<br><br><br><h2 class="date-header">Thursday, December 13, 2007</h2>
<div class="post hentry">
<a name="1633409626888073293"></a>
<h3 class="post-title entry-title">
<a href="http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2007/12/anonymous-flyer.html">The "anonymous flyer"</a>
</h3>
<div class="post-body entry-content">
<p>If
you get bored reading about Douglas Wilson's stunningly stupid revision
of Southern slavery, then you're missing the big picture. Yes, Wilson's
position on slavery represents his twisted worldview, but it also
represents a first step of indoctrination for his loyalists. If you
surrender your intellectual faculties to buy his revision, then you
have given him a stronghold in your head that he will exploit. You're
fast on your way to becoming a monkey boy. And if you dismiss his
Southern fantasy as just that — <i>pure fantasy</i> — but you still
think that he has something to offer, then you have conceded no less of
a stronghold to him than his loyalists, because you have made excuse
for a man who has no excuse. And if you do it once, you'll do it again.<br><br>The
Southern Slavery scandal did not hit the Palouse by accident. Douglas
Wilson could have averted it easily if he had simply admitted that, in
hindsight, he relied on specious arguments to overstate his case. End
of story. In fact, there is no story. The whole thing goes away. But
that's not how it happened.<br><br>Early in the week of October 11,
2003, someone (no one knows who) papered downtown Moscow with a flyer
advertising Wilson's and Wilkins' booklet <i>Southern Slavery As It Was</i>.
The flyer made two points: First, Wilson & Wilkins wrote a book
containing these quotes (and it reproduced some of the more shocking
statements from the booklet) and, second, it noted that both men would
be speaking at the UI in February 2004. It closed with the words "Meet
the Authors!"<br><br>The flyer looked more like litter than street art, but that wasn't the point. The point was to call attention to <i>Southern Slavery As It Was</i> by saturating the town with these flyers. Accordingly, someone left a stack of 50 flyers on the front desk of the
<i>Daily News</i>
who contacted Wilson to confirm the accuracy of the quotes.
Unbelievably, Wilson not only confirmed the quotes, but he invited the <i>News</i>
— with their cameraman — into his living room to discuss the biblical
merits of that Peculiar Institution known as Southern slavery. He even
smiled for the camera, it's the famous photograph you see <a target="_blank" href="http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=665">here</a>. Two days later they splashed photo and <a target="_blank" href="http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2007/10/happy-anniversary.html#sr">
headline</a> on the front page.<br><br>Now,
please stop for a moment of morbid introspection to reflect upon
Wilson's conduct. A so-called minister of the gospel took time out of
his busy pastoral schedule to inform the local media in northern Idaho
that he thought the slaves had a pretty good deal and that history has
maligned the reputations of their noble masters. And as you contemplate
this historical fact, remind yourself that serial paedophile <a target="_blank" href="http://www.tomandrodna.com/CR_2005_02027/">Steven Sitler</a> was raping helpless children in the Kirk and he would continue to rape lambs of the flock for another year and a half.
<br><br>Now, stop for another moment to pick up your jaw.<br><br>That's Douglas Wilson, mighty man of God.<br><br>Regardless,
he got his headline, just as he wanted, and it took him exactly three
days to figure out that this story had legs. Manstealing, slavery, and
racism are a tough sell to a civilized audience — educated or not. So
the first thing Wilson did to sidestep this controversy was use
dougspeak to blame an "anonymous flyer" for his woes. Never mind that
he invited the local media into his home to discuss the story; he
pinned the whole thing on a mysterious "anonymous flyer" and he never
let go of his scapegoat:<br></p><blockquote><b><a target="_blank" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-October/004849.html">[Vision2020] Aaaaa? Slavery!</a></b><br>Douglas<br>Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:38:55 -0700
<br><br>Visionaries,<br><br>Related to the article in the newspaper this weekend, there is one other item you should know. The <i>Daily News</i>
did the story on the basis of an anonymous flyer that was circulated
downtown. The flyer was done in such a way that if someone was not
paying close attention (as some people on this list sometimes don't),
they might think we had done it. But no, not us.<br><br>Cordially,<br><br>Douglas<br><br>P.S. I think someone needs to write a biography soon — <i>The Life and Times of Anonymous: A Profile in Courage</i>.<br><br><br><b>
<a target="_blank" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-October/005133.html">[Vision2020] Journalistic integrity</a></b><br>Douglas<br>Mon, October 27, 2003 8:52 AM<br><br>Visionaries,<br><br>Ambrose
Bierce once defined ink as a "villainous compound of tanno-gallate of
iron, gum-arabic and water, chiefly used to facilitate the infection of
idiocy and promote intellectual crime."<br><br>On Friday, <i>The Idaho Statesman</i> picked up the article which had previously run in the <i>Daily News</i>. They ran it with this by-line: "Pair to give their "biblical" defense of practice at U of I conference."
<br><ol><li>The conference is not on slavery. Never has been. The <i>Daily News</i>
really needs to quit relying on anonymous flyers as part of their
crackerjack reporting team. The savings in payroll are not really worth
the embarrassment.</li><br><li>No, we are not going to give a defense of slavery at the conference.</li><br><li>It is not a U of I conference.</li><br><li>Having shouted their error on the front page, the <i>Daily News</i>
had whispered a teeny correction later on. <i>The Statesman</i> must have missed it somehow.</li></ol>I would like to ask Nathan Alford to respond, or someone at the <i>Daily News</i>. Who is responsible for misrepresenting our history conference in this egregious way? What are you going to do about it?
<br><br>Cordially,<br><br>Douglas Wilson<br><br><b><a target="_blank" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-October/005186.html"><br>[Vision2020] Journalistic integrity</a></b><br>Douglas<br>Tuesday, October 28, 2003 12:30 PM
<br><br>Visionaries,<br><br>Greg Burton asks:<br><br><blockquote>My question is will Wilson and Wilkins discuss slavery or will they not?</blockquote><br>The
answer is that no, we will not be discussing slavery. The conference is
on Revolution and Modernity — Marx, Robespierre, et al.<br><br><blockquote>If so, the article is accurate in my mind.</blockquote><br>But if not, then the article is inaccurate, right? And the <i>Daily News</i> should correct it. The real issue in my mind here is that the
<i>Daily News</i>
is being as stubborn as the pope's mule. The only basis they had for
connecting this conference and slavery was the fact the connection was
made for them by the anonymous Timid One.<br><br><blockquote>Many
times, too, a journalist will get a tip about something, examine the
veracity and go with the information if they can confirm it elsewhere.</blockquote><br>In
this instance, the reporter confirmed with me that the conference was
NOT about slavery. And the error appeared in print anyway. And the
newspaper will not acknowledge it as an error.<br><br><blockquote>Maybe
that happened in this instance. If not, there should be a simple
correction or clarification. Further, the "journalistic integrity" slug
to this thread is a red herring.</blockquote><br>What brings
journalistic integrity into question is not the initial mistake
(although it is at least suspect). The thing that shows a lack of
journalistic integrity is the simple refusal to acknowledge that the
article wrongly identified the topic of the conference. What would be
lost if the <i>Daily News</i> said, "The article xyz wrongly
identified slavery as a topic in the upcoming history conference." They
did that, the conference not about that. Why the reluctance?<br><br><blockquote><i>The New York Times</i> incident was about integrity and ethics, this seems more like quibbling.</blockquote><br>It
is only quibbling if you don't mind being called a racist on AP wires
across the Pacific Northwest. But I do object to it. I do not mind (at
all) standing up for what I believe. I do mind being made a defender of
something I loathe. Quibbling?<br><br>Cordially,<br><br>Douglas Wilson<br><br><b><a target="_blank" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-November/005713.html"><br>[Vision2020] The end of Moscow?</a></b>
<br>Douglas<br>Wednesday, November 26, 2003 11:41 AM<br><br>Visionaries,<br><br>Donovan
wrote to ask about my responsibility in helping to give Moscow a black
eye in the PR department. What was my intent in all of this?<br><br>First,
Donovan is exactly right in anticipating how I would respond. We did
not print and distribute the anonymous flyers, we did not ask for a
front page news story that erroneously proclaimed slavery as the topic
of the conference, we did not ask for the AP to pick up the story,
using that error as the hook of the story, we did not ask for certain
progressives to start boycotting businesses owned by multi-racial
families who happen to attend our multi-racial church (to show their
opposition of racism!), and we did not ask for the subsequent torrent
of shrill, humorless, and ugly denunciations. Now, according to the
normal drill, whenever the progressive meat grinder goes into action,
the selected victim is supposed to apologize and promise to be a good
boy thereafter. But we, taking our cue from Tom Petty, are not backing
down. And now Moscow has a black eye because certain people insisted on
maintaining their slanderous lies at the top of their voices. . . .<br><br>Cordially,<br><br>Douglas Wilson</blockquote><br>I think you get the point. The implication was plain, though Wilson never stated it outright: "The story is not true; the
<i>Daily News</i>
relied on an anonymous flyer and reported lies." Clearly his monkey
boys understood the message because if you search the Vision 20/20
archives you'll see them swarm the Internet, advancing Wilson's
falsehood wholesale. But not once did he ever take responsibility for
granting an interview to the <i>Daily News</i>. Without exception, he blamed this so-called "anonymous flyer."<br><br>Now <a target="_blank" href="http://www.tomandrodna.com/notonthepalouse/Flyer.jpg">look at the flyer</a>
.
Please notice that there is not one false, incorrect, or misleading
representation in it, which is why Wilson confirmed the accuracy of its
contents to the <i>Daily News</i>.<br><br>And now I have exceeded my
word count. So if there's anything you can take from this post, it's
that when Wilson screams the word "anonymous," it's because every word
of the anonymous witness is true. And you should not make excuse for a
man who has no excuse.<br><br>Thank you.
</div>
<div class="post-footer">
<p class="post-footer-line post-footer-line-1"><span class="post-author vcard">
Posted by
<span class="fn">Mark T.</span>
</span> <span class="post-timestamp">
at
<a class="timestamp-link" href="http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2007/12/anonymous-flyer.html" rel="bookmark" title="permanent link"><abbr class="published" title="2007-12-13T09:30:00-08:00">9:30 AM</abbr></a>
</span> <span class="post-comment-link">
</span> <span class="post-icons">
<span class="item-action">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=9097408555576085021&postID=1633409626888073293" title="Email Post">
<span class="email-post-icon"> </span>
</a>
</span>
<span class="item-control blog-admin pid-90443309">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=9097408555576085021&postID=1633409626888073293" title="Edit Post">
<img alt="" class="icon-action" src="http://www.blogger.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif">
</a>
</span>
</span> </p>
<p class="post-footer-line post-footer-line-2"><span class="post-labels">
Labels:
<a href="http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/search/label/DUMB%20and%20Tan" rel="tag">DUMB and Tan</a>
</span> </p>
</div>
</div>
<a name="comments"></a>
<h4>
2 comments:
</h4>
<dl id="comments-block"><dt class="comment-author anon-comment-icon" id="c2116396269292674068">
<a name="c2116396269292674068"></a>
Rev. Jesse Pirschel (OPC)
said...
</dt><dd class="comment-body">
<p>Your
blog post "anonymous flyer" shows you have no shame whatsoever. I am
hoping ministers will be wise enough to not use your website as a place
to launch any of their arguments. Tying the issues that you did
together in that post is beyond ridiculous and shows you have a
personal vendetta of some sort that has allowed you to callously bring
up tragic circumstances in the lives of church families for your
personal gain (or at least for the personal harm of Rev. Wilson, which
clearly gives you glee).</p>
</dd><dd class="comment-footer">
<span class="comment-timestamp">
<a href="http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2007/12/anonymous-flyer.html#c2116396269292674068" title="comment permalink">
December 13, 2007 6:27 PM
</a>
<span class="item-control blog-admin pid-612963951">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/delete-comment.g?blogID=9097408555576085021&postID=2116396269292674068" title="Delete Comment">
<span class="delete-comment-icon"> </span>
</a>
</span>
</span>
</dd><dt class="comment-author blogger-comment-icon" id="c7617593389608168394">
<a name="c7617593389608168394"></a>
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/09673762599798493263" rel="nofollow">Mark T.</a>
said...
</dt><dd class="comment-body">
<p>Rev. Pirschel,<br><br>I
am afraid that you have mistaken me for someone such as yourself —
completely ignorant of the facts of the case, that is. Therefore,
you'll have to excuse me if I don't share your enthusiasm. Do you know
the victims? Have you spoke with them? Do you even know how many child
molesters struck Christ Church during that period? Have you even read
the court records? Do you know any of the facts at all?<br><br>While I am confident that you must answer "No" to these questions, I can answer "Yes" to all of them.<br><br>But
let me ask you a few more questions with the hope of redirecting your
righteous indignation. Can you tell me what "Pastor" Wilson's response
was to the serial paedophile whom God brought to Christ Church? Do you
know how long he waited to warn the families in his charge of the
possibility of the predation? Do you even know if "Pastor" Wilson
bothered to warn the church of predation?<br><br>I'll give you a day or two to compose yourself and contemplate the answers to these questions.<br><br>Thank you.</p>
</dd><dd class="comment-footer">
<span class="comment-timestamp">
<a href="http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2007/12/anonymous-flyer.html#c7617593389608168394" title="comment permalink">
December 13, 2007 6:53 PM</a></span></dd></dl><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><br><br>Juanita Flores<br>Advocate for the Truth from Jesus