Paul LaClair is a Liar!

[Guest Lazarus]

What the heck is wrong with you people? Criticizing his father over a choice of WORDS? Jeez, it's like you're all gasping for air. This is what's wrong with so many in the evangelical right; they can't adequetely defend their positions, so they turn to trvialities and go about name calling.

Just admit that the guy violated the Constitution. It's writen that Church and State SHALL NEVER be mixed, and as an agent of the state, Mr. P clearly did so by preaching in a class room. How you cannot see this is beyond me. If you want to live in a theocracy, go to Iran.

[Guest Guest]

Are you aware that we have been asking the administration to sit and talk with us since October, and that they have refused? Actually, they ignored us. It wasn't until I had Mr. Lindenfelser on the telephone that he finally told me that how they address this matter was not my business to know. This is not what I would expect of a colleague in the law, not to mention that he is simply wrong on the law. The legal concept is called standing, and I am shocked that the school district's attorney does  not think I have it.

I have not taken a position on whether or to what extent Paszkiewicz should be disciplined, because I thought we was not wise for us to make such a request. The flip side of that coin is that there is nothing for us to negotiate. Matthew had a meeting with Paszkiewicz, at which he was not truthful, and tried to intimidate Matthew. If that is any indication of what we might expect from him, and obviously it is, I can't see a purpose to a meeting. I do think he should have apologized to us, but obviously he does not think so.

Having said that, we would be willing to sit with Mr. Paszkiewicz and discuss these matters, if he would identify and commit to a good purpose for such a meeting. However, I wrote him a personal note approximately three weeks ago, and he has not responded to me in any way --- not even so much as the courtesy of telling me he received it.

Please tell the administration and the school board "let's get it over with." We completely agree.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul, please accept this as a reply from someone looking at this from a totally uninvolved position. I see in your reply to my comment the words "I, I, I, I." Your son is obviously taking his position from what he has learned from you. It's very sad to see a parent living through his kid in anything, be it this situation, sports, academics, etc. Personally I think there has been enough said on the issue and I'm sure Mr. P will no longer talk about his faith in the classroom. What is your intent here? Do you want the man fired? Isn't it enough that you brought to light a situation that is now stopped? I can think of a lot of things that are wrong with the public schools, and I've brought some to the attention of the administration and have always found them to be willing to look at the problem.

[Strife767]

"Paul, or "Strife" or even "guest" as I suspect he sometimes uses

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you that desperate to attempt to trivialize the 'other side' that you're going to start accusing people of going under multiple names?

You guys' squirming while you attempt to avoid the issue is hilarious.

[Guest Paul]

Reply from Paul at 9:44 PM on January 8th.

"I have not taken a position on whether or to what extent Paszkiewicz should be disciplined." 

Excuse me?  235 slanderous posts and you cannot take a position?  You would make a good lawyer. Glad you don't represent me. You know exactly what you want so just say it here.

You keep accusing everyone of speculating on what you or your trained Matthew is thinking or wanting.  Just come out and say it.  We would like to hear it in your own words instead of trying to hear it from everyone else.  It will eventually get out.

Forewarned, is this meeting going to taped as well?  Will the tapes be hidden like Matthew did in the classroom, in his bag, or will you or him be bugged?  Hoping this discussed prior to the meeting so everyone is on the same playing field this time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This must be upsetting you. I answered your question on the other topic where you asked me the same thing. We've also answered it dozens of times before.

[Guest Paul]

Paul, please accept this as a reply from someone looking at this from a totally uninvolved position. I see in your reply to my comment the words "I, I, I, I." Your son is obviously taking his position from what he has learned from you. It's very sad to see a parent living through his kid in anything, be it this situation, sports, academics, etc.  Personally I think there has been enough said on the issue and I'm sure Mr. P will no longer talk about his faith in the classroom. What is your intent here? Do you want the man fired?  Isn't it enough that you brought to light a situation that is now stopped? I can think of a lot of things that are wrong with the public schools, and I've brought some to the attention of the administration and have always found them to be willing to look at the problem.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, it's not enough. The schools are there to educate. When a teacher makes incorrect and improper remarks, they must be corrected. Is that reasonable? If not, why not?

We also want quality control to make sure this never happens again. What is unreasonable about that, if anything?

[Guest Guest]

No, it's not enough. The schools are there to educate. When a teacher makes incorrect and improper remarks, they must be corrected. Is that reasonable? If not, why not?

We also want quality control to make sure this never happens again. What is unreasonable about that, if anything?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And if Mr. P had said something stupid like "The sun revolves around the earth" he would have been disciplined and even perhaps fired. There's no question that he's an incompetent boob if he started saying things like that in the classroom.

But because he's part of the Fundamentalist Theocracy taking over the schools, he's regarded as a hero by some because he taught that "dinosaurs were on Noah's ark" and certain people "are going to hell" becuase they don't accept a certain faith.

Which statement is loonier?

The "teacher" should be fired immediately. If he wants to teach elsewhere, let him teach in a religious school where he can preach all day long.

Keep these loonies out of the public schools.

God save us from the Christians!

[Guest bewildered]

And whether is be Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or "Martian" as some scholar referred, Saturday and Sunday has been historically know at the day of observance of ones beliefs. For others it is a day of rest. Could you imagine what "Paul, or "Strife" or even "guest" as I suspect he sometimes uses could actually do if he didn’t spend all this time on the computer? Maybe even spend more quality family time or doing good for the community instead of trying to destroy it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[/quote\

I still want to know how one "does" Hinduism or Fundamentalism on any day of the week. Please proofread your posts before you send them.

I think Paul and Matthew are doing good for the community by standing up for the Constitution.

[Guest MSM]

Paul, kudos to you for taking a stand on such inappropriate behavior by a teacher. It's disappointing to read the personal attacks in this thread.

Congrats and best of luck in seeing this through,

-Mike

[Guest Guest]

No, it's not enough. The schools are there to educate. When a teacher makes incorrect and improper remarks, they must be corrected. Is that reasonable? If not, why not?

We also want quality control to make sure this never happens again. What is unreasonable about that, if anything?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul and Matthew are right. These are reasonable requests, even modest ones. What's wrong with these requests? If you're going to make accusations, back them up with facts, not name-calling.

[Guest Guest]

Reply from Paul at 9:44 PM on January 8th.

"I have not taken a position on whether or to what extent Paszkiewicz should be disciplined." 

Excuse me?  235 slanderous posts and you cannot take a position?  You would make a good lawyer. Glad you don't represent me. You know exactly what you want so just say it here.

You keep accusing everyone of speculating on what you or your trained Matthew is thinking or wanting.  Just come out and say it.  We would like to hear it in your own words instead of trying to hear it from everyone else.  It will eventually get out.

Forewarned, is this meeting going to taped as well?  Will the tapes be hidden like Matthew did in the classroom, in his bag, or will you or him be bugged?  Hoping this discussed prior to the meeting so everyone is on the same playing field this time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you saying that Paszkiewicz has to be warned about being recorded so he won't lie? Good grief, read what you're saying!

[Guest Guest]

Paul, please accept this as a reply from someone looking at this from a totally uninvolved position. I see in your reply to my comment the words "I, I, I, I." Your son is obviously taking his position from what he has learned from you. It's very sad to see a parent living through his kid in anything, be it this situation, sports, academics, etc.  Personally I think there has been enough said on the issue and I'm sure Mr. P will no longer talk about his faith in the classroom. What is your intent here? Do you want the man fired?  Isn't it enough that you brought to light a situation that is now stopped? I can think of a lot of things that are wrong with the public schools, and I've brought some to the attention of the administration and have always found them to be willing to look at the problem.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The man is being attacked. Give him credit for responding at all, not criticism for responding honestly in the first person.

Is there something wrong with a teenager following his upbringing, or is it just that you don't agree with it?

[Guest Guest]

When a teacher makes incorrect and improper remarks, they must be corrected. Is that reasonable? If not, why not?

Here we go again, incorrect and improper according to whom?

Who makes you the judge?

When you do not aggree with someone, that does not mean what the other say is incorrect.

I'm sure you have come accross many people that do no agree with your crazy views on things. But are you going to stop living because of that.

We also want quality control to make sure this never happens again. What is unreasonable about that, if anything?

What are you going to do? Put a LaClair security guard in each classroom?

You are out of control.

If you are not happy with this school, pack your things and get out.

I'm sure people in this town will NOT miss you.

Please do not let the door hit your bottom on your way out.

Good Luck!!!

Oh! Please take Canessa and Strife with you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest Guest]

Dishonesty is not the issue when the LaClairs are the ones lying, huh? It was an issue before when Paul and Matthew said in every newspaper that Mr. P has lied during the meeting. You know the meeting that Paul said he was not allowed to attend!    Give me a break! You know they are lying,it is obvious! By the way, don't forget that there were two witnesses in the room and apparently Matthew didn't record that meeting or if he did, the LaClairs are hidding something. I wonder what it is! How about asking the LaClairs where that CD is?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you research Paul LaClair, you'll find out that not only is he a lawyer, he is a damned good lawyer. He is an emeritus director of New York State Trial Lawyers Association and has had many verdicts over a million dollars. Those are facts.

Fact 1: Paul LaClair is an experienced lawyer who must know the definition of "slander."

Fact 2: Paul LaClair says David Paszkiewicz lied in the meeting with the principal.

Question: Did Paul LaClair accuse David Paszkiewicz of lying without having the goods to back it up? I wouldn't bet on it.

[Guest Guest Who?]

If you research Paul LaClair, you'll find out that not only is he a lawyer, he is a damned good lawyer. He is an emeritus director of New York State Trial Lawyers Association and has had many verdicts over a million dollars. Those are facts.

Fact 1: Paul LaClair is an experienced lawyer who must know the definition of "slander."

Fact 2: Paul LaClair says David Paszkiewicz lied in the meeting with the principal.

Question: Did Paul LaClair accuse David Paszkiewicz of lying without having the goods to back it up? I wouldn't bet on it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If by "the goods" you mean a recording, he doesn't need that (I don't believe he has it or it would have been mentioned already). He has witnesses who will have to testify under oath if it gets that far.

[Guest Guest]

If you research Paul LaClair, you'll find out that not only is he a lawyer, he is a damned good lawyer. He is an emeritus director of New York State Trial Lawyers Association and has had many verdicts over a million dollars. Those are facts.

Fact 1: Paul LaClair is an experienced lawyer who must know the definition of "slander."

Fact 2: Paul LaClair says David Paszkiewicz lied in the meeting with the principal.

Question: Did Paul LaClair accuse David Paszkiewicz of lying without having the goods to back it up? I wouldn't bet on it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank you Mrs. LaClair for your unbiased, candid opinion.

[Guest Guest]

If you research Paul LaClair, you'll find out that not only is he a lawyer, he is a damned good lawyer. He is an emeritus director of New York State Trial Lawyers Association and has had many verdicts over a million dollars. Those are facts.

Fact 1: Paul LaClair is an experienced lawyer who must know the definition of "slander."

Fact 2: Paul LaClair says David Paszkiewicz lied in the meeting with the principal.

Question: Did Paul LaClair accuse David Paszkiewicz of lying without having the goods to back it up? I wouldn't bet on it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know Paul LaClir as a lawyer and I can care less that he is a "dammed good lawyer" all I know is that he posts here all day long, therefore he is probably not doing much lately. His evidence that Mr. Paszkiewicz lied is his son. As far as I know, there were two witnesses in the room, they haven't said anything about it. About your question, yes he did accuse Paszkiewicz of lying without having the goods to back it up. I think your "good" lawyer made a big mistake there!

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

If you research Paul LaClair, you'll find out that not only is he a lawyer, he is a damned good lawyer. He is an emeritus director of New York State Trial Lawyers Association and has had many verdicts over a million dollars. Those are facts.

Fact 1: Paul LaClair is an experienced lawyer who must know the definition of "slander."

Fact 2: Paul LaClair says David Paszkiewicz lied in the meeting with the principal.

Question: Did Paul LaClair accuse David Paszkiewicz of lying without having the goods to back it up? I wouldn't bet on it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, it sounds like you slept with him too. So why doesn't Paul LaClair work for New Jersey instead of New York? With all those verdicts over a million dollars I am sure he has enough money to continue this smear campaign on the town of Kearny. Todays Observer page 3 has Father Mancini giving a prayer at the town hall for a town meeting. Why hasn't this great lawyer gone after the town? Separation of church and state right?

Keeping going after the defenseless. Wondering how much this is going to cost us although he keeps saying its not about the money. Or is it?

[Calybos]

"When a teacher makes incorrect and improper remarks, they must be corrected. Is that reasonable? If not, why not?"

Here we go again, incorrect and improper according to whom?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

According to the Constitution and a huge pile of case law, court rulings, and other precedent. Is that good enough for you?

You are out of control.

If you are not happy with this school, pack your things and get out.

I'm sure people in this town will NOT miss you.

Sorry, but as Americans the LaClairs have every right to live here and enjoy the same freedoms as everyone else. Mr. P attempted to deny them that right--why don't you call for HIM to leave town?

[Guest Lazarus]

What I find particularly confusing is the fact that SO many people are accusing Paul of playing his son like a puppet master manipulates his puppet. So because they share similar views on the matter it automatically denotes that Matthew is a mindless automaton who is merely following directives?

I agree that upbringing influences one's political beliefs, but upbringing also effects EVERYTHING in a young persons life. It's not mind control, as so many of you seem to be getting at. Matthew's father is defending a just action. What on earth can possibly be wrong with this?

[Guest Guest]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And after you wrote that you went and wiped your butt with the constitution?

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

If we had it recorded, and Mr. P

  --- denied four times using the phrase "you belong in hell";

  --- claimed that all his religious comments were in response to questions about the Bible;

  --- claimed that Matthew's letter of complaint had distorted his words;

  --- said "you got the big fish" after Matthew produced the recordings;

  --- tried to make Matthew feel guilty for reporting his conduct:

Would you change your mind? If so, how? If not, why not?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

At the following site i got the transcipt from the class : http://www.dranger.com/classtranscript.html. It starts with Matthew talking.

"LaClaire: Let's say that you disagree [with God]. Let's say that

maybe, in God's eyes, you have done something wrong. If you go to

Hell, that would mean that you would burn and suffer forever. Now,

hang on, let me think about this for a second. You have an all-loving

God. Why would God give up on a human being after just one lifetime?

As a parent, if your child did something wrong, if your child did

something terrible, would you throw them in an oven and leave them

there forever?

"Teacher: You know, it's up to you to reason it out, and the outcome is

your perogative. But the way I see it is this: he's done everything in

his power, so much so, that he went to a cross that I should've been -

it was my sin, he was innocent! But you saw the Mel Gibson portrayal?

That was pretty accurate, when you read history, the flesh being

beaten off of his back. God himself sent his only son to die for days

(???)...on the cross. That's the idea. And if I reject that, then it

really is, then to Hell with me. I created you, I ..."

"LaClaire: So then, parents (SCHOOL BELL) always do give their lives

for their children. If their children did something bad -"

"Teacher: I know very few parents that would -"

"LaClaire: they would do that. You don't think they would do that? I

think personally, if I had a child, I would, it came down to that, I

would."

Point one. You, Mr. LaClair keep taking the "you belong in hell" out of the original context.

I am sure Matthew does not feel guilty he recorded his teachers classes without his consent.

So where does it say "to hell with you?". When anyone read this you make it appear that its directed directly to your son. It isn't.

Secondly you claimed that all his religious comments were in response to questions about the Bible. They were questions right from your son. So you are wrong there as well.

If these are not the right words from the transcript then please direct me and others to where they are. Because I believe these are from the tapes your son provided.

Until then I still have my opinion and it favors the teacher in this one. But until the evidence it shown, you are wrong. Thats just my opinion and no one can take that away.

If you have no other evidence then you have no case.

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

Are you saying that Paszkiewicz has to be warned about being recorded so he won't lie? Good grief, read what you're saying!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No I have to say that his words won't be used out of context and then run to the media. As far as i see it the teacher had no prior knowledge he was being recorded, did he? Just hoping for a fair playing field.

[Guest bewildered]

At the following site i got the transcipt from the class : http://www.dranger.com/classtranscript.html. It starts with Matthew talking. 

"LaClaire: Let's say that you disagree [with God]. Let's say that

maybe, in God's eyes, you have done something wrong. If you go to

Hell, that would mean that you would burn and suffer forever. Now,

hang on, let me think about this for a second. You have an all-loving

God. Why would God give up on a human being after just one lifetime?

As a parent, if your child did something wrong, if your child did

something terrible, would you throw them in an oven and leave them

there forever?

"Teacher: You know, it's up to you to reason it out, and the outcome is

your perogative. But the way I see it is this: he's done everything in

his power, so much so, that he went to a cross that I should've been -

it was my sin, he was innocent! But you saw the Mel Gibson portrayal?

That was pretty accurate, when you read history, the flesh being

beaten off of his back. God himself sent his only son to die for days

(???)...on the cross. That's the idea. And if I reject that, then it

really is, then to Hell with me. I created you, I ..."

"LaClaire: So then, parents (SCHOOL BELL) always do give their lives

for their children. If their children did something bad -"

"Teacher: I know very few parents that would -"

"LaClaire: they would do that. You don't think they would do that? I

think personally, if I had a child, I would, it came down to that, I

would."

Point one. You, Mr. LaClair keep taking the "you belong in hell" out of the original context.

I am sure Matthew does not feel guilty he recorded his teachers classes without his consent.

So where does it say "to hell with you?". When anyone read this you make it appear that its directed directly to your son.  It isn't.

Secondly you claimed that all his religious comments were in response to questions about the Bible. They were questions right from your son. So you are wrong there as well.

If these are not the right words from the transcript then please direct me and others to where they are. Because I believe these are from the tapes your son provided. 

Until then I still have my opinion and it favors the teacher in this one.  But until the evidence it shown, you are wrong.  Thats just my opinion and no one can take that away.

If you have no other evidence then you have no case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bix, your mendacity is astounding. Tellling a half-truth is the same thing as lying.

You may fool your fellow sheep by quote mining, but anyone with half a brain could see this. Bix quotes only a very short part of the whole conversation and then say we are taking it out of context. The religious propaganda and pseudo-science came a long time before the part you quote. If any of you Paszkiewicz-supporters would read the the entire transcript, you will find all your arguments about what happened in that class will vaporize. How many people live in Kearny?

With people like bix in the town I wonder that anything gets done. My prayer would be that the anti-separation people are the ones making Kearny look bad.

[Strife767]

Oh yeah..Matthew is a liar! I think the person who posted here, left this part out! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Show one example of him lying.

[Guest Guest]

Bix, your mendacity is astounding.  Tellling a half-truth is the same thing as lying.

You may fool your fellow sheep by quote mining, but anyone with half a brain could see this.  Bix quotes  only a very short part of the whole conversation and then say we are taking it out of context.  The religious propaganda and pseudo-science came a long time before the part you quote.  If any of you Paszkiewicz-supporters would read the the entire transcript, you will find all your arguments about what happened in that class will vaporize.  How many people live in Kearny?

With people like bix in the town I wonder that anything gets done.  My prayer would be that the anti-separation people are the ones making Kearny look bad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all, its BIK (Born In Kearny). Were you? 49 years in Kearny. Increase your font size or get better glasses.

The course that was being taught was US History and the subject right from the transcript was Halloween and costumes. I didn't make up Halloween but the event of Halloween has religious overtones. Try to tell me otherwise on that one. It has been in this country for more years than you and I have been alive. I am not necessarily a "Paszkiewicz- -supporter" as you label me, but would like to know where the so-called comments from Paul LaClair come from. Reading the transcript provided, it is young Matthew continuously probing the questions and the teacher answering them. That's what teachers do. I may not always like the answer and at times I have found the teachers, like lawyers, to be even wrong. But be it as it may, I can't see the attempts to ruin one persons career because of an answer.

And I do not see why Mr. LaClair young or old needs an apology either. Until someone can show me otherwise (and no one has been able to direct me to the transcipt that apparently does) then my opinion is that this is just grandstand of a lawyer looking to make a buck of his son. In his own words he still doesnt know what he wants?

We have to stop catering to the wants of the one, and instead care for the needs of the many.