What We Know As Truth So Far, Verifiable information on the 3abn situation Options

[PeacefulBe]

Happy New Year to all of you!

On this first day of 2007, I submit this thread topic to you as a sort of clearinghouse, a recap of information. Not just any information, not speculation but what actual truth we know and have discovered on this 3abn forum journey so far.

The types of information that would be acceptable here are:

1. First hand experience that you would feel comfortable sharing before God and in a court of law.
2. Information that can be verified with documentation.
3. Information that has been established as true by all parties involved, no matter how small.

When you submit information, you must also submit the documentation or type of verification you have or your personal statement that it is from your first hand experience.

If you know someone with documentation or verifiable first hand information that would be pertinent to this list, please encourage them to become members here on BSDA and share it with us.

As submissions are verified as items of truth, it would be nice to be able to list them in an area close to the beginning of this thread accompanied by the link to the initial submission.


To refute information posted as truth you must/should be able to verifiably demonstrate its inaccuracy.

I would simply ask that any frivolous challenges be avoided. I have edited out the final part that Calvin disagrees with. As he states, opinions are always welcome here.

This post has been edited by PeacefullyBewildered: Jan 2 2007, 08:08 PM

[calvin]

Opinions are always welcome here so a topic where only factual information is acceptable is something I would not enforce. As we have seen here, what one considers factual are often disputed.

It is my opinion that we have sliced and diced this story enough for people to form their own opinion as to what is truth without anymore summary or pinned topics.

[Skyhook]

If I recall correctly, Gaillon Joy said that if ASI, 3abn and Linda did not come to an agreement about a fair and open investigation of all the facts, by an impartial panel, by Jan. 2007, he would go public with the results of his investigation. I assume "going public" means media attention. Is there any new information about Mr. Joy's plans?

[Observer]

If I recall correctly, Gaillon Joy said that if ASI, 3abn and Linda did not come to an agreement about a fair and open investigation of all the facts, by an impartial panel, by Jan. 2007, he would go public with the results of his investigation. I assume "going public" means media attention. Is there any new information about Mr. Joy's plans?

Several of us involved in these discussions believe that we are near a decision, whatever that decision may be. You will note that Mr. Joy' statement referenced January, and did not specifically state January 1. I personally expect that prior to the middle of January we will either be able to announce that an agreement has been reached in which ASI will mediate, or an announcement will be made that there has been a failure to reach such an agreement.

[PeacefulBe]

Opinions are always welcome here so a topic where only factual information is acceptable is something I would not enforce. As we have seen here, what one considers factual are often disputed.

It is my opinion that we have sliced and diced this story enough for people to form their own opinion as to what is truth without anymore summary or pinned topics.

Hi folks.

In a PM from Calvin yesterday he assured me that my topic was not inappropriate, only that he would not enforce facts only in the way I had requested. He further said that I could speak to Clay and PrincessDi to see if they would be willing to do such. (Clay, Di, ya interested?)

I received a PM from Aletheia telling me she thought the thread was a good idea and was sorry that it got shot down. It has not been shot down, but it sure shows how well respected the opinion of the owner of this site is!

I have asked Calvin if he could come over and reassure everyone that it is okay to carry on with the topic.

Thanks,
PeacefullyBewildered

[calvin]

PB is correct. I was giving my opinion as a members, not wearing my administrator hat. Also, I have no interest personally in moderating the topic as PB requested. Every topic has to live or die on its own merit. So if there is an interest people will respond accordingly.

[PeacefulBe]

Thanks Calvin.

[PeacefulBe]

Since there haven't been any submissions to the list to date, could we perhaps discuss if this is a worthwhile exercise?

[Pickle]

Since there haven't been any submissions to the list to date, could we perhaps discuss if this is a worthwhile exercise?

Feel free to copy and paste anything I've written that you think qualifies.

My hands are full at present, so I'll have to pass on doing it myself.

[awesumtenor]

Since there haven't been any submissions to the list to date, could we perhaps discuss if this is a worthwhile exercise?

I say no; it would only be yet another regurgitation of that which is already been posted; there's a reason the forum software has search capability... and all of the information has been collected in a single sub-forum rather than being spread hither and yon...

What you are asking is an even further distillation to soundbite level, which I think would not help one see the how and why of the various positions found in this area. This is a 3 year on going conversation where the journey from the outset to now and the opinions expressed matter...not to mention the issue of who determines what has been 'proven'? There are some who will not believe it until they see the nail prints and thrust their hand in His side... even in the face of first hand testimony... so as far as they are concerned the issue is agnostic; it's unproven and unproveable... or at least that's their story and they are sticking to it..

Just my $0.02

In His service,
Mr. J

[watchbird]

I say no; it would only be yet another regurgitation of that which is already been posted; there's a reason the forum software has search capability... and all of the information has been collected in a single sub-forum rather than being spread hither and yon...

What you are asking is an even further distillation to soundbite level, which I think would not help one see the how and why of the various positions found in this area. This is a 3 year on going conversation where the journey from the outset to now and the opinions expressed matter...not to mention the issue of who determines what has been 'proven'? There are some who will not believe it until they see the nail prints and thrust their hand in His side... even in the face of first hand testimony... so as far as they are concerned the issue is agnostic; it's unproven and unproveable... or at least that's their story and they are sticking to it..

Just my $0.02

In His service,
Mr. J

I agree with Mr. J. Those who come here seriously looking for information would want to see all that has been said from the beginning. Those who are not seriously looking for information would not believe what was said in one special thread anyhow.

We are at the stage where the main thing for most of us to do is to develop patience as we wait and see the results of the information that has already been disseminated... and to see what new things are being brought by current researchers. Repetitions of things already said only distract and frustrate the person who is looking for information and gets weary of bumping into the same things over and over again.

[sister]

I agree with Mr. J. Those who come here seriously looking for information would want to see all that has been said from the beginning. Those who are not seriously looking for information would not believe what was said in one special thread anyhow.

We are at the stage where the main thing for most of us to do is to develop patience as we wait and see the results of the information that has already been disseminated... and to see what new things are being brought by current researchers. Repetitions of things already said only distract and frustrate the person who is looking for information and gets weary of bumping into the same things over and over again.

I agree with both Mr. J. and Watchbird. In addition to frustrating the person who is looking for information and gets weary of bunping into the same things over and over again, it is also frustrating to answer the same type of questions over and over again. I would suggest that newbies in the area of 3ABN do their homework first and read through the threads or use the search function as was suggested.

Sister

[Pickle]

Just to give another side of things, I'd say that something like the Factual Information forum at Maritime is helpful to folks who want to see the facts without a lot of bantering back and forth.

But whatever. Things are moving pretty fast these days anyway.

[PeacefulBe]

Mr. J, WB, Sister, Pickle,

All of you make excellent points and I defer to those of you who have the wisdom and experience of longer membership here on the 3abn forum.

We will let this topic slide onto the next page or so and get about the business of helping newbies learn to search the forum for themselves.

Pickle, you are right. Things seem to be progressing quickly now, anyway. Would you mind posting a link to the Factual Information forum on Maritime for those who might be interested?

[Pickle]

Pickle, you are right. Things seem to be progressing quickly now, anyway. Would you mind posting a link to the Factual Information forum on Maritime for those who might be interested?

There will be links to it throughout my more recent correspondence with Danny.

Here's a link: http://www.maritime-sda-online.org/forums/...=107&page=1