Save3abn Website Uses Blackmail Tactics, 3abn better not go to Court! Options

[Lee]

Save3abn website has made some interesting threats towards 3ABN that constitute blackmail. Here is what is on their site below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Leonard Westphal Said That and Got Away with It?
Where This Article Went
Everything is still here, but is no longer visible to web browsers.

We have covered elsewhere how various ones affected by the various scandals and allegations swirling around Danny Shelton and 3ABN have had concerns that they might reap retribution if they do not remain silent regarding what has happened. The sources for our story here have similar concerns, and have asked that we pull this story until a later time. We have decided to honor their request.

It should be pointed out, though, that if everyone remains silent, no reforms will be made, and the same abuses and corruption will continue. That scenario is not an option.

What is particularly relevant regarding this story is that we see here a repetition of a familiar pattern:

Definite concerns and perceived wrongs are pointed out.
An investigation is done improperly or not at all.
The wrongdoers get rewarded, while the concerned get punished.
We trust that the particular situation we addressed in this story will be properly resolved in a professional, Christian manner. If that does not happen, then it will undoubtedly be released to the media once again
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "threat" is in the last two sentences. Unless 3ABN stops the lawsuits, they will take their information to the media. Last I heard, using Blackmail was against the law!

You may see it for yourself here: http://www.save3abn.com/leonard-westphal-hope-lebrun-1.htm

This post has been edited by Lee: Feb 22 2007, 07:43 PM

[Richard Sherwin]

And all the legal papers filed against save3abn telling them to stop or else is not blackmail?

[inga]

Save3abn website has made some interesting threats towards 3ABN that constitute blackmail. Here is what is on their site below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Leonard Westphal Said That and Got Away with It?
Where This Article Went
Everything is still here, but is no longer visible to web browsers.

We have covered elsewhere how various ones affected by the various scandals and allegations swirling around Danny Shelton and 3ABN have had concerns that they might reap retribution if they do not remain silent regarding what has happened. The sources for our story here have similar concerns, and have asked that we pull this story until a later time. We have decided to honor their request.

It should be pointed out, though, that if everyone remains silent, no reforms will be made, and the same abuses and corruption will continue. That scenario is not an option.

What is particularly relevant regarding this story is that we see here a repetition of a familiar pattern:

Definite concerns and perceived wrongs are pointed out.
An investigation is done improperly or not at all.
The wrongdoers get rewarded, while the concerned get punished.
We trust that the particular situation we addressed in this story will be properly resolved in a professional, Christian manner. If that does not happen, then it will undoubtedly be released to the media once again
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "threat" is in the last two sentences. Unless 3ABN stops the lawsuits, they will take their information to the media. Last I heard, using Blackmail was against the law!

You may see it for yourself here: http://www.save3abn.com/leonard-westphal-hope-lebrun-1.htm

Well, I read the article this morning ... now wish that I'd downloaded it. What is being clearly said above is that the article was pulled out of concern regarding retribution against the main author of the article in question. (It was clear who wrote it.) What is also being said is that if the concerns in the article are not addressed properly, it will be "released to the media once again." The last phrase indicates that it was already released (no threat, just statement of fact) and it will be released again (in the same manner, i.e. on the website.

I see nothing but a statement of fact and a statement of intention that hardly constitutes blackmail. (I suspect that some have already copied the article anyway.)

If I tell you that, unless you stop traveling in the direction you're going, you're going to drive into the river where there used to be a bridge, do you consider that a threat of blackmail?

You may ...

[fallible humanbe...]

And all the legal papers filed against save3abn telling them to stop or else is not blackmail?

No similarity at all. If anything it is more akin to the argument between Apple and Cisco about the name "iPhone." Or, the lawsuit by an organization started by the Beatles over the use of the name "Apple" and the "Apple" logo.

3ABN has every right to protect its name. The SDA church has fought many battles of the use of its name over the years.

- FHB

[Richard Sherwin]

Protecting it's name is but one small part of their threat, but hey, you knew that, right?

Richard

No similarity at all. If anything it is more akin to the argument between Apple and Cisco about the name "iPhone." Or, the lawsuit by an organization started by the Beatles over the use of the name "Apple" and the "Apple" logo.

3ABN has every right to protect its name. The SDA church has fought many battles of the use of its name over the years.

- FHB

[Seraphim7]

And all the legal papers filed against save3abn telling them to stop or else is not blackmail?

My father taught me that you should not use a word, when you do not know what the word means. It is unfortunate that the dannyscribes will not take the time to even check a definition before using a word.

blackmail definition
n.
1.
a. Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information.
b. Something of value extorted in this manner.

What our dear sister has completely missed is that blackmail is predicated on "secrecy".

For example, not long ago, one of the members of BlackSDA was sent a threatening PM from one of dannyscribes threatening to "expose" personal information about the member, if she did not keep quiet about things she has personal knowledge of regarding 3ABN. That is an example of blackmal.

While what Lee has tried to call blackmail is far from the case. No threat was made to "expose" anything the 3abn folks want kept secret.

This post has been edited by seraph|m: Feb 22 2007, 08:42 PM

[Panama_Pete]

3ABN has every right to protect its name. The SDA church has fought many battles of the use of its name over the years.

- FHB

If that's true, then you also believe that Linda Shelton has "every right" to protect her name.

And not just a few rights to protect her name, but "every right."

Linda Shelton will be glad to know you understand.

[fallible humanbe...]

My father taught me that you should not use a word, when you do not know what the word means. It is unfortunate that the dannyscribes will not take the time to even check a definition before using a word. : doh :

blackmail definition
n.
1.
a. Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information.
b. Something of value extorted in this manner.

What our dear sister has completely missed is that blackmail is predicated on "secrecy".

For example, not long ago, one of the members of BlackSDA was sent a threatening PM from one of dannyscribes threatening to "expose" personal information about the member, if she did not keep quiet about things she has personal knowledge of regarding 3ABN. That is an example of blackmal [sic].

While what Lee has tried to call blackmail is far from the case. No threat was made to "expose" anything the 3abn folks want kept secret. : nonono :

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law

Main Entry: black·mail
Pronunciation: 'blak-"mAl
Function: noun
Etymology: originally, payment extorted from farmers in Scotland and northern England, from black + dialectal mail payment, rent
: extortion or coercion by often written threats esp. of public exposure, physical harm, or criminal prosecution —blackmail transitive verb —black·mail·er /-"mA-l&r/ noun
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

And your final statement is simply wrong. There is a threat to repost the information that was removed. Now, it was there, is not now, so someone - whether it is 3ABN or Mr. Westphal himself - sought the appropriate means to have it removed. I would venture to guess that it was Mr. Westphal who asked it be removed even though he did not write what had been posted. What had been posted was removed and there is a threat to repost it unless 3ABN does what Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy want.

It is nothing more than a power play on the part of the PickleJoy team.

-FHB

This post has been edited by fallible humanbeing: Feb 22 2007, 09:03 PM

[Panama_Pete]

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law

Main Entry: black·mail
Pronunciation: 'blak-"mAl
Function: noun
Etymology: originally, payment extorted from farmers in Scotland and northern England, from black + dialectal mail payment, rent
: extortion or coercion by often written threats esp. of public exposure, physical harm, or criminal prosecution —blackmail transitive verb —black·mail·er /-"mA-l&r/ noun
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Pleeeeezzzze. There's no extortion. No coercion.

It's much closer to a typical, business-oriented ultimatum, as in, "This is my best price, take it or leave it." So, leave out the extortion and coercion, please. You're just injuring your own case when you throw out that nonsense.

http://www.selfknowledge.com/102039.htm

Ultimatum (Ul`ti*ma"tum) (?), n.; pl. E. Ultimatums (#), L. Ultimata (#).
[NL. See Ultimate.]

A final proposition, concession, or condition; especially, the final propositions, conditions, or terms, offered by either of the parties in a diplomatic negotiation; the most favorable terms a negotiator can offer, the rejection of which usually puts an end to the hesitation.
(-- a final demand, the rejection of which may lead to a resort to force or other compelling action by the party presenting the ultimatum. --)

[fallible humanbe...]

If that's true, then you also believe that Linda Shelton has "every right" to protect her name.

And not just a few rights to protect her name, but "every right."

Linda Shelton will be glad to know you understand.

PP,

Weak. To equate Linda's name with the name of an entity like 3ABN or Hope or LLNB isn't going to fly.

- FHB

Pleeeeezzzze. There's no extortion. No coercion.

It's much closer to a typical, business-oriented ultimatum, as in, "This is my best price, take it or leave it." So, leave out the extortion and coercion, please. You're just injuring your own case when you throw out that nonsense.

http://www.selfknowledge.com/102039.htm

Ultimatum (Ul`ti*ma"tum) (?), n.; pl. E. Ultimatums (#), L. Ultimata (#).
[NL. See Ultimate.]

A final proposition, concession, or condition; especially, the final propositions, conditions, or terms, offered by either of the parties in a diplomatic negotiation; the most favorable terms a negotiator can offer, the rejection of which usually puts an end to the hesitation.
(-- a final demand, the rejection of which may lead to a resort to force or other compelling action by the party presenting the ultimatum. --)

PP,

3ABN will be glad to know that you have finally seen their right to protect their name. They haven't used coercion or extortion against Mr. Joy - they have offered him an ultimatum, a final deal, a take it or leave it in regards to his "onionesque" site save3ABN.

- FHB

This post has been edited by fallible humanbeing: Feb 22 2007, 09:07 PM

[Panama_Pete]

PP,

Weak. To equate Linda's name with the name of an entity like 3ABN or Hope or LLNB isn't going to fly.

- FHB

Oh yes, it does fly; It flies very well.

Unless, of course you equate Linda Shelton as having less innate value than The Chosen One at 3ABN. In the end, you're just displaying your own sense of inequality, which is inherent in everything else you say.

[watchbird]

No similarity at all.......
3ABN has every right to protect its name. The SDA church has fought many battles of the use of its name over the years.

- FHB

OKayyyyyyy... gotit... thanks for being so clear.... So 3abn has every right to threaten someone who says anything about the things they do.....

But NO ONE... absolutely NO one... has any right to complain or to protect their own name against 3abn's threats.

Yup... that's what I THOUGHT.... just what you , FHB, said... just what Lee said.... ..... now we wait for the rest of the dannyscribes to check in to confirm it.... OK... we is waitin....

.....................

If that's true, then you also believe that Linda Shelton has "every right" to protect her name.

And not just a few rights to protect her name, but "every right."

Linda Shelton will be glad to know you understand.

Pete..... what's got into you man.... have you forgotten all the stuff these dannyscribes been teachin us ....... .....

C'mon now... YOU know better than that....
You know that all rights cease once a Shelton is ousted from the family tree.....
You know that no one speaks anything against the Great Anointed White Father....
And SURELY you know that the GAWF has the right to say whatever he wishes against anyone else, whenever he wants, however he wants.... and has the right to change it at any time he wants....

..... now.... got that through your head now?

OK... here's a blanky for you.... ..... and a couch if'n ya feel the need of lyin down..... ......

oooooooh... these dannyscribes... ain't they predictable though....... .......

[Panama_Pete]

3ABN will be glad to know that you have finally seen their right to protect their name.
- FHB

If you had any imagination, you'd find you own argument, rather than simply re-writing and re-stating my argument, which is: Linda Shelton has every right to protect her name.

OKayyyyyyy... gotit... thanks for being so clear.... So 3abn has every right to threaten someone who says anything about the things they do.....


Pete..... what's got into you man.... have you forgotten all the stuff these dannyscribes been teachin us ....... .....

C'mon now... YOU know better than that....
You know that all rights cease once a Shelton is ousted from the family tree.....
You know that no one speaks anything against the Great Anointed White Father....
And SURELY you know that the GAWF has the right to say whatever he wishes against anyone else, whenever he wants, however he wants.... and has the right to change it at any time he wants....

..... now.... got that through your head now?

OK... here's a blanky for you.... ..... and a couch if'n ya feel the need of lyin down..... ......

oooooooh... these dannyscribes... ain't they predictable though....... .......

Thanks for the blanky, I need it right now as I curl up into a fetal position behind the couch!

This post has been edited by Panama_Pete: Feb 22 2007, 09:21 PM

[PrincessDrRe]

I'm waitin' on my papers... I got Mother to take care of, a son to put through school, an education to pay off/start up afresh; then a counseling center to build, a cousin to finsh putting through school (unless she's finished and ain't told me), and some real estate to build....

[fallible humanbe...]

For those interested, here is the double-speak interpretation of the line in red quoted by Lee.

Save3abn website has made some interesting threats towards 3ABN that constitute blackmail. Here is what is on their site below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Leonard Westphal Said That and Got Away with It?
Where This Article Went
Everything is still here, but is no longer visible to web browsers.

We have covered elsewhere . . .

If you go to the page on the save3abn website and use your browsers "View Source" function here is what you will discover (the main part being what is bolded):

<html>
<head>
<title>Leonard Westphal Said That and Got Away with It?</title>
<meta name="description" content="The sources for our story here felt that they might reap retribution over the publishing of this story. They have asked that we pull it until a later time. We have decided to honor their request.">
<meta name="keywords" content="3ABN, 3-ABN, Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Danny Shelton, Melody Shelton, Tommy Shelton">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=x-user-defined">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-us">
<script language="JavaScript" src="/js/f.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<style type="text/css">

It is my understanding that the "source" is a terminated employee who purports to be sharing comments made by Mr. Westphal. Isn't it interesting that the JoyPickle will adhere to their "sources" request while completely ignoring the confidentiality of the ASI communications and the request of Dr. Thompson that his emails not be published. But then I guess there is no surprise at their tactics.

Mr. Pickle, did you have the "sources" permission initially, or was it posted prior to receiving their approval and because you rushed to post it you had to backtrack?

- FHB

This post has been edited by fallible humanbeing: Feb 25 2007, 10:06 PM