Larry N Moore

Both!

Ie., from TWI because of your kind of TWI mentality, and from the faith due to the expectation to believe in religious material w/o proof, ... or w/o question. <_<

Which came first? The chicken or the egg. :)

hello everyone!........................larry.......your language, attitudes and behavior speak for themselves............and they depict a person full of rage who can throw a "hissy fit" at the drop of a hat....................imo....you have demonstrated some of the most self-serving and discourteous posting habits i have seen here at the greasespot!...............unless you get your way, on your terms within your time frame.......you seem incapable of calm, respectful dialogue with anyone who chooses not to agree with you...................this is not a common posting pattern of many other members here......

but, apparently it is a common posting habit of mr. moore.................i did a google search of "larry n moore".................very interesting what came across my computer screen!..............it seems larry, that you have inflicted yourself on many other forums with a similar posting pattern to the one you have displayed here!

your record speaks for itself.............in much the same way it does here at the greasespot cafe!!..............it seems your posting personality is "equally engaging" on many other sites as it has been here!............maybe you'll hurry to try to cover your tracks...........but, in the meantime, why don't those of you who "want larry back" do the same search i did and check out larry n moore on some of his other "dumping grounds"????.............you've been a member here since may of this year...............in that time, you have chosen to wear out your welcome instead of enjoying it................why not return to your many other sites, if the greasespot is so "unkind" or "unfair" to you...............why not spread your joy around where you've been before instead of "torturing" yourself here at the greasespot????

better yet, larry..............why not start your very own website, where you can be "the boss"???...........spend some time talking to yoursef the way you talk to others and see how you feel about yourself.............be your own moderator and fight with yourself..........turn your rage upon yourself and see how you react to it................maybe then you'll understand how you've treated the posters and moderators here at the spot..............maybe then you'll feel for yourself what it's like for the real world to have to deal with the real larry n moore!!...............maybe...............maybe not!.................................peace.

WOW! For someone that's obsessed with John Lynn (and CES) I'm amazed that you had enuf time on your hands to do this. How much time did you actually spend researching the history of Larry N Moore in bordieland? An hour. Two. Three.

Tell ya what -- why don't you tell me everywhere you've been and done in your past so I can return the favor for you. ;)

P.S. Dan I responded to your latest "missile", but you'll have to wait to see what I said. :)

P.S.S. rainbow!

P.S.S.S Have a great day Dan. I have to get ready for work.

Happy Birthday Mr. Squirrel. I see someone already offered you some nuts so, what else do squirrels like? :)

Have a good one!

ADan, I don't understand....

I do.

DWBH, Are these bits and pieces that you have been posting parts of the "code of conduct" that each and every one of the CES/STFI leaders pledged to abide by???

If that's the "code of conduct" they all pledged to abide by then they... well ...they obviously haven't so they should just step down.

There doesn't need to be any public explanation... it's quite obvious that they have not kept their vow, they've broken the trust that is needed to be effective leaders.

If they want to "stay on" as leaders it would seem that they need to make some sort of similar public proclamation as to what went on and how they're going to keep it from happening again... SOMEWHERE... anywhere...

How can they hope for anyone to trust them otherwise?

If they're afraid that by "going public" it will ruin the ministry... then maybe, just maybe, that's as it should be.

I would say that it's not a matter of being afraid of "going public". I would say it's just simply none of the public's business. John has invited those who care for him to email him with questions. Even so, that is no guarantee that all your questions will be answered. Some things are just no one else's business. I don't know why some of you don't "get it".

Larry I have 2 words for you and they aint Merry Christmas.

Danny -- Happy Halloween! -- to you likewise.

Absolutely amazing! At first I thought he was painting a dragon.

Can you guys set aside your need to defend vpw long enough to just for a miniute try to understand what it was like to be scared and lonely, wanting to be loved, wanting to be healed, for the pain, the shame the self loathing to go away?

To want it so bad that you would be willing to shut down those inner warning bells.

Can you imagine daring to hope that the great man of God would have the answeres promised...that if one would just put aside their fears, put their lack of understanding on the burner that this man could heal them?

Can you for one miniute imagine the shame of being used, and once used handed down to howard or Don while the mog went after a new new conquest?

Can you understand the hurt and bitterness when once discovering that nt only were you not healed, you were simply used by a lascivious old pervert? That your usefullness exhausted, nobody cared any more?

Try for a miniute guys to understand the pain and shame and disgust....

Try for a miniute some compassion for the youth that was exploited to sate the lusts of these mens bellies.

Oh I can imagine quite easily the pain associated with being used and abused. I've suffered it. Can you just for once try to understand that no one (at least not myself) is calling you a liar. I'm simply an agnostic. Ask an agnostic in relationship to the belief in the existence of god/s what that means and then maybe you'll understand my position.

"YOU happen to be one of the first ones I've engaged here that treated me in a condescending and discourteous fashion. Of course you don't see it that way, but if you were to take dan's suggestion and re-read my posts from the beginning"

Ok, did that.

"you (or others) might see where I just got tired of your arrogant and condescending tone in your responses to me. So I slapped you back."

(Although the length was what made it more useful, more clear, more logical.)

No surprise here. If I was permitted I could point out in PLAIN ENGLISH (you must not have learned it so I'll go slow for your benefit) how mistaken you are. Unfortunately, even in PLAIN ENGLISH I have my doubts that you're be able to see it. Just as you might not see how making such a comment is condescending and arrogant, but PLAIN ENGLISH must not be the language you speak.

Larry,

<snip>

Your disappointment is not my problem. I'm not really looking for your approval. <snip>

Fair enuf. I really didn't think you were.

I admit, I consider this a very inventive reinterpretation of your conduct at the GSC,

and I think anyone who reviews your post history would find it so as well.

Funny (not really) that you would say this seeing as how YOU happen to be one of the first ones I've engaged here that treated me in a condescending and discourteous fashion. Of course you don't see it that way, but if you were to take dan's suggestion and re-read my posts from the beginning you (or others) might see where I just got tired of your arrogant and condescending tone in your responses to me. So I slapped you back. I suppose that's something you just can't get over -- having someone stand up to your bull.

Dan, here's a quote from that thread. Re-read the whole thread again and maybe (just maybe) you might see where I made an effort to be reasonable and even tried to lighten up the discussion but continued to be attacked personally.

Dooj, it's very simple. If rascal had taken the time to pay attention to what followed after Dot made her point and a few other comments were made and then a voice of reason came along -- You -- and called for a time out and the subsequent comments were light-hearted or fluff (if you prefer) then perhaps she might not have GONE THERE with her post that amounted to nothing more than "stirring the pot" again. I can only surmise that either she didn't bother reading the posts from the point of Dot's last post or he deliberately choose to GO THERE and try to start a ....ING CONTEST. Could I have ignore it. Sure. But obviously SHE has some need to attract attention to HERSELF. I was just giving HER what she seemed to crave. Attention.

In any case this has all become moot if in fact she follows through on her intent to put me on ignore. Problem solved. smile.gif

<snip>Larry, if you don't yet see why you came to the attention of the moderators, or think it's unfair, I suggest you re-read the thread in question, and note how often and with what character your posts were on that thread, and listen to how folks responded to you in that thread. <snip>

Dan, I took your suggestion and started reading through my posts (from the beginning). I'm currently looking over the thread A Few Big Things I Learned Taking PFAL. If that's the one you're referring to I will have to respectfully disagree with your point of view. I was NOT the first one to "cast stones". I know, I know -- Two wrongs do not make a right -- but singling me out while ignoring who started the "fight" is -- well -- it's bs.

Christian has (graciously) given me permission to post excerpts from his books on this thread. He has told me that he's appreciative of the kind comments people have expressed here. You can see what he says here. He went on to say (in his latest email to me) that he thinks the books might spark some intense conversation -- negative or positive -- it would be interesting to see nevertheless.

I'm currently half way through his book and I must say it's one of those kind of books that you just don't want to put down -- at least in my opinion.

I think a lot of the "just get over it" crowd hasn't looked into the depth of their own pain..

maybe they can't.

maybe they see a little too much of themselves in the person expressing grief, anger, frustration..

Although you might be right about some people I don't think you can paint everyone into the picture you have in your mind with such a broad brush. You have no idea of what I personally have dealt with. Dwelling on the past obsessively and negatively doesn't allow you to move forward in life.

You guys are villifying the people who were abused, the people who are finally speaking up about it instead of being properly disgusted by the perverted sexual predators that took advantage of naieve young people....people who just wanted to be a blessing and of service of God.

Rascal, you're simply wrong in your accusation of us. If you're including me in this generalization I would simply have to say that I'm an agnostic concerning your claims. Having never seen direct evidence of what is claimed I simply don't know if they are true. That's NOT the same thing as calling you a liar. If you don't understand the difference I suggest you speak to an agnostic (concerning belief in God/s). They would tell you that although they don't consider people who claim there is a God liars, they just don't know if there is just because you say so. Your words are not enuf to convince us (agnostics) that there is a god/s.

P.S. This post was edited to draw attention to what I told Paw in another post (which is not intended to be viewed by the general populace.

Funny I thought if some of the members of Greasespot had shown me a little common courtesy, then perhaps I wouldn't be where I am today. Of course, I'm sure you and many others won't see it that way.

Apparently you were/are mistaken.

Oh. So you do see it that way. Then why didn't you show me a little common courtesy? ;)

A little common courtesy is all that is necessary Larry.

Funny, I was thinking that if many of the members I've engaged would have shown me a little common courtesy none of this might have happened. Of course, I don't expect you to see it that way.

it's not really anyone's business why or how Paw runs this board.

Paw if you want to know why I came back it's really simple. I have the freedom of will to change my mind. And I have the freedom to voice my opinion about what I believe to be wrong. If you don't think so, then the whole concept of Greasespot is a lie. To call me a troll because I don't share the same opinion that the majority does is pure crap.

I think it's wrong for you to voice your opinion of why you did what you are doing without affording me the opportunity to defend myself publicly. If I'm wrong (in my opinion) then at least have enuf confidence in the intelligence of the members of Greasespot to make up their own minds. All they're hearing is your side of the story. I can't believe you are so insecure about your actions that you aren't willing to defend them -- PUBLICLY.

P.S. This post was edited to draw attention to what I told Paw in another post (which is not intended to be viewed by the general populace.

A little common courtesy is all that is necessary Larry.

Funny I thought if some of the members of Greasespot had shown me a little common courtesy, then perhaps I wouldn't be where I am today. Of course, I'm sure you and many others won't see it that way.

Well done Abi! I'm very pleased to know you'll finally be able to take a rest.

Of course being a mother might limit just how much of a rest that will be. Did I ever tell you my theory of how kids seem to have so much energy? They take ours! :)

Irrelevant. While some or even most of the girls may have consented, it is certain that some

did not.

The relevancy lies in whether the first occurrences of VP having sex outside of his marriage came about as a result of certain women seducing him. If that's true then (even though it's not right) VP succumbed to the temptation of the Devil and with that temptation it's very possible that the road he was traveling on became more deviant. Who can say they've never been tricked (seduced) by the Devil? Who can say they might not still be suffering from his seduction in some cases of behavior?

They have a "public trust" ... they don't necessarily need to post responses about all of this stuff on GSC... but they need to post it PUBLICLY somewhere...

...they betrayed the public trust... now they hide in the shadows hoping it will all blow over...

They don't want folks to know what's going on and would dearly like this to go quietly away...

IF they truly wanted it all fixed they'd let the chips fall where they may... so far it looks like they don't want to because they're not falling where they would like...

Shoot! I can't remember if I already responded to this post. That happens when it takes hours (or a day) before your post are submitted for public consumption.

Did I respond to it already Paw?

I'd bet your last dollar that she was intimidated into silence by an intimidating man

I'll take that bet! Although it's possible that you're right -- possible -- I think she really did have a heart for the ministry. Many people choose to stay (as long as they did) for the same reason. I did but, eventually gave up the "fight". Some continued on because they thought the "fight" was worth it. And then some I've talked to told me: "Larry, where else is there to go? I just want to serve the Lord. You're not going to find a perfect church."

Larry, I'm more than happy to apologize.

That's nice but you . . .

Oldies, I apologize. I should have been more specific and clear headed in my wording. I was and still am deeply offended by this post. That is no excuse for how I worded my own post to you.

. . . should have stopped right here. Even though I'm sure you didn't mean to -- everything else you wrote comes across as a feeble attempt to rationalize what you said. When I first read your "apology" I had to make a choice -- Seeing as how Dooj did apologize should I ignore her attempts at rationalization? I decided (obviously) that although it's admirable of you to do what I doubted you would I'm disappointed that you found it necessary to say anything other than: "I'm sorry Oldies. It was wrong of me to infer that you were a pedophile. Please forgive me."

dear gentlemen posters

i was born in 1956. i forget when dr. wierwille was born

what age are you now, fellows ?

would you ever think of harming a teenage girl (18-19) young woman / lady / girl ? i don't think so

and i don't believe you would use being a "father" (in the word) as an excuse

love,ex

Ex, I'm 52 and no I would never think of harming a young (or old) woman (in a sexual or otherwise way). Well, I have thought about spanking my grand-daughter. Does that count? ;)

I posted on 346 It only took till 361 For ol jean to say

johnniee didn't hit me.

She hasn't been here for a month and wow. 1 hour.

Tell you husband not to put on the net he would like to hit you.

and all women need a good clocking i think he said.

Carry on.

My My Oldies you sure put the poo poo in

the top hat.

Your words are very telling why its ok for vp.

You "think he said"? Unless you can submit evidence (the actual quote) of what John said, what you say (or think) amounts to nothing more than bull. Next I expect it to be said that he actually said he did hit his wife.