Do you take seriously the ...

Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote
and quietly and secretly snip my question

Is your Megalomania evolving into Paranoia Kane?

You constantly complain about perceived
improprieties in responses to you.

You're like somebody in a street fight
griping that somebody else is not following
the Marquis De Queensbury rules!

People MUST answer you or they are violating some rule?

You seem to insist (as if you have a right to) that
"snippage" only takes place as a violation of the ""rules"".

Snippage can be used to highlight what a person IS responding to.

I am NOT required to quote your text I am not responding to.

That's correct. I made no such requirement.

Your belief in excessive requoting is NOT universal.

I do not have such a belief. I too snip, WITH CLEAR NOTICE OF HAVING
DONE SO, as a practice to remove what has been discussed and concluded,
and is not relevant to the remainder I wish to discuss.

If you think I've removed critical information that changes your intent
I want you to feel free to speak up and demand that include passages
that clarify your intent.

Your huge number of posts and long wind bagging posts
are NOT a sign of intelligence or true knowledge.

I actually post very few original posts. Almost all of mine are
replies. And I am outnumbered by you twits, so naturally I am going to
post more than any individual among you.

So what would be, to you, a sign of intelligence and true knowledge,
Greg?

You argue to justify an industry that paid you.

Nope.

Pat yourself on your back and put yourself up for sainthood.

That seems more the style of you twits in the vengence field of debate.


Clearly your identity is wrapped around the CPS INDUSTRY.

You could say that, but it would not be true.

I suspect that an unspoken implication of your
arguing here is about squelching your own self doubt
about CPS and your connection to it.

Nope. How could I, unlike you, have more than one note to post.

I post both criticisms and explanations of CPS operations and practices
as I understand them.

YOU cast that as 'agency suck' but do not bother to check and see if my
explanation is correct or not.

YOU, on the other hand, post nothing but diatribe, and mostly lies at
that, or studied ignorance of the subject.

I also suspect you were a victim of child abuse
and that you have lied about it to this newsgroup
and perhaps even to yourself.

Nope.

Perhaps you tell yourself it is a moral or ethical lie.

Nope. I've told you my position and it does not extend to argument, but
simply protection of others. This of course, makes YOU a liar to
insinuate otherwise.

Perhaps you just thought it was tactically advantageous to you.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Do you argue with words and comments that are not tactically
adventageous to you?

Let me explain.

In war, or business, there are two exercises one must learn to be good
at.

One is tactics, the other strategy.

Strategy, roughly, is taking information from as many persectives as
one can master, and applying them to the picking of appropriate
attainable goals.

Tactics is the practices, the actions, once decides to take, and is as
it should be the exercise of planning.

Now comes the hard part, Greg.

What is my strategy? In other words ...

What is my goal, or goals?

So far you've missed it.

Try again.

0:-

Dan Sullivan wrote:
Is your advice to that woman a sign of intelligence?

Why don't you give her YOUR expertise?

OH WAIT!
You were KICKED OUT of that support group site!
How intelligent is that?
It's the 3rd or 4th group you've been kicked OUT of.

You seem incapable of constructive criticism, focusing
on your EGO, destructive criticism or ridicule.

Ironically you have been caught giving people
such BAD advice that quite a bunch of
parents and Family Rights people concluded
you are working AGAINST families.

Your reposting of messages from a private
SUPPORT GROUP web site into a public
newsgroup would likely get you expelled
from EVERY SINGLE Family Rights
group that exists or will exist.

The fact that you or one of your minions
lifted messages from a private SUPPORT GROUP
web site that you had been KICKED OUT OF
and posted them in a public newsgroup
would certainly prove your intentions.

How smart is that?

Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
Is your advice to that woman a sign of intelligence?

Why don't you give her YOUR expertise?

He is doing that. I presume she is interested enough in her own case to
be following this conversation for herself.

If not, why don't you, since you've already posted to her, invite her
here to do so?

Afraid?

OH WAIT!
You were KICKED OUT of that support group site!

I'm still waiting for you to produce the circumstances. What you call
'kicked out' may be something very different from your reality.

How intelligent is that?

It isn't possible, and intelligence has little to do with it, to
control other peoples actions. I suspect a few fools like you to be
involved. But we'll see when you prove he was "kicked out" and it
wasn't by kooks.

Have at it, boy. Prove yourself.

It's the 3rd or 4th group you've been kicked OUT of.

Could it be that there are those that want losses instead of wins, and
are losers rather than winners, that just can't stand to have someone
successful, a multiple winner in the fight against
child protective services around?

It would tend to highlight their being losers, now wouldn't it?

You seem incapable of constructive criticism, focusing
on your EGO, destructive criticism or ridicule.

Actually you have it quite backwards.

Dan appears to have a healthy ego ... those are the kind based on
facts, verifiable reality. The reality is that Dan has successfully
beating what you losers portray as an evil all powerful unbeatable foe,
CPS.

Yet he's done it again and again. Family after family with overturned
founding, child after child returned from foster care.

Cases with complex issues, even serious medical ones where he had to
find, and he did, the research that proved the unlikelihood of guilt on
the part of the parents....and of course, they DID get their children
back.

If there is one criticism I have of Dan is that he wastes his valuable
time on twits such as you, and the loser contingent of antiCPS little
thugs that are cruising for CPS families to abuse and use to cover up
their own failings.

Ironically you have been caught giving people
such BAD advice that quite a bunch of
parents and Family Rights people concluded
you are working AGAINST families.

Please list here, the "BAD advice" that he gave. I'm very curious to
see proof of this, since I have never seen Dan give a single piece of
bad advice on CPS matters.

His advice tends to be conservative, tactically sound -- and proven
repeatedly, and resulted in tens of families winning against CPS. Even
he has, many times, beaten CPS in his own case.

Please explain just how, and by what evidence, "quite a bunch of
parents and Family Rights people concluded," he was "working AGAINST
families."

I suspect those people include many of the losers that have moved on
from this newsgroup, after being exposed -- mostly by Dan.

Your reposting of messages from a private
SUPPORT GROUP web site

You are misrepresenting the website. It is not a private group.

into a public
newsgroup would likely get you expelled
from EVERY SINGLE Family Rights
group that exists or will exist.

Since anyone can join those forums there is nothing the least private
about them.

Would they stop me, for instance, from joining?

If so, given this is a public medium, would that not be a violation of
my rights?

Would you, for instance, try to stand between me and a group that could
pump me for information, as Dan has, from own long standing experience
winning for kinship relative placement families?

I coached, taught, advocated, and was an activist for 13 plus years,
and count over 2,000 relative families that successfully gain custody
of their grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and even siblings, in a system
that during that time was dead set against providing support to
relatives seeking foster custody, and adoption of their little
relatives.

I accumulated a mass, in fact a chuckle vast mass, of operations and
practice information for both CPS, the juvenile justice system, mental
health, and the legal system that we extremely valuable to those
families.

And you'd do everything you could to keep me out or kick me, wouldn't
you, Greg?

Costing any families that came to such groups the value of my
experience.

Isn't that right, Greg, you loser?

The fact that you or one of your minions
lifted messages from a private SUPPORT GROUP
web site

It is not a private support group website. You need to get that clear
in your little pointy yead.

And we certainly can see why you are frantically kicking up a must dust
as possible...since you gave dangerous LEGAL advice to someone in one
of those groups. Is that not so, Greg?

that you had been KICKED OUT OF
and posted them in a public newsgroup
would certainly prove your intentions.

You mean to tell us, coward, that you would not have posted the same
advice to that women right here in this newsgroup....to go ahead and
challenge the secret recording laws of her state, and attemp to use the
recording in court in her case?

How smart is that?

Yes, I have to ask that too. Just how smart is it to keep offering such
valuable services as Dan does in such hostile company as that of you
losers that cluster for comfort and your little circle jerk in this
support groups (you little thugs manage to take them over and crowd out
both the people that need expert help, and shout down those that can
give it)?

I have to presume he's either a misguided nut himself, or, and far more
likely 0:-], very dedicated to his advocacy and activism to family
rights.

Which do you think it is?

You might want to remind yourself, as you ponder, that Dan didn't drop
out of the blue into this issue. He's been doing it for over three
years that I know of, activily, and I believe longer AS A FORMER CPS
TARGET HIMSELF.

And for all that time he has been winning, and you and your cronies,
for all that time, have been doing what, Greg? What?

Why, continuing your remarkable string of losses, of course. No wonder
you folks hate him irrationally.

0:-

Kane wrote
Tactics is the practices, the actions, once decides to take, and is as
it should be the exercise of planning.

Got a dictionary definition for those?

Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote
Tactics is the practices, the actions, once decides to take, and is as
it should be the exercise of planning.

Got a dictionary definition for those?

Sure.

You can't use a dictionary?

Try it you'll like it.

But be careful. Only the first toke is free.

You could get hooked and be going back for
more word meanings, and your life would crumble around you, Greg.

Oliver Sutton learning what your words really mean, and all.

Like, "show up in court with the evidence you have committed a crime,
and use it to challenge the law and the court, and they'll have to
deliver your kids to you," isn't that about what you said, Greg?

If I am paraphrasing incorrectly please correct me with your exact
quote, would you?

I just love figuring out what words mean.

0:-

I just love watching you twist everything up like caseworkers do.

0:- wrote:
Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote
Tactics is the practices, the actions, once decides to take, and is as
it should be the exercise of planning.

Got a dictionary definition for those?

Sure.

You can't use a dictionary?

Try it you'll like it.

But be careful. Only the first toke is free.

You could get hooked and be going back for
more word meanings, and your life would crumble around you, Greg.

Oliver Sutton learning what your words really mean, and all.

Like, "show up in court with the evidence you have committed a crime,
and use it to challenge the law and the court, and they'll have to
deliver your kids to you," isn't that about what you said, Greg?

If I am paraphrasing incorrectly please correct me with your exact
quote, would you?

I just love figuring out what words mean.

0:-

0:- wrote:
Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote
Tactics is the practices, the actions, once decides to take, and is as
it should be the exercise of planning.

Got a dictionary definition for those?

Sure.

You can't use a dictionary?

Try it you'll like it.

But be careful. Only the first toke is free.

You could get hooked and be going back for
more word meanings, and your life would crumble around you, Greg.

Oliver Sutton learning what your words really mean, and all.

Like, "show up in court with the evidence you have committed a crime,
and use it to challenge the law and the court, and they'll have to
deliver your kids to you," isn't that about what you said, Greg?

If I am paraphrasing incorrectly please correct me with your exact
quote, would you?

I just love figuring out what words mean.

Greg didn't say getting arrested in court would help get the kids back.

He said it would be one way of challenging the recording laws in that
state.

And he said she should sue CPS for 12 million dollars.

Dan Sullivan wrote
Greg didn't say getting arrested in court would help get the kids back.

He said it would be one way of challenging the recording laws in that
state.

And he said she should sue CPS for 12 million dollars.

But not in the same case.

Typical half truth and innuendo.

Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote
Greg didn't say getting arrested in court would help get the kids back.

He said it would be one way of challenging the recording laws in that
state.

And he said she should sue CPS for 12 million dollars.

But not in the same case.

Typical half truth and innuendo.

Yes it was the same case, Greg.

Just ask lostintranslation.

It was her case.

You made specific accusations that Dan gave such bad advice it caused
him to be kicked off of support groups.

I asked you to post some of that here. Quote him please.

I take full responsibility for any charges of Felonious Quoting he might
make against you.. 0:-]

Why won't you prove your claim?

Post his advice. I assure you if it's bad advice he's going to catch
hell from me. I have NO patience with people that give bad advice:
haven't you noticed?

Put up, Greg. Put up.

And no, please don't shut up. That's been your dodge for years, when you
are finally cornered like the king rat you think you are.

Kane


0:- wrote:
Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
Is your advice to that woman a sign of intelligence?
Why don't you give her YOUR expertise?

He is doing that. I presume she is interested enough in her own case to
be following this conversation for herself.

If not, why don't you, since you've already posted to her, invite her
here to do so?

Afraid?

OH WAIT!
You were KICKED OUT of that support group site!

I'm still waiting for you to produce the circumstances. What you call
'kicked out' may be something very different from your reality.

How intelligent is that?

It isn't possible, and intelligence has little to do with it, to
control other peoples actions. I suspect a few fools like you to be
involved. But we'll see when you prove he was "kicked out" and it
wasn't by kooks.

Have at it, boy. Prove yourself.

It's the 3rd or 4th group you've been kicked OUT of.

Could it be that there are those that want losses instead of wins, and
are losers rather than winners, that just can't stand to have someone
successful, a multiple winner in the fight against
child protective services around?

It would tend to highlight their being losers, now wouldn't it?

You seem incapable of constructive criticism, focusing
on your EGO, destructive criticism or ridicule.

Actually you have it quite backwards.

Dan appears to have a healthy ego ... those are the kind based on
facts, verifiable reality. The reality is that Dan has successfully
beating what you losers portray as an evil all powerful unbeatable foe,
CPS.

Yet he's done it again and again. Family after family with overturned
founding, child after child returned from foster care.

Cases with complex issues, even serious medical ones where he had to
find, and he did, the research that proved the unlikelihood of guilt on
the part of the parents....and of course, they DID get their children
back.

If there is one criticism I have of Dan is that he wastes his valuable
time on twits such as you, and the loser contingent of antiCPS little
thugs that are cruising for CPS families to abuse and use to cover up
their own failings.

Ironically you have been caught giving people
such BAD advice that quite a bunch of
parents and Family Rights people concluded
you are working AGAINST families.

Please list here, the "BAD advice" that he gave. I'm very curious to
see proof of this, since I have never seen Dan give a single piece of
bad advice on CPS matters.

His advice tends to be conservative, tactically sound -- and proven
repeatedly, and resulted in tens of families winning against CPS. Even
he has, many times, beaten CPS in his own case.

Please explain just how, and by what evidence, "quite a bunch of
parents and Family Rights people concluded," he was "working AGAINST
families."

I suspect those people include many of the losers that have moved on
from this newsgroup, after being exposed -- mostly by Dan.

Your reposting of messages from a private
SUPPORT GROUP web site

You are misrepresenting the website. It is not a private group.

into a public
newsgroup would likely get you expelled
from EVERY SINGLE Family Rights
group that exists or will exist.

Since anyone can join those forums there is nothing the least private
about them.

Would they stop me, for instance, from joining?

If so, given this is a public medium, would that not be a violation of
my rights?

Would you, for instance, try to stand between me and a group that could
pump me for information, as Dan has, from own long standing experience
winning for kinship relative placement families?

I coached, taught, advocated, and was an activist for 13 plus years,
and count over 2,000 relative families that successfully gain custody
of their grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and even siblings, in a system
that during that time was dead set against providing support to
relatives seeking foster custody, and adoption of their little
relatives.

I accumulated a mass, in fact a chuckle vast mass, of operations and
practice information for both CPS, the juvenile justice system, mental
health, and the legal system that we extremely valuable to those
families.

And you'd do everything you could to keep me out or kick me, wouldn't
you, Greg?

Costing any families that came to such groups the value of my
experience.

Isn't that right, Greg, you loser?

The fact that you or one of your minions
lifted messages from a private SUPPORT GROUP
web site

It is not a private support group website. You need to get that clear
in your little pointy yead.

And we certainly can see why you are frantically kicking up a must dust
as possible...since you gave dangerous LEGAL advice to someone in one
of those groups. Is that not so, Greg?

that you had been KICKED OUT OF
and posted them in a public newsgroup
would certainly prove your intentions.

You mean to tell us, coward, that you would not have posted the same
advice to that women right here in this newsgroup....to go ahead and
challenge the secret recording laws of her state, and attemp to use the
recording in court in her case?

How smart is that?

Yes, I have to ask that too. Just how smart is it to keep offering such
valuable services as Dan does in such hostile company as that of you
losers that cluster for comfort and your little circle jerk in this
support groups (you little thugs manage to take them over and crowd out
both the people that need expert help, and shout down those that can
give it)?

I have to presume he's either a misguided nut himself, or, and far more
likely 0:-], very dedicated to his advocacy and activism to family
rights.

Which do you think it is?

You might want to remind yourself, as you ponder, that Dan didn't drop
out of the blue into this issue. He's been doing it for over three
years that I know of, activily, and I believe longer AS A FORMER CPS
TARGET HIMSELF.

And for all that time he has been winning, and you and your cronies,
for all that time, have been doing what, Greg? What?

Why, continuing your remarkable string of losses, of course. No wonder
you folks hate him irrationally.

0:-