Re: Christine case...It's rolling! LMFAO

[0:->]

Michael© wrote:
> "0:->" > wrote in
> ps.com:
>
> .. . .
>> And I'll be keeping watch. As will the Oregon state police. And if you
>> put ONE more mention of Don Fisher, or allude to his location again, I
>> shall see to it the Iowa state police have a copy of all your
>> correspondance. I take YOU very seriously. You should, if you are
>> wise, take ME very seriously. I don't bluff.
>>
>> Because his name got inadvertantly linked to mine three or four years
>> ago, I feel an obligation to him. So ....
>>
>> ... if so much as a hair on Don or his family gets mussed, the wheels,
>> already well greased with information, will start to turn. Even an
>> inquiry from the wrong quarter will be sufficient.
>>
> .. . .
>> Kane
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> The net cop Kane A.K.A. Don Fisher will be watching!
>
> LMAO
>
> Oregon State Police will be monitoring this group too because Don Fisher
> is such an important man! He has the State Police protecting him just
> like the governor does!
>
> LMAO
>
> The wheels are greased! Let 'em roll Don Fisher, you ****ing piece of
> ****! I hope someone cuts your ****ing head off and ****s down your
> throat while your wife and kids watch!
>
> They rolling yet?

No but I am. On the floor. You silly ego besotted twit.

> LMFAO

You are nearly as stupid as Greg, and that's goin' some.
>
> Michael©®™

You THINK you know how to put a threat together that doesn't make you
complicit, but you are too stupid to look up statute first.

I'm not.

I never post on such matters without close attention to detail.

Keep posting. I love it.

0:->

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> A little side note. When you came to my neighborhood we got your picture.
> You are one of three visitors, and it's not going to be hard to find out
> which you are, if push comes to shove.

If Kane isn't Donald Fisher then why is Kane so
freaked about somebody who THINKS Don=Kane
actually showing up in Don's neighborhood?
....And referring to it as HIS neighborhood? Video and all...

Kane has used his duck blind of anonymity as a tool
of harassment for YEARS. He publicly posted gratuitous
obscenity for over a year. Kane has made the most vicious
and hateful comments to and about people he disagrees with.
He posted messages calling an elderly woman a [c-word] over and over.
Kane claimed expertise in psychology, but then tried using
that supposed expertise to INSULT opponents.
Kane made all kinds of claims and vicious insults while
hiding behind his anonymity.

Kane's has gone out of his way to incite anger in any
opponents, harassing, obsessing, taunting all while hiding
behind his anonymity. To me this is an abuse of anonymity.

Coprolalia is an apt comparison, the sort of person
who sits on a bus in the middle of black people
and yells the n-word, and then complains about
what results.

I am not anonymous, and Kane has made comments
about how he flies all over and how he might pay me a visit.
Should I contact law enforcement about that?

[Greegor]

In a newsgroup called alt.support.child-protective-services
In a message thread called Re: In regards to my recent prior post.

Greg Hanson of Cedar Rapids Iowa wrote

I confess I also hope very bad things happen to Kane.
Please send me a copy of the report.

The BS artist formerly known as Kane 0:-> wrote:
> On Nov 16, 8:39 pm, "Michael©" > wrote:
> > "0:->" > wrote :
> >
> > > Criminal Investigations Division Oregon State Police
> > > >
> >
> > > This is the message in question with the full header included.
> >
> > > Thank you for your attention to this matter.
> >
> > > Again, feel free to contact me by reply.
> >
> > > Michael, you are not invited to reply to me in return unless it is
> > > publicly where our conversations take place.
> >
> > > But I have sent you a copy of this for your personal files and any
> > > other use you wish to make of it.LMFAO
> >
> > I have a copy, thanks, **** face!
>
> You are welcome.
>
> > I'll be sure that they send me a copy of the complaint in this matter,
> > since it is my right and it is public record!
>
> Ah, good. You've asked for a copy then. That's takes care of something
> I was interested in finding out.
>
> > I'll share a copy
> > here when I receive it.
>
> Thank you. I look forward to it.
>
> We can presume you won't revise it, but will scan it into a page it can
> be viewed in its original form, right? Your website would do nicely.
> Be sure and don't obscure the record ID number. I'll be needing that.
>
> It's all evidentary, only, of course, if it's ever needed. For now it's
> just plain information.
>
> And will stay that way as long as nothing criminal takes place that
> could relate to it.
>
> Come on Michael, where's that familiar "LMFAO" (Laughing my FAT Ass
> Off) you like to use to pretend you aren't bothered?
>
> 0:->
>
>
>
> >
> > > Kane. . .
> >
> > Michael

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote
> > A little side note. When you came to my neighborhood we got your picture.
> > You are one of three visitors, and it's not going to be hard to find out
> > which you are, if push comes to shove.
>
> If Kane isn't Donald Fisher then why is Kane so
> freaked about somebody who THINKS Don=Kane
> actually showing up in Don's neighborhood?

I didn't mention Don's neighborhood. I mentioned mine.

> ...And referring to it as HIS neighborhood? Video and all...

I didn't mention a video?

You have the most interesting delusions, Greg.


>
> Kane has used his duck blind of anonymity as a tool
> of harassment for YEARS.

Is Michael posting under his own name?

Did Dennis?

KILLCPSbob?

Bobber?

Fern?

And so many others?

Some of whom promoted violence against CPS workers and others?

> He publicly posted gratuitous
> obscenity for over a year.

And I still do, occasionally. It takes inspiration though.

You are aware you have, right?

> Kane has made the most vicious
> and hateful comments to and about people he disagrees with.

I'm absolutely charmed with your restraint when you disagree with
someone.

I seem to recall even recent incidences of accusations of insanity,
felony, and that rip snorter: how to declare yourself a criminal in
court to get your child back.

> He posted messages calling an elderly woman a [c-word] over and over.

Could you be referring to the lovely "elderly women" that posted her
claim that people who had their chilren whipped naken in church by
church members where having their parental rights violated by the state
when it intervened? That lovely elderly woman?

The one that like you claim I am a socialist, posited government social
programs?

> Kane claimed expertise in psychology, but then tried using
> that supposed expertise to INSULT opponents.

Gee, you have done that and NOT claimed expertise. Which of us would be
more likely to know what they were talking about, eh?

> Kane made all kinds of claims and vicious insults while
> hiding behind his anonymity.

bob

DestroyCPS

Michael (and his family of socks)

Fern(and a number)

Dennis for quite a long time.

Various other folks that used a nym to post.

All hidding?

And what were my claims, Greg? And what was the subject of my insults?

Did they have something to do with lies and misleading and propaganda,
and more especially those that would give dangerous advice to people
losing their children to CPS?

I stand accused, and you are right. I sure as hell did "insult" you
slimey dangerous ****ants that would families in crises for your own
little games of 'losers lies' and 'let's let YOU be the lab rat for my
insane 'tactics''

> Kane's has gone out of his way to incite anger in any
> opponents, harassing, obsessing, taunting all while hiding
> behind his anonymity. To me this is an abuse of anonymity.

If you are the target, I'd say you are right. But a well thought out
"abuse."

Abuse of an abuser, as it were. Well deserved. A liar, a child abuser,
a lazy slug, and someone that tells people ways to get their children
back by doing things that will most definately LOSE those children.

You tried that "I'm a criminal" declaration in court yet, Greg? You
know, the one you told some women fighting for her kids in court, and a
third of the way home, you told to admit to a crime to challenge the
law?

How does that work again? This get's your kids back how?

> Coprolalia is an apt comparison, the sort of person
> who sits on a bus in the middle of black people
> and yells the n-word, and then complains about
> what results.

Well, considering you are the bigot and homophobe here, Greg, and I
don't do such things, and this isn't a bus, but a place of debate, and
lots of rough language of all kinds (why aren't you addressing
Michael's frequent use of both his anonymity and foul language?) is
used here.

> I am not anonymous,

That's nice.

> and Kane has made comments
> about how he flies all over and how he might pay me a visit.
> Should I contact law enforcement about that?

Sure. Do it.

And while you are at it tell them that you posted the name, address,
and phone number of someone you think is me.

They'll be as charmed as Don Fisher and his family was, when you
identified him as a CPS worker in a newsgroup that has had people
express threats of and a desire to kill CPS workers.

That'll be some "flying" for sure.

What we have here, is a pack of filthy dangerous jackals that have
infested this newsgroup, ascps, for years now, and have routinely and
consistently turned it into a liars club for losers, and a place where
new readers here to see if they can find help are picked off for abuse
and misdirection by you and your cronies.

Your, and others, continuous attack on the one person here that has
consistently succeeded repeatedly for nearly 18 years, prevailing not
only in his own case, about 15 times, and helping dozens of other
people get their children back in extremely difficult circumstances, is
proof posative of just how dangerous, self serving, and vicious you
people are.

You may NOT have this newsgroup exclusively for your brutalization of
these folks, Greg.

Most will NOT fall for your bull****, ever. And I'm here to provide
some help with exposing you, again and again.

And it's worked.

Can't say as they might not have gotten it eventually, but imagine if
they all fell for your bull**** "Make it a Constitutional issue" and
"use announcing your breaking the law as a tactic to get your children
back."

You are a loser, and you want others to be losers. It's the only way
you can hide from the truth of you being a loser.

It's nice to see how desparate you and other liars and vampires here
have become that they are so frightened of me and angry at me they will
try anything to drive me away, even threaten me with violence.

Keep up the good work.

I have all these posts, of your lies, just like this one, to send them
to review if they look for a minute like they are about to fall for
your dangerous bull****.

0:-}

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> And while you are at it tell them that you posted the
> name, address, and phone number of someone you think is me.

Address and phone number?
Citations please!

[Greegor]

Kane griped about "Make it a Constitutional issue".

Something either IS or isn't a Constitutional issue.
The only question is whether a person raises the issue.

Dan suggested raising these issues on appeal.
This is not ALLOWED if the issues were never raised
in the lower court. Attorneys commonly fail to
take action to "preserve appealable issues".

This is much more disastrous than the
bad advice you say I gave somebody.

[Greegor]

Kane, You're claiming that a person who thinks you are Don
showed up in your neighborhood and was photographed?
If he actually appeared in your neighborhood, wouldn't
he have to know that you aren't Don, unless you are?
What hovoc did he raise in your neighborhood anyway?

> > Kane wrote
> > > A little side note. When you came to my neighborhood we got your picture.
> > > You are one of three visitors, and it's not going to be hard to find out
> > > which you are, if push comes to shove.
> >
> > If Kane isn't Donald Fisher then why is Kane so
> > freaked about somebody who THINKS Don=Kane
> > actually showing up in Don's neighborhood?
>
> I didn't mention Don's neighborhood. I mentioned mine.
>
> > ...And referring to it as HIS neighborhood? Video and all...
>
> I didn't mention a video?
>
> You have the most interesting delusions, Greg.
>
>
> >
> > Kane has used his duck blind of anonymity as a tool
> > of harassment for YEARS.
>
> Is Michael posting under his own name?
>
> Did Dennis?
>
> KILLCPSbob?
>
> Bobber?
>
> Fern?
>
> And so many others?
>
> Some of whom promoted violence against CPS workers and others?
>
> > He publicly posted gratuitous
> > obscenity for over a year.
>
> And I still do, occasionally. It takes inspiration though.
>
> You are aware you have, right?
>
> > Kane has made the most vicious
> > and hateful comments to and about people he disagrees with.
>
> I'm absolutely charmed with your restraint when you disagree with
> someone.
>
> I seem to recall even recent incidences of accusations of insanity,
> felony, and that rip snorter: how to declare yourself a criminal in
> court to get your child back.
>
> > He posted messages calling an elderly woman a [c-word] over and over.
>
> Could you be referring to the lovely "elderly women" that posted her
> claim that people who had their chilren whipped naken in church by
> church members where having their parental rights violated by the state
> when it intervened? That lovely elderly woman?
>
> The one that like you claim I am a socialist, posited government social
> programs?
>
> > Kane claimed expertise in psychology, but then tried using
> > that supposed expertise to INSULT opponents.
>
> Gee, you have done that and NOT claimed expertise. Which of us would be
> more likely to know what they were talking about, eh?
>
> > Kane made all kinds of claims and vicious insults while
> > hiding behind his anonymity.
>
> bob
>
> DestroyCPS
>
> Michael (and his family of socks)
>
> Fern(and a number)
>
> Dennis for quite a long time.
>
> Various other folks that used a nym to post.
>
> All hidding?
>
> And what were my claims, Greg? And what was the subject of my insults?
>
> Did they have something to do with lies and misleading and propaganda,
> and more especially those that would give dangerous advice to people
> losing their children to CPS?
>
> I stand accused, and you are right. I sure as hell did "insult" you
> slimey dangerous ****ants that would families in crises for your own
> little games of 'losers lies' and 'let's let YOU be the lab rat for my
> insane 'tactics''
>
> > Kane's has gone out of his way to incite anger in any
> > opponents, harassing, obsessing, taunting all while hiding
> > behind his anonymity. To me this is an abuse of anonymity.
>
> If you are the target, I'd say you are right. But a well thought out
> "abuse."
>
> Abuse of an abuser, as it were. Well deserved. A liar, a child abuser,
> a lazy slug, and someone that tells people ways to get their children
> back by doing things that will most definately LOSE those children.
>
> You tried that "I'm a criminal" declaration in court yet, Greg? You
> know, the one you told some women fighting for her kids in court, and a
> third of the way home, you told to admit to a crime to challenge the
> law?
>
> How does that work again? This get's your kids back how?
>
> > Coprolalia is an apt comparison, the sort of person
> > who sits on a bus in the middle of black people
> > and yells the n-word, and then complains about
> > what results.
>
> Well, considering you are the bigot and homophobe here, Greg, and I
> don't do such things, and this isn't a bus, but a place of debate, and
> lots of rough language of all kinds (why aren't you addressing
> Michael's frequent use of both his anonymity and foul language?) is
> used here.
>
> > I am not anonymous,
>
> That's nice.
>
> > and Kane has made comments
> > about how he flies all over and how he might pay me a visit.
> > Should I contact law enforcement about that?
>
> Sure. Do it.
>
> And while you are at it tell them that you posted the name, address,
> and phone number of someone you think is me.
>
> They'll be as charmed as Don Fisher and his family was, when you
> identified him as a CPS worker in a newsgroup that has had people
> express threats of and a desire to kill CPS workers.
>
> That'll be some "flying" for sure.
>
> What we have here, is a pack of filthy dangerous jackals that have
> infested this newsgroup, ascps, for years now, and have routinely and
> consistently turned it into a liars club for losers, and a place where
> new readers here to see if they can find help are picked off for abuse
> and misdirection by you and your cronies.
>
> Your, and others, continuous attack on the one person here that has
> consistently succeeded repeatedly for nearly 18 years, prevailing not
> only in his own case, about 15 times, and helping dozens of other
> people get their children back in extremely difficult circumstances, is
> proof posative of just how dangerous, self serving, and vicious you
> people are.
>
> You may NOT have this newsgroup exclusively for your brutalization of
> these folks, Greg.
>
> Most will NOT fall for your bull****, ever. And I'm here to provide
> some help with exposing you, again and again.
>
> And it's worked.
>
> Can't say as they might not have gotten it eventually, but imagine if
> they all fell for your bull**** "Make it a Constitutional issue" and
> "use announcing your breaking the law as a tactic to get your children
> back."
>
> You are a loser, and you want others to be losers. It's the only way
> you can hide from the truth of you being a loser.
>
> It's nice to see how desparate you and other liars and vampires here
> have become that they are so frightened of me and angry at me they will
> try anything to drive me away, even threaten me with violence.
>
> Keep up the good work.
>
> I have all these posts, of your lies, just like this one, to send them
> to review if they look for a minute like they are about to fall for
> your dangerous bull****.
>
> 0:-}

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane, You're claiming that a person who thinks you are Don
> showed up in your neighborhood and was photographed?

Yep. I'm not at liberty to say how he did that, but he did.

> If he actually appeared in your neighborhood, wouldn't
> he have to know that you aren't Don, unless you are?

Can't say, Greg.

> What hovoc did he raise in your neighborhood anyway?

Did I say he did?

We live in a very tight community here. We look out for each other.
Strangers attract a lot of unobserved attention.

Because many people here were or are in LE, they know how to pay
attention.

I have state police, sheriff's deputies, U.S. Marshals living all over
the place here. Some retired, most on active duty.

A few military retired as well.

I picked this neighborhood to live in as much for the neighbors as any
other reason. I know them, they know me. We knew each other, a lot of
us, before I bought here.

It's nice. And it's not in Bend.

0:->

>
> > > Kane wrote
> > > > A little side note. When you came to my neighborhood we got your picture.
> > > > You are one of three visitors, and it's not going to be hard to find out
> > > > which you are, if push comes to shove.
> > >
> > > If Kane isn't Donald Fisher then why is Kane so
> > > freaked about somebody who THINKS Don=Kane
> > > actually showing up in Don's neighborhood?
> >
> > I didn't mention Don's neighborhood. I mentioned mine.
> >
> > > ...And referring to it as HIS neighborhood? Video and all...
> >
> > I didn't mention a video?
> >
> > You have the most interesting delusions, Greg.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Kane has used his duck blind of anonymity as a tool
> > > of harassment for YEARS.
> >
> > Is Michael posting under his own name?
> >
> > Did Dennis?
> >
> > KILLCPSbob?
> >
> > Bobber?
> >
> > Fern?
> >
> > And so many others?
> >
> > Some of whom promoted violence against CPS workers and others?
> >
> > > He publicly posted gratuitous
> > > obscenity for over a year.
> >
> > And I still do, occasionally. It takes inspiration though.
> >
> > You are aware you have, right?
> >
> > > Kane has made the most vicious
> > > and hateful comments to and about people he disagrees with.
> >
> > I'm absolutely charmed with your restraint when you disagree with
> > someone.
> >
> > I seem to recall even recent incidences of accusations of insanity,
> > felony, and that rip snorter: how to declare yourself a criminal in
> > court to get your child back.
> >
> > > He posted messages calling an elderly woman a [c-word] over and over.
> >
> > Could you be referring to the lovely "elderly women" that posted her
> > claim that people who had their chilren whipped naken in church by
> > church members where having their parental rights violated by the state
> > when it intervened? That lovely elderly woman?
> >
> > The one that like you claim I am a socialist, posited government social
> > programs?
> >
> > > Kane claimed expertise in psychology, but then tried using
> > > that supposed expertise to INSULT opponents.
> >
> > Gee, you have done that and NOT claimed expertise. Which of us would be
> > more likely to know what they were talking about, eh?
> >
> > > Kane made all kinds of claims and vicious insults while
> > > hiding behind his anonymity.
> >
> > bob
> >
> > DestroyCPS
> >
> > Michael (and his family of socks)
> >
> > Fern(and a number)
> >
> > Dennis for quite a long time.
> >
> > Various other folks that used a nym to post.
> >
> > All hidding?
> >
> > And what were my claims, Greg? And what was the subject of my insults?
> >
> > Did they have something to do with lies and misleading and propaganda,
> > and more especially those that would give dangerous advice to people
> > losing their children to CPS?
> >
> > I stand accused, and you are right. I sure as hell did "insult" you
> > slimey dangerous ****ants that would families in crises for your own
> > little games of 'losers lies' and 'let's let YOU be the lab rat for my
> > insane 'tactics''
> >
> > > Kane's has gone out of his way to incite anger in any
> > > opponents, harassing, obsessing, taunting all while hiding
> > > behind his anonymity. To me this is an abuse of anonymity.
> >
> > If you are the target, I'd say you are right. But a well thought out
> > "abuse."
> >
> > Abuse of an abuser, as it were. Well deserved. A liar, a child abuser,
> > a lazy slug, and someone that tells people ways to get their children
> > back by doing things that will most definately LOSE those children.
> >
> > You tried that "I'm a criminal" declaration in court yet, Greg? You
> > know, the one you told some women fighting for her kids in court, and a
> > third of the way home, you told to admit to a crime to challenge the
> > law?
> >
> > How does that work again? This get's your kids back how?
> >
> > > Coprolalia is an apt comparison, the sort of person
> > > who sits on a bus in the middle of black people
> > > and yells the n-word, and then complains about
> > > what results.
> >
> > Well, considering you are the bigot and homophobe here, Greg, and I
> > don't do such things, and this isn't a bus, but a place of debate, and
> > lots of rough language of all kinds (why aren't you addressing
> > Michael's frequent use of both his anonymity and foul language?) is
> > used here.
> >
> > > I am not anonymous,
> >
> > That's nice.
> >
> > > and Kane has made comments
> > > about how he flies all over and how he might pay me a visit.
> > > Should I contact law enforcement about that?
> >
> > Sure. Do it.
> >
> > And while you are at it tell them that you posted the name, address,
> > and phone number of someone you think is me.
> >
> > They'll be as charmed as Don Fisher and his family was, when you
> > identified him as a CPS worker in a newsgroup that has had people
> > express threats of and a desire to kill CPS workers.
> >
> > That'll be some "flying" for sure.
> >
> > What we have here, is a pack of filthy dangerous jackals that have
> > infested this newsgroup, ascps, for years now, and have routinely and
> > consistently turned it into a liars club for losers, and a place where
> > new readers here to see if they can find help are picked off for abuse
> > and misdirection by you and your cronies.
> >
> > Your, and others, continuous attack on the one person here that has
> > consistently succeeded repeatedly for nearly 18 years, prevailing not
> > only in his own case, about 15 times, and helping dozens of other
> > people get their children back in extremely difficult circumstances, is
> > proof posative of just how dangerous, self serving, and vicious you
> > people are.
> >
> > You may NOT have this newsgroup exclusively for your brutalization of
> > these folks, Greg.
> >
> > Most will NOT fall for your bull****, ever. And I'm here to provide
> > some help with exposing you, again and again.
> >
> > And it's worked.
> >
> > Can't say as they might not have gotten it eventually, but imagine if
> > they all fell for your bull**** "Make it a Constitutional issue" and
> > "use announcing your breaking the law as a tactic to get your children
> > back."
> >
> > You are a loser, and you want others to be losers. It's the only way
> > you can hide from the truth of you being a loser.
> >
> > It's nice to see how desparate you and other liars and vampires here
> > have become that they are so frightened of me and angry at me they will
> > try anything to drive me away, even threaten me with violence.
> >
> > Keep up the good work.
> >
> > I have all these posts, of your lies, just like this one, to send them
> > to review if they look for a minute like they are about to fall for
> > your dangerous bull****.
> >
> > 0:-}

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane griped about "Make it a Constitutional issue".

Yep. If it's not needed.

> Something either IS or isn't a Constitutional issue.

Gee, can I quote you?

> The only question is whether a person raises the issue.

There is rarely a time what something is "only a question of."

> Dan suggested raising these issues on appeal.

Yep, if it's appropriate.

> This is not ALLOWED if the issues were never raised
> in the lower court.

"never raised?"

That's not what you said earlier on this issue, nor what Bob the
Creative Constitutionalist suggests. What makes you think you have to
'file' anything with the court?

Everything that transpires in a court case is appealable. One need only
read the court transcript to pick and choose.

Show us the statutes that says that one must file anything at all to
later appeal on a subject that came up in court.

And the circumstances where one would appeal something but not have
already brought it up in court?

> Attorneys commonly fail to
> take action to "preserve appealable issues".

What "action?"

Dodo, the problem is that your buddy Bob the Constitutional Creativist,
and I mean that in the most appreciative way, 0:->, seems to think that
invoking, in trial, all the amendments he mentioned, which for the most
part have anything to do with family court RARELY IF AT ALL, is a waste
of time and will NOT be useful then or later.

You cannot, for instance, claim your child is being enslaved (without
making everyone laugh) because he or she is in foster care. It would
never GO to appeal, so why file on it with a claim of violation of the
13th?

So what good what it do to invoke the 13th amendment, claim a
violation, so you could later appeal? No appellate court would agree to
hear such a case...unless you had some evidence your child was treated
like a slave.

Now THAT would be something to bring up in court if you had evidence.
How many such cases have you heard of, that did in fact go on to
appeal?

Show a single CPS case where this has worked? ONE.

> This is much more disastrous than the
> bad advice you say I gave somebody.

"You say?" No, Greg...I told you. And anyone else that can read.

Are you suggesting you are ready to defend YOUR claim that using
admission of a criminal violation in a civil court child welfare case
is a tactic that is likely to result in the court turning over your
children to you? Winning, in other words?

You trying to shift to an argument about constitional issues, and Dan,
is seen for what it is; a dodge, Greg.

You told someone to use their lawbreaking in a CIVIL CASE, a child
protection case, one that had already been one third WON.

Now I ask you, and don't expect an answer (surprise me anyway), would
YOU use such a strategy yourself in similar circumstances?

If so, why don't you use it in your present case?

Challenge the constitutionality of some law that would be peripheral to
your case...not child abuse or similar, but say something like
recording illegally.

Do it, and get back to us. Or present an argument, with some supporting
data or legal opinions that would support your advice to that woman.

Or go back to attacking Dan or myself with whatever you can pull out of
your hat: lies, personal slander, outrageous claims of CPS workers in
hiding here. Give it a go.

Or, Greg, admit you gave very bad advice indeed, and risk that women,
if she loses her children, suing YOUR ass off.

She can sue you for anything. Remember, that's allowed in this country.


I wonder if you settle before trial, eh? But you are brave enough and
believe in your methods enough (though you have never won a case using
them) to stand up and be counted. Is that not right. Or might you be
thinking, as I am ....

There is a good deal of evidence that you did indeed advise her to
flaunt the law to challenge the law.

Going to go for it, Greg?

0:->

[0:->]

Michael© wrote:
> "0:->" > wrote in
> ps.com:
>
> >
> > Greegor wrote:
> >> Kane, You're claiming that a person who thinks you are Don
> >> showed up in your neighborhood and was photographed?
> >
> > Yep. I'm not at liberty to say how he did that, but he did.
> >
> >> If he actually appeared in your neighborhood, wouldn't
> >> he have to know that you aren't Don, unless you are?
> >
> > Can't say, Greg.
> >
> >> What hovoc did he raise in your neighborhood anyway?
> >
> > Did I say he did?
> >
> > We live in a very tight community here. We look out for each other.
> > Strangers attract a lot of unobserved attention.
> >
> > Because many people here were or are in LE, they know how to pay
> > attention.
> >
> > I have state police, sheriff's deputies, U.S. Marshals living all over
> > the place here. Some retired, most on active duty.
> >
> > A few military retired as well.
> >
> > I picked this neighborhood to live in as much for the neighbors as any
> > other reason. I know them, they know me. We knew each other, a lot of
> > us, before I bought here.
>
> Translation: The halfway house for the formerly committed, criminally
> insane to which you were assigned, is conveniently located next-door to
> the police department,

I'm about 18 miles from the nearest police department office.

> one block away from the veterans home

I'm, probably 60 miles from one of those.

> and the
> video of the 'stranger'

Three of them. You could be one.

> was captured on the 'Goodwill store' parking lot
> security camera.

Video? What video?

Goodwill? 48 miles from me.

> LMFAO

Sure you are.

> You're a trip, Donald Fisher.

Oh, you were talking to him.

Well, okay, I'll relay the message, as I always do when he's mentioned
here.

It's nice to know you are making it less and less possible to take the
action yourself that you hope happens to him, or me. At least less
likely if you don't want to be implicated or caught.

You've no idea what a relief that will be to both our families.

You seem very violent by nature. Am I mistaken in that assumption?

How are the doggies by the way?

Where is this police academy that does killer dog training? I'd sure
like to watch them at work training.

Likely the press would too. Freedom of speech and all. Protection of
the right to it, you know.

0:->

[Greegor]

G> > Kane griped about "Make it a Constitutional issue".
>
K> Yep. If it's not needed.

Isn't that an issue between the family, their attorney and the JURY?

G> > Something either IS or isn't a Constitutional issue.
>
K> Gee, can I quote you?
>
G> > The only question is whether a person raises the issue.
>
K> There is rarely a time what something is "only a question of."
>
G> > Dan suggested raising these issues on appeal.
>
K> Yep, if it's appropriate.
>
G> > This is not ALLOWED if the issues were never raised
> > in the lower court.
>
K> "never raised?"

New issues can NOT be raised on appeal
in any court of any state of the USA.

K> That's not what you said earlier on this issue, nor what Bob the
> Creative Constitutionalist suggests. What makes you think you have to
> 'file' anything with the court?
>
> Everything that transpires in a court case is appealable. One need only
> read the court transcript to pick and choose.

Nope. Can't raise a new issue on appeal. Must be timely also.

PLUS you seem to forget that many Family Law hearings are not
transcribed.
This is another example of the lawless Family Courts.
Family can't easily appeal from a transcript that doesn't exist.
CPS and the Judge KNOW that.

K> Show us the statutes that says that one must file anything at all to
> later appeal on a subject that came up in court.
>
> And the circumstances where one would appeal something but not have
> already brought it up in court?
>
G> > Attorneys commonly fail to
> > take action to "preserve appealable issues".
>
K> What "action?"

Some kind of black scribbling on very thin pieces of flattened ground
up trees.

Kane wrote
> flaunt the law to challenge the law.

flount?

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> G> > Kane griped about "Make it a Constitutional issue".
> K> Yep. If it's not needed.
>
> Isn't that an issue between the family, their attorney and the JURY?

Yep, that's why I wouldn't want to follow Bob's advice.

Of course, unless I miss my guess, Bob was referring to child custody
cases. Are there a lot of juries in those?

> G> > Something either IS or isn't a Constitutional issue.
> K> Gee, can I quote you?
> G> > The only question is whether a person raises the issue.
> K> There is rarely a time what something is "only a question of."
> G> > Dan suggested raising these issues on appeal.
> K> Yep, if it's appropriate.
> G> > This is not ALLOWED if the issues were never raised
>>> in the lower court.
> K> "never raised?"
>
> New issues can NOT be raised on appeal
> in any court of any state of the USA.

You seem to forget, one does not have to go to the trouble, or risk,
that Bob suggests to "raise" on appeal later. Everything in the trial
can be appealed by any mention of it.

You can use the constitution on appeal without it's ever being mentioned
before. It's the content of the CASE that is the basis for the appeal
process, not a "constitutional challenge in lower court."

> K> That's not what you said earlier on this issue, nor what Bob the
>> Creative Constitutionalist suggests. What makes you think you have to
>> 'file' anything with the court?
>>
>> Everything that transpires in a court case is appealable. One need only
>> read the court transcript to pick and choose.
>
> Nope. Can't raise a new issue on appeal. Must be timely also.

What don't you understand about the statement, "Everything that
transpires in a court case is appealable?"

Does it look to you like I'm claiming what you seem to think I'm claiming?

Nothing IN and from the lower court case would be "new," stupid.

All the attorney has to do is mention ANY aspect of the case, and it's
automatically available for later appeal. It does NOT have to formatted
or presented as a "constitutional issue."

Presumably nothing is exempt from that status if it can be shown to BE a
constitutional issue later.

It's the issue that is appealable, not whether or not it's constitutional.

Man, Fundy thinkers are weird.

> PLUS you seem to forget that many Family Law hearings are not
> transcribed.

Wrong.

> This is another example of the lawless Family Courts.

Wrong.

> Family can't easily appeal from a transcript that doesn't exist.
> CPS and the Judge KNOW that.

And they cold appeal from a Constitutional issue brought up, by name, in
that court, where there still is no record of it by transcript?

Please explain this strange anomaly, where one kind of issue is not
recorded, because NOTHING is recorded, and yet another kind of issue IS,
though it too is not recorded, because nothing is recorded.

Did you forget your smart pills with breakfast this morning?

> K> Show us the statutes that says that one must file anything at all to
>> later appeal on a subject that came up in court.
>>
>> And the circumstances where one would appeal something but not have
>> already brought it up in court?
>>
> G> > Attorneys commonly fail to
>>> take action to "preserve appealable issues".
> K> What "action?"
>
> Some kind of black scribbling on very thin pieces of flattened ground
> up trees.

Yes? And this is recorded in a civil trail you claim no recorded
transcript is made how? In flaming letters on the marble walls?

>
> Kane wrote
>> flaunt the law to challenge the law.
>
> flount?

Hey, you DID take a smart pill this morning. Thanks for the correction.

On the other hand, "Flaunt" works for me.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1) - Cite This Source
flaunt  /flɔnt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[flawnt]
Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object)
1. to parade or display oneself conspicuously, defiantly, or boldly.
2. to wave conspicuously in the air.
–verb (used with object)
3. to parade or display ostentatiously: to flaunt one's wealth.
*** 4. to ignore or treat with disdain: He was expelled for flaunting
military regulations.

I draw your attention to number ***4. above.

That was my meaning, exactly.

If you are going to correct someone else's choice of terms or words, be
sure theirs don't mean what they obviously were meant to mean.

Now, can you help me with that other matter.

How bringing up a constitutional violation in court, where you claim no
records are kept, will produce evidence it was brought up later when one
wishes to go to appeal.

And for that matter, how about proving the transcripts of civil family
court trials are not made.

Are you referring to a "hearing" of some kind? A preliminary hearing to
determine if there is going to be a courtroom "trial" or "hearing for
determination of outcomes," kind of hearing?

IN the first kind, those aren't appealable.

Deciding to have a trial isn't an appealable issue.

The trial itself, of course, IS.

We've had this conversation before, and I confess I must have failed to
get through to you. You are not the most apt pupil I've ever had.

Please try to remember this time.

Some stages of a case in child welfare don't constitute a "trail" in the
sense it has appealable factors in it.

You could be thinking of those.

They might not have recorded narrative, because all the factors are in
written form already and presented to the judge.

And in fact, there is no litigation going on, just a decision whether or
not their will be.

Got that? Good. Don't forget it.

As for the TPR trial, which is the place for constitutional issues, you
don't have to say, for it to be appealable, "My child is held in slavery
by the foster care system and I invoke the 13th amendment as being
violated in his and my case."

All you have to say, to appeal it later is something on the order of,
the state placed my child wrongfully in foster care.

If the court finds against you and terminates your rights, and you can
convince the higher court, the appellate, you don't need to have
mentioned the 13th amendment earlier to bring it up when you again claim
your child was wrongfully taken.

If fact, if you insist you must have, then what you are expressly
claiming is that all trial issues would have been covered earlier...that
is no appeal process would include NEW ARGUMENT.

Now that would be kind of silly to claim.

But go ahead.

Here's how you seem to be stating it:

If you claim wrongful taking and holding of your child, but do NOT
mentioned the 13th amendment in the earlier trial, YOUR attorney at
appeal may not mention the 13th amendment (never mind he'd be insane to
do so as a logical argument) in building his case.

Am I correct in your meaning?

Please explain how the BOR is barred from use as argument and support of
argument in appeal if it has not been mentioned before in prior trial.
Get Bob the Creative Constitutionalist to assist.

This IS going to be good.

Fundy thinkers are a laugh riot.

But dangerous as hell running rampant in the population.

R R R R R R R

And in a court room? Much bigger yuks.

Though I've seen a judge or two run out of his or her sense of humor
eventually.

You need flushing, you fundies. Hop right in. I'll get the handle.

0:->

[Greegor]

If Michael showed up in your neighborhood and
still calls you Don, that would indicate you are Don.

[Greegor]

In newsgroups
alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.foster-parents
Subject: Re: Does anyone remember this?

Kane wrote
> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.

1. This could of course just be some hogwash
you spew out of some sort of fear.

2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
You lead a sort of "Walter Mitty" life of posting abuse and
hiding behind anonymity and "moral and ethical" lies.
You voluntarily created your own threat.

3. They probably would look at you as their pet - mental case.
If you had a friend or family member with Tourettes Coprolalia
who yells the n-word in a crowd of black people, just how
long would you keep defending this person from the
inevitable result of their instigation?

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> If Michael showed up in your neighborhood and
> still calls you Don, that would indicate you are Don.

You'd have to provide a bit more logical argument to support that
claim.

Your name is not "Butthead," actually, is it Greg?

Despite all indications here to that presumption.

If I showed up in your neighbor hood and still called you "Butthead"
would that mean you are not Greg?

So if Michael shows up in my neighborhood and calls me "Greg" does that
make me Greg?

Just how stupid are you, Doug...oh wait, .... that's not logical at
all, no matter what I use for a name for you how does that change you
actual name, stupid?

I'm Kane, here, there, and everywhere.

Have you ever stopped to figure out what it would mean if I were Don
Fisher?

The risk he would take by posting here and giving good information
about CPS?

The risk to his job he'd be taking?

Think about it.

If I were he, I'd be doing a great service AND risking my job. Is that
not likely, stupid?

0:->

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> In newsgroups
> alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.foster-parents
> Subject: Re: Does anyone remember this?
>
> Kane wrote
>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>
> 1. This could of course just be some hogwash
> you spew out of some sort of fear.

Anything is possible, Greg. Like you claiming to do child care.

> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.

Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though I was
far too kind.

> You lead a sort of "Walter Mitty" life of posting abuse and
> hiding behind anonymity and "moral and ethical" lies.
> You voluntarily created your own threat.

You seem totally unconcerned with the anonymous posting of others, Greg.
Others that make lying accusations about posters here.

No, I didn't create any threat Greg. That's impossible.

> 3. They probably would look at you as their pet - mental case.

They haven't told me.

> If you had a friend or family member with Tourettes Coprolalia
> who yells the n-word in a crowd of black people, just how
> long would you keep defending this person from the
> inevitable result of their instigation?

For ever. Naturally. They cannot control their outbursts reliably.

No Tourettes victim instigates anything at all. Their disease does.

Now you go after Tourette's victims too?

Where will it end, Greg.

In our country words are not sufficient motive to injure or kill someone
unless those words are accompanied by actions.

My own tactics are to make sure the words aren't lost just in case the
actions take place.

It will make the result much easier for me to defend. Should I prevail.

As I'm likely to.

0:->

[Greegor]

Two messages answered

Kane wrote
> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though I was
> far too kind.

You know, I've seen you yapping about that over and over again
like some kind of mental case for a LONG time now.

Please post a link to where she said as you described.
You wouldn't have embellished that now would you?

Greg wrote
> You lead a sort of "Walter Mitty" life of posting abuse and
> hiding behind anonymity and "moral and ethical" lies.
> You voluntarily created your own threat.

Kane wrote
> You seem totally unconcerned with the anonymous posting of others, Greg.
> Others that make lying accusations about posters here.

Did they shill for the state?
Did they work for CPS?
Do they make excuses for CPS?

Do you have a problem coping with angry citizens?

Kane wrote
> No, I didn't create any threat Greg. That's impossible.

Yell fire in a crowded theatre and call it free speech.
Stand in the middle of a crowd of black people and yell the n-word.
You cultivated your own threat throught great effort and
over a period of YEARS.

Greg wrote
> 3. They probably would look at you as their pet - mental case.

Kane wrote
> They haven't told me.

Is that so amazing?

Greg wrote
> If you had a friend or family member with Tourettes Coprolalia
> who yells the n-word in a crowd of black people, just how
> long would you keep defending this person from the
> inevitable result of their instigation?

Kane wrote
> For ever. Naturally. They cannot control their outbursts reliably.
> No Tourettes victim instigates anything at all. Their disease does.
> Now you go after Tourette's victims too?

And out of your utmost respect for black citizens
you would put them in the middle of just such a crowd?

Or you'd feign amazement they end up suffering violence?

Kane wrote
> Where will it end, Greg.
> In our country words are not sufficient motive to injure or kill
> someone unless those words are accompanied by actions.

This is like the idiot who steps in front of a semi truck
because he has the right of way.

Kane wrote
> My own tactics are to make sure the words aren't
> lost just in case the actions take place.

Why ANNOUNCE IT then? More pre-emptive intimidation?
Is it like your BS "lawyer approved" legal "threatgram"?
That was a good one!

Almost as good as remotely ""diagnosing"" some
opponent as if you or ""your friend"" with qualifications
would be ethical in doing so?
For the purpose of winning an argument?

Kane wrote
> It will make the result much easier for me to defend. Should I prevail.

Why would you have to defend it if you prevail?

Kane wrote > As I'm likely to.

How nice for you.

Greegor wrote:
> If Michael showed up in your neighborhood and
> still calls you Don, that would indicate you are Don.

Kane wrote
> You'd have to provide a bit more logical
> argument to support that claim.

In order for Michael to show up in YOUR
neighborhood, as YOU have alleged, he would
have had to know who you really are, and he
has called you Donald since then.

How could he possibly show up in your
neighborhood if he has your name wrong?

Kane wrote
> Have you ever stopped to figure out what it would mean if I were Don
> Fisher?
>
> The risk he would take by posting here and giving good information
> about CPS?

What good information? You're a complete SUCKUP! And a nut case!

Kane wrote > The risk to his job he'd be taking?

You're retired.

Kane wrote > Think about it.

..0001 seconds of CPU time expended.

Kane wrote > If I were he, I'd be doing a great service

Delusions.

Kane wrote > AND risking my job.

Retired.
And a delusional nut case.

<snip!>

[0:->]

On Nov 17, 10:47 pm, "Greegor" > wrote:
> Two messages answered
>
> Kane wrote
>
> > Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> > intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> > hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
I was
> > far too kind.You know, I've seen you yapping about that over and
over again
> like some kind of mental case for a LONG time now.

And every time, twice that I can quickly and easily document, liar, I've
answered your question fully with both quotes and links to source posts.

You are lying again.

If you really aren't remembering my replies before to this same
question, Greg, and aren't just using a sad and hapless debating "ploy"
by asking again, then don't you think that maybe you have a little problem?

If you really don't remember, then Greg, you need some help. It sounds
organic to me. Brain deterioration. Ever work in an environment with a
lot of volatile chemicals?
>
> Please post a link to where she said as you described.

It's been done before, more than once.

> You wouldn't have embellished that now would you?

In fact I toned it down.

And Greg, the fact is, in aps, I not only answered this question fully
but it was YOU I replied to. TWICE at a minimum.

So you are a liar, and I have proof again that you simply ask such
questions to muddy and fog the issue. Or you are in serious need of help
for some brain damage or something similar.

Do that in court and some judge is going to give you a little time in
jail to think about what a lowlife scumsucker you really are.

Here's the post where I already answered your -Fern in support of
parents beating children in church question- you lying, or memory
impaired, little git:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/c9f724afed1ba56e?hl=en&

And again, I answered this SAME question, but in more detail, with
direct quotes from Fern's own posted defense of the church and claiming
CPS was violating the constitution to intervene.

How many more times are you going to lie about this, Greg?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/1cba7ce8e157b082?hl=en&

She supported the beating of children, naked, in church, by church
members. Simple as that.

And it goes along with other nutso family hating bull**** from her and
support by you and other lowlifes just like you.

>
> Greg wrote
>
> > You lead a sort of "Walter Mitty" life of posting abuse and
> > hiding behind anonymity and "moral and ethical" lies.
> > You voluntarily created your own threat.Kane wrote
>
> > You seem totally unconcerned with the anonymous posting of others,
Greg.
> > Others that make lying accusations about posters here.Did they
shill for the state?
> Did they work for CPS?

Michael? Could be. I've always suspected it.

Dennis? Not as far as I know.

The various Bobs? I couldn't say since I don't know.

> Do they make excuses for CPS?

Dodging again?

>
> Do you have a problem coping with angry citizens?
>
Do I appear to have a problem coping with you and Michael, and the many
that came before?

> Kane wrote
>
> > No, I didn't create any threat Greg. That's impossible.Yell fire in
a crowded theatre and call it free speech.
> Stand in the middle of a crowd of black people and yell the n-word.
> You cultivated your own threat throught great effort and
> over a period of YEARS.

Well, I've not done your "crowd of black people" yell here. All I've
done is expose liars, child abusers, and sick little creeps like you.

> Greg wrote
>
> > 3. They probably would look at you as their pet - mental case.Kane
wrote
>
> > They haven't told me.Is that so amazing?
>
> Greg wrote
>
> > If you had a friend or family member with Tourettes Coprolalia
> > who yells the n-word in a crowd of black people, just how
> > long would you keep defending this person from the
> > inevitable result of their instigation?Kane wrote
>
> > For ever. Naturally. They cannot control their outbursts reliably.
> > No Tourettes victim instigates anything at all. Their disease does.
> > Now you go after Tourette's victims too?

[[[ I note a peculiar character handling glitch in the new google reply
format. Occasionally not only does it drop an attribution mark, but it
also loses the "break" or what we used to call a carraige return, and
the sentence in question gets joined with the prior posters comment,
paragraphically. The sentence below was in fact tacked onto the end of
my paragraph above. I have corrected it. Watch for these if you use
google to reply. ]]]

> And out of your utmost respect for black citizens
> you would put them in the middle of just such a crowd?

I? YOU created the black crowd scenario. In fact I'd avoid black people
when that child was with me. Sad, but true. ON the other hand, I'd make
clear to black aquaintences of mine that the boy was afflicted with
Tourettes. Do you think black people in general are so ignorant that
they could not cope with the reality of the disease, Greg?
>
> Or you'd feign amazement they end up suffering violence?

That's not the question you asked, nor is it in my answer.

You are deluding again.

Have you any idea how sick this makes you appear, Greg?

>
> Kane wrote
>
> > Where will it end, Greg.
> > In our country words are not sufficient motive to injure or kill
> > someone unless those words are accompanied by actions.

> This is like the idiot who steps in front of a semi truck
> because he has the right of way.

You have just defended the right of violent people to injure or kill
others because they victim used WORDS.

You are one sick puppy.

>
> Kane wrote
>
> > My own tactics are to make sure the words aren't
> > lost just in case the actions take place.

> Why ANNOUNCE IT then? More pre-emptive intimidation?

Nope. More collection of information that both discourages violence from
others, as they have to think now of the consequences of their reply or
commentary if viewed later after they commit a violent act, should they
chose to do so.

> Is it like your BS "lawyer approved" legal "threatgram"?
> That was a good one!

A notice of intent from an attorney is a very serious matter, Greg. One
should not laugh. In fact a notice of intent from a person carries very
similar weight, if used later as evidence.
>
> Almost as good as remotely ""diagnosing"" some
> opponent as if you or ""your friend"" with qualifications
> would be ethical in doing so?
> For the purpose of winning an argument?

Well, if one is asked, then one responds.

If you don't agree that's your right to disagree.
>
> Kane wrote
>
> > It will make the result much easier for me to defend. Should I prevail.

> Why would you have to defend it if you prevail?

Non sequitur.

>
> Kane wrote > As I'm likely to.
>
> How nice for you.

So far, so good.

>
> Greegor wrote:
> > If Michael showed up in your neighborhood and
> > still calls you Don, that would indicate you are Don.Kane wrote
>
> > You'd have to provide a bit more logical
> > argument to support that claim.

> In order for Michael to show up in YOUR
> neighborhood, as YOU have alleged, he would
> have had to know who you really are, and he
> has called you Donald since then.

What he calls me is irrelevant. I have a neighborhood.

> How could he possibly show up in your
> neighborhood if he has your name wrong?

Yes, interesting question isn't it. That suggests he doesn't have my
name, Kane, "wrong" at all.

>
> Kane wrote
>
> > Have you ever stopped to figure out what it would mean if I were Don
> > Fisher?
>
> > The risk he would take by posting here and giving good information
> > about CPS?

What good information? You're a complete SUCKUP! And a nut case!

That's your claim. I doubt others would agree if they were familiar with
my posts related to CPS information.

I've cited, for instance, long passages of state statutes, and policy
manual items in response to questions of how to fight CPS.

I've even answered YOUR questions in this regard, Greg.

You are lying and delusional.

I just proved that with the "fern defending churchgoing child beaters."
You can't even remember your own questions and my replies, my detailed
and source provided links to my answer to your question.

So when you make a claim as you did above that I have not provided
information, Good information, and claim I'm a suckup to CPS, you would
be most likely lying yet again, Greg.
>
> Kane wrote > The risk to his job he'd be taking?
>
> You're retired.

No, I'm not retired.

>
> Kane wrote > Think about it.
>
> .0001 seconds of CPU time expended.

More than you deserve.
>
> Kane wrote > If I were he, I'd be doing a great service
>
> Delusions.

Nope. Dan seems to think I've been a great help to his families using
the information I supplied. Dan has asked me some tactical as well as
specific policy and statute questions over the years. He claims my
answers helped.


>
> Kane wrote > AND risking my job.
>
> Retired.

I'm not retired.

> And a delusional nut case.

I don't pretend questions I've asked have not been repeatedly answered,
as you have done over the years, apparently as a ploy in argument...or
because you in fact are the delusional nutcase.

Go read the --fern as apologist for church going child beaters-- Greg,
where YOU pretend I've not answered that question fully more than
once...and DIRECTLY TO YOU.

> <snip!>

Of course. You've run out of lies for the moment.

0:->

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> I was far too kind.

You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.

Why is it so hard to produce a link to Fern's post that says what you
claim?

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote
> > Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> > intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> > hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> > I was far too kind.
>
> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.

No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.

> Why is it so hard to produce a link to Fern's post that says what you
> claim?

Why is it so hard for you to produce a link to that accusation you made
above?

Well, could it be because you are a liar?

As for my producing a link, are you suggesting that my quote of Fern is
a lie?

Tiny URL has somehow slipped a cog and their link no longer goes to
Fern's post. At the time it did and those that clicked it read what I
quoted. Can it be produced again. heheh...well let's see shall we. Read on.

Are you trying to pretend to claim to bull**** us that she did not post
that quoted comment?

Let's start with that lovely legal jargon that applies here, and in my
recent discussion about 'threats.'

It's called, "goes to state of mind."

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=church+reverend&qt_s=Search&enc_author=JSlYjxAAAADq8YQJJ6m3_Q8fISn4esWT

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/browse_thread/thread/c70ee7b8b177670a/8b0270d47a15c354#8b0270d47a15c354

Read those and try to convince us Fern is not defending churches who
beat the children of their congregation. Go ahead. I want to see this.

Then move on to these:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/b4057f5c3cb664a7

And of course, Fern's own post citing a news article where the language
of "suspend" and beat is clearly stated as the charges against the
church members.

Do you think she was posting that to defend the state's action against
the church members, village idiot?

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/browse_thread/thread/d3aa524952bf81e4/044fa7d926a0c8d0?lnk=st&q=congregation&rnum=1#044fa7d926a0c8d0

"Hard," Greg?

Does it look hard to find and re-post Fern's posts?

I guess that would look hard to you.

Now rather than deal with the issue that she supported churches beating
children, find some small detail to argue about.

Do the Doananation Dance for us.

0:->

[Christopher]

"0:->" > wrote in message
news:P96dnUQLUNj2If3YnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
> Greegor wrote:
> > Kane wrote
> > > Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> > > intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> > > hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> > > I was far too kind.
> >
> > You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>
> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>
> > Why is it so hard to produce a link to Fern's post that says what you
> > claim?
>
> Why is it so hard for you to produce a link to that accusation you made
> above?
>
> Well, could it be because you are a liar?
>
> As for my producing a link, are you suggesting that my quote of Fern is a
> lie?
>
> Tiny URL has somehow slipped a cog and their link no longer goes to Fern's
> post. At the time it did and those that clicked it read what I quoted. Can
> it be produced again. heheh...well let's see shall we. Read on.
>
> Are you trying to pretend to claim to bull**** us that she did not post
> that quoted comment?
>
> Let's start with that lovely legal jargon that applies here, and in my
> recent discussion about 'threats.'
>
> It's called, "goes to state of mind."
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=church+reverend&qt_s=Search&enc_author=JSlYjxAAAADq8YQJJ6m3_Q8fISn4esWT
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/browse_thread/thread/c70ee7b8b177670a/8b0270d47a15c354#8b0270d47a15c354
>
> Read those and try to convince us Fern is not defending churches who beat
> the children of their congregation. Go ahead. I want to see this.

Hey Don - you might begin by reading your own links -

In the links you have provided Fern criticizes CPS for their heavyhandedness
and references a Dateline program which came to the same conclusion!

No where does Fern support the actions you describe.

Rule#1 - everything you say will be twisted and used against you.

Typical CPS slimeball trick.

Thanks for the illustration Don.

>
> Then move on to these:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/b4057f5c3cb664a7

Ditto - nothing here with Fern supporting actions you describe.

>
> And of course, Fern's own post citing a news article where the language of
> "suspend" and beat is clearly stated as the charges against the church
> members.
>
> Do you think she was posting that to defend the state's action against the
> church members, village idiot?
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/browse_thread/thread/d3aa524952bf81e4/044fa7d926a0c8d0?lnk=st&q=congregation&rnum=1#044fa7d926a0c8d0

And nothing here also.

This should put the issue to rest.

You are a lying CPS scumsucker. You live in a moral vacuum - false
accusations - false innuendos - to maintain your delusions. You are a very
sick person.



>
> "Hard," Greg?
>
> Does it look hard to find and re-post Fern's posts?
>
> I guess that would look hard to you.
>
> Now rather than deal with the issue that she supported churches beating
> children, find some small detail to argue about.
>
> Do the Doananation Dance for us.
>
> 0:->

[0:->]

Christopher wrote:
> "0:->" > wrote in message
> news:P96dnUQLUNj2If3YnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
>> Greegor wrote:
>>> Kane wrote
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>>> I was far too kind.
>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>>
>>> Why is it so hard to produce a link to Fern's post that says what you
>>> claim?
>> Why is it so hard for you to produce a link to that accusation you made
>> above?
>>
>> Well, could it be because you are a liar?
>>
>> As for my producing a link, are you suggesting that my quote of Fern is a
>> lie?
>>
>> Tiny URL has somehow slipped a cog and their link no longer goes to Fern's
>> post. At the time it did and those that clicked it read what I quoted. Can
>> it be produced again. heheh...well let's see shall we. Read on.
>>
>> Are you trying to pretend to claim to bull**** us that she did not post
>> that quoted comment?
>>
>> Let's start with that lovely legal jargon that applies here, and in my
>> recent discussion about 'threats.'
>>
>> It's called, "goes to state of mind."
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=church+reverend&qt_s=Search&enc_author=JSlYjxAAAADq8YQJJ6m3_Q8fISn4esWT
>>
>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/browse_thread/thread/c70ee7b8b177670a/8b0270d47a15c354#8b0270d47a15c354
>>
>> Read those and try to convince us Fern is not defending churches who beat
>> the children of their congregation. Go ahead. I want to see this.
>
> Hey Don - you might begin by reading your own links -

Kane here. 0:->

> In the links you have provided Fern criticizes CPS for their heavyhandedness
> and references a Dateline program which came to the same conclusion!

Yep. That doesn't mean the beatings didn't happen, and it doesn't mean
Fern didn't defend the church.

I am not arguing the merits of CPS in the case, I'm pointing out the
defense of what appears by the media description to be some pretty
severe ongoing..over considerable time...beating of little children.

The CPS heavy handedness had to do with police actions (CPS workers
don't carry hand cuffs) where police are doing what they are trained to
do to protect ALL parties at such an event. And the use of the church
directory to locate the church members.

Hardly very heavy handed, actually.

Please remember, I was NOT arguing about any of that before, and really
don't care, now.

This had to do with how Fern defended the beating of children in church.

She did by joining in the bull**** you just brought up. We don't really
know how heavyhanded anyone was, but I've seen again and again where
standard police procedures are criticized by people that know nothing
about them, their reasons, and the safety factors they provide even for
perps and innocent people in the area.

If I was part of that church and the cops came, and they wanted to
handcuff me to get me and others safely out of the building, I'd simply
put my hands out. There is nothing illegal or heavyhanded in handcuffing
someone.

The cops cannot know who the bad guy is, so they tend to cuff'em all.

Unless they hurt me doing so, I have no beef. If they hurt me because I
want to put on a show (that IS what took place, stupid) by struggling,
screaming, spitting on the cop, thrashing about violently, hey..that's
how it goes. I'm going to get hurt, and I get to scream, as Fern seems
be supporting, and you as well, "CPS brutality."
>
> No where does Fern support the actions you describe.

Bull****. Quote here, anywhere in that diatribe and tell us that she's
not supporting the church and it's actions.

Her posts for years consisted entirely of outlandish attacks on CPS by
everything from "CPS should set up community activity centers for
youth.." to this kind of bull**** where someone is beating a child and
it's an invasion for CPS to stop it.

You are just another pile of lying crap, little boy.
>
> Rule#1 - everything you say will be twisted and used against you.
>
Then stop doing it.

> Typical CPS slimeball trick.

Why would you wish to be like CPS?

> Thanks for the illustration Don.

I'll give him your message if you wish.

0:->





>
>> Then move on to these:
>>
>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/b4057f5c3cb664a7
>
> Ditto - nothing here with Fern supporting actions you describe.
>
>> And of course, Fern's own post citing a news article where the language of
>> "suspend" and beat is clearly stated as the charges against the church
>> members.
>>
>> Do you think she was posting that to defend the state's action against the
>> church members, village idiot?
>>
>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/browse_thread/thread/d3aa524952bf81e4/044fa7d926a0c8d0?lnk=st&q=congregation&rnum=1#044fa7d926a0c8d0
>
> And nothing here also.
>
> This should put the issue to rest.
>
> You are a lying CPS scumsucker. You live in a moral vacuum - false
> accusations - false innuendos - to maintain your delusions. You are a very
> sick person.
>
>
>
>> "Hard," Greg?
>>
>> Does it look hard to find and re-post Fern's posts?
>>
>> I guess that would look hard to you.
>>
>> Now rather than deal with the issue that she supported churches beating
>> children, find some small detail to argue about.
>>
>> Do the Doananation Dance for us.
>>
>> 0:->
>
>

[Christopher]

"0:->" > wrote in message
news:H7mdnWjbtvRhnfzYnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
> Christopher wrote:
>> "0:->" > wrote in message
>> news:P96dnUQLUNj2If3YnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
>>> Greegor wrote:
>>>> Kane wrote
>>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>>>> I was far too kind.
>>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>>>
>>>> Why is it so hard to produce a link to Fern's post that says what you
>>>> claim?
>>> Why is it so hard for you to produce a link to that accusation you made
>>> above?
>>>
>>> Well, could it be because you are a liar?
>>>
>>> As for my producing a link, are you suggesting that my quote of Fern is
>>> a lie?
>>>
>>> Tiny URL has somehow slipped a cog and their link no longer goes to
>>> Fern's post. At the time it did and those that clicked it read what I
>>> quoted. Can it be produced again. heheh...well let's see shall we. Read
>>> on.
>>>
>>> Are you trying to pretend to claim to bull**** us that she did not post
>>> that quoted comment?
>>>
>>> Let's start with that lovely legal jargon that applies here, and in my
>>> recent discussion about 'threats.'
>>>
>>> It's called, "goes to state of mind."
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=church+reverend&qt_s=Search&enc_author=JSlYjxAAAADq8YQJJ6m3_Q8fISn4esWT
>>>
>>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/browse_thread/thread/c70ee7b8b177670a/8b0270d47a15c354#8b0270d47a15c354
>>>
>>> Read those and try to convince us Fern is not defending churches who
>>> beat the children of their congregation. Go ahead. I want to see this.
>>
>> Hey Don - you might begin by reading your own links -
>
> Kane here. 0:->
>
>> In the links you have provided Fern criticizes CPS for their
>> heavyhandedness and references a Dateline program which came to the same
>> conclusion!
>
> Yep. That doesn't mean the beatings didn't happen, and it doesn't mean
> Fern didn't defend the church.
>
> I am not arguing the merits of CPS in the case, I'm pointing out the
> defense of what appears by the media description to be some pretty severe
> ongoing..over considerable time...beating of little children.
>
> The CPS heavy handedness had to do with police actions (CPS workers don't
> carry hand cuffs) where police are doing what they are trained to do to
> protect ALL parties at such an event. And the use of the church directory
> to locate the church members.
>
> Hardly very heavy handed, actually.
>
> Please remember, I was NOT arguing about any of that before, and really
> don't care, now.
>
> This had to do with how Fern defended the beating of children in church.

Fern didn't defend the beatings at all - here is the first post:

Subject: GA public agrees w "spanking minister" Dateline Friday nite
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 12/16/01 9:04 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: >

Reverend Allen and his Baptist congregation live around DeKalb County in
Georgia, USA.


The CPS, DCFACS, did not like the church's habits and kidnapped
approximately
55 children and held them for about 5 months.


The minister videoed the state coming in to "liberate" the children from
their
parents.


Subject: Dateline public defeats DCFACS-"belting minister"
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 12/15/01 11:43 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: >


African-American minister stated that black children, due to their adverse
living environments, may need more discipline.


Apparently the Atlanta public agrees with the minister.


Another step in curbing CPS,DCFACS.


BTW, did you notice the brutality the 3 agents of the states used against
the
children when they handcuffed them and carried them into state custody.


Http://www.dateline.msnbc.com


Http://www.benchtree.com (WA state CPS restructuring site)


DESCRIPTORS; CAS,
ACS,FIA,DCF,DCS,DHR,DHS,DHHS,HHS,DCFS,DFCS,ILDCFS, CPPS,FCB,CFS,SRS,SCF,DYF
S,DFYS,DSS,DHHS,HHS,TDPRS,TROXEL, WHITE COLLAR CRIME, ABUSE, NEGLECT




Now, you pick out the part from this post where you say Fern has defended
the actions you describe. You can't asshole. Cause you're a typical CPS
screwball - false accuser with issues.

Your second link is to the same post.

Fern references a Dateline program about how CPS came and brutilized 55 kids
[not even the whupping victims], handcuffed them and stuffed them into
buses.

The Court ordered CPS to return these children to their parents as Dateline
reported.

Fern, Dateline, and Atlanta citizens expressed their outrage at CPS for
brutalizing 55 non-victims.

Now. This issue should be closed as you have AGAIN been shown to be a
falsely accusing CPS koo-koo with issues.

And Don, please post your evidence in short concise packages as I have.

It's a bummer having to wade through thousands of kb's of your lunatic rants
only to find you lied and/or twisted things beyond recognition.

You are typical CPS slimeswabber.

<snipped rest of smoke and mirrors>

[0:->]

Christopher wrote:
> "0:->" > wrote in message
> news:H7mdnWjbtvRhnfzYnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
> > Christopher wrote:
> >> "0:->" > wrote in message
> >> news:P96dnUQLUNj2If3YnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
> >>> Greegor wrote:
> >>>> Kane wrote
> >>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> >>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> >>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> >>>>> I was far too kind.
> >>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
> >>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
> >>>
> >>>> Why is it so hard to produce a link to Fern's post that says what you
> >>>> claim?
> >>> Why is it so hard for you to produce a link to that accusation you made
> >>> above?
> >>>
> >>> Well, could it be because you are a liar?
> >>>
> >>> As for my producing a link, are you suggesting that my quote of Fern is
> >>> a lie?
> >>>
> >>> Tiny URL has somehow slipped a cog and their link no longer goes to
> >>> Fern's post. At the time it did and those that clicked it read what I
> >>> quoted. Can it be produced again. heheh...well let's see shall we. Read
> >>> on.
> >>>
> >>> Are you trying to pretend to claim to bull**** us that she did not post
> >>> that quoted comment?
> >>>
> >>> Let's start with that lovely legal jargon that applies here, and in my
> >>> recent discussion about 'threats.'
> >>>
> >>> It's called, "goes to state of mind."
> >>>
> >>> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=church+reverend&qt_s=Search&enc_author=JSlYjxAAAADq8YQJJ6m3_Q8fISn4esWT
> >>>
> >>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/browse_thread/thread/c70ee7b8b177670a/8b0270d47a15c354#8b0270d47a15c354
> >>>
> >>> Read those and try to convince us Fern is not defending churches who
> >>> beat the children of their congregation. Go ahead. I want to see this.
> >>
> >> Hey Don - you might begin by reading your own links -
> >
> > Kane here. 0:->
> >
> >> In the links you have provided Fern criticizes CPS for their
> >> heavyhandedness and references a Dateline program which came to the same
> >> conclusion!
> >
> > Yep. That doesn't mean the beatings didn't happen, and it doesn't mean
> > Fern didn't defend the church.
> >
> > I am not arguing the merits of CPS in the case, I'm pointing out the
> > defense of what appears by the media description to be some pretty severe
> > ongoing..over considerable time...beating of little children.
> >
> > The CPS heavy handedness had to do with police actions (CPS workers don't
> > carry hand cuffs) where police are doing what they are trained to do to
> > protect ALL parties at such an event. And the use of the church directory
> > to locate the church members.
> >
> > Hardly very heavy handed, actually.
> >
> > Please remember, I was NOT arguing about any of that before, and really
> > don't care, now.
> >
> > This had to do with how Fern defended the beating of children in church.
>
> Fern didn't defend the beatings at all - here is the first post:

Bull**** sucker. She has defended families and THIS CHURCH that did in
fact beat their children. Stop playing stupid word games that simply
prove what you low life scumsucking liar you are.

>
> Subject: GA public agrees w "spanking minister" Dateline Friday nite
> From: (Fern5827)
> Date: 12/16/01 9:04 AM Eastern Standard Time
> Message-id: >
>
> Reverend Allen and his Baptist congregation live around DeKalb County in
> Georgia, USA.
>
>
> The CPS, DCFACS, did not like the church's habits and kidnapped
> approximately
> 55 children and held them for about 5 months.
>
>
> The minister videoed the state coming in to "liberate" the children from
> their
> parents.

What's that tell you stupid?

I told you, I'm not arguing CPS actions.

Prove they didn't beat the children and that Fern didn't defend this
pack of sick wallowing baby beaters, you sick ****.

0:->


>
>
> Subject: Dateline public defeats DCFACS-"belting minister"
> From: (Fern5827)
> Date: 12/15/01 11:43 AM Eastern Standard Time
> Message-id: >
>
>
> African-American minister stated that black children, due to their adverse
> living environments, may need more discipline.
>
>
> Apparently the Atlanta public agrees with the minister.
>
>
> Another step in curbing CPS,DCFACS.
>
>
> BTW, did you notice the brutality the 3 agents of the states used against
> the
> children when they handcuffed them and carried them into state custody.
>
>
> Http://www.dateline.msnbc.com
>
>
> Http://www.benchtree.com (WA state CPS restructuring site)
>
>
> DESCRIPTORS; CAS,
> ACS,FIA,DCF,DCS,DHR,DHS,DHHS,HHS,DCFS,DFCS,ILDCFS, CPPS,FCB,CFS,SRS,SCF,DYF
> S,DFYS,DSS,DHHS,HHS,TDPRS,TROXEL, WHITE COLLAR CRIME, ABUSE, NEGLECT
>
>
>
>
> Now, you pick out the part from this post where you say Fern has defended
> the actions you describe. You can't asshole. Cause you're a typical CPS
> screwball - false accuser with issues.
>
> Your second link is to the same post.
>
> Fern references a Dateline program about how CPS came and brutilized 55 kids
> [not even the whupping victims], handcuffed them and stuffed them into
> buses.
>
> The Court ordered CPS to return these children to their parents as Dateline
> reported.
>
> Fern, Dateline, and Atlanta citizens expressed their outrage at CPS for
> brutalizing 55 non-victims.
>
> Now. This issue should be closed as you have AGAIN been shown to be a
> falsely accusing CPS koo-koo with issues.
>
> And Don, please post your evidence in short concise packages as I have.
>
> It's a bummer having to wade through thousands of kb's of your lunatic rants
> only to find you lied and/or twisted things beyond recognition.
>
> You are typical CPS slimeswabber.
>
> <snipped rest of smoke and mirrors>

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> Prove they didn't beat the children and that Fern didn't defend this
> pack of sick wallowing baby beaters, you sick ****.

Rabid hysterical language painting with a broad brush.
Kane is an atheist and this took place in a church.
Kane is a singularly fanatic crusader for anti-spanking.

For Kane it is "ethical and moral" to swear and lie
about opponents.

Kane has made false claims about Fern.

Asked for links to her offending remarks he CAN NOT.

Links to Mapquest and links to Kane's old
remarks about Fern DO NOT prove that Fern
defended abuse in the way Kane has asserted.
When it's obvious that he cannot provide a link
to Fern saying such things, Kane then postures
that others cannot PROVE that she did not!

Fern complained about CPS violating the constitution
because Mr. Bond had been marked on the registry
as a child abuser with NO NOTICE.

Fern complained about CPS violating the constitution
because CPS used the entire church directory
to target families for investigation.

Kane feels no obligation to social graces. Fern does.
Kane referred to her over and over again as a smelly [c-word].

As if all of that is now LOW ENOUGH, there
is the simple fact that Kane seizes this sort of opportunity
whenever any opponent leaves.

Fern moved on to more productive persuits many months ago.
So WHY does Kane keep repeating her name over and over?

[Greegor]

Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
alt.support.foster-parents
> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> I was far too kind.

Greg wrote
> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.

Kane wrote
> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.

Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.

Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.

Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?

31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents

> Kane wrote
>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
....
Greg wrote
> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.

Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
alt.support.foster-parents
> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
> the parents had their children hung up in church and
> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> alt.support.foster-parents
>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>> I was far too kind.
>
> Greg wrote
>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>
> Kane wrote
>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.

I have no "keepers."

> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.

It's crucial to determine who "they" are and if the qualify as 'keepers'
of me.
>
> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>
> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>
> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>
>> Kane wrote
>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
> ...
> Greg wrote
>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>
> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> alt.support.foster-parents
>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.

I've seen nothing suggesting they are my "keepers," Greg?

You have this wonderfully fanciful delusional state you fall into
whenever you post here.

Maybe being dropped on your head from a great height as a baby is really
a creative imagination booster, eh?

Or weren't you? And are you sure?

As for the posts in question? Yes, they saw them.

They thought Fern was a nutcase too.

Are you still wanting to argue that Fern identified the beatings and was
against them while defending the very perps?

That requires a HUGE spectacle of writhing logical dissonance to carry
off, but you would be just the one to try.

Greg, if there was a little girl, and her mommy's boyfriend had taken to
be real handy when she was taking showers he ordered her to take as
"aversive motivation" or some such, and the little girls G'pa showed up
and socked the boyfriend in the face, would you say I was defending the
sock in the face if I said, "The grandpa was right?"

Now, same scenario.

If I said instead, 'Grandpa was justified, but NOT to doing any socking
in the face of the boyfriend," you see the difference?

I have NOT defended the socking. If I fail to say this latter, and ONLY
defend the g'pa, say against the police coming and a struggle ensuing,
then Greg, I have by default defended the action of the g'pa...the
facial application of knuckles to said boyfriend.

Would you not grasp that if say, you were that boyfriend?

Or say, the cops?

The cops almost always, for instance, put cuffs on the people on scene
that look most likely to have a strong reaction to them having to be
there and arrest people.

Yet Fern would blame the cops, and join happily in the show the perps
and the participants, children trained to and threatened most likely
with lies about CPS coming to torture them, act out and force the cops
to use more restraints.

As for the directory. If it was taken legally, a church director is NOT
a protected document.

Membership lists are carefully concealed by people that want to hide the
membership because they KNOW they cannot legally withhold them if taken
by warrant, or found in the course of a legal entry seeking membership.

If you have this case to cite where I am shown to be wrong, I'll happily
admit you were correct. Unlike you when you are wrong.

Now while you are here, wallowing around in any and everything possible
to avoid the inevitable.

Why did you harass Dan Sullivan with slanderous claims that he was a
felon? Why did you claim a "privacy" that did not and does not exist in
that newsgroup at the time of his quoting it? Why have you not responded
with a retraction or adequate argument to support your claims by PROOF?

If you continue to avoid facing up to this harassment, I SHALL HAVE TO
TAKE STEPS, MIND YOU.

Personally I love the Scottish Sword dance, though I need to replace my
tartans. Damned bloody expensive, let me tell you.

The 'English' side of my ancestry, is actually Highland.

Just a quarter or so, but the sound of the pipes has a profound effect
on me.

Now, get honest Greg, if you can.

1. - You have made a claim against Dan that you have not provided proof
for.

Yet YOU claim harassment, and Dennis the Sock hints around at legal action.

You be damn sure to have a lawyer read ALL your posts before you set out
on that path, if that's your intent.

You are a thoroughgoing thug, bully, liar, and cheat, Greg.

And I have your posts to prove it.

You say Dan is a felon.

Do YOU have the posts to prove it?

If so, post them.

2. - How you doing on that first draft of a correction to the HWMC
hearing record into the congressional record that retracts your
statement against Iowa claiming they broke the law by not keeping to the
federally mandated guidelines for funding of X number of CPR offices
throughout their various districts?

Anything yet?

Why can't you produce it NOW before you have written it, like you want
the state of Iowa to produce it's budget for you before they have
produced and published it?

This is too funny, because we had this very same conversation about two
years ago, Dummy and you STILL can't remember that I told you, no one
can produce what's not produced yet, budget or pie.

****, what a feeb you are.

0:->

[Sharon Ispay]

"Greegor" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> alt.support.foster-parents
>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>> I was far too kind.
>
> Greg wrote
>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>
> Kane wrote
>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>
> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>
> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>
> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>
> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>
>> Kane wrote
>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
> ...
> Greg wrote
>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>
> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> alt.support.foster-parents
>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.

And just to clear up a few of the disinformation -

Two children were found to have marks from their spanking. Pastor Allen and
several congregation members went to jail. Allen got 90 days + 10yrs
probation.- the rest less.

The children were held, not hung.

They were not naked.

The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo witch
who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol. Yavonne and
Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a few false
accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as Fern was calmly
kicking their stupid asses. lol.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote
>> Prove they didn't beat the children and that Fern didn't defend this
>> pack of sick wallowing baby beaters, you sick ****.

The whole rant below is a crock of horse ****. Not a soul here is
unaware of Fern's nitwittery in posting. The off topic, the CPS
UNmandates she she demanded. The blaming of CPS for everything from the
potato blight to marital discord in immigrant families...there just
didnt' seem to be anything the nutcase wouldn't lay on CPS.

She was the worst thing to ever happen to both true and phony CPS
reformers...just too off the wall even for the most rabid ranters.

She actually minimize, with what appeared to be happy lilting in her
prose, the poisoning of a baby by the mother using the mother's meds to
quite the baby.

Instead of clearly identifying it as MURDER, infanticide, she launched
into a mini lecture on how in the 1800s various patent medicines with
opiates were common and commonly used on babies....never thinking that
the times had one hell of a lot of infant deaths.

It looked like she was writing, "lah lay lay, lah tee dah." Not a brain
in her head.

>
> Rabid hysterical language painting with a broad brush.
> Kane is an atheist and this took place in a church.
> Kane is a singularly fanatic crusader for anti-spanking.

Are you really suggesting I attacked the beating of children in church
because it was a church? And not because it was beating of children?

What a nitwit YOU are.

You ever see me minimize the beating of children by anyone, any class?
If so put it up here. I'm curious to see if I've lost my mind. I would
not forget that.

>
> For Kane it is "ethical and moral" to swear and lie
> about opponents.

Absol****inlootilly, and I do not lie about opponents. Show posts were I
lie about opponents. Go for it stupid.

> Kane has made false claims about Fern.

Not once, ever.

It's all documented and far more of it than I could possibly repost.

>
> Asked for links to her offending remarks he CAN NOT.

Odd, I posted them. Why would you lie about that?

> Links to Mapquest and links to Kane's old
> remarks about Fern DO NOT prove that Fern
> defended abuse in the way Kane has asserted.

I found and replaced the dead links...dried up tinyURLS that they were.

You read it.

> When it's obvious that he cannot provide a link
> to Fern saying such things, Kane then postures
> that others cannot PROVE that she did not!

Yet you now ignore that I did so post those links corrections. Have you
completely given up on ethics Greg?

> Fern complained about CPS violating the constitution
> because Mr. Bond had been marked on the registry
> as a child abuser with NO NOTICE.

She did not mention the beatings. She was defending the beater, rightly
or wrongly treated by CPS, no mention of the beating is a chilling
reminder of where Fern was always coming from in her later years.

Children are NOT allowed to have protection against abusive parents. The
sum of her accumulated postings.

> Fern complained about CPS violating the constitution
> because CPS used the entire church directory
> to target families for investigation.

Another avoidance of the issue of the beatings. Argue about something
other than the offense to try and minimize the impact of the crime.

Common in courtrooms across the land, and very much so here for
weaseling dodgers...you among others.

> Kane feels no obligation to social graces. Fern does.

Fern had many posts that were vicious diatribes and false accusations
against other posters. You just don't want to see it.

> Kane referred to her over and over again as a smelly [c-word].

How many times total? Link to them.

How many directly to her? Link to them (it, actually).

I want people to see for themselves, and judge for themselves if what
she advocated for deserved to be ignored, or attacked strongly.

Go for it, liar.

> As if all of that is now LOW ENOUGH, there
> is the simple fact that Kane seizes this sort of opportunity
> whenever any opponent leaves.

There are dozens of opponents that have left here I've never mentioned
again unless they were relevant to the arguments. Say pointing out
comparisons to you.

> Fern moved on to more productive persuits many months ago.

Feb 7th to be more precise, as I recall.

And I'll just bet. Has she taken up the cause of say The Pearls and
their baby switching on the hand parenting guides.

> So WHY does Kane keep repeating her name over and over?

Because you provoke it and defend her.

Don't you wish to defend her? You seem to.

Here's the sequence of events that brought Fern's name into this, Greg.

YOU decided that the use of nyms and the anonimity provided was somehow
sinister. I brought up a list of names of anonymous posters that made a
regular habit of attacks on other posters, and outrageous claims not
supported by evidence even when requested.

Fern was one of those.

I pointed out that Fern had never answered for her support of the church
that beat children.

Now you are off on a "prove it" which I did so many times in the past,
and you KNOW that.

Your "prove it" isn't an honest request for information, because YOU
know, and everyone here with a working brain knows that's all been
covered before.

You simply ran a dodge, a Doananation and are milking it for all it's
worth.

You are lying sick little piece of roadside ****, Greg.

My comments about Fern were MORE than deserved. She advocated constantly
for parents against children.

That parents had more rights. That any intervention was suspect on it's
face without merit.

A flat out lie, of course.

One that if followed out and acted upon would kill children.

Until YOU and our bull**** buddies come up with something better, CPS is
all there is that stands between children and parent abuse of
them...well, CPS, and LE for the more serious offenses, cops too often
come to too late.

**** off liar, dodger, harasser, fraudulent accuser.

Now, get back to your claim Dan is a felon.

Prove it.

Or admit you are harassing because YOU got caught jackin' off over some
poor family you told to go to court and expose in court they had
committed a crime as a way to win the case against CPS and get the
children back.

Come on Greg, you can't hide from this one forever. And it's just as
important, no more so in this venue, than the "lethal force question."

Admit you were wrong.

0:->

[Sharon Ispay]

WOW - 9kb of koo-koo whine and Don's delusions.

How do you CPS scum dream up these hilarious rants.

You got caught in a pack of lies falsely accusing folk.

So you puke out reams of bull**** to cloud the issue.

You CPS lowlife make me laugh. lol.

They weren't hung.

They weren't naked.

Their spankings weren't supported by Fern.

You're a typical CPS liar and false accuser.


"0:->" > wrote in message
news:PYednbwRKpOP1__YnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
> Greegor wrote:
>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>> I was far too kind.
>>
>> Greg wrote
>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>
>> Kane wrote
>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>
> I have no "keepers."
>
>> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>
> It's crucial to determine who "they" are and if the qualify as 'keepers'
> of me.
>>
>> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>>
>> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>>
>> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
>> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>>
>>> Kane wrote
>>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>> ...
>> Greg wrote
>>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>>
>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
>
> I've seen nothing suggesting they are my "keepers," Greg?
>
> You have this wonderfully fanciful delusional state you fall into whenever
> you post here.
>
> Maybe being dropped on your head from a great height as a baby is really a
> creative imagination booster, eh?
>
> Or weren't you? And are you sure?
>
> As for the posts in question? Yes, they saw them.
>
> They thought Fern was a nutcase too.
>
> Are you still wanting to argue that Fern identified the beatings and was
> against them while defending the very perps?
>
> That requires a HUGE spectacle of writhing logical dissonance to carry
> off, but you would be just the one to try.
>
> Greg, if there was a little girl, and her mommy's boyfriend had taken to
> be real handy when she was taking showers he ordered her to take as
> "aversive motivation" or some such, and the little girls G'pa showed up
> and socked the boyfriend in the face, would you say I was defending the
> sock in the face if I said, "The grandpa was right?"
>
> Now, same scenario.
>
> If I said instead, 'Grandpa was justified, but NOT to doing any socking in
> the face of the boyfriend," you see the difference?
>
> I have NOT defended the socking. If I fail to say this latter, and ONLY
> defend the g'pa, say against the police coming and a struggle ensuing,
> then Greg, I have by default defended the action of the g'pa...the facial
> application of knuckles to said boyfriend.
>
> Would you not grasp that if say, you were that boyfriend?
>
> Or say, the cops?
>
> The cops almost always, for instance, put cuffs on the people on scene
> that look most likely to have a strong reaction to them having to be there
> and arrest people.
>
> Yet Fern would blame the cops, and join happily in the show the perps and
> the participants, children trained to and threatened most likely with lies
> about CPS coming to torture them, act out and force the cops to use more
> restraints.
>
> As for the directory. If it was taken legally, a church director is NOT a
> protected document.
>
> Membership lists are carefully concealed by people that want to hide the
> membership because they KNOW they cannot legally withhold them if taken by
> warrant, or found in the course of a legal entry seeking membership.
>
> If you have this case to cite where I am shown to be wrong, I'll happily
> admit you were correct. Unlike you when you are wrong.
>
> Now while you are here, wallowing around in any and everything possible to
> avoid the inevitable.
>
> Why did you harass Dan Sullivan with slanderous claims that he was a
> felon? Why did you claim a "privacy" that did not and does not exist in
> that newsgroup at the time of his quoting it? Why have you not responded
> with a retraction or adequate argument to support your claims by PROOF?
>
> If you continue to avoid facing up to this harassment, I SHALL HAVE TO
> TAKE STEPS, MIND YOU.
>
> Personally I love the Scottish Sword dance, though I need to replace my
> tartans. Damned bloody expensive, let me tell you.
>
> The 'English' side of my ancestry, is actually Highland.
>
> Just a quarter or so, but the sound of the pipes has a profound effect on
> me.
>
> Now, get honest Greg, if you can.
>
> 1. - You have made a claim against Dan that you have not provided proof
> for.
>
> Yet YOU claim harassment, and Dennis the Sock hints around at legal
> action.
>
> You be damn sure to have a lawyer read ALL your posts before you set out
> on that path, if that's your intent.
>
> You are a thoroughgoing thug, bully, liar, and cheat, Greg.
>
> And I have your posts to prove it.
>
> You say Dan is a felon.
>
> Do YOU have the posts to prove it?
>
> If so, post them.
>
> 2. - How you doing on that first draft of a correction to the HWMC hearing
> record into the congressional record that retracts your statement against
> Iowa claiming they broke the law by not keeping to the federally mandated
> guidelines for funding of X number of CPR offices throughout their various
> districts?
>
> Anything yet?
>
> Why can't you produce it NOW before you have written it, like you want the
> state of Iowa to produce it's budget for you before they have produced and
> published it?
>
> This is too funny, because we had this very same conversation about two
> years ago, Dummy and you STILL can't remember that I told you, no one can
> produce what's not produced yet, budget or pie.
>
> ****, what a feeb you are.
>
> 0:->

[Ron]

"Sharon Ispay" > wrote in message
news:f0s8h.3592$IW2.1975@trndny03...
>
> "Greegor" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>> I was far too kind.
>>
>> Greg wrote
>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>
>> Kane wrote
>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>>
>> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>>
>> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>>
>> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>>
>> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
>> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>>
>>> Kane wrote
>>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>> ...
>> Greg wrote
>>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>>
>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
>
> And just to clear up a few of the disinformation -
>
> Two children were found to have marks from their spanking. Pastor Allen
> and several congregation members went to jail. Allen got 90 days + 10yrs
> probation.- the rest less.
>
> The children were held, not hung.
>
> They were not naked.
>
> The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
> witch who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.
> Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a
> few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
> Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.

Links chuckels, or you are a liar.

Ron

[Greegor]

G> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.

Kane wrote
> It's crucial to determine who "they" are and if
> the qualify as 'keepers' of me.

Is this that "finesse" again where you get hung up
on details and forget the real issue?

Which of Fern's posts was it you said you
showed to your neighborhood "posse"?

Considering that you can't provide a link
to this post you have described over and
over again, that might have been difficult.

[Sharon Ispay]

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sharon Ispay" > wrote in message
> news:f0s8h.3592$IW2.1975@trndny03...
>>
>> "Greegor" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>>> I was far too kind.
>>>
>>> Greg wrote
>>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>>
>>> Kane wrote
>>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>>>
>>> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>>>
>>> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>>>
>>> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>>>
>>> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
>>> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>>>
>>>> Kane wrote
>>>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so
>>>>> she
>>>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>>> ...
>>> Greg wrote
>>>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>>>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>>>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>>>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>>>
>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>>>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>>>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>>>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
>>
>> And just to clear up a few of the disinformation -
>>
>> Two children were found to have marks from their spanking. Pastor Allen
>> and several congregation members went to jail. Allen got 90 days + 10yrs
>> probation.- the rest less.
>>
>> The children were held, not hung.
>>
>> They were not naked.
>>
>> The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
>> witch who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.
>> Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a
>> few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
>> Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.
>
> Links chuckels, or you are a liar.

Kiss my ass bozo, or you are a MoRon.

>
> Ron
>

[0:->]

Sharon Ispay wrote:
.........deliberate lies. He knows Fern quite as well as the rest of us,
and what her posting consisted of......

Preamble.

This thread has moved off topic.

When Fern first came up the issue was claiming that someone posting with
a nym for anonymity was obviously doing something sinister.

I mentioned a group of people that have posted here anonymously....Greg
went off this direction to avoid dealing with his harassment of me for
protection my family with a nym. No argument, just harassment.

Now back to the fun, your misinformation and lies.

> WOW - 9kb of koo-koo whine and Don's delusions.
>
> How do you CPS scum dream up these hilarious rants.
>
> You got caught in a pack of lies falsely accusing folk.
>
> So you puke out reams of bull**** to cloud the issue.
>
> You CPS lowlife make me laugh. lol.
>
> They weren't hung.

The language of one media article on this, at least, was that they were
"suspended." You may love that softened termed, but to me they were hung
up and beaten.
>
> They weren't naked.
>
I'm afraid they were.

> Their spankings weren't supported by Fern.

She did, and she has done so in other instances.

> You're a typical CPS liar and false accuser.

You are a typical ****assed abuse minimizer and denier and protector of
abusers.

And she did in fact support their beating in quite explicit language.

Here's another Fern "gem" of abuse apologist minimizing and defense of
parents rights to beat their children without interference from the
state. She's wrong in her claim of the beatings evidence coming up as
inconclusive. Inconclusive was the the finding in only two of the
children. Some were found not to have been injured at all, some showed
clear signs of having been injured, but before I provide you with
evidence, let's look at the Fern gem together, shall we?:

[[[ My comments interspersed in these brackets ]]]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/f7a90e8aadcb83ca?hl=en&

415
From: Fern5827 - view profile
Date: Mon, May 28 2001 8:12 am
Email: (Fern5827)
Groups: alt.parenting.spanking
Not yet rated
Rating:
hide options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author

Chris, do you understand that the evidence that the children were beaten
was "INCONCLUSIVE"?

[[[ The term inconclusive was applied to only two of the children. Fern
commits the crime of lying by diminishing the facts to partial facts
making them appear to apply to the entire demographic being discussed.
Typical of you ****ants. ]]]

Suppose you were 8 years old, and agents of the state swarmed into your
home and took you away in handcuffs because you might have been beaten?

[[[ Suppose they didn't and the beatings continued? Suppose the church
pastor and members had already proven to be combative and resistive and
had coached their children to be? I can "suppose" right along with the
best of them, and folks in the civil rights movement, of which I
approve, learned how to be aggressively "non-aggressive." It was part of
King's tactical development. A militant non-aggression and taught
specifically as a skill for people engaging the authorities in protest.


And I most thoroughly agreed with it myself, but not for resisting when
one has broken the laws against child abuse. ]]]


You spend 2 months in a foster home, where you may be molested by older
children, surely teased, and surely not told why you are here.

[[[ Pure speculative bunk'm, Fern's specialty was dreaming up scenarios
that might have somewhere some time and applying them to situations
where no such events occurred, such as this, to promote these miserable
arguments siding with child beaters and other abusers. ]]]

You are handcuffed.

[[[ The police have a right AND a duty to protect both themselves, the
one in cuffs, and others in the vicinity. There is no "violence" or
threat in being handcuffed. No abuse taking place. ]]]

Or do you believe all African-American children should be HANDCUFFED at
age 8?

[[[ Isn't that a cute Johnny Cockran though? ]]]

Destroy the authority of your Mom whose only crime was to participate in
that church?

[[[ It does not destroy the authority of parent to remove a child. If it
did then they sure as hell must have been without much authority to
begin with...yet another of Fern's whining accusation with no bottom to
it. ]]]

Do you have any idea how many thousand were squandered by Georgia DCFS
on this odyssey of idiocy?

[[[ What has this to do with the issues at stake here? ]]]

If you truly believe the state makes a better parent, then I suggest you
apply for a position as a CPS caseworker or a group home supervisor.

[[[ There it is. As you will see she had access to the article I am
going to reprint, and it clearly showed some children were in fact
beaten. ]]]

The first time a teen tries to sucker punch you,. you might sing a
different tune. ..

[[[ Let me see now. We were discussing "suspending children" and beating
them with objects, and suddenly it's rationalized by some strange quirk
of mind in an abrupt departure from the topic up to now, with a
reference to violent teens. NO TEEN was identified in this story as
sucker punching anyone. ]]]

..... And Fern's annotated post. I've changed nothing, and only added my
comments to this babbling drivel of Fern's............

Give you any idea of the mentality of Fern?

Now lets look at the post that came directly in the thread before this
Gem of Ferns....not by the poster she addresses though, but by someone
on HER side of the argument. It's a copy and paste of a media piece
describing the situation.

Here it is, the article, and I'll comment again in [[[ brackets ]]]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/a20032579e0fadb1?hl=en&

[[[ You will see the comments of other beatings apologists here as well. ]]]


From: destorycps - view profile
Date: Sun, May 27 2001 11:15 am
Email: destorycps >
Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
alt.support.foster-parents, alt.parenting.spanking, misc.kids, misc.legal
Not yet rated
Rating:
show options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author

http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/reports/church/052601.html
House of Prayer reunion
Parents get 35 kids; 13 more on way

By ALAN JUDD
Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer

As soon as the door swung open, 14-year-old Dianna Frazier spotted her
mother.
The girl sprinted across the room and leapt into Kim Ogletree's arms,
wrapping
her legs around her mother's waist.

When Jimmy Barnett reunited with his 8-year-old son, Cephas, he lifted
the boy
high into the air. Then he hugged him tighter and tighter.

Half an hour after David Duncan and his son, Stephen, found each other, the
7-year-old continued to rest his hand on his father's shoulder.

In the chaos of Friday's sudden reunions between members of the House of
Prayer
church and many of the children seized from their homes by state welfare
officials in an abuse investigation, the boy wasn't letting his father go
anywhere.

[[[ Have seen children 'rest their head' on parents that were
forensically proven rapist of that child, let alone having beaten them
to the point of broken bones and permanent injuries. A child's behavior
around an abuser is NEVER a valid indicator of what actually took place.
CPS worker investigators know to NOT go by such signs either way. A
frightened appearing child may never have been abused, but simply be
timid by disposition...the article itself is a crock of tearjerking
hyperbole, but there are some facts revealed. ]]]

When her tears subsided, Ogletree said getting her eight children back from
state foster care was almost enough to make up for the trauma of seeing them
pulled from their home May 8 in an ugly confrontation with police. Like the
other parents, Ogletree had not seen her children since they were taken into
custody. For some parents, the separation had been as long as two months.

"If you hold on and stay firm and continue to believe, you can see what
happens," Ogletree said. "It took a miracle, but we got our children
home. The
Lord brought them home."

In a stunning turnaround, state child welfare officials decided Friday to
release 35 of the 49 children they had taken into protective custody amid
reports of widespread, systematic beatings of children at the small
northwest
Atlanta church.

All but one of the remaining 14 children in state custody could be
released as
early as Wednesday. That child is expected to return home by June 16,
when he is
scheduled to complete psychological treatment.

The parents were not required to agree to any restrictions on how they
discipline their children. Earlier proposed restrictions by Juvenile
Court Judge
Sanford Jones - such as a ban on spankings at church - had sparked a
two-month
impasse between state officials and church members.

Church members and their pastor, the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., had sought
unconditional surrender from the state Division of Family and Children
Services.

The resolution of the conflict between the state and the parents came hours
after the Journal-Constitution reported that physical evidence suggested
no more
than five of the 49 children in protective custody had suffered physical
harm.

[[[ Oh gee, only five, eh? And the authorities were supposed to find
those five with water witching skills? ]]]

Evidence indicating abuse of two of those children was inconclusive, the
newspaper's review found, and only two children suffered the welts or
bruises
that elevate a spanking to the level of child abuse under Georgia law.

[[[ And Georgia is a notorious paddling state and has passed on children
with wounds that were clear across the child's body and left supperating
infected sores. ]]]

"The judge and DFCS now realize that so many mistakes were made along
the way,"
said state Rep. Tyrone Brooks (D-Atlanta), one of the lawmakers and
civil rights
leaders who negotiated the children's release. "It really is an
embarrassment to
the state of Georgia."

Until late Friday afternoon, it had seemed unlikely the children would
soon go
home.

The judge had set a deadline of 2 p.m. for parents to comply with an
order he
imposed Wednesday. Under that order, they had to promise to prevent their
children from being abused and not to let girls as young as 14 leave the
state
to get married. A hearing would have been held in late June to determine
when,
or if, the rest of the children could go home.

[[[ Like that one, do you? Looking for a young wife maybe? ]]]

Allen's response, on behalf of the parents from the six families, was: "No
deal." The pastor insisted all the children had to be returned.

As Friday's deadline approached, DFCS officials took the 35 children
approved by
the judge to a picnic near the agency's office on Bankhead Highway,
where the
judge had instructed the parents to pick them up.

DFCS officials showed little sign of relenting on the conditions they
had asked
the judge to impose.

"[The parents] said they would come, but if all the children are not
here, they
would not take any," Andy Boisseau, a DFCS spokesman, told reporters at
midday.
"All of the children are not going to be here - that's for certain."

To avoid raising false hopes, the children were not told that a reunion
was a
possibility.

But at the House of Prayer, about two miles from the DFCS office, Brooks and
several colleagues were meeting with Allen and church members, trying to
reach a
compromise. Brooks talked by telephone several times with Judge Jones, the
judge, and with Gary Redding, acting commissioner of the state Department of
Human Resources, which oversees DFCS.

Just before 1:30, Jones faxed Brooks a statement giving the lawmaker
what the
judge had declined to give the parents Wednesday - a specific date that
the last
of the children would be released if they agreed to take the first group
Friday.

The judge's statement said the remaining children would be returned home by
Wednesday unless evaluations found "emotional, sexual or physical damage
that
can't be handled by the family." One child's evaluation won't be
finished until
June 16, however.

That promise sealed the deal.

Inside the church, the congregation drafted a letter seeking an apology from
Gov. Roy Barnes and DFCS. And the church members rejected the notion of
outside
monitors watching how they raise their children.

"We want the situation returned, as near as possible, to the way it was
before
they intruded in our lives," the letter said.

Then the congregation boarded two church buses to bring their children home.

"If they had been reasonable from the beginning, they could have
prevented all
of this," Allen said of state officials. "They were going to go
roughshod over
us, but we were a little tougher than they thought."

destroycps says ...
Seventy percent returned after only two months is an outstandingly positive
result considering most families never get reunited.

The returns were largely the consequence of the media attention for the
en masse
abduction. If the CPS (GA's DFCS) tacticians had been smarter or less
brazen,
they could have taken 5 or so kids at a time and gotten away with it.

[[[ Above you see an apologist for beatings admit that the issue was
decided NOT on the merits of the case, but on public opinion pressure. ]]]

Neal Feldman said ...
>Atlanta:
>In the wake of the mass kidnapping of 49 children on an accusation that
>TWO were abused and with absolutely no evidence or credible accusation
>of child abuse against any of the rest of the parents 34 children were
>finally returned to their parents after the parents capitulated to
>extorted agreements infringing on their parental, due process, civil,
>constitutional and human rights.

>One in particular was that they must send their children to public
>school, which violates a clearly accepted parental right to home school
>their children.

>These children had been kidnapped and held hostage for at least two
>months by Gestapo CPS.

[[[ That's known as blah blah blah by the group clown. ]]]
.....................

Basically the state failed to protect these children. How do I know
this? By reading for comprehension.

And knowing that the entire public was not conned by this so called
"Christian Pastor."

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Rev.+Arthur+Allen+Jr.%2C%22+georgia&btnG=Google+Search

I made it a point at the time to stay up to date on the events and the
aftermath. Most of these links will be active still, but you can get the
drift of things if you bother to read rather than rant, and lie.

The pastor was a violent sadistic brute and his followers a cultlike
group that did his bidding even to the point of injuring their children
at his command, both physically and psychologically.

Fern's a brute as far as I'm concerned and this "poor little old lady
Kane attacked with ugly WORDS," is a crock of **** rolled out here to
camoflage their own sick support and love of torture of children in
these ways.

There are some other stories, of similar nature mixed in here...likely
that you and Fern would also find excuses for the perps.

Cult News from Rick Ross » House of Prayer
Dwight York, the leader of another group in Georgia named the
“Nuwaubians ... Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., leader of the “House of Prayer,”
ended his three-month ...
www.cultnews.com/?cat=67 - 79k - Cached - Similar pages
Sentences (Criminal) - News - Times Topics - The New York Times ...
National Briefing | South: Georgia: Sentences In Church Whippings. Rev
Arthur Allen Jr of House of Prayer, independent Atlanta church, and four
church ...
topics.nytimes.com/.../s/sentences_criminal/index.html?query=ATLANTA%20(GA)&field=geo&match=exact
- 57k - Cached - Similar pages
Foster Care - News - Times Topics - The New York Times - Narrowed ...
Your search for GEORGIA in Foster Care returned 2 articles ... beaten by
their parents and by church leaders, under supervision of Rev Arthur
Allen Jr, ...
topics.nytimes.com/.../subjects/f/foster_care/index.html?query=GEORGIA&field=geo&match=exact
- 43k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from topics.nytimes.com ]
National Briefing | South: Georgia: New Term For Child-Cruelty ...
National Briefing | South: Georgia: New Term For Child-Cruelty Minister
.... leader of the House of Prayer, the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., to two
years in prison ...
query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06E5D61039F934A1575BC0A9659C8B 63
- 16k - Cached - Similar pages
National Briefing | South: Georgia: Police Catch Fugitive Minister ...
National Briefing | South: Georgia: Police Catch Fugitive Minister ...
The Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., the leader of the House of Prayer who has
been a fugitive ...
query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D03EFDC1E30F933A1575BC0A9659C8B 63
- 17k - Cached - Similar pages

[ More results from query.nytimes.com ]
Pastor, Followers' Date With the Law
Rev. Arthur Allen, Jr. recently finished serving a previous 90-day jail
sentence ... Meanwhile, officials from the Georgia Division of Family
and Children's ...
www.nospank.net/n-k05.htm - 4k - Cached - Similar pages

''ATLANTA HORROR CHURCH" SCENES OF WHIPPINGS, BIBLE-DISCIPLINE
.... a 130-member congregation headed by Rev. Arthur Allen Jr. Last week,
.... he told the Constitution that while Georgia law does not permit
girls of that ...
www.atheists.org/flash.line/faith11.htm - 20k - Cached - Similar pages

WorldWide Religious News-Child Abuse at a Church Creates a Stir in ...
.... Georgia child welfare authorities were surprised to discover that
the beating had ... under the supervision of the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr.,
the pastor. ...
www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=9329&sec=31&cont=all - 19k - Cached -
Similar pages

Domestic and church whipping, USA Mar 2001 - CORPUN ARCHIVE usd00103
But Georgia law defines child abuse as punishment that leaves welts or
marks, ... The Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., was sent to jail in 1993 after
ordering members ...
www.corpun.com/usd00103.htm - 29k - Cached - Similar pages

Domestic corporal punishment in United States, Oct 2002 - CORPUN ...
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Georgia, 9 October 2002 ... The
defendants, including the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., and the parents of one
of two boys they are ...
www.corpun.com/usd00210.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages

Here's a few words from the opinions of some of the public that were not
fooled by the cult of the Pastor and his sickness.

You'll find them by going to the articles above:

"National Briefing | South: Georgia: Sentences In Church Whippings

Rev Arthur Allen Jr of House of Prayer, independent Atlanta church, and
four church members are convicted of aggravated assault and cruelty to
children for whipping two boys in front of congregation; Judge T Jackson
Bedford Jr sentences defendants to up to 90 days in jail and bars Allen
from advising or participating in disciplining children other than his
own.."

This is the man Fern defended.

" National Briefing | South: Georgia: New Term For Child-Cruelty Minister

* Print
* Save

Article Tools Sponsored By
By ARIEL HART (NYT)
Published: August 27, 2003

Judge T. Jackson Bedford Jr. of Superior Court in Fulton County
sentenced the leader of the House of Prayer, the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr.,
to two years in prison for violating his parole on charges of child
cruelty. Judge Bedford imposed the sentence a week after the capture of
Mr. Allen, who was a fugitive for five months. He and four other church
members were convicted last year of whipping children in church. Mr.
Allen, 71, served 90 days in jail but violated a 10-year probation,
which included agreeing to hit children only with an open hand and
attending anger-management counseling. Ariel Hart (NYT) "

http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/faith11.htm

.... In 1993, Allen admitted in court his role in a beating which took
place the previous year, when he ordered members of his congregation to
whip a 16-year-old girl with belts and then taunt the bleeding
youngster. The girl, Ivory Johnson, testified at the proceeding, "He
(Allen) stood over me and said, 'I had you whining like a baby.'"

Allen said that the youth had defied his authority, so she was
"beaten into submission." ...

.... At a preliminary hearing, a police investigator testified that Allen
directed regular beatings of children. The youngsters were tied up and
suspended by their arms and hands, and "beaten with switches, sticks or
belts." Photographs produced at the hearing showed welts on some of the
victims, including one in the shape of a belt buckle. ...

.... Another possible victim, a 7-year-old, told police that his uncle
whipped him with a "big switch" at the church while three other men
restrained him. A police report on the incident shows that the beating
resulted in bruising on his stomach and back. A 10-year-old boy
recounted his whipping, as adult men in the congregation held his feet
and arms while Rev. Allen supervised the procedure.

One parent told the judge that the whippings had become so common
that he had lost count of how many he had seen at Allen's church.

Rev. Allen and most of his followers, though, denied any abuse and
were described as "defiant" over the charges. "I've really been painted
as a monster," He also defended his position on so-called "Bible
discipline," and said that he takes a literal approach such as that
found in Proverbs 23:13: "Withhold not correction from the child: for
(if) thou beatest him with a rod, he shall not die." ...

.... He added that he approves of marriages between older men in his
church and women as young as 14; he told the Constitution that while
Georgia law does not permit girls of that age to marry, Alabama does. ...

[[[ 14 year old girls? ]]]

.... One follower told the paper that she comes to Allen frequently for
"counseling" and "guidance," adding "My pastor has better judgment than
I have." Others, though, including former members of the House of Prayer
say that Allen and his flock are a dysfunction group, preying on
youngsters and others under the pretense of following Old
Testament-style religion. ...

[[[ Basically hell on earth. ]]]

[[[ Read the next carefully and wonder why the Reverend used the
specific language he did and the words "seeing you." ]]]

... Jason Bates used to attend Allen's church along with his mother and
several siblings. Now, he says "I get nervous just talking about it."

"He said his years at the church were filled with unexpected
beatings, sermons laced with curse words and a stern sense or order,"
noted writer Michael Pearson.

"They'd have kids back there lined up," for whipping says Bates, 19.
"They'd beat them for every simple little thing they'd do. " Bates noted
that his sister who was 12 at the time was whipped after Allen accused
her of being a prostitute and told her, "You're used to men seeing you."
Linda Bates, Jason's mother, took the family out of the church after
Allen stopped her from visiting Jason in the hospital after he suffered
injuries from a fire. "It was like a cult. He controlled everything..."

[[[ Think he might have been beating her naked? ]]]

What's your opinion of Fern now, little boy?

And just so you get YOUR commupance R R R R R...and your well deserved
verbal whuppin' for lying and being a ****head:

http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=9329&sec=31&cont=all

"Tanyaneeka Barnett, 25, a former church member, testified yesterday
that teenage girls who had sex were frequently whipped during church
services, after removal of their skirts or dresses."

As any woman you know how she would feel if she was forced to remove her
clothes down to her underwear in front of a group of people and be whipped.

http://www.corpun.com/usd00103.htm

.... The pastor and four members of the House of Prayer were charged with
cruelty to children for the beating of two boys, ages 7 and 10. Another
church member was charged with battery and reckless conduct.

The older boy had open wounds on his stomach and right side, said
Atlanta police Lt. Elizabeth Propes, commander of the youth crimes unit.
The younger boy had welts on his stomach and back. The boys told police
they were held down at church and beaten with sticks, switches and a
belt. ...

.... he Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., was sent to jail in 1993 after ordering
members of his church to beat a 16-year-old girl with belts and then
taunting the bleeding girl when she cried.

Now, the pastor of the House of Prayer church in northwest Atlanta is at
the center of a massive abuse investigation that has led to the removal
of 41 children from their parents' homes.

"He stood over me and said, 'I had you whining like a baby,' " the girl,
Ivory Johnson, testified during a 1993 trial in DeKalb County State Court.

Allen admitted in court that he ordered the August 1992 beating - which
he said may have lasted from 20 to 30 minutes. The beating continued, he
testified, until the girl was "beaten into submission." The teenager had
defied his authority, Allen said, and she "had to be beaten, or she
would take over the church." ...

And Fern is concerned about his Constitutional rights, and that of the
church members, BUT COULD NOT NAME THE RIGHTS SUPPOSEDLY DENIED THEM.

The state failed these children, and Fern would have them sent back for
more of the same kind of abuse.




>
> "0:->" > wrote in message
> news:PYednbwRKpOP1__YnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
>> Greegor wrote:
>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>>> I was far too kind.
>>> Greg wrote
>>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>> Kane wrote
>>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>> I have no "keepers."
>>
>>> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>> It's crucial to determine who "they" are and if the qualify as 'keepers'
>> of me.
>>> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>>>
>>> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>>>
>>> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
>>> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>>>
>>>> Kane wrote
>>>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>>>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>>> ...
>>> Greg wrote
>>>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>>>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>>>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>>>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>>>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>>>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>>>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
>> I've seen nothing suggesting they are my "keepers," Greg?
>>
>> You have this wonderfully fanciful delusional state you fall into whenever
>> you post here.
>>
>> Maybe being dropped on your head from a great height as a baby is really a
>> creative imagination booster, eh?
>>
>> Or weren't you? And are you sure?
>>
>> As for the posts in question? Yes, they saw them.
>>
>> They thought Fern was a nutcase too.
>>
>> Are you still wanting to argue that Fern identified the beatings and was
>> against them while defending the very perps?
>>
>> That requires a HUGE spectacle of writhing logical dissonance to carry
>> off, but you would be just the one to try.
>>
>> Greg, if there was a little girl, and her mommy's boyfriend had taken to
>> be real handy when she was taking showers he ordered her to take as
>> "aversive motivation" or some such, and the little girls G'pa showed up
>> and socked the boyfriend in the face, would you say I was defending the
>> sock in the face if I said, "The grandpa was right?"
>>
>> Now, same scenario.
>>
>> If I said instead, 'Grandpa was justified, but NOT to doing any socking in
>> the face of the boyfriend," you see the difference?
>>
>> I have NOT defended the socking. If I fail to say this latter, and ONLY
>> defend the g'pa, say against the police coming and a struggle ensuing,
>> then Greg, I have by default defended the action of the g'pa...the facial
>> application of knuckles to said boyfriend.
>>
>> Would you not grasp that if say, you were that boyfriend?
>>
>> Or say, the cops?
>>
>> The cops almost always, for instance, put cuffs on the people on scene
>> that look most likely to have a strong reaction to them having to be there
>> and arrest people.
>>
>> Yet Fern would blame the cops, and join happily in the show the perps and
>> the participants, children trained to and threatened most likely with lies
>> about CPS coming to torture them, act out and force the cops to use more
>> restraints.
>>
>> As for the directory. If it was taken legally, a church director is NOT a
>> protected document.
>>
>> Membership lists are carefully concealed by people that want to hide the
>> membership because they KNOW they cannot legally withhold them if taken by
>> warrant, or found in the course of a legal entry seeking membership.
>>
>> If you have this case to cite where I am shown to be wrong, I'll happily
>> admit you were correct. Unlike you when you are wrong.
>>
>> Now while you are here, wallowing around in any and everything possible to
>> avoid the inevitable.
>>
>> Why did you harass Dan Sullivan with slanderous claims that he was a
>> felon? Why did you claim a "privacy" that did not and does not exist in
>> that newsgroup at the time of his quoting it? Why have you not responded
>> with a retraction or adequate argument to support your claims by PROOF?
>>
>> If you continue to avoid facing up to this harassment, I SHALL HAVE TO
>> TAKE STEPS, MIND YOU.
>>
>> Personally I love the Scottish Sword dance, though I need to replace my
>> tartans. Damned bloody expensive, let me tell you.
>>
>> The 'English' side of my ancestry, is actually Highland.
>>
>> Just a quarter or so, but the sound of the pipes has a profound effect on
>> me.
>>
>> Now, get honest Greg, if you can.
>>
>> 1. - You have made a claim against Dan that you have not provided proof
>> for.
>>
>> Yet YOU claim harassment, and Dennis the Sock hints around at legal
>> action.
>>
>> You be damn sure to have a lawyer read ALL your posts before you set out
>> on that path, if that's your intent.
>>
>> You are a thoroughgoing thug, bully, liar, and cheat, Greg.
>>
>> And I have your posts to prove it.
>>
>> You say Dan is a felon.
>>
>> Do YOU have the posts to prove it?
>>
>> If so, post them.
>>
>> 2. - How you doing on that first draft of a correction to the HWMC hearing
>> record into the congressional record that retracts your statement against
>> Iowa claiming they broke the law by not keeping to the federally mandated
>> guidelines for funding of X number of CPR offices throughout their various
>> districts?
>>
>> Anything yet?
>>
>> Why can't you produce it NOW before you have written it, like you want the
>> state of Iowa to produce it's budget for you before they have produced and
>> published it?
>>
>> This is too funny, because we had this very same conversation about two
>> years ago, Dummy and you STILL can't remember that I told you, no one can
>> produce what's not produced yet, budget or pie.
>>
>> ****, what a feeb you are.
>>
>> 0:->
>
>

[Greegor]

> The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
> witch who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.
> Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a
> few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
> Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.

Yep.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> > The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
> > witch who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.
> > Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a
> > few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
> > Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.
>
> Yep.

Come on dummy. I just posted an hour or so ago the proud declarations
of the reverend his very own self, that indeed he did and had his
parishoners DO those things.

He was convicted in 1993 of the brutal beating of a 17 year old girl,
because she was out of control and trying to take over the church. 20
to 30 minutes of beating her bloody. CONVICTED OF IT.

And HE gave HIS rationale for DOING it.

Stop lying to yourself.

[0:->]

Ron wrote:
> "Sharon Ispay" > wrote in message
> news:f0s8h.3592$IW2.1975@trndny03...
>> "Greegor" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>>> I was far too kind.
>>> Greg wrote
>>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>> Kane wrote
>>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>>> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>>>
>>> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>>>
>>> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>>>
>>> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
>>> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>>>
>>>> Kane wrote
>>>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
>>>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
>>>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>>> ...
>>> Greg wrote
>>>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>>>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>>>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>>>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>>>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>>>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>>>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
>> And just to clear up a few of the disinformation -
>>
>> Two children were found to have marks from their spanking. Pastor Allen
>> and several congregation members went to jail. Allen got 90 days + 10yrs
>> probation.- the rest less.
>>
>> The children were held, not hung.
>>
>> They were not naked.
>>
>> The 'hung from rafters naked'

I don't believe that was the wording, but a minor error, considering
nudity will not cause wounds, but one boy had wounds.

I've still not recovered the news article that revealed the naked
beatings claim, but I do recall reading it back when the incidents first
came to light and were reported.

Probably archived out of sight in deference to the privacy of the children.

>> lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
>> witch

No...she really didn't care for beating children? Well, I swan. Deed I do.

>> who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.

Never let it be said you'd stoop to hyperbole.

>> Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas,

Don didn't do that. He doesn't post here.

And no attacks took place. Just pointing out what she had done.

>> and figured a
>> few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
>> Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.

Read my posts with the news articles where the reverend confesses and it
comes out he had a 93 conviction for beating a 17 year old girl bloody
in a 20-30 minute thrashing?

>
> Links chuckels, or you are a liar.

I posted, this evening, all the links.

He's a liar, so he won't, of course. Like that's news.

Indeed the reverend, his very own sweet kindly self, attested to his
discipline methods. Harsh long beatings, up to thirty minutes, children
left bloody. He was convicted for doing that to a 16 or 17 year old
girl. Brutal stuff.

Ex church members and current ones spoke out and defended or blasted
such things.

They did indeed make a habit of such beatings, and they did indeed
'suspend' kids and whip them with objects. A police investigator saw
wounds, not marks, wounds in one boy's flesh in this latest incident
under discussion.

In the reverends own words, he related something he said to a girl
laying on the ground being beaten...a twelve year old he called a
prostitute and told her that "men have seen you..." I sort of took that
to be a reply to her trying to cover up her nakedness. But then that's
probably some of that fertile imagination I have caught temporarily from
Greg.

As you know, kids that have been brutally treated still want to be with
who they know, with the things that are theirs, their pets, sibs,
neighbors, the corner store, the playground. They will keep going back
even to the point of death sometimes, if they can.

Some of the teens I worked with even did that. Run away TOO family
members that raped them regularly.

But that's humans for yah.

> Ron

Kane

[Sharon Ispay]

You've already admitted that Fern didn't defend the spanking abuse of these
two boys.

You say she criticized CPS which your sick CPS mind is the same as abusing
children.

So 1 + 1 = 3 and presto - innocent folks who criticize the criminal behavior
of CPS become child abuse defenders.

Typical CPS slimeball using typical CPS everyone is guilty logic.

You could post 3500 kb of your kookrant whine - the fact is you are a liar
and false accuser.

Typical CPS lowlife.

"0:->" > wrote in message
news:rdidnYnyvtSd6__YnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
> Sharon Ispay wrote:
> ........deliberate lies. He knows Fern quite as well as the rest of us,
> and what her posting consisted of......
>
> Preamble.
>
> This thread has moved off topic.
>
> When Fern first came up the issue was claiming that someone posting with a
> nym for anonymity was obviously doing something sinister.
>
> I mentioned a group of people that have posted here anonymously....Greg
> went off this direction to avoid dealing with his harassment of me for
> protection my family with a nym. No argument, just harassment.
>
> Now back to the fun, your misinformation and lies.
>
>> WOW - 9kb of koo-koo whine and Don's delusions.
>>
>> How do you CPS scum dream up these hilarious rants.
>>
>> You got caught in a pack of lies falsely accusing folk.
>>
>> So you puke out reams of bull**** to cloud the issue.
>>
>> You CPS lowlife make me laugh. lol.
>>
>> They weren't hung.
>
> The language of one media article on this, at least, was that they were
> "suspended." You may love that softened termed, but to me they were hung
> up and beaten.
>>
>> They weren't naked.
>>
> I'm afraid they were.
>
>> Their spankings weren't supported by Fern.
>
> She did, and she has done so in other instances.
>
>> You're a typical CPS liar and false accuser.
>
> You are a typical ****assed abuse minimizer and denier and protector of
> abusers.
>
> And she did in fact support their beating in quite explicit language.
>
> Here's another Fern "gem" of abuse apologist minimizing and defense of
> parents rights to beat their children without interference from the state.
> She's wrong in her claim of the beatings evidence coming up as
> inconclusive. Inconclusive was the the finding in only two of the
> children. Some were found not to have been injured at all, some showed
> clear signs of having been injured, but before I provide you with
> evidence, let's look at the Fern gem together, shall we?:
>
> [[[ My comments interspersed in these brackets ]]]
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/f7a90e8aadcb83ca?hl=en&
> 415
> From: Fern5827 - view profile
> Date: Mon, May 28 2001 8:12 am
> Email: (Fern5827)
> Groups: alt.parenting.spanking
> Not yet rated
> Rating: hide options
> Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
> original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author
>
> Chris, do you understand that the evidence that the children were beaten
> was "INCONCLUSIVE"?
>
> [[[ The term inconclusive was applied to only two of the children. Fern
> commits the crime of lying by diminishing the facts to partial facts
> making them appear to apply to the entire demographic being discussed.
> Typical of you ****ants. ]]]
>
> Suppose you were 8 years old, and agents of the state swarmed into your
> home and took you away in handcuffs because you might have been beaten?
>
> [[[ Suppose they didn't and the beatings continued? Suppose the church
> pastor and members had already proven to be combative and resistive and
> had coached their children to be? I can "suppose" right along with the
> best of them, and folks in the civil rights movement, of which I approve,
> learned how to be aggressively "non-aggressive." It was part of King's
> tactical development. A militant non-aggression and taught specifically as
> a skill for people engaging the authorities in protest.
>
>
> And I most thoroughly agreed with it myself, but not for resisting when
> one has broken the laws against child abuse. ]]]
>
>
> You spend 2 months in a foster home, where you may be molested by older
> children, surely teased, and surely not told why you are here.
>
> [[[ Pure speculative bunk'm, Fern's specialty was dreaming up scenarios
> that might have somewhere some time and applying them to situations where
> no such events occurred, such as this, to promote these miserable
> arguments siding with child beaters and other abusers. ]]]
>
> You are handcuffed.
>
> [[[ The police have a right AND a duty to protect both themselves, the one
> in cuffs, and others in the vicinity. There is no "violence" or threat in
> being handcuffed. No abuse taking place. ]]]
>
> Or do you believe all African-American children should be HANDCUFFED at
> age 8?
>
> [[[ Isn't that a cute Johnny Cockran though? ]]]
>
> Destroy the authority of your Mom whose only crime was to participate in
> that church?
>
> [[[ It does not destroy the authority of parent to remove a child. If it
> did then they sure as hell must have been without much authority to begin
> with...yet another of Fern's whining accusation with no bottom to it. ]]]
>
> Do you have any idea how many thousand were squandered by Georgia DCFS on
> this odyssey of idiocy?
>
> [[[ What has this to do with the issues at stake here? ]]]
>
> If you truly believe the state makes a better parent, then I suggest you
> apply for a position as a CPS caseworker or a group home supervisor.
>
> [[[ There it is. As you will see she had access to the article I am going
> to reprint, and it clearly showed some children were in fact beaten. ]]]
>
> The first time a teen tries to sucker punch you,. you might sing a
> different tune. ..
>
> [[[ Let me see now. We were discussing "suspending children" and beating
> them with objects, and suddenly it's rationalized by some strange quirk of
> mind in an abrupt departure from the topic up to now, with a reference to
> violent teens. NO TEEN was identified in this story as sucker punching
> anyone. ]]]
>
> .... And Fern's annotated post. I've changed nothing, and only added my
> comments to this babbling drivel of Fern's............
>
> Give you any idea of the mentality of Fern?
>
> Now lets look at the post that came directly in the thread before this Gem
> of Ferns....not by the poster she addresses though, but by someone on HER
> side of the argument. It's a copy and paste of a media piece describing
> the situation.
>
> Here it is, the article, and I'll comment again in [[[ brackets ]]]
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.parenting.spanking/msg/a20032579e0fadb1?hl=en&
>
> [[[ You will see the comments of other beatings apologists here as
> well. ]]]
>
> From: destorycps - view profile
> Date: Sun, May 27 2001 11:15 am
> Email: destorycps >
> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.support.foster-parents,
> alt.parenting.spanking, misc.kids, misc.legal
> Not yet rated
> Rating: show options
> Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
> original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author
>
> http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/reports/church/052601.html
> House of Prayer reunion
> Parents get 35 kids; 13 more on way
>
> By ALAN JUDD
> Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer
>
> As soon as the door swung open, 14-year-old Dianna Frazier spotted her
> mother.
> The girl sprinted across the room and leapt into Kim Ogletree's arms,
> wrapping
> her legs around her mother's waist.
>
> When Jimmy Barnett reunited with his 8-year-old son, Cephas, he lifted the
> boy
> high into the air. Then he hugged him tighter and tighter.
>
> Half an hour after David Duncan and his son, Stephen, found each other,
> the
> 7-year-old continued to rest his hand on his father's shoulder.
>
> In the chaos of Friday's sudden reunions between members of the House of
> Prayer
> church and many of the children seized from their homes by state welfare
> officials in an abuse investigation, the boy wasn't letting his father go
> anywhere.
>
> [[[ Have seen children 'rest their head' on parents that were forensically
> proven rapist of that child, let alone having beaten them to the point of
> broken bones and permanent injuries. A child's behavior around an abuser
> is NEVER a valid indicator of what actually took place. CPS worker
> investigators know to NOT go by such signs either way. A frightened
> appearing child may never have been abused, but simply be timid by
> disposition...the article itself is a crock of tearjerking hyperbole, but
> there are some facts revealed. ]]]
>
> When her tears subsided, Ogletree said getting her eight children back
> from
> state foster care was almost enough to make up for the trauma of seeing
> them
> pulled from their home May 8 in an ugly confrontation with police. Like
> the
> other parents, Ogletree had not seen her children since they were taken
> into
> custody. For some parents, the separation had been as long as two months.
>
> "If you hold on and stay firm and continue to believe, you can see what
> happens," Ogletree said. "It took a miracle, but we got our children home.
> The
> Lord brought them home."
>
> In a stunning turnaround, state child welfare officials decided Friday to
> release 35 of the 49 children they had taken into protective custody amid
> reports of widespread, systematic beatings of children at the small
> northwest
> Atlanta church.
>
> All but one of the remaining 14 children in state custody could be
> released as
> early as Wednesday. That child is expected to return home by June 16, when
> he is
> scheduled to complete psychological treatment.
>
> The parents were not required to agree to any restrictions on how they
> discipline their children. Earlier proposed restrictions by Juvenile Court
> Judge
> Sanford Jones - such as a ban on spankings at church - had sparked a
> two-month
> impasse between state officials and church members.
>
> Church members and their pastor, the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., had sought
> unconditional surrender from the state Division of Family and Children
> Services.
>
> The resolution of the conflict between the state and the parents came
> hours
> after the Journal-Constitution reported that physical evidence suggested
> no more
> than five of the 49 children in protective custody had suffered physical
> harm.
>
> [[[ Oh gee, only five, eh? And the authorities were supposed to find those
> five with water witching skills? ]]]
>
> Evidence indicating abuse of two of those children was inconclusive, the
> newspaper's review found, and only two children suffered the welts or
> bruises
> that elevate a spanking to the level of child abuse under Georgia law.
>
> [[[ And Georgia is a notorious paddling state and has passed on children
> with wounds that were clear across the child's body and left supperating
> infected sores. ]]]
>
> "The judge and DFCS now realize that so many mistakes were made along the
> way,"
> said state Rep. Tyrone Brooks (D-Atlanta), one of the lawmakers and civil
> rights
> leaders who negotiated the children's release. "It really is an
> embarrassment to
> the state of Georgia."
>
> Until late Friday afternoon, it had seemed unlikely the children would
> soon go
> home.
>
> The judge had set a deadline of 2 p.m. for parents to comply with an order
> he
> imposed Wednesday. Under that order, they had to promise to prevent their
> children from being abused and not to let girls as young as 14 leave the
> state
> to get married. A hearing would have been held in late June to determine
> when,
> or if, the rest of the children could go home.
>
> [[[ Like that one, do you? Looking for a young wife maybe? ]]]
>
> Allen's response, on behalf of the parents from the six families, was: "No
> deal." The pastor insisted all the children had to be returned.
>
> As Friday's deadline approached, DFCS officials took the 35 children
> approved by
> the judge to a picnic near the agency's office on Bankhead Highway, where
> the
> judge had instructed the parents to pick them up.
>
> DFCS officials showed little sign of relenting on the conditions they had
> asked
> the judge to impose.
>
> "[The parents] said they would come, but if all the children are not here,
> they
> would not take any," Andy Boisseau, a DFCS spokesman, told reporters at
> midday.
> "All of the children are not going to be here - that's for certain."
>
> To avoid raising false hopes, the children were not told that a reunion
> was a
> possibility.
>
> But at the House of Prayer, about two miles from the DFCS office, Brooks
> and
> several colleagues were meeting with Allen and church members, trying to
> reach a
> compromise. Brooks talked by telephone several times with Judge Jones, the
> judge, and with Gary Redding, acting commissioner of the state Department
> of
> Human Resources, which oversees DFCS.
>
> Just before 1:30, Jones faxed Brooks a statement giving the lawmaker what
> the
> judge had declined to give the parents Wednesday - a specific date that
> the last
> of the children would be released if they agreed to take the first group
> Friday.
>
> The judge's statement said the remaining children would be returned home
> by
> Wednesday unless evaluations found "emotional, sexual or physical damage
> that
> can't be handled by the family." One child's evaluation won't be finished
> until
> June 16, however.
>
> That promise sealed the deal.
>
> Inside the church, the congregation drafted a letter seeking an apology
> from
> Gov. Roy Barnes and DFCS. And the church members rejected the notion of
> outside
> monitors watching how they raise their children.
>
> "We want the situation returned, as near as possible, to the way it was
> before
> they intruded in our lives," the letter said.
>
> Then the congregation boarded two church buses to bring their children
> home.
>
> "If they had been reasonable from the beginning, they could have prevented
> all
> of this," Allen said of state officials. "They were going to go roughshod
> over
> us, but we were a little tougher than they thought."
>
> destroycps says ...
> Seventy percent returned after only two months is an outstandingly
> positive
> result considering most families never get reunited.
>
> The returns were largely the consequence of the media attention for the en
> masse
> abduction. If the CPS (GA's DFCS) tacticians had been smarter or less
> brazen,
> they could have taken 5 or so kids at a time and gotten away with it.
>
> [[[ Above you see an apologist for beatings admit that the issue was
> decided NOT on the merits of the case, but on public opinion pressure. ]]]
>
> Neal Feldman said ...
> >Atlanta:
> >In the wake of the mass kidnapping of 49 children on an accusation that
> >TWO were abused and with absolutely no evidence or credible accusation
> >of child abuse against any of the rest of the parents 34 children were
> >finally returned to their parents after the parents capitulated to
> >extorted agreements infringing on their parental, due process, civil,
> >constitutional and human rights.
>
> >One in particular was that they must send their children to public
> >school, which violates a clearly accepted parental right to home school
> >their children.
>
> >These children had been kidnapped and held hostage for at least two
> >months by Gestapo CPS.
>
> [[[ That's known as blah blah blah by the group clown. ]]]
> ....................
>
> Basically the state failed to protect these children. How do I know this?
> By reading for comprehension.
>
> And knowing that the entire public was not conned by this so called
> "Christian Pastor."
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Rev.+Arthur+Allen+Jr.%2C%22+georgia&btnG=Google+Search
>
> I made it a point at the time to stay up to date on the events and the
> aftermath. Most of these links will be active still, but you can get the
> drift of things if you bother to read rather than rant, and lie.
>
> The pastor was a violent sadistic brute and his followers a cultlike group
> that did his bidding even to the point of injuring their children at his
> command, both physically and psychologically.
>
> Fern's a brute as far as I'm concerned and this "poor little old lady Kane
> attacked with ugly WORDS," is a crock of **** rolled out here to camoflage
> their own sick support and love of torture of children in these ways.
>
> There are some other stories, of similar nature mixed in here...likely
> that you and Fern would also find excuses for the perps.
>
> Cult News from Rick Ross » House of Prayer
> Dwight York, the leader of another group in Georgia named the “Nuwaubians
> ... Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., leader of the “House of Prayer,” ended his
> three-month ...
> www.cultnews.com/?cat=67 - 79k - Cached - Similar pages
> Sentences (Criminal) - News - Times Topics - The New York Times ...
> National Briefing | South: Georgia: Sentences In Church Whippings. Rev
> Arthur Allen Jr of House of Prayer, independent Atlanta church, and four
> church ...
> topics.nytimes.com/.../s/sentences_criminal/index.html?query=ATLANTA%20(GA)&field=geo&match=exact
> - 57k - Cached - Similar pages
> Foster Care - News - Times Topics - The New York Times - Narrowed ...
> Your search for GEORGIA in Foster Care returned 2 articles ... beaten by
> their parents and by church leaders, under supervision of Rev Arthur Allen
> Jr, ...
> topics.nytimes.com/.../subjects/f/foster_care/index.html?query=GEORGIA&field=geo&match=exact
> - 43k - Cached - Similar pages
> [ More results from topics.nytimes.com ]
> National Briefing | South: Georgia: New Term For Child-Cruelty ...
> National Briefing | South: Georgia: New Term For Child-Cruelty Minister
> ... leader of the House of Prayer, the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., to two years
> in prison ...
> query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06E5D61039F934A1575BC0A9659C8B 63
> - 16k - Cached - Similar pages
> National Briefing | South: Georgia: Police Catch Fugitive Minister ...
> National Briefing | South: Georgia: Police Catch Fugitive Minister ... The
> Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., the leader of the House of Prayer who has been a
> fugitive ...
> query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D03EFDC1E30F933A1575BC0A9659C8B 63
> - 17k - Cached - Similar pages
>
> [ More results from query.nytimes.com ]
> Pastor, Followers' Date With the Law
> Rev. Arthur Allen, Jr. recently finished serving a previous 90-day jail
> sentence ... Meanwhile, officials from the Georgia Division of Family and
> Children's ...
> www.nospank.net/n-k05.htm - 4k - Cached - Similar pages
>
> ''ATLANTA HORROR CHURCH" SCENES OF WHIPPINGS, BIBLE-DISCIPLINE
> ... a 130-member congregation headed by Rev. Arthur Allen Jr. Last week,
> ... he told the Constitution that while Georgia law does not permit girls
> of that ...
> www.atheists.org/flash.line/faith11.htm - 20k - Cached - Similar pages
>
> WorldWide Religious News-Child Abuse at a Church Creates a Stir in ...
> ... Georgia child welfare authorities were surprised to discover that the
> beating had ... under the supervision of the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., the
> pastor. ...
> www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=9329&sec=31&cont=all - 19k - Cached - Similar
> pages
>
> Domestic and church whipping, USA Mar 2001 - CORPUN ARCHIVE usd00103
> But Georgia law defines child abuse as punishment that leaves welts or
> marks, ... The Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., was sent to jail in 1993 after
> ordering members ...
> www.corpun.com/usd00103.htm - 29k - Cached - Similar pages
>
> Domestic corporal punishment in United States, Oct 2002 - CORPUN ...
> Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Georgia, 9 October 2002 ... The defendants,
> including the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., and the parents of one of two boys
> they are ...
> www.corpun.com/usd00210.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
>
> Here's a few words from the opinions of some of the public that were not
> fooled by the cult of the Pastor and his sickness.
>
> You'll find them by going to the articles above:
>
> "National Briefing | South: Georgia: Sentences In Church Whippings
>
> Rev Arthur Allen Jr of House of Prayer, independent Atlanta church, and
> four church members are convicted of aggravated assault and cruelty to
> children for whipping two boys in front of congregation; Judge T Jackson
> Bedford Jr sentences defendants to up to 90 days in jail and bars Allen
> from advising or participating in disciplining children other than his
> own.."
>
> This is the man Fern defended.
>
> " National Briefing | South: Georgia: New Term For Child-Cruelty Minister
>
> * Print
> * Save
>
> Article Tools Sponsored By
> By ARIEL HART (NYT)
> Published: August 27, 2003
>
> Judge T. Jackson Bedford Jr. of Superior Court in Fulton County sentenced
> the leader of the House of Prayer, the Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., to two years
> in prison for violating his parole on charges of child cruelty. Judge
> Bedford imposed the sentence a week after the capture of Mr. Allen, who
> was a fugitive for five months. He and four other church members were
> convicted last year of whipping children in church. Mr. Allen, 71, served
> 90 days in jail but violated a 10-year probation, which included agreeing
> to hit children only with an open hand and attending anger-management
> counseling. Ariel Hart (NYT) "
>
> http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/faith11.htm
>
> ... In 1993, Allen admitted in court his role in a beating which took
> place the previous year, when he ordered members of his congregation to
> whip a 16-year-old girl with belts and then taunt the bleeding youngster.
> The girl, Ivory Johnson, testified at the proceeding, "He (Allen) stood
> over me and said, 'I had you whining like a baby.'"
>
> Allen said that the youth had defied his authority, so she was "beaten
> into submission." ...
>
> ... At a preliminary hearing, a police investigator testified that Allen
> directed regular beatings of children. The youngsters were tied up and
> suspended by their arms and hands, and "beaten with switches, sticks or
> belts." Photographs produced at the hearing showed welts on some of the
> victims, including one in the shape of a belt buckle. ...
>
> ... Another possible victim, a 7-year-old, told police that his uncle
> whipped him with a "big switch" at the church while three other men
> restrained him. A police report on the incident shows that the beating
> resulted in bruising on his stomach and back. A 10-year-old boy recounted
> his whipping, as adult men in the congregation held his feet and arms
> while Rev. Allen supervised the procedure.
>
> One parent told the judge that the whippings had become so common that
> he had lost count of how many he had seen at Allen's church.
>
> Rev. Allen and most of his followers, though, denied any abuse and were
> described as "defiant" over the charges. "I've really been painted as a
> monster," He also defended his position on so-called "Bible discipline,"
> and said that he takes a literal approach such as that found in Proverbs
> 23:13: "Withhold not correction from the child: for (if) thou beatest him
> with a rod, he shall not die." ...
>
> ... He added that he approves of marriages between older men in his church
> and women as young as 14; he told the Constitution that while Georgia law
> does not permit girls of that age to marry, Alabama does. ...
>
> [[[ 14 year old girls? ]]]
>
> ... One follower told the paper that she comes to Allen frequently for
> "counseling" and "guidance," adding "My pastor has better judgment than I
> have." Others, though, including former members of the House of Prayer say
> that Allen and his flock are a dysfunction group, preying on youngsters
> and others under the pretense of following Old Testament-style religion.
> ...
>
> [[[ Basically hell on earth. ]]]
>
> [[[ Read the next carefully and wonder why the Reverend used the specific
> language he did and the words "seeing you." ]]]
>
> .. Jason Bates used to attend Allen's church along with his mother and
> several siblings. Now, he says "I get nervous just talking about it."
>
> "He said his years at the church were filled with unexpected beatings,
> sermons laced with curse words and a stern sense or order," noted writer
> Michael Pearson.
>
> "They'd have kids back there lined up," for whipping says Bates, 19.
> "They'd beat them for every simple little thing they'd do. " Bates noted
> that his sister who was 12 at the time was whipped after Allen accused her
> of being a prostitute and told her, "You're used to men seeing you." Linda
> Bates, Jason's mother, took the family out of the church after Allen
> stopped her from visiting Jason in the hospital after he suffered injuries
> from a fire. "It was like a cult. He controlled everything..."
>
> [[[ Think he might have been beating her naked? ]]]
>
> What's your opinion of Fern now, little boy?
>
> And just so you get YOUR commupance R R R R R...and your well deserved
> verbal whuppin' for lying and being a ****head:
>
> http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=9329&sec=31&cont=all
>
> "Tanyaneeka Barnett, 25, a former church member, testified yesterday that
> teenage girls who had sex were frequently whipped during church services,
> after removal of their skirts or dresses."
>
> As any woman you know how she would feel if she was forced to remove her
> clothes down to her underwear in front of a group of people and be
> whipped.
>
> http://www.corpun.com/usd00103.htm
>
> ... The pastor and four members of the House of Prayer were charged with
> cruelty to children for the beating of two boys, ages 7 and 10. Another
> church member was charged with battery and reckless conduct.
>
> The older boy had open wounds on his stomach and right side, said Atlanta
> police Lt. Elizabeth Propes, commander of the youth crimes unit. The
> younger boy had welts on his stomach and back. The boys told police they
> were held down at church and beaten with sticks, switches and a belt. ...
>
> ... he Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., was sent to jail in 1993 after ordering
> members of his church to beat a 16-year-old girl with belts and then
> taunting the bleeding girl when she cried.
>
> Now, the pastor of the House of Prayer church in northwest Atlanta is at
> the center of a massive abuse investigation that has led to the removal of
> 41 children from their parents' homes.
>
> "He stood over me and said, 'I had you whining like a baby,' " the girl,
> Ivory Johnson, testified during a 1993 trial in DeKalb County State Court.
>
> Allen admitted in court that he ordered the August 1992 beating - which he
> said may have lasted from 20 to 30 minutes. The beating continued, he
> testified, until the girl was "beaten into submission." The teenager had
> defied his authority, Allen said, and she "had to be beaten, or she would
> take over the church." ...
>
> And Fern is concerned about his Constitutional rights, and that of the
> church members, BUT COULD NOT NAME THE RIGHTS SUPPOSEDLY DENIED THEM.
>
> The state failed these children, and Fern would have them sent back for
> more of the same kind of abuse.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> "0:->" > wrote in message
>> news:PYednbwRKpOP1__YnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
>>> Greegor wrote:
>>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>>>>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>>>>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>>>>> I was far too kind.
>>>> Greg wrote
>>>>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
>>>> Kane wrote
>>>>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
>>> I have no "keepers."
>>>
>>>> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
>>> It's crucial to determine who "they" are and if the qualify as 'keepers'
>>> of me.
>>>> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
>>>>
>>>> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
>>>>
>>>> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>>> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
>>>> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
>>>>
>>>>> Kane wrote
>>>>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own
>>>>>> field
>>>>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
>>>>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
>>>>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so
>>>>>> she
>>>>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
>>>> ...
>>>> Greg wrote
>>>>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
>>>>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
>>>>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
>>>>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>>>> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
>>>> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
>>>> alt.support.foster-parents
>>>>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
>>>>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
>>>>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
>>>>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
>>> I've seen nothing suggesting they are my "keepers," Greg?
>>>
>>> You have this wonderfully fanciful delusional state you fall into
>>> whenever you post here.
>>>
>>> Maybe being dropped on your head from a great height as a baby is really
>>> a creative imagination booster, eh?
>>>
>>> Or weren't you? And are you sure?
>>>
>>> As for the posts in question? Yes, they saw them.
>>>
>>> They thought Fern was a nutcase too.
>>>
>>> Are you still wanting to argue that Fern identified the beatings and was
>>> against them while defending the very perps?
>>>
>>> That requires a HUGE spectacle of writhing logical dissonance to carry
>>> off, but you would be just the one to try.
>>>
>>> Greg, if there was a little girl, and her mommy's boyfriend had taken to
>>> be real handy when she was taking showers he ordered her to take as
>>> "aversive motivation" or some such, and the little girls G'pa showed up
>>> and socked the boyfriend in the face, would you say I was defending the
>>> sock in the face if I said, "The grandpa was right?"
>>>
>>> Now, same scenario.
>>>
>>> If I said instead, 'Grandpa was justified, but NOT to doing any socking
>>> in the face of the boyfriend," you see the difference?
>>>
>>> I have NOT defended the socking. If I fail to say this latter, and ONLY
>>> defend the g'pa, say against the police coming and a struggle ensuing,
>>> then Greg, I have by default defended the action of the g'pa...the
>>> facial application of knuckles to said boyfriend.
>>>
>>> Would you not grasp that if say, you were that boyfriend?
>>>
>>> Or say, the cops?
>>>
>>> The cops almost always, for instance, put cuffs on the people on scene
>>> that look most likely to have a strong reaction to them having to be
>>> there and arrest people.
>>>
>>> Yet Fern would blame the cops, and join happily in the show the perps
>>> and the participants, children trained to and threatened most likely
>>> with lies about CPS coming to torture them, act out and force the cops
>>> to use more restraints.
>>>
>>> As for the directory. If it was taken legally, a church director is NOT
>>> a protected document.
>>>
>>> Membership lists are carefully concealed by people that want to hide the
>>> membership because they KNOW they cannot legally withhold them if taken
>>> by warrant, or found in the course of a legal entry seeking membership.
>>>
>>> If you have this case to cite where I am shown to be wrong, I'll happily
>>> admit you were correct. Unlike you when you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Now while you are here, wallowing around in any and everything possible
>>> to avoid the inevitable.
>>>
>>> Why did you harass Dan Sullivan with slanderous claims that he was a
>>> felon? Why did you claim a "privacy" that did not and does not exist in
>>> that newsgroup at the time of his quoting it? Why have you not responded
>>> with a retraction or adequate argument to support your claims by PROOF?
>>>
>>> If you continue to avoid facing up to this harassment, I SHALL HAVE TO
>>> TAKE STEPS, MIND YOU.
>>>
>>> Personally I love the Scottish Sword dance, though I need to replace my
>>> tartans. Damned bloody expensive, let me tell you.
>>>
>>> The 'English' side of my ancestry, is actually Highland.
>>>
>>> Just a quarter or so, but the sound of the pipes has a profound effect
>>> on me.
>>>
>>> Now, get honest Greg, if you can.
>>>
>>> 1. - You have made a claim against Dan that you have not provided proof
>>> for.
>>>
>>> Yet YOU claim harassment, and Dennis the Sock hints around at legal
>>> action.
>>>
>>> You be damn sure to have a lawyer read ALL your posts before you set out
>>> on that path, if that's your intent.
>>>
>>> You are a thoroughgoing thug, bully, liar, and cheat, Greg.
>>>
>>> And I have your posts to prove it.
>>>
>>> You say Dan is a felon.
>>>
>>> Do YOU have the posts to prove it?
>>>
>>> If so, post them.
>>>
>>> 2. - How you doing on that first draft of a correction to the HWMC
>>> hearing record into the congressional record that retracts your
>>> statement against Iowa claiming they broke the law by not keeping to the
>>> federally mandated guidelines for funding of X number of CPR offices
>>> throughout their various districts?
>>>
>>> Anything yet?
>>>
>>> Why can't you produce it NOW before you have written it, like you want
>>> the state of Iowa to produce it's budget for you before they have
>>> produced and published it?
>>>
>>> This is too funny, because we had this very same conversation about two
>>> years ago, Dummy and you STILL can't remember that I told you, no one
>>> can produce what's not produced yet, budget or pie.
>>>
>>> ****, what a feeb you are.
>>>
>>> 0:->
>>

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> He was convicted in 1993 of the brutal beating of a 17 year old girl,
> because she was out of control and trying to take over the church. 20
> to 30 minutes of beating her bloody. CONVICTED OF IT.
>
> And HE gave HIS rationale for DOING it.

So what? He is not Fern.

If you're talking about Mr. Bond. he was NOT convicted.
He was silently marked, was never informed.

Is this Bond the person you're saying was CONVICTED?

Perhaps it was another one of those
Family Court ""Convictions"" eh?

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> Probably archived out of sight in deference to the privacy of the children.

Yeah, HUGE INTERNATIONAL STORIES that are in almost
every single newspaper in America for WEEKS always have
a habit of dissappearing!

That's the biggest conspiracy theory ever concocted!

But even if some news story revealed HORRORS,
that still* would not prove that Fern made the statements
you falsely attributed to her.

You just decided it was "moral and ethical" to lie again.
When you get to be as rabid about a crusade as you are, that happens.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote
> > Probably archived out of sight in deference to the privacy of the children.
>
> Yeah, HUGE INTERNATIONAL STORIES that are in almost
> every single newspaper in America for WEEKS always have
> a habit of dissappearing!

Actually they do. The become fish wrappers in about a week or two. Very
common.

And you've never seen the media withhold information in respect of
privacy of say rape victims or children?

Avoiding mentioning over and over again that the children were naked
(by the way, I posted the media piece where girls said they were forced
to take of dresses and skirts. Ask a women you know if that would
bother then...being forced to strip to their underware before a church
congregation) would be highly likely in fact.

It's YOU that has the prurient interest in children. Most of the public
is not like you.
>
> That's the biggest conspiracy theory ever concocted!

BONG!! Argument destroyed by the use of ridiculous over the top
hyperbole.

> But even if some news story revealed HORRORS,
> that still* would not prove that Fern made the statements
> you falsely attributed to her.

Wrong. I didn't attribute statements to Fern. I merely said she
defended the abuse. I did not say how.

And if she defended the abusers she defended the abuse unless she
explicitely stated otherwise.

It's very easy to say that one does not condone the behavior, but does
protest the treatment of the actor.

She simply chose to protest the treatment of the actor.

Figure it out yourself.
>
> You just decided it was "moral and ethical" to lie again.

Nope. I would lie only to protect life and limb of myself or someone
else.

I have asked you if you would lie to protect the life of say Lisa, or a
real family member. You have declined to answer.

Either you are too stupid to figure out the question or your immoral
and unwilling to reveal it.

Only an immoral person, or a criminal, or a mentally defective person
would tell "the truth" if would injure or cause the death of an
innocent person, Greg.

Care to answer my question?

> When you get to be as rabid about a crusade as you are, that happens.

You are projecting. That is exactly your MO, Greg.

You have your failure to live with (coming up on six years now), and
the mistakes, OR the purposeful actions you took or failed to take, and
you must lie to cover them up from yourself and others.

I would not lie to protect my ego. Only person's personal safety.

You lie for nothing more than to conceal your unethical
behavior....just as you are doing now.

Fern defended the abusers.

I have posted full information that was freely available at the time of
the events. Fern defended the abusers by attacking the actions of the
state.

She has repeatedly claimed the rights of the parent exceeds that of the
child.

Tell us what you think of the stories I posted where the reverend
admitted to savage beatings of children, even calling a 12 year old
girl, child of a parishoner, a 'prostitute,' as he had her whipped
laying on the ground.

He proudly defended and described his actions, for which he was
convicted, of beating a 17 year old girl for 20 to 30 minutes, beating
her bloody.

This your idea of parental rights to discipline.

How is it Fern had all that indignation at the state for using the
church directory to locate church members, but had nothing at all to
say about such behavior of the pastor and church members.

They were the ones holding the children, sometimes "suspended." As in
hung up.

Give us your real personal opinion if you think the rights of the
pastor were morally the correct issue to address.

And his admitted and convicted for actions were morally okay to ignore.


She did ignore them.

You are doing so now.

0:->

[Doan]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Ron wrote:

>
> "Sharon Ispay" > wrote in message
> news:f0s8h.3592$IW2.1975@trndny03...
> >
> > "Greegor" > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> >> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> >> alt.support.foster-parents
> >>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> >>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> >>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> >>> I was far too kind.
> >>
> >> Greg wrote
> >>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
> >>
> >> Kane wrote
> >>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
> >>
> >> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
> >>
> >> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
> >>
> >> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
> >>
> >> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> >> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
> >> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
> >>
> >>> Kane wrote
> >>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
> >>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
> >>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
> >>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
> >>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
> >> ...
> >> Greg wrote
> >>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
> >>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
> >>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
> >>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
> >>
> >> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> >> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> >> alt.support.foster-parents
> >>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
> >>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
> >>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
> >>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
> >
> > And just to clear up a few of the disinformation -
> >
> > Two children were found to have marks from their spanking. Pastor Allen
> > and several congregation members went to jail. Allen got 90 days + 10yrs
> > probation.- the rest less.
> >
> > The children were held, not hung.
> >
> > They were not naked.
> >
> > The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
> > witch who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.
> > Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a
> > few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
> > Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.
>
> Links chuckels, or you are a liar.
>
> Ron
>
Why not do a search for yourself? Are you suggesting that it is ok to
call other women a "smelly-****" like Kane did?

Doan

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Ron wrote:
>
> >
> > "Sharon Ispay" > wrote in message
> > news:f0s8h.3592$IW2.1975@trndny03...
> > >
> > > "Greegor" > wrote in message
> > > oups.com...
> > >> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> > >> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> > >> alt.support.foster-parents
> > >>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> > >>> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> > >>> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> > >>> I was far too kind.
> > >>
> > >> Greg wrote
> > >>> You claimed you showed this post by Fern to your keepers.
> > >>
> > >> Kane wrote
> > >>> No I didn't. You are fantasizing again.
> > >>
> > >> Actually, your words above "they also saw her post" are crucial.
> > >>
> > >> Below is more information on the CONTEXT of those comnments.
> > >>
> > >> Why did Kane claim this was "fantasizing"?
> > >>
> > >> 31 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> > >> Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services,
> > >> alt.parenting.spanking, alt.support.foster-parents
> > >>
> > >>> Kane wrote
> > >>>> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
> > >>>> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
> > >>>> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
> > >>>> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
> > >>>> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
> > >> ...
> > >> Greg wrote
> > >>> 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
> > >>> if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
> > >>> over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
> > >>> a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
> > >>
> > >> Kane wrote Fri, Nov 17 2006 11:03 pm
> > >> alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.parenting.spanking,
> > >> alt.support.foster-parents
> > >>> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state
> > >>> had not right to intervene in the parents business when
> > >>> the parents had their children hung up in church and
> > >>> beat naked with various objects, they though I was far too kind.
> > >
> > > And just to clear up a few of the disinformation -
> > >
> > > Two children were found to have marks from their spanking. Pastor Allen
> > > and several congregation members went to jail. Allen got 90 days + 10yrs
> > > probation.- the rest less.
> > >
> > > The children were held, not hung.
> > >
> > > They were not naked.
> > >
> > > The 'hung from rafters naked' lie came from Yavonne the rabid koo-koo
> > > witch who would kill 1000 kids to keep one from being spanked. lol.
> > > Yavonne and Don were attacking Fern like two rabid hyenas, and figured a
> > > few false accusations and lies would turn the table in their favor, as
> > > Fern was calmly kicking their stupid asses. lol.
> >
> > Links chuckels, or you are a liar.
> >
> > Ron
> >
> Why not do a search for yourself? Are you suggesting that it is ok to
> call other women a "smelly-****" like Kane did?

Can't speak for Ron, but my opinion would be that he'd disagree with my
choice of words, but agree with my reasons for chosing them.

Would that be saying it's okay?

If so, then you need to pop into the argument at the point where folks
wish to claim that Fern didn't defend the beatings simply because she
defended the beaters.

By the way, you are not screeching loud enough these days, monkeyboy. I
miss you.

> Doan

Kane

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
>Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> I was far too kind.

Where IS this post from Fern you showed to your Posse?

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote
> >Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> > intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> > hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> > I was far too kind.
>
> Where IS this post from Fern you showed to your Posse?

You mean the one I've posted quotes from time after time over the
years.

It's in google archives of Usenet posts.

In fact, there is no "it" in the singular. I have posted more than one.


Here's another for you, again defending violent beating on the grounds
it's a legally protected right to spank:

Here is the incident she refers to, using a long and badly broken URL
as link.

Notice the pastor admits to BEATING but pulls off the same bull**** you
folks try...that it was a "spanking," a "HOLY spanking." r r r r r r r

http://www.corpun.com/usd00311.htm

....
Oliver is charged with two counts each of assault and risk of injury to
a minor for beating two child parishioners of his former church in New
Haven. Jury selection in his trial is scheduled to begin this week.

He freely admits he beat the boys, who were 11 and 12 at the time. They
were beatings in Jesus' name, he said, and carried out with love
according to the adage "Spare the rod and spoil the child."

"I call it a "Holy Spanking' - that's God's mandate to keep law and
order," Oliver said in an interview last week.

He said he was acting with the permission of their mother in his
official capacity as the children's pastor.

He hit the boys several times on the bare buttocks with a black leather
belt. The boys were not bloodied or seriously injured; prosecutors said
the beatings left marks, an allegation Oliver denies. ...

And here's Fern's defense of him:


From: Fern5827 - view profile
Date: Wed, Nov 12 2003 11:05 am
Email: (Fern5827)
Groups: alt.parenting.spanking
Not yet rated
Rating:
show options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author

Said he would have no hesitation in spanking young men again, if parent
asked
him.

Looks like the DA should have been spanked for bringing forward such a
deficient case.

Subject: CT: spanking minister acquitted assault by jury
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 11/12/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: >

http://www.wfsb.com/global/video/popup/pop_index.asp?ClipID1=162770&h...
ister%20acquitted%20in%20spanking%20trial&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=125334&LaunchP
ageAdTag=News&activePane=info&playerVersion=7

Video clip.

Note that spanking is LEGAL IN ALL STATES.

DESCRIPTORS; INGRAHAM V WRIGHT, USSC holding, CORPORAL PUNISHMENT,
CHRISTIANITY, Christian
..................

Want more, Greg?

In the Georgia case we are discussing, Fern came up with this gem, and
mind you, this is about a church whose pastor is in fact a convicted
and CONFESSED violent abuser by beatings of children, even calling a 12
year old a prostitute as she was beaten, and claiming a 17 year old was
beaten by him AND HE WAS PROUD OF IT, for 20 to 30 minutes in a bloody
on the ground thrashing, or "whipping" as he admitted he called it:

"
From: Fern5827 - view profile
Date: Mon, Apr 2 2001 11:37 am
Email: (Fern5827)
Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services
Not yet rated
Rating:
show options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author

DFACS supposedly had a standing committee investigating CPS abuses.

Is there any fiscal accountability?

Anyone from GA here? Any African-Americans who have some insight into
this
miscarriage of the intent of the foster care system? "

Do you really wish to claim she is NOT defending the abusers?

Enough yet?

Okay, here's more:

Fern managed to carry her apparent hatred of children and loving
families who don't do this sort of thing to yet another newsgroup,
soc.culture.african.american . She's been quoted on this before, in
this one.

The is once again discussing the Georgia case in question:

From: Fern5827 - view profile
Date: Tues, Jan 15 2002 1:59 pm
Email: (Fern5827)
Groups: soc.culture.african.american
Not yet rated
Rating:
hide options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author

Should a family act to prevent a child from engaging in dangerous
behavior?

Apparently the state of Georgia doesn't feel parents are competent or
fit
enough to do so. So, they "incarcerate" the children.

Remember the national news video of kids being ripped from their caring
parents' homes?

Subject: House of Prayer Members hold Protest March
From: "News From Reality"
Date: 1/14/2002 7:06 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: >

>From the Atlanta Journal Constitution

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/metro/0102/0114houseofprayer.html

By JILL YOUNG MILLER January 14, 2002

About 100 men, women and children from the embattled House of Prayer
church marched in protest in downtown Atlanta today.

"We are trying to make the public aware of what we are facing," said
the
Rev. Arthur Allen Jr., pastor of the northwest Atlanta church.

Jacquelyn Barnett holds aloft a sign during Monday's rally.
On Tuesday, Georgia child welfare officials plan to ask a Fulton County
Juvenile Court judge to terminate parental rights to eight children
from
the church so the children can be put up for adoption.

The protestors, carrying signs and child-sized coffins, walked from the
Fulton County Courthouse to the Division of Family and Children
Services
then to the state Capitol. Along the way, Allen stopped and tried to
get
a meeting with the head of DFCS but was told he was in a meeting.

"It's hard to anticipate what DFCS will do or what the courts will do,"
Allen said. "But we're prepared for the worst."

A DFCS spokesman declined to speak to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
today.

For almost a year, the small, non-denominational church has been in a
high-profile dispute with the state over the church's ways of
disciplining children, including whippings in church.

Parents have been told repeatedly by social workers and Chief Judge
Sanford Jones of Fulton County Juvenile Court that they could get their
children back if they agreed to conditions including not using corporal
punishment that leaves marks.

But today, the pastor and the parents of the eight children in state
custody said they wouldn't budge.

"I'm not willing to compromise our position at all," Allen said. "We
haven't backed up one inch.... If they keep the children until they are
legal age of 18, then we're not going to compromise our religion."

The parents have not seen their children since the state took them into
custody in March, but sometimes the children call home.

Said Yolonda Wilson, the mother of two of the children, "We tell them
to
keep praying and to trust to Lord" to send them home.

http://www.DontTakeOurKids.com
--
http://www.hereinreality.com
....

I point out to you in the following commentary by Fern quoted from the
above post that she is defending a confessed child beater, not a
spanker, not even a paddler, but a convicted WHIPPER. Something would
hope would never happen to a child, and more especially, given history,
a BLACK CHILD.

"
Should a family act to prevent a child from engaging in dangerous
behavior?

Apparently the state of Georgia doesn't feel parents are competent or
fit
enough to do so. So, they "incarcerate" the children.

Remember the national news video of kids being ripped from their caring
parents' homes?"

Now tell us, stupid, if Fern is NOT defending the whipping of children
by the church?

In many cases the children were held down, or as the news reported,
"suspended" and whipped with objects.

I have recently posted in these newsgroups the news articles where the
pastor is quoted as righteously recounting how he did in fact give a
whipping to a 17 year old girl, until she was bloodied...20 minutes or
more, for "trying to take over the church."

This is what Fern defends above.

She had ample opportunity, if at first she didn't read all the articles
(she must have given she did a running commentary IN DEFENSE OF THE
CHURCH for months) to see them later, and comment against the
whippings.

She did no such thing, but continued to defend the church and excoriate
the state for intervening.

Did she generally stand on the side of whippings, as I've given my
opinion that she does?

She consistently did so....as you can see, with yet another shot at
the state for intervening in just such a case:


From: Fern5827 - view profile
Date: Wed, Jun 23 2004 7:14 am
Email: (Fern5827)
Groups: alt.support.child-protective-services
Not yet rated
Rating:
show options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author

Subject: GA school employees can PADDLE, Dad cannot spank
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 6/22/2004 10:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: >

Muscogee County, Georgia.

This case is current within this county in Georgia. You might wish to
email
the Prosecutor's office. Link embedded in story.

Is there not a more humane resolution to this story than involving law
enforcement, DFACS, DSS, and the full scale press of the DA's office?

http://www.geocities.com/cp_prosecutions/muscogee.html

GEORGIA, CPS, SPANKING, FAMILY LAW, CAPTA, KINSHIP CARE, CHILD ABUSE,
CHILD
NEGLECT, DSS, ATLANTA, SAVANNAH
....................................

She doesn't think the state should intervene in such a case? Dad did
not, "spank" by the way. She ephemismizing yet again. (Great new word.
I "verbformed" it, like it?)

Still want to defend Fern on her record of siding against the state and
WITH child beaters?

Still want to claim she didn't?

Still want to Doananize and claim I used a verb instead of a noun so my
claim is mooted?

You pack of liars amaze me.

Still.

After all these years.

And waaaay back into the archives.

Constantly referring to BEATINGS as "spanking, a parental right
protected by law."

My quotes denote paraphrase.

0 : - ]

[Sharon Ispay]

"0:->" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Greegor wrote:
>> Kane wrote
>> >Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
>> > intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
>> > hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
>> > I was far too kind.
>>
>> Where IS this post from Fern you showed to your Posse?
>
> You mean the one I've posted quotes from time after time over the
> years.
>
> It's in google archives of Usenet posts.
>
> In fact, there is no "it" in the singular. I have posted more than one.
>
>
> Here's another for you, again defending violent beating on the grounds
> it's a legally protected right to spank:
>
> Here is the incident she refers to, using a long and badly broken URL
> as link.
>
> Notice the pastor admits to BEATING but pulls off the same bull**** you
> folks try...that it was a "spanking," a "HOLY spanking." r r r r r r r
>
> http://www.corpun.com/usd00311.htm
>
> ...
> Oliver is charged with two counts each of assault and risk of injury to
> a minor for beating two child parishioners of his former church in New
> Haven. Jury selection in his trial is scheduled to begin this week.
>
> He freely admits he beat the boys, who were 11 and 12 at the time. They
> were beatings in Jesus' name, he said, and carried out with love
> according to the adage "Spare the rod and spoil the child."
>
> "I call it a "Holy Spanking' - that's God's mandate to keep law and
> order," Oliver said in an interview last week.
>
> He said he was acting with the permission of their mother in his
> official capacity as the children's pastor.
>
> He hit the boys several times on the bare buttocks with a black leather
> belt. The boys were not bloodied or seriously injured; prosecutors said
> the beatings left marks, an allegation Oliver denies. ...
>
> And here's Fern's defense of him:

After pointing out that Ferns link is broken, you provide a link to
"minister Goes on Trial' - you list the ASSAULT accusations and then falsely
state that Fern defended 'him'.

BUT - YOU CUT OFF THE REAL SUBJECT OF FERNS POST.

"CT: spanking minister acquitted by jury in *assault* case"

After the aquittal, Fern criticized the DA for bringing a deficient case.

The manipulation and misrepresentation of the facts is why activists have
rule #1 - everything you say will be twisted out of context and used against
you --

You Don, are a perfect example. Thanks for the illustration.

How many innocent families suffered through hell when you manipulated and
misrepresented the facts to falsely accuse them?? - huh -- 10 -- 15 -- 50 --
YOU LYING SCUMBAG. They should put you in stocks and let the innocent
families you've destroyed have a go at you.


>
> From: Fern5827 - view profile
> Date: Wed, Nov 12 2003 11:05 am
> Email: (Fern5827)
> Groups: alt.parenting.spanking
> Not yet rated
> Rating:
> show options
> Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
> original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author
>
> Said he would have no hesitation in spanking young men again, if parent
> asked
> him.
>
> Looks like the DA should have been spanked for bringing forward such a
> deficient case.
>
> Subject: CT: spanking minister acquitted assault by jury
> From: (Fern5827)
> Date: 11/12/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
> Message-id: >
>
> http://www.wfsb.com/global/video/popup/pop_index.asp?ClipID1=162770&h...
> ister%20acquitted%20in%20spanking%20trial&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=125334&LaunchP
> ageAdTag=News&activePane=info&playerVersion=7
>
> Video clip.
>
> Note that spanking is LEGAL IN ALL STATES.
>
> DESCRIPTORS; INGRAHAM V WRIGHT, USSC holding, CORPORAL PUNISHMENT,
> CHRISTIANITY, Christian
> .................
>
> Want more, Greg?

More of your sick lies, manipulations, misrepresentations and false
accusations?? No Don. No thanks.

<snipped rest of Dons manipulations, misrepresentations, lies, and false
accusations>

[Greegor]

Kane: WHY DID YOU confuse the CT case with the GA one?
Did you INTENTIONALLY leave out the part about a JURY AQUITTING??

Do you know your head from your hind end?

> From: Fern5827 - Wed, Nov 12 2003 11:05 am
> Said he would have no hesitation in spanking young men again, if parent
> asked him.
> Looks like the DA should have been spanked for bringing forward such a
> deficient case.

> Subject: CT: spanking minister acquitted assault by jury
> From: (Fern5827)
> Date: 11/12/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
> Message-id: >
> http://www.wfsb.com/global/video/popup/pop_index.asp?ClipID1=162770&h...
> ister%20acquitted%20in%20spanking%20trial&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=125334&LaunchP
> ageAdTag=News&activePane=info&playerVersion=7
> Video clip.
> Note that spanking is LEGAL IN ALL STATES.

[0:->]

Sharon Ispay wrote:
> "0:->" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >
> > Greegor wrote:
> >> Kane wrote
> >> >Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> >> > intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> >> > hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though
> >> > I was far too kind.
> >>
> >> Where IS this post from Fern you showed to your Posse?
> >
> > You mean the one I've posted quotes from time after time over the
> > years.
> >
> > It's in google archives of Usenet posts.
> >
> > In fact, there is no "it" in the singular. I have posted more than one.
> >
> >
> > Here's another for you, again defending violent beating on the grounds
> > it's a legally protected right to spank:
> >
> > Here is the incident she refers to, using a long and badly broken URL
> > as link.
> >
> > Notice the pastor admits to BEATING but pulls off the same bull**** you
> > folks try...that it was a "spanking," a "HOLY spanking." r r r r r r r
> >
> > http://www.corpun.com/usd00311.htm
> >
> > ...
> > Oliver is charged with two counts each of assault and risk of injury to
> > a minor for beating two child parishioners of his former church in New
> > Haven. Jury selection in his trial is scheduled to begin this week.
> >
> > He freely admits he beat the boys, who were 11 and 12 at the time. They
> > were beatings in Jesus' name, he said, and carried out with love
> > according to the adage "Spare the rod and spoil the child."
> >
> > "I call it a "Holy Spanking' - that's God's mandate to keep law and
> > order," Oliver said in an interview last week.
> >
> > He said he was acting with the permission of their mother in his
> > official capacity as the children's pastor.
> >
> > He hit the boys several times on the bare buttocks with a black leather
> > belt. The boys were not bloodied or seriously injured; prosecutors said
> > the beatings left marks, an allegation Oliver denies. ...
> >
> > And here's Fern's defense of him:
>
> After pointing out that Ferns link is broken, you provide a link to
> "minister Goes on Trial' - you list the ASSAULT accusations and then falsely
> state that Fern defended 'him'.

I included many posts of fern's that showed she did indeed defend by
criticizing the prosecution and the intervention of the state.

> BUT - YOU CUT OFF THE REAL SUBJECT OF FERNS POST.

I don't think so.

>
> "CT: spanking minister acquitted by jury in *assault* case"
>

Non sequitur. I would have left that out because it was not what showed
that she defended the church and the minister.

> After the aquittal, Fern criticized the DA for bringing a deficient case.

Not in terms that show she was sorry he hadn't succeeded. She
criticized that he brouth ANY case at all. The deficiency claimed was
that the DA lacked a case.

This was not true, and is patently a defense of the church.

Testimony of church members was enough to show the acts in question did
take place.

> The manipulation and misrepresentation of the facts is why activists have
> rule #1 - everything you say will be twisted out of context and used against
> you --

Then you and your cronies should stop doing it.
>
> You [Kane], are a perfect example. Thanks for the illustration.
>
> How many innocent families suffered through hell when you manipulated and
> misrepresented the facts to falsely accuse them??

None. I haven't done any such thing.

- huh -- 10 -- 15 -- 50 --
> YOU LYING SCUMBAG.

Lying about what?

Show your proof.

> They should put you in stocks and let the innocent
> families you've destroyed have a go at you.

While the stocks might be uncomfortable I'd suffer no harm because
there are no such families.

Since you seem to be claiming there are, would you mind posting their
circumstance and names and how I went about destroying them?

You seem to overlook my point about Fern's history of doing exactly
what I've claimed...defending the beating of children.

See below.

>
> >
> > From: Fern5827 - view profile
> > Date: Wed, Nov 12 2003 11:05 am
> > Email: (Fern5827)
> > Groups: alt.parenting.spanking
> > Not yet rated
> > Rating:
> > show options
> > Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
> > original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author
> >
> > Said he would have no hesitation in spanking young men again, if parent
> > asked
> > him.
> >
> > Looks like the DA should have been spanked for bringing forward such a
> > deficient case.
> >
> > Subject: CT: spanking minister acquitted assault by jury
> > From: (Fern5827)
> > Date: 11/12/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
> > Message-id: >
> >
> > http://www.wfsb.com/global/video/popup/pop_index.asp?ClipID1=162770&h...
> > ister%20acquitted%20in%20spanking%20trial&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=125334&LaunchP
> > ageAdTag=News&activePane=info&playerVersion=7
> >
> > Video clip.
> >
> > Note that spanking is LEGAL IN ALL STATES.
> >
> > DESCRIPTORS; INGRAHAM V WRIGHT, USSC holding, CORPORAL PUNISHMENT,
> > CHRISTIANITY, Christian
> > .................
> >
> > Want more, Greg?
>
> More of your sick lies, manipulations, misrepresentations and false
> accusations?? No Don. No thanks.
>
> <snipped rest of Dons manipulations, misrepresentations, lies, and false
> accusations>

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane: WHY DID YOU confuse the CT case with the GA one?
> Did you INTENTIONALLY leave out the part about a JURY AQUITTING??
>
> Do you know your head from your hind end?

Well enough to spot creative snipping when I see it...and attribution
abortion thereby.

The piece below was not listed as BEING this case, as WAS in my
original post, and missing here, "somehow."

The piece below as offered as an example of Fern's attitude toward
children, and the beating thereof.

It seems you and your old buddy Dennis have erred.

Would you like to leave your "error" stand, as you did the congression
record accusation against the state of Iowa on CRBs, or would you like
to correct both now?

0:->


> > From: Fern5827 - Wed, Nov 12 2003 11:05 am
> > Said he would have no hesitation in spanking young men again, if parent
> > asked him.
> > Looks like the DA should have been spanked for bringing forward such a
> > deficient case.
>
> > Subject: CT: spanking minister acquitted assault by jury
> > From: (Fern5827)
> > Date: 11/12/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
> > Message-id: >
> > http://www.wfsb.com/global/video/popup/pop_index.asp?ClipID1=162770&h...
> > ister%20acquitted%20in%20spanking%20trial&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=125334&LaunchP
> > ageAdTag=News&activePane=info&playerVersion=7
> > Video clip.
> > Note that spanking is LEGAL IN ALL STATES.

[Greegor]

Kane: The JURY agreed with Fern!
Why don't you accuse the whole JURY for this?

Kane wrote
> I included many posts of fern's that showed she did indeed defend by
> criticizing the prosecution and the intervention of the state.

In a case where the JURY aquitted! Duh?

> "CT: spanking minister acquitted by jury in *assault* case"

You can't tell CT from GA Kane? <grin>

> > After the aquittal, Fern criticized the DA for bringing a deficient case.

Kane wrote
> Not in terms that show she was sorry he hadn't succeeded. She
> criticized that he brouth ANY case at all. The deficiency claimed was
> that the DA lacked a case.

The JURY fully agreed with FERN!
You're heartbroken that the JURY and Fern all PANNED THIS?

Kane wrote
> Testimony of church members was enough to show the acts in question did
> take place.

That has NOTHING to do with Fern's defense of people
where a JURY also found them innocent!

Kane wrote
> You seem to overlook my point about Fern's history of doing exactly
> what I've claimed...defending the beating of children.

The JURY agreed with Fern!

Calling spanking BEATING is your demagogic kook rhetoric propaganda.

[Greegor]

Kane wrote
> Greg how is it that you went on as though I had not written this post,
> failed to answer any questions from this post, and resorted to obvious
> snipperage or simply ignoring?
> Then asked questions with such obvious answers as to be ludicrous ....
> on your part?

Greegor wrote:
> Kane you said that pictures were taken of 3 people, one
> of whom you thought was Michael.
> Why only three?
> Why not every stranger in your neighborhood?

Kane wrote
> They were the only strangers during the period I was thinking about
> when I mentioned it.
> We take a lot of photos around here. Many people have security systems
> that do.
> Did you read the list of the professions of people that have retired in
> my community and the professions of folks that have chosen to live
> here.

I'll bet your neighbors love the publicity you give them!

> We tend to be security conscious because we either worked directly in
> varous areas of national security, or we worked directly with those
> that tend to pose threats to society, one way or another.

And they LOVE you talking this up!

In the long run, your verbal hostility might threaten them.

Do other neighbors who
"worked directly with those that tend to pose
threats to society, one way or another."
spend as much time as you do trying to
make people angry at you after you retire?

I would think your neighbors would like this place
kept extremely quiet, low profile...

Not BLABBED UP by some idiot who whips
up a lot of hatred on a daily basis.

Isn't it stupid to blab up the security measures also?

> > What was special about those three strangers?
>
> Nothing. They were just three more that happened to wander in during
> the time period I was thinking of when I mentioned this.

Pardon me for my disbelief.
You did accuse Michael of appearing in your neighborhood
and implied you thought one of the three you mentioned
were him.

Please give me the straight poop but no BS.



0:-> wrote:
> Greegor wrote:
> > In newsgroups
> > alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.foster-parents
> > Subject: Re: Does anyone remember this?
> >
> > Kane wrote
> >> My whole neighborhood, mostly retired military, many from my own field
> >> of the profession, and many retired law enforcement, and my
> >> brother-in-law, a retired U.S. Marshall, are watching all this with
> >> great interest. My little sister, his wife, kind of dotes on me, so she
> >> keeps him interested, if he weren't already.
> >
> > 1. This could of course just be some hogwash
> > you spew out of some sort of fear.
>
> Anything is possible, Greg. Like you claiming to do child care.
>
> > 2. I wonder what all of these ""connected"" people would think
> > if they looked at how you posted public obscenity for
> > over a year (and bragged about it), called an elderly woman
> > a (c-word) over and over again, harassed people at length, etc.
>
> Considering they also saw her post claiming the state had not right to
> intervene in the parents business when the parents had their children
> hung up in church and beat naked with various objects, they though I was
> far too kind.
>
> > You lead a sort of "Walter Mitty" life of posting abuse and
> > hiding behind anonymity and "moral and ethical" lies.
> > You voluntarily created your own threat.
>
> You seem totally unconcerned with the anonymous posting of others, Greg.
> Others that make lying accusations about posters here.
>
> No, I didn't create any threat Greg. That's impossible.
>
> > 3. They probably would look at you as their pet - mental case.
>
> They haven't told me.
>
> > If you had a friend or family member with Tourettes Coprolalia
> > who yells the n-word in a crowd of black people, just how
> > long would you keep defending this person from the
> > inevitable result of their instigation?
>
> For ever. Naturally. They cannot control their outbursts reliably.
>
> No Tourettes victim instigates anything at all. Their disease does.
>
> Now you go after Tourette's victims too?
>
> Where will it end, Greg.
>
> In our country words are not sufficient motive to injure or kill someone
> unless those words are accompanied by actions.
>
> My own tactics are to make sure the words aren't lost just in case the
> actions take place.
>
> It will make the result much easier for me to defend. Should I prevail.
>
> As I'm likely to.
>
> 0:->

[Sharon Ispay]

Don - you are a lying CPS fatass. You manipulated the posts and links to
make it seem that Fern defended someone charged with a horrible crime.

You snipped the information that reveals Fern only criticized the DA - AFTER
the man was found NOT GUILTY.

You later admit that you left off the subject because it was: "Non sequitur.
I would have left that out because it was not what showed
that she defended the church and the minister."

It showed she criticized the DA for dragging a church through hell for
SPANKING two boys.

NowDon , how many innocent families did you destroy with tricks like these??
How many 'child abusing thugs' [spankers] , did you destroy with your lies??

You are the lowest of lowlifes Don. A destroyer of children and families for
your own sick ends.

You CPS lying scum make me cry.



"0:->" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Kane: The JURY agreed with Fern!
> Why don't you accuse the whole JURY for this?

I do. Are you seriously going to say that OJ, for instance, did not
kill Nicole just because a jury acquited?

Are you seriously going to claim that any jury acquits on the facts
alone?

Yer kind of dumb, I think, but not that dumb, Greg.

> Kane wrote
> > I included many posts of fern's that showed she did indeed defend by
> > criticizing the prosecution and the intervention of the state.
>
> In a case where the JURY aquitted! Duh?

Yep. Sure did.

She loved that the jury acquited a confessed group of people that even
SAID they beat children according to "Biblical" mandate to do so.

You missed that did you?

Did you miss that post also where Fern went on and on and ended with,
and I paraphrase except for the "sock" to the face, " wait until some
teenager socks you in the face."

This was in defense of the chuch and the minister because it was the
subject at the time she wrote it.

You know her. Go ask her is she was defending the "Constitutional
rights" and the "acquiting" of those folks that CONFESSED OPENLY AND
PUBLICLY TO BEATING CHILDREN.

> > "CT: spanking minister acquitted by jury in *assault* case"
>
> You can't tell CT from GA Kane? <grin>

I posted more evidence of Fern's attitude about churches.

You seem entirely unable to operate in the real world, Greg, but YOU
demand lattitude when YOU Post. Why is that, Greg?

And we ALLOW YOU THAT LATTITUDE to try and make your case.

Did the case cited NOT provide you with proof that Fern defended
beatings?.

> > > After the aquittal, Fern criticized the DA for bringing a deficient case.
>
> Kane wrote
> > Not in terms that show she was sorry he hadn't succeeded. She
> > criticized that he brouth ANY case at all. The deficiency claimed was
> > that the DA lacked a case.
>
> The JURY fully agreed with FERN!

Yes, they, like Fern defended the confessions of the church people.

I'd guess the judge would not allow those to be considered because they
were not done with Miranda in place. Just media interviews. Do you deny
the confessions in the media?

Are you willing to give up all media revelations that indict CPS?

> You're heartbroken that the JURY and Fern all PANNED THIS?

Yes, very. It shows that there are people that would support the
vicious beating of children, that the children, their parents, and the
minister insist they did indeed DO, and will continue to do.

Or don't you consider whipping a child bloody a beating?

> Kane wrote
> > Testimony of church members was enough to show the acts in question did
> > take place.
>
> That has NOTHING to do with Fern's defense of people
> where a JURY also found them innocent!

You are delusional it appears.

If Fern can defend them after confessions that they did indeed hold
children down, hold them suspended while the minister did indeed beat
them, then Fern IS defending their actions.

Are you truly this immoral, Greg?

A trial doesn't prove an act didn't happen, only that the jury does not
support conviction for the charges brought.

I NEVER can be take to mean the actions did not happen.

> Kane wrote
> > You seem to overlook my point about Fern's history of doing exactly
> > what I've claimed...defending the beating of children.
>
> The JURY agreed with Fern!

Yes.

>
> Calling spanking BEATING is your demagogic kook rhetoric propaganda.

I have posted the quoted words of both the minister, some children, and
some church members, both current members and former members that
indeed describe whipping to the point of bleeding. A police
investigator found open wounds on one boy, the oldest of the two that
precipitated this current case.

The minister was convicted in 93 of beating a 17 year old girl for,
"trying to take over the church" as he put it, so severely for 20-30
minutes she was bloodied.

He was not remorseful for doing so and said he would continue to beat
children as his right as a pastor of a "Christian" congregation that
followed the bible mandates to beat.

Now if all this is not "beating," but is just spanking in your mind,
Greg, you have some serious problems with reality.

Go back and reall all the posts on this subject for just the past three
or four days. You'll see the quotes, and the links to the sources. Read
them.

Get back to me an apologize to the readers of this group that would
believe that I called "spanking" beating.

When in fact it is clear that there was, probably still is, and will be
beatings of children going on on that church. If the jury KNEW (I doubt
it) the facts, they would not have likely acquited. Judges are known
for agreeing with defense attorneys about "prejudicing the jury" with
the more spectacular behaviors of the accused.

You know this. Stop deluding yourself.

Do the apologizing and withdraw your fraudulent accusation, Greg.

If you are man enough.

Kane

[Sharon Ispay]

"0:->" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>

Spanking is not abuse Don - how many spanking families did you 'help' Don??

You misrepresent and lie to turn legal spanking into abuse.

Hoe many innocent families suffered at the hands of your lies and
misrepresentations??

How many went to foster 'hell' because of your lies.

How many were abused in FC because of your misrepresentations??

Hey Don - HOW MANY CHILDREN DIEDBECAUSEOF YOUER LIES???

[0:->]

Sharon Ispay wrote:
> "0:->" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >
>
> Spanking is not abuse Don - how many spanking families did you 'help' Don??

Actual families that used spanking in parenting?

Around 1,200 that I'm very sure of.

Probably approaching 3,000 in all, but I am not positive and have tried
to make a conservative estimate.

This would be from about 1978 through 2003.

I worked in mental health with children and families for a good deal of
that time, and of course helped families with mentally ill children
learn more effective strategies for parenting and handling discipline
challenges. I'm quite proud of having done so, and seen sick children
be able to turn it around when their parents did.

The 1,200 were privately taught those skills on a strictly voluntary
basis. I gave public lectures to introduce the concept, and group
lessions for those that decided they would like to learn skills that
precluded the use of punishment stratgies and especially pain and
humiliation elimination from their parening repertoire.

I was pretty expensive for the times, but many folks, the 1,200 I
mentioned, who names remain still in my files with various lessons they
completed, remain in my files, so the count is easy, thought it well
worth my fees.

They were not clients of any kind. Just folks. Loving parents, for the
most part.

> You misrepresent and lie to turn legal spanking into abuse.

You can cite some instances where I've misrepresented, or are you
calling disagreent in debate "misrepresenting?"

You do know what you have done would be called, right Dennis?

> Hoe many innocent families suffered at the hands of your lies and
> misrepresentations??

I have never beaten my wife, and I have not lied and misrepresented, so
neither my wife or the families have suffered at my hands or anything
else.

> How many went to foster 'hell' because of your lies.

Zero, for the reasons stated above.

The largest number, in fact, that I helped and along with my help
provided some education in parenting abused and neglect children, were
themselves "foster and adoptive family applicants" who were the
grandparents, aunts and uncles, much older siblings, even some older
neices and nephews of those children.

As far as I know not a one 'went to foster hell.' They simply recieved
children into their loving family FROM a bio parent hell.

> How many were abused in FC because of your misrepresentations??

None, since I didn't misrepresent.

Many who had been spankers when parenting their own children listened
to what I had to say, and applied it to children that were very
difficult to parent, abused children, and returned stunned at how
effective such non-punitive methods are. Some cried as they told the
story, because before they had come to the groups I ran for kinship
folks (foster rels often have the children before they are
trained...since they are the ones that contacted ME as a resource)
they were having a horrible time with the children.

The methods of punishment they knew were as nothing to abused children.


> Hey Don - HOW MANY CHILDREN DIEDBECAUSEOF YOUER LIES???

Well, since I don't lie the logical answer would be zero.

How many died because I helped their parents, or their parenting kin
learn and apply methods that did not use punishment?

I've never heard of single death at the hands of the parent or kin.

You do have proof of all these claims of yours, right?

You know some dead children, and or children "sent to foster hell,"
because of me, right?

Or were you just looking for information?

Can I help with your son, Dennis? He'd be coming into his teens now and
I suspect you are going have one hell of a time, and you can try to
blame it on CPS but it won't fly.

0:->

[Greegor]

Pththth!

Kane have you had impure thoughts?

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Pththth!
>
> Kane have you had impure thoughts?

Not since I was a teenager.

What's your excuse?