tirsdag 7. juni 2016

No. 1240: Jan Aage Torp revealed by conducting quote cheating and hersketeknikk the value debate, he perceived only as the criminal actor he really is!

No. 1240:
Jan Aage Torp revealed by conducting quote cheating and hersketeknikk the value debate, he perceived only as the criminal actor he really is!

The problem here is that Torp has zero credibility! He should never received stated philosophy itself either in our country or any other place regarding child protection. The man is so little fit to give any statements on this question as it is possible to be!

He should no doubt have been deprived of their own children if the knowledge we have today had been available.

Then he shall hold a crusade against child welfare is only a cover for his own iniquity obviously!


I have just quoted Jordheim, type manipulator Jan Aage Torp, it is so far from the truth it is possible to get. Here Torp undressed on Debate as the robber and criminal person he really is.
Torp itself should be very happy that it has only now come out which parenting he and Ann-Christin Torp had.

Had this been known before, so I am convinced that the CPS had not only taken the children of this couple. But they also had been punished for neglect!

Photo of the criminal Jan Aage Torp, who has managed to stoop both Oslo District Court and police Manglerud. But it is mostly the only thing he manages to fool today, otherwise he revealed in all forums he is to participate.

For the record, Torp paraphrases here a quote, and everything to make it fit into his fabricated world where he is the "big".

This is typical narcissism as a psychopath always have a lot of in!

Finally in this debate have Torp no answer, then resorted he personal attacks against something that has nothing with debate to do. All this we know from before when it comes to January Aage Torp. Nothing new under the sun right here! He attacks the priest Granerud because he has a fixed salary in the State. But these things can not do anything with debate to do, in one of Torp liar. But me lie he now that I've written so and so much about him. But 99% is written about him in the Heavenly blog, written by his fictional review of me and the Heavenly blog, again it is the liar January Aage Torp is afoot! Now he uses the amount for all that it is worth, but that it was written 99% after his fictional Review omission he and Hatpoltiet completely proven to mention. Why? Because then, the amount does not matter, talking about being a criminal!

This printer Oddbjørn Johannessen:

You have not cited Jordheim, Torp. You have omfomulert his statements to get it to fit into a enemy image - and it is indeed a dirty debate technique. To point out that, obviously not meaningless.

Jordheim wrote that is:

People can voice almost whatever they want, also on Karl Johan, but demonstrations like the one I witnessed, is a good example of how freedom of expression can also be used to do great harm. The only thing I can do about it is to use my own speech to say: The CPS is there to help children in need, as long as they are in Norway, regardless of where they come from - not to destroy immigrant families.

So "quoting" (ie reformulating) to his statement this way:

Trygve Jordheim believed that freedom of expression as part of us availed ourselves of to fight for this family, and to warn against the child protection abuses, are harmful.
(End of quote).

This writes the manipulator and the criminals January Aage Torp who have managed to fool the police and Oslo District Court as certainly the only soon he still hair confidence in. Besides the nefarious website Searchlight and the false Smyrna blog being run by Norway's two largest grid roll, Ansgar Braut and Torodd Fuglesteg.

Alf GJØSUND and Trygve W. Jordheims commentary articles in Our Country respectively March 3 and May 31, "The Father's hand" and "The harmful child conspiracy", enters a strange light after the ruling in a Norwegian court on Friday.

Alf Gjøsund thought that a couple of us who fought for the five children would be returned to his mum and dad made life more dangerous for children in Norway.

Trygve Jordheim believed that freedom of expression as part of us availed ourselves of to fight for this family, and to warn against the child protection abuses, are harmful. His defense of Norwegian child welfare was of the extreme kind. While secular Norwegian media have actually done a serious job of uncovering child welfare abuse, contributing Our Country to the opposite.

Is it really Alf Gjøsund, Trygve Jordheim and Our Country that makes life dangerous for children in Norway?
(End of quote).

Here are some other commenting what the criminals and mock apostle January Aage Torp writes:

Priest Frode Granerud:

There is a certain difference between saying that "freedom of expression (...) is harmful" and saying that "freedom of expression also can be used to do great harm." The last thing I expect that most of us can agree. Trygve Jordheim will surely answer for themselves, but I refuse to believe that he thinks that freedom of speech is harmful.

This is more a semantics. There is a widespread hersketeknikk preparing opponents as if they want to limit anyone's freedom of speech, when what they are really doing is disagreement in the way someone uses it. In Jordheims text, there is no clue to say that he believes that freedom of expression is harmful. But with a small and elegant reformulation get him to say just that. Such control techniques I think you should consider yourself too good for.

You quoted simply not Jordheim, you reformulated statement of his, so it got a completely different emphasis. It is not the same as a citation. Call it a dispute about semantics, in my eyes it is a dirty debate way. In line with calling a care takeover organized by CPS for kidnapping, when everyone knows that kidnapping is something very different.

Oddbjørn Johannessen

Did the referee was talk about kidnapping? Which judge, by the way? Here takes you recognize formulation freedoms hardly have coverage. As far as I have understood, there is now an agreement between the child welfare in Naustdal and the affected family. The details of this are unknown to the public because of a mutually agreed confidentiality.

"It cited" which you refer, is thus this formulation from Torp:

When a Norwegian court sends the children home, it means recognizing that children were actually kidnapped - with Norwegian law in hand.

Where Torp has his information I do not know, but as far as I've registered, this is the information that has so far migration public (quoted from NRK's ​​website):

The child welfare service in Naustdal municipality and the private parties have agreed to the return of children to their parents and an agreement on cooperation on assistance measures for parents and children, said the law firm Stiegler in a statement.

Rune Tveit

lowlights 2

Speaking about the meeting itself in the door. Let me add, as you make your motdebatant their working conditions and remuneration to a point. Have you ever preached to your church (you call the pastor, according to what I understand) about giving money in collectives, and you have taken out a salary from the same collection.
When it comes to expertise, then reveals that pastor profession is hardly likely to develop either legal or child welfare expertise.

Magne Husøy

Regardless of the debate in general: Was it really necessary (and expedient?) To come up with this estimate against Granerud integrity as carrier of meaning?

priest Granerud

lowlights 1

Now drops you simply down to a very disappointing lowlights, by going in person and not the point. My job, my salary or my profession has nothing to do with this matter to do. To reply nor in my arguments, but recalls 100,000 protesters worldwide - most of whom do not know much about how the Norwegian child welfare work, but based on rumors and untruths. It has spread a myth that child protection intervenes and takes children from parents who want to give them a Christian upbringing, but it knows well that is not true. The issue here is that the family is being investigated for educator violence. Violence against children is very serious, and it is remarkable that those who object to child welfare in this case doOddbjørn Johannessen.
I do not think I should pursue this debate particularly on since Torp and I saw clearly struggling to reach each other. I endorse the desire for a comment from the two journalists who Torp caters to.

I would nevertheless like to mention a final point, and that is that Torp repeatedly mentioned the 100,000 demonstrators. 100000 is a high figure, but it is given that they are entitled simply because they are many? There are certainly a lot more than 100,000 atheists in Norway, but you and I are at least agree that they are not entitled simply because they are many? 100,000 people could be wrong, and it is clear that a large part of the 100,000 do not know much about the Norwegian child welfare. Is not it better to refer to arguments than showing the number who feel something?

lowlights 4

After having written a post where you twist the quotes, you - rather than responding seriously justified criticism - with a vile personangprep on Granerud. And now quit therefore to shout at moderator.
This is really low, Torp!es not seem to care about this. It produced almost as if CPS completely gratuitous conducts a careful upbringing, without any justification, but only of evil.

Related links:

Ingen kommentarer:

Legg inn en kommentar