socks

Infiltration!!!! Beware the Dark Monkey and his mocking minions...

Hmmm. Hm. That's Debra O on the one song. Right? Hmmm. Whoever said "this ain't your father's Way Ministry" was right. It's your grandfathers.

Chek it out, RG! One thing I really enjoyed hearing discussed was the diversity of beliefs, ideas and opinions and conflict (gasp!) :)--> that were present in the first century church. Paul was right in the middle of that and all of the religious, political and social turmoil of the times. Many people look at those guys and gals thru an idealized filter as if they all somehow knew what they were doing and were planning for all of us someday to sit down and read all about what they wrote and did. Not so. The early church had serious conflicts and Peter, Paul and James are mentioned in the second half of the show quite a bit as to the possible underlying questions of doctrine they were dealing with. Good stuff to see.

Yes, I watched it. It was interesting. It covered the growth of Christianity and looked at Paul as the primary builder, architect. How accurate, dunno. It gave more of a view of the social and political conditions of the time and opinions about how Paul might have thought and worked, Christianity was looked at forming out of Jewish thought and faith and that was interesting. They discussed the conflicts of the time and the devlopment of the "Jesus sect", which I thought was really interesting. A lot of ideas, information were put out on the table which was good. Paul says in Galatians he went to "Arabia" and spent time in that area. The period after the road to Damascus and his next mention in Acts is figured to be somewhere around 10 to 13 years from what I know. During that time, there's not a lot of detail as to exactly what he did, went, etc.

A La, I suspect the very same! "Snappy Tom" martini mix....it HAS to be the DARK MONKEY'S evil minions at work! Taunting OLM's! As we be the love, feel the love and live the love we will prevail however against these very hounds of hell!!!! Or something. Malpacks...oddly enough, yes....yes!! I didn't realize it at the time! MALPacks! Monkey Abundant Life - Packs! Tiny packs, filled with goodness! We have to be alert. No doubt The Dark Monkey's SCUM's....(Sea Counterfeit Unamazing Monkeys)will be masquerading with their arm bands of love, bringing mischief instead! DAMM! the SCUMS!!!!

I've got that on for tonite too, rottiegrrl! Looks interesting. Paul's been a subject I've studied over the years, very interesting figure in the N.T. to me. I'm looking forward to the show. You're right, Paul didn't know Jesus personally that it's recorded. They lived in the same time frame certainly, but it's never mentioned that Paul knew, met or saw Jesus while He was alive. The Pharisees were an interesting bunch. They formed somewhere inside 200 BC and were part of the whole Maccabean revolt against the Greek rule which was very hard against the Jews and finally the desecration of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem in 167 BC led to mass rebellion . It was a religious uprising, spiritual but in a political context. They must have been a rowdy bunch in that day. Then along comes Rome in the mid-60's BC. In Paul's day they were relatively free to carry on with their traditions but under Roman rule of course. Between the Sadducees, Pharisees and the Essenes you've got quite a range of Jewish leadership.

Tom, I've been making progress. I recently found an old Life magazine from 1958 with an interesting piece covering bring shrimp experiments being done in the Mojave Desert by a Dr. Filia in which he was pursuing a technology he called "Aqua-lution". His premise was that evolutionary processes could be sped up and observed by using species such as brine shrimp. Since brine shrimp regenerate so quickly he felt that his experiments would show results quickly using them. It was dealt with as a humorous piece, like "more whacky stuff from California". After doing more research on this Dr. Filia I discovered a great deal of his work up to 1961, at which point it completely stopped. No mention of him, his work, or any of his experiments seems to exist after May of 61. Except for one. Using the Freedom of Information act, I secured documents from several U.S. agencies, including an FBI file from 1963 which contains only one document, an internal memo titled "Filia Status/Project Mars Monkey - Area 51 - TOP SECRET". All of the text is blacked out but I could almost read the last few lines. Using some Photo Shop techniques I enhanced the page text and it seems to read as follows (I've inserted my best guesses in some spots): "[subjects] will not finish...[fiber optic]...? technology matrix. Experi[ment] can't continue without finished flowcharts. [silica] fusion completed, all [other processes are] at a standstill. Filia not responding to [chemical] stimuli.[Communication] at a standstill. Hanger 3 outer wall breached at 01400 hours. Containers 12, 13, [14] displaced and empty. Recommend complete and immediate removal of all equipment and files. Requesting Unit 9 [on site] for disposition..[?]." My sense of urgency rose as I headed down the lonely corridor of I-95 today, deep in thought. Fiber optic technology didn't reach a practical level of use until 1970...and wasn't used by the U.S. government till what, 1975? What's out there that the government was so afraid of that they had to secure and cover it up and hide it all these years????

A la, the blue wristbands are showing up everywhere on the wrists of dancing SEa Monkeys! as they move out! It's amazing! A few weeks ago boxes of them were found on U.S. 101 in northern california by the Highway Patrol where they'd apparently dropped off the back of a truck. Little tiny wristbands with "MOW" embossed on them. I tried to track them down and was led to a storage facility in Ukiah, CA. After numerous phone calls and dozens of forms I was allowed access to the storage yard and directed to bin #78 and given the key. When I opened the door I found...3 boxes of "Snappy Tom" martini mix and nothing else. --> Supposedly the bin hadn't been opened since the wristbands had been dropped off there. HA! I suspect mischief afoot!!! The emissaries of the Dark Monkey! had beaten me to it! I'm sure of it. DAMM! that Dark Monkey!!! Who knows what evil uses he'll put them to??? Counterfeit MOW'S??!! Be on the alert people! Be aware. Be very aware....!

ExWayDaryl, a short answer (bout all I know really :)-->) would be no. The domains - com org net, etc. are established to broadly group sites according to purpose...com is generally for commercial business, org is for organizations of various kinds such as educational, universities, etc - non profits generally use the org domain names. You can maintain business using any domain name. The distinction would be profit/non-profit. Still, it's common practice to register all the domains for a given site name. IMO, the Way would have an interest in owning all the domains for a name. I think this is where Pat's saying the issue is trademark and copyright based. If I registered socks.org, that's it. Someone else could register socks.com and carry on under that name all day long and on the basis of the domain registration I couldn't insist that they stop. But if I had "socks" trademarked and/or copyrighted to protect and own that name I could proceed based on their use of the name, not the domain registration itself. The use of the url name is relatively recent, since the inception of the "world wide web". Behind it is the actual ip address assigned to each registered domain name - "20.234.45.67". That's what I "own" along with the word/name I register, and each IP address is distinct and different. The word "name" crosses over into other areas of ownership too, though. F'instance again, someone could register "TWI" and they might hear from The Welders Institute before they'd hear from The Way International. But if the use was clearly related somehow to welding I suppose they'd have a case to make that I stop using it based on their trademarking. (I don't know, it's just an example). Pat, the more I understand about this the more I follow Long Gone's view. I still feel like I don't have the whole picture, but frankly the sum of 15,000 dollars for a domain name - I didn't realize at the outset that was what you were doing. I still feel like they're numb nuts for handling the whole thing the way you've described but in fact that's why people trademark and copyright names, so that they can own and control the use of it. I'd never expect them to act in a civilized manner so any ham handed behavior is to be expected. As far as I understand where you're coming from on this, I understand how you feel but there's a lot going on it appears. It's why I have nothing to do with them and won't get mixed up with them in any way. It's bound to bring the worst out of everyone involved. If I don't have to get in a snake pit, I don't. :)-->

Glad to be of soivice. :)-->

---disingenuous?

Hey Evan, did you see it? What did you think? Wife and I saw it and it was different than what I expected from all I'd read and heard about it. The anti-semite feelings that are supposed to be the result of the way the Jews are portrayed didn't hit me at all. The story seems to be pretty close to the gospel accounts. Jesus, the disciples, family, the leaders, etc. were all Jews. Again, the criticisms made me think I'd see exaggerated caricaturized portrayals of the Jewish leaders who led the call for Jesus's death, but they seemed very believable based on the gospels. They weren't made to look like The Evil Incarnated Jews, they looked and acted much like I would have thought they would based on the gospels. Most of them hated Jesus and wanted Him killed. I've also read that the governor, Herod and the various Roman characters were portrayed more sympathetically. But actually Herod looked like a bisexual nut and Pilate fearful and indecisive, caught between a rock and a hard place. The guards who scrouged Jesus and led him to crucifixion were portrayed as drunken, insane animals. More than any other characters in the movie they seemed to show the evil that man is capable of, the mindless hate and prejudice, the sinful nature. Nearly all of the worst scenes were random, uncalled for acts of violence. Had Jesus been scourged, taken to be crucified and then killed it would have been horrible enough. The movie seems to use the majority of the time to show the nature of man at his most immoral, sin-filled worst potential where all moral standards are discarded. Sin not being deliberate and calculated only, but out of control. And it could have been any government, any army, and leaders at any time doing the same things. One of the most moving segments for me was when Jesus was shown teaching about loving your enemies. "You have heard it said..." He's shown saying that if you love those who love you, then "where is your reward for that?" This comes back to the scene of Him at the cross. On the cross the character is shown praying "Father, forgive them..." I think Gibson did an excellent job of illustrating what the people may have been thinking and going through at that time. When he showed the flashback scene of Mary running to help the little boy Jesus when he fell down - the whole theater collectively sobbed. Peter, Judas. He explores a lot of things. The ending struck me as hmmm...spooky, for want of a better word. It made me shiver. It's almost a surreal moment of realization. Knowing the story and how it goes, after seeing the whole movie as a movie, there's even still the slightest feeling that in this movie you know no one could survive that death, no one that went through what you've just seen is going to be anything but very dead. For me it made that last 60 seconds so riveting, frightening even for want of a better word and not in a bad way. I was left with the very real feeling that something completely out-of-this-world had just happened in this movie. For a movie to do that is difficult. I think Gibson made a point and made it very well. In a way he let the story tell itself.

Well, this dicussion is going downhill! To which I can only add, I posted this awhile back, don't know if anyone got it. For awhile my hotmail account was getting every imaginable advert for everything under the sun. The usual Viagra stuff, plus etc etc. One day I got an email that had this subject line: Socks! Increase your breast size the easy way! --> Now, aside from the fact that such a thing wouldn't be desirable for me, it gave me great pause....the "easy way"....what's that? I had to wonder...is there a hard way??? And if so, what would it possibly be and how many women try it? I gave this several minutes of consideration and realized I needed to get my mind on other things. But still, it haunts me. ...the easy way.... Did the Way have the ultimate size enhancer formula all the time??? :D--> :D--> :D-->

My3cents, it doesn't you're right. I use a legal firm and get counsel for business affairs, even some very minor ones, whether for advice or execution. Likewise with taxes, I don't do my own. The appendix is a good example. I'm going to assume Pat knows the waters pretty well when it comes to the Way and will proceed accordingly.

Hey Pat, that makes sense, thanks. Also, Goey's question is one I would have myself. Lawyer me no, but from my own past experience with trademarking and copyrights, I believe you've got a case. But so do they. The fact they ignored it for so long...it sounds so Wayish, how they change their doctrines and "minds" whenever the wind blows up the MOG/WOG's shorts.

I know of at least two ministries that use The Way in their names. An acquaintance of mine has worked with one, and they have no background of any kind with the New Knoxville Way, past or present. Might as well be on different planets. My name is the same as a well known professional athlete. He has a domain name that includes another word plus his name. I was researching it as a domain name and discovered that another person with my same name has registered the actual name as a dot com. So I had some other avenues to pursue, such as a _ in the name, or additional characters. In my case I learned a name is a name is a name. If it's registered, it's registered. The IP address is always assigned as a different one, but the name as a collection of letters has to be different. And the fact that the other person's name is the same, it's a done deal. Their intent was identical to mine. If someone else had it registered and wasn't using it, I could buy it, or negotiate a turnover of some kind when it lapsed. Or just wait. To prove fraud of some kind would be fairly involved, and expensive I discovered. In my case, it was a no brainer. There were legitimate legal rights being exercised by those who had registered the name.

Good point, Pat. The dot com was sitting there when the Way registered the others and they didn't register it. Org is appropriate, dot com is for commercial endeavors. Usually when a company wants to insure that all url entries will come to them and they want their name to be covered, they register all of them and redirect the unused to the one they're actually using for a site. ICANN.com itself does that, by placing you at a page with links that directs you to the actual sites with content that are all net and org domains. They registered them all but really only use the ones appropriate. It makes the whole use of the url names simpler, and for a large organization it makes sense to have them all. Then no matter what a person types in (and the com is still the one nearly everyone defaults first time) they'll get to the right spot. Was/is the Way just ignorant, stupid? You'd think their "legal" advisors would have advised them according to normal accepted business practice. Since the Way is an international effort with what, activities in 50 countries is it? what were they thinking? Their action seems to indicate their interest in the dot com was nil. Still, I wonder if their actual right to it is arguable. Guess they think so. The Way left the dot com. They're not a commercial endeavor. (So they say). From their standpoint which may have very well been due to a lack of expertise in internet set up (go figure) their intent may have been established by what they did and didn't do. ? At first pass though, I'd say they may have an argument. That's why I'm curious to see more of the story.

Yeah! I think .biz would be appropriate! Maybe a new one "theway.givnusthebiz" :D-->

Pat, I'm interested in how this will work out. I won't push for details till you're ready, but in light of ICANN's (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) rules and regs for domain name procurement how will this play out. Namely, the "bad faith" section. Here's the section I'm talking about: Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith. For the purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(iii), the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith: (i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or (ii) you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or (iii) you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or (iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location. -------- Is the Way Nash's approach going to be that you secured the name to prevent their rights as users, misrepresent it, or...?

They're actually totally different names - "wayinternational.com" was registered to a guy in Irvine, CA. in 2003 according to the domain searches I did. "thewayinternational.com" is regsitered to a guy in Vermont. :)--> You could register "thewayinternationale.com tomorrow, it's not taken.

:)--> "One by one" "Honey, I'd like to pray for you..."

Interesting. Was there a laying on of hands, Oaks?

That's a cool card, Zix. At that price it IS a steal!

Wacky, go to the wall and click around the lower left shadow, down at the bottom...

Hey diazbro, thanks for all the comments on this thread. The balance of information and ideas is really interesting. ex10, your post is close to me. I've often thought of how the expectations were built to literally expect a person, like Way Corps, to have all the answers all the time, to be perfect and to always be everything that anyone needed and wanted at anytime of the day or night. Kind of like Dirty Harry. Never sleeps or finishes a meal ;)-->. He's on The Case 24 X 7. I think that kind of lifestyle appealed to some people, too. So what do you get? Well, for better or worse people who's byline is "The Ministry's my LIFE!" (ooh I love the Dirty Harry flix! but of course he was a troubled conflicted character who's personal problems led to all kinds of pathological behavior. The assumption was that the force of the character's personal resolve could overcome all human failings and in the end, when that .44 took aim, it hit what it was aiming at, right?) I've always been kind of fascinated by people when they have that approach. They're "called" to this or that, they have a calling of some sort they say and they want everybody to get on their bandwagon. But if the calling destroys the vessel it lives in, what's really going on? It's something we don't see see immediately sometimes. (at least ol' Harry had the class to go it alone since he knew he could only account for himself ;)-->)