twi thinks like this I think. Forget the past. Better yet, ignore the present. don't think of the future. when it comes. Get over it.
horse poop
You may be right (at least from your perspective) but, from mine I would disagree. I don't think you have to be a member of TWI to have known that forgetting the past, yet planning for the future is a Biblical principle.
... this practice coming from a research and teaching organization??? And a biblical one at that??? ohmy.gif I'm sorry, but something just doesn't sit quite right here. unsure.gif Talk about a poor excuse!
Excuse!!???
Who ever said I was making excuses? That was a simple statement of fact. We were (the editorial dept) given a directive to write to 8th grade reading level. I didn't say I liked or agreed with it, that was what we were TOLD to do by our bosses on the job.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. You "can't copyright an idea", yadayadayada. ... Is that theme the best you can do to defend what VPW did? Keep in mind that I used to be in the "VPW didn't really commit plagarism 'cuz he mentioned all the people he learned from" camp. Until Raf (who knows quite a bit about what copyrights and plagarism is) 'fully instructed' me otherwise.
Who said I was trying to defend VPW?
I don't care what "camp" you're in Garth. I'm not in ANY camp I'm not in any camp. Frankly my dear, I really don't give a da## whether VPW plagurized or not. I never said VPW never plagurized. I actually said repeatedly that he lifted ideas that weren't his. I said he was FULLY aware that he was lifting other people's work and COMPLIED other people's work into "his" work. What I said and the point I was making is that VPW went to great lengths to cover his butt legally.
I'm constantly amazed at the knee jerk reaction so many folks here at the cafe have to anyone who doesn't just slam VPW along the "party line." If you don't slam VP you're supporting him.
I'm not supporting him by recounting my personal experience.
Surely you can make a better argument than that, Howard.
Again Garth. I wasn't making an argument. Its obvious that you feel very strongly about what VPW did with his works. I didn't say how I feel about what he did. I just pointed out WHAT he did, when he did it.
I'll say now, I really don't care a whole lot about it. I think I'm on record here at the cafe about how I feel about VPW being a pretty angry, egotistical and two-faced (minimally), deceitful guy. I also don't feel it prerequisite to skewer VP every time I speak about things he did. I believe that after a while skewering people reflects more negatively on the "skewer-ER"
than it illucidates the "skewer-EE."
Stop putting words in my mouth then flaming me for what YOU think I said Garth. OK - - CHIEF??
PS. My name's not CHIEF.
Well,now, let's see here.
God told VP that He,God, would teach him stuff nobody had seen for 1,000s of years.
Just to be on the safe side, though, maybe we better have the legal dept. check to make sure he didn't make this same promise to someone else.
Gee wiz... can't you guys see by now that that "God told me he would teach me His Word as it hadn't been taught for centuries, if I would teach it to others..." was nothing more than a tag line?! It was a hook! A great one at that! It was very successful in hooking pretty much every one of us who took PFAL.
That line is precisely the SAME thing as McDonald's, "I'm Lovin' it!" - A TAG LINE designed soley to illict an emotional response in order to draw people - a certain TYPE of people into their stores and by their product line.
I am NOT LOVING McDonald's food. Are YOU?
The FORD Motor Corporation does NOT have "a better idea."
I can NOT put on a pair of Air Jordans and "Just DO It" and dunk like Michael Jordan. Try as I might I CAN'T "be Like Mike."
The Maytag repairman does NOT sit around his shop all day bored because Maytag equipment "never" breaks down.
Absolutely NONE of those are universally and factually TRUE statements and NONE OF US care about it! We either buy their product or we don't and then forget about it.
VPW's greatest talent was that he was an excellent pitch-man. As good at it as Bill Cosby on his best day. We're mad at him because he snookered us! Admit it. Hate him for that if you choose, but don't hate me (or anyone else) because I don't waste my energy hating him like you do.
Big collaborative effort, not matter how you slice it. Wierwille's level of involvement is arguable, but what's clear either way is that he is not the primary collector of the information, nor is he the primary writer. He may or may not have played a strong active role in developing the big picture.
This is percisely how creativity is handled in literally EVERY corporation in the US. When a company hires any creative, and employs him in his field of expertise when that person creates ANYTHING the copyrights belong to the corporation, not the individual. You may not like it but when Walter did his research it belonged to TWI and VPW was the "named principal" of the corporation and therefore had the discretion to take any and all works of the employees, publish them as he saw fit and put his name on it if he chose to do so.
Of course the moral, ethical and RIGHT thing to do would be to credit ALL contributors to the work in the work itself. eg: my daughter is currently doing a research fellowship as an intern at John Hopkins Medical School, the #2 medical research program in the country (proud Poppa!). She told me that the fact that she will write some of the findings of the experiments she conducts this summer, she will be listed as one of the authors of the work when its published in whatever medical journal it goes into.
Catch my drift?
John Hopkins = top of the food chain - - the BEST. TWI = the opposite.
Yup, Some of the books I mentioned were class materials, not all of VPW's works were. Some of his stuff was collaborative.
Basically I was commenting on an earlier post that said that what VPW did on the plagurizing issue in general were criminal. When you get into crime in this matter you're talking copyright.
Sure. Its immoral and wrong to take somebody else's work and say its yours. What I was commenting on is how VPW went about doing it. Basically TWI did then, and does NOW and always will skate "just this side" of the legal line in every single thing they do as a corporation. They do this to limit the legal recourse of the followers of The Way. On top of it they convince followers that GOD is on THEIR side.
They do TONS of immoral stuff. When I say I don't care about the plagurism thing I"m thinking in the context of immoral things they do/did, VPW's plagurism is the among the smallest, most insignificant BY COMPARISON with other stuff they do.
They do & say things that are absurd. They hire lawyers who work there because they couldn't hold their own in a "real" law firm. The lawyers who, while they should be going through stuff with a fine tooth comb - miss stuff that a "better" attorney wouldn't.
Anyone who has spent any time in a courtroom in litigation knows that attorney's present absurd arguments every day. Again, I'm not speaking in support of what went on. I'm only recounting what I remember of what went on when I was there (I wasn't there after 1988 so I can't speak to that very much).
No Raf. I wasn't on in the research Dept. I wasn't in editorial. I worked closely w/ editorial as we were part of the process & therefore knew how the process worked & we knew in general "how we did things."
Personally I never liked it, nor do I like it now how companies cry out "well it's LEGAL" when they do things people don't like. People generally don't like it when they get used. We were used on staff @ HQ.
Ok, now I get a better read of what you were communicating in your post that I responded to, ... sort of. I say 'sort of' because that particular post seemed to read like a kind of "All right all ready! So he committed plagiarism. So big deal! ... Hey, it was still legal, and TWI made damn sure that they were diligent (from an ethical standpoint? :unsure: ) in keeping it that way." Ie., I saw a white washing where there wasn't so much of one.
However (you knew it was coming, didncha? ;) ) while we're not talking mass murder here, plagiarism still is a bigger thing than you realize, even if you 'don't give a damn' about the issue. Particularly when it comes from a man who claimed that he was getting his stuff straight from God, and his research organization's 'research' amounted to little more than them playing copying machine, and expecting those involved to submit totally to this kraut's authority and abuse regardless. Ie., as Raf states succinctly, VPW lied, and it effected people's lives horribly. ... Just ask Excathedera.
Waste of time 'hating' (your term, not ours, so keep that in mind, ok?) the man? As Waysider accurately pointed out, it isn't hate. It's calling VPW for what he was, and his reputation for what it should be. Them's the breaks for someone/their rep who behaved like VPW did, and if that's going over the top for you, then _you_ just don't see it. Hey, nobody's making you join in on the 'piling on', so what's it to ya? :huh:
All that said, I do apologize for reading into what you said, that which you didn't say.
Why the plagiarism matters (in my oh-so-humble opinion )
Most people who took PFAL, in my observation a large majority, took PFAL because they were unsatisfied with what they were learning in their churches. Hardly any had any background in biblical research of any kind. For these people, Wierwille (or his representatives or adherants) was the first person who even attempted to amke sense out of the bible. Not having any real research to compare to, PFAL students accepted much of what Wierwille said based on their trust of Wierwille, because they were convinced of his credibility and trustworthiness.
I'm not talking about going to the bible or a concordance or an interlinear to "check out" what Wierwille taught, I'm talking about accepting many of the assumptions and premises that his teachings were based on without any evidence whatsoever.
For example: the "old piece of literature" that Wierwille claimed said that bar-mitzvahs took place at age 12 for illegitimate sons; that "God" was the first word in the "original" text; the explanations of dechomai vs. lambano, allos vs. heteros and various other definitions; even the significance of various research "keys". How did we know that any of that stuff was true? (and some of it we know isn't true) We took Wierwille's word for it.
Why did we take Wierwille's word for it? Because we trusted him, we believed him.
If we had know from day 1 that he was a liar, a plagiarist and any of the other things, who would have given him the time of day? It's only from the point of view of someone who had heard and internalized PFAL and Wierwille's teachings in general that we want to reatin anything that he taught as "truth".
You may be right (at least from your perspective) but, from mine I would disagree. I don't think you have to be a member of TWI to have known that forgetting the past, yet planning for the future is a Biblical principle.
I kinda had two thoughts at once on that. twi uses the "get over it" technique to sweep issues under the rug.
the other thought being twi still exists and is pain in the rump at times.
Sure it is but, I don't think anyone will make an issue out of it. ;)
Most people who took PFAL, in my observation a large majority, took PFAL because they were unsatisfied with what they were learning in their churches. Hardly any had any background in biblical research of any kind. For these people, Wierwille (or his representatives or adherants) was the first person who even attempted to amke sense out of the bible. Not having any real research to compare to, PFAL students accepted much of what Wierwille said based on their trust of Wierwille, because they were convinced of his credibility and trustworthiness.
Oakspear, you're only confirming (in hindsight) what I thought in foresight concerning my observation that many members of TWI put VP on a pedestal. I sometimes wondered how much they were paying attention to what VP said in PFAL. Seemed they only heard what they wanted or needed to hear and not much more.
how else could a person plan for it.. at least in a real sense.
Well, (if I understand you correctly) the future we can plan for is the one God promises us. I think He's laid out the detail of how we are to plan for it in so far as how we are to live from day to day. Living from day to day as He would have us live is in a sense planning for the future, isn't it?
Well, (if I understand you correctly) the future we can plan for is the one God promises us. I think He's laid out the detail of how we are to plan for it in so far as how we are to live from day to day. Living from day to day as He would have us live is in a sense planning for the future, isn't it?
Well.. I dunno. I think that perhaps you refer to the future that WE think that God promises us. I still live day to day for Him.. but where are the guarantees of abundance.. the guarantees that somethow we will be victorious in this life.. in a sense all of the promises of instant gratification or success are irrelevant. At least to me.. in a sense, the promises mean nothing.. to me.
The only promise that I rely on.. is that I will be there.
Well.. I dunno. I think that perhaps you refer to the future that WE think that God promises us. I still live day to day for Him.. but where are the guarantees of abundance.. the guarantees that somethow we will be victorious in this life.. in a sense all of the promises of instant gratification or success are irrelevant. At least to me.. in a sense, the promises mean nothing.. to me.
The only promise that I rely on.. is that I will be there.
If the promise "that (you) will be there" is found in the Bible why would you rely on that one and not the other ones also found in the Bible. That seems to be a tad bit like cherry picking to me. For instance: is the promise of God opening the windows of heaven and pouring you out a blessing if you but tithe one of those promises you don't rely on?
For instance: is the promise of God opening the windows of heaven and pouring you out a blessing if you but tithe one of those promises you don't rely on?
The only way I have been able to sometimes, is to play being a stinking crazy squirrel..
I freely adopt the roll.. it isn't too far from the truth..
In a sense I'm ruined, at least as some people would think. I could never be what it takes to be a success in business.
I'd let the damn company go the route of financial ruin, rather than let people suffer.. I know.. offenses must come.. but I'm a damn coward. They won't come by me.
We had a rat here.. big rascal. The creature looked me in the eye.. I couldn't even club a stinking rat.. oh, I do hold human beings in greater regard..
the lady of the house here must love me..
Had to catch and release.. but she had a few words for the varmint along the way to the release point:
Oakspear, you're only confirming (in hindsight) what I thought in foresight concerning my observation that many members of TWI put VP on a pedestal. I sometimes wondered how much they were paying attention to what VP said in PFAL. Seemed they only heard what they wanted or needed to hear and not much more.
Yeah, maybe, but I'm not talking so much about the Wierwille "worship", which certainly went on, or the lack of paying attention, which also went on, but how Wierwille did an excellent job at getting us to trust him and what he said. Unless one came out of PFAL still skeptical about what was taught there was necessarily a taking of Wierwille's word for it.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
26
25
27
59
Popular Days
Jun 8
60
Jun 7
55
Jun 10
38
Jan 4
18
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 26 posts
WordWolf 25 posts
Ham 27 posts
Larry N Moore 59 posts
Popular Days
Jun 8 2007
60 posts
Jun 7 2007
55 posts
Jun 10 2007
38 posts
Jan 4 2007
18 posts
Larry N Moore
You may be right (at least from your perspective) but, from mine I would disagree. I don't think you have to be a member of TWI to have known that forgetting the past, yet planning for the future is a Biblical principle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Who ever said I was making excuses? That was a simple statement of fact. We were (the editorial dept) given a directive to write to 8th grade reading level. I didn't say I liked or agreed with it, that was what we were TOLD to do by our bosses on the job.
Who said I was trying to defend VPW?
I don't care what "camp" you're in Garth. I'm not in ANY camp I'm not in any camp. Frankly my dear, I really don't give a da## whether VPW plagurized or not. I never said VPW never plagurized. I actually said repeatedly that he lifted ideas that weren't his. I said he was FULLY aware that he was lifting other people's work and COMPLIED other people's work into "his" work. What I said and the point I was making is that VPW went to great lengths to cover his butt legally.
I'm constantly amazed at the knee jerk reaction so many folks here at the cafe have to anyone who doesn't just slam VPW along the "party line." If you don't slam VP you're supporting him.
I'm not supporting him by recounting my personal experience.
Again Garth. I wasn't making an argument. Its obvious that you feel very strongly about what VPW did with his works. I didn't say how I feel about what he did. I just pointed out WHAT he did, when he did it.I'll say now, I really don't care a whole lot about it. I think I'm on record here at the cafe about how I feel about VPW being a pretty angry, egotistical and two-faced (minimally), deceitful guy. I also don't feel it prerequisite to skewer VP every time I speak about things he did. I believe that after a while skewering people reflects more negatively on the "skewer-ER"
than it illucidates the "skewer-EE."
Stop putting words in my mouth then flaming me for what YOU think I said Garth. OK - - CHIEF??
PS. My name's not CHIEF.
Gee wiz... can't you guys see by now that that "God told me he would teach me His Word as it hadn't been taught for centuries, if I would teach it to others..." was nothing more than a tag line?! It was a hook! A great one at that! It was very successful in hooking pretty much every one of us who took PFAL.
That line is precisely the SAME thing as McDonald's, "I'm Lovin' it!" - A TAG LINE designed soley to illict an emotional response in order to draw people - a certain TYPE of people into their stores and by their product line.
I am NOT LOVING McDonald's food. Are YOU?
The FORD Motor Corporation does NOT have "a better idea."
I can NOT put on a pair of Air Jordans and "Just DO It" and dunk like Michael Jordan. Try as I might I CAN'T "be Like Mike."
The Maytag repairman does NOT sit around his shop all day bored because Maytag equipment "never" breaks down.
Absolutely NONE of those are universally and factually TRUE statements and NONE OF US care about it! We either buy their product or we don't and then forget about it.
VPW's greatest talent was that he was an excellent pitch-man. As good at it as Bill Cosby on his best day. We're mad at him because he snookered us! Admit it. Hate him for that if you choose, but don't hate me (or anyone else) because I don't waste my energy hating him like you do.
This is percisely how creativity is handled in literally EVERY corporation in the US. When a company hires any creative, and employs him in his field of expertise when that person creates ANYTHING the copyrights belong to the corporation, not the individual. You may not like it but when Walter did his research it belonged to TWI and VPW was the "named principal" of the corporation and therefore had the discretion to take any and all works of the employees, publish them as he saw fit and put his name on it if he chose to do so.
Of course the moral, ethical and RIGHT thing to do would be to credit ALL contributors to the work in the work itself. eg: my daughter is currently doing a research fellowship as an intern at John Hopkins Medical School, the #2 medical research program in the country (proud Poppa!). She told me that the fact that she will write some of the findings of the experiments she conducts this summer, she will be listed as one of the authors of the work when its published in whatever medical journal it goes into.
Catch my drift?
John Hopkins = top of the food chain - - the BEST. TWI = the opposite.
By their fruit you SHALL know them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Yup, Some of the books I mentioned were class materials, not all of VPW's works were. Some of his stuff was collaborative.
Basically I was commenting on an earlier post that said that what VPW did on the plagurizing issue in general were criminal. When you get into crime in this matter you're talking copyright.
Sure. Its immoral and wrong to take somebody else's work and say its yours. What I was commenting on is how VPW went about doing it. Basically TWI did then, and does NOW and always will skate "just this side" of the legal line in every single thing they do as a corporation. They do this to limit the legal recourse of the followers of The Way. On top of it they convince followers that GOD is on THEIR side.
They do TONS of immoral stuff. When I say I don't care about the plagurism thing I"m thinking in the context of immoral things they do/did, VPW's plagurism is the among the smallest, most insignificant BY COMPARISON with other stuff they do.
They do & say things that are absurd. They hire lawyers who work there because they couldn't hold their own in a "real" law firm. The lawyers who, while they should be going through stuff with a fine tooth comb - miss stuff that a "better" attorney wouldn't.
Anyone who has spent any time in a courtroom in litigation knows that attorney's present absurd arguments every day. Again, I'm not speaking in support of what went on. I'm only recounting what I remember of what went on when I was there (I wasn't there after 1988 so I can't speak to that very much).
No Raf. I wasn't on in the research Dept. I wasn't in editorial. I worked closely w/ editorial as we were part of the process & therefore knew how the process worked & we knew in general "how we did things."
Personally I never liked it, nor do I like it now how companies cry out "well it's LEGAL" when they do things people don't like. People generally don't like it when they get used. We were used on staff @ HQ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
HCW
Re: Your post that talked of "hating" VP" or "being mad at him" for snookering his followers.
I am not mad at him nor do I hate him.
I do, however, recognize that I was snookered.
That's a big obstacle that one must overcome in order to start to see what happened in the proper perspective.(IMO)
It's like standing in front of the room at an AA meeting and admitting you are an alcoholic.
"Hi, I'm Waysider and I've been snookered."
(See there? I'm starting to feel better already.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Howard,
Ok, now I get a better read of what you were communicating in your post that I responded to, ... sort of. I say 'sort of' because that particular post seemed to read like a kind of "All right all ready! So he committed plagiarism. So big deal! ... Hey, it was still legal, and TWI made damn sure that they were diligent (from an ethical standpoint? :unsure: ) in keeping it that way." Ie., I saw a white washing where there wasn't so much of one.
However (you knew it was coming, didncha? ;) ) while we're not talking mass murder here, plagiarism still is a bigger thing than you realize, even if you 'don't give a damn' about the issue. Particularly when it comes from a man who claimed that he was getting his stuff straight from God, and his research organization's 'research' amounted to little more than them playing copying machine, and expecting those involved to submit totally to this kraut's authority and abuse regardless. Ie., as Raf states succinctly, VPW lied, and it effected people's lives horribly. ... Just ask Excathedera.
Waste of time 'hating' (your term, not ours, so keep that in mind, ok?) the man? As Waysider accurately pointed out, it isn't hate. It's calling VPW for what he was, and his reputation for what it should be. Them's the breaks for someone/their rep who behaved like VPW did, and if that's going over the top for you, then _you_ just don't see it. Hey, nobody's making you join in on the 'piling on', so what's it to ya? :huh:
All that said, I do apologize for reading into what you said, that which you didn't say.
... Chief. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Why the plagiarism matters (in my oh-so-humble opinion
)
Most people who took PFAL, in my observation a large majority, took PFAL because they were unsatisfied with what they were learning in their churches. Hardly any had any background in biblical research of any kind. For these people, Wierwille (or his representatives or adherants) was the first person who even attempted to amke sense out of the bible. Not having any real research to compare to, PFAL students accepted much of what Wierwille said based on their trust of Wierwille, because they were convinced of his credibility and trustworthiness.
I'm not talking about going to the bible or a concordance or an interlinear to "check out" what Wierwille taught, I'm talking about accepting many of the assumptions and premises that his teachings were based on without any evidence whatsoever.
For example: the "old piece of literature" that Wierwille claimed said that bar-mitzvahs took place at age 12 for illegitimate sons; that "God" was the first word in the "original" text; the explanations of dechomai vs. lambano, allos vs. heteros and various other definitions; even the significance of various research "keys". How did we know that any of that stuff was true? (and some of it we know isn't true) We took Wierwille's word for it.
Why did we take Wierwille's word for it? Because we trusted him, we believed him.
If we had know from day 1 that he was a liar, a plagiarist and any of the other things, who would have given him the time of day? It's only from the point of view of someone who had heard and internalized PFAL and Wierwille's teachings in general that we want to reatin anything that he taught as "truth".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I kinda had two thoughts at once on that. twi uses the "get over it" technique to sweep issues under the rug.
the other thought being twi still exists and is pain in the rump at times.
but this is off topic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Oakspear, you're only confirming (in hindsight) what I thought in foresight concerning my observation that many members of TWI put VP on a pedestal. I sometimes wondered how much they were paying attention to what VP said in PFAL. Seemed they only heard what they wanted or needed to hear and not much more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Well, I think if you actually KNOW the future..
how else could a person plan for it.. at least in a real sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Well, (if I understand you correctly) the future we can plan for is the one God promises us. I think He's laid out the detail of how we are to plan for it in so far as how we are to live from day to day. Living from day to day as He would have us live is in a sense planning for the future, isn't it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Well.. I dunno. I think that perhaps you refer to the future that WE think that God promises us. I still live day to day for Him.. but where are the guarantees of abundance.. the guarantees that somethow we will be victorious in this life.. in a sense all of the promises of instant gratification or success are irrelevant. At least to me.. in a sense, the promises mean nothing.. to me.
The only promise that I rely on.. is that I will be there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
If the promise "that (you) will be there" is found in the Bible why would you rely on that one and not the other ones also found in the Bible. That seems to be a tad bit like cherry picking to me. For instance: is the promise of God opening the windows of heaven and pouring you out a blessing if you but tithe one of those promises you don't rely on?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
huh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Yeah, well, I realize it's one of those OT promises but I thought it was addressed to God's people. You are one of them kind, aren't you?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
what I mean is I have no idea what you're talking about. tithing a promise?
Edited by BolshevikLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Because it is enough.
Besides, I'm tired of trying to tell God what to do.. why I should have money, or success, or "abundance"..
See, I already have a blessing that there is not room enough to receive.. so to speak.
what more could I want?
What am I going to do with it? Can't take it with me..
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
No, I mean the result of tithing is a promise. You have read the Bible, haven't ya?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
yes I've read the bible ha ha ha
thanks for clarifying
have your read Narramore's book?
http://tekoapublishing.com/books/tithing/index.html
Edited by BolshevikLink to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
You could try sharing your abundance with others. Would you like my address? I will accept paypal contributions. :)
Nope. Will it make me rich? I'm not interested in becoming famous.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Have to rephrase this..
Perhaps what I've got, I can..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I've derailed again I think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Shame on you!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
The only way I have been able to sometimes, is to play being a stinking crazy squirrel..
I freely adopt the roll.. it isn't too far from the truth..
In a sense I'm ruined, at least as some people would think. I could never be what it takes to be a success in business.
I'd let the damn company go the route of financial ruin, rather than let people suffer.. I know.. offenses must come.. but I'm a damn coward. They won't come by me.
We had a rat here.. big rascal. The creature looked me in the eye.. I couldn't even club a stinking rat.. oh, I do hold human beings in greater regard..
the lady of the house here must love me..
Had to catch and release.. but she had a few words for the varmint along the way to the release point:
"You come back here sucker, and you're dead.."
Edited by Mr. HammeroniLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.