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
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about
a123sdg321 On 18 Feb 2004, Chris wrote: In alt.parenting.spanking Greg Hanson wrote: [snip] : He describes low level legal spanking as BEATING, : so you know his "bloodbath" is a delusion. Odham's Dictionary of the English Language defines "spanking" as "a beating witha flat object." Chris And Straus, in his studies, defined it as: "the use of physical force with the intention of causing physical pain, but not injury, for purposes of correction and control." Is Chris no longer believe in Straus??? ;-) Doan |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:47:39 -0800, Doan wrote:
a123sdg321 On 18 Feb 2004, Chris wrote: In alt.parenting.spanking Greg Hanson wrote: [snip] : He describes low level legal spanking as BEATING, : so you know his "bloodbath" is a delusion. Odham's Dictionary of the English Language defines "spanking" as "a beating witha flat object." Chris And Straus, in his studies, defined it as: "the use of physical force with the intention of causing physical pain, but not injury, for purposes of correction and control." Is Chris no longer believe in Straus??? ;-) "Spanking?" Really. I would have thought he said CP. Oh well. yah learn something new everyday. Given that Chris, believe it or not, knows there are other dictionaries, my bet is he also knows there are many words and definition for "spanking"the point being he listed the one in question. I gave you dozens yesterday. And another dictionary agreeing with Odam's. How does that equate with Chris not also agreeing with Straus? You'll clarify for us, or be known for a rotten lying scoundrel...right...you aren't are you? Day 6 to February 25th 8AM Doan I'm just a twitter with anticipation. Excited you'll actually follow through...yawn and you'll debate instead of play, finally, like that's going to happen. 6 {:- Kane |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
Greg wrote
: He describes low level legal spanking as BEATING, : so you know his "bloodbath" is a delusion. Chris wrote Odham's Dictionary of the English Language defines "spanking" as snip How does it define BLOODBATH? Doan wrote And Straus, in his studies, defined it as: "the use of physical force with the intention of causing physical pain, but not injury, for purposes of correction and control." [Does] Chris no longer believe in Straus??? ;-) Hoisting them by their own petard (Strauss). Way to go, Doan. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
"Kane" wrote in message m... On 17 Feb 2004 01:50:51 -0800, (Greg Hanson) wrote: No, I think I'll write something first, before the lies and balogna come rollin' down the river. I'll offer some actual resources, data, clarifications of the role of CPS, in other words the truth: http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/ You might want to get with the program and actually read something. According to The Plant I NEVER offer any data and It offers tons of it. Oddly all we see from It and you are opinion pieces more often calculated to increase circulation by sensationalizing. Here, on the website above, is the opening page to the resources I've quoted and cited so many times and the more intelligent of you have tried to lie.........BUT ARE NOT AMONG THE MISSING IN THIS NG....the truth beat their butts, as it always does. Before you get too carried away with claims about the perpetrators of child fatalities and abuse you might want to have a quick peek at: http://tinyurl.com/2ft2s This quote seems rather telling about your bogus nonsense: "No matter how the fatal abuse occurs, one fact of great concern is that the perpetrators are, by definition, individuals responsible for the care and supervision of their victims. In 2001, one or both parents were involved in 83 percent of child abuse or neglect fatalities. (The other 17 percent of fatalities were the result of maltreatment by nonparent caretakers.) In almost one-third (32 percent) of fatalities, the mother alone was found to be responsible. These percentages are consistent with findings from previous years." Poor Plant and Whore, seems they forgot that part of what I do, and have since 1956 through 1960 in the military, and in business since, and since 1976 about child welfare from county to state to national level. Yah never really want to bring up claims you haven't researched when you address me, you bozos. Hmmm... I think anyone with a bit of common sense could've drawn the same conclusions... and those conclusion are available from a number of other sources as well but the site you post has a built in bias. They are in the adoption business. Except for a few valid stand-alone statistics.. they offer nothing more than to promote a child fatality review process to help identify risk factors that may assist prevention professionals, such as those engaged in home visiting and parenting education, to prevent future deaths. A committee of monday morning quarter-backs being well paid to do report what many others have already done... and prbably better paid, too. Their conclusion are self-serving, inflamatory, and obviously biased. It lumps parents tgether with primary care-givers and uses undefinable, or at the very least, subjective terms such as 'maltreatment' to bolster their cause. Then there are acts of commission as well as ommission and says nothing about intent. But then if you did you couldn't plant your heads firmly so far up your cloaca's and ignore the truth for your bogus claims. Oh, and by the way, in that 17% of caretakes above? That percentage also includes relative caregivers...kinship care....of about 30% of the 17%....so tell me again about all those non-related foster parents that are killing child compared to the bio production units and relatives that are? And 32% of the total killed by their own mothers? Dear me, I think you just drove a bit deeper into the dark territories and are lost. Between you yahoos, the politicos, and the media in a couple of years we'll see the old blood bath of children come back. The data will show more deaths, more neglect, more abuse, because NON of you will face the truth of substance abuse and parental failure and viciousness. Fern! He's admitting that the tide is turning! It's an "admission" when I point out the facts? Like YOU or The Plant have the least grasp of what is going on? Or would tell the truth if you had the facts? R R R R R R What he overlooks I overlook nothing. I've researched for years and been the bane of CPS in those instances where they truly screw up. I also note when it is NOT in their purview and do NOT blame them in that case, as both you yahoos do. is that the "bloodbath" he is describing I reflect the researched FACTS as they are known. Something you dweebs seem all to unfamiliar with. is just part of his rabid pipedream delusion and the harm done BY CPS far outweighs vapid false propaganda put out mostly by the losers that beat, neglected, and killed their children and are not banned together in denial and friendly loserhood. what little good they stumble onto with their abject incompetence. No, I'm not "overlooking" a thing. You are just lying. And there is no solution in what you and your little venomous leeches propose. Around here, Around where, you block, your neighborhood, your city, your county, your state? Where? deaths in foster/adoptive care outnumber deaths at the hands of blood parents and live-in boyfriends. Well, I should hope that's true, as there are many more blood parents than foster/adoptive parents, and as for boyfriends, it would be interesting to see the actual rates....(which I know and will supply on request). I appreciate the long hours of research and the mountains of data you have produced to support your claims. I guess my newsreader, or usenet lost some more posts....seems I can't find your cited proof. Would you mind resending....after all, all that work lost...what a shame that would be. Non Fatal abuse is epidemic in foster adopter homes. I don't see any stats to back that up. I do see nationally, from commonly used sources on national abuse reporting, that you are full of Argentian Folliclarity. . His bitter complaining The only bitter complaining I do here about you is that you attempt to lead needful parents that come to this ng for help into your snares of misdirected rage...and away from the need to direct their energy at what they CAN do to get their children back. I notice also my bitterness at The Plant and friends being willing to sacrifice these families....INTO LOSING THEIR CHILDREN...for The Cause. What I am even MORE bitter about is YOUR willingness to have them join you as a loser to ease your own guilt or diguise it by you all sitting around and chanting "Gee, Ain't it Awful" when you are lying. You would sacrifice the children of these families just so YOU can appear right. I am bitter you are sick enough to do what you did and what you do. about our success You would brag about your "success?" I invite anyone reading to google on your name in your addy for browser accessed archives of your "success" and that of the little girl and her mother. is a plea to have Sympathy for the Devil. R R R R R... What "success" would that be...the right of parents to kill and maim their children that you support? When Kane talks bloodbath, you have to remember that he IS Commander McBragg, and likes to exaggerate where it suits him. When Kane talks bloodbath you have to remember he's been studying this issue for 30 years and more. He's seen the streams of drunks, druggies, insane, and all around vicious parents doing things to their children beyond belief. The recent article about the mother in Texas directing the on camera action with vivid descriptions of the raping molestation of her own daugther by the child's step father was tame compared to the things I've found in child abuse cases. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4045899/ I recall that The Plant posted that the rate of substanciated sexual abuse of children was down. When I protested the methodology a little buddy of It came to the rescue...that buddy has been missing for months now. I proceeded to produce more information that discredited the claim of reduction in sexual abuse of children...as very likely bogus count based on factors other than actual numbers of molestation, and suddenly dead silence around here....NO comeback, nothing...but The Plant from time to time would once again claim there is no need for CPS because sex abuse was declining....(for one thing, ignoring that the population is growing rapidly so all population based incident ratios likely go down for a time until reporting catches up to the census) and here's the info I offered in refutation: http://www.ncjrs.org/html/ojjdp/jjbu...1_1/page5.html This article does a good job of explaining why sexual abuse has been on the decline. For example... "One possibility is that reporting behaviors have changed. For example, there could be an increased reluctance to report child sexual abuse because of a so-called child abuse backlash. Some researchers who have analyzed media coverage of child sexual abuse have found a more skeptical attitude toward the topic in the 1990's (Beckett, 1996; Myers, 1994). According to these researchers, the dominant message of recent publicity about child sexual abuse has been that false allegations are frequent, that many innocent people are being unfairly stigmatized, and that professionals are being overly zealous in reporting possible cases of sexual abuse." This stuff we've been saying for years.... and then this... "Additional explanations for the decline in substantiated cases of child sexual abuse include events that could be occurring after a report is made to a CPS agency. It may be that fewer reports of sexual abuse are being investigated or that fewer investigations are being substantiated. A reduction in the number of investigations of alleged sexual abuse could be due to changes in the type of cases CPS agencies accept as falling within their jurisdiction. More and more of these agencies may be excluding certain types of cases, such as extrafamilial child sexual abuse or abuse that involves adolescent victims or offenders. CPS agencies may also be requiring that more or better quality information be available before a report is investigated." Please note.. and I quote, "More and more of these agencies may be excluding certain types of cases, such as extrafamilial child sexual abuse or abuse that involves adolescent victims or offenders." Another point many rant about... and CPS is finally begining to recognize. And lastly, "For example, many CPS agencies have added a structured decisionmaking component to their investigation procedures (English and Pecora, 1994). It is possible that with greater structure, fewer cases meet the criteria for substantiation than would have if the investigator had used his or her clinical judgment. More cases in which sexual abuse did not in fact occur may be getting screened out." Seems that subjective interpretation has been limited and the critera for substantiation radiacally changed resulting in a more positive screening process. What is demonstrated in your article.. was the earlier existance of vast inconsistanices, improper screening, subjective interpretation, and recognization that peer sex and even extrafamilial child sex is viewed differently. The public fought back... back-lash is it called. Even those charged with mandatory reporting saw the injustices that resulted. Your article give me hope that the tides are changing.. for the better. CPS is being tamed. bobb Am I, and others in this ng, going to be treated to more silence on issues of substance, and more lies? Of course we are....it's an historical truism with you KCPS yahoo whining slobs. He describes low level legal spanking as BEATING, Yes, suspending children to beat with objects, making young women stripe to be beaten in church, as The Plant defends as a Liberty Interest of parents, certainly isn't beating...no sirree, just a little low level spanking. By they way, can YOU define where "low level legal spanking" crosses over into abusive injurious "BEATING," before one has reached the beating stage...not after the fact? Show us the line. So much for "legal." so you know his "bloodbath" is a delusion. From a google search on [child fatalities abuse] http://tinyurl.com/2b33p Heres' a list of organizations and folks that seem, like me, to think there might be just a wee problem: http://www.seanet.com/~duff/ire/kidsourc.htm I tend to think of children being killed and maimed as something of a bloodbath. I also think of the parents that come here that you yahoos lead astray as something of a bloodbath. You don't seem to think so though, do you? Recently when stats revealed a drop in crime here, Police did something laudible when they did not claim they had caused it, and instead cited the natural ebb and flow of such things. Stats you aren't providing. And the natural ebb invariably is followed the natural flow, have you ever noticed? So did the police department cut back? Were they reduced in budget? That would have been smart, eh? They similarly don't want to be blamed when the natural variations go the OTHER way. It was refreshing to see. It would be refreshing to see you apply that to your bogus claims about CPS then. You forgot that, didn't you, little couch growth? I suspect Kane would have to exaggerate a few deaths into a "bloodbath" to justify more funds and would take credit for the other side of the natural wave, asking for more funds. Well, I do confess, I do not minimze by the use of terms like "a few deaths" and I do understand data and statistics and correlations. And I do understand chronological scope when looking at policy setting. YOU little twits always confine yourself to a blinders on snapshot of a few events over a short period of time. I look at decades and trends, and I'm here to tell you that when that ebb comes it is followed by a flow, time after time over decades. Hence it makes sense to not count on cutbacks as cures, or the level of funding during a downturn (the case for the past 10 years) being sufficient for what is obviously coming. But talking "sense" to the senseless is rather naive of me, don't you think? However sigh, I'm endlessly optimistic and I HAVE actually seen fools such as you and The Plant wake up and smell the coffee instead of each others hindquarters. Kane |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
Darn.. I should also post the last paragraph of your citiation...
"It is also important to keep in mind that although changes in CPS attitudes and policy may at least partially account for the decline in substantiated cases, these changes alone clearly do not represent the entire picture. The parallel decline in reports of child sexual abuse suggests that other factors, occurring before a case even reaches a child protective agency, must also be affecting the overall decline." Please note the free admission that there have been changes in CPS attitude and policy. I asked the question in earlier posts.. why has the population of foster kids dropped by as much as 50 percent in recent years? I now have by answer. Thanks, Kane. If anyone needs to wonder why groups like this exist this single citation provides a lot of answers. CPS, under recently, was out-of-control. Hyped by the media and often citing worse case examples they received a lot of public support they were seen as an agency that could do no wrong. Too bad for all the families they helped to destroy along the way. bobb |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
"bobb" wrote in message ...
Darn.. I should also post the last paragraph of your citiation... You should have, to be honest, posted the entire page. "It is also important to keep in mind that although changes in CPS attitudes and policy may at least partially account for the decline in substantiated cases, these changes alone clearly do not represent the entire picture. The parallel decline in reports of child sexual abuse suggests that other factors, occurring before a case even reaches a child protective agency, must also be affecting the overall decline." Please note the free admission that there have been changes in CPS attitude and policy. "free admission?" When has this information not been available and when has CPS proceeded for more than a few years without changes in policy and attitude? Making a point by NOT making a point? Brilliant. I asked the question in earlier posts.. why has the population of foster kids dropped by as much as 50 percent in recent years? I now have by answer. Thanks, Kane. You're welcome....did you forget the article also says, a great deal of it is coming from underreporting that could very likely be leaving children unprotected....and YOU WEINERS HAVE BEEN SCREAMING ABOUT CPS MISSING CHILDREN THAT ARE BEING KILLED? Yah can't have it both ways unless you are an immoral brick, bobb. If anyone needs to wonder why groups like this exist this single citation provides a lot of answers. Yeah. You are a pack of immoral stupid mindless twits that don't see the significance of, and use by politicos, the swing of the pendulum. At both ends it costs...families at one extreme and children at the other and YOU, bobberino, are celebrating the swing into the end zone for children. And count on it, it will come back WAAAAY past ASFA this next rebound, as ASFA did CAPTA...and I'd bet with a slightly shorter time lag. CPS, under recently, was out-of-control. You bought the media hype and and now the anti CPS folks hype, and your own garbaged filled mind, full of misinformation and predjudice. Hyped by the media and often citing worse case examples they received a lot of public support they were seen as an agency that could do no wrong. They were no such thing. This current viewpoint you think is a biggie was around in 76 when I first had a confrontation with CPS and has continued unabaited with NO time CPS was considered a good thing by the general public. It has been the convenient whipping boy (while trying to do a nearly impossible terrifying job) the entire time. IT's used by everyone with their own little ax to grind and hide the sparks from since my first encounter, and probably long before. Too bad for all the families they helped to destroy along the way. Playing to the gallery. You have really become one of the makers of the problem. bobb Congrats bobb, you get to have company in your happy little mudpuddle with the other ignorant pigs. Give us another shot of your smug mug. Kane |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
Greg wrote (about Kane)
He describes low level legal spanking as BEATING, so you know his "bloodbath" is a delusion. Kane wrote Lie. OK, your "bloodbath" is a lie. The line between each is unknowable, One requires BLOOD to have a bloodbath! hence any part can be called a bloodbath, as in injuries to many In other words, you LIED. ....in this case children. And it IS a bloodbath when one looks at the stats of parents claiming they were just "disciplining by spanking." Even black and blue is no "bloodbath". To call it that is a LIE and demagoguery. Face it, Dude, you're getting caught up in the zeal of your radical CAUSE! Your ideology is not bound by facts. Chris wrote Odham's Dictionary of the English Language defines "spanking" as snip Greg wrote How does it define BLOODBATH? Kane wrote It doesn't, liar. Some more thinking error? How did my question in general terms LIE? Why does this dictionary not define BLOODBATH? Are you SURE that it doesn't? Mixing subjects to confuse issues is frequently the tactic of moral cretins. It's what YOU do constantly. I did all that with my question? Man that question must have hit the mark. Doanerator runs a close second. You run a subject off to yourself Without YOUR permission? Kane, you've got ISSUES, man. to whine, he's just a noisy child seeking attention by diversion and noise. Are you gonna spank him in the grocery store? What if somebody calls the Gestapo? Doan wrote And Straus, in his studies, defined it as: "the use of physical force with the intention of causing physical pain, but not injury, for purposes of correction and control." [Does] Chris no longer believe in Straus??? ;-) See, what did I say? Did you wet yourself with your mature excitement? All I heard was: blah blah Strauss blah blah. A typical diversionary lie. I much prefer your variety of lies. You are the expert liar. Posting one definition does not mean the poster is denying any or all others. Is this like the sound of one hand clapping? How sickly immoral of you two bratty children to pretend it does as an argument against someone as honest and moral as Chris. As opposed to your atheist MORALITY? You are a paragon of morality indeed! How can we but aspire to your moral greatness? Hoisting them by their own petard (Strauss). Strauss may have mispoke. He did that a lot I think. I haven't gone to the source in a long time, but he either said, or obviously meant, corporal punishment. Could we have it in the original Straussian? Interpretations vary. And the statement would be correct if snip! IF? About Strauss' intent? Reaching for STRAWS! he was defining what happens when one uses spanking....it is the use of "a" physical force in precisely that way. To pretend that either definition negates the other, Odam or Straus is a blazingly obvious example of the moral disability you and Doan labor under. It's twisting Straus out of context to twist Chris's simple dictionary citation out of context. Way to go Baad Boyz. Yes, it's a conspiracy, Kane. We have perverted all dictionaries. I feel ever so much put in MY place. How about you, Doan? Are you all broken up? How EVER did anybody get along before we had you to lead us out of the wilderness? Way to go, Doan. Sure is. Expose yourself yet again, Droany, and you too, circle jerker. Your maturity has me just all busted up. Little boys in the bushes, making noises, and exposing themselves To take a whiz on your shoes? because they think that the people looking at them are doing anything but laughing and shaking their heads in derision. Yeah, yeah, Bad humor can be as liberating as flying without a net, but why are we talking about this? Does it excite you, Greegor? I enjoyed messing your shoes. Kane |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Kane used "odiferous vulva" and his mother wasn't queried about it .. was ... Kane used "smelly-****" and his mother approved!
"Kane" wrote in message om... "bobb" wrote in message ... Darn.. I should also post the last paragraph of your citiation... You should have, to be honest, posted the entire page. "It is also important to keep in mind that although changes in CPS attitudes and policy may at least partially account for the decline in substantiated cases, these changes alone clearly do not represent the entire picture. The parallel decline in reports of child sexual abuse suggests that other factors, occurring before a case even reaches a child protective agency, must also be affecting the overall decline." Please note the free admission that there have been changes in CPS attitude and policy. "free admission?" When has this information not been available and when has CPS proceeded for more than a few years without changes in policy and attitude? Making a point by NOT making a point? Brilliant. I asked the question in earlier posts.. why has the population of foster kids dropped by as much as 50 percent in recent years? I now have by answer. Thanks, Kane. You're welcome....did you forget the article also says, a great deal of it is coming from underreporting that could very likely be leaving children unprotected....and YOU WEINERS HAVE BEEN SCREAMING ABOUT CPS MISSING CHILDREN THAT ARE BEING KILLED? The sentence was a bit ambigious. Under reporting refers to reports never made..... not investigating, or giving little little attention to reports of minor allegations changes the picture. It's the people who are fed up fighting off the authorities and calling for change. It's the people who are willing to accept any inherent risk... or, better put, able to see there is no risk involved. Either way, your citiation sums up, very nicely, the error of CPS. Either way, it's unfair to through in the idea that the subject child would be at risk of becoming missing or killed. Absent strong indicators, that I'm sure would not be ignored, the probability is almost non-existant. bobb Yah can't have it both ways unless you are an immoral brick, bobb. If anyone needs to wonder why groups like this exist this single citation provides a lot of answers. Yeah. You are a pack of immoral stupid mindless twits that don't see the significance of, and use by politicos, the swing of the pendulum. At both ends it costs...families at one extreme and children at the other and YOU, bobberino, are celebrating the swing into the end zone for children. And count on it, it will come back WAAAAY past ASFA this next rebound, as ASFA did CAPTA...and I'd bet with a slightly shorter time lag. CPS, under recently, was out-of-control. You bought the media hype and and now the anti CPS folks hype, and your own garbaged filled mind, full of misinformation and predjudice. Acutally, not so. Any such conclusions come from CPS data.... court records.... government investigations... and citiations you provide.. which I'm sure you'll say are accurate and without predjudice. bobb Hyped by the media and often citing worse case examples they received a lot of public support they were seen as an agency that could do no wrong. They were no such thing. This current viewpoint you think is a biggie was around in 76 when I first had a confrontation with CPS and has continued unabaited with NO time CPS was considered a good thing by the general public. It has been the convenient whipping boy (while trying to do a nearly impossible terrifying job) the entire time. IT's used by everyone with their own little ax to grind and hide the sparks from since my first encounter, and probably long before. Too bad for all the families they helped to destroy along the way. Playing to the gallery. You have really become one of the makers of the problem. bobb Congrats bobb, you get to have company in your happy little mudpuddle with the other ignorant pigs. Give us another shot of your smug mug. Kane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|