WhiteDove

Really? post something pro Way and see how fast the pack come to dismantle it. Thanks for all the laughs today Rascal............. Oh I see you changed the subject again it did not slide by me I gues you don't count the experiance of those who know how to referance things as well. Does that fall into the Duke trial record bin as well doesn't fit with your agenda therefore it does not count.

Come on Mr. Squirrel if you are going to post a quote about me at least leave in my name as in the original. Be a man at least make it a personal attack In the mean time Anyway, my coffees cold and Im getting told That I gotta get back to work So when the sun goes low and youre home all alone Think of me and try not to laugh and I wear it well.............. Rod Stewart

Don't misquote me out of context of what I said [edited to remove ad hominem argument] Clearly I spoke of fair rights that we enjoy in this country [edited to remove ad hominem argument

That's just it, it is not enough for you to share your point of view I have no problem, if that was what you did. But you don't . You post things as fact, truth that have no evidence as such you refuse to document your accusations as alleged when you know that is the proper thing to do until such time as you have some documentable record. Just why is that if you have no ax to grind? Just why won't you do that which anyone knows is common sense? Watch the news for a few days and see how undocumented information is spoken of read the manual that CMAN posted a few pages back and see how to refer to such information read a newspaper and see what they do. The truth is there has been ample things posted on why this is the correct way to speak and yet you choose to dismiss all the people who's job it is to know such things and post information as true that has not been established as such. I'd say that leads me to believe that you have an ax to grind people who do not use proper terminology.

Exactly and I am exercising mine to point out that along with that their are restrictions for that free speech such as not yelling fire in a crowded room and not referring to someone as guilty until you have a record of such. Don't believe me ask Raf he works in the media he can tell you that it is not acceptable.

Here is a case that fits your description of acceptable terms first hand testimonies from people that are well established in their own communities with no history of criminal activity, no ax to grind, no profit to be made. .Here Perhaps you would like to see the fruit of this wonderful example of first hand testimony and what it accomplished when people were denied their rights. Of course it does not fit with you ax, so it wont count either I'm sure. It must be nice to decide who gets rights and who does not.

Assuming that you meant to insert Me in the space previously held by the IT I'll tell you that I most defiantly without any doubt ,positively, unequivocally , (Are you getting it) absolutely do believe in the point made. It is the foundation of our rights our freedom that which by the way as I pointed out many believe, that there are those paying a high price to freely enjoy and preserve. Some don't think it is just OK to trample on peoples rights just because one has deemed another unworthy. Actually even if they were, they still get the same due process of the law. I'm sorry that those efforts are lost on you and your understanding of the importance of such freedom. You want to accuse me while you sit in judgment and pick and choose who gets rights and who does not?

.Jeff I'll say it again slow so you maybe get it I never said that everyone's accusations were made up I said that they were not documented with proof, I have said numerous times that they may in fact be true or may in fact not be true. Until such said time in our country they are referred to as alleged. Simple as that........ I did say some people just make S**t up your post here is a prime example. I have posted the same thing on numerous pages and yet you still misrepresent my point - that qualifies you as making S**t Up . When people post guilty verdicts without the benefit of a fair hearing that is making S**t UP It is an unproven fact. Again I'll repeat just to make it clear for you (so you don't just make more S**t Up) That person may be guilty or may be innocent either way they are alleged until such time as a verdict is rendered and should be referred to as such.

I do and it's hearsay until they can prove it as well...........

.Quote 'rascal' The Duke case is entirely irrelevant. That was one woman, an exotic dancer at that. Because you say so? actually there were more than one I guess if it disproves Rascals theories it is irrelevant There are plenty of other cases by the way that fit your profile of acceptable that non the less were not correct I posted them a few pages back sworn eyewitness accounts that sent people to prison for years only to find out they were mistaken. Here you have many first hand testimonies from people that are well established in their own communities with no history of criminal activity, no ax to grind, no profit to be made....ten twenty and thirty years after the fact trying to discuss their personal experience in twi. :lol: :lol: :lol: :blink: :blink: :blink: No ax to grind? Pardon me while I climb back on my chair from off the floor after small laugh break.............. Why you alone have worn down at least a dozen ax's grinding away. Your non stop campaign to try to discredit that person in order to call into question their experience is not some noble cause or truth that you are gallantly fighting for. In reality, You make this a hostile place for any whom try to present their experiences that you don`t approve of. Dove, you personally, though you couch your responses in diplomatic sounding terms....are really hurtful to those who don`t deserve your innuendos....innocent people who were simply deceived...and now all these years later...you can`t even allow us to discuss it without somehow trying to make people feel dirty all over again. It isn`t pleasant, nobody enjoys the spot light that you shine upon them, your assaults on their veracity....not being allowed to participate on threads without having to defend themselves from your attacks....relentlessly ...time after time....many times not even to comment on the topic at hand, or the content of the post.......but simply to attempt to discredit the poster period....the threads being drawn off track and into the soap opera forums eventually when trying to defend ourselves. What you do to your brothers and sisters, what you do in the name of your religion is hurtful and mean, whatever you tell yourself. There is a simple solution until you have tangible evidence you could just refer to your accusations as alleged much like the examples I have show that most normal people do.

Yeah maybe it is right next to the social disorder to see only evil because of ones own failed life choices and make judgments based on unproven hearsay and to generally think it is ok to just make S**t Up because they don't like a certain person

Not Really ,most Christians support their countries laws and the rights of each individual to a fair hearing. Most support the rights we have both in Christ and in the world we live in one does not negate the other. I repeat again for the billionth time I never excused anyone of any crime I have only asked that they have the same rights that we all are guaranteed in our country. Once that due process has occurred I fine with the verdict IT HAS ZERO NOTHING TO DO WITH MY VIEW OF TWI OR VPW. It has to do with honest fair and balanced rights for all. Really I think the Bible supports equal treatment of everyone. Do you have a referance to support your view that because you suspect someone of an offence you have the right to assume guilt without a fair hearing?

When a victim's testimony is accompanied by others it is enough to convict in a court of law. Google that and find real cases that were documented. Such is the cases here. Except that there are on record ,you can check yourself only two cases that were in a court and actually never finished the process. When you get the rest of these others and get to court and have a verdict then you you will have proved your point. until then sometimes it is enough sometimes it is not. Until you go through the process one can not claim a victory or a loss.

quote 'rascal' You know, there are people who get away with crimes...who are damnably guilty, whether they are ever prosecuted in a court of law. Absolutely Dove, it isn`t alleged when I/WE am relating first hand personal experiences. You cannot handle the reality of our experiences, so you have accuse the rest of us of making up lies. That's where you are wrong take for example the Duke case the boys were accused by first hand testimony it was an alleged crime until they had their day in court and when they did they were cleared. Why because the alleged first hand testimony was proved to be lacking. Look it up yourself you will see it in black and white. Just because you want it to be different does not make it so Rascal. Oh here I'll do it for you. Here it is exactly how these things are refered to: You can deny it all you want but the truth is there in black and white. Lack of DNA evidence in an alleged rape by members of the Duke University lacrosse team may alter the prosecution's options, legal analysts say........ Here I'll be perfectly satisfied with either verdict because they have met the burdon of fairness unlike your verdict that is based on emotion, and your need to see only evil. Not the way the justice system works......

Quote Cman No, sorry, no dice. It's not made up. Follow along Cman.. I did not say the crimes if in fact there were any, were made up, as I have said a gazillion times they have not been proven either way so they are alleged, they may have happened or they may have not but until such time as a verdict is rendered the proper reference is alleged. What is made up is your assumption that a guilty verdict has been rendered by due process, It has not. These are not accusations but what actually happened in doctrine and practice. You assume that because that is what you wish it to be, the truth is it has not been proven either way, by your own reference let me remind you: "Recent cases in which DNA evidence has been used to exonerate indi-viduals convicted primarily on the basis of eyewitness testimony have shown us that eyewitness evidence is not infallible. Even the most honestand objective people can make mistakes in recalling and interpreting a witnessed event; it is the nature of human memory. This issue has been atthe heart of a growing body of research in the field of eyewitness identifi-cation over the past decade." As I pointed out the Duke Rape Case was a Prime Example of this. There are plenty of other cases as well. Here are a few for you to read DNA Just because someone says so does not make a story true. Especially on the internet by a faceless nameless person named goofy shoes or the phantom. Call The WayInternational and ask them yourself. Why are you bothering with these people here when it's them who are in question for you. You don't believe what's documented here-or say you don't, saying it's heresay. When it's not heresay, when it's the person that experienced the abuse. Exactly, because eyewitness accounts is not infallible as we have seen from real evidence...........

But there is a legal system , your question was hypothetical you asked if. God will make his judgment in His day In our day we have man's judgment a legal system

No it would not, But everyone deserves due process, the system is not perfect far from it, but it none the less is what we have. We have people fighting for our rights paying a dear price I wont see them trampled on just to satisfy someones agenda to make everything spoken about The Way evil. i said it before there is enough documentable problems to discuss.

No this is what happens when you accuse people of crimes that they have not been charged with and refer to them as guilty without the benefit of legal representation and a fair hearing and because it just grates on your nerves to refer to them as alleged as most anyone knows that you should but that just isn't evil sounding enough to suit your agenda so you just make s**t up. Its pretty simple just say alleged because that is what the proper terminology is..

Ok ,so you only want to see things that support your view and ignore the rest to bad that the facts get in the way. hey you are the one that pointed out the websites not me and nnow your unhappy because they don't agree and support your anti way views.. Oh well...................

Now you can read their minds, and know the SOLE reason they could elect not to go to trial is that they thought they could not win their case? Do you know what it's like to be dragged through a lengthy court-case, with the defense's attorneys calling the victim a whore and a liar? It's even worse than here when some posters keep suggesting that of the victims. First I never said it was the sole reason ,only a possible one Second my fault I was not clear I was refering to the Way when I said they thought they could not win. But since you brought it up thats the price one pays for going to trial if you don't think you are prepared to hear such things then you should not persue a goal of gettin some cash............... "Just because you are coerced does not mean you have to comply." That's a remarkable statement that is both true and false. Technically, one is able to choose- however, in any practical sense, the choice is limited. During the days of slavery in the American South, a slave was coerced to work as a slave. That did not mean he has to comply. He can choose to try to escape, or elect to refuse to work. This will mean a whipping, and he may be scarred for life, and repeats could end with a crippling injury or a death, but he does not HAVE to comply. Well we were not discussing a slave in the south were we we were discussing the Way Int. It seems that the Allens found a way not to be coerced evident by the word attempted in the quote. I can attest to the fact as well so apperantly it is possible which leaves some just did not accomplish it. No big deal unless you try to blame someone else for your choice. Being honest with the data would include NOT EXTRAPOLATING FROM NONREPRESENTATIVE DATA. It's easy to pull a nonrepresentative sample, and extrapolate to the general population. If one polled the chatroom at the right moment, one could extrapolate that 80% of the membership of twi was raped or molested by vpw, lcm or someone vpw taught to rape and molest. It's dishonest, but one could pretend it's not. Equally, it's dishonest to take the results of a poll where A FEW GSCers in the HISTORY of GSC have responded, and claim it represents THE ENTIRETY of GSCers in the HISTORY of GSC. In that timeframe, I'd say about 100 posters have been posting. So, 7 people out of 100, or 7%, would be represented here, and that's only counting the ones here NOW. And claiming 100,000 were ever "involved" in the way is also non-representative. It was claimed by twi based on the number of people who ever SIGNED UP for pfal. Not everyone who signed up EVER SHOWED UP. Not everyone who showed up at Session 1 completed Session 12. Not everyone who completed Session 12 was around for more than that (some took it and made tracks.) Not everyone who stayed after Session 12 stayed more than a few months. WW I think I said roughly anticipating that someone would point out that it may differ one person or so. You can debate and crunch the numbers all you want pick one 90,000 80,000 70,000 but 7 vs ? is still not even on the % scale. I'd say the history of twi included some 50,000 people EVER who were around for more than 3 months, and as many as 38,000 were around at the same time, as of its height in 1979-1982. Just because you "see" something with the data doesn't mean it's so. I'd suggest "re-examining" the data, but I expect you'd get the same results, since you'd approach it the same way each time. I agree the poll is flawed but it is what we have It's anonymous so why not speak up if it is so important for all to know the other side of the story?I'm sure that will change now that I brought it up though can't have a poor poll result it might look like the truth. Your claim your job to provide the backup thats how it works put up shut up remember? Excuse me but I provided a quote from your own suggested website they agree that eyewitness accounts are flawed. Its there in black and white and you refered us to it. Now it is you who want to twist the faccts you presented.

some piece of work there whitedove you really are screwed up Thanks it was some piece of work, I guess since you had no response again, you are in agreement with the facts that I presented, from articles and polls. I suppose when the data the truth proves your theories otherwise lacking in information one has no choice but to result to name calling in order to try and save face. yeah there's a few that spoke up that tells me there is more Really how does that work? How many more? ,How do you tell? B S it does not tell you squat except that the ones who spoke up ,spoke up........ There is no indication that there is more or that there is not more. You really can't just make stuff up here. So if u had any common sense i'd explain it stupidity is your game though and I've spent enough here No offence, but you have failed to explain your own data and point here against the evidence I'll pass on the explanation and that poll is no indicator if i had my say it would not be there Well we do agree on this , there are obvious flaws in an anonymous poll ,but it is none the less a poll which by the way is more proof than you offered to back up your claim which was "Cough" by the way....... none............

It's not my job to prove your accusations that burdon is upon you.

quote name='cman' When the eye witness is the victim, that's when you love to attack their credibility. Such is your 'love' of your own hate. The facts are that women were raped in twi by twi leaders. Ouote Mrs. Allen and Mr. Allen claim they suffered humiliation, embarrassment and stress at the hands of The Way officials, and that officials attempted to “coerce” Mrs. Allen into engaging in sexual activity with the Rev. L. Craig Martindale, former president, between 1996 and 1999. The Allens resigned from The Way in 1999. I guess you missed the part where I said I had no disagreement with the court actions filed against LCM The reason being is because they offered proof and a chance for each side to present their case. All cases filed were settled out of court. That does not prove innocent or guilty. Exactly what I said ,however it does in my OPINION show some credibility to the charge, they have the money to defend the case so that is not a concern as it would be for some, if they thought that they could prove their case they would have gone to trial, obviously they did not. Numerous first hand eyewitness testimony here at greasespot. Not only of rape, but coercion into many deeds that those who were coerced would not have done without the type and kind of pressure applied, which is also documented, in all circumstances where it was not the persons will to do what they were being told to do. Just because you are coerced does not mean you have to comply That is a personal choice that each must be accountable for. Apparently the Allens figured out how not to comply. Numerous first hand eyewitness testimony here at greasespot. Not only of rape, but coercion You should educate yourself whitedove. You are not well informed, even when the info is readily available. Reallly ,lets look at the latest poll data I was sexually abused by VPW or LCM [ 2 ] I was sexually abused by a different leader in TWI [ 5 ] I see a total of 7 out of a base of roughly 2000 posters give or take for those who no longer post and duplicate names. This is from a site mind you that is anti Way. Now factor in the roughly 100,000 people who were involved in the Way who don't share this feeling. You can figure the % on that yourself less than a half of a half of a percent. I think you need to reexamine the data even you below contradict yourself, you say numerous, below it is a few. Which is it? Perhaps it is you that is not being honest with the data? You are deceived by deceiving. Not honest and seeking something else besides the truth. That much is apparent and certain. What's the matter TWI? You can't stop the courage of your victims. The words of the few that speak up scare you huh.... Do an internet search on your twi, and learn. And talk to those willing to right here. No, you are too afraid, cause you know they are right. Cowards. PS So since you seem quiet on the subject all of a sudden I guess that we can conclude from your site that you offered that they seem to support the idea that evidence is needed not only eyewitness accounts to arrive at the truth. gee what a revelation........Thanks for making my case...........

yep looks like they are big on evidence as well but then I knew that already........ "Recent cases in which DNA evidence has been used to exonerate indi-viduals convicted primarily on the basis of eyewitness testimony have shown us that eyewitness evidence is not infallible. Even the most honestand objective people can make mistakes in recalling and interpreting a witnessed event; it is the nature of human memory. This issue has been atthe heart of a growing body of research in the field of eyewitness identifi-cation over the past decade."