I have now received secondary confirmation regarding allegations that the Maxwell Institute was told that it would need to downsize their operations by fiscal year 2012. In other words, this material has now been affirmed by at least two separate sources. For those who are unfamiliar with the basic claims, they are thus:

---That the MI sought approval for a budget in the neighborhood of 37 million, but was, as my source put it, "summarily rejected."
---The current budget for the year is alleged to be approx. 20 million.
---The people in charge at the Maxwell Institute were told that they would need to restructure so that they could operate within the constraints of a 5 million dollar budget by fiscal year 2012.
---The current discrepancy (i.e., the 17 million dollar difference between the requested budget vs. the actual) was supposed to have been covered by way of a donation from the Cannon family, who are personal friends with DCP.
---According to one of my sources, this donation was meant to be kept private due to the Cannon brothers' political ambitions, and there association with the Deseret News. When the question about this secrecy/privacy was posed to DCP, he refused to say one way or the other if he'd be obliged, per MI policy, to lie about such a donation.

Ever since I first posted these allegations, DCP has been posting up a storm in an effort to deny them, listing a series of MI projects which are supposed to show just how financially healthy the MI is. (Of course, this completely ignores the part of the claim that suggests that these reductions will not go into effect until 2012.) Dr. Peterson jokingly subtitles these threads, "Maxwell Institute Death Watch," and though I realize this is just his playful way of dealing with the allegations, I think it's important to correct him. Based on what I've been told, I *do not* believe that the Maxwell Institute is going to "die" or experience a "death rattle." Instead, if what I've been told is correct, there will simply be a scaling back of projects, publications, travel, and so forth. In addition to this, my source believes that the apologists are engaged in aggressive and energetic fundraising among "rich, intellectually snobby" LDS, though I wasn't quite sure what s/he meant by this. The point, I suppose, is that the MI might be able to find a separate supply for its budget.

Finally, when I inquired into my network of sources in order to determine why, if these allegations are true, Professor Peterson would so rigorously deny them, I was told simply and rather sharply that Dr. Peterson is "lying." Make of that what you will. I can say that this network of sources has been generous in terms of providing very specific details, many of which I have been able to confirm as being accurate. While I continue to urge skepticism and caution, I am now willing to say, a bit hesitantly, that these allegations are beginning to seem correct. I will provide more details if and when I can.

Hi there Doctor Scratch. Hope you are doing well, my friend. I am doing fine.

It's a staggering proposition, really, if this intel is correct. I have no opinion one way or the other but the *persistence* of your source(s) is notable. I have to wonder if there might be something to this intelligence. I mean, if the Church just cut out several missions in Europe, scaling back because of the economy in addition to what I believe is a change in industry, City Creek being the venture of primary interest, I can easily imagine side projects such as apologetics taking a cut as well.

Another perspective I have on this comes from my observations on the struggles of small businesses. Parent companies will infuse plenty of dough to get things going, but ultimately, a time will come where it's either sink or swim. And this might be another reason why MST is such an important site for the battle for apologetic superiority. If the steady drip from Church headquarters is threatened, then the competition with competing firms, excuse the pun, is underscored. In fact, if my City Creek theory is correct and ultimately doctrine will be outsourced to the most resourceful apologetic firm as they wage unbridled capitalistic warfare to win the contract, then it would be *cheating* to dump millions of dollars per year in the way of subsidies to one apologetic firm while the others have to drum up their own business. As part of putting on the face as representative of Mormon intellectual orthodoxy, MST surely is a solid PR move to reach out to the masses and get the platinum memberships rolling in. Certainly, the hardcore hand pumping from the official fundraisers in the well-off crowds is first matter of concern, but this image warfare in the long run is equally important as ultimately, the MI business model needs consumers as well as investors.

So I think there are a few things that could be going on here. The economy is tough, City Creek comes first, and the various apologetic firms can't really fill the doctrinal void by investment alone, ultimately, the church members vote with their credit cards and the winning firm will be the most *profitable* firm, even if that has to be translated into the non-profit organizational terms.

The Church didn't merge the west European missions because of financial reasons.

Of course not, that is more due to the "baseball baptism" effect.

sure they did.

ooops, oh yea, all those empty buildings were spendy

All the Church's decisions ultimately come down to the dollar. I don't even necessarily disagree with them for taking this route. I mean, one of the truest tests of discipleship is what one is willing to part with. An economics teacher of mine at BYU from a prominent Utah family would freely explain to our class the kind of econometric studies the church undertakes at the COB to maximize tithing revenues, it was a real eye-opener at the time though it's really only common sense. The dollar comes first, and the assumption if that if one wins dollar wise, then doctrine, salvation and all that crap naturally prevails with it. On the other hand, a broke church doesn't stand a chance.

Can it simultaneously be confirmation and speculation?

How well do you know your sources? Are you sure they're not feeding you a line and you're overly anxious to take the bait? Kind of an anti-anti ploy?

Whatever anybody's low opinion of Mormon apologists, are they completely and demonstrably stupid when it comes to facts that can easily be verified?

I find it hard to accept at face value that some "anonymous source" is inside the belly of the beast far enough to have the inside scoop about private financial matters and yet is "anti" enough to state categorically, as you report, that DCP "is lying".

Why would DCP lie, and post his "lying" statements publicly, if at some point, inevitably, he will be caught out, when events move inexorably towards their conclusions. The MI will continue to exist - or not, its budget will be downsized - or not, the "Brethren" will wield their influence - or not, DCP will cease to travel - or not, etc. Somewhere in the midst of all these options for what might - or might not - occur, anyone left standing, who cares, will be able to easily figure out whether Scratch and/or his informants were publicizing correct information - or not - and whether DCP was "lying" - or not.

So, in what universe does it make sense for insiders to pass along confidential information to Scratch, to the detriment of their own (or those they pretend to call their own?), for Scratch to post "confirmed" speculation, or for DCP to lie about information that at some point can be proven true or false?

I don't have a lot of time for Benedict Arnolds (as opposed to whistle blowers). I don't respect these so-called informants. I also think there is at least a 50-50 chance that they are playing with Scratch and he's falling for it and maybe a 60-40 that Scratch himself is playing with everybody. I'm not amused if so, but maybe he, they, or you are. It's kind of a waste of time if it's all on spec or lies or just a game.

One day we may know - or not.

Are MI value for money? Rod Meldrum seems to be paying his own way.

Scratch's snitch is certainly an interesting character and one who has his or her finger on the pulse of the Maxwell Institute. But on the other hand, I can not see this institute bubbling with people in the know. These decisions are made by a small group of people who then may spread it among a select group of people, if that. This would mean that scratch's snitch is likely to be identified soon. Does scratch actually have a snitch and or is he an inner circle member of the institute himself?

Crickey!

Take a screenshot everyone. whyme said something sensible.

If the intel is not coming from a 'snitch' inside MI circles, then the good Dr. Scratch has a divining rod that works really well when pointed at MI.

That is what I've noticed also. MI has it's hand out, awaiting their assumed share of the tithing dollar or begging rich friends for money. Meldrum puts his own money where his mouth is.

Don't get the idea that I disapprove of fundraising. What I disapprove of is fundraising that isn't transparent. Asking for donations and then not publishing an annual report of how the money was used is just sleazy.

I started a post A MAD years back that was basically..." Is it okay to lie for the Church
(Lord?)...It was shut down after a few responses, they wanted nothing to do with it.

I believe that...they believe...it is a justifiable means to an end. Lying for the Lord or Church in their minds insures the cohesiveness of "the church", and all stays well in Zion.

Is Dan lying...who knows, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he is Scratch...one thing that is for sure is that Dan is by far the most narcissistic person at MAD and the biggest "victocate" I have talked to in my life...we'll except for maybe my mother in law.

Here's my theory, Scratch works at BYU, or close with indirectly, and that Gadianton is dropping the dimes.

Mark

What do you mean by "dropping the dimes?"

LOL..I'm showing my age, and of my late teens running the streets. It's street lingo for a snitch, they would 'drop a dime' in a pay phone and call the cops.

{edit} another street slang that just occurred to me is "snitches need stitches", although in this case I believe they need an award.

Take care

Mark

Why Me:

I'm willing to say that this information--if correct--is coming from a network of sources. It's not just one person.

Incidentally, I see that Dr. Peterson has rather predictably surfaced to kick up smoke and dust:



Why? If it is so demonstrably false, then why bother replying at all? I would guess that nearly two dozen people have advised you to simply ignore this material. So why don't you? Merely for the sake of "revenge"?



Sure, I'll share it with you: it's that Karma has at last come around for the apologists. You know as well as I do that you and your pals have created a ton of enemies over the years, both in and out of the Church. My question for you is this: if I am be "played for a fool" (which I readily admit is a possibility), what would be the point of it? What would be the payoff? Merely that I received information and passed it along? This is supposed to embarrass me somehow? I'm genuinely curious to know what you think the "payoff" would be for someone who is making all this up. Maybe they think it's amusing that you and all the others at MAD will so predictably flip out?

The fact is that you and the apologists at MAD have been thrown far more out of whack that I have (or will, if you ever provide clear evidence that this "intel" is false). Your and Scott Gordon's obfuscation in the wake of his meeting with Elder Oaks serves, imo, as pretty clear evidence that the "intel" is far more problematic for you and your "team" than it ever will be for me. I continue to regard the "intel" with skepticism, but watching the reactions of you, Scott Lloyd, Scott Gordon, WonkaOnaPlate, and others makes me think that there is some truth to it.



As I've said, my "source" believes you are lying. I was told that you guys were trying to establish an endowment or something of that nature. (Though I personally wondered if this alleged large request had something to do with the Middle East project you've mentioned in the past.)



That remains to be seen. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to think that the MI has a budget of 20 million. You guys had a budget of almost 10 million back in the mid 1990s when you were just FARMS. It makes perfect sense that the budget would have grown since that time. You guys are doing a lot more things now---including financing fancy documentaries about Christ.



Actually, this particular bit of intel arose precisely because one of my "sources" found it funny that the apologists were being "kicked to the soup line." So, yes: at least one person finds it "hilarious."



The Maxwell Institute has in place a policy which ensures that donations will be kept strictly confidential. This *was* brought to your attention, Dr. Peterson. The assumption was that, if the Cannons had made a large donation, you would, per policy, be required to lie about it---or to find some way of keeping it quiet.



I'm glad you brought this up. See: my impression all along has been that you guys *do* get a lot of your money via fundraising, but that this money has to be approved by the powers-that-be at BYU. So, when my "source" claimed that your request for the 37 million was denied, I assumed that one possibility is that you had found this money in the form of a large donation, but the moneychangers at BYU, per the "Packer Factino," refused to sign off on it.



That's not true. I've treated this material with skepticism from the outset. It may very well turn out that all of this "intel" is false. But you yourself are unwilling to post any definitive evidence demonstrating such.

What I don't understand, Dr. Peterson, is why you would think your silly "Maxwell Institute Death Watch" threads are in any way a contradiction of this "intel." It seems to me that you'd be better off posting a list of the MI's proposed projects for the next three years. But we both know that you won't do that. And we both know why.

Maybe there aren't any projects planned out that far ahead. I mean, lots of organizations don't have 5 or 10 year strategic plans. It's possible MI is one of those kind.

Dropping the dimes? God, you're old, Markkkkkk.

:-D

You see, young grasshoppah, back in the ancient days of Markkkk people spoke in terms of coinage. Nickel bags, dropping a dime, and that sort of thing.

He means you're narking people out to the man.

;-)

[/derail]

My sister

Don't forget the proverbial "four fingered lid" ( or "can"), that was really out-ah-sight, far out, and bitchin! I can remember thumbing to my Bros pad and getting a gallon of red mountain, putting on some James Gang, splitting up a pane of four way, and taking a trip without leaving the farm.

Mark