Ron said
I'd suggest that you ask him directly,

He DID, and you even quoted that very part below Ron!

and avoid all this useless finger pointing.
You waste our time, our bandwidth, and indeed your own intelligence.

Ron, you complained about finger pointing and in
the very next line you did EXACTLY THAT!
Did you KNOW that you did that?

Odd that you didn't feel this compunction about FINGER POINTING aimed my way!

Kane said
They have an agenda and an organization of well
integrated groups that have as a goal the intrusion
of factions not healthy to the body politic.

Geez, Kane, JUST WHO determines that a faction is an
INTRUSION, or NOT HEALTHY for the body politic?

YOU?

Kinda reminds me of that old Trek episode where exceptions
need to be brainwashed around to the "Will of Landru".
You should especially like that one Kane, because while
on the face it was slapping at communism, it was secretly
slapping at zombie like religion as being equally dangerous.
"Are you not OF the body?"

But the romper room social worker mentality was not as
revealed and reviled as it is getting to be in decades since.

Social Workers who do not speak up when a family has shown
them paper proof that CPS has done a FRAME UP JOB to make a
case, they are not "healthy to the body politic" either.
There are LOTS of them my family discovered!
Other SW's gesticulate about the problem but act powerless.

Doug ASKED
What are the names of these "well-integrated groups" and who are these
unhealthy "factions" with intrusionary goals? What are the goals? How
are the groups integrated?

The few among you that can think might want to do some research.

Where should they look in their research?
What are they to look for, Kane?
What is the plot they should search out?

Kane said
...the first time I came across this ng.

You mean when Dan Sullivan asked you to join, right?

What have you discovered in your research? What was your methodology for
that research? Where did you look? What were your findings? Without
specifics, what we have here is a glittering generality with no substance.
Any citations? Any source we should look at in our research?

If you continue to remove all that things that do not show themselves
to connect to the discussion, what remains must be the answer.

What things do not show themselves in discussions in this newsgroup? What
things are these? What things do not connect to the discussion and what
does remain after these things are removed?

Ask yourself what is it the [principle] players in the anti CPS club
NEVER discuss, and you have your answer. Even when it comes up?

What should we ask ourselves? Who are the principal players in the
"Anti-CPS club"? What do they "NEVER" discuss?

Please provide us some information. Some beef. You seem to be making
charges here. Do you have any substantation for them? Share with us what
evil things you have discovered. And, please, for godsakes show us
where we can look to find the truth.

Otherwise, what you have provided in this post of yours is propaganda.

More often than not, it wouldn't even qualify as propaganda.
Much I see is attempted insult.
Then when it doesn't work, complaints that I have no shame! Ha!