Greegor wrote:
Don and Dan tried for a long time to pretend they are Family Rights
people.

I don't pretend.

I don't believe Kane does either.

Kane (Don) and Dan have provided references for each other at great
length.

And?

Dan has been kicked out of at least 4 Family Rights groups.

Of course Greg won't say who the four groups are or post the links
which show why I was "kicked out."

Both of them have pretty much badmouthed all Family Rights groups.

Which one's did I "badmouth?"

Citations, please.

It's all about trying to position themselves to sabotage Family Rights.

How have I ever sabatoged family rights?

Citations, please.

That wasn't working very well, but works even less now that we
confirmed that Don is a former state drone.

What does that mean?

About a month ago Dan Sullivan was STILL lifting text from a
private Family Rights web site based Support Group and posting it
in the PUBLIC newsgroups.

Private?

I still go there.

He got caught using a Fake Name and cloaking his IP address.

If someone used a fake name and cloaked their IP address how could you
know it was me?

Proof, please.

This behavior ALONE would get him
barred from every known Family Rights group and any future ones.

Is that what you see in your crystal ball, Greg?

Dan recently had a major feud going with Bob Lynn Jarovitz about
people using a constitutional defense against CPS intrusion.

Dan has said many times that Constitutional issues should not be
brought up in Juvenile Court.

I didn't say that.

Dan said that people should wait until
appeal to launch those issues.

I don't think that's what I said.

But no issue, constitutional or not, can be newly raised on appeal.

As you might have noticed, one person who Dan and Kane claim
I lead astray seems more like a system suck who was playing
a ROLE, than a parent under siege from CPS.
Typically with a MIRACULOUSLY quick and easy case involvind
cooperation.

Please explain that story in detail, Greg.

Kane, Dan and friends have actually had friends playing these
kinds of "sock" games, socks as ""references"" (success stories) etc.

Such as?

Kane recently regurgitated Jennifer being ""attacked"" long ago
by a person who no longer posts here. If you look at that
more closely you will see that Jennifer seems to have some
glaring gender confusion.

Jennifer had "glaring gender confusion?"

She has three kids and a boyfriend.

Where's the confusion?

Kane sees questioning on that as "attack".

Ironically, Jennifer was a ""success story"" for Dan but the story
is she fell back into drugs and lost her family.

And how would that negate the fact that I did help her get her three
kids back?

Kind of makes you wonder why they didn't pick some OTHER
""success story"" doesn't it?

Jennifer was a success story, which unfortunately took a turn for the
worse after her boyfriend had a dirty UA..