SO if what we're saying here at GS about VPW being 'guilty' of said sexual abuses amounts to libel, slander, and character assassinations, all a VPW apologist has to do is take us to court.
I think it depends on the state laws. To the best of my knowledge, most states have no law against slandering the dead, so a lawsuit of this nature likely would be a big waste of time and money even if the allegation is false.
What'd be interesting is if VPW were alive and someone would sue for sexual harassment/rape.
Logically, Craig got sued, so its not crazy to think someone would sue and end up receiving a financial settlement.
I don't know about anybody being innocent or guilty, of anything. GS isn't small claims court or any kind of court for that matter. It's a discussion board.
To me the whole topic deals more with accurate, factual and true information. Is the information true according to fact?
Wiki-peedonit is a great example of an attempt at collaborative, community shared information. Any topic can be placed, written, added to, edited, annotated, or questioned. Sources have to be cited where appropriate. Anyone using it needs to check those sources. Wikipedia is as good as those who contribute to it. Topics have holes, gaps, inaccuracies, uncited content. Some of that's because it's a work in progress by design, some is because the information just isn't correct. Overall there's a lot of sound, accurate and well written information that can be checked and used. But anyone who uses content published to it without checking it against other sources runs the risk of getting wrong information.
Here, things are posted, stated.
Some are opinions - "I think", "IMO", "as far as I know", "I always heard", etc. and the like.
Others are facts based on experience - "In 1988, (this) happened to me", "I saw", "I said", "they said", etc.
Others still are simply restated known facts - "The PFAL book reads on page...", "The Way published....", "I wrote", etc.
Some are facts from publicly known events and occurrences - "At the ROA 77...", "In a meeting held in...", etc.
I don't know that that covers everything but those are at least some types of information. Plus jokes and humorous asides, there's a lot that goes up in those categories.
The context(s) for the information shared and collaboratively generated has to be considered - a lot of what's posted has happened in the past and all of the primary participants aren't here, collectively sharing and creating the information. So, one person may be restating their knowledge, memory, understanding and observations of past events that may be recognized generally by others but by no one else directly involved at that time other than the poster.
This happens all the time - "In 1988, I remember...", and someone else posts "Yes, I remember in our area, the same kind of thing happened where...", etc.
Getting to the innocent/guilty verdict here regarding people and past events isn't of interest to me personally. I consider that an area of my own domain and one where I don't see any value to knowing that and won't pursue it about other people, here. If it deals with me, that's different. Others, I post at times along the lines of what I stated above but if I feel something is factual I state it so it reads like that. Whether someone else wants to accept that verbatim is up to them, but if I were me I'd be careful doing that. So to speak. Just on face value.
I think a lot of good information is shared here, but I would caution everyone to carefully consider the compositve view of the "facts" they generate from what they read here. It's the nature of a board like this that as information posts and circulates and recirculates that a "record" of facts can be generated that's apparently "true" but is in fact mostly unconfirmed information that's been shared informally in the course of discussing a topic.
Not all of it, I'm not suggesting that for everything. Can't think of an example off the top of me head, but there are some that float around where it's assumed that if this happened, and that is true, then (this) is probably verifiably true. That's not accurate or reliable information, obviously.
But it's a discussion board here, so the kind of posting that goes on can and should allow for a topic to be kicked around as it will by those interested, freely and without too many restrictions. I just try to weight and evaluate the information and not insist (for myself) that everything be in a signed affadavit with photos and subpoenaed records before I give it consideration. It's a discussion board, not a court of law and setting it up as such would restrict the objective of providing open discussion of one's involvement and experiences in the Way (and related topics).
You have no idea of who I have personally interacted with, and when you have something other someone's testimony then you can speak as to what is a fact ,as facts can be proven.
Dove, what I DO know (according to what you yourself have personally posted here) is that anything DOVE writes about twi outside of Doves area in Doves particular state is ALL second and third hand information...and as such unreliable, undocumentable and therefor not to be believed......You personally Dove (according to your statements and the standards that you uphold) are simply unqualified to present an opinion regarding wow way corpes vp lcm treatment of others at the hands of twi leaders etc. because the ONLY thing that YOU personally know about such things is what someone ELSE has told you. Let`s have the same standards that you insist on in others.
Mean time I will continue to speak up as to what I have actually experienced in twi, and discuss the experiences of others on this board.
The bible talked about and soundly condemned the pharacees, saducees, false prophets, wolves in sheeps clothing, adulterers, drunks, lascivious behavior, etc etc...all without the benefit of a legal trial! Imagine that :)
I think it depends on the state laws. To the best of my knowledge, most states have no law against slandering the dead, so a lawsuit of this nature likely would be a big waste of time and money even if the allegation is false.
What'd be interesting is if VPW were alive and someone would sue for sexual harassment/rape.
Logically, Craig got sued, so its not crazy to think someone would sue and end up receiving a financial settlement.
You have no idea of who I have personally interacted with, and when you have something other someone's testimony then you can speak as to what is a fact ,as facts can be proven.
Dove, what I DO know (according to what you yourself have personally posted here) is that anything DOVE writes about twi outside of Doves area in Doves particular state is ALL second and third hand information...and as such unreliable, undocumentable and therefor not to be believed......You personally Dove (according to your statements and the standards that you uphold) are simply unqualified to present an opinion regarding wow way corpes vp lcm treatment of others at the hands of twi leaders etc. because the ONLY thing that YOU personally know about such things is what someone ELSE has told you. Let`s have the same standards that you insist on in others.
That is absolute bulls**t I have never said anything remotely like that Pure fabrication. As I said ......
You have no idea of who I have personally interacted with, what I know or don't know. You just think you do.
Mean time I will continue to speak up as to what I have actually experienced in twi, and discuss the experiences of others on this board.
Really ? you speak alot about several issues that I don't recall you had any personal experiance with. Starting with the one that you just were moderated for, it was not your experiance it was someone else's were you there when it happened ? No ,you just believed what you were told and relayed it here. You might wanna lecture yourself about "The ONLY thing that YOU personally know about such things is what someone ELSE has told you."
You can now continue to hock you bunkum in peace on your own thread, and good luck to you.
Cheers
Pete
Oh I have not left there by any means I just did what I asked someone else to do, who by the way started the conversation by dragging me into the thread. The only Bunkum is opinion being passed off as truth.
No I expect people to have whatever OPINION that they want, but stating that OPINION as a guilty verdict or in terms as such, as a forgone conclusion, without said legal verdict is incorrect Your opinion may be that he is guilty, mine may be the same, but it is not a statement of fact as there is no case or verdict to conclude such.
I think you've taken this over the top. Opinions do not need to have a legal verdict to meet the criteria of "fact". He is never going to face a trial by jury. He is never going to be able to defend himself. He can't be charged in absentia. It sounds to me like you are demanding that people use verbiage that leaves his guilt or innocence open for debate based solely on your experience (or in this case, lack of) and an impossible burden of proof.
Dove what the hell does it matter WHO you have interacted with? Everything outside of your limited geographic area is information related to you by another person...ie second hand :blink: You have no first hand knowledge of wow, way corpes, staff at root locals...how vp treated people on a regular basis...Face it...YOUR first hand information is limited to your personal experiences in your particular area. Certainly that is not good enough for you to allow in any other posters testimony or experiences. Yet strangely enough it was enough for you to call into question the experiences and honesty of others.
How many have you accused outside of the courts of law here at GS through the years without documentation or the proof that you require of others?
I think you've taken this over the top. Opinions do not need to have a legal verdict to meet the criteria of "fact". He is never going to face a trial by jury. He is never going to be able to defend himself. He can't be charged in absentia. It sounds to me like you are demanding that people use verbiage that leaves his guilt or innocence open for debate based solely on your experience (or in this case, lack of) and an impossible burden of proof.
Not really, if you claim someone is guilty of a crime and have no record of such crime or guilt in said crime. It is simply not documented as factual. It also may be against the law. You may certainly state that it is your opinion they are guilty , you may even offer any personal testimony that one may have in argument of your position. But guilt is not established until due process of law is enacted. Until then it is a charge or accusation. There is no guilt or innocence, it remains to be proved or disproved.
Dove what the hell does it matter WHO you have interacted with? Everything outside of your limited geographic area is information related to you by another person...ie second hand :blink: You have no first hand knowledge of wow, way corpes, staff at root locals...how vp treated people on a regular basis...Face it...YOUR first hand information is limited to your personal experiences in your particular area. Certainly that is not good enough for you to allow in any other posters testimony or experiences. Yet strangely enough it was enough for you to call into question the experiences and honesty of others.
How many have you accused outside of the courts of law here at GS through the years without documentation or the proof that you require of others?
Again this is pure fabrication I have years of first hand interaction it is not limited to any geographic area. You have no idea what I have or have not done, pretty much because you were not there.
You do however like to speak on things you have no experience in as evident in recent posts. By the way as you seem intent on misrepresenting my position, I have never challenged second hand information on basic or common place matters ,only when a charge of guilt in a crime is concerned as that is a serious charge and worthy of consideration before one just throws it around , The courts require such consideration and proof it is reasonable to request the same.
Dove, I only have your own testimony here at gs to go by. You yourself have written these things here... What the heck more do I need to know about whom ELSE you`ve interacted with when?? Surely it`s all 2nd hand information, and therefor unreliable and lacking in documentation.
Everything that you experienced concerning any issues outside of twi in your particular area is hearsay.....second hand information. That hardly puts you in a position to call into question the validity of another`s experiences, nor require documentation to back up anyone elses testimony.
Again this is pure fabrication I have years of first hand interaction it is not limited to any geographic area. You have no idea what I have or have not done, pretty much because you were not there.
You do however like to speak on things you have no experience in as evident in recent posts. By the way as you seem intent on misrepresenting my position, I have never challenged second hand information on basic or common place matters ,only when a charge of guilt in a crime is concerned as that is a serious charge and worthy of consideration before one just throws it around , The courts require such consideration and proof it is reasonable to request the same.
WD.....you keep side-stepping rascal's questions. So, I'll give it a try.
Question #1
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW experience?
Question #2
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW program?
Question #3
If you, Whitedove, have never gone inresidence Corps, do you have first-hand interaction of the corps experience? the daily schedule? the wierwille-teaching-and-drinking-drambuie corps nights? the sleep deprivation?
Question #4
If you, Whitedove, have never worked on staff at twi's hq, do you have first-hand interaction of staff meetings? staff/roa set-up schedules? presidents' cabinet and department oversight? layout of osc offices?
Question #5
If you, Whitedove, have never signed on for any of twi's programs.....left your comfort zone and area.....and followed the guidelines of these programs, how can you speak by experience (ginosko) on this discussion board?
Question #6
If you, Whitedove, simply reitterate the propaganda of twi into these discussions, how can you possibly be taken seriously since you have NO FIRST-HAND TESTIMONY of twi's programs and staff involvement?
It's pretty simple when you accuse and pronounce guilty someone of a crime and sexual abuse is one, you take the discussion out of the realm of common knowledge discussions. (Actually, no you don't) It is a criminal offence and as such requires criminal investigation and prosecusion. and a fair trial....A real one. that places it in a court no longer public opinion.
.
It requires these things if one brings criminal charges. Otherwise. . . no it doesn't. That is how it is taken OUT of the realm of common knowledge discussion. By going to a DA or the POLICE and ASKING for an investigation by MAKING criminal accusations. Talking about things on an ex-cult forum is different.
Again and for the last time. . . it is not even libel. Since you seem so intent on legal definition. . . VP was a limited PUBLIC FIGURE. . . one could persuasively argue his cohorts were as well, "Leadership" that is. . . . New York Times V Sullivan stated that the burden of proof in a libel case has an ADDED element for a limited public figure to prove. . . that being. . . the one accused of libel spoke a falsehood with MALICE.
You might be surprized how narrow the area of interest can be to determine if one is a limited public figure. VP and Co more than qualify.
Why do you do this? What bothers you so much about people telling their stories? WD, it was a bad cult. We all got tricked. I have posted here about 9 months now. . . . I have seen this same conversation again and again. It doesn't matter that people explain the law to you. If VP were tried, he would have had the presumption of innocence. No one says he has to have it on an internet forum. Show me the statute.
Dove, I only have your own testimony here at gs to go by. You yourself have written these things here... What the heck more do I need to know about whom ELSE you`ve interacted with when?? Surely it`s all 2nd hand information, and therefor unreliable and lacking in documentation.
That would be the point I have given no testimony you asume. interaction with people is not second hand information it is going to the source. aditionally any information when documented with evidence is factual.
Everything that you experienced concerning any issues outside of twi in your particular area is hearsay.....second hand information. That hardly puts you in a position to call into question the validity of another`s experiences, nor require documentation to back up anyone elses testimony.
Again you are incorrct it is not hearsay when you were there. You don't know what you speak of and anytime you wish to challenge something I have said I'll be happy to see who was right in the end .
WD.....you keep side-stepping rascal's questions. So, I'll give it a try.
Question #1
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW experience?
Question #2
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW program?
Question #3
If you, Whitedove, have never gone inresidence Corps, do you have first-hand interaction of the corps experience? the daily schedule? the wierwille-teaching-and-drinking-drambuie corps nights? the sleep deprivation?
Question #4
If you, Whitedove, have never worked on staff at twi's hq, do you have first-hand interaction of staff meetings? staff/roa set-up schedules? presidents' cabinet and department oversight? layout of osc offices?
Question #5
If you, Whitedove, have never signed on for any of twi's programs.....left your comfort zone and area.....and followed the guidelines of these programs, how can you speak by experience (ginosko) on this discussion board?
Question #6
If you, Whitedove, simply reitterate the propaganda of twi into these discussions, how can you possibly be taken seriously since you have NO FIRST-HAND TESTIMONY of twi's programs and staff involvement?
She has asked no questions she has only assumed that she knows what and where I have been. That which I have spoke on is from personal experience, it is accurate, I have never spoke on things that I have no involvement with from personal experience such as the WOW program. By the way on your other matter quoting documented policy is admissible evidence. it shows intent and reasonable actions of the organization.
I assume that YOUR interaction WITH people here at gs where YOU said what your actual experience was in twi was true and factual. I think you are playing word games because you don`tlike being reminded that most of the knowledge that you base your facts on was 2nd and 3rd hand.
...and hows come.... if YOU talk to a person it is *going to a source* but if I talk to a person, it is second hand information that needs documentation?
Okay, Whitedove...........according to your admission (or silence) on GS posts,
you have NOT gone wow,
you have NOT been inresidence corps,
you have NOT been staff at twi's hq,
THEREFORE......you answers would be in RED
Question #1
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW experience?
NO
Question #2
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW program?
NO
Question #3
If you, Whitedove, have never gone inresidence Corps, do you have first-hand interaction of the corps experience? the daily schedule? the wierwille-teaching-and-drinking-drambuie corps nights? the sleep deprivation?
NO
Question #4
If you, Whitedove, have never worked on staff at twi's hq, do you have first-hand interaction of staff meetings? staff/roa set-up schedules? presidents' cabinet and department oversight? layout of osc offices?
NO
Question #5
If you, Whitedove, have never signed on for any of twi's programs.....left your comfort zone and area.....and followed the guidelines of these programs, can you speak by experience (ginosko) on this discussion board?
NO
Question #6
If you, Whitedove, simply reitterate the propaganda of twi into these discussions, can you possibly be taken seriously since you have NO FIRST-HAND TESTIMONY of twi's programs and staff involvement?
NO
See........it's not that hard to answer a question with either 'yes' or 'no.'
I assume that YOUR interaction WITH people here at gs where YOU said what your actual experience was in twi was true and factual. I think you are playing word games because you don`tlike being reminded that most of the knowledge that you base your facts on was 2nd and 3rd hand.
...and hows come.... if YOU talk to a person it is *going to a source* but if I talk to a person, it is second hand information that needs documentation?
And by the way you seem to be quite outspoken on subjects like accidents in the Corps, rapes in the Corps exactly how many lead accidents did you see first hand? And I forget what Corps did you graduate from that gives you such experiance.?
And by the way you seem to be quite outspoken on subjects like accidents in the Corps, rapes in the Corps exactly how many lead accidents did you see first hand? And I forget what Corps did you graduate from that gives you such experiance.?
those incidents have been documented, here at GS, where anyone can read and refer to them.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
45
110
70
43
Popular Days
Feb 22
39
Feb 15
37
Feb 18
36
Mar 7
31
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 45 posts
WhiteDove 110 posts
waysider 70 posts
potato 43 posts
Popular Days
Feb 22 2009
39 posts
Feb 15 2009
37 posts
Feb 18 2009
36 posts
Mar 7 2009
31 posts
Popular Posts
rascal
I assume that YOUR interaction WITH people here at gs where YOU said what your actual experience was in twi was true and factual. I think you are playing word games because you don`tlike being remind
potato
actually, for the record, the claims have been documented. methinks you should go back and read the federal rules of evidence again. at this point, in a court of law, the documented testimony of vpw
waysider
Pure fabrication ,never stated such what I said was I'm not by the way seeing many here posting. You seem to be claiming guilt exactly how many rapes did you witness? I thought so you read an opinion
waysider
Was Jim Jones ever convicted of his crimes at Jonestown?
(He was an American.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I think it depends on the state laws. To the best of my knowledge, most states have no law against slandering the dead, so a lawsuit of this nature likely would be a big waste of time and money even if the allegation is false.
What'd be interesting is if VPW were alive and someone would sue for sexual harassment/rape.
Logically, Craig got sued, so its not crazy to think someone would sue and end up receiving a financial settlement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
May be on topic -
I don't know about anybody being innocent or guilty, of anything. GS isn't small claims court or any kind of court for that matter. It's a discussion board.
To me the whole topic deals more with accurate, factual and true information. Is the information true according to fact?
Wiki-peedonit is a great example of an attempt at collaborative, community shared information. Any topic can be placed, written, added to, edited, annotated, or questioned. Sources have to be cited where appropriate. Anyone using it needs to check those sources. Wikipedia is as good as those who contribute to it. Topics have holes, gaps, inaccuracies, uncited content. Some of that's because it's a work in progress by design, some is because the information just isn't correct. Overall there's a lot of sound, accurate and well written information that can be checked and used. But anyone who uses content published to it without checking it against other sources runs the risk of getting wrong information.
Here, things are posted, stated.
Some are opinions - "I think", "IMO", "as far as I know", "I always heard", etc. and the like.
Others are facts based on experience - "In 1988, (this) happened to me", "I saw", "I said", "they said", etc.
Others still are simply restated known facts - "The PFAL book reads on page...", "The Way published....", "I wrote", etc.
Some are facts from publicly known events and occurrences - "At the ROA 77...", "In a meeting held in...", etc.
I don't know that that covers everything but those are at least some types of information. Plus jokes and humorous asides, there's a lot that goes up in those categories.
The context(s) for the information shared and collaboratively generated has to be considered - a lot of what's posted has happened in the past and all of the primary participants aren't here, collectively sharing and creating the information. So, one person may be restating their knowledge, memory, understanding and observations of past events that may be recognized generally by others but by no one else directly involved at that time other than the poster.
This happens all the time - "In 1988, I remember...", and someone else posts "Yes, I remember in our area, the same kind of thing happened where...", etc.
Getting to the innocent/guilty verdict here regarding people and past events isn't of interest to me personally. I consider that an area of my own domain and one where I don't see any value to knowing that and won't pursue it about other people, here. If it deals with me, that's different. Others, I post at times along the lines of what I stated above but if I feel something is factual I state it so it reads like that. Whether someone else wants to accept that verbatim is up to them, but if I were me I'd be careful doing that. So to speak.
Just on face value.
I think a lot of good information is shared here, but I would caution everyone to carefully consider the compositve view of the "facts" they generate from what they read here. It's the nature of a board like this that as information posts and circulates and recirculates that a "record" of facts can be generated that's apparently "true" but is in fact mostly unconfirmed information that's been shared informally in the course of discussing a topic.
Not all of it, I'm not suggesting that for everything. Can't think of an example off the top of me head, but there are some that float around where it's assumed that if this happened, and that is true, then (this) is probably verifiably true. That's not accurate or reliable information, obviously.
But it's a discussion board here, so the kind of posting that goes on can and should allow for a topic to be kicked around as it will by those interested, freely and without too many restrictions. I just try to weight and evaluate the information and not insist (for myself) that everything be in a signed affadavit with photos and subpoenaed records before I give it consideration. It's a discussion board, not a court of law and setting it up as such would restrict the objective of providing open discussion of one's involvement and experiences in the Way (and related topics).
IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Dove wrote to me......
You have no idea of who I have personally interacted with, and when you have something other someone's testimony then you can speak as to what is a fact ,as facts can be proven.
Dove, what I DO know (according to what you yourself have personally posted here) is that anything DOVE writes about twi outside of Doves area in Doves particular state is ALL second and third hand information...and as such unreliable, undocumentable and therefor not to be believed......You personally Dove (according to your statements and the standards that you uphold) are simply unqualified to present an opinion regarding wow way corpes vp lcm treatment of others at the hands of twi leaders etc. because the ONLY thing that YOU personally know about such things is what someone ELSE has told you. Let`s have the same standards that you insist on in others.
Mean time I will continue to speak up as to what I have actually experienced in twi, and discuss the experiences of others on this board.
The bible talked about and soundly condemned the pharacees, saducees, false prophets, wolves in sheeps clothing, adulterers, drunks, lascivious behavior, etc etc...all without the benefit of a legal trial! Imagine that :)
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Just a note the quote was RumRunners not mine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete
WD
Thank you for leaving the JT thread.
You can now continue to hock you bunkum in peace on your own thread, and good luck to you.
Cheers
Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Oh I have not left there by any means I just did what I asked someone else to do, who by the way started the conversation by dragging me into the thread. The only Bunkum is opinion being passed off as truth.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
You mean something like
THIS?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
White Dove said:
I think you've taken this over the top. Opinions do not need to have a legal verdict to meet the criteria of "fact". He is never going to face a trial by jury. He is never going to be able to defend himself. He can't be charged in absentia. It sounds to me like you are demanding that people use verbiage that leaves his guilt or innocence open for debate based solely on your experience (or in this case, lack of) and an impossible burden of proof.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Naw , no bunkum there the witnesses said they lied, the man was set free. Enough said....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Dove what the hell does it matter WHO you have interacted with? Everything outside of your limited geographic area is information related to you by another person...ie second hand :blink: You have no first hand knowledge of wow, way corpes, staff at root locals...how vp treated people on a regular basis...Face it...YOUR first hand information is limited to your personal experiences in your particular area. Certainly that is not good enough for you to allow in any other posters testimony or experiences. Yet strangely enough it was enough for you to call into question the experiences and honesty of others.
How many have you accused outside of the courts of law here at GS through the years without documentation or the proof that you require of others?
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Not really, if you claim someone is guilty of a crime and have no record of such crime or guilt in said crime. It is simply not documented as factual. It also may be against the law. You may certainly state that it is your opinion they are guilty , you may even offer any personal testimony that one may have in argument of your position. But guilt is not established until due process of law is enacted. Until then it is a charge or accusation. There is no guilt or innocence, it remains to be proved or disproved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Again this is pure fabrication I have years of first hand interaction it is not limited to any geographic area. You have no idea what I have or have not done, pretty much because you were not there.
You do however like to speak on things you have no experience in as evident in recent posts. By the way as you seem intent on misrepresenting my position, I have never challenged second hand information on basic or common place matters ,only when a charge of guilt in a crime is concerned as that is a serious charge and worthy of consideration before one just throws it around , The courts require such consideration and proof it is reasonable to request the same.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Dove, I only have your own testimony here at gs to go by. You yourself have written these things here... What the heck more do I need to know about whom ELSE you`ve interacted with when?? Surely it`s all 2nd hand information, and therefor unreliable and lacking in documentation.
Everything that you experienced concerning any issues outside of twi in your particular area is hearsay.....second hand information. That hardly puts you in a position to call into question the validity of another`s experiences, nor require documentation to back up anyone elses testimony.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
WD.....you keep side-stepping rascal's questions. So, I'll give it a try.
Question #1
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW experience?
Question #2
If you, Whitedove, have never gone WOW Ambassador, do you have first-hand information of the WOW program?
Question #3
If you, Whitedove, have never gone inresidence Corps, do you have first-hand interaction of the corps experience? the daily schedule? the wierwille-teaching-and-drinking-drambuie corps nights? the sleep deprivation?
Question #4
If you, Whitedove, have never worked on staff at twi's hq, do you have first-hand interaction of staff meetings? staff/roa set-up schedules? presidents' cabinet and department oversight? layout of osc offices?
Question #5
If you, Whitedove, have never signed on for any of twi's programs.....left your comfort zone and area.....and followed the guidelines of these programs, how can you speak by experience (ginosko) on this discussion board?
Question #6
If you, Whitedove, simply reitterate the propaganda of twi into these discussions, how can you possibly be taken seriously since you have NO FIRST-HAND TESTIMONY of twi's programs and staff involvement?
Okay......that's probably enough questions.....for now.
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
It requires these things if one brings criminal charges. Otherwise. . . no it doesn't. That is how it is taken OUT of the realm of common knowledge discussion. By going to a DA or the POLICE and ASKING for an investigation by MAKING criminal accusations. Talking about things on an ex-cult forum is different.
Again and for the last time. . . it is not even libel. Since you seem so intent on legal definition. . . VP was a limited PUBLIC FIGURE. . . one could persuasively argue his cohorts were as well, "Leadership" that is. . . . New York Times V Sullivan stated that the burden of proof in a libel case has an ADDED element for a limited public figure to prove. . . that being. . . the one accused of libel spoke a falsehood with MALICE.
You might be surprized how narrow the area of interest can be to determine if one is a limited public figure. VP and Co more than qualify.
Why do you do this? What bothers you so much about people telling their stories? WD, it was a bad cult. We all got tricked. I have posted here about 9 months now. . . . I have seen this same conversation again and again. It doesn't matter that people explain the law to you. If VP were tried, he would have had the presumption of innocence. No one says he has to have it on an internet forum. Show me the statute.
There are better people to defend
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
She has asked no questions she has only assumed that she knows what and where I have been. That which I have spoke on is from personal experience, it is accurate, I have never spoke on things that I have no involvement with from personal experience such as the WOW program. By the way on your other matter quoting documented policy is admissible evidence. it shows intent and reasonable actions of the organization.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I assume that YOUR interaction WITH people here at gs where YOU said what your actual experience was in twi was true and factual. I think you are playing word games because you don`tlike being reminded that most of the knowledge that you base your facts on was 2nd and 3rd hand.
...and hows come.... if YOU talk to a person it is *going to a source* but if I talk to a person, it is second hand information that needs documentation?
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Okay, Whitedove...........according to your admission (or silence) on GS posts,
you have NOT gone wow,
you have NOT been inresidence corps,
you have NOT been staff at twi's hq,
THEREFORE......you answers would be in RED
See........it's not that hard to answer a question with either 'yes' or 'no.'
:)
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
And by the way you seem to be quite outspoken on subjects like accidents in the Corps, rapes in the Corps exactly how many lead accidents did you see first hand? And I forget what Corps did you graduate from that gives you such experiance.?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Someone once told me they heard from someone that vpw followers are stupid . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
those incidents have been documented, here at GS, where anyone can read and refer to them.
Edited by potatoLink 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.