WordWolf

Next one. " The entire point of something like this is to hand-make it. Just as you have used Old England in a hobby of your own." "Look at all of the detail... and everything here has some significance?"

"Do unto others-then run." "Relax. Do you understand 'relax'?" "Yes-a little piece of dark chocolate." "'Omelet', ja, to be, or not to be, that is the question!" "And this is the answer! *smack* Dumbkopf!" "After the meal, you will want an after-dinner mint. You will need an after-dinner 'mint' to pay for the bill! But ve, of course, haff conquered inflation. Just as ve conquered Poland. And Czechoslovakia..." "No, I'm wearing black for my poor, departed husband." "Oh... how long's he been gone? " "Ten minutes. He won't be back till 1." "Drink and sex. That's what killed your uncle - drink and sex!" "Yeah. He couldn't get either, so he shot himself." "With the way you treat me, people would think I was the cook here." "Not if they came to dinner." "How do women get ahold of your Lotharios?" "Not as often as I'd like..."

Considering that he took Leonard's class in 1953 and began TEACHING Leonard's class (announcing it was his OWN class and calling it something else) in 1953, it sure took him a long time before he had a "ready to market" class. It seems more like they delay was more until he was able to get a cheap headquarters from which he could operate without being held accountable to a group like his denomination, and the delay in getting an audience. After all, a DECADE of "his class" -1953 to 1963- produced a tiny group, and it was only once he had the audience provided by the hippies that the group experienced anything approaching large growth. Even his OWN accounts put his numbers low before that, and we have yet to hear from posters (with the possible exception of Peter W, since I don't know what year he heard of vpw) predating that, and we certainly have had no first-person accounts from times before that. All GSCers-and virtually all people in twi history- effectively consider twi to exist from THAT point, because THEIR connection began at that time. Although I use the phrase "hijacking the hippies" because I think it's become a phrase recognizable for the specific incidents of that time, I agree that CARJACKING might be a more appropriate phrase- that vpw CARJACKED Leonard's class, Stiles' book, Bullinger's books, and Heefn3r and Do0p's ministries, and claimed they were his own. They just redefine what "Old Timer" means. After all, they redefined "the First Corps" once all the First Corps actually left the FIRST time, and called the second corps "the First Corps." Then, once all of them were gone, they rounded up all the old-timers still connected with twi, and labelled THEM "the First Corps", making them the third "First Corps" and the only "corps grads" who never entered the corps. Taking the pickle-jar and labelling it "apple-butter" has a long, proud tradition in twi.

[Here we have a PERFECT example of the hallucinations and tortured logic necessary to deny the Holocaust. I shall narrate.]

Ok, another show..... "Do unto others-then run." "Relax. Do you understand 'relax'?" "Yes-a little piece of dark chocolate." "'Omelet', ja, to be, or not to be, that is the question!" "And this is the answer! *smack* Dumbkopf!" "After the meal, you will want an after-dinner mint. You will need an after-dinner 'mint' to pay for the bill!"

Well, I'm game to keep this moving. So, the next song. "You're in hiding, And you hold your meetings. We can hear you coming. We know what you're after. We're wise to you this time- We won't let you kill the laughter." Something made me think of this recently... :)

It's my PERSONAL OPINION that vpw was IMAGINING he was some sort of international phenomenon back when he began teaching in Payne and Van Wert. However, it wasn't until he "hijacked the hippies" in 1968-1970 that he had any kind of REACH or IMPACT- since THEY had REACH and IMPACT. Until then, he was an engaging speaker (since 1941 or so), who had a pretty good class (BG Leonard's, since 1953) and a pretty good textbook (JE Stiles' since 1953), but very few people to heed it. That's why he was still FULL-TIME an employee of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. Furthermore, he had no qualms using their facilities and supplies to run his little enterprise on the side, which is dishonest among the unbelievers-even THEY know that's wrong. vpw had no problem with it, however. It wasn't until he was able to get land tax-free that he made any kind of move. (The Wierwille family farm- he bought out his brothers and made it an asset of a non-profit, so he could escape taxes and still use the land how he wanted.) For all the badmouthing he did of the church he came from, he had no problem taking their paycheck and using their facilities for well over a decade, and only moved when it was financially advantageous to him. So much for personal integrity.... Anyway, it's my OPINION that the first time he rewrote his history to any major degree was when he met the hippies, and began setting forth that himself was some great one, and it was only about 1970 when we start hearing "God spoke to me, and showed me snow". He now had a whole new audience who weren't around to know he was lying about exclusive Bible knowledge and so on. So, the REAL start of twi was in the end of the 1960s. In the late 1950s, we had a small group that nobody ever heard of.

You were correct, and this was a good idea for a thread, a pair of silly posters notwithstanding. Too bad you can't expect more civility from supposed fellow Christians, but there you go.

[Watch as he claims he's getting the charg of derailing, and then attempts to derail the thread in the same post.... [And thus begins the attemped Mike-ification of polar bear's thread, pretty early onpage 1, even.] [Actually, when offered that, Mike complained because reasonable, rational posters paid attention and refuted him on every point, which he also interpreted often as refuting THEM. So, what Mike's complaining about is not the ability to DISCUSS-which he has- but the ability to HAVE HIS POSITIONS EMBRACED- which he can't enforce. Woe betide Mike for being disagreed with! He's just like Nelson Mandela, who was put in jail for being a political dissident! ] [You're promoting a NEW doctrine, which has been concluded to beinconsistent, unnecessary, and not based on anything sensible. Hm, it's not completely dissimilar to the doctrines that afflicted us before after all....Never noticed that before...] *** [That is your OPINION. Your OPINION has been considered, your evidence has been examined. Both have been found wanting. But you're welcome to hang out and participate here anyway. You're even permitted to use that welcome to spit on the welcome and complain about your ability to post here. It's silly and senseless, but you're permitted to do that to a point. (ALL speech has limits, including mine and yours.)]

[You get fired, kicked out of a group, and family and friends are told to shun you because you're serving the devil, when you speak up? That's typical of what polar bear was talking about. YOU get people who disagree with the content and style of your posts, and are asked to keep them to the appropriate forums and threads. Except to those eager to see the two as the same thing, they don't resemble each other at all.] [Actually, you keep getting refuted that you're interpreting the written texts correctly, and keepforgetting that. And nobody kicks you from a group and tells your friends and family to shun you. It's not the same thing. Disagreement =/= shunning and persecution. Nobody follows you off the GSC to harass you. twi has done that. Woe is you for not having a popular opinion! Cry me a river.] [since there's no connection-and you're not "attacked", let alone "thusly", there's no problem with the integrity of polar bear's complaint or anyone else's complaint about twi going after people and punishing them for asking questions.] [You're welcome to post here, have you noticed that?You're NOT welcome to post at twi-where NOBODY is welcome to post, have you noticed that? We disagree with you- which is hardly "silencing" you. Even though you're hallucinating some connection to polar bear's legitimate topic about twi suppressing thought and discussion. That you can even post, claiming you're being suppressed, shows you're not being suppressed. If you WERE, you wouldn't be able to post about it. See how simple that is? Of course you don't.] [We considered your "input", and concluded it makes very little sense AT BEST, and lacks understanding at many levels. That's not "ignoring". Furthermore, we've considered MANY unpopular ideas here, and they all got a fair hearing. People have been free to consider, ask questions, and draw their own conclusions. In some cases, they rejected them as unsound. In other cases, they accepted them as sound. In your case, it's been rejected as unsound, and your response has been to claim the grapes were sour after all and that's why you don't want any.]

WTH: "I don't recall making any claim that these Holocaust revisionists are also poster's here at GSC. I don't even know where you got that idea." Well, WTH, I actually explained it already, but it seems you missed it. It was in the very post you quoted. I shall quote myself and you and show it AGAIN. Please try to follow along this time. == WordWolf said: WTH read this, quoted it-including the part where it specifies it's referring specifically to posters on the GSC and came back with After quoting both, I then said-which WTH quoted now and was unable to understand... ========= The connection between the two was right in the post WTH made. I spoke of Holocaust denier who post here, and WTH replied by invoking those names. HE drew the connection, which any adolescent or adult English reader should have no trouble understanding. WTH continues. "I don't even know where you got that idea. But then again, it appears that you are making "a connection" where none exists -" WTH seems rather good at denying connections between things that OBVIOUSLY exist- like errors in his posts, and the content of the errors (like saying "in the GSC" applies to all sorts of Holocaust deniers then denying he ever connected them). He continues "But then again, it appears that you are making "a connection" where none exists - which apparently you are very good at, especially when you drop little comments like: "but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender." This claim, BTW, is pretty self-evident to everyone else here. I said not every person on the GSC who is a vpw defender/apologist is a Holocaust denier (AFAIK), but those posters at the GSC who ARE Holocaust deniers are also all vpw defenders/apologists. There being only a tiny handful of Holocaust deniers at the GSC, it's easy to see what they seem to all have in common. Off the top of my head, the few of them are all male, and they all come out to defend vpw's memory and engage in apologetics to excuse his felonies and misdemeanors and other bad things. To say otherwise is like denying giraffes have long necks. You won't convince anyone, and you just sound silly. But that doesn't stop SOME people... WTH: "(Apparently you consider me to be one of those "VPW defender's" though - which only goes to prove how little you know because there are many things VPW did I don't care to or want to defend.) " WTH, apparently, is in denial over the content of many of his posts, in which he has gone to great lengths to attempt to excuse vpw of crimes, or draw attention away from them. Is he convincing anyone other than himself that his posting history has no connection with defending vpw? WTH still can't let drop the connection that HE drew by responding to "on the GSC" with the names of Holocaust deniers he's quoted. " will simply go on record by saying: "There is no connection between them and VPW and TWI, anymore than there is a connection between them and the GSC." That is the point I was making and am still making. Remarkable though how you chose to respond to everything I said, except for this comment I also made: And I keep wondering ... exactly what makes you think there ever WAS a connection there to begin with? Well WW, do you care to respond to that comment or not? Probably not. And why is that?" A) I KNOW there is no connection between them-your own post notwithstanding. That's the one where you invoked their names in response to me specifying "on the GSC." It's really sad that I can say this REPEATEDLY in such clear terms and you can still miss it. Perhaps there's a biological problem that's preventing this-I'm aware some victims of Traumatic Brain Injuries can be physically unable to draw connections. If so, I'm very sorry and you should have mentioned that. If you're trying your best, I can try to make allowances. If not, your insistence on highlighting your OWN mistake repeatedly is baffling, and your attempt to pass it off on someone else rather than just say "whoops-I posted before I read" and moving on is rather transparent, to everyone except possibly your own self. I can't see a reasonable motive for doing it. B) I not only have no problem responding to why any connection was drawn, but I ALREADY did, since I ALREADY had explained it, and all I did now was REPOST the previous explanation. It was clear to everyone else the FIRST time I posted it. WTH again: "Because none of us really knows exactly what your basis is/was for drawing any connection beween Holocaust deniers and VPW defenders, regardless if they happen to post on GSC or not. Of course I realize you "conveniently" choose not to respond to that particular comment I also made, simply because you wanted to make it appear as though I were the one drawing that connection instead of you." Actually, I responded specifically to every comment so far. I didn't see the need to explain that the Holocaust deniers at the GSC are all vpw defenders (but not necessarily vice versa), because everyone except those few have no difficulty seeing that they are both. However, I've spelled it out now. And not every light-skinned person has red hair, but most naturally red-headed people have light skin. And I don't need to explain that one, since it's obvious to anyone not deliberately trying to miss it. As to what connected those authors to the GSC, YOU did, and I quoted you doing so- TWICE now, and explained the quotes, TWICE now. Everyone except you can see it without difficulty, TWICE now. It would surprise few if you STILL miss what you YOURSELF connected. Of course, we're supposed to respect your interpretation of the Holocaust's evidence even though you can't see the direct connections in your own replies. Forgive us if WE can see the disconnect in one, and conclude the other has little hope of making sense. WTH: "WELL - HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR NOW? Or are you still deaf? But then, with all the "noise" you make, it's a wonder anyone can hear at all.: You made yourself clear before. You were so eager to try to discredit me, that you didnt even read my post, and when I specified Holocaust deniers [u[on the GSC[/u], you skipped over it completely-and connected my post with Holocaust deniers worldwide- unaware you now connected all of them with posting on the GSC. Then you displayed an intentional denial you made that mistake, and even when it was explained, you remained adamant you never said it. You've been coming in loud and clear. Error-ridden, but loud and clear. I have had no difficulty understanding you-although you've been deficient in understanding me. I've never been "deaf", but your own "blindness" is on display- and not just because I'm recognizing it in a post- everyone else can see it whether I mention it or not. But since you're speaking on "deaf", it seems apt to mention it in passing. Finally, I post, and you post. You seem under some illusion that refuting all the flaws in your post is identical to shouting you down. Sorry, I'm unable to correct that illusion. Also, you're under a separate illusion-or deliberately lying- that my posts lack content. Do you think you're convincing anyone? But since WTH is either unable or unwilling to notice the connection, apparently, there's ANOTHER thing to deny for WTH while he's busy denying...

If you have the right adapters, and a VHS machine and a DVR (DVD recording device), you can copy to DVD from VHS. Presumably, the same thing applies here. The catch is probably finding the adapters. Then again, for all I know, they may be easy to find.

For those playing along, I posted this (I'm adding emphasis to point out what WTH seems unable to read): WTH, demonstrating the consistency with which he's approached the evidence of the Holocaust, replied-quoting that in its entirety, as follows: So, apparently, Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, etc, are all posters on the GSC, since WTH replied to my comments-which were specifically flagged to refer ONLY to the GSC in case someone was skimming or lacked the wit to contextualize properly- by saying they applied to these people. Somehow, they have how magically become posters on the GSC as I specified. == Again, he responded to my with his own Apparently, when I specified this wasn't an equation ("I'm NOT saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier"), WTH "fully realized" I was saying it WAS an equation ("Every Holocaust denier = a VPW defender.") Since I never made it, that's little problem of mine. It's the problem of the imaginary poster whom WTH supposedly "fully realizes". Somehow, he's reading a post that specifies each Holocaust denier around the world defends vpw, despite the posts actually specifying otherwise- A) the connection is only between posters on the GSC] B) the connection does not equal an equation, since there's no equivalence (it doesn't apply in both directions) If he's looking at the evidence the Holocaust happened the same way he can read "this only applies to posters at the GSC" and translate that as "this applies to everyone around the world" and read "I'm not saying this" and translate that as "I'm saying this", then there's small wonder that he can view piles of evidence for something, and still miss that there was any strong evidence in it. This is the kind of "logic" in play when one is denying the Holocaust happened, as we can all see. (Scroll up and see it for yourselves, those posts are from a few hours ago.) ====== Oh, and the irony of the mentally-blind calling the mentally-sighted people "deaf" is just too funny.....

Does that mean you're currently undecided, and cannot honestly say your convictions point distinctly at either direction at this moment? (That's what it sounds like, so I'd like to clarify.)

Let's see.... if you're not on dialup, then something's wrong. If you're on dialup, that's STILL way too slow. I'd see about editing the picture down a little, and seeing if that helps. IIRC, about 1/2 an hour is the timeframe for about SIX GIANT DIGITAL pictures to load up to most online photo galleries on DIALUP speeds. So, a GIANT DIGITAL picture should be less than 15 minutes. I doubt your image there is QUITE that "big" (both in size and in density of image, which both affect the size of the file, and it's the overall filesize that affects the upload speed.) Maybe you should try Imageshack. ======== Then again, maybe you can email it to someone on staff here or something, since this website HAS A PHOTO GALLERY. I don't know how it works, but this site hosts the images.

Oldies, for now I'm leaving alone that you skipped HALF my statement- that a link is demonstrated- to deny the existence of a link without refuting the demonstration- because I'd like to give you a chance to set the record straight on your current thinking. So, Oldiesman, do you believe that over 100,000 or millions of people, some of them Jews, were imprisoned during World War II by the Nazis and under the order of their command (Hitler and the boys), and thousands or more of them were killed BY the Nazis at that time? Or, do you believe that the branded numbers in the skin of people, the recovered video, photos, the confessions, the eyewitness accounts from all sides, and the sites recovered, do you believe they were all invented in some sort of grand conspiracy to frame the Nazis for attempted genocide and mass-murder of prisoners? Or, do you refuse to say either way what you think?

Ah, you can host it on an external website (like Photobucket or Imageshack), and post a link to it here. Or you can shrink the image using Photoshop or the GIMP or something, but I think we'd be better served with the full-size image. (Or you can use them to trim out the borders, or both.)

I'm still curious why there are people who keep saying that vpw was neither anti-Semetic, nor pro-Nazi in any way, and never taught along those lines, and yet the only times we EVER see ANYONE denying the millions of Jews and non-Jews imprisoned and killed for the "crimes" of being different by Nazi Germany during World War II, these are people who are enthusiasts of vpw, and feel the need to defend both the public image of vpw and the public image of Holocaust denial. Is this connection supposed to be accidental? I'm not saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier, but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender. (I expect there may be some vpw defenders who are NOT Holocaust deniers, but there don't seem to be any GSC Holocaust deniers who are NOT vpw defenders.)

WTH then QUOTED Belle's question, and went on for several paragraphs, coming nowhere close to her question in actually addressing it. All the bombastic BS was to draw attention away from his refusal to answer the question, and pretend he actually addressed it. Just in case you were wondering. I can read his bombastic bs lightning-quick.

Catchphrases ARE among Figures of Speech, so long as they're addressed to the community that uses them. At least, Bullinger listed them as so, and twi did as well-there were even 3 different books on it from Pillai- "Light Through an Eastern Window" "Orientalisms of the Bible" volumes 1 and 2. As a figure, one wanted to analyze it, this specific phrase is "synecdoche", where the parts are placed for the whole. That is, to name all of humanity, you name 2 extremes and imply everything between them is included. So long as it's not overthought and considered for what it is, it's not a problem. Remember when vpw was explaining about the potential for life? He went into a short digression on Humpty Dumpty. During that explanation, he explained that Humpty Dumpty was an egg, an egg that a chicken laid "WITHOUT ANY STRESS OR STRAIN". It was an expression, meant to sound clever, not a literal post-analysis of the laying of the egg. I imagine a number of eggs are laid WITH stress, or at least STRAIN. So, when considering what vpw said about "sinner and saint alike", one should consider that the Orange Book, at least some of the time, rendered it as "Christian and non-Christian", and consider THAT the technically-accurate phrase. Of course, there WILL be people out there who will probably come up with a doctrine for why it says ONE thing in ONE place, and the deep, spiritual significance of saying the OTHER thing in ANOTHER place. I can't do anything about those people, but they're not taking part in this discussion, so it's not] exactly any stress or strain on me.

I think I can agree with this, pending any possible permutations taking a hard left into the wilderness. (I'm just being cautious. On the face of it, this sounds like I can agree.)

You made no exception whatsoever. We addressed WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP and did not pretend you hold positions you don't. You just tossed that in and PRETENDED there's no connection with you saying that- in MORE THAN ONE POST- and any posts you're responding to. I'm well-read enough to know when someone's trying to INSINUATE a connection between two things. I'm aware they make that Holocaust deniers make that claim of their own. I'm also aware the evidence doesn't support their claim. Furthermore, one of the major issues, I've noticed, you've been ducking. That is, do you believe SOME Jews were exterminated by Hitler and his Nazis during World War II, whether that was 100,000 or 1 million or some other number, or are you claiming there was no concerted effort to round up and kill Jews and other minorities in Germany during World War II by Nazis as directed by Hitler? Personally, I think your persistent refusal to address this from ANY angle is quite telling. If you DID believe that SOME were killed but the numbers were inflated, you'd sound less nonsensical to the average poster, and stand to gain by posting it. If you believe that there was NO such effort, then you only stand to look silly in the face of all the photographic evidence, eyewitness accounts, and confessions from people who were there in one form or another, so you stand to lose by posting THAT. Therefore, ignoring this perfectly reasonable question, and changing the subject, is quite telling on its own. After all, we didn't presume you held EITHER position, but you must hold ONE of them- since you've rejected "the accounts everyone ELSE hold as accurate ARE accurate". Ok, so are you saying that there WAS no roundup of Jews and other minorities in Nazi Germany AT ALL, let alone executions of them for being minorities of their particular sort? Or are you just intending to prevaricate and pretend you said "yes" or "no" whenever it suits your whims? That's not intellectually honest....... .......which hardly comes as news....

The problem with that is, this "when he said 'sinner and saint alike' he meant Christians both times" thing completely ignores what he said other times- in the Orange Book, this phrase is written, at least part of the time- as "Christian and nonChristian alike". Therefore, he CLEARLY meant sinner as non-Christian, and saint as Christian, and claiming he meant otherwise is demonstrably incorrect.

Hello, zarko. I'll try to fill in a few blanks for you. (I shall also sum up, so this isn't comprehensive, just the main points.) Back when vpw was a minister with a congregation, he was always looking for something bigger-he had ambition. What he DIDN'T have was something bigger- talent to match his ambition. That changed the first time in the early 1950s when-in the space of one year- he got Stiles' book on the holy spirit, and Leonard's class on "Gifts of the Spirit." By reteaching Leonard's class and claiming it was entirely his own, and retyping Stiles' book and claiming it was entirely his own, he began having success more along the lines of what he wanted. It changed at second time in the late 60s when he travelled to the House of Acts- a bunch of hippie Christians operating in the Haight-Ashbury area of San Francisco. He succeeded in convincing a few of them that he had something special to offer (true) that was unique to him (false-it was the work of others.) It was once he had these Christians working for him that twi took off. vpw had been trying for something since the early 50s, but he now had the right people under him who could expand the organization. He sent them out to both coasts to grow the ministry as much as possible, as Way East and Way West. Once these were grown to a "self-propagating" point, vpw announced he was taking over what were effectively THEIR ministries- the East and West- and all leadership was to come directly from him, and all moneys collected were to go directly to his hq in Ohio, with none of it staying locally. Somewhere in there (early 70s), Peter Wade cut ties with vpw. That was the time it was EASIEST to see vpw evidencing power-hunger. We could get into an analysis of the way corps for further discussion along those lines if you want.

I wish he was stopping closer to me-I'd seriously consider a little travelling to see him in person.