rubondfan2

I wasn't aware you and I were in some kind of superiority competition. My vote would be no and yes, respectively. My belief in the agency of man and in the Constitution both trump my personal decision to live the Word of Wisdom. Who am I to compel someone else through legal means to live the Lord's law of health? More importantly, who would I be (as president in this hypothetical example) to completely overstep the bounds of the Constitution and declare alcohol illegal... or even to define a drinking age? (Personally, I'd be inclined toward no federal legislation regarding a drinking age. That's an issue for the state and local governments to decide.) Simply because I believe in a certain gospel principle or doctrine does not imply that I would go about legislating morality. And my post earlier in which I listed out several tenets that I believe should influence the political and civic decisions of those in office nowhere implies that I believe legislation at the federal level is required to enforce those doctrines or principles in which I believe. You see, at the federal level, there is really very little that needs to be decided concerning individual behavior or economics. So getting into a debate with me over what I would do if this or that legislation was presented to me is pointless because my first question is, "does the Constitution enumerate this power to the federal government?" If the answer is "no", then my vote would be "no"... period. If the answer is "yes", then my personal convictions and beliefs would then come into play as a factor over which to deliberate my decision and position.

Just so we're clear, I did mention one other facet other than just responsibility and accountability. I mentioned agency, which is quite unique to our faith in many ways. And a belief that I suspect influences you, me and others to oppose legislating morality (i.e., abortion in the example you and I are speaking about currently). Some other tenets (doctrines and principles) of our faith that I believe should influence our political and civic decisions are: - The Word of Wisdom - The Law of Chastity - The Beatitudes - The Law of Tithing - The Lord's system of welfare - Our revelations & teachings concerning the Constitution - The warnings concerning these last days and the end times - The Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood - D&C 121 - Mosiah 18:9 - And many, many more... Again, it's the separation of these ideas and concepts from our political and civic discourse that I believe is at the very root of the demise and downfall of our nation. And answering a basic question about ones beliefs in an honest, straightforward and no nonsense way is paramount, in my opinion.

Well, in order for me to be able to really relate to what you are seeking to illustrate here, I would need to see our system of government in the same way that you expressed here. I don't see it the same way and therefore you and I are going to have a very different opinion on the matter. I'll try to stay on point here and not derail this thread, but I do have a couple of fundamental disagreements with your post. 1) I do not believe "There's a big difference to personal conviction and the political process." This was the premise behind my earlier post. I believe it's the dissolution of the relationship between personal convictions (rooted in Gospel truths) and the political process that has in fact gotten us into the very mess we are in today. 2) The president is not supposed to be elected "by the majority"... that would be full democracy and the next step closest to communism. The president is elected by the electoral college. It's a broken system, but one that would work if we returned to the principals outlined in the Constitution. Unfortunately, for all practical purposes, the President is elected "by the majority", which again, I believe is part of our problem today. Imagine if the Savior ruled by the "voice of the people". Or if the Church was governed by the voice of the people. Should our nation be any different? (Yes, these things are all easy to say and difficult to do... but if we don't even try to apply gospel principles and doctrine to our every day way of life, -- political process included -- then we are really not headed toward a very good outcome.) 3) The Chief Executive is NOT the voice of the people. That is not what the Framers ever intended for the office of President to be. We have representatives who represent the voice of the people. The Chief Executive is supposed to execute the laws as determined by the voice of the people and to represent our nation to the international community. 4) I believe a case can be made that we are already dangerously close to this point in our nation today. The uncontrolled, unchallenged use of "Executive Orders" has all but destroyed the Constitution. Again, and to tie this back to the thread at hand. I believe personal convictions SHOULD influence our political and civic decisions. I believe that no matter what your goal in life is... political office, head of business, waiter down at the crab shack, etc., you should seek to accomplish it while living and and standing up for your beliefs, principles and convictions no matter the price. Lesson 31 in the current edition of Gospel Principles speaks quite clearly and without room for debate on the subject of complete honesty; even going so far as to state that honesty is paramount "even if it seems to be to their disadvantage". It's a great lesson. For those of you who haven't already heard it presented in your individual units it's a great read and might end up altering some of the opinions expressed here.

A position that, I suspect is firmly rooted in the belief that agency and taking personal responsibility for ones actions and choices is paramount within any civilized society... both concepts which are firmly rooted in LDS doctrine. So, I still see your position and subsequent (hypothetical) policy recommendation as being influenced by your faith. (A position I share with you, I might add). I do see and acknowledge your deliberate use of the word dictate, as opposed to influence.

I struggle with this statement a little. How could ones religious beliefs NOT dictate (or at a super bare minimum influence) your political and civic choices? Perhaps this is a fundamental issue in our national and world politico-economic scene today... not enough political and civic choices being influenced by faith in the Creator and in adherence to personal and societal morals and integrity of character. -- I certainly think so. Could you imagine the Savior saying, "Well, I am the Son of God and I certainly have a stance on the ,<insert your favorite issue here> issue, but I'm not going to let my personal beliefs influence my political and civic choices while I am in office." I've read the comments here regarding Mr. Huntsman's interview and thought about them each. I have decided that I am definitely on the side of "Good grief Mr. Huntsman, stand up for your beliefs one way or the other, but don't straddle the fence." I'm recalling something about lukewarm people being spewed out of a mouth or something like that.

I wonder... and maybe you mega-historians on the forum could pull some quick quotes out of your hats... but I wonder if Ezra Taft Benson or J. Reuben Clark ever stated their LDS beliefs as "hard to define". They seemed to do alright politically while maintaining an unabashed dedication to their faith.

Thanks for the few of you who jumped in and shed some light on this subject for me. I appreciated too, the speculatory comments seeking to address the "how" this may have worked for Adam & Eve. Looks like I've got a little studying to do; especially around Talmage's teachings. I wasn't aware that he taught that only the Garden of Eden was in a Terrestrial/Celestial state. If this is the case, then all else around cavemen, dinosaurs and forgotten species sure makes a lot more sense. Although... even as I type this, the following thought goes through my head; how was the creation of the earth anything less than perfect? We read (and hear, for us temple going folks) of the creative periods of the earth. All things being made spiritual followed by physical. Are the Father and the Son capable of creating anything that is not perfect? What caused the fall of the earth prior to Adam & Eve in the Garden? Were Adam & Eve introduced to an existing, fallen earth? But then how does that jive with "here is matter unorganized... let us form it and call it earth" (paraphrased a bit)? So many questions... guess I'll do some digging in the past threads around this topic. Thanks again!!

So... I only just now had my mind open up to a new question around the subject of the dinosaurs. It seemed a large enough diversion from the "Church's position on Dinosaurs" thread, so I opted for creating a new thread. Mine is a two-part question. 1) Was the perfection in the Garden of Eden limited to only the Garden of Eden? Or to ask this another way; was all the area outside of the Garden imperfect and mortal? Or was the entire earth considered perfect prior to the fall? We are taught that there was no birth or death in the Garden, implying a state of perfection. This is the springboard for my second question... 2) Was the perfected state in which Adam & Eve lived prior to partaking the fruit only realized at the point of Adam & Eve's creation? Or was each creative period created in a state of perfection consecutively until the final creative period and ultimate pinnacle creation of Man? The reason for these questions is -- If a state of perfection only existed within the Garden of Eden and only in the Garden of Eden AND/OR if the earth was only in a perfect state after the end of the final creative period, then I can see how the dinosaurs might have "lived and died, age after age" as Talmage says. If the earth, however, was created perfectly throughout each creative period and up to and including the final creative period, then I do not see how dinosaurs could have "lived and died", as they would have been perfect creations just like Adam and Eve. Thus "the fall" would have brought about the mortality of ALL life, at which point we would be speculating about how the dinosaurs were destroyed after the Fall. (Perhaps during the flood?) Anyone have some wild speculation on this? Or even better... any sources that might address these questions? I can't believe that I only now thought of this angle... I've thought a great deal on this subject. Just goes to show how much there is to learn.

Very nice post. I have not read a lot of J. Reuben Clark's materials, but after reading what you've posted here and matching that up to the extensive study I have made of Ezra Taft Benson's writings, I can assure you that I am going to do more digging. I completely agree with the concept that we have a military industrial complex and that it is dragging this nation speedily down to you-know-where. I also believe strongly that secret combinations abound and the great majority of our foreign, domestic and finance policies are the result of a well calculated combination on the part of some very powerful yet secretive and very greedy few. Thanks again for your post and I look forward to reading others in the future.

I wondered who else caught the following statement to us by one of the Lord's servants: "... difficult days are ahead. Rarely in the future will it be easy or popular to be a faithful Latter-Day Saint." I'd like to hear some of the thoughts from forum members regarding this very pointed statement.

This is what I also think about when catastrophies like this occur. I am reminded of how puny we humans are. Just imagine... this was one earthquake lasting for probably less than 2 minutes (tried to find a source with the exact duration) and look at the sheer amount of destruction that took place as a result. In 3rd Nephi we read of the destruction that took place just before the resurrected Savior's arrival to the American continent. The turmoil lasted for the space of three hours. Three hours. When I read of entire cities being "swallowed up by the sea"; or "sinking into the earth"; mountains forming where valley's once existed and valley's now found where once were mountains it all makes sense in the context of such a long duration of physical upheaval. Look at the destruction caused through earthquakes/tsunami's in the past and present... San Francisco, Haiti, Thailand and Japan... all caused by physical events lasting just seconds or minutes and then imagine such taking place for 3 hours or more. It boggles my mind. May the people of Japan receive all the blessings the Lord has to offer them in this time of tragedy.

It's not the credit card that I'm calling out. It's the system and I'll keep saying that, no matter how myopic you want to try and take this discussion. Thanks for illustrating my point. I don't travel around with my refrigerator in my pocket. Well that's a bit of an assumption now, isn't it? Up until recently I haven't carried a cell phone and the one I do have is a pay as you go that isn't traceable to me personally. I never said not to live in the system or that I don't live in it. Am I of it... that's the better question to be asking... and not of me, but of ourselves individually and collectively. Recognition that there is a system is the first step in a list of many to arm yourself as one of the soldiers in the fight for righteousness and against combinations that tear at the very fabric of society. Never said they were. Really? I suppose it depends upon your definition of free and to what other cultures or nations you compare America against. Freedom is eroding and it is a direct result of a mesmorized and asleep citizenry that the erosion began and continues to this day in an accelerated manner. Now this is a statement that I can get behind. You profess to have some knowledge in this area. My challenge to you is to stand up and educate others... but also to continue learning and studying for yourself the ideas presented by myself and others like me. No, not "everyone" is out to get me or you and I never proposed such an idea. But there is a lot underfoot all around us and it behooves us to learn, be aware and be actively engaged.

The system, the system, the system. It's this kind of a response that I knew was going to come out here. And it's ok. I get that so many of us are stuck on the conveyor belt on which we were placed the day we were born and then the moment we were put in front of a TV for the first time and the day we were tossed into the public school system. I get it, I do, really. Since when do we need to rely upon our credit bureau scores to buy a house? How long have the three credit bureaus even been in existence? (You can study that out for yourself.) How did someone buy a home in 1910... 1920 or even 1950? What about in the 1800's? And going into debt to buy a car?? Well, I'm not going to get started on that one. The more entrenched one is in the system of things, the more easily they can be monitored, manipulated and controlled. And this is the point of my initial post. I'm not arguing the nuances within the system. I'm calling out the system in general.

Thanks for starting up a thread dedicated to this topic. I'll start my answer by providing a small analogy. In the game of Chess, the objective is to "capture" the opponents king through a process called "Checkmate". Now, in the game it is impossible for one side to win with just a King on the board. You must have at least one other piece to help out in the effort and to ultimately have any hope of putting the opponents King in Checkmate. To carry the analogy further, the more pieces the King has working for him... and the more strategically placed those pieces are... the greater the chance of success that exists. Is Hosni Mubarak at the head of or even directly involved in the overall secret combination? Nah, he's just a pawn... a player in the game. Are George Bush Sr., Bill Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt, Anwar Sadat, John D. Rockefeller or [insert your favorite high profile person here] one of the big planners? Nah, I don't think so... but I do think one or more of them are some of the more strategically placed pieces in the game. Is Rupert Murdock part of the inner circle? Maybe... but still unlikely, and in my opinion he's another example of a powerful, well placed piece in the game. These are just a handful of names that most everyone would recognize. I could go on and on. So who is at the head? Well, that one is easy; it's Satan, of course. But the better question is who are the ones working directly with him? Well, that's a bit tougher to figure out now, isn't it? Just as in the Book of Mormon, we see that those who were involved in secret combinations were kept secret from society in general. We got to see some of their names hundreds or even thousands of years after the fact through reading the books of Ether, 3rd Nephi, Alma and many other places throughout the book. But at the time, the people in general were duped. They got sucked into the combinations... became players in the game without even realizing there was a game. Let's look at the Jaredite nation (society) for example. Through the introduction of secret works of darkness (combinations) introduced to a willing few who desired power, control and glory of the world, we ultimately see the destruction of an entire nation of people literally down to the "last man standing" (Coriantumr). Why was this account placed in the book in the first place? Of all of the 1000's of pages of records that Mormon had at his disposal during the compilation of the book, why did he choose to include this? Why did he choose to include at least two other accounts of secret combinations resulting in the destruction of entire nations of people? Just because they were cool stories? Just so we could sit back and shake our heads and point our fingers and say, "Well those poor suckers just couldn't learn, could they?... Gosh, what a mess they were in and they didn't even know it." Or, "Wow, they were warned and warned and didn't pay attention and it ultimately led to their downfall... golly... sucks to be them." I personally think those accounts are there because of something that Moroni said very specifically in the eighth chapter of Mormon: "35 Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing." Moroni saw the day in which we live and knew what we would be doing. Is it so much of a stretch to believe that he saw secret combinations alive and well in our day and left those very important parts and pieces in the record his father compiled (who no doubt had the same vision granted to him as well) for us to see today? I hear some say, "Well if there are secret combinations what can I do to stop them? I just need to pray, read my scriptures and show forth a good example and just do my thing." When I hear statements like these, I hear in my head, "Well, there's nothing I can do... and ultimately we know who wins this war... so if I am prepared I shall not fear." I believe that is only half the story. Yes we have been told that if we are prepared we shall not fear. But who do you think is going to help the Father and the Savior win this war? Are they just going to win it by themselves? Is it just up to "someone else" to be a soldier in the army for righteousness? Can we sit ignorantly and idly by with our noses buried in our scriptures and our heads in the sand as secret combinations and the work of Satan progresses on all around us? Do you really think that if you just pull the covers of "the Church" over your head that the literal monster in your room will not be able to get to you and destroy you? I believe that an army is needed. I feel as though I am an educator of sorts. And I believe that those who do see what is happening have a responsibility, duty and obligation to join the fight... to get involved... to study, understand and then to stand up and do something. I may be labeled as a conspiracy theorizing ranter... a "Tea Partier"... a "radical thinker" and "extremist" a "over-reactionist" or whatever. But none of that matters to me. I know what I know. I learn more every day. It's taken me years to wake up and open my eyes. I don't pretend to be able to convince anyone of anything with a few paragraphs here and there. But what I do hope to do is encourage some to think... to study... to pray... and then to act. Yes, there is a global conspiracy. It is well organized, well funded and led by the master of deceit; practiced in his art since before the mortal sphere of existence. He has his army, with members on both sides of the veil. They are paying attention. They are well organized. They are willing to stop at nothing to accomplish their goal. Are you?

Thank you for your post. I agree with your sentiments. And this particular part of your comment also drives at the heart of the overall issue. How many hundreds of thousands of people are in a perpetual cycle of bondage over credit card debt? Credit card companies... and the financial few who own/control them make their money off the interest charged on carried balances. What better way to entice more consumers to this model than to make using a debit card inconvenient to the point of obsolesence? Manipulation, control, greed and power. All the elements behind every secret combination ever conceived since the days of Cain.

Not surprised to see a comment such as this. And if looking at this subject from the very limited of perspective of whether or not Credit/Debit cards are good/bad, then I see your point. I'm talking about the issue from an entirely different point of view. It sounds like you've bought into the anti-debit card propaganda. If you've actually had an experience such as the one you describe, then I am sorry to hear it and I can imagine how frustrating it was. Again, I'm not going to debate the nuances of the pro's/con's of Credit vs. Debit cards, however I will say that over the past 7 years, I have transacted more than $300,000 through my debit card and have had only had a very small number of situations similar to that which you describe and I was able to resolve all of them to my satisfaction in a short period of time. Interesting article. Clearly written with pro-credit card interests in mind. More than half of the "disadvantages" noted are related to poor money management/awareness on the part of the user... in which case, they shouldn't be using either a credit card or debit card. Hmm... now that is an interesting comment. My initial guess is that you have lived in the same area for an extended period of time? If so, then yes, I suppose writing checks is an option for you. But for those who travel extensively, such as I and my family do... including international travel... writing checks is absolutely not an option. This really misses the overall point of the banking industry moving toward a model where even greater financial control over consumers can be exercised... greater transaction transparency to the financial industry over consumer behavior... greater reliance upon the credit bureaus (don't even get me started on them)... and greater ability to monitor the movements of the masses. The idea of a microprocessor inside of a piece of plastic that is on my person... wow... that is just plain mortifying to think about. I am reminded of the scripture about the last days being a time when we would call good evil and evil good. "Gosh, it's a good thing to have our movements tracked throughout the globe." Or, "It's a good thing to protect consumers." How about protecting ourselves? Or has that concept gotten lost in the noise of social agendas, government safety nets and reliance upon others to provide what we should be providing for ourselves?

Well, it seems the bankers are implementing the next stage in exercising financial control over the masses. It appears to be coming in a two-pronged approach: 1) The elimination of the magnetic stripe cards and implementation of embedded chips (already in widespread use throughout the EU) The future of banking? Credit card that contains a computer will read aloud your balance | Mail Online 2) Caps on debit card transactions, which will drastically limit the financial options for those without credit cards (whether by choice or default due to bad or no credit) Debit card spending limit? Banks consider a $50 cap - Mar. 10, 2011 Now, I'm no fan of the "bankers" as many of you have noticed from my past posts, and I am again very concerned about worldwide movements happening under our noses. I wonder if anyone is paying attention? You see, the use of a debit card, in my view is good thing. Many do not have the discipline to utilize a credit card responsibly and the debit card is a great alternative. I use debit cards exclusively and do not even own a credit card... no, not a single one. And I don't want one... period. Debit card transactions are also tied to a checking account which is a little tougher for big brother to monitor without cause and a court order. Credit card transactions on the other hand are wide open to big brother monitoring. Information about the habits of the masses is a key step in the agenda of any organization or groups who ultimately want to influence... or worse yet, control... the masses. Imposing restrictions such as the ones proposed upon debit cards will lead to more people using credit cards and more inconveniences and less freedom imposed upon folks who either don't want or can't obtain a credit card. Imagine having to go to the ATM machine everytime you wanted to make a purchase over $100? Heck, my Costco trips are $600 minimum... and I can't even take $600 out of an ATM in one day with my particular bank. Plus, what if I don't want to walk around with a wad of cash in my pocket? At any rate, I digress. The point here, is that for those who are looking and paying attention; this is, in my opinion, another step being taken by a small number of people to execute a very old, well thought out and carefully executed secret combination. Very large and influencial things in our world have been changing steadily for the past 100 years or so. The changes are accelerating. People in general are more asleep than ever and freedoms are being lost all around us and only a precious few are doing or saying anything about it. In fact, even here on this forum, I won't be at all surprised to have many comment on my thread something to the effect of: "Yeah, this will be a little inconvenience, but in the end no big deal." or... "Well, gosh, all the money that banks are losing because of the current debit card program structure is what is causing this move... it makes sense... it may not be a 'good' thing, but it's really not part of a secret combination; you're over-reacting bondfan." I point your attention to the first link to the EU article about talking credit cards. Read it carefully and note especially the statements which allude to the "bankers" "controlling" the "behavior" of "billions" of people. This goes to the heart of my point about secret combinations. The "bankers" really are a small group of elite folks whose names most of us don't even know. There really aren't hundreds of different banks in the world today. The entire banking system worldwide is controlled and manipulated by a literal handful of people... just as is the media worldwide. Don't just take my word for it. Study it out for yourselves. It's things like this debit card situation that to me, are huge warning signs of what is to come and what is happening right in front of our very eyes. Those with eyes to see and ears to hear will notice it. The others... well I guess just go back to watching the next episode of Survivor... because, after all... all is well in Zion, right?

Well, I'm still going to disagree here. Again, is there a secret society of hundreds of news personalities, outlets, networks, reporters and individual players getting together to conspire as a group? No, I don't believe so and I really don't believe ProphetofDoom believes that either. (I can't wait for him to come online so that he can clarify his opinion a bit). What I am most certainly saying is that the media -- as a whole -- is filled from top to bottom with corruption. I believe "the media industry" in general qualifies as one of the groups spoken of in the quote below by Bruce R. McConkie from the revised edition of Mormon Doctrine. It is part of the church of the devil... the great and abominable church spoken of by Nephi. It is a tool used by the Adversary to lead away the hearts and minds of people away from God and toward bondage and destruction... that's what I believe. Neither could Bruce R. McConkie. Which is why he said the following: "The titles church of the devil and great and abominable church are used to identify all churches or organizations of whatever name or nature--whether political, philosophical, educational, economic, social, fraternal, civic, or religious--which are designed to take men on a course that leads away from God and his laws and thus from salvation in the kingdom of God." Once again, bear in mind that the vast majority of the news media propagated upon the earth today is owned and controlled by only a literal handful of individuals. The individual players may have the best of intentions doing what they do to deliver information to the people, but they are playing in a rigged system... they are simply teeth on the cogs in a much bigger set of wheels ultimately being turned by a small number of elite who are being used by the Adversary. Whether they (the elite few) purposefully chose to make the deal with him or are just corrupt enough of heart to buy into his agenda doesn't matter. In Book of Mormon times, we read of power hungry, greedy individuals who literally sought out the secret works of darkness. Other times they "stumbled across them". Regardless of how they got them, the result was the same when those works of darkness (secret combinations... i.e. "conspiracies") were allowed to grow and permeate the leaders and those who followed them... they brought about the destruction of entire nations of people who at one time were very righteous and unified. I would further offer that I'm sure there were many during those times, as the destruction was happening all around them, were saying to themselves, "there can't possibly be some grand conspiracy here... things are fine... my government wouldn't lie to me... my textbooks at school say this is the way it is... all is well in zion." Hmm... could we be seeing a repeat performance today?

I disagree pretty much all of the above Anatess. And here is why. ProphetofDoom is asserting (I think... he'll have to speak for himself) that the Media is part of the overall "megaconspiracy", to use Funky's term. The way in which he is describing his assertion, in my opinion, could be said a little differently so as not to come across as a blazing conspiracy theorist rant... but in principle, I agree with ProphetofDoom that there is a large scale movement to lead the souls of men down a path toward enslavement and bondage... such as that described by President Benson in the link I provided earlier. ProphetofDoom simply grabbed onto and targeted the media in his comment (I believe) because that's the context of this thread -- the media. We could make similar assertions about the food industry, the drug industry, the education "industry", the military "industry", and on and on. Is "the media" part of the large scale "megaconspiracy" (hereinafter referred to as "secret combinations")? My answer to that is unequivocally yes, yes, and double yes. Does each little anchor and local news outlet or reporter throughout the world gather together in a grand meeting in a secret location in South Africa every 3rd leap year to work out their master plan as a group? No, of course not. And neither ProphetofDoom nor I are asserting such a claim. Is the media as a whole a tool being used by the Adversary through a few of his agents (Rupert Murdock and others of his ilk) to bring about his agenda of secret combinations? I personally believe so. As an aside. I will say that I understand why I can talk to different people and share with each of them the same beliefs that I have and get a range of responses varying from a blank stare, a fearful gasp, a hearty belly laugh to fist pumping agreement. This is a paradigm shift for many. I realize that it is hard for many to undo the conditioning and the training our minds and hearts have received literally from birth. We're conditioned through the medications injected into our bodies, the food we ingest, the damned TV we watch, the papers we read, the schools we attend, the jobs we work, and the people with whom we choose to associate and align ourselves. Once you're on the conveyor belt built by "the system", it is hard to jump off. It is hard to see anything else other than what "the system" wants you to see. President Benson "got it". Not only because of his mantle as Prophet, Seer and Revelator, but because of who he was politically as well. He was an insider... more so than certainly any of us on this forum are or likely will be. Read that talk in its entirety. He's speaking about as plainly as one can speak without coming out and actually using the words "megaconspiracy". He took the red pill, if you will. He chose to see what was really happening and he, quite fortunately for us, chose to not be silent about it. Some chose to listen then and went on to become freedom fighters in the battle against the secret combinations. Those of us today can also choose to join this fight. Still others can choose to remain entrenched, asleep and blissfully ignorant of the conveyor belt they so comfortably ride upon.

I disagree. And that's ok.

A Witness and a Warning - Ensign Nov. 1979 How about a prophet of God proclaiming such? Will that work for ya? Look, Funky. You're debating the details. Without question, there is, in fact a global conspiracy. Actually, its a "galactic" conspiracy if we really think about it. Satan is very much a real entity with real motivations and a very real capacity to influence the hearts and minds of very influential people. Like I said before; it's not just the "Walter Cronkite's" or the "Glen Becks" or the "Sam Walton's" or even the "dave-johnson-made-up-guy-from-Tennessee's" who are the problem. Did thousands of people get together to contrive a grandly executed plan to take over the world? No, I don't think so... and I don't believe that is what ProphetofDoom and others with similar ideas as he are saying. No, what I personally believe is happening is that a small group of very powerful, influential and greedy people have gathered together in all moments throughout history and either purposefully sought out or, because of their frame of minds were vulnerable to the enticings of the Adversary and ripe for the planting of his designs to enslave the souls of mankind. Satan works his purposes through those who are open to his influence and who are in positions of mortal power and influence. Those individuals then utilize and work through their resources (mathematically a much larger group). Those individuals than carry forth a message to others who then carry it forth. Within a short period, hierarchically speaking, thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people can be actively working toward a purpose that Satan designed at the "top" of the chain; many of whom without realizing or understanding that they are fulfilling the orders of an unnamed, unseen captain. Those who come to see the "conspiracy" for what it is then start to see how so many things in our society and our world today are actually part of a larger more sinister scheme. Is everything a conspiracy? I don't believe so. But are a great many things part of an overall agenda being led by the unnamed, unseen captain? I know so in my heart. Can I prove it? No. Can you prove it not? No. Can I testify of what I know of myself through my own study, prayer and observation? Yes, yes I can and I do. And I also feel a responsibility to gather more soldiers who will join with me and others in the fight against Satan and his secret combinations... wherever they may be happening in the world around us. This is all ProphetofDoom and I are saying here... we're just saying it a little differently. The choice is between the proverbial "blue pill" and the "red pill". Each of us has the choice.

While your question above led to a moderately humorous exchange of related comments, it's actually a spectacular example from which to illustrate my point. On the surface, most of us would say, "Well, it's Peter's fault... he's ultimately responsible for his own choices." A deeper look, however, might reveal a different answer. Let's say for example that John (the seller) is supplied his drugs by a very wealthy, powerful cartel. Their goal is to addict people to Cocaine for the purpose of growing their revenue stream even further thus increasing their power and feeding their greed. The cartel owner devises a marketing plan which when properly presented by his cronies like John will be nearly impossible for John's targets to resist. Peter is presented with the marketing plan by John... presented with a product that he would not otherwise try on his own without any help, encouragement, temptation, manipulation or propaganda. Does Peter have some accountability? Sure. Does John? Definitely. Does the drug cartel? Absolutely. Who paid for Walter Cronkite to be in North Africa covering a story? Who paid his salary? Who marketed him to us, the viewing public? I am really, really concerned with those who use the term "trusted news source". Network news anchors are bought and paid for by the networks, who are owned by an elite few... an elite few with an agenda... an agenda which is spoken of several times in the Book of Mormon... Mormon 8:27 2 Nephi 26:22 This entire debate over whether or not Cronkite is a "trusted" source or not is not the debate. The heart of the issue is that in these end times, there are those who are going about doing the business of the Father of Lies; some of them without any realization that they are doing so. It's not the news personalities who are the problem. It's the networks and the money and the power and the greed behind them that is the problem. And when I hear people use a term like "trusted news source", I hear people who are bought into a system, who are entrenched, who are asleep... not because they are stupid or ignorant... but because they have simply fallen prey to a very effective, very well organized, very manipulative and well established movement. I do understand that not everyone will agree with me. I also understand that some will find me paranoid or over zealous in my beliefs... maybe even view me as a conspiracy theorist. Well... I don't care. We live in vulnerable times... the end times and the movement I spoke of earlier is alive and well and has been since the days of Cain.

I believe that I see the point you are making Funky and the reaffirmation given by Pam as well. I believe I hear you saying that Cronkite made a distinction between "factual news" and "editorial commentary" and therefore he qualifies as a grand exception to my carte blanc statement earlier. Furthermore, I believe you are saying that we, the viewing public are largely responsible for demanding more infotainment than news and we are where we are today because of a societal shift in viewing demand. Well... I'm going to disagree with you again and say that Cronkite and others like him are exactly the reason "we" (the many sheeple who gawk at the TV screen to see what the latest super media star has to say) are so addicted to mainstream media today and have "demanded" the type of subject matter spoon fed to us through the TV. Cronkite absolutely WAS a personality placed before us... and we bought what the networks were selling... hook, line and sinker. They were selling a "trusted news anchor"... a talking head who could say anything to us and we would buy it. Perhaps (and I say that very loosely)... just perhaps he spoke more "informational, unbiased news" than we hear today... but his personality was absolutely instrumental in setting the groundwork for others to follow... Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Brian Williams... and then the lines get fuzzy with people like Katie Couric, Maria Schrieber, Anderson Cooper... the "soft news" personalities... and then we get down to the Sean Hannity's, Glen Becks and Chris Matthews of the infotainment sector and we have people (ignorant ones, yes) who actually think this latter group is delivering news when in fact, it is only commentary and highly biased commentary at that. We can agree to disagree if you like, but I maintain that Cronkite and others like him, before him and after him were introduced to us for a specific purpose... and oh how greatly that purpose has been fulfilled.

Ah, yes... the villain from Tomorrow Never Dies. Well played slamjet... well played.

And even more sad than this, in my opinion, is that many people have even thought of those "trusted network news anchors" as... umm... trustworthy. Good grief, these guys (and gals) are nothing but puppets and actors/actresses on a stage... nothing more. Even the "great" Walter Cronkite... nothing more than a face and a voice reading from a script containing information that only a select few wanted you to hear. It's no different today... we just have more actors and actresses on the stage. "He who controls the media controls the hearts and minds of the people who listen to it." I just made that up, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a real quote out there attributable to someone more enlightened than myself, but for now, I'll take credit for it. :)