Reaping The Whirl Wind, IRS Criminal Investigation of 3ABN Options

[Johann]

Interesting to see the other articles/topics contained there.

Also interesting the assertion that the writer will remain neutral but repeatedly concludes that the lawsuit would not have commenced unless the plaintiffs had proof (bascially that Danny had the right to remarry) in hand.

Proverbs 18:17 (New King James Version)
17 The first one to plead his cause seems right,
Until his neighbor comes and examines him.

[watchbird]

Interesting to see the other articles/topics contained there.

Also interesting the assertion that the writer will remain neutral but repeatedly concludes that the lawsuit would not have commenced unless the plaintiffs had proof (bascially that Danny had the right to remarry) in hand.

Vance Ferrell is an old man... and has been in very poor health for years. He is probably no longer keen enough intellectually to examine the facts for himself. At this point probably the kindest attitude we can take towards him is to just not be too sharply critical of him. While he and I have been on opposite sides of almost every issue he has championed... he has in his later years impressed me with his sincerity in wanting to right the things he sees as wrong. It will doubtless hurt him terribly when he learns that his trust has been so badly misplaced in this instance.

[Clay]

It is getting a lot more difficult to express one's thoughts. Before you know it the subject has been closed. Not honest?

its not difficult at all... however some issues lead to arguments, if that happens and the thread deteriorates into slinging personal insults, then yes its gonna be closed.... Now if there is something you think is worth discussing, open a thread and discuss it....

[Johann]

Vance Ferrell is an old man...

Seems like he was attending Emmanuel Missionary College when I was there. . . if it wasn't his brother?

[Johann]

its not difficult at all... however some issues lead to arguments, if that happens and the thread deteriorates into slinging personal insults, then yes its gonna be closed.... Now if there is something you think is worth discussing, open a thread and discuss it....

I was just underlining what Ian had said - from his viewpoint

[Ian]

Ian, there's a button on nearly every page here on BSDA that says "New Topic". You, as a member, can push it and begin a discussion on points you wish to bring forward. It's one of the great percs of being a registered member here!

Thank you, but I really hope I'm not such an idiot as you seem to be regarding me, and are again presenting me to others...

I am aware we may start new topics. I consider it likely that most, ir not all here are aware of that. But ---> I wasn't bringing up a new topic, or discussion.

Right or wrong, I was simply explaining "why" I posted "where" I did. I had brief questions, and points in followup, regarding the court cases, and Mr Pickles references which have already been posted. They only required a brief anser, not an entire thread, which would have accomplished nothing of merit.

I'm sure there are others besides myself who get tired and frustrated by such a waste of time and energy such as rehashing the same topics, which either causes or leads to offtopic discussion, or members here posting a lack of support for what they claim or present, because it has already been done. (helping no one). I am equally sure others relish it, and thrive on sewing confusion, doubt and babble, and major in diversions and evasions, and ad hominem attacks while minoring in even appearing to notice, reply to, or address the main points and concerns under discussion

Neither you or I need to identify those parties, or point fingers, they know who they are and we can each see, think, and decide that for ourselves. Don't you agree?

Cause and effect, action and equal reaction, what goes around, comes around, falling by your own devices, being judged as you judge... it's all very scientific and logical... biblical too..

There's many opinions here, guess we'll all know who and what is correct and true as this all plays out..
=============
PB:
Ah, yes. Karma...

NOUN:

1. Hinduism & Buddhism The total effect of a person's actions and conduct during the successive phases of the person's existence, regarded as determining the person's destiny.
2. Fate; destiny.
3. Informal A distinctive aura, atmosphere, or feeling: There's bad karma around the house today.

NO!

This thread is called "reaping the whirlwind...", AS IN "you reap what you sow"

Karma is related to reincarnation, and being your own saviour, and IS NOT biblical.

Why would you again take what I posted 180% out, knowing I am a professed SDA as you are, and knowing SDA foundational beliefs? I was referring to biblical texts.(and partially quoted them) and principles, and truths.

I'm not going to engage in this discussion publicly, either in the 3ABN forum unless you, or others pursue it here, or in another forum, where it may be ontopic. unless you take it up there, Check your PMs please.

- Ian

This post has been edited by Ian: Dec 8 2007, 06:40 PM

[Ian]

It is getting a lot more difficult to express one's thoughts. Before you know it the subject has been closed. Not honest?

Not honest? I didn't raise that question, nor think that. YOU did.

Yes it is sometimes frustrating to me that topics get closed or go astray and then new and additional info, questions or answers can't be posted there so all is together in one place, it is also frustrating to me that some conversations are allowed to go offtopic and others not, ( as I see, think, and understand it) but I also understand, and am willing to consider that administrators may see or have a different perspective then mine, or may not see all, or maybe it is me who doesn't see or understand all. so I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt rather then finding fault and misjudging them, and hope and pray that they regard me the same way.

That's all I have to say about the issue of honesty in this regard, Johann.

This post has been edited by Ian: Dec 8 2007, 07:10 PM

[Ian]

I was just underlining what Ian had said - from his viewpoint

NO, sorry, but you don't speak for me, nor my viewpoint.

You were only underlining,speaking for and representing your own viewpoint.

And the misrepresentation needs to stop.

This post has been edited by Ian: Dec 8 2007, 07:17 PM

[Observer]

Thank you, but I really hope I'm not such an idiot as you seem to be regarding me, and are again presenting me to others...


- Ian

There have been times in these Internet forums that I have had to ask very simple questions. One of those simple questions has been: How do I post a new topic.

I object to the implication that someone who would ask how to post a new topic is an idiot. That reaches me.

Sometimes the simplest qeustion may hvae very valid reasons for beign asked.

[Ian]

There have been times in these Internet forums that I have had to ask very simple questions. One of those simple questions has been: How do I post a new topic.

I object to the implication that someone who would ask how to post a new topic is an idiot. That reaches me.

Sometimes the simplest qeustion may hvae very valid reasons for beign asked.

MR Matthews,

Who, here in this thread asked "How do you post a new topic"?

NO ONE.


Why are you even postiing and objecting here?

This post has been edited by Ian: Dec 9 2007, 04:59 AM

[awesumtenor]

Why are you even postiing and objecting here?

Funny question coming from you... "Ian"...

When did you become such an authority on events to which you are not a witness... by your own admission...

For all your advice to others about believing things without evidence, you apparently have gone all in with what someone is clearly feeding you...

without evidence...

maybe it's the air up there... that makes you think because somebody told you something that it was the same as your actually having been there and seen with your own eyes and heard with your own ears...

Lest you forget what you said about yourself...

I am a poster just giving my own personal opinions, views, and conclusions on all this; based solely on the stuff that you and your group have posted, what has been revealed publicly by 3ABN to all, and my own personal research and investigation based on that.

So how, exactly, have you become such an authority on this topic based on the above even as you criticize others who are doing no more and no less than what you state here, only differing in the conclusions they have drawn? How is it you should be viewed as authoritative and others as worthless who have done no more or less than you?

You aren't an eyewitness. You aren't a principal in any of the conversations or events... and yet you are walking point on all things apologetic where DS and 3ABN are concerned and telling people who are far more involved than you could ever be that they don't know what they are talking about... even when they are talking about what they have seen and heard first hand... and your so-called refutation is based on what someone has told you...

Because you don't know anything by your own admission save what you've been told and what you've read.

And yet we are supposed to believe what you say... solely because you say it.

I may have been born at night... but it wasn't last night.

In His service,
Mr. J

[PeacefulBe]

Thank you, but I really hope I'm not such an idiot as you seem to be regarding me, and are again presenting me to others...

I am aware we may start new topics. I consider it likely that most, ir not all here are aware of that. But ---> I wasn't bringing up a new topic, or discussion.

For the record, Ian, I was not attempting to present you as an idiot. I checked and found that you had not started any topics so thought you might appreciate the information. It was some time after I became a member here that I learned about the "New Topic" button.

Right or wrong, I was simply explaining "why" I posted "where" I did. I had brief questions, and points in followup, regarding the court cases, and Mr Pickles references which have already been posted. They only required a brief anser, not an entire thread, which would have accomplished nothing of merit.

There are many threads here that contain similar information, but others have been started anyway to further discuss or follow up the others. It would, most likely, not have been a problem to start a new one that might have begun a new or futher discussion on the topic. If it required only a brief answer, as you said, then just do as you did. We don't follow rigid parliamentary procedures here, as a rule.

I'm sure there are others besides myself who get tired and frustrated by such a waste of time and energy such as rehashing the same topics, which either causes or leads to offtopic discussion, or members here posting a lack of support for what they claim or present, because it has already been done. (helping no one). I am equally sure others relish it, and thrive on sewing confusion, doubt and babble, and major in diversions and evasions, and ad hominem attacks while minoring in even appearing to notice, reply to, or address the main points and concerns under discussion

Neither you or I need to identify those parties, or point fingers, they know who they are and we can each see, think, and decide that for ourselves. Don't you agree?

Yes, I do agree. Sometimes things are hashed and rehashed ad nauseum. However, there are also productive discussions that bring in new material or perspectives. Some wonderful discussions have come of straying off topic. Some forums may be rigidly against this. I'm thankful that BSDA is not, and will sometimes allow a bit of lattitude or move the discussion to a new thread if it gets too far off topic for too long.

NO!

This thread is called "reaping the whirlwind...", AS IN "you reap what you sow"

Karma is related to reincarnation, and being your own saviour, and IS NOT biblical.

Why would you again take what I posted 180% out, knowing I am a professed SDA as you are, and knowing SDA foundational beliefs? I was referring to biblical texts.(and partially quoted them) and principles, and truths.

I'm not going to engage in this discussion publicly, either in the 3ABN forum unless you, or others pursue it here, or in another forum, where it may be ontopic. unless you take it up there, Check your PMs please.

- Ian

From your last few posts it appears you are a bit frustrated and unhappy. I'm sorry that you were offended by my use of the word Karma, but if you will go back to the dictionary definition I quoted in my post, you will see that it reads much as your own quotes do. You reap what you sow.

I would urge you to take a deep breath and relax a bit. If this forum is causing you this much stress and grief right now, perhaps you should step away for a bit.

PB

[GRAT]

Interesting to see the other articles/topics contained there.

Also interesting the assertion that the writer will remain neutral but repeatedly concludes that the lawsuit would not have commenced unless the plaintiffs had proof (bascially that Danny had the right to remarry) in hand.

Maybe I got the wrong impression when I read the article but I thought that the conclusion that the lawsuit would not have happened if the plaintiffs didn't have proof was a kind of tongue in cheek statement or (I can't think of the other term I want when someone writes something they don't mean). Drives me crazy when the word is right there but I can't retrieve it. Probably will hit me right after I hit post or in the middle of the night.

[Observer]

Maybe I got the wrong impression when I read the article but I thought that the conclusion that the lawsuit would not have happened if the plaintiffs didn't have proof was a kind of tongue in cheek statement. . ....

That is how I understood it--a tongue in cheek statement.

[Ian]

For the record, Ian, I was not attempting to present you as an idiot. I checked and found that you had not started any topics so thought you might appreciate the information. It was some time after I became a member here that I learned about the "New Topic" button.
There are many threads here that contain similar information, but others have been started anyway to further discuss or follow up the others. It would, most likely, not have been a problem to start a new one that might have begun a new or futher discussion on the topic. If it required only a brief answer, as you said, then just do as you did. We don't follow rigid parliamentary procedures here, as a rule.
Yes, I do agree. Sometimes things are hashed and rehashed ad nauseum. However, there are also productive discussions that bring in new material or perspectives. Some wonderful discussions have come of straying off topic. Some forums may be rigidly against this. I'm thankful that BSDA is not, and will sometimes allow a bit of lattitude or move the discussion to a new thread if it gets too far off topic for too long.

From your last few posts it appears you are a bit frustrated and unhappy. I'm sorry that you were offended by my use of the word Karma, but if you will go back to the dictionary definition I quoted in my post, you will see that it reads much as your own quotes do. You reap what you sow.

I would urge you to take a deep breath and relax a bit. If this forum is causing you this much stress and grief right now, perhaps you should step away for a bit.

PB

Ok, I'm sorry but I don't think we need to keep going in this direction, do you?
I was originally attempting to get some brief answers or an explanation from Mr Pickle, which no one has commented on including him. Maybe it just got buried???

So here it is again.

And since we're all hopelessly offtopic... and the only threads I can find where this is on topic are closed.

Can you explain to me why Gailon Joy per his bankruptcy case and his related adversarial proceeding case stated to the court on Nov 30, 2007, the following:

1. On or about April 7, 2007, Danny Lee Shelton and Three Angels
Broadcasting Network, Inc., filed suit against Gailon Arthur Joy and
Robert (Bob) Pickle, alleging violation of trademark and disparagement in
the Central District Court of Massachusetts ("District Court Case").
2. The Debtor, faced with a lack of income, filed for bankruptcy protection on
August 14, 2007.

If you can prove all that you and he, as "Private investigator and reporters" have claimed, why would he perceive the lawsuit as a threat to his income and file bankruptcy, for protection???

Further, WHY, if as you have claimed the automatic stay was a strategy on 3ABN's part to stop Joy's involvement in the civil case; Why did 3ABN counsel make a motion for the stay to be lifted? And why did He file a document requesting that the Judge not grant 3ABN's motion to lift the stay, and why did you file a brief to support his argument and request?


If you don't know what I am talking about or referring to, just let me know and I'll supply the documents and arguments and quotes from both you and Joy.


For what it's worth and despite the false claims and erronious speculation about the IRS and what's going on in this thread, from what I have seen and read it appears to me that it is you and Joy, and your cohorts and supporters, and even sources, who are, and will be reaping the whirlwind.

Cause and effect, action and equal reaction, what goes around, comes around, falling by your own devices, being judged as you judge... it's all very scientific and logical... biblical too..

There's many opinions here, guess we'll all know who and what is correct and true as this all plays out.

This post has been edited by Ian: Dec 9 2007, 05:32 AM