"Greg Hanson" wrote in message
om...
LaVonne said
I try very hard not to label people or use disrespectful
names. I'd like to replace "The Plant" with "Fern." Fern,
can you address these questions?

You try not to swear and whitewash like Kane?
But you would like Kane's foul questions answered?

Any point he makes is fruit of a poison tree.

Why is that?

Kane is so rabidly hateful of bio parents because
he feels his bio parents let him down and his adoptive
parents rescued him.

Where'd you get that info, Greg?

The odd part of this is that
this story doesn't fit well given Kane's supposed age.
If he is indeed middle 40's, he was raised in the
late 50's or through the 60's, before Mondale wrote CAPTA.

When did Kane claim he was in his mid-forties?

His SON may be in his forties...

Back in that era, there basically WAS NO Child Protection.

Yet he acts like he knows how it is, based on his own
experience from 30 plus years ago.

And thirty years of being in the business.

If some questions are to be answered, perhaps these
glaring inconsistencies about Kane should be answered.

Get yer facts sraight first, Greg, and then ask questions.

Momentarily acting civilized does not make the length
and breadth of Kane's intent to smear and insult go away.
He swore a blue streak in ascps for over a year!
Despite his pretense at some sort of intellectual
superiority, his tactics of name calling, swearing and
smear abound in the newsgroup archive.
Where were you with your civilized amelioration when
he posted this large body of work?

Amelioration?

Please explain.

No, you can not apologize FOR Kane.

No one's apologizing for Kane.

He hangs around your neck like an albatross.

Kane tried using the old
"My buddy the psychologist says you're nutz" gambit.

Been done before.

How many times, Greg?

The nature of newsgroups is such that smearing people
is much easier than getting such stuff corrected.

Which stuff?

Even correcting information loses out to sheer volume
of posting, and the determination of a poster to
post incorrect information.

Kane and Dan can't even get a simple fact like the
childs stated age correct, referring to the child many
times as 6 when she was 7 and older throughout this.

Your girlfriend's daughter was never six?

I have pointed out the factual error, but they don't care.
They have since repeated the incorrect age repeatedly.

Brought to you from the Department of Redundancy Department.

They have both tried to act like there was some
improper sexuality based only on minimal family
nakedness in the bathroom. One oddity is that Kane
revealed his almost nudist views of nakedness,
admitting he walked around with his adult male
privates exposed to young children.
I am much more conservative than that, yet what little
bit of "in passing" nakedness took place has been
blown up because DAN has some huge personal hangups.

Yeah, I'm against non-related adult males being in the bathroom every time a
little girl needs to get out of the shower.

I'm against non-related adult males physically forcing little girls into the
shower.

I'm against non-related adult males forcing little girls to take cold
showers as punishment for wetting their pants.

Neither Dan nor Kane seems to care that CPS here
has never seen anything sexual to be an issue
in my families case.

Then why is there info about an earlier accusation of child sexual abuse
from a previous CPS investigation regarding YOU in yer girlfriend's case,
Greg?

When they compared me to Father Geoghan, I did
not see you object. Where was your civility then?

Who compared you to Father Geoghan?

And when?

The ""game"" they're running is a LOT like the way
things worked for Joseph McCarthy when he ran the
HUAC hearings known as the 1950's witch hunts for
communists. If are a moderate of their view and
speak up about their paranoia, expect to be vilified
or at least chastised.

Is that a threat, Greg?

And the witch hunt proceeds.

The crusade to "save kids" gets a strong reaction,
and virtually NO reaction to make sure the
crusading ""child savers"" are not paranoid.

Nobody in the ChildAbuse Industry wants to speak up
and demand that false information needs to be corrected.
That would be seen as "in favor of child abusers".

Your temporary ""civilized"" behavior in a forum
that Kane labeled "A Plant's Motivation" is
certainly worthy of question.

Do you not understand that?

There are a bunch of people in here who are
trying to defende themselves or our society from
unwarranted attacks from CPS. There is another
bunch in here who seems to want to assert that
all accused are guilty, just because they are
biological parents and they are accused.

Greg, you aren't a bioparent and you're the only one being accused of
maltreatment.

Your arguement doesn't hold water.

People under attack and the attackers.

If the people under attack utter any offensive words,
it should be more understandeable than when the
other major faction insults and whitewashes.

Kane is not under attack.

He is connected with CPS. He first asserted that
he had a close relative who works for CPS. Later we
hear that he has experienced this from the inside,
as a child. The age he presents makes that dubious.
He had already shown that he hates bio-parents.
And he sad on a governing board over CPS.

How do you like those ethics?

My fiance' and I want our family back!

Kane is in here denying the WELL known faults of CPS.

Kane loves to see CPS lose.

CPS loses for a very good reason... they deserve to lose.

He spews his hatred of bio-parents.

Not at all. He hates abusers.

He calls us scum.

You ARE scum, Greg.

His good buddy Dan never publicly corrects him.

Many times I've posted my displeasure in the words Kane chooses to use.

Ethics give way to some sick strategy for
newsgroup ""stature"".

You've got that backwards, Greg.

But that's what smears are all about.

Keep in mind if you think that a parent is smearing
CPS, that an AGENCY has no civil rights, and that
you know very well that CPS does smear parents.

Like a lot of the caseworkers, Kane sees evil
child beating parents every time he sees a child.

And you know that how, Greg?

Parents see a fear of caseworkers taking their child
away for reasons that don't satisfy the requirements
of the US Constitution.

"Parents see a fear of caseworkers... ???"

The trolly has left the tracks again, Greg.

A basic Ethical contract
in our society.

I have personally talked to about 7 Social Workers, shown
them documentary proof, and asked about the ethical
responsibility of Social Workers to demand that known
false information in a Juvenile Court case be corrected.

Show yer proof to the psych evaluator and get it into evidence.

Many acknowledge the problem.
None want to speak up about it.

So don't wonder why parents under attack are angry
and see CPS as a giant RACKET, an industry, a fraud, etc.

But look at Kane's posts.
He acts like he is the renaissance man. Some model.
He smears, slurs, demeans, insults, and what he seems
to think is reasoned discourse is just grandiose insult.

Kane believes he insults the people who DESERVE to be insulted.

My personal view is that Dan and Kane have turned
this newsgroup into an insufferable mess so that
it is of no use to any parent falsely accused.

It was an "insufferable mess" before I got here.

No one ever got their children back from FC.

And when the first one did whatsisname chastized the woman for not fighting
"for society!!!!!"

Yeah, all she did was get her three kids back.

And then David and Amy Carl got their five kids back.

Chuck got his daughter back the day before her first birthday.

Quite the "insufferable mess."

I asked Dan and Neal to stop fighting in here long ago.
Neal left.

Hoo-FREAKIN-rayyyyyy!

(And Dan acted triumphant! What a twit.)

Why am I a "twit?"?

What did whatsisname ever do?

He posted that it was OK to force red pepper into children's mouths as
punishment and claimed that proof had already been posted on the NG.

After being challenged for months to cite the facts whatsismane finally
posted a news
story in which a policeman was arrested for committing the same offense and
had lost his job because of it!

Possibly permanently!!!

For over a year whatsisname claimed the red pepper punishment was OK'd by
the courts.

When all along he knew it was a lie.

This NG is a place where people come to get OUT of trouble with CPS... NOT
DEEPER INTO TROUBLE!!!

Hey, and you didn't mention that Bob SueCPS left too.

Altho he does pop in from time to time ( anonymously) when you and Dennis
can't take the heat.

Dan went from one flame war to another in here.
Apparently that is the only way Dan communicates.

I communicate very well, Greg.

The effect on many parents seeking help is that they
feel like CPS is watching anything they say in here,

A few people from CPS have posted here.

and a few have had comments in here used in court
to slam them as if they violated privacy laws.

Bull ****, Greg.

Name em.

Name one!

Even parents smart enough to keep names and identifying
details out of this forum are inhibited by the CPS eye.

Why on earth would an anonymous person... someone who's unrecognizable and
untraceable... be inhibited?

That's the reason they ARE anonymous... NOT to be inhibited.

(Myself, If they brought something from here in, I
would simply demand that they bring the archive of
the ENTIRE newsgroup into evidence, or strike it
all for lack of contextual setting.)

YOU would demand???

You aren't even allowed in the Courtroom, Greg.

When things got a little sticky for Dan, Kane showed up.

What things got sticky for me, Greg?

I haven't lost ONCE to CPS since 1987.

And with the swearing and hostility, I am still not
convinced that Kane is not just Dan's sock puppet.

You aren't convinced that you being in the bathroom everytime a little girl
finished showering, you physically forcing her back into the shower when she
hadn't rinsed off enough, and you forcing her to take cold showers as
punishment for wetting her pants, isn't FREAKIN child maltreatment; WHEN IT
IS!!!

Now be sure you fail to respond to everything I've just posted, Greg, as
usual.

Dan