The Death Threat Problem - And resolution.

On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
I have found that most anti-spanking zealotS are mentally unstable. ;-)

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Huh? I thought you said she's a sock puppet of mine. Were you just lying
then? ;-)

And since Greegor mentioned me below, do you think I'm one of the
mentally unstable zealots, or could I be a stable one, do you think?

You need to see a shrink! ;-)

So far I haven't indulged in any fantasies or delusions that spanking
isn't hitting and hitting isn't assault.

Does that include the police? ;-)

I find it fascinating that millions of people do entertain such
delusions though, don't you?

Hahaha! The whole world must be crazy.

Look up a definition of "assault." In most places you don't even have to
HIT someone, just touch them under certain conditions. The only
difference between spanking a child and assaulting an adult is in their
age difference.

So did you assault your kid?

What is it about a child that makes him legally assaultable I wonder?

Hahaha! Ask LaVonne!

My own opinion is mass delusions, that are self promoting, and that is
why you all are so much in agreement. Well, except for what "spanking"
actually is, even legally.

Hahaha!

Yes, mass insanity is a curious phenomena, and only humans seem to be
able to do it.

Hahaha!

AFfromDreamLand

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
I have found that most anti-spanking zealotS are mentally unstable. ;-)
Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Huh?

What is your question?

I thought you said she's a sock puppet of mine. Were you just lying
then? ;-)

Oh, that's neither a real question or an answer. Notice?

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

And since Greegor mentioned me below, do you think I'm one of the
mentally unstable zealots, or could I be a stable one, do you think?

You need to see a shrink! ;-)

Why do you say that? I have no desire to assault children and twist my
brain around and misuse language and call it 'spanking.'

So far I haven't indulged in any fantasies or delusions that spanking
isn't hitting and hitting isn't assault.

Does that include the police? ;-)

Yes, I don't have any delusions about hitting the police either.

I find it fascinating that millions of people do entertain such
delusions though, don't you?

Hahaha! The whole world must be crazy.

Actually there are some pretty strong arguments for that. War is one.

Hitting children and claiming it's for love of them, another.

I wonder if there could be a connection? After all...I love my wife and
I don't hit her out of love for her. I think that would be crazy and if
the law allowed me to do it it might just make her kind of crazy too.

Look up a definition of "assault." In most places you don't even have to
HIT someone, just touch them under certain conditions. The only
difference between spanking a child and assaulting an adult is in their
age difference.

So did you assault your kid?

Absolutely. Care to post what I did, or are you all insinuation?

In fact I posted that what I did was wrong.

Or didn't you want people to know about my posting that?

The circumstances were such that I was not justified in smacking his
butt through the heavy quilt and blankets, thus by my standards, yes, it
was an assault.

It was legal, of course, which is I think just as sad.

What is it about a child that makes him legally assaultable I wonder?

Hahaha! Ask LaVonne!

You seem to be the one here. Why don't you try for an answer? Could it
be you are still smarting from The Question?

My own opinion is mass delusions, that are self promoting, and that is
why you all are so much in agreement. Well, except for what "spanking"
actually is, even legally.

Hahaha!

There's nothing funny about so many people doing so much harm to so many
children, and then as adults passing it on to their children.

You may not think that insane, but I do.

Yes, mass insanity is a curious phenomena, and only humans seem to be
able to do it.

Hahaha!

I take it you are laughing at me. Why?

AFfromDreamLand

Hahahahaha!

0:-



--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

"0:-" wrote:
wrote:
"0:-" wrote:
some ****.
Har har har, you are a **** puke. We got our kids back thanks in part
to your family hate posts printed and submitted! Thank You barf face.
Lil

Well, you certainly told ME, by golly.

Now if we could just figure out what you told me.
Does "**** You" ring any bells? Thanks for helping us get our kids back,
you are one lame asshole. Pat yourself on the back, li]

Kane

AFfromDreamLand

On 3 Apr 2006, Greegor wrote:

Kane, You are a mental case.

On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
I have found that most anti-spanking zealotS are mentally unstable. ;-)
Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Huh?

What is your question?

What is the answer? ;-)

I thought you said she's a sock puppet of mine. Were you just lying
then? ;-)

Oh, that's neither a real question or an answer. Notice?

So you are denying that your accusation that she was a my "sock puppet"?
Shall I looked in the archives for that one too? ;-)

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Now, why would I want to do that? ;-)

And since Greegor mentioned me below, do you think I'm one of the
mentally unstable zealots, or could I be a stable one, do you think?

You need to see a shrink! ;-)

Why do you say that? I have no desire to assault children and twist my
brain around and misuse language and call it 'spanking.'

Hihihi! No? You just think that it is ok to call other women
"smelly-****"! ;-)

So far I haven't indulged in any fantasies or delusions that spanking
isn't hitting and hitting isn't assault.

Does that include the police? ;-)

Yes, I don't have any delusions about hitting the police either.

Hahaha! Try it! They do carry batons, you know. And they can also
taser a SIX-YEAR old. I guess that is not assault in your book. :-(

I find it fascinating that millions of people do entertain such
delusions though, don't you?

Hahaha! The whole world must be crazy.

Actually there are some pretty strong arguments for that. War is one.

Huh? So you think that it is "crazy" for our forefathers to go to war
with England for our independence? Was it "crazy" for us to go to war
with Hitler in WWII too?

Hitting children and claiming it's for love of them, another.

Spanking, when done appropriately, YES! Tasering a SIX-YEAR old, however,
is crazy! ;-)

I wonder if there could be a connection? After all...I love my wife and
I don't hit her out of love for her. I think that would be crazy and if
the law allowed me to do it it might just make her kind of crazy too.

Hahaha! I just the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS, comparing the
relationship between wife/husband with parents/children. Hey Kane, do
you **** your wife? ;-)

Look up a definition of "assault." In most places you don't even have to
HIT someone, just touch them under certain conditions. The only
difference between spanking a child and assaulting an adult is in their
age difference.

So did you assault your kid?

Absolutely. Care to post what I did, or are you all insinuation?

Hahaha! So you should go to the police and turn yourself in!

In fact I posted that what I did was wrong.

Or didn't you want people to know about my posting that?

Actually, you are the one that didn't want people to know about it.
How about reposting it for everyone to see?

The circumstances were such that I was not justified in smacking his
butt through the heavy quilt and blankets, thus by my standards, yes, it
was an assault.

It was legal, of course, which is I think just as sad.

So did you know where "the line" is? ;-)

What is it about a child that makes him legally assaultable I wonder?

Hahaha! Ask LaVonne!

You seem to be the one here. Why don't you try for an answer? Could it
be you are still smarting from The Question?

Already answered, "numerous times"! ;-)

My own opinion is mass delusions, that are self promoting, and that is
why you all are so much in agreement. Well, except for what "spanking"
actually is, even legally.

Hahaha!

There's nothing funny about so many people doing so much harm to so many
children, and then as adults passing it on to their children.

You may not think that insane, but I do.

Hahaha! But you are not the emperor so I CARE LESS!

Yes, mass insanity is a curious phenomena, and only humans seem to be
able to do it.

Hahaha!

I take it you are laughing at me. Why?

Because you are funny! ;-)

AFfromDreamLand

Hahahahaha!

Hihihi!

AFfromDreamLand

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
I have found that most anti-spanking zealotS are mentally unstable. ;-)
Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Huh?
What is your question?

What is the answer? ;-)

What is your question?

I thought you said she's a sock puppet of mine. Were you just lying
then? ;-)
Oh, that's neither a real question or an answer. Notice?

So you are denying that your accusation that she was a my "sock puppet"?

I asked you a question. That's neither denial or agreement.

Shall I looked in the archives for that one too? ;-)

For my question?

And no, I wasn't lying then, nor was I "just lying," then. I was
challenging her to prove she wasn't you.

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Now, why would I want to do that? ;-)

I've no idea. Does that mean "no," or "yes?"

And the question directly if you can:

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

And since Greegor mentioned me below, do you think I'm one of the
mentally unstable zealots, or could I be a stable one, do you think?

You need to see a shrink! ;-)
Why do you say that? I have no desire to assault children and twist my
brain around and misuse language and call it 'spanking.'

Hihihi! No? You just think that it is ok to call other women
"smelly-****"! ;-)

Nope. Not the plural, "women."

Only Fern and those that would, like her, post vicious and dangerous
encouragement of beating of children by a gang of church members.

You've never answered my question why you, someone that appears
dedicated to defining spanking and beating as separate and the latter
unacceptable, did not intervene and protest when she claimed those
beatings were a protected parental right and the state should butt out.

So far I haven't indulged in any fantasies or delusions that spanking
isn't hitting and hitting isn't assault.

Does that include the police? ;-)
Yes, I don't have any delusions about hitting the police either.

Hahaha! Try it!

Are you presuming my meaning for me?

They do carry batons, you know. And they can also
taser a SIX-YEAR old. I guess that is not assault in your book. :-(

No, it was not assault. Anyone reading the article that was not stupid
like you are would have seen it was in fact lifesaving. He was a split
second from opening a vein or artery with that broken glass he was saw
his leg with. Glass he had already cut himself with.

I see now why you did not protest Ferns defense of beatings. YOU are
defending allowing a child to take lethal self destructive actions.

I find it fascinating that millions of people do entertain such
delusions though, don't you?

Hahaha! The whole world must be crazy.
Actually there are some pretty strong arguments for that. War is one.

Huh? So you think that it is "crazy" for our forefathers to go to war
with England for our independence?

Don't assume that all war is crazy. I made no such claim.

If I said shoes pinch your feet, would you assume I mean all shoes would?

Was it "crazy" for us to go to war
with Hitler in WWII too?

See above, stupid child.

Hitting children and claiming it's for love of them, another.

Spanking, when done appropriately, YES! Tasering a SIX-YEAR old, however,
is crazy! ;-)

I would hope they would not consider spanking him in the middle of using
a piece of glass to slice himself.

I doubt even done "appropriately" (what ever that is....you haven't
answered The Question yet, Doan) it would have helped. The taser stopped
him immediately. Neither he or anyone else was hurt, and likely he was
saved from grave injury or even death.

Have you not conscience or morals at all...wait, how naive of me to ask.


I wonder if there could be a connection? After all...I love my wife and
I don't hit her out of love for her. I think that would be crazy and if
the law allowed me to do it it might just make her kind of crazy too.

Hahaha! I just the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS, comparing the
relationship between wife/husband with parents/children. Hey Kane, do
you **** your wife? ;-)

What does "I just the logic..." mean?

How does having sex with my wife change what I do with my children?

It legal for us to have sex together. It's not legal to hit here.

At present it's not legal for an adult to have sex with a child.

Nor would you see me advocating a law that changes that.

I do advocate for a law that provides the same protection to children
that my wife enjoys....no hitting.

Look up a definition of "assault." In most places you don't even have to
HIT someone, just touch them under certain conditions. The only
difference between spanking a child and assaulting an adult is in their
age difference.

So did you assault your kid?
Absolutely. Care to post what I did, or are you all insinuation?

Hahaha! So you should go to the police and turn yourself in!

Why would I? What would they charge me with, since it was obviously legal?

And when we pass a law it cannot be retroactive. That is against our
supreme law. The Constitution.

In fact I posted that what I did was wrong.

Or didn't you want people to know about my posting that?

Actually, you are the one that didn't want people to know about it.
How about reposting it for everyone to see?

I posted it originally. How could that, you logical little monkey, be
evidence I didn't want anyone to SEE it?

Feel free to repost it if you wish. It's an excellent example of a
parent reforming himself from what a flawed society taught him.

We'll assume, of course, since you are a known and confirmed liar, that
you will post it cut and tailored to reflect the view YOU want to
create, rather than the full post in it's entirety so that readers can
see the truth.

The circumstances were such that I was not justified in smacking his
butt through the heavy quilt and blankets, thus by my standards, yes, it
was an assault.

It was legal, of course, which is I think just as sad.

So did you know where "the line" is? ;-)

Nope. That should be obvious.

When did I ever claim I did? In fact, I asked The Question, which I
later answered for you and all, to point out that it's impossible to
establish the line. No one would agree, and there are too many
uncontrolled and uncontrollable variables do determine if injury would
or would not occur.

What is it about a child that makes him legally assaultable I wonder?

Hahaha! Ask LaVonne!
You seem to be the one here. Why don't you try for an answer? Could it
be you are still smarting from The Question?

Already answered, "numerous times"! ;-)

Care to prove that by repeating a few?

And do not fudge The Question as asked, or you'll be seen yet again for
a liar.

You can't use 'someone else determines it." That's been thoroughly
rebutted. YOU have to answer for YOURSELF.

How do YOU determine the line. I didn't ask anyone else, and certainly
not the law because they have clear they do not know where it is and
deal only with those that have crossed it.

My own opinion is mass delusions, that are self promoting, and that is
why you all are so much in agreement. Well, except for what "spanking"
actually is, even legally.

Hahaha!
There's nothing funny about so many people doing so much harm to so many
children, and then as adults passing it on to their children.

You may not think that insane, but I do.

Hahaha! But you are not the emperor so I CARE LESS!

About children, obviously. And less obvious, but importantly, you care
less about humanity.

Yes, mass insanity is a curious phenomena, and only humans seem to be
able to do it.

Hahaha!
I take it you are laughing at me. Why?

Because you are funny! ;-)

You'd not think so if you met me.

AFfromDreamLand
Hahahahaha!

Hihihi!

AFfromDreamLand

DDTfrominsanity.

0:-




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

wrote:
"0:-" wrote:
wrote:
"0:-" wrote:
some ****.
Har har har, you are a **** puke. We got our kids back thanks in part
to your family hate posts printed and submitted! Thank You barf face.
Lil
Well, you certainly told ME, by golly.

Now if we could just figure out what you told me.
Does "**** You" ring any bells?

Sure. It describes you nicely.

Thanks for helping us get our kids back,
you are one lame asshole.

Took a hit on my shin a couple of months back dropping some large
conifers in my woodlot. 80 to 90 footers, over 24inches at the base. I
turned to move away from one about to fall, and another log had rolled
behind me. Smacked me a good one, because a person moves smartly when
getting away from the tree they are falling.

My lower leg still hurts and is healing. But nothing happened to my
asshole, as you weren't even there.

I don't believe I did help you getting your kids back, and you haven't
indicated how I did this bit of magic, since I do not know the details
of your case, and have made no suggestions about it.

Was there something specific you were thinking of?

Pat yourself on the back, li]

What's a "li]?"

If I helped you, really, and I knew how, I might do that, but I doubt
anything I wrote here helped you all that much. Most everything I post
on the subject is well proven by others to have worked and still work.

You have a nice day nursing your rage. You could work that up to
something really stupid if you make the effort.

0:-


Kane

AFfromDreamLand

On 3 Apr 2006, Greegor wrote:

Kane, You are a mental case.




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
I have found that most anti-spanking zealotS are mentally unstable. ;-)
Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Huh?
What is your question?

What is the answer? ;-)

What is your question?

What is the answer? ;-)

I thought you said she's a sock puppet of mine. Were you just lying
then? ;-)
Oh, that's neither a real question or an answer. Notice?

So you are denying that your accusation that she was a my "sock puppet"?

I asked you a question. That's neither denial or agreement.

Shall I looked in the archives for that one too? ;-)

For my question?

No. For your accusation!

And no, I wasn't lying then, nor was I "just lying," then. I was
challenging her to prove she wasn't you.

You wanted her to prove a NEGATIVE??? Logic and the anti-spanking
zealotS... ;-)

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot,
and subject to that
assessment by you?

Now, why would I want to do that? ;-)

I've no idea. Does that mean "no," or "yes?"

Hihihi! Maybe.

And the question directly if you can:

Huh? Speak English, will you?

Would you say that becca is an anti-spanking zealot, and subject to that
assessment by you?

Now, why would I want to do that?

And since Greegor mentioned me below, do you think I'm one of the
mentally unstable zealots, or could I be a stable one, do you think?

You need to see a shrink! ;-)
Why do you say that? I have no desire to assault children and twist my
brain around and misuse language and call it 'spanking.'

Hihihi! No? You just think that it is ok to call other women
"smelly-****"! ;-)

Nope. Not the plural, "women."

Only Fern and those that would, like her, post vicious and dangerous
encouragement of beating of children by a gang of church members.

And that is not plural??? ;-)

You've never answered my question why you, someone that appears
dedicated to defining spanking and beating as separate and the latter
unacceptable, did not intervene and protest when she claimed those
beatings were a protected parental right and the state should butt out.

Huh? Why would I want to do that? Just to please you? ;-)

So far I haven't indulged in any fantasies or delusions that spanking
isn't hitting and hitting isn't assault.

Does that include the police? ;-)
Yes, I don't have any delusions about hitting the police either.

Hahaha! Try it!

Are you presuming my meaning for me?

Are you?

They do carry batons, you know. And they can also
taser a SIX-YEAR old. I guess that is not assault in your book. :-(

No, it was not assault. Anyone reading the article that was not stupid
like you are would have seen it was in fact lifesaving. He was a split
second from opening a vein or artery with that broken glass he was saw
his leg with. Glass he had already cut himself with.

Hahaha! You are STUPID!

I see now why you did not protest Ferns defense of beatings. YOU are
defending allowing a child to take lethal self destructive actions.

Hahaha! So parents now should use a taser instead?

I find it fascinating that millions of people do entertain such
delusions though, don't you?

Hahaha! The whole world must be crazy.
Actually there are some pretty strong arguments for that. War is one.

Huh? So you think that it is "crazy" for our forefathers to go to war
with England for our independence?

Don't assume that all war is crazy. I made no such claim.

Hihihi! "War is one"! Or are you mincing words now?

If I said shoes pinch your feet, would you assume I mean all shoes would?

Yup! That's how logic works, stupid.

Was it "crazy" for us to go to war
with Hitler in WWII too?

See above, stupid child.

See above, stupid "never-spanked" boy! ;-)

Hitting children and claiming it's for love of them, another.

Spanking, when done appropriately, YES! Tasering a SIX-YEAR old, however,
is crazy! ;-)

I would hope they would not consider spanking him in the middle of using
a piece of glass to slice himself.

So they should use a taser instead???

I doubt even done "appropriately" (what ever that is....you haven't
answered The Question yet, Doan) it would have helped. The taser stopped
him immediately. Neither he or anyone else was hurt, and likely he was
saved from grave injury or even death.

Hahaha! So every parents should have a taser???

Have you not conscience or morals at all...wait, how naive of me to ask.

Have you looked in the mirror? ;-)


I wonder if there could be a connection? After all...I love my wife and
I don't hit her out of love for her. I think that would be crazy and if
the law allowed me to do it it might just make her kind of crazy too.

Hahaha! I just the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS, comparing the
relationship between wife/husband with parents/children. Hey Kane, do
you **** your wife? ;-)

What does "I just the logic..." mean?

Typo. Should have read "I just see...".

How does having sex with my wife change what I do with my children?

Exactly my point! Your relationship with your wife is different than
your relationship with your children. GOT IT?

It legal for us to have sex together. It's not legal to hit here.

And it's legal to spank your kid, not your wife, STUPID!

At present it's not legal for an adult to have sex with a child.

That's my point, STUPID!

Nor would you see me advocating a law that changes that.

You are the one that advocating a law change, not I!

I do advocate for a law that provides the same protection to children
that my wife enjoys....no hitting.

Hahaha! You wife can vote too! And the police can still hit your wife, in
some cases, with a baton! Is that not ""hitting"?

Look up a definition of "assault." In most places you don't even have to
HIT someone, just touch them under certain conditions. The only
difference between spanking a child and assaulting an adult is in their
age difference.

So did you assault your kid?
Absolutely. Care to post what I did, or are you all insinuation?

Hahaha! So you should go to the police and turn yourself in!

Why would I? What would they charge me with, since it was obviously legal?

Hihihi! Assault as you called it. Since when is "assault" legal?

And when we pass a law it cannot be retroactive. That is against our
supreme law. The Constitution.

Hahaha! That's right!

In fact I posted that what I did was wrong.

Or didn't you want people to know about my posting that?

Actually, you are the one that didn't want people to know about it.
How about reposting it for everyone to see?

I posted it originally. How could that, you logical little monkey, be
evidence I didn't want anyone to SEE it?

And yet I have the power to prevent the people from seeing and knowing
about it! Oh, the logic of an anti-spanking zealotS! ;-)

Feel free to repost it if you wish. It's an excellent example of a
parent reforming himself from what a flawed society taught him.

I thought you said I don't want people to know about it. ;-)

We'll assume, of course, since you are a known and confirmed liar, that
you will post it cut and tailored to reflect the view YOU want to
create, rather than the full post in it's entirety so that readers can
see the truth.

Hahaha! You are the proven liar here. I didn't post it, I gave you a
chance to repost it! You REFUSED because you know that would either show
how stupid you are or , once again. prove what a stupid liar you are!

The circumstances were such that I was not justified in smacking his
butt through the heavy quilt and blankets, thus by my standards, yes, it
was an assault.

It was legal, of course, which is I think just as sad.

So did you know where "the line" is? ;-)

Nope. That should be obvious.

So you crossed over it?

When did I ever claim I did? In fact, I asked The Question, which I
later answered for you and all, to point out that it's impossible to
establish the line. No one would agree, and there are too many
uncontrolled and uncontrollable variables do determine if injury would
or would not occur.

So did any injury occur?

What is it about a child that makes him legally assaultable I wonder?

Hahaha! Ask LaVonne!
You seem to be the one here. Why don't you try for an answer? Could it
be you are still smarting from The Question?

Already answered, "numerous times"! ;-)

Care to prove that by repeating a few?

It's in the "archives"!

And do not fudge The Question as asked, or you'll be seen yet again for
a liar.

You are the liar, not me! ;-)

You can't use 'someone else determines it." That's been thoroughly
rebutted. YOU have to answer for YOURSELF.

Hahaha! Reasonable person standard, I have always stated so.

How do YOU determine the line. I didn't ask anyone else, and certainly
not the law because they have clear they do not know where it is and
deal only with those that have crossed it.

If theyey don't know the line it then how do they know it has been
crossed, STUPID?

My own opinion is mass delusions, that are self promoting, and that is
why you all are so much in agreement. Well, except for what "spanking"
actually is, even legally.

Hahaha!
There's nothing funny about so many people doing so much harm to so many
children, and then as adults passing it on to their children.

You may not think that insane, but I do.

Hahaha! But you are not the emperor so I CARE LESS!

About children, obviously. And less obvious, but importantly, you care
less about humanity.

NO. About you, STUPID! ;-)

Yes, mass insanity is a curious phenomena, and only humans seem to be
able to do it.

Hahaha!
I take it you are laughing at me. Why?

Because you are funny! ;-)

You'd not think so if you met me.

Is that a threat? I would probably think you are ugly too! ;-)

AFfromDreamLand
Hahahahaha!

Hihihi!

AFfromDreamLand

DDTfrominsanity.

Hihihi! Anne Frank from Germany!

AF

Greegor wrote:
Kane, In your original post that you say
your attorney reviewed, you made comments
about having driven off some people.

Who, exactly?

None of your business.

Who made death threats?

If you knew how to read, and weren't biased, and would make a stand
against the use of lethal force you might figure it out all by your
little helpless impotent self.

The issue isn't what's threatened, Greg, it's what happens that will
link those that threatened to an investigation, and their cohorts.

So pray, child, pray me and mine stays safe forever.

toothy smile

Kane

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

"0:-" wrote:
Greegor wrote:
Kane, In your original post that you say
your attorney reviewed, you made comments
about having driven off some people.

Who, exactly?

None of your business.

Who made death threats?

If you knew how to read, and weren't biased, and would make a stand
against the use of lethal force you might figure it out all by your
little helpless impotent self.

The issue isn't what's threatened, Greg, it's what happens that will
link those that threatened to an investigation, and their cohorts.

So pray, child, pray me and mine stays safe forever.

toothy smile
ha ha har what a Dildo. You probably don't have any teeth and your
neighbors is making a good **** of your wife while you whittle away here,
Har har har.
Prickish one rules, the good girl.
Li]

Greegor wrote:
Kane,
If there is a real issue, then send me a letter
from your attorney, or at least contact
information for your attorney.

If you can't pony up some beef when it comes
to these supposed THREATS AGAINST YOU,
then quit browbeating everybody with your a-priori
quasi-legalese mumbo jumbo.

You're the same MORON who tried to
say that identifying you was a criminal threat.

Nope, I said if anything happened. You keep missing that.

Why?

You nervous about some of your buddies?

You also seem to think that names and addresses
posted all over the WORLD WIDE WEB for promotion
purposes can still be "private information".

Nope. Never said that and you know it. YOU linked someones plastered
private information under a heading of them being CPS CASEWORKERS.

Do you still not get it?

Next you'll be saying that the entire PHONE BOOK
is classified top secret because it's DANGEROUS!

Why would I say that?

You might notice that you cannot find a single white page entry of
persons that includes they work for CPS.

NOW do you get the picture?

Out in Oregon a legislator tried that ****. Wanted all CPS workers home
phone and addresses posted publicly.

He seemed to take unkindly to having them picket his house and keep
planting signs that he lived there.

Seems like the shoe on the other foot is too hot to wear.

You still don't get it don't you?

In fact, that very legislator, after he was voted out of office posted
to this ng a few times.

Kind of a thrill, eh?

Kane

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin