Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Looking for answers New Jersey

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Helping Hand View Post
    together they make 125,000 a year,while I only make 29,999.
    How is it that you make exactly 29,999? Does making a single penny more put you over some threshold or something?
    Last edited by mikswi; 11-10-2007, 02:20 PM.
    This will pass. Life's got bigger disapointments waiting for you.

    Comment


    • #77
      Good Lord Saxxyman, do you link the entire net when you post? You may receive a better response if you post smaller snippets. Most if not all, will not read through volumes in an attempt to get your point.
      This will pass. Life's got bigger disapointments waiting for you.

      Comment


      • #78
        One problem

        Originally posted by mikswi View Post
        Good Lord Saxxyman, do you link the entire net when you post? You may receive a better response if you post smaller snippets. Most if not all, will not read through volumes in an attempt to get your point.
        Good point! Just one problem. Certain individuals enjoy taking post out of context and twisting it around from it's original meaning. I've had several of my own post mis quoted or interpreted by the perception of closed minded people that can no comprehend the possibilities other than what their mind tells them.
        They simply are brain washed bitter individuals. I do admit my own hostilities, because of my experiences, but I keep it in check. I allow and accept that every case is unique, but similarities can also be found. I don't expect the others have enough moral character to do the same.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by saxxyman View Post
          Your certainly one to talk concerning your last statement.You self righteous bigot. You are blaming Dr Gardner as if he were the man's attorney in the above mentioned case. Gardner only testified only to his knowledge. If the slant or innuendos were misinterpreted in court, then that is the defenses problem isn't it? That is standard practice by both sides in a court room situation. How is it when it suits your and others views that is perfectly fine and when it doesn't then it is crap? Grow up what is good for the prosecution is good for the defense and vice versa. You can't change the point simply by one case. Everyone is different. Both of us can find a case to support or perspectives. One other thing, you should be ashamed to put much confidence in a news paper story. Everyone knows, I guess except you. They are full of politics and liberal slants. They are a far cry from any kind of acceptable research. Sure they are true to an extent. They often go no farther than the writers perspective of the person interviewed.
          When it comes to pedophiles, I am absolutely biased and bigoted.... unlike you. Gardner testified that the mother should be forced under penalty of prison to send her children to see the father that abused them. Under that "Professional" insight, the judge did... and the boy killed himself rather than face his father.

          Now you are saying, "It's not Gardner's fault... sure, it was his theory, his testimony and his views that caused the result, but it wasn't his fault". Are you on crack?

          You can't have it both ways. You can't say that the man is a responsible vessel of theory but not have him responsible for the fallout that his theories produce. You can't trot out one article and then tell me that all articles are biased and wrong.

          My favorite part of your little diatribe?

          You can't change the point simply by one case.
          Well, except your case, right? You want to change the way the entire world looks at abused children because of YOUR CASE.

          I have shown you evidence that 95-99% of children claiming abuse were telling the truth. I have shown you evidence that PAS is a sham and a money making joke perpetrated at your expense.

          All you have admitted is that you plead guilty to a crime... by the way, not a civil matter but a CRIME... that you think that Dr. Gardner's pedophiliac wanderings are okay because you like the rest of his theory... and that you believe that one case shouldn't change the point... or the law.

          I couldn't agree more. Well, to that last part. The rest makes me want to vomit.
          Last edited by cyjeff; 11-10-2007, 05:04 PM.
          Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

          I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

          Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by saxxyman View Post
            Good point! Just one problem. Certain individuals enjoy taking post out of context and twisting it around from it's original meaning. I've had several of my own post mis quoted or interpreted by the perception of closed minded people that can no comprehend the possibilities other than what their mind tells them.
            They simply are brain washed bitter individuals. I do admit my own hostilities, because of my experiences, but I keep it in check. I allow and accept that every case is unique, but similarities can also be found. I don't expect the others have enough moral character to do the same.

            You want to admit to your own experiences? Then how about fessing up to your criminal past? What did you plead guilty to? Did it involve children? Did it involve your OWN children?

            I don't twist anything. You told me to research PAS and SAID. You said I was dense and stupid because I didn't know anything about them. So I researched them.... and found that they had been founded as a haven for pedophiles that wanted to make sex with children and incest legal.

            Then you said that you had a plethora of experience on this topic... even though you got divorced 18 years ago and, apparently, not only didn't get your children but also got a criminal record out of it. Nice.

            Then you wanted proof. So I provided it... in spades. I gave you a host of listings.

            You, when asked for proof, directed me to the Psychiatric Dictionary. Then you find an article (one article, by the way) published by a woman that makes her living perpetuating the business model established by the pedophile.

            You have mentioned over and over that there are studies that will prove this lie to be truth. You haven't provided a link or title to any.

            Finally, you said that the trama a child feels as part of a custody battle equals the trama a child feels when sexually abused. You haven't provided a link or title to any study that proves this.

            You keep spitting out sound bites. I demand proof, and you call me bigoted because I don't give you a pass.

            This is a legal website. Unless you can provide any proof (and you have had a week to do it), please do as the OP has asked and shut up.

            You will definately find a more appreciative audience at www.dontmakehermad.com. You should stay there.
            Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

            I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

            Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

            Comment


            • #81
              Nail out of coffin

              Originally posted by cyjeff View Post
              When it comes to pedophiles, I am absolutely biased and bigoted.... unlike you. Gardner testified that the mother should be forced under penalty of prison to send her children to see the father that abused them. Under that "Professional" insight, the judge did... and the boy killed himself rather than face his father.

              Now you are saying, "It's not Gardner's fault... sure, it was his theory, his testimony and his views that caused the result, but it wasn't his fault". Are you on crack?

              You can't have it both ways. You can't say that the man is a responsible vessel of theory but not have him responsible for the fallout that his theories produce. You can't trot out one article and then tell me that all articles are biased and wrong.

              My favorite part of your little diatribe?



              Well, except your case, right? You want to change the way the entire world looks at abused children because of YOUR CASE.

              I have shown you evidence that 95-99% of children claiming abuse were telling the truth. I have shown you evidence that PAS is a sham and a money making joke perpetrated at your expense.

              All you have admitted is that you plead guilty to a crime... by the way, not a civil matter but a CRIME... that you think that Dr. Gardner's pedophiliac wanderings are okay because you like the rest of his theory... and that you believe that one case shouldn't change the point... or the law.

              I couldn't agree more. Well, to that last part. The rest makes me want to vomit.
              WOW! how can you throw around numbers? you statistic has changed from 95% to 99%. I never knew our justice system or humans were any where near that reliable. Just how did you come by the extra 4%? Check my post to other threads. A hole has just been cut into your so called coffin. Are you a habitual liar? You should get help for that!

              Comment


              • #82
                I realize that 1. I shouldn't feed you and 2. Cyjeff needs no help from me, but..........

                I post stalked, and what he said was:

                Because, according to numerous studies, over 95% of children that claim abuse HAVE been abused.
                Then he said:
                I have shown you evidence that 95-99% of children claiming abuse were telling the truth.

                His statstic didn't change. You are arguing semantics.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Funny wasn't it saxxyman man who said we were reading things in his posts that were not there?
                  http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by saxxyman View Post
                    WOW! how can you throw around numbers? you statistic has changed from 95% to 99%. I never knew our justice system or humans were any where near that reliable. Just how did you come by the extra 4%? Check my post to other threads. A hole has just been cut into your so called coffin. Are you a habitual liar? You should get help for that!
                    The studies that I presented showed a margin of lying abused children to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 95-99%. It was a range because, unlike you, I used SEVERAL studies with slightly different results in my response to you.

                    Heck, even your best bud and drinking buddy Gardner said that 95% of abused children were telling the truth.

                    I have never been anything but truthful and forthright. You, however, seem to have a problem with the truth.

                    You will not fess up to your crime. You will say you lied to a judge, however... because, if what you said is true, you committed perjury.

                    So, are you a child molester or a liar? Why not go for the bonus pack and admit to both?
                    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

                    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

                    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by panther10758 View Post
                      Funny wasn't it saxxyman man who said we were reading things in his posts that were not there?
                      Saxxy has been carrying a hate filled grudge against his wife and kids for 18 years.

                      He must be a KICK at parties...
                      Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

                      I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

                      Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Hey, folks, we are WAY off topic here. None of this has anything to do with the age at which two brothers can/should be sharing a bedroom. Let's keep to the topic, shall we? And take the tangental discussions off line.
                        The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                        Comment

                        The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
                        Working...
                        X