On Mar 19, 3:59 pm, "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net
> grag has intimated that the clutter CPS was referring to was a laundry
> basket on the kitchen table.
Your assertion that I "intimated" such a claim is false.
> Just a bit deceptive.
You presented that I said something that I never did.
Did you forget the archive can be searched?
Don't forget responses that quoted me.
> The truth is greg posted years ago the single wide mobile home was filled
> with "boxes of household items, electronic parts, tools, raw speakers, nuts,
> bolts, televisions, wires and cables, spare phones, computer parts, books
> and magazines, etc. not terribly disorganized, just too much VOLUME of stuff
> in the single wide mobile home we got out of."
> greg claimed he got the piles of crap in the living room down to four feet
> high and stopped because CPS couldn't tell [ ] exactly how much
> crap had to be removed for her to get her daughter back.
> CPS told the little girl's mother that her daughter had to be able to use
> the living room in the mobile home without moving boxes.
The living room was always useable without moving boxes.
When we asked them what the standards were that
we were trying to meet, they could give us no answer.
They infuriated us by standing around gawking
but could not give us any such standards and
as we found out later, their refusal to provide
standards is one of their major SCAMS.
The CPS agencies have no standards for the
inspection of parental homes.
Therefore no parent can meet the standards.
Therefore CPS can make a case out of
ANY parental home they so choose to.
This of course violated our 4th amendment rights
against unreasonable search and seizure.
To have your home gawked at by those
imbeciles and then judged by standards
that DO NOT EXIST is an unreasonable
For the results of that search to go before
a Judge in family court makes it even more so.
> greg didn't understand that.
> greg claimed he asked CPS if he could load all his crap into one of the
> bedrooms but he claims CPS said, "no."
> If greg was such a sharp cookie about CPS and he could post original Motions
> filed in court without notifying Lisa Watkins' attorney, you'd think he'd be
> smart enough to know CPS couldn't tell someone what they could or could not
> put in a bedroom in someone's home.
Now you're arguing in support of my family's position, Dan?
Why did you reverse your position?
Are you admitting your position on the
"recording the caseworker" issue was
decided contrary to your position, and
contrary to the wishes of caseworkers?
Did you confirm yet that citizens DO
have a right to record public officials
in the performance of their duties?
Please argue against the now decided
right of citizens to record public officials
during the performance of their duties.
I like it when you make a fool of yourself
and reveal who butters your bread.
> Unless greg was being deceptive.
You really could do better than to use Kent's
favorite, the "missing middle" fallacy, Dan.
That's H1a on Kent's chart.
H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation