Print

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

[Johann]

Sam, are you speaking of the Hartland Institute that the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has disavowed and considers to be an offshoot that should not be trusted by Adventist Christians, and has even published warning about? Are you making a comparison that would relate 3ABN and Hartland? That might actually be a very pertinent and relevant comparison in some ways.

It would be nice to find out if someone - and who - has helped that institution gain the credibility that was lacking in the past.

I was once invited to attend a seminar with the president of Hartland. As I was listening to him I was hoping someone would have the courage to be truthful. Then we received the warnings from the General Conference. Although they were approving the work of most Independent Ministries at that time, Hartland was rejected as a Supporting Ministry. The pastors in our area were provided with documentation why the General Conference could not accept Harland.

[GrandmaNettie]

Grandma Nettie,

This can't go both ways. You  offer up proof to what you are posting or quit demanding it from others.

That e-mail is  suspect .Even if true, Sam needed to provide the proof he so freely requires from others

Bonnie,

Not sure I understand why you state this as you have. 

As far as the email that Sam posted goes, if you have followed this internet saga for long you certainly know that most emails that Bob and Gailon have provided, whether personally posted or posted by those they have passed them to for posting, and even many of those they have given to the courts as evidence, have the names edited out.

As far as demanding proof from others, when one of the members here makes allegations against someone, isn't it logical to want to see the proof behind those allegations?  To accept an allegation against someone without more than the word or opinion of another is rather irresponsible, isn't it?  It's called "hearsay" without any documentation or verification.

[GrandmaNettie]

I have had a few problems with Gailon when he appeared to be enjoying the fight and relished it.
However,your post is proof of what??

Who wrote it??
How credible is the person writing it??
How would one know this was a legitimate e-mail and not one concocted by you??

Who was the disgruntled staff member of Heartland?
Were they perhaps disgruntled for a good reason??

I know some on the outer edges of this mess may have a good reason for hiding their identity. When those that so staunchly and almost fanatically defend DS hide their identity  it loses a lot of credibility.

Just who are you Sam?? I know from the sounds of your posts you have more than a passing acquaintance with the DS mess. I personally would be insulted by so called friends or supporters that defend anonymously. If a friend is to afraid to own up to his identity while tearing others down,your statements, assurances and now this e-mail lack any credibility as far as I am concerned.

Now maybe the time has come for you to put up or shutup. You either stop asking others for proof,or lay your proof out there. Maybe a good place to start is this letter from a year ago that you are just sharing with us now.

Without the proof you demand in every post, this e-mail is nothing but rumormongering. Now we know how much those that defend DS abhor that word, don't we.

Wonder how much lower this whole sickening mess can go before it finds it's own level

Sam, we are all waiting for you to answer Bonnie's questions. Bonnie, you hit the hammer directly on the nail concerning the validity of Sam's "email from Heartland".

Sister,

Interesting sentiment.  Does this throw the question of validity onto all those who have supported their positions with emails posted without identification? Those emails could have been faked, too.  Bob and Gailon must have cringed when they read this!

Now, let's change one letter in a statement Bonnie made and see if the sentiment applies equally to the other side:

I know some on the outer edges of this mess may have a good reason for hiding their identity. When those that so staunchly and almost fanatically defend LS hide their identity  it loses a lot of credibility.

Hammer still directly on target?

Edited to make it more clear who response was directed at...

[bonnie]

[quote ,

This can't go both ways. You offer up proof to what you are posting or quit demanding it from others.

That e-mail is suspect .Even if true, Sam needed to provide the proof he so freely requires from others
[/quote]

Bonnie,

Not sure I understand why you state this as you have. 

As far as the email that Sam posted goes, if you have followed this internet saga for long you certainly know that most emails that Bob and Gailon have provided, whether personally posted or posted by those they have passed them to for posting, and even many of those they have given to the courts as evidence, have the names edited out.

I understand that. I have a problem when anyone comes up with this mysterious "party" that said he knew and so on and on and on.

If Sam had wanted to ,apparently he could have posted with name intact, without this constant drama from so many.
You know something to be fact and are interested enough  and personally involved to join in and condemn, then you should be confident right out of the gate to put it out there and stand behind with your name.  
All of this "Gotcha" mentality is rubbish to keep playing. Just like this ridiculous IRS routine. Rather than being grateful it is resolved and issuing a simple professional statement it is making a cliff hanger out of it to get the most mileage possible. By the time the hype is over no one really remembers or cares that there was to be this big announcement, of complete  letter of absolution. Will settle for the mundane and ordinary in the end . The objective has been realized.
The any day now,things like this take time, the IRS issued an apology,please be patient it is coming is milking this whole thing for all it is worth.

I think even if it had gone against DS, the milking would have gone on. This picture of this beleaguered martyr struggling valiantly on to preach the gospel under attack from so many doing the devils work would have been used.

Just as it has been done with the adultery issue. The way DS has handled that is a complete repudiation of what he stands for publically.
He first uses spiritual adultery which was utter nonesense, then we switch to physical adultery . After that has spread quite nicely,OOP'S we cannot give the proof unless LS signs an agreement not to sue. But again, if we absolutely have to we will make public her sin.
After it has already been made public and the dirty work has been done. It will never be settled at this point.
The stigma of adultery will follow LS and stick for many.
Mission accommplished and DS hand's are just as clean as Pilate's.

one of the members here makes allegations against someone, isn't it logical to want to see the proof behind those allegations?

  To accept an allegation against someone without more than the word or opinion of another is rather irresponsible, isn't it?  It's called "hearsay" without any documentation or verification.

Of course it is logical. But the logic works both ways. If I demand proof from you for what you say as an accusation,I need to be willing to do same.
Otherwise I am doing what I accuse others of doing

[bonnie]

Now, let's change one letter in a statement Bonnie made and see if the sentiment applies equally to the other side:

I know some on the outer edges of this mess may have a good reason for hiding their identity. When those that so staunchly and almost fanatically defend LS hide their identity it loses a lot of credibility.

Hammer still directly on target?

Let's try this once more.
What I said applies to both sides. I realize there are reasons for some to hide their identity. I don't care what the reason,Gailon,Joy and Fran's identity is right out there. You know who you are interacting with. I do not see that always on the other side. I see those very strident in their defense of DS,but I don't know who, haven't a clue if they come 3 for 1 price or not. Their dogmatic approach is not very convincing to me personally.

If you are as in a interested by stander it is probably not important what or who you are. When you reach the level of "I KNOW" then maybe it is time to stand up and put a name to the "I KNOW"

Frankly, anything Ian,anyman,sam have to say I take with a grain of salt. They want to be front and center in the defense of DS so badly yet hide

Doesn't mean I agree with or believe everything that is posted with a known name. It does mean at least I know whom I am dealing with instead of interacting with those that could be, Ian,Sam,anyman,DS, all rolled into one

[bonnie]

Interesting sentiment.  Does this throw the question of validity onto all those who have supported their positions with emails posted without identification?

Puts it right in the same wastebasket. Support without identification might be encouraging to some. It is absolutely worthless in the scheme of things as proof of anything. We battled this for almost 6 years






 

Those emails could have been faked, too.  Bob and Gailon must have cringed when they read this!

I am sure they could have been. If the shoe fits let them cringe

Now, let's change one letter in a statement Bonnie made and see if the sentiment applies equally to the other side:

I know some on the outer edges of this mess may have a good reason for hiding their identity. When those that so staunchly and almost fanatically defend LS hide their identity it loses a lot of credibility.

Hammer still directly on target?

Yes, hammer still on target. If someone 's support is going to have any real validity it is not going to be anonymous support. Yet the fact remains those defending someone they know is innocent, cannot be sued it they happen to be wrong  has much less to lose than those accusing may face.

If you are defending someone annointed by God and you can only do so anonymously I would not want that kind of defense. It is offensive IMO and something that doesn't do anyone any good except the opponent

[GrandmaNettie]

Bonnie, I have modified my earlier response to indicate that I was replying to Sister's response to your post.

BTW, most take the Sister missives as gospel without knowing who her sources are, without any documentation of the allegations she has penned and without knowing who she actually is.  Is it wisdom to accept such purely by faith?

[Sam]

Now, let's change one letter in a statement Bonnie made and see if the sentiment applies equally to the other side:

I know some on the outer edges of this mess may have a good reason for hiding their identity. When those that so staunchly and almost fanatically defend LS hide their identity it loses a lot of credibility.

Hammer still directly on target?

Let's try this once more.
What I said applies to both sides. I realize there are reasons for some to hide their identity. I don't care what the reason,Gailon,Joy and Fran's identity is right out there. You know who you are interacting with. I do not see that always on the other side. I see those very strident in their defense of DS,but I don't know who, haven't a clue if they come 3 for 1 price or not. Their dogmatic approach is not very convincing to me personally.

If you are as in a interested by stander it is probably not important what or who you are. When you reach the level of "I KNOW" then maybe it is time to stand up and put a name to the "I KNOW"

Frankly, anything Ian,anyman,sam have to say I take with a grain of salt. They want to be front and center in the defense of DS so badly yet hide

Doesn't mean I agree with or believe everything that is posted with a known name. It does mean at least I know whom I am dealing with instead of interacting with those that could be, Ian,Sam,anyman,DS, all rolled into one

Bonnie,

Some of what you say I agree with. What I do see though is contrary to your claims of being even handed, you are as one sided as anyone.  You are basically saying that if we don't present our real names we don't carry validity. Fine.  But I have never seen you address that directly to Sister who has played a huge part in defamation, or Snoopy, or Artiste or SSOM or Watchbird.....all either against 3abn and/or friends and supporters of Linda.

As Grandma pointed out you haven't made an issue out of a huge amount of emails submitted by the other side with names deleted and much of the wording edited.  You only bring it up to me and my one paltry little email.  FYI, I wasn't sure if the party that sent it to me wanted the names left in so deciding to err on the side of caution and confidentiality I deleted them.  I later found out it was fine to leave them in.  Had nothing whatsoever to do with playing games.

Speaking of, your take on the IRS announcements couldn't be any more off base as far as "milking" and "games" go.  I thought I had explained this but will try again to make you understand the events as they happened.

The attorney that handled the IRS case (not Duffy) called 3abn & Duffy and said he had just been contacted by the IRS with the question "did Danny and 3abn want their documents back or destroyed"?   The attorney ask then if the investigation was over?  The agent said he could not say "officially" but the 3abn attorney could contact the AG's office for official word.  It was a day or two later before the Attorney got in touch with the AG's office.  He was told from someone in that office that yes, officially it was over with no fines, penalities, etc and (for reasons I won't go into ) it had been a mistake to start the investigation in the first place. Hence, the apology of sorry your organization had to deal with this.

Once 3abn received this news, they ask if it could be made public as was only fair as the investigation was made public thanks to certain people. Some of those that new about it told it here on the internet.  That should have been the end of it. But no, Bonnie you like the other's here could not accept that and leave it alone. So what you call milking the situation was in reality you all not believing what we the defenders had told you.  Why should you have believed it?  Because it would be of a too serious nature to say something untrue publically where the IRS is concerned. It could have gotten 3abn, Danny and other people in a lot of trouble so why would the defenders put it out there if it wasn't so?

Because 3abn wanted to be able to prove to the diehards that it was over, days later they contacted the attorney's and ask for a letter of clearance. The attorney said they normally do not do that but he would try.  Over a period of a couple of weeks he tried talking to the AG but never made contact.
Because the attorney himself had spoken previously with the AG's office and knew it was over he decided along with Duffy to write a confirmation letter since he had not been able to contact the AG with 3abn's request for a letter.

So Bonnie, games? No. Milking? No.  Just battling with the redtape and hands of time where the government is concerned.

Never did anyone say there would be a letter of apology. That was verbal in a phone conversation.  The only fault I might accept for the 3abn defenders is having faith that the attorney's would be able to contact the AG and get an Official letter from the IRS.  When we said there would be a letter we were trusting in the government to do what was right but it didn't work that way.  Our fault since the attorney said to begin with that the IRS doesn't work that way and we should have listened.  That is NO reflection on DS or 3abn as no one has ever told me to come on the internet and write anything.  I think the rest of the defenders can say the same.  I use my own judgement and give my own opinion based on facts known to me.

Had people used their heads and common sense when we announced 3abn was cleared ,all of this "drama" as you call it would have never taken place. Your side is the reason it was drawn out.

I also want to address a post you made fairly recently where you said that your opinion of Danny was from Danny and his actions not from what anyone else has said.

Do you know Danny personally?  Have you had interaction with him or the "higher ups" at 3abn?  If you answer no to these questions then the only opinion you could have of DS is over what you have read on the internet. The accusations, edited emails, and the spins put on everything that is said and done.

Since someone at 3abntalk put the link to the only letters and program that concerned Linda, no one can possibly continue the lie that 3abn and DS publically trashed her.  Go look at the video. REad the letters.  Then come back and say 3abn/DS trashed Linda on the air or anywhere else.

I believe you said you weren't a 3abn viewer so all of your opinions of Danny have come from somewhere else.  As much as you want to believe that you are more reasonable than other's here (and sometimes you are) you still ended up as judge and jury where Danny is concerned and you came to your conclusions by faulty, tampered with information.

No Bonnie this is not a game to me...far from it.  The whole mess that Linda, Gailon, Pickle has started sickens me.  The fact that 3abn was forced to bring a lawsuit because of all of their defamation and lies sickens me.  The wound to the ministry sickens me.  I am here only to defend what I know to be right.  To let the lurkers see that all isn't painted as Pickle and Joy want people to believe. Luckily they have been painting their own selves into a corner where their shennanigans are concerned, which makes less work for me.  But, as long as I feel I have to be here, I will fight fire with fire. The difference being, my fire is truth.

[Johann]

Is there a possibility that some posters know the identity of other posters, and because they know the sources they know it is the truth?

To me this seems to apply to members on both sides of the discussion.So your question, GrandmaNettie, seems to apply to both sides.

[bonnie]

Bonnie, I have modified my earlier response to indicate that I was replying to Sister's response to your post.

BTW, most take the Sister missives as gospel without knowing who her sources are, without any documentation of the allegations she has penned and without knowing who she actually is.  Is it wisdom to accept such purely by faith?

It is getting tiresome to ask people to quit putting words in my mouth. I was unaware of what went on at BSAD,I did not and do not know who sister is. At this point I could not repeat anything she has put "in her missives" as my interaction with her has been on a completely different playing field. The principal players in this on the defendent side is very clear. Those defending DS are not nearly as clear as to their identity. None of you could factually say what I have taken on faith and what I have not

edited to add  last sentence

[Fran]

Sam;

The whole mess that Linda, Gailon, Pickle has started sickens me.  The fact that 3abn was forced to bring a lawsuit because of all of their defamation and lies sickens me.  The wound to the ministry sickens me.

Let's regroup here.  Danny started this when he divorced Linda for Spiritual Adultery!   Danny started the lawsuit!  Bob & Gailon are defending themselves!  They did not even come onto the scene until years after the divorce.  Go back to the beginning and then go forward.  We are all here because of Danny Shelton.  3ABN was never forced to file charges!  They chose to file the lawsuite!  Their choice; not Bob and Gailon's' choice! 

Johann;

When I posted about trusting pastors and people, I did not mention how much I trust you.  You know that to be true.  For years, I spoke to no one that you did not introduce to me.  I am so glad I did/do that.  Thanks for being there for me.

[GrandmaNettie]

Bonnie, I have modified my earlier response to indicate that I was replying to Sister's response to your post.

BTW, most take the Sister missives as gospel without knowing who her sources are, without any documentation of the allegations she has penned and without knowing who she actually is.  Is it wisdom to accept such purely by faith?

It is getting tiresome to ask people to quit putting words in my mouth. I was unaware of what went on at BSAD,I did not and do not know who sister is. At this point I could not repeat anything she has put "in her missives" as my interaction with her has been on a completely different playing field. The principal players in this on the defendent side is very clear. Those defending DS are not nearly as clear as to their identity. None of you could factually say what I have taken on faith and what I have not

edited to add  last sentence

I did not ask you if you took what sister has written on faith.  I asked you if it is wisdom for the "most" who do to accept it by faith.

[bonnie]

You haven't a clue. I have repeatedly said that DS, his position and conduct requires the greater responsibility. DS has the world stage at his disposal,LS does not. Like it our not, if someone cannot conduct him/herself with integrity and ethics then leave it to ones that can.

The principal players in this, the three that have the most to lose,have made their identity known, for whatever reason.  Those defending a person and feeling they are innocent has nothing to lose except a perceived lapse of judgement. But even so,I would not expect all to come forward with their given names.I do expect those that post so stridently in favor of DS to do so under their own name

As Grandma pointed out you haven't made an issue out of a huge amount of emails submitted by the other side with names deleted and much of the wording edited.  You only bring it up to me and my one paltry little email.  FYI, I wasn't sure if the party that sent it to me wanted the names left in so deciding to err on the side of caution and confidentiality I deleted them.  I later found out it was fine to leave them in.  Had nothing whatsoever to do with playing games.

First I have not seen and read all the "huge amount" of e-mails submitted by the other side.

Personally I do believe you were playing games. The amount you have contributed here and the tone is not one that comes from casual observance. I believe you knew full well that it would not be taken as fact when the sender was anonymous. Just a little Gotcha

Speaking of, your take on the IRS announcements couldn't be any more off base as far as "milking" and "games" go.  I thought I had explained this but will try again to make you understand the events as they happened.

The attorney that handled the IRS case (not Duffy) called 3abn & Duffy and said he had just been contacted by the IRS with the question "did Danny and 3abn want their documents back or destroyed"?   The attorney ask then if the investigation was over?  The agent said he could not say "officially" but the 3abn attorney could contact the AG's office for official word.  It was a day or two later before the Attorney got in touch with the AG's office.  He was told from someone in that office that yes, officially it was over with no fines, penalities, etc and (for reasons I won't go into ) it had been a mistake to start the investigation in the first place. Hence, the apology of sorry your organization had to deal with this.

Nothing you say has any ring of truth on this. Or you again are simply inserting again what you wanted to have been said. I could not care less about the behaviour of the IRS. I referred if you remember to the cliff hanging suspense that was so obviously crafted. I do not care what they said, it is the conduct of DS handling this in a professional manner. I really do not believe the apology bit and we should never have started this in the first place, especially coming from an anonymous person.

Once 3abn received this news, they ask if it could be made public as was only fair as the investigation was made public thanks to certain people. Some of those that new about it told it here on the internet.  That should have been the end of it. But no, Bonnie you like the other's here could not accept that and leave it alone. So what you call milking the situation was in reality you all not believing what we the defenders had told you.  Why should you have believed it?  Because it would be of a too serious nature to say something untrue publically where the IRS is concerned. It could have gotten 3abn, Danny and other people in a lot of trouble so why would the defenders put it out there if it wasn't so?

I have said from the beginning that I believed there had been some kind of resolution.
Remember Jack, maybe a close relative of yours. Now there was one that didn't want it to die. I said nothing about it should not have been announced. Most would have issue a public statement and moved on. Not enough mileage in that tho

Because 3abn wanted to be able to prove to the diehards that it was over, days later they contacted the attorney's and ask for a letter of clearance. The attorney said they normally do not do that but he would try.  Over a period of a couple of weeks he tried talking to the AG but never made contact.
Because the attorney himself had spoken previously with the AG's office and knew it was over he decided along with Duffy to write a confirmation letter since he had not been able to contact the AG with 3abn's request for a letter.

Said by an anonymous person. No accountibility, no way to determine if this took place,

So Bonnie, games? No. Milking? No.  Just battling with the redtape and hands of time where the government is concerned.

Baloney.

Never did anyone say there would be a letter of apology. That was verbal in a phone conversation.  The only fault I might accept for the 3abn defenders is having faith that the attorney's would be able to contact the AG and get an Official letter from the IRS.  When we said there would be a letter we were trusting in the government to do what was right but it didn't work that way.  Our fault since the attorney said to begin with that the IRS doesn't work that way and we should have listened.  That is NO reflection on DS or 3abn as no one has ever told me to come on the internet and write anything.  I think the rest of the defenders can say the same.  I use my own judgement and give my own opinion based on facts known to me.

Not knowing who you are or what personal role you play in this, someone would believe this WHY???

Had people used their heads and common sense when we announced 3abn was cleared ,all of this "drama" as you call it would have never taken place. Your side is the reason it was drawn out.

Don't believe that to be true. Ask Jack. Wouldn't it be fun to have a poll, just for the kicks and giggles

I also want to address a post you made fairly recently where you said that your opinion of Danny was from Danny and his actions not from what anyone else has said.

Do you know Danny personally?  Have you had interaction with him or the "higher ups" at 3abn?  If you answer no to these questions then the only opinion you could have of DS is over what you have read on the internet. The accusations, edited emails, and the spins put on everything that is said and done.

I don't know Oral Roberts personally either, I think he is a shameless huckster, which I believe he has proven. Very early on my opinion of DS began to form. Not from the spin but from what it was pretty clear was true.



 

Since someone at 3abntalk put the link to the only letters and program that concerned Linda, no one can possibly continue the lie that 3abn and DS publically trashed her.  Go look at the video. REad the letters.  Then come back and say 3abn/DS trashed Linda on the air or anywhere else.

Whose side was it that put up 3ABN talk again. All will know of course that 3ABN talke is objective and unbiased. Yup

I believe you said you weren't a 3abn viewer so all of your opinions of Danny have come from somewhere else.  As much as you want to believe that you are more reasonable than other's here (and sometimes you are) you still ended up as judge and jury where Danny is concerned and you came to your conclusions by faulty, tampered with information.

I really don't care what you believe, how's that. 
I am not his judge and jury.  I can only take responsibility for my own opinions and statements. So please stop telling me what I want.
I did discover not to long ago that we actually got 3ABN on our cable. Have watched a few times and that has done nothing other than to convince me that DS seems very ego driven. When someone has as his favorite word I and has a list of miracles bestowed  I because I am so very special ,3ABN becomes more about DS the annointed one than the gospel

No Bonnie this is not a game to me...far from it.  The whole mess that Linda, Gailon, Pickle has started sickens me.  The fact that 3abn was forced to bring a lawsuit because of all of their defamation and lies sickens me.  The wound to the ministry sickens me.  I am here only to defend what I know to be right.  To let the lurkers see that all isn't painted as Pickle and Joy want people to believe. Luckily they have been painting their own selves into a corner where their shennanigans are concerned, which makes less work for me.  But, as long as I feel I have to be here, I will fight fire with fire. The difference being, my fire is truth.

Oh, I think it is a very serious game, but a game non-the-less.  On the lawsuit, may be DS should try what we were told to do,Leave it in God's Hands.

Whatever you say, whatever fire is in your truth you cannot be standing on very firm ground. I am not sure, but I don't think anyone is forcing you to be here.

You might be telling the truth 100%, but I am not real big on anonymous sources as their fire being truth. So I would have no idea.
Not involved enough to try to find out if what you say is true or not.

[bonnie]

Grandma Nettie,

Can someone like yourself,not directly involved or so it seems, explain what there is about Ian,anyman,Sam,Jack that should be believed among those without a dog in this fight.
I had never heard of Bob Pickle, Gailon Joy. I have known Fran for a long time around the forums. I never went thru her posts with a fine tooth comb to see if she could be believed. Mostly because she remained consistent in what she said she believed. I have not known her to lie.
Given that, can you tell me as one that has apparently not been deeply involved , Like myself,  forming an opinion from watching and reading my choice  would be to believe in the credibility  of nameless,faceless posters.
On one side there are at least 4 people, counting Duane Clem that have pretty well stuck their neck out. Probably more but that is the names that come to mind.
Now can someone help me out with the other side. I can't recall the true names of any that are in the forefront of calling others liars, delusional and wrong.

Those that are anonymous could be telling the absolute truth,yet why would I choose to believe them.
DS already knows the identity of those that oppose him on this forum. So far the other side does not have that luxury.Why would I believe this was that important to them as to keep responding and trying to convince, when no one knows who is trying to do the convincing.

My folks had a few ideas they managed to pass on to my siblings and I. If something is so important to you that you are going to interject your opinions or state a fact, however unpopular,STAND FAST, NEVER WAVER. Sometimes gets us into trouble,but mostly works pretty well for my brothers and myself

[Child_of_God]

Bonnie, it must really be a bone of contention to you when someone leaves out the name of a person or is themselves using an anonymous name or server as you mention it quite often. While on the one hand you state that you can understand why some do, on the other hand it prevents you from choosing to accept anything they say as the truth. Maybe it is because the 3ABN defenders do not continually complain or talk about what they have personally gone through because of those who do know, or think they know, who some of the defenders are. Some of us and including friends we know, family members and pastors have received harassing phone calls from the members of the other side and some several times a day. Some phone calls actually have someone calling the receiver a vile name and hanging up. One actually asked for one of the defenders by a log in name and when asked where they got the phone number they said the phone book. The log in name has never been in any phone book and the person they were trying to call didn’t even have a phone number listed or unlisted. Some of us have had the other side come to our homes. Then there are those of us who get banned because family members have the same IP # so we choose a server that gives anonymity. Others are banned because they use the same server that gives anonymity so have to seek another.

None of us want our children, grandchildren, other family members, or friends to suffer in any way and to especially hear such vile talk. The calls come from men and women alike.