Ham

I'm glad you appreciate that.. :)

so.. what's the consensus.. or conclusion here? let me say this *nicely* as I possibly can.. You've had your.. what would I call it.. kumbaya moment, around the camp fire.. what about the rest of us? (or more specifically, me..) I'm left with the image of a God who will heal and love unconditionally.. on one hand.. and then on the other hand, turn around and abuse, rape and pillage.. I laugh.. because that's all I can do. it's far beyond any kind of logic, or logical conclusion I have any possibility of arriving at... and mr. socksie thought I was just making fun of Linda.. it's just a tad bit more than that.. but don't worry.. my spirituality does not depend on you.

da way needs to do something to get them back.. gotta keep up with the neighbours.. maybe they need to put out better feed.. maybe they don't like the stench of loy's materials..

I hear the spirits are migrating by droves to surround a little known, insignificant farm in rural Mississippi..

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.. it was more than that I believe.. around here, I know people who were kicked out.. not because they HAD said problems, but simply because they had the potential of developing them.. they were as loyal as the winter is long in Michigan.. did the "trustees" really BELIEVE loy's madness? And staff. especially rosie, did she sincerely believe the insane mandates, or did she go along for corporate reasons? No matter how one looks at it.. it was systematic.. 1. Remove any high end staff who would not knee jerk at loy's request.. 2. remove those who would not completely comply.. 3. and when it came to the local scene.. a duplication of 1 and 2, but remove those who: a. presented a possible threat b. were a liability (sick, nuts, etc) c. those who could POSSIBLY turn into said liability or threat.. d. those who they.. just could not figure out.. at least that's my perception..

at the best.. I feel *they* built an organization on the backs of individuals whom they could not REALLY trust.. that includes me.

so.. what is the financial cost of a background check? I think it starts at fifty bucks.. and it only works for the most part if the volunteer isn't giving you an alias.. figure.. maybe at the most. five to ten thousand volunteers in the organization.. how else can they describe twiggies and such? It's a non profit organization.. supposed to provide some kind of service..and there are no members.. just "volunteers".. I really don't think they felt they were obligated to pay the bill.. maybe there were insurance requirements.. who knows.. that's why I started this thread.. somebody knows more than me I'm sure..

Yes.. I agree entirely.. that was the reason given.. but I think the motive was far more "secular".. or at least I am exploring that explanation.. it makes far more sense to me at the moment..

twi has followed the austerity cries of the rest of corporate america.. and it is PURELY "senses knowledge".. now I think they have followed the path of volunteer organizations.. I BET they perform background checks of possible marks (ahem, volunteers) nowadays.. to do so, with an existing organization of thousands of marks (ahem.. volunteers) would prove to be an administrative nightmare.. just a few thoughts..

I was looking at a FEMA course.. actually several the last couple of weeks. one of the statements stood out to me. It was in a course about developing a volunteer organization. "How to avoid litigation?" The answer was.. "train your volunteers WELL.." that's about the only chance a volunteer organization has..

dont' knock it too much.. sometimes that's all I've got.. kinda pathetic though.. over twenty some years involvement with "da WORD as it hath not been known since the earth cooled".. and that's about all I've got..

Right.. I agree. But I am considering that the motives for the "directives" from upper "leadership" to do so, were purely administrational.. purely "business".. they'd already had at least one (or more) *ministers" on charges for various nasty acts.. you'd think they would have known before it even happened.. so much for "discerning of spirits" or something..

The hardest part is reconciling the two often far removed but equally valid experiences.. and I meant no offense to Linda Z..

maybe its just me.. but why did they purge people who seemed (to them) just a little "funny"? I really think.. it wasn't "personal".. it was just business..

Perhaps that explains it.. but really.. the only group they seem to lreally isten to is court and lawyers.. if there were no liability, the loyster would still be busy in the twi oval office of sorts.. lack of liability appears to be the path of least resistance.. maybe there's nothing to this.. but who knows..

And I think I got the answer.. or maybe part of it. Liability. an organization can be responsible for the actions of volunteers. And we were volunteers. I think it was a PURELY corporate decision.. most volunteer organizations around here perform a background check of sorts.. whether one is criminal, has a history of drug or sex offenses, etc. I think because of decades of loose, slip -shod work, to get a hold on accountability, it would have been an administrative nightmare.. the solution? Send the volunteers off for a myriad of "spiritual" reasons.. what do you think?

a side note.. these were the "kind" of people (volunteers) twi shaved from their ranks around here in the nineties.. and I don't have an agenda. It's an honest observation.. those who are left, with MAYBE one exception.. would not give one the time of day..

what do you suggest we put out in the feeder for them.. the spurits, that is?

"Ambition".. that's it. I don't know why.. there's this five minute delay for this one word...

Maybe it's just the almighty.. no matter how evil, arrogant, criminal.. abusive or such a man can choose to be.. "by gawd.. nothing I make can be ENTIRELY useless.." like Capone.. didn't do much to fix his reputation in history, but he DID feed a few hungry people in Chicago..

if it makes any difference.. I'm not making fun of your "side of the str-ee" linda. It''s my perception of it, considering what I've come to learn of the vicster's character. 1. I am taking you at your word.. that it ACTUALLY happened.. 2. Now add the vicster's documented non-ethical, non christian behavior.. and I say.. if the almighty wants to strap a large encumberances on a lead brick to make it fly.. so be it.. I've seen similar dealings with certain people.. sycophants take a five minute break from obnoxious selfishness, greed, arrogance, and unbridled.. what's the word, it'll come to me five minutes after I post this.. but take a momentary break from all that, and actually compassionately help another individual.. so no. I am not laughing at *you*, if it makes any difference..

and I'm not minimizing your personal experience either. The freakish (not as in being a freak.. freakish as in rare as raining cows in a thunderstorm instead of rainwater or something) occurrence would not be unlike Him forcing a known hoodlum, murderer and psychopath to take a five minute break, and open soup kitchens and give away free coffee and doughnuts.. It DID happen.. I've had the same kind of "freakish occurrence" happen as well.. imagine, in a time of economic downturn, technology jobs going away.. universities making drastic budget cuts.. a university actually PAYING a scruffy middle or past aged Squirrel to teach math, and throw in free graduate classes to boot.. does anyone else see the humor in this?

I dunno.. maybe God was bored that day.. been too easy and routine to send a *real* minister to do the job.. I might be laughing.. but Linda, in all sincerity..I think the almighty loves you enough he made a lead dump truck fly for you that day..

"God USED him.." it's like something I heard from some guy in the air force.. enough hardware, and even a lead brick can fly..

I think it's an apt description.. I don't think the vicster was a prophet or anything.. but it's pretty similar.. such a dullard, he wouldn't get it if his donkey took up ta few issues with him..