|Re: Greg's still tryin to deny the truth...
Kane
wrote:
>Dan, Again you have derailed a few facts
>in an effort to create new falsehoods.
Well, let me put it this way...YOU LIE.
It's really simple Greegor.
HE quotes what YOU post.
So tell us, what "falsehoods" can he create from what you post?
You've been claiming for three years that the child was removed for
"clutter."
Now we see you write that the neighbor called in an allegation.
And you've been three years getting around to that little tidbit.
>It's like a few good kernels of truth
>in the middle of a huge cow flop.
Your corn is popped. Poop.
>Rather than attempting to retrievc the
>few kernels of truth from the cow flop,
>I will just deny the entire pile of stuff.
Mmmm...and you don't get what you just admitted, do you?
Now you are going to deny those things you claim are the truth?
Better switch holes on the hookah nozzle again.
>I know, that you will then claim that I am
>somehow dishonest because I deny the whole
>thing.
Life kinda works that way. You want DAN to sift shit for you?
He just posts your own words. He doesn't have to shift shit, you have
already done it for him. He just waits, as I do....R R R...for the
next stupid exposure you do of yourself.
So when you reach the next kernel of truth you want to pop for us just
wipe off your chin...nonono...the other hand dummy, and pop up.
>I can live with that.
You have to. You may be the worst liar I've ever come across...and I
probably worked, back in the early 80's, 150 or so teen boys whose
whole lives revolved around lying for survival, with some of the best.
It may be that you actually ARE a victim after all Greegor. You should
tell that guy to quit tipping everyone off to your real life..
Run over to the mirror and tell him to shut up.
>I addition you have attempted to put your
>words in my mouth, and attribute your
>malicious interpretations to my statements.
Wrong on count one, guilty on count two. Dan is in trouble. He keeps
thinking, because of what you yourself post for us all to read, that
you are some kind of lowlife child abusing lazyass can and bottle
refunder 4 year sabbatical twit. Oh, and you write Motions.
Can't imagine where he got such an idea. Shame Dan. Shame shame
shame...R R RR R R R R R R R R R R R R RR .....<wheeze>
>You have no credibility with anybody
>that matters to me.
I know you are probably too stoned to notice, but you steal my stuff
usually within 24 hours. If you are ever going to learn to be a
powerful logical debater...ehehehe....you are going to have to work on
originality.
But I love YOUR use of it. Because the people that matter to you....r
r r...in this ng at least....r r r are a dodging weasel and a Sap
Leakin' Tree...R R R R
Tooooo much.
But if you were really trying to make us think you were referring to
the little girl and her mother....shame on you. Another lie.
>You are NOT any finder of truth.
On the contrary. Dan is an extraordinary finder of truths. He pumps
his sources dry. He examines the facts, not the claims....you twits
will never figure THAT one out that's for sure....and what does he do
with all that?
He helps families get their kids back.
>I have not concealed the details you allege that I did.
Please show when you first told the ng that there was an allegation
phoned in by a neighbor that you had locked the child out...and don't
give us that non answer crap...that it later was deemed unfounded.
THAT doesn't matter...what matters is that you concealed the incident.
>Quite the opposite in fact, I have revealed
>an unusually large amount of detail,
MMMMmmmmmmmMMMMMMMMMMMmMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM, yes sir, you sure have.
Bit by bit when you had to much of whatever it is you imbibe, or that
tiny little sliver of conscience left in the shit filled corners of
our mind kicked something, anything, out to make it self known in
hopes you might mend your ways.
Not a chance, eh?
>which
>you have tried to use against me
Greegor. If Dan didn't exist you would have buried yourself long ago
just by your own posts. Anyone that would miss what you are just by
reading your posts would have to be delusional, or perpetually
shitfaced.
>because I
>have punctured your inflated ego and your
>bogus internet reputation.
Dan's been lying to us? He has no right to be all puffed up?...well,
golly gee. I wonder where he dredged up those people to help him lie.
I've seen a couple of them right on this ng talking about his help.
I'll just have to give him a good talking to.
He has been thoroughly exposed by the towel=boy...
Got that rubber girlie dry yet?
>On the other hand, you have concealed quite a bit.
>Nature of your employment, credentials?
Yah got'em. Yah finally got'em. I'll bet he can't come up with
anything on the level of your employment and credentials. No sir ee
bobb.
But then even as an unpaid amateur he's managed to run circles around
CPS and even the court...or so those families he's helped say.
I wonder why they would lie to ME...I've gotten e-mails...lauding him
for the help. They sounded pretty genuine in their terror, rage,
helplessness in some of those posts. And by golly you could bottle the
Glee after he won for them and sell it for life extending elixer, it
was that pure and sweet.
I must be getting old if liars can fool me like that.
I guess I'll have to let YOU tell me the truth from now on.
>In fact, you have recently revealed aspects
>of your own story that you have concealed
>for several years.
No body asked, fool.
>Bipolar relative besides
>your wife?
R R R R...the weasel boy doesn't like it when he discovers that some
folks don't feel compelled to spill now and then...like your own
vomiting conscience does.
>The Bipolar who can judge child
>abusers by the look on their face?
Sounds like a nut to me.
>But I have not been top posting
Your speciality is snipping attributes and losing your place and
taking things out of context. Can't keep it all sorted out, can you?
>and harassing
I doubt Dan feels harassed. The little girl? Well bullies don't have
to work as hard to successfully harass a six year old naked little
girl in the shower.
>you about that apparent hypocrisy because
>your hypocirsy and waffling seem to be
>routine for you.
I think I'm going to have Turkey for both holidays this year, "gobble
gobble."
>I do not deny the truth.
I don't have a weak heart but I'm told that hard enough laughter can
kill even a strong man. Lay off or I'll instruct me wife to
sue....assuming she doesn't read my posts and die laughing herself
when she comes to that one..."I do not deny the truth."
>I only deny your deliberately
>malicious interpretation of the truth.
Naked little girl. Cold Shower. Punished for wetting herself. Having
to sleep on a shelf. Her room taken over by a thug. Mom abadons child
for gigolo who screws up CPS case big time.
How am I doin' Greegor?
Oh, and trust me...I can't speak for Dan Sullivan, but for myself::
I AM VERY DELIBERATELY MALICIOUS WITH ASSHOLES THAT DO THINGS TO
CHILDREN LIKE YOU HAVE ADMITTED DOING TO THE GIRL.
Must be a character flaw. I'll take it up with my pri...opps, with my
rab...no not that either, imam...nope. Oh, that's right, I am one of
those atheists you don't ad hom about.
Geez if I was a fag I'd be in real trouble wouldn't I. (I'm an
Honorary Fag, by the way...my gay and lesbian friends awarded me that
honor at a barbeque about 3 years ago...so I get to use all the rude
words they laughingly use to describe themselves....wanna make
something of it panty?)
Kane
Kane
wrote:
>Greg wrote
>> > I only deny your deliberately
>> > malicious interpretation of the truth.
>
>Dan wrote
>> YOU may think what I post is malicious
>> but it IS as you just stated... "the truth".
>
>Do you think malicious interpretation
>of the truth is the truth? :)
>
>Every malicious interpretation of truth is true? :)
Please. I am soooooo tired of the "when did you stop beating your
wife" ploy.
I've a more pertinent question, of the kind that can be answered
without self incrimination. Or it can be ignored.
Is every interpretation malicious?
Kane
Greg Hanson
> >> > I only deny your deliberately
> >> > malicious interpretation of the truth.
> >
> >Dan wrote
> >> YOU may think what I post is malicious
> >> but it IS as you just stated... "the truth".
> >
> >Do you think malicious interpretation
> >of the truth is the truth? :)
> >
> >Every malicious interpretation of truth is true? :)
>
> Please. I am soooooo tired of the
> "when did you stop beating your wife" ploy.
If you're "tired" then go take a nap.
There was no such "ploy" in the above text.
Another tactic you use but pretend not to understand?
> I've a more pertinent question, of the kind that can be answered
> without self incrimination. Or it can be ignored.
>
> Is every interpretation malicious?
From what source?