Dan skewered by "tacit admission" then tries it IMPROPERLY
Greegor
> On Dec 20, 4:16 pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 20, 1:09 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 20, 11:59 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > > On Dec 20, 12:49 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Dec 20, 8:46 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > > > > Are you listed on the Iowa State Child Abuse Registry for sexual abuse
> > > > > > of Lisa Watkins' seven year old daughter, grag? Or physical abuse?
> > > > > Never. You're projecting again!
> > > > I'm just questioning your earlier statement, grag, "I am now a
> > > > "founded" child abuser for making a 7 year old take a fast cold
> > > > shower."
DJS3 > Was the CPS determination regarding your behavior sexual abuse
No it was not.
DJS3 > because you forced the naked little girl into the shower?
Forced physically? No. Commanded.
Forced in the sense that she was ordered and complied.
DJS3 > Or did CPS conclude it was physical abuse?
Not on paper!
G > Do you honestly think that a cold shower
G > meets the technical legal requirement to
G > qualify as child abuse, Dan?
Failure to answer directly. Yes or no.
DJS3 > Evidently the authorities in Iowa believe
This is always a brain storm kind of comment.
DJS3 > what you did to the little
DJS3 > girl WAS abuse, based on your admission.
That is NOT what they put down on paper.
DJS3 > The fact that you failed to say which form
DJS3 > of abuse it was is a tacit admission it
DJS3 > was determined to be sexual abuse.
Just a bit heavy handed with the meaning of
"tacit" aren't you? Not only are you saying
that failure to answer regarding something
means something MUCH larger, but you
presume a non-answer before I had TIME
to answer!
Will you accuse me of a tacit admission
for failing to answer a question you never
even asked, next?
DJS3 > Right, grag?
Don't you WISH I hadn't said "neglect" over and over?
And what you describe would be a criminal charge, not family court.
Dan, Are you saying that having a kid take
a fast cold shower is child abuse?
Please be very clear on this point. Yes or no.
And then turn around and try to declare yourself
to be an advocate for Family Rights against CPS.
Dan Sullivan
> On Dec 20, 8:24 pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 20, 4:16 pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 20, 1:09 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 20, 11:59 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > > > On Dec 20, 12:49 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Dec 20, 8:46 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > Are you listed on the Iowa State Child Abuse Registry for sexual abuse
> > > > > > > of Lisa Watkins' seven year old daughter, grag? Or physical abuse?
> > > > > > Never. You're projecting again!
> > > > > I'm just questioning your earlier statement, grag, "I am now a
> > > > > "founded" child abuser for making a 7 year old take a fast cold
> > > > > shower."
>
> DJS3 > Was the CPS determination regarding your behavior sexual abuse
>
> No it was not.
You forced an unrelated, naked, seven year old girl to take a cold
shower as punishment and CPS did NOT determine it was sexual abuse,
grag??
I don't believe you.
> DJS3 > because you forced the naked little girl into the shower?
>
> Forced physically? No. Commanded.
And the little girl "stripped" and jumped into a cold shower on your
command without you ever having to touch her at all, grag?
I don't believe you.
> Forced in the sense that she was ordered and complied.
>
> DJS3 > Or did CPS conclude it was physical abuse?
>
> Not on paper!
Then what kind of abuse was it when you said "I am now a "founded"
child abuser for making a 7 year old take a fast cold shower."
> G > Do you honestly think that a cold shower
> G > meets the technical legal requirement to
> G > qualify as child abuse, Dan?
>
> Failure to answer directly. Yes or no.
I believe that you forcing an unrelated naked seven year old girl to
take a cold shower as punishment was sexual abuse, grag, because I
believe you got sexual gratification from what you did.
How many times did you force her to take a cold shower, grag?
> DJS3 > Evidently the authorities in Iowa believe
>
> This is always a brain storm kind of comment.
>
> DJS3 > what you did to the little
> DJS3 > girl WAS abuse, based on your admission.
>
> That is NOT what they put down on paper.
What did they put down on paper?
> DJS3 > The fact that you failed to say which form
> DJS3 > of abuse it was is a tacit admission it
> DJS3 > was determined to be sexual abuse.
>
> Just a bit heavy handed with the meaning of
> "tacit" aren't you? Not only are you saying
> that failure to answer regarding something
> means something MUCH larger,
Not much larger, based on the information YOU POSTED.
> but you
> presume a non-answer before I had TIME
> to answer!
You responded TWICE to my question, whether it was physical or sexual
abuse, 1 - "Never. You're projecting again!," and 2 - "Do you
honestly think that a cold shower meets the technical legal
requirement to qualify as child abuse, Dan?" and now you're claiming
you didn't have "TIME to answer?"
> Will you accuse me of a tacit admission
> for failing to answer a question you never
> even asked, next?
I asked the question TWICE, grag.
> DJS3 > Right, grag?
>
> Don't you WISH I hadn't said "neglect" over and over?
You also claimed you were a "founded child abuser."
> And what you describe would be a criminal charge, not family court.
I asked whether the CPS finding of abuse made in regard to your
maltreatment of Lisa Watkins' seven year old daughter was sexual or
physical.
Neither criminal nor family court.
> Dan, Are you saying that having a kid take
> a fast cold shower is child abuse?
I'm saying you were founded by CPS for sexual abuse because you forced
an unrelated naked seven year old daughter to take cold showers as
punishment.
> Please be very clear on this point. Yes or no.
>
> And then turn around and try to declare yourself
> to be an advocate for Family Rights against CPS.
grag, if I learned you forced my seven year old daughter to take a
cold shower as punishment, I do far worse to you than the grandfather
of Lisa Watkins' daughter did.
Kent Wills
<dsul...@optonline.net> wrote:
>On Dec 21, 12:34�pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 20, 8:24�pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 20, 4:16�pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Dec 20, 1:09 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > On Dec 20, 11:59 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> > > > > On Dec 20, 12:49 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > On Dec 20, 8:46 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> > > > > > > Are you listed on the Iowa State Child Abuse Registry for sexual abuse
>> > > > > > > of Lisa Watkins' seven year old daughter, grag? Or physical abuse?
>> > > > > > Never. �You're projecting again!
>> > > > > I'm just questioning your earlier statement, grag, "I am now a
>> > > > > "founded" child abuser for making a 7 year old take a fast cold
>> > > > > shower."
>>
>> DJS3 > Was the CPS determination regarding your behavior sexual abuse
>>
>> No it was not.
>
>You forced an unrelated, naked, seven year old girl to take a cold
>shower as punishment and CPS did NOT determine it was sexual abuse,
>grag??
>
>I don't believe you.
They clearly found it to be abuse, unless Greg LIED about being
listed on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry (he's RUN from every request to
prove the claim).
>
>> DJS3 > because you forced the naked little girl into the shower?
>>
>> Forced physically? � No. �Commanded.
>
>And the little girl "stripped" and jumped into a cold shower on your
>command without you ever having to touch her at all, grag?
>
>I don't believe you.
The mere THREAT of physical assault may have been enough to
motivate her to do as Greg demanded. As such, it is possible he had
no physical contact with her in regards to the above mentioned
incident.
>
>> Forced in the sense that she was ordered and complied.
>>
>> DJS3 > Or did CPS conclude it was physical abuse?
>>
>> Not on paper!
>
>Then what kind of abuse was it when you said "I am now a "founded"
>child abuser for making a 7 year old take a fast cold shower."
He's flat out lying. DHS is required by law to inform the
accused via mail. As such, it was on paper.
>
>> G > Do you honestly think that a cold shower
>> G > meets the technical legal requirement to
>> G > qualify as child abuse, Dan?
>>
>> Failure to answer directly. �Yes or no.
>
>I believe that you forcing an unrelated naked seven year old girl to
>take a cold shower as punishment was sexual abuse, grag, because I
>believe you got sexual gratification from what you did.
By Greg's own standards, it was PROVED he touched the little
girl's genital area. It's not difficult to imagine that he was
sexually aroused by forcing her to take a cold shower. Gratification
may have occurred at the same time, or later while fantasizing about
her.
>
>How many times did you force her to take a cold shower, grag?
>
>> DJS3 > Evidently the authorities in Iowa believe
>>
>> This is always a brain storm kind of comment.
>>
>> DJS3 > what you did to the little
>> DJS3 > girl WAS abuse, based on your admission.
>>
>> That is NOT what they put down on paper.
>
>What did they put down on paper?
I doubt Greg will even acknowledge the question. If he does, he
will try to distract attention from it by trying to change the
subject.
>
>> DJS3 > The fact that you failed to say which form
>> DJS3 > of abuse it was is a tacit admission it
>> DJS3 > was determined to be sexual abuse.
>>
>> Just a bit heavy handed with the meaning of
>> "tacit" aren't you? �Not only are you saying
>> that failure to answer regarding something
>> means something MUCH larger,
>
>Not much larger, based on the information YOU POSTED.
Greg is upset that the standards he DEMANDS for others are being
used against him.
>
>> but you
>> presume a non-answer before I had TIME
>> to answer!
>
>You responded TWICE to my question, whether it was physical or sexual
>abuse, 1 - "Never. You're projecting again!," and 2 - "Do you
>honestly think that a cold shower meets the technical legal
>requirement to qualify as child abuse, Dan?" and now you're claiming
>you didn't have "TIME to answer?"
Greg's admitted use and abuse of illegal drugs may cause him
difficulty in telling time.
>
>> Will you accuse me of a tacit admission
>> for failing to answer a question you never
>> even asked, next?
>
>I asked the question TWICE, grag.
And he answered, as you prove above.
I find it interesting that he's presenting that he didn't.
>
>> DJS3 > Right, grag?
>>
>> Don't you WISH I hadn't said "neglect" over and over?
>
>You also claimed you were a "founded child abuser."
As Greg is well aware, neglect is abuse under Iowa law. No
amount of his crying about it will change this simple truth.
>
>> And what you describe would be a criminal charge, not family court.
>
>I asked whether the CPS finding of abuse made in regard to your
>maltreatment of Lisa Watkins' seven year old daughter was sexual or
>physical.
>
>Neither criminal nor family court.
Greg is DESPERATE to distract from the truth that it was sexual.
>
>> Dan, Are you saying that having a kid take
>> a fast cold shower is child abuse?
>
>I'm saying you were founded by CPS for sexual abuse because you forced
>an unrelated naked seven year old daughter to take cold showers as
>punishment.
>
AND sexual stimulation. By Greg's own standards, any claim made
by a caseworker is 100% true and accurate, it was PROVED he sexually
abused Lisa's little girl.
>> Please be very clear on this point. �Yes or no.
>>
>> And then turn around and try to declare yourself
>> to be an advocate for Family Rights against CPS.
>
>grag, if I learned you forced my seven year old daughter to take a
>cold shower as punishment, I do far worse to you than the grandfather
>of Lisa Watkins' daughter did.
Grandpa was punished far too harshly. I wasn't consulted, of
course, but had I been, I would have suggested a one dollar fine and
15 minutes of community service, which would be met by kicking Greg in
a place that would minimize his sexual interest in any children, at
least for a while.
A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
DEMANDS be held to others):
Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
(DOB 05/22/1959)
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
"That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
Greg "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson proving his bigotry towards Asians, by
attacking my first wife (deceased).
http://www.rsdb.org/search?q=zipperhead
Me: "I suspect your stalking is due to the use and abuse of illegal
drugs, Greg. Is the reason for your stalking the members of
alt.friends due to the use and abuse of illegal drugs?
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child abuser:
"Of course."
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child
abuser
" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
minority overpopulation, repatriate minorities abroad, imprison more
minorities, increase use of the death penalty and divest minorities of
the power they have usurped over us in recent years. That would
address the most pressing problems of our day. ... "
April 2000, Gregory "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson
http://www.nationalist.org/ATW/2000/040101.html#Hanson
Path:
news.datemas.de!newsfeed.datemas.de!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!postnews.google.com!y21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Greegor <gree...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
misc.kids,alt.support.foster-parents,uk.people.parents,alt.support.child-protective-services
With the Christmas season upon us again, my stepdaughter was launching
into her usual tirade of "I need this" (Nintendo 64 games, Pokemon,
videos, Rhianna CD, etc.) After enduring a trip through Kmart, I
was at my wits end. I took the kid home and filled the bathtub with
water. Then I dunked the brat's head under the water and counted out
a full minute, with her flailing her arms. I brought her up and she
gasped for air. When she'd caught her breath, I asked her, "When you
were under that water, did you 'need' Nintendo? Pokemon? Rhianna?"
She shook her head. "What were you thinking about?" I
prodded. She told me "I was thinking that I needed air."
"Now you know the difference between 'need' and 'want'" I exclaimed
triumphantly.
--a true story
As of Sunday, Nov. 29, 2009:
Financials
Title: STATE OF IOWA VS HANSON, GREG SCOTT
Case: 06571 AGCR015216 (LINN)
Citation Number:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 9200.00 850.00 8350.00
FINE 500.00 500.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 150.00 150.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00
$9850.00 $1500.00 $8350.00
Yes, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson still owes over
$8000.00 related to his convictions for BEATING his ex-wife.
"I am now a "founded" child abuser for making a
7 year old take a fast cold shower."
-- Gregory Scot "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson bragging in MID
<cu6H6.14493$3c6.3...@news1.elmhst1.il.home.com>