Jump to content
The Education Forum

Dispute Dankbaar / Pamela Ray


Wim Dankbaar
 Share

Recommended Posts

It will not have gone unnoticed that Pamela Ray (mis)uses this forum to make defaming and libelous statements about my person and alleged conduct. Most of these statements are outright lies that require a response. Let me start with a quote from Pamela Ray:

James Files trusted ONLY me to tell the public the truth regarding his role in history and that is why he asked me to write with him. He obviously never trusted Bob or Wim to do the job right or he would have asked them...don't you think? Wim never had our permission to publish our letters and all our hard work in his plagiarized version of the story.

Mrs. Ray has given me permission to publish every single piece of material she mentions. In writing and by a legally binding contract. Hence what she claims is a bold face lie. In fact she signed away her book to me, which book I do not want to publish, but that's another issue. The only person who fails to understand this, is Pamela Ray.

Pamela Ray claims she represents the will and wishes of James Files. However, nothing could be farther from the truth. James Files has sent her and me letters wherein he urges her to stop telling lies and defaming statements about my person.

Pamela Ray claims that her unpublished book is the only authorised book about the story of James Files. Wether it is relevant that a book is authorised by the main subject, is not the issue here. The issue is that this is another lie by Pamela Ray. James Files has praised the book I have on the market on numerous occasions, along with his best living friend Bruce Brychek. In fact he had Bruce obtain 20 copies on two separate occassions (40 in total) of the book for Bruce to give it to people of his choice. Moreover, James Files wrote me a thank you card two weeks ago that he is in possession of the 2008 edition, but at the time too sick to start reading it.

Pamela Ray claims that my book is a "plagiarized" and distorted version of the story. Not the real story. This is yet another lie. The book contains the transcripts of the two video interviews ever done with James Files (1994 and 2003). The only content that was left out is nittywitty stuff of no historical importance, like the religious leanings of Mrs Ray and the alleged romantical feelings of James Files for this woman.

Pamela Ray has absorbed in excess of 60,000 USD from me, without paying it back, thereby defaulting on her obligations and signing over certain materials. Her thanks is slander, claims of "threachery", claims that I did not "take care of her" and demands for an apology......????

Pamela Ray has shown contempt of the law and ethics repeatedly by violating my rights and stealing my properties, for example by publishing fragments of my copyrighted 2003 video interview with James Files on Youtube, as well as publishing its transcript on various Internet locations, including this one. The owners of these internet sites were quick to recognise the violations of my rights and ownership, and removed the content accordingly.

Below is a letter from my attorney to a publisher that will explains things further.

Re: Dispute between Wim Dankbaar (my client) and Pamela J. Ray (your author) re Interview with History (AuthorHouse publication from 2007 and 2008)

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:

You were kind enough to speak with me about this matter when I called on July 15, 2008, as a follow up to my letter of July 14, 2008. As you will recall, I represent Wim Dankbaar, who wants Pamela J. Ray’s Interview with History removed from publication as soon as possible. My client believes that Ms. Ray’s book infringes on his copyrights, and that—pursuant to a contract with Ms. Ray—he is the copyright owner in the book itself. Furthermore, the book includes a number of items from other copyright holders, and Mr. Dankbaar wants to avoid any liability

If the book is promptly withdrawn from distribution, Mr. Dankbaar will forgo any claim of contributory infringement against AuthorHouse or the related companies. If the book cannot be withdrawn within 48 hours of your receipt of this letter, please let me know—as soon as possible—the reason for the delay.

History

At all times relevant to this matter, James Files has been in prison. In 2002, he signed various documents giving Pamela J. Ray (your author) the power to sign contracts and make agreements on his behalf.

Ms. Ray then made various agreements with Wim Dankbaar (my client), notably in 2002 through 2004. The most immediately relevant of these is the Loan Agreement between Pamela Ray and Wim Dankbaar of January 27, 2004. That agreement provided for certain consequences if Ms. Ray did not pay off a loan by July 1, 2005. The deadline passed, and the debt has not been paid; therefore, so the following provisions relevant to publication became effective on July 1, 2005:

1. “Wim Dankbaar [is] the 100% owner, rightsholder and beneficiary of the planned book (currently known as “To kill a country”) as opposed to 50% rightsholder and beneficiary.”

2. “Wim Dankbaar will be a 50% beneficiary for income, resulting from a possible second or follow-up book.”

At the time of this agreement (January 27, 2004), a manuscript of “To Kill a Country” was already in existence, and Ms. Ray and Mr. Dankbaar were both familiar with the manuscript. At that time, it was anticipated that another publisher (not AuthorHouse) would issue To Kill a Country. On September 1, 2004, the publisher informed Ms. Ray that they would not be publishing To Kill a Country.

On July 24, 2006, Ms. Ray sent an email message to Mr. Dankbaar, with an approximately fifty (50) page document attached:

“You own this according to our loan agreement Jan 27, 2004.

“Since you are 100% owner you need to publish it and make it available. I can’t publish it.

“According to the loan agreement you will receive 50% from any second or follow up book. You will receive 50% of beneficiary income from To Kill A Country II. I will send a copy of the loan agreement with the contract to the publisher. They will send you the funds directly and I won’t be involved with that part. I’m getting To Kill A Country II ready to submit and should be published within 2 months.”

Ms. Ray presented fifty pages to my client as the manuscript of “To Kill a Country,” a work whose manuscript already comprised several hundreds of pages. When my client characterized this as “a fraudulous attempt,” Ms. Ray eventually emailed him (on August 1, 2006) the complete manuscript as it was published by AuthorHouse without his permission. This occurred at a time when Ms Ray was seeking a new agreement with my client to obtain permission for publishing “To Kill a Country.” Hence, there can be no misunderstanding about what my client obtained as his property under the Loan Agreement. My client argues that what Ms. Ray presented to AuthorHouse was his intellectual property, that she apparently misrepresented herself to AuthorHouse, and that the work was published without Mr. Dankbaar’s authorization or consent, in infringement on his copyright in the work. He also argues that “To Kill a Country,” as well as “Interview with History” (2007) contained defamatory material. He further argues that many texts of “Interview with History” are exactly the same as in “To Kill a Country”, and for that reason alone it is infringing on his rights.

To trace some of this in detail, AuthorHouse published Pamela J. Ray with James E. Files, To Kill a Country (Bloomington, Ind.: AuthorHouse, 2006), ISBN-13 987-1420882230. The published version corresponded closely to the earlier manuscript, i.e., the “To Kill a Country” referred to in the Loan Agreement of January 27, 2004. In publishing this work, Ms. Ray violated Mr. Dankbaar’s copyright in the work as whole; the work even contained substantial portions of the fifty-page manuscript that Ms. Ray had sent to Mr. Dankbaar on July 24, 2006, as being 100% his property. As published, To Kill a Country also contained defamatory material.

On Friday, June 30, 2006, Mr. Dankbaar sent an email message to Mr. xxxxx at info@authorhouse.com. In or about August 2006, AuthorHouse withdrew To Kill a Country from publication.

On or about August 22, 2007, AuthorHouse issued Pamela J. Ray with James E. Files, Interview with History: The JFK Assassination (Bloomington, Ind.: AuthorHouse, 2007), ISBN-13 978-1425959920. This book was essentially an abridged version of To Kill a Country. (In terms of copyright law, it was a derivative work—and it was derived from intellectual property belonging to Mr. Dankbaar; we are concerned that a substantial amount of material from other rightsholders may also have been included without permission, as discussed below.) Strictly speaking, I would argue that Mr. Dankbaar’s 100% interest definitively vests in the first otherwise legally publishable version of the text that is published without his consent; that does not diminish his property interest in the defective, intermediate versions of the text, published or not.

Again, Mr. Dankbaar complained to AuthorHouse. (I sent copies of the following cease-and-desist letters with my previous letter to you.)

On September 25, 2007, Mr. Dankbaar emailed a cease-and-desist letter to you attention.

On October 11, 2007, xxxxxxxxx (an attorney in South Pasedena, California) sent a cease-and-desist letter to your attention on behalf of Mr. Dankbaar.

On January 6, 2008, Mr. Dankbaar sent another cease-and-desist email to your attention.

On January 25, 2008, attorney xxxxxxxxxx (in Encintas, California) sent cease-and-desist letter to your attention on behalf of Mr. Dankbaar and Mr. Zack Shelton. (Mr. xxxxxxxx was engaged because Mr. xxxxxxxxxx had passed away. Mr. xxxxxxxx suggested that local counsel be engaged, which is how I became involved in the case.)

Mr. Dankbaar and his attorneys got no response to their letters, emails, or telephone calls. At some point, the book was altered—with no notification to Mr. xxxxxxxx, Mr. Dankbaar, or Mr. Shelton. Defamatory material on some pages was toned down. Factually problematic material on other pages was altered. The copyright date in the front matter was changed from 2007 to 2008. But the fundamental problem of copyright infringement has not been resolved.

Meanwhile, AuthorHouse.com has begun to list an electronic edition of Interview with History as “coming soon” (ISBN-13 978-1438901312).

Ms. Ray also prepared to have two works published on wordclay.com. On July 13, 2008, both were listed as “coming soon.”

James Files on JFK

James Files on JFK: 45th Anniversary Edition.

On or about July 15, 2008, Mr. Dankbaar communicated with a customer service agent (xxxxxx) at AuthorHouse through on-line “live chat.” The conversation ended with a decision to have me call you. Very soon thereafter (even before I called you), the two titles disappeared from wordclay.com.

After all the cease-and-desist letters, Mr. Dankbaar wishes to see Interview with History removed from the market immediately. Not only does it infringe on his copyrights; it also exposes him to potential liability for copyright infringement. A great deal of material reproduced in this book comes from printed sources or the internet. In general, the sources are generally documented for text, but not for photographs; however, for the various photographs and a great deal of quoted matter (news articles, compilations of quotations, song lyric, essay, and so forth), I could not find an acknowledgment, either on the copyright page, in a footnote, or in an acknowledgments section. A couple of acknowledgments appear in the book, but they seem to have been copied along with material taken from another source; in other words, they seem to reflect permission given to someone else to reproduce the materials in a different work. Perhaps Ms. Ray has secured permission to reproduce the following, for example. (Page references are to the 2008 version of Interview with History.)

1. Entire internet postings and long quotations from books in the “Quotes” section, pp. vii-xxv.

2. Long quotation from Craig Roberts, pp. 10-11.

3. Various photographs throughout.

4. Mary E. Woodward, “Witness from The News Describes Assassination,” pp. 51-54.

5. Mae Brussell (compiler), “The Last Words of Lee Harvey Oswald,” pp. 61-74. (My concern would be any copyright belonging to Mae Brussell or the People’s Almanac.)

6. Marina Porter, letter, pp. 83-86.

7. Dick Russell, quotation from The Man Who Knew Too Much, p. 93.

8. Mike Wallace and Gary Paul Gates, portion of interview from Close Encounters, pp. 98-101.

9. Washington Post, Grassy Knoll Shooter Correct, March 26, 2001 (p. A6), pp. 102-103.

10. A number of photographs and texts from the internet in the photo gallery, pp. 123-191.

11. Dave Ratcliffe, March 22, 1992, web posting, pp. 198-200.

12. L. Fletcher Prouty, selection from An Introduction to the Assassination Business, pp. 201-210. (The first page says “reprinted with permission of the author,” but the last page has a signature by “daveus rattus,” who may have been the person who secured permission for his own use, but not for use in this book.)

13. Bill Weaver, “Where Is Luis Posada?” pp. 243-245.

14. Anthony Summers, selection from Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover, pp. 263-266.

15. Peter Dale Scott, New York Times interview, pp. 355-367. (The permissions statement at the end seems to be reproduced from www.assassinationresearch.com instead of reflecting permission granted from the rightsholder.)

16. P. F. Sloan and S. Barri, “Secret Agent Man,” p. 374.

17. Eric Jon Phelps, cover image from CD-ROM, p. 392.

18. Eric Jon Phelps, “The Missing Link: The Assassination of President Kennedy,” pp. 393-401.

Since the usual indicators of permission are missing, and since Mr. Dankbaar was not asked about inclusion of the fifty pages that Ms. Ray had assured him were 100% his property, I worry that a number of permissions have not cleared. I do not want my client to get sued (as owner of Interview with History) for copyright infringement. He is a victim of infringement himself.

Mr. Dankbaar looks forward to the immediate withdrawal of Interview with History from the market. Again, my client has agreed not to sue AuthorHouse for contributory infringement if the book is removed from the market promptly. If you need any further information or any clarifications, please let me know as soon as possible.

Yours truly,

Edited by Wim Dankbaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you ready to make peace yet? I spoke with Zack Shelton this morning and if he and I can get along, don't you think there might be hope for us? He even thinks you are a bully and "you think you are god with your money." Jimmy and I have given you everything. Why don't you DO THE RIGHT THING?

Pamela Ray & Wim Dankbaar

Final Agreement (Proposal)

October 17, 2008

Pamela Ray and Wim Dankbaar acknowledge there have been legal agreements and contracts in the past.

Contract History:

October 2002 Trine Day Agreement – cancelled Sept 2004

Pamela Ray author – Wim Dankbaar “Silent Investor”

November 2003 Joint Venture/Revenue Sharing Agreement

Wim Dankbaar – 75% shareholder of James Files 2003 taped interview

Pamela Ray – 25% shareholder of James Files 2003 taped interview

January 2004 – loan agreement between Wim Dankbaar & Pamela Ray – in loan agreement Pamela Ray’s book copyrights and ownership are mentioned –

To Kill A Country – book rights involved

Interview with History: The JFK Assassination – 2nd book

Proposal:

Wim Dankbaar has 100% control of the 2003 James Files footage.

Pamela Ray owes Wim Dankbaar no money from previous contracts and all debt is absolved.

Wim Dankbaar owes Pamela Ray no money from the sale of the 2003 James Files footage.

Pamela Ray has 100% control of both her books To Kill A Country and Interview with History: The JFK Assassination.

Interview with History: The JFK Assassination has been modified and is ready to be put back on the market. (Oct 2008)

To Kill A Country has yet to be modified and will be put back on the market as soon as the modifications are made and Wim Dankbaar agrees to the changes. Pamela Ray agrees to present To Kill A Country to Wim Dankbaar for final approval once modifications to manuscript have been made.

Wim Dankbaar releases all claims to Pamela Ray’s copyright and ownership to both books and will not claim now or in the future any copyright/ownership at Pamela Ray’s publisher AuthorHouse. This contract will serve as a notice to AuthorHouse that Wim Dankbaar’s claim to Pamela Ray’s books Interview with History: The JFK Assassination and To Kill A Country are no longer valid.

Pamela Ray & Wim Dankbaar both agree that all previous contracts are no longer in effect by signing and dating this final agreement. Both agree no debt is owed by either party to the other party.

Signed: Pamela Ray _________________________________

Date: ________________________________

Signed: Wim Dankbaar _______________________________

Date: ______________________________

Witness: Jeff Ankrom ______________________________

Date: _______________________________

Blessed are the peacemakers and God hates the oppression of the poor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

November 4 , 2008

(fragment)

Hi Jimmy,

Thanks for your card. Once you receive this letter, you may already have sent me another. What can I say? I sure hope you will be able to beat it and manage to keep in good spirits. That’s what I admire the most in you, that you can keep your spirits and humor under the harshest circumstances. I think many people would have given up or have a depression already, but you’re a soldier always going to battle.

Enclosed is some updates on communications and bickering that has been going on.

Let me be frank with you. I dislike Pam with a passion. I have thought for a long time that she has a nasty self centered, revenge oriented character, who always puts the blame for mishaps and disfortune with others. I know this probably does not match your feelings about her, but I will tell you anyway. I want you to know that whatever agreement I would strike with her, I do for you and myself, not for her. The woman has tried to damage me enough to feel no compassion for her.

The new agreement with her, I would only do to please you and take a stone out of my shoe. Frankly , there is nothing else for me to gain. I can handle her also when she persists in trying to be a pain in the ass. It’s funny that good friends of yours have a similar take on her. What is yours without bullxxxxting me? Let me know your position on what you truly want. I can do the new agreement with her if that’s what you want. (However, I am going to stick to the release.)

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

Is Mr. Dankbaar thankful and fair to his helpers?

Are you thankful and fair to your helper?

These questions are totally irrelevant for an agreement. Frankly I don't care anymore if she is thankful or not. She has said many times she is thankful but her behaviour shows otherwise. She has also shown she has broken every promise she made me and signed for.

As for me, I have been thankful for what she did untill she started breaking the agreements. And I have rewarded her accordingly and exactly according to our agreements. I have even given her exactly what she asked for each time she knocked on my door. So in fact I have been more than accomodating than what she originally asked for. Time and again I have extended my generosity. It appears that I have a hard time convincing you of this. Let me give you what I offered her in 2004, right after the loan agreement when she started to tell me that she felt being screwed:

You have got quite a nerve.

You got to see Jimmy and your trip was paid for. Just because of the new interview. You've got a great 60 extra pages for the book. Added credibility for the book because of my documentary. You got 10 grand on top of that, for which you had to do NOTHING. Possible future revenue in addition. Another 15 K loan to bridge the time to the book I'm sorry I did that now. And then I financed your book in the first place.

You dare to say you feel screwed? There's something wrong with you!

Okay! Let's reverse the whole deal. I won't use the interview, I won't market it as a separate product and you wire back 25K tomorrow, plus the money I spent for your travel and stay. How is that? Does that wake you up?

Wim

And her response:

From: Pam

To: Wim Dankbaar

Cc: Daniel Marvin

Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 8:54 PM

Subject: Re: About feeling screwed

I see your points Wim and I'm sorry for going off on you. As you know, I want to bring Jimmy home as soon as possible because his health is not going to last forever in there. He has been very sick since they made him stand outside in 20 degree weather for a couple of hours about a month ago. I love him and I want to help him sooner than later...that's all. I guess I should say I feel frustrated, not that I feel screwed. Sorry.

Pam

And don't forget that Files told Pamela Ray repeatedly to leave it alone and get on with her life. He also told Bruce Brychek repeatedly that he fully stands behind the 2003 interview. See for example email below:

----- Original Message -----

From: Bruce P. Brychek

To: David Cannon

Cc: Wim Dankbaar

Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:32 AM

Subject: Re: James Files

BB REPLY:

Dear Mr. David Cannon,

I have received, and reviewed your emails, both here, and on the JFK Forum.

Jimmy and I are extremely close business, and personal friends for well over

30 years. I see Jimmy 1 - 2 X a week. We also write daily.

Wim Dankbaar is also a very close business, and personal friend for over 2 years.

Wim and I have met in the U.S.A. several times, and we talk, or email daily.

Jimmy totally stands on his 2 interviews, and Thanks Wim for maintaining the

integrity of Jimmy's interviews.

However, Jimmy, at this point in time, wants to never give another interview,

nor discuss JFK publicly. Jimmy feels that he has provided more than enough

information, and is tired of being nickled and dimed to death about ridiculous details

from simple minded people, not meaning you, David Cannon

That being said, I will closely analyze your Post to me on the JFK Forum. I will not

be able to respond without Jimmy's permission. If it is given, I will also advise Wim,

along with you.

Thank You for taking time to follow-up your first email so well.

Respectfully,

Bruce Patrick Brychek.

Edited by Wim Dankbaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask a few questions to Wim.

Have you ever contacted Dick Clark as of yet?

DId you ask them any questions towards the contract that they did on Files?

You claim you have all of these rights, yet the first one to do the rights on Files was Clark?

If you had of done this then you would know they not only closed the door on Files but they did something rather strange, they keep all the records on Zack Sheldon's work? from what I am told it is a lot of work and it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack is what they told me. ALL OF HIS original works and documents they retain.

Now, Wim did you get to better questions.

Like MONEY on it? Somehow I doubt you did. Guess what, you have no rights to that. Did you know this.

Let's move on now,

Dick Clark closed the door, yet holds info on Files and the work of Zack Shelton. Yet, he does not release or distory the work he now walked away from. So what does that make you have so much data on and have the rights you claim. You never contacted him to see info and you never let all see your contact.

OH wait a minute, I have seen your contact. Guess what it is small compared to the Clark one that has extra copies of it in NARA. See ;yours is just a contact from the sale of the forum on what Bob Vernon had done and that is it. Now, the contact that Clark has is much broader it is on FILES.

Yes, I like the part on your contact that puts a line over in as if to void out third party rights. Now that is clear that it has to be with an attoney to do that. Yet, you think it makes it legal to just delete it out on your own. NO NO NO you can not do that now. OH it is done but that does not make that legal. You have to check who it is from sources and then get them to know info of any issues and then make that legal on another form.

Now, here is a real clutching info on the Clark agreements

He took the first pay check and it was a very large check and then Dick Clark ditched it as if it is never to be his or he forgot to take any cash amounts later on. Yeah, that is right. He let them month after month grow. I thought well, it is not much. I am told NO SO. Who can make claim on that? Not you.

Not even Zack. SO WHO?

Well one day when I posted one page of the document of the contact I got a phone call from Bob Vernon to me. He wanted to know How I got that document. I told him and we talked calm and in peace. He let me know so info. Like the money and he also let me know more. HE TOLD ME IN A LOUD VOICE YOU GOT THE CONTACT YOU HAVE IT. I told him well no just one page the contact is very large and involved. He said NO YOU GOT THE CONTACT. I told him again the same thing. He then told me he never got that contact and never saw it ever. I told him well you did the show on it and the questions he said he never is to get that, not that.

SO now Wim I have to ask you a very serious question here, what does it seem to you that you have the legal rights to express over Pam over me and or for that matter over Files? I got the contact the original one.

There is a more powerful one over Dick Clarks now. That one was done by the one that caused Files to write to me. That one was Richard Nixon. SO again now, are you sure you have any rights what so ever.

All you have is this, a contact that is just for the web site of Bob Vernon and that is all you have. You can not buy over people make a deal over on this or change and alter what Nixon set up. Sorry you just do not any claim to any rights what so ever.

Now there is one more thing that Bob Vernon told me, WHO IS It going to be TO FILE SUIT ON WIM DANKBAAR YOU OR ME? He told me, "you do not know much now but you will later on learn more then you will see what is going on here." I think he has it about right. I do think I see a bit more now. You used people

Pam has rights on the book SHE WROTE but only if I say she has that right. I have the legal right from what I am told to write the book. I admit I have a problem with that skill. Yet, I do not approve of all that Pam says in her book just reading a few things she claims. SO now that puts me up to date on this issue. Also you as well.

I have a feeling there will not be a court thing not by me. I have other issues right now. That is for me to know and you later on to hear about.

Maybe Bob will take you to court after all when he gets wind of this. He will probaly state it is about time. If you think that it is impossible to get a copy of your contact thnk again two people had it to give over to me and one more told me that he can get it. SO NO it is not impossible to get that info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pam has rights on the book SHE WROTE but only if I say she has that right. I have the legal right from what I am told to write the book. I admit I have a problem with that skill. Yet, I do not approve of all that Pam says in her book just reading a few thing she claims

Well, what say you, Nancy? Do you say she has that right? And I join Cig in welcoming you back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's why Bruce and I will always get along:

10 mrt 2006 - 1:54

BB REPLY

Dear Ms. Nancy Eldreth,

I have just reviewed your email.

Get a life, you low life sick, mental case.

Your opinion counts for nothing.

Don't go away mad, just go away.

You had to go to Holland to find friends

because you've been kicked out of the

U.S., practically speaking.

Nancy, take your medication.

Also, Nancy, I was responding to emails sent to me

you simpleton. You can't read, and you can't

research, all you can do is gossip.

You're a lying, two faced, back stabbing bitch,

and everybody knows it.

Who cares how many old letters you have.

Further proof of how sick you are. You have

to count old letters.

Also, any moron can get a letter into the library.

Nancy, go away. Take your medication like a

good little mental case.

Respectfully,

Bruce Patrick Brychek.

**********

Hurray, I agree with Pamela Ray (that rhimes!)

Sweetheart, I told Nancy Eldreth you were playing head games with her. Please do not write to her at all anymore. She and Bob still want all this insanity to end up in court for all the wrong reasons. I told her I was sorry for letting this go on and on. Jimmy, she really is someone who hurts our credibility because of how confused she is naturally and then mix in the fun and games…well she can’t handle it. It doesn’t look good for us saying we are Christians and then this is going on. Please do not add to this mess. Find a new way to stir the pot if you need to do it for reasons I trust you with. Okay Honey? It will make my life much easier. I’m already dealing with her lies about me that she gets from Vernon. PLEASE STOP IT!

Edited by Wim Dankbaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case anyone wonders on my feelings again on Files.

HE has no proof to his story. SO they used him.

His story for the most part is bogus. But there is moments of truth behind certain things Files states.

Jimmy real feelings towards Bruse is a high regard.

Jimmy real feelings towards Wim well now, he wishes he never met him.

Jimmy wished he never did it and wished that more than once of telling it Wim knows I got letters. Letter that show another side.

Files is more civil than Wim and Bob FOR SURE.

As for Wim

He just was like Files I think I heard this as this,

WIM DANKBAAR WAS IN TROUBLE WITH THE LAW IN HIS OWN COUNTRY AND HAD OFFICIALS QUEStION HIM. hOW DID YOU LIKE THAT WIM? WAS IT FUN. I THINK YOU WERE IN JAIL RIGHT.

Yeah, you did not know I knew this did you?

This is knowing some of YOUR friends from Holland. Some are your friends and some are not. Well let's put it like this, you sure make wrong moves that last a lifetime.

As for me taking med. NO I DO NOT. NO PROOF OF THAT AS WELL

Only what is given to me by a doctor of internal med. NOW on that one well I take very little of it and have had a hard time. Thanks for caring. The prescrition was way to strong and if I took longer it would have killed me. The doc felt bad so did the pharmist. WRONG MED IS ALSO A CRIME WIM.

Maybe why I do duck low so much is to try to live. Why Tosh runs at a drop of a hat. Why so many go under cover so much and can not breath.

Why so many others who find papers shoved behind cabinets in a military camp end up dead. Yeah, Wim it is loads of fun. Just wonder all the time who is enemy towards whom and who is true and who is good. Hate to say this Wim I do not have you on any good list.

As for Bruce not sure of him. I thought he was a true guy and I think you wrote that Wim and not bruce.

SORRY I do not believe another of YOUR LIES.

END OF SUBJECT AND I AM OFF THE FORUM AGAIN.

but befoe I go I have tthis to tell and share.

Just can not wait until a real PRESIDENT GETS INTO OFFICE TO MAKE CHANGES WE CAN LIVE WITH AND LOVE MORE.

David Plouffe is from the parish I work at and he is Obama's campaign manager. I just got another letter from him. BIDEN is now the one that made it to Vice Pres. He lives miles from where I work and he goes to the parish I should be going to. I go to another one. SO WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT>

YES CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN. You can read into that and HOPE FOR IT. I am part of that CHANGE.

GO OBAMA GO and BIDEN THANKS FOR ALL YOU HAVE DONE SO FAR.

OH Wim I work in Wilmington DELAWARE now look it up that is where Biden office is. NOW LOOK UP DAVID PLOUFFE TOO and see what you can find on the fact I just told. I am busy very busy. One day you will see me on the news and on that day you will believe and wished you treated me better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I notice is this,

Wim Dankbaar does not answer any of the statements on his trouble with the law. NOTICE IT WELL.

NOW THAT IS NOT CONFUSING AT ALL.

Also notice that Wim Does not go into his friends in Netherlands and leaving them with any thing of nice for a lifetime.

What you do not know is Wim in a fit of anger broke a person window and NEVER Paid for it in Holland.

So there is things that the reader on this forum does not know.

WHY what that Wim? For things you claim as yours and YOURS alone. Yeah well. I wish I did not know Wim and I am certainly not confused on that.

Now if anyone wishs to know a puzzle on what you think of me NOT being Busy during the election Here is a riddle to try to figure out.

HILLARY CLINTON SITTING UP STAIGHT IN A CHAIR AND SAYING THESE WORDS

I WILL NOT ANSWER TO BITTERGATE.

Yes I know the whole sceens around it. Barack in a town in Pennsylvania and saying these people know guns ect and they are bitter. Refering to the problems of economy. He sort of let that hang there his words. SO they tore into him.

IN the over 250 emails I got there were some that you can talk to Super delegates. Tell your story. SO I put my two cents in.

Now here is the test on this

Why did Hillary say these words,

I can not respond to BITTER GATE.

also here is one up Wim's ally a test Wim just for you,

Hillary also stated these words and had a person in the news to relate it.

If you know someone in the ten most wanted list HOW CAN YOU TURN THAT FRIEND IN.

Know the answer to them WIM? Gee you should,

Thank you Jimmy for your comment on giving over to Pam this to put on the internet. It is on this forum and I gathered it up.

Jimmy knew Hillary and put her on a moter cycle in Chicago.

Now Wim can you figure it out on how much I am confused. GO FOR IT WIM FIGURE IT OUT

What did Jimmy tell me on Hillary in my letters? ON A RED LETTER FOR HILLARY

DID SHE WIN? NO WIM SHE DID NOT WIN she would have though.

SO now who is confused here NOT ME

Remember Wim on the COOPER TOSH AND FILES FOLDERS IN THE WHITE HOUSE IN FIles letters to me.

Why would Jimmy do that? OH they are just letters.

I did thank Kenneth Starr for putting out a lot of materials on HILLARY it was a phone call to his office IN CALIFORNIA.

Yeah they worked rather well It sure pushed Super delegates from Hillary on the RED LETTER she expected.

Now I say that is not any confusing at all. It hits it just about right.

Files was good at telling and it left me with DID I DO RIGHT afterwards? Maybe I should have let Hillary win after all but there is the catch 22 to it. What I used on Hillary if Bush was piffed at her on any thing he would have used the past up against her. Now That is what made me know NO WAY NO MORE BUSH IN OFFICE DARN IT GET HIM OUT OF THERE>

as for Biden helping

I have been in his office wrote to him and let him see a few things. HE SEES WHAT WAS IN A DA OFFICE

Just because you do not see things yet WIM and any one else does not mean it is not there. ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS LOOK

THe papers is not a letter Wim in the National Archives it was CLARKS Papers on FIles. I know I am told you DO NOT LIKE LIBARIES. Well then it is not my fault Wim you are to stupid to ever learn something.

FILES DID KNOW HILLARY WELL

He was around her and did write to me on it. FILE GATE

Just files papers in the White House Kenneth Starr wanted from them.

Tosh was Mean Ark. issue that was the beginning of it. Files was on the plane once and when they got off the plane there sat Hillary for them. Why don't you write to Jimmy about it? Hell he tells it.

I did however thank Kenneth Starr in the end with a phone call and it was for letting a lot of papers out that I downdoaded so the super delegates could see them. SO NOW I DO NOT GIVE A DARN on if you think I am confused or not. I DID IT I HOPE I DID RIGHT AND WELL but somehow I do hope that Obama is what I think he is about and Biden.

I did met with Biden several days prior to his winning. I caugh his line. WE NOW WILL DO IT BEtTER AND PRIOR WAS REFERRING TO BUSH. i WAS WORRIED ON HIS WORDS A BIT HE STATED THIS

BUSH IS NOT BAD HE WAS JUST MISLEAD BIDEN LOOKED AT ME IN THE FIRST ROW OF SEATS WHICH I WAS PLACED THERE BY A GUARD WHO ESCORTED ME UP TO THE BEGINNING OF LINE AND TO THE SEATS. WHEN BIDEN SAID HIS WORDS I SHOOK MY HEAD NO NO NO OH MY GOD NO BUSH IS VERY BAD HORRIBLE ON WHAT HE DOES OH MY GOD BUT ONLY COULD BIDEN SEE WHAT I REACTED THEN HE PAUSED ON THAT AS HE LOOKED AT ME. WHEN I LOOKED UP HE SAID NOW WE WILL DO IT BETTER. HE KNOWS WHO I AM. THAT IS A FOR SURE. SO DOES OBAMA THAT IS A FOR SURE. HOW CAN HE MISS. I NOW WRITE TO ED RENDELL AND TELL WHAT I HAVE TO SAY.

I HAVE ANOTEHR EMAIL FROM DAVID TO ANSWER AN OPEN AREA JUST LIKE THIS FORUM AGAIN ON HOW WE NOW MAKE IT BETTER.

SO THINK WHAT YOU WILL OF ME I FRANKLY DO NOT CARE.

WIM DOES NOT ANSWER THINGS ON HIMSELF HOW WAS JAIL WIM

WAS IT FUN

DO NOT TALK ABOUT ME BEING CONFUSED WHEN YOU CAN NOT EVEN PICK UP FOR YOURSELF AND YOUR BEHAVIOR ON YOUR OWN FRIENDS IN HOLLAND.

YOU BROKE A WINDOW DID NOT PAY FOR IT YELLED AT PEOPLE ON YOUR FILM THEY WERE ASLEEP AND YOU KNEW IT YOU ACT LIKE A MORON AND CALL EVERYONE ELSE THAT.

DID YOU GET THE FILM? i DOUBT IT. DID THEY HAVE IT, i DOUBT IT. YET YOU CARE LESS OF THE PAYING FOR THE BROKEN WINDOW OH PEOPLE WIM DID NOT GO TO JAIL ON THAT ONE BUT HE SHOULD HAVE. IF IT WAS TO ME I WOULD HAVE PUT HIM IN JAIL ON IT. WITHOUT BATTING AN EYE.

NO WIM WENT TO JAIL ON SOMETHING FAR MORE SERIOUS FROM WHAT I AM TOLD.

I WILL NOT ANSWER AGAIN SO I HAVE NO MORE ISSUES TO TELL JUST THAT I DO HOPE AND PRAY THAT OBAMA AND BIDEN DO WHAT THEY SAY THEY CAN DO

SO FAR INDICTMENTS ARE ON CHANEY

I HOPE FOR MANY ON BUSH AND WHAT HE HAS DONE TO THIS COUNTRY

IF WHAT BIDEN SAYS IS TRUE IT SHOULD TAKE UP TO TWO YEARS TO FINISH THE LONG LIST OF CHARGES THAT BUSH WILL BE FILED ON.

THSI MIGHT BE LONGER IS WHAT IS SAY IF THEY DO THEM ALL AND NOT TO MENTION ON HIS FATEHR AS WELL. THEN YOU GET THE TRUTH OUT ON JFK

AMEN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh great, another confused bonehead slandering. I will only dignify two lies with a repsonse:

Wim Dankbaar does not answer any of the statements on his trouble with the law. NOTICE IT WELL.

NOW THAT IS NOT CONFUSING AT ALL.

Very confusing, cause you fail to mention that I was not even charged let alone prosecuted for what they hoped to have against me. I was picked up for questioning, they held me at a police station, which is something entirely different than jail. It was an intimidation effort to make me stop prying into the falsification of evidence by the highest authorities as result of which an innocent man was sentenced to 12 years prison for murder. They didn't succeed in intimidating me, and sooner or later they will find that out too!

What you do not know is Wim in a fit of anger broke a person window and NEVER Paid for it in Holland.

That was because I drove 200 miles with Judyth to the house of some lowlifes that refused to give back Judyth's belongings. When they didn't open the door and left me ringing, while I knew the cowardly thieves were hiding inside, that's when I broke the window. And that's when they opened the door and let us load the goods in my car. When Judyth had not brought some muscle, she would now still be begging for her properties. No shame or regret whatsoever! Or it must be that upon leaving I threw them a hundred bill to have their window fixed . Hence you're lying or your sources are lying!

Wim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh great, another confused bonehead slandering. I will only dignify two lies with a repsonse:
Wim Dankbaar does not answer any of the statements on his trouble with the law. NOTICE IT WELL.

NOW THAT IS NOT CONFUSING AT ALL.

Very confusing, cause you fail to mention that I was not even charged let alone prosecuted for what they hoped to have against me. I was picked up for questioning, they held me at a police station, which is something entirely different than jail. It was an intimidation effort to make me stop prying into the falsification of evidence by the highest authorities as result of which an innocent man was sentenced to 12 years prison for murder. They didn't succeed in intimidating me, and sooner or later they will find that out too!

What you do not know is Wim in a fit of anger broke a person window and NEVER Paid for it in Holland.

That was because I drove 200 miles with Judyth to the house of some lowlifes that refused to give back Judyth's belongings. When they didn't open the door and left me ringing, while I knew the cowardly thieves were hiding inside, that's when I broke the window. And that's when they opened the door and let us load the goods in my car. When Judyth had not brought some muscle, she would now still be begging for her properties. No shame or regret whatsoever! Or it must be that upon leaving I threw them a hundred bill to have their window fixed . Hence you're lying or your sources are lying!

Wim

WIM.

THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING ME ON THESE ISSUES.

I HAVE TO SAY TO YOU i AM SORRY FOR SAYING THIS TO YOU. GLAD I DID THOUGH TO CLEAR THE AIR ON THIS.

I HAVE YOU OUT AS A HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE PERSON AND MOST OF THE TIME TOWARDS ME YOU ARE. SO WHAT AM I LEFT TO THINK?

I DID NOT KNOW YOU GAVE THEM MONEY TO FIX THE WINDOW.

I DID NOT KNOW THAT YOU WERE NOT SENTENCED AND PUT INTO PRISON. ALSO THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THIS EVENT.

I JUST HOPE ONE DAY YOU BECOME CIVIL TOWARDS ME.

AS FOR ME BEING CONFUSED, NO JUST TOLD ISSUES IN A WRONG WAY.

AS FOR ALL THEY HAVE OF SOME OF MY THINGS FROM ME,, I MILES WELL PLAN NEVER GETTING THEM BACK EVEN THOUGH THEY PROMISED ONE DAY I WILL. THEY DID GIVE ME MONEY ONCE AND I HAVE TO SAY I DID NOT EXPECT THAT. IT WAS SORT OF OWED TO ME. SO IN A WAY AT LEAST THEY DID DO THAT.

AGAIN I DO SAY TO YOU SORRY.

PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY.

ONE DAY WITH THEM I HOPE THEM WELL STILL BUT ONE DAY I HOPE THEY LIVE UP TO THE PROMISES THEY MAKE. I HOPE I DO SEE THAT.

AS FOR MY FEELINGS TOWARDS BRUCE I STILL THINK THE WORLD OF HIM AND ALWAYS WILL. I RESPECT THE MAN AND THINK HE IS A GREAT ASSET TOWARDS HIS WORK. I DO NOT CARE WHAT HE WROTE IN THAT LETTER YES I DO REMEMBER IT WHEN THINGS WENT CRAZY OVER JUDYTH AND ALL OF HER ///// WELL FORGET IT.

JUDYTH CAUSED A LOT OF PROBLEMS FROM ONE END DOWN TO THE OTHER. END OF SUBJECT

STEPPING BACK FROM ALL OF THIS SEEMS A BIT SOFTER NOW THEN AT THE TIME IT WAS. I MEAN ALL OF THE NONSENSES SURROUNDING EVERYTHING. NOW IT SEEMS CLEARER AND MORE INTO PROSPECTIVE. I AM GLAD I WALKED AWAY ONLY TO COME BACK KNOWING MORE AND LEARING MORE.

TAKE CARE AND PLEASE

FORGIVE MY OUTBUSTS FROM A LONG TIME BACK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...