Adrianvs

The military can be really picky about their ammunition. I recall watching a program showing how the Army (I think) builds each cartridge individually. They buy the parts in bulk and then customize them to their specifications. Each cartridge is then weighed and otherwise inspected by hand. I had no idea..

No no, what would you have done if you were the parent, Bob? Hypothetical question.. I probably would have contacted the store first to see if they would open the device. I presume that they don't call the locksmith each time they must restock it. If the store didn't comply, I would inform them that mechanical kidnapping is a felony. haha.. Ed, "this never would have happened to me?" Hahahahah!!! That's the kind of statement that gives Providence a wicked little grin.. (This message has been edited by Adrianvs)

"Tell you what. . . you can volunteer to eat the brain of an infected cow and report on what happens." I would, FOG, but I'm already involved in cancer research which requires me to have tumors implanted into various tissues of my body. Given this, I believe that the results would be compromised. Exactly how fat are you, FOG? I may be able to find some interesting research subject jobs for you if you need the cash..

I read somewhere that there haven't been any scientific investigations describing how this disease is actually transmitted to humans from cows. Furthermore, it seems that the notion that this is spread by eating meat is mere speculation; there may be a third factor causing both (different) diseases in cows and humans. Oo..here's something: ------------- Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), is a fatal brain disorder that occurs in cattle and is caused by some unknown agent. In BSE, the unknown agent causes the cow's brain cells to die, forming sponge-like holes in the brain. The cow behaves strangely and eventually dies. The connection between BSE and humans was uncovered in Great Britain in the 1990s when several young people died of a human brain disorder, a new variation of a rare brain disorder called Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD), which typically strikes elderly people. The new variation was called new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (nvCJD), was similar to BSE and its connection to BSE was based on the following findings: *The nvCJD victims had lived in areas where outbreaks of BSE had occurred in cattle years earlier. No victims were found in areas without BSE outbreaks. *The brains of nvCJD victims had proteins called prions (pronounced "pree-ahnz") that were similar to those from the brains of BSE-infected cows, but different from those found in victims of classic CJD. *The time between the BSE outbreaks and the deaths of the victims was similar to the time that it takes for Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease to develop. *Brain tissue from BSE-infected cows caused experimental animals to develop symptoms and brain tissue disorders similar to those of the nvCJD victims. The British government concluded that BSE was probably the cause of nvCJD, and that the victims contracted the disease probably by eating meat from BSE-infected cows. BSE is spread by contact with brain or other nervous-system tissue from an infected individual. Contact can be from eating food or food by-products that have been contaminated with nervous tissue, or from instruments that have contacted diseased nervous tissue. Once the infectious agent enters the brain, it can lie dormant for several years (even as long as 10 to 15 years). When activated, the agent kills brain cells, leaving large areas of spongy holes. Also, large clumps of abnormal prion proteins (plaques) are found in brain cells. Once the agent is activated, the disease runs its course in less than one year, and ultimately results in death. We don't know the agent that causes BSE, but we do know the following: *The agent must be small - The agent's size must be as small or smaller than a virus. *You can't kill it by cooking or freezing - Much higher temperatures than those used in cooking or sterilizing are required to kill it. *Disinfectants don't work - Normal chemicals that you would use to disinfect surfaces for bacteria and viruses (Lysol, Betadine) are not effective. *It does not appear to have genetic information (nucleic acids) - This finding has been questioned. Research into BSE and similar diseases (nvCJD, CJD, scrapie) have provided three theories about the agent that causes BSE. These theories lead us to believe that it is: *An unidentified virus or virus-like particle - Although the size of the agent is right, the resistance to heat and chemicals, as well as the absence of any nucleic acids, would make it unlike any known virus. *A mobile bacterium (Spiroplasma) - Many of the features of Spiroplasma infections are similar to BSE, but there is no direct evidence to tie it to BSE. *An abnormal protein (prion) - Abnormal prions are found throughout the brains of BSE-infected cows, nvCJD victims, CJD victims and scrapie-infected sheep. The protein is smaller than a virus and not changed by heat or by disinfectants. This hypothesis is the most prevalent in the media, but goes against many accepted theories of biology. -------------- It seems that the 10-15 year "dormant period" may simply be a stretch to allow more correllations between cases of BSE in cows and cases of nvCJD in humans. A cow dies of BSE and a human dies of nvCJD fifteen years later in the same area. Please tell me that this is replicable in the lab (in less time).. Anyone have more specific information? It seems that we have a lot more loose ends than the media leads us to believe.

If the scoutmaster is leaving the troop entirely, then there may be some confusion between the friendship and cameraderie that the former scoutmaster supplied and his position. Remember that you aren't supposed to replace HIM, but to fill the position of scoutmaster. While you may want to be out of his shadow, it's not your place to be in the limelight either. Get or keep the scouts focused on their program and responsibilities and it will not be as important to them who the scoutmaster is. In other words, your goal isn't to be standing before the boys running the show with your charisma, but instead guiding them as they run the troop and meeting their goals themselves. Ask the former scoutmaster about aspects of the position and issues that may come up. If by "heart and soul," you mean that he imparted a great enthusiasm to the youth, then you may need to fill in for some of that. If you mean that he was a venerable fellow whose personal anecdotes about vegetable trucking were loved by all, then you may not be in the position to fill in for that. If you mean that he ran the show 100 percent of the time, then perhaps it is time for a change. Just remember why you are here and do what needs to be done. You are probably in a much better position than the former scoutmaster when he began in a new position with a new troop so many years ago. If nothing else, you have been serving the troop and observing him for six years. If that's not a practicum training, I don't know what is.. Good luck and keep posting!!(This message has been edited by Adrianvs)

Unfortunately, the OA handbook is still ambigious on exactly when the OA sash is to be worn. I think the phrase is "OA functions, when representing the OA, or special scouting events." The "special scouting events" has been interpreted as widely as to include all scout events and as narrowly as to exclude all but OA functions. I really wish that the BSA would make a list of what events may be considered "special." hahaha Regardless, I agree with the previous posters. Not only is the OA sash already represented on your uniform (in the lodge flap and arrow ribbon), but the merit badges have no other representation other than on their sash. Besides, an essential part of your trail to Eagle has been the merit badges that you have earned. Good luck and congratulations on getting this far!!

"In other other thread I showed you a dictionary definition of "hypocrisy" that fit my usage. Whether it is a public figure or someone posting on this board, when someone holds other people to a different standard than their own conduct, I call that person a hypocrite, unless they have openly (and credibly) renounced their past conduct. You can call the person whatever you'd like." I'm sorry; I'me afraid that you misunderstood my intent. I didn't bring it up because I disapprove of your use of the word "hypocrisy." I just meant to remind everyone that the word has traditionally been used more broadly to include those whose action DOES correspond to their preaching. It would just be a matter of whether the teaching is honestly held. I concede that the common usage is almost entirely the one that you use. I only brought it up to begin with because most people don't think of it that way any more. And it was a friendly barb to make sure that you weren't using "pretend virtue" (backed up by real action) in comparing yourself with another. That's all...

The biggest problem that we have encountered in creating our new society isn't the lore,symbols, or ceremonies; it's the structure. Specifically, we don't know how to structure the organization so that it may be effectively led as a group. Do we adopt a council of elected officials like OA? One problem with that is that the symbolic progression is very important and it would be difficult to have the positions open to all members. Progression in the tribe is largely a matter of experience, skill, and ability. Those who have been inducted into the "highest" circle aren't supposed to just be folks who are given an award, but those put in that position to lead and serve. Must there be people elected to yearly terms at all? How big is the risk of a "permanent establishment" running the show and excluding others for years on end? We also have to decide how to bring about the first generation. In other words, who starts at what level? An objective means would be to use the number of years attending the camp as a basis, but what role should merit play? Shouldn't there be some exclusion? Who decides? If the people are assigned to levels, should they be given a crash course in what they "missed," so to speak? The four main ceremonial levels aren't necessarily dependent upon each other, but they do follow the historical figures which typify them chronologically. The backstory needs to be understood up to the point that they are. We are also considering multiple paths through the levels. Not every person must fill the same positions as they progress. Some may wish to be chanters and speakers. Others prefer drumming and making outfitting. Some are most content building fires and torches. There are all different types and at some level, it seems we need to accomodate them in the tribe. To progress to the highest level, they will likely have to understand all of the lore and traditions and lore intimately, but it seems that there should be multiple responsibility options. Related to this is the membership of youth and adults. I know that some forms of MOS have different "ways" that youth and adult members take. It seems that this is mainly to prevent the indignity of 50 year old adults having to serve as shirtless torch-bearers, etc. While I agree with the results, I don't think that is best for us. How can the positions be shared without either group becoming artificially dominant? In other words, I think that youth and adults can become members without distinction between them. If more adults stay around and have a higher proportion in the high levels, so be it. But there shouldn't be any artificial restrictions on either group. Any thoughts or suggestions would be most welcome. I am quite satisfied with the way that the lore is fitting together so far. We have symbols that not only relate to our camp and historical figures specifically, but they are also scouting symbols metamorphized so nothing is really added as far as symbols go. It is very much our lore and history, which is hard to come by, even in a local society. The problems come in running the business. There are tasks that need to be organized and we need some objective structure. I am having trouble remembering how the levels and positions in MOS translate. How does one advance in positions and how are offices taken? Must one be a certain level to be elected head honcho for the season? Is there a head honcho for the season? Where is the authority and how does that relate to the average member? So many questions...

"That would be difficult since Eugene Stoner was born in the 20th century. However, didn't Christ say "if you don't got a piece, go sell your Starter jacket and buy one"? hahaha... I was just about to type a similar paraphrase, but you beat me to it.. It's better than mine, too. It comes as quite a shock to some people when they realize that Robert Powell wasn't the Christ.

Read Thomas Sowell's book, "The Vision of The Annointed" to see a detailed analysis of the doctrine and driving force behind liberal condescension.

"The awards are being presented at a pack meeting at the boys request." This must have been posted as I was typing. In the words of Roseanne Roseannadanna, "Nevermind." I would still attempt to have a representative of the awarding institution present, however. I just seems appropriate to me, but perhaps the situation would dictate otherwise..(This message has been edited by Adrianvs)

Ditto. Nearly all of the religious emblems require the youth to meet or work with a cleric or representatve of some religious community, so there should already be some individual who can arrange the presentation. As stated, the religious emblems are the religious institutions' awards and so should be awarded by the institution if possible. Just remember that it is up to the religious institution to determine how it will present the award. Don't attempt to plan a "scout mass" or "Cub service" or otherwise hijack the event. In most cases, I imagine that the community would welcome troop members as guests at their regular service, but you should check ahead and see if situations would require reserved seating, etc.

"...to the effect that what Strom did was ok because he, the poster (ok, it was FOG) had had "fun" (I think that was the term) with a number of "girls" who he would not have brought home to mother." False characterization. I merely corrected. The implicit charge of pretend virtue still stands. Would you prefer "whitewashed tomb?" What about "self-aggrandizing pretend moralist?" It seems that you are fond of common parlence; I believe that "poser" is the proper term. YiS, P.S. How many dozen articles on Strom's (what is the phrase...) personal life have you read? Hmm..

"Correction, I do not disapprove with how people are reacting to Saddams capture, I disapprove of the many people who see this as the answer to the worlds problems." I agree and apologize if I misinterpreted your position. Many people in this country do hold the feelings and thoughts that I described, and it appeared that you were one of them..

"...but I still stand by my first argument; I am disgusted with how people are taking this Saddam captured thing." I'm sure you would see no problem with partying down harder than the Iraqis if your political candidate was elected or another was defeated. Do you really not see the emotional impact of a man who killed millions including hundreds of thousands of civilians being brought to justice and permanently removed from power? Or is it just too much of a political liability for the 2004 election to even pretend that reality exists? "This CANNOT be something good. Prime directive states that only bad can come from government during set period of time..." I think your gut impression is that this is a BAD thing, but you realize that you can't state such a thing openly. Do you secretly wish that Saddam came back into power and slaughtered a couple thousand civilians? Be honest now.. Do you wish that terrorists would kill more Americans just before the November election? Would that make you grin as you waited for the political commentary? Tell us the truth. Do you get a warm fuzzy feeling every time the soldiers' death toll rises? Are you disappointed that there haven't been any terrorist attacks on American soil since 9-11-01? Is your political faith so absolute that you have made right into wrong and wrong into right? Or have you just been brainwashed into believing that even small victories (the capture of a mass-murderer and mass-torturer) cannot be celebrated? What would be cause for celebration for you? I don't expect an honest answer, but then again I'm not sure that I would like to hear one.. "We are a barely a speck lost somewhere in this gigantic cosmos and we fight each other with ruthless abandon, as if we were issued the Holiest of decrees to do so. We crown our selfhood with the highest of import and swagger like drunken lords, yet we are the smallest of vapors in the fabric of space and time." We must remember that your reductive cosmology assumes one crucial fact: Man is the astronomer. Or steal another trite statement, "It may be crooked, but it's the only game in town." I do agree with the gist of your statement as William Golding stated it: "Men produce evil like bees produce honey." I see hope, as well. But to find that solution, we need to realize that we are rather like "broken gods" to use Chesterton's terms. "As much as I hate Michael Moore, I have to agree with his claim that America is a very fear-driven place." As Arnold Schwartzenegger said in Kindergarten Cop, "Compared to what?" This type of comparison is very common, but what is the standard to which we compare the US? People like Michael Moore? While he may not really be that paranoid about non-liberals in political power, he sure pretends to be to sell products. Are the terrorists or the Muslim community less fear-driven? What about other foreign powers? Are they less fear-driven? What about those (aside from Mr. Moore) who comment on the fear-driven nature of society? Are they fear-driven themselves? FOG provides a good example of this: "It looks like we might be headed that way. National ID cards. Random checkpoints. Cameras watching our every move. Police browsing our email." America is indeed a fear-driven place. But the fear-driven Americans aren't the ones you are likely referring to and they aren't alone in their fear-driven motives. I'm going to sleep now; I'm quoted out...(This message has been edited by Adrianvs)

Welcome, WAKWIB. Your mention of your son reminds me of something. I don't want to appear too cynical about the OA or give the impression that I disapprove of it. I am a Vigil Honor member of my lodge and am proud to be part of the organization. The ceremonial symbolism in OA goes quite deep and I have spent hours helping members unravel the meaning of the ordeal symbols to understand the progression to brotherhood. It is fun to tease out the threads of symbolism implicit in the ordeal and see how they manifest in the brotherhood. I also don't want to give the impression that I find MOS a perfect program. I much prefer the OA model of youth leadership (in theory) and don't care for the common MOS model that gives all the top positions to "old timers." I like the merged system that gave analagous positions to youth and adults. There are two sets of officers and ceremonial positions that co-exist. It neither forced 98% of adults into "retirement" (like OA), nor permanently enthroned anyone who had been around for a long time to the exclusion of youth (like MOS). As for the faults of OA, I don't know whether it would be better to amend the program to fill these gaps or use other programs to fill them. One of the aspects of MOS that I admire is how it apparently makes everyone part of a tribe. That means that everyone belongs and everyone has a job. So often (here, at least) the OA program seems to be carried out by a few officers and conscripted camp staff. Members become mere spectators. It isn't "their" program. It's the program that a lodge sub-committee puts on with conscripted staff labor. Members aren't really distinguished from non-members until they hold a (relatively rare) office. In MOS, the position is what you do as well as who you are in the tribe. I like that. Again, I critique the OA because I see much unused potential in it. I have had several years of active leadership and service in the organization and enjoyed it very much. I performed camp promotions, as well as served as a chapter chief and ceremonialist. Our council has two camps and the smaller one is basically under the jurisdiction of our chapter, so we function as a mini-lodge without all the financial responsibilies. It was all rewarding and I hope to serve many more years as an adult, trying to keep my mouth shut and hands behind my back unless I become an adviser or advice is asked of me. (I just turned 22.) I have been found useful as a ceremonial adviser this past year, but I must always remind myself of the line between giving direction and becoming a director. Admittedly having been a rather authoritarian chief during my tenure, I have found this to be the most difficult ordeal of all. I'm still having fun, however, and it's good to see the torches passed (figuratively and literally) to the younger generations, just as they were passed to us not so long ago... Yours in WWW, Klamachpin Elitehat(This message has been edited by Adrianvs)

"And by the way, it seems to me that the same person who criticized the Beatles for "casual sex" posted something in the thread about Strom Thurmond to the effect that what Strom did was ok because he, the poster (ok, it was FOG) had had "fun" (I think that was the term) with a number of "girls" who he would not have brought home to mother." I'm sorry, but FOG wasn't stating that Strom's "fun" with the black mistress was OK. He was simply stating that a racist (or anyone else) needn't respect the object of his sexual gratification. He was indicating that lots of people engage in such actions with people that they wouldn't associate with publicly or introduce to one's family as a potential spouse. He never stated that such behavior is acceptable and I don't think that he believes that it is at all. Some people do, however. Don't you have words for it like "free love" or "safe sex" or something to the like? Remember what we learned about hypocrisy? It usually takes the form of pretend virtue? Pretend prudence perhaps?

Here is a brief history of the lodge in question. I had hesitated in revealing the lodge name and number, but it seems to be well-known enough that I wouldn't be betraying any secrets. So here you go.. HISTORY OF ORDER OF THE ARROW SILVER TOMAHAWK LODGE #80 By Bill Dorrell Silver Tomahawk Lodge was established in 1935 and continued untill the fall of 1958. At that time Mr. Earl Ring moved from Kansas City to become the Scout Executive for the then Southeast Iowa Council and under Mr. Ring's directive the Order of the Arrow charter was dropped and The Tribe of the Silver Tomahawk, a Mic-O-Say organization, was established. In 1964 Mr. Ring died and the new Scout Executive, Bill Kephart, rechartered us as Silver Tomahawk Lodge 80. At that time both the standard O.A. program and some of the Mic-O-Say traditions were used together. The single biggest change was that once again boy officers were elected and an L.E.C. structure was used. Over the next few years the organization was in flux, with changes in ceremonies occuring almost weekly. To solidify things an ad hoc group got togeather and created a more unified blend of the two organizations. When they submitted their proposal, a majority of it was accepted by the Scout Executive. When Mr. Kephart moved on many of the Mic-O-Say traditions he did not approve of were gradually re-instituted. With minor modifications the mixed program continued untill Southeast Iowa Council was combined with Saukee Area Council and Silver Tomahawk Lodge 80 was merged with Meheegun Lodge 136 to form Ka-Ti-Mississippi Lodge 37. Almost all of the Mic-O-Say traditions were dropped and there was great discontent on the Silver Tomahawk side. After two years of heated discussion and communication with the National Order of the Arrow, the boys from the two former lodges were allowed to vote as to what they desired and both lodges voted, Meheegun Lodge by 92% and Silver Tomahawk Lodge by 96%, to return to the original two lodges. Today, Silver Tomahawk Lodge 80 continues to be a unique blend of both the Order of the Arrow program and the Mic-O-Say program. Bill Dorrell Vigil/Keeper of the Wampum Silver Tomahawk Lodge 80

"Now as to the MOS tribe that is reportidly an OA lodge, I would very seriously question that. I could see how you could be a OA lodge and also do the MOS program, but doing the MOS program instead of the OA program, while pretending to be OA would not be exceptable to anyone I know. From what I understand MOS ceremonies and 'membership levels' do not equate well with anything in the OA." It is a very odd situation, indeed. I've looked over the program and ceremonial books for the lodge and it is almost entirely MOS. The only elements of OA present in their program are the youth officers, lodge flaps, and sashes. I don't recall exactly how they reconciled the MOS organization of officers with OA's. They do have most all the youth chiefs and vice-chiefs of OA, but they also keep the (slightly modified) positions of Mic-O-Say. There are both youth and adult positions that compliment each other (like chiefs and advisors), that seem to follow the levels of MOS. Whether the "official" lodge officers and advisors are also the MOS positions, I don't recall. The levels and offices have Lenni Lenape names, but seem to correlate to the MOS levels (Brave, Warrior, Medicine Man, and Chief). I realize that this is likely confusing, but I don't recall many of the details. Members wear MOS log chains, but they also receive OA sashes at three of the levels. The lodge advisor I spoke to said that he had a vigil sash, but he had never been to an actual vigil ceremony, let alone gone through an ordeal. As I understand it, there was a move to shut down this organization at the council level, but it was so popular with the scouts and scouters that the lodge members ended up receiving an apology letter from the council. Needless to say, this all seems very uncommon and unlikely in the BSA, but I haven't heard any disconfirming evidence so far. It seems odd that national would allow the symbols and insignia of one program to be used for another. As we all know, the BSA wouldn't stand for another group using its uniform and registering as a council or unit. Yet such a thing is happening with the OA. It doesn't bother me at all, as this program seems to be integrated into the program and serving the youth better than OA can. I just wonder how such a bottom-up (and classically FOGean) display of power could be pulled off. Is the hammer yet to fall on the Silver Tomahawk?

Check out this site, Tamegonit. http://usscouts.org/honorsociety/honorscout.html While the OA provides many opportunites for service and experience, I think that local honor societies also have their place. One of the original purposes of the Brotherhood was to preserve local camping traditions. Now, it seems that the purpose is to uproot and replace them with national ones. We are actually working on a local organization here which will become part of our camp program. Drawing on both local history and camp lore, it seems much more appropriate than ceremonialists with Lenni Lenape names wearing Sioux outfits showing up for five hours a week. Most years, the "Lodge Team" wants practice time, so the ceremonies are performed by individuals who don't even attend our camp. At one time, the OA served primarily as an enhancement of the summer camp program. In time, it branched out and began having events the rest of the year. Now, it's primarily a separate entity and some councils are even removing OA from their summer camp programs entirely. Members will go through the ordeal at a separate event, etc. Very often, Arrowmen will have to choose between OA events or council/unit camping. This is especially the case in our lodge which happens to be the host for NOAC this summer. (I will not be attending, as I will be on camp staff instead. Our council has two camps.) It just seems to me that many of the original or stated goals of the national program could be better met by local programs. I am interested in how programs like Mic-O-Say and OA could co-exist. I know of one council where the MOS tribe is officially registered as an OA lodge and they retain the MOS program, organization, and ceremonials. I've spoken with the former lodge advisor about it, but I still don't understand how they can get away with it... Very interesting indeed...

Just because his name is Anselm, I will make a donation. Heck, I'll just fork over the whole $2.25 and buy him the knot..

I realized that commandpro is likely a professional scouter himself just after I posted. I would guess that he is not responding because he is pretending to not have the time to follow the board closely. It'll be a few days until he comes out of faux hiding and we hear from him. UTPBHO... Remember when we were talking about the true meaning of hypocrisy as pretending to be what one is not? Busy busy beaver..

It won't really take effect until the new line of 'moichendise' comes through.. "Darn, we're going to have to sell 5 billion new patches over the nexy year." I wonder if current lodge flaps will become obsolete or improper insignia.

Why should being a professional scouter indicate less free time than any other profession? Go through the career thread again and see if there are any other people that you should say "Get back to work!!" too. I would wager that Dave spends more of his free time on work related pursuits than nearly anyone else here. What is your job, Commandpro, and how much time to you spend at it?

I have a society sword under the bed. Does that count?