Dear Daughter

Dear Daughter:

Hello Daddy-O! :)

Your question is a good one: You asked how we deal with sabotage if the "baggage carriers" are excluded from a new movement? They would presumably snipe and screech and sue and stink up the joint.

I think there is a good answer. Such a new movement will be at a level where the low lifes can't touch it with the same methods they have used. Their means of access has been 1) To muck around with web sites; 2) To sue because of comments made about them; 3) To make nasty comments on line. That's it!

I would add to make false reports to government officials...CPS, IRS, calling/writing other professional associates, trying to shut down conferences, turning in our family members, shutting down phone services.

Any new movement will IGNORE them, so there will be no comments, no web sabotage and no lawsuits. Anyone who pays them any mind is a fool. No comments = no lawsuits.

Are you saying there would be no web presence? What if one if us has an article about them in the paper? That's been another avenue of attack.

The only reason that they got any traction in the past is because people gave it to them, and played their game in their court. No more. Any credible organization will give the STM crowd no comment, no attention, no anything. The lawsuit occurred because we engaged them on their turf and stupidly made comments about them. As long as that doesn't happen, and everyone ignores the screeching monkeys, there can be no more lawsuits.

I did nothing but hold a conference and attend another conference. (Does nothing include the invention of the BAL, something she admitted on AFRA groups? Does this nothing include the libel she and her cohorts committed? Does nothing include the fact that she began Famtrak in 2002 then through the BAL tried to place the blame on other people? It's easy to see just how innocent she is.) For that my daughter got called in on, my phone services shut off briefly, and I got turned in for "welfare fraud." Funny thing was...I didn't receive welfare benefits either before or the time frame they turned me in for. When we were turned in, the younger children had medical. It harmed THEM because they had dental appointments scheduled. Their benefits were put on hold while they "investigated" me for "failing to report I worked full time for several law firms around the state."(Isn't receiving medical benefits without claiming income fraud? The people who really need these benefits suffer because of people who can pay for treatment, stealing these services from the state)

I attended another's conference, and someone wrote a letter to the Judge who spoke at the conference and told him a bunch of crap about me. There has been one time and one time only that I've been involved in calling or reporting anyone...my husband called police when we received a threat of burning our home down and cutting our baby out of my belly...remember that? We did nothing to the people who did this, in fact, I hadn't even seen them or spoken to them in three weeks! The last time I saw them was at one of MY team attorney's offices for a meeting to get them proper counsel! So, our lives get threatened for HELPING them?? (We heard Brenda's side of the story and we witnessed innocent Rose attacking and provoking her. You did sue her using her conversations with Rose as evidence. So who did you really help?)

What about Effie? What has she done to deserve the attacks on her and her family? Marlene was booted off the groups and people have sent her "hate mail" and she doesn't know why. How about Gayle Susko? Christine's family has been attacked, too. So has Wayne and Jan. Rosemary was also turned in down here...for her association with me? (Could it be the disruptive behavior your group causes on every group they're on except your own groups)

The problem is that so many people STILL feel compelled to prove something to these people, and are still saying things to them and about them. I can't believe that anyone still takes them seriously, wasting their precious time on correcting fools. Life is too short to worry about what those jamokes think. Who cares if they call us names? So what?

I really don't care about name-calling, Greg. In my opinion, this is much more than name calling. Several people have done nothing and have been turned in or whatever.

In sum, the simple sure-fire strategy for success is: DON'T ENGAGE- keep them at arms length by no communication whatsoever. Yet, despite the obvious stupidity of continuing to defend ourselves against bozos, we keep doing it anyway, as though their thoughts matter. Who gives a care what bully says? If we continue to worry about that, we don't deserve to have a professional movement.

I disagree that this is a sure-fire way, Greg. No one did anything and now there are issues with Wiki (maybe that's over now, but that's the latest.) One person injecting themselves into Wiki was allegedly a professional in leadership. This is the example being set? Until the leadership of both groups can reach an agreement and stop it, I don't think anyone should bother with a new organization because there is no time to deal with all the damage control.(Maybe your group should exercise self control, remove your garbage publications on the Internet and put an end to the flame wars. Your group will not end the harassment against those they perceive as competition.)

Anyone who accomplishes anything enduring and significant has detractors. Losers worry about the detractors. Winners ignore them. No one ever erected a monument to a critic.

I think 'detractors' is quite a big difference than what we've been forced to deal with here. (You can't twist the truth, remember alot of people have been watching. )

At 12:55 PM 5/14/2007, you wrote:

Let's say, hypothetically, a new National Organization is formed. How do you stop the attacks we already know will come from happening?
It's easy enough to not include baggage carriers, but once they are excluded and hear about said exclusion, those in the new organization will have to deal with the sabotage attempts that will inevitably come.

Kay

Love work, despise lordliness, do not become overly friendly with the government.
-- Rebbe Shemayah

----- Original Message -----

From: Gregory A. Hession

To: FamilyRightsAdvocacyIMPROVEMENTProject@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 10:06 AM

Subject: [FamilyRightsAdvocacyIMPROVEMENTProject] Monsters and self-sabotage

My dear young daughter:

The first step to creating a "new" movement is we quit ranting at ghosts and toothless monsters (Billy, Bully). Criticizing everyone else in the movement seems to be the full time sport around here, and has almost completely usurped any consideration of the big picture, and used up almost all the time we could devote to creating an effective movement. Once that is once and for all put behind us, and we quit caring about what anyone thinks about us, and quit trying to "fix" all the jerks out there, we can proceed to figure out what to DO. There will never be enough time to get everyone to behave, so why even try?

As long as this movement is mired in petty sniping, it is not ready to do anything credible. Those who live to snipe cannot be involved in something new because they are fixated on the old conflicts, and they will sabotage the new work with the spirit of fractiousness dragged in from the past. That baggage is fatal. In order to succeed at such a difficult new level, those involved will have to be ready to move on and up in soul and spirit, and have to let go of the surely bonds of the past conflicts about AFRA, Billy, Bully, Lenny, Denny, and whoever else! That stuff is dead as far as I'm concerned. They have no hold on us, unless we let them, (other than some tenuous legal claims which we will deal with.)

Then, we need to plan all aspects of the new movement, its structure, its personnel, its goals, etc.

Next, we must start implementing, even though we have nothing to do it with.

Finally, we need $$$$$$$. You can only get the money AFTER you start moving, and the people with money see something credible that they want to give to. Success breeds success.

GAH

Love work, despise lordliness, do not become overly friendly with the government.
-- Rebbe Shemayah

At 07:17 AM 5/12/2007, you wrote:

So, Greg, (dad?) how do we get to the point of being able to form that National Organization? Who should be involved? Who should not be involved? What about potential baggage people could bring in with them?

Kay

Dear Daughter:

Your response below, suggesting that the bad guys can cause more disruption than I supposed, has some validity, but I still disagree with your premise, and here is why. Just like The Five Stairsteps sung, "Ooh-ooh child, things are gonna get easier". In fact, the future's so bright, we gotta wear shades. (as sung by Timbuk3) Here is why I think so.

First, most of what we have viewed as "attacks" don't matter much (with the exception of being turned in personally to the gummint or being sued, which I'll address), and such petty attacks are likely to abate over time. So what if they muck around with a Wiki article or boot people off of yahoo groups or send hate mail. Big deal. That is not "opposition" worth worrying about.

Most of that will dissipate once the group goes professional. The poo slingers won't have any basis to get into the mix or know what is going on, because they won't be plugged into it. We are having trouble, because a lot of those in the anti-CPS fight are people whose only qualification is that they got hammered by CPS. Professionals don't act that way. These people will be completely sidelined in the future as the movement goes pro, and no NEW whackadoodles will be invited. Things will be just fine, as the old "movement" types who are just anal orifices fade away, as they have been doing. There are a lot fewer of them even now, than a year ago.

Professional movements have their own difficulties, but they are on a much different level. There is no escaping tribulation and ridicule when you fight the system, but it will likely take a much different form, as it has done for me. I have had people try to take my law license, get me fined in court, stifle my right to speak, accuse me of all manner of sin, steal boatloads of money from me, interfere with my family in a drastic manner, and other non-fun stuff. Just part of the normal process of being in this movement. If anyone is going to be a serious fighter in this movement, that person WILL have serious opposition, and serious problems. I view most of the ones that people have now, like internet attacks, Wiki slander, etc., as minor inconveniences. If that stuff is too much to handle, don't dare move into the larger arena, where the exposure is great, the trials are heavy, and the potential down side is genuinely serious.

You have rightly pointed out that I have failed to account for the more serious personal and professional attacks suffered by some people like you, Effie and Suzanne, as well as on family members, disrupting professional conferences, being turned in to CPS or other gummint thugs, etc. I have had every one of those things happen to me, so I know the sting of them all. Here is my opinion: I think that stuff is going to stop. Why? Because as this movement becomes professional, the new unprofessional creeps won't be part of it, and the existing creeps will fade, as will their opposition. Then, the opposition will be at a different level, described above. The pioneers have had to endure a lot of hardship, but the lessons learned will save the next batch from having it so hard.

Finally, much of the opposition which people are complaining about (not all, certainly), has been brought about by us ourselves. Yes, us. We don't want to admit that it is our fault, but it mostly is. We have involved the wrong people in the movement. We have acted arrogant or unkind to people who are so maladjusted that they try to get revenge. We have stupidly obsessed over every little insult. We have been quick to anger, thus setting off the unbalanced fools who are even quicker to anger. We have worried about protecting our own turf, thus upsetting the envious and jealous ones who can't stand anyone else's success. We have used too many words, bragged too much, worried about our image too much, used the internet WAY too much, worried about being called names too much, worried about people using OUR ideas too much, etc. We have sued, when we should have just moved on, answered when we should have been quiet, provoked when we should have been peaceful, brought in the wrong kind of help when we should have suffered alone.

All of this will pass eventually. The current, and genuinely serious issues which you have listed, (like being sued, or being reported to CPS) will cease in due course, when this batch of wrongly recruited people pass from the scene, which will be soon. It is already happening. You can see the shift is in the works.

In conclusion, while there are problems now, some, if not most, are of our own making, which will begin to dissipate as their perpetrators are shoved out of the boat one by one (which they have been). Others will just fade over time as the movement learns who NOT to invite or train. As one who has suffered these attacks and troubles to a far greater extent than most people realize, I am qualified to say that I am optimistic that most of this sort of infantile behavior is behind us, and the future's so bright, we gotta wear shades.

I think we're basically done with the eruption of new lawsuits like Tower v. Effie/Suzanne, with gross interference with conferences, with threats to kill and maim. Once we get a credible movement established, then when an Aimee calls a conference center to disrupt things, she'll be treated with the contempt she deserves. I don't think drunken fools are going to be threatening to do harm in the same earthy way, but threats may happen on a more sophisticated level. I don't think we'll see internet interference, phone service interference, etc, because it won't get traction in the way it has been able to against a movement that is mostly low level, not institutional, and ad hoc now. These things WILL change for the better.

GAH

At 06:37 AM 5/17/2007, you wrote: