 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Parenting / Adoption / July 2008Child dragged away by police on command of CAS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc This is sad. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > This is sad. Dan? Roberta? Betty? Ron? Talk it up! > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Talk it up! No. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Talk it up! Na. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Talk it up! Do you have any idea what this was all about? It didn't appear to me that there was any force on the part of the police until the child threatened to kick and bite and refused to comply. If the police have a court order that they have to enforce then that's simply what they have to do. If you know something about why the child was taken, or proof that the child was even taken on an order by DFS, then please do indicate where you find this information aside from the claims of the poster of the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > > > This is sad. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > you find this information aside from the claims of the poster of the > video. Betty, Did you read the YouTube text description? CAS is Canadian, by the way, Children's Aid Society. Not everything in a WWW discussion is about Missouri DFS, Betty. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Not everything in a WWW discussion > is about Missouri DFS, Betty. I said nothing about MIssouri, Greg. CAS, and DFS, and CPS, as well as a whole load of other agencies are the same, with different names. Children's protective services, any way you stack it up. You avoided answering my questions as to whether or not there was any credible accounting of this incident. A label on a youtube video doesn't really seem credible to me. Apparently it does to you. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Not everything in a WWW discussion > is about Missouri DFS, Betty. I said nothing about MIssouri, Greg. CAS, and DFS, and CPS, as well as a whole load of other agencies are the same, with different names. Children's protective services, any way you stack it up. You avoided answering my questions as to whether or not there was any credible accounting of this incident. A label on a youtube video doesn't really seem credible to me. Apparently it does to you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc LK > This is sad. G > Dan? Roberta? Betty? Ron? G > Talk it up! BJHW > Do you have any idea what this was all about? BJHW > It didn't appear to me that there was any force on the part of the BJHW > police until the child threatened to kick and bite and refused to BJHW > comply. BJHW > If the police have a court order that they have to enforce then that's BJHW > simply what they have to do. BJHW > If you know something about why the child was taken, or proof that the BJHW > child was even taken on an order by DFS, then please do indicate where BJHW > you find this information aside from the claims of the poster of the BJHW > video. G > Betty, Did you read the YouTube text description? G > CAS is Canadian, by the way, Children's Aid Society. G > Not everything in a WWW discussion G > is about Missouri DFS, Betty. BJHW > I said nothing about MIssouri, Greg. BJHW > CAS, and DFS, and CPS, as well BJHW > as a whole load of other agencies BJHW > are the same, with different names. BJHW > Children's protective services, any BJHW > way you stack it up. BJHW > You avoided answering my questions BJHW > as to whether or not there was any BJHW > credible accounting of this incident. BJHW > A label on a youtube video doesn't BJHW > really seem credible to me. BJHW > Apparently it does to you. It's funny that CPS uses low standards of evidence, which you'd swear by, but when something cuts against CPS you need the highest evidenciary standards. Why is that, Betty? <grin> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc LK > This is sad. G > Dan? Roberta? Betty? Ron? G > Talk it up! BJHW > Do you have any idea what this was all about? BJHW > It didn't appear to me that there was any force on the part of the BJHW > police until the child threatened to kick and bite and refused to BJHW > comply. BJHW > If the police have a court order that they have to enforce then that's BJHW > simply what they have to do. BJHW > If you know something about why the child was taken, or proof that the BJHW > child was even taken on an order by DFS, then please do indicate where BJHW > you find this information aside from the claims of the poster of the BJHW > video. G > Betty, Did you read the YouTube text description? G > CAS is Canadian, by the way, Children's Aid Society. G > Not everything in a WWW discussion G > is about Missouri DFS, Betty. BJHW > I said nothing about MIssouri, Greg. BJHW > CAS, and DFS, and CPS, as well BJHW > as a whole load of other agencies BJHW > are the same, with different names. BJHW > Children's protective services, any BJHW > way you stack it up. BJHW > You avoided answering my questions BJHW > as to whether or not there was any BJHW > credible accounting of this incident. BJHW > A label on a youtube video doesn't BJHW > really seem credible to me. BJHW > Apparently it does to you. grag> It's funny that CPS uses low standards of evidence, which you'd swear by, but when something cuts against CPS you need the highest evidenciary standards. Grag> Why is that, Betty? <grin> What is there evidence of, grag? High OR low. And if it's your diminutive IQ we'll know why you don't respond. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Why is that, Betty? <grin> I don't see any evidence of anything. Do you? A label is placed on a video showing police scuffling with a child of about 10 to 13. The label may be factual, it may not be. If it is, there could be a whole slew of reasons behind it. Was the child with the non custodial parent? Did that parent refuse to return the child to the custodial parent and social services became involved, as well as the police? Was the child in need of some kind of services that she refused, such as mental health services? Looks to me like the young lady is a bit out of control. No child of mine would ever dare threaten a police officer and then physically attack them. Was the child in state custody already and refusing to return from a visit? Did the child run away? What WERE the circumstances, Greg? I'm not holding anyone, or any entity to a 'standard'. All I am asking for is the whole story. This is something you would normally agree with. What gives now? Why are you suddenly making more of this than the eye can see? No news report, no posted records, nothing but a short youtube video with a caption that reads that CAS ordered police to take a child by force. We don't know why, where, etc. Lay off the bullshit already. >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc >> [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > with a caption that reads that CAS ordered police to take a child by > force. > We don't know why, where, etc. > Lay off the bullshit already. Because it would not support greggs account of things and his personal belief structure. As I remember, to gregg the facts only tend to cloud a good story and therefore should be avoided at all costs. Ron > >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g8Fgq2xkTc > [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > > Ron Ron buddy, do you really think that this is a "good story"? Pretending Greg wasn't involved of course... Tell me, you were a cop once right? Is this what it's like? The video I mean. Is it at least realistic in its presentation? Did you ever get to drag a 12 year old away from their family kicking and screaming? On Jul 11, 7:01 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" <Patis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > "Dragon's Girl" <bettywir...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > you ever get to drag a 12 year old away from their family kicking and > screaming? I'm not a cop, nor have i ever been one. However, I've had relatives who were, including my uncle, who was a constable for many years. I don't think he would have worded your phrase quite the way you did....'get to drag a 12 year...'. LK, do you know more about this story than the two and a half minute video shows? > On Jul 11, 7:01 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 97 lines] > don't think he would have worded your phrase quite the way you > did....'get to drag a 12 year...'. Ron said "good story." I assume he meant that he liked it. > LK, do you know more about this story than the two and a half minute > video shows? No. I just thought it would add a good visual. There is lots of good stuff on YouTube. I could post more if you'd like. I get stuff like this sent to me from the readers of my blog all the time. > > On Jul 11, 7:01 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] > > No. <<<snip>>> Can't you post something that might actually help someone who's family is involved with CPS? "Good visuals, good stuff, and stuff like this" isn't really helpful. > > > On Jul 11, 7:01 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 109 lines] > Can't you post something that might actually help someone who's family > is involved with CPS? Can you? Explain how your practically daily refrences to "Ken's daughters porn videos," helps families Dan. > "Good visuals, good stuff, and stuff like this" isn't really helpful. And you're advertising porn in usenet does? Don't you understand that CPS gets away with all it does simply because society is misled and ignorant of the issue? If a video from YouTube can help people to see what it's like dealing with these a.sholes or wake a few people up to the truth then somewhere down the line it's going to start helping a lot more families then your "one family at a time/kiss CPS a.s approach" ever thought of. How many people have read what you have to say about the Child Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard your brilliant advice? And you can say whatever you want about what I post here or to my website, but I still get more readers then you ever will. In the last 30 days, Legally Kidnapped http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com had 5,468 Pageviews from 3,261 Absolute Unique Visitors, and that continues to grow every month. It's a new favorite of the Family Rights movement. I'll tell you what Dan. If you're advice is so great, I'll make a deal with you. Write a few articles that tells ways of dealing with CPS or get a web cam and make a few YouTube videos of your own and if they're worth a piss hole in the snow, I'll post them. We'll call it "Dan's Corner!" I'll even provide a special link that brings up everything that you post. I'll make you famous throughout the family rights movement and the CPS/foster care system as the brilliant CPS stratigest that you claim to be. All you have to do is prove it. > How many people have read what you have to say about the Child > Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard > your brilliant advice? Enough to get dozens and dozens of kids back to their parents. Enough to challenge CPS findings and have them reversed. Enough to have their criminal charges dropped. > > How many people have read what you have to say about the Child > > Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard > > your brilliant advice? > > Enough to get dozens and dozens of kids back to their parents. Got proof? > Enough to challenge CPS findings and have them reversed. Got proof? > Enough to have their criminal charges dropped. Got proof? On Jul 13, 11:47 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote: > On Jul 13, 11:21 am, LK <Patis...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Enough to get dozens and dozens of kids back to their parents. Got proof? Ask him if he has "a God damn LINK!!!!" > On Jul 13, 11:47 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Ask him if he has "a God damn LINK!!!!" LOL Dan, Ya got a damned LINK? >> How many people have read what you have to say about the Child >> Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard >> your brilliant advice? > > Enough to get dozens and dozens of kids back to their parents. Oh don't be modest Danny - it's probably thousands or tens of thousands! YOU are a HERO! Maybe YOU are the ONLY one in all recorded history who has EVER beaten CPS. > >> How many people have read what you have to say about the Child > >> Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > are a HERO! Maybe YOU are the ONLY one in all recorded history who has EVER > beaten CPS. That would not be correct. Using Dans advice I have helped two families, one family to get thier children back from CPS and another parent who was placed on the registry, taken off the registry. You and gag both know this, and know he helped Betty and Lost in Translation. Carry on idiots. > > >> How many people have read what you have to say about the Child > > >> Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > That would not be correct. Using Dans advice What advice would that be Roberta? > I have helped two > families, one family to get thier children back from CPS and another > parent who was placed on the registry, taken off the registry. You and > gag both know this, and know he helped Betty and Lost in Translation. > > Carry on idiots. On Jul 13, 9:23 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" <Patis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> How many people have read what you have to say about the Child > > > >> Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > - Show quoted text - You have asked me that question before lk, and I have told you to go to fightcps.com and look it up. Why would you ask again? > On Jul 13, 9:23 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > to fightcps.com and look it up. > Why would you ask again? Because nothing turned up. Got a link? Probably not huh? > > On Jul 13, 9:23 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Because nothing turned up. Got a link? Probably not huh? Quite a number of people on FightCPS got their children back using my advice. If nothing turned up, it's your fault, LK. > > > On Jul 13, 9:23 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > If nothing turned up, it's your fault, LK. There's almost 1500 of my posts. How many did you read? DS > There's almost 1500 of my posts. DS > How many did you read? Most of them were Dan infighting with Family Rights people. Are you sure the messages didn't age off ? > DS > There's almost 1500 of my posts. > DS > How many did you read? > > Most of them were Dan infighting with Family Rights people. When someone claims the best way to get children returned to their parents is by challenging the Constitutionality of the Family Court system , I couldn't let it go without telling the truth. > Are you sure the messages didn't age off ? Why would they? DS > There's almost 1500 of my posts. DS > How many did you read? G > Most of them were Dan infighting with Family Rights people. DS > When someone claims the best way DS > to get children returned to their parents DS > is by challenging the Constitutionality DS > of the Family Court system , I DS > couldn't let it go without telling the truth. Who appointed YOU arbiter of truth? Kent Wills? G > Are you sure the messages didn't age off ? DS > Why would they? Why would the old messages age off? LOL Is it a challenge to your ego and immortality, Dan? > DS > There's almost 1500 of my posts. > DS > How many did you read? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Who appointed YOU arbiter of truth? Kent Wills? See below. > G > Are you sure the messages didn't age off ? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Is it a challenge to your ego and immortality, Dan? May 25, 2006, FightCPS, "I was here for a few months before I asked Bob Lynn to provide proof for his claim "When sued, CPS loses in the majority of cases." He insisted he was right for a week or so and then retracted his statement as fact and changed it to his unsubstantiated opinion." Here's my first post on FightCPS, "Dan Sullivan Joined: 30 May 2005 Posts: 1539 Location: Long Island, New York PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:39 am Post subject: AN INVESTIGATION INTO NEW YORK'S SPCC - July 2001" Looks like they're all there, grag. Prove otherwise. > > DS > There's almost 1500 of my posts. > > DS > How many did you read? [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Prove otherwise. <GASP!> You ask for PROOF??? Be still my heart...it shall never come. [...] >> PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:39 am Post subject: AN INVESTIGATION >> INTO NEW YORK'S SPCC - July 2001" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] ><GASP!> You ask for PROOF??? >Be still my heart...it shall never come. Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, valid proof, of any claim he's ever made?  Signature"I am erudite [sic] but not Buckelyesque" Gregory Scott Hanson, Jan 22, 2008 > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:39:18 -0700 (PDT), "Dragon's Girl" > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > "I am erudite [sic] but not Buckelyesque" > Gregory Scott Hanson, Jan 22, 2008 Yes. However, it's all been for things that really don't matter. KW > Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, KW > valid proof, of any claim he's ever made? BW > Yes. BW > However, it's all been for things that really don't matter. Predictable angling. >KW > Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, >KW > valid proof, of any claim he's ever made? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Predictable angling. That you see truth as angling is your issue to address, not hers. But see someone about addressing you low self esteem you have first. Please see http://groups.google.com/group/misc.legal/msg/bf3f9227e9d86067 where your seeing yourself as a loser is shown. "My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on the Child Abuse registry, for example." -- Gregory Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child abuser. Message-ID: <35120b16.0401111639.6825febd@posting.google.com> KW > Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, KW > valid proof, of any claim he's ever made? BW > Yes. BW > However, it's all been for things that really don't matter. G > Predictable angling. KW > That you see truth as angling is your KW > issue to address, not hers. KW > But see someone about addressing KW > you low self esteem you have KW > first. Please see http://groups.google.com/group/misc.legal/msg/bf3f9227e9d86067 It's YOUR message, not mine! KW > where your seeing yourself as a loser is shown. Allegedly shown. But you are Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8, 1969 the infamous garage burglary felon. >KW > Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, >KW > valid proof, of any claim he's ever made? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >It's YOUR message, not mine! I didn't claim it was yours. Is there a specific reason you're deceptively implying I claimed it was? >KW > where your seeing yourself as a loser is shown. > >Allegedly shown. You claimed my using a name other than your own to reference you means I'm loser. Since you started using a name other than mine to reference me before I adopted your style, you MUST think YOU are a loser. Or do you think the standards you set for others do not apply to you? If so, how long have you had this specific psychosis? >But you are Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8, 1969 >the infamous garage burglary felon. Please prove that I am he. I'm waiting... "My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on the Child Abuse registry, for example." -- Gregory Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child abuser. Message-ID: <35120b16.0401111639.6825febd@posting.google.com> > KW > Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, > KW > valid proof, of any claim he's ever made? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Predictable angling. Well, Greg, does it really matter that you offered us all proof of your letter to the Ways And Means Committee? I don't see you proving much else. Not that I really want or expect any proof of anything from you. When the subject of workers using investigation forms came up I was part of that discussion, and I offered real proof...I scanned a copy of one and give it to anyone who asked. Even you. That's 'real proof'. I don't see much of that kind of stuff from you. >> KW > Has Greg ever offered proof, I mean actual, >> KW > valid proof, of any claim he's ever made? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >That's 'real proof'. >I don't see much of that kind of stuff from you. As of my writing this, I've never seen any proof of any claim Greg has made. He's offered some items that, upon investigation, fail to support, let alone prove, any claim he's made. Signature"I am erudite [sic] but not Buckelyesque" Gregory Scott Hanson, Jan 22, 2008 > > On Jul 13, 9:23 pm, "http://www.LegallyKidnapped.blogspot.com" > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > - Show quoted text - You are a liar and a coward lk. >> >> How many people have read what you have to say about the Child >> >> Protective/Foster Care issue Dan? How many people have actually heard [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Carry on idiots. That Dan is able to help really angers GregWhore and Kenny-Bob. They have a vested interest in seeing that no one is ever helped. Kenny-Bob's livelihood depended on it at one time. GregWhore thinks everyone should be the massive failure he is. SignatureDo not meddle in the affairs of Dragons... for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup. > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:25:31 -0700 (PDT), Firemonkey > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons... > for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup. Sadly, that should be obvious by the lack of respect, lack of dignified solutions, etc that are posted within this group by Greg, et al. I've always been amazed at the 'pack of hungry wolves' mentality that seems to ooze from each post they make when a new poster, searching for information, writes here. I've often been amused by the stupidity posted. Meanwhile, nothing gets accomplished for those families. It seems that many just post, and then disappear into the woodwork, afraid and distraught even further after reading the 'pearls' of 'wisdom' Greg, et al, produce. Few of us have stayed on...myself, FM, wishing to help people just as we were helped. I find it ironic that the question is posed, time and time again 'Tell us your strategy', and yet, a simple question 'What do you think would be a solution?' is never answered. You can't know the solution if you don't know the problem, and you can't know the problem if you aren't willing to listen. There is no listening by the 'kill CPS' crowd. They only wish to berate and use failures as examples of their 'right'. It's pretty pathetic. What is supposed to be a support group becomes an obsession in winning the pissing contest. I've always felt this group could serve as a wealth of information for those in need, but, as unfortunate as it is, Greg, et al, use this group to create fear, rebellion, distraction, and more. Disgusts me. > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:25:31 -0700 (PDT), Firemonkey > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > distraught even further after reading the 'pearls' of 'wisdom' Greg, > et al, produce. Betty, I realize that I'm just "et al," and everything, but that's a one hell of a case of the pot calling the kettle black that you're suggesting here. Your side is guilty of the same thing. Remember, it wasn't that long ago that I started posting here. I got several private emails, most from your side and from people who rarely if ever post here, trying to either scare me away and even a couple trying to steer me towards Dan to "help me with my case" as it was put. Oh I was going to get attacked and on and on. And the one thing that I can tell you is that there are lots of people who read this group. They just don't post here. In my first post to this group, I put a link to my website and over 60 unique hits came from this group that night. Do you know who all of these people are Betty? If Greg scares people away from this group it's for their own good. I've seen it happen to people in other groups looking for support online and having everything they posted turn up on the desk of a judge. Besides, don't you think it's time that somebody speaks the truth, tells it like it is and doesn't sugar coat it with all of the political correctness and feminist bullshit, or the blown out of proportion child abuse propaganda that you all fall for. All Greg's doing is calling a spade a spade. So his method is not politically correct or it's impolite. Neither is reality. And do you know what else? You all feed the fire. So if anything, you're just as guilty as he is. > Few of us have stayed on...myself, FM, wishing to help people just as > we were helped. Uh huh. I kind of get the feeling that you all like the fight too. Otherwise you wouldn't participate. You all would leave and snuggle in warmly with a nice friendly moderated group in Yahoo or somewhere. But for some reason you all just keep on going right? Or is it like Greg says, this your last hope because you got kicked out of all the others? > I find it ironic that the question is posed, time and time again 'Tell > us your strategy', and yet, a simple question 'What do you think would > be a solution?' is never answered. There are plenty of solutions Betty, you just have to start thinking in those terms. And you can't do so until you're willing to listen to and discuss the truth for what it is instead of arguing against it simply because it was stated by Greg. > You can't know the solution if you don't know the problem, and you > can't know the problem if you aren't willing to listen. > There is no listening by the 'kill CPS' crowd. Listen to who Betty? Dan? Ron? Get real! You Betty, being the one system suck that seems to have half a brain must at least realize that Dan's one family at a time approach just isn't enough to solve the problem for the thousands going through it at any given time. You also have to expose the truth and educate the people so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole. Greg is at least the one person in here making an attempt to do that. Look what he gets for it. > They only wish to > berate and use failures as examples of their 'right'. That's where you're dead wrong. People like you want to cover up the severity or quantity of their failures as well as their motives. You all want to believe deep in your hearts that they're really trying to do the right thing when you know damn well that it's all about money. Sure maybe not totally to the foster parents and babystealers, after all, they're falling for the same joke you are right? It's always the pee-on’s that get stuck with the dirty work. > It's pretty pathetic. What is supposed to be a support group becomes > an obsession in winning the pissing contest. Sounds like you're talking about Dan. I guess you'd have to "listen" to realize that, huh. > I've always felt this group could serve as a wealth of information for > those in need, but, as unfortunate as it is, Greg, et al, use this > group to create fear, rebellion, distraction, and more. Maybe it's time for that. Hell, they've tried everything else right? > Disgusts me. That's because you're playing for the wrong team Betty. > - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:25:31 -0700 (PDT), Firemonkey > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > post here, trying to either scare me away and even a couple trying to > steer me towards Dan to "help me with my case" as it was put. So "most" out of several wanted to scare you away. Why do you say the people who wanted to scare you away were from Betty's side? Was Betty one of them? And "a couple" tried to steer you to me to help you with your case. THAT sounds like Betty. What were the "most" out of several afraid of? > Oh I > was going to get attacked and on and on. And the one thing that I can > tell you is that there are lots of people who read this group. They > just don't post here. In my first post to this group, I put a link to > my website and over 60 unique hits came from this group that night. > Do you know who all of these people are Betty? What difference would that make? BTW look at all the websites like your's, LK. And how long they've been in existence. I don't see any of them with a decent success rate for getting children back to their parents. Why after all these years haven't they figured it out? Because they're dominated by people like grag. > If Greg scares people away from this group it's for their own good. Scares them away with his ridiculous comments? Or scares them away from other people's advice? > I've seen it happen to people in other groups looking for support > online and having everything they posted turn up on the desk of a > judge. You've "seen it happen?" Is that like grag's "I've heard????" Which web site's postings ended up on the desk of a judge? > Besides, don't you think it's time that somebody speaks the > truth, tells it like it is and doesn't sugar coat it with all of the > political correctness and feminist bullshit, or the blown out of > proportion child abuse propaganda that you all fall for. All Greg's > doing is calling a spade a spade. Grag couldn't be a more perfect example of who NOT to listen to!!! He advises people to do things that would cause them to never get their children back. He told one mother (who had custody) to do something in Court that would have gotten her arrested! And she wasn't even in trouble with CPS! You haven't been around long enough to have read grag's years of advice that plays right into the hands of CPS. > So his method is not politically > correct or it's impolite. Neither is reality. > > And do you know what else? You all feed the fire. So if anything, > you're just as guilty as he is. So when grag advises a parent to do something that would get them arrested or cause them to never get their children back or lose their children, everyone else is supposed to remain silent? > > Few of us have stayed on...myself, FM, wishing to help people just as > > we were helped. > > Uh huh. I kind of get the feeling that you all like the fight too. > Otherwise you wouldn't participate. Your advice is for everyone to remain silent when bad advice is posted? Sounds like bad advice to me. Or shouldn't I have said that? > You all would leave and snuggle > in warmly with a nice friendly moderated group in Yahoo or somewhere. > But for some reason you all just keep on going right? Or is it like > Greg says, this your last hope because you got kicked out of all the > others? Not at all. > > I find it ironic that the question is posed, time and time again 'Tell > > us your strategy', and yet, a simple question 'What do you think would > > be a solution?' is never answered. > > There are plenty of solutions Betty, you just have to start thinking > in those terms. Then why haven't you posted the solutions on your website, LK? Why haven't you asked grag to post his advice on your web site? Call it "grag's corner!" > And you can't do so until you're willing to listen to > and discuss the truth for what it is instead of arguing against it > simply because it was stated by Greg. Specifically what truths from grag are you referring to? > > You can't know the solution if you don't know the problem, and you > > can't know the problem if you aren't willing to listen. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > isn't enough to solve the problem for the thousands going through it > at any given time. Your complaint about what I do is that I only help "one family at a time?" You can be sure the family's that I help don't complain. Each and every defeat of CPS demonstrates to them and the Family Court Judge that returns the children that someone knows how to expose the people in CPS for what they really are. And if I knew how to "solve the problems for the thousands going through it at any given time," do you really think I wouldn't? Why don't you tell me how, and I'll start right now. What should I tell the people who get referred to me from FightCPS, and the local people, and the people who get recommended to me from the internet? That I don't work with families anymore... I'm only working on the "big picture?" >Hell, they've tried everything else right? > You also have to expose the truth and educate the > people so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole. Every time someone gets their CPS finding reversed, or their children returned, it exposes the truth about CPS. You want to educate the people? Fine, me too. You want the people to "cry out against the injustice as a whole?" Is that what your blog is for? How many children went back to their parents because of the newspaper stories posted on your blog? > Greg is > at least the one person in here making an attempt to do that. You really think grag is "exposing the truth and educating the people so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole?" If grag is exposing the truth, why did he go back and remove his messages that detailed what he did to his girlfriend's seven year old daughter that caused her to be removed by the authorities? BTW if you don't know, grag was an unrelated adult male living with the little girl's mother. Reading what he did (spank the little girl, force her to take cold showers as punishment, and be present in the bathroom every time she got out of the shower) and didn't do (like clean up the clutter in his girlfriend's trailer which he claims was the cause of the removal) would be QUITE an education. The mother lost custody for more than seven years. Now THERE'S an injustice for the public to cry out against!!!! > Look what he gets for it. What he deserves. > > They only wish to > > berate and use failures as examples of their 'right'. > > That's where you're dead wrong. People like you want to cover up the > severity or quantity of their failures as well as their motives. What evidence is there that's what Betty wants? > You > all want to believe deep in your hearts that they're really trying to > do the right thing when you know damn well that it's all about > money. Sure maybe not totally to the foster parents and > babystealers, after all, they're falling for the same joke you are > right? It's always the pee-on’s that get stuck with the dirty work. Who are the "pee-ons?" BTW IMO if CPS concentrated on the cases that needed their attention, their workload could be reduced by 90% or more. > > It's pretty pathetic. What is supposed to be a support group becomes > > an obsession in winning the pissing contest. > > Sounds like you're talking about Dan. I guess you'd have to "listen" > to realize that, huh. Has grag a single success against CPS? > > I've always felt this group could serve as a wealth of information for > > those in need, but, as unfortunate as it is, Greg, et al, use this > > group to create fear, rebellion, distraction, and more. > > Maybe it's time for that. Usually the first reactions a family has to a CPS intervention ARE fear, rebellion and a distraction from the goal, which is getting their children back. > Hell, they've tried everything else right? No. Everything else is what I advise them to do. Calm down, don't show anger, do what's appropriate and necessary, and focus on reunification. > Disgusts me. > > That's because you're playing for the wrong team Betty. Betty was mistaken when she tried to resolve her family's problems with CPS? In your opinion she should have focused on "exposing the truth and educating the people so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole," rather than what CPS did to her family? In regard to Dan's story of how I advised somebody to do something he says would get her arrested: Dan says she was not in trouble with CPS. So WHY then was she was appearing in front of a Judge? And the issue was an illegally made recording that exposed how CPS lied/perjored. The practical reality about such a recording presented to a court is that sometimes they are actually allowed, and sometimes they are disallowed. One interesting aspect of this recording is that it was a recording of a government agent in the performance of their duties, and NOT any private citizen. I maintain that laws about recording and privacy don't apply to PUBLIC officials in the performance of their duties. I highly doubt that the prosecutor would dare prosecute a criminal charge against a citizen for protecting themself against dishonest caseworkers by recording them, PARTICULARLY in a case where there actually was such dishonesty. Do you think a JURY of US Citizens would like that? Dan played down the value of proving that a caseworker commmitted perjury and exaggerated the risk of prosecution for recording. > In regard to Dan's story of how I advised somebody > to do something he says would get her arrested: > > Dan says she was not in trouble with CPS. > > So WHY then was she was appearing in front of a Judge? The CPS case was against her ex-husband and she had already had custody of the children. What difference would it make if she WAS appearing in Court or not? Admitting in Court that you committed a crime is NEVER a good idea, is it, grag? Have you not heard "You have the right to remain silent???" Or the 5th amendment??? The right not to incriminate oneself in Court? > And the issue was an illegally made recording > that exposed how CPS lied/perjored. Even if a CPS case worker lied in a telephone conversation, it's not a CRIME is it, grag? But recording that conversation in that state WAS a crime, wasn't it, grag? And advising someone to admit committing that crime in court wasn't a good idea, was it, grag? > The practical reality about such a recording > presented to a court is that sometimes they > are actually allowed, and sometimes they > are disallowed. Why would the mother even mention the recording when she already had custody of her children? > One interesting aspect of this recording is > that it was a recording of a government agent > in the performance of their duties, and NOT > any private citizen. Is it not still a crime to make the recording? Is there a "government agent exception" to the law? > I maintain that laws about > recording and privacy don't apply to PUBLIC > officials in the performance of their duties. So that would be the "greg hanson exception" to that specific law... in that state only? Or is that for all states? How many times has the "grag hanson exception" been successfully used in court in the defense of the crime? > I highly doubt that the prosecutor would dare > prosecute a criminal charge against a citizen > for protecting themself against dishonest > caseworkers by recording them, PARTICULARLY > in a case where there actually was such dishonesty. So that would be the "greg hanson doubts I would be prosecuted for breaking the law" defense. How many times has that been successfully used in a criminal trial????? > Do you think a JURY of US Citizens would like that? The recording wouldn't have to be played in court. The issue is whether the illegal recording was made or not. What was recorded, makes no difference. > Dan played down the value of proving that a > caseworker commmitted perjury and exaggerated > the risk of prosecution for recording. butthead, a CPS case worker lying in a telephone conversation isn't perjury. Perjury is lying in court under oath or in a sworn statement. Again, how many times has the "greg hanson doubts I would be prosecuted for breaking the law" defense been successfully used in a criminal trial????? Are you going to maintain your claim that admitting that crime in court is a good idea, grag? Is a Judge's eye roll, an admission of the crime on the record in Court, an arrest and trial (probably plea bargained down to a lesser offense) and the loss of her children worth admitting her crime? >In regard to Dan's story of how I advised somebody >to do something he says would get her arrested: > >Dan says she was not in trouble with CPS. > >So WHY then was she was appearing in front of a Judge? Are you so stone cold stupid that you think one appears before a judge only if they are in trouble with CPS? >And the issue was an illegally made recording >that exposed how CPS lied/perjored. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >recording and privacy don't apply to PUBLIC >officials in the performance of their duties. Does the law agree with you? You can maintain whatever you wish. If the law doesn't agree, it doesn't matter. >I highly doubt that the prosecutor would dare >prosecute a criminal charge against a citizen >for protecting themself against dishonest >caseworkers by recording them, PARTICULARLY >in a case where there actually was such dishonesty. >Do you think a JURY of US Citizens would like that? If the recording was illegal, it probably wouldn't be allowed in as evidence, even if it could prove the CW had committed perjury. The rules of evidence holds the same for both sides. If the prosecutor wanted to file for making the recording, it may be allowed in that trial, since it would prove the recording was made. >Dan played down the value of proving that a >caseworker commmitted perjury and exaggerated >the risk of prosecution for recording. An illegal recording of a conversation isn't a great crime. Your cases of committing abuse would be seen by most as far greater. "My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on the Child Abuse registry, for example." -- Gregory Scott Hanson telling Usenet he's a FOUNDED child abuser. Message-ID: <35120b16.0401111639.6825febd@posting.google.com> > > > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:25:31 -0700 (PDT), Firemonkey > [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > So "most" out of several wanted to scare you away. Yes Dan. > Why do you say the people who wanted to scare you away were from > Betty's side? because they were system sucks like you. > Was Betty one of them? Did I say Betty was one of them? > And "a couple" tried to steer you to me to help you with your case. Yes Dan. > THAT sounds like Betty. I didn't say it was Betty. > What were the "most" out of several afraid of? There was only one who expressed fear Dan. The rest were warnings. > > Oh I > > was going to get attacked and on and on. And the one thing that I can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What difference would that make? I was just stating an observation. > BTW look at all the websites like your's, LK. Show me one. Mine is actually fairly original. > And how long they've been in existence. How long? > I don't see any of them with a decent success rate for getting > children back to their parents. We know Dan. You're the only one with all the answers. > Why after all these years haven't they figured it out? Lots of people have figured you out, I'm sure. > Because they're dominated by people like grag. There is only one Greg Dan. > > If Greg scares people away from this group it's for their own good. > > Scares them away with his ridiculous comments? I just think that your blaiming him for that which he's not entirely responsible for. > Or scares them away from other people's advice? What advice? I've yet to see you offer anything good to anybody who'se posted here. > > I've seen it happen to people in other groups looking for support > > online and having everything they posted turn up on the desk of a > > judge. > > You've "seen it happen?" Yes I have. > Is that like grag's "I've heard????" No it isn't. > Which web site's postings ended up on the desk of a judge? In other groups I've belonged too. Are you saying this doesn't happen? > > Besides, don't you think it's time that somebody speaks the > > truth, tells it like it is and doesn't sugar coat it with all of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > He advises people to do things that would cause them to never get > their children back. Like what? > He told one mother (who had custody) to do something in Court that > would have gotten her arrested! What was that? > And she wasn't even in trouble with CPS! Then what's her problem with the system? > You haven't been around long enough to have read grag's years of > advice that plays right into the hands of CPS. Like the kiss a.s approach that you suggest? > > So his method is not politically > > correct or it's impolite. Neither is reality. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So when grag advises a parent to do something that would get them > arrested for example? > or cause them to never get their children back for example? > or lose their > children, for example? > everyone else is supposed to remain silent? Where did I say that? > > > Few of us have stayed on...myself, FM, wishing to help people just as > > > we were helped. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Your advice is for everyone to remain silent when bad advice is > posted? No Dan what I said was that Greg isn't the only one scaring people away from this group as Betty claimed. I also said that Greg tells it like it is. > Sounds like bad advice to me. Point out where I said that. > Or shouldn't I have said that? > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Then why haven't you posted the solutions on your website, LK? How do you know I haven't? Have you looked through all 2000 + posts? > Why haven't you asked grag to post his advice on your web site? Greg hasn't claimed to have all the answers. That's your claim. > Call it "grag's corner!" Do you know what Dan? I've been looking into this issue for a while now. Since then I've read many posts from several news groups. Some are frequented by experienced lawyers. Some are frequented by foster parents and a couple even included social workers. And do you know what? You are the first person who makes the bullshit claim to "Know the system better then the people in the system." You are the first person who I have ever heard of that claims to have single handedly rescued over 40 children from the system. Yet you can't prove a single one. Your claims are wild and unrealistic. sh.t, you can't even get your own puppet bear story straight, what with the recent development, for example, the detectives from the DA's office being from the sex crimes unit and all. > > And you can't do so until you're willing to listen to > > and discuss the truth for what it is instead of arguing against it > > simply because it was stated by Greg. > > Specifically what truths from grag are you referring to? Google it. > > > You can't know the solution if you don't know the problem, and you > > > can't know the problem if you aren't willing to listen. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Your complaint about what I do is that I only help "one family at a > time?" No Dan. What I am saying here is that if you do actually help families, that it just isn't enough. Great, you rescue one kid from the system what about the other half a million stuck in there? What about all the people who never hear of you and your brilliant advice? As soon as one family is helped another 100 fall victim. It happens on a massive scale. There just aren't enough of you to go around. While you're helping one family at a time Congress is getting ready to pass a new version of the adoption and safe families act (ASFA ends this September BTW) which will make it harder for you to do that because it makes it even easier to adopt kids out from foster care and provides more money for the adoptive parents, bigger adoption bonuses, etc. I have been encouraging people to contact their congressmen and senators about this. Is that the wrong thing to do? Hell your own Senator (Hillary) is one of the biggest advocates for it. Have you contacted her office? > You can be sure the family's that I help don't complain. About what? Your help or the injustice dished out by the system? I hardly doubt that their experience with false accusations strengthens their support for CPS and the injustice they dish out on a regular basis. What's your success rate? 100%? What about the families you couldn't help? Or wouldn't help? How do you pick and choose? > Each and every defeat of CPS demonstrates to them and the Family Court > Judge that returns the children that someone knows how to expose the > people in CPS for what they really are. And what are they really Dan? And who are you exposing them too? > And if I knew how to "solve the problems for the thousands going > through it at any given time," do you really think I wouldn't? You'd be out of a job. > Why don't you tell me how, and I'll start right now. I can get you in front of thousands. I can make you famous either way Dan, as a system suck or as the hero you claim to be. You're just haven't proved that you're worth the blog space and I'm not going to risk the quality of Legally Kidnapped in order to expose you for the bullshit artist that you are. You haven't written anything specific, that I've seen anyway that would be useful. I'd make that offer to anybody. You got the answers? Send them to me and I'll post it for the whole world to see. > What should I tell the people who get referred to me from FightCPS, > and the local people, and the people who get recommended to me from > the internet? That you are a system suck. > That I don't work with families anymore... I'm only working on the > "big picture?" See Dan, this is where your arguement fails. Where did I say that the one family at a time approach is unimportant? Yes Dan, some families need to be helped individually. All need the system fixed as a whole. This is a problem with multiple levels. Do you deny that? Do you really think that the problem will be solved one family at a time? > >Hell, they've tried everything else right? > > You also have to expose the truth and educate the > > people so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole. > > Every time someone gets their CPS finding reversed, or their children > returned, it exposes the truth about CPS. To who? The judge? Do all of these families get to the front page of the newspapers? > You want to educate the people? That's the attempt I'm making. > Fine, me too. Really? > You want the people to "cry out against the injustice as a whole?" Yes. > Is that what your blog is for? That's the attempt. > How many children went back to their parents because of the newspaper > stories posted on your blog? Again you fail to see the purpose of my blog. I'd like to turn it into something like that, but I'm not the one making the claim to have all the answers. I've said before that if I had all the answers I'd post them, but you're the only one who makes that claim. > > Greg is > > at least the one person in here making an attempt to do that. > > You really think grag is "exposing the truth and educating the people > so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole?" I think he's made the attempt. > If grag is exposing the truth, why did he go back and remove his > messages that detailed what he did to his girlfriend's seven year old > daughter that caused her to be removed by the authorities? Why didn't you tell us until recently that the detectives from the DA's office were from the sex crimes unit? Others were under the impression that the worker brought them there with her. Now you change your story. > BTW if you don't know, grag was an unrelated adult male living with > the little girl's mother. So? > Reading what he did (spank the little girl, force her to take cold > showers as punishment, and be present in the bathroom every time she > got out of the shower) and didn't do (like clean up the clutter in his > girlfriend's trailer which he claims was the cause of the removal) > would be QUITE an education. And you post that story every time someone in here comes looking for info. The minute Greg posts a response, you copy and paste your anti- Greg bullshit. Is that how you help families? > The mother lost custody for more than seven years. Yet she stays with him anyway. > Now THERE'S an injustice for the public to cry out against!!!! I agree. If everything you say about Greg is true and there was such a concern, he should have been removed, not the child. > > Look what he gets for it. > > What he deserves. I'll bet you say that to all the parents. > > > They only wish to > > > berate and use failures as examples of their 'right'. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > What evidence is there that's what Betty wants? I said people like her. > > You > > all want to believe deep in your hearts that they're really trying to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Who are the "pee-ons?" That was a metaphore Dan. In the context I was refering to the foster parents and babystealers who aren't paid all that much. When you compair the child protective industry to any other industry in a capitalist society, the lowest paid members of the society are the ones who do the dirty work while the "smart people" rake in the profits off of their backs. In the child protective industry the product is children. You have the product aquisition team, ie babystealers, you have storage, ie foster and group homes, you have sales, ie adoption agencies and even a liquidization team dealing with children who aren't a quality product for the sales team, ie older or special needs children who age out. > BTW IMO if CPS concentrated on the cases that needed their attention, > their workload could be reduced by 90% or more. And I agree with you on that. > > > It's pretty pathetic. What is supposed to be a support group becomes > > > an obsession in winning the pissing contest. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Has grag a single success against CPS? Make that caseworker to caseworker call and find out. You really should get an update. > > > I've always felt this group could serve as a wealth of information for > > > those in need, but, as unfortunate as it is, Greg, et al, use this [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > fear, rebellion and a distraction from the goal, which is getting > their children back. And some are beaten down psychologically so much that they never overcome that. > > Hell, they've tried everything else right? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Calm down, don't show anger, do what's appropriate and necessary, and > focus on reunification. Well there is a time for everything, isn't there? > > Disgusts me. > > > That's because you're playing for the wrong team Betty. > > Betty was mistaken when she tried to resolve her family's problems > with CPS? No. Betty is mistaken now that her families problems are resolved to her satisfaction. > In your opinion she should have focused on "exposing the truth and > educating the people so that they cry out against the injustice as a > whole," rather than what CPS did to her family? Now that her problem with CPS is resolved, she should be screaming out against the injustice of what she had to go through to make that happen. If the removal was the right thing to do and Betty was always an adequate placement for her grandson, as I assume she was probably from day one, she shouldn't have had to fight them to win. There is a time and a place for everything. I agree with you that people who have open cases should be focused on getting the kids back, and not be crying out against the system in the same way I am, but only because of the way the system is set up and operates currently where they can get f.cked for doing so. I've come across lots of blogs with just that purpose and the problem that I have with these is that these people tend to fill them with personal info, they name judges and lawyers and workers, etc. Although I have no ethical problem with that, the concern is retaliation and the legal consiquences for doing so. They try to use their own stories as a means for crying out against the injustice and are limited in knowledge to what they are going through. They're all over the internet I come across them all the time. I've actually been trying to talk a woman into deleting her myspace page because she's crying out for help and trying to expose the workers and the lawyers and the judge and everybody else by name. She names them and they know that she's been writing all of this in her little myspace blog and THEY have told her that it's not helping her case, not to mention they know about it and she gives away her strategy, her plans, etc. in it. So you're right, there is a time and a place for everything. It's just that too many people are beaten down into the pavement psychologically, so they don't have what it takes. > - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:25:31 -0700 (PDT), Firemonkey > [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > because they were system sucks like you. I don't understand why you think I would want to scare people away from here. > > Was Betty one of them? > > Did I say Betty was one of them? That doesn't answer my question. > > And "a couple" tried to steer you to me to help you with your case. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I didn't say it was Betty. I didn't say it was. I said it sounds like Betty. > > What were the "most" out of several afraid of? > > There was only one who expressed fear Dan. The rest were warnings. Interesting. > > > Oh I > > > was going to get attacked and on and on. And the one thing that I can [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I was just stating an observation. To what end? > > BTW look at all the websites like your's, LK. > > Show me one. Mine is actually fairly original. Isn't your blog a copy and paste job of info from the internet? How could that be original? > > And how long they've been in existence. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > We know Dan. It's a shame. > You're the only one with all the answers. Not all, but enough to beat CPS on a regular basis. > > Why after all these years haven't they figured it out? > > Lots of people have figured you out, I'm sure. And they got their children back. And like Betty and Bobbe got their family back together and helped other families do the same. > > Because they're dominated by people like grag. > > There is only one Greg Dan. No, unfortunately there's a lot like grag. > > > If Greg scares people away from this group it's for their own good. > > > Scares them away with his ridiculous comments? > > I just think that your blaiming him for that which he's not entirely > responsible for. He's not responsible for what he says? Why is that? > > Or scares them away from other people's advice? > > What advice? I've yet to see you offer anything good to anybody > who'se posted here. You said you read the archives. Guess not, huh? > > > I've seen it happen to people in other groups looking for support > > > online and having everything they posted turn up on the desk of a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Yes I have. Interesting. > > Is that like grag's "I've heard????" > > No it isn't. Interesting. > > Which web site's postings ended up on the desk of a judge? > > In other groups I've belonged too. Are you saying this doesn't > happen? I just thought you could prove your claim. Guess not, huh? > > > Besides, don't you think it's time that somebody speaks the > > > truth, tells it like it is and doesn't sugar coat it with all of the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Like what? Like what he did in Lisa Watkins' case. > > He told one mother (who had custody) to do something in Court that > > would have gotten her arrested! > > What was that? Tell the Judge she made an illegal recording off the telephone of a CPS case worker. > > And she wasn't even in trouble with CPS! > > Then what's her problem with the system? It was her ex-husband that had the problem > > You haven't been around long enough to have read grag's years of > > advice that plays right into the hands of CPS. > > Like the kiss a.s approach that you suggest? That's never been my approach. Guess you never read the archives, huh? > > > So his method is not politically > > > correct or it's impolite. Neither is reality. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Where did I say that? You said you wanted to "discuss the truth for what it is instead of arguing against it simply because it was stated by Greg." As if what greg says has anything to do with the truth! > > > > Few of us have stayed on...myself, FM, wishing to help people just as > > > > we were helped. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > away from this group as Betty claimed. I also said that Greg tells it > like it is. YOU don't have any solutions and certainly greg doesn't have any, so how could you possibly say "greg tells it like it is?" That's one of the most stupid statements I've ever read on asCPS. > > Sounds like bad advice to me. > > Point out where I said that. I said it sounds like bad advice to ME. > > Or shouldn't I have said that? > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > How do you know I haven't? Have you looked through all 2000 + posts? I thought you said your website was original. Guess not, huh? I bet if you had a solution or two you would have featured them some place prominent. Guess not, huh? > > Why haven't you asked grag to post his advice on your web site? > > Greg hasn't claimed to have all the answers. That's your claim. But if greg "tells it like it is," as you claim, surely you could post his messages on your "not so" original website. > > Call it "grag's corner!" > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > rescued over 40 children from the system. Yet you can't prove a > single one. The stories are all thru the asCPS and FightCPS archives. Ask Betty, Bobbe, Lostintranslation. > Your claims are wild and unrealistic. A claim from someone who has no idea how the CPS system works. What a surprise. > sh.t, you can't > even get your own puppet bear story straight, what with the recent > development, for example, the detectives from the DA's office being > from the sex crimes unit and all. That's what I was told. Prove I wasn't told that. > > > And you can't do so until you're willing to listen to > > > and discuss the truth for what it is instead of arguing against it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Google it. Got nothing, huh? > > > > You can't know the solution if you don't know the problem, and you > > > > can't know the problem if you aren't willing to listen. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > No Dan. What I am saying here is that if you do actually help > families, that it just isn't enough. Well, EXCUUUUUUUUUSE ME!!!! > Great, you rescue one kid from > the system what about the other half a million stuck in there? What > about all the people who never hear of you and your brilliant advice? I've never turned anyone away. > As soon as one family is helped another 100 fall victim. It happens > on a massive scale. There just aren't enough of you to go around. Sad to say. > While you're helping one family at a time Congress is getting ready to > pass a new version of the adoption and safe families act (ASFA ends [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > etc. I have been encouraging people to contact their congressmen and > senators about this. Is that the "cry out against the injustice as a whole" part of your plan? > Is that the wrong thing to do? Hell your own > Senator (Hillary) is one of the biggest advocates for it. Have you > contacted her office? Has CPS removed Chelsea? > > You can be sure the family's that I help don't complain. > > About what? My help. Of course they complain about CPS. What are you stupid?. > Your help or the injustice dished out by the system? I > hardly doubt that their experience with false accusations strengthens > their support for CPS and the injustice they dish out on a regular > basis. Apparently you are. > What's your success rate? 100%? Higher than I could ever have hoped for. > What about the families you couldn't help? Or wouldn't help? I have never declined to help anyone. > How do you pick and choose? I have never declined to help anyone. > > Each and every defeat of CPS demonstrates to them and the Family Court > > Judge that returns the children that someone knows how to expose the > > people in CPS for what they really are. > > And what are they really Dan? If the parents prevail in a Family Court Hearing that means CPS lost. That means the Judge believed the family and NOT CPS! > And who are you exposing them too? To themselves and the Family Court Judge, just like it says in the sentence. > > And if I knew how to "solve the problems for the thousands going > > through it at any given time," do you really think I wouldn't? > > You'd be out of a job. Helping people involved with CPS isn't my job. > > Why don't you tell me how, and I'll start right now. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > risk the quality of Legally Kidnapped in order to expose you for the > bullshit artist that you are. First, Legally Kidnapped is a copy and paste web site. Certainly NOT "original" as you seem to think. And if there is any quality it's from the news stories and other websites that you suck your copy from. Being that you believe grag "tells it like it is" YOU should have HIM be the hero of your Legally Kidnapped web site. > You haven't written anything specific, > that I've seen anyway that would be useful. Never read the archives, huh? > I'd make that offer to anybody. You got the answers? Send them to me > and I'll post it for the whole world to see. Every case is different. > > What should I tell the people who get referred to me from FightCPS, > > and the local people, and the people who get recommended to me from > > the internet? > > That you are a system suck. That the guy who had the Legally Kidnapped web site hasn't a clue about how to beat CPS... I DO!!! > > That I don't work with families anymore... I'm only working on the > > "big picture?" > > See Dan, this is where your arguement fails. Where did I say that the > one family at a time approach is unimportant? Yes Dan, some families > need to be helped individually. What a monumental horses a.s you are! They ALL need to be helped individually! > All need the system fixed as a > whole. This is a problem with multiple levels. Do you deny that? Do > you really think that the problem will be solved one family at a time? That's how I'm doing it. Constitutional Bob from Pennsylvania "wrote" two laws he thought fixed all the CPS problems in Pennsylvania. The Family Preservation Act of 2006 and the Family Advocate Act. They were originally referred to as the 2005 laws. He switched the name to 2006 when he failed to submit them to the legislature in 2005. And then came 2007. And then 2008. In a few months it will be 2009. The guy is so caught up in his own bullshit he doesn't have any idea what he should do. And then YOU say you "have to expose the truth and educate the people so that they cry out against the injustice as a whole." Well what HAVE you done and have you gotten a SINGLE child back from CPS foster care? AND you claim "Greg is at least the one person in here making an attempt to do that." So why would you NOT feature grag and his "tell it like it is" messages on your website??? Just let me know when you have actually accomplished something, other than your "not-so-original" website. > > >Hell, they've tried everything else right? > > > You also have to expose the truth and educate the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > To who? The judge? And to CPS themselves. > Do all of these families get to the front page of the newspapers? I really don't think that's where they'd want to be. > > You want to educate the people? > > That's the attempt I'm making. And what have you accomplished so far. Your website isn't an answer. > > Fine, me too. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > That's the attempt. Well, I'm WAYYYYY past attempting to do something. I have been helping people prevail over CPS since 1993. > > How many children went back to their parents because of the newspaper > > stories posted on your blog? > > Again you fail to see the purpose of my blog. So the answer is ZERO! > I'd like to turn it > into something like that, but I'm not the one making the claim to have > all the answers. I've said before that if I had all the answers I'd > post them, but you're the only one who makes that claim. Every case is different. > > > Greg is > > > at least the one person in here making an attempt to do that. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I think he's made the attempt. By saying what, exactly? > > If grag is exposing the truth, why did he go back and remove his > > messages that detailed what he did to his girlfriend's seven year old > > daughter that caused her to be removed by the authorities? > > Why didn't you tell us until recently that the detectives from the > DA's office were from the sex crimes unit? Was it not obvious that they were investigating a sex crime? Do you think they were traffic detectives? > Others were under the > impression that the worker brought them there with her. Others? Where? In the same car? > Now you change your story. Not at all. > > BTW if you don't know, grag was an unrelated adult male living with > > the little girl's mother. > > So? Parents are the primary disciplinarians. Live in sponges don't make the list. > > Reading what he did (spank the little girl, force her to take cold > > showers as punishment, and be present in the bathroom every time she [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > info. The minute Greg posts a response, you copy and paste your anti- > Greg bullshit. People should know what greg is all about. > Is that how you help families? To get them to not listen to a word greg says is a start. > > The mother lost custody for more than seven years. > > Yet she stays with him anyway. You're claiming Lisa Watkins still lives with greg? greg has hinted that Lisa got physical custody of her daughter back. Have you proof of any of that? > > Now THERE'S an injustice for the public to cry out against!!!! > > I agree. If everything you say about Greg is true and there was such > a conc |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message