Come out of the closet Americans

[wesw]

oh I don t know....

gob seems to be a kind person. he obviously appreciates the beauty of creation, from what I see in his photos anyway.

...and what s wrong with being a tree hugger? trees give us shade, oxygen and fruits and nuts. what s not to like?

more trees mean better lives for people, in my view.

what I don t get is the relationship everyone has with rubato....

its hard to love your foes and detractors. the proverb about beings kind to your enemy having the effect of pouring hot coals on their head seems true tho. its a win win situation! instead of giving them the conflict that they thrive on, give them love.

and from the high road you have a good view of their head exploding without getting the nasty bits on you.

[Lord Jim]

instead of giving them the conflict that they thrive on, give them love.

You be sure to let me know how applying that to rubato works out for you, Wes...

I see that you've been on the board almost a week and haven't been insulted by him yet...

That may be a record...

[MajGenl.Meade]

I understand, but then I am not actually sure peter was there--he is not mentioned by name.....Now you reason peter was there (and maybe he was), but that is an interpretation

It's reason all right but is it an interpretation or is it very clear indeed? You be the judge

"That same hour they got up and returned to Jerusalem; and they found the eleven and their companions gathered together" Luke 24:33

Unless there are any other candidates** "The Eleven" would be "The Twelve" minus one.

"And when day came, he called his disciples and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor" Luke 6:13

Since we know that Judas wasn't there, The Eleven are Peter and .... oh, fancy that!



**other candidates:
G Boycott allegedly c & b Lloyd 93
RM Prideaux perhaps b Barlow 36
C Milburn might have been lbw b Sobers 7
JB Bolus possibly c PM Pollock b McKenzie 53
KWR Fletcher rumoured to have been c PM Pollock b McKenzie 28
DB Close believed by some to have been b Lloyd 32
R Illingworth according to one interpretation run out 0
JG Binks (if actually present) c Butcher b Hanif Mohammad 5
FS Trueman not out 2 and will kill anyone who says otherwise

[Guinevere]

What LJ meant to say:

I see that you've been on the board almost a week and not a day has gone by where I haven't insulted [rubato]...

Wes, you're wasting your breath on the "high road" argument. Even though you are entirely correct, it won't change any of them.

Although I'd happily challenge LJ, Gob, and rubato to a little experiment -- leave off the insults for the month of September, and see what happens.

[wesw]

I m not saying that I always do the right thing by any means, only that I try and feel bad when I fail.

I m also much less certain that I always know what is right than I once was.

there was a time when I took pleasure in using my rapier like wit to cut someone down to size when I judged that they needed it.

now? not so much.

it was easier to see things in black and white, right and wrong terms. life is seldom that simple tho.

[Lord Jim]

Although I'd happily challenge LJ, Gob, and rubato to a little experiment -- leave off the insults for the month of September, and see what happens.

Let me remind you that I have not once, but twice, over the years offered to bury the hatchet with rube not for a month, but permanently...

The first time he responded with some delusional nonsense about how I was free to change my behavior anytime, but that his behavior was just fine and in no need of change...

The second time, he deigned not to respond to my offer at all...

There are a couple of reasons why what you suggest would never work:

First, rube would never allow the snarky left-handed, indirect passive-aggressive insults he regularly employs to be counted, so he would continue to use them in an effort to provoke others into responding with a direct retort. (At which point he would whine about being the aggrieved party, as he frequently does)

Second, (and even more fundamentally) rube is obviously in complete denial about his behavior; he doesn't see his insulting behavior as insulting. From his delusional perspective, he sees it as justified "truth telling" when the insults come from him. (Remember, this is a guy who recently said that it wasn't insulting for him to call other people "ignorant".)

Another fantasy he has embraced is this bizarre notion that he never starts any unpleasantness and only responds to a "lesser extent." (A belief which he has asserted more than once, despite the fact that it's been proven to be a complete joke on countless occasions.)

You can't have an agreement with someone on behavior and conduct who is so completely out in La La Land about their own behavior and conduct. A complete waste of time.

To draw an analogy, it would be like if I were to try to make an agreement with a schizophrenic that neither of us would talk to ourselves out loud. The schizophrenic doesn't even think he's doing that....

ETA:

Rube is a guy who believes that being condescending (which is of course, insulting except on Planet Rube) is something he simply can't avoid:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11057&p=139010&hil ... th#p139010

[Big RR]

Since we know that Judas wasn't there, The Eleven are Peter and .... oh, fancy that!

Of course we do know Thomas wasn't there as well from his behavior later, so maybe the 11 was just a name for the original apostles whether they all were there or not, or maybe not. Who really knows?

edited to add--from John 20:

19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. {the first post-resurrection appearance to the group--most likely the luke 24 appearance?)

20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.

21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

24 But Thomas, one of the twelve [again, it would only be 11 as Judas was not there/had hung himself, so either the 12 or 11 is likely a generic name for the apostles), called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

[oldr_n_wsr]

I m not saying that I always do the right thing by any means, only that I try and feel bad when I fail.

I m also much less certain that I always know what is right than I once was.

there was a time when I took pleasure in using my rapier like wit to cut someone down to size when I judged that they needed it.

now? not so much.

it was easier to see things in black and white, right and wrong terms. life is seldom that simple tho.

I like this guy.
Being civil is my goal. Progress, not perfection.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Big RR.... damn! And I'd already pointed that out too! Except oh.... no.... wait..... Luke 24:33 "while they were still talking about it, Jesus appeared.." Hearsay I'm sure that is but obviously Thomas had been there but just popped out to fetch the beer.

[rubato]

What LJ meant to say:

I see that you've been on the board almost a week and not a day has gone by where I haven't insulted [rubato]...

Wes, you're wasting your breath on the "high road" argument. Even though you are entirely correct, it won't change any of them.

Although I'd happily challenge LJ, Gob, and rubato to a little experiment -- leave off the insults for the month of September, and see what happens.

The experiment has been done. Gob and LJ failed every time.

Not that anyone else might have noticed.

yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

The experiment has been done. Gob and LJ failed every time.

Rube, I am so glad you posted that...

I was making the case that you're completely delusional about your behavior, and you were thoughtful enough to come along and provide a splendid example to help prove my point ...

[Big RR]

Big RR.... damn! And I'd already pointed that out too! Except oh.... no.... wait..... Luke 24:33 "while they were still talking about it, Jesus appeared.." Hearsay I'm sure that is but obviously Thomas had been there but just popped out to fetch the beer.

Touche!

[BoSoxGal]

Although I'd happily challenge LJ, Gob, and rubato to a little experiment -- leave off the insults for the month of September, and see what happens.

Challenge seconded!

Please, guys?? What could it hurt?

[Lord Jim]

Ok, I guess this needs to be repeated:

Although I'd happily challenge LJ, Gob, and rubato to a little experiment -- leave off the insults for the month of September, and see what happens.

Let me remind you that I have not once, but twice, over the years offered to bury the hatchet with rube not for a month, but permanently...

The first time he responded with some delusional nonsense about how I was free to change my behavior anytime, but that his behavior was just fine and in no need of change...

The second time, he deigned not to respond to my offer at all...

There are a couple of reasons why what you suggest would never work:

First, rube would never allow the snarky left-handed, indirect passive-aggressive insults he regularly employs to be counted, so he would continue to use them in an effort to provoke others into responding with a direct retort. (At which point he would whine about being the aggrieved party, as he frequently does)

Second, (and even more fundamentally) rube is obviously in complete denial about his behavior; he doesn't see his insulting behavior as insulting. From his delusional perspective, he sees it as justified "truth telling" when the insults come from him. (Remember, this is a guy who recently said that it wasn't insulting for him to call other people "ignorant".)

Another fantasy he has embraced is this bizarre notion that he never starts any unpleasantness and only responds to a "lesser extent." (A belief which he has asserted more than once, despite the fact that it's been proven to be a complete joke on countless occasions.)

You can't have an agreement with someone on behavior and conduct who is so completely out in La La Land about their own behavior and conduct. A complete waste of time.

To draw an analogy, it would be like if I were to try to make an agreement with a schizophrenic that neither of us would talk to ourselves out loud. The schizophrenic doesn't even think he's doing that....

ETA:

Rube is a guy who believes that being condescending (which is of course, insulting except on Planet Rube) is something he simply can't avoid:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11057&p=139010&hil ... th#p139010

[MajGenl.Meade]

Actually it didn't but it looks like we're headed for another death spiral