WordWolf

I'm also aware that, when certain posters suddenly change the subject- often with ad hominem personal attacks or cheap shots, like this one- that it's as good as an admission that A) they didn't like what we were talking about B) were unable to refute what we were saying, not with evidence nor logic Really. It's a consistent set of flaws in posting that are as good as coded messages once someone knows how to read them. (Know the code, and all the subtext might as well be plain text.) In this case, the translation works out to "Well done! You have made a strong, logical case for your position and shown the opposing one to be error-ridden and flawed!" In response, I say "Thank you for the kind words, even if they were accidental."

I generally know that, when I see these unlinked, partial sentences quoted by certain posters, that it's a sure sign the full sentence said something important that got dropped in the partial quote, akin to quoting the Bible as saying "there is no God" when the full sentence is "The fool says in his heart, 'there is no God'". Here's what the sentence read a post or so up: So, John's insinuating-once again, refusing to state his opinions outright, but slyly suggesting them without the courage to state them outright- John is insinuating that the administration acted appropriately in what they did and did not do. John INSINUATED that it would have been wrong to have "punished" the alleged perpetrators, and that the remaining actions and halts were appropriate....which would mean he thinks it's just fine that the school refused to investigate when matters were brought to their attention- and that it was totally appropriate for the school to have SHAMED AND EXPELLED the alleged victims when they came forth. Most schools would have taken a different tack. They could have turned the entire matter over to local law enforcement, and that would have been fine. They could have conducted their own investigation, taken limited action, and THEN turn the entire matter over to local law enforcement. Instead, they just sat on the reports. In the case of the second claim, we don't have a lot of information to go on, so, until more information is presented, it's premature to go into a lot of detail as to what the best specific actions would have been. However, in the case of the first, there was a witness who was a school staffer- a security guard who was required to have reported what he observed- which was an obvious aftermath of a rape or similar crime (pending confirmation by police investigators who should have been called in immediately.) The alleged victim went to the hospital, where the details of her report and their treatment were logged- and she went to the police, where the details of her report were logged. At that point, there's a curious disconnect, since the school never said "We have a potential crime scene. We don't know if a crime happened here or not. You're the experts, so you find out." The school SAT on their end of things. Then, when the student returned to school, complete with black eye and broken arm, the administration expelled her. So, she was expelled- "punished"- automatically because she REPORTED a crime. So, according to John, it's awful if someone is automatically punished if accused of anything- but it's also preferred for accusations to be quietly buried, and the ACCUSER is AUTOMATICALLY punished if accusing anyone of anything. That's conducive to an environment that shames the victims, empowers the victimizers and felons, and covers the tracks of the felons so they can escape consequences and commit more felonies down the road. Since it does that, there's also an environment present that encourages other possible felons to commit felonies- since they will face no consequences. Civilized society is supposed to work a lot differently. Why would an ex-twi'er and vpw supporter find it acceptable for an institution to bury felonies, punish and expel victims, and allow felons to escape consequences? It's also the bright light that gets shined on stories where victims were expected to just accept being shamed, punished, and expelled, and institutions and individuals just expected them to fade away. When abuse of power is done, the internet gives victims and eyewitnesses the voice they were denied- so appropriate action can be taken. Naturally, once an institution had tried to silence and punish victims- a clear abuse of their power- while refusing to investigate claims- a clear violation of their responsibilities- it's in their best interests to later LIE once everyone's been made aware something happened, and claim this is the first they'd heard of it. It's obvious, it's transparent, and few people would actually be fooled by their claims- generally people who had a vested interest in automatically assuming any official statement would be nothing less than the unvarnished truth.

I'm slow to just endorse anything that anybody says/writes. I am reading all the posts. I have no problem with you posting more- in fact, I'd rather you post more than leave it at that. You didn't post the substance-you just made statements. Perhaps they are all well-documented....but darned if they are for all we know. In your particular case, I'm specifically aware that a prevalent danger is to get too wedded to a fascinating theory or set of ideas, and end up so far out in left field a helicopter has to be sent to retrieve you. (Saw it happen once, in fact.) I know every approach has its own pitfalls no matter what, so I'm keeping an eye out for yours when you post. (When you don't post, I don't monitor you, of course.) Since we're both honest and sincere in our approaches, the net result of our interactions should (at least in theory) be a benefit overall- if to the others only but probably to us as well. :) (Note: Yes, with Tertullian you made a start on the explanation, later. But we could use more if you want us all on board, or at least me.)

That's it.

Shanghai Surprise Sean Penn Fast Times at Ridgemont High

Here's part of an imaginary conversation to pitch a show..... "Wait, so is she a vampire or a fairy?" "I guess you'd say both." "You mentioned a werewolf, too?" "Not exactly. Look- we'll represent the 2 courts of fairy." "Oh, so we'll have the Summer Court and the Winter Court?" "Yes, but we won't call them that." "You're messing with me! Get out of my office!"

Yes. Too easy?

"Hi, I'm Amanda Buckman. Why are you dressed like that?" "Like what?" "Like you're going to a funeral. Why are you dressed like somebody died?" "Wait." "So... you still desire me after all these years? The old ball and chain?" "Forever!" "I'll get them!"

I'm waiting to see where he goes with this. That was a lot of sizzle-I'm waiting to see the steak come out of the kitchen.

Seriously, ebay. It's been done plenty of times. While those books may seem less than useless to you (since they contain misinformation), there's a handful of pigeons out there who are eager to get your copies, and will pay through the nose to get them. In case that wasn't clear, I'm saying to jack up the price a bit, they're collectibles and there's people who want them.

That's it. I usually prefer to combine 2 movies, since that's how inspiration strikes me (usually.) Although once I combined 2 shows (same principle in my head, I suppose.)

"Loaded Weapon 1"?

You would have had it already if you went just a tiny bit more obvious. You came SO close.

The only hope for a girl trying to return home is a small-time magician who arrived a generation before her- the survivor of a power struggle between 3 sorceresses.

Mrs Wolf said it's some sort of spoof of "Silence of the Lambs." So, is this one "Silence of the Hams"???

The only hope for a girl trying to return home is a small-time magician who arrived before her- the survivor of a 3-way power struggle.

Peter Boyle Taxi Driver Jodie Foster

Presumed Innocent Harrison Ford Working Girl

We seem to need another clue of some kind.

If you ask me what the best songs are by individual artists, I could come up with my picks. I have trouble knowing which songs came out in the 70s, and picking the ONE best song is highly subjective. I saw a list of the top 80s songs. #1 was "Centerfold" by the J. Geils Band. We disagreed about that, and I suspect you do as well.

Amazing how some actors get around. Running Scared Dan Hedaya the Addams Family

Thank you, Sir! May I have another?

Perhaps you blinked and missed "TEAM KNIGHT RIDER." That ran 1997-1998. I liked the concept, but they never aired it when it was convenient for me to watch it, so I don't know why it never found an audience. Other than William Christopher (MASH series' Father Mulcahy) and George Lazenby (James Bond for 1 movie), I don't recognize the names of anybody who was in any episode. But you had the right show(s).

"Hello." That's from Mel Brooks' "Silent Movie." Finally saw it last year. And I now know why people re-air most of his other movies but never mention that one. It was amusing, but forgettable.

Unless "Wedding Crashers" is an alias for an actor who was in "Risky Business." In which case, we'll need their STAGE NAME. (That's an important distinction for those who would think of posting a legal name for someone who's known for their stage name. Like linking "Michael Douglas" from Batman when the stage-name in question would be "Michael Keaton", since no 2 actors are allowed to use the same stage-name.)