diazbro

Pat said: A question for the armchair legal buffs: >> Raf said: NOTICE: PAT IS SPECIFICALLY ASKING FOR "ARMCHAIR LEGAL BUFFS," NOT PROFESSIONAL OPINIONS. HE IS SPECIFICALLY SOLICITING THESE RESPONSES. SO IF YOU DON'T LIKE NON-PROFESSIONALS OFFERING LEGAL OPINIONS, TAKE IT UP WITH PAT. >> So would I be correct in assumming that PR is asking for advice from armchair legal buffs ? ;>

Vickles said: I didn't do it on purpose it just happened. I have to laugh now thinking about that southern accent. >> Interesting. I should point out that the people in Oregon to whom I was referring didn't leave Oregon. They started picking up "southernisms" courtesy of Way teachings, tapes, and shows. Now that was bizarre.

I always thought that VPW adopted the down home accent when it suited his purposes. Preachers and public speakers typically have stock public speaking mechanisms they employ and over time it becomes automatic to them. During the High Country Caravan phase I recall hearing Way people from like Oregon copping southern accents or at least employing a few southern phrases. Perhaps they though this was what the ministry wanted but it sounded very strange. I had a friend who was a rock singer and he later went on to lead a Way prods group that was C&W based though his accent was affected. He was southern yes thats true but he darn sure wouldn't have picked the C&W vibe unless someone in leadership had told him to.

Zix said: diazbro: No offense, but the thread is getting away from the lawsuit and devolving into a personality clash. Hasn't enough time been spent on questioning each other's motives for now? >> A fair question though I feel that the larger part of LG's opposition to PR's actions are based upon some fundamental dislike of how this was rolled out as opposed to any alleged misuse of the legal system on PR's part. Therefore I think its important to address the situation on this level. You yourself have been in some threads that became interesting so I'm sure you can appreciate that any thread can evolve into something else over time.

JustThinking said: Now they just to find someone who can write a book using a ghost writer and looks good on video. >> Are we to believe that VPW and LCM looked good on video ? *laff*. Once at a Twig a WOW was telling a newcomer about AOS and how Craig was an "attractive man" so a few weeks later when LCM came to town the newcomer went to the teaching though afterwards she asked us "so where is this attractive man she (the WOW) keeps talking about "?

Long Gone said: Yes, vanity. I wrote that on April 4, on page 5 of that thread. Yes and you also referred to it as a "piddling little squabble" and I asked if thats how you feel then why are you still posting and expending energy on it unless of course you are taking it seriously now though are perhaps hesistant to admit that PR might have a case after all despite your best efforts to convince him that he didn't. If its a "piddling little squabble" then why bother ? Long Gone said: >> But I'm not going to cheer on someone who wants to don a rusty suit of armor, mount an old nag, and charge windmills. Looks like those windmills have just hired two more attorneys.

Raf said: It was a cheap shot to suggest that my standard was personal and not Christian. If you think I'm mistaken, that's fine. Your prerogative, like I said. But you crossed the line by suggesting that I'm just looking for a verse to back up my point of view. It's the Scripture that informs my point of view on this, not vice versa. >> Raf I do think that you are reflecting a personal point of view that PR's actions don't reflect the spirit of the teachings found in the Sermon on The Mount. But I think thats human nature and hardly a problem (more on that below). Now perhaps its your point of view because you feel that there is strong biblical context but its a conclusion that you have reached on a personal basis. Of course no where did I say you were somehow wrong just that its subjective. For example I've read the sections to which you are referring and I don't have the same ideas that you do though I would still characterize myself as a christian. And while I understand the Bible's call to a more elevated standard of behavior I don't know that something like PR's lawsuit is in obvious contrast to that. I saw this in someone's signature file the other day: We do not see things as they are, we see things as we are. -- Talmudic Saying I'm not posting this AT you or anyone as I spent a long time reflecting on it as it seems to me that many of my personal beliefs have been cultivated and nurtured on the basis of how "right" they feel or how congruent they might be with existing patterns of thought. I'm sure I'm not unique and the fact this expression has been around for a while does support the concept that we are relfecting a personal level of opinion in most cases. That is no great crime - it appears to be characteristic of human nature.

Raf said: Legal advice that runs in Pat's favor, you greet with utter silence. >> Edited.... I didn't see all of your last post... I think those posts only underscore what I said when I pointed out that laws in the US change over time and sometimes when challenged. You would agree I'm sure. However it seems that the most recent information apparently takes some of the strength out of the "legal arguements" which have been offerred. But who really knows ? If Long Gone , or anyone else, wants to crank up the legal analysis machine again then thats his choice but looks like for all that work he put in he missed something pretty significant but that doesn't mean he isn't intelligent. It simply underscores the concept that law is complicated, detailed, and sometimes complex to interpret which is why its a job best left to professionals. Raf said: Now that was a cheap shot. I cited chapter and verse. I stand by it. >> Cheap shot ? How so ? You obviously have strong beliefes about the chapter and verse. While I can respect that I simply don't agree that on the basis of that content that PR has done anyhting wrong...

Raf said: P.S. If you don't care to look up the difference between psychology and psychiatry, then I don't care to continue that portion of our discussion. >> Yes I know the difference and I think you know that I know but it seems you want to pick at something so go ahead. but given that you are focusing on the differnce between two words then I'll take it that you concede my point. (But will you be examining my posts for spelling errors in an attempt to belittle the underlying points ?) Relative to your arguments based on christianity. I don't see that the teachings you site exclude the possibility of participation in a lawsuit or protecting an interest. Even outside of TWI I've never found a universal concept or agreement on what christian behavior should entail. Some people get very literal and "turn the other cheek" while others do not. Are they less christian ? >> I noticed that you have not criticized Goey or Zix for their legal posturing that supports Pat. I suppose offering a legal opinion is only objectionable to you if Pat is opposed. Uhhh.... I've said before that I think Pat has a case of hubris , he went at this the wrong way, and he needs a real lawyer. Yea I'm a robot for PR huh ? But I don't see a problem with what he is doing and if the courts are going to take it on then why should you care ? Its not your time , money, or energy and if you are attempting to compel someone to conform to your idea of christian behavior then perhaps you are being demanding on the basis of a personal standard as opposed to a christian one.

Raf said: And diazbro, when you start telling me what's motivating me, you're putting yourself in my head. That's psychology. You don't know me, and you're flat out wrong about my motivations. >> Its routine for people to speculate about someone's motivations. You , I , and everyone here has done it with PR. "Why is he doing this ?" we ask ourselves. Also as I said earlier I didn't resort to posting excerpts from psychiatry texts to adorn my my opinion in an effort to make it look more official or acceptable whereas Long Gone and others did this with legal texts. Had they left it as an opinion that would have been fine but once they pulled a wierwille by acting like something they weren't then I started to have a problem with it. Raf said: If the Sermon on the Mount doesn't apply here, where does it apply? To answer your question more directly, yes. >> So for you its the christian thing to do for PR to abandon his pursuit ? you should know that not everyone here is christian or conforms uniquely to concepts outlined in the bible. I'm sure you know this nor do you expect others to see things your way.... usually.. but in this case you are making appeals to whats right based on the bible and would like to see PR to fall in line with behavior advocated in certain biblical references ? I'm not totally opposed to this approach though I don't see the situation as being that cut and dried. At some point TWI had zero interest in the domain and only seemed to spring to life when they saw what was up. So in my mind its worth a challenge - I don't know that I would go to court though if I did I would probably do it with a real lawyer. As a layman I do know this much about laws in the US - they change over time and typically after having been challenged. On that basis alone I see a reason to move forward.

Long Gone - You critiize PR for not being a lawyer or refusing to consult with one though you yourself act like one so a case , no pun intended, can be made for hypocrisy or at the very least a double standard - its okay for you to come on with the Perry Mason routine but no one else ? But lets look at this some more. In the other thread Long gone said: Pat, It’s no puzzle at all to me. This piddling little squabble is fueled by vanity. Enjoy. >> Vanity ? You are tring to convince PR that his case is unwinnable on the basis of your interpretations of various legal excerpts. Who the heck is being vain ? PR might have a case of hubris but you have taken it beyond that. I guess real lawyers aren't needed now that we have you. If you have an opinion then express it but don't flank it with some pseudo legal talk in an attempt to elevate its value. In your own words you said PR is doint this out of vanity so deal with it on those terms. Leave the wannabee lawyer act out of it. And if PR's actions are just a "piddling little squabble" why are you bothering yourself with it ?

Raf said: Well, I'll tell you what: I'll cut out the amateur lawyering if you cut out the amateur psychology. >> This is interesting since in the other PR thread you vehemntly denied doing such (amateur lawyering) and claimed to be basing your argument solely on moral principles. Second , relative to the "amateur psychology" remark- I'm not posting entire sections of diagnostic medical texts and lecturing on them, pretending to have an exhaustive knowledge of what it says and means. Folks like Long Gone took this one to the extreme relative to the legal stuff Once I start posting excerpts from psychiatry texts and pretending to know all about it then claims of me practicing amateur psychology/psychiatry might have some footing. Okay I'm not sure why you are making appeals to the sermon on the mount though I have my suspicions - does it involve doing the right thing ? doing the christian thing ? Are these two synonymous in your point of view ? Is PR's unwillingness to see your point of view putting him in an unchristian like category ? Is that what this is about for you ? I'm being serious..

Raf said: It has nothing to do with Pat, and I utterly reject your mischaracterization of my motives. >> As do I your earlier suggestion that I "hate" TWI and have allowed that to obscure better judgement while also serving as a motivation for offerring an opposing point of view to the ideas raised by PR's posts. Its clear that you took every thing I said personally though it was intended as a general assessment of the situation as opposed to a rebuttal to just one person. I really do believe that most have a problem with PR and how he accounced his intention more so than what it is that he is doing. Obviously its going to be matter of opinion. But if I attempt to offer an analysis of the situation that appears to favor PR (thats not even true) then I'm a "Way hater" and clearly blinded to appeals to rationality. Now isn't that presumptuous as well as I think PR is not particulalry well prepared for this thing nor do I agree with his strategies such as they are but I don't think that painting him as an embitterred quixotic figure (Long Gone's assessment) because of it is *not* a natural first conclusion except perhaps to those who don't like how he rolled all this out.

Raf said: I submit that for you, it's not about TWI vs. PR; it's about your hatred of TWI and your desire to see them brought down by any means necessary, even if they have a point. >> Raf I'm disappointed that you took the cheap way out by suggesting this. Its easy to represent a dissenting opinion in black and white terms in an attempt to rapidly dispose of it. Frankly I'm a bit surprised but you are heavily invested in this thead so perhaps I shouldn't be. Whether or not TWI is "brought down" (highly unlikely of course) has never been the primary issue in this or the other PR thread. Quite simply people didnt like the way PR announced his intent and his apparent unwillingness to relent to the will of others only inflamed those seeking his aquiesence. People just didn't like how he rolled it all out. "Just who does he think he is ? He is no lawyer.. I'll show him" Look at it this way - if PR or another poster had posted something like "I'll be suing the Way" and had outlined their reasons and intent in a more subdued fashion then there would have been nothing but support. The general disapproval that I see here is not based on any sensitivty for "the law" but rather his verbosity and bositerous approach to dealing with this whole issue. I get the impression that some people would have preferred that he ask for permission from Gspot to go forward with this. Its been my observation that PR has maintained a website about TWI for some time. Its also been my observation that during that time that for whatever reason , his website isn't so popular among GSpotters and I've even seen a few posts criticizing his policies in place at his website. Okay all well and good but I think that perhaps this thread has presented ,for those not liking PR's website and latest activity, an opportunity to vent. In my mind the lawyering stuff is just a mask for some underlying irritation with PR on a personal basis and its a way to spar with him. So its little wonder that I think that its a waste of time to deal with "legal aspects" of the case - especially when its not really about that.

Long Gone said: You could try something novel. You could do the right thing and stop using any form of TWI's name as your own. Do that and TWI will leave you alone. >> Interesting. Long Gone you are every bit as guilty of trying "fighting windmills" as ,in your view, PR is. Its amazing that you guys just won't stop - he is going through with it whether any one likes it or not. This isn't about TWI vs PR its about not liking PR's approach and possibly him. And please stop trying to be an attorney.... PR might need this advice also but you aren't any better at playing attorney than he is so quit acting like you are freakin' F.Lee Bailey. Its obvious that you aren't and it irks me that people want to suddenly make others beleive they have some "gift" for the law... Sure next time there is anti-trust suit against Microsoft I'm sure we can count on you to be the Gspot equivalent of Greta Van Sustern

Well see this is what I'm talking about. People here are saying that they saw someone else get healed but no one is telling me that they were cured of cancer or paralysis , etc. This is no different than what I experienced while in TWI. Always third person and about someone who is nameless. Note - I'm not saying that people here are misrepresenting what they saw though let me toss in some more perspective... Once this lady was rumored to have been cured of cancer and her story was used to illustrate the law of believing and serve as an inducement to take PFAL. But I found out that this lady never in fact was diagnosed with cancer. She suspected she had it on the basis of a family history combined with chronic fatigue though she never went to the doctor to get her problems diagnosed possibly because she was afraid ? No one knows but she was never given a diagnosis of cancer. But how many people heard this wonderful story and beleived it ? Probably most but they didn't have the benefit of the info that I later discovered. But of course people heard the story and turned it into something that it wasn't so it was quite disappointing to hear people proclaiming her as victorious over a disease that no one, including herself, could say definitively that she even had. Also I've seen so called spontaneous healings in and outside of TWI and they follow the pattern described in the wheelchair healing. But hey you can watch Benny Hinn and catch stuff like this. People throwing away crutches, glasses, hearing aids (most likely later wishing they hadn't ) I've seen people in wheelchairs get up and jump in joy only later to return to their previous state. Of course just because someone is in a wheelchair does not mean that they are incapable of movement but lots of people naturally assume this so if a person is in a wheelchair and they later get out if it then its called a miracle Lots of arthritis patients use wheelchairs to ease the pain associated with walking though they are still ambulatory and basically save their energy for times when they need to walk or exercise. So unless someone is saying that they are para pallegic then I'm not going to assume they are. So while I apprecaite it that people are posting their experiences , please understand that its consistent with my previous Way experience of not being able to find anyone firsthand who claims to have been delivered of a major illness (was totally blind but could see, regrown limbs, terminal illness gone) who was/is willing to talk about it in specific terms. Mircales in the bible were typically used as opportunities to glorify God and the recipeient of the miracle was typically more than happy to talk about their deliverance and provide their story as a way to help the unbeliever understand that such things as miracles are indeed possible. But this simply isn't the case in TWI. Its all hush hush and they think it odd if you want to know the details. Lastly you should understand that I've seen a few things (very few ) that I simply cannot explain. whether or not they were miracles I really don't know but I do realize that there are times in one's life where things occur that seem to have the hand of the divine behind it and these are the things that give us hope and such that there is more to it than just the eartly life. But I witnessed these things outside of TWI which leads me to believe that perhaps TWI actually prevented miracles from happening if anything.

PFAL was a snore even the first time around. And for those who took the audio only class it was especially boring. VPW sounded corny, his jokes were horrible, and the forced, insincere laughter by the grads was creepy. Of course once I sat in on the class as a grad I too was pressured into laughing at all the jokes to make sure that the students were into it. At one session I guess I wasn't laughing enough and got pulled off to the side during break and was reproved for not being "into it". I had only worked my tail off that week and was operating on like 4 hours of sleep so its a miracle that I didn't fall out of the chair. Of course this was not a valid excuse. One of the PFAL sessions is shorter than the rest - I can't remember which one but if the class leader was cool then everybody got to go home early. If he/she wasn't then you actually went home later since they took the opportunity to add in extra teachings. That sucked so bad- PEople just wanted to go home and rest and you had to hear some class leader do his best VPW imitation....

excathedra said: twi 1 was godly, only twi 2 was devilly a true way myth >> Oh yea. amen to that but you're gonna meet resistance with some people who think that TWI during the 70s could do no wrong and ,in fact, did no wrong. But I agree with you. TWI I being godly is a total myth...

ChasUFarley said: Most of these TWI "err-ban legends" came about in what we x-TWI-ers call TWI One. Not too many of them were from the TWI TWO (post-fog years). Some of these stories are pretty "out there" but anyone consider there might be some truth to them? >> Well actually at the time I did consider that there might be some truth to these stories but upon making even the most basic of inquiries to validate these events I was shut down all around. I've posted in this thread and many others that I was totally discouraged from contacting people who had allegedly received miraculous healings - like I was out of line for wanting to hear the story firsthand. All the miracles that were reported during the 70s were related in the third person and most times lacking names and places. For example I was told things like "my WOW brother witnessed to a guy (no name presented of course) who went to the ROA, talked to Dr and got healed of cancer". Okay well try following up on that one. But I DID. And all I got were Way roadblocks at every turn. "Leave him alone- he has been through enough". So I couldn't even figure out who "him" was let alone contact "him" to get the simply information on his "deliverance". I guess Way leaders didn't expect people to want proof of these alleged miracles. We were supposed to blindly accept these tall tales as proof ? They just wanted the credit for the healing and were far less concerned with the reality of the situation. But the transportation miracles were everywhere I guess because so many people had clunker cars. It was routine to hear people claim that they were able to drive large distances (always related to a Way event of course) with malfunctioning engines, empty gas tanks, flat tires, missing fan belts, no oil). I could never verify any of those either. Sure I've heard many people thorugh the years say things like "well so-and-so ministered to me because of migraine headaches and I was totally healed". Err well okay but I know people who have gone to hypnotists who were able to achieve the same result. But lets take it a step further. I've met no one ever in my Way history who would report to my face that they were delivered of some terminal illness, raised from the dead, regrew limbs, were blind and could see. But I was told that miracles like this were ROUTINE in TWI. But between 74 and 83 I encountered NO ONE who would come forward saying they had PERSONALLY experienced any of this. It was ALWAYS third person stories...

Long Gone said: It’s obvious to me that Pat filed the answer and counterclaim without benefit of legal counsel or even a competent layman’s understanding of applicable law, the U.S. Constitution, or civil procedure. It will be even more obvious to lawyers, including the judge. I’ll address a few points in the answer and counterclaim. >> Are you a lawyer ?

Tom Strange said: don't know how it's done today, but back then someone would just say "I need ministering to"... no specifics, no hints... and if you're believing was up to it, you just said "sure"... >> This is also how I remember it. As you said there might be some acknowledgement that what you said as you ministered was in the ballpark whereas other times there were entire misses. Once I was ministering to a guy and got it in my mind that his appendix was infected so I mentioned that and then he started laughing a little bit. In my puffed up Way brain I though he was just thrilled that I had nailed his problem. Afterwards the guy told me he had his appendix removed years ago. And once someone was ministering to me and told me to stand up straight and had this trumphant smile like he had uncovered some exotic malady !!! Please understand that I'm talking about those major healings as mentioned - blind seeing, amputees growing limbs - these were things I was told were happening on a routine basis yet I could never find solid evidence of any of this and furthermore I was discouraged from doing so - "Leave them alone they've been through enough". The biblical precendent for miracles involves the recipient willingly sharing his/her miracle to give god the glory. In TWI they wanted credit for these mindblowing miracles without backing it up. I will say this - that before my time with TWI up until my earliest days with TWI (before I had PFAL or any of that) I encountered situations with a friend of mine which were pretty hair-raising in terms of accuracy during ministering but we were unable to repeat that as we progressed in our "walk" with TWI. I've often felt that perhaps the religion of TWI put a damper on that "pipeline".

In general tales of miraculous and profound healings were numerous and widely circulated but always in the third person. I never met anyone who was the subject of these healings (the blind could see, limbs regrew, people were instantly cured from cancer). And furthermore I was discouraged from seeking out these people who had received these miracles. Why ? Perhaps these miracles were exagerrated ? Perhaps they never in fact occurred ? I ran into lots of people for whom the word miracle had become very watered down in terms of definition. People with sore throats were claiming miracles simply because someone prayed for them and three days later they were all better ! Err....Okay if you say so but I think that time and rest were the cause of the "miracle". And then once I was told to come to Twig so I could talk to someone who just that very day had experienced a REAL mircale. So man I was there like one hour ahead of time and I had to wait till after Twig to find out what the miracle was. So ready ? This person who had expressed interest in PFAL had been $20 short for the "donation" (why did they call it that ?) and at the last minute (actually about 10 days before the class was to start) this lady's uncle gave her a twenty. And this was being touted as a TOTALLLY REAL miracle of God and was used to illustrate that God wanted this person , and everyone, to take PFAL. Don't let people cheapen the concept of miracle for you. Keep that standard high - that way when one does happen you will definitely know it.

Oakspear said: And "ABS" is just a three character abbreviation for "abundant sharing"....I really hate using their terminology when it isn't necessary >> My impression is that most people use the term "abundant sharing" to obviate the Way's hijacking of the tithing concept. I seldom enocunter anyone who thinks that ABS is some biblically defined term or is clearly God's will for our lives. I do understand the dislike of wayspeak especially when its clear that someone is hopelessly indoctrinated in it and refuses to acknowlege it let alone eliminate it from their vocabulary. However I don't think thats the case here relative to ABS.

It used to be standard teaching that it was "best" to give money to TWI whereas it might be only "good" to give money to other churches and orgainzations. I was taught to look down on people who couldn't "believe enough" to get themselves out of their problems especially if they couldn't "believe enough" to get the money together for PFAL. I was also told that for TWI to give money to organizations such as the American Cancer Society was not "best" since TWI could use the money to get the word over the world thus dispensing with the need to cure cancer. Besides cancer is a devil spirit so its a spiritual problem not a financial one. I've also heard teachings which suggest that giving clothes, money, and such to those less fortunate was only enabling them to remain in their poor condition thus it was better to dispense those items within the body. TWI had the concept of us vs them and its clear that anytime there were financial resources available it was for sure that they would try very hard to direct that money to New Knoxville. If you openly gave money to non-Way interests you heard about it.

yes well there were many alcohol abusers in TWI and for an allegedly christian organization there seemed to have been a marked lack of personal discipline in this regard. Of course the Way double standard looked over alcoholism as a real problem preferring rather to focus on "homo spirits" and such. But it was taught that alcoholism was caused a devil spirit also but perhaps because enough people had this very real problem they decided to place it in a less severe category. I guess some spirits aren't as bad as others at least in TWI point of view