Print

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

[Bob Pickle]

You are standing here looking naked and without excuse, Robert Pickle. You should be ashamed as even I, after reading all, am embarrassed for you. You appear to me to be seared to the core. A man who can not choose to do the right thing is no man as far as I am concerned.

Talk to Danny about it. He's the one who 3ABN gave the land to, not me.

No one but the board of directors/trustees has any right to say where the money from the 3ABN organization goes, EXCEPT when it comes to the donors.

False. The U.S. Government has such a right because 3ABN is a non-profit organization. Further, 3ABN's corporate documents forbid 3ABN from facilitating Danny in engaging in private inurement.

And God has such a right as well. It is simply wrong for 3ABN to solicit money from the public, and then turn around and pour it into Danny's pockets.

Remember why that 1998 house deal occurred instead of simply paying Danny housing and retirement benefits? Because they didn't want to make it look like Danny and Linda were making a lot of money, because that wouldn't sit well with donors.

[tinka]

Nosir Myzing,

Whether you want to recognize this fact or not it remains to this extent.

What you have in 3abn is this:

1. Many baptized SDA's focusing on business of an idea that DS came up with.

2. Many contributors, did not know that they claim non-denominational for the record and still don't.

3. Why?.. so they are not affiliated with the church to answer what they do with the money as you state.

4. This way they controll the money "mind you" using the people of the Seventh Day Adventist church when they have the gall not to be associated with. How sweet it is to be able to outsmart for "nobodies business" what they do with these ill gotten funds.

5. That is fraudulent ways and means. Politically correct in the field of business and TV personalities, but against the SP of church ethics.

6. Bob and Gailon have every right to bring this to the focus of the SDA people and protect the fraudulent taking of the pew money. In this manner they found also criminal coverings, accusations, false statements in the reporting of funds made within and used for nonprofit. while, adultery, fornication's, divorces,smoking, molesting & call what may was going on under the banner of SDA...and for public view.

7. You see 3abn stand on a line of business as usual using fraudulent statements of "all volunteer" for "evangelism" to the public and Bob & Gailon stand on the principles of SDA and SP to the protection of the Devil's folly in so many confusing ways 3abn took to protect every aspect of business as usual.

8. In fact now because of the non-complete employment and non- complete real estate clause
It is obvious how DS got Brandy to sign a prenuptial. The Board just could not take a chance and made it easy for DS as his excuse to her. (laugh) They weren't going to let his shenanigans jeopardize all the rest of the   feed.  I am glad now they are found out not to be of the church but impostors with SDA baptismal credentials that are denied for the sake of assets in their own pockets.

9. And how did you expect this to last? Before all greed was found out?? This was abuse to the honest funds provided by SDA people. and that is what Bob and Gailon are standing up to and for and nothing more.

[Johann]

In case you want to do further research on what has been posted on this subject, Ian thinks you may want to consider these posts as well:

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23192.html#msg23192
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23193.html#msg23193
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23194.html#msg23194
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23195.html#msg23195
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23196.html#msg23196
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23197.html#msg23197
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23198.html#msg23198
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23208.html#msg23208
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23210.html#msg23210

[Pat Williams]

In case you want to do further research on what has been posted on this subject, Ian thinks you may want to consider these posts as well:

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23192.html#msg23192
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23193.html#msg23193
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23194.html#msg23194
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23195.html#msg23195
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23196.html#msg23196
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23197.html#msg23197
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23198.html#msg23198
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23208.html#msg23208
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23210.html#msg23210

And I agree with ian, if she even said this (?) as I see nothing here about it. So do you agree or not Johann? If you do why didn't you just move those posts here along with the rest? seems weird to me as they don't belong in the other thread anymore and don't make sense. But, much is strange here in my opinion. and you do here as you think makes sense. so carry on..

[Johann]

I like your positive attitude - thank you. I was just too lazy to move them all - too much work. With your graceful remark we can manage these discussions.

In case you want to do further research on what has been posted on this subject, Ian thinks you may want to consider these posts as well:

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23192.html#msg23192
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23193.html#msg23193
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23194.html#msg23194
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23195.html#msg23195
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23196.html#msg23196
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23197.html#msg23197
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23198.html#msg23198
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23208.html#msg23208
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,1820.msg23210.html#msg23210

And I agree with ian, if she even said this (?) as I see nothing here about it. So do you agree or not Johann? If you do why didn't you just move those posts here along with the rest? seems weird to me as they don't belong in the other thread anymore and don't make sense. But, much is strange here in my opinion. and you do here as you think makes sense. so carry on..

[Johann]

Get out of your ditch, Ms/Mr. Nosi! Your verbiage is challenging.

For what it is worth: I am both amazed and appalled here. You are standing here looking naked and without excuse, Robert Pickle. You should be ashamed as even I, after reading all, am embarrassed for you. You appear to me to be seared to the core. A man who can not choose to do the right thing is no man as far as I am concerned.

May God have mercy on your soul.

[Fran]

Bob,

I agree with you!  I think Ian needs to learn to give respect where it is due.  Her attitude with you is disrespectful and UN-Christ like!  She is the one standing naked before the world.  She is quite transparent with her motives.  I will have to really pray for Ian.  She has been so deceived.

There is enough proof against Danny for her to see the light. Yet, she continues not see that Danny is not representing God in his motives and actions. 

Bob, thank you for sticking in with the truth.  I have been sick and not able to read and post.  But this needs a comment.

[tinka]

Fran,
How good to hear from you again on here, Wonder and Think about you much and pray for your health.

[princessdi]

Girl, because I am laughing at the very thought!  LOL!!

It doesn't need to say the word "land" it says "other reportable compensation" and lists 96,000. One day somebody is going to pop you right upside your little head for your shenanigans , and pardon me if I can't stop laughing even while I ask you if you are all right...

MODERATOR HAT ON

Warning!  Disrespect to the degree that these posts suggest will not be tolerated on this site. 

MODERATOR HAT OFF

[tinka]

di,
yes I am laughing too, did you go back far enough to see and read that Bob is now the "Pope"

[princessdi]

Girl, I saw that!

di,
yes I am laughing too, did you go back far enough to see and read that Bob is now the "Pope"

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Now that everyone has had fun tearing that apart, go to the Divorce Docs and let's take a look at the disclosure relating to the sale of the Danny & Linda Estate to Gilley and how the proceeds are now disclosed to the court for the purchase of the 48 acres. Is this designed to make the property exempt from the divorce estate?

Thank-you, IAN, for clarifying so nicely the tax return issues...now explain this cute little discrepancy.

Your ardent advocacy is unequalled...wish the lawfirm and the foundation had a couple more lawyers like that!!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[Cindy]

Bob,

I agree with you!  I think Ian needs to learn to give respect where it is due.  Her attitude with you is disrespectful and UN-Christ like!  She is the one standing naked before the world.  She is quite transparent with her motives.  I will have to really pray for Ian.  She has been so deceived.

There is enough proof against Danny for her to see the light. Yet, she continues not see that Danny is not representing God in his motives and actions.  

Bob, thank you for sticking in with the truth.  I have been sick and not able to read and post.  But this needs a comment.

You forgot to add "in my opinion", Fran.

And if you are wrong in your judgments about either Bob or myself? How will the Lord regard your prayers?

All I ask here is that you think about that...

[Cindy]

Now that everyone has had fun tearing that apart, go to the Divorce Docs and let's take a look at the disclosure relating to the sale of the Danny & Linda Estate to Gilley and how the proceeds are now disclosed to the court for the purchase of the 48 acres. Is this designed to make the property exempt from the divorce estate?

Thank-you, IAN, for clarifying so nicely the tax return issues...now explain this cute little discrepancy.  

...

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

Your welcome  and thanks for not getting bent out of shape about it.

I can't really answer here yet and am not sure if I will even be able to, as I am not sure what  you are asking above.

I do want to say here to start with that I disagree with calling it the "Danny and Linda estate" though. According to my understanding of the documents and letters which have been published online, there was a property agreement which Danny and Linda signed in which he bought out her part of their marital real estate. I understand that there were some things which were not included in that property agreement though and so they agreed that he would file for the divorce and she would file later to resolve those things between them. That case is still underway... As that case is underseal and under a protection order I am not sure if she is now claiming she didn't get her fair share concerning their marital  residence or not, BUT.. even if she is.. She needs to prove her case before it can be called Linda and Danny's estate.  Reason being she sold her part to Danny and received 150,000 from Danny for it and so Danny was the only registered owner/seller when it was sold to Jim Gilley.

My questions here are.

1. In regards to you saying " let's take a look at the disclosure relating to the sale of the ... Estate to Gilley and how the proceeds are now disclosed to the court for the purchase of the 48 acres. " are you referring to the following which was earlier referenced?

The parties acknowledge that the Husband had a home which he was awarded pursuant to his agreement with his former wife, Linda Sue Shelton. That home has been sold and the proceeds from that sale have been used to purchase new real estate in West Frankfort, Illinois, on which he is currently building a home which will be subject to a mortgage.

  1. a) If not, what part are you referring to? (You can just give a page number and I will go look
        at it if that's easier than quoting it.)

2.) In regards to " Is this designed to make the property exempt from the divorce estate?" which divorce are you referring to?



Thanks in advance for your clarifications here.


..ian

[Cindy]

As that also says, he is no longer President and is at present a trustee and consultant. As such his salary has dropped to about 1/2 of what it was before he stepped down as President and signed the non-compete agreement. That is revealed in the financial part of the dissolution of marriage Papers Bob published if you want to look that up too.

False. There is nothing that says that Danny's salary from 3ABN dropped 50% when he allegedly stopped down from being president.

I get so tired of the quibbling about words, meaning and intent with you , Bob. It's just so ridiculous to me! No, it doesn't say that in those exact words, but it doesn't need to.  You have intelligence. You are more than capable of using your head and the facts you have as far as documents go to easily see that his salary is now about 1/2 of what it was.. ----> because DS's monthly income is listed for 2010 in those divorce documents, and if you multiply that by 12, and then compare it to his yearly income listed on previous 990's when he was President of 3ABN, and before the non compete agreement was made and signed, it's very obvious, and easy to see. Unless you choose not to.

The main point here is that it was all reported by 3abn  as "other reportable compensation" to DS given to him in addition to his salary that year as part of the non compete agreement they signed, so it is above board and legal and there are no IRS problems and no funny business going on here.

Stop the spin and distortion. The point is that there are at least three different versions of 3ABN's 2008 Form 990 floating around out there, and the one filed with the IRS omits the fact admitted on the other versions, that 3ABN gave $96,000 to Danny Shelton.

Spin and distortion? Bob Pickle, what you just posted [bold text] is either a gross mistake on your part or an outright lie!

You were previously arguing about that IRS 990, that it only said "other reportable compensation" ( apart from his salary) 96,000, and should have used the word "land"

Now you stand here and claim it omitted the fact that 3abn even gave him the 96,000?

Anyone can go look at that document and easily see what you just said is false.
 Scroll down to Page 51 of 53 of Bob's pdf file. Here's the link to it: http://www.save-3abn.com/media/3abn-form-990-2008-irs.pdf ( It says 13 of 15 on that page, and  schedule J part II) and it says right under Danny's name, and I quote:

Compensation reported on other form 990 EZ  - 78,404
Other reportable income - 96,000

How can you in all conscience make these kinds of arguments, and then follow it up by posting:

" But since 3ABN's board is self-perpetuating and answers to no one, including to its donors, there was no one to hold the board accountable. And that is wrong."

In my opinion before you can even think of holding someone else accountable, you need to be honest and hold yourself accountable.