faith. So, we find the Lamanites being described as strong, when compared to other faithless men:
but described as weak when compared to men endowed with the miraculous strength of the Lord:
Only through the gospel, repentance, hardening not the heart and receiving the gifts and powers of God can a man become truly masculine. If the LDS do not manifest the gifts in their lives, surely they do not manifest the strength of the Lord, either, and were they to go to battle, they would likely be as weak as other men who know nothing of the Lord.
My own experience with Mormon men is that the church emasculates them. Who teaches of the strength of the Lord in the church today? No one does. Anciently, the Nephites were taught this doctrine continually, as it was the only way they could survive. They were under perpetual threat of war from the Lamanites and were always vastly outnumbered by them. It was suicidal for them to think that they could match the power and numbers of the Lamanites without help from the Lord. They did not have superior weapons upon which to rely (as we moderns often do.) They had to turn to the Lord for help, to strengthen them so that one Nephite was a match for multiple Lamanites. So, their prophets continually stirred them up to repentance to get them to humble themselves before the Lord and plead for and obtain “the strength of the Lord.” This increased their masculinity. This is why the Lamanites looked upon Ammon as a superman or god. He was the epitome of masculinity because he had the strength of the Lord with him. Or, in other words, he was a weak male whose humility before the Lord allowed the Lord Jesus Christ, the only truly, masculine, powerful individual to exist on this planet, to show forth His own masculinity in Ammon. Jesus then, is the only example of masculinity we have.
In the church we are taught to follow prophets and apostles (the Brethren). In other words, we are taught to follow weak men, or to emulate weakness. So, the church’s influence on men tends towards emasculation and not virility and the strength of the Lord.
The American view of masculinity is that of the anti-Christ Korihor:
The church has largely adopted this same view. These are “the works of men” that the Savior spoke of in 3 Nephi 27: 11. Jesus said that if “the church is built upon my gospel then will the Father show forth his own works in it” (3 Nephi 27: 10.) The Father does not show His works in the church, which are the miracles, signs, wonders, etc., therefore the church is not built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ. The church, then, is built upon “the works of men” and must, of necessity, adopt the ways of Korihor.
The Nephites were given the laws found in D&C 98. These laws were given to them prior to Jesus visiting them, while they were living the law of Moses, but they were not part of the law of Moses, for they were expected to be lived by them even after Christ came among them. It was the violation of them that caused their destruction. So, these laws concerning persecution and what constitutes justified war are part of the law of Christ, which is why they were revealed anew to us in D&C 98, as this is a dispensation that is supposed to be living the law of Christ (and not of Moses.)
The Gentiles do not know of these laws and the Mormons have largely forsaken them. Now, instead of believing in the revealed word of God and trusting in the strength of the Lord and relying upon Him to fight our battles, by obeying this revelation, we, like the Gentiles, simply rely upon our governments and arms and our own strength to keep us safe. So, the American way has become the Mormon way. We do what they do, when it comes to war. There ain’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two on this point.
As far as male sexuality is concerned, I am inclined to likewise agree with Knowlton. The American view is on one extreme, an unhealthy embracing of sinful behavior, in which everyone is obsessed with sex, while the Mormon view is on the other extreme, an unhealthy embracing of prudishness and guilt, in which everyone is obsessed with sex (that is, with keeping themselves sexually pure.)
Sick justification for behavior worthy of animals, not those of God. Jesus Christ taught the sanctity of marriage between one woman and one man. Nothing else beyond that is of God. Sick, Sick, Sick and totally EVIL just like the tribes of carnally-driven Lamanites at their worst. When the Lamanites were more righteous than the Nephites, they loved their ONE wife and children while the Nephites who practiced the evil you advocate were destroyed. Totally appalled at your evil path, when you were headed in the right direction you’re now lost in the muddy waters. Good by!
There’s an entire book chapter in the GEMTAM on plural marriages, [that would be the “M”, multihusband-multiwife] — It would’ve been nice if you’d have given more substantive objections to what’s in this post, then I could have addressed them specifically.
As it stands though truthsrestored — your mind seems pretty made up on the subject — but you can read that linked PDF chapter for a detailed outline of the doctrine that’s behind this post of LDSA’s.
You say that this post and the people contributing to it are promoting behavior ‘worthy of animals’. Well actually Tribally organized people and animals are worthy of the Kingdom and have a place guaranteed in Zion and anyone who does not align themselves with them in spirit, both tribal humans and animals is vainly trying to reject or stand in the way of the Second Coming of Christ.
So just know, Truthrestored, that in ignorantly condemning as filthy the practices of tribal peoples and the ‘animalistic’ behavior is proclaiming yourself as an Enemy to God. And you should also be aware that the spirit of God through his creation, the Lion, and through the remnant of the Lamanites will go through and tear to pieces, those who cling stubbornly to their false traditions, even going so far as to justify them as if they knew what Heaven was about, simply because they happen to be hip the the illuminati in the LDS Church. MAKING SENSE OF IT ALL PT.2 is up now and it addresses this. Since you will not bother to read it I will just share the last paragraph:
“Animals and tribal humans alike, have an inner sense that tells them when danger is approaching. The sense of smell and many others have been better preserved in the so called lower life-forms and primitive peoples. The God of Nature is ready to restore them to us if we will but humble ourselves. If the Second Coming of Christ is to be survived by us it will have to be experienced in all its glory and power and that requires a Second Coming to our senses. But if upon feeling the senses of our souls surge to the surface, we run straight to the Doctor for a prescription to deaden the strange sensations so that we can function ‘normally’ in the ‘real’ work-a-day world — what does that say about our stance towards Christ?”
Elder Chantdown,
You’re not suggesting that everyone either lives the GEMTAM or stands in the way of the second coming are you? That’s not exactly what you wrote but it could be interpreted that way so I thought I’d ask.
There are so many different people who claim to have been taught so many different things by God that it can be very tempting to conclude that everyone who claims revelation that seems to contradict your own is deceived. That’s how I used to approach everything.
I have come to realize-through the spirit-that I am better off believing every claim to revelation whether contradicting mine or not. God moves in a mysterious way and what may be expedient for one would not be for another. All I can concern myself with are the things revealed to me. My responsibility is to live up to what I am given and to never compel another to do the same. I also have a strong aversion to others trying to compel me(as truthseeker appears to be doing) If God tells you plural marriage is wrong-then it probably is FOR YOU. But if he tells me it’s good and right then back off and let me live accordingly.
Oh by no means…no I’m definitely not saying that everyone who does not live by the GEMTAM is standing in opposition to Christ’s triumphant return. I would in fact say that those of us who feel the Spirit’s witness to truth in the GEMTAM should bear in mind the ‘A’ in GEMTAM at all times. Because, like you said, compulsion is not of God and impedes His children’s growth.
To clarify, I am saying that all of humanity has a deep need to return to their tribal roots. Every individual has to be free to decide exactly how they feel comfortable doing this. It is happening, it’s the Spirit of Elijah. Yes I believe that many who resist, sensations in their physique and psyche do so at their own risk. I know clearly that when societies cling to selfish systems and value money over the human roots of family and community, that they suffer the consequences. And the arder they come the harder they fall seems to be a universal law when it comes to empires throughout history. So individuals will experience this same thing to the degree to which they remain affiliated with the collective during its descent.
People need to be strong individually but they have a deep and primal need for family and community. In my mind and heart it makes perfect sense to seek out and preserve that unity through making family and community one and the same. But not everyone will or must see it that way. The more people get in touch with their own roots in a real biological and spiritual way, the closer they grow to everyone around them, even those who come from groups who seem so drastically different. Because the further back we go, the more similarities we see in the tribal roots of all humanity. And I firmly believe that this is the common ground on which Zion is built.
From the OP:
I think the reason for the “shoot first, ask questions later” reaction of the LAPD in their search for Christopher Dorner is that he’s the real deal: a lone wolf, As I’ve pondered this matter, it seems to me that Dorner can be the means, directly and indirectly, of bringing the LAPD to its knees, as well as any other PD that participates and is hunted by him. I don’t recall the police ever asking him to turn himself in. I think I’ve only heard about their hunt for him. They obviously want him dead, not alive, based on their “shoot first” actions. So the picture being painted is that the cops are scared of Dorner. I don’t believe their fear derives solely from his ability and determination to take their lives, I think it’s also because he can cause a systemic breakdown in law and order, and remove the perceived power and authority of the cops. This can only lead to the people arming themselves, or a re-enthroning of the power and authority of the people. Dorner is a statist, so he cannot envision a society without the state or without the cops. He cannot see the end result of his actions, being narrowly focused on the LAPD. He thinks that once the corrupt cops are exposed, they will either repent.or be replaced by good cops. He doesn’t realize just what a house of cards the whole system really is. He doesn’t understand that he is potentially setting off a chain reaction that possibly will be imitated by copycats. The police have their hands full with one lone wolf, could you imagine two or more? Of course, it may be that Dorner actually does realize all these things and he just doesn’t care. Perhaps his attitude is, “Let the chips fall where they fall.” Either way, this man’s intended actions are going to force societal change upon us, whether we like it or not. That change will not be according to the plans of TPTB, hence the valiant effort to find (kill) him fast. I think Dorner is smart, very smart. I think there is a possibility this guy has the know-how to stay one step ahead of the authorities. I think the only way they are going to catch him is if he makes a mistake. Time will tell…
has any investigation begun on his claims? i would love to see whether it will all be backed up with evidence or not. if its not i wouldnt be suprised knowing the LAPD though
He sent material to Anderson Cooper which does corroborate what he said about there being a video of the man who was kicked in the face testifying to the same, but even if everything he said is true, there is no justification for murdering people. He’s being as evil as the he says the LAPD has been and is garnering support from some of the people, which is remarkable.
If Dorner is not on Big Bear Mountain and his burning truck there was just a diversionary tactic, then he has succeeded in locking the cops into a perpetual, fruitless search.
If he is not there, the man is playing the cops like a fiddle, using their own protocols against them. If he is there, then he’s made a mistake and they have a real chance a stopping further destruction of life. Their only hope is that he’s still on that mountain, dead or alive. The above quote, though, indicates to me the real possibility that it’s a diversionary tactic.
i would guess its a diversion as he wrote “I know your TTP’s, (techniques, tactics, and procedures).” no support here i want to make that clear. i hate the police as much as the next guy, but murder is not a solution only a perpetuation of the cycle
My own interest in this is prophetic. I wonder about the war prophecy of slaves rising up, of the appearance of another captain Moroni (a Holy Ghost-inspired, lone wolf-type leader), of the reaction of the people to someone who openly opposes the system, of the coming tribal anarchy, etc. I am also extremely interested in how TPTB will respond over time. Dorner is not inspired of God, but still poses a major problem to them. Besides, sometimes the Lord uses the wicked to punish the wicked. I imagine they will engage in damage control, downplaying or not even mentioning his danger to the system and concentrating on his status as a killer. But if the killings begin anew, things can quickly spiral out of their control. I mean, look what he has already forced them into doing, in reaction to his actions:
Just considering the financial costs alone, he’s already wounded them by bleeding the coffers. I truly believe that he can bring the LAPD to its knees if the killings continue.
From the OP:
“what TPTB most fear is a lone wolf, someone who operates outside of the normal channels, who doesn’t give a damn what people think of him”
From Dorner’s Manifesto:
“I will not be alive to see my name cleared. That’s what this is about, my name.”
This police are called “pigs” but they act like wolves. This man is a wolf. Not a “lone wolf”. Wolves work in packs. The only lone wolves in nature are those males that lose to the alpha-male. They are shunned by the group and they trail the pack hoping for left-overs but they do not challenge the pack. Christopher is of course a man. But, as I channeled in Making SENSE of it All Pt., in the section titled, A*N*I*M*A*L – ALL IN MAN:
We do not merely possess a human version of instincts. We share the self same instincts of our animal cousins. Subconsciously, we are well aware of this. We do not say that one is as cunning as a lawyer but that the lawyer is as cunning as a snake. According to the Rabbi Elijah of Vilna, the Creator was addressing all of creation, bidding each creature to contribute a portion of its characteristics to the human being when He said “Let us make man in our image and after our likeness.” The beasts of the field obey their Creator’s law in the instinct which governs them. Of all the creatures that God has made upon the earth, man alone is rebellious. The [fall]ing out we experienced with our animal cousins that occurred when we lost sight of paradise has made it so we sometimes seem only capable of bringing out our animal natures in the most disgusting and vile of ways. Suppressing those parts of ourselves for so long makes it difficult to access them except in extreme circumstances. Man is a microcosm for the whole universe. And as such, God grants him the privilege of being the repository for all its powers.
Ancient Vedic Scripture says that God sleeps in stone, breathes in plants, dreams in animals and awakes in man. But those beautiful sentiments were recorded in a different time and different world. These days it would seem that M.A.N. is an acronym for Misuse of Animal Nature. We have set the tone of this dog-eat-dog world. If humanity is to awaken from its coma we will need to inhale deeply the smelling salts of the earth. To do so, we should tap into that good old olfactory that is so keen and reliable among many animals but underdeveloped for the most part in modern man. One distinct clue that the spiritual side to this particular sense is all but completely dormant is the rarity with which it occurs that we smell or even taste things in our dreams. Survey your friends, family and acquaintances and see how rare an occurrence it is. Smell being so closely linked with memory, it is no wonder we have trouble remembering our dreams most of the time.
We can continue to ignore these truths as we have done throughout history. But if we are truly looking to bring again Zion, then we should take our relationship to the animals more seriously. The only ones who will participate fully and nobly in preparing the way for the REAL Zion are those who not only see the symbolic connection between animal and man, but recognize that all symbolism is the surface of deeper realities.
I felt inspired to bring these truths to the forefront of our minds in order to better understand what is happening with Dorner. And to take note of what is not happening in this scenario. Like all men, Dorner possesses qualities from all the animal Kingdom. But not being motivated by the Wild Kingdom of Heaven on Earth – the Holy Spirit of creation and its various aspects which are expressed in the various life forms of our planet, find themselves imbalanced in him, like in many other habitations of spirit or habitats throughout the earth. More ego than eco, this character is not operating “outside of the normal channels” of the system. Nope, not really. He is a lycanthrope through and through or at least we can say that he is predominately motivated by a wolf spirit.
It does not matter that he was cast out of the pack and “appears” to be acting alone. He has many of the markings of that strange animal known as the North American “Patsy”….Ex-Military, connection to a university psychology department. Not to mention, the words that Anderson Pooper told us were from Dorner to not match up with the actions. It says that it is all about his name. Many military men have been brainwashed but most of them with a very traditional concept of “honor”. And for them their “good name” would have already been preserved by testifying against police brutality. But further “specialty” brainwashing could account for the discrepancy. The man has received various decorations in the military. His “commendable” dis-service only illustrates how “commandable” he is.
That is not the only discrepancy. Unless we are not hearing the whole story, then it is very strange that the officer responsible for Dorner’s dismissal has not been killed or even targeted yet. Are we to believe he is saving her for last? Killing other officers and their family members first? Why is he announcing his targets publicly? This only ensures maximum security and fire-power will be present to protect those he intends to kill. Makes no sense whatsoever. Makes me think that not only is Dorner not inspired by God….but not even so much by Dog either. I detect more mental MANipulation going on here, both on the patsy and on the mind’s of the public.
He appears to have thought this through well, using technical language like “unconventional and asymmetric warfare”. Seems pretty sure of himself. Then the next minute he sounds very sure that he will die. Why would he state unequivocally that he “will not live” to see his name cleared? Does the success of his mission include death? Not adding up. If it was a question of exacting what he perceives as justice and getting away with it then why is his death seem as foregone a conclusion in his mind as in the cops searching for this guy? There is another less fishy but no less funny discrepancy in the “story” behind this rogue cop character, straight out of a movie. If he is reported to have been the only African American student in his elementary and high schools from first grade to seventh grade and that he had altercations due to his race – What ever made him choose to attend Southern Utah Universtiy – one of the whitest places on earth? It certainly wasn’t a sports scholarship since it is only verified that he played for one or two seasons. And lets not forget, he studied political science and psychology. Interesting mix.
The point is, he is not a man acting on a mission from God. So where did the mission come from? Seriously who hatches an elaborate plan like this acting as a lone, uninspired, individual? If your looking for prophecies to be fulfilled then you need to look at the vessels who the Lord chooses to work through. I know it says that the slaves who rise up will be “martialed for war” and at one point I thought it would be ex-military who would fulfill that prophecy. But I am not so sure that it will be ex-military, at least not exclusively and definitely not them who leads the uprising. There is a man who has already been chosen and raised up for the work. It won’t be the wolf but the lion, who does the work of the Lord. Don’t look for him in the ranks of military or law enforcement. Look for him among the oppressed but divinely aware.
Dorner doesn’t fulfill the war prophecy but he may be a visible “first bubble” manifestation of the water temperature. When water is put under fire, there is a specific sequence that occurs before the full boil. We can hear and see the fire (stress) the water is being subjected to, we might see the water start to move erratically, and we might see steam begin to come off of the surface of the water. None of that tells us how close the water is to boiling. But when the first, tiniest bubble that is still stuck to the bottom of the pot appears, we know that many more such bubbles will also soon appear, and then the bubbles will begin rising to the surface in a rapid boil that disturbs the entire volume. When you see that first bubble, you must cut the fire off, otherwise it will boil over. I see Dorner as the first, tiny bubble. He portends a systemic boil on the horizon. This is why the authorities are now going to offer a $1,000,000 reward for information leading to his capture (kill).
The war prophecy, as I read it, does not say that the slaves are marshaled and disciplined for war, but the masters. And indeed, we hear of the DHS acquiring 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the last 10 months, an obvious preparation for war. Against whom? Again, the obvious answer is against the people. All of this is writing on the wall. Many people see these signs, both within and without the body of the saints.
I don’t believe that this coming war will be started by the masters, but by the slaves, which will be led by someone inspired of the Holy Ghost. Many think the 1.6 rounds are for fighting the people. That may not be the principle reason. This ammo may principally be for use against the servants of the Lord, who must appear and lead the people.
The Dorner case is interesting because it indicates that when the “captain Moroni” character appears, the people may already be prepped to follow him.
“He is both symbolically and in a very real physical sense a threat because has stood up,” said former LAPD detective and investigative journalist Michael C. Ruppert on RT (Russia Today.)
This video shows the same footage but adds a clever ending.
hahah twisted sister sucks
Waco all over again?
Fugitive ex-cop believed dead, as cabin stronghold goes up in flames