Things That Make You Go Hmmm..., --letters on save 3ABN not -- contradict earlier testimony here Options

[Rosyroi]

Positing absolute negations you've already violated is not going to help your credibility, Cindy...
Which means it's ok for your lies to be pointed out... nothing personal; it's strictly business.
You do realize this statement contradicts your initial statement quoted above, don't you? There are myriad posts from you full of your defending DS and criticizing/condemning LS... in spite of your professed lack of knowledge.

Which either means that you do, in fact, knowingly and willfully lie... or that you are confused in the extreme and you do not realize when you make contradictory or mutually exclusive statements...
This statement applies to you too; the sooner you realize it, the better you'll be...

Thank you watchbird, now I won't have to go back and reread several times all those posts to come up with the same thing you pointed out. I agree with everyone else's comments about Alethia's posts.

My question is to Alethia: How about asking the people themselves about the questions you have and post their replies and add your comments to the replies. Also ask others (witnesses) who might have been involved in the move and post their replies and offer your comments.

One other suggestion. After typing it all out, BEFORE sending the post, scroll down to the very bottom of the page. Look for the place next to ADD REPLY, click on PREVIEW POST. Check for spelling, content and anything else. click save. Then walk away. Take a break. Mabe an hour or two or longer as needed. Then come back view your post then EDIT what you wrote then if it looks like it is postable then click ADD REPLY. The main idea is be sure what you are posting is understandable to others.

Mabe the above seems too simplistic but I am just trying to be helpful. Hoping Alethia takes the suggestion to heart. I would dearly love to be able to understand the posts in the threads.

By the way Alethia, I do have my own personal witness but I am unable to produce the letters to prove that Linda was trashed. There were three letters sent each one week apart, the first one no one has heard about and I won't discuss it, the second one has been discussed but I am unable to find the post for it. The third one was about Linda and the Dr. Now if they didn't need the first two rumors to trash Linda why would they send them? I believe the first two were sent to show Linda was not a nice person. The third one was the worst trashy one to smash the last nail in the coffin. (I had asked an employee about the first rumor sent and the person said that as far as they knew the first rumor was a lie. I believe all three were lies) My witness may not be the right witness for you but it is all that I have.

Just my opinion
Rosyroi

[Noahswife]

I know this is off topic, but I believe everyone posting on this thread thus far either knows Barbara Kerr or knows of her since many have posted on her thread. How about taking a minute from this thread and wishing her well and tell her you are including her concerns in your prayers. She needs our support and prayer today. She will be back tomorrow and I know she will be encouraged by our BSDA show of support.

nw
C"i"

[Pickle]

Cindy, you've raised some interesting questions about the furniture.

Now we need to put all of that along side of Danny's financial affidavit of July 2006, which states that he owns and received from Linda,

Bowflex exercise machine
Stove
2 Refrigerators
Dishwasher
2 Freezers
Master bedroom set
Downstairs bedroom set
Old outside lawn furniture

I think we can scrounge up a number of other documents along these lines if we try.

So how do we understand Danny's email to Linda about picking up all the furniture? In light of the above, I would think that would refer to the specific furniture she was to receive, which was spelled out in their house agreement of June 4, 2004. It would be all that furniture, not all the furniture in the entire house.

I don't know how to comment on your March 22 email. Perhaps you can get Danny to list everything he kept vs. everything she took, and we can see if it might match up with a similar list from Linda. It is possible that if we did that that the two lists would agree.

[awesumtenor]

Cindy has done her research - included in that are the words of sister and yourself. You and others continually claim that she (among others) is attempting to "spin" things in her direction. It is easily arguable that you, WB, as well as sister, Johann, Bob Pickle, Greg Matthews, and G.A. Joy, via his surrogates, have all spun a story as well. Your dependence on a fictional piece of writing as your basis for your position is a "spin" exercise by the definition that has been developed for that word in this community.

The problem is if the piece of writing is indeed utterly fictional... why are you and others spending so much time doing damage control around it? It's not the existence of the writing... or of those making commentary said writing that is nearly as damning as the perceived need to defend against something you claim to know is fiction....

Your doing so is then tantamount to putting forth an apologetic argument for the easter bunny or santa claus... if indeed the writing is utterly fictitious...

Additionally, Bob Pickle, one of Linda's most ardent spokespersons has developed your idea of spinning into an art. This has been pointed out numerous times and the evidence has been unmistakable and yet you support his interpretations as though they were divinely inspired as well as the words of sister.

Both sides of this debate can be charged with that...

Now, along come individuals who are questioning inconsistencies in what you have based your opinions on and you don't like it. I understand. No one likes to have the world they have constructed around themselves to be questioned - because that means having to face inconsistancies and falsehoods that are used to prop up that world. But, that doesn't make the challenges of no import. Instead it should bring you to re-examine your world and see if it needs some housekeeping.

And the fruit of said soul-searching by you of your own private idaho has reaped what results, exactly? Or is this another one of those do as I say, not as I do things... do me a favor... look into the mirror and then read what I've quoted above... because it is plain that you have not considered the possibility that you are wearing those self-same Hush Puppies...

Cindy's point is not to convice you, Emerson said, "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still." . . . so Cindy isn't trying to change your mind - instead she is working to bring a balanced perspective, and truth, to the discussions that have taken place here.

How can Cindy bring balance when by her own admission she is "not a witness"? How can she provide a balanced picture of Linda when, by her own admission, she neither knows nor has met either Danny or Linda?

Cindy, by Cindy's own admission, has no facts, first hand experience or personal testimony upon which to base any conclusions she has drawn... she is relying on what she has been told by others... the overwhelming majority of whom, like Cindy, are not witnesses either... by their own admission.

That's not a 'balanced perspective'; that's the blind leading the blind... watch that first step...

She isn't talking to you, but to those who want to examine the situation anew - and part of that means adding an understanding of Linda's character and those defending her, since your side has already attempted to create a picture of Danny's and 3ABN's character.

Re-acquaint yourself with the definition of a public forum, por favor...

No, you would like to make it about her because then that takes the focus off the evidence of lies and misleading on the other side of the coin. If you can successfully make this about someone other than Linda and her defense team, then you effectively hijack the thread and turn it into a personal attack. However, that does not diminish the fact that what is presented is strong evidence that the "spinning" and misleading has been done by Linda's side of the coin.
I raised this question in an earlier thread, maybe since your proximity to Linda is what it is, you can answer this question. Why was the case almost thrown out recently? Why did the judge almost end the proceedings? The answer I have received from people very aware of the proceedings would support the claim that Cindy is making in her OP. There is much untruth coming from the Linda camp - always has been.
Has your opinion been formed from objective third party sources - or directly from Linda?

And you get your information how, exactly? Were you in the courtroom? Was it broadcast on courtTV? Or did you get yet another report from somebody else? Also... you make much over the fact that in your estimation... or according your info the case was *almost* thrown out... almost means it continues... which means that in spite of whatever you are crowing about, the prima facie case retains suffifcient merit to continue through the process of jurisprudence... which is far more significant a point than what almost happened...

How do you know the intent of this thread? Can you read minds? You make the above statement as if you talked to Cindy this morning and she said the thread was not a search for the truth.

Watchbird stated her "guess". Nothing more. She never presented it as anything more than that... your accusation notwithstanding.

Your post is an attempt to discredit and call into question Cindy, you are not addressing the OP, nor are you adding any information that is substantive. Instead you are continuing your exercise of disparaging anyone who comes along to claim that there is filth in the Linda camp and that if one is to understand the whole complex issue they need to know that the "evidence" presented by Joy, Matthews, Pickle, et. al. has been altered, manipulated, and I am going to go out on a limb and say some of it may be manufactured.

And your post is an effort to discredit watchbird's post and my post yours and I am sure you will respond in an effort to discredit mine... b ut you fail to acknowledge that Cindy's post which started this thread was intended to discredit Pickle and Linda... so if you find that objectionable, you need to find it objectionable where all these attempts to discredit began and which you continue to perpetuate...

which would be at Cindy's feet.

At any given point, if she truly wanted to take the high road she would have said "NO" to making public all of these things. If she wanted to take the high road she wouldn't have shared stories about her intimate life with Johann (and that is the one we know of so far). The truth is this, you expected to be able to have your space here and vent your anger and frustrations about 3ABN without challenge. Challenge has arrived and you would like to do nothing more than silence it and keep the world you have created in tact.

- FHB

Your camp is not in a position to speak about the high road... if Danny had taken the high road 3 years ago, we arent even having this conversation.

In His service,
Mr. J

This post has been edited by awesumtenor: Mar 22 2007, 02:56 PM

[sonshineonme]

Your camp is not in a position to speak about the high road... if Danny had taken the high road 3 years ago, we arent even having this conversation.

In His service,
Mr. J

AMEN brother!

Odd isn't it....they are unhappy because Linda has spoken up to defend herself. I mean, that really is upsurd, isn't it? To defend yourself? Aren't you a witness to your own life? Don't you yourself know what happens to you? Shouldn't you be able to speak? Now again, why would DS want her quiet? High road? Think people think. Does this mean you sit by and let someone crush you, when God gave you a voice, common sense, and a God given defense mechanism that we all need as long as we are on this planet to protect ourselves from our enemies? Do we just sit by on our bottoms and do nothing when we are attacked? What about self respect?

Read Linda's website. She certainly takes the high road.

They simply don't like the fact that she can speak and they can't stop that. That speaks volumes all by itself. It's not complicated. Control control control...when they lose it, it seems to just drip from their comments and intent. That is what makes me go HMMMMMM........

Truth. It is what it is, they can't change it, no one can.

This post has been edited by sonshineonme: Mar 22 2007, 01:17 PM

[Jnana15]

You know, I said, "self, you need to not comment on this topic anymore". Well, I lied to self after I recieved a phone call this morning from a friend who told me that Danny answered her e-mail. After reading it to me, I really do believe that Bystander, Lee and Aletheia are Danny or have been brain washed to say "repeat after me". If my friend hears from him within the next 24 hours, then I really know that I'm not crazy because they will have reported this information to him.
When she started reading the e-mail to me, it had some of the same content that is being said here by these three individuals. He wanted things to be kept quiet that were in the e-mail and wants my friend to consider to start supporting 3ABN AGAIN.

My friend and I both agree that Barbara Kerr had no reason to lie when she posted her letter here and we are believers now for sure about this 3ABN saga...oops, let me get my facts straight, Johann started the thread.

When I first started posting here, I said that I knew what was going on before it was made known to the public as I am sure that many of you knew also.

I believe that God IS going to clean house soon in regards to 3ABN.
JMHO

This post has been edited by Clay: Mar 22 2007, 02:19 PM

[sonshineonme]

You know, I said, "self, you need to not comment on this topic anymore". Well, I lied to self after I recieved a phone call this morning from a friend who told me that Danny answered her e-mail. ......

When she started reading the e-mail to me, it had some of the same content that is being said here by these three individuals. He wanted things to be kept quiet that were in the e-mail and wants my friend to consider to start supporting 3ABN AGAIN.

My friend and I both agree that Barbara Kerr had no reason to lie when she posted her letter here and we are believers now for sure about this 3ABN saga...oops, let me get my facts straight, Johann started the thread.

When I first started posting here, I said that I knew what was going on before it was made known to the public as I am sure that many of you knew also.

I believe that God IS going to clean house soon in regards to 3ABN.
JMHO

Thank you for sharing Jnana15

This post has been edited by sonshineonme: Mar 22 2007, 08:47 PM

[Clay]

A reminder SSOM and Jnana.... address the issues that people have and not the people themselves.... we don't know who those who post really are, neither can we or should we say they are brainwashed.... certainly if they chose they could say the same about you..... Notice that I have edited both of your posts, striking through the content that is questionable...... in the future that type of content will be deleted....

keep to the issues..... not the person posting..... thank you.....

[Pickle]

I thinkJnana15, all such emails should get sent to Save3ABN.com for analysis, and possible posting whether anonymous or not.

[Bystander]

True... the point I'm making is with her not being a 'witness'... to any of this... she is not in a position to say what happened or did not happen... nor is she in a position to refute the testimony of someone who was there with her own observations and experience... so the only club in her bag is ad hominem, in the hope of discrediting those who have stated their experience enough to make them incredible...

It boils down to she don't know nuthin' 'bout nuthin'; everything she has is based on what someone told someone else who told her... the hypocrisy comes in when she only selectively listens to such hearsay and does not insist those she will believe provide proof in like manner as she demands of those she will not believe...

In His service,
Mr. J

Well, I have just finished reading this thread and couldn't be more shocked.
Those of you that are saying that Cindy isn't credible because she wasn't there, are looking in the mirror. Mr. J, your first paragraph describes you, clay and so many others exactly. You said Cindy is not in a position to say what did or did not happen. Yet, repeatedly you have done exactly that. You have made your statements as fact about what DS has done and not done. What he is and what he isn't. So has Clay. The difference is, Cindy has consistently verified what she says with the posting of the emails and/or links to such, that back it up. She has done a lot of research to back what she says and she has done an excellent job doing it.
You, and Clay and others have fell into line with your above paragraphs. You have judged, accused and made mountains out of molehills towards anything concerning DS and 3ABN, while at the same time, ignoring, proven lies, twisted stories, the pickle spin on words, and emails that only prove the things that DS has said all long.
On the other hand, you believe everything that watchbird or sister says even knowing that they were not eyewitnessess to most things between DS and LS as their marriage blew up. They only knew what LS told them. Yet, you find this credible and accept their stories from Linda without a word. I have never once seen any of you acknowledge a PROVEN, lie that has come from LS's side.
Until you can show a little more unbiased opinions and until you provide something, anything, of substance to back up what you have accused DS of, you have absolutely no validity when you call Cindy to task.
She has been diligent, thorough, and put many hours into verifying truth and lies. What she has contributed has been invaluable to the lurkers that come here to find truth. The outsider can see for themselves who is backing up what they say versus those that give all their opinions with nothing but the word of Linda's friends to back it up. Those who are truly objective will see who has validity here. That will be those who have actually witnessed or been a party to certain events, and those who have produced the emails, pictures or whatever to back up what they say. I am sorry. The rest of you have taken the lazy way out by believing the pinned threads that were put here in the beginning and then continueing to base your opinion on that 2nd and 3rd hand testimoney from the lindanites.
Until you and others have anything to bring to the table, please refrain from attacking those that do.

[Clay]

Well, I have just finished reading this thread and couldn't be more shocked.
Those of you that are saying that Cindy isn't credible because she wasn't there, are looking in the mirror. Mr. J, your first paragraph describes you, clay and so many others exactly. You said Cindy is not in a position to say what did or did not happen. Yet, repeatedly you have done exactly that. You have made your statements as fact about what DS has done and not done. What he is and what he isn't. So has Clay. The difference is, Cindy has consistently verified what she says with the posting of the emails and/or links to such, that back it up. She has done a lot of research to back what she says and she has done an excellent job doing it.
You, and Clay and others have fell into line with your above paragraphs. You have judged, accused and made mountains out of molehills towards anything concerning DS and 3ABN, while at the same time, ignoring, proven lies, twisted stories, the pickle spin on words, and emails that only prove the things that DS has said all long.
On the other hand, you believe everything that watchbird or sister says even knowing that they were not eyewitnessess to most things between DS and LS as their marriage blew up. They only knew what LS told them. Yet, you find this credible and accept their stories from Linda without a word. I have never once seen any of you acknowledge a PROVEN, lie that has come from LS's side.
Until you can show a little more unbiased opinions and until you provide something, anything, of substance to back up what you have accused DS of, you have absolutely no validity when you call Cindy to task.
She has been diligent, thorough, and put many hours into verifying truth and lies. What she has contributed has been invaluable to the lurkers that come here to find truth. The outsider can see for themselves who is backing up what they say versus those that give all their opinions with nothing but the word of Linda's friends to back it up. Those who are truly objective will see who has validity here. That will be those who have actually witnessed or been a party to certain events, and those who have produced the emails, pictures or whatever to back up what they say. I am sorry. The rest of you have taken the lazy way out by believing the pinned threads that were put here in the beginning and then continueing to base your opinion on that 2nd and 3rd hand testimoney from the lindanites.
Until you and others have anything to bring to the table, please refrain from attacking those that do.

Bystander... you have not paid attention.... Cindy herself said she was not credible.... likewise your comments have not addressed the issues but are personal attacks.... time out.... 24 hours...

[fallible humanbe...]

I thinkJnana15, all such emails should get sent to Save3ABN.com for analysis, and possible posting whether anonymous or not.

Why hassle with the middle man (unless all correspondence to the JoyPickle site is forwarded to you) just have her send them directly to you.

- FHB

[Jnana15]

A reminder SSOM and Jnana.... address the issues that people have and not the people themselves.... we don't know who those who post really are, neither can we or should we say they are brainwashed.... certainly if they chose they could say the same about you..... Notice that I have edited both of your posts, striking through the content that is questionable...... in the future that type of content will be deleted....

keep to the issues..... not the person posting..... thank you.....

My apology Clay.

[sonshineonme]

My apology Clay.

Meee toooo.

[watchbird]

Cindy, you've raised some interesting questions about the furniture.

Now we need to put all of that along side of Danny's financial affidavit of July 2006, which states that he owns and received from Linda,

QUOTE(Danny Shelton)
Bowflex exercise machine
Stove
2 Refrigerators
Dishwasher
2 Freezers
Master bedroom set
Downstairs bedroom set
Old outside lawn furniture

I think we can scrounge up a number of other documents along these lines if we try.

So how do we understand Danny's email to Linda about picking up all the furniture? In light of the above, I would think that would refer to the specific furniture she was to receive, which was spelled out in their house agreement of June 4, 2004. It would be all that furniture, not all the furniture in the entire house.

I don't know how to comment on your March 22 email. Perhaps you can get Danny to list everything he kept vs. everything she took, and we can see if it might match up with a similar list from Linda. It is possible that if we did that that the two lists would agree.

I find this list about as credible as that his total cash assets were two bank accounts with only 1500 in each. If who got what out of the house is important enough to bother with, then it would seem to me that we need to get some testimonies from those who were involved in the moving process... or watched the movers, or saw the contents of Danny's house before and after the moving process.

Surely someone was around at that time and has at least some recollection of what was taken and what was left.

And where is the June 4, 2004 document. What was really spelled out there?