If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Bobb: If you haven't figured out that "Pop" (Tom) is one of
LaVonne's associates from the U of MN, I thought I should let you know. The ignorant puke sent one to me in my e-mail either deliberately or accidentally, and the backtrace shows a UMN server. It's all about artificially propping up somebody who by themself had long since risen to the level of their own incompetence. It's a troll the size of LaVonne's rear end. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Greegor" wrote in message
oups.com... Bobb: If you haven't figured out that "Pop" (Tom) is one of LaVonne's associates from the U of MN, I thought I should let you know. The ignorant puke sent one to me in my e-mail either deliberately or accidentally, and the backtrace shows a UMN server. It's all about artificially propping up somebody who by themself had long since risen to the level of their own incompetence. It's a troll the size of LaVonne's rear end. LOL! You'd better figure out how to read headers again, pukey! You've got that all wrong and I'm far, far from Mn. That's OK though, I wouldn't expect you to have any intelligence re figuring out who's who. Whoever sent to your own mailserver though,apparently upset you, and for that, I thank them; you need to be upset, and a lot more. You're in kiddieland; you need a life based on growing up and reality. Did baby make a boom-boom did he? Have fun, Pop |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Greegor wrote: Bobb: If you haven't figured out that "Pop" (Tom) is one of LaVonne's associates from the U of MN, I thought I should let you know. Gosh, I thought you claimed he was my sock? Getting your signals crossed again? The ignorant puke OH, come on, can't you at least be original in your name calling? I used that just a couple of days ago. R R R R sent one to me in my e-mail either deliberately or accidentally, and the backtrace shows a UMN server. Oh dear. Let me suggest you do something you so rarely indulge in. It's called googling. Try the word, without the brackets, just as I've keyed it, [ +proxie ] And my bet is someone was playing with your head and sending under Pop's header, spoofed, of course. It's all about artificially propping up somebody who by themself had long since risen to the level of their own incompetence. All that's left for you, and all that's ever been available to you, greegor, in this arena of debate, is the ad hom. You rarely if ever post evidence of any kind to support your claims. You just did it again. It's a troll the size of LaVonne's rear end. "It's" is you and bobber, greegor. Other than your continued presence here, you and he fit the description of a trolls to a tee. Most run after a bit of fun. You lie, provoke, lie some more, babble, rant, and generally make a childish fool of yourself, and NEVER debate an issue, while pretending that others do not and have not debated. And screaming that you've been unfaired against, greegor, is not debate. Even bobber the swift does better than that, sometimes. So, you ready to debate the serious issue of life threating force being used by parents to take or keep their children from state custody? You pick the side you wish to defend, pro or con, and I'll happily take the other. Ready, set, go! 0:- |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
He posts via a service called USADATANET.NET.
Who they use as a proxie is unknown, but could be anyone -- in the moment. In fact one of the issue you apparently know nothing about is that of course, many universities, and colleges contract for ISP service....and can be anyone and they can, when loaded up, route traffic to any available node. Could even be USADATANET.NET for all I know. YOU could research. That IS the point of "The InterNET." that traffic flows over the most direct least heavily trafficed sources of the moment. Otherwise, YOUR crappola would clog the system. What DO you do for a living? Sort cans and bottles? Now give us one more of your enlightening "expose's" of posters. I need to be reminded from time to time, being naive in the extreme when it comes to trusting that people are always doing their best, of what an idiot fool you are. 0:- |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Pop" wrote in message ... ... Cutting edge? Hahahah.. unproven RX to be trialed on children of the state. Hey, if it works... we'll give to bio families. If not... we'll look around and do more testing. === You don't know what cutting edge means, do you? Hhahah. === Maybe you could save the children by volunteering yourelf; I'm sure they wouldn't notice you're not a child! Hahahah ... Cutting edge is reserved for tested and proven results. If you didn't notice these were trials... unproven results. Pop.. there goes you bubble. bobb |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
bobb wrote: "Pop" wrote in message ... ... Cutting edge? Hahahah.. unproven RX to be trialed on children of the state. Hey, if it works... we'll give to bio families. If not... we'll look around and do more testing. === You don't know what cutting edge means, do you? Hhahah. === Maybe you could save the children by volunteering yourelf; I'm sure they wouldn't notice you're not a child! Hahahah ... Cutting edge is reserved for tested and proven results. If you didn't notice these were trials... unproven results. Pop.. there goes you bubble. Apparently you still haven't read the article. These were not first time in the field unproven drugs. They obviously had been tested before. And 90% of the test subjects were volunteered by their own parents. I've posted this before, and instead of debating the point or points made, you, like douggie boy, just keep repeating yourself. Debate the points made. I'll post them again for you: "The research funded by the National Institutes of Health spanned the country. It was most widespread in the 1990s as foster care agencies sought treatments for their HIV-infected children that weren't yet available in the marketplace. The practice ensured that foster children-- mostly poor or minority-- received care from world-class researchers at government expense, slowing their rate of death and extending their lives. But it also exposed a vulnerable population to the risks of medical research and drugs that were known to have serious side effects in adults and for which the safety for children was unknown." And; "The government provided special protections for young wards in 1983. They required researchers and their oversight boards to appoint independent advocates for any foster child enrolled in a narrow class of studies that involved greater than minimal risk and lacked the promise of direct benefit. Some foster agencies required the protection regardless of risks and benefits." And; "Officials estimated that 5 percent to 10 percent of the 13,878 children enrolled in pediatric AIDS studies funded by NIH since the late 1980s were in foster care. More than two dozen Illinois foster children remain in studies today." And; "Researchers typically secured permission to enroll foster children through city or state agencies. And they frequently exempted themselves from appointing advocates by concluding the research carried minimal risk and the child would directly benefit because the drugs had already been tried in adults." And; "Those who made the decisions say the research gave foster kids access to drugs they otherwise couldn't get. And they say they protected the children's interest by carefully explaining risks and benefits to state guardians, foster parents and the children themselves." Notice these drugs had been tested. They don't test on humans until they test out on animals, usually primates at the last step before humans. Humans then with AIDS are solicited, and tested. There is a large prison population with AIDS and little to lose, and a great deal to contribute to society (unlike their lives up to that time). Before children are tested, adults are tested. They use various means to test the safety for children (and I've posted THIS before as well): they overdose based on bodyweight to simulate and even max out in ratio to a child's body weight and more delicate immune system. So, bobber, where is this testing directly on children, and claiming these are untested drugs coming from? Just your ever fertile imagination? The entire issue at this point is becoming muddied by sensationalist reporting. Claims are being made with no supporting evidence. We aren't going to settle this here, and you'd be better advised instead of ranting and babbling as usual, to spend some time continuing to search on the issue from different sources, and as time passes, see what surfaces. The problem is, just like your mentor, any NEW news that changes to the old news is simply ignored and the OLD news continues to be babbled by you because it fits your agenda. You've done it on other issues before. Smoking, seatbelts, sexual abuse trauma. Do you, at this point in time, have proof that these drugs had not been tested before using them on children? In all the sensationalist posting by the media, and those quoting the media, I notice a careful avoidance to say that, and the occasional mention there WERE, in fact, tested drugs. Now let me tell you my personal view...outside of the bounds of objective fact finding (which as yet has not been done). I do not approve of foster children, orphaned or not (and most were, I've learned recently) being used in medical testing. On the other hand, if there is a high success rate in other children the tests have been performed on, then I might be persuaded otherwise. Each issue is special in itself, and needs careful consideration, not your blind attempts to find something, anything at all, wrong with government. That is how very terrible mistakes are made. We've seen it in the past. You make assumptions based on your limited understanding, and run when facts are presented that either show you to be wrong, or that the answers aren't all in sufficiently to make such a judgement call. bobb Are you ever going to move forward in your development from a mental and emotional 9 year old? By the way, an indepent review of this incident is underway. Keep you eyes peeled. And it's NOT the finger pointing media. Yah know what finger pointing PROVES, bobber? That you know how to point your finger. 0:- |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
.... Cutting edge? Hahahah.. unproven RX to be trialed on children of the state. Hey, if it works... we'll give to bio families. If not... we'll look around and do more testing. === You don't know what cutting edge means, do you? Hhahah. === === Just as I thought: You don't know, you just think you know. You are wrong. === Maybe you could save the children by volunteering yourelf; I'm sure they wouldn't notice you're not a child! Hahahah ... Cutting edge is reserved for tested and proven results. If you didn't notice these were trials... unproven results. === === Try again. Pop.. there goes you bubble. === === Not mine, but should it happen, no big deal; you see, you think I care about what you think or feel, and I don't. I just want the feces to be dumped into the toilet where it belongs, and then flushed. That's all; no animosity here, just a chance for an occasional glance at comedic activities you provide. Comedy; there's another word I bet you don't know the meaning of. bobb |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Kane's Komments
Kane: Looks like CPS has screwed the pooch on this one. Of course we have to ignore who actually killed the child, and ignore that CPS is not always going to be allowed full access by the suspect being investigated. In fact, we'd have to ignore, to fully blame CPS, some of the arguments here in support of "parent's rights," now wouldn't we, Michael? Doug? greegor? bobber? Who have I forgotten? CHILD Abuse Cases Bristol Herald Courier - Bristol,TN,USA 2-year old Christopher Smith died March 30th. Sullivan County Police charged his mother's boyfriend with murder. Abuse the family ... http://www.tricities.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=TRI%2FMGArticle%2FTRI_BasicArti cle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031782616655 Kane: Just a spanking folks, just some "discipline." 0:-\ HAMPTON Man Charged With Felony Child Abuse WAVY-TV - Portsmouth,VA,USA A Hampton man was arrested Friday after officials say he abused a six-year-old child. Police say Corey D. Taylor, 35, used a wooden ... http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp?S=3319244&nav=23iiZcwr Kane: It's not like we are the only country with this problem. This planet is still, when it comes to children, in almost every land and corner of it, in the dark ages. That children have to suffer like this because we were treated like them when we were little. Sad, isn't it? We'd defend our parents even if it means we destroy the planet. Instead of seeing the sad truth in how they had been treated, and vowing to break the cycle, we continue on. BEWARE of Child Abuse AllAfrica.com - Africa .... Child abuse is being embraced like it is fashionable. ... Although child abuse takes different forms, the pain of emotional mutilation cuts across them all. ... http://allafrica.com/stories/200505091503.html Kane: The fact that child abuse is underreported has been debated in this ng, with you twits pretending that actual child abuse is only 10% of reported CPS cases. A brilliant piece of deductive logic. Who gives a ****? It's the total that counts, in and out of CPS. And guess what...it's impossible to find out that number even on reported cases. Why? Because the reporting agency most responsible has dropped the ball long ago. CHILD abuse disclosure law backed Marietta Times - Marietta,OH,USA A child sex abuse law is proceeding through the Ohio General Assembly despite opposition from many of Ohio's Catholic bishops. The ... http://www.mariettatimes.com/news/story/059202005_new02aubse.asp And did you see, Wex's little cut and paste: May 10, 12:10 pm show options Newsgroups: alt.support.foster-parents From: wexwimpy - Find messages by this author Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:10:54 GMT Local: Tues,May 10 2005 12:10 pm Subject: Insane not to require reporting of sex abuse Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse Insane not to require reporting of sex abuse By Randy Means My Word Posted May 10, 2005 Cinco de Mayo turned out to be a dark and dreary day for those of us following the progress and ultimate demise of a child-protection amendment in the Florida Senate. The legislative amendment's impetus was an Osecola County arrest of several school employees on charges of failing to contact the Department of Children & Families or law enforcement appropriately when they learned of sex abuse occurring on their students by one of their own employees. It seemed like a simple case. However, a local court ruling turned this whole issue on its ear. The ruling stated that no one is statutorily required to contact DCF in child-abuse cases if the alleged offender is a public-school employee. This is because, in 1993, a change in the law removed public-school employees as a group that were required to be reported. What is important to note is that no mandatory reporter of any kind -- be it physician, judge or social worker -- is required to report suspected abuse by a public-school employee. Before 1993, public-school employees had been included in the group of people that warranted mandatory reporting. I can think of no other group of individuals that should be more morally and legally required to be reported for abusing children than the people to whom we entrust our children's safety 180 days a year. I also have a hard time discerning the difference between private and public when it comes to our children's safety -- other than that one has, in my opinion, a more effective union lobbyist to protect members from reporting laws. A person listed as a mandatory reporter walking into a private school and observing a private-school teacher molesting a child is legally required to report such an offense. However, if that same person witnessed a public-school teacher molesting the same child, he or she would not be required to report it. This is insane. Furthermore, prosecutors disagree with anyone's argument that public-school employees can be charged under different Florida statutes for non-reporting of public-school employees. The courts have ruled otherwise, and until public-school employees are placed back into the appropriate statute, this insanity will continue, plain and simple. DCF's concerns that it could cost millions of dollars to investigate these additional cases is chilling. If DCF is correct, we must truly be experiencing an unreported epidemic of abuse by public-schools employees. I submit that is even a more compelling reason to include public-school employees as people required to be reported. The smoke-and-mirrors tactics may have won the battle this year, but, with the assistance of like-minded parents and concerned citizens, we will be ready to re-file this legislation as soon as possible. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...rd10051005may1... |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Teachers were allowed to NOT report child abuse
because it was perpetrated by another teacher? Is this in ANY way, shape or form, a representation of the wishes of the citizenry? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Greegor wrote: Teachers were allowed to NOT report child abuse because it was perpetrated by another teacher? Please, try to keep your facts straight. PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER. Private schools are not covered under this strange piece of legislation. And it's NO mandated reported is "REQUIRED to report suspected abuse by a public-school employee." (emphasis mine) Is this in ANY way, shape or form, a representation of the wishes of the citizenry? Why sure it is. The citizenry called Public School Teachers. It obviously was lobbied into existence by their union. Yet another reason I advocate for and am an activist supporting home schooling. And trot on over to your stroke buddy, Michael, and remind him once again he lied about me when he claimed I was a huge supporter of government...you know better, and that you just happened to not like, being of a criminal mind, those things about government I DO support. Like kickin' your ass occasionally to remind you you live in a society that won't tolerate your sickness and stupidity. I do not support any state worker committing a crime, more especially any CPS employee. Any cop. Any judge. I've said so many times. I do support them all enforcing the law as the law reads. And when I don't like how the law reads, I agitate, and not on this silly asshole of a vomit hole you use to try and avoid what kind of a scum sucker you really are with all your "anti government" ranting, and claims that others who don't rant in your fashion are apologists and supporters of corrupt government. That makes you a liar, and one sick little boy. Get your head shrunk before it's too late and your really **** up enough to stay in jail the next time. Any questions? 0:- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|