Re: Ray attempts Biblical justification: was Re: U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

On 26 Nov 2003 18:15:46 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Hanson)
wrote:

>Kane wrote
>> If "somebody" screwed up then it is THERE culpability.
>Geez, man, lousy english?  Capitalized also?

Lousy English? No it isn't. Just a transposition of one kind of their
for another. People do it all the time. I probably get dyslexic when
I'm tired. Geniuses are like that....R R R R

Go play with your toes, child. 

>> Yep. Caseworkers are disgusted at malfeasance of
>> any kind from coworkers. They don't get to go
>> public with it usually. Do you know why?
>
>Yes, I'd like to see that.

Of course you would. You are suit happy and just slavering all over
yourself at what you would do to people that were being honest.

>> > When a caseworker swears in an affidavit that
>> > I have a sex abuse history, and I don't,
>> > that should be perjury.
>> 
>> Did they swear you have a sex abuse history,
>> or that they know you sexually abused?
>> If I read that you have a history and swear
>> I read it that is all I'm swearing to, not
>> that you sexually abused anyone.
>
>No, he swore that I had a sex abuse history,
>in reference to the past investigations which
>were not only unfounded but also NOT SEXUAL.

Barbeque time, if you really wanted the child back. But hey, don't
listen to Dan, he's just successful. Can't have that, now can we,
Whore. Imagine your difficulty if the child returned.

>> > At the least, before he SWORE to it, he should
>> > have looked it up on a computer.  He did not.
>> 
>> How do you know he didn't?
>
>Because it doesn't exist and I found the old
>documents which prove he lied about the past
>CPS investigation that found nothing.

And you don't know how to use them other than to come here screeching
"EVIL CPS EVIL CPS?"

What a duplicitious thug you are. It's obvious that you don't want
that child back that I'm starting to think you've convinced the mother
that if she can hold out you are going to make her rich with a state
settlement.

I'll bet that's it. It fits your profile and your admissions. 

>> > Why should this ass be immune in such a case?
>> 
>> He was immune? 
>> 
>> You sued him and lost on an immunity argument?
>
>Not yet.

What's holdin' you up, besides your shitfilled drawers?

>CPS always claims the immmunity issue every time
>somebody drags them into court for stuff like this.

Well, they can claim a mistake, and if it wasn't, your lawyer should
be able to take them apart.

They can claim irrelevance to the claim you are making, such as THAT
is no longer the reason they are not returning the child.

>Without fail.

Don't be silly. There'd be lots of times they don't claim
immunity...they make huge settlements over many cases gone astray, and
sometimes they aren't even culpable but the cost of pursing a counter
case would be prohibitive. They've got little baldheaded green
eyeshade decorated specialists who figure out the cost and the
benefits of offering less than the cost to the complaintent.

I'd say you ought to go for it if you are sure you have a case. Even
if you are not.

I'd love to see what you do in the clinch. 
  
>> > He should be free to LIE?
>> You are.
>Coming from you that makes me an honest man.

Are you suggesting I lie? 

Prove it. 

>> > (The 2 year unwillingness to correct makes
>> >  it no longer a mere technical mistake.)
>> 
>> The 2 years may well represent waiting to see
>> if more comes in on you.  Having the claim
>> there is a reminder this is an open investigation.
>> When I read what you write here I too, just
>> a plain old ordinary (but with a lot of interest
>> in CPS activities) citizen also wonders if
>> there isn't more.
>
>That's not investigation, that's voyeurism.

Watching a alleged perp to see if they offend is voyeurism? 

Well, if you say so. 

I kinda thought making little girls let you be their
towelboy-shampoogirl and making them take cold showers had more stink
of voyeurism.

>You've got so much interest in CPS activities
>that you are obviously in some way
>one of the "whores of the court".

Dan too I guess. Tell me how he's benefited, outside of more puffing
up of his already monumentally huge ego (that is well deserved
considering the results...the thought of all those children coming
home makes me absolutely envious...r r r r)?

So, who is he a whore, and how am I? What do I get out of studying CPS
and helping the occasional family deal with their vagueries without a
penny from them?

>> You recently popped up with a new bit on
>> your prior retraining order
>> history. Brand new stuff to me.
>
>New to me also, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

You didn't talk recently about your wife or was it a prior "fiance"
having a restraining order against you?

>
>> What else is going to surface.
>
>Was that a question?

No. Since I know that things have been, it's just a statement of
highly likely fact.

As long as you post here, trying to convince us, and possibly
yourself, that you are the victim in the mother/child/CPS escapade you
will blow it and spill more.

You are carefull, and neurotically, building around yourself, lying to
yourself, a victim state of mind so that you can keep your indignation
quotient up for your suit against CPS.
  
>> > A large number of parents who have dealt with
>> > CPS have found that this "immunity" amounts
>> > to a freedom for caseworkers to DELIBERATELY LIE.
>> 
>> Then they should sue. And bring criminal charges anyway.
>
>Civilians can't bring criminal charges.

A civilian can't sign a complaint against another person for actions
that are criminal?

Our country is in some trouble. 

You are being a nit picking dipshit yet again. Why do you do that when
you have been called on your bullshit?

>The Prosecutor would do that.

And in response to your filing a complaint, no? Dipshit nitpicker
caught at it. Don't you know that you can't get away with anything
here. Someone, me mostly, Dan comes in second (R R R R), others from
time to time, will call you on your crap.

>They will not prosecute the caseworker.

Liar. The media as posted by your other Dipshit Tree buddy proves you
wrong time and again.

Caseworkers have been successfully prosecuted. And on many kinds of
charges.

You are, as I've said many a time, a liar. Or stupid. Or abysmally
ignorant. Or neurotic as a lonesome puppy.

>> WHAT? Now you are admitting that a page
>> of ranting about the immunity of the
>> state doesn't constitute the absolute
>> power of the state you were saying it did?
>
>Very Difficult and expensive.

Oh, now it's difficult and expensive. No longer absolute immunity. 

Like I said, you'll get called everytime I can catch you at it, shit
dipper.

>> What IS up with you? 
>> 
>> How much time have you done in lockup, Greg?
>
>You first.

I lost count of the hours of work I was paid to do there with many
very like you.

Now, back to you. 

How much time in lockup, Greg?
 
>> > Freedom to do their job?
>> 
>> Yes. That is exactly the case. You want
>> them completely crippled so you can ply
>> your hobby with little girls in showers.
>
>Never was a hobby, just another chore.

I beg your pardon then. You are an exceptionally hard worker when you
have given yourself a chore.

>You did FAR WORSE when you went into
>a shower naked in front of your kids.

My own children, with whom I have a naturally strong incest taboo, who
I stopped showering with the day I found them focusing on sexual
organs?

>Your danglies must have been about eye
>level for the kids.

No doubt. Until they day they noticed it was not an issue, nor should
it have been. I find people that are comfortable with their bodies
somewhat less likely to get caught up in child molestation.

In fact far less likely. 

I understand you to say that you are terribly shy and wouldn't have
done what I did even if related to the child.

Given that millions of people bathe with their small children as a
matter of course I have to ask, what is wrong with you, Greegor?

You prefer standing around clothed with little girls you aren't
related to watching them shower...or is those little sideways self
denied peeps that get you off?

>Was that a hobby for you?

It was a family custom. I'm certainly not alone in that custom. 

I'm getting a lot more insight into you by these questions. 

You want the reader to think there is something perverse in my
showering with my own children...whose mother I was married to...while
you, unmarried to the mother of the child, not related to her, not
there when she was born, want us to believe there was nothing up,
perversion wise, with you out of the blue deciding that a six year old
wetting needed to be punished with a cold shower that YOU had to
attend because you and the mother, with NO pressure from you of
course, decided you'd be the one best left at home to care for this
child while the mother was absent all day at work.

I have a question for you, Greegor the Whore. 

Who cared for the child all day before you came into the home?

Sleep well,

Kane