Re: Dan & Kane Heros to parents!!!!!

[Greegor]

Firemonkey wrote:
> > greg,greg,greg did you forget you already tried this at Fight cps?
> > You were so bad I was forced to send Linda Martin my personal
> > information, it didn't work there and it won't work here. You just are
> > not as smart as you think you are.
> > What opinion do you think people have of you when you pull this grade
> > school stuff?
> > Maybe that have you no credibility? no honor?
> > I know for a fact that you are the laughing stock of Fight CPS, do you
> > know that people from there make fun of you, Ive got 13 emails now from
> > people writing mock greg advice, its hysterical.

Dan Sullivan wrote:
> But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> (newbies) who don't know better.

Sour grapes
Dan tried giving his BS advice to submit to services regardless of
basis.
Dan got shot down by Linda herself.
Dan got caught at harassing behavior, of myself and others.
Dan would not stop the harassing behavior.
Dan Sullivan was kicked out of FightCPS.
I was not immediately involved in that.
Dan personally and his pack engaged in further harassment
like lifting text from inside a private SUPPORT web site
and posting it in an open channel for him and his cronies to ridicule.
Dan's pack sends e-mails to each other? So what?
Dan's pack is ****ed off and plays a lot of rotten games? So what?
lostintranslation made one of the goals of the pack apparent,
that is to discredit me. Then they tried the silly attempt
to portray me as an agent for the CPS agencies.
Everybody should have enemies that are such brain trust material.

With all of this great help, Dan is STILL so desperate he
has to post stuff about my ten year old traffic tickets?

""Firemonkey"" says they get many e-mails mocking me?

Is that the new name for a trash receptacle?

The name itself tells a story about intent, from the start.
Somewhat Freudian...

Were the names "Instigator", "Saboteur" and "BollWeevil"
already taken?

The pack is just a gang of "system sucks" using
guerilla tactics and thug tactics to lobby for the
Child Protection INDUSTRY interests.

One of these tactics is misrepresenting themselves
as Family Rights people to inject advice that
helps the AGENCIES, a kind of sabotage.

The primary wish of most of the ignorant caseworkers
is that people kiss their heiney and SUBMIT to all
of the services. Good little bureaucrats want to
check off every little box on some bureaucratic form
so their bureaucratic supervisor is pleased with them.
That drives them more than whether the service
ever had any basis at all.

This is what drives advice from the pack to submit.

After all, who really needs ""advice"" on how to
submit to the caseworkers demands?

How valuable is advice to bend over?

My favorite was when Kane tried to argue that
if a family had agressive legal representation
it would backfire because it would look like they
are beating up on the agency!

Fortunately most of the time when people are looking
for help to fight the agencies, they have already
had a dose of caseworker behavior and such stuff
is easily recognized.

The Child Protection INDUSTRY is a multi BILLION dollar racket.
Can't they do better than this pack of morons for their "dirty tricks"?

[Firemonkey]

greg, you are a liar, I was there, anyone can go to fight CPS and read
your posts, Dan never said to summit to CPS at all cost. And that was
not in the advice he gave to me. You and Dan, along with your other
kidless flunkies harrassed Dan to death, not the other way around. Then
you greg began harrassing me just for speaking up for him. I know you
havent' had the benefit of a higher education, maybe if you had you
would know what a fire monkey is, stupid stupid man.


Greegor wrote:
> Firemonkey wrote:
> > > greg,greg,greg did you forget you already tried this at Fight cps?
> > > You were so bad I was forced to send Linda Martin my personal
> > > information, it didn't work there and it won't work here. You just are
> > > not as smart as you think you are.
> > > What opinion do you think people have of you when you pull this grade
> > > school stuff?
> > > Maybe that have you no credibility? no honor?
> > > I know for a fact that you are the laughing stock of Fight CPS, do you
> > > know that people from there make fun of you, Ive got 13 emails now from
> > > people writing mock greg advice, its hysterical.
>
> Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> > advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> > (newbies) who don't know better.
>
> Sour grapes
> Dan tried giving his BS advice to submit to services regardless of
> basis.
> Dan got shot down by Linda herself.
> Dan got caught at harassing behavior, of myself and others.
> Dan would not stop the harassing behavior.
> Dan Sullivan was kicked out of FightCPS.
> I was not immediately involved in that.
> Dan personally and his pack engaged in further harassment
> like lifting text from inside a private SUPPORT web site
> and posting it in an open channel for him and his cronies to ridicule.
> Dan's pack sends e-mails to each other? So what?
> Dan's pack is ****ed off and plays a lot of rotten games? So what?
> lostintranslation made one of the goals of the pack apparent,
> that is to discredit me. Then they tried the silly attempt
> to portray me as an agent for the CPS agencies.
> Everybody should have enemies that are such brain trust material.
>
> With all of this great help, Dan is STILL so desperate he
> has to post stuff about my ten year old traffic tickets?
>
> ""Firemonkey"" says they get many e-mails mocking me?
>
> Is that the new name for a trash receptacle?
>
> The name itself tells a story about intent, from the start.
> Somewhat Freudian...
>
> Were the names "Instigator", "Saboteur" and "BollWeevil"
> already taken?
>
> The pack is just a gang of "system sucks" using
> guerilla tactics and thug tactics to lobby for the
> Child Protection INDUSTRY interests.
>
> One of these tactics is misrepresenting themselves
> as Family Rights people to inject advice that
> helps the AGENCIES, a kind of sabotage.
>
> The primary wish of most of the ignorant caseworkers
> is that people kiss their heiney and SUBMIT to all
> of the services. Good little bureaucrats want to
> check off every little box on some bureaucratic form
> so their bureaucratic supervisor is pleased with them.
> That drives them more than whether the service
> ever had any basis at all.
>
> This is what drives advice from the pack to submit.
>
> After all, who really needs ""advice"" on how to
> submit to the caseworkers demands?
>
> How valuable is advice to bend over?
>
> My favorite was when Kane tried to argue that
> if a family had agressive legal representation
> it would backfire because it would look like they
> are beating up on the agency!
>
> Fortunately most of the time when people are looking
> for help to fight the agencies, they have already
> had a dose of caseworker behavior and such stuff
> is easily recognized.
>
> The Child Protection INDUSTRY is a multi BILLION dollar racket.
> Can't they do better than this pack of morons for their "dirty tricks"?

[Greegor]

Firemonkey wrote:
> You and Dan, along with your other kidless flunkies harrassed Dan to death

Dan harassed himself to death?
The thought had not occurred to me.

> I know you havent' had the benefit of a higher education,

Erudite but not Buckleyesque.

> maybe if you had you would know what a fire monkey is

Apparently Google and Wikipedia are confused as well.

[Firemonkey]

you know dam well I meant Bob you coackroach
:

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Firemonkey wrote:
> > > greg,greg,greg did you forget you already tried this at Fight cps?
> > > You were so bad I was forced to send Linda Martin my personal
> > > information, it didn't work there and it won't work here. You just are
> > > not as smart as you think you are.
> > > What opinion do you think people have of you when you pull this grade
> > > school stuff?
> > > Maybe that have you no credibility? no honor?
> > > I know for a fact that you are the laughing stock of Fight CPS, do you
> > > know that people from there make fun of you, Ive got 13 emails now from
> > > people writing mock greg advice, its hysterical.
>
> Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> > advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> > (newbies) who don't know better.
>
> Sour grapes
> Dan tried giving his BS advice to submit to services regardless of
> basis.

Wrong.

> Dan got shot down by Linda herself.

Linda caved to good dad.

> Dan got caught at harassing behavior, of myself and others.

On FightCPS?

All I posted were facts.

> Dan would not stop the harassing behavior.

Bob got banned for his offensive and abusive posts.

> Dan Sullivan was kicked out of FightCPS.

'Cause good dad thinks Bob J has good advice, but he doesn't.

> I was not immediately involved in that.

The first eight out of twelve of your posts on FightCPS were attacks on
me.

> Dan personally and his pack engaged in further harassment
> like lifting text from inside a private SUPPORT web site
> and posting it in an open channel for him and his cronies to ridicule.

So?

Are you ashamed of what you said?

> Dan's pack sends e-mails to each other? So what?

OMG emails!!!!!

> Dan's pack is ****ed off and plays a lot of rotten games? So what?

What rotten games?

> lostintranslation made one of the goals of the pack apparent,
> that is to discredit me.

You discredited yourself with what you posted.

> Then they tried the silly attempt
> to portray me as an agent for the CPS agencies.

Your girlfriend has been losing to CPS for SIX years with your
guidance.

> Everybody should have enemies that are such brain trust material.
>
> With all of this great help, Dan is STILL so desperate he
> has to post stuff about my ten year old traffic tickets?

Just for fun, Greg.

Would you rather I ask questions about your convictions???

OTOH you have the gall to ask LIT,

"You have a 30 year old daughter with severe autism don't you?
What provisions have you made for when you can no longer
provide that intensive care?"

> ""Firemonkey"" says they get many e-mails mocking me?
>
> Is that the new name for a trash receptacle?
>
> The name itself tells a story about intent, from the start.

Please explain what you mean.

> Somewhat Freudian...

How is that?

> Were the names "Instigator", "Saboteur" and "BollWeevil"
> already taken?
>
> The pack is just a gang of "system sucks" using
> guerilla tactics and thug tactics to lobby for the
> Child Protection INDUSTRY interests.

By helping people get their children back from CPS???

> One of these tactics is misrepresenting themselves
> as Family Rights people to inject advice that
> helps the AGENCIES, a kind of sabotage.

My advice gets kids home.

How is that sabotaging families?

[Greegor]

Dan wrote
> My advice gets kids home.

What is your proof?
Role playing members of your pack?

Some skank so totally dependant on the STATE
that they would lick the state's undercarriage?

Or the one with a family so dysfunctional
that the misfits at CPS look like role models?

Every caseworker can say that following their
advice gets kids home.

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Dan wrote
> > My advice gets kids home.

> Some skank so totally dependant on the STATE
> that they would lick the state's undercarriage?

Who is that?

> Or the one with a family so dysfunctional
> that the misfits at CPS look like role models?

Who is that?

[Greegor]

Greg wrote
> Some skank so totally dependant on the STATE
> that they would lick the state's undercarriage?

Dan wrote > Who is that?

Greg wrote
> Or the one with a family so dysfunctional
> that the misfits at CPS look like role models?

Dan wrote > Who is that?

Gonna pretend you don't know Dan?
Considering the archive, good luck with that!


Greg wrote
> What is your proof?
> Role playing members of your pack?
>
> Some skank so totally dependant on the STATE
> that they would lick the state's undercarriage?
>
> Or the one with a family so dysfunctional
> that the misfits at CPS look like role models?
>
> Every caseworker can say that following their
> advice gets kids home.

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Greg wrote

> > Role playing members of your pack?

Who's in my pack?

> > Some skank so totally dependant on the STATE
> > that they would lick the state's undercarriage?
>
> Dan wrote > Who is that?
>
> Greg wrote
> > Or the one with a family so dysfunctional
> > that the misfits at CPS look like role models?
>
> Dan wrote > Who is that?
>
> Gonna pretend you don't know Dan?

Keep your guessing game for the little girl in your neighborhood, Greg.

> Considering the archive, good luck with that!

What?

[[email protected]]

>
> > Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > > But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> > > advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> > > (newbies) who don't know better.

IMO Greg doesn't really give advice a parent can use. His posts are
usually directed at the system; CPS workers, judges, CASA etc...
Telling someone to stand up for their Rights and never saying "how"
isn't advice, it's just a statement.

> > Sour grapes
> > Dan tried giving his BS advice to submit to services regardless of
> > basis.
>
> Wrong.

I never saw "regardless of basis" in Dan.. He did advice to submit to
services more then I would tho' .

One of the best pieces of advise I have seen was from Dan..Talk to the
worker outside your door, ask them to put the accusations in writing
and mail it to you so you can go over it with your lawyer before you
speak with them. Great advice!!
>
> > Dan got shot down by Linda herself.
>
> Linda caved to good dad.

Why would a website owner "cave" to a member?
>
> > Dan got caught at harassing behavior, of myself and others.
>
> On FightCPS?
>
> All I posted were facts.

Any member can go back and look at your last 2 months of posts on
FightCPS and decide for themselves if all you posted were facts or if
you were argumentative.
>
> > Dan would not stop the harassing behavior.
>
> Bob got banned for his offensive and abusive posts.

I'll say it again, You both were banned for a week for continually
arguing, after that week you both came back, picked up with the arguing
again..Numerous members asked you both to stop, it continued. As stated
by Linda a few times, we didn't want to ban anyone, we just wanted a
peaceful board. Linda and myself asked you both to stop, it
continued.. Linda and I discussed it and banned you both.. No hidden
motives, nobody "caved".. The outcome was directly related to BOTH YOUR
actions..
You speak of Greg "misdirecting" people...The only reason I'm posting
here is you mislead people as to the reasons why you were banned at
FightCPS


>
> > Dan Sullivan was kicked out of FightCPS.
>
> 'Cause good dad thinks Bob J has good advice, but he doesn't.

LOL..I've stated numerous times,even here, I agree with alot of what
you post in ways of FightingCPS Dan, I agree somewhat with Bob, but to
use your Rights as your main defense is not something I would
recommend.. I think you need to state what your rights are in court on
the record or in a Declaration of Facts, forcing the judge to accept or
to rule against your rights. If all else fails, you have more to Appeal
your case on.

P.S. If Linda would "cave" to me and I sided with Bob, why isn't he
still posting there????


> > Dan personally and his pack engaged in further harassment
> > like lifting text from inside a private SUPPORT web site
> > and posting it in an open channel for him and his cronies to ridicule.
>
> So?
>
> Are you ashamed of what you said?

Since you've been a ng user for so long does the word "netiquette" mean
anything to you?

netiquette
convention, networking
/net'ee-ket/ or /net'i-ket/ Network etiquette.
The conventions of politeness recognised on Usenet and in mailing
lists, such as not (cross-)posting to inappropriate groups.
The most important rule of netiquette is "Think before you post". If
what you intend to post will not make a positive contribution to the
newsgroup and be of interest to several readers, don't post it!

[Dan Sullivan]

wrote:
> >
> > > Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > > > But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> > > > advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> > > > (newbies) who don't know better.
>
> IMO Greg doesn't really give advice a parent can use. His posts are
> usually directed at the system; CPS workers, judges, CASA etc...
> Telling someone to stand up for their Rights and never saying "how"
> isn't advice, it's just a statement.

Among other things...

Greg told lostintranslation to do something in Family Court to get
herself arrested.

> > > Sour grapes
> > > Dan tried giving his BS advice to submit to services regardless of
> > > basis.
> >
> > Wrong.
>
> I never saw "regardless of basis" in Dan.. He did advice to submit to
> services more then I would tho' .

And the people I advise get their children back.

It's called reunification.

> One of the best pieces of advise I have seen was from Dan..Talk to the
> worker outside your door, ask them to put the accusations in writing
> and mail it to you so you can go over it with your lawyer before you
> speak with them. Great advice!!
> >
> > > Dan got shot down by Linda herself.
> >
> > Linda caved to good dad.
>
> Why would a website owner "cave" to a member?

Ask Linda.

Linda caved to you, her website administrator.

> > > Dan got caught at harassing behavior, of myself and others.
> >
> > On FightCPS?
> >
> > All I posted were facts.
>
> Any member can go back and look at your last 2 months of posts on
> FightCPS and decide for themselves if all you posted were facts or if
> you were argumentative.

Linda never asked me in her emails to stop doing anything.

Linda never posted on the forums in any of my messages that I should
stop arguing, but she had to a few times in Bob's messages, and when
Bob refused, she banned him.

> > > Dan would not stop the harassing behavior.
> >
> > Bob got banned for his offensive and abusive posts.
>
> I'll say it again, You both were banned for a week for continually
> arguing,

I wasn't arguing I was discussing the issues.

> after that week you both came back, picked up with the arguing
> again..

Wrong and I'll post ALL of the back and forth emails I had with Linda
to show that what you're claiming about me isn't true.

> Numerous members asked you both to stop, it continued.

Linda asked Bob on the forums to stop just before he was banned... show
me the posts where she asked me the same thing.

YOU banned me with no notice and no reason.

> As stated
> by Linda a few times, we didn't want to ban anyone, we just wanted a
> peaceful board.

Right and that's why Linda emailed me,

"Thanks Dan,

I just posted to Bob in two threads so hopefully he'll get the message
to stop. If he doesn't, I will be happy to ban him from the forum since
we really need a peaceful atmosphere there.

Linda"

> Linda and myself asked you both to stop, it
> continued.. Linda and I discussed it and banned you both..

No according to the emails I got from Linda.

> No hidden
> motives, nobody "caved".. The outcome was directly related to BOTH YOUR
> actions..
> You speak of Greg "misdirecting" people...The only reason I'm posting
> here is you mislead people as to the reasons why you were banned at
> FightCPS

I'll be happy to post ALL the back and forth emails between Linda and
myself.

> > > Dan Sullivan was kicked out of FightCPS.
> >
> > 'Cause good dad thinks Bob J has good advice, but he doesn't.
>
> LOL..I've stated numerous times,even here, I agree with alot of what
> you post in ways of FightingCPS Dan, I agree somewhat with Bob, but to
> use your Rights as your main defense is not something I would
> recommend.. I think you need to state what your rights are in court on
> the record or in a Declaration of Facts, forcing the judge to accept or
> to rule against your rights. If all else fails, you have more to Appeal
> your case on.
>
> P.S. If Linda would "cave" to me and I sided with Bob, why isn't he
> still posting there????

Bob still visits the FightCPS forums (and Linda banned him from the
forums!!!) and Dazeemay posts Bob's info in her posts and attributes it
to Bob.

> > > Dan personally and his pack engaged in further harassment
> > > like lifting text from inside a private SUPPORT web site
> > > and posting it in an open channel for him and his cronies to ridicule.
> >
> > So?
> >
> > Are you ashamed of what you said?
>
> Since you've been a ng user for so long does the word "netiquette" mean
> anything to you?

I'll say it again, I'll post ALL the back and forth emails between
Linda and myself regarding her banning Bob Jarovits and you banning me.

And it will show that I'm telling the truth... or it will show Linda
Martin is a liar.

> netiquette
> convention, networking
> /net'ee-ket/ or /net'i-ket/ Network etiquette.
> The conventions of politeness recognised on Usenet and in mailing
> lists, such as not (cross-)posting to inappropriate groups.

I didn't repost anything to an inappropriate group.

> The most important rule of netiquette is "Think before you post". If
> what you intend to post will not make a positive contribution to the
> newsgroup and be of interest to several readers, don't post it!

The positive contribution was to show that Greg's advice was dangerous
to people and children and families in trouble with CPS.

[Greegor]

Dan wrote
> The positive contribution was to show that Greg's advice was dangerous
> to people and children and families in trouble with CPS.

1. Don't let them in, do not answer their questions.
2. Insist on a search warrant actually signed by a Judge
3. Have your attorney find out what the accusation states
4. Beware of the ""stipulation scam"" and beware of your OWN attorney.
5. Insist on a full blown "adjudication hearing" (waived if you
stipulate).
6. Do NOT agree to any baseless services as the easy way out.

How is this advice dangerous Dan?

The last time I posted something like this, all Dan
did was turn it into more personal attack.

Recently in this newsgroup the issue of how to get
a big Service Plan pared down was addressed.
Dan's advice assumes that caseworkers are reasonable people.
It was laughable to anybody who has actually been in that spot.
Even Dan's own comments seem to indicate that caseworkers
are not very reasonable yet in this one critical place
Dan's strategy COUNTS on caseworkers being reasonable.

I do not need to "toot my own horn" as far as
cases where my advice made a difference.

Long ago in this newsgroup Dan asserted his
method (cooperation) was THE ONLY WAY to
retrieve children from CPS.

Even Ric the originator of this newsgroup complained
about Dan's arrogance on that point, pointing out
that there is a lot more than Dan's "one way" to do this.

Dan has so much "finesse" he has been kicked out
of at least FOUR Parents Rights groups.
Dan denied that he was kicked out of FightCPS, yet
based on Dan's recent posts of e-mails etc. clearly
Dan was KEENLY AWARE that he was kicked out.

Where previously he argued about the FACT he was
kicked out, more recently he has expelled lots of
energy on attempts to finesse his way out of the
REASONS he was ejected.

Clearly Dan WAS kicked out of FightCPS and KNEW that he was.
The e-mails he recently posted in his ""defense"" show that
he was most definately AWARE that he was kicked out.
Dan had pretended he was not.
Playing the usual "prove it" game over and over again.

Even more onerous was Dan's behavior AFTER
he was ejected, lifting text from inside of a private
support group web site and posting it in a public place
would have gotten him expelled from any Family Rights
web site and any Family Rights web sites that might
exist into the FUTURE!

Dan would argue about that, of course, posting comments
asking me if I was embarassed by his abuse of my text, etc.

Dan attempted to divert attention away from the basic
immutable fact that he HAD violated an ethical code
so widely known that indeed it could be a LEGAL issue.

Dan is anonymous and has both stated that he
is not anonymous and almost simultaneously made
the case HIMSELF that indeed he is anonymous.

I am NOT anonymous.

Dan has attacked me even in a place where I was
not going at the time.

Is that protecting somebody? Is that fair?

Dan's primary associate and "reference" is a retired
Oregon caseworker who continues to openly lobby FOR
the Child Protection INDUSTRY and Dan has made
comments derogatory about Family Rights groups in general.

The idea of Dan as some smooth fellow with so much "finesse"
he can talk hostile caseworkers out of their socks is
just plain silly.

Dan can't even talk his way out of being kicked out of
four different Family Rights groups.

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Dan wrote
> > The positive contribution was to show that Greg's advice was dangerous
> > to people and children and families in trouble with CPS.
>
> 1. Don't let them in, do not answer their questions.
> 2. Insist on a search warrant actually signed by a Judge
> 3. Have your attorney find out what the accusation states
> 4. Beware of the ""stipulation scam"" and beware of your OWN attorney.
> 5. Insist on a full blown "adjudication hearing" (waived if you
> stipulate).
> 6. Do NOT agree to any baseless services as the easy way out.
>
> How is this advice dangerous Dan?

First that certainly isn't the only advice you've posted.

Second #2 gets the Courts involved when most cases can be handled
without Court intervention. The rule is STAY OUT OF COURT!!!

#3, the family can simply ask the CPS CW to mail them all the
information. Chances are the CW won't mail them anything.

#4, the stipulation scam is too vague of a claim. Your usual BS, Greg.

#5, INSIST on an "adjudication hearing?"

What percentage of families win these, Greg? Very few that I'm aware
of.

Again, the rule is STAY OUT OF COURT!!!

#6, I've been saying that all along.

> The last time I posted something like this, all Dan
> did was turn it into more personal attack.

Four out of the six are ridiculous or too vague to be of value.

> Recently in this newsgroup the issue of how to get
> a big Service Plan pared down was addressed.
> Dan's advice assumes that caseworkers are reasonable people.
> It was laughable to anybody who has actually been in that spot.
> Even Dan's own comments seem to indicate that caseworkers
> are not very reasonable yet in this one critical place
> Dan's strategy COUNTS on caseworkers being reasonable.
>
> I do not need to "toot my own horn" as far as
> cases where my advice made a difference.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

The onlt difference your advice would make is to push the family deeper
into trouble with CPS and the Courts.

> Long ago in this newsgroup Dan asserted his
> method (cooperation) was THE ONLY WAY to
> retrieve children from CPS.

What is my only way, Greg?

> Dan has so much "finesse" he has been kicked out
> of at least FOUR Parents Rights groups.

Name all four.

> Dan denied that he was kicked out of FightCPS, yet
> based on Dan's recent posts of e-mails etc. clearly
> Dan was KEENLY AWARE that he was kicked out.

What email did I post, Greg?

> Where previously he argued about the FACT he was
> kicked out, more recently he has expelled lots of
> energy on attempts to finesse his way out of the
> REASONS he was ejected.

No notice and no reason.

> Clearly Dan WAS kicked out of FightCPS and KNEW that he was.

See above.

> The e-mails he recently posted in his ""defense"" show that
> he was most definately AWARE that he was kicked out.

Which emails?

> Dan had pretended he was not.
> Playing the usual "prove it" game over and over again.
>
> Even more onerous was Dan's behavior AFTER
> he was ejected, lifting text from inside of a private
> support group web site and posting it in a public place
> would have gotten him expelled from any Family Rights
> web site and any Family Rights web sites that might
> exist into the FUTURE!

Greg and his crystal ball.

> Dan would argue about that, of course, posting comments
> asking me if I was embarassed by his abuse of my text, etc.

Not the abuse of your posts but if you were embarrassed by what you
said.

> Dan attempted to divert attention away from the basic
> immutable fact that he HAD violated an ethical code
> so widely known that indeed it could be a LEGAL issue.

Greg the attny.

I quoted and attributed everything I reposted.

> Dan is anonymous and has both stated that he
> is not anonymous and almost simultaneously made
> the case HIMSELF that indeed he is anonymous.

No I didn't.

> I am NOT anonymous.
>
> Dan has attacked me even in a place where I was
> not going at the time.
>
> Is that protecting somebody? Is that fair?

You asked for comments and advice.

> Dan's primary associate and "reference" is a retired
> Oregon caseworker who continues to openly lobby FOR
> the Child Protection INDUSTRY and Dan has made
> comments derogatory about Family Rights groups in general.

Post the citations to my derogotory comments, Greg.

> The idea of Dan as some smooth fellow with so much "finesse"
> he can talk hostile caseworkers out of their socks is
> just plain silly.
>
> Dan can't even talk his way out of being kicked out of
> four different Family Rights groups.

Name all four and give the citations for my being kicked out.

Start with Profane Justice.

[Dan Sullivan]

wrote:
> >
> > > Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > > > But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> > > > advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> > > > (newbies) who don't know better.
>
> IMO Greg doesn't really give advice a parent can use. His posts are
> usually directed at the system; CPS workers, judges, CASA etc...

Really?

Check out Greg's first 12 posts in the forums of FightCPS, you'll find

1- Dan, Why do you keep thinking that the agencies follow their own
rules and laws, or that attorneys work such miracles for families? You
know better.

2- Dan, Maybe you should post my family's letter to the U.S. Congress
and court pleading along with your mockery and harassment?

That would really convince these families under siege from CPS just how
great an
advocate for Parents Rights you are!

I see your little charade hasn't held up well even before I came along
in here!

3- Can anybody confirm that tonymoo is not a fake persona? What advice,
exactly, is tonymoo thanking Dan for?

4- The whole issue of threats of violence is a thread on a newsgroup
where Dan's rabid system player buddy has harassed people for years
from a duckblind of internet anonymity.

5- Dan and his cohorts complain that Parents Rights groups help people
who had their kids removed for legitimate reasons. They ridicule this.

6- Hey Dan! Ya wanna post my family's letter from the U.S.
Congressional register and ridicule it here like you did in the
newsgroup several times?

7- Dan's tactic here about ignoring the comments sounds good, but he
says you can't do
anything about it, which is not true.

8- In answer to some of Dan Sullivan's old comments:

9- Come on Dan, why do you "sell out" parents by encouraging them to
cooperate even if
they are totally innocent?

Who else but a system suck would do that?

======================

And you claim to want to stop people from fighting, Tim?

How about when you allowed Bob and Eric to post the Ban Dan Sullivan
subject?

And it only ended when Bob told you to delete the entire thread.

And, of course, being the good lap dog of Bob's, you did exactly as you
were told.

[Greegor]

Dan, Are you lobbying to be let back into FightCPS as if you're
innocent?
Would some of that text lifting you did be a problem?
Or the Oliver Sutton stuff?
Posting lifted private text into a PUBLIC newsgroup?
Or badmouthing ALL Family Rights groups in general?

Dan Sullivan wrote:
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > > > > But Linda Martin, good dad and dazeemay will allow Greg's ridiculous
> > > > > advice to stand as written on FightCPS, misdirecting all the people
> > > > > (newbies) who don't know better.
> >
> > IMO Greg doesn't really give advice a parent can use. His posts are
> > usually directed at the system; CPS workers, judges, CASA etc...
>
> Really?
>
> Check out Greg's first 12 posts in the forums of FightCPS, you'll find
>
> 1- Dan, Why do you keep thinking that the agencies follow their own
> rules and laws, or that attorneys work such miracles for families? You
> know better.
>
> 2- Dan, Maybe you should post my family's letter to the U.S. Congress
> and court pleading along with your mockery and harassment?
>
> That would really convince these families under siege from CPS just how
> great an
> advocate for Parents Rights you are!
>
> I see your little charade hasn't held up well even before I came along
> in here!
>
> 3- Can anybody confirm that tonymoo is not a fake persona? What advice,
> exactly, is tonymoo thanking Dan for?
>
> 4- The whole issue of threats of violence is a thread on a newsgroup
> where Dan's rabid system player buddy has harassed people for years
> from a duckblind of internet anonymity.
>
> 5- Dan and his cohorts complain that Parents Rights groups help people
> who had their kids removed for legitimate reasons. They ridicule this.
>
> 6- Hey Dan! Ya wanna post my family's letter from the U.S.
> Congressional register and ridicule it here like you did in the
> newsgroup several times?
>
> 7- Dan's tactic here about ignoring the comments sounds good, but he
> says you can't do
> anything about it, which is not true.
>
> 8- In answer to some of Dan Sullivan's old comments:
>
> 9- Come on Dan, why do you "sell out" parents by encouraging them to
> cooperate even if
> they are totally innocent?
>
> Who else but a system suck would do that?
>
> ======================
>
> And you claim to want to stop people from fighting, Tim?
>
> How about when you allowed Bob and Eric to post the Ban Dan Sullivan
> subject?
>
> And it only ended when Bob told you to delete the entire thread.
>
> And, of course, being the good lap dog of Bob's, you did exactly as you
> were told.