Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Fran]

Right on Tinka!  

You are so right!  Praise God you can see right through those who are trying to cover a multitude of sins!

Bob,

Ignore those comments from the factually challenged.  You are by far the professional one!  Your facts are there for all to read.  They are not of the Lord for sure!  I know you have to post to let people know the truth.  I am sorry you have to repeat, repeat & repeat to those with blinders one.

Their facts all come from Danny, the factually challenged counterfeit!  They give no proof.  They give nothing to even lend to the words they are saying!  

Danny is really charismatic.  He could sell and Eskimo an air conditioner when the weather is 150 degrees below zero!  I will never subject my brain to him.  I see what he has done to others.  God bids up to treat our bodies with wholesome things.  That leaves Danny out in the cold for sure!

Does any one know if the paternity test has been made by now?  

I appreciate you and Gailon for your hard work and your full disclosure of the truth.

Bring on the jury!  Non-Adventists will see right through him!  The judges sure can see through them!  I am still smiling at the way the judge responded in the document I read last month!  The judge knows!

I have been reading the documents on your new website.  I started with the 1st document filed to open the lawsuit.  I read every accusation they made against both you and Gailon.  There was one that I know for a fact you guys never made!  However, every accusation has been proved through your research.  

Your documents are very revealing.  All you cited above, plus much more is right on!

God be with you as you are at war with the real counterfeit!

[Fran]

Ian,

I would like to see the photo from ASI.  It could be the first in your submitting anything of value.

[Bob Pickle]

Bring on the jury!  Non-Adventists will see right through him!  The judges sure can see through them!  I am still smiling at the way the judge responded in the document I read last month!  The judge knows!

It was funny, some of the things he said. For those who want to read them, see http://www.3abnvjoy.com/ilsd-08mc00016/ilsd-08mc00016-doc-29.pdf.

Litigation 101.

Or, (1) ways Danny might hide money which means we have to conduct more discovery, (2) how to use a lawsuit to say it ain't so, Joe, and (3) how to open a very large can of worms.

[Mary Sue Smith]

Ian,

I would like to see the photo from ASI.  It could be the first in your submitting anything of value.

Wow Fran--how could you possibly know Ian's posts are of no value if you don't read them?       I mean, you did say you don't read them. 

[Mary Sue Smith]

Bring on the jury!  Non-Adventists will see right through him!  The judges sure can see through them!  I am still smiling at the way the judge responded in the document I read last month!  The judge knows!

It was funny, some of the things he said. For those who want to read them, see http://www.3abnvjoy.com/ilsd-08mc00016/ilsd-08mc00016-doc-29.pdf.

Litigation 101.

Or, (1) ways Danny might hide money which means we have to conduct more discovery, (2) how to use a lawsuit to say it ain't so, Joe, and (3) how to open a very large can of worms.

You thought the Judge was funny?  I did read what he said. The very end was the most interesting.  For those who don't know, Mr. Simpson represents 3ABN.  The Court is the Judge speaking.



MR. PICKLE: Your Honor, can I speak to the issue

of complete production?



THE COURT: No. No, we don't need to get there

right now. All we're dealing with here, because the

production issue is clearly not before me.



MR. PICKLE: Could I --



THE COURT: No. No. No. We're done here. I have

one of two options here. And I could either go ahead and

quash this subpoena and with the understanding that the

defendants could reserve the subpoena on Gray Hunter Stenn at

a later date when this scope of discovery has been narrowed

by Judge Hillman in Massachusetts. That would --



MR. PICKLE: Your Honor --



THE COURT: No. No. No. You have had your time

to talk. Now is mine.



MR. PICKLE: Okay.



THE COURT: I don't know what that would really

accomplish, so what I'm going to do is this: We're going to

do nothing on this. We're just going to leave this subpoena

open for right now. And I will direct that Gray Hunter Stenn

and Three Angels take every effort to preserve any documents

of any kind, documents or records of any kind, electronic or

otherwise, which might be produced under the subpoena. And

I'm going to then order right now that any further litigation

concerning the subpoena which has been issued to Gray Hunter

Stenn be transferred to the district of Massachusetts and

Judge Hillman because it is so closely and completely

intertwined with matters before him at this time. And I fear

that anything which might be done here might lead to

inconsistent rulings, and that will be that.

So the subpoena is open. Gray Hunter Stenn and

Three Angels are ordered to preserve any records of any kind,

electronic or otherwise, which might satisfy the subpoena.

The matter then will be transferred to Judge Hillman for any

further action. And waiting until the scope of discovery is

resolved is going to be a good way to do that.

And we have made a transcript of these proceedings.

Anybody who desires to have a transcript may contact Jane

McCorkle and arrange for the transcript. And that will be

that. Actually, you're going to have this electronically so

I guess Judge Hillman could pull this up if he wanted to if

somebody orders it. Right. And that will be that.



MR. SIMPSON: Thank you, Judge Frazier.



THE COURT: All right. Thanks, everybody.

(End of hearing.)

[Cindy]

Thanks, Duane. And that just illustrates that the "facts" Cindy cites about Danny or his cousin or anything else are no more reliable than those Walt Thompson cites, the man who reports what he believes he was told.

Wrong, You must think people are stupid, Bob.  Donating money to build a facility is a whole different ball game... Most I hope can understand that.

But where did you get the idea that there was more than one sign?

I got that idea as soon as the picture of another sign was posted, Bob.
I thought my post about that was quite clear.

You referred to a sign, and if there has only been one sign, and Duane posted a picture of that sign, my statement is valid. Your contention that there must be another sign would be a glaring inaccuracy.

Ah.. the hypothetical "if"...

Still wrong.  I would put it like this, Bob:

I referred to a specific sign, and there has obviously over time been more than one sign, as Duane just posted a picture of another sign, your statement is therefore invalid. Your contentions are full of glaring inaccuracies.

Moving on... and I do mean that. If you want to continue quibbling about this, and trying to justify what you wrote, do it alone.

So Cindy, who or what is the source of your information regarding the car loan and all? Those details you cited were concrete. Why not get a copy of the loan and its payment history and post it?

I don't have a copy, nor do I feel the need to attempt to get one, Bob. As you stated the details I cited are concrete. Anyone else who cares to verify that for themselves has only to talk to those who were there and involved and even witnesses...

1. You failed to state the source of your information.

That is a truly a hoot coming from you Bob... but if by that you mean I failed to name names? That is true. Far too many innocent people have already been publicly sacrificed to this Bonfire Of The Vanities, I don't intend to add to that.

2. In this case we have something that can be easily documented to be true or false, and yet you suggest that people can instead rely on he said/she said. Why?

More than a couple of things are worth noting here...

1. You already stated the details I cited were concrete...

2. The personal info on those loan papers are neither your's nor the public's business, and to post them would be a violation of privacy. So even if I had them, which I don't, I would NEVER post them or give them to you.

3. I didn't suggest that people can instead rely on he said/she said. YOU just suggested that for me. He said/ she said indicates opposing viewpoints or stories. That isn't the case here. Let me repeat myself: "Anyone else who cares to verify that for themselves has only to talk to those who were there and involved and even witnesses" they will all tell the same story.

If they don't know who those people are, then it is probably not their business.


4. You don't need the "payment history". You might try asking Linda, after all she knew all about the loan and the car etc.. and had no problem with it. Then.

You said you had a picture from ASI. Why not post it? Or rather, why did you ignore my question?

I didn't mean to ignore your question. But I have been debating with myself about the merits of posting it in contrast to Sister's posts just to prove she is deceptive, and whether I want to attempt to do that??

What's your opinion about that, Bob?

..ian

[Fran]

Junebug!

Well, well,well!  Those parts are not what was being discussed.  I encourage everyone to read the whole thing!  

Hey, Junebug, why is it being sent to Hillman?  He refused to rule because it should be heard by Hillman.  I agree.  

Why did you not enter what ALL the judge said?  He is on to what is going on.  Anyone reading the document will see!  

However, thank you for revealing your chopped up counterfeit view!

The judge knew what was happening and knew what he was going to do.  Bob had no clue and wanted to make comments.  However, when the judge saw what was in the wind he put a stop to the 3ABN group!  Yes, it is a must read!  Be sure to read it all, not just the counterfeits choice.

[GRAT]

FYI Ian, I was never confused about what picture was being talked about.  And I don't know who sister is so how would I know who her husband is?

[Bob Pickle]

The very end was the most interesting.

Note that the first one labeled "Pickle" is actually Gailon. There is a place earlier where "Simpson" is actually Gailon.

Note also that Simpson led the court to believe that the issue of scope and relevance was not yet decided by Hillman, when Simpson had told me that it was. And since Hillman had denied Simpson's request to limit the scope of discovery, I think Hillman had already decided it.

That is a problem with hiring worldly lawyers.

[Bob Pickle]

But where did you get the idea that there was more than one sign?

I got that idea as soon as the picture of another sign was posted, Bob.
I thought my post about that was quite clear.

You didn't answer my question. Where did you get the idea that there was another sign other than the one Duane posted? The only sign I ever recall hearing about is the one he posted. Where did you get the idea that there was a sign commemorating anything other than the building of the ball diamond or whatever it is?

2. In this case we have something that can be easily documented to be true or false, and yet you suggest that people can instead rely on he said/she said. Why?

More than a couple of things are worth noting here...

1. You already stated the details I cited were concrete...

What I meant by stating that is that you provided concrete details which could easily be proven true or false with documentation.

2. The personal info on those loan papers are neither your's nor the public's business, and to post them would be a violation of privacy. So even if I had them, which I don't, I would NEVER post them or give them to you.

Then don't bring it up. Entirely refrain from making easily documented assertions that you refuse to document.

You said you had a picture from ASI. Why not post it? Or rather, why did you ignore my question?

I didn't mean to ignore your question. But I have been debating with myself about the merits of posting it in contrast to Sister's posts just to prove she is deceptive, and whether I want to attempt to do that??

What's your opinion about that, Bob?

..ian

Like I said above, if one can prove an assertion, it should be done under at least some circumstances.

But suppose what you said about Sister were true, and I do not say that it is. What would that prove? Not much. It certainly wouldn't prove that Danny didn't threaten Glenn Dryden, or lie about the child molestation allegations against Tommy, etc.

[CRYSTAL]

Folks... Cindy, or 'Ian' and the entire group of Danny defenders know that this paternity test is an explosive issue. That's why they do what they can to change the subject from that... So let's stick to it. Don't get distracted. Danny doesn't want this out in the open because he knows that the results of this could potentially destroy what's left of his credibility.

[anyman]

Robert, your postings across the Internet always remind one of these individuals . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnunfciSr7k

They visually represent your standard operating procedure.

But where did you get the idea that there was more than one sign?

I got that idea as soon as the picture of another sign was posted, Bob.
I thought my post about that was quite clear.

You didn't answer my question. Where did you get the idea that there was another sign other than the one Duane posted? The only sign I ever recall hearing about is the one he posted. Where did you get the idea that there was a sign commemorating anything other than the building of the ball diamond or whatever it is?

2. In this case we have something that can be easily documented to be true or false, and yet you suggest that people can instead rely on he said/she said. Why?

More than a couple of things are worth noting here...

1. You already stated the details I cited were concrete...

What I meant by stating that is that you provided concrete details which could easily be proven true or false with documentation.

2. The personal info on those loan papers are neither your's nor the public's business, and to post them would be a violation of privacy. So even if I had them, which I don't, I would NEVER post them or give them to you.

Then don't bring it up. Entirely refrain from making easily documented assertions that you refuse to document.

You said you had a picture from ASI. Why not post it? Or rather, why did you ignore my question?

I didn't mean to ignore your question. But I have been debating with myself about the merits of posting it in contrast to Sister's posts just to prove she is deceptive, and whether I want to attempt to do that??

What's your opinion about that, Bob?

..ian

Like I said above, if one can prove an assertion, it should be done under at least some circumstances.

But suppose what you said about Sister were true, and I do not say that it is. What would that prove? Not much. It certainly wouldn't prove that Danny didn't threaten Glenn Dryden, or lie about the child molestation allegations against Tommy, etc.

[Cindy]

2. The personal info on those loan papers are neither your's nor the public's business, and to post them would be a violation of privacy. So even if I had them, which I don't, I would NEVER post them or give them to you.

Then don't bring it up. Entirely refrain from making easily documented assertions that you refuse to document.

Bob,

 Allow me to be perfectly clear.

I did not bring up the loan agreement or the payment history documents. I don't even consider them necessary. You brought them up, you wanted them posted and made public. Not me.

Is there something about respecting others and their right to privacy
that you just can't comprehend?

Here is what I brought up.

""Might want to ask" Sister (or if it's really your business and you want the real facts, ask the real cousin) how a car she claims was"bought" for the cousin had to be sold to pay off the loan when she and her mother couldn't make the payments, or how that qualifies as "hush money"

The girl herself could tell you that the car wasn't bought for her and that it had to be sold to pay off the loan.

See this is a real problem, and not just in this topic but in almost every one you bring up. An innocent is publicly sacrificed in your BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES. There are a bunch of you making accusations here about a innocent girl that you don't even know, gossiping about her, and tarnishing her reputation, a girl who you haven't even consulted about this or asked for her version of events.

You all think this is righteous? Well, not me. I call it hatred, Character assassination (murder) and lies, which is serving a whole other God than the one you are all claiming to work for in this "work" you have appointed yourselves.

It's disgusting and vile.

Good-bye, Bob.

Danny had an affair with a second cousin during her senior year of high school. He bought her a car. Some people might consider it hush money. Since CRYSTAL was the one who started this topic, let her be the one to supply further information.

I don't know how I missed this one..

Yeah right, Crystal supplies zero information or proof as anyone reading this thread can see for themselves. 100% of her posts so far are ugly unsupported insinuations and accusations not even backed up by anyone I've asked or heard from who were there at the time. Yet her thread and posts continue to be allowed here blackening not only DS's name but his young cousin's...  And what has she done to deserve or justify all the public smearing and gossip about her on this forum?


Anyway..

"Might want to ask" Sister (or if it's really your business and you want the real facts, ask the real cousin) how a car she claims was"bought" for the cousin had to be sold to pay off the loan when she and her mother couldn't make the payments, or how that qualifies as "hush money".

Might also want to ask Sister to post some proof as it is Sister who is the one who boldly and bluntly has claimed there was an "affair", (again an accusation against the "young cousin".)

[anyman]

Ian, in today's perverse society, accusations of sexual impropriety are usually quicker to gain traction than the more mundane financial accusations that Gailon and Robert have tossed around. Since the financial accusations have not been able to convince anyone to this point - even the IRS - the attackers of God must focus on accusations that are bound to get more people riled up. Robert has focused the majority of his efforts on the issues that revolve around Tommy Shelton and the, evidently manufactured, issues of sexual misconduct he has tried to pin on Danny Shelton.

His obsession with these two particular areas raises red flags in the minds of many, and well it should. More than once in recent months I have been asked why there is never any attack on the message spread to the world by 3ABN - and they answer their own rhetorical question by pointing to the truth of the message being beamed around the world from 3ABN. In the area churches around me, there have been a multitude of baptisms in the past year that are the result of souls either being pointed to 3ABN's broadcasts by a friend or "stumbling on to" the broadcasts as they flipped around the dial. The truth wins souls. How many souls do you think have come to the foot of the cross as a result of the work of Gailon, Robert, Lynette, Fran, Kris F., and others who have been on their band wagon? One would have to guess, none, since they keep peoples focus away from God, they keep others eyes on the earth and not on heaven. Isn't there much said in the Bible and Mrs. White's writings about those who know the truth, yet lead others astray and away from the saving grace of the cross?

anyman

2. The personal info on those loan papers are neither your's nor the public's business, and to post them would be a violation of privacy. So even if I had them, which I don't, I would NEVER post them or give them to you.

Then don't bring it up. Entirely refrain from making easily documented assertions that you refuse to document.

Bob,

 Allow me to be perfectly clear.

I did not bring up the loan agreement or the payment history documents. I don't even consider them necessary. You brought them up, you wanted them posted and made public. Not me.

Is there something about respecting others and their right to privacy
that you just can't comprehend?

Here is what I brought up.

""Might want to ask" Sister (or if it's really your business and you want the real facts, ask the real cousin) how a car she claims was"bought" for the cousin had to be sold to pay off the loan when she and her mother couldn't make the payments, or how that qualifies as "hush money"

The girl herself could tell you that the car wasn't bought for her and that it had to be sold to pay off the loan.

See this is a real problem, and not just in this topic but in almost every one you bring up. An innocent is sacrificed to your BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES. There are a bunch of you making accusations here about a innocent girl that you don't even know, gossiping about her, and tarnishing her reputation, a girl who you haven't even consulted about this or asked for her version of events.

You all think this is righteous? Well, not me. I call it hatred, Character assassination (murder) and lies, which is serving a whole other God than the one you are all claiming to work for in this "work" you have appointed yourselves.

It's disgusting and vile.

Good-bye, Bob.

Danny had an affair with a second cousin during her senior year of high school. He bought her a car. Some people might consider it hush money. Since CRYSTAL was the one who started this topic, let her be the one to supply further information.

I don't know how I missed this one..

Yeah right, Crystal supplies zero information or proof as anyone reading this thread can see for themselves. 100% of her posts so far are ugly unsupported insinuations and accusations not even backed up by anyone I've asked or heard from who were there at the time. Yet her thread and posts continue to be allowed here blackening not only DS's name but his young cousin's...  And what has she done to deserve or justify all the public smearing and gossip about her on this forum?


Anyway..

"Might want to ask" Sister (or if it's really your business and you want the real facts, ask the real cousin) how a car she claims was"bought" for the cousin had to be sold to pay off the loan when she and her mother couldn't make the payments, or how that qualifies as "hush money".

Might also want to ask Sister to post some proof as it is Sister who is the one who boldly and bluntly has claimed there was an "affair", (again an accusation against the "young cousin".)

[GRAT]

Anyman - 3ABN is not God.  Danny Shelton is not God.