Suda

dmiller, Very apropos. Suda

Great prose and very apt and humorous response. Suda Great prose and very apt and humorous response. Suda

Not at all, Groucho. I understand that when people are passionate about a subject and trying to be heard it can call for brutal honesty. Sometimes that is received differently than it was intended. Sometimes people can get carried away and cross the line from civility to name calling, and feel that it is necessary to get someone's attention. I have no control over other people's actions - nor do I desire such control. But I do have control over my reactions and how I choose to deal with them. If the "playing field" is too much for me, I can choose to sit in the bleachers, go to the snack bar, or hang out in the parking lot chatting with friends. I don't like being bullied, and when I feel like that is happening, I can walk away. People don't need to change to please me. I can choose who I hang out with, and excuse myself when I don't like their current attitude. And I can rejoin the group when it's settled back down and more to my pleasing. Some of my favorite posters here hold very different opinions from me. And I think that's why I enjoy them so much. They challenge me to think. You and Oakspear both fall into that category. I may not like all you have to say, nor the way in which you say it from time to time, but I still like hearing what you have to say. You are both fine folks in my book. Suda

Sarah Jessica Parker knitting, stitch tee shirt Serendipity? Suda

Good edge-of-your-seat chiller thriller. Might want to check it out sometime if you like that kind of movie. Suda

To me, GSC is the juke-and-jive joint a couple of miles out of town on the road from “here to there”. Parking lot full of Harley’s, pick-em-up trucks, sports cars, sedans, WOW-mobiles, even a couple of mini-vans - kinda looks like a used car lot offering a bit of everything. Inside you can find a seat in one of a variety of different places. Saddle up to the bar on a stool; grab a booth on the periphery; take a seat at one of the tables in the center; go listen to the live music, or sit near the juke box and choose your favorite songs, old or new; grab someone for a spin around the dance floor; or venture back into the pool room if you’re looking for real excitement and ready for a brawl. You see old friends and meet new ones. Depending upon your mood, you may stay put in one place tonight, or you may enjoy meandering around, enjoying the ambiance and flavor of each section. Fun place grab your morning cup of coffee, or enjoy your lunch away from the office, or come and relax after a long day, whether it was good or bad or neutral. You can always find engaging conversation on just about any topic, some lighthearted, other more serious. People know where you came from, can understand why you think and feel the way you do, and accept and appreciate you for being you. If you need help with a problem, someone’s there to lend an ear, a helping hand, and a shoulder to cry on. If you want to celebrate, they always welcome a round for the house. If you just want to chill, this is the place to be. It’s a comfortable place where you like to hang out. Sometimes you stay for just a bit, other times they have to kick you out when it’s time to close, or direct you to the cots in the back if you have nowhere else to go. Relax, prop your feet up, and rest awhile. Y’all come back again, ya hear?

Actually, I believe that the VP apologist/defender label is used primarily for those who dismiss or minimize Wierwille's abuses because they got some goodies. I don't believe that I've ever seen you do that. Others have. I’ve only made it through page 10 of this thread, and will be reading through more if it as time allows over the weekend. At that time I may see the apologist/defender attitude you speak of. As I have not yet spent time reading the comments on threads concerning those abused, I have not seen that attitude displayed to date. But I have heard often that it exists, so expect I will see some this weekend. I have no problem with people acknowledging or commenting on my beliefs that there were many good things taught in PFAL or that I give due respect and thankfulness to VPW as teacher of that class. If I were ashamed of my opinions or felt they were wrong, I certainly would not be so free post them, but rather would be in the process of changing them to something I felt confident about and comfortable with. Your wording, “if others call you that”, call me a contentious name, it indicates that those others are unwilling to treat my opinions with respect or courtesy. Instead of an acknowledgment that we have differing opinions and making a civil effort to “agree to disagree”, my opinions are castigated as being faulty, askew, counterfactual, erroneous, fallacious, inaccurate, misguided, perverse, spurious, unsound, or unsatisfactory. And, yes, those adjectives may be apt descriptions of how many view my opinions. But to give me a hostile, antagonistic label is to say I am “guilty” versus “differing”. One is a callous accusation, the other is a civil pronouncement. One is intolerant, the other tolerant. One infers my comments are unwelcome, unwanted, and unacceptable; the other says they invited, worth consideration, and admissible although they differ from the mainstream. But when viewed in the light that the mission of the GSC is to provide information that tells the other side of the story about the Way International and it's trustees, with no purpose stated on how that information is to be used, the rules of the "playing field" are a bit ambiguous. It would appear I am on the wrong “playground” and, unless I wish to keep silent on the subject, I should expect to be bullied rather than treated with civility. And if civility is not extended, the message is “pack your toys and go home”. I was strongly encouraged/persuaded to come visit this “playground” because I would find many different viewpoints (some similar to mine, some very different) so that I could be exposed to the “whole story” of twi. Being a good sport, I ventured over here, and have learned a lot, but my basic beliefs have not changed. It would appear that as I have “not come to my senses”, seen the folly of my beliefs, and joined the other team, I am fair game for name calling and derision. And it begins to feel like that is just a continued effort by the “other team” to beat me down, show me how “stupid” I am, and get me to change my mind. I guess if I’m to continue here, I’d better go sit on the bleachers in the “Visitors Section”. There I can cheer for my team, as well as say, “Man, what a pretty play! Sure wish our team had made it! Can’t help myself from applauding that player even if he is on the opposing team." I prefer being in an environment where an attempt is made to value everyone and enjoy the diversity, versus one of prejudice and intolerance. And sometimes it feels exactly like that around here. Perhaps I’m just a “sissy” and not capable of playing with the “big boys”. Suda (not trying to whine, just clearly express myself)

The mission also begs the question, FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I would think it would include (1) to aid in the healing and recovery process for those who have left and have wounds or scars (2) to expose the "true" identity of twi as a decision making aid to those thinking of making or breaking an affiliation with the organization. Is there a purpose for those who left and have no scars or wounds they are seeking and/or needing help in healing/recovery process? Is this an appropriate forum for them? What purpose could/should they serve? Input is welcomed. Suda

Corrina, Corrina Joan Cusasck Arlington Road

Sounds interesting. Keep me posted, please, if you think I'd be of benefit to your endeavor. Suda

Quite a remark. Could be taken so many different ways. Wonder how you meant it. Funny list, herbiejuan. Thanks for the chuckles. Much prefer that to a grimace. Suda

No idea, will be interesting to see the answer. So sorry I missed my cue to post - been pretty busy lately. Glad y'all kept it going! Suda

Drumroll . . . . Yes, you're up, George! Suda

Suda The simple answer to that question can be found by clicking on the "About us" on GreaseSpot's homepage: "Our mission is to provide information that tells the other side of the story about the Way International and it's trustees." I disagree with you there. Not that these labels aren't used pecipitously at times, but my observation is that those newbies who "uses some “Way Speak” verbiage and hits the hot buttons of “good associated with PFAL” and “due respect accorded to vpw as teacher of PFAL”, get tarred and feathered and labelled predominantly when they make a judgement against those of us who have no use for Wierwille and PFAL, or offer some "helpful" advice about how we should "get back to the Word", or move on or be positive or whatever, with no consideration as to why we feel the way we do, and with the condescending attitude that we have somehow "lost our way". Excellent points, well made, and well received. Many thanks Groucho and Oakspear. Suda

Okay, enough time has passed to make it worth my efforts. Let the guessing begin (although I know at least three of you have already solved it! :)) Suda

Thanks Dooj and Deciderator. And Dooj, Me thinks your right! Suda

Page 4 - What’s Happening in this thread? (Page 1 is post #874 on page 44 of this thread, Page 2 post #891 on page 45, Page 3 post #893 on page 45) Differing points of view, Preconceived Ideas, Individual Freedom of Choice, Due Respect The food fight continues, with each side trying to explain more fully their side of the picture - to make it plain and simple enough so that any reader can understand what they are saying and see where they are coming from. But this seems impossible, as posters seem to want to stick with their preconceived ideas about the other’s thoughts, rather than try to hear what the other is saying. Let me give an example here that has applied here as well in many other threads. When a new poster comes along, uses some “Way Speak” verbiage and hits the hot buttons of “good associated with PFAL” and “due respect accorded to vpw as teacher of PFAL”, they are pigeon-holed as a “pfal/twi/vpw” fan/lover/defender/apologist. And it’s a one-size-fits-all suit they are visualized as wearing, no room for individual variations on the theme, so to speak. “Oh, here’s another newbie we have to rescue and re-teach. He likes pfal so he obviously is unaware that there are errors in it due to vpw twisting scriptures to cover his a$$ to justify his vile, evil lifestyle that hurt and decimated so many. He must believe every word was God-breathed and obviously has no ability to search the scriptures himself, or he would realize all the bunk in pfal. He thinks PFAL and twi teachings = The Word = the Bible. He is incapable of seeing the differences; thinks they are all the same. And since he gives due respect to vpw as the teacher, poor kid, he still respects, admires, and trusts vpw and still sees him sitting on a pedestal. Still sees him as that kind grandfather who only wants the best for his kids. Man, we gotta set him straight.” Where do I get that idea? From many posts on this thread, and very succinctly stated by WordWolf’s post #103 on page 6 But what has Deciderator stated from the beginning? Do his words fit this mold? Not from what I read. (I have strung fragments of different posts together and put in highlights.) See, he believes some of PFAL, has set aside some of PFAL, and has continued his personal study completely away from PFAL. And I don’t see where Gartmore or other twi-splinters are his only outside sources. He does not specifically state what other avenues he has explored, nor does he specifically state all avenues were spin-offs of twi. But I get the feeling from his posts that he has explored well outside the realms of anything even vaguely associated with twi. Could be wrong, just my impression, as he does not specify. And yet, in a later post Waysider again asks Deciderator never said that. He did say that “It’s the Word, the Word, and Nothing but the Word” was his favorite one-liner and that the greatest gem he received from pfal was how to study the word for himself. Taking the PFAL class in many ways is analogous to going on a mining expedition. We were presented with lots of information during that 36 hour period. It would be impossible for the average person (like me) to be able to grasp and retain all that information overload in one sitting, or even several. But I sifted through what was being presented, and at least once, usually quite a few times during a night, nuggets of gold or gems would shine, and I would grab them and put them in my pocket (brain). For instance with the law of believing, and what’s available, etc. related to believing for one’s health (and I may be mixing sessions up, but this is what I relate to that session today - what has stuck in my brain), two verses stand out in my mind. I had never heard 3 John 2 prior to PFAL “Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.” Nor had I heard Psalms 116:15 explained that “precious” meant “costly”. I had often heard about God making you sick to make you humble, that people died because God was bringing his precious child home, and such things, but I never believed them to be true. They just didn't line up with what my gut told me about a loving God. Man, those two verses were an epiphanies to me! And they helped me greatly in my prayer life when I would be sick, knowing that God did not “curse me with sickness” and that healing and deliverance could happen. But most of the other stuff about the law of believing I never accepted as truth. A law is absolute, happens every time. But people die every day, even if they pray to be healed or others pray on their behalf. Granting prayer is God’s business, praying is my business, but I was thankful to know God preferred me to be in health rather than sick. The silver lining to me of being exposed to the bogus teaching of the law of believing, was that it spurred me to research it on my own, to saturate myself in the subject, and then come to my own conclusions about it, and have confidence in what I believe. So yes, I appreciate these two gems I learned in PFAL, but that’s about all I’ve kept out of that whole section of teaching. I kept much less than I discarded. Just as a miner keeps only the “good stuff” he finds, and leaves the piles and piles of stuff he had to sift through behind him. But because I kept two gems, am I now a “law of believing” fan/lover/apologist/defender? I don’t think so. And because I mined numerous gems in PFAL, does it mean I’m a PFAL fan/lover/apologist/defender? I am a fan and a lover of parts of it, but I do not consider myself an apologist nor a defender, because I readily point out the errors and make no bones that some scriptures were twisted and misapplied. Do I think the PFAL class is valuable? Am I glad I sat through it a number of times? Would I encourage others to take it if and only if I had the opportunity to sit with them and advise them of the parts that I disagree with and let them feel free to ask questions about anything that didn’t sit well with them? Yes. Why? Because to date I have not found another source or package that presents the wealth of information found in PFAL. In fact, I sat with my son as he took it several years ago. And every night he had questions for the instructor/class leader that were answered in straightforward, honest terms, and he and I had discussions about what we liked and disliked, agreed/disagreed with, etc. He, too, gained a lot from the class, but has discarded and forgotten the portions he did not feel were relevant. The scriptures alone speak volumes. And pointing out the misapplication and misinterpretations is not difficult. And like I said, some of the discarded portions were excellent jumping off points for things I wanted to study, so in that way, they were of benefit, also, even though I came to very different conclusions regarding the subjects. The choice is not between liking all or liking none of pfal. The choice between what to hold on to, and what to discard. It’s not all good, or all bad; it’s a mixture. And, in my opinion, it’s worth sifting through the sand and rubble to mine the gems. Ever go to a party and meet someone new and from their vocabulary in their conversations decide “Hey, bet they are in the legal field, or the health care field” or something like that? Happens to me often, and just as often they confirm my suspicions without me ever having to ask. Their profession will come up in conversation. I find it’s also true that clergy and very active lay people incorporate a lot of Bible speak or religious speak into their conversations. Why? Because that’s where their “head” is most of the time, at work and at home, since they most often choose books, movies, etc. to enjoy in their off-time that compliments their interests. And much of their verbiage sounds a lot like Way Speak to me. Deciderator professes that his passion is studying the scriptures. So it seems very natural and logical to me that his vocabulary will contain a lot of Bible-type speak, much that is similar to our way days. Yet, I don’t consider him to be a “twit-head” or “still brainwashed” or “Way brained”. But it seems others may draw that conclusion. As for those he claim his adulation of vpw, it contradicts what he has said. He was accused of wanting to cover up the sins of vpw. Sounded to me like he just felt no need to uncover them any further himself as the gist of the abuse threads was clearly summarized here. He never denied they happened. He gave real insight into why he felt no need to wade through them, put himself in the place of judge or jury, and come up with his guess of guilt or innocence for each accusation. This is probably why he seems to have a real distaste for accusations without the other person being allowed to present their side. And that can never happen with vpw since he’s dead. And in the absence of a “legal, guilty” verdict, he is not going to pass judgment on the man on each thing he has been accused of. Knowing the basics of the facts seems to be sufficient for him to believe vpw did indeed act in a sexually reprehensible manner and inflict great harm on others; he does not need to read the details for further “evidence”. He states he knew to expect like things from powerful, charismatic men. And though he does not say “like vpw” it is inferred. I think people get tripped up on the little word IF. In responding to Rascal he says Some interpret that to mean “If they happened (I personally don’t think they did, they are mere accusations by hysterical women living in their past)”. But he seems to be saying since they have not yet been proven in a court of law, I must accord vpw the legally proscribed “innocent until proven guilty” benefit and will not make the claim they absolutely did happen just as stated, thus, his the use of the word IF. He has repeatedly said he knows people were hurt in the ministry. Even that his twig coordinator protected his twigees, and protection is needed against evil, not good. No where has he said the accusations were false, just that they are one-sided. This is a similar argument to what WhiteDove gives later in the thread. From WhiteDove’s posts, I gather that he strongly believes the abuse happened, but cautions against the misuse of legal terms such as proof/verification/judgment with non-legal definitions. On that different day he can say with authority, yes it did happen. It has been proven and is no longer just an issue of my gut feel based on a large body of testimony or trusting one party’s side of the accusations. He can’t say it is truth, an absolute; but he can believe (subjective, no need for objective proof) that they are. And he seems to believe just that. The numerous similar accounts give great weight to the accusations. But unless the abuser or one of his accessories or someone else who was an eyewitness to the actual abuse comes forward and says “Yes I was there the night this happened to M. I saw the drugs being slipped into her drink. I saw her drink it. Later, we heard moaning from the back of the motorcoach and peeked in to investigate. VPW was penetrating her, she was trying to resist, but the drugs had performed their intended task, and he was able to overpower her struggles. Later, I had to change and clean his sheets, and the evidence was there.” or something to that effect, it cannot be verified in a legal sense. But it can be believed to be true. And even if one believes it to be true, without a “legal pronouncement”, they may be of the school of thought that “if” is the proper word to be used. Raf could probably give some good input on this subject. As a journalist by profession, if he were to say “The sexual abuse carried out by vpw”, indicating the abuse is an absolute certainty, that could land him in hot water due to slander as he was not an eyewitness and there has been no legal verdict of “guilty”. He could avoid that by saying “If the alleged sexual abuse was carried out by vpw”. To stay “out of the soup” legally, one must be very careful how they phrase statements about accusations. To some, such phrasing is not only a legal obligation, but a moral and ethical one, also. To some it is splitting hairs, to others there is a huge and significant difference. Some may not like the stance Deciderator has taken on the abuse issue, and will continue to say he denies it since he will not state it absolutely happened. But it seems like a waste of time and energy at this point to try and persuade him to change his mind. If people feel backed into a corner, they are less likely to accept suggestions. Rather, they tend to walk in the opposite direction.Because one chooses not to read the accounts of abuse, and does not state emphatically “Yes I believe them”, it does not mean they do not have care and concern for the victims. Deciderator demonstrates his care and concern by offering them the advice he holds dear and lives by in his own life ‘don’t dwell in the darkness, dwell in the light’. It’s the best advice he knows to give. Does it mean it is sound? Nope, certainly not in the case of sexual abuse. He illustrated his advice using the example of making a clean break after his divorce. He didn’t dwell on the “evils” of his ex, he dropped it. And after time, when they met again, the “negative” feelings did not resurface and they enjoyed a short visit together. It drew some interesting responses, all of which were quite valid. Rascal again clearly stated her passions, pointing out that we as a body should care about those still ensnared in twi and feels that many here at the GSC share her passion and see it as “ She is clearly upset that he does not see the validity of her passion and encourages him (as others do also) to familiarize himself with the carnal side of vpw and cgeer, so that he can understand the foundation for their zeal. She goes so far as to say that anyone who chooses to ignore it is acting in a cowardly and unconscionable manner. What I see going on here is people having differing passions and each fulfilling their particular function in the Body of Christ. He chooses to heal by holding forth the truth of the Word, she chooses to heal by warning the unwary. Both are noble callings and necessary functions in the body. We can respect each other’s passions without feeling offended if someone places a lower “personal” priority on ours and a higher one on theirs. That’s what is to be expected as we each must choose the battles we wish to fight. However, as Deciderator is not ready to look into the dark side yet, some feel a need to persuade him to do so. Give him some time. He may decide to look into it, he may not, but he has the freedom to choose if and when he delves into it. As the attempts at persuasion continue, and Deciderator continues to try and explain his position, he triggers the hot button I’ve done rotten things, you probably have to. He points out that Saul was a mass murderer (regarded the “worst” crime by society at large) yet his fellow Christians were able to forgive him. Some people seem to interpret such comparisons as slighting the severity of vpw et. al.’s deeds, to me, he’s still trying to explain his position and taking an extreme position for emphasis. And, as noted previously, forgiveness is another hot button for a myriad of reasons. He hits the “move on, shed the bitterness” hot button. Again, easier for those whose hearts weren’t shattered and souls stolen. Unless he chooses to read the accounts, he will remain unaware of the depth of the hurt, and why it takes a long time to recover. Seems Paul was absent from the early church for at least 10 years (and I think closer to 20, but I don’t remember for sure) before he returned to be among them. It obviously took him a while to focus on the scriptures and forgive himself. And it took the believers of that day and time that long to be able to forgive him for killing their loved ones, also. It takes God and time both to heal a broken heart. But again, it’s his choice whether or not to read them and find out the details rather than be satisfied with the summaries he’s already read. Deciderator also notes that he knows those trying to persuade him have honorable intentions, and he appreciates that. And the food fight continues. Let’s explore the concept of due respect. It means the respect that has been earned via some action. It does not mean admiration, reverence, worship. Best analogy I can think of (being from Old South heritage) is with Melanie in Gone With The Wind. During Reconstruction, the leaders and shakers of the “old south brigade” decided they needed to go out to shantytown and clean it out, i.e., murder the ringleaders and set the whole place afire to force all those “no counts” out of their neighborhood. Moral? Not in my opinion, but to them, the right “their safety” justified the wrong “murder, burn out”. The old scoundrel (but somewhat loveable scoundrel, because he was honest about who he was and made no bones about it), Rhett Butler is able to save them from apprehension by the law and certain death by hanging, by saying they were at the wh*re house with he and his friend, Belle Watling. Well, Belle was nothing but trash, a madam for heaven’s sake, no morals, a disgrace to mankind. The wives, and other proper Southern ladies, were thankful their husband’s necks had been saved, but hated that they had to live with the disgrace of saying those good men had patronized the bordello. It was disgusting, dirty, and contemptible; almost better their men had died than have to live with such shame. And, by George, that scoundrel Rhett had purposely chosen to take them to Belle’s just so he could make a laughing stock out of the “old guard”. Well, they were tricked, so there was no way in he!! they would be “under obligation” to Rhett nor Belle. They had schemed and tricked their way into “deserving” gratitude from decent folks, therefore no gratitude was necessary and, by God, they wouldn’t give it to them. Noone, except Melanie. She was grateful to Belle for having saved her husband’s neck, and was proud to be “under obligation” (you did good for me, I will be pleased to return the favor to you) to Belle, even sent her a note saying she planned to “come to call” (go visit Belle at her home - which of course was in the bordello! - because, culturally, it was the requisite action to show thankfulness and respect). She did not approve of Belle’s lifestyle, in fact, was repulsed and horrified by it, but she was thankful and appreciative that Belle saved her husband’s life. She had due respect for what Belle had done to “bless” (yes, I think that’s the best description) her life. Some people thought Melanie was just a “ninny” and had lost her mind for feeling thankful and showing due respect. I think she was doing the right thing and showed great courage in acting on her convictions and what her heart told her was the right thing to do, despite what other’s thought of her. Poster’s here, such as I, can have due respect for vpw because he was the person who presented truths of God’s word to us that liberated us and helped us immensely on our personal spiritual journey. We have other’s that are accorded that same due respect for their helpfulness along our way. Some we do respect, admire, and love as human beings, also. For me personally, vpw is no longer worthy in my eyes of those attributes, but instead I feel contempt and horror for the things he did behind the scenes. His actions forfeited the respect I once had for him. However, he will always have my due respect, and nothing will ever change that. But I do not feel that makes me a vpw lover/defender/apologist/fan; those are untrue characterizations, in my opinion. Lastly, here at GSC those who are pfal/twi/vpw rejecters have chosen many “spiritual” paths since their departure. Some are Christian, and within that framework may be independents (not affiliated with any organized group) or be aligned with Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, etc. churches. Some have returned to the Jewish faith, either with or without a belief in Jesus Christ. Others have chosen non Judeo-Christian groups such as Wiccans, or those into the metaphysical, or others. Some have become agnostics or atheists. And all their choices are allowed and respected, even if they are disturbing to some posters here. If pfal/twi/vpw rejecters are allowed such latitude and freedom of choice, why must those who have positive things to say about pfal/twi/vpw be pigeonholded as “Way brained twits that believe every word ever spoken by vpw, and still worship him”? Why shouldn’t they be given the same courtesy as the rejecters, to be able to express their individual thoughts and choices, versus being viewed as only and entirely supportive pfal/twi/vpw? Is it merely a black or white issue, or is there room for other colors in there too? (Say purple, for instance? It's my favorite.) Don’t know what page this thread is up to now, but that’s all I have the energy to say right now. Thanks for allowing me to share my thoughts and concerns. Suda

Hee Hee. Actually glad you're not rushing to solve it since it took me so dang long to post it! Hard to get anything by GSG, the Strange One, and Raf. You are all so good at this. Suda

Julie Brown, sounds familiar but can't place her. Didn't see "Earth Girls Are Easy" though I heard tell of it. Guess I'll have to pass on this one. Suda

Page 2 of 2 Page 2 has 9 pictures total, 3 on the first line. Suda

Been waiting a while to do this one. Had it almost finished and *poof* it was gone. I'll try again. Page 1 of 2 (I think). Man, I think I've bitten off more than I can chew! On this page 10 pictures, 3 each on lines 1 and 3. Continued to next page.

I'd offer him one of these - like heaven on earth for a cigarette. Or, if you're into "beautiful" cigarettes, puff on one of these As for diets, I like the "Dr. Laura Diet" - Eat less, move more. Ta ta for now! Suda

Happy Birthday to my favorite butterfly and good chat buddy! Bet that's what God said the day you were born! Happy Birthday! This is the day the Lord has made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. Psalm 118:24 Butterfly kisses to you, sweet one, Suda (oops, double posted it!)

Not at all, Tom. I couldn't begin to fill his shoes, nor would I attempt to do so. He is both more learned and more eloquent than me, and I love reading and learning from his posts. They add so much to the cafe. My notes are just to help me understand what's going on here. Since they seem to be helping others, I'll continue posting. When they are no longer desired, I will just keep them to myself. This thread took off during a very busy time for me, so I was not able to keep up and when I'd check in, a new twist or turn had been taken. Just trying to go back to the beginning and see what happened, that's all. Pretty simple and direct. Thanks for asking, though. Suda

The Producers Jon Lovitz A League of Their Own