.........wouldn't it be fair to summise that they are all Mormon? I mean, if our presidents can change their name and then run for office and become president under a new name, why can't they pretend for purposes of getting ahead that they are something besides what they really are, Mormon? Senator Hatch of Utah is openly Mormon, and this kind of Nixonian stonewalling as the press calls it is typical politics at the Utah state capital. Most Utahns don't have access to alot of what really goes on in Utah politics, and only the most 'important' Mormons do. The Mormons under Joe Smith published a 'manifesto' threatening to take over this country back in the 1850's and 1860's. They still believe they are 'the new zion' and that 'jesus will come to them first and then the temple mount in israel' and that they are 'God's word and power on Earth in this age and none have authority over them.' I can already guess how many mormons are gonna flip over this post. But the truth hurts, doesn't it?
2007-06-28
04:23:02
·
7 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
Not to mention the words "axis of evil" Bush uses in his speeches which come strait from the sermons of Gordon B. Hinkley, moron(oops, mormon) "prophet/president, priest, and king" a title which blasphemously attempts to usurp the title of the most high God. But this is normal Mormon grandiosment. Their leaders are extremely narcissistic and above the law. And in case you're all wondering, my ex was Mormon and left behind manuals and texts which psychologists would go into a frenzy over, and which would probably inspire said psychologists to institutionalize the authors who are prominent leaders of said Mormon church. "And in those days your secrets will be shouted from the rooftops". It is also interesting to note the obsessive secrecy of mormonism, while publishing works which preach against 'secret societies'. Secret meetings, temple rituals, political agendas=mormonism.
2007-06-28
04:30:24 ·
update #1