markomalley

BTW, here is an article done up from SPLC research on the old militia movement that you might find a bit interesting: Anti-Government US "Patriot Groups" (research from Southern Law Poverty Center Intelligence Report) The Rise and Decline of the Patriots With the planned execution of Timothy McVeigh, a movement that roiled the 1990s comes symbolically to a close John Trochmann, a Militia of Montana leader who once claimed a following in the thousands, today leads a tiny organization that is derisively referred to as the "Mail Order Militia." Donald Beauregard, a Florida militiaman who asserted in 1995 that a map on a Trix cereal box revealed secret government plans, is now serving a five-year sentence for trying to blow up power stations. Jeff Randall, co-founder of an Alabama militia group and the man who embarrassed federal agents by exposing a racist event they’d attended, has left the "Patriot" movement and apologized. More than seven years after it began, the so-called Patriot movement, characterized by gun-toting militiamen angry at the federal government, is a shadow of its former self. The scheduled May 16 execution of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh may well serve as a bookend to the militia phenomenon, marking the dying gasps of a movement that has dwindled away in favor of other groups. In its latest annual count, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project identified 194 antigovernment Patriot groups that were active in 2000 — a drop of almost 9 percent from the year before, and the fourth consecutive decline since the Patriot movement peaked with 858 groups in 1996. The count marked the lowest ebb of a movement that throughout much of the 1990s captured the attention of the nation — and which was shoved into the international limelight with the 1995 attack that left 168 people dead in Oklahoma City. People have left the militia movement for a variety of reasons. They have gone home, disillusioned and tired of waiting for the revolution that never seems to come. They have been scared off, frightened by the arrests of thousands of comrades for engaging in illegal "common-law" court tactics, weapons violations and even terrorist plots. And they have, in great numbers, left the relatively non-racist Patriot world for the harder-line groups that now make up most of the radical right. "Although militia activity continues at a low level, the antigovernment Patriot movement is running out of steam," said Joe Roy, director of the Intelligence Project. "But at the same time, racist and anti-Semitic hate groups have been growing, thanks to former militiamen and others who have joined up." Less Outreach from a Harder Core Patriot outreach has shrunk, too. Although there have been recent efforts to expand Patriot short-wave radio programming, the number of Patriot sites on the Internet — the principal propaganda venue for most Patriot groups — has plummeted. The Intelligence Project identified just 155 Patriot sites on the World Wide Web in early 2001, a drop of 41 percent from the 263 Web sites counted a year earlier. What remains of the Patriot scene today is generally harder core, with an increasing number of groups influenced by the racist and anti-Semitic Christian Identity theology favored by some American neo-Nazi groups. Many others have embraced another radical theology, Christian Reconstructionism. Typical of declining movements, the Patriot world is also increasingly dominated by profiteers — men and women who play on the conspiracy theories that characterize Patriot thinking to rip off their supposed brethren in the movement. The life stories of many well-known Patriots help illustrate the changing shape of the radical right (see "False Patriots," also in this issue). Linda Thompson, a Patriot who once called for an armed march on Washington, D.C., and created a key propaganda film about Waco, has disappeared into obscurity in North Carolina. J.J. Johnson, at one time the militias’ favorite African-American, now says he doesn’t want to be black any more; he’d rather be a rebel, and so has taken up with "pro-South" groups. Behind the Fears It would be easy to dismiss the Patriot movement, with its outlandish conspiracy theories and childish fascination with guns, as a collection of nuts, people lacking basic reasoning skills whose arguments were naïve at best. But that would be too easy. In fact, America’s militiamen embodied real grievances and fears. In many ways, the movement represented an alienated and distrustful response to a rapidly changing world — a rejection of the vision of the post-Communist world that was summarized in then-President Bush’s "New World Order" speech in 1990. In the heartland, Americans were not so quick as their country’s elites to endorse the drawing together of economies, races and cultures that globalism represents. Instead, they saw globalism as robbing America of its independence and culture, and threatening farmers, industrial workers and others economically. Their anger, aimed at the government and all international bodies, was seen both in the "Republican Revolution" of 1994 — when a large number of candidates were elected on explicitly antigovernment platforms — and in polls which showed that more than half of Americans saw the federal government as an imminent threat to their civil liberties. Governmental power in general was under attack. In particular, many in the West and Midwest mightily resented attempts to impose gun control — few actions helped spur the militia movement more than the 1993 Brady Bill — and to regulate the environment. They were also deeply angered by international trade agreements that seemed to be facilitating the transfer of jobs from America to cheap Third World labor markets. And they were infuriated by two events that seemed to show how the federal government treated dissenters. Government as Villain The first was the 1992 federal siege of white supremacist Randy Weaver, whose wife and son were killed at their Ruby Ridge, Idaho, home. It was in response to this that extremists convened at a key meeting — the "Rocky Mountain Rendezvous," held in Estes Park, Colo. —and laid out the contours of the militia movement. But what really ignited the militia movement was the federal siege of the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, which ended in a conflagration that left some 80 Davidians dead. Consider the Oklahoma bombers. McVeigh, as he told the authors of the just-released book American Terrorist, was animated by Waco, and in fact blew up the federal building on the second anniversary of the fiery end of that standoff. McVeigh also had a foot in the neo-Nazi world, using the racist novel The Turner Diaries as the blueprint for his attack. Co-conspirator Terry Nichols, too, had deep roots in the radical right, renouncing his U.S. citizenship in 1992 and endorsing an array of Patriot theories first popularized by the racist Posse Comitatus in the 1980s. Today, the state of the Patriot movement can be discerned in many ways. Patriot periodicals have almost all lost circulation. Former colleagues are finding themselves on opposite sides as some militias adopt Identity theology and others try to maintain a "moderate" image. Virtually every week, more people involved in the movement are sent to prison for crimes ranging from illegal gun possession to such common-law tactics as filing false property liens and passing fake checks. Official crackdowns have militiamen and other Patriots in constant fear of informers. The Movement ‘Abandoned’ For years, Patriot heavyweights gathered twice a year in Shepherdsville, Ky., for the nearby Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot. Members of militia coalitions like the Third Continental Congress and the Southeastern States Alliance set up tents there and filled meeting halls. But divisions persisted and worsened. In the end, even the best-laid plans for pulling together a national or even regional coalition of Patriot groups could not survive the pettiness and power plays of the would-be rebels. Thousands still attend the Kentucky gun events. But at the most recent "shoot," there was virtually no antigovernment sentiment on display other than a sticker on a backpack that proclaimed its owner a "Militia Sniper" — a sticker that may well have been meant as a rhetorical jab rather than a boast. In a similar way, what were once billed as Preparedness Expos — events where survivalist goods were sold to Patriots fearful of "Y2K" disasters — are seeing far fewer Patriots. Reflecting the change in audience, the fairs were recently renamed Lifeline Expos. To some, it all amounts to a sad state of affairs. Norm Olson, a Michigan gun shop owner who began one of the earliest and largest militias, was spurned recently when he offered to bring armed Patriots to help defend Indianapolis Baptist Temple (IBT), which was about to be seized by officials for refusing to pay withholding taxes (see p. 49). "All day long I’ve heard reports that the IBT was seized," Olson wrote bitterly after federal agents finally moved in last February. "This is not true. The IBT was not seized or taken, it was given away… . t was abandoned by people who once swore that they would stand." Clearly, the Patriot movement is not what it once was; in fact, this particular expression of the American radical right is almost certainly fizzling. But that does not mean that radical antigovernment sentiment is going away. Antigovernment ideology has been with the United States since its founding, and it is certain to remain a permanent fixture in our culture. The only question is precisely what form the antigovernment extremist right will take in the decades to come. (remainder snipped) The takeaway on this is that most of these people who were so deeply involved with all the conspiracy stuff were, for the most part, wannabes. When it came down to it, they abandoned ship when the going got too tough for them. But what characterized them in general was a feeling of powerlessness that they are able to overcome through believing in a conspiracy to explain their personal lack. You still haven't shown me that TWI, in the field of conspiracies, that is any more serious than that. Did Wierwille spread conspiracy stuff? Of course. Did Wierwille teach it to people? Yup. Did people buy into it? Absolutely! Conspiracy theories are very compelling when you can't understand why things are the way they are. Did he stockpile weapons? Don't know, but in all likelihood yes...hunting weapons (show me some proof of .50 cal, RPG's, Claymores, and all the rest). Did he have people take survivalist training and have that kind of mentality? Sure. Absolutely. Again, it fits with his apocryphal vision [brought on, in large part, due to his Aryan theology, imho]. But did he stockpile heavy weapons? Prove it. Did he stockpile explosives? Prove it. Did he have terrorist plans for offensive operations? Prove it. I used to fly in black helicopters (you know, the ones the conspiracy nuts are talking about all the time). A conspiracy nut is one who believes the helicopter is being driven by a pilot with a mind-control chip embedded in his brain and whose hands are being tracked by the Bilderbergers. He believes the helicopter is swooping down to get an unarmed patriot out of his home and take him to a re-education center. Well, I used to fly in them... You want to tell me that Wierwille was a conspiracy nut? I will agree with you. You want to tell me that he tried to breed other conspiracy nuts through his teaching and practices? No problem. A conspiracy-driven terrorist is one who will believe the same thing as the conspiracy nut, but will try to shoot down the helicopter to save his neighbor. A plain-old terrorist is one who will use the conspiracy theory as his excuse to do damage and will try to encite the conspiracy nut into becoming a conspiracy-driven terrorist. 99.5% of conspiracy nuts are just that. .49% may be able to be turned into conspiracy-driven terrorists. .01% are just plain old terrorists. I have not read anything credible here or anyplace else that would place Wierwille and TWI in any other category than that of the simple conspiracy nut. My advice: if there's something there, great. But don't turn into a conspiracy nut through unraveling other conspiracy nuts. Said with all due respect, of course.

Well, I appreciate what you're saying here. Keep in mind that, as an innie, I had a security clearance above Top Secret and dealt with all sorts of good stuff that I can't even come close to telling you about. Shoot, as a fairly fresh outie, I was doing counterterrorism...and part of counterterrorism was providing support to other agencies in dealing with domestic incidents (like white supremicist groups). Galen, another poster here, was on a nuclear submarine -- as an innie. Now, I can't speak for anybody else here, but when I was an innie and dealt with civilian TWI folks, I would simply not tell them the specifics of what I was dealing with in my job. And they respected that (equating it to the lockbox principle). What you're saying is the equivalent to stating that a deeply committed Catholic should not be allowed to possess a clearance, because he might spill his guts during confession, or that he might have questions of whether to be loyal to the US or to the Vatican. Like it or not, there is freedom of religion in this country. And that includes the freedom to belong to a group like TWI, the moonies, hare krishna, or to David Koresh's group. For the most part, the government respects that -- and, all in all, that is probably a good thing. In fact, the government is not even permitted to ask you about your religious preference when filling out a security clearance background investigation form anymore (my last update was in 2003, so that is the timeliness of my information). Just because some (or even a plurality) of the leaders in an organization are corrupt and abusive, that gives nobody the right to tar everybody with that same brush. And, even in TWI, there were good people. I have not heard anybody say a bad word about Walter Cummins. Likewise with Joe Guarini. and quite a few others. That, in no way, excuses those who were bad. But it points out that people should be judged as people and not, automatically assumed to be wrong, just because they were in the same religion with somebody else who was wrong. Just because some (or even a decent percentage) of the followers in an organization gave up their will to think for themselves and subjegated their thoughts and their souls to a theology that demanded blind obedience doesn't mean that everybody did. I know of NO military person in my time in TWI who would have ever considered compromising his military commitment because of TWI. Not to say that this didn't happen, but I sure didn't witness any of that. (At the time, I was rather envious of those people who were able to go WOW or able to go in the Way Corps , but I couldn't -- because I had made a commitment that prevented me from doing so. That commitment probably kept me from going off the deep end -- because part of that commitment kept me as a professional and prevented me from totally selling out to, what I believed at that time, God). There were onsie-twosie departures all the time through the late 70s and 80s. And I seem to recall a rather large departure of Way Corps, along with rank-and-file believers in 1989, after the "loyalty letter" came out. Truly brainwashed zombies wouldn't have been able to make themselves depart like that. [Note: that is not to say that everybody who stuck around after the loyalty letter was a brainwashed zombie...please don't take it that way, all I'm saying is that if the membership was totally brainwashed, they would have 100% completely done whatever they were told, no matter how outrageous it was] I can't personally speak for anyody else who was military and TWI at the same time here, but I will tell you that I NEVER gave any classified information out nor was I asked. Had I been asked, I would have said no. Had the person asking pushed, it would have set up a conflict in me that would have resulted in my departure earlier than, in fact, happened. As I said, I can't personally speak for anybody else, but if I was to wager, I would wager that this would be the reaction of most. All I'm saying is that when you're making a broad-brush statement like: <i>But how in the world does a cultic TWI innie get clearance to be in the White House several days per week? </i>, you are not only accusing somebody who you really don't know, you are also accusing a bunch of us who were <i>cultic TWI innies</i>, had high security clearances, and did not compromise our commitment to our country as a result of our religious affiliation at the time. Maybe you ought to re-think the words you used to make that statement.

Why is that interesting? (Contracting – Alpha Contracting) -- Contracting - Statement of Objectives (SOO)NAVAIR Lcdr. Donald L. H**tig Predator Medium Altitude Endurance Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (PM-PS) Commander Naval Air Systems Command (Code 2.4.2.2.3) Bldg. 2272, Suite 256 47123 Buse Road Unit IPT, Patuxent River MD 20670-1547 (301) 757-5898 Fax: (301) 757-5955 E-mail address: LCDR_Donald_H**tig@peocu.navy.mil What is the name of your program? Predator Medium Altitude Endurance (MAE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Give a description of this idea and how it fits in the program: SOO Contracting is an extension of Alpha Contracting which involves the Government and the contractor jointly developing the Statement of Work (SOW). SOO contracting entails issuing the RFP with a Statement of Objectives (vice a SOW) which describes the objectives of the prospective contract. With the guidance of the Statement of Objectives the contractor is requested to develop a SOW. Similar to Alpha Contracting, in which the contractor and Government jointly develop the proposal, the contractor-prepared SOW is evaluated jointly by both contractor and Government for revision/refinement and inclusion in the contract. How is it innovative and creative? Typically, the Government provides a SOW to the contractor as direction for developing the proposal. Usually, several contentious issues emerge during the proposal preparation and negotiation contracting phases. These issues arise as a result of differing interpretations of SOW language. Consequently, several iterations of Government-contractor discussions are required to clarify each other’s position. With SOO Contracting, in contrast, contentious issues are minimized (if not eliminated) because the SOW is jointly developed. As a result, there are improved lines of communications and an improved proposal process. How has this new improvement been applied? SOO contracting is currently in process for two prospective contracts. What were the results and lessons learned in developing this improvement? Yet to be determined. What other information would help another program evaluate its applicability towards their program? The SOO contracting method is appropriate for both cost and fixed type contracts, however, it is best suited for R&D efforts where specific definition of effort is uncertain. Having the contractor and Government jointly develop the SOW is a communication tool that is beneficial for all proposed contracting efforts. Obviously, the guy works in the program office for the Predator, or he did 7 years ago. He was a Lt Cmdr, the equivalent to an Army, AF, USMC Major. That would place him at somewhere between 7 and 14 years time in service (probably over 10). In an officer's career path, they generally get stuck in a desk job pushing papers around that level of experience. If he did good, chances are that he would go to a small unit (batallion level) command stint on his next assignment. This document is the read-ahead for an acquisition reform conference, the type they have many times a year down in the Pentagon City/ Crystal City area. The tone of this document leads me to believe it was sort of a self-congratulatory conference where they were telling themselves how smart they were and how much money they've saved the Navy while, at the same time, making the Navy much more effective (yawn). There were a lot of conferences like that when they were self-affirming how smart they were in implementing Al Gore's re-inventing government measures. Your tax dollars at work. There's no news here. Just that he was stationed at Pax River 7 years ago and shuffled paper. Sorry.

The first name rings a vague bell. But that's about it.

I don't know how much covert military outreach there was. At least during the time I was in, it was pretty much out in the open. Maybe it was hidden during the 70s, before my time. The bit about the nice, friendly, pretty WOW girls was pretty much true. The fact that they wanted to recruit military folks was true. The fact that the traditional religious folk were not happy, because TWI was a cult, was true. But covert? Naw. In fact, I didn't hesitate too much from mentioning it even during security investigations (you have to list your memberships and affiliations on the background investigation form) -- and it never prevented me from having a clearance (e.g., TS), indoctrinations (e.g., SCI, COMSEC, etc.), or access to any programs (e.g., if I told you I'd have to shoot you). Just to keep things in perspective. Having said that, it may have been different during the '70s.

Sure, it says it in the Bible, but as with so many topics, TWI taught that part incorrecty, as well! 2Cr 6:3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed: 2Cr 6:4 But in all [things] approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, 2Cr 6:5 In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; 2Cr 6:6 By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, 2Cr 6:7 By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, 2Cr 6:8 By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and [yet] true; 2Cr 6:9 As unknown, and [yet] well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; 2Cr 6:10 As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and [yet] possessing all things. So how did TWI get that wrong: In verse 3, the word translated "offense" in the KJV is the Greek word "proskope" (from the word "proskopto", or to stumble). Proskope should be translated either "the event of stumbling," or "to do something to cause another to stumble." In verse 4, the word translated "approving" in the KJV is the Greek word "sunistao" (from the words "sun" (with) and "histemi" (stand)). Sunistao should be translated to stand with, to associate with, etc. In verses 6:5 - 6:7 all of the usages of both the words "in" and "by" (up through by the armour of righteousness) are all the greek word "en" (which implies a static remaining within). The next three usages of "by" (v7: by the armour of righteousness through v8: by evil report and good report) are the greek word "dia" (which implies a movement completely through). Here's another key one: verse 8: honour = docha -- meaning exulted, splendor (a noun) disnohour = atimia -- from 'time' (a = a negative, 'time' = value)...thus, one of no value (a noun) evil report = dusphemia -- meaning a defamation (a noun) good report = euphemia -- meaning a praise (a noun) as = hos -- meaning 'like' deceivers = planos -- an ADJECTIVE (note the words so far in this litany from v4 through v8 were NOUNS) -- planos means deceptive true = alethes (from lanthano, to hide...therefore a = not, lethes = hidden) -- another ADJECTIVE, meaning not hidden And so on. Don't want to spend all day on this. And I'm sure you don't want to spend all day reading it. The point is that the KJV, in its use of archaic English, does not convey an accurate translation for these modern days of the words. Verses three and four could easily and more accurately be understood as meaning: doing nothing to cause my brothers to stumble, that the ministry not be blamed, but in everything standing together as the servants of God -- and then go through the litany of contradictions contained in v4 - v10. But that's not how TWI handled that verse, was it? From what I've gathered here and what I've seen, apparently it was used to discount the ministry or its leadership taking the blame for anything.

Maureen,<br><br>I understand that tomorrow, Dec 23, is the 200th anniversary of Joseph Smith's birthday. I hope you enjoy whatever festivities your church has planned to mark the event!<br><br>For the rest (who are wondering what the heck I'm talking about):<br><blockquote><hr align='center' width=50%><table border=0 width=100%><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><td width="30%" valign="top"><img src="http://www.newhousenews.com/images/NNS_MORMONS_SMITH2.jpg" height=250><br><font size=1 face="arial"><i>A Book of Mormon and a pair of reading glasses rest on a table used by Joseph Smith during his time in Kirtland, Ohio. (Photo by Tim Harrison)</i></font><td colspan=2 valign="top"><font size=6 face="arial" color="000066"><b>Mormons Celebrate Two<br><br>Important Birthdays<br><br>This Month</b></font><font face="garamond" size=3 color="333333"><br><br><br><br>KIRTLAND, Ohio -- Anyone with a birthday close to Christmas will recognize the dilemma faced by leaders of two churches linked to the man they call the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr.<br><br>Smith, who is said to have discovered the Book of Mormon and while in northeast Ohio received revelations that remain effective for millions today, was born Dec. 23, 1805.</tr><tr><td colspan=3><font face="garamond" size=3 color="333333">Yet as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ, the former Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, celebrate the bicentennial of Smith's birth, they do so with some wariness that their reverence for Smith not be seen as taking away from their devotion to Jesus, whose birthday is celebrated two days later.<br><br>So here at the Historic Kirtland complex run by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Smith's portrait was taken down in the multipurpose room and replaced with an exhibit of Nativity scenes.<br><br>Up the hill, at the Kirtland Temple built by Smith and his followers while they were in Northeast Ohio, the Community of Christ plans no celebration on Friday. The major event will be a Christmas Eve service at the temple the next evening.<br><br>But that does not mean Smith no longer plays a meaningful role in the history of either church or in the lives of millions of Mormons worldwide.<br><br>In this bicentennial year of his birth, attendance rose from 96,000 in 2004 to an estimated 120,000 this year at the Historic Kirtland complex of buildings where Smith lived and is said to have received many of his revelations. The number of people visiting the temple rose 5,000 to more than 40,000, the largest number ever.<br><br>And on Christmas Eve, a new film about Smith produced by the Latter-day Saints will have its Ohio premiere at the Historic Kirtland Visitors Center. The 68-minute film, "Joseph Smith: The Prophet of the Restoration," will be shown for free at 90-minute intervals beginning at 9 a.m.<br><br>"The more I read and study the life of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the more reverence I have for him," said Walter Selden, president of the Kirtland Stake, or regional body, of the Latter-day Saints. "Joseph Smith had his faults, as we all do, but the honor and character and integrity of the man is undeniable."<br><br>It was in the 1820s that a farmer's son named Joseph Smith Jr. claimed to have been visited in a vision by the angel Moroni and led to a cache of golden plates that he later translated into the Book of Mormon. A church was formed in upstate New York in 1830 after the book's publication.<br><br>Not long after, following the success of missionaries in Northeast Ohio, Smith reported a revelation to move the church to Kirtland. Over the next seven years, the community grew from 1,120 to 3,230.<br><br>In Kirtland, leaders of the new church are said to have received 65 revelations from God and established the form of church government. In a remarkable show of faith for a small, relatively impoverished community, church members built a three-story "House of the Lord" that was one of the largest buildings in Northeast Ohio at the time. The Kirtland Temple is where Smith is said to have been personally handed down authority for his new church from the ancient prophets Moses, Elias and Elijah.<br><br>However, persecution of the new religious movement led Smith to take the church to Missouri and eventually to Nauvoo, Ill. Smith was killed by a mob in a Carthage, Ill., jail in June 1844.<br><br>After his death, Brigham Young led the main body of Latter-day Saints on a migration West, ending up in what is now Salt Lake City.<br><br>Several groups of Mormons stayed behind in the Midwest, and in the leadership void that existed, some appealed to Joseph Smith III, Smith's son, to become the new prophet. In 1860, Smith accepted that role, becoming the leader of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.<br><br>Both churches believe in modern-day revelations and accept the Book of Mormon as scripture, but they have substantial differences in theology and practice. In general, the Latter-day Saints are more conservative and literal in their interpretation of sacred texts and prophetic revelations.<br><br>In 2001, partly in an effort to more clearly establish its own identity, the Reorganized Church changed its name to the Community of Christ. The more missionary-oriented Latter-day Saints have grown to 12 million members, while the Community of Christ reports about 250,000 members.<br><br>The name change accelerated a trend among the two churches in recent years, replacing the hostility of the early days -- when each church was defining itself against the other -- with a spirit of cooperation.<br><br>"We're now different enough, with different enough missions, that we're comfortable with one another," said Lachlan Mackay, historic-sites coordinator at the Kirtland Temple.<br><br></tr><tr><td valign="top" colspan=2><font face="garamond" size=3 color="333333">"There's nothing but the warmest relationships." said Latter-day Saints Elder T. Bowring Woodbury, director of the Historic Kirtland Visitors' Center.<br><br>While both churches emphasize the central role of Jesus Christ in their theology, and are careful not to contribute to what they consider anti-Mormon stereotypes by putting Joseph Smith on a par with Jesus, Smith still holds great meaning for members of both groups.<br><br>Among Latter-day Saints, Woodbury said, "You cannot join the church without having a testimony, a deep belief, that No. 1, Jesus is the Christ, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that the Gospel was restored on this Earth."<br><br></td><td width=30% valign="top" colspan=1><right><img src="http://www.newhousenews.com/images/NNS_MORMONS_SMITH.jpg" height=188><br><font size=1 face="arial"><i>Lights illuminate the John Johnson Inn in Kirtland, Ohio, former residence of Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith Jr. The building is now a museum. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ are celebrating the bicentennial of Smith's birth Dec. 23. (Photo by Tim Harrison)</i></font></right></td></tr><tr><td colspan=3><font face="garamond" size=3 color="333333">And that respect for Joseph Smith is especially true for those people who live and work in the area where Smith struggled to build a church.<br><br>Mackay said it is easy for middle-class church members today to be desensitized to the needs of the poor and the oppressed.<br><br>He finds it helpful to remember that Smith and his followers -- facing persecution and living in hovels, shanties and small houses -- were able to accomplish great acts of faith and sacrifice even though they were part of the poor and oppressed of their time.<br><br>"We were the homeless," Mackay said. "That's the power of this story for me."<br><br>Dec. 21, 2005</font></td></tr></table><hr align="center" width=50%></blockquote><br>Original source <a href="http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/briggs122105.html">here.</a>

With due respect, I wasn't referring to your situation in any way shape or form. I do not know your situation and so would not presume to refer to it. I was also not attacking either of those two people. Had I done so, there would be no question about it. I sincerely regret any offense I may have personally caused you by providing some constructive, fraternal advice to some apparently very nice people who appear to want to provide some comfort.

Hey, CW...nice seein' your Avatar. Long time!

FWIW, let me add my two cents in on this for the benefit of Mary Poppins and Powerfilled... I appreciate your attitudes, first of all. People DO need to, at some point, move on with their lives and, for once and for all, put it in their pasts. I truly believe that forgiveness is a part of that. I truly believe that the perception of God's mercy to them is critical in allowing them to be healed sufficiently to finally forgive from their hearts. HAVING SAID THAT I see Greasespot as having a unique ministry. And yes, I meant ministry. A part of the healing process is going through the process of catharsis. Going through a grieving process for the part of their lives and the part of their families and friends and childrens' lives that were lost as the result of abuse at the hands of TWI and many who were in its leadership. Not all. But many. As you will see discussed on many, many other threads, the TWI cultus had its own complete culture: its own language, its own mores, norms of conduct, dogma, and so on. The only people who were completely versed in this culture were those who lived in it, as well. Although, at its peak, TWI was fairly big for a cult, out of a whole wide world, there aren't that many people who were in TWI. It would be rather difficult, in most places, to find a F2F support group of ex-Wayfers with whom you could vent. Venting to a person who had never been in TWI and was not immersed in the TWI culture would simply not be possible. If you talked about going duo on LEAD, you'd have to explain it...not just the meaning of the terms, but all the little innuendo that was associated with the terms. To most people, SIT means to place derriere on chair, not speak in tongues. And so on and so forth. So, in order to get that cathartic effect that is truly necessary as a part of their healing, they need to speak to somebody who actually understands what the heck they're talking about. Without that, a person can wander around in life thinking that he/she is the only one who feels hurt with nobody who could possibly understand what he/she has gone through for the past 5, 10, 20, 30 years of his/her life. And how could he/she have been so stupid as to have wasted that time and how could he/she have been so blind as to not see the signs and not have the wisdom to realize what was going on. Greasespot, to my understanding, is just about the only place where ex-TWI people can get together to vent. And it is UNIQUELY valuable for that purpose. There have been over a thousand people (maybe up to a couple of thousand) who have registered on this site. There have been several hundred who have, over a period of years, who have been regular posters on this site. Many have come, gotten the healing they sought, found the answers they sought, and then moved on. I can think of lots and lots of folks who have just moved on -- (Steve! and Cindy!, anybody). God bless them one and all! There are some who are provocoteurs who like criticizing anybody who dares say anything was amiss...there are people who have beliefs literally all over the spectrum. To assume that anybody here has a given belief is a very foolish mistake. But everybody is here for a reason. And they all have a reason to stick around. Or they move on. Mary Poppins/Powerfilled, I think that your philosophy about forgiveness is quite correct. Let me state that again. But you don't tell a woman who was raped by a man who allowed himself to be reputed as the modern-day version of the apostle Paul, or His Divinely Appointed Successor, that she needs to forgive her rapist. You don't tell a woman whose husband was so brainwashed that, when told by his leadership that he needed to divorce his wife in order to stay in that ministry, he took the leadership's advice, that she needs to forgive that leadership. You don't tell a woman who was told that it was God's will that she abort her child (and she did so and has been plagued with guilt ever since) to forgive the man of God who told her to kill her baby. And there are as many other stories as there are GS posters, but those three stories always stick out in my mind. Yes, objectively, for them to be healed completely, they need to do so. However, God's Divine Mercy needs to heal their hearts so that they will do so naturally. They may never be healed to the point of being able to finally let it completely go. That's not for me or for you to determine. It's your job to minister that Divine Mercy into their hearts so that they will, if God wills, be healed at some point in time. That, my friends, is the ministry of reconcilliation. Not just quoting a Bible verse to them that they know already, anyway. My point is that, while you should feel free to believe as you'd like and post whatever you'd like, the (correct) consensus around here is that folks need to have the chance to vent...and that venting serves a valuable purpose. Oh, yeah, back to the "ministry" comment I made: how do you think people FIND GSC? Most Google the place up and, when they read the stories of posters on here, they realize that they are not the only ones...and may realize that they may not have been the worst hurt. That's the other ministerial function. Only God knows how many people have been helped by this forum and by the main site. Many thousands could have gotten some form of deliverance who have never registered. There are guests on each thread all the time... Anyway, carry on.

Oldies: Thanks for that quote. I seem to remember reading or hearing that statement someplace but couldn't recall where. Having said that, yes, he should have sourced his quotes. Yes it is plagarism if data is not sourced properly. But, when asked about it, I am glad that he didn't say that it was all his original material. In that case, I'd say that it's more of a matter that he should have been more forthcoming and accurate in his writing than he was...

I absolutely LOVED that review (I guess not conspiratorial enough for the reviewer LOL) -- it is typical of some folks' attitudes: don't let facts get in the way of their opinions! (this is no reflection on the book...it was just my impression after having read the review)

Oldies: You aren't reading the reports properly. The first report was from Baltimore in 1977, where an individual (likely a walk-in) [call him subject-1] said that he was concerned about VPW making a bomb. He described the WOW field, size of TWI, and size of WOW festival in '77. The first report was from Guam, a couple of months later. This source [subject-2] was interviewed by NIS in the presence of another individual (perhaps his master chief). He discounted the info from the first person. Now, what it sounds like is the subject-2 was named by the subject-1 and that the subject-2 gave some additional information to substantiate his denial. The third report apparently has nothing to do with the first two (I may be wrong, there are still 109 pages to go LOL). But it appears that this source [subject-3] spoke to the NIS in New London Conneticut in 1979 (almost 2 years after the first two reports). This source was concerned that TWI was a mind control cult that was recruiting sailors from the base using female WOWs that tried to entice the prospective recruits with sex. Subject-3 was concerned that sailors, once recruited into TWI, would pose a threat to national security, because they'd be likely to reveal highly classified information to the cult's leadership (due to the brainwashing). He also identified that there were WOWs in Tampa doing the same thing as in New London. (Note: this could have possibly been worth a follow-up, since nuclear subs are homeported at New London and the headquarters of the US Special Operations Command and US Central Command are located in Tampa. And, after all, how would they know that TWI wasn't just a front organization for the Speznaz or KGB?). But the key point is -- don't make connections where none exist. And, unless jkboehme has a document to transcribe that shows a connection, there isn't much of a connection between the first two documents and the third document.

I read Walsh's book years ago. Interesting piece of work. Very conspiratorial. Yeah, Opus Dei is a real organization. Their website is here: http://www.opusdei.org/index.php?w=32 The chief thing I know about them is that they are extremely orthodox. (I would probably be considered a liberal compared to most Opus Dei folks :D -- and, believe me, I am no liberal). They believe in putting their faith in practice in everything they do (thus, the name: Opus Dei -- Work of God). As I am not a member of Opus Dei, I really am not in a position to comment directly **from the inside** in regards to anything they do. So I really wouldn't be able to answer any questions from personal knowledge. However, in regards to Walsh's book, one thing that I would say is that he puts together a conspiracy. Sort of similar to Dan Brown (Da Vinci Code). In other words, there may several factoids in the book. There may be a few fictions in the book. But I put the conclusions the book leads the reader to draw in the category of most conspiracy theories. But, having said that, as I recall it was a pretty decent read all in all.

Ran into this article about how St. Nicholas became Santa Claus and thought that some would enjoy reading it, while others would enjoy bashing it. Fun, either way. The source is here. How St. Nicholas Became Santa Claus: One Theory Jeremy Seal on an Epic History BATH, England, DEC. 20, 2005 (Zenit.org).- The modern persona of Santa Claus is a far cry from its origins: St. Nicholas, bishop of Myra. So how did he go from a charitable saint to an icon of Christmas consumerism? Travel writer Jeremy Seal embarked on an international search to answer that question and recorded his findings in "Nicholas: The Epic Journey from Saint to Santa Claus" (Bloomsbury". Seal told ZENIT what he discovered tracking the cult of Santa Claus across the globe and why he thinks St. Nicholas and his charism of charity still resonate today -- despite the commercialization of Christmas. Q: What inspired you to write this book? To what lengths did you go to research it? Seal: I was drawn to this subject because I have children of my own, two girls who were 6 and 2 when I started this project. They reminded me how significant a figure Santa is to children. I also was attracted to St. Nicholas because his story has an epic quality. I am a travel writer and was aware that in his posthumous evolution he made a strange journey from his beginnings in Turkey to Europe, Manhattan and the frozen north. I went to all the places associated with Nicholas' life. I began in Turkey where his original basilica stands in Myra, now Demre; followed his cult west to Bari, Italy, and north to Venice; then Amsterdam and plenty of other places in Europe; then on to Manhattan and eventually to Lapland in northern Finland and Sweden with my daughters last Christmas. Q: Who was St. Nicholas of Myra? Seal: We know very little about him. He was a fourth-century bishop of Myra, a town in southern Turkey now known as Demre. There are almost no references to his actual life except for a material reference in a sixth-century manuscript. We're left with an almost entirely posthumous St. Nicholas. But because he was such a success posthumously, it suggests something in his life must have commended him; we don't know much about him but get the sense that he was a special person. Nicholas seems to be a sensible person that made his name from giving material, practical assistance. That aspect has resonated through the ages because material assistance is something we all need and can relate to. Q: What are some of his most remarkable deeds? Seal: There are a whole range of stories, because he was unique in living a long life. During his time, most Christian saints were martyred, but Nicholas has lots of stories because he lived a long life and he died in his bed. You can select any number of stories about him, but most have in common his bringing help to people. There are endless stories of him saving sailors caught in storms off Myra. Once he persuaded the captain of a passing ship to bring his grain cargo to Myra where people were starving -- and the captain's cargo of grain was replenished. Some falsely accused soldiers awaiting execution saw him in a vision; Nicholas comforted them and brought about their release. When the idea of Nicholas reached Russia in the 11th century, a whole new range of stories popped up. Russians call him "ugodnik," which means "helper." In Russia, he helps in other ways: assisting shepherds in protecting their flock from wolves, protecting houses from being burned down, etc. Q: What obstacles did the cult of St. Nicholas face through the centuries? Seal: I think there are two particular areas. First, from the eighth century onward, the area where he began in southern Turkey was increasingly under threat from advancing Muslims, who didn't have much interest in him. Nicholas' relics were removed from Turkey in 1087 and were taken to Bari, Italy, which established him in Europe and allowed his cult to expand throughout the continent. It was an amazingly timely relocation because he was not to be marginalized in a future Islamic country; he could start again in Bari with a cathedral over his relics. Second, the Reformation swept across Northern Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries and downgraded the significance of saints. I think he survived that because he had become a figure that had moved beyond the Church -- he had become a cherished member of the home. Nicholas would come every Dec. 6 and bring gifts down the chimney to children in Northern Europe as early as the 14th century; he was popular and much loved. This seems to have given him and his cult a kind of resilience when elsewhere the images and statues of saints were being razed, burned or smashed. Q: How did he evolve into the present-day Santa Claus? Seal: The love of Nicholas kept his cult alive up until the late 18th century in Manhattan, where a re-versioning of Santa Claus occurred. The name "Santa Claus" is an American accented version of the Dutch "Sinterklaas." St. Nicholas and Santa Claus are the same person, but many people don't realize that. They are one in the same, but they look different because they are at different points in his posthumous evolution. We don't know when the idea was carried from Northern Europe to New Amsterdam, now Manhattan. It's safe to say he came with early settlers as a fake memory and was then dormant in North America until the late 18th century. What happened then was that gift giving, which had been until that time a local and seasonal exchange of homemade objects, exploded into something bigger. Mass manufacturing began, retail shops opened, toys became available from Northern Europe, and books, musical instruments and linens all became purchasable. The effect this had was that gift-giving customs were transformed out of all recognition. This caused the need for a providing spirit of gift giving. St. Nicholas was the gift giver from the old world in the Dutch and English traditions; they didn't have to think back too far to remember him. People in the late 18th century popularized the idea of Santa Claus, but not too deliberately at that time for commercialization. He began to emerge then and his name gradually changed into Santa Claus. In the 1820s he began to acquire the recognizable trappings: reindeer, sleigh, bells. They are simply the actual bearings in the world from which he emerged. At that time, sleighs were how you got about Manhattan. The poem "A Visit from St. Nicholas," also known as "'Twas the Night Before Christmas," debuted in 1822 and described all his details. He smoked a pipe then, but was well on the way to be the figure we know now. As all these elements took shape around him, he became more and more associated with commercialism, which is understandable but a corruption of what he originally meant. In the medieval period he was a symbol and icon of charity. I am not sure that is true anymore; he seems to be a strange mixture of charity and rampant commercialism. Q: What do you suggest faithful Christian parents tell their children about Santa? Seal: What I have tried to do by tracing Santa back to his origin is remind myself there is a real moral point to gift giving. St. Nicholas' point was helping people when they were in a spot. That is the lesson we can take out of this. Gifts just for the sake of giving to our loved ones who have enough may not reflect what St. Nicholas was all about. How to frame questions about the significance of this man to children, I do not know. I am a lapsed Anglican, but I find St. Nicholas fascinating from the intellectual and moral points of view. I love the wonderful moral material that he stands for, his active charity. St. Nicholas appeals to anyone with any moral basis; no belief system can disagree with what he stands for. He speaks to everyone because so much theology can be complex, but he and his stories are simple. I think that is why they have resonated for hundreds of years and why they had evolved into this family rite we practice with Santa Claus today. When my family lived in a little town in Northern Italy, we used to enjoy St. Nicholas' Day, Dec 6, as part of the lead-up to Christmas. During the evening of that feast day, a man dressed up as St. Nick would walk through town and distribute candy to all the little children in town. Yes, he wore red. No, he was not fat. Part of the tradition in many places had children leaving their shoes out overnight and they'd be filled with treats. Some more on St. Nicholas (note: all of the historic data should be taken as legend -- may be true, may be stories, built on the truth): Bishop of Myra in Lycia; died 6 December, 345 or 352. Though he is one of the most popular saints in the Greek as well as the Latin Church, there is scarcely anything historically certain about him except that he was Bishop of Myra in the fourth century. Some of the main points in his legend are as follows: He was born at Parara, a city of Lycia in Asia Minor; in his youth he made a pilgrimage to Egypt and Palestine; shortly after his return he became Bishop of Myra; cast into prison during the persecution of Diocletian, he was released after the accession of Constantine, and was present at the Council of Nicaea. In 1087 Italian merchants stole his body at Myra, bringing it to Bari in Italy. The numerous miracles St. Nicholas is said to have wrought, both before and after his death, are outgrowths of a long tradition. There is reason to doubt his presence at Nicaea, since his name is not mentioned in any of the old lists of bishops that attended this council. His cult in the Greek Church is old and especially popular in Russia. As early as the sixth century Emperor Justinian I built a church in his honour at Constantinople, and his name occurs in the liturgy ascribed to St. Chrysostom. In Italy his cult seems to have begun with the translation of his relics to Bari, but in Germany it began already under Otto II, probably because his wife Theophano was a Grecian. Bishop Reginald of Eichstaedt (d. 991) is known to have written a metric, "Vita S. Nicholai." The course of centuries has not lessened his popularity. The following places honour him as patron: Greece, Russia, the Kingdom of Naples, Sicily, Lorraine, the Diocese of Liège; many cities in Italy, Germany, Austria, and Belgium; Campen in the Netherlands; Corfu in Greece; Freiburg in Switzerland; and Moscow in Russia. He is patron of mariners, merchants, bakers, travellers, children, etc. His representations in art are as various as his alleged miracles. In Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, they have the custom of making him the secret purveyor of gifts to children on 6 December, the day on which the Church celebrates his feast; in the United States and some other countries St. Nicholas has become identified with Santa Claus who distributes gifts to children on Christmas eve. His relics are still preserved in the church of San Nicola in Bari; up to the present day an oily substance, known as Manna di S. Nicola, which is highly valued for its medicinal powers, is said to flow from them. Priest. Abbot. Bishop of Myra, Lycia (modern Turkey). Generous to the poor, and special protector of the innocent and wronged. Many stories grew up around him prior to his becoming Santa Claus. Some examples: - Upon hearing that a local man had fallen on such hard times that he was planning to sell his daughters into prostitution, Nicholas went by night to the house and threw three bags of gold in through the window, saving the girls from an evil life. These three bags, gold generously given in time of trouble, became the three golden balls that indicate a pawn broker's shop. - He raised to life three young boys who had been murdered and pickled in a barrel of brine to hide the crime. These stories led to his patronage of children in general, and of barrel-makers besides. - Induced some thieves to return their plunder. This explains his protection against theft and robbery, and his patronage of them - he's not helping them steal, but to repent and change. In the past, thieves have been known as Saint Nicholas' clerks or Knights of Saint Nicholas. - During a voyage to the Holy Lands, a fierce storm blew up, threatening the ship. He prayed over it, and the storm calmed - hence the patronage of sailors and those like dockworkers who work on the sea. Again, although St. Nicholas was a historic figure, let me stress that the stories attributed to him are LEGEND. But it is interesting when one looks at the legendary tales surrounding our modern-day Santa Claus to see from where they originated. But most importantly, Merry Christmas, all!

The principal concern that I had seen was with connections between domestic groups and overseas groups, where the overseas groups might use the domestic groups as facilitators to import and use WMDs. Having said that, I didn't see such a connection made involving right-wing militia groups at all. (At the time, the principle concern in this area was a left-wing group in the states having contact with a group overseas that was a front for the Speznaz -- when I was working that stuff, it was long before the OKC bombing) But keep in mind that there are a lot of people who talk really "big" and this is not to say that somebody might not have heard rumors within TWI that they might not have boasted about something that had no basis in reality (of course, we all KNOW that nobody in TWI exaggerated at all, now don't we? :blink: ) and a person, hearing it for the first time, may have taken it seriously and then done his/her civic duty and reported it to the FBI. If the FBI gets any kind of word on this type of subject, they are going to check it out -- they have to -- if, for no other reason, to verify that it isn't credible. According to the message you extracted, that was the conclusion -- that the report was found to be not credible. Now apparently you have 111 more pages of FOIA'd documents: if there is something of interest in any of those other pages, I'd be happy to see it..

Suggest you review some of the threads previously discussed on the topic: The Thirteenth Tribe 1978 - The Current Psychological Hoax 1976 Corps Meetings VPW - A Patton Wannabe As for the subject matter expert on that topic, I would refer you to Sunesis.

If it's a problem, they could update the robots.txt file to block the crawlers from getting data.

Evan/Rascal, If you actually look at the verses that Oldies quoted from that PFAL segment, above, you note a few interesting things. Romans 10:17 -- The word "word" is the word "rhema" versus "logos" (if you look at the usages of the two words, rhema emphasizes the "utterance" of the word vice the "content" of the word) The word "God" is, in almost every critical text, the word "Christos" (in fact, I believe that the majority of modern translations use the phrase "word of Christ" versus the "word of God") Romans 10:9 -- Both of the words "confess" and "believe" are in the aorist tense and the subjunctive mood. That dramatically changes the way that the English should be translated. It is a rather dramatic contrast to the future indicative use of the word "saved." (the aorist is "typically" translated into English as the simple past) Secondly, if one was to look at the context throughout Romans 9:3ff, one can clearly see that the Apostle is speaking to the Israelites and that their salvation comes through trust in God and not through the empty works of the Mosaic law. Looking at the section in context, it is clear that the Apostle is making the statement that if they have confessed the Lord Jesus and they have believed that God raised Him from the dead, they will be saved in the future (kept, reserved, remembered), as opposed being saved, kept, reserved, remembered as the result of the fulfillment of the Mosaic law (which Christ fulfilled by the sacrifice of Himself as the Lamb of God). Yeah, Evan, it is amazing how VP ended up teaching that one...

Sorry for the bad link. The site is: www dot pe sh it ta dot org (the filter kills the name. Replace the "dot" with . and remove all the spaces and it will work for you.

David, Interesting thing you bring up. The relationship with Ps 22 is, in addition to what CES is teaching, also what the Catholic Church teaches about this, as well. Here's another interesting thing: if you take a look at an online Pesh itta interlinear of Matt 27 (available here, you'll note that it says in v 46 "why have you spared me?" in the literal English. Now, literally the only TWI books I have kept were the Aramaic Interlinears and concordance. So I pulled them out for grins...and guess what: they say the same thing! "why have you spared me?" So, again just for grins, I pull out my Lamsa Bible (all from Aramaic): and you know what it has for Ps 22:1? "My God, my God, why hast thou let me to live?" (sort of sounds like "spared me," huh?) Thought you'd find that interesting... Oh, and btw, I have little or no use for CES, but when they've got it right, they've got it right! Hat tip to them!

Good summary. The crazy part about it is how long those thought processes keep working even after we've departed TWI.

Thanks for the very kind words. I placed Allan on 'ignore' a long time ago because of posts like the one you quoted...and the fact that he apparently feels forced to comment any time I say something about the Catholic Church (I think he is horrified by the fact that somebody on his discussion forum is not ashamed to be in that Church and is compelled to attempt to purge his board from impurities like me). The fact that you simply say been there, done that, not interested, thanks... is laudable. And I appreciate it. David, I am not asking you to agree with Catholic doctrine. I am not asking you to agree with Catholic practices. I am not asking anybody to do so. And I am certainly not asking you or anybody else here who's an ex-Catholic to ever set foot in a Catholic church, much less to revert back to the Faith. As I' e said on other threads, are you doing something that works for you...that is bringing you into a closer relationship with God...great. I believe a key function of the Church Universal (i.e., that made up of ALL Christians) is to reveal Christ and to help is the formation of man into conformance with Christ. If what you're doing helps you in that fashion better than something else you've done, including the Catholic church, I'm very happy for you. The only reason why I even mentioned the fact that I am Catholic, much less speak in positive terms of it, is that I finally got sick of Catholic-bashing (a la Allan) that was based on patently false information. I realize that the vast majority of people here do not agree with Catholic doctrine. Whether ex-Catholic or not. And I realize anything I say is not going to alter anybody's opinion one way or the other. Fine. But I would rather them not agree with what actually is Catholic doctrine rather than with something they were taught by a Protestant was Catholic doctrine. If they are going to disagree with Catholic practices (the liturgies, etc.), fine. But I would prefer them to be in disagreement about something that actually happens, vice something that has no resemblence to any church I've ever set foot in. Frankly, I have a lot of disagreements with things that happen in individual churches myself...and if somebody wishes to disagree with some news element or some politics involving the US Catholic bishops, they'd better be careful...because I'd likely agree with them. However, I will make sure that FACTS are available for consideration. Anyway, I do appreciate your constructive comments. The fact that you, in no uncertain terms, have no interest whatsoever in ever returning to the Catholic Church, but are able and willing to do so, repeatedly, without insulting Catholics, is a class thing to do and is appreciated.

Belle, Thanks for the kind words

LG, I don't...it's just another in a succession of bizarre things that we see in the public schools these days e.g., banning Christmas. e.g., female teachers who can't their hands off the kids (so commnplace that it will soon cease to be news anymore) e.g., zero tolerance rules taken to ridiculous ends (kid expelled for weapons violation -- put earring in ear: http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=2579621) e.g., note my comments at the bottom of this story: and she's a special ed teacher? As I said, just more bizzareness!