WordWolf

'oldiesman'= ======== WOW, I hadn't read this thread up until now, and it's very interesting. Don't know if I ever posted this, but I was one of the runners who ran one of the 10 mile legs, from Rome City to Athens, carrying the torch. I think I also was the only non-corps person running. As I recall, this effort was coordinated by Bob Moynihan and all who ran received a bronze medallion. I had been training for this event for 6 months prior to make sure I'd be able to run 10 miles straight without stopping. The day before the start at Rome City, I develop this sharp pain in one of my legs. I start limping around and start getting very worried that I might not be able to run. While limping by the reception desk, a gal at the reception desk saw me limping, and I told her what was wrong. She immediately layed hands and prayed for me. The pain was gone. Next day, I ran the 10 miles with no problems. Day after that, my body ached all over, except that one part of my leg that was healed the day before! True story. Anyway, back to Craig, yeah he had to have the spotlight. Those of us who did the marathon ran 10 miles each, but all of a sudden when the torch is coming around the corner guess who's carrying it? Craig. Did he run 10 miles? No. Apparently Craig grabbed the torch a few yards back, and started running carrying the torch to the front with some others behind him. So here we are, each one running 10 miles busting our butts while we watch Craig grabbing the freakin torch running his few yards and getting all the attention like he's been running for miles. :lol: ========== You personally saw this, and you STILL say lcm wasn't all about himself?

'oldiesman'= "Of course it depends on the severity of the crime" [This has already been adequately addressed by other posters.] "but it may also be that they don't want to rat on a brother/sister in Christ if they don't have to." [And I don't want to pay payroll tax, but it's the law and I do it.] [ All states have similar legislation. Hq is in Ohio and is under the Federal and State laws governing Ohio. Ohio Revised Code section 2921.22 states: " (A) No person, knowing that a felony has been or is being committed, shall knowingly fail to report such information to law enforcement authorities. (B) Whoever violates division (A) of (B) of this section is guilty of 'failure to report a crime'. Violation of division (A) of this section is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree." ] "But kicking them out immediately is strong punishment, and better than keeping them in, wouldn't you say?" [Trick question. The proper response upon a religious organization's discovery that a member or employee has committed a crime, is to report that individual to the local legal authorities. Period. Kicking the person out is independent of the MORAL responsibility to protect the community, and the LEGAL responsibility to report a criminal. Here's an example of how Ohio law views this sort of thing... http://www.cleveland.com/abuse/index.ssf?/...1185150122.html This legal response -requiring reporting of a crime- predates the founding of the United States and has its roots in "raising a hue and cry" back in the Dark Ages of Europe. ]

So how IS Jeff doing these days?

Here's a quote I think relates in a way. Martin Niemoeller said: "First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a communist. Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out- because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me- and there was no one left to speak out for me."

lcm seems to have DISAGREED with you on this one, Oldiesman. You SUPPOSED that's what he was thinking. "Out There" PHONED him and spoke to him PERSONALLY on this. ====== "Out There": "When I received the Loyalty letter in the mail I immediately called LCM and by some miracle after leaving a message he actually called me back. When I asked if this letter was a call to blindly follow him he said I had been doing this all along. I then told him thats what he thinks he could 'kiss my foot'. I think I was dropped from the rolls of the Way Corps that next morning." ===== Therefore, lcm was WELL AWARE he was calling for blind, unquestioning loyalty to HIM, and thought that blind, unquestioning loyalty was his DUE.

Clarifying our terms to avoid confusion is a necessary step if we are to increase in understanding. Therefore, making sure we mean EXACTLY the same thing with our terms is necessary. It aids understanding and retards "weasel-wording", where someone keeps changing the meaning in an attempt to dominate the discussion. ====== BTW, I didn't do my own research there-that was quoted from further up the page, from a poster who DID do his own research. ==== A healthy skepticism to any man's position is good. It means we then look for ourselves and see if he's right or not. This is especially true if previous examinations have shown him to have a low batting average on his signature doctrines. Therefore, a calm, reasoned approach is superior to an "I love him" approach, just as it's superior to an "I hate him" approach. ===== Finally, Mark quoted his source for his "research", WTH did not, but insisted we do our own. What's your source, WTH? Did YOU do your own?

'oldiesman': I beg to differ. I validate the letter on its own, without needing support from the events that followed. [No, you're operating with PARTIAL information, and that out of choice. ] But when I look at those events, they were godly. Folks left who believed Craig and the BOT were worshipping other gods, or at least not "standing on the word", which got the folks who were unhappy and malcontented, out. [Partially true. This did not mean those who stayed were clueless about the ERROR practiced at hq. They just had LESS evidence, or had more reason to stay-like the famous "they thought they could fix things from within." ] There was, among other things, lots of peace in the fellowships that remained. No more arguing about Craig and the BOT being off the wall. [ The fellowships that remained varied widely. Those in NYC were FINE for the most part because NYC twi'ers as individuals were stubborn individuals who were slow to bend their neck or scratch gravel for ANYBODY. That puts them as high on the list to escape when someone demands BLIND loy-alty. Further, the twiglets took their cues from the twig coordinators. The twig coordinators took their cues from the branch coordinators. The branch coordinators took their cues from the territory coordinators. The territory coordinators took their cues from the Limb coordinator. The Limb coordinator of NY state at that time was VF. VF was on some people's short-list for vpw's successor. He was better suited to running things nationally than lcm, and had experience running twi stuff. Therefore, he was more than capable of keeping the state intact, which he did. Locals didn't hear there WERE problems because we were insulated from it- because higher-ups didn't pass that along. Nobody below Territory Coordinator knew. So, branch coordinators smiled and said everything was fine-so the twig coordinators did the same, which is why you had no idea there were problems 1985-1989. However, there WAS information there-to which you lacked access. Some had access. When I heard there were problems, I naively thought they could be fixed, and VF might go work things out and help restore balance to lcm. I even said so. The very next piece of news from lcm was "I'm firing VF and every other staff member in NY state for being evil." So, every staff member in NY state seceeded-since they were already kicked out- but they remained in contact with each other-which makes sense unless you're an idiot. ] Twigs were loving full of peace unity, and no legalism. [ Because they were maintained at the state, city, and neighborhood levels, there was some love and peace LOCALLY. This being twi, there was LESS legalism, but there was still legalism.] PFAL classes were still being run and the word was moving. [ Locally, things moved along because locally we knew what we were doing. Locally, that's always been the case. ] There was still a WOW program where the word was moving. [ I question the success of the wow program, for several reasons. At best, it was a mixed bag. Furthermore, you know NOTHING about what it was like on the field in 1989. lcm forced the issue with 1/4 of the wows. lcm kicked people off the field all over the place in 1989. So wows were STRANDED in the field as a direct result of lcm stripping them of leadership and part of their "families." In several cases, the wows notified hq that they were now stuck as a result-for rent and so on, which they were paying. HQ said-in one case I'm aware of-and I expect this was true for many I am NOT aware of-that they would help for THIS month but they were smoked for next month. WHEN THE PROMISED HELP FROM TWI DID NOT ARRIVE- which was the result of needs generated by twi kicking wows off the field- the wows were then forced to turn to rank-and-file believers to provide the assistance twi PROMISED to provide and was morally responsible TO provide. Since one believer who was contacted said "Well, I haven't sent in my tithe for this month yet, so I can send it to you", the wows I'm aware of were not EVICTED, which would have been the result of lcm's decision and twi's failure to live up to a direct promise. Ever see a wow get his pin and REFUSE TO SHAKE lcm's hand? Someone got a snapshot.... That was lcm's "contribution" to the wow field.] Some folks were even returning, who had left in 1989. I would estimate a window of about 5 years (1989-1994) when the word was moving. I'm not saying everything was perfect, but it certainly wasn't tyrannical, at least where I was. Far from it. [Actually, the stage was already being set. Forget the wow program, the PFAL class-lcm was preparing to throw them out and replace them with something inferior because it had his name on it. And if a handful was returning, at least that many were STILL LEAVING. Of course, with so few NYC'ers LEFT, it's hard to see ANY people arriving as anything less than a huge jump. ] I was a twig coordinator too from around the end of 1989 to end of 1990 and I know there was no legalism. [ Not local to you, no. Didn't you find it odd when lcm sent a letter saying "I'm firing VF and Li*** Ma***, your local overseer, because he's corrupt?" You'd met LM, correct? Didn't you know he was the real deal? ] I can't speak for others involvement during that time, but my time right after 1989 up until I stopped going to twig was pleasant and the word was moving. [ Oh, wait- you're one of the guys who stayed and were promoted to "top local guy" after everyone with a lick of training left. That explains a lot.... If I'd stayed, you might have been taking orders from me within a few years.... But after around 1993-94, was when I think the present day false doctrines started about the excessive legalism, prying into peoples lives, mandatory ABS, genuine spiritual suspicion, word already over the world, closed ministry, homo purge, excessive meanness, so on and so forth. [ Wrong. When lcm fired all the staff across NY state, the Father Son and Holy Ghost caught the last train to the coast. 4 out of every 5 Joe Believers walked. All the Territory and Branch coordinators walked. Almost all the Advanced class grads walked. ALL the corps grads walked. That was statewide-citywide, the numbers were even higher in NYC. The Bronx was a Territory before lcm drew his line in the sand- it became a SMALL twig AFTER the line. Manhattan-the same. I'm not aware of anyone I knew in BQSI who stayed, which to me is a sign that the majority of the other 3 boroughs walked as well. I know it's true NORTH of NYC, in Westchester County and Yonkers as well. ===== I do know a handful of people DID stay, for reasons which were there own. (I didn't speak to any of them face-to-face.) I AM aware that those whom I knew who stayed, they were among the "bottom-feeders" in skill and ability. As I said once before, if I had stayed, I would have been one of NYC's heavier hitters even then. That's not saying I was that good-that's saying those who remained were not up to scratch. All the quality people left, and a handful of the least-talented stayed. Doesn't say much for the discernment of the remainders. You've previously posted that there were some quality heavy-hitters who remained in NYC after the 1989 split. Once again, I call "shenanagans" on that. After 1989, the skill-levels would have to be recalibrated to measure at lower levels to consider stragglers as heavy-hitters. All the people lcm himself used to cite as important had left- wows, corps, Advanced class grads. After 1989, of course, he stopped saying this, since they weren't around.]

Pat Morita The Next Karate Kid Hilary Swank

Nuts. Belle beat me to it. Deleting my requote...

"Yeah, I have. However this is based upon yet another one of VPWs blunders with Greek. VPW taught that "saved" was translated from the Greek "sozo". Then he taught that sozo came from the Greek root word "zoe" meaning life in its fullest. He then relates that to "wholeness" . Then he fits that in with his formed, made & created / body, soul, and spirit theory. The final result being, saved means receiving the holy spirit and thus becoming body, soul and spirit once more ( the spirit being missing previously). So then according to VPW a person is saved/made whole when he/she receives the spirit. The problem with this is that sozo - (saved) DOES NOT come from the Greek "zoe" as VPW errantly taught. Sozo comes instead from the primary Greek "sos" a contraction for the obsolete obsolete saoz, "safe". VPW foisted the Greek and then forced a new meaning on sozo so that his definition of salvation would fit neatly in with body, soul, spirit. He also misunderstood why the King James translated sozo "made/make whole"in regards to physical healing. Salvation is from the Greek "soter" , which has a common root with sozo (saved). However neither of these Greek words is related to "zoe" or to wholeness. Wierwille was dead wrong in his definition of saved/salvation." ========= See, this is the type of problem that can crop up when you get your degree in "HOMILETICS" and then act as if you got it in Koine Greek or Bible languages or the like.

Martin Niemoeller: " First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a communist. Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out- because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me- and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Ok, it seems we've reached the end of the quotes for this book. Having read thru all this, and having discussed it, I'd like some general thoughts, possibly from those who haven't been posting every day (for variety). Do any old-timers from the 70s have any general conclusions on this subject-the book or its contents? What do the exits from the 90s and 00s have to say about all this?

Not only have we discussed this before, but I posted the OTHER letter once in its entirety. As to the previous discussions, I clicked one up to the top. As to the OTHER letter, I can't find it. The OTHER letter was the one where lcm sent it to EVERYONE-not just the staff- and said they were firing everyone. As it turned out, he made specific allegations against the people he was firing-that they didn't love Christ, that they worked for greed- and yet people in different states all got the SAME letter where only the NAMES were changed. ALL the people had EXACTLY the same issues? No, lcm felt like making a blanket accusation, so he did. I'm confident he was personally unfamiliar with most of the people he was accusing. I'll have to dig out the old letter and repost it.

Clicking this thread to the top, since it's being discussed...

Out There said

Well, this is old stuff. However, I can save you the trouble of sitting thru their series. :D Matthew 1:1-16 covers part of the Christ-line. It names only a few women, who are the subject of "this" study. Matthew 1:3 mentions Tamar Matthew 1:5 mentions Rahab Matthew 1:5 mentions Ruth Matthew 1:16 mentions Mary So, this is a study in 4 parts-one for each woman.

"Gitarzan: the Motion Picture".

It's tough with fewer players. I'm thinking Sharon, Belle or Steve! might have gotten it off the first post. The answer was "Solid Rock" by Dire Straits. Their most recognizable commercial hit was "Money for Nothing" and their best-known song among rock rans is probably "Sultans of Swing", not "Solid Rock." ========== Ok, here's one more the speed of the current players. "I'm a-walkin' in the rain, Tears are fallin' and I feel the pain, Wishin' you were here by me, To end this misery"

Friday, November 22, 1963 =========== Ssshh. I can hear you- no need to yell. I think you missed my point. There were at least as many things NOT in common as IN common. The lists are in the minds of the readers.

pg-240. ======== "Along the slender black-top road and across the bridge in the distance, a dozen figures clothed in navy sweatsuits are running towards us. Doctor slows the car down, laughing and smiling. "That's my Corps," he says affectionately. "They're my kids." [You have ownership papers for those students? Don't answer that-maybe you DO.] ===== pg-251, Dr Spencer from West Virginia is speaking. "...We learned in medical school that a fear of death is a symptom of cardiac condition...." Me, I'd like to know where he went to school, and who taught that. I know medicine has not so completely advanced since, say, med school in the 50s or 60s that they taught that fear of death is a symptom of a bad heart. That belongs more to the "bleed him with leeches" era-or at least the Freud "everything is scientific" era, in the 19th century. Fear of death is a symptom of having brushed death-either thru personal experience or thru the death or near-death of a loved one. I don't even have to go to medical school to learn that. (I'll just stick with my "Doctorate of Theology", thankyouverymuch. ;) Now, this educated MD talks about witnessing, and he talks about how he used to be a "hunter" of men-describing how people ambush a deer with both barrels from a concealed position (which would make him a SNIPER of men, but I digress.) He then says "But I've been seeing more and more what the Word says: You've got to be a fisher of men, like Peter. Every fish is different. You put out the bait, and it's different for different fish. You put it out, and our bait is the best. You dangle it here, tease it a little, get the hunger up. Then when you get a fish on the line, you pull it in. Some you play with. Some get away from you, but they keep coming back, and you just gotta keep the bait there all the time." Interesting analogy. AND COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. Peter was not a hook-and-line fisherman, Peter was a NET fisherman. "I will let down the net." The analogy is completely different. A net fisherman casts the net out broadly over the area, then he draws the net out of the water, and whatever is in the net is in the net. Jesus wanted THAT kind of guy, not a line fisherman, AND NOT A HUNTER OR SNIPER. When the sower went forth to sow, he sowed everywhere, and some grew and flourished. He did not study out the area, and bury one seed HERE and one seed THERE. Dr S completely misunderstood Peter's job AND the lesson it teaches us. Then again, even that early, twi was beginning to practice early hints of elitism.....

pg-240. ======== "Along the slender black-top road and across the bridge in the distance, a dozen figures clothed in navy sweatsuits are running towards us. Doctor slows the car down, laughing and smiling. "That's my Corps," he says affectionately. "They're my kids." ===== pg-251, Dr Spencer from West Virginia is speaking. "...We learned in medical school that a fear of death is a symptom of cardiac condition...." Me, I'd like to know where he went to school, and who taught that. I know medicine has not so completely advanced since, say, med school in the 50s or 60s that they taught that fear of death is a symptom of a bad heart. That belongs more to the "bleed him with leeches" era-or at least the Freud "everything is scientific" era, in the 19th century. Fear of death is a symptom of having brushed death-either thru personal experience or thru the death or near-death of a loved one. I don't even have to go to medical school to learn that. (I'll just stick with my Doctorate of Theology, thankyouverymuch. Now, this educated MD talks about witnessing, and he talks about how he used to be a "hunter" of men-describing how people ambush a deer with both barrels from a concealed position (which would make him a SNIPER of men, but I digress.) He then says "But I've been seeing more and more what the Word says: You've got to be a fisher of men, like Peter. Every fish is different. You put out the bait, and it's different for different fish. You put it out, and our bait is the best. You dangle it here, tease it a little, get the hunger up. Then when you get a fish on the line, you pull it in. Some you play with. Some get away from you, but they keep coming back, and you just gotta keep the bait there all the time." Interesting analogy. AND COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. Peter was not a hook-and-line fisherman, Peter was a NET fisherman. "I will let down the net." The analogy is completely different. A net fisherman casts the net out broadly over the area, then he draws the net out of the water, and whatever is in the net is in the net. Jesus wanted THAT kind of guy, not a line fisherman, AND NOT A HUNTER OR SNIPER. When the sower went forth to sow, he sowed everywhere, and some grew and flourished. He did not study out the area, and bury one seed HERE and one seed THERE. Dr S completely misunderstood Peter's job AND the lesson it teaches us. Then again, even that early, twi was beginning to practice early hints of elitism..... Now then, in the middle of the book is a set of pictures. Most are pretty typical. There's a shot of the traditional birthday dunk-in-the-river "God's blessings on you-SPLASH!", and there's a photo of vpw on the film set of pfal. You can recognize the set, you can recognize the suit, there's the sign saying "power for abundant living" on the desk. vpw's not actively filming in this shot. There's a person in the foreground getting ready to cue the cameraman to begin his countdown-you can see him ready to start the count. vpw is holding up a Bible and looking forward. I don't remember him holding up a Bible at the start of any segment. Plus, he's holding it a little close to comfortably read from. It looks like he's holding it up for the photo snapshot. I also note the light levels. Despite the stage lights, he knows someone is getting ready so snap a picture, and they're standing next to the cameraman. He can see the cue-guy. So, he's looking towards lights that aren't blinding. STAGE lighting blinds you to anything in its direction. If he was using the lighting at STAGE level-which is not as bright as he claimed the lights were during filming-then the entire crew could have slipped away with the camera, and, if they were silent, he'd be waiting for the signal to begin. You can see NOTHING at that light level. (Yes, I've been on stage, and seen the audience vanish as I stepped into the light.) Furthermore, the man giving the cue, and the cameraman, can be seen in silhouette, since they're seen blocking the light to the "studio". If the light really WAS at blinding level, we'd be able to see the pattern of the guys' shirts, and their facial features. The next shot, in fact, shows how tight the formation was..... it shows the side with the cameraman.....but there's no bank of BLINDING LIGHTS lined up in a row like STAGE LIGHTS. Are they all stacked up in the one non-visible corner, out of sight? If so, that's a STUPID place to put ALL the lights. You'd put them CENTRAL in some way. So, unless someone's wheeling in a foldaway LIGHTHOUSE BEACON, the lights were NOT nearly as bright as he claimed. I'm also curious just how lousy this film material supposedly was. The old, old black-and-white turn-of-the century films filmed outdoors to use sunlight. According to vpw, the stage had lights far in excess of that. Car headlights are 18,000 candlepower. They are bright enough to make that studio REALLY bright-brighter than in the photo. Yet, they are not PAINFUL to have shined at you. Am I the only one skeptical of this story? Perhaps he got sore eyes from the filming. I could buy that. But "lose my sight" bright? And he was STUPID ENOUGH to film 2-3 more days when Day One swelled his eyes SHUT and the Dr said he'd be blinded for LIFE? Was he that stupid, or does he think WE are? (No, that was not a rhetorical question.)

Something to think about. Have a history teacher explain this...if they can [No need, Snopes already explained this. ] Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846. John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946. Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860. John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960. [ Technically true-but ignores that their political careers were completely different other than that. Lincoln had many setbacks, and Kennedy went like a rocket.] Both were particularly concerned with civil rights. [ No they weren't. Lincoln was concerned with divisiveness in the United States. This forced him to address slavery, but he would have found it acceptable to maintain slavery if it preserved the Union, allowing it to die slowly like twi. Kennedy was slow to move on civil rights legislation. He did so when events required a response.] Both wives lost their children while living in the White House. [ The Lincolns lost 2 children-one while Lincoln was President. The Kennedys lost one child while JFK was President. The Lincolns had 4 boys-one lived to adulthood. The Kennedys had 2 boys, one girl-two lived to adulthood.] Both Presidents were shot on a Friday. [ Assassination attempts are made during public events. Public events happen more often on weekend appearances. The odds of either to be shot on Friday (as opposed to Sat or Sun) approach 1 in 3. The odds of both to be shot on Friday approach 1 in 9.] Both Presidents were shot in the head. [ Assassination attempts use head or torso shots. Thus a head-shot is EXPECTED. ] Now it gets really weird. Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy. Kennedy's Secretary was named Lincoln. [Lincoln did NOT have a secretary named Kennedy.] Both were assassinated by Southerners. [ If you divide into "Northerner" and "Southerner", the odds were 1 in 4 for that, discounting that they-being Northerners-would be less likely to be shot by other Northerners.] Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson. [ Both Presidents were Northerners-thus they needed Southern running-mates to draw votes. Do you know how common the name "Johnson" is? Flip thru a phonebook.] Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808. Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908. [ Let's not "cherrypick" the similarities and ignore the differences. One was from NC, the other from Tx. One supported slavery, the other championed civil rights. One was never elected President, the other won the Presidency by THE landslide. One was impeached, the other wasn't. One became President at the end of a war, the other became President at the beginning of a war.] John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939. [ Booth was born in 1838, not 1839. ] Both assassins were known by their three names. [ Not until after their deaths. ] Both names are composed of fifteen letters. [ Neither first, middle nor last names have the same number of letters. Abraham Lincoln and John Fitzgerald Kennedy do not have the same number of letters. Andrew Johnson and Lyndon Baines Johnson do not have the same number of letters. ] Now hang on to your seat. [ Not impressed yet.] Lincoln was shot at the theater named 'Ford.' Kennedy was shot in a car called 'Lincoln' made by 'Ford.' [ Lincoln was shot indoors, Kennedy was shot outdoors. A number of Presidents who WEREN'T assassinated rode in Presidential Lincoln limosines.] Lincoln was shot in a theater and his assassin ran and hid in a warehouse. Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and his assassin ran and hid in a theater. [ Booth shot Lincoln in a playhouse (theater). He was trapped and killed in a tobacco shed days later. Oswald shot Kennedy FROM (not IN) a textbook warehouse/book depository, and was taken in a movie house ("theater") about an hour later. ] Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials. [ Depends on how one defines "assassinated". ] And here's the kicker... A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe. [ Marilyn Monroe died well over a year before Kennedy's assassination.] Creepy huh? :unsure: :unsure: [ NO.] http://www.snopes.com/history/american/linckenn.htm You will want to take 6 months and read the entire Snopes site.

Hm. I'm surprised this song hasn't been gotten. I'll give it the rest of the day, then flip over the name and post a different song. I really want to give a fair chance for this one without stopping the thread entirely. As it is, I'm fighting the urge to bang my head against a stone. Which would hurt, since it's not hollow. (Neither my head nor the stone would be hollow.) Besides, I can pass on getting a concussion- a major enough one would put my life in extreme danger. Plus I'd be unconscious and unable to post the answer.

Zshot: "Let's look at the wow program a little more.... 1. after this so called training at the ROA, we were sent to find and meet our "new wow family". I want to know how in the F*** was the decision made as to who was with whom?!?!?!?! 2. I also want to know on how they decided who was going where? I understand that twi had it own interest in where they wanted to send bodies. However, these bodies were people! It seems they didn't care about the people when it came down to assigning locations." =================== See, Zshot, this is one reason I like to review old threads from time to time. I KNEW I'd seen the answer to this one SOMEWHERE. LINDYHOPPER posted it. === He was discussing a corps couple that needed relocation... "Funny story. We are in the corp relo tent or something and we are discussing with the Rev Ander* on where they can go. It came down to either Dallas, Tx as BC as they were before in FL or twig coor. in the town I was now in. The rev was our elder corps while we were in residence. So we were down. Well he goes to talk things over or go abroad or something and it was taking him a while to get back with us. Meanwhile, we are standing waiting and talking about their options when one Rev. J Rumproast came over and asked us if he could help. They told him their deal and how they couldn't decide what would be best. So, he pulls out a coin and says "This is how we do it in the back...'Heads, it's Dallas, tails it's B-more.' He smiles as though he is kind of joking but totally serious as though he had been inspired by God to do this. It was heads! Praise the Lord! Right about the time everyone is shaking hands and saying our goodbyes to Rev Rump the Rev. Ander-son-of-a comes walking back in. He is p!$$ed...." ============ So, seems at least ONE method of deciding who goes where was evident. =================== We have seen a number of accounts of people who WENT wow or interim corps and at least one person in their "wow family" was a tipped turbolaser who ruined the entire "wow family" because they were unable or unwilling to function in the program as told, even after someone took them aside and explained things. Everything I saw about the program said that anyone who walked up would be accepted unless they set fire to the Big Top or something. If the wows went out on Saturday morning, you had until WEDNESDAY MORNING to decide to go. I think it's ridiculous to believe that there was a degree of quality control when they were ready to accept ANYONE who walked in, and sent them out after 3 days of possible observation and teachings. So, I have a new question of my own: Does ANYONE know of ANY person , EVER, who was REFUSED entry into the wow program for reasons OTHER than not having their money ready? Did the management of the program EVER exercise Quality Control and say "you lack sufficient experience" or "you lack emotional stability" or "you do not have a mind to work" or "you lack trustworthiness" or any other legit reason to not send someone into a small cell that relied on the performance of each cell member? I'd LOVE to hear ANY details of ANY time that happened.