New Info From Walter Thompson -via Msdaol, Danny's side of the story with details- Options

[Uncle Sam]

While most of what is in this Walt Thompson letter has been analyzed before, some details have not been dealt with.

I wonder if we should believe what Dr. Thompson says regarding unverifiable conversations when some of the verifiable facts are not what he represents them to be?

That persons would be Brenda Walsh. Is her testimony credible, considering she reportedly spent a lot of time with Danny alone and invited him (without Linda) to a birthday party while Dan and Linda were still married?

I don't recall this "friend" being brought in before. Who was she?Seeing that overseas calls may be charged at 5x the "minutes" of local calls, this would give a very exaggerated view of the amount of time spent. Thus "hundreds of hours," as charges, might boil down to 50 hours or less -- some of which were conversations with Irmgard and Johann, others with Nathan, and others with Dr. Abrahamsen, with a good part of that time devoted to family therapy for addictions. So, perhaps over the course of a few months, Linda spent an actual 25 hours talking to Dr. Abrahamsen. Is that way out of line for family counseling for addictions?Now this is a very serious charge, and the facts should be verifiable. Did Linda, in fact, meet Dr. Abrahamsen alone in Florida?

I understood that when such a meeting was supposed to have happened Linda was, in fact, somewhere else.

It would be good to have this verified. If she was, in fact, somewhere else, then this is a complete fabrication on Dr. Thompson's part. Can we then trust his report on what Linda supposedly said and agreed to?

I don't want to be verbally "stoned" but how do we know Linda is telling the truth? Danny has as many witnesses as Linda? It is all he said, she said. What can Danny do at this point to fix this problem? Does he have to step down or would just leaving Linda alone be enough? I have heard rumors that Linda is with the Dr. even now. How do we know that is not true? This just gets more complicated......

[Chez]

Well, it's just the same old same old stuff...I don't believe a word of it. It's way too vague and contrary to what he says, they have trashed Linda. He even again likened her to Lucifer, Anninias and Saphira (excuse the spelling).

Like Barbara Kerr said in another post, Linda has been vindicated and we will find out shortly how...if she's been vindicated then Walt's letter is basically his last ditch effort to tell a story

Then his letter is a big, fat lie! [Lord help him.]

This post has been edited by Chez: Sep 12 2006, 09:40 PM

[Ralph]

I have heard rumors that Linda is with the Dr. even now.

You crack me up.

[Johann]

While most of what is in this Walt Thompson letter has been analyzed before, some details have not been dealt with.

I wonder if we should believe what Dr. Thompson says regarding unverifiable conversations when some of the verifiable facts are not what he represents them to be?

That persons would be Brenda Walsh. Is her testimony credible, considering she reportedly spent a lot of time with Danny alone and invited him (without Linda) to a birthday party while Dan and Linda were still married?

I don't recall this "friend" being brought in before. Who was she?Seeing that overseas calls may be charged at 5x the "minutes" of local calls, this would give a very exaggerated view of the amount of time spent. Thus "hundreds of hours," as charges, might boil down to 50 hours or less -- some of which were conversations with Irmgard and Johann, others with Nathan, and others with Dr. Abrahamsen, with a good part of that time devoted to family therapy for addictions. So, perhaps over the course of a few months, Linda spent an actual 25 hours talking to Dr. Abrahamsen. Is that way out of line for family counseling for addictions?Now this is a very serious charge, and the facts should be verifiable. Did Linda, in fact, meet Dr. Abrahamsen alone in Florida?

I understood that when such a meeting was supposed to have happened Linda was, in fact, somewhere else.

It would be good to have this verified. If she was, in fact, somewhere else, then this is a complete fabrication on Dr. Thompson's part. Can we then trust his report on what Linda supposedly said and agreed to?

Let me merely state briefly here that Linda and Arild never met in Florida. In a few days I will have verified new facts which make these statements ridiculous. There is coming an avalance of them shortly. Stay tuned!

[inga]

Let me merely state briefly here that Linda and Arild never met in Florida.

That makes it a complete fabrication by the Dan Shelton/Walt Thompson camp.

What does that say for the trustworthiness of the rest of the letter? (I understand that the Las Vegas and New York "meetings" are speculations based on laughably skimpy evidence, none of it involving "the doctor.")

What is the actual and honest date of this email?

That's a good question, and I'm at a loss to surmise the reason for leaving out the date.

If no one supplies it here, I'll try to find out from 'GM."

[Panama_Pete]

From: "Walt Thompson" <walttmd@wi.rr.com>

A little more than two years ago a live television program aired on 3abn from Green Bay, Wisconsin. During that program Linda told of meeting a special person that had changed her life. She did not give the name or the sex of that person, but we later learned that he was listening in Norway.

This would be Green Bay SDA Church April 2 and 3, 2004. The guests on Friday Night were Pastor and Mrs. Corkum. Pastor Corkum is President of the Wisconsin Conference. That evening, they taped a "3ABN Up Close" program for the new TV series Linda had decided to develop. There was another program on Sabbath, the next day. That program aired live, I believe. Is this when the "special friend" was mentioned that 3ABN management, on their own, ascribed to the Norwegian doctor?

This post has been edited by Panama_Pete: Sep 13 2006, 02:18 AM

[icedragon]

I agree. I don't know why this was posted here. It really isn't all that different from the mass mailed one that we have pinned to the top. That one, so far as I know is circa May of this year. I have one that I believe is identical to this one that seemed to have been a form letter sent out during June .... at least I had two copies of it to two different people, with nothing different except the addressees and some slight difference in wording of the introductory and closing paragraphs. It's just another "smoke and mirrors" attempt. No problem at all for a "6 year old mind" .... remember the "Emperor's New Clothes"?

This is just more of the stuff. designed to addle as many brains as possible.....

Watchbird
I posted this here because I had not seen it else where on the site and found that the information gave more detail as to danny's side of the story. I have collected ALL the information, known to me, of first hand accounts. This was the first time I have seen a detailed explainiation from danny's side. I am not out to get Danny, I am out to get the truth and In the intrestest and Fairness to Danny I felt it approprate to post it seprately so that people could take a look at it. If it has already been posted else where I am unaware of it. I check this site at least 4 times a week and have not seen it posted. If it is "hidden" else where, then it Would seem to show a bias against Danny and that minds have already been made up, mine is not. While i think that this is more Detail from the Danny Camp it still raises guestions as to Brenda Walsh's involvement and that is Where we should focus. What was her involvement in this? Was she sent to Norway to Make up information? What did she see? Danny says that he heard conversations on the telephone? what did he hear? He says there is a clip in Green Bay, lets see it. He says there is evidence of plane tickets and arranged meeting where is it. This make claims about linda that to me make her look guilty. overspending, possible coverup there is just more info. Detail, Details, Details. This post is more detailed then Walters previous responses.

In order to establish guilt we must have 3 things.
1. Motive, - who has a reason, Why?
2. Means, - who has the ability and resources
3. Oppetunity - who has the time and circumstances




If we appply this to Danny What is his ....
Motive-Why would danny end a 20 years relationships and risk his reputation, his ministery, friendship and Job over this. That is not logical unless you establish motive.
So here it is his possible motive.: Dr. abrahm.... wanted to help linda solve problem with here son. in trying to treat him he discovered Danny was part of the problem. Danny did not like what the Dr was saying he felt threatened he felt that he was either being lied about or was going to be exposed for being an abusive or neglectful step-parent. This was too much for him to handle, his pride and desire for self preservation kicked in and he went on the attack to defend himself. In the process he took information facts, linda on the phone with the Dr. the trip to Norway, the spending and the pregenancy test to make it look like she was cheating, so he could get rid of her and not face his the reality of his bad parenting skills and the damage he and done to Linda.

The other option is Linda has motivation: so What is her motivation?

Linda for some time had been feeling like she wanted a change in her life. After being gilted by her Husband live on World TV about how he came to marry her was disillusioned, offend,hurt and humiliated. Inside she felt unappreaciated and betrayed. That combinde with the new found popularity of 3abn and the appreciation of the millions of adoring fans led her to conciously or unconciousily look else where and get her need met through other means some legitmite and other not legitment. When Dr. abrahm came to visit and expressed concern for her son her heart was drawn to him because He and taken an intrest in her child who was important to her. This new found attention comined with the lack of attention from danny towards her and her children and the distance from an source of accountablity, lead to her spending more time than was aproprate with the Doctor. This eventrually lead to an inapproprate relationship. If sexual in nature there was certinaly an oppetuinty and would explain the pregnancy test. If not sexual then way past the dr./patient relaitionship. This would account for the phone calls.

Both of these are legitimate possiblities based on the evidence on hand. I do not know right now. I was really in favor of linda at first, but i must make room for the possibility I am wrong. In the intrest of obeying the Lord I do not want to bear false wittness. So until I have convincing proof I cannot say for certian. Many people have made up there mind. I have had to back off based on the evidence. This evidence cast doubht on the initial conclusions as to Danny's guilt and makes linda look not so innocent . I am sorry if that is not to peoples liking or beliefs, but I must be honest.

[PeacefulBe]

IceDragon,
While your two scenerios are obviously speculation, your point is well taken. The truth of the situation is certainly hard to pin down.

[fallible humanbe...]

That's a good question, and I'm at a loss to surmise the reason for leaving out the date.
If no one supplies it here, I'll try to find out from 'GM."

I would be interested in where this fits into the chronology . . .

[watchbird]

IceDragon,
While your two scenerios are obviously speculation, your point is well taken. The truth of the situation is certainly hard to pin down.

Not only speculation, but speculation that flies in the face of what multiple witnesses and participants have stated. Every item Icedragon mentions has already been addressed in the various discussions on each point. The "truth" is only "hard to pin down" when one does not decide who are credible witnesses and who are not. And I disagree that we need to go into all these exercises in finding "motives" that make sense to us. We can see what happened. We can decide whether Danny and Walt have been caught in lies or not. We can decide whether we trust the witness of Johann and Beartrap and Arild as primary actors in the events of 2004 and whether we trust the witness of other observers and friends of Linda. Once we make the basic decision as to who can be counted on to tell the truth, then it matters not how much the details are embroderied or how many times they are repeated. Repetitions do not make lies into truth.

[watchbird]

I would be interested in where this fits into the chronology . . .

I have waited to speak on this thinking that Gregory would respond or someone would contact him. Since that has not happened, I'll just say that I have a letter in my possession which is word for word identical with the one posted here. The date on the letter is June 13, 2006. (I also have the addressee's name, but I'll not divulge that other than to say it was to a private individual rather than being a mass mailing as the one from Thompson that we have pinned seems to be.)

I also have another one which came to me a few days later that is identical to this one except for the opening and closing paragraphs. This one is also addressed to an individual. This leads me to think that this must have been a basic form letter which was slightly adapted when sent out to individuals.

As for how it fits into the "time line"..... The Thompson letter which is pinned was sent out as a mass mailing to the 3ABN "family and friends" sometime in early April. (The earliest firm date I found for its posting on BSDA is April 19, 2006, though it had been posted at Club Adventist previous to that time.) Internal evidence in the letter itself may be found in the first sentence which begins, "Two years ago....."

This present letter was sent out privately at least to two different persons in mid-June 2006. If the two letters are compared, one finds that the second is merely an expanded version of the first, with more emphasis being given to justifying Brandy's presence and marriage. Internal evidence of the accuracy of this date can be found in the second paragraph, which reads: "Let me summarize some of the events as viewed from my perspective during the past couple years."

The Arild Abrahamsen letter (which is pinned along with the Thompson letter of ca April 19) was interiorly dated June 20, 2006, though it was not officially released until July 13. 2006. If one compares the Abrahamsen letter with the two Thompson letters, it is very plain to see that only one author can be telling the truth. The differences are two great to be accomodated by any mere "different perspectives".

I strongly suggest that it is Abrahamsen who speaks the truth, and I believe we had already posted confirming evidence of that long before we received his letter.

[paleface]

Our private forward e-mail letter dated 4/13/06 7:41:43 Pacific Daylight Time- Subj: 3ABN From Walter Thompson.
Letter from Dr. Arild Abrahamsen, dated June 20, 2006 with the BlackSDA. web site was how we found BSDA. It was in our local church mail and the rest is history.

[icedragon]

IceDragon,
While your two scenerios are obviously speculation, your point is well taken. The truth of the situation is certainly hard to pin down.

I think speculation is the wrong word. Speculation is making statments with out fact or evidence to support it, picking a side and hoping the evidence will support it. Stock speculators, in the stock market used to pick stock based on hope, gossip, and current market conditions, Hot or cold. Stock analyist on the other make decisions and predications based on the financial condition of the companies they are recommending and the market indicators. they use fact to project resonable conclusions, to make more accurate decisons.

The same has I have tried to do. I have tried to stay away from speculation and inuenendo, unlike many people around here. I gathered all the information from first hand information scources and put them in one place, unfortunately it was not posted in it's completeness. After careful analaysis and discussion with friend who are i respect for there analitical skills. These are the 2 possible situations that could have occured more or less, based on the information, some minor details maybe changable but to the greater extent these are the options. right now we have no smoking Gun to absloutely to accuse Linda or Danny. of wrong doing. while i have leanings i have had to back off Those leanings. I think that analysis is a better word.

[Green Cochoa]

The same has I have tried to do. I have tried to stay away from speculation and inuenendo, unlike many people around here. I gathered all the information from first hand information scources and put them in one place, unfortunately it was not posted in it's completeness. After careful analaysis and discussion with friend who are i respect for there analitical skills. These are the 2 possible situations that could have occured more or less, based on the information, some minor details maybe changable but to the greater extent these are the options. right now we have no smoking Gun to absloutely to accuse Linda or Danny. of wrong doing. while i have leanings i have had to back off Those leanings. I think that analysis is a better word.

Icedragon, I could give you some other scenarios, based on some eyewitness accounts which I have heard firsthand. They are no less plausible, to one who knows the facts, but to the casual observer would seem much more far-fetched--like an ongoing soap "As the Stomach Churns." As it is said, "Truth is stranger than fiction." I think it is best to keep surmising out of this situation, and allow the facts to speak. 1) Because, we as humans, have poor motives with our sin-sick hearts, and thus blind ourselves to proper discernment; and 2) because as we put forth an opinion, it strengthens us in that very belief, whether or not it were true at the beginning. It is, in fact, that second point which has caused many to truly believe a lie. A third point of still greater magnitude that I might add here has much to do with the Arch-Deceiver, and his practiced art of placing walls between even the closest of friends by causing each one to misunderstand, and misappropriate the motives of the other for some small, innocent detail of life.

[summertime]

[
[/quote]

Why do not all of you go to the new posting here today which does a whole Dr. Bacchiocchi Biblical Study of the Linda/Danny relationship. For one thing he quotes: Particular emphasis is placed upon the Christian character of a church leader, exemplified by his temperate life-style, loyalty to his wife, and spiritual leadership in the home. The reason is that a pastor or a TV evangelist serve as role models to the congregation or viewing audience entrusted to them. A man divorced and remarried several times, can hardly serve as a role model to his congregation or viewing audience. Thus, fidelity to the biblical teachings demands that spiritual leadership is to be entrusted to men who have proven to be faithful to their wives and to be moral and spiritual leaders in the home. According to Paul's teachings, the solution to Danny and Linda's marital conflicts, should have been, not the filing for a hasty divorce in Guam, but the filing of a legal separation which would have left the door open for a possible reconciliation. , Danny has remarried a twice divorced woman who is 20 years younger. The facts speak for themselves. In the light of this situation, the only honorable thing for Danny to do is to resign from his present position as Director of 3ABN and let someone with a clean record serve as the leader of a station committed to preach the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. He can still work at 3ABN but in a less conspicuous position. The longer he holds on to his position, the more people will become disenchanted with him and 3ABN. In an age of instant communication, one cannot cover up past mistakes for very long.

(These quotes came directly from the posting originating from Dr. Bacchiocchi Biblical Studies. Dr. Bacchiocchi is a retired Religious Professor at Andrews University. They were forwarded to us today and are under the 3ABN listings.)

This post has been edited by summertime: Sep 14 2006, 02:29 PM