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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Greegor wrote:
You claim the snitches broke laws Kane wrote Include my comments so that we can see if that is in fact what I did. I recall no such claim by me. (To see this claim by Kane, use your browser to search for "None of your business" further down or just read on to see the full context.) On June 6th (two days ago) Kane wrote I have claimed, and have some powerful reasons to know related to my ability to pay for detective work, that someone on these ngs, in the past, did in fact reveal to the worker of someone posting here that they were indeed discussing the case here. It cost the person posting here. What the hell does your "ability to pay for detective work" have to do with it? I could pay for that redeeming cans! Wouldn't the issue be whether or not you DID pay for such services? OK, I get your veiled threat to be an informer but why are you so desperate to try to shift responsibility for that to somebody else? How many readers do you really think can't figure out that YOU are so neurotic and snitchy that it's a PATHOLOGY? You are the pathological snitch that teachers and cops all recognize as more of a problem than what the snitch reports. Kane wrote It was NOT one of us that revealed this to the worker. IT WAS ONE OF YOU. I presume, once again, considering it a great ends justifies the means attempt, to "prove" that CPS was Evil. In other words, they were willing to sacrifice someone else's child to the system, with all that entails, for their own selfish childish ends. I don't play games, Greg, though it's fun encouraging you to think so. When I see harm being done I WILL try to stop it. Have you strangled yourself yet? Kane wrote Right now, certain people from YOUR side of the aisle, so to speak, are watching what YOU say...and give not a **** for my posts. And of course you know what other people are doing on their end of the internet because of your Omnicient Megalomania right? Kane wrote They will weigh if it's profitable to their cause to feed Lisa, the child and YOU to Iowa's child protection system. You're the big "psy ops" and disinformation intrigue guy, so of course you imagine that amount of double think on the part of grassroots citizens activism? Or are you practicing your special skills? Don't you think you might just be a bit too full of yourself and melodramatic for the real world? Kane wrote And I'm warning them, I'll run them down again and this time I'll turn my evidence over to the state they reside in, to a public prosecutor in their area. Some laws were broken the last time. And they know that. We've discussed it privately before. Here's where you said that laws were broken when somebody snitched, but you never explained what laws you were talking about. You said it was none of my business what laws were broken when this snitching took place. How could such broken laws not be my business? I'll remind you this is the USA, not the old USSR. Greg wrote but when asked which laws they broke you assert that is none of my business?? Kane wrote Again: Include my comments so that we can see if that is in fact what I did. I recall no such claim by me. Kane wrote And I'm warning them, I'll run them down again and this time I'll turn my evidence over to the state they reside in, to a public prosecutor in their area. Some laws were broken the last time. And they know that. Greg wrote What laws specifically? Kane wrote None of your business, Greg. That's between me and them. You posting any information that indicates [REDACTED] has a court case underway can be used by them to claim that someone here called Iowa and disclosed your discussion. YOU'D believe that before you'd believe the truth. NOW who's part of the "black helicopter" crowd? This is a conspiracy theory par excellence! Greg wrote You pretend you are the anti-snitch? Kane wrote Your comment is pointless since it's impossible to judge if you are addressing something I actually said, or making it up as you so lyingly do, so much of the time. See above quote of your post posing as anti-snitch. Greg wrote ROFL! Kane wrote Your laughter would be at yourself. You attempt to describe the nature of someone else's laughter? No Megalomania there! Kane wrote You allow no continuity in the flow of the exchanges, and it becomes obvious to any reader, myself included, that you do this to avoid being called out for lies. Right, I am an evil poster because I didn't requote your ad homs and non sequiturs... and this isn't a whiny comment HOW exactly?? Kane wrote In fact if you fully attributed my comments you'd have nothing to accuse me of. See above quote of you. How has my ability to accuse you of being what you are diminished now? Kane wrote You are simply harassing for the sake of it. Like any troll. Whereas you are a master troll right? Kane wrote Do you remember my question to YOU? The one about the Christines and the use of lethal force to take a child from state custody? Do you recall how frequently I cited and quoted your comments that led me to ask that question? I already acknowledged that you are a master troll. (Master baiter?) Kane wrote That's the difference between us, Greg. Ethics and honesty are mine. And you have none. Self proclaiming your virtue and your opponents lack of same? Gosh, that is a tactic nobody ever saw before (sic). Kane wrote You demonstrate it constantly. But if I snipped this drivel you'd whine that I was dishonest?? Doesn't that imply that at some point I was not dishonest? Your assertion of a totality, an absolute state, is the giveaway. You just logically proved your OWN dishonesty! Kane you really ARE your own worst enemy. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Greegor wrote:
Greegor wrote: You claim the snitches broke laws Kane wrote Include my comments so that we can see if that is in fact what I did. I recall no such claim by me. (To see this claim by Kane, use your browser to search for "None of your business" further down or just read on to see the full context.) 'bout time. 0:- On June 6th (two days ago) Kane wrote I have claimed, and have some powerful reasons to know related to my ability to pay for detective work, that someone on these ngs, in the past, did in fact reveal to the worker of someone posting here that they were indeed discussing the case here. It cost the person posting here. What the hell does your "ability to pay for detective work" have to do with it? I could pay for that redeeming cans! Ah, but you don't know what I pay with? Friends help friends. Wouldn't the issue be whether or not you DID pay for such services? I suppose. OK, I get your veiled threat to be an informer but why are you so desperate to try to shift responsibility for that to somebody else? No, that's not what it was and you know. I had to do with clarifying for the person or persons that you consider buddies, and putting them on notice that pulling their snitch right on YOU and LISA isn't going to happen. How many readers do you really think can't figure out that YOU are so neurotic and snitchy that it's a PATHOLOGY? You have done it again. I point out that snitches from YOUR crowd took down another bio-parent in this ng, I point out the I contacted the afterward and warned them there would be consequences should it happen again. YOU pop on the ngs spilling the beans about what took place in the courtroom, and I let you know that was not smart and that despite my lack of respect for you I did not feel that Lisa deserved you or the ****ants that snitched. Where did you get that I was snitching? You have it backwards. You are the pathological snitch that teachers and cops all recognize as more of a problem than what the snitch reports. Then speak to your friends from these ngs stupid. Kane wrote It was NOT one of us that revealed this to the worker. IT WAS ONE OF YOU. I presume, once again, considering it a great ends justifies the means attempt, to "prove" that CPS was Evil. In other words, they were willing to sacrifice someone else's child to the system, with all that entails, for their own selfish childish ends. I don't play games, Greg, though it's fun encouraging you to think so. When I see harm being done I WILL try to stop it. Have you strangled yourself yet? I see you are ignoring that it was your crowd that pulled off a snitch. You seem to forget the Christine's as well and how they were set up to be the fall guys for the little pack of ****ants in Oregon that set them up to be "victims" of CPS, doing ALL THE THING YOU AND OTHER ****ANTS HERE have recommended. INCLUDING THE USE OF LETHAL FORCE. You seem completely unable to follow the content of ascps and what people say and mean. Kane wrote Right now, certain people from YOUR side of the aisle, so to speak, are watching what YOU say...and give not a **** for my posts. And of course you know what other people are doing on their end of the internet because of your Omnicient Megalomania right? No. I know the watch and that you know they watch. And that you contact them, and they you, from time to time. I know also that you are fool they will use and throw away like they did the Christines, as though they were used toilet paper. Kane wrote They will weigh if it's profitable to their cause to feed Lisa, the child and YOU to Iowa's child protection system. You're the big "psy ops" and disinformation intrigue guy, Nope. I spent a long time doing analytical work. That's all. so of course you imagine Estimates aren't "imagination," though we used to joke that we were the crystal ball unit. that amount of double think on the part of grassroots citizens activism? Actually the trick is to see through the double TALK the self deluded and often wrong spout. Or are you practicing your special skills? You'll have to explain. Don't you think you might just be a bit too full of yourself and melodramatic for the real world? Nope. The sanctity of the family is important to me. Whether Lisa buys your **** or not I do not approve of family destruction and YOUR ****ant friends have destroyed families that have come here. Kane wrote And I'm warning them, I'll run them down again and this time I'll turn my evidence over to the state they reside in, to a public prosecutor in their area. Some laws were broken the last time. And they know that. We've discussed it privately before. Here's where you said that laws were broken when somebody snitched, but you never explained what laws you were talking about. Nor will I. You said it was none of my business what laws were broken when this snitching took place. That's right. Your own poor morals and worse ethical choices make it important that YOU discover what they are for yourself. As long as you refuse to believe me you are vulnerable. I can do nothing about that beyond telling you the risk is there. What YOU do with it is entirely up to you. How could such broken laws not be my business? Because they did not concern you. Why would you think they did? I'll remind you this is the USA, not the old USSR. I'll remind you that this is the USA where we have some privacy left. Yo may NOT demand information from me like a commissar. Well, you can, but you can't get it. Greg wrote but when asked which laws they broke you assert that is none of my business?? Kane wrote Again: Include my comments so that we can see if that is in fact what I did. I recall no such claim by me. Kane wrote And I'm warning them, I'll run them down again and this time I'll turn my evidence over to the state they reside in, to a public prosecutor in their area. Some laws were broken the last time. And they know that. Greg wrote What laws specifically? Kane wrote None of your business, Greg. That's between me and them. You posting any information that indicates [REDACTED] has a court case underway can be used by them to claim that someone here called Iowa and disclosed your discussion. YOU'D believe that before you'd believe the truth. NOW who's part of the "black helicopter" crowd? This is a conspiracy theory par excellence! You are closer to them than I am. You own moral limitations keep you from seeing what they are. I can point it out. If you can't read their posts and see it for yourself, then you are stump stupid by way of moral lack. You approve of them. When you stop it you'll be able to see it for what it is. Greg wrote You pretend you are the anti-snitch? Kane wrote Your comment is pointless since it's impossible to judge if you are addressing something I actually said, or making it up as you so lyingly do, so much of the time. See above quote of your post posing as anti-snitch. What leads you to think I'm not anti-snitch. Your friends know, trust me. Greg wrote ROFL! Kane wrote Your laughter would be at yourself. You attempt to describe the nature of someone else's laughter? No Megalomania there! Should I list all the ways you assign meaning to others posted comments that do not in fact appear in those comments unless you take them out of context and ask a rhetorical question to change their meaning? Kane wrote You allow no continuity in the flow of the exchanges, and it becomes obvious to any reader, myself included, that you do this to avoid being called out for lies. Right, I am an evil poster because I didn't requote your ad homs and non sequiturs... and this isn't a whiny comment HOW exactly?? Nope. You are a nasty little work that is a self serving self deluding twit. Nothing more. The rest is your dressing. Kane wrote In fact if you fully attributed my comments you'd have nothing to accuse me of. See above quote of you. How has my ability to accuse you of being what you are diminished now? Well you have accused me of being things that in the same post you commented in a manner about things that show I am not, and that I pointed out others were. Kane wrote You are simply harassing for the sake of it. Like any troll. Whereas you are a master troll right? Nope. You post harassing questions by not posting the proof of your claims. Kane wrote Do you remember my question to YOU? The one about the Christines and the use of lethal force to take a child from state custody? Do you recall how frequently I cited and quoted your comments that led me to ask that question? I already acknowledged that you are a master troll. (Master baiter?) That does not answer my question. And shows you to be harassing, and nothing more. Kane wrote That's the difference between us, Greg. Ethics and honesty are mine. And you have none. Self proclaiming your virtue and your opponents lack of same? "Your opponents?" You are elevated to using the third person now? Gosh, that is a tactic nobody ever saw before (sic). Why would you post an editorial error mark where there is not error, either in spelling or grammar? You often through words and phrases around that are nonsensical, such as using "non sequitur" illogically. Kane wrote You demonstrate it constantly. But if I snipped this drivel you'd whine that I was dishonest?? Of course. What has that to do with what I said above? I wasn't talking about my comments, just your demonstration of dishonesty. Doesn't that imply that at some point I was not dishonest? You are at some point honest. Not many, but you are bound to make a 'mistake' sooner or later. 0:- Your assertion of a totality, an absolute state, is the giveaway. The use of "constantly" was exaggeration by literary license. If you wish I can withdraw it and substitute, "frequently." You just logically proved your OWN dishonesty! By using "constantly," what you call and "absolute?" Greg, parse your own postings for these "absolutes." You'd be amazed. Kane you really ARE your own worst enemy. No, I am yours. Until you do what's right by Lisa and her daughter and stop pretending the case was about you and YOUR rights. 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 (or someone else) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
You've now said that for somebody to snitch on me
is a crime, but you won't say how. Never mind that there is nothing substantially confidential to be a problem.. Is this like that crap legal statement ""threatgram"" that you said your lawyer approved? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Greegor wrote:
You've now said that for somebody to snitch on me is a crime, but you won't say how. No, once again you twist the meaning of my comments. This time blatantly. Or is it that you naturally embellish? Never mind that there is nothing substantially confidential to be a problem.. That's not the point I made. The point was that should someone reveal to the court that you are maligning the Prosecutor and the witnesses publicly during a trial that could defeat your case. I'm not arguing "substantially confidential." I'm pointing out that one does not discuss a case outside the courtroom normally. Is this like that crap legal statement ""threatgram"" that you said your lawyer approved? Letters of intent are not "threats." They are descriptions of intended legal action given certain specified events occurring. You are embellishing again, aren't you, Greg? 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 (or someone else) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Greegor wrote:
Kane: You're calling your "threatgram" a "Letter of Intent"? You are calling it a "threatgram?" Wouldn't a lawyer approved letter of intent specify at the least WHO it is about, and wouldn't it ideally state more precisely WHAT the complaint is? Yep. What legal use do you think that a "Letter of Intent" would have that was not properly served and never even named the party or parties it was addressed to? Or even specified what the supposed transgression was? Very little to none. What makes you think those were not included? Are you fantasizing again? Where did you hire this attorney anyway? At his office. He's been our lawyer for about 20 years. And a very good one at that, or we wouldn't keep him. By they way, have you a citation for my statements about a letter of intent? If so, return the courtesy I extend you and post them here. Thanks, pal. 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 (or someone else) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
When your attorney "reviewed" this, what exactly
was the purpose of that, since this is absolutely and utterly useless in any court... And.. As I asserted before, a lawyer who participates in such a bogus legal threat is violating ethical code. From: 0:- - view profile Date: Thurs, Mar 2 2006 11:28 am From 1977 to a recent year, I provided help and support, as well as advocacy to clients and care providers involved with some state child protections agencies. These are things I've mentioned on these newsgroups many times over the course of my posting here. During that time I, as one might expect, found myself faced with occasional adversaries from both sides. I'm not known for backing down. I was instrumental, for instance in the firing of a some CPS employees. I was both a major claimant and witness for the state in the termination and permanent disbarment from state government employment for life for a management level employee. We won, he lost. even CPS employees were glad to see him go. That particular one, because of his prior work with criminals as a probation officer had access to those same people in asking them to act criminally in his behalf...and did so to myself and others involved in his case. Property damage, dead animals on the doorstep (that is a death threat in criminal circles) and similar actions took place in his behalf over the six months of the investigation, and from time to time over the years afterward. He threatened injury and death to myself and family members as well as to others involved in his dismissal in private conversations with me. His promise was that we would never be able to stop looking over our shoulder no matter how many years had passed. I believe him. From among clients whose relatives I helped gain custody of children out of stranger foster care I also received threats. Usually people criminally involved hence capable of escalating to follow through. There was occasional harassment from that quarter. When I began posting to this and other ngs my wife and children requested I not post under my common given name known to those people above, but use a pseudonym to protect her and others in my family. My children had received harassing threats during the more serious of state actions, the hearings resulting in his being denied any future government employment, against the manager I mentioned before. Hence I maintain my anonymity for myself and my family, some of whom are public people and vulnerable, by the use of the nym, Pohaku Kane. A name I'm known by on the other side of the Pacific Rim. After posting here for some time I came into conflict, apparently, with some posters, and interestingly references were made to me NOT by my name here, but by my off line real world name, and by references to circumstances that indicated I was being watched by posters, or associates of theirs. And, a reconnect with some of those adversaries from the past. References to actual real world events, such as naming certain places I was on certain dates for certain occasions strongly supported my suspicions they were serious threats. And a link to the thug CPS manager was established by one individual on a newsgroup. As one might imagine, all such incidents and information on the people involved were collected, and placed both with my attorney and state police in respective states. Where the individuals, (two of them) made direct threats to me by e-mail against my self and family, those were reported to the respective states of residence law enforcement. Those reports, which I recently followed up to review the status of, are still on file and active. I am not going to be intimidated by nor curtail my activities here in the face of such threats, so be warned if you the reader are one of these that wish to play with either my, or my family member's identity in the real world, you place yourself at considerable risk with law enforcement. And that is regardless of how much or little you are involved with the parties in these threats. If it can be used to locate me or mine, it is a threat of harm. I take such actions, as do law enforcement authorities I've talked with in three states, as direct threats of harm. Very seriously. And I consider you a thug associate, very possibly, of those that would possibly follow through on threats. So does law enforcement. If you wish to initiate harassment of this kind I'll be happy to have my attorney contact you and advise you of the risks you are taking and the civil and criminal charges that could ensue, with a cc to your state authorities. Others that have tried it have had such correspondance and are no longer posting. At least not under their original names. This correspondance has been reviewed by my attorney. In anticipation of you using your best judgement, have a nice day. Kane |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Greegor wrote:
When your attorney "reviewed" this, what exactly was the purpose of that, since this is absolutely and utterly useless in any court... Where did you get your law degree? And.. As I asserted before, a lawyer who participates in such a bogus legal threat is violating ethical code. No they aren't. Lawyers read all kinds of things that pertain to possibly cases as evidence. From: 0:- - view profile Date: Thurs, Mar 2 2006 11:28 am From 1977 to a recent year, I provided help and support, as well as advocacy to clients and care providers involved with some state child protections agencies. These are things I've mentioned on these newsgroups many times over the course of my posting here. During that time I, as one might expect, found myself faced with occasional adversaries from both sides. I'm not known for backing down. I was instrumental, for instance in the firing of a some CPS employees. I was both a major claimant and witness for the state in the termination and permanent disbarment from state government employment for life for a management level employee. We won, he lost. even CPS employees were glad to see him go. That particular one, because of his prior work with criminals as a probation officer had access to those same people in asking them to act criminally in his behalf...and did so to myself and others involved in his case. Property damage, dead animals on the doorstep (that is a death threat in criminal circles) and similar actions took place in his behalf over the six months of the investigation, and from time to time over the years afterward. He threatened injury and death to myself and family members as well as to others involved in his dismissal in private conversations with me. His promise was that we would never be able to stop looking over our shoulder no matter how many years had passed. I believe him. From among clients whose relatives I helped gain custody of children out of stranger foster care I also received threats. Usually people criminally involved hence capable of escalating to follow through. There was occasional harassment from that quarter. When I began posting to this and other ngs my wife and children requested I not post under my common given name known to those people above, but use a pseudonym to protect her and others in my family. My children had received harassing threats during the more serious of state actions, the hearings resulting in his being denied any future government employment, against the manager I mentioned before. Hence I maintain my anonymity for myself and my family, some of whom are public people and vulnerable, by the use of the nym, Pohaku Kane. A name I'm known by on the other side of the Pacific Rim. After posting here for some time I came into conflict, apparently, with some posters, and interestingly references were made to me NOT by my name here, but by my off line real world name, and by references to circumstances that indicated I was being watched by posters, or associates of theirs. And, a reconnect with some of those adversaries from the past. References to actual real world events, such as naming certain places I was on certain dates for certain occasions strongly supported my suspicions they were serious threats. And a link to the thug CPS manager was established by one individual on a newsgroup. As one might imagine, all such incidents and information on the people involved were collected, and placed both with my attorney and state police in respective states. Where the individuals, (two of them) made direct threats to me by e-mail against my self and family, those were reported to the respective states of residence law enforcement. Those reports, which I recently followed up to review the status of, are still on file and active. I am not going to be intimidated by nor curtail my activities here in the face of such threats, so be warned if you the reader are one of these that wish to play with either my, or my family member's identity in the real world, you place yourself at considerable risk with law enforcement. And that is regardless of how much or little you are involved with the parties in these threats. If it can be used to locate me or mine, it is a threat of harm. I take such actions, as do law enforcement authorities I've talked with in three states, as direct threats of harm. Very seriously. And I consider you a thug associate, very possibly, of those that would possibly follow through on threats. So does law enforcement. If you wish to initiate harassment of this kind I'll be happy to have my attorney contact you and advise you of the risks you are taking and the civil and criminal charges that could ensue, with a cc to your state authorities. Others that have tried it have had such correspondance and are no longer posting. At least not under their original names. This correspondance has been reviewed by my attorney. In anticipation of you using your best judgement, have a nice day. Kane Yep. Just what I wrote. Having a lawyer review one's public utterances and give advice on them is NOT one of the things lawyers do? What law school did you win your degree from, Greg? In fact, I made a few changes of my original draft at his suggestion. So explain for us, solicitor, the following: And.. As I asserted before, a lawyer who participates in such a bogus legal threat is violating ethical code. What legal threat? How is my statement bogus? If it were, how would YOU know? You in contact with people that are denying to you my claims? Interesting. 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 (or someone else) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
If you can't even name the subject of the
legal action and you post it anonymously to some anonymous ""defendant"" then you clearly have not properly served anybody about anything. QED it serves NO legal purpose. If you HAD, there would be no reason to post it in the newsgroup. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Greegor wrote:
If you can't even name the subject of the legal action What legal action? and you post it anonymously to some anonymous ""defendant"" They know who they are and who I am. then you clearly have not properly served anybody about anything. Nothing to "serve." Public notice is sufficient in such matters. You are not familiar with publishing announcements of circumstantial intent? QED it serves NO legal purpose. Yes it does. Should said John Doe or Does, act in the manner I have defined, and we end up in court, I can have my lawyer point out they were in fact publicly notified in a medium they are known to frequent. If you HAD, there would be no reason to post it in the newsgroup. Sure there would. This is a public medium. I can chose the ones most likely to result in the person or persons reading my statement of circumstantial intent. And you've never seen the range of odd things taken into evidence, have you now? Take that petition to the court that someone ghosted for his girl friend..... Or the erroneous blathering rants the House Ways and Means Committee accepts at public hearings. A letter describing one's awareness of circumstances that later do take place is MORE than good evidence. It's rock solid. I have seen CPS administrators blanch upon receiving similar. You'd have crowed. 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 (or someone else) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
more bizarre news from florida
Kane wrote
I have seen CPS administrators blanch upon receiving similar. You'd have crowed. Yes, and of course they are known for being the cream of the crop of intelligencia.... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|