Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

WhiteDove

Members
  • Posts

    4,300
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WhiteDove

  1. No actually what we speaking of before the sidestep was your double standard of being present that you seem to require for my points to be valid . I have hours of such, you don't, you speak on internet stories that's your authority to your claims, Being there is being there, one does not observe different things because of a program nametag you observe because of your sight and experiance.
  2. You might wanna get informed...... I never one upped anyone , I responded to her double standard where she seems to think fist hand accounts related to me as opposed to those related to her are any different. They're not. She did not ,as well go through the training she is a spouse corps as well ,and no more qualified to speak on what happened there than others. Long before you or her saw the first twig I had logged in countless hours working and living at Emporia, The better part of a year living there. working eating sleeping side by side. I was there before the Corps were there working in about every inch of the place. From the kitchen to the print shop. I shoveled out the science lab from the rubble left there by the former college. out into the hall and down the steps into the dumpster. I cleaned out the back stage closets in Kenyon from the props and costumes there left behind, painted the mushroom psycadelic walls in Emporia hall and Kipp. Cleaned the kitchen walk ins, moved mattresses and beds, worked on grounds, worked in the kitchen and dinning room ,and a million other jobs. You know not which you speak of. And yes we sat in the teachings as long as they were because VP said we could. And for years after that we drove there to do the same on Wednesday Corps nights . I've done the same at Rome City although not as much. Don't presume to know what I have done You don't. I'd submit I have far more foot on the ground experience that Rascal has to speak of. Not to mention the hours of access to the tape library of Corps information there.
  3. Which by the way I submit is a lot more creditanle as there is a name ,face, voice inflexions, and mannerisms to detect to aid in truthfulness, as opposed to a nameless, faceless ,screenname, where no tone or facial response is available.
  4. I call into question Accusing others of guilt in a crime that that you could have no possible personal knowledge of. Also As I have stated many times I have never used second or third hand accounts ,misrepresentation is against the rules If you persist I will file a complaint
  5. Some states do permit suits for libel or slander to be brought on behalf of the estate of a deceased person in some circumstances. The definition of libel in Texas includes written words that "tend to blacken the memory of the dead." In Rhode Island there is a right of action if the deceased person was slandered or libelled in an obituary in any newspaper or on any radio or television station within three (3) months of his or her date of death. Many states, including California, will allow personal injury suits (libel and slander are considered personal injuries) filed by a living plaintiff to continue on and be passed to the plaintiff's successor in interest or personal representative upon the plaintiff's death. The plaintiff's estate may then recover if the lawsuit is successful.
  6. Actually it does ,we were held to the same standard as those who had benefit of training in residence. We were required to do the same work. So what qualifies you to speak about things you were not geographically present for when you hold others to that standard?
  7. IF yep a small condition that has yet to be documented as true.
  8. I can dig you up another case if you would like where the victim survived, the point will be the same ,until there is a conviction the crime is alleged.
  9. The context of my statement which you quoted was in regard to VPW. that said I have made no challenge to the documented crimes affore mentioned, I do so because they have been through the test of the law, a fair hearing, evidence presented and disputed and a jury of their peers has made a verdict. See that's how it works, then you can call them guilty.
  10. Except I was and there is no comparison.
  11. Testimony is not proof of anything it is a record of what may or may not have happened according to the one testifying That's all. It is not considered fact it is recorded and examined it does not stand on anything until it is proven. Until then it is a collection of words undocumented. when you state that so and so is a thief, rapist, or murderer you are accusing one of guilt of a crime dead or living. There are those that think Casey Anthony is a murderer but she is guilty of nothing at this time she is alleged to be. Saying so does not stand, what stands is what is in the end proven. You can think whatever you want thoughts are not proof of a crime. The context was VPW.
  12. And your point ? Have I ever stated that they were not documented? They were, and received results. Which is exactly my point
  13. I fail to see any connection between the two, not even remotaly the same.
  14. Show me a confirmed charge of a crime and I'll shout it from the roof tops.
  15. I can't answer that for you. But it has nothing to do with believing either way. I may agree , in fact I have never stated that I did not, it's still my opinion not fact. Accusing one of guilt of a crime requires documentation. Not just undocumented testimony. We don't take people at their word on other points we require proof. The standard is the same.
  16. Good question, Actually some of the most understanding people are the ones that have shared their stories here. It's the Johnny come latelies that were not present and yet seem to hold other people to some standard that they themselves do not follow, at attempting to discredit their opinion. Those who rant day after day about that which they did not witness, accusing others of crimes that have no documentation other than accusation. People are accused of many things when you can make the charges stick then you may refer to them as guilty of a crime , until then its your opinion or in the case of one involved, a testimony.
  17. You are incorrect I have never stated that. I have stated that records were not documented by hard evidence as such it is only testimony. Words out of someone's mouth ,one can choose to accept anything that comes out of a mouth, or not their privilege. I don't, simple as that, my privilege. words are cheap, one can say anything , facts, proof are harder to come by. I prefer to have the truth especially when accusing one of a crime. And yes I will be consistent because innocent until proven guilty is at the foundation of American rights.
  18. Typos are not lies Jeff just as Potatoe's was not I've explained my position I won't be baited into a discussion of your derail, and that is your purpose. By the way calling someone a liar is against the rules here .....just Sayin
  19. For those who may not know a reprint of an old article. Also a snopes report HERE ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center Issues Cocoa Bean Fertilizer Warning Friday March 14, 2003 Organic mulch fertilizer may pose hazard to dogs. Contacts: Deborah Sindell (212)-876-7700 ext. 4658 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (URBANA, IL) March 13, 2003 -- As spring approaches, people will start to tend their lawns and gardens. Many will consider using cocoa bean mulch as a fertilizer. Made from spent cocoa beans used in chocolate production, cocoa bean mulch is organic, deters slugs and snails, and gives a garden an appealing chocolate smell. However, it also attracts dogs, who can easily be poisoned by eating the mulch. Cocoa beans contain the stimulants caffeine and theobromine. Dogs are highly sensitive to these chemicals, called methylxanthines. In dogs, low doses of methylxanthine can cause mild gastrointestinal upset (vomiting, diarrhea, and/or abdominal pain); higher doses can cause rapid heart rate, muscle tremors, seizures, and death. Eaten by a 50-pound dog, about 2 ounces of cocoa bean mulch may cause gastrointestinal upset; about 4.5 ounces, increased heart rate; about 5.3 ounces, seizures; and over 9 ounces, death. (In contrast, a 50-pound dog can eat up to about 7.5 ounces of milk chocolate without gastrointestinal upset and up to about a pound of milk chocolate without increased heart rate.) If you suspect that your dog has eaten cocoa bean mulch, immediately contact your veterinarian or the ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center (1-888-426-4435). Treatment will depend on how much cocoa bean mulch your dog has eaten, when the mulch was eaten, and whether your dog is sick. Recommended care may include placing your dog under veterinary observation, inducing vomiting, and/or controlling a rapid heart beat or seizures
×
×
  • Create New...