A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Spanking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

wDnnSCPS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 9th 05, 09:45 PM
Greegor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old May 9th 05, 10:32 PM
Pop
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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  
Old May 9th 05, 11:21 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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  
Old May 9th 05, 11:34 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old May 10th 05, 12:10 AM
bobb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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  
Old May 10th 05, 02:47 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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  
Old May 10th 05, 12:30 PM
Pop
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


....
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  
Old May 10th 05, 08:08 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old May 10th 05, 08:38 PM
Greegor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old May 10th 05, 11:44 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.