Assault On Danny Shelton, horses, horses and more horses Options

[PeacefulBe]

According to FHB, I would have no credibility without posting my picture, social security number, and income tax reports anyway!

He hasn't posted his...why would you think he would demand that in order to deem your personal testimony credible?

FHB - like so many others on here - are asking for proof because they know that none can be given in many of these situations. He claims to be here to find the truth and ask questions. What he's really doing is trying to divide opinions and blow smoke up the rears of people who aren't close to the situation.

I am more comfortable accepting first-hand personal testimony and things that have been documented as truth. I can see that it all hits a raw nerve with you, HOTY, since you live the situation. I have tried to follow each debate that arises and fail to see FHB trying to divide. What I have seen is him seeking to uncover the truth and suggesting that we all seek to follow principle. What I have also seen is those debates breaking down to the point where others begin to act paranoid and throw accusations at him rather than accept that he has his own opinion and is on his own journey.

He claims to know writing styles of people he doesn't know and doesn't watch on television in the hopes of antagonizing Sister. He conveniently adds remarks about the inner workings of 3ABN while saying he hasn't been there and definitely hasn't worked there. I'm not saying he's Danny or a counterpart - like I said before - he's here to divide.

...and to contradict himself...

In my own experience here even I have learned Danny's writing style just from reading the emails he has had posted. There is also a wealth of info that you present and former employees have submitted about the inner workings there at 3abn.

Regarding this present debate, if Sister got the information about the spousal abuse directly from the abused woman that makes it first-hand knowledge in my book. If the abused woman gave her permission for it to be made public it certainly would be proper to post it here. Whether one has the trust in Sister as a credible source is a matter of personal opinion and experience.

FHB, if you are here to find the truth about this situation like many of the rest of us, terrific. If you are here to divide please be up front about it.

I personally find the debates that go on here very edifying. They drive me to study to try to understand each point of view and check supporting data. I am disappointed when they break down to name-calling and accusations. I don't have the skill in this area like Watchbird, FHB, Sister and others do. In high school I was miserable at debating. I haven't improved with the years. hehe. But I do enjoy watching and learning from them.

[husbandoftheyear]

He hasn't posted his...why would you think he would demand that in order to deem your personal testimony credible?

I was simply being sarcastic.

I am more comfortable accepting first-hand personal testimony and things that have been documented as truth. I can see that it all hits a raw nerve with you, HOTY, since you live the situation. I have tried to follow each debate that arises and fail to see FHB trying to divide. What I have seen is him seeking to uncover the truth and suggesting that we all seek to follow principle. What I have also seen is those debates breaking down to the point where others begin to act paranoid and throw accusations at him rather than accept that he has his own opinion and is on his own journey.

My point was that if proof is going to be required for every story here - it's going to be very short reading material. We all know that proof can be supplied for some - but not all things.

If you feel that FHB is simpy looking for answers - that's your opinion.
But it isn't mine.

In my own experience here even I have learned Danny's writing style just from reading the emails he has had posted. There is also a wealth of info that you present and former employees have submitted about the inner workings there at 3abn.

It was Linda's style that I was refering to - as FHB was accusing Sister to be - not Dan's.
Linda has never posted here - at least under name - and if FHB doesn't watch 3ABN much nor claim to know her - as he admitted - then how could he become such an expert on her habits?

FHB posted inside information before some of us employees...

Regarding this present debate, if Sister got the information about the spousal abuse directly from the abused woman that makes it first-hand knowledge in my book. If the abused woman gave her permission for it to be made public it certainly would be proper to post it here. Whether one has the trust in Sister as a credible source is a matter of personal opinion and experience.

I was not speaking directly to this present information about Larry Welch.

But what - exactly - is considered "proper" to post here? We have discussed prostitution, stealing, cheating, lying, molestation, and sexual harassment to name a few things. Not one of these things has been completely verified except to those "inside."
Now that Sister has added spousal abuse - it is taboo?

I personally find the debates that go on here very edifying. They drive me to study to try to understand each point of view and check supporting data. I am disappointed when they break down to name-calling and accusations. I don't have the skill in this area like Watchbird, FHB, Sister and others do. In high school I was miserable at debating. I haven't improved with the years. hehe. But I do enjoy watching and learning from them.

I have not been looking at this as a debate. As far as I am concerned BSDA is a place where a few people have chosen to tell what is really going on at 3ABN and others to believe or not.

Thank you for your comments though...

[fallible humanbe...]

If FHB is an attorney, what of it? Any thinking person should not accept what another says without being certain it is the truth.
Please, HOTY, don't devalue your credibility with folks anxious to find the truth by careless remarks. This is all very serious stuff and deserves to be carefully discussed and viewed from all angles. Right?

PB,

I was driving home from work today listening to a sports talk radio station. The two hosts were interviewing a young player who has been in the league for three years. He was asked if he thought he had "arrived" as a legitimate player in the NBA. He responded by saying that he had approached the process with an attitude that it would be hard work. He said that in order to be a legitimate presence on a basketball court you had to earn the respect of your peers and in turn you had to build your respect of them.

He didn't say that it was predicated on his beginning to play the game the way played it that would lead them to respect him, but insinuated that if he worked hard, played by the universally accepted rules, and most importantly with integrity and desire - he would receive that respect and develop a respect for those he was on the court with.

After the interview the hosts continued with this particular aspect of the interview. They commented that far too many of the rookies in the league come in with an attitude of expectation. They expect that the players in the league should automatically respect them because, after all they were drafted into the league as though that brings with it automatic respect. They then listed a number of players who have made it over the past three years, and those who have not and were easily able to identify that those who hadn't made it, had had this attitude of expectation. Those who did make it had put in the time and effort to convince their peers that they could in fact compete on that level.

I didn't come here seeking acceptance. I didn't come in looking to make converts to my point of view or any other point of view. I did come because I was lead to believe that there was an open discussion about the subject and I would be able to find information here that would enable me to understand the larger picture. But, when sorting through information here or anywhere one can only filter it as far as it goes. When we study history we ask a few initial, fundamental questions:

Who is the author? (meaning, where does their authority to speak come from)
What is the author's purpose?
What is the author's motivation?
Who is the audience?
What is the context? (setting and background)

Then you read and decide the integrity of the writing and the ideas based on your ability to corroborate the ideas, information, or point of view using multiple sources.

But it does take that up front knowledge in order to determine the veracity of a source and feel comfortable incorporating what they say into your decision making process. Historians must interpret in order to build a picture of history, after all they do not often have access to the individuals they are studying. If they have no idea who the writer is, or at least enough to answer the fundamental questions, they have to eliminate them as a reliable source.

Similarly, here, we must do without the aid of identity, body language, facial expression, volume, tone or any of the other things we all use daily to help interpret the dialogue we are part of. We are left to interpret the words on the screen with what amounts to a handicap - and interpret we must. We have to attempt, as best we can, to correctly interpret all the above as well as intent. Sometimes we are right some times we are not. But, in an cyberplace like this, we have to remember not to take things personally because we will lose the focus of accomplishing our goals.

It is interesting that I can’t just be looking for information. I must obviously be an insurgent. Am I Danny, no. Larry W., no. Am I a lawyer, no. Am I a pastor, no. Have I ever worked at 3ABN, no. Have I ever been to the 3ABN facilities, no. Have I watched 3ABN, yes. Have I been to a live event, yes. Have I heard Danny’s “side”, yes. Did I ask questions the same way, yes. Do I feel I got all my questions answered, no. Do I have a working point of view on the issue, yes. So what does that leave, me, a person who is looking for answers to the questions that arise for me as I read here.

- fhb

This post has been edited by fallible humanbeing: Nov 3 2006, 06:37 PM

[sonshineonme]

.....

I didn't come here seeking acceptance. I didn't come in looking to make converts to my point of view or any other point of view. I did come because I was lead to believe that there was an open discussion about the subject and I would be able to find information here that would enable me to understand the larger picture. But, when sorting through information here or anywhere one can only filter it as far as it goes. When we study history we ask a few initial, fundamental questions:

Who is the author? (meaning, where does their authority to speak come from)
What is the author's purpose?
What is the author's motivation?
Who is the audience?
What is the context? (setting and background)

Then you read and decide the integrity of the writing and the ideas based on your ability to corroborate the ideas, information, or point of view using multiple sources.

But it does take that up front knowledge in order to determine the veracity of a source and feel comfortable incorporating what they say into your decision making process. Historians must interpret in order to build a picture of history, after all they do not often have access to the individuals they are studying. If they have no idea who the writer is, or at least enough to answer the fundamental questions, they have to eliminate them as a reliable source.

Similarly, here, we must do without the aid of identity, body language, facial expression, volume, tone or any of the other things we all use daily to help interpret the dialogue we are part of. We are left to interpret the words on the screen with what amounts to a handicap - and interpret we must. We have to attempt, as best we can, to correctly interpret all the above as well as intent. Sometimes we are right some times we are not. But, in an cyberplace like this, we have to remember not to take things personally because we will lose the focus of accomplishing our goals.

It is interesting that I can’t just be looking for information. I must be obviously be an insurgent. Am I Danny, no. Larry W., no. Am I a lawyer, no. Am I a pastor, no. Have I ever worked at 3ABN, no. Have I ever been to the 3ABN facilities, no. Have I watched 3ABN, yes. Have I been to a live event, yes. Have I heard Danny’s “side”, yes. Did I ask questions the same way, yes. Do I feel I got all my questions answered, no. Do I have a working point of view on the issue, yes. So what does that leave, me, a person who is looking for answers to the questions that arise for me as I read here.

- fhb

You have just described the mass majority of people who have come here. You must keep in mind, though I understand why it might be something you might leave out of your thinking, the aspect that MANY people who have also come here have truth to tell, have told it, and of course are targets for all kinds of discrimination and and potential disbelief. That won't stop them, they have liberty here, for the FIRST time, to tell things. All these little things are parts of a large complicated and convoluted puzzle. Who could possible just read and know? It takes time, and more pieces of the puzzle to come out for completion - but you can put the basics together and see a picture of a serious problem, that too is complicated and convoluted. Like politics, who can just "fix" it now? Who can know all there is to know? You get enough to know there are serious issues, and SOMETHING should and has to be done, and ultimately will be done. There have been SERIOUS injustices for years against many people. Do we do nothing? Do we keep our mouths shut (still) and let it go on? Can you wait for more of the puzzle to come without getting impatient and hasty in your conclusions (not just asking you, generally speaking to anyone of us). There are always those thoughts of "well in that case I wasn't there" or "how can we really know how bad". We can't know someones heart, we can know someones fruits. There is a reason for that - character observations and testimony. You keep seeking, because you know there is something to seek, your heart won't let you rest because you understand the seriousness of this (I am assuming this all to be true). Will you keep seeking? Will you wait, let things take their course, share what you know, prepare others? Because the bigger picture here is that this is devastating in many ways - NOT just in figuring it out for yourself, but in the true evil affects it will have on all that come to see what has really been happening. Time marches on either way - facts are just that, facts. It is what it is. People (like in politics) can pick and chose to suit their own ideals and paradimes, but truth should always be the first priority, and to me, that shows real faith - faith that God will still be in control in spite of the deep seeded evil of sin.
And then there are the spin doctors, the ones that don't want truth, but revel in keeping the marry go round going round and round and round - causing confusion where ever they go....again, fruits.

[PeacefulBe]

I was simply being sarcastic.

I figured...

My point was that if proof is going to be required for every story here - it's going to be very short reading material. We all know that proof can be supplied for some - but not all things.

If there are things posted here that have no proof, how do we know they are true? Do you have any examples of these type that spring to mind? It would be of interest to me to see what you mean.

If you feel that FHB is simpy looking for answers - that's your opinion.
But it isn't mine.
It was Linda's style that I was refering to - as FHB was accusing Sister to be - not Dan's.
Linda has never posted here - at least under name - and if FHB doesn't watch 3ABN much nor claim to know her - as he admitted - then how could he become such an expert on her habits?

Oh. Guess I should break down and start wearing my glasses.

FHB posted inside information before some of us employees...
I was not speaking directly to this present information about Larry Welch.

What information was that? Did you ask him what his source was?

But what - exactly - is considered "proper" to post here? We have discussed prostitution, stealing, cheating, lying, molestation, and sexual harassment to name a few things. Not one of these things has been completely verified except to those "inside."
Now that Sister has added spousal abuse - it is taboo?
I have not been looking at this as a debate. As far as I am concerned BSDA is a place where a few people have chosen to tell what is really going on at 3ABN and others to believe or not.

Thank you for your comments though...

I believe Clay has dealt with this several times in the last few months. I think if it happened at 3abn since it began it is fair game. I also think he said it must be true. Perhaps the guidelines are listed in the "Board Rules".

[PeacefulBe]

It is interesting that I can’t just be looking for information. I must obviously be an insurgent. Am I Danny, no. Larry W., no. Am I a lawyer, no. Am I a pastor, no. Have I ever worked at 3ABN, no. Have I ever been to the 3ABN facilities, no. Have I watched 3ABN, yes. Have I been to a live event, yes. Have I heard Danny’s “side”, yes. Did I ask questions the same way, yes. Do I feel I got all my questions answered, no. Do I have a working point of view on the issue, yes. So what does that leave, me, a person who is looking for answers to the questions that arise for me as I read here.

- fhb

FHB,
Well stated! I applaud your entire post but didn't quote it all since sonshineonme left much in already. It is my opinion that you hit the nail squarely on the head, several times. There is much to consider when weighing the material posted here or anywhere.

I don't see how your last statement could be any more clear. I hope it will allay the concerns of some here. Of course, now I'm curious about what you actually do in the real world. If it isn't writing of some sort I would just wonder why not?

In defense of those close to the situation who sometimes get paranoid, this is a pretty inflamatory situation. I would hope that they would get to the point where they can comfortably allow others to have their own points of view without getting rumpled.

[husbandoftheyear]

In defense of those close to the situation who sometimes get paranoid, this is a pretty inflamatory situation. I would hope that they would get to the point where they can comfortably allow others to have their own points of view without getting rumpled.

As far as I am concerned, FHB's point of view is not causing the rumpling. I am very comfortable with the fact that much of this information is difficult to believe as well as the fact that many people will choose not to believe it. I defended 3ABN when local people would tell me some of the things they heard. It was only when I saw things first-hand that I believed. I don't hold someone's opinions against them as at one point in time I was skeptical of the situation myself.

However, I still stress that there is a difference between asking questions, having an opinion, and simply antagonizing.

As for the validity of accusations posted here, I would assume that as we are all christians, we would not slander, and instead, simply present the facts - as ugly as they are.

[PeacefulBe]

As far as I am concerned, FHB's point of view is not causing the rumpling. I am very comfortable with the fact that much of this information is difficult to believe as well as the fact that many people will choose not to believe it. I defended 3ABN when local people would tell me some of the things they heard. It was only when I saw things first-hand that I believed. I don't hold someone's opinions against them as at one point in time I was skeptical of the situation myself.

Sometimes seeing is the only way to believe with things such as this. It is through your eyes and experience that others who are not as close to it all can get a glimpse.

However, I still stress that there is a difference between asking questions, having an opinion, and simply antagonizing.

I agree wholeheartedly, however I haven't really seen the antagonizing you speak of. I will go back and reread some of FHB's posts to see if I can. Sometimes when hard questions are asked or statements made it is not to antagonize but a call to think outside of the box - to see a larger picture.

As for the validity of accusations posted here, I would assume that as we are all christians, we would not slander, and instead, simply present the facts - as ugly as they are.

It would be so nice if only it were that black and white. Unfortunately, I don't believe that we can make such a blanket assumption. If even one or two of the folks posting here feel that the end justifies the means we could be buying bogus claims.

One thing I do believe is that a forum such as this can be used not only for interested folks to discuss the 3abn topic in all of its twists and turns but also as a place for those close to the situation to vent their feelings about it all. That is one reason I find it important for those reading not to take what is posted as the gospel without some sort of verification.

[Panama_Pete]

Sometimes when hard questions are asked or statements made it is not to antagonize but a call to think outside of the box - to see a larger picture.

OK. Let's think "outside the box" on this one.

If you were a televangelist somewhere, why would you choose to not mention on the air that you travel in your own private jet? You're a good televangelist. You do everything by the book. You have nothing to hide. You are pleased with all of your expenditures.

And yet, you never seem to get around to mentioning to the donors the large amount of money you spend on a Gulfstream VI. You don't mention you have pilots on standby. None of this information makes it on the air to the donors. There is no video of the President climbing aboard Air Force One, so to speak. It's all hidden from view.

If you folks were televangelists, why would you choose to tell or not tell the donors that money goes to this item?

Also, suppose that your employees know that the airplane is on the "classified information" list never to be mentioned or be included in a camera shot.

Also, do we always need to have more and more "facts" before we reach our own conclusions on this question? Isn't there a point where wisdom and common sense sometimes supply answers? Why should we pray for wisdom if only facts are controlling?

Facts lead to Knowledge
Knowledge leads to Intelligence
Intelligence leads to Wisdom

This post has been edited by Panama_Pete: Nov 4 2006, 05:29 PM

[PeacefulBe]

OK. Let's think "outside the box" on this one.

If you were a televangelist somewhere, why would you choose to not mention on the air that you travel in your own private jet? You're a good televangelist. You do everything by the book. You have nothing to hide. You are pleased with all of your expenditures.

And yet, you never seem to get around to mentioning to the donors the large amount of money you spend on a Gulfstream VI. You don't mention you have pilots on standby. None of this information makes it on the air to the donors. There is no video of the President climbing aboard Air Force One, so to speak. It's all hidden from view.

If you folks were televangelists, why would you choose to tell or not tell the donors that money goes to this item?

Also, suppose that your employees know that the airplane is on the "classified information" list never to be mentioned or be included in a camera shot.

If I was a televangelist that intentionally hid the fact that a lot of donor money is spent on a Gulfstream VI and stand-by pilots I would feel like a poor steward of the money entrusted to me. If I went so far as to even have a "classified information" list of things never to be mentioned or photographed I would feel like a scam artist.

Also, do we always need to have more and more "facts" before we reach our own conclusions on this question? Isn't there a point where wisdom and common sense sometimes supply answers? Why should we pray for wisdom if only facts are controlling?

Facts lead to Knowledge
Knowledge leads to Intelligence
Intelligence leads to Wisdom

Yes. Facts are the foundation, even of your own argument. If we based our conclusions on speculation and possibilites would we really have any true answers?

[husbandoftheyear]

If I went so far as to even have a "classified information" list of things never to be mentioned or photographed I would feel like a scam artist.

Well PB - you have definitely named this correctly.

[PeacefulBe]

Well PB - you have definitely named this correctly.

So, besides the Gulfstream, do you know what else is on that list?

[Richard Sherwin]

Gulfstream? I thought it was a Cessna Citation VI. Oh well, luxury jet in any case.

There are certain things that the general public would not be able to understand the cost of. I'm certain there is some camera equipment that cost 10's of thousands of dollars that most of us would consider a waste of money but really is essential to the operation of 3abn, and because of that you would not want the donors to know about. However I just don't see the jet in that category. Commercial flights take a bit longer but are much cheaper. Also if a plane is really needed then a light piston engine twin would cost a fraction of the jet and a regular employee could be the pilot, an employee who could in fact have other duties besides flying. There are many pilots out there with several hundred hours of flight time that would love to have a job like that, where they could fly a few hours a week and be involved in other things as well. (Hey I'm one of them, but I don't have twin time).

Richard

[Panama_Pete]

So, besides the Gulfstream, do you know what else is on that list?

As Richard Sherwin stated, the plane is a Citation jet, rather than a Gulfstream jet.

I was thinking about the late Herbert W. Armstrong, the founder of the Worldwide Church of God, who is said to have flown around the world on a Gulfstream jet as God's ambassador and the founder of Ambassador College. But notice how Armstrong did not feel a need to hide that fact.

Herbert W. Armstrong (note: not an Adventist):


"Let me give an illustration. I fly in a Gulfstream-II jet aircraft."

http://reluctant-messenger.com/HWA/Incredible/ihp6.html

(Since this time, Armstrong's church has been broken into many different factions. This can happen when your organization is built around the personality of one human being.)

I also understand that the Shelton employees are not to point out or even mention Danny's house to any visitors. People who see the Shelton house have been known to put their wallets back in their pockets.

Danny prefers to tell people how he was a lowly carpenter and picked tomatoes for the Amish. He likes to keep the image of the lowly, humble persona going. Anything that contradicts that image is eliminated from view.

This post has been edited by Panama_Pete: Nov 5 2006, 05:13 PM

[PeacefulBe]

As Richard Sherwin stated, the plane is a Citation jet, rather than a Gulfstream jet.

I was thinking about the late Herbert W. Armstrong, the founder of the Worldwide Church of God, who is said to have flown around the world on a Gulfstream jet as God's ambassador and the founder of Ambassador College. But notice how Armstrong did not feel a need to hide that fact.

Herbert W. Armstrong (note: not an Adventist):


"Let me give an illustration. I fly in a Gulfstream-II jet aircraft."

http://reluctant-messenger.com/HWA/Incredible/ihp6.html

(Since this time, Armstrong's church has been broken into many different factions. This can happen when your organization is built around the personality of one human being.)

I also understand that the Shelton employees are not to point out or even mention Danny's house to any visitors. People who see the Shelton house have been known to put their wallets back in their pockets.

Danny prefers to tell people how he was a lowly carpenter and picked tomatoes for the Amish. He likes to keep the image of the lowly, humble persona going. Anything that contradicts that image is eliminated from view.

PP,
At the risk of sounding dense (I admit that I'm not the brightest bulb in the candelabra) are you a present or past employee? It is my recollection that you are/were.

Seems like a photo of the Shelton home that could be Googled on the internet would be nice for those wise folks who would like to get an idea of where their donations are being spent. Okay, maybe that's a little mean-spirited of me but it bothers me that he apparently feels the need to "hide" some very pertinent things from his donors. That raises red flags.

This post has been edited by PeacefullyBewildered: Nov 5 2006, 06:23 PM