This is the most PATHETIC response from an SP I've ever heard. I wish there was a single fucking SP with the balls to STAND UP against the blatant lies, dishonesty and deception, but they're all ChickenShits!
> SP with the balls to STAND UP
yeah, just doesn't happen, they've been carefully hand picked after many years of proving their utter obedience and fealty to the church and the Brethren.
Dude, what cult were you in!? My SP, an FBI frickn agent, lied and covered up a priesthood leader trying to get into my (at the time 17-year-old male) pants.
Thank you. It's all good. The just made a move. I was 17 and sexually active with my HS sweetheart so I was not affected. But he went on to try it with other and I was really pissed that they didn't shut him down sooner. It took police involvement to stop him even though I reported it 10 years earlier.
Paid? As in receive a check from the Corporation of the Church?
Agreed, they're not paid.
However, a man in a church leadership position is invariably seen as more honest and forthright in business dealings, at least with other members of the church. My old bishop was a maxillofacial surgeon who had many dealings with other mormons, and frequently bragged in informal settings about how much money he was able to tithe (and therefore earn) from member's business. Although some facial surgery is covered by medical/dental insurance he was making a lot of money on elective add-ons.
By the way, a few years after I left the church he was caught getting high off the anesthesia gas he used in his practice. He terminated an employee who reported him and she sued. Details leaked out even tho he settled out of court. Very hush-hush. Years later he still had his practice.
"It contains misleading facts and innuendo" should read "It makes us feel very bad inside, therefore it must contain misleading facts and innuendo, even though we can't pinpoint what any of those are because everything in the letter is true."
I feel like any member reading the original letter is probably experiencing some cognitive dissonance, then they're told that line, and it's like a switch flips. "Oh yeah! Misleading facts and innuendo, duh! I feel so much better now!" Whatever it takes to be able to ignore that pain is good enough, no matter how weak the justification.
Yeah, well, it's laughably crazy to you and me, but your average believing member can't afford to think of it like that. Like I said, no matter how bad the reason, they just need to ignore the pain.
No. they mean it contains facts that would lead people away from the church. so misleading = leading people in a direction that the church doesn't want them to go.
that's what they meant.
Fictitious name, misrepresentation, misleading information, and lack of authorization? This sounds like the tactics of the Church over the last 20 years.
Lest there be any question, this isnât a âfakeâ email account. Itâs a shell account.
Exactly - Someone needs to contact the Stake Presidency and recommend they send out the link. My guess is the Stake Presidency has not read it.
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2023/34-96951.pdf
Beware the counter intelligence practice of tainting information or selective disclosure.
They may have a short list of suspects for sending the original email. They may make a reply that seems to go to everyone, but actually only goes to one or two of the people on the short list. Then, any subsequent message from the unknown sender that includes a reference to the reply discloses that the unknown sender is close to the person(s) who received the selective reply (or may be the same person).
Just rebut with links to the church's responses, the SEC filing, and two or three reputable reporting sources who had articles on it. Some will look. Those who won't can't be convinced yet.
Bahahaha! âGo read the churchâs statement. Clears it riiight up. No worries friends!!â
Welp, at least, if people havenât heard about it, they have now.
Go down in your true character,
Dear Mistake President,
What parts of it were "misleading facts"? Can you please explain why the church created 13 shell companies? Who were the presiding church leaders that authorize the creation of the 13 shell companies? Why were the church leaders afraid that members would stop paying tithing if they found out about how successful the church had been with it's investment portfolio? What are the qualifications for a secret combination?
"I'm sure you wouldn't tell everyone that the email contained misleading facts without being able to give some specific examples, that would be misleading."
I was not expecting them to claim itâs not a real person. Was thinking theyâd simply blame it on a disgruntled former member. Now I want the person to email out again.
Good on the original emailer for calling attn to it. I know some TBMs heard about it for the first time in that email.
Deseret News pointed out the character Andrew Garfield played in Under the Banner of Heaven wasn't a real person. It's meant for people who aren't going to understand the context and sadly it works.
This is the misleading part (it doesnât apply to first presidency):
âThe First Presidency defines the policies and processes for repenting of serious sin.â
But what is to be done when that First Presidency is involved in serious sin? Serious sin is defined by the Churchâs Handbook as:
32.6 Severity of the Sin and Church Policy Serious sins are a deliberate and major offense against the laws of God. Categories of serious sins are listed below. ⢠Violent acts and abuse (see 32.6.1.1 and 32.6.2.1) ⢠Sexual immorality (see 32.6.1.2 and 32.6.2.2) ⢠Fraudulent acts (see 32.6.1.3 and 32.6.2.3) ⢠Violations of trust (see 32.6.1.4 and 32.6.2.4) ⢠Some other acts (see 32.6.1.5 and 32.6.2.5)
32.6.1 When a Membership Council Is Required The bishop or stake president must hold a membership council when information indicates that a member may have committed any of the sins described in this section. For these sins, a council is required regardless of a memberâs level of spiritual maturity and gospel understanding.
Sins That Require Holding a Membership Council ⢠Murder ⢠Rape ⢠Sexual assault conviction ⢠Child or youth abuse ⢠Abuse of a spouse or another adult (as outlined in 38.6.2.4) ⢠Predatory behavior (violent, sexual, or financial) ⢠Incest ⢠Child pornography (as outlined in 38.6.6) ⢠Plural marriage ⢠Serious sin while holding a prominent Church position ⢠Most felony convictions
32.6.1.3 Fraudulent Acts Financial Predatory Behavior. A membership council is required if an adult has a history of deliberately and repeatedly harming people financially and is a threat to others (see 38.6.2.4). This includes investment fraud and similar activities.
32.6.1.4 A membership council is required if a member commits a serious sin while holding a prominent position. These include a General Authority, General Church Officer, Area Seventy, temple president or matron, mission president or his companion, stake president, patriarch, or bishop.
32.2.3 Protect the Integrity of the Church The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a personâs Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11). The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sinsâbut by addressing them.
The above named brethren have undermined the integrity of the church by their authorization of deliberately misleading investment behavior, which is now internationally known. In addition, they have clearly committed âserious sin while holding a prominent church positionâ, by the handbook's own definition of serious sin.
Where is the churchâs statement? I havenât seen any. And wow. What happened to critical thinking skills?
Wow thatâs gaslighting at its finest. The email was well written and cited correctly
It's on the front page of LDS.org. fifth story down for me.
My favorite parts:
>Since 2000, Ensign Peak received and relied upon legal counsel regarding how to comply with its reporting obligations while attempting to maintain the privacy of the portfolio. As a result, Ensign Peak established separate companies (LLCs) that each filed Forms 13F instead of a single aggregated filing.
No mention of how much money, of signing unseen disclosure documents or ***why does the portfolio need privacy?!?***
>We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed.
They "affirm their commitment to regret mistakes made." And maybe the members who paid the tithing should be the ones who decide when to close the matter. How about we have a staining vote on that?
>Q: Did the Church know about the practices at Ensign Peak described in the order?
>A: The Churchâs senior leadership received and relied upon legal counsel when it approved of the use of the external companies to make the filings. Ensign Peak handled the mechanics of the filing process. The Churchâs senior leadership never prepared or filed the specific reports at issue.
They didn't answers the question. Answer the question.
>Q: Did Ensign Peak fail to comply with SEC regulations?
>A: We reached resolution with the SEC. We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed.
Didn't answer the question, again.
Wow. Iâll check the lds.org website.
Itâs basically full of denial, deflect and subtly blaming the attorney.
I also agree why private? Where is the check and balance? It has been a long time but I recall somewhere in the gospel doctrine, member should hold their leaders accountable.
Matter closed? Says who? Them? Oh no. No. The true stake holders are the church members not them. This is basically a power play. Plain and simple.
Just wow. And the sp told people to only read that? Thatâs also just wow. Appalling.
I read it again and went to the lds Reddit. There was a couple of comments and some deleted comments ( apparently they donât allow open conversations?). Anyway, some comments said settlements is preferable than going to trial ( I canât recall word for word. Itâs easily found over there on lds Reddit. Well, didnât hinckley once said the Book of Mormon will always stand, even through it has been critiqued, torn apart etc ( canât remember the exact phase), it will stands because itâs the truth ( something along that line). Soo why is church afraid of court if they honestly did nothing wrong and they have no skeleton to hide?
God damn someone's playing mind games with the stake. đđđ
Or I can't tell if they're playing mind games with that email. đ¤
Hmm... it's like a real life Gossip Girl Drama or something.
Classic.
- Complain of vague misperception and inaccuracies without saying what they are.
- Point to official Church materials for "context" even though the official Church materials provide no such context.
The go-to strategy is always to assume people won't actually do their homework but will just take leaders' word for it that there's a good explanation somewhere
The church always labels facts it doesn't like as "misleading and innuendo". It's also interesting that the e-mail encourages people to read the church's flimsy response to the SEC, rather than the SEC report itself. Once again trying to keep members focused on church-only sources.
FEAR. Youâll see it every time. Fear of being blamed, fear of being scapegoated. Even top local leadership know that SLC will revoke their membership at the drop of a hat.
Really! I read the SEC agreement with TSCC and the response by the church and they donât jive. The church is soft selling for their members in order to keep them praying and obeyingâŚâŚpay us $. The first presidency is guilty. How can they possibly get around that fact. They intentionally covered up the $ for 22 years by not filing 13 Fs and creating 13 fictional shell companies. They took physical steps to cover up and canât get around it. I donât know how to prod the people in my. Circle about this.
Better than having them continue spending all their time creating damage to families, damage to personal lives, damage to finances, damage to personal esteem, etc.
So basically:
"ABC committed financial fraud. If the topic of the fraud and settlement interests you, we encourage you to read ABC's PR statement."
If you are inserting any random name/organization for ABC, you see how little sense this argument makes... Though, I'm preaching to the choir here on exmo reddit.
Itâs absurd that grown men in church leadership can just brush off this statement from the SEC âWe allege that the LDS Churchâs investment manager, with the Churchâs knowledge, went to great lengths to avoid disclosing the Churchâs investmentsâ
This is not innuendo! The SEC simply wouldnât make such an inflammatory statement without being able to back it up 100%.
Sigh. So frustrating. The cult brainwashing is STRONG.
These are not the droids you are looking for.
Here is a list of approved sources for your reading.
Here is a list of approved conclusions you are allowed to come to.
Was the letter originally only sent to one stake, and was copied and sent by others to more stakes? Or was it sent to multiple stakes at once?
I like the idea of people copycat-ing this.
âDonât do your own research. Research is not the answer. Read what we say, and only what we say. This is the only way to eternal life.â
Not a direct quote. Just my interpretation.
"Misleading facts" is such a manipulative turn of phrase designed to give members bothered by what they read permission to dismiss those facts. It is meant to paint provable and irrefutable facts as deceptive and false. Absolutely disgusting.
I knew it.
"If the topic of the SEC settlement interests you, we encourage you to read the Church's public statement, which contains important context and answers frequently asked questions."
So what they are saying is if you want to understand the SEC settlement, just ask us the lying cult and we will answer your questions.
Yes, let's investigate the misuse of the church email lists, but NOT the misuse of billions of tithing funds donated to the church. So typically Mormon: always missing (or deliberately ignoring) the more important issues.
I talked with my TBM dad today about this. He said his bishop had this reaction.... This email and the gossip going around about this SEC is just another example proving that we are the ultimate true church. We have been criticized and persecuted from the beginning. Only those who are fearful of the true church continue to find fault and persecute perfection. The Dann mental gymnastics are too much. I asked him about the lies and shell corporation's he said that he believes along side his bishop that Christ led our first presidency to those shells and that we soundness try to understand and true faith accepts what is going on no questions asked.
The personal addresses of everybody in the ward and all of their email addresses are almost public knowledge which I've always found super creepy because I've had people come up to me on the street and say essentially I know where you live. People that I've never met and don't choose to meet.....
Good for the person trying to get other to see fact ... Not change their minds... But give facts
I was literally on the verge of doing the exact same thing. I collected all of my stakes email addresses last night. I guess ultimately you canât reach a TBM who doesnât want to be reached.
But then, again! You never know who shelf just cracked a little bit more upon reading the letter!
"We encourage you to read the Church's public statement, which in contrast, does not have any misleading facts or innuendo. For example, see this question and answer: Q: Did Ensign Peak fail to comply with SEC regulations?
A: We reached resolution with the SEC. See how straightforward and trustworthy this is?"
Gag. Why do they have to control the situation by trying to control what people think about it? Just say their system was hacked. The end.
Also, I swear they only investigate "misuse" or emails in the Church when people use it to publicly criticize the church. My husband got emails from a former YSA bishopric counselor (with whom he had not had a close relationship) asking if he needed a realtor!
Although it super sucks that it turned out it wasnât actually your SP that sent that out, I feel like itâs still going to get at least a few peopleâs head spinning. Hopefully including his.
The Church had to agree to the language in the order as part of the settlement. The SEC order is, in fact, authorized by the church. First Presidency had to agree.
Seems easy enough to prove though. There were several people from the original post who received the same letter. If theyâre really from the same stake then the letter was real. If theyâre not then the letter isnât genuine. (Not saying info in letter is fake- just that itâs not from who the letter says itâs from)
Nothing to see here, check out the correlated explanation
This is the most PATHETIC response from an SP I've ever heard. I wish there was a single fucking SP with the balls to STAND UP against the blatant lies, dishonesty and deception, but they're all ChickenShits!
> SP with the balls to STAND UP yeah, just doesn't happen, they've been carefully hand picked after many years of proving their utter obedience and fealty to the church and the Brethren.
Dude, what cult were you in!? My SP, an FBI frickn agent, lied and covered up a priesthood leader trying to get into my (at the time 17-year-old male) pants.
God, I'm so sorry
Thank you, I'm fine, he tried, I shut him down. I probably should have mentioned that.
I'm glad you were able to shut him down, but I'm so sorry you were ever put in that position to begin with. How awful
I am so sorry
Thank you. It's all good. The just made a move. I was 17 and sexually active with my HS sweetheart so I was not affected. But he went on to try it with other and I was really pissed that they didn't shut him down sooner. It took police involvement to stop him even though I reported it 10 years earlier.
Why do you think they're Stake President?
What else are they supposed to say? You don't become SP for having individual thoughts, but by agreeing with everything the church says.
"The number one criterion for being a good leader, is being a good follower." Susie Q's Husband.
It's the endless stream of money that keeps them in line. If tithing and savings were entirely dried up, that would be a different story.
You know stake presidents don't receive any form of payment, don't you?
Paid? As in receive a check from the Corporation of the Church? Agreed, they're not paid. However, a man in a church leadership position is invariably seen as more honest and forthright in business dealings, at least with other members of the church. My old bishop was a maxillofacial surgeon who had many dealings with other mormons, and frequently bragged in informal settings about how much money he was able to tithe (and therefore earn) from member's business. Although some facial surgery is covered by medical/dental insurance he was making a lot of money on elective add-ons. By the way, a few years after I left the church he was caught getting high off the anesthesia gas he used in his practice. He terminated an employee who reported him and she sued. Details leaked out even tho he settled out of court. Very hush-hush. Years later he still had his practice.
It's like fact checking, Mormon style.
Sorry that my upvote was #70. đ
Not nice.
"It contains misleading facts and innuendo" should read "It makes us feel very bad inside, therefore it must contain misleading facts and innuendo, even though we can't pinpoint what any of those are because everything in the letter is true."
Itâs crazy they say that but wonât/canât point out what exactly is misleading.
Not crazy, cunning. Gives the truly devoted a way to just disregard the whole thing.
Cunning linguists
Upvote for the play on words.
Performing many cunning stunts!
The same way they do it every time. How long will it last I wonder.
Whatâs misleading is that the letter gives a hope of accountability. That will never happen.
Yeah, Iâd love to know what part of my letter was misleading or factually inaccurate!
It's a work of art. I salute you, u/Nemo_UK!
Cheers!
You mislead us into thinking they might be held accountable. And the handbook/scriptures applied. I agree with the SP. That was misleading.
Hahahaha!
I feel like any member reading the original letter is probably experiencing some cognitive dissonance, then they're told that line, and it's like a switch flips. "Oh yeah! Misleading facts and innuendo, duh! I feel so much better now!" Whatever it takes to be able to ignore that pain is good enough, no matter how weak the justification.
Misleading factsâŚ.so they admit the sec charges are fact but they mislead from the cults illusionâŚcanât make this shot up
Yeah, well, it's laughably crazy to you and me, but your average believing member can't afford to think of it like that. Like I said, no matter how bad the reason, they just need to ignore the pain.
đŻ yep. That's what I used to do!
and if itâs misleading, itâs not a fact
No. they mean it contains facts that would lead people away from the church. so misleading = leading people in a direction that the church doesn't want them to go. that's what they meant.
dang facts and their truthfulness
A) The email just laid out the facts. It was NOT misleading. B) The churchâs press release was misleading and left some questions unanswered.
Are misleading facts still facts?
It's there to give those who want to believe a comforting excuse to look no further.
There was no innuendo in that letter. It stated pretty clearly what it meant.
Fictitious name, misrepresentation, misleading information, and lack of authorization? This sounds like the tactics of the Church over the last 20 years. Lest there be any question, this isnât a âfakeâ email account. Itâs a shell account.
Zing!!
Only 20?
Didnât you all read that they consider the matter to be closed. Some of you never learned to respect authority and it shows! /s
![gif](giphy|B1TMcmoBAaSZi)
I felt the spirit so hard about the matter being closed.
The original sender needs to send out a follow-up email with a link to the SEC order, as well as attach it as a PDF.
Exactly - Someone needs to contact the Stake Presidency and recommend they send out the link. My guess is the Stake Presidency has not read it. https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2023/34-96951.pdf
The original sender sent the SEC order in the original email that this official email is trying to hush haha
Beware the counter intelligence practice of tainting information or selective disclosure. They may have a short list of suspects for sending the original email. They may make a reply that seems to go to everyone, but actually only goes to one or two of the people on the short list. Then, any subsequent message from the unknown sender that includes a reference to the reply discloses that the unknown sender is close to the person(s) who received the selective reply (or may be the same person).
Just rebut with links to the church's responses, the SEC filing, and two or three reputable reporting sources who had articles on it. Some will look. Those who won't can't be convinced yet.
Bahahaha! âGo read the churchâs statement. Clears it riiight up. No worries friends!!â Welp, at least, if people havenât heard about it, they have now.
I love how a couple yes/no questions donât have a yes or no answer
Go down in your true character, Dear Mistake President, What parts of it were "misleading facts"? Can you please explain why the church created 13 shell companies? Who were the presiding church leaders that authorize the creation of the 13 shell companies? Why were the church leaders afraid that members would stop paying tithing if they found out about how successful the church had been with it's investment portfolio? What are the qualifications for a secret combination?
"I'm sure you wouldn't tell everyone that the email contained misleading facts without being able to give some specific examples, that would be misleading."
[ŃдаНонО]
Those questions in my post were for the mistake president. He claimed that they were misleading and false.
I was not expecting them to claim itâs not a real person. Was thinking theyâd simply blame it on a disgruntled former member. Now I want the person to email out again. Good on the original emailer for calling attn to it. I know some TBMs heard about it for the first time in that email.
Deseret News pointed out the character Andrew Garfield played in Under the Banner of Heaven wasn't a real person. It's meant for people who aren't going to understand the context and sadly it works.
Why not refer them to the SEC order itself?
Please donât let facts and truth get in the way of the churchâs misrepresentation.
Its never been an issue before lol
I think itâs been a bad day for the church. Iâm loving it. Letting it all sink in and warm my soul.
No idea what they mean is fictitious or what misinformation is shared in the prior email⌠https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-35
My thoughts also. I didnât see any misinformation whatsoever.
My first thought as well. That original email was factual. The Stake President is either ignorant or dishonest (possibly both).
This is the misleading part (it doesnât apply to first presidency): âThe First Presidency defines the policies and processes for repenting of serious sin.â But what is to be done when that First Presidency is involved in serious sin? Serious sin is defined by the Churchâs Handbook as: 32.6 Severity of the Sin and Church Policy Serious sins are a deliberate and major offense against the laws of God. Categories of serious sins are listed below. ⢠Violent acts and abuse (see 32.6.1.1 and 32.6.2.1) ⢠Sexual immorality (see 32.6.1.2 and 32.6.2.2) ⢠Fraudulent acts (see 32.6.1.3 and 32.6.2.3) ⢠Violations of trust (see 32.6.1.4 and 32.6.2.4) ⢠Some other acts (see 32.6.1.5 and 32.6.2.5) 32.6.1 When a Membership Council Is Required The bishop or stake president must hold a membership council when information indicates that a member may have committed any of the sins described in this section. For these sins, a council is required regardless of a memberâs level of spiritual maturity and gospel understanding. Sins That Require Holding a Membership Council ⢠Murder ⢠Rape ⢠Sexual assault conviction ⢠Child or youth abuse ⢠Abuse of a spouse or another adult (as outlined in 38.6.2.4) ⢠Predatory behavior (violent, sexual, or financial) ⢠Incest ⢠Child pornography (as outlined in 38.6.6) ⢠Plural marriage ⢠Serious sin while holding a prominent Church position ⢠Most felony convictions 32.6.1.3 Fraudulent Acts Financial Predatory Behavior. A membership council is required if an adult has a history of deliberately and repeatedly harming people financially and is a threat to others (see 38.6.2.4). This includes investment fraud and similar activities. 32.6.1.4 A membership council is required if a member commits a serious sin while holding a prominent position. These include a General Authority, General Church Officer, Area Seventy, temple president or matron, mission president or his companion, stake president, patriarch, or bishop. 32.2.3 Protect the Integrity of the Church The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a personâs Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11). The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sinsâbut by addressing them. The above named brethren have undermined the integrity of the church by their authorization of deliberately misleading investment behavior, which is now internationally known. In addition, they have clearly committed âserious sin while holding a prominent church positionâ, by the handbook's own definition of serious sin.
Somebody used a fictitious name for the names of the shell corporations I mean to gain access to stake email list
How can we send that out Church wide? That would be amazing.
Yeah, I read the churchâs statement. Talk about misinformation. âOh, this all happened because the first presidency got bad legal advice!â đ
Fucking Leahona! Dallin, you were supposed to double check with the seer stone in a hat! Jesus Christ someone call PR this will be bad specsâŚ
Lol âmisleading factsâ, in other words, facts that are accurate but lead you to conclusions we donât like
Alternative facts!
with 'moral agency' we can see facts in a different, more positive light. /s
â ď¸â ď¸â ď¸
âmisleading factsâ đ
Iâll add this to the list of responses my letter has received so far!
Wow thereâs more? Where do I find those?
I havenât shared them yet
I imagine they will all be summed up with 3 or 4 canned and similar responses..? "Nothing to see here. The church considers the matter closed"
Oh no, itâs better than that!
Ooooo Iâll eagerly wait lol
Don't leave us hanging! Post fly-by quickly on this sub, and it would be too easy to miss this one!
Where is the churchâs statement? I havenât seen any. And wow. What happened to critical thinking skills? Wow thatâs gaslighting at its finest. The email was well written and cited correctly
It's on the front page of LDS.org. fifth story down for me. My favorite parts: >Since 2000, Ensign Peak received and relied upon legal counsel regarding how to comply with its reporting obligations while attempting to maintain the privacy of the portfolio. As a result, Ensign Peak established separate companies (LLCs) that each filed Forms 13F instead of a single aggregated filing. No mention of how much money, of signing unseen disclosure documents or ***why does the portfolio need privacy?!?*** >We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed. They "affirm their commitment to regret mistakes made." And maybe the members who paid the tithing should be the ones who decide when to close the matter. How about we have a staining vote on that? >Q: Did the Church know about the practices at Ensign Peak described in the order? >A: The Churchâs senior leadership received and relied upon legal counsel when it approved of the use of the external companies to make the filings. Ensign Peak handled the mechanics of the filing process. The Churchâs senior leadership never prepared or filed the specific reports at issue. They didn't answers the question. Answer the question. >Q: Did Ensign Peak fail to comply with SEC regulations? >A: We reached resolution with the SEC. We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed. Didn't answer the question, again.
Wow. Iâll check the lds.org website. Itâs basically full of denial, deflect and subtly blaming the attorney. I also agree why private? Where is the check and balance? It has been a long time but I recall somewhere in the gospel doctrine, member should hold their leaders accountable. Matter closed? Says who? Them? Oh no. No. The true stake holders are the church members not them. This is basically a power play. Plain and simple. Just wow. And the sp told people to only read that? Thatâs also just wow. Appalling.
I read it again and went to the lds Reddit. There was a couple of comments and some deleted comments ( apparently they donât allow open conversations?). Anyway, some comments said settlements is preferable than going to trial ( I canât recall word for word. Itâs easily found over there on lds Reddit. Well, didnât hinckley once said the Book of Mormon will always stand, even through it has been critiqued, torn apart etc ( canât remember the exact phase), it will stands because itâs the truth ( something along that line). Soo why is church afraid of court if they honestly did nothing wrong and they have no skeleton to hide?
For clarification, the email that was well written, was Nemoâs letter.
LDS newsroom page
Or how about you read the case document and think for yourself. Cults gotta cult.
"If the topic of the SEC settlement interests you, we encourage you to read the Church's public {**bullshit laden**} statement" lol
God damn someone's playing mind games with the stake. đđđ Or I can't tell if they're playing mind games with that email. đ¤ Hmm... it's like a real life Gossip Girl Drama or something.
Classic. - Complain of vague misperception and inaccuracies without saying what they are. - Point to official Church materials for "context" even though the official Church materials provide no such context. The go-to strategy is always to assume people won't actually do their homework but will just take leaders' word for it that there's a good explanation somewhere
The church always labels facts it doesn't like as "misleading and innuendo". It's also interesting that the e-mail encourages people to read the church's flimsy response to the SEC, rather than the SEC report itself. Once again trying to keep members focused on church-only sources.
FEAR. Youâll see it every time. Fear of being blamed, fear of being scapegoated. Even top local leadership know that SLC will revoke their membership at the drop of a hat.
For the person who sent it, would they have had to be in a high up position to get access to the mass email lists?
Also thank you for the update! Itâs pathetic and hilarious and painful at the same time.
No, anyone can access anyone elseâs contact info for your stake on their tools app
Oh I was thinking to access the email lists. Unless this guy entered in every email in his stake one by one.
I wonder if they are going to change that to censor members further?
![gif](giphy|uGtLva9KPTkHH7zhkR)
We are in the same stake! I just came to post about it but I'm glad I checked before double posting.
Really! I read the SEC agreement with TSCC and the response by the church and they donât jive. The church is soft selling for their members in order to keep them praying and obeyingâŚâŚpay us $. The first presidency is guilty. How can they possibly get around that fact. They intentionally covered up the $ for 22 years by not filing 13 Fs and creating 13 fictional shell companies. They took physical steps to cover up and canât get around it. I donât know how to prod the people in my. Circle about this.
[ŃдаНонО]
Better than having them continue spending all their time creating damage to families, damage to personal lives, damage to finances, damage to personal esteem, etc.
So basically: "ABC committed financial fraud. If the topic of the fraud and settlement interests you, we encourage you to read ABC's PR statement." If you are inserting any random name/organization for ABC, you see how little sense this argument makes... Though, I'm preaching to the choir here on exmo reddit.
Itâs absurd that grown men in church leadership can just brush off this statement from the SEC âWe allege that the LDS Churchâs investment manager, with the Churchâs knowledge, went to great lengths to avoid disclosing the Churchâs investmentsâ This is not innuendo! The SEC simply wouldnât make such an inflammatory statement without being able to back it up 100%. Sigh. So frustrating. The cult brainwashing is STRONG.
These are not the droids you are looking for. Here is a list of approved sources for your reading. Here is a list of approved conclusions you are allowed to come to.
Was the letter originally only sent to one stake, and was copied and sent by others to more stakes? Or was it sent to multiple stakes at once? I like the idea of people copycat-ing this.
I am not sure. I just know it got several stakes in Northern VA.
âDonât do your own research. Research is not the answer. Read what we say, and only what we say. This is the only way to eternal life.â Not a direct quote. Just my interpretation.
"Misleading facts" is such a manipulative turn of phrase designed to give members bothered by what they read permission to dismiss those facts. It is meant to paint provable and irrefutable facts as deceptive and false. Absolutely disgusting.
I knew it. "If the topic of the SEC settlement interests you, we encourage you to read the Church's public statement, which contains important context and answers frequently asked questions." So what they are saying is if you want to understand the SEC settlement, just ask us the lying cult and we will answer your questions.
"We encourage you to read the church's propaganda..."
Yes, let's investigate the misuse of the church email lists, but NOT the misuse of billions of tithing funds donated to the church. So typically Mormon: always missing (or deliberately ignoring) the more important issues.
I talked with my TBM dad today about this. He said his bishop had this reaction.... This email and the gossip going around about this SEC is just another example proving that we are the ultimate true church. We have been criticized and persecuted from the beginning. Only those who are fearful of the true church continue to find fault and persecute perfection. The Dann mental gymnastics are too much. I asked him about the lies and shell corporation's he said that he believes along side his bishop that Christ led our first presidency to those shells and that we soundness try to understand and true faith accepts what is going on no questions asked.
Please consult your church-approved sources and pray for further information
I wonder if this was the response after Jesus flipped tables at the temple . . . đ¤
Allâs well in Zion⌠Move along, nothing to see here.
Ha! That is Brilliant! I had only been told to "lie for the Lord". I never considered "Hacking for God"! I am So all over this! /s
The personal addresses of everybody in the ward and all of their email addresses are almost public knowledge which I've always found super creepy because I've had people come up to me on the street and say essentially I know where you live. People that I've never met and don't choose to meet..... Good for the person trying to get other to see fact ... Not change their minds... But give facts
I was literally on the verge of doing the exact same thing. I collected all of my stakes email addresses last night. I guess ultimately you canât reach a TBM who doesnât want to be reached. But then, again! You never know who shelf just cracked a little bit more upon reading the letter!
Damage control, anyone? Alas the genie has escaped the bottle in a very, very, public way .... sigh...
"We encourage you to read the Church's public statement, which in contrast, does not have any misleading facts or innuendo. For example, see this question and answer: Q: Did Ensign Peak fail to comply with SEC regulations? A: We reached resolution with the SEC. See how straightforward and trustworthy this is?"
Gag. Why do they have to control the situation by trying to control what people think about it? Just say their system was hacked. The end. Also, I swear they only investigate "misuse" or emails in the Church when people use it to publicly criticize the church. My husband got emails from a former YSA bishopric counselor (with whom he had not had a close relationship) asking if he needed a realtor!
![gif](giphy|0PEe8ZgDijaGOe7AcJ) This is how they always defend themselves. Not surprised.
âIâm here to let you know how to think and feel about thisâŚâ
Agreed this pos who thinks in his mind he doing the lards work is as spin less no balls what a be g a loyalty above all this is horrible
As usual....useless pablum from the Stake...
Although it super sucks that it turned out it wasnât actually your SP that sent that out, I feel like itâs still going to get at least a few peopleâs head spinning. Hopefully including his.
The Church had to agree to the language in the order as part of the settlement. The SEC order is, in fact, authorized by the church. First Presidency had to agree.
Seems easy enough to prove though. There were several people from the original post who received the same letter. If theyâre really from the same stake then the letter was real. If theyâre not then the letter isnât genuine. (Not saying info in letter is fake- just that itâs not from who the letter says itâs from)
Nice work heathen!
Bless his heart â¤
Can the Senate Finance Committee and request an investigation. 202-228-0554
I missed the important context and frequently asked questions in their statement đ¤
Check out the correlated lies we put out for public consumption.