Media links

[Greegor]

Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
be adopted out separately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA

DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
by DCF and the Judicial System.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
> be adopted out separately.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA


What's your thought, Greg?

Ever notice my posts on sibling splitting? It's gross violation.

Don't pretend to claim to pretend that anyone here, myself included,
would defend such a practice.

In fact it's YOU THAT ****ING ALLOWED A MOTHER AND DAUGHTER TO BE SPLIT
UP TO SUPPORT YOUR SELF INDULGENCE AND YOUR DESIRE TO **** THE STATE OUT
OF A PIECE OF THE PUBLIC TREASURY.

Now isn't that true, Greg?

>
> DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
> Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
> speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
> by DCF and the Judicial System.
>

Oh yeah, ask a preacher that would **** you out of your pocket change,
let alone the elderly folks entire legacy to fill the church coffers.

They'll tell the truth...yes sir, you betcha.

R R R R R R R

Greg, you are ****ed up little punk that needs to be in lockup, bad.

A mental hospital would be a safe haven for you. I expect you'll end up
some big bad bubbah's "girlfriend," in time.

You are too sick in the head and stupid to avoid it.

Bless yah, child.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
> be adopted out separately.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA
>
> DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
> Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
> speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
> by DCF and the Judicial System.

YOUTUBE?

YOU ****IN' TUBE?

YOU ARE A CRAZY ASSED NUTBALL, YOU SLIMLY LITTLE PIECE OF DRIPPING
EXCREMENT FROM A TWO BIT WHORE.

Are you getting my message yet, you lying immoral sick cretinous
aggregate of insanity?

As far as I'm concerned you rank right up there with child rapers and
baby killers we post about here. You just haven't been caught yet. R R R
R R R R R R

0:-]

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
> be adopted out separately.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA
>
> DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
> Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
> speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
> by DCF and the Judicial System.
>

[Greegor]

I'm glad you liked them so much!

Kim Olson's 10 seconds of fame
http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wnpr/local-wnpr-544939.mp3

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> I'm glad you liked them so much!
>
> Kim Olson's 10 seconds of fame
> http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wnpr/local-wnpr-544939.mp3

Liked what?

I don't look at graphics display sites for the most part. They are
notorious for inserting virus, loggers, stealth cookies, and serious
worms and Trojans.

And I certainly don't when they come from sick ****s that attack
families in these newsgroups.

Since your exposure recently as a high energy parents saboteur who
appears, by his treatment of parents to be more like CPS agents than
true parent advocates, you have much more blatantly let everyone see
that we are correct in outing you.

Just like the above.

Have a nice day.

[Greegor]

ROFL! This is choice!

Kane and pack are Shills for the Child Protection INDUSTRY
trying to pretend THEY are Family Rights advocates so they
can sabotage families seeking help. I posted several links
that said "bad things" which are absolutely TRUE about Child
Protection agencies. Kane's blowout with multiple f-bombs
kind of gives away his true loyalties.

Kane is a former Oregon CPS caseworker.

I can just imagine Kane "doing the Klink"! (wringing both fists)



1 From: Greegor - Date: Thurs, Jan 18 2007 9:04 pm

Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up
siblings so baby can be adopted out separately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA

DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
by DCF and the Judicial System.


2 From: 0:-> - Date: Thurs, Jan 18 2007 10:53 pm

Greegor wrote:
> Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
> be adopted out separately.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA

What's your thought, Greg?

Ever notice my posts on sibling splitting? It's gross violation.

Don't pretend to claim to pretend that anyone here, myself included,
would defend such a practice.

In fact it's YOU THAT [f-bomb] ALLOWED A MOTHER AND
DAUGHTER TO BE SPLIT UP TO SUPPORT YOUR SELF
INDULGENCE AND YOUR DESIRE TO [f-bomb] THE STATE
OUT OF A PIECE OF THE PUBLIC TREASURY.

Now isn't that true, Greg?

> DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
> Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
> speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
> by DCF and the Judicial System.

Oh yeah, ask a preacher that would [f-bomb] you out of your pocket
change,
let alone the elderly folks entire legacy to fill the church coffers.

They'll tell the truth...yes sir, you betcha.

R R R R R R R

Greg, you are [f-bomb] up little punk that needs to be in lockup, bad.

A mental hospital would be a safe haven for you. I expect you'll end up

some big bad bubbah's "girlfriend," in time.

You are too sick in the head and stupid to avoid it.

Bless yah, child.


3 From: 0:-> - Date: Thurs, Jan 18 2007 10:58 pm

Greegor wrote:
> Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
> be adopted out separately.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA

> DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
> Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
> speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
> by DCF and the Judicial System.

YOUTUBE?

YOU [f-bomb]' TUBE?

YOU ARE A CRAZY ASSED NUTBALL, YOU SLIMLY LITTLE PIECE OF DRIPPING
EXCREMENT FROM A TWO BIT WHORE.

Are you getting my message yet, you lying immoral sick cretinous
aggregate of insanity?

As far as I'm concerned you rank right up there with child rapers and
baby killers we post about here. You just haven't been caught yet. R R
R
R R R R R R

0:-]


4 From: 0:-> - Date: Thurs, Jan 18 2007 11:33 pm

- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Greegor wrote:
> Nervous CPS worker regarding adoption - busting up siblings so baby can
> be adopted out separately.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9oQajDZXNA

> DCF Florida - Pastor Bruce Bendt
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcC6x_V3YEE&
> Bruce Bendt, Pastor of Grace and Peace Fellowship Church in Tampa,
> speaks on how the rights of the citizens of Florida are being violated
> by DCF and the Judicial System.


5 From: Greegor - Date: Fri, Jan 19 2007 1:12 pm

I'm glad you liked them so much!

Kim Olson's 10 seconds of fame
http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wnpr/local-wnpr-5...



6 From: 0:-> - Date: Fri, Jan 19 2007 1:52 pm

Greegor wrote:
> I'm glad you liked them so much!

> Kim Olson's 10 seconds of fame
> http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wnpr/local-wnpr-5...

Liked what?

I don't look at graphics display sites for the most part. They are
notorious for inserting virus, loggers, stealth cookies, and serious
worms and Trojans.

And I certainly don't when they come from sick ****s that attack
families in these newsgroups.

Since your exposure recently as a high energy parents saboteur who
appears, by his treatment of parents to be more like CPS agents than
true parent advocates, you have much more blatantly let everyone see
that we are correct in outing you.

Just like the above.

Have a nice day.

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> ROFL! This is choice!
>
> Kane and pack are Shills for the Child Protection INDUSTRY
> trying to pretend THEY are Family Rights advocates so they
> can sabotage families seeking help.

Kane and the "pack" have helped get kids out of CPS foster care as soon
as they possibly could.

As opposed to YOU, Greg.

> I posted several links
> that said "bad things" which are absolutely TRUE about Child
> Protection agencies.

It's true that CPS gets funding for the kids they keep in the system.

It's also true that Greg Hanson and Lisa Watkins have allowed Lisa's
daughter to remain in the custody of Iowa CPS simply because they
mistakenly believe they'll be able to sue the authorities for their
"error" in removing the little girl supposedly for no good reason.

I'd like Greg to post how much money he believes Iowa CPS has
accumulated over the past SIX YEARS due to their retention of custody
of Lisa's daughter.

And then I'd like to see Greg speculate how many children have been
removed to foster care with the money he and Lisa helped CPS accrue.

Or Greg could speculate how many children would still be with their
parents if the funding stream ceased to flow back in 2001 when Lisa
should have been reunited with her daughter.

Greg???

Answers???

Excuses????

Who are ya gonna blame?

What would you like to tell all those kids in FC that wouldn't have
been there but for you and Lisa?

[Greegor]

Nice try Dan!

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Nice try Dan!

I didn't try, Greg.

I proved that Iowa CPS has filled their bank account with money
specifically because of what you and Lisa have done over the last SIX
YEARS!!!

On what did Iowa CPS spend all that extra cash?

Not investigating families?

Not placing kids in FC?

Not hiring more people to do the same, over and over?

YOU and LISA are the agency shills, Greg.

And Iowa CPS is desperate for more CPS funding hounds like you and Lisa.

[Greegor]

Greegor wrote:
> Nice try Dan!

Dan wrote
> I didn't try, Greg.
> I proved that Iowa CPS has filled their bank account with money
> specifically because of what you and Lisa have done over the last SIX
> YEARS!!!

Really?! You PROVED that?

> On what did Iowa CPS spend all that extra cash?
> Not investigating families?
> Not placing kids in FC?
> Not hiring more people to do the same, over and over?
> YOU and LISA are the agency shills, Greg.
> And Iowa CPS is desperate for more CPS funding hounds like you and Lisa.

Riight!
We forced them to commit Perjury and cover up Mental Illness of
accuser/caretaker.

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Greegor wrote:
> > Nice try Dan!
>
> Dan wrote
> > I didn't try, Greg.
> > I proved that Iowa CPS has filled their bank account with money
> > specifically because of what you and Lisa have done over the last SIX
> > YEARS!!!
>
> Really?! You PROVED that?

Is it not a fact that CPS receives funding based on the children they
have in their system?

Or are you going to claim CPS is handling Lisa's case for free?

> > On what did Iowa CPS spend all that extra cash?
> > Not investigating families?
> > Not placing kids in FC?
> > Not hiring more people to do the same, over and over?
> > YOU and LISA are the agency shills, Greg.
> > And Iowa CPS is desperate for more CPS funding hounds like you and Lisa.
>
> Riight!

Nice you can admit the truth... for a change.

> We forced them to commit Perjury and cover up Mental Illness of
> accuser/caretaker.

What does that have to do with the money Iowa CPS received because of
Lisa's case?

And you claimed the accuser was a nosey neighbor, NOT the little girl's
grandmother.

Or is the neighbor mentally ill, too?

[Greegor]

Dan wrote
> I didn't try, Greg.
> I proved that Iowa CPS has filled their bank account with money
> specifically because of what you and Lisa have done over the last SIX
> YEARS!!!

G > Really?! You PROVED that?

Dan wrote
> Is it not a fact that CPS receives funding based on the children they
> have in their system?
>
> Or are you going to claim CPS is handling Lisa's case for free?

I thought you said you PROVED it.
Trot that right out will you?

[Greegor]

Suffolk Co (NY) HHS Meeting on Thimerosal- Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEIFeYKTlmE

[Greegor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNmEt-_nMgw
Woman fell with her son, and took him to the hospital, children were
taken away for three years. The Florida DCF caseworker lied (again) to
make this happen. After three years, and $11,000 spent by this family,
all charges were dropped. But, the mother was locked up for seven
months while pregnant, supposedly to "protect her children." DCF
regularly attempts to break up families to get Federal grant money.
THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO ABUSE IN THIS CASE, only an accident, yet the
children were removed, the mother incarcerated, and the family
destroyed, with their own tax dollars, and to get more of their tax
dollars. And, they were made to pay child support while their children
were held hostage by DCF. NO WONDER PEOPLE DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE
GOVERNMENT ANYMORE, as it preys on the poor, and destroys the American
family.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4c1fykeHCA
Overmedicating Texas Foster Children WFAA Investigates
100s perhaps even 1000s of Texas foster children are being
overmedicated with psychiatric drugs.
Girl's IQ went from 86 (almost 90 which is normal) to 68 after Foster
Care and psychotropics.
Physician weighs in.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ZmhQx9Ikg
THE HUGS FOR HARLEM SHOW (Bad mic level)
hugsforharlem.org


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYCD75NvK10
KEYE NEWS CBS 42 Austin Texas Drug Makers Accused Of Misleading Health
Dept.
(CBS 42) AUSTIN One of the nation's largest drug makers is accused in a
lawsuit of misleading the Texas Mental Health Department about the
safety and effectiveness of one of its top selling drugs. The drug in
question is the anti-psychotic Risperdal. The Texas Attorney General
joined a whistle-blower lawsuit that could cost the Johnson and Johnson
companies more than a billion dollars.
If you go to any state or community mental health center in Texas and
are diagnosed with major depression--bipolar disease or
schizophrenia--doctors there are required to follow a step by step
treatment guideline. The guideline is called TMAP, and stands for
Texas Medical Algorithm Program. It lists specific drugs that doctors
are to prescribe for each illness. It caught our eye when CBS 42
noticed the drugs listed in TMAP are the most expensive on the market,
with little scientific evidence the drugs work better than cheaper
alternatives.
Now, the Attorney General is suing to get the money back that taxpayers
spent on the drug.
The possible penalties could end up being more than a billion dollars.
--------------
Dr Shon actually thought his sponsorship by the Pharmaceutical
companies was NORMAL for educational conferences etc.

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> Dan wrote
> > I didn't try, Greg.
> > I proved that Iowa CPS has filled their bank account with money
> > specifically because of what you and Lisa have done over the last SIX
> > YEARS!!!
>
> G > Really?! You PROVED that?
>
> Dan wrote
> > Is it not a fact that CPS receives funding based on the children they
> > have in their system?
> >
> > Or are you going to claim CPS is handling Lisa's case for free?
>
> I thought you said you PROVED it.

I did.

Where the money come from is a well known fact.

You've posted about it yourself many times.

[0:->]

Dan Sullivan wrote:
> Greegor wrote:
> > Dan wrote
> > > I didn't try, Greg.
> > > I proved that Iowa CPS has filled their bank account with money
> > > specifically because of what you and Lisa have done over the last SIX
> > > YEARS!!!
> >
> > G > Really?! You PROVED that?
> >
> > Dan wrote
> > > Is it not a fact that CPS receives funding based on the children they
> > > have in their system?
> > >
> > > Or are you going to claim CPS is handling Lisa's case for free?
> >
> > I thought you said you PROVED it.
>
> I did.
>
> Where the money come from is a well known fact.
>
> You've posted about it yourself many times.

No he hasn't ...

.... not according to his selective memory which you will be treated to
in his reply, if he bothers.

I'm never right in arguing with him for that very same reason. He has
to be right if his memory serves him. R R RR R R R R

0:->

[Greegor]

My family got abused by the agency and you say
somehow we set that up so the agency could profit?
You're goofy.

Are you sure you don't WANT to be wrong?

[Dan Sullivan]

Greegor wrote:
> My family got abused by the agency

It's not your family.

YOU abused your girlfriend's seven year old daughter.

And the authorities did the right thing in removing the little girl
from her unsafe,unhealthy and abusive situation.

> and you say
> somehow we set that up so the agency could profit?
> You're goofy.

I didn't claim you set that up.

I'm claiming that Lisa Watkins could have been reunitied with her
daughter more than five years ago... if it wasn't for you.

And obviously neither one of you care.

> Are you sure you don't WANT to be wrong?

Wrong about what?

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> My family

You mean they were after your mother and father way back then?

> got abused by the agency and you say
> somehow we set that up so the agency could profit?

I don't see where he said "we" set that up, Greg.

YOU, would be a bit more accurate, wouldn't it?

Tell us you weren't thinking "$$$$" back when they first had contact
with you.

> You're goofy.

Nope. He simply saw a rather typical intervention by CPS, where an
unrelated male, the boyfriend of a single mother, triggered and
investigation by reports that he was showering and otherwise spending a
lot of alone time with the little daughter of that single mother.

The "set up" came when the dollar signs jumped into the mind of a three
or four year ass sitter on "sabbatical" and no income, saw an
opportunity and rather than get the child back, he appeared to do
everything possible to prolong the separation...to increase the amount
the mother might sue for.
>
> Are you sure you don't WANT to be wrong?
>
Are you sure you aren't wrong?

[0:->]

Dan Sullivan wrote:
> Greegor wrote:
>> My family got abused by the agency
>
> It's not your family.
>
> YOU abused your girlfriend's seven year old daughter.
>
> And the authorities did the right thing in removing the little girl
> from her unsafe,unhealthy and abusive situation.
>
>> and you say
>> somehow we set that up so the agency could profit?
>> You're goofy.
>
> I didn't claim you set that up.
>
> I'm claiming that Lisa Watkins could have been reunitied with her
> daughter more than five years ago... if it wasn't for you.
>
> And obviously neither one of you care.
>
>> Are you sure you don't WANT to be wrong?
>
> Wrong about what?

Opps! Sorry. I keep trying to remember to look ahead to see if you've
posted to the thread, but missed that one.

My apologies.

0:->

>

[Greegor]

> Are you sure you aren't wrong?

When our mess started we had no idea that CPS even existed,
much less any idea they were so corrupt.
How could we possibly have intended to start this mess?
How did we make the caseworker commit Perjury?
Or remove the child for 21 days with NO COURT ORDER?

Also, what sort of Family Rights people would be WORRIED
that somebody's going to de-fund the corrupt agency through a law suit?

It's an odd concern for a real Family Rights advocate.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
>> Are you sure you aren't wrong?
>
> When our mess started we had no idea that CPS even existed,

Yes, standing around to monitor if a little girl is using cold water, at
your command, is the start of a mess. That's for sure.

> much less any idea they were so corrupt.

Now starts the lies, of course.

How corrupt is "so corrupt?"

> How could we possibly have intended to start this mess?

Didn't say you started it. Said you saw an opportunity. And it fit in
with your values, Mr. I'm On A Sabbatical.

> How did we make the caseworker commit Perjury?

No idea. I didn't say you did.

I said you very likely saw a monetary opportunity. Why aren't you
addressing what I said about that?

> Or remove the child for 21 days with NO COURT ORDER?

All grist for the 'sue the *******s' mill, Greg.

You could have very easily gotten that child back. Even you admit it.

After all, you had Dennis, you had Neal, you had various permutations of
Sue this and Kill that running about here all of whom you trust, don't
you?

They surely must have been able to help you get the child back. Why
didn't you take their advice and do it?

> Also, what sort of Family Rights people would be WORRIED
> that somebody's going to de-fund the corrupt agency through a law suit?

Someone that knows the quality of casework goes down as resources are
stretched and workers overloaded.

A well run more properly funded CPS would make far fewer of the kinds of
mistakes that overload brings.

And you, and others, Greg, in your camp, have claimed that CPS does this
to get more money.

Ipso Facto, if they had more money they'd have less need to "violate
parental rights."
>
> It's an odd concern for a real Family Rights advocate.
>
It's a far odder concern to see a "Family Rights advocate," spend so
much time and energy and venom on parents, families that come here for
help and to support each other, and to provide what expertise they have
when they have beaten CPS.

Even if they were lying about having done so, Greg, why attack them?

It's an odd concern to want to keep CPS in a condition that they can't
sort out the guilty from the innocent more accurately.

You have attacked them for both, is that not correct?

What do YOU think would improve their score....a bigger caseload per
worker?

0:-]

[Greegor]

> How corrupt is "so corrupt?"

Caseworker Perjury

K > I said you very likely saw a monetary opportunity. Why
K > aren't you addressing what I said about that?

If you're driving and a drunk who is well off destroys your car
or injures you, I would suspect your lawyer would be busy
investigating "monetary opportunities". That doesn't mean
that you caused the drunk to hit you.

G > Or remove the child for 21 days with NO COURT ORDER?
K > All grist for the 'sue the *******s' mill, Greg.

Yep.

> You could have very easily gotten that child back. Even you admit it.

Where did I admit that? Link and quote please!

G > Also, what sort of Family Rights people would be WORRIED
G > that somebody's going to de-fund the corrupt agency through a law
suit?

K > Someone that knows the quality of casework goes down
K > as resources are stretched and workers overloaded.
K > A well run more properly funded CPS would make
K > far fewer of the kinds of mistakes that overload brings.

Other than your former caseworker self and your parrots
what Family Rights advocate has ever said such stuff?

CPS agencies have had 30 years to get it right.
They've squandered money big time.

> And you, and others, Greg, in your camp, have
> claimed that CPS does this to get more money.
>
> Ipso Facto, if they had more money they'd have
> less need to "violate parental rights."

Since when is MORE of something bad better?
You advocate throwing good money after bad.

G > It's an odd concern for a real Family Rights advocate.

K > It's a far odder concern to see a "Family Rights advocate,"
K > spend so much time and energy and venom on parents,
K > families that come here for help and to support each other,
K > and to provide what expertise they have when they have beaten CPS.

Do you tell them you are a PRO-CPS lobbyist?
Do you tell them you were a caseworker?
Do you tell them that Dan's is THE ONLY WAY? (Ric Werme comments)

Kane wrote
> Even if they were lying about having done so, Greg, why attack them?

You answered your own question regarding FRAUD.

Kane wrote
> It's an odd concern to want to keep CPS in a condition that they can't
> sort out the guilty from the innocent more accurately.

I think the whole INDUSTRY was ill conceived and
a gigantic threat to the core of our society, the family.

> You have attacked them for both, is that not correct?

They have failed both ways, apparently insane in both directions.
The terms RECKLESS and BUREAUCRATICALLY STUPID come to mind.

K > What do YOU think would improve their score...
K > a bigger caseload per worker?

Fire them all. Close it. Remove all the stupid laws.
Start over very small. Hire none of the old "regime".
Screen out crusaders and catharsis cases.
Define Imminent Danger more reasonably. No trivial or clutter cases.
Expect most cases to be criminal or kicked BEFORE removal.
No more "administrative law" BS that violates the Constitution.
Mandatory prosecution of Caseworker and LEO Perjury.

Fewer cases, but real ones.

Meth, Heroin, Crack Cocaine instant TPR and family adoption.
No more blockage of kin for old or trivial blemishes.
Fewer Fosters, screened more carefully and prosecuted fully.

Subsidize families not *******ization.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
>> How corrupt is "so corrupt?"
>
> Caseworker Perjury

If it happens.

Were you referring to quality or quantity, dummy?

> K > I said you very likely saw a monetary opportunity. Why
> K > aren't you addressing what I said about that?
>
> If you're driving and a drunk who is well off destroys your car
> or injures you, I would suspect your lawyer would be busy
> investigating "monetary opportunities". That doesn't mean
> that you caused the drunk to hit you.


It does mean that you were milking it for everything you thought you
could get out of if, including the possibility of prolonging your
'agony' to claim more distress and pain.

Just like it appears you are doing and have done with the Lisa's child
case.

>
> G > Or remove the child for 21 days with NO COURT ORDER?
> K > All grist for the 'sue the *******s' mill, Greg.
>
> Yep.

We know, Greg? You have not ethics. It's about the money, not the child,
or you'd have done what needed to be done and had her home long ago.

Is that not true.

>> You could have very easily gotten that child back. Even you admit it.
>
> Where did I admit that? Link and quote please!

You admitted that you could have gotten the child back if only you'd
have taken the advice of your winning buddies, didn't you?

Are you now saying their strategy didn't work, that you applied neither
their's or Dan's?

Which is it? Stop confusing me. R R R R R R RR RR RR R

> G > Also, what sort of Family Rights people would be WORRIED
> G > that somebody's going to de-fund the corrupt agency through a law
> suit?
>
> K > Someone that knows the quality of casework goes down
> K > as resources are stretched and workers overloaded.
> K > A well run more properly funded CPS would make
> K > far fewer of the kinds of mistakes that overload brings.
>
> Other than your former caseworker self

I was a student for one school year, about 9 months. Never was a
caseworker. You have me confused with someone else you have as yet not
proven was a caseworker either.

You simply make things up as you go, Greg. About like you did with Lisa.

> and your parrots
> what Family Rights advocate has ever said such stuff?

Your grammar moves reality much closer to your delusions, I think.

I can't understand what you mean, and I'm tired of trying when you
continue to do this bull**** babbling.

Are you contending that with adequate funding, and recommended
caseloads, workers would make MORE mistakes?

> CPS agencies have had 30 years to get it right.

No they haven't. They've had 30 years of trying to work with an
impossibly large population of abusers, and never funding adequate to do
so.

> They've squandered money big time.

ON suits?

>> And you, and others, Greg, in your camp, have
>> claimed that CPS does this to get more money.
>>
>> Ipso Facto, if they had more money they'd have
>> less need to "violate parental rights."
>
> Since when is MORE of something bad better?

When the bad is shown to be alleviated by the MORE resources being
delivered.

You know that when federal judges took over the first thing they
demanded was that the legislature provide more funding.

> You advocate throwing good money after bad.

No, I advocate what has been proven. When you lower caseloads, and have
more funding for training, and more funding for hiring a higher caliber
of worker, the errors go down.

You've never proven that an increase in funding decreases practice
outcome improvement.

Some of you have tried. And failed.

> G > It's an odd concern for a real Family Rights advocate.
>
> K > It's a far odder concern to see a "Family Rights advocate,"
> K > spend so much time and energy and venom on parents,
> K > families that come here for help and to support each other,
> K > and to provide what expertise they have when they have beaten CPS.
>
> Do you tell them you are a PRO-CPS lobbyist?

I'm not. I'm an advocate for funding that meets the recommendations of
various group, and organizations, that even my opponents use as source
references.

Recommended levels of caseload and recommended levels of funding. That's
all I advocate for.

> Do you tell them you were a caseworker?

I cannot lie. I was never a caseworker.

> Do you tell them that Dan's is THE ONLY WAY? (Ric Werme comments)

No, I don't say Dan's is THE ONLY WAY, but I do admit that it has been
more successful than other ways, especially yours and your cronies.

Lisa's kid home yet?

Six years, Greg?

>
> Kane wrote
>> Even if they were lying about having done so, Greg, why attack them?
>
> You answered your own question regarding FRAUD.

Non sequitur, Greg. Answer the question asked. Why do you attack them?
Are you claiming they are fraudulently posting their success...all of them?

Even one?

Your proof would be?

>
> Kane wrote
>> It's an odd concern to want to keep CPS in a condition that they can't
>> sort out the guilty from the innocent more accurately.
>
> I think the whole INDUSTRY was ill conceived and
> a gigantic threat to the core of our society, the family.

Then what would you replace it with, or are you claiming that abuse of
children is considerably less than it is?

If so, please provide data to match that archived for some years at DHHS.

>
>> You have attacked them for both, is that not correct?
>
> They have failed both ways, apparently insane in both directions.

Yes, the have failed in both areas. To what do you attribute their failure?

And show a system that would have no failures.

You cannot support a claim of "insane" in both ways, so I won't bother
to ask you to...but I'm not going to stop you from proving it, and
proving it's not related to resource shortfalls of serious scope.

> The terms RECKLESS and BUREAUCRATICALLY STUPID come to mind.

Yes, they do. And what do people that have a job to do, and a mandate to
do it, usually do when they do not have the resources to meet the mandate?
>
> K > What do YOU think would improve their score...
> K > a bigger caseload per worker?
>
> Fire them all.

There are not abused children to be concerned about then?

"All" would suggest that you think there is NO need at all for CPS or
caseworkers.

Can you defend that premise?

If not tell us what you would do with the children that are abused after
all are fired?

> Close it.

All considerations, questions, and challenges to you above apply this
suggestion.

> Remove all the stupid laws.

And in the meantime?

> Start over very small.

Okay. Pretend the problem is small. I can see that it would comfort
many, but the children that are victims.

> Hire none of the old "regime".

You will find new administrators, managers, and workers with education
and experience, and training where exactly?

This time don't run away. Provide a reasonable logical answer to that
last question without asking yet another evasive question.

> Screen out crusaders and catharsis cases.

Then you would not be allowed to work for the new CPS. It very apparent
you are both.

> Define Imminent Danger more reasonably.

So until the child was bleeding, broken or dead, no intervention by
society.

I see.

> No trivial or clutter cases.

You've failed miserably to prove such is the case now. That then would
be easy to meet in the future.

> Expect most cases to be criminal or kicked BEFORE removal.

We already have that class of crimes against children.

So until a child is broken, bleeding, or dead, no state intervention.

I see your thinking, if you can call it that. We simply regress to the
Middle Ages.

Will we be cutting of children's hands for petty theft too?

> No more "administrative law" BS that violates the Constitution.

Mmmm.. you have failed miserably, along with your cohort, to ever prove
that CPS policy, and related statutes in themselves are violations of
the Constitution.

We have seen workers fail to meet the constraints and boundaries of
state law and violate the constitution, but we have not seen state laws
do so.

Please provide some proof.

> Mandatory prosecution of Caseworker and LEO Perjury.

Nope. Without protections against prosecution for error on the part of
law enforcement, which caseworkers are as all as LEO, then you might as
well shut down the executive branch and go to a judicial and legislative
run country with no enforcement capacity.

That could be very hard on the population, you included.
>
> Fewer cases, but real ones.
>
They are real now. You simply lie.

> Meth, Heroin, Crack Cocaine instant TPR and family adoption.

Then you withdraw your claim, and Doug's that the programs that give
druggies a chance to parent with supervision and support are successful
and appropriate.

Okay, I see where you are coming from.

I presume other's see it as well.

So you would have taken Jennifer's children, the twins and the other
child or children from her, immediately and never returned them because
she and the twins tested positive for meth at their birth.

I see.

I wonder if anyone here called in to Oregon CPS that Jennifer was
discussing her case in this ng, ascps?

I was much upset by the turn her case took, when things had been going
so very well.

> No more blockage of kin for old or trivial blemishes.

That's easy. I lobbied for that, and happily it was attained. Kin are
not studied (home study process) anywhere near the level stranger
applicants are.

In fact, those instances where they have turned around and injured or
killed the children in their care, you and others have criticized CPS on
that very basis..CPS was not rigorous enough.

> Fewer Fosters, screened more carefully and prosecuted fully.

There is shortage now. And you wish to cut back.

Name a few screening points you think should be done that are not now?

> Subsidize families not *******ization.

In other words, bigot, do not support those single parent, or same sex
families that are on difficult times, and into drugs, or other family
dysfunction, but only two sex, two parent families that are not
involved with drugs.

I see.

You have a plan.

Is it doable? Is it reasonable. Does it pass the "non bigotry test?"

Can the money for it be found?

Can the requirements, like this phantom crowd of non CPS involved folks
be found to staff the new Greg's CPS?

Tell us how, and I WILL go back to lobbying, and this time I will,
unlike in the past, lobby for CPS ... Greg's.

I await your response with the answers to these with baited, but not
held, breath.

Thanks for responding ASAP.

Kane