WordWolf

Here's my feedback on this. Keep in mind it's commentary on the current state of affairs, and not on anything else-past, present, future, fictional, etc. Right. Let's be generous and say it's a 25-person trip.(It's probably less than 20, but let's be generous.) They're in residence (where, BTW? I thought they were AT HQ. That would mean "travel" means "a brisk walk across grounds". *scrolls down* Oh, Colorado to Ohio. Must be the Camp Gunnison site.) They're planning a trip for the bunch of them. They planned: 1) vehicles 2) food 3) finances 4) routes 5) lodging Now, how much planning is involved with the vehicles? Figure out what you have, and what you need. One twi bus and you've got all the seating worked out FINE. Plus space for luggage. Or 2 passenger vans and one car. Or 4 cars above "compact" size. Make sure the cars run. How complicated is that? Food... packing a sack lunch? Packing supplies in general? Scheduling stops at a 7-11 to buy more stuff when gassing up? This takes HOW much planning? Finances... Figure out how much the other steps cost, double that, divide by the # of people, and make sure people each have that amount. One person with a calculator, tops. Routes... this is a fun part. Stare at the maps. Find the nearest interstates, and how to get on & off them. Make sure every driver has the plan, and a good map. Lodging... Motel on the way there? Straight drive thru? Stopping in a scheduled rest or campsite? Are they counting "reserve room at destination hotel" as part of this step? How tough is all this supposed to be? When in college, a bunch of us college types took trips from NYC to St Louis, Boston, Albany, Dallas and so on. And we worked all this out. With a variety of travel methods. And all the trips went off as planned. Complete with hotel rooms and stuff. This didn't require "special training" or anything. A series of meetings were run to handle each step. Committees studied each step before recommending a course of action, then carrying it out. There were meetings, planning meetings, and preplanning meetings. Are you sure you want to rush into that preplanning meeting without preparation? When we college kids planned, things were handled in ONE quick meeting as more of a 2-minute update, then we moved on to other items. These guys need entire meetings on this? With this much planning, I've RUN events, not gotten TO events. He needed to learn this?When I eat a fricking hot dog on the street there are variables (where to get it, what to put on it, what to drink.) They needed to train to learn "make sure everyone's on the same page and knows what we're doing"?

*checks* Chas was correct. You, I'm confident enough NOT to check at the moment. Your turn. :)

Is this the one you are referring to? HCW told me that vpw credited this one properly, but-like the one in the opening post- most of us never heard that. ====== "The Touch Of The Master's Hand" -------------------------------- 'Twas battered and scarred, and the auctioneer Thought it scarcely worth his while To waste much time on the old violin, But held it up with a smile. "What am I bidden, good folks," he cried, "Who'll start the bidding for me?" "A dollar, a dollar. Then two! Only two? Two dollars, and who'll make it three?" "Three dollars, once; three dollars, twice; Going for three..." But no, From the room, far back, a grey-haired man Came forward and picked up the bow; Then wiping the dust from the old violin, And tightening the loosened strings, He played a melody pure and sweet, As a caroling angel sings. The music ceased, and the auctioneer, With a voice that was quiet and low, Said: "What am I bid for the old violin?" And he held it up with the bow. "A thousand dollars, and who'll make it two? Two thousand! And who'll make it three? Three thousand, once; three thousand, twice, And going and gone," said he. The people cheered, but some of them cried, "We do not quite understand. What changed its worth?" Swift came the reply: "The touch of the master's hand." And many a man with life out of tune, And battered and scarred with sin, Is auctioned cheap to the thoughtless crowd Much like the old violin. A "mess of pottage," a glass of wine, A game -- and he travels on. He is "going" once, and "going" twice, He's "going" and almost "gone." But The Master comes, and the foolish crowd Never can quite understand The worth of a soul and the change that is wrought By the touch of The Master's hand. -- Myra Brooks Welch. ========== That was written in 1921.

Now, someone pointed out that a live class they took LATER did not include references to this. I shall clarify (repeating myself in the process.) vpw bought a film including 2 women and a dog engaging in sex acts. vpw taught the Advanced class live-on grounds at hq and other places. vpw taught the Christian Family & Sex class live-on grounds at hq and other places. When he taught them (most or all of them) live, he showed part or all of this pornographic movie. For BOTH classes. Even the wierwille defenders admit this-there were hundreds of witnesses. (Some sometimes respond that he showed them the deviant porn for a good reason. You can find that in the archives, too. For that matter, one claimed that vpw raped and molested corps women for their own good as well. I can point to the thread that's on pretty quickly.) When he put the class on TAPE like all the others, he did NOT include the dirty movie (AFAIK, he did not.) However, in BOTH taped classes (Advanced and CFS), he described the contents of the movie as quoted above. I sat thru the CFS class and tried to block out this mention-but it was there when I took it. (I took it more than once because I took EVERY class as often as I was able to attend any session.) The above quote was from a transcript of the Advanced class. So, are you going to say that ALL those who saw it run live in their classes are liars? How about ALL those-like me-who were in taped classes where it was described- prepared to call us-including me-liars? If you're going to do so, please do it now, outright and in the open! We like open dialogue here-we were UNABLE to get it in twi. Here's a side-question. If you're prepared to accept that ALL of us were, in fact, telling the truth, what was the relevance of movie of deviant porn in TWO different classes. A separate question is, why did he LAUGH at the end of the quote? I was twisting uncomfortably away from the subject in my mind, but it made him LAUGH. WHY did the deviant porn make the MINISTER laugh? Is this a normal reaction, an expected reaction, to deviant porn from a minister? And why does a minister show deviant porn to students- TWICE? (All twi'ers were expected to take ALL classes, and the corps sat thru both on grounds-as did the college division-not even counting any times they saw it "on the field.") I think these are questions that warrant REAL thought and a REAL answer.

Go ahead and review the archives. Women have said that he-PERSONALLY-raped them, or PERSONALLY drugged AND raped them. Eyewitnesses have interacted with women sent to "his office" (which was separate from all the buildings and was furnished completely as a bedroom), saw them leaving distraught, then kicked off grounds, and later put the pieces together. Eyewitnesses have interacted with people on-staff who were instructed to be ready and "counsel" women who had JUST been raped by vpw. In particular, the "Moneyhands" were mentioned as being old hands at that. Those who weren't "successfully counselled" were kicked IMMEDIATELY off-grounds, and their reputations were smeared, as in "never speak to her-she is possessed". Can't tell your story if nobody will hear you. At least one person who was part of the "cleanup crew" later confessed to knowing of this. A reliable witness reported that vpw-after having a few drinks- asked him to describe what an orgy is like- and told him that they were ok with God. Guy didn't put the pieces together until later. We have women who say he tried UNSUCCESSFULLY to get them to have sex with him, and they report the SAME lines used on them as the women he succeeded with. We have women who reported that their "From Birth to the Corps" autobiographies (MANDATORY papers) included a history of sexual abuse or assault. Many of those are the same women who were targeted for rape. It's not a big secret that victims of something one time are often easier to victimize later. Were the papers specifically used to find rape victims? One poster reported meeting vpw and Uncle Harry face-to-face for the first time-together- and Harry copped a feel off of her, out in the open, immediately. Women on OTHER websites have reported being raped by him. Ever read Schoenheit's paper on Adultery? Do you honestly believe it wouldn't have been necessary if vpw hadn't signed off on adultery and no-strings sex in the first place? Ever hear about "the Lockbox?" A number of insiders were told that this sort of thing were to be kept secret and never to be told to other twi'ers, even. Then there's things which escape my mind at this time. So, all or some of them are telling the truth...... ....or you're prepared to call dozens of people who have never met a bunch of liars. BTW, the victims who have come forth have been insulted and had people slander and vilify them online when they came forth. Some posters tried to silence them immediately. They came forth ANYWAY. So, since we've danced this dance before, I ask you: How many reports from victims, MINIMUM, will it take to convince you they're telling the truth? How many reports from bystanders and those who spoke to them just afterwards, MINIMUM, will it take to convince you that they're telling the truth? Please provide an exact number. Or, admit publicly that you may NEVER consider the testimony of the eyewitnesses sufficient even if HUNDREDS of them show up, because they're reporting something you do not WISH to hear? When he was alive, he did a very thorough job of concealing his tracksand silencing any discussion. If not for the internet, we STILL wouldn't know. But they DO relate to people who are alive and tell their stories NOW, and they have witnesses.....

Like this quote from the Advanced class on videotape? =========== "I have in my possession, a film, which I'm not gonna show ya, not because I'm afraid to show it to ya, it's just because I don't have time to do everything. But, I have a film of two beautiful ladies endeavoring to have intercourse with a German short-hair dog - eh, not a German - German shepherd, dog. And the damned dog's got more sense than the women, ya know. (laughter) They're workin' on him, they're masturbating him, they're sucking him, they're doing everything, pulling him up to 'em. The dumb dog's all the time working back, trying, but he wants to get away from 'em. Those two women are totally possessed, and - heh-heh." ========= That's regarding the film he mentioned in the CFS class AND the Advanced class (taped), and showed groups who took it LIVE, and some people confirmed he showed it when under-18s took them- which is a crime in the US. Or when he told lcm that he'd have to "loosen up sexually" or something else entirely?

And that particular tactic preceeded the GSC, and started as soon as women began sharing their stories- and especially when their stories all began fitting together.

Correct! (As if you didn't know.) It's included on "Best of Jethro Tull" but not on "Original Masters", which is a more complete "best of" EXCEPT for "the Teacher". Next turn is Ca_dreaming. I must have just beaten you to the draw when someone posted "Bungle in the Jungle", possibly my favourite Jethro Tull song. But you probably felt the way I did when someone posted an "Offspring" song-and I was sure nobody else would get it.

Please remember that you should properly download the pic to your hard drive, THEN upload the pic to an online gallery, because most sites hate "direct hotlinking" since they have a bandwidth limit for their site, and that gets used up when you link to the site and we open the page each time. Probably the EASIEST site to do that with is Imageshack, http://imageshack.us

You CHECKED the Album of Verse? If so, then-pending an account who specifically heard vpw claim OTHERWISE- I'll chalk this one up to a semi-exaggeration on my part. That is, vpw never attached his name to it, nor said "I wrote this." However, I'm still waiting for any indication that he gave ANY credit to this particular poem.

If vpw had set the example of actually practicing the contents of the books, then we'd not be having this discussion. A lot of stuff that looks good or is good was in print here and there. It sounds soooo Christian and accurate. The books were often FINE. However, vpw put the books out, then promptly did whatever he wanted, sometimes adding a drapery of a holy epithet to it. lcm TRIED to do it, but lacked the finesse to SUCCEED. The basic problem of "non-adherence" to what vpw said/wrote was at vpw's level. Since, apparently, Oldiesman attended meetings entirely in the books and never interacted with the meetings were all of us were exposed to otherwise- SNS, ROA, TOM, weekends at hq, corps, wow, and so on- his arguments are that the literal contents of the books don't say something, then it was NEVER TAUGHT and NEVER PRACTICED. Explains why there's such a complete disconnect between the teachings- live and on tape-that WE heard, and the ones HE heard.

Ok, if that was too easy, if one of you can shoot it down then?

Next song: "No man's an island and his castle isn't home, the nest is for nothing when the bird has flown.''

"THIS SAME ADAPTATION"? Was the person an ex-wayfer? On all of cyberspace, I can find a bunch of references to St Teresa of Avila's version, but the twi version is only on ex-wayfer sites. If someone has a copy of the poetry book ("An Album of Verses?" What was the name?), they can check if this was in there, labelled "BY Victor Paul Wierwille". We already had it confirmed that the "BY Victor Paul Wierwille" label was attached to the poem "If a Million People Love You", which, except for the last line, was in use long before by people who've never heard of vpw.

So, here's the chain-of-command. vpw claimed Christ was "absent"-and, contrary to what someone claimed about vpw claiming Christ was "ONLY PHYSICALLY ABSENT"- no qualifier was made. (Kindly produce the quote from the book where vpw said otherwise, and I shall retract this statement.) vpw claimed "the Word"-i.e. the Bible- takes the place of the Christ he declared was absent. That SAME Word shows the Christ (who may or may not be absent) claimed that the Comforter would be sent, and the Comforter would be the authority in all things where Jesus currently was. So, Jesus said the Comforter would fill in for him, and never said he was "absent." vpw claimed JC was "absent" and that "the Word" takes his place. The Word claimed the Comforter takes JC's place, and that Comforter is the Spirit. JC-IN that Word- explained his followers wouldn't have rulers, and that those who meant to be in charge were to be servants. What did he mean by 'servants'-did he mean that they could rule and reign and that would be their "service"? JC demonstrated this. He washed the feet of his apostles. That was the most menial, demeaning task given to the lowliest of servants. Jesus' claims about the position of the leader contradict everything vpw claimed about leadership. vpw, of himself, wanted-and got-an airplane, motorcycleS, fancy cars, 3 catered meals a day, a continuous river of alcoholic beverage and a steady supply of tobacco- while he said that people should treat his "suggestions" as "orders". Occasionally, he said leaders had to "serve", but in PRACTICE, his concept of that was more Lord Over God's Heritage than humble servant washing their feet. === So, consider him the sole arbiter on what The Word said- which he was set up to from the time he called HIMSELF "THE Teacher"- or consider him the leader of the organization that explained HOW it was Christ in you. vpw defined procedure, and changed it whenever he saw fit. So, if you want to know in what way you were free to think for yourself- as in "Christ in you without leadership giving orders- after 1989, that was nearly impossible, (unless your local leaders wanted to risk being fired for failing to sufficiently lean on you), and thru the 1980s it was possible only face-to-face at the lowest level (and never as high as the branch coordinator, let alone territory nor state/limb.)

Watersedge, just so you know, there are a handful of people here whose posts consistently demonstrate a pattern of whitewashing twi. Things like vpw never committing the felonies he did- which means all his victims who've come forth are ALL liars who coincidentally have matching testimonies, things like just about everything harmful that was ever taught never actually happened, especially if they weren't in the room when it was taught, things like if the official statements and positions of twi said one thing that sounded right, then they never said or did anything to contradict it, even if it was also in print, or on tape, or had hundreds of witnesses and other things that don't spring to mind at this second. ======= So, what does that mean in a practical sense? It means that here-like anywhere else, you need to carefully evaluate anything said. Sometimes people are mistaken and in error. Sometimes people are misunderstood. Sometimes people sincerely post error, since they honestly think that. Sometimes people deliberately post what they know is a lie. We've had posters representing each position. And every longtime poster has made a mistake at some point, no matter how hard they tried.

vpw's thing about making changes in the work of other as suited him and conveniently forgetting to mention their names came into play here again. Remember this poem "written by vpw"? "God has no hands but our hands with which to give His people bread. God has no feet but our feet with which to walk amoung the almost dead. We say that we are His,and He is ours. Deeds are the proof of this, not words, And these are the proving hours." Well, if you knew about the FOURTEENTH-CENTURY St Teresa of Avila, this poem might have sounded oddly familiar. After all, she said === ""God has no hands but our hands to do his work today; God has no feet but our feet to lead others in his way; God has no voice but our voice to tell others how he died; and God has no help but our help to lead them to his side." " === If the average person did this, I might be open to possibilities like "they wrote this having never seen the work of the other person" or "they forgot they ever read this from another person" However, vpw had QUITE the track record on dropping labels off off things he liked, whether they were entire books of Christians, poems, etc.

I believe Hegotout meant the same thing that's meant by "trained monkey-boy" "gopher" or "lackey". Someone at the beck and call of another, who is given all the boring, time-consuming stuff of another. Like "fetching me a cup of coffee", or things like that.

If that one doesn't sing to you, My grandfather had a dog matching that description once, and they called him "Othello."

We've heard of Armand Assante. Fatal Instinct Sean Young Stripes

Sounds like "I'm Just a Singer in a Rock & Roll Band", by the Moody Blues. Maybe?

Using cutesy acronyms for stuff is really more of an American phenomenon, and mostly since the 20th century began. I forget which language has the word "ficken", but reliable sources give that as the connection.

I'll take a wild swing here, and guess that's the Bert from "It's a Wonderful Life."

Kit Sober, on friendship vs twi's "understanding" of same. "It takes being a friend to find the friend God has for us."

Thought you'd like to know. HCW informed me that this poem WAS properly attributed. However, I myself never heard the attribution, and I bet most of you didn't. "What constitutes a school? Not ancient halls and ivy-mantled towers, Where dull traditions rule With heavy hand youth's lightly springing powers; Not spacious pleasure courts, And lofty temples of athletic fame, Where devotees of sports Mistake a pastime for life's highest aim; Not fashion, nor renown Of wealthy patronage and rich estate; No, none of these can crown A school with light and make it truly great. But masters, strong and wise, Who teach because they love the teacher's task, And find their richest prize In eyes that open and in minds that ask. (Henry Van Dyke) ================= Seems that's not the entire thing, either. (Henry Van Dyke) "What constitutes a school? Not ancient halls and ivy-mantled towers, Where dull traditions rule With heavy hand youth's lightly springing powers; Not spacious pleasure courts, And lofty temples of athletic fame, Where devotees of sports Mistake a pastime for life's highest aim; Not fashion, nor renown Of wealthy patronage and rich estate; No, none of these can crown A school with light and make it truly great. But masters, strong and wise, Who teach because they love the teacher's task, And find their richest prize In eyes that open and in minds that ask; And boys, with heart aglow To try their youthful vigour on their work, Eager to learn and grow, And quick to hate a coward or a shirk: These constitute a school,-- A vital forge of weapons keen and bright, Where living sword and tool Are tempered for true toil or noble fight! But let not wisdom scorn The hours of pleasure in the playing fields: There also strength is born, And every manly game a virtue yields. Fairness and self-control, Good-humour, pluck, and patience in the race, Will make a lad heart-whole To win with honour, lose without disgrace. Ah, well for him who gains In such a school apprenticeship to life: With him the joy of youth remains In later lessons and in larger strife!" ========== If we'd had the internet back in the days of twi, vpw would have been SO pinched.