3abn Continued

[Adventist Dissident]

i have yet to see danny or his camp produce one shread of evidence that says linda is guilty. just hearsay.

 

[DarylFawcett]

Well stated icedragon101.

 

[Sophia7]

If you receive a positive response, I will be surpised, however, after saying this, I hope you will.

I did get a response from 3ABN today, including a financial statement. I haven't had a chance to look at it yet, though.

 

[steffanphilip]

You stated something earlier that I have been meaning to address, but have not had the opportunity. I think you have shown a cynical side that needs to be address.

Jim I personally don't think you care about what happened to Linda or the truth. I think you just care about you own personal needs. You keep appealing to you own personal blessings you revcieve from 3abn. You don't want ot mess that up. Your unwillingness to even consider that Danny my be guilty is troubling.

I see that the same bunch have surfaced here also. It's quite amazing how they keep trying to recycle the same old tired rubbish and tactics. Now you're down to analyzing Jim's motives in not agreeing with your thinking?

Daryl has not been balanced, whichever way you want to take that statement is fine with me, at all.

I stopped posting last year in another forum when I realized that they are just bent.

Jim has pretty much said what I said to you in September, 2006. Nothing has changed and, when all is said and done, nothing will with your way of thinking.

And I don't post anonymously, either. You, on the other hand...

 

[annie1speed]

Hey There ,

First off let me say that I am not SDA, so I don't really have a dog in this fight, BUT I do want to ask a question.

Do you folks know how companies/corporations are designated as FOR-PROFIT, NOT-FOR-PROFIT, and NON-PROFIT?

What I know may not be right for the state 3abn is located, but it is my understanding that a non-profit organization cannot by its charter show a profit on the books. That doesn't mean the employees can't bring home a paycheck or profit themselves from it. The ORGANIZATION does not show a profit. Profit is not the reason the organization exists.

A not-for-profit organization CAN show a profit on the books, but profit is not the primary reason for its existance. Again, employess can bring home a paycheck and profit from the organization, but the organization itself may or may not show a profit. Service orgnizations like 3abn could easily fall into this category.

Last we have the for-profit organization, which is in business primarily for the purpose of making money through the distribution of goods or services. If this business doesn't profit, it dies.

I haven't read anywhere in this thread where 3abn is a NON-profit organization, therefore if they make a profit, I don't see anything shady about it.

But hey, I'm from Alabama so what do I know? I is not a lawyer, but I did work for a NON-profit organization that changed its designation to NOT-FOR-profit while I was employed there.

Class dismissed .

Bye now,

Annie

 

[Rosie55]

Hey There ,

First off let me say that I am not SDA, so I don't really have a dog in this fight, BUT I do want to ask a question.

Do you folks know how companies/corporations are designated as FOR-PROFIT, NOT-FOR-PROFIT, and NON-PROFIT?

What I know may not be right for the state 3abn is located, but it is my understanding that a non-profit organization cannot by its charter show a profit on the books. That doesn't mean the employees can't bring home a paycheck or profit themselves from it. The ORGANIZATION does not show a profit. Profit is not the reason the organization exists.

A not-for-profit organization CAN show a profit on the books, but profit is not the primary reason for its existance. Again, employess can bring home a paycheck and profit from the organization, but the organization itself may or may not show a profit. Service orgnizations like 3abn could easily fall into this category.

Last we have the for-profit organization, which is in business primarily for the purpose of making money through the distribution of goods or services. If this business doesn't profit, it dies.

I haven't read anywhere in this thread where 3abn is a NON-profit organization, therefore if they make a profit, I don't see anything shady about it.

But hey, I'm from Alabama so what do I know? I is not a lawyer, but I did work for a NON-profit organization that changed its designation to NOT-FOR-profit while I was employed there.

Class dismissed .

Bye now,

Annie

3abn says they are a "not-for-profit" organization. Thank you Annie for helping us see this correctly.

 

[noahswife]

3abn says they are a "not-for-profit" organization. Thank you Annie for helping us see this correctly.

But you see, Rosie55, the problem is between what 3abn says/claims and what Judge Rowe found in her decision.

I am going to quote someone else's review of the decision for those who don't want to take the time to read it themselves at:

http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf

Here's some highlights for those who can stomach it.

*****************

Applicant is advocating a way
of life but it is a lifestyle that applicant favors, not a religion.

According to
applicant’s 2001 financial statement, applicant’s assets have accumulated to over forty-two
million dollars ($42,000,000), approximately three times the total revenue for 2001 of slightly
under fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000). The income raised and accumulated by applicant
has allowed it to purchase an airplane, a state-of-the art recording studio, and other audio/video
production facilities and tools. The airplane is a business airplane that is used to promote the
Shelton’s commercial enterprises and expand the target audience areas

I must conclude from the evidence of record, that applicant is controlled by Danny and
Linda Shelton, and all final decisions are made by them and not by a disinterested impartial
board of directors.

Applicant has
failed to establish that it is not charging everyone that purchases or uses its products, facilities,
and programs at prices above the cost of operation. On the contrary, these appear to be armslength
transactions producing fees no different than a non-exempt business enterprise would
generate. Programming and broadcasting are done for profit on this property, as clearly shown
by applicant’s financial statements.

The operation of 3ABN on the property in question generates a significant profit for
applicant.

The nature of applicant’s programming and CDs is the
encouragement of a healthy lifestyle, for a price. Although there may be religious overtones in
applicant’s use of the property, that is not sufficient to qualify for a religious property tax
exemption. Were I to recommend a grant of tax exemption for the majority of the property at
issue, which is clearly a commercial enterprise, it would give applicant an unfair commercial
advantage over other commercially owned and operated radio and television stations.

Applicant has accumulated
sufficient wealth that it is currently in the process of setting up its own music label and has
purchased additional properties for various uses not contemplated under the not-for-profit
statutes.

Applicant has, therefore, not established that it does not profit from
the enterprise conducted on the subject property, a fatal flaw to its exemption claim.

Applicant has not established that it conducts charitable activities
when it clearly has the resources to extend the use of the property and equipment on the property
to charitable and/or religious entities at no cost. The record does not indicate that it did so.

Danny and Linda Shelton have control of applicant. They regulate the amount they are
paid. They have control of programming. They regulate all contracts. Applicant uses this
property to produce television programs, to sell equipment, radio and television time, and to sell
merchandise, and, absent evidence to the contrary, sales are made at commercially competitive
prices.

For the aforementioned reasons it is recommended that Franklin County Parcel Index No.
174-116-11 remain on the tax rolls for the 2000 and 2001 assessment years and be assessed to
the applicant, the owner thereof, except for the two pastor’s offices, each measuring 14 feet by
18 feet, on the second floor of the administrative production center building, and a corresponding
amount of land. That area, I recommend, be granted a property tax exemption as used for
religious purposes without a view to profit

Barbara S. Rowe
Administrative Law Judge
January 28, 2004

The emphasis is my own. I know the case is on appeal. I have asked if there are amicus briefs and no one has responded.

 

[noahswife]

I see that the same bunch have surfaced here also. It's quite amazing how they keep trying to recycle the same old tired rubbish and tactics. Now you're down to analyzing Jim's motives in not agreeing with your thinking?

Daryl has not been balanced, whichever way you want to take that statement is fine with me, at all.

I stopped posting last year in another forum when I realized that they are just bent.

Jim has pretty much said what I said to you in September, 2006. Nothing has changed and, when all is said and done, nothing will with your way of thinking.

And I don't post anonymously, either. You, on the other hand...

It is interesting that we each have come to quite different conclusions after reading the same materials. I actually thought Daryl was very neutral when I read his posts from the beginning and only recently began to demonstrate he was viewing one side as more credible than the other.

Not sure where you have posted elsewhere but I would be willing to read what you said if you would refer me to those posts.

And personally, Mr. Steffan? /Mr Phillip? every single post I read regarding this matter I analyze the poster's possible motives if they seem to be biased one way or the other. It has nothing to do with whether I agree or not with their thinking. This is also true if their posts seem to contain content or wording similar to that of other posters who have demonstrated bias one way or the other.

Also you said "Jim has pretty much said what I said to you hypocrites in September, 2006. Nothing has changed and, when all is said and done, nothing will with your way of thinking."

I am not quite sure exactly what you mean by your last sentence. Can you explain? And I would disagree with you that nothing has changed although some things remain the same. Since September, the save3abn.com site has posted documents that quite a few people have read. Since September, Linda has asked that the evidence against her be produced for examination. Since September, Tommy Shelton was given a fond farewell on tv for all to watch.

What has not changed? Lawsuits are still threatened and I think those in support of Linda will welcome them from what I have read. No evidence has been produced as Linda Shelton has requested. Attacks are made against those inquiring about issues at 3abn rather than producing documents....let's just use the phone records as an example, shall we, that John Lomacang said would be provided and Bob Pickle was never allowed to view in Thompsonville? Would that not be a simple thing to produce and so easy to restore some credibility if it in fact those documents show what was claimed they demonstrated?

 

[Pickle]

NW,

Just to make sure no one accuses you of lying simply because you got one little nit-picky detail wrong, it was John Lomacang (rather than Walt Thompson) who on September 1, 2006, promised me that I and whomever I brought with me could see the phone card phone records of hundreds of hours of phone calls, phone records that he had personally seen.

Blessings.

 

[noahswife]

NW,

Just to make sure no one accuses you of lying simply because you got one little nit-picky detail wrong, it was John Lomacang (rather than Walt Thompson) who on September 1, 2006, promised me that I and whomever I brought with me could see the phone card phone records of hundreds of hours of phone calls, phone records that he had personally seen.

Blessings.

Thanks for the correction!! I should have gone back and read the information rather than relying on my age activated ADD memory. I will correct the name above per your reminder.

 

[DarylFawcett]

I did get a response from 3ABN today, including a financial statement. I haven't had a chance to look at it yet, though.

I will be interested in whether or not the financial statement you received addresses any of the financial concerns previously posted here.

 

[steffanphilip]

You can go and do a search for my first and last name to find out where and what I've posted. At this point, forum rules prohibit me from using links.

As far as my own statement goes: the pack of jackals will never change their way of thinking. That is what I meant by nothing will change.

When you judge other people's motives and make it your basis for attack, then you expose what little substance you have.

save3abn dot com? You must be joking right? A convicted (and unrepentant) embezzler is now going to save 3abn?

Linda Shelton asked/demanded for evidence of her crime? But nobody said she committed one. Oh wait, maybe she almost did - from the Illinois tax case that has been waved about - Linda almost committed perjury and then quickly corrected herself.
And why is it that you fail to tell your audience that the Illinois tax case happened _with_ Linda Shelton still there. Notice that this is not a case of "oops I forgot about that or it slipped my mind." Instead, she insisted .

Here is the actual information I copied without any alteration, except for the bold emphasis:

In addition, there is discrepancy in the testimony of Linda Shelton. She stated she did not
receive royalty payments for the CDs (Tr. pp. 595, 617) and later admitted that she did (Tr. p.
619). The CD admitted into evidence, entitled “I think About Grace”, has a copyright mark on
it. (Applicant’s Ex. No. 24). Broadcast Music Incorporated, a private company unaffiliated with
applicant, licenses her songs. (Tr. pp. 617-620). The songs on the CD belong to Linda, and were
copyrighted by her in 2001. (Tr. pp. 620-623). Linda insisted that the (800) area code, toll free
telephone number is strictly for prayer requests (Tr. p. 608, 612); however, it is the number listed
on the inside label of her CD that was admitted into evidence. The (800) telephone number is
listed for ordering additional CDs. The outside label had the (618) area code telephone number
listed with the address of applicant. Applicant’s Fall/Winter 2001-2002 newsletter has an
advertisement for Linda Shelton’s new CD, “I Think About Grace.” The advertisement has the
toll free number listed for orders.

 

[Pickle]

save3abn dot com? You must be joking right? A convicted (and unrepentant) embezzler is now going to save 3abn?

Why are you purposely distorting the truth? Why did you not mention that Vermont (I think it was Vermont) considers it to be embezzlement if you keep money that belongs to someone else even if that someone else owes that money to you, and that that is what happened?

And why would you accuse Gailon of being unrepentant when he already has stated what he would do differently, including something having to do with invoicing?

Don't you think it possible that you have crossed the line and violated the ninth commandment in your statement?

 

[steffanphilip]

In his long convoluted reply, Gailon did not show ANY sign of repentance of being convicted of embezzlement. He was convicted. Please don't try to say that he was being ethical, he never was, in that entire saga.

It doesn't matter how much you twist it. I will say it again - the owner/administrator of the slander site save3abn dot com is a convicted embezzler who is still unrepentant.
(Wasn't any problem when you applied that label to other people).

And how many commandments have you crossed over and trampled underfoot in your rush to "get" 3ABN?

 

[steffanphilip]

And since I can't post a link here yet...

Please go to google and type in : Gailon Joy conviction Ashcroft

And click on the third link.

His is a textbook case of embezzlement!

 

[Pickle]

And since I can't post a link here yet...

Please go to google and type in : Gailon Joy conviction Ashcroft

And click on the third link.

His is a textbook case of embezzlement!

I'll be more plain: When you accuse Gailon of being a convicted embezzler without also pointing out his claim that he kept money equal to an amount that was owed to him (without evidence that his claim is false), and that Vermont's statute calls that a crime, you are guilty of deception.

Further, any claims you make of my trying to "get 3ABN" are a lie.

And any vague accusations of my being dishonest without also giving specific examples, as I have done regarding your statement, is inappropriate.

 

[Rosie55]

I'll be more plain: When you accuse Gailon of being a convicted embezzler without also pointing out his claim that he kept money equal to an amount that was owed to him (without evidence that his claim is false), and that Vermont's statute calls that a crime, you are guilty of deception.

Further, any claims you make of my trying to "get 3ABN" are a lie.

And any vague accusations of my being dishonest without also giving specific examples, as I have done regarding your statement, is inappropriate.

What Staffan says is true. You are out to "get" 3ABN. Anyone can plainly see that no matter what you proclaim as the truth.

 

[Pickle]

What Staffan says is true. You are out to "get" 3ABN. Anyone can plainly see that no matter what you proclaim as the truth.

It is a lie. I am not out to get 3ABN. When a pastor last summer asked me to look yet again at all these things, I got involved out of a desire to see God's cause and truth be saved from reproach. "Getting" 3ABN has never been my motive or intent.

Today I posted over on BSDA an image of one of several ads I did, with downloaded artwork, advertising 3ABN's airing of "Prophecy Code." Here it is:

I did the pre-press work on that add, and I arranged for the printing of it in our local newspaper. You are dead wrong that I am out to "get" 3ABN.
​

 

[steffanphilip]

And since I can't post a link here yet...

Please go to google and type in : Gailon Joy conviction Ashcroft

And click on the third link.

His is a textbook case of embezzlement!

And lo and behold, the Google search did not show it anymore this morning. Not to worry.

go to http colon slash slash tinyurl dot com slash ypp6cv and it will lead you to the Google page.

 

[steffanphilip]

I'll be more plain: When you accuse Gailon of being a convicted embezzler without also pointing out his claim that he kept money equal to an amount that was owed to him (without evidence that his claim is false), and that Vermont's statute calls that a crime, you are guilty of deception.

Further, any claims you make of my trying to "get 3ABN" are a lie.

And any vague accusations of my being dishonest without also giving specific examples, as I have done regarding your statement, is inappropriate.

I will repeat, if necessary in every post, EMBEZZLER. Turn and twist how much you want - CONVICTED EMBEZZLER. No overturning on appeal, nothing. Embezzled. Stole. Got caught.

I'll be more plainer. Your words, actions and every accusation and allegation you have made all point to one thing. "Must bring down 3ABN."

And when I do get the ability to post the URLs I will pinpoint each and every one of your words so that people can see how much you want to bring down 3ABN.

There is nothing inappropriate in identifying evil by its proper name.