Should I just stop paying or petition to modify ????

On Jun 14, 7:23 am, Greegor wrote:
snip
On Jun 13, 11:54 pm Kane wrote

I've just posted, AGAIN, some of the real problems with staffing, so
that there inappropriately trained caseworkers, with massively
excessive caseloads making it impossible for them to do the work they
must do.

Did you mention the caseworker who was so short on time
that she was "on the clock" as a school teacher while she
was on the clock as a caseworker? Paid in both places
for the same hours?

How about the caseworker passed out drunk in the car
with other people's kids in the back seat?

Reporting to court they visited a kid and that they are OK when
the kid had been dead for a year or so?

You keep up with that lobbying for more MONEY for
your beloved Child Protection INDUSTRY.

After that you can rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic!

Betty has even said insulting things about some caseworkers.
firemonkey fought the system. lostintranslation also.

Betty also said she looks like Bette Midler!
That doesn't mean she does.
Anonymous names prove what exactly? Diddly about Midler?

Others from the past that have "attacked" poor little Greg, have also
attacked CPS. Sherman, for instance, has focused on the system
puckering problems and described them in detail.

Got a link?

Yet YOU, dimwit have the lying gall to claim that we believe in "the
abject goodness of a BUREAUCRACY."

By the way, what the puck is "abject goodness?"

Use the puckering dictionary, won't you?

At least one of them actually worked for the bureaucracy,
contracted to the agencies and continues to support the bureaucracy.

Yep. I'm that one. You couldn't ask for a better resource if you want
to know and understand how CPS actually DOES work, and what all the
bureaucratize really means in the real world.

And yet while you claim ALL of this ""expertise"" you say you
worked for them ages ago when you were in college, for a year?
As a twerp doing your internship you became an expert in a year?

I was a student. I worked for a mental health agency that had a great
many children in treatment that were ward of the court. Under CPS
supervision, what little time they could find to do it.

Yes, you were a CONTRACTOR. So?

My biggest retort is merely to question their motivation for
sucking up to BUREAUCRACIES, the Child Protection INDUSTRY.

Well, ducky, you just go right ahead and merely question our
motivation.

Mine is to see CPS do their job better. Nothing more. I get not a dime
one way or the other.

I've seen what I love about our system of government as the motive of
others here. The pursuit of their own goals....to have their children
back and keep them. And apparently they so appreciate that wonderful
feeling of having done so, they wish to share how they did it with
others.

Thus they give opinions based on actual WINNING experience, Greg...and
YOU?

Got to give it to Dan though. When it comes to being attacked, Greg,
you can't hold a candle to him.

Or near him. Remember his "Where there's smoke there's fire" comment?
Particularly amusing since he claims 15 investigations, and supposedly
reversed "founded" reports 5 times. (When he's not tooting his horn?)

For the first five years he posted here it was continuous.

But, you'll note, he's still here. The others aren't, or are socking.

Then there is you, you little dickens you.

You are still around, whining, grumbling, stomping your little foot,
that YOU have done NOTHING but set up the state for suit,

Not possible, not true, would take incredible skills indeed, but
if it were true, it would be a tremendous public service.

while Dan has again and again helped people get their children back.

Can you prove that he didn't do that as a CASEWORKER?
I'm sure many of them think they are "helping" families
from their warped perspective.

Why Greg, even Dan says, "hope they sue and win big."

In fact, I think he just mentioned, in a child death, where the mother
sued and lost, her loss should be overturned on appeal.

Hardly sounds like the ramblings of a "system suck," Greg.

Dan and you sometimes say things that are out of character
with the bulk of your posting history. Bluff or quirk, I don't know.

Caseworkers report "token" positives about parents just so that their
reports don't look rediculously negative, which is an abuse of the
"preponderance" (51%) standard for burden of proof in court.

They sometimes pick a small positive even though they know
of a really BIG positive. Hence "token positive".

I think he opinion of you is coloring your thinking just a bit. Don't
you?

Several of them have burrowed into Parents Rights groups
seeking to steer things a bit in favor of the AGENCIES.

And you've been asked repeatedly to provide proof, which you have not
done. The fact is, Dan's provided PROOF in the form of quotes, direct
quotes, and offers to groups leaders to share the facts, and they,
sadly, have run away.

They confirmed that Dan had been kicked out and knew full well.
They did not want to be dragged into the Dan's bitch fest.
That's basically why he was kicked out, ironically.
"Proof" of what? "Share the facts" about what?

Dan got caught advising people to do ""services"" before
the agency had any right to ask them.
He has done this a lot.
This is why I joke about his "winning through surrender" strategy.

You want me to post lifted text from a secured Parents Rights group.
Just because you guys are that unethical and did that does not compel
me to be just as unethical to post the proof you ask for.

Particularly since you already

I still think Dan is too much of a do gooder. Naive about you
****ants, Greg. He should have written those groups off long before he
did.

Dan attempted to ridicule me in a place where I was not active.
Bizarrly Dan expected parents to laugh at his attempted ridicule of
me.
He spotted another Lion preaching about the Constitution and
made hostile comments. That escalated on both sides.
Dan was kicked out for hostile comments that were not helpful.
Then he tried using anonymizer relays and the name Oliver Sutton.
But he quickly posted in his previous hostile style and was
recognized.
He was kicked out again.

Dan tried to deny that he had been kicked out.
Then when the management posted confirmation that he had been
he argued about the WHY using e-mails that showed
he had been well aware of the fact that he WAS in fact kicked out.

That was not the only Parents Rights group that Dan Sullivan
has been kicked out of. He just lies about it, asking for proof.
His bluff was called on that one!

Dan knew full well that he had been kicked out, but he had LIED and
denied.
Kane has also projected these lies as Dan quitting on the Parents
Rights group rather than Dan being ejected for his rudeness and
hostility.
Since Kane saw the confirmation this projection is a lie also.

The confirmation is IN the ascps newsgroup archives.

In an attempt to neutralize my effectiveness

R R R R....EFFECTIVENESS?

The girl is home then?

G they actually spent MONTHS actively asserting
G that I am an agent of the agencies!

Nope. I said that you were doing things that would lead one to believe
you had to be.

And after a few months of trying you gave up?

Every successful parent, in their engagement with CPS, that posts to
this newsgroup, has been attacked by you and your buddies, Greg.

Did you count ""Oliver Sutton"" among them?
It's amazing how easily we spotted your sock puppets isn't it?

What IS one supposed to think that is about...that you are just stupid
and insane?

That would be too easy. It LOOKS very much like, you know, SEEMS, like
you have an agenda that does wonders for CPS and is bad news for new
posters here to seek advice and support.

I consider it a puckering wonder you didn't attack the latest
one...though you most certainly DID begin your usual destructive to
families rant.

You know, the "quick, start slapping the judge around on
Constitutionality...that's get your kid back in say 6 years or more."

Yes, It's true that caseworkers and their familiars laugh off
the US Constitution as an inconvenience for their job.
They paint Constitutionalists as all crazy.
Caseworkers just want parents to bend over and take it up the..
Speaking up for your Constitutionally GUARANTEED rights
proves to caseworkers that you are guilty of child abuse.
Disrespecting caseworkrs awesome POWER makes you
much worse than an actual child abuser to caseworkers.

This didn't work very well, partly because
ironically they THEMSELVES have complained many times
about how much I hate BUREAUCRACY, long before and
long after the ruse that I was a "plant".

I told you a nice story about a plant in an AF intelligence unit I was
assigned to. Same behavior. He pretended, like you appear to be
pretending, Greg.

The only pretense here is my civility toward you, Commander McBrag!

You see, from inside the head of a BUREAUCRAT that is
an insult, hating BUREAUCRACY.

Mmmmm....more babble?

It appears, unless you made a typo, that you are saying that hating
bureaucracy ... oh, well, you figure it out. And try Funk and Wagnals.

How many people do you think actually LIKE bureaucracy Kane?
Even many bureaucrats hate bureaucracy, but to citizens
it is a derogatory term for good reason.

They complain about how I have not yet DEFEATED the
dragon, hoping to discredit me.

"Complain?" Greg, we have celebrated repeatedly that the little girl
escaped you. How is THAT a complaint?

Something only a CASEWORKER or a system suck would do.

WE do NOT have to discredit YOU, Greg.

If NONE, not a one of us, were here, Greg, any thinking objective
honest person would read your babble over the years, your treatment of
the child, your ignoring her feelings and situation continually, your
rants about government, your rants TOO government (you forget YOU
tried to USE bureaucracy yourself, stupid), your idiocy with the
petition to the court, man it was ALL proof of what we simply feed
back to you.

After you play a giant game of TELEPHONE and distort
things to the point they are nothing but your ATTITUDE!
Twelve monkeys tapping away on twelve typewriters
could do better.

That's why I always suggest to newcomers as you close in for a neck
bite, they do a little review of the posting archives for Greg Hansen.
Mistakenly these "system sucks" think that to other families
in the deadly fight AGAINST these dragons (CPS BUREAUCRACY)
that somebody who actually fought long and hard

On a slam dunk case, so puckering easy to win a child could have done
it. An honest child, though. That's important. 0:]

So now my family is a slam dunk case that we messed up?
Have you ever characterized it that way before?
In fact you have characterized it as very different from that over and
over.
You have characterized me and us as actual abusers.
Suddenly NOW you say it was a slam dunk case??

G is less of a resource than their FAKE heros with simple solutions,

K Well, I think we are heros, in the real sense
K of that word. We have done NO grandstanding.

And you're SO modest! chuckle You're hilarious!
You earned the nickname "Commander McBrag".
Dan has bragged about his greatness.

No blathering about the Constitution,

Did you actually think saying this would HELP you?

and forcing the state to arrest us so we
can have a go at the laws we don't like

Thomas Jefferson would be proud of you!

(RIGHT AFTER GETTING OUR CHILDREN BACK)...not me, of
course, but another poster.

Greg, you are a nutcase.

You were a caseworker and a contractor!

You sided long ago with the other nutcases.

herein read: Parents who hate crooked CPS caseworkers.

easy answers and victorious results. (Mostly anonymous)

The people that posted here about Dan's help were not posting
anonymous.
And we all have seen the real names of Dragon's Girl,
lostintranslation, firemonkey.

Can you prove that?

And we certainly have proof Dan is Dan.

You can look him up in Long Island.

I found him by using the phone book.

John Smith on Long Island New York?

"lostintranslation" stated that she had recorded the caseworkers
secretly in a state where that is supposedly illegal.

MMmm....hmmmm....and you KNEW that she had just gotten her children
back from the state.

Then WHY was she seeking HELP?
If she had gotten her kids back why tell others she had
illegally recorded the caseworker?
If she had already gotten her kids back at that time, WHY
would she be going into court and fighting?

I explained that government agents have no reasonable
expectation of privacy when they are dealing with the public.

That's not what the law says in some states. That's your opinion.

I have already explained that states pass laws that are BELOW
the standards of the US Constitution.
This could well be yet another case where the state law is
only waiting for somebody to challenge it, to point out
that the emperor is wearing no clothes, so to say.

In many instances what they speak about may well be confidential
information. And they may also be working on a "case," that is,
investigating.

Are you saying they must TELL the person they are speaking to that
they are recording, during an investigation?

And that you think that's moral and ethical?

That would include telling the perp they are being investigated.

You seem quite happy with it being done secretly for other purposes,
Greg.

I am a citizen. I have rights.
Government agencies have power and clout but no citizens RIGHTS.
Recording is about a CITIZENS right to privacy.

Did YOU tell government agents you were recording them?

I don't need to in Iowa, on the phone.

They should have no expectation of privacy or ""privacy rights""
when they are performing such a critical duty as interviewing parents.

Recording government agents in the performance of their duty
is NOT like recording the government agent when they
are off the clock and in private, or a private individual.

Of course not. Doing so while they are investigating, which is about
all the time, Greg, is not like recording them when they are off the
clock.

I gave her no "easy answer", using the word "litigation".

Sure you did. You said show up in court and use the recording itself
to force the court to have her arrested so she could challenge the
law.

Half truth. Spin, hyperbole, exaggeration.
I notice you did not mention the word "litigation" or
any other qualifiers like TRANSCRIBING the recording
and submitting that.

You characterized it to suit your needs.

You didn't quote me exactly.

If you quote me exactly and in context, you will see that
your characterization is unfair.

I've interacted with you long enough to say
that you KNOW very well it's a half truth.

The pack of hyenas of course tried to make the most of it.

That's the thing about the truth, Greg. That should always be "the
most of it."

An area you seem to think is adjustable according to your need.

You told a half truth deliberately. Lecture me on elastic truth.

They overlooked that about the only people so eager
to defend the ""privacy rights"" of government workers
on duty are GOVERNMENT WORKERS themselves!

"about the only people?"

Greg, when I ask people NOT government agents, if they would like to
be secretly recorded by anyone for any purpose, try guessing their
answer.

It's always easier to say yes, if it's the OTHER guy, even a
government agent. But when you say, "in the performance
of your work, they get it immediately.

It seems like MOST workplaces now video record employees.
I did inbound Credit Card applications a few years back and
in addition to being video recorded for security, I was also
audio recorded for legal purposes and quality control.
Very exacting legal contracts done in voice form.
Later I also worked VERIFYING those recordings against
the computer database. The wierdest part was that
after doing the actual apps and having to be so perfect,
I could not believe how horribly wrong some other people
had done that same job.

My point is that for anything IMPORTANT like a
family's grilling by a CPS caseworker, it should
all be on tape to protect the family against
the torrent of lies caseworkers tell later on in court.

If caseworkers feel uncomfortable being recorded
on the job, perhaps they had better get out of
a field with such IMPORTANT (huge) legal implications
that their interactions should be recorded.

When they removed working video camera systems
from cop cars it wasn't because they were failing to
record evidence on criminals. It wasn't because
the cops wanted their privacy. It was because they
were catching cops saying or doing criminal things, often
which cost the city big law suit payouts.

Any cop who doesn't want to be on video should switch careers now.

Citizens generally feel that we should have a citizens
RIGHT to record our interactions with a government
worker or Law Enforcement Officer.

Sure. Why not. If it's legal in your state. And you inform them you
are doing so.

Why two sets of rules, Greg?

Public official vs. citizens privacy

GState laws that prevent citizens from recording interactions

with government workers in the performance of their duties
generally support a huge array of abuses by government agents.

K Ho hum. This is how you got the little girl back,
K right? Sometime after her upcoming 18th birthday?

G Government agents have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

K Yes, they do when their job requires it.

If a family is naive enough to let them into their home,
the caseworkers job is about violating the privacy of that family,
not about the caseworkers right to say or do nasty
stuff with no recording to prove it in court.

I am spoiled on this one because I am in a state
where only one party needs to know a phone call
is being recorded, and no beep is required.

Caseworkers STILL say the stupidest, most illegal
crap on the phone, and their nasty attitude would
set almost any jury against them.

This is the REAL reason you argue against families
recording caseworkers when they intrude into their home.

Some states REQUIRE that all interviews with the
family be recorded by the caseworker, and amusingly
some have come up with excuses like their recorder
is broken, but it instantly works when they go to
interview the child.

In those states Citizens should also record to back up
what the caseworker records.
In one case where the caseworker wasn't recording a
parent told them they would HELP them conform to
the law by making their own recording!

AGENCIES have no civil rights, and while on duty, their
agents should have NO right against being tape recorded.

I am not an attorney.

Greg, you said:
Then WHY was she seeking HELP?
If she had gotten her kids back why tell others she had
illegally recorded the caseworker?
If she had already gotten her kids back at that time, WHY
would she be going into court and fighting?

I was NOT seeking help!! How many times do I need to say that to
you!!! I was RESPONDING to someone else looking for advice about
recording and stuff like that. Do I need to lift MY response AGAIN
and repost it AGAIN so you can re-read it? GO READ THE THREAD
GREG!!!! You are wrong. I was NOT seeking advice. My 3 sons were
already home. Yes, I was in court but not with cps. It was with my
ex, who had I had shared custody with for my two older children. My
daughter was removed by cps from HIS HOUSE, NOT MINE and was
immediately placed with me, her mother. I was in FAMILY COURT, not
juvenile matters, getting sole custody of her! Gee, you really do
have problems with reading comprehension, don't you. At the time this
was going on and when I made the post about the recording, MY SONS WHO
HAD BEEN IN FOSTER CARE HAD BEEN HOME FOR MONTHS AND MY CASE WAS
CLOSED!!!! Is that clear enough for you now? When I made that post
about the recording I made, it was talking about something I had done,
in the past, while my case was still new and my boys were still in
care. I was just using that as an example in that thread. Go back
and read it Greg. When you are done, I will have your crow ready for
you to eat.

Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Jun 14, 7:23 am, Greegor wrote:
snip
On Jun 13, 11:54 pm Kane wrote

snip

My biggest retort is merely to question their motivation for
sucking up to BUREAUCRACIES, the Child Protection INDUSTRY.
Well, ducky, you just go right ahead and merely question our
motivation.
Mine is to see CPS do their job better. Nothing more. I get not a dime
one way or the other.
I've seen what I love about our system of government as the motive of
others here. The pursuit of their own goals....to have their children
back and keep them. And apparently they so appreciate that wonderful
feeling of having done so, they wish to share how they did it with
others.
Thus they give opinions based on actual WINNING experience, Greg...and
YOU?
Got to give it to Dan though. When it comes to being attacked, Greg,
you can't hold a candle to him.
Or near him. Remember his "Where there's smoke there's fire" comment?

Wasn't that comment referring to you going into the bathroom whenever
your girlfriend's little girl (seven year old) was showering?

And you forcing the little girl to take cold showers as punishment?

And you physically grabbing her and forcing her into the shower?

Seems like alot of smoke to me, Greg.

Tell us about your kids -- why did your wife take your kids and run you
off like a stray dog??

Were they just fed-up with your petty obsessions and narcissistic
delusions - or was it something else??

How many times were you accused of diddlin your own kids?

Were you and krp and Don/Kane/d'geezer all raised in the same trailer?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Jun 14, 8:49 am, Greegor wrote:
Lostintranslation wrote

Hey Greg. Listen. Do I have your attention? Good. To be perfectly
honest with you, whatever you wrote I use to pretty much ignore. I
figured people on the forum would see you as the maniac you are.
However, when you suggested that I bring the recording into court,
play it, get arrested so I can challenge the law using litigation

Do you remember me stating any concerns for the difficulty of that
"litigation"?
Have a link to where your clown posse posted the lifted text
in an attempt to ridicule me?

I don't believe anyone was trying to ridicule you specifically, Greg.
Maybe posting about how dangerous your advice is, yes.

, and mess my family up, you got my attention. When I first read your
response, I was thinking, what the hell is this guy thinking? Why
would I want to get arrested, have a criminal record, go through
criminal court, risk having cps knocking on my door again, etc to
challenge a law I didn't agree with? Why would I think that I would
actually be paid attention to on the wrong side of the tracks, so to
speak? I didn't think that way. I decided to challenge the law by a
letter writing campaign and actually addressing law makers.

Please explain how you claimed to have addressed lawmakers on VOTING
DAY!

The hearing I was at in November was, well, you heard some of the
recording. My interview..or at least a condensed version of it. How
did I fake that, Greg? Please, you are more than welcome to contact
the reporter, as she did identify herself in the recording. Go for
it, please. And that isn't the only thing I have done, Greg. Nor is
it the only thing I will do. Are you going to the Rally?

Change
doesn't happen over night and it surely doesn't change while you are
considered a criminal.

Ghandi, King, Malcolm X, Boston Tea Party, all criminals.

Yep but did change happen overnight? And sorry, but they were very
strong leaders. Currently, I am just a joe-shmoe helping families on
a local level hoping to help change laws locally then help change
those laws on a national level. But, being behind bars, it would
really slow the process down so I prefer to do everything legally.

You say I am a system suck panning around after Dan and Kane. Sorry
but no. I hate to disappoint you. I hate cps. I want to see it
reformed. I want clear cut investigative outlines. I want the system
totally rebuilt with clear cut laws, policies and regulations
presented to families before the agents are let in the door the first
time. There are many changes that I want to see. However, lawmakers/
politicians, etc usually won't listen to someone that sounds like they
are either
A....a raving maniac screaming constitutional this, constitutional that

Did you see the explanation about how states use "preponderance"
rather than "Clear and Convincing" straight out of the Bill Of Rights?

Did you think the BOR was merely a SUGGESTION?

Have you looked at US Santosky v. Kramer?

Here we go. I'm not going to get into a BOR or constitutional ****ing
contest with you, Greg.

Iowa has a lot of caselaw that cites Santosky v Kramer also.

Yeah? Wow, amazing. YOu would think you actually knew how to do
research for the good of everyone but you are self serving.

The use of the preponderance standard is an institutionalized scam
operating within the courts themselves.

And you have done what to change this besides acting like a deranged
person addressing lawmakers?

or B...a parent that may be considered a scourned
person because their children are still in foster care or they are on
the road to TPR.

This presents a gigantic systemic problem for another day.

Yep. And what do you propose we, the people, do for that?



It doesn't give the presenter much leverage to work
with. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute or two. Would you
rather listen to someone who successfully got their children returned
to them and a closed cps case or someone that still hasn't done jack
**** and their child(ren) is in long term foster care? To me, the
answer is quite obvious. Sometimes the only way you can help change
happen is to succeed against the very thing you are trying to change.
And you have to be very active in it. Trust me, I am exhausted at the
end of the day between work, stuff at home, school and helping people
with active cps cases get their children back or helping them prevent
the removal of their children.

What have you done? How many families are you actively helping right
now? How many families have you helped reunify quicker? What
families have you helped prevent a TPR and get their children back to
them? How many families have you helped get their visits increased
and changed to unsupervised and longer? I want to hear from all those
that question people that have actually helped families.

Didn't you just say that you don't attack me, just question me?
Is this what you meant?

No matter. Refusing to toot my own horn doesn't mean I don't have
one!

You don't have a horn, Greg. Maybe a whistle missing the hole to
allow it to whistle but definitely NOT a horn. I'm telling you, if I
was under scrutiny from a group of people, whether in real life or
online, and these people wanted to know what I did to help someone or
families, I would tell them. But, you like playing childish games.
Enjoy yourself.

I have never seen Dan disrupt anything.

I have.

On the one particular forum I
belong to, I use to see him and Bob bicker back and forth because they
would question, and disagree, with one another. One was banned and
very shortly there after, the other. One is back and one isn't.

Yes, Bob is back there.

OH well. That's how life is. Take it or leave it. Do I agree with
everything or everyone on that forum? No. But I'm not there to make
friends or agree with everyone that is a member and/or moderator/admin
there. I'm there to help families and offer support to those that are
feeling the anguish of losing their children or just the initial
investigation. I encourage people to question services on their plans
if they don't agree with them.

Questioning is quite a bit different from getting overburden of
needless services removed.
For us, questioning the caseworkers was problematic.
They refused to answer any questions, no matter how simple, complex,
basic or just plain humane.

This caught up to them just a bit last year when I personally cross
examined an early caseworker about WHY they refused to answer
any questions.

Under oath he tried saying that the questions were irrational.
I called forth three e-mails from that time from the records.
I asked him what was irrational about the e-mail.
After taking about 5 minutes to read one he went into
some sort of speech that in no way answered the question.
I let him blather on till he was done, then I simply asked
him the question again. What is irrational about this e-mail?

His face turned pink and he said weakly "nothing".

I did the same for two other e-mails from the early weeks.

"nothing"

In a courtroom cold enough to turn a person blue, his face was almost
red.

I explain this here to point out that negotiating to strip a service
plan
of the junk services can't work if you have a caseworker acting like
that.

Bull****. OUr caseworker was one of the most beligerant people I have
ever met. He was a moron. He insisted that there was rampant mental
illness issues in our family. He was always trying to diagnose one or
all of us with this or that. He was always trying to place services on
us that we did not need. Once I stopped yelling at him and started to
act rationally and non-attacking, we got alot of work done, progress
made and our kids home...without his so-called labels and services.
It can be done Greg. You just have to approach it the right way.
Obviously, your little horn blowing up there didn't really matter much
because well, Lisa's daughter is still not reunited with her mother.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

This "easy answer" you brought up long ago about
getting a bad service plan repaired is a total farce
if you have caseworkers as malevolent as the ones
we experienced.

No, it's not. You just don't have effective communication skills,
obviously.

snipped because well, it was all hot air again

Greg, I don't attack you. I question you. I put you on the spot. So
what? You do it too. Trust me, you haven't seen me in attack mode,
Greg. I don't believe anyone here on this ng has seen me in attack
mode. I do stoop to your level

You were saying you don't attack? Are you sure you're not Kane in
drag?

Nope, I don't attack. Sorry if my forwardness and lack of sugar
coating makes you uncomfortable and you consider me as an attacker.
And the last time I looked, I am 100% female and I'm pretty sure Kane
wouldn't look as good as I do in a dress.

sometimes and for that, I do
apologize...to myself. I'm better than stooping that low but I do
have my moments of weakness.

Kane and Dan have both seen pictures of my family. In the pictures,
you can see that we are a happy family full of love for one another.

Sock puppets and anonymous people giving references for each other is
funny.

Yes, I find it comical also. I am far from anonymous, Greg. Just
look me up on Google and you will see for yourself. I'm all over the
place.

Care to share your family photos?

Did you miss the recent complaint that a photo that I posted a LINK to
was firemonkey's "proof positive" that I infected her computers with
an
exploit and Trojan from 2004?

Read it and moved on with no public opinion.

She spent $2000 on a computer in 2005 and never set up a virus scan,
firewall or spyware detector on it?

I don't know. I haven't examined her computer.

And the entire computer had to be landfilled because of a PORN DIALER
Trojan!
Forgive me for not being anxious to upload any photos to you!

firedmonkey might try to blame the next Tornado on me! ROFL

Why don't you address her about this? I have nothing to do with it
nor do I have anything to say about it. Thanks.

On Jun 14, 8:59 am, Moderator wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Jun 14, 7:23 am, Greegor wrote:
snip
On Jun 13, 11:54 pm Kane wrote

snip

My biggest retort is merely to question their motivation for
sucking up to BUREAUCRACIES, the Child Protection INDUSTRY.
Well, ducky, you just go right ahead and merely question our
motivation.
Mine is to see CPS do their job better. Nothing more. I get not a dime
one way or the other.
I've seen what I love about our system of government as the motive of
others here. The pursuit of their own goals....to have their children
back and keep them. And apparently they so appreciate that wonderful
feeling of having done so, they wish to share how they did it with
others.
Thus they give opinions based on actual WINNING experience, Greg...and
YOU?
Got to give it to Dan though. When it comes to being attacked, Greg,
you can't hold a candle to him.
Or near him. Remember his "Where there's smoke there's fire" comment?

Wasn't that comment referring to you going into the bathroom whenever
your girlfriend's little girl (seven year old) was showering?

And you forcing the little girl to take cold showers as punishment?

And you physically grabbing her and forcing her into the shower?

Seems like alot of smoke to me, Greg.

Tell us about your kids

Like what?

-- why did your wife take your kids and run you
off like a stray dog??

There is no answer to that question because what you assert never
happened.

Were they just fed-up with your petty obsessions and narcissistic
delusions - or was it something else??

How many times were you accused of diddlin your own kids?

The court appointed evaluator wrote in her decision that there was no
evidence of any kind that I did anything inappropriate.

She did state that my children were "the foundation of my life."

And they still are!

On Jun 14, 8:49 am, Greegor wrote:
Lostintranslation wrote

snip

You say I am a system suck panning around after Dan and Kane. Sorry
but no. I hate to disappoint you. I hate cps. I want to see it
reformed. I want clear cut investigative outlines. I want the system
totally rebuilt with clear cut laws, policies and regulations
presented to families before the agents are let in the door the first
time. There are many changes that I want to see. However, lawmakers/
politicians, etc usually won't listen to someone that sounds like they
are either
A....a raving maniac screaming constitutional this, constitutional that

Did you see the explanation about how states use "preponderance"
rather than "Clear and Convincing" straight out of the Bill Of Rights?

Did you think the BOR was merely a SUGGESTION?

In Family Court decisions are at the Judge's descretion.

IOW it matters little whether the standard is preponderance or clear
and convincing.

Have you looked at US Santosky v. Kramer?

Iowa has a lot of caselaw that cites Santosky v Kramer also.

The use of the preponderance standard is an institutionalized scam
operating within the courts themselves.

As I said, it's of little consequence.

The law can be changed to CAC and the decisions would remain the same.

or B...a parent that may be considered a scourned
person because their children are still in foster care or they are on
the road to TPR.

This presents a gigantic systemic problem for another day.





It doesn't give the presenter much leverage to work
with. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute or two. Would you
rather listen to someone who successfully got their children returned
to them and a closed cps case or someone that still hasn't done jack
**** and their child(ren) is in long term foster care? To me, the
answer is quite obvious. Sometimes the only way you can help change
happen is to succeed against the very thing you are trying to change.
And you have to be very active in it. Trust me, I am exhausted at the
end of the day between work, stuff at home, school and helping people
with active cps cases get their children back or helping them prevent
the removal of their children.

What have you done? How many families are you actively helping right
now? How many families have you helped reunify quicker? What
families have you helped prevent a TPR and get their children back to
them? How many families have you helped get their visits increased
and changed to unsupervised and longer? I want to hear from all those
that question people that have actually helped families.

Didn't you just say that you don't attack me, just question me?
Is this what you meant?

No matter. Refusing to toot my own horn doesn't mean I don't have
one!

What can you "toot your own horn" about regarding CPS and the Courts,
Greg?

I have never seen Dan disrupt anything.

I have.

Exposing terrible advice.

On the one particular forum I
belong to, I use to see him and Bob bicker back and forth because they
would question, and disagree, with one another. One was banned and
very shortly there after, the other. One is back and one isn't.

Yes, Bob is back there.

And his 2005 proposed law for Pennsylvania?

Next year look promising to submit it to the legislature?

Those kids in foster care can wait forever, right, Greg?

Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Jun 14, 8:59 am, Moderator wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Jun 14, 7:23 am, Greegor wrote:
snip
On Jun 13, 11:54 pm Kane wrote
snip
My biggest retort is merely to question their motivation for
sucking up to BUREAUCRACIES, the Child Protection INDUSTRY.
Well, ducky, you just go right ahead and merely question our
motivation.
Mine is to see CPS do their job better. Nothing more. I get not a dime
one way or the other.
I've seen what I love about our system of government as the motive of
others here. The pursuit of their own goals....to have their children
back and keep them. And apparently they so appreciate that wonderful
feeling of having done so, they wish to share how they did it with
others.
Thus they give opinions based on actual WINNING experience, Greg...and
YOU?
Got to give it to Dan though. When it comes to being attacked, Greg,
you can't hold a candle to him.
Or near him. Remember his "Where there's smoke there's fire" comment?
Wasn't that comment referring to you going into the bathroom whenever
your girlfriend's little girl (seven year old) was showering?
And you forcing the little girl to take cold showers as punishment?
And you physically grabbing her and forcing her into the shower?
Seems like alot of smoke to me, Greg.
Tell us about your kids

Like what?

-- why did your wife take your kids and run you
off like a stray dog??

There is no answer to that question because what you assert never
happened.

Were they just fed-up with your petty obsessions and narcissistic
delusions - or was it something else??

How many times were you accused of diddlin your own kids?

The court appointed evaluator wrote in her decision that there was no
evidence of any kind that I did anything inappropriate.

Which brings us full circle to your comment

"Where there's smoke there's fire"



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Jun 14, 9:48 am, Moderator wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Jun 14, 8:59 am, Moderator wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Jun 14, 7:23 am, Greegor wrote:
snip
On Jun 13, 11:54 pm Kane wrote
snip
My biggest retort is merely to question their motivation for
sucking up to BUREAUCRACIES, the Child Protection INDUSTRY.
Well, ducky, you just go right ahead and merely question our
motivation.
Mine is to see CPS do their job better. Nothing more. I get not a dime
one way or the other.
I've seen what I love about our system of government as the motive of
others here. The pursuit of their own goals....to have their children
back and keep them. And apparently they so appreciate that wonderful
feeling of having done so, they wish to share how they did it with
others.
Thus they give opinions based on actual WINNING experience, Greg...and
YOU?
Got to give it to Dan though. When it comes to being attacked, Greg,
you can't hold a candle to him.
Or near him. Remember his "Where there's smoke there's fire" comment?
Wasn't that comment referring to you going into the bathroom whenever
your girlfriend's little girl (seven year old) was showering?
And you forcing the little girl to take cold showers as punishment?
And you physically grabbing her and forcing her into the shower?
Seems like alot of smoke to me, Greg.
Tell us about your kids

Like what?

-- why did your wife take your kids and run you
off like a stray dog??

There is no answer to that question because what you assert never
happened.

Were they just fed-up with your petty obsessions and narcissistic
delusions - or was it something else??

How many times were you accused of diddlin your own kids?

The court appointed evaluator wrote in her decision that there was no
evidence of any kind that I did anything inappropriate.

Which brings us full circle to your comment

"Where there's smoke there's fire"

There was smoke everytime Greg went into the bathroom when the little
(seven year old) girl was showering (supposedly to hand her a towel),
everytime Greg forced the little girl to take a cold shower as
punishment, and everytime Greg physically grabbed the girl and forced
her into the shower. You do know that Greg wasn't related in any way
to the child.

Lots of smoke.

And as I said, in my case the evaluator wrote in her decision that
there was no evidence I did anything inappropriate... no smoke.

Just a baseless accusation.

BTW you have seen Greg admit he surfs myspace looking for
inappropriate postings from children.

On Jun 14, 5:49 am, Greegor wrote:
Lostintranslation wrote

Hey Greg. Listen. Do I have your attention? Good. To be perfectly
honest with you, whatever you wrote I use to pretty much ignore. I
figured people on the forum would see you as the maniac you are.
However, when you suggested that I bring the recording into court,
play it, get arrested so I can challenge the law using litigation

Do you remember me stating any concerns for the difficulty of that
"litigation"?
Have a link to where your clown posse posted the lifted text
in an attempt to ridicule me?

, and mess my family up, you got my attention. When I first read your
response, I was thinking, what the hell is this guy thinking? Why
would I want to get arrested, have a criminal record, go through
criminal court, risk having cps knocking on my door again, etc to
challenge a law I didn't agree with? Why would I think that I would
actually be paid attention to on the wrong side of the tracks, so to
speak? I didn't think that way. I decided to challenge the law by a
letter writing campaign and actually addressing law makers.

Please explain how you claimed to have addressed lawmakers on VOTING
DAY!
She has greg, I read it and so did you and all the others her, you
"forget" things like that alot.
Change
doesn't happen over night and it surely doesn't change while you are
considered a criminal.

Ghandi, King, Malcolm X, Boston Tea Party, all criminals.

And all honorable and noble men, unlike you.

You say I am a system suck panning around after Dan and Kane. Sorry
but no. I hate to disappoint you. I hate cps. I want to see it
reformed. I want clear cut investigative outlines. I want the system
totally rebuilt with clear cut laws, policies and regulations
presented to families before the agents are let in the door the first
time. There are many changes that I want to see. However, lawmakers/
politicians, etc usually won't listen to someone that sounds like they
are either
A....a raving maniac screaming constitutional this, constitutional that

Did you see the explanation about how states use "preponderance"
rather than "Clear and Convincing" straight out of the Bill Of Rights?

Did you think the BOR was merely a SUGGESTION?

Have you looked at US Santosky v. Kramer?

Iowa has a lot of caselaw that cites Santosky v Kramer also.

The use of the preponderance standard is an institutionalized scam
operating within the courts themselves.

or B...a parent that may be considered a scourned
person because their children are still in foster care or they are on
the road to TPR.

This presents a gigantic systemic problem for another day.





It doesn't give the presenter much leverage to work
with. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute or two. Would you
rather listen to someone who successfully got their children returned
to them and a closed cps case or someone that still hasn't done jack
**** and their child(ren) is in long term foster care? To me, the
answer is quite obvious. Sometimes the only way you can help change
happen is to succeed against the very thing you are trying to change.
And you have to be very active in it. Trust me, I am exhausted at the
end of the day between work, stuff at home, school and helping people
with active cps cases get their children back or helping them prevent
the removal of their children.

What have you done? How many families are you actively helping right
now? How many families have you helped reunify quicker? What
families have you helped prevent a TPR and get their children back to
them? How many families have you helped get their visits increased
and changed to unsupervised and longer? I want to hear from all those
that question people that have actually helped families.

Didn't you just say that you don't attack me, just question me?
Is this what you meant?

No matter. Refusing to toot my own horn doesn't mean I don't have
one!

I have never seen Dan disrupt anything.

I have.


I was there greg, Dan was stating his opinion and debating with the
one you mention, it was you and Bob
who were disrupting that forum. And Dan was kicked off because the
onwner of that forum was alot like you, weak and not able to keep up
with Dan. She buckeled under from pressure from the other crazies who
need to emotionalize everything instead of looking at the situation,
gathering facts and developing a winning strategy.


On the one particular forum I
belong to, I use to see him and Bob bicker back and forth because they
would question, and disagree, with one another. One was banned and
very shortly there after, the other. One is back and one isn't.

Yes, Bob is back there.

OH well. That's how life is. Take it or leave it. Do I agree with
everything or everyone on that forum? No. But I'm not there to make
friends or agree with everyone that is a member and/or moderator/admin
there. I'm there to help families and offer support to those that are
feeling the anguish of losing their children or just the initial
investigation. I encourage people to question services on their plans
if they don't agree with them.

Questioning is quite a bit different from getting overburden of
needless services removed.
For us, questioning the caseworkers was problematic.
They refused to answer any questions, no matter how simple, complex,
basic or just plain humane.

This caught up to them just a bit last year when I personally cross
examined an early caseworker about WHY they refused to answer
any questions.

Under oath he tried saying that the questions were irrational.
I called forth three e-mails from that time from the records.
I asked him what was irrational about the e-mail.
After taking about 5 minutes to read one he went into
some sort of speech that in no way answered the question.
I let him blather on till he was done, then I simply asked
him the question again. What is irrational about this e-mail?

His face turned pink and he said weakly "nothing".

I did the same for two other e-mails from the early weeks.

"nothing"

In a courtroom cold enough to turn a person blue, his face was almost
red.

I explain this here to point out that negotiating to strip a service
plan
of the junk services can't work if you have a caseworker acting like
that.

This "easy answer" you brought up long ago about
getting a bad service plan repaired is a total farce
if you have caseworkers as malevolent as the ones
we experienced.

Another one on cross examination brought up a brand
new story about how I had threatened to "roll her up in a rug"
(as in dead body) if she showed up at our door.

She might have gotten away with this lie except that
she claimed I had E-MAILED that threat to her.
Amazingly she could not produce the e-mail.
Even more incredible since this e-mail was never
written up in a Police report, never investigated, and
never mentioned in the quarterly case reviews.

That one caused the Judge to actually roll his eyes.

The tape recording of her on the phone was short
but made the points about both her RUDE and
hostile demeanor on the phone, and the answers
she gave to requests for repair of services and service plan.

Their MSW testified that a Psych Eval would be worthless
and contaminated by even a short "grocery list" of ""collateral
input"".
We think he didn't realize he had stepped ALL OVER his own
agency until it was too late.

We were LAUGHING at that one when we got in the hallway for a break.

I encourage people that when they do
that, to leave their emotions aside and confront their worker calmly
and rationally and talk, rather than attack. It's hard to do. I know
this. But, it does and WILL work if you approach it correctly.

As I already described, our caseworkers were trying some BS "stone
wall" strategy.
And I personally made them eat it in court too.


How wonderful for you get, not so good for Lisa, inspite of all your
"brillant work" she didnt get her daughter back, did she. You couldn't
make that happen.

Greg, I don't attack you. I question you. I put you on the spot. So
what? You do it too. Trust me, you haven't seen me in attack mode,
Greg. I don't believe anyone here on this ng has seen me in attack
mode. I do stoop to your level

You were saying you don't attack? Are you sure you're not Kane in
drag?

sometimes and for that, I do
apologize...to myself. I'm better than stooping that low but I do
have my moments of weakness.

Kane and Dan have both seen pictures of my family. In the pictures,
you can see that we are a happy family full of love for one another.

Sock puppets and anonymous people giving references for each other is
funny.

Care to share your family photos?

Did you miss the recent complaint that a photo that I posted a LINK to
was firemonkey's "proof positive" that I infected her computers with
an
exploit and Trojan from 2004?

She spent $2000 on a computer in 2005 and never set up a virus scan,
firewall or spyware detector on it?

I did, McAfee, it didnt catch it, why I do not know but I am using
different protection now. I do still have the monitor and the printer/
scanner but its not much use with the system I am running now.

And the entire computer had to be landfilled because of a PORN DIALER
Trojan!

A porn dialer? I didn't see that..so you DO know the trojan well, good
for you greg

Forgive me for not being anxious to upload any photos to you!

firedmonkey might try to blame the next Tornado on me! ROFL- Hide quoted text -

oh! there you go with the drama again.
Firemonkey

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 14, 12:06 pm, firemonkey wrote:
On Jun 14, 5:49 am, Greegor wrote: Lostintranslation wrote

Hey Greg. Listen. Do I have your attention? Good. To be perfectly
honest with you, whatever you wrote I use to pretty much ignore. I
figured people on the forum would see you as the maniac you are.
However, when you suggested that I bring the recording into court,
play it, get arrested so I can challenge the law using litigation

Do you remember me stating any concerns for the difficulty of that
"litigation"?
Have a link to where your clown posse posted the lifted text
in an attempt to ridicule me?

, and mess my family up, you got my attention. When I first read your
response, I was thinking, what the hell is this guy thinking? Why
would I want to get arrested, have a criminal record, go through
criminal court, risk having cps knocking on my door again, etc to
challenge a law I didn't agree with? Why would I think that I would
actually be paid attention to on the wrong side of the tracks, so to
speak? I didn't think that way. I decided to challenge the law by a
letter writing campaign and actually addressing law makers.

Please explain how you claimed to have addressed lawmakers on VOTING
DAY!

She has greg, I read it and so did you and all the others her, you
"forget" things like that alot.

Change
doesn't happen over night and it surely doesn't change while you are
considered a criminal.

Ghandi, King, Malcolm X, Boston Tea Party, all criminals.

And all honorable and noble men, unlike you.

You say I am a system suck panning around after Dan and Kane. Sorry
but no. I hate to disappoint you. I hate cps. I want to see it
reformed. I want clear cut investigative outlines. I want the system
totally rebuilt with clear cut laws, policies and regulations
presented to families before the agents are let in the door the first
time. There are many changes that I want to see. However, lawmakers/
politicians, etc usually won't listen to someone that sounds like they
are either
A....a raving maniac screaming constitutional this, constitutional that

Did you see the explanation about how states use "preponderance"
rather than "Clear and Convincing" straight out of the Bill Of Rights?

Did you think the BOR was merely a SUGGESTION?

Have you looked at US Santosky v. Kramer?

Iowa has a lot of caselaw that cites Santosky v Kramer also.

The use of the preponderance standard is an institutionalized scam
operating within the courts themselves.

or B...a parent that may be considered a scourned
person because their children are still in foster care or they are on
the road to TPR.

This presents a gigantic systemic problem for another day.

It doesn't give the presenter much leverage to work
with. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute or two. Would you
rather listen to someone who successfully got their children returned
to them and a closed cps case or someone that still hasn't done jack
**** and their child(ren) is in long term foster care? To me, the
answer is quite obvious. Sometimes the only way you can help change
happen is to succeed against the very thing you are trying to change.
And you have to be very active in it. Trust me, I am exhausted at the
end of the day between work, stuff at home, school and helping people
with active cps cases get their children back or helping them prevent
the removal of their children.

What have you done? How many families are you actively helping right
now? How many families have you helped reunify quicker? What
families have you helped prevent a TPR and get their children back to
them? How many families have you helped get their visits increased
and changed to unsupervised and longer? I want to hear from all those
that question people that have actually helped families.

Didn't you just say that you don't attack me, just question me?
Is this what you meant?

No matter. Refusing to toot my own horn doesn't mean I don't have
one!

I have never seen Dan disrupt anything.

I have.

I was there greg, Dan was stating his opinion and debating with the
one you mention, it was you and Bob
who were disrupting that forum. And Dan was kicked off because the
onwner of that forum was alot like you, weak and not able to keep up
with Dan. She buckeled under from pressure from the other crazies who
need to emotionalize everything instead of looking at the situation,
gathering facts and developing a winning strategy.

Well said.

I especially enjoy Greg calling what I advise people to do "winning by
surrender" when the family he was referring to was reunited at the
earliest possible court date, much to the surprise and chagrin of CPS.

Of course the parents could have used the "Hanson approach" and waited
till after their children were eighteen years old to see them again.

Dan

What about your LIE that you were not kicked out of that group Dan?
First you tried complete denial and asking for proof, then when the
managers confirmed that you were kicked out, you began arguing
with them again about WHY you were.

Your groupies all KNEW that you were telling a LIE when
you denied being kicked out of that group.

They all supported you using the Oliver Sutton deception as well.

How dramatic is that?