WordWolf

HCW's previous quote was responding to Dmiller, who said

HCW make the Gems list!

This also bore repeating. Ok, I'll stop now.

This bore repeating.

Funny you should say that Mr. Hamma. When the IRS was coming after TWI to revoke the tax exempt status back in th e late 1980's I stood up at a staff meeting durng the part of the meeting where they took questions/comments from the staff and said, "Why should we really care about this? If I believe God's promise to meet my individual needs, won't he meet the ministry's needs too? They can have the tax exempt status as far as I'm concerned." It wasn't too long after that thay they fired me. That's funny-UNOFFICIALLY, they disliked that and canned you. OFFICIALLY, LCM went out and said that he was thrilled that, among the believers, "the overwhelming reaction is 'So What?' " So, he stole your lines and claimed them for his own.

Oldiesman, First of all, the definition you listed that has any RELEVANCE TO THE LEGAL SYSTEM (a dictionary provides ALL definitions, not just the ones relevant to your needs) is Definition 2-what is undertaken to be proven. Since you yourself didn't read the sealed documents, you feel you're entitled to find it logical that their allegation may have been "without merit", that is, that a full jury would have likely found it to lack sufficient support to be believed based on the preponderance of the evidence. That's a GROSS oversimplification based on an insufficient understanding of the legal system-and furthermore, an insufficient understanding of what IS in the Public Record. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/laws...ly-11072000.htm Everything in this newspaper is in the public record. If it wasn't, and they printed it anyway, they'd be sued out of existence. (If a newspaper broke into your house, and wrote an expose of all the scandalous things hidden in the bottom of your hall closet, it would be factually true but you could sue them and make a fortune. They invaded your privacy AND broke the law. You could then consider RETIRING and living off the lawsuit.) So, what's in a newspaper is considered public knowledge-available to the public if the public had the information resources as that newspaper. Who is qualified to be considered a "legal expert"? Well, a PROFESSIONAL in the legal field, who spent years receiving an education in that field, can be considered one. A lawyer has a Doctorate in his field (Juris Doctor). That means he completed his Doctorate degree in an ACCREDITED insitution. After several years of experience, a lawyer is eligible to be an ARBITRATOR of the Civil Court. If there's demand, and his record is impeccable, he is eligible instead (AFTER THE SEVERAL YEARS AS A LAWYER) to be made a Judge. So, if a Judge has just become a judge 5 minutes ago, he has nearly a decade of education in Law, and several years of practice in Law. Usually, they have experience as a Judge also. I submit that any reasonable person would consider a judge in the US to be a "legal expert". Neither you nor I are "legal experts". Did a "legal expert" get to review the complaint, the allegation and the evidence? Yes-by defintion. Judge Schmitt reviewed the case. At the time, his JOB was to determine the following: A) Which points of the complaint are outside the jurisdiction of the court? (Those would be thrown out.) B) Which points of the complaint lack merit? (THOSE would be thrown out.) C) Which points of the complaint are supported by evidence and have merit? (Those would proceed.) It was NOT his job to make a summary judgement at the time and close the case, unless ALL items of the complaint were thrown out. (If WordWolf sued Oldiesman on 50 counts of being a dumbass, all 50 counts would be thrown out, period. It is outside the jurisdiction of the court to penalize someone for being a dumbass. US citizens have the freedom to be dumbasses. Therefore, the complaint in its entirety would be thrown out.) If a suit completely lacks merit, BTW, a judge can have the complainant FINED for wasting the court's time. (This happens from time to time.) "Scmitt ruled a jury should decide the following allegations: that The Way breached its contract with them by creating impossible working conditions, including requiring Mrs A11en to submit to sexual assault as a condition of employment; that she was sexually victimized by Martindale and others; that the alleged assault against her was the result of a conspiracy; and the officials of The Way engaged in a pattern of corrupt activity." " 'The Ohio Supreme Court has determined that sexual misconduct by clergy is not protected by any claim of First Amendment privilege', Schmitt ruled. ' Similarly, a religious organization can be held liable for failing to protect its members from the sexual assaults of its employees.' The question of whether the encounters between Mrs A11en and Martindale were consensual should be decided by a jury, the judge ruled." "Evidence exists that Rivenbark and another woman played a role in events leading to the encounters between Allen and Martindale, which a jury would have to use to decide whether officials engaged in a pattern of corrupt activity against the A11ens, Scmitt ruled." ======= In plain English, a legal expert, having reviewed the complaints and preliminary evidence, ruled that the complaint not only was "supportable", but that it was sufficient to warrant a trial in court. Mind you, TWI did not file a COUNTERSUIT. They could easily have done so if the complaints were "frivilous". So, TWI's lawyers thought this lawsuit was "supportable". Judge Schmitt thought this lawsuit was "supportable". They had access to the evidence. ("It's called DISCLOSURE." -My Cousin Vinny.) They also had education and experience. THEY had access to the evidence, and thought the claims were "supportable." Oldiesman, who lacks legal training, legal experience AND access to the evidence, has declared that "it is to be viewed as unsupportable because it was never proven in court." ============= So, I ask those of you who have some hope of viewing this subject with a degree of fairness, WHOSE interpretation of this account is more valid: Oldiesman's "it is to be viewed as unsupportable because it was never proven in court" or WordWolf's "the legal EXPERTS who examined the evidence thought their case had merit, and therefore, its claims were SUPPORTED"? I ask you, whose?

Hello. I made much the same comment, but it seemed my posts got skimmed at best. Since I bothered digging up the previous discussion of "Blackmoor" (which Arneson DID write) and gave a quick thumbnail of the history of D & D (in chronological order but without dates), I thought it would be read a LITTLE slower. Although, to be honest, Gary Gygax, IF ANYONE, can be said to have been the creator of D & D, it really WAS the result of a number of people on a number of occasions, including Arneson. Few things are made solely by one person with absolutely no input from anyone else. (Supposedly, PFAL was exactly that, but, as we saw, that was a gross lie.) Sorry for the interruption, everyone. Just us geeks passing thru.

I made much the same point earlier, as did Garth. There's evidence that Ratzinger Even penned one or 2 of the previous encyclicals. I thought that response bore repeating.

Oh, and you're not allowed to even THINK about anything that would lead to leaving. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/edit.../obedience.html

Well, he was disappointed you didn't drop dead. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/edit...romisedland.htm As you may recall, there were people he said he'd he'd gladly kill. "..because there are some of us who would gladly execute you." (closing of this article) http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/html...homo-exerpt.htm

Oh, how could I leave out THIS little link, for a thread with THIS title? http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/edit.../prisoners.html See, this is why I recommend reviewing all the documents and editorials at least once a year, as a refresher on what you've escaped, or are thankful you were spared the worst of, or were completely lied to.

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/edit...exit-advice.htm Here's how one person advised making an exit.

That's why I try to treat participants in twi-2 as responsible adults who can make decisions on their own. I think treating them like infantile helpless mindless victims doesn't do any good. Treat every decent person with respect and there's a good chance you'll receive back the same consideration. Me too Jonny. Addressing this in reverse order: A) And yet....whether or not you saw it, Oldiesman, IT WAS HAPPENING TO SOMEONE ELSE. Your life wasn't destroyed like that? Wonderful. Neither was mine. Last month, American soldiers were killed in Iraq. I wasn't killed. You weren't killed. We didn't see the killings happen. Guess what? They happened anyway. Gonna say they didn't because YOU DIDN'T SEE IT? It gets tiresome to see you continually make the same sole comment over and over. "It was never that bad because I didn't see it get that bad. You all either exaggerate or (if you claim it happened to you) you lie outright." ==== B) Oldiesman, I can't tell if there's any hope whatsoever in trying to show you the difference between claiming someone was influenced by deceptive practices, coercive doctrines, and thus had their ability to make clear, informed decisions severely compromised (which was and is the situation with twi, and what WE said) and claiming an adult's entire ability to think was completely replaced with an "infantile helpless mindless victim" (which is what YOU said we said.) ==== I think everyone except Oldiesman can read this article and see an example of practices we described. http://www.ardemgaz.com/prev/way/11.html Can someone besides me catalog all the dangerous doctrines mentioned right in the article?

I remember a dude in my area getting M&A and one of the many reasons was because he never got rid of his D&D stuff after being told to burn it. I was never into D&D but I didn't understand how a game could be the source of so much evil and the possibility of possession for someone. Some people say to watch horror movies is to invite possession, to read liberal newspapers is to invite possession, to have conversations with certain people is to invite possession. twi was worse than most at that, eventually. We've got documents showing how evil the internet supposedly is, how people risked possession by logging in. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/edit...strictions.html

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/main/real.html

A quick online search gave what, I think, is the quote you wanted, verbatim... "It's a pretty good mop. It's not as good as my first mop. I miss my first mop. But, this is still a good mop."

One of the services-there were something like 7-8 services. Cardinal Law (ironic name) was relocated to Europe after Catholics in the US called for his beheading. I'm unsure the degree to which JP II was informed of the Cardinal's crimes of conspiracy, and aiding and abetting. I strongly suspect the details were lost somewhere between here and Cardinal Ratzinger (last stop before JP II.) I'd need a bit more evidence before I'd be ready to accuse JP II of conspiracy in this. I think it's more likely he's guilty of being unsufficiently informed before making critical decisions. Did anyone spot him saying he WAS aware of Law's crimes, or those of the pervert? Was he spotted helping Law shred documents?

I'm willing to give HCW the benefit of the doubt and judge his question a fair one. If he PERSONALLY did not remember anything of a vicious or abusive nature, either A) he wasn't present when it happened B) he misinterpreted what he saw C) it didn't happen He asked for more information. He wanted to know what he didn't see. He's not been here for years, and may not have seen the threads where it's been outlined. So, I say, let's give him sufficient information to make an informed opinion. ===== Now, those RealAudio clips ARE highly informative. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/main/real.html The clip ChasUFarley mentioned is the 928K clip. A lot of twi's OWN documents can be found here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/main/way-generated.htm Notes on some of their meetings can be found here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/main/corpsnotes.html A number of topical articles on twi's policies, practices and statements can be found here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/waydale/main/editorial.html Here's a newspaper article that includes some quotes where you can see the end results of twi's despicable teachings: http://www.ardemgaz.com/prev/way/11.html ==== This should provide some answers to some persistent questions.

I got curious and checked. I never even saw PART of this movie. Might be true of a lot of people here, maybe. Might give one last quote and one more day.

Ben Affleck Dogma George Carlin

He can't be referring to the FIRST one, since that fellow was not FROM the Bronx, did not move TO the Bronx, and has not, AFAIK, returned TO the Bronx since then even for pizza or a Yankees game. The reason you're thinking of him at all is that he spent a corps interim year in the Bronx. (And has a shirt from the Bronx believers commemorating this, saying "Corps Interim Year" on it, complete with the year.) That guy was in NYC for several months, but was NOT in NYC as of 1989, certainly, and thus, definitely not in 1991. In 1989, he was given a staff assignment at a root locale. Further, he never thought of himself as a New Yorker. When he saw a sign listing the dates for "Bronx Week" he once joked about some of the events that might be taking place that week-competitive events like mugging and hubcap-stealing. So, that leaves him the second guy, maybe.

I figured the Blues Brothers quote was too easy. (Too many people here saw that movie!)

"For a lot less money, you can get BG Leonard's class, ... " According to their website [which politely asks us not to link back to them without their permission] Full Bible Course: (two weeks in residence) Christ The Rock - a 23 tape audio set $115 The Water In The Bottle (the godhead) - a 24 tape audio set, $120 and book “The Water In The Bottle - the god head” $15 Healing Made Plain - a 20 tape audio set $110 and book ‘Healing Made Plain’ $20 Gospel Of Grace – a 15 tape set $100 and book ‘Gospel Of Grace’ $12 Foundations - a 30 tape set $130 and book ‘Foundations’ $25 and other accompanying books: The Everlasting Covenant $14 Gifts Of The Spirit $25 Positive Prayer $19 Church Government $12 Homiletics And Pastoral Theology $12 Holocaust $20 Unless my ‘adder’ is broken asunder that totals $749 I think that $749 is slightly more than $500. :-) PS I really did have that text very nicely formatted, GS' server messes up the whole formatting thing. Your "adder" is broken asunder. I contextualized Paradiseden's comment- involving $500 and PFAL- to refer to $500 in current USA dollars (let me know if you see it differently) and PFAL FOUNDATIONAL CLASS, not ALL THREE (let me know if you see it differently.) So, "Foundations" plus "the Everlasting Covenant" plus "Gifts of the Spirit" plus "Positive Prayer" plus "Church Government" plus "Homiletics and Pastoral Theology" plus "Holocaust"- ASSUMING ALL THOSE BOOKS ARE NECESSARY FOR A FOUNDATIONAL LEVEL- (and taking it as a given that your numbers are accurate) is $130 25 14 25 19 12 12 20 ==== 257 (checks twice.) ------------------- Paradiseden: "I would make a $500 donation to obtain a copy of the PFAL class on DVD or VHS." WordWolf: "For a lot less money, you can get BG Leonard's class." Leaving aside that it's still not "very closely held", $749 may be more than $500, but, since we're not comparing $500 versus BG Leonard's equivalent of all three levels of PFAL, just the highest figure for comparison against the Foundational class, $500 is approximately twice $257. ($257 + $257 is $ 514.) This, of course, is more than $40, but $40 never gave you the ability to retake the class at will. It's like the lawyerish "You never BOUGHT our software. You bought a license to USE our software. We still own the software and offer no guarantees it actually works or will continue to do so" that computer users find utterly dishonest when referring to computers. This is why the supposed guarantee to retake "the class" anywhere, anytime is currently MEANINGLESS- besides being dependent upon space during IDEAL circumstances, it's impossible since they chose to stop running it, and are insistent they're under no legal requirement to continue to do so with their implied guarantee that "being able to take it anytime" means it will continue to be offered.

I hate Illinois Nazis.

Ok, that's Aladdin! :)-->