WLKY Kentucky Cabinet CPS corruption
Greegor
WLKY Kentucky Cabinet CPS corruption
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8h4SOwWXdc
http://www.wlky.com/news/14596226/detail.html
Social Workers Allege Child Protection Service Abuses
POSTED: 2:46 pm EST November 14, 2007
LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- Social workers are alleging abuses in Kentucky's
Child Protective Services.
In a follow-up to a 3-year investigation of CPS, NewsChannel 32
interviewed a group of Kentucky social workers who alleged families
are harassed and workers are pressured in efforts to boost adoption
numbers.
Pat Moore said she was a state social worker until she was fired for
not ignoring half a dozen allegations of abuse in a foster home.
"I did what I felt like I had to do," Moore said. "It was the right
thing to do and I stand by the complaint."
When Moore found that two foster parents had criminal records, a son
living with them had multiple felonies, and a convicted sex offender
visited and, sometimes, cared for the children, she refused to arrange
an adoption.
Her supervisors responded to her complaint with a memo suggesting the
adoption proceed quickly.
"Our theory is that the basis for this is the tie to the federal
money," Moore's attorney, Tom Beiting said. "That every time a child
is not placed in the home comma the state of Kentucky through its
Cabinet is losing money"
After she was fired, Moore filed suit and last month, the Commonwealth
paid $380,000 to settle it.
The high-adoption trend apparently began in 2004, when adoptions in
Kentucky ballooned to 724 while the federal bonus money more than
doubled from $452,000 the previous year to more than $1 million.
"The Cabinet puts pressure on stats because federal and state money
come from statistics," said another social worker who wants her
identity concealed for fear of retaliation against her family. "You
get praised. The Cabinet praises you for terminating rights and
adopting kids out immediately."
She said the concerted effort to take children away and put them up
for adoption was so brazen, she actually saw someone successfully
place an order for children.
"Someone could not have a child and wanted a child so within the
community," the social worker said. "This person saw a family in
distress, having a hard time, relayed to workers that they would like
those children, and that's exactly what has happened."
And a former CPS supervisor, who also wants anonymity for fear of
retaliation, said if an order for a child was delayed or denied, her
supervisors would overturn local decisions.
"This one family was promised a child, and when it happened that this
child was going to be reunified with the parent, they called our
regional office, and our regional office came in our county and they
harassed the birth parents and that kind of thing because they didn't
agree with our decision," the former supervisor said.
Vanessa Shanks had her kids taken away and, when she fought back, her
relatives had their children taken away. Then, after she won in court,
her attorney's child was taken away.
The former CPS workers said that kind of retaliatory power is common
and, in the secretive, one-sided system, they can take anyone's kids
away on a moment's notice - and get away with it.
According to data just released, there's a huge disparity between
counties on adoption rates. Some counties reunify 100 percent of
children taken with their families. Other counties adopted out as many
as 82 percent of children taken from their homes.
Dan Sullivan
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9b190e78-e401-46bf...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> Hey Dan and Betty!
Hey asshole.
I'm working on something similar right now.
Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
situations like this with CPS?
krp
"Dan Sullivan" <dsul...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:49be725a$0$22526$607e...@cv.net...
You mean you won't DEFEND IT? Can you recall a while back ATTACKING ME
saying things like this NEVER happened?
Did you watch the VIDEO, Danny? Or are you just doing your EELISH best
to IMPLY that you have? Like you tried with my "ARTICLE?"
BTW, WHY so franticly STRIP the adoption group from the crosspost? Since
it is about corruption in the adoption RACKET!
Dan Sullivan
"krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Mzvvl.470$6%.87@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsul...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:49be725a$0$22526$607e...@cv.net...
>>
>> "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9b190e78-e401-46bf...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Hey Dan and Betty!
>>
>> Hey asshole.
>>
>> I'm working on something similar right now.
>
>> Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
>> situations like this with CPS?
>
> You mean you won't DEFEND IT?
Defend what?
> Can you recall a while back ATTACKING ME saying things like this NEVER
> happened?
I don't know what you're referring to, kenny boy.
> Did you watch the VIDEO, Danny? Or are you just doing your EELISH best
> to IMPLY that you have?
I didn't say anything about the video.
Do you think I did?
> Like you tried with my "ARTICLE?"
I didn't try anything with your "article."
> BTW, WHY so franticly STRIP the adoption group from the crosspost?
> Since it is about corruption in the adoption RACKET!
Cause I wanted to.
krp
>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Dan and Betty!
>>>
>>> Hey asshole.
>>>
>>> I'm working on something similar right now.
>>
>>> Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
>>> situations like this with CPS?
>>
>> You mean you won't DEFEND IT?
>
> Defend what?
Defemd the foster care and adoption program in Kentucky that the video
is about.
>> Can you recall a while back ATTACKING ME saying things like this NEVER
>> happened?
> I don't know what you're referring to, kenny boy.
>> Did you watch the VIDEO, Danny? Or are you just doing your EELISH best
>> to IMPLY that you have?
> I didn't say anything about the video. Do you think I did?
Danny you are such a prolific BULLSHIT artist. What do YOU think this
thread is about? The 1952 Ford Mustang?
>> Like you tried with my "ARTICLE?"
> I didn't try anything with your "article."
You TRIED to make it appear you wedre familiar with it, when you have
NEVER SEEN IT.
>> BTW, WHY so franticly STRIP the adoption group from the crosspost?
>> Since it is about corruption in the adoption RACKET!
> Cause I wanted to.
And WHY do you want to, Danny???
Why do you NEED to?
Greegor
DS > Hey asshole.
I love you too, Dan! LOL
DS > I'm working on something similar right now.
You're actually working?
Is that what you call it?
Similar how?
DS > Do you really think your post was
DS > the first time I ever heard about
DS > situations like this with CPS?
Then why don't you post about these
other situations where the press catches
onto the wholesale corruption ?
Where BUNCHES of caseworkers inside the agency
tell the press how the "pattern and practice" of
corruption is NOT just anecdotal, not just an
abberation? Where even several supervisors
report the corruption to the press and describe
the pressure to do the WRONG thing?
You've got stories where the press got this
many insiders to actually confirm the
wholesale corruption?
What's holding you back?
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:49be890e$0$24466$607e...@cv.net...
>
>
>
> >>>> Hey Dan and Betty!
>
> >>> Hey asshole.
>
> >>> I'm working on something similar right now.
>
> >>> Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
> >>> situations like this with CPS?
>
> >> You mean you won't DEFEND IT?
>
> > Defend what?
>
> Defemd the foster care and adoption program in Kentucky that the video
> is about.
Of course not.
> >> Can you recall a while back ATTACKING ME saying things like this NEVER
> >> happened?
> > I don't know what you're referring to, kenny boy.
What were you referring to, kenny boy?
> >> Did you watch the VIDEO, Danny? Or are you just doing your EELISH best
> >> to IMPLY that you have?
> > I didn't say anything about the video. Do you think I did?
>
> Danny you are such a prolific BULLSHIT artist. What do YOU think this
> thread is about? The 1952 Ford Mustang?
Of course not.
> >> Like you tried with my "ARTICLE?"
> > I didn't try anything with your "article."
>
> You TRIED to make it appear you wedre familiar with it, when you have
> NEVER SEEN IT.
So now you're claiming I "tried to make it appear" I was familiar with
it, when numerous times in the past you've said I claimed I had read
it!
Were you lying then, kenny boy, or are you lying now?
> >> BTW, WHY so franticly STRIP the adoption group from the crosspost?
> >> Since it is about corruption in the adoption RACKET!
> > Cause I wanted to.
>
> And WHY do you want to, Danny???
>
> Why do you NEED to?
I didn't say I needed to.
I said because I WANTED to.
Greegor
DS > Do you think I did?
Did you catch that, Moe?
Notice how Dan makes bold statements about what he DIDN'T say?
Dan's a Wuss!
krp
>G > Hey Dan and Betty!
>
> DS > Hey asshole.
>
> I love you too, Dan! LOL
ATTOORNEY AT LAW DAN SULLIVAN SAID
> DS > I'm working on something similar right now.
SURE YOU ARE DANNY! SURE YOU ARE! EVERYONE BELIEVES YOU.
> DS > Do you really think your post was
> DS > the first time I ever heard about
> DS > situations like this with CPS?
> Then why don't you post about these
> other situations where the press catches
> onto the wholesale corruption ?
>
> Where BUNCHES of caseworkers inside the agency
> tell the press how the "pattern and practice" of
> corruption is NOT just anecdotal, not just an
> abberation? Where even several supervisors
> report the corruption to the press and describe
> the pressure to do the WRONG thing?
>
> You've got stories where the press got this
> many insiders to actually confirm the
> wholesale corruption?
>
> What's holding you back?
His duties in the SUPREME COURT arguing his MANY cases on behalf of his
CLIENTS, Greg! Don't forget, Danny is the FOREMOST LAWYER in North America.
Maybe the world!
krp
>
> >>>> Hey Dan and Betty!
>
> >>> Hey asshole.
>
> >>> I'm working on something similar right now.
>
> >>> Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
> >>> situations like this with CPS?
>
> >> You mean you won't DEFEND IT?
>
> > Defend what?
>
> is about.
DS> Of course not.
Are we back to you pretending to be a lawyer agaij< Dan ny? Orf do you
have delusions of your being a C RUSADING investigative journalist? Which
delusion will we be treated to today?
> >> Can you recall a while back ATTACKING ME saying things like this NEVER
> >> happened?
> > I don't know what you're referring to, kenny boy.
DS> What were you referring to, kenny boy?
More amnesia, Danny??? When I mentioned CPS snatc hing kids for the
MOLNEY - you went into one of your TYPICAL little girlyman hissy fits
DEMANDING that I "PROVE" it you wanted a GODDDDDAMMMM LINK! You claimed it
NEVER HAPPENED..
> >> Did you watch the VIDEO, Danny? Or are you just doing your EELISH best
> >> to IMPLY that you have?
> > I didn't say anything about the video. Do you think I did?
>
> Danny you are such a prolific BULLSHIT artist. What do YOU think this
> thread is about? The 1952 Ford Mustang?
DS> Of course not.
Senility Dan? Can't get from the subject header to the text body to
figure out what this thread is about???? Confused? Is it early onset
dementia? What's your problem, Danny? The subject at hand is gthe VIDEO (TV
NEWS report) of the collapse of the Kentucky CPS - - - SCAM. BABIES FOR
SALE! CPS SELLING KIDS for PROFIT! The whole stinking foster care and
adoption RACKETS.
> >> Like you tried with my "ARTICLE?"
> > I didn't try anything with your "article."
> You TRIED to make it appear you were familiar with it, when you have
> NEVER SEEN IT.
DS> So now you're claiming I "tried to make it appear" I was familiar with
DS> it, when numerous times in the past you've said I claimed I had read it!
Danny - everyone with at least two working brain cells KNOWS your cute
little games. Dealing with you is like trying to nail Jello to the cieling.
You always use "WEASEL WORDS" you want people to THINK you have great
knowledge on a subject and that you are quoting from something AT HAND. But
you always leave yourself an avenue of escape. "I never ACTUALLY said that."
Oh but Danny -
that little GAME doesn't work. When you jump up and down, as you did, little
monkey, about what the TITLE of my article is, you WERE making a FACT CLAIM
that does state gthat you HAD READ IT.
DS> Were you lying then, kenny boy, or are you lying now?
Danny boy, YOU are the liar, then AND now. MAKE SMOKE AND RUN,
DANNY!!!!!
> >> BTW, WHY so franticly STRIP the adoption group from the crosspost?
> >> Since it is about corruption in the adoption RACKET!
> > Cause I wanted to.
>
> And WHY do you want to, Danny???
>
> Why do you NEED to?
DS> I didn't say I needed to. I said because I WANTED to.
No, Danny, with YOU it is a COMPULSIVE NEED.
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:74b60d43-a03f-4fc1...@z1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > >>>> Hey Dan and Betty!
>
> > >>> Hey asshole.
>
> > >>> I'm working on something similar right now.
>
> > >>> Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
> > >>> situations like this with CPS?
>
> > >> You mean you won't DEFEND IT?
>
> > > Defend what?
>
> > Defend the foster care and adoption program in Kentucky that the video
> > is about.
>
> DS> Of course not.
>
> Are we back to you pretending to be a lawyer agaij< Dan ny? Orf do you
> have delusions of your being a C RUSADING investigative journalist? Which
> delusion will we be treated to today?
The delusions you will be treated to today, kenny boy, are YOUR
delusions.
ENJOY!!!
Ask another stupid questions, kenny.
LOL!!!
> > >> Can you recall a while back ATTACKING ME saying things like this NEVER
> > >> happened?
> > > I don't know what you're referring to, kenny boy.
>
> DS> What were you referring to, kenny boy?
>
> More amnesia, Danny??? When I mentioned CPS snatc hing kids for the
> MOLNEY - you went into one of your TYPICAL little girlyman hissy fits
> DEMANDING that I "PROVE" it you wanted a GODDDDDAMMMM LINK! You claimed it
> NEVER HAPPENED..
Your first delusion of the day, kenny boy.
> > >> Did you watch the VIDEO, Danny? Or are you just doing your EELISH best
> > >> to IMPLY that you have?
> > > I didn't say anything about the video. Do you think I did?
>
> > Danny you are such a prolific BULLSHIT artist. What do YOU think this
> > thread is about? The 1952 Ford Mustang?
>
> DS> Of course not.
>
> Senility Dan? Can't get from the subject header to the text body to
> figure out what this thread is about???? Confused? Is it early onset
> dementia? What's your problem, Danny? The subject at hand is gthe VIDEO (TV
> NEWS report) of the collapse of the Kentucky CPS - - - SCAM. BABIES FOR
> SALE! CPS SELLING KIDS for PROFIT! The whole stinking foster care and
> adoption RACKETS.
Your second delusion, kenny boy.
> > >> Like you tried with my "ARTICLE?"
> > > I didn't try anything with your "article."
> > You TRIED to make it appear you were familiar with it, when you have
> > NEVER SEEN IT.
>
> DS> So now you're claiming I "tried to make it appear" I was familiar with
> DS> it, when numerous times in the past you've said I claimed I had read it!
>
> Danny - everyone with at least two working brain cells KNOWS your cute
> little games. Dealing with you is like trying to nail Jello to the cieling.
> You always use "WEASEL WORDS" you want people to THINK you have great
> knowledge on a subject and that you are quoting from something AT HAND. But
> you always leave yourself an avenue of escape. "I never ACTUALLY said that."
> Oh but Danny -
> that little GAME doesn't work. When you jump up and down, as you did, little
> monkey, about what the TITLE of my article is, you WERE making a FACT CLAIM
> that does state gthat you HAD READ IT.
Your delusion number three.
> DS> Were you lying then, kenny boy, or are you lying now?
>
> Danny boy, YOU are the liar, then AND now. MAKE SMOKE AND RUN,
> DANNY!!!!!
When you lie, kenny bboy, that makes YOU the LIAR!!!
Delusion number four.
LOL!!!
> > >> BTW, WHY so franticly STRIP the adoption group from the crosspost?
> > >> Since it is about corruption in the adoption RACKET!
> > > Cause I wanted to.
>
> > And WHY do you want to, Danny???
>
> > Why do you NEED to?
>
> DS> I didn't say I needed to. I said because I WANTED to.
>
> No, Danny, with YOU it is a COMPULSIVE NEED.
No, it's because I wanted to.
LOL!!!
krp
>
> > >>>> Hey Dan and Betty!
>
> > >>> Hey asshole.
>
> > >>> I'm working on something similar right now.
>
> > >>> Do you really think your post was the first time I ever heard about
> > >>> situations like this with CPS?
>
> > >> You mean you won't DEFEND IT?
>
> > > Defend what?
>
> > Defend the foster care and adoption program in Kentucky that the video
> > is about.
>
> DS> Of course not.
>
> have delusions of your being a CRUSADING investigative journalist? Which
> delusion will we be treated to today?
DS> The delusions you will be treated to today, kenny boy, are YOUR
delusions.
The only delusions I have Danny boy are the ones YOU display.Are hyou
ATTORNEY Sullivan today? CHIEF JUSTICE Sullivan? Perhaps DOCTOR Sullivan or
is it just DAN SULKLIVAN ACE REPORTER for the Daily Planet?
DS> ENJOY!!!
Oh - Danny - I AM - very much. Now WHAT is the title of my "ARTICLE"
again???
DS> Ask another stupid questions, kenny.
Okay, if you insist; "What's your IQ, Danny?"
Greegor
http://www.wlky.com/news/14596226/detail.html
DS > Hey asshole.
G > I love you too, Dan! LOL
KRP > ATTOORNEY AT LAW DAN SULLIVAN SAID
DS > I'm working on something similar right now.
KRP > SURE YOU ARE DANNY! SURE YOU ARE!
KRP > EVERYONE BELIEVES YOU.
DS > Do you really think your post was
DS > the first time I ever heard about
DS > situations like this with CPS?
G > Then why don't you post about these
G > other situations where the press catches
G > onto the wholesale corruption ?
G >
G > Where BUNCHES of caseworkers inside the agency
G > tell the press how the "pattern and practice" of
G > corruption is NOT just anecdotal, not just an
G > abberation? Where even several supervisors
G > report the corruption to the press and describe
G > the pressure to do the WRONG thing?
DS > You've got stories where the press got this
DS > many insiders to actually confirm the
DS > wholesale corruption?
DS > What's holding you back?
KRP > His duties in the SUPREME COURT arguing
KRP > his MANY cases on behalf of his CLIENTS,
KRP > Greg! Don't forget, Danny is the FOREMOST
KRP > LAWYER in North America. Maybe the world!
Hey Dan! How could you possibly be working on something similar
when you're still doing a "dance" about whether or not you
even saw the video?
If you didn't see the video, then
how would you have any idea how "similar"
the thing is you're making?
krp
http://www.wlky.com/news/14596226/detail.html
DS > Hey asshole.
http://www.wlky.com/news/14596226/detail.html
Don't confuse the BIMBO with LINKS she wants a fukkking SCAN of the
document!!!!
Greegor
DS > I didn't say anything about the video.
DS > Do you think I did?
G > Did you catch that, Moe?
G > Notice how Dan makes bold statements
G > about what he DIDN'T say?
G > Dan's a Wuss!
KRP > Don't confuse the BIMBO with LINKS she
KRP > wants a fukkking SCAN of the document!!!!
Come on Maureen! LOL
Dan Sullivan
What does one have to do with the other?
> If you didn't see the video, then
> how would you have any idea how "similar"
> the thing is you're making?
Take a guess, asshole.
Greegor
G > on something similar when you're still doing
G > a "dance" about whether or not you
G > even saw the video?
DS > What does one have to do with the other?
G > If you didn't see the video, then how
G > would you have any idea how
G > "similar" the thing is you're making?
DS > Take a guess, asshole.
Too much of a WUSS to explain in your own words?
krp
DS> What does one have to do with the other?
Oh Danny - even YOU can't be that stupid. HOW can you KNOW with such
ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that *YOU* were working on the same thing if you don't
know what the SAME THING is???? That's your problem Danny. Your GRANDIOSITY!
You're like those fukking Soviets in the 50's. "WE THOUGHT OF IT FIRST!"
Sullivan you are a VERY boring BLOW HARD! Did you invent the internet too
like your BUDDY Killer Kane? What haven't you INVENTED, Sullivan? Are you
ATTORNEY Sullivan today? Chief Justice Sullivan? Dr. Dan Sullivan, M.D.?
Maybe Dan Sullivan, Ph.D.? What kind of ULTIMATE EXPERT are you today,
Sullivan?
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
It's grag and you that are that stupid, kenny boy.
You guys couldn't follow a conversation if it was tattooed to your
nose.
> HOW can you KNOW with such
> ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that *YOU* were working on the same thing if you don't
> know what the SAME THING is????
I couldn't know what "same thing" was because I read the news article?
krp
DS> It's grag and you that are that stupid, kenny boy. You guys couldn't
follow a conversation if it was tattooed to your nose.
> HOW can you KNOW with such ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that *YOU* were working on
> the same thing if you don't
> know what the SAME THING is????
DS> I couldn't know what "same thing" was because I read the news article?
http://www.wlky.com/news/14596226/detail.html
DANNY BOY - walk over to that cement wall over there. See it? Start banging
your head against it till we tell you to stop in a week or so. The VIDEO is
attached to the story Danny.
But YOU - being the FOREMOST OF THE FOREMOST OF THE FOREMOST of the EXPERTS
on this, have been working on it successfully for YEARS.. Doing the SAME
THINGS.
Danny, did you work in Moscow in 1955? Politburo? "WE THOUGHT OF IT FIRST!"
Is there ANYTHING that YOU didn't do FIRST and BETTER than anyone on the
planet? Danny, you are fukkking AMAZING! A TOWERING giant in the world of
child protection issues. YOU DA MAN!!!
Sullivan - I read your stuff, and again all I can say is; "YOU ARE MORE FULL
OF SHIT THAN A CHRISTMAS GOOSE!"
Dan Sullivan
> ATTORNEY AT LAW DAN SULLIVAN,. ESQ EMERITUS VOBISCUM SPIRITU"Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
So what?
I couldn't read the story and know what it was about unless I watched
the video?
LOL!!!
You and grag are a PAIR of morons!!!
krp
> > > G > Hey Dan and Betty!
>
> > >http://www.wlky.com/news/14596226/detail.html
>
> > > DS > Hey asshole.
>
> > > G > I love you too, Dan! LOL
>
> > > KRP > ATTORNEY AT LAW DAN SULLIVAN SAID
DS> So what? I couldn't read the story and know what it was about unless I
watched
DS> the video?
Sure you could to get HALF the story. But THAT is the story of your
life, isn't it smart ass? Tell me again, Danny, WHAT was the EXACT title of
my "article?"
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
Not true at all, kenny boy.
And I did say I'm working on something SIMILAR.
krp
> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
SIMILAR.
What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny? Gadzooks
another EXPERT CAREER for SULLIVAN!!!
1. FOREMOST ATTORNEY IN THE MILKY WAY,
2. CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE INTERGALACTIC COURTS.
3. NOBEL PRIZE WINNING MEDICAL DOCTOR.
4. BRAIN SURGEON.
5. WORLD'S LEADING PHYSICIST.
6. MOST PROMINENT PSYCHOLOGIST EVER KNOWN.
7. DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR.
8. PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH.
9. SPACE EXPLORER.
10. PULITZER PRIZE WINNING CRACK INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST FOR THE DAILY
PLANET.
What the fukk ELSE do you claim to be the leading expert about,
Sullivan? COMEDY CENTRAL?
Dan Sullivan
> INVESTIGATIVE CRACK JOURNALIST
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsul...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:3ec0b784-e3dc-4439...@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> SIMILAR.
>
> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
Your meds are out of wack and so are YOU!
krp
>>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>>
>> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
>> SIMILAR.
>> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
Well YOU are the one claiming to be working on a similar story. DANNY
CLARK SULLIVAN!
> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny? Gadzooks
> another EXPERT CAREER for SULLIVAN!!!
>
>
> 1. FOREMOST ATTORNEY IN THE MILKY WAY,
>
> 2. CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE INTERGALACTIC COURTS.
>
> 3. NOBEL PRIZE WINNING MEDICAL DOCTOR.
>
> 4. BRAIN SURGEON.
>
> 5. WORLD'S LEADING PHYSICIST.
>
> 6. MOST PROMINENT PSYCHOLOGIST EVER KNOWN.
>
> 7. DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR.
>
> 8. PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH.
>
> 9. SPACE EXPLORER.
>
> 10. PULITZER PRIZE WINNING CRACK INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST FOR THE DAILY
> PLANET.
Danny boy - ALL you qualify for is "USENET'S BIGGEST BLOWHARD!"
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:49c25618$0$22526$607e...@cv.net...
>
> >>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> >> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> >> SIMILAR.
> >> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> > Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> Well YOU are the one claiming to be working on a similar story. DANNY
> CLARK SULLIVAN!
I didn't say I was working on a similar STORY.
I said I was working on something similar to the CPS cases being
discussed, as described in the news story.
Who gets you dressed in the morning, kenny boy?
krp
On Mar 19, 10:43 am, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:49c25618$0$22526$607e...@cv.net...
>
> >>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> >> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> >> SIMILAR.
> >> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> > Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> Well YOU are the one claiming to be working on a similar story. DANNY
> CLARK SULLIVAN!
DS> I didn't say I was working on a similar STORY.
DS> I said I was working on something similar to the CPS cases being
DS> discussed, as described in the news story.
Oh so it's NOT your job as THE crack investigative reporter for the
daily planet, is is your work as the GREATEST living ATTORNEY in the GALAXY.
I understand counselor. Learn to actually SAY what you mean Mr. LOOPHOLE.
Those Weasel words will get you in trouble.
ROUND 3.
the count is 8
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:9a67d886-6d28-49c2...@p11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 19, 10:43 am, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:49c25618$0$22526$607e...@cv.net...
>
> > >>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> > >> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> > >> SIMILAR.
> > >> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> > > Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> > Well YOU are the one claiming to be working on a similar story. DANNY
> > CLARK SULLIVAN!
>
> DS> I didn't say I was working on a similar STORY.
>
> DS> I said I was working on something similar to the CPS cases being
> DS> discussed, as described in the news story.
>
> Oh so it's NOT your job as THE crack investigative reporter for the
> daily planet,
I didn't say it was.
> ROUND 3.
>
> the count is 8
And when the count goes over ten you have to take your shoes off!
LOL!!!
krp
> > >>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> > >> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> > >> SIMILAR.
> > >> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> > > Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> > Well YOU are the one claiming to be working on a similar story. DANNY
> > CLARK SULLIVAN!
>
> DS> I didn't say I was working on a similar STORY.
>
> DS> I said I was working on something similar to the CPS cases being
> DS> discussed, as described in the news story.
>
> Oh so it's NOT your job as THE crack investigative reporter for the
> daily planet,
DS> I didn't say it was.
Oh Danny, aren't you CLEVER? Why is it you can NEVER say what you mean?
WHY is it that you can ONLY speak IN WEASEL WORDS? AFRAID Danny?
> ROUND 3.
> the count is 8
DS> And when the count goes over ten you have to take your shoes off!
I forget you were the world's LEADING boxing referee, you see Danny, in
the REST of the world, at TEN it is a KNOCKOUT! ALL EXCEPT IN DANNYLAND.
Michael Dobony
let's see here. We have a self-proclaimed researcher whose journal articles
are not found and he refuses to provide the references. Then he is an
investigative reporter who again refuses to provide references. His
credibility is as solid as his references. Just put him where he belongs,
in the killfile!!!!
krp
"Michael Dobony" <sur...@stopassaultnow.net> wrote in message
news:n95si9v9imd8.y...@40tude.net...
>>>
>>>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>>>
>>> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
>>> SIMILAR.
>>>
>>> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>>
>> Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>>
>> Your meds are out of wack and so are YOU!
>
> let's see here. We have a self-proclaimed researcher whose journal
> articles
> are not found and he refuses to provide the references. Then he is an
> investigative reporter who again refuses to provide references. His
> credibility is as solid as his references. Just put him where he belongs,
> in the killfile!!!!
You were going to get back to us Mikey. Just WHAT is the REAL title of
my "ARTICLE?" Let's see, in alt.adoption, YOU claim you found ONE "article",
but in ASCPS you LOUDLY claimed NONE just less than an hour after you were
talking about the ONE. Which is it? HUH MIKEY? Hiding from me since I
exposed your little games with your "MINISTRY?" Any comments on the WLKY
story?
I didn't think so.
Dan Sullivan
> "Michael Dobony" <sur...@stopassaultnow.net> wrote in message
>
> news:n95si9v9imd8.y...@40tude.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> >>> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> >>> SIMILAR.
>
> >>> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> >> Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> >> Your meds are out of wack and so are YOU!
>
> > let's see here. We have a self-proclaimed researcher whose journal
> > articles
> > are not found and he refuses to provide the references. Then he is an
> > investigative reporter who again refuses to provide references. His
> > credibility is as solid as his references. Just put him where he belongs,
> > in the killfile!!!!
>
> You were going to get back to us Mikey. Just WHAT is the REAL title of
> my "ARTICLE?" Let's see, in alt.adoption, YOU claim you found ONE "article",
A "hit" is not an article.
> but in ASCPS you LOUDLY claimed NONE just less than an hour after you were
> talking about the ONE. Which is it?
Even you admitted it was nothing more than a simple paper, kenny boy.
But then claimed it MAY HAVE BEEN the basis for a four hundred page
book!
What was the name of the 400 page book, kenny boy, and who was the
author?
krp
> >>>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> >>> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> >>> SIMILAR.
>
> >>> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> >> Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> >> Your meds are out of wack and so are YOU!
>
> > let's see here. We have a self-proclaimed researcher whose journal
> > articles
> > are not found and he refuses to provide the references. Then he is an
> > investigative reporter who again refuses to provide references. His
> > credibility is as solid as his references. Just put him where he
> > belongs,
> > in the killfile!!!!
> You were going to get back to us Mikey. Just WHAT is the REAL title of
> my "ARTICLE?" Let's see, in alt.adoption, YOU claim you found ONE
> "article",
DS> A "hit" is not an article.
No - you're right. In YOUR world a "HIT" is either something your MOB
boss orders you to do, OR it's something you take with your funny
cigarettes.
> but in ASCPS you LOUDLY claimed NONE just less than an hour after you were
> talking about the ONE. Which is it?
DS> Even you admitted it was nothing more than a simple paper, kenny boy.
No Danny, that's your drug induced STUPOR. I never "ADMITTED" any such
thing. But then I am nowhere near as grandiose as YOU ARE, Sullivan.
DS> But then claimed it MAY HAVE BEEN the basis for a four hundred page
book!
LIAR! He said NO SUCH THING. You are getting confused again. ROUND 4,
Danny. You're not doing so well. Zero for four.
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:bc716ac5-7aab-4354...@y13g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > >>>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> > >>> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on something
> > >>> SIMILAR.
>
> > >>> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> > >> Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny boy.
>
> > >> Your meds are out of wack and so are YOU!
>
> > > let's see here. We have a self-proclaimed researcher whose journal
> > > articles
> > > are not found and he refuses to provide the references. Then he is an
> > > investigative reporter who again refuses to provide references. His
> > > credibility is as solid as his references. Just put him where he
> > > belongs,
> > > in the killfile!!!!
> > You were going to get back to us Mikey. Just WHAT is the REAL title of
> > my "ARTICLE?" Let's see, in alt.adoption, YOU claim you found ONE
> > "article",
>
> DS> A "hit" is not an article.
>
> No - you're right. In YOUR world a "HIT" is either something your MOB
> boss orders you to do, OR it's something you take with your funny
> cigarettes.
You're suffering from severe delusions, kenny boy.
> > but in ASCPS you LOUDLY claimed NONE just less than an hour after you were
> > talking about the ONE. Which is it?
>
> DS> Even you admitted it was nothing more than a simple paper, kenny boy.
>
> No Danny, that's your drug induced STUPOR. I never "ADMITTED" any such
> thing. But then I am nowhere near as grandiose as YOU ARE, Sullivan.
Sure you did, kenny boy.
You wrote "In 30 TRIES you never got the TITLE correct even ONCE. Then
your gaffes with believing that it was an "ARTICLE" and claiming it
suffered from "BREVITY" even though it is about 400 pages.Then your
claims about its contents. (The "summary" bullshit again.) Look
DIPSHIT what you don't understand is that the PAPER that I did for
the Utah Legislature may be the BASIS for the BOOK, but they are two
separate documents."
> DS> But then claimed it MAY HAVE BEEN the basis for a four hundred page
> book!
>
> LIAR! He said NO SUCH THING. You are getting confused again. ROUND 4,
> Danny. You're not doing so well. Zero for four.
I didn't claim Mike said that.
I said YOU said that, kenny boy.
See above.
LOL!!!
krp
>
> > >>>> Sure you could to get HALF the story.
>
> > >>> DS> Not true at all, kenny boy And I did say I'm working on
> > >>> something
> > >>> SIMILAR.
>
> > >>> What NETWORK are you doing this INVESTIGATIVE STORY for Danny?
>
> > >> Your delusions are getting more and more serious every day, kenny
> > >> boy.
>
> > >> Your meds are out of wack and so are YOU!
>
> > > let's see here. We have a self-proclaimed researcher whose journal
> > > articles
> > > are not found and he refuses to provide the references. Then he is an
> > > investigative reporter who again refuses to provide references. His
> > > credibility is as solid as his references. Just put him where he
> > > belongs,
> > > in the killfile!!!!
> > You were going to get back to us Mikey. Just WHAT is the REAL title of
> > my "ARTICLE?" Let's see, in alt.adoption, YOU claim you found ONE
> > "article",
>
> DS> A "hit" is not an article.
>
> No - you're right. In YOUR world a "HIT" is either something your MOB
> boss orders you to do, OR it's something you take with your funny
> cigarettes.
DS> You're suffering from severe delusions, kenny boy.
So Danny - WHAT is the title of my "ARTICLE?" Since you claim to know.
> > but in ASCPS you LOUDLY claimed NONE just less than an hour after you
> > were
> > talking about the ONE. Which is it?
>
> DS> Even you admitted it was nothing more than a simple paper, kenny boy.
>
> No Danny, that's your drug induced STUPOR. I never "ADMITTED" any such
> thing. But then I am nowhere near as grandiose as YOU ARE, Sullivan.
DS> Sure you did, kenny boy.
PROOF!!
DS> You wrote "In 30 TRIES you never got the TITLE correct even ONCE. Then
DS> your gaffes with believing that it was an "ARTICLE" and claiming it
DS> suffered from "BREVITY" even though it is about 400 pages.Then your
DS> claims about its contents. (The "summary" bullshit again.) Look
DS> DIPSHIT what you don't understand is that the PAPER that I did for
DS>the Utah Legislature may be the BASIS for the BOOK, but they are two
DS> separate documents."
Danny boy. Yes, Danny, you took 30 stabs at the name of my "article"
(that's what YOU were calling it at the time, an "article") and never got it
correct once. You also CLAIMED it suffered from brevity, and on one occasion
said it was "only 38 pages long." You also made several claims about the
content. FINALLY you have to admit you had NEVER seen it. You had been LYING
all along. Oh and Mr. WHACKJOB, you STILL haven't a frigging CLUE as to what
the title of my actual paper for the State of Utah, OR the other publication
in your drug addled mind you THINK was my "article." And, shithead, I say it
"MAY" have been the basis for the book. I didn't say it WAS. Oh you are just
so fuccccccccking clever, Danny weasel.
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
Not true.
> and on one occasion said it was "only 38 pages long."
Not true.
> You also made several claims about the content.
Not true.
> FINALLY you have to admit you had NEVER seen it.
Not true.
> You had been LYING all along.
Not true
> Oh and Mr. WHACKJOB, you STILL haven't a frigging CLUE as to what
> the title of my actual paper for the State of Utah,
So your paper was never published?
> OR the other publication in your drug addled mind you THINK
> was my "article."
What was that publication titled?
Who was the author?
> And, shithead, I say it "MAY" have been the basis for the book.
That's exactly what I said your claim was "MAY HAVE BEEN."
> I didn't say it WAS.
And I didn't say that either.
> Oh you are just
> so fuccccccccking clever, Danny weasel.
Yes, kenny boy, clever is accurate and true.
Far more clever than you'll ever be, even with your phony college
degrees!!!
LOL!!!!!
krp
DS.Not true.
Are you SERIOUSLY claiming you got the title CORRECT?????
> and on one occasion said it was "only 38 pages long."
DS> Not true.
I've already replayed that post of yours once, MUST I do it again and
again and again, Danny?
> You also made several claims about the content.
DS> Not true.
When yopu claim it was "a simple summary" Danny boy, that IS a claim as
to the document's CONTENTS, except in DANNYWORLD.
> FINALLY you have to admit you had NEVER seen it.
DS> Not true.
Are you AGAIN claiming you HAVE seen it Danny? Or are you just playing
with words again Mr. WEASEL????
> You had been LYING all along.
DS> Not true
You still are. BUT, Danny, you can't help it.
> Oh and Mr. WHACKJOB, you STILL haven't a frigging CLUE as to what
> the title of my actual paper for the State of Utah,
DS> So your paper was never published?
There you go again. Where did I say that? Things get kind of screwy on
Dannyworld, don't they?
> OR the other publication in your drug addled mind you THINK
> was my "article."
DS> What was that publication titled? Who was the author?
Don't YOU know Danny? I asked you, maybe you can come up with the title
and get it WRONG for the 31st time.
> And, shithead, I say it "MAY" have been the basis for the book.
DS>That's exactly what I said your claim was "MAY HAVE BEEN."
Nice SNIPPAGE... DISHONEST DAN.
> I didn't say it WAS.
DS> And I didn't say that either.
Danny - your problem is that youi are so smart-assed CLEVER you never
SAY much of anything, at least not anything you can't ANGRILY DENY later Mr.
Weaselword.
> Oh you are just so fuccccccccking clever, Danny weasel.
DS> Yes, kenny boy, clever is accurate and true. Far more clever than you'll
ever be, even with your phony college
DS> degrees!!!
Danny so clever you think you have the wool over EVERYONE'S
EYES............
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
I'm seriously claiming what you said wasn't true.
> > and on one occasion said it was "only 38 pages long."
>
> DS> Not true.
>
> I've already replayed that post of yours once, MUST I do it again and
> again and again, Danny?
Do it once more.
> > You also made several claims about the content.
>
> DS> Not true.
>
> When yopu claim it was "a simple summary" Danny boy, that IS a claim as
> to the document's CONTENTS, except in DANNYWORLD.
That's not SEVERAL.
> > FINALLY you have to admit you had NEVER seen it.
>
> DS> Not true.
>
> Are you AGAIN claiming you HAVE seen it Danny? Or are you just playing
> with words again Mr. WEASEL????
No, I'm claiming I never said I didn't see it.
> > You had been LYING all along.
>
> DS> Not true
>
> You still are. BUT, Danny, you can't help it.
Not true at all.
> > Oh and Mr. WHACKJOB, you STILL haven't a frigging CLUE as to what
> > the title of my actual paper for the State of Utah,
>
> DS> So your paper was never published?
>
> There you go again. Where did I say that? Things get kind of screwy on
> Dannyworld, don't they?
Failure to answer my question is noted.
> > OR the other publication in your drug addled mind you THINK
> > was my "article."
>
> DS> What was that publication titled? Who was the author?
>
> Don't YOU know Danny? I asked you, maybe you can come up with the title
> and get it WRONG for the 31st time.
So a 400 page document written by an unnamed author that "MAY HAVE
BEEN" written with your paper as the basis, YOU are claiming was
written by you.
> > And, shithead, I say it "MAY" have been the basis for the book.
>
> DS>That's exactly what I said your claim was "MAY HAVE BEEN."
>
> Nice SNIPPAGE... DISHONEST DAN.
Was something you said deleted?
> > I didn't say it WAS.
>
> DS> And I didn't say that either.
>
> Danny - your problem is that youi are so smart-assed CLEVER you never
> SAY much of anything, at least not anything you can't ANGRILY DENY later Mr.
> Weaselword.
I don't "angrily deny" anything.
If you're not up to a spirited debate, that's your problem.
> > Oh you are just so fuccccccccking clever, Danny weasel.
>
> DS> Yes, kenny boy, clever is accurate and true. Far more clever than you'll
> ever be, even with your phony college
> DS> degrees!!!
>
> Danny so clever you think you have the wool over EVERYONE'S
> EYES............
Everyone can see you just AREN'T up to a spirited debate, kenny boy.
If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
LOL!!!!
krp
DS> I'm seriously claiming what you said wasn't true.
Like that youj m,ade 30 tries to name the title and ALL yoiur guesses
were WRONG!
> > and on one occasion said it was "only 38 pages long."
>
> DS> Not true.
> I've already replayed that post of yours once, MUST I do it again and
> again and again, Danny?
DS> Do it once more.
Wasn't getting SPANKED TWICE bad enough for you Danny?
> > You also made several claims about the content.
>
> DS> Not true.
> When you claim it was "a simple summary" Danny boy, that IS a claim as
> to the document's CONTENTS, except in DANNYWORLD.
DS> That's not SEVERAL.
You ndid that more than a dozen times. THAT is several EXCEPT on
Dannyworld.
> > FINALLY you have to admit you had NEVER seen it.
> DS> Not true.
> Are you AGAIN claiming you HAVE seen it Danny? Or are you just playing
> with words again Mr. WEASEL????
DS> No, I'm claiming I never said I didn't see it.
Of course not you never actually ":CLAIM" anything Mr. Weasel, do you?
> > Oh and Mr. WHACKJOB, you STILL haven't a frigging CLUE as to what
> > the title of my actual paper for the State of Utah,
>
> DS> So your paper was never published?
>
> There you go again. Where did I say that? Things get kind of screwy on
> Dannyworld, don't they?
DS> Failure to answer my question is noted.
You don't get to ASK questions until you naswer some. NOT WITH YOUR
SLIMEY WEASEL WORDS.
> > OR the other publication in your drug addled mind you THINK
> > was my "article."
>
> DS> What was that publication titled? Who was the author?
>
> Don't YOU know Danny? I asked you, maybe you can come up with the title
> and get it WRONG for the 31st time.
DS> So a 400 page document written by an unnamed author that "MAY HAVE
DS> BEEN" written with your paper as the basis, YOU are claiming was
DS> written by you.
CUTE Danny - utter BULLSHIT as usual. Thanks for PROVING that you are
just jack-jawing again.
> Danny - your problem is that youi are so smart-assed CLEVER you never
> SAY much of anything, at least not anything you can't ANGRILY DENY later
> Mr.
> Weaselword.
DS> I don't "angrily deny" anything. If you're not up to a spirited debate,
that's your problem.
So you call LYING "spirited debate", Danny????? REALLY?
Dan Sullivan
krp
DS> Everyone can see you just AREN'T up to a spirited debate, kenny boy.
Danny using "WEASEL WORDS" is NOT a "spirited debate."
DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
disqualified at the start.
Dan Sullivan
>
> DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
> DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
> disqualified at the start.
The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
And that success carries thru till today, when your telling response
was "Dan Sullivan molests little boys."
LOL!!!
krp
> DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
> DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
> disqualified at the start.
DS> The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
Judging from what we can see here, they obviously had VERY lax rules.
You would have been bounced in the first round for lack of specificity. One
of the rules of REAL DEBATE, Danny boy, is that yolur must make a SPECIFIC
point, not your WEASEL WORDS. An EXTREMELY generous refereee would have
called you the first time and demanded you make your statement over, if you
did it again you'd have been disqualified. Your problem Sullivan is that
you actually never REALLY say anything you just PLATY with words. Maybe
where YOU were they allowed little semantic games, not where I was.
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1a87a3e6-9359-4755...@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
> > DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
> > DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> > Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
> > disqualified at the start.
>
> DS> The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
>
> Judging from what we can see here, they obviously had VERY lax rules.
Not at all.
I won because the opposition failed to be specific with their "facts,"
much like you have been doing on your websites and on the news groups.
krp
>
> > DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
> > DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> > Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
> > disqualified at the start.
>
> DS> The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
>
> Judging from what we can see here, they obviously had VERY lax rules.
DS> Not at all.
Sullivan YOPU are FOS.
DS> I won because the opposition failed to be specific with their "facts,"
DS> much like you have been doing on your websites and on the news groups.
SURE DANNY. MR. WEASEL WORDS calling he POT black.
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:6aa95f0a-431e-479c...@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > > DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor would
> > > DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> > > Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
> > > disqualified at the start.
>
> > DS> The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
>
> > Judging from what we can see here, they obviously had VERY lax rules.
>
> DS> Not at all.
>
> Sullivan YOPU are FOS.
YOPU?
Is that an example of you being specific, kenny boy?
krp
>
> > > DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor
> > > would
> > > DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> > > Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have been
> > > disqualified at the start.
>
> > DS> The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
>
> > Judging from what we can see here, they obviously had VERY lax rules.
>
> DS> Not at all.
>
DS> YOU? Is that an example of you being specific, kenny boy?
Specifically you are one of Usenet's biggest BLOW HARDS.
Dan Sullivan
insanity and lies!!!!!
LOL!!!
krp
> kenny boy, you have websites, your own and others, devoted to your
> insanity and lies!!!!!
And YOUR life accomplishments - thus far have been WHAT Danny? Other
than being the GREATEST EVER ATTORNEY in your own mind. WHAT can you point
to as a GREAT ACCOMPLISHMENT that the world should take note of? All your
GREAT courtroom victories?????
OR that you are *A* leading source of BULLSHIT on Usenet?
whitevamp
That's the best he can do. You know how he is. I pretty much nailed
him when in another thread he said that half of rape victims tell the
truth while, by his own claim, 40 to 70 percent of rape victims lie.
IOW a full percentage to Kennie is 120 percent. And he's yet to show
anything to prove his claims on that issue. Nor will he, might I add.
He also claims that battered women's syndrome doesn't exist.
Bear in mind according to his CV as provided by Moore, he SUPPOSEDLY
did a lot of studying on sexual abuse. His appalling ignorance that
he's shown so far about rape an BWS pretty much puts his " expertise"
into serious question.
Also may I point out that he ignores certain challenges, particularly
if the one challenging him is far more knowledgeable than he PRETENDS
to be. For example, once he found out I am the daughter of an Air
Force comm ( who BTW was still in service during Kennie"s ALLEGED AF
service years) and I questioned him about his claims of being and "
advisor" during his AF stint, I asked him for the names of his COs-- a
reasonable request BTW. He has yet to provide their names. And the
ironic thing is that Ken Pangburn claims to be a weapons expert but
provides a vague dumbass shooting in the foot story to as " proof" of
his legendary status in the AF. While I can tell far more specific
stories my father told me about his years in the AF that would make
his pathetic story look as childish as it is.
Ken is a pompous pissant. Worse still he blames his typos/
misspellings on the Microsoft program he uses, as if all the OTHER
times he made such errors in more than a DECADE online is not his own
obvious semi-literacy. Sometimes he fakes intelligence by using long
words he, ahem, copied elsewhere. Problem is his posts show his actual
low level usage of the English language. When someone who had to learn
English as a second language like Kent did is far more literate ( as
in the level of English words used) than Kennie-poo, it really looks
bad as to Kennie's alleged extensive higher education.
Worse still is when he is challenged he resorts to hissy fit rants
and childish personal attacks as if these are good counter arguments
to the subject at hand. And this is from someone who supposedly is a
professional in a field where credibility, maturity and ability to
support the claims with evidence are crucial.
I think it's funny that he calls me names including " moron" and yet
I beat him time after time in the past week alone-- and he's too
stupid to see it!
Ken " Jethro" Pangburn a weapons expert? Yeah, right. Funny how my
father won all those AF shooting range awards......
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
"http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/blies.htm
krp
"whitevamp" <fvr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3d8f5c4a-2360-4e2f...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > DS> If you and I were in high school debating class the instructor
> > > > would
> > > > DS> tell you to "sit down" after every one of your posts.
>
> > > > Danny if you and I were in a high school debate - you would have
> > > > been
> > > > disqualified at the start.
>
> > > DS> The fact is I rarely lost a debate in high school or college.
>
> > > Judging from what we can see here, they obviously had VERY lax rules.
>
> > DS> Not at all.
>
>
> YOU?
>
> Is that an example of you being specific, kenny boy?
MOE> That's the best he can do. You know how he is. I pretty much nailed
MOE> him when in another thread he said that half of rape victims tell the
MOE> truth while, by his own claim, 40 to 70 percent of rape victims lie.
MOE> IOW a full percentage to Kennie is 120 percent. And he's yet to show
MOE> anything to prove his claims on that issue. Nor will he, might I add.
MOE> He also claims that battered women's syndrome doesn't exist.
YAWN
http://www.aaets.org/article138.htm
2. The term "battered woman syndrome" is vague.
There is no clearly defined set of criteria to define "battered woman
syndrome." If the label "battered woman syndrome" is reserved only for
battered women with specific types of reactions (e.g., posttraumatic stress
disorder), then using it instead of the diagnosis term is confusing
especially since battered woman syndrome is not a recognized diagnostic term
in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) (
American Psychiatric Association, 1994 ). Further, other reactions to
battering that are relevant to pending legal (or other) issues may be
excluded from consideration. Alternatively, if the term is used more broadly
to refer to a range of psychological reactions to battering, as it often is
in actual testimony by experts, then its diagnostic utility is lost since
there is no clearly defined criteria for inclusion. In this case, the
question of whether a battered woman "suffers" from battered woman syndrome
is not an appropriate question: its meaning is vague and can be misleading.
An extensive scientific and professional literature concerning traumatic
experiences, including domestic violence and victims' reactions to it,
provides a solid foundation for expert testimony in cases involving battered
women. Expert testimony concerning battering and its effects cannot
adequately rely on a single construct such as "battered woman syndrome": the
comprehensive body of existing knowledge cannot be so condensed. Instead,
focus should be on identifying the specific questions relevant to the issues
at hand for which there is a body of knowledge to support a valid
conclusion.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders. Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric
Association.
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Legal-Implications-of-Battered-Woman-Syndrome&id=2060685
Let's examine the legal implications of Battered Woman Syndrome. BWS was
first proposed in the 1970's. According to Joe Wheeler Dixon, PhD, JD BWS
appears to be the product of legal advocacy and not science. BWS seems to
owe its existence to the needs of legal advocates to support and justify
claims by battered women who have killed (their batterers). The defense
revolves around the woman's mental deficiency and helplessness. Learned
helplessness can be induced in lab animals, but no sudden rage or
aggression.
http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?10+Duke+J.+Gender+L.+&+Pol'y+225
In short, although the term battered woman syndrome offers a convenient
"label" that may ease communication, the disadvantage is that the "syndrome
has become a stereotype that often does not fit the current state of
knowledge concerning battering and its effects."
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2002/libe196-20021028-04.html
Battered Women's Syndrome: Science Or Sham?
BWS claims that battered women are psychologically traumatized and therefore
not responsible for their violent actions. Thus, a battered woman is not
held responsible for murdering her abuser in his sleep, as in the much cited
court case State of North Carolina v. Judy Ann Laws Norman or in the movie
The Burning Bed. BWS sidesteps the long established principle that only a
clear and imminent danger to life can justify murder, especially the
premeditated variety.
Controversy swirls over whether BWS even exists or is a creation of feminist
politics. Whatever is true, BWS is a legal defense available to women and de
facto denied to men. Both women and men should be held equally accountable
for their acts of violence. The courts should not bar anyone from a valid
legal defense -- but is BWS valid? "
So much for the issue, eh Moe?
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Nice Googling try, Kennie, but you forgot a few web sites.
http://new.vawnet.org/category/Main_Doc.php?docid=375
Among other sites showing BWS is a legitimate defense and a
legitimate condition.
As usual you deceive in a pathetically obvious way. You deliberately
used a search engine criteria to support your misogynistic views while
pretending you were being impartial and intellectually honest. Both
qualities,, BTW you do not have and repeatedly show it.
So Kennie, how about posting a list of the names of your CO's. oh "
weapons advisor"? And the name of the person running the shooting
ranges you presumably "practiced" on.
(( laughing))
krp
MOE> Among other sites showing BWS is a legitimate defense and a
MOE> legitimate condition.
MOE> As usual you deceive in a pathetically obvious way. You deliberately
MOE> used a search engine criteria to support your misogynistic views while
MOE> pretending you were being impartial and intellectually honest. Both
MOE> qualities,, BTW you do not have and repeatedly show it.
OOO you don 't LIKE that which contradicts gthe QUEEN - do you?
MOE> So Kennie, how about posting a list of the names of your CO's. oh "
MOE> weapons advisor"? And the name of the person running the shooting
MOE> ranges you presumably "practiced" on.
Sorry MOE I am NOT going to HELP your BUDDY David Moore with new names
for his KEYWORDS. He'll have to do some VERY serious STALKING to find the
names. He can start with Curt Lemay and work his way down. Say MOE -
where's your SMART SHIT about the A-37's???????? Daddy a bit confused on
that one? That I knew something about TWEETIE BIRD? Moe are you AFRAID to
answer my question?????? You DADDY is an AIR FORCE EXPERT... The A-37 had
TWO roles. One was ground attack and the other was as FAC. Planes like the
A-37 and another plane by Cessna, KNOW WHAT IT WAS????????? DADDY should
know. It had twin booms and a front and rear engine. What OTHER kind of FAC
did the Air Force employ?
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>
>
>
> > > > > KRP > She bumped her head riding her broom.
> > > > > KRP > She *THINKS* she's a witch.
>
> > > > > Moe > I'm a Wiccan, Catholic boy. Wicca is a
> > > > > Moe > religion even recognized in the military.
> > > > > Moe >
> > > > > Moe > You belong to a religion where pedophile
> > > > > Here we go, Moe the kooky Wiccan attacking
> > > > > Ken for being Catholic! LOL
>
> > > > While YOU forgot that Ken made malicious comments about MY religion
> > > > first. The " broomstick" comments. But then you yourself mock
> > > > Christianity.
>
> > > > Or is your short-term memory from your frequent drug abuse excuse
> > > > enough for your lack of seeing the obvious.
>
> > > > Your hypocrisy noted Greg.
>
> > > > Tell me Greggie will you chastise Ken WHEN he attacks my religion in
> > > > one of his hissy fits?
>
> > > Moe you are too stupid to understand I am not attacking your religion. I
> > > am making fun of YOU - a MORON.
>
> > MOE> I am hardly a " moron" but hey, if an old phony like you wants to
> > MOE> call me names, go right ahead.
> > Moe you hold a MINORITY opinion on that score.
>
> MOE> On me being a " moron" or on you being an old phony"
>
> Yes Moe. But have NO FEARS you DO have DAVID MOORE 100% on your side,
> along with Sullivan and Betty.
AH yes, good intelligent people on my side. Or more accurately with
me on seeing you as scum.
Its not who is with me that's important, Kennie. Its how we "score"
at this " game".
And you are obviously a sore loser.
(( laughs))
>
> > MOE> So how about giving me the names of your CO's ? (( smiles)) hm, were
> > MOE> you by any chance a pencil pushing, paper stabling pompous pissant?
>
> > NOT gonna happen Moe baby! I am NOT going to provide more names for your
> > asshole buddy DAVID MOORE to put in his KEYWORDS so he can harass them.
>
> MOE> More likely they would tell a different story of your service
> MOE> record. I seriously doubt you were an " advisor" on anything,
> MOE> including weapons. BTW what are you so afraid Moore might find out? If
> MOE> what you claim is true, whatever Moore would dig upwould only confirm
> MOE> your claims.
>
> Man you slammed into theat BOARD. I said KEYWORDS I didn't say SHIT
> about Moorfe "diggiong ujp" anything. MAKING UP - yes, DIGGING UP???
>
> MOE> But if he found out you were, say, a low level janitor....
>
> Ask your daddy. The Airforce had NO such AFSC at that time.
IOW you lied as a deception. Got it.
Admitting you lie is the first step, Kennie-poo.
>
> > I notice that you didn't have any smart assed Feminazi comebacks to my
> > comments on the A-37 "tweetie bird."
>
> MOE> You Googled it, dumbass. Even I knew that. By your own admission you
> MOE> left service by 1965 and the "Dragonfly" was started AFTER you left,
> MOE> so you DIDN"T know about it. I just let you hang yourself once again
> MOE> in your posturings.
>
> HEY YOU STUPID BITCH - ever hear of the RESERVES??????????????????? Is
> that a NEWSFLASH for your DADDY???? HUH Bimbo.
Hey nice RANT!! Even CUSSING!!!
(( cheers))
Okay, amateur and obvious sexist cussing but hey at least Kennie-poo
lost control ( not that he had much control in the first place).
So I'm supposed to believe that you, a guy who so easily loses
emotional control on a frigging newsgroup, had the maturity to
convince the military that you could be a "weapons advisor"?
I highly doubt it.
BTW if you want cussing, Kennie, I can give you some lessons to make
your grade school vulgarity more to the level you, ahem, SHOULD HAVE
HEARD in actual military service.
Even your cussing is below par. (( laughing))
>
> >After all the DRAMA QUEEN buildup. I
> > could go futher, that it was used as both ground attack and FAC. The Air
> > Force had two kinds of FAC. ONE was using planes like the A-37. Ask your
> > DADDY what the other was. No comments on "BUFF?" Tell your daddy "GEORGE
> > FOX!"
>
> MOE> So my father's name is George Fox? Really?
>
> Ask HIM who GEORGE FOX is. It was a common radio traffic call. IF he was
> the COMMANDING GENERAL as you say, he'll KNOW it.
>
> MOE> BTW dumbass, he FLEW the damn A-37s in Nam.
>
> So? BFD. SO did several hundred other men. THEY will know what GEORGE
> FOX means. Tell me, did GOOGLE sources say that A-37 folks called it
> "TWEETIE BIRD" or WHY they did?
> If your DADDY is real and honest - he should have told you I know what I am
> talking about.
>
> MOE> A lowlife like you can posture all you want, but you are an obvious
> MOE> phony. You can with the help of search engines pose yourself as
> MOE> knowledgeable-- until someone who actually knows about the subject
> MOE> challenges you on it.
>
> Well it AIN'T you Moe. The search engines MAY know the plane was called
> "TWEETIE" but not WHY. I knew WHY.
>
> MOE> Your " advisor" service in the AF, like pretty much everything else
> MOE> you claim about yourself, is highly questionable as to the accuracy
> MOE> and truthfulness.
>
> Really? Did you ask your dad about the ARVN officer blowing his toes off
> on the range outside Saigon? It was sort of common knowledge among the
> troops. Does your Daddy KNOW what the Colt 1911 is? He probably wore one.
>
> MOE> I can understand why you won't even say who you served with, CO's or
> MOE> not. It would blow your BS for good.
>
> Like I said your BUDDY Moore is harassing enough people with his
> KEYWORDS, I'm not adding fresh meat for him to STALK.
As opposed to your stalking, Kennie?
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:e2a50127-f3b5-47b9...@e38g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > kenny boy, you have websites, your own and others, devoted to your
> > insanity and lies!!!!!
>
> And YOUR life accomplishments -
You consider your lies and insanity on your websites "life
accomplishments," kenny boy?
THAT'S INSANE!!!!
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I answered your POSTURING FAKERY, Kennie.Its not my fault you can't
keep up with the threads.
The issue is your CLAIMS about your AF service, Kennie-poo, not what
I know about the A-37. You can try that trick all you want to
manipulate me away from your posturings about yourself, but the
problems about your claims about yourself still stands.
I've shown that you as this so-called "sexual abuse expert" you can't
even prove your claims that "40 to 70 percent" of the rape victims lie
while half tell the truth. Bad math, Kennie. Percentages of a whole
always adds up to 100. If half are telling the truth, half is 50% and
the remainder is 50%. Your max of the HALF is 70%, making the total
120%.
I've shown you to be a misogynist and a religious bigot,so obviously
the tolerance references on your CV are not what you really believe.
And your rantings and childish temper tantrum cussings show how
pathetically immature you are emotionally.
Your childish cussing contrasts with the level of vulgarity actual
military personnel use, even during your era of service.
I'm happy you cussed at me. I'm amused at your amateur responses. I
smirk at your personal attacks.
You lose, every time, Kennie-poo.
whitevamp
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
That's YOUR award, Kennie-poo.
(( laughing))
whitevamp
There is no question that Ken Pangburn doesn't have all his marbles
and what few he DOES have are cracked.
The question is how long has he been mentally fucked up.
Greegor
52 Dan Sullivan Mar 21
53 whitevamp Mar 21
Re: kDANNY SULLIVAN - FORVER on 24/7 PATROL from hnis
NAPPER CRAPPER
54 whitevamp Mar 21
Ken " Jethro" Pangburn depends on DEPENDS
55 whitevamp Mar 21
56 krp Mar 21
57 whitevamp Mar 21
Re: Moe the Feminazi NUT CASE! STUMPED on her Air Force
BULLSHIT!!!!!
58 krp Mar 21
59 whitevamp Mar 21
60 whitevamp Mar 21
whitevamp
Subject headers supplied by you and Ken.
Too bad Jonesie isn't still around. He's the expert on feces that you
bow to in reverence.