December 30, 2009

mc and his view on female politicians and monarchies






mc Says:

December 30th, 2009 at 8:51 pm

My comment was directed at the link between female voting power and the sex of the executive, elected leaders. With the monarchy, we have no say - we're pretty well stuck with whoever is born into the job. Fortunately, the job is purely a ceremonial one.


I am sure that the Queen would love to know she does nothing and is simply "born into" her role. And that it is purely cereminal? Go smoke some more of that good stuff dude......

AS promised, Carol and her place on the Hall of Shame.






(My comments in red)

1.Hold UP!?
Who is the STUPID one here?
I say it’s Bristol Palin…… and her parents….who did not teach their child to “just say NO” to premarital sex;


blame the female for the male and his sex drive this is priceless

they didn’t even teach the dumb, little twit name calling to shame the female?how to use “protection” to prevent STD’s! And they are damn lucky that all she got was pregnanc and not herpes, gardinella or HIV/AIDS!
Failure to educate your kids? That is stupid.
To blame Levi for the stupidity of Bristol and her parents is ludicrous.
Levi appears to be your average, red blooded, horney little dude……which describes millions of teenage boys around the globe.
Did you ever think (oh I forgot you do not know how to THINK) that maybe just maybe Bristol might have those same feelings? Or are females not allowed those feelings?
He took what he could get….and Bristol gave it up..willingly and without protection for her own health.
Again, another stupid move on her part.
more name calling and shaming
Levi’s not stupid…he’s young and an opportunist.
Let's pump up the male and give him more power and control, women are supposed to be frail and weak and need protection. WHATEVER!!!!
It wasn’t Levi’s idea to strut across the national stage during Mc Cain’s campaign for President.
oh was she supposed to go to a convent halfway across the country to hide the fact that she was pregnant because good little girls just do not do these types of things? AGAIN WHATEVER!!!!!
It wasn’t Levi’s idea to tell the whole, wide world how he “nailed” the Vice Presidential hopeful’s daughter.
but he was sure there afterwards so he could keep being famous, keep having his 15 minutes in the spotlight. I think his 15 minutes has stretched into 24 hours and it is more than enough.
That was Sarah and her political advisors who made those decisions.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Levi was only 18….with no parents to advise him…or so it appears….in any case…..Levi did what Levi was told to do….as did Bristol.
so it is okay that Levi did as the Palins tol dhim and Bristol should have done differently? AGAIN AND AGAIN WHATEVER!!!
They stupidly followed “stupid directives” from adults who should have known better….and who had an obligation to protect these kids.
In my mind…I keep thinking, ‘Good Lord Sarah Palin! Even in the animal kingdom, a mother protects her young!’ What is wrong with you!!!!!!
Did Sarah NOT think that these two kids would be devoured by the media?
Is Sarah so stupid…….. that she didn’t think people would judge the situation? Or that her child would suffer from all the world’s attention?
If she did…..Sarah is not only stupid……. she is “Queen Stupid”.
Sarah’s blind ambition got in the way of teaching her daughter the values and mores that she herself believes in…..
Sarah’s raw desire for fame and power….. got in the way of good decision making for the sake of her family…….and she did nothing to protect her child and her future grandbaby from the cruelty of media scrutiny; commentary and ridicule.
Queen Stupid.
Sarah threw these kids to the wolves….to further her own political ambitions.
And Levi…..teenage stud muffin that he ismaybe in your eyes, but in mine that towel was awful damn small!!!…..is taking advantage of it…..and why not?
Bristol is no more fit to parent a child than her mother is…..obviously.
I suspect God sent that special needs baby, Trig, to Sarah for one good reason…… so that maybe she could get her priorities straight and to teach her….. that children are a “gift” and they need mother’s attention and protection. to say this is a punishment from God is so beyoind comprehension, one must only assume you are a self-professed Christian. Your type of christian needs to stay away from me!!!!!
Ah, but Queen Stupid is instead out all over the country promoting and signing her book.
Meanwhile, she resents that Levi is taking advantage of the spotlight she put on him!

Like I said…..Queen Stupid.


Now I must say as other commenters on this site have said - you really have issues with Sarah Palin and you seriously need help. If you would like to email me and tell me your location, I willattempt to find you a good therapist so you can work through this Sarah anxiety you are having :-).

More of Mark Godbey's rants about the evil protective parents






If the grandparents from Brazil do show up in the United States (they never will) one can only hope that the US government and the FBI takes a lead role in the prosecution of violations of US Code against family kidnappings and conspiracy to kidnap that “protective parents” deserve.


If i am reading this the right way, MG is saying that parents should not protect their children? okay I will read more and see if this is really what he meant. Because every parent who is a "GOOD" parent will want to protect their children from whatever is lurking in those dark corners. I know I do.

More curiously still, Sean Goldman has now returned to the United States and, by this account on ABC-TV, is happy to be on American soil and in fact gives every sign of remembering the original family home from which he had been abducted, and even the family pet cat. (David Goldman, his father, had not moved in the interim.) The only sour note is that the boy has not yet taken to addressing his father as “Dad,” but that might still come.


He is said to appear happy. By whose account? Strangers who paid to take this child from his SISTER?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Don't even get me started on taking a child away from a sibling - especially whent hose siblings share a parent who is deceased.

December 28, 2009

Jugs for Justice for true "shared parenting"? Not likely - read here for Teri's own words









Re: JugsForJustice.org
« Reply #6 on Mar 5, 2009, 12:34am »
First and foremost, I find it offensive every time a woman states that
men who like to look at breasts are perverts. Seems these women don't
know men very well. It is quite normal for men to enjoy looking at
breasts.

I did write "low traffic." That's because it was down to a little over
200 hits a month. But since I've been updating it I'm now getting over
400 hits a month. That's 400 more each month than we had before I made
the site. That's before I start posting again. And that's without the
nipples.

Jugs is not about family rights. It's mainly about men's rights. I'll
be including info on dv against males, false allegations of abuse,
etc, not just equal parenting.


I know this will work. And believe me, you need all the help you can
get. You guys have been waiting over 30 years for equal parenting. I'm
not that patient.


And Jugs for Justice supports women how? Oh now I get it, women love
to expose their breasts for men to ogle.

'Nuff said...

Or better yet - why don't we do a website called Tits for Teri - seems she is obssessed about jugs and tits.....

December 21, 2009

mc on father's rights and children as property






mc Says:

December 20th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Marriage was a contract. A man promised to provide, and a woman promised him exclusive use of her womb. He paid her to bear his children. That's why they assumed his name. That's why up until 200 years ago they were considered his property until they came of age. This is how fatherhood became an institution and a cornerstone of civilization, rather than the random mating activity that is more commonly seen in Nature.


Read this again slowly a second time. Are you disgusted also?

Mark on children being property *taken from the GS blog)






Mark Says:

December 19th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
To be honest I tend to favor a return to the idea that children of married parents are the property of the father, and children of unmarried parents have no father. In the first case is discourages divorce because there will be no child support payments. In the second case in discourages having children outside of marriage because there will be no child support payments.


Now let's take this apart word by word, okay?

To be honest I tend to favor a return to the idea that children of married parents are the property of the father, and children of unmarried parents have no father.Okay children are property? And a child born to an unwed mother is a bastard? That is what the good ol' days said about children and Mark wants to go back there?

In the first case is discourages divorce because there will be no child support payments. No child support payments? Maybe we are now getting to the truth of the matter....

In the second case in discourages having children outside of marriage because there will be no child support payments. I really think we have hit the nail on the head. Mark wants COMPLETE CONTROL and NO CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS....

December 20, 2009

Boston Parent Still Fighting to See His Children After Biased Court Decision


Spray-paint Man



Boston Parent Still Fighting to See His Children After Biased Court Decision
(link provided only for verification, entire spew posted here so no need to visit his site and jack his stats)

Protest Action by Mr. Andrew Steele, Boston
This are of the web site is about Mr. Andrew Steele. A Boston parent who lost any real contact with his four sons after a Divorce and wanted to make a peaceful statement about the violation of basic rights that occurred. I was able to speak to a good friend of his, Ms. Mandy Varona mandyvarona@yahoo.com who lives in Seattle and is familiar with Andrew and his history. I came away very impressed by his motivation and methods. This was a preplanned and thoughtful action his part. I encourage anyone, especially those in the Boston area, to contact Andrew & Ms. Varona.

December 10th, 2009: (Human Rights Day) The initial news report was:

"An unhappy parent was caught red-handed tagging a courthouse after being denied a holiday visit with his sons. Andrew Steele, 45, of Tacoma, Wash. used three cans of spray paint to write "Steele boys rights denied" in large letters on the Brockton District Court in Boston, Mass.... TheBostonChannel.Com & PatriotLedger.Com

Ms. Varona explained that Andrew had not planned to use regular spray paint! He was going to purchase cans "easy remove" paint -- the same type that is used to spray "Just Married" on cars.

He also prepared a two page "Purpose of Protest Statement" before his action -- which he knew was Human Right's Day, the start of Human Rights week. An excerpt from that statement:


PURPOSE OF PROTEST:

•My son rights have been and continue to be denied them.
•My rights have been and continue to be denied me.
•My children's mother's life has been made very difficult.
•Some family members have been and continue to be harmed.
FACT: Children need to feel special in Mom's life and Dad's. When they have this they do alright. When they are denied this they are at greater risk of having troubles. (click here to read complete statement)

CURRENT STATUS/CONTACT INFO:

"Mr. Steele was arraigned in Brockton, MA, court on charges of tagging, destruction over $250 and malicious damage. Steele was ordered held in lieu of $50,000 cash bail or $500,000 surety. He will return to court on Jan. 6." -- from TheBostonChannel.Com

I was told he does not plan on making bail and wishes to continue his protest as a prisoner. We encourage everyone to write him at:

Andrew Steele, #53441
Plymouth House of Corrections
Housing Unit BS1
26 Long Pond Rd.
Plymouth, MA 02360

He has a good friend, Ms. Mandy Varona. She is trying to help Andrew get as much publicity as possible. She is very familiar with his family background and struggles. She can be contacted at: Ms. Mandy Varona mandyvarona@yahoo.com , phone: (206) 313-9888

BACKGROUND:

For many years Andrew worked in construction. He married and the couple had four sons (who now range in age from 8-13). In his 40s he realized he would not be able to work construction for long and wanted to make a career change and become a Children's Book writer. He wrote and published one book (Amazon link below). His wife was not happy with this career change and sought divorce.

The divorce began in 2006 and almost immediately the Judge ordered "supervised visits" and Andrew could only see his four sons every other weekend, from 10am - 5pm, in a visit supervised by someone acceptable to his wife. There had been no type of threatening conduct on his part.

The divorce decree was issued in Nov of 2009 and no change was made to the visitation schedule or procedure. There was NO extra time for any vacations or holidays. Andrew had hoped for a return to more normal contact with his children -- this triggered his plan of action. (Click here for decree - NOTE: Andrew challenges the veracity of the some of the reported "Facts" listed. These documents are usually character assassination of the 'losing' party, but Andrew wanted to be completely upfront in the matter).


This story "sounds" so sad, right? Well Godbey in all of his infinite wisdom has provided us with enough information to investigate this on our own. He has given us the divorce decree (and that is shame on Godbey and Steele for publishing a document with the names of minor children available as well as putting their names in the public eye). Godbey has also given us Steele's statement concerning the protest vandalism of the courthouse. Steele states through his spokesperson (how nice that an alleged criminal has a spokesperson as if he were some sort of celebrity - well I guess in FR eyes he IS a celebrity) that he did not INTEND to use permanent spray paint. Temporary or permanent, he STILL engaged in the act of vandalism. He took the cans of paint and painted ALL OVER the outside of the courthouse regarding HIS rights. The judge investigated through testimony in their divorce trial, which parent would be a residential parent and exactly when the children should be with the parents. This is not about the children's rights being denied, this is about an angry father.

How angry you might ask? Here are some excerpts from his divorce decree:

The children have been upset by the upheaval in the family structure and their father's long term, long distance absences. They have also been upset by their father's discussion of the divorce with them, as well as his tearfulness in their presence.


The party's oldest son XXXXXX (*) was diagnosed with epilepsy in the summer of 2007. As of the time of trial, Husband had not attended any of his son's doctor appointments or medical tests. Wife has diligently kept him informed regarding same. Wife sought conventional medical treatment for XXXXXXX (*). When she sought Husband's input and comments, he suggested neuropathic treatment for XXXXXX (*). He does not provide any information as to why neuropathic treatment would be better for XXXXXX (*). All he does is send website addresses to her.


On June 22, 2007, in response to Wife's report that XXXXXXX (*) may need glasses by age 10, Husband replied, "as for XXXXXXX (*), he needs to spend less time looking at things up close; he needs to spend time with me in the mountains".


There are even more disturbing or questionable things in this decree. He alludes to suicide attempts in voice mails to his wife and his mother (notice HIS mother, not HER mother). He dropped the insurance requirement because the cost had tripled and his reasoning is that the boys need him now more than they need money after he dies. He was also downright nasty to her when she asked if he had a response to the proposed marital settlement agreement. His answer to that simple question?

"When you see heifers in your back yard and hear some fat lady singing. Actually if you do see cows in your backyard let me know that would be quite a sight. And fat women have beautiful voices and do amazing things for our country.


He also compares the fact that the courts wanted to protect the children from instability to the persecution of the Jews by the Nazis because according to him, he thinks she does not feel he adds up to her standards. So what are her standards? Well before he went on a soul searching mission to write a very unsuccessful children's book (more on that later), he was a highly recognized and skilled carpenter. He created projects in high end homes before quitting that to write a children's book. After this unsuccessful journey, he went back to work as a carpenter, but not in high end homes.

He had not paid any of his child support or alimony (wife stayed home with the children and worked sporadically part time) for 18 months and total arrearages was more than 34,000 dollars.

It is also stated in the court order that the Husband's behavior became more and more erratic, he was not able to balance emotions and reason and he was behaving in a passive aggressive fashion towards his Wife.

The decree also states (the thing he is complaining about in his graffiti is his visitation) that his visits have been sporadic at best and future visits should be supervised by a third party (reading between the lines here but the passive aggressive behavior must have been of more concern than was let on as Wife did not have to supervise the visits). The judge did award visits with the children and father to occur on the first and third Saturdays from 10AM to 5PM and any other times as pre-arranged. He is also allowed to phone the children any day (every day) between the hours of 4PM and 8PM. He is also able to have all medical and school records, he just has no legal right to direct their care or education (due to his instability mentioned earlier).

The Wife gets the proceeds from the sale of their home and the tax refund, and the arrearages are reserved.

The husband also gets to claim all four children on his taxes every year, so long as he remains current on his child support obligation. They have numerous debts which the judge splits between the two of them. He must maintain insurance of 250,000 with wife as irrevocable beneficiary.

For the behaviors listed (and there are many more in the decree published and available online, this is actually not a bad deal. The judge could have granted RO's, he could have said the father is not allowed to talk to or see the children until he goes through counseling. There is no mention made of any counseling needing to be undertaken.

Now you must be wondering why Petunia is writing about this? So far most of this is pretty ordinary accusations. Well, the book is the deal breaker. The book he wrote is what is getting Steele his own spotlight page in Petunia's pen. What is this book you may ask? Well, you can go HERE to check it out.

Product Description
The discovery of an alternate reality in outer space is linked to self-discovery in this story of the four Roar boys, who live in an orphanage in Brooklyn. When they are mysteriously recruited for spaceship pilot training, the boys learn that their parents were once space explorers and may have held secret knowledge about life on other planets. As their training intensifies, the boys realize they must stay together at all costs to survive against the evil forces racing across the heavens toward earth.


The interesting part is in the reviews. We have one from a customer who purchased this book as a gift for his nephew:

I just bought this book for my nephew's birthday. And, he could not even finish reading it and wished to return it to the store. And, unlike the cover pictures, I could not believe the storyline is rather banal and characters are not-so-creative. The author probably tried to recap the brotherhood once he cherished in his time. But it is distracting and inconsistent in the story development. And, I don't find any genuine lesson that children can truly believe. Maybe the author did not believe in it or did not know how to engage himself with the readers-children. I would not recommend this book to any children I know. Major Disappointment!


This buyer has also reviewed several other products on Amazon.com. He (she) is attacked however by these reviews and comments:

I ordered The Galaxy Boys and the Sphere through Amazon.com a couple of weeks ago. The shipping date listed at that time was - and it still is - December 13, 2007. The delay in shipping is due to the book being hot off the presses. So, HSLee must have discovered the book somewhere, soon after it rolled off the presses, in the UK perhaps, because it is only now reaching the U.S from Europe. I've noted, and encourage all others who may read HSLee's review to do the same, that HSLee has never reviewed a novel, not a story for children, at least not on Amazon.com, though he has reviewed a couple of books on architecture, and some CDs, and some DVDs, and some electronic devices, and an exercise rope. One may learn about a person by what he purchases, and then reviews, and likes, or not. HSLee - we don't really know who he is nor where he lives nor what he does for a living - is unclear in his review as to whether he himself reviewed The Galaxy Boys and the Sphere or if he left it up to his nephew. If he left it up to his nephew, how old is his nephew? What kind of boy is he? We would think we could trust an adult's opinion, but maybe this boy just doesn't like to read, though we can't know that. Or perhaps HSLee himself doesn't really like to read, or just doesn't like to read a story like The Galaxy Boys and the Sphere; we can't know his tastes, because, as pointed out above, he has not reviewed any other literature, on Amazon.com at least. Finally, if HSLee is to call a work amateurish, perhaps he should spell amateurish correctly and not as he did, 'amaeurish'. I look forward to reading this book, when it arrives, and encourage all others to seek a way to form their own opinion. The only way to do that, in my opinion, is to read the book, if it appears to be something in which you are interested.


and the original reviewer answered with this:

Is Sally Withers(reviwer below mine) = the author, Andrew Steele? or his publisher?

First, you pointed out that I misspelled the word, Amateurish, I did not see the error as it was in the title blank but corrected it, thank you.
Now, your turn, you typed, Charles Rose to be a tallented architect. HAHA. And, your writing is no better than me. So, who is lecturing whom?

This person who left a very aggressive comment in my first review of this book seems to know when and where the books were published in USA or UK with given dates. And, that very person claims he(oops, she) also knows Charlie Rose, the local Boston Architect, the book of whom I left a review on Amazon.com quite a while ago. Then he/she definitely went over my other reviews to figure out what I buy and who I am. Wow, that is bullying. Check his comment(false accusation) in my review for Charles Rose Architect(paperback) to see it yourself. Sally Withers must be from Boston, not from Northwest as she says.

And, Sally Withers, now the second reviewer of this book(the Galaxy..) left a 5/5 rating describing the book as if she is either a child with a extensive vocabulary skill, rather close to the words the author uses in his book and the style.
If she was a genuine parent, you know her review doesn't sound right but it rather sounds like the abstract of the whole book. How strange!

If Sally Withers works for the publishing houses or the author, his/her rating should be invalidated, faking the company's promotion as a positive 5/5 review from a buyer. Or, if Sally Withers is indeed the actual author, you don't have any decency to leave any room for the readers to judge. What kind of person are you to pretentiously leave the 5 star feedback to your own work?

Coincidentally, the third person, Nancy Harter, is also from WA; Sally Withers herself is from Northwest and so is the author!!! And the both the second and the third reviewers do not have any other reviews on amazon.com. They created their user name to promote the book.

Even Nancy Harter wrote the book review way before me. Why didn't you accuse her of not reading the book and writing a review with the same accusation toward me, which is false? Isn't that because they both were written to promote the book? a Nice try!!! And, thanks for allowing me to track you all down because of your own trick to frame my genuine reviews.

On the other hands, I have a great history in writing reviews over many years, yes, mostly on small gadgets and electronics, books(amazon.com knows) and toys for my new nephew and nieces in recent years. So, whose opinion is more credible, Mr. Author?

...My conclusion, Sally Withers, Nancy Harter are Andrew Steele, the author of this book, for simply showing that level of aggression and disclosing the detailed release dates and where the books are sold in the comments in my review(please check it out and judge yourself) but I still cannot tell how Sally(the author?) knows that particular architect in Boston, or is she/he simply lying to invalidate my book review? If Sally Withers is not Andrew Steele, are you the author's wife or the publisher's wife?

You really started a very ugly game and only showed me a mean, lying,controlling personality. Who are you really? Shouldn't you have a good heart to write a children's book?

Whoever you are, don't you bully a genuine review! Why can't you accept that the kid did not like how the book reads? Stop this mean act! This is getting too ridiculous.


Neither of the individual reviewers who raved about this book have any other reviews on Amazon.com. She then goes on to attack the negative reviewer on another of his reviews. Links are all below:


Link to divorce decree
Link to the statement of purpose (reason for the graffiti)
Spray Paint Story Link 1
Spray Paint Story Link 2
Google search results for stories on incident (over 19,000 results)
Link to review of book by Nancy
Link to review of book by Sally
Link to negative review of Steele's book
Link for Steele's publishing attempt
Attacks by Sally towards HSLee on a review of another book



You Tube - Police: Court Vandal Caught Red-Handed -- Literally





December 12, 2009

Mental Disorder/Illness Opposition to Parental Alienation Syndrome – Part 1






Mental Disorder/Illness Opposition to Parental Alienation Syndrome – Part 1

When I first discovered the term of Parental Alienation Syndrome, I thought that everyone was in agreement that it was valid since proof of alienating tactics can be seen in parents that train children to hate, and vilify the other parent.

Isn’t it obvious that anyone who does this is mentally ill? To judges, attorneys and parents everyone seems to agree, a parent that does this to a child is an abuser. Since the vast majority of women have sole custody, most of the abusers are women. But Parental Alienationn is a gender-neutral sickness, because I have friends that are women that are alienated from the children. By the dads.

Further reading showed that Parental Alienation Syndrome is generated and perpetuated by an axis of disorders listed in the current DSM book. These include paranoia, histrionic, and borderline disorders. There are a few more that can be added to this disorder, but I have read that these are the core disorders that make up this syndrome.

The American Psychological Association uses a test, shortnamed the MMPI-II test that can actually indicate any of the above mentioned disorder exist. Collectively and through actions by the abusive parent, this makes up Parental Alienation Syndrome.

By itself, the test does not indicate mental illness.

But answers to the test point to actions and activities that mentally ill persons see as OK. Denial, lying, slander, libel, self-medicating, etc. are OK with these folk since to them, the end justifies the means. Sociopathic behavior is fine and dandy, with Parental alienators.

For dozens of children’s and parent’s rights activists, a group of “Anon…..s.” or members of the Pig Pen as we call them spend their days attacking fathers and children through lies and slander. They also attack women from time to time, so women are “abusers,” too.

They have also been creating fake IDs on Facebook, and joining father’s groups to stalk them there. Just recently, a person known as “Randi James” (not real name, obviously) was de-friend-ed by dozens of men (and a few women) when she spewed her bittternes against fathers in a comment thread on Facebook.

If you read some of the hatred that comes from their hate websites you can see why they lost their kids and

1.Denial – Everyone else to blame for their problems. They are “victims” or “battered women”.
2.Paranoia – Most alienates are paranoid and hide while they lie. they imagine they are being stalked.
3.Lying – See 1, also they will say anything to win in family court, especially false allegations of abuse, etc. Besides lying in court, they when they blog, or write or when they talk to you.
4.Hate – See, 1 2.3. above.
There are some websites that glorify in blaming others for “their problems”. Primarily being no one believes them. Either they were “battered” women, or married to “abusers” or the children are now in the hands of “abusers”.

You will also find vicious attacks on Dr. Richard Gardner (he is dead, it is OK to attack a dead person.) All the stuff about Dr. Garnder is made up. Attacks on fathers, activists for children, etc. are their primary targets. They go after live dads, too, but never with their own names, since they fear libel and slander laws.

Despite the fact that women are playing on their “home field” in Family Court, these women of the “pig pen” lost a fight that bookies had them winning.

Why is this? See the list above. Nuff said. Part 2 to come.


Now it is time to take this apart - point by point. I know it will never shut this guy up though.

His first paragraph:

When I first discovered the term of Parental Alienation Syndrome, I thought that everyone was in agreement that it was valid since proof of alienating tactics can be seen in parents that train children to hate, and vilify the other parent.


Where is this so-called "proof" of which you speak Markie poo? And you "discovered" Parental Alienation Syndrome? I thought that was your buddy, famed pedophile supporting, suicide committing Richard Gardner? 'Nuff said - next paragraph.

Isn’t it obvious that anyone who does this is mentally ill? To judges, attorneys and parents everyone seems to agree, a parent that does this to a child is an abuser. Since the vast majority of women have sole custody, most of the abusers are women. But Parental Alienationn is a gender-neutral sickness, because I have friends that are women that are alienated from the children. By the dads.


How is this a mental illness? Maybe a parent has good reason to not want a child to be around the other parent? And what YOU might deem as alienation, another might feel is protection. You say po-tay-toe, I say po-tah-toe. You also point out that this is a women's disorder since most women have custody, yet you switch teams and then contradict yourself. Which is it? Do women mostly do this (whatever "this" is in your remaining brain cell) or are women also affected by this? I think you do not even know yourself. 'Nuff said.

Further reading showed that Parental Alienation Syndrome is generated and perpetuated by an axis of disorders listed in the current DSM book. These include paranoia, histrionic, and borderline disorders. There are a few more that can be added to this disorder, but I have read that these are the core disorders that make up this syndrome.


Again let me point out that you have chosen to list only those disorder that affect primarily women. In fact if you look at one of the terms you use (histrionic), this is generally associated with women (as histrionic is based on the term hysteria, hysterical and women are stereotypically perceived as hysterical when we are upset). Shall we list the disorders that are associated with an abusive parent (truly abusive - one who enjoys wielding power and control over his victims)? How about Narcisstic Personality Disorder? Or how about alcohol and drug abuse/dependency? 'Nuff said.

The American Psychological Association uses a test, shortnamed the MMPI-II test that can actually indicate any of the above mentioned disorder exist. Collectively and through actions by the abusive parent, this makes up Parental Alienation Syndrome.


Were you aware that battered women can test as paranoid, hysterical, and with borderline tendencies due to the trauma and ongoing fear she may have due to an abusive spouse? Some of the key questions on the MMPI-III ask if you feel people are watching you, if you are being followed, etc etc. If a battered woman answers these honestly with an abusive spouse who is stalking her, an expert UNTRAINED in dv would deem her as suffering from paranoia. On the same token, many of the symptoms of BPD are shared with PTSD. In fact, if an expert is trained in trauma victims he or she will realize that the answers supplied which could lead a person to believe the test taker is suffering from borderline when taken in context with an in face interview and knowledge of trauma and abuse will lead the test giver to conclude the test taker suffers from PTSD. Got it Markie poo? Good, 'nuff said.

By itself, the test does not indicate mental illness.


Ahhh here he acknowledges (yet he does not clarify) that the test by itself does not conclude the test taker to be suffering from any mental defect or disorder. But then again he does not need to clarify, I do that quite well. One need only go to On Soul's Edge - Complex PTSD to read about this issue. Markie poo and others in the father's rights movement are fond of claiming the ex-wives are also suffering from bipolar disorder. A very interesting read can be found here: Complex (Chronic) Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD)
. 'Nuff said on this one.

But answers to the test point to actions and activities that mentally ill persons see as OK. Denial, lying, slander, libel, self-medicating, etc. are OK with these folk since to them, the end justifies the means. Sociopathic behavior is fine and dandy, with Parental alienators.
Okay I must ask, how are we lying, slandering, comitting libel, self-medicating, and in denial as well? If we lie, then the test would be useless as all the answers would be lies. I must also ask how we commit slander? Is this against you or some unnamed person? And you know this how? The definition of slander is utilizing the spoken word to utter untruths about someone which causes him or her harm. You are not anywhere close to me geographically to know whether I say anything and whether those statements are true or not. Also the person (either you or Mr. Mystery) would have to prove that my actions have caused irreperable harm to you or the mysterious Mr. Mystery. You would also need to prove that this harm was not caused by something you did yourself. You court record speaks for itself Markie poo. 'Nuff said.

For dozens of children’s and parent’s rights activists, a group of “Anon…..s.” or members of the Pig Pen as we call them spend their days attacking fathers and children through lies and slander. They also attack women from time to time, so women are “abusers,” too.


Here you go again bringing up Anonymums. Have you not kept up with the news dude? Sadly the woman responsible for creating Anonymums has passed on (and this unforeseen event was totally by surprise and we are all still reeling from her loss). I am sure however that once her family adjusts, someone will be there to pick up the pieces left by Anonymums and carry on her selfless and valiant lifelong effort. And there you go again with your name calling (pig pen allegations again). Tsk tsk tsk Markie poo. 'Nuff said.

They have also been creating fake IDs on Facebook, and joining father’s groups to stalk them there. Just recently, a person known as “Randi James” (not real name, obviously) was de-friend-ed by dozens of men (and a few women) when she spewed her bittternes against fathers in a comment thread on Facebook.


Okay do you have "proof" of these fake Facebook pages? We write on blogs and as such we are using psuedonyms. So while in your mind these Facebook profiles might be fake, it is only because you want our true identities revealed so you and others like you can shut us down through intimidation and fear. I already know several abused and protective mothers who have been through THAT ringer. 'Nuff said.

If you read some of the hatred that comes from their hate websites you can see why they lost their kids and

1.Denial – Everyone else to blame for their problems. They are “victims” or “battered women”.
2.Paranoia – Most alienates are paranoid and hide while they lie. they imagine they are being stalked.
3.Lying – See 1, also they will say anything to win in family court, especially false allegations of abuse, etc. Besides lying in court, they when they blog, or write or when they talk to you.
4.Hate – See, 1 2.3. above.


Funny how our websites are considered hate websites when all we do is copy what you (and others like you) have placed on the internet, yet you are not writing a hate website yourself. Do you forget so quickly the creation of the fake Anonymums website (courtesy of Markie poo folks)? Or how about the numerous posts about the members of the pig pen? How is that for hate Markie poo? And yet again we go through these supposed symptoms of an alienator. A victim of domestic violence whose abuser has followed them, has others track her as well, could be percieved as being paranoid, or cautious. I myself prefer to think of a woman expressing anxiety over the fact that her ex-abuser is turning up everywhere she goes to taunt and harras as cautious. But that is just me. And again how are we in denial? We know what happened to us and to our children by the freak abusers. You were not there (just as you are not here now) so you have absolutely no stinking idea what has happened or is happening or will happen. Again you are ASS U ME ing. 'Nuff said.

There are some websites that glorify in blaming others for “their problems”. Primarily being no one believes them. Either they were “battered” women, or married to “abusers” or the children are now in the hands of “abusers”.


Again I must point out that you have no idea who some of us are, and as such you do not have access to our court records. I can only speak of myself but you will see numerous calls to law enforcement before the initial restraining order (the first of 3) and then a period of several months before the divorce filing. I did manage to have some victories despite the decks being stacked against me (he had the money basically). But I will not list the errors made by my attorney on my site, if a battered woman wants to know what mistakes those might be, they may contact me directly. I will then determine if the email is legitimate as I will not provide any abuser with the means to take or keep a child away from a protective parent. 'Nuff said.

You will also find vicious attacks on Dr. Richard Gardner (he is dead, it is OK to attack a dead person.) All the stuff about Dr. Garnder is made up. Attacks on fathers, activists for children, etc. are their primary targets. They go after live dads, too, but never with their own names, since they fear libel and slander laws.


I will tear this up starting with your last comment and moving to the first. You say we "go after" living fathers? We only post on this site the spews of those men who make their views public and then only when they have reached epidemic proportions (such as yourself). We do not go after dads who are private and who are keeping the identities of their child private. Nor do we go after any man who was not arrested for, charged with, or convicted of abuse of any form. Apparently your ex-wife has felt the need to have numerous restraining orders placed on you, so you are fair game. You also fill the second part of my criteria, you not only have made your identity known, you have exposed the children your ex-wife and you brought into this world, and lastly you have the record and the mouth. Your mouth (or should I say, your fingers, are what gets you mentioned here. Nothing more, nothing less.

Now onto your statement that all the stuff about Richard Gardner is made up. His autopsy report:Richard Gardner Autopsy Report (scroll down to see actual images of the report) His views on children and sexuality: Richard Gradner Children Sexuality. You can also go to Liz Library at these two links:http://www.google.com/custom?q=richard+gardner&cof=L%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelizlibrary.org%2Fthelizlibrary-search.gif%3BAH%3Aleft%3B&sitesearch=thelizlibrary.org http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/012.htm to read more. 'Nuff said.

Shew almost there. Petunia's hooves are killing her :-(

Despite the fact that women are playing on their “home field” in Family Court, these women of the “pig pen” lost a fight that bookies had them winning.

Why is this? See the list above. Nuff said. Part 2 to come.


Again you go with your name calling and libel against us and again you go ASS U ME ing that we LOST in court. Some of us did and others of us are just not happy due to not being able to protect our children from the wrath of an abuser.

So I will anxiously be awaiting Part 2 as I will tear that one apart as well.

'NUFF SAID!!!!!




I think this picture says it all. Readers wouldn;t you be scared if you saw THIS?????

Donna McBroom-Theriot does not get it






http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=4445#comment-1142126

I think a phone time limit should be imposed. My husband's ex would call his sons morning, noon, and night when they were with us every other weekend and spend at least 10-15 minutes with each one on the phone. It was evident by their answers what she was asking. What did you have for breakfast, dinner, etc. I just wanted to check and make sure you were safe, etc. It interrupted the father/son bonding time and their moods would also change. I have seen the divorce/custody from both sides since I am also divorced with children. It is impossible for a parent to stay connected with only every other week visitation, especially if it is constantly interrupted by the other parent. Many people disagree vehemently with me but every other week is the ideal. The children are able to interact with both parents by having alone time. Rules should remain consistent between the houses and open communication is key. The children have a right to two parents and excuse the language but the parents need to just suck it up. I do know that in some cases, it would not be good for the health of the child to have that extended amount of time with a parent. There are always exceptions.


The danger in proposing laws that will allow this is that the parents who fall into your category of "not being good for the health of a child" will slip thorugh the cracks and the kids will get hurt. The parents who can cooperate are doing, the ones who cannot (either the small percentage who are mentally ill and the remainder who are affected by abuse and violence) are not cooperating. And that larger percentage of the non-cooperating parents who have been dealing with abuse and violence are the ones we are trying to help.

December 8, 2009

Why we should not lie to our children - it is not Parental Alienation (Syndrome) to tell them the truth






I promised to cover this article on its own after the last post. I will try to give it justice. Here is a link to the article in question:

http://mkg4583.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/real-protective-parents-never-call-themselves-protective-parents/.

Here is the text of the article for those who do not wish to go to the website. You can go to verify that as of 11AM CST, I have a true and correct copy of this article.

Many father’s and families rights activists hear the term protective parents used by those parents who make false allegations in court all the time.

Court Judges, Commissioners, Attorneys and Psychologists KNOW that what you say about the other parent is what you are saying about your own CHILD. Children know this intuitively. If children know you hate mom or dad, then your children know you hate them. After all, they are half the other parent. Children are not stupid, but one wonders about “Protective parents.”

It is time to set the record straight.

Real Protective Parents

1. Never make allegations against the other parent in court, and NEVER make them in the presence of their children.

2. Never refer to themselves as protective parents. It is a code word, listed below.

3. Support efforts to have Parental Alienation recognized by courts and the American Psychological Association, and never keep a child away from the other.

4. Never refer to their ex-spouse as abuser, drug addict, alcoholic, neither in court, on the Internet, and NEVER before their children.

5. Encourage the children to see the other parent, actively support the children’s involvement with the other parent.

6. Cooperate with the other parent to raise the children through co-parenting.

7. Never use a restraining order against the other parent as a sword, instead only obtain one as a shield for themselves alone.

The term protective parent is code word that non-custodial mothers groups invented after losing their children in family court action when they violated one of the basic cannons recognized by family court as be a fit parent.


Now lets take this apart point by point and see where your logic is in the mild form somewhat flawed, and in the most severe EXTREMELY dangerous to children.

1. Never make allegations against the other parent in court, and NEVER make them in the presence of their children.

If your wife was found to have sold your children into prostitution or child slavery, would you still stand by the creed - never badmouth the other parent? Would you still insist that one parent must always be positive about the other parent? I can imagine how this conversation would go. Mommy (daddy), so and so stuck (insert item here) into my private area, when child is being questioned about vaginal or rectal bleeding. If the guilty party IS the other parent what IS the non-offending mother or father supposed to say to the child? Can you please explain that one to me Godbey?

What is the non-offending parent supposed to do when the child comes home and uses racial slurs? IGNORE IT? When we see socially unacceptable behavior coming from a stranger, we educate our children as to why that behavior is inappropriate. Why should this same standard not be applied to us as parents? You have mentioned many times in your blog that I (as one of the so-called Pig Pen mothers) am not allowed contact with my child. And I have informed you that is the furthest thing from the truth. And as a CUSTODIAL mother, I tell my child when I have made bad decisions. When I make mistakes, I try to show these mistakes to my children in the hopes they will not have to repeat those same mistakes. It does not always work because everyone must make their own mistakes.

But when you are discussing safety issues for children and the perpetrator of the violence against a child IS a parent, the worst thing the other parent can do is keep silent about the abuse. I am not suggesting the protective parent (covered here should go out of their way to bad mouth the other parent, but when abuse is uncovered, the non-offending parent has a duty to the child to explain how this was not appropriate on the part of the perpetrator.

2. Never refer to themselves as protective parents. It is a code word, listed below.

I am unclear as to why this is a code word and why you are allowed to claim to be a protective parent? Why is the term "protective parent only viewed as bad when it is a mother who is claiming this?

3. Support efforts to have Parental Alienation recognized by courts and the American Psychological Association, and never keep a child away from the other.

This is covered all over the Internet so I will not go into this here. Suffice it to say, the best articles I have discovered to date on this issue are located at www.randijames.com and www.rightsformothers.com.

4. Never refer to their ex-spouse as abuser, drug addict, alcoholic, neither in court, on the Internet, and NEVER before their children.

Tell me again why we should not tell our children if the other parent is engaging in reckless behavior (such as abuse, addictions, excessive uncontollable drinking). I missed the "WHY's" of your reasoning behind this particular rule of rearing children. If one parent is diagnosed as an alcoholic, should we not try to help our chidlren so they may possibly avoid this same path? A "PROTECTIVE MOTHER" with whom I speak on a regular basis is an alcoholic. She however has quit drinking. She has learned that her children have an extremely high risk of engaging in the same behavior, whether she abstains or not, as it has been determined to be partially linked to genetics (studies here. Are you telling me that as children grow and evelop, we should not inform them of any medical issues which could imapct their life? My alcoholic friend has already started with her child, as both her and her ex-spouse have problems with alcohol (the mothers issues are in remission at this point, the father's sadly not so).

5. Encourage the children to see the other parent, actively support the children’s involvement with the other parent.

Is this an all the time kind of thing, whether the other parent is safe for the child or not? To whom should a non-offending parent turn in cases of severe abuse (or even not so sever albeit chronic abuse)? This just sounds like another victim waiting to happen to me.

6. Cooperate with the other parent to raise the children through co-parenting.

Again the same argument from above can be applied to this "requirement". This is just another way to say that (especially in cases like your and some of the other father's rights activists), a mother (custodial parent) MUST do what the non-custodial parent (father) says - OR ELSE. Or else - what?

7. Never use a restraining order against the other parent as a sword, instead only obtain one as a shield for themselves alone.

I do believe we are getting to the crux of this matter. Godbey is upset over the numerous RO's his exwife has had to obtain due to his behaviors, which his exwife allegedly feels are harmful to the children. Are we as parents not to try to protect our children whenever possible? I realize that children must make mistakes in order to grow. When do we as good parents draw the line between growth and downright harmful behaviors? When do we say - enough is enough? Apparently in the eyes of this blogger, if the person who is abusive is a NCP(father), it should be NEVER.



The term protective parent is code word that non-custodial mothers groups invented after losing their children in family court action when they violated one of the basic cannons recognized by family court as be a fit parent.


Now we are onto to something here. Godbey again ASS U MEs that the active protective parents who blog about protecting chidlren, who share about children's rights being more important than those of mothers or of fathers, are in some sort of conspiracy and we are so evil that the courts have removed our children from us. Not that I have anything to prove to you, but I AM a custodial mother, my ex is a 14%er as some are so fond of calling themselves. There is still abuse occurring, however this abuse is not illegal. Until our child can stand on alone, I will continue to tell which choices of mine AND those of the ex-husband are appropriate and right and which are inappropriate and wrong. I will also inform the child of those choices which are abuse.

Your little list is nothing more than another tool for abusers to use in order to silence the victim. But of course this is the main goal of the father's rights movement. They may preach equality for all except those who abuse, but in their eyes, any mother who dares stand on her own is a bad mother.

Sounds pretty dam sexist if you ask me, Godbey.



Confusion or old age? Protective parents fighting against bogus Parental Alienation (Syndrome)






I am extremely confused about something Godbey. You seem to contradict yourself when you want. You first post this dated 12/03/09:

Separation, Divorce and Parental Alienation Syndrome – Reprint

In this article you write:

For those who missed this original article, I have reprinted it here. When it first appeared in Pyschology Today Online, the hate-children organization that actively encourages hate-speech against men, Anonymums and the Members of the Pig Pen, (as they are known to children and protective parenting advocates) began spamming the site with their lies about children and divorce, particularly Parental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome.


Then 4 days later you write this (on 12/07/09):

Real Protective Parents Never Call Themselves “Protective Parents”

The title of this blog explains it all, and your second item also does an excellent job of explaining this:

2. Never refer to themselves as protective parents. It is a code word, listed below.


So which is it Godbey? Are you what you claim you should never call yourself, a protective parent? Or are you one of the parents from whom children need protecting? One need only look at court record to determine whether you are truthful regarding your alleged compaints in family court. I think we have covered your case to death, and it is nothing more than the typical male hate that spews from the "ohmygodihavetogivethatbitchsomeofmymoneyandidonotwantto" syndrome. Why won't you cover that in your blog? Or it could even be the "iwasapricktomyexwifeandthekidswhenwelivedtogetherandnowthatmykidsarefreetheyhatemyactionsbutifistraightenupimightbeableotrepairtherelationshipbutihatetheirmomsomuchthatiwillneveractright" syndrome? Just like with any addcition or mental illness, the first step Markiepoo is to admit it to yourself.

You are so fond of spewing hatred though that I never see an admission of the part you played in your case.

December 3, 2009

How was court Markie poo?






Yet again Mark Godbey LIES his way through to his readers. He states:

Of course, for children’s and family advocates, the tactics of the hate-speech encouraged by Anonymums, is well-known. Most of the followers of these hate-sites are women that lost their children because of false allegations of abuse. Instead of placing these women in jail, most were placed on supervised visitations because of flight risk to the children.


I hate to break it to you numb nutz, but I am (I shoudl say WAS) a follower of Anonymums. I still respect her work even though she has passed. And I do have custody of my children. In fact my numb nutz ex husband is facing the very real possibility of jail due to his own stupidity.

And while we are at it numb nutz, why don't you blog about all those poor poor little children whose MOMS did TRY to SHARE parenting with the ABUSER DADS, only to have these same ABUSER DADS KILL mom, kids, family, neighbors, total strangers. Why not discuss the wonderful 3 hour (oops 2 day) Gulf Of Mexico tour that one of these dads took? Or how about the winderful (NOT!!!!) dad who threw his baby downstairs?

Or better yet? Why don't we get into your court file again and share with the viewers out there just what a loser you appear to be?

Oh and to be very clear on this, I have never had to be supervised with my child. Her father on the other hand has. So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it.

November 29, 2009

Panda Abuzz (buzz buzz buzzz buzzz buzzzzzzzzz)








This is what the website has to say about the buzzy panda:

PAAO is proud to announce the launch of our mascot Panda Abuzz!

Panda Abuzz is the hard work and creation of Donna Ingold (Abuzz's mom!), Sarvy Emo, and Bronwyn Coveney (our brilliant cartoonist). Together, along with the input of many adult alienated children and professionals, they have created Abuzz, who will be appearing in cartoon strips very shortly, as well as stand alone cartoon posters.
Abuzz's job is to educate the public and parents about how some adult behaviors are harmful to children. He will in effect be an extension of the child, expressing and voicing what the child can not, in order to make parents understand how they are harming their own children by their Parental Alienation behaviors.

Panda Abuzz is unique in that he will bring light to how damaging and confusing PA is to children, while being passed from child to child inorder to help multitude of parents in many cultural, religious or blended family dynamics understand and cope for the benefit of their children.


My question is this:

Does this panda truly buzz? It so sickenly reminds me of a pedophile plying a child with candy, toys, or a video game in order to steal them away and hurt them. I thought maybe this buzzy panda might have a real buzz like....



















Well I would post it but this blog will not show pictures which are rated X, so you get the idea right? Lets do a crossword instead. This starts with V ends with R and has 8 letters. After all, wasn't it the GOD of the FATHER's RIGHTS MOVEMENT, "Richard Gardner" who suggested we need to teach children this act?

Calling all Protective UK Moms!!!!






Have you been abused by your partner or ex-partner? Have you lost custody of your child due to this abuse and his continued litigation in court? Email me!!!

New projects in the works






I am in the process of cooperating with a fellow blogger in preparing the first ever of its kind database for abused and protective moms. This database will be in place to protect those women new to the family rights scene on the internet. It will be available in order to protect these women from being sucked in by father's rights groups and thereby giving up all of their rights to mother the children they gave birth to.

It is coming guys. You will not succeed much longer.

Oh and another project is coming and that is just one that will be more amusing. It will be a nice thing to take down another extremely active fathers rights activist with their own words. I have a special person to thank for that, she knows who she is :-)

Mark Godbey and Psychology Today






Mark Godbey sure is behind the times. Too bad he keeps linking to articles which have been removed. And they have been taken down because the author realized that he did not have enough information to proceed. So markie, why don;t you go back to where you link to the article. You will see it is bye bye. And soon, very soon, we will have the proof that it was removed because it is false, misleading and utilizing junk science.

http://mkg4583.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/separation-divorce-and-parental-alienation-syndrome-psychology-today/

We will now begin lawsuit proceedings against Mark Godbey of San Ramon CA






nothing could be more proof than libelous attacks that members of the “pig pen” cult of followers that attack fathers only, and labels all mother and children as “battered” and the fathers as “abusive”.


Godbey uotes an article placed not by Lorraine Tipton but by an abuse advocate working tirelessly along with many others in order to protect Lorraine's child from further abuse. This child has NOT been given her day in court. Godbey ASS U ME s that Lorraine is an abusive and parentally alienating mother - because in his mind all mothers who do not want a child to visit a father are such.

Now as one of the members of the so called pig pen cult he calls out so bravely on his website, I plan to contact lawyers in California and undertake a lawsuit against Mark Godbey for libel. He needs to produce his evidence that any of the bloggers who posted this article concerning Lorraine are indeed engaging in libel against her ex-husband and ex-abuser. Court records are generally a matter of public record Markie. Why don't you do a search for Hensberger. You will see that he has indeed been arrested for and convicted of dui. The child has disclosed not just to family but to others of the abuse she has endured in the father's house. And the mother has attested to his abuses of her.

So keep calling us out on your blog markie. I have forced way back machine to archive your site. It will be up for all to see. And you WILL answer in court for YOUR libel.

November 21, 2009

Presenting only part of something eh?






Russ McNeill, on November 21st, 2009 at 12:18 am Said:
I love how this forum cuts what they don’t like.


Why don;t we get into how some stuff is being completely deleted off of other blogs and forums because someone does not like the username provided? Or lies about email access? I have posted on one such forum using the username of Glenn's Cult, providing my email contact which is clearly present on my blogger profile, and all of my comments were deleted. I never received an email from the blog/forum owner. And I was permamnently banned from posting there. I challenge that bog/forum owner to prove that in the posts where I used the username Glenn's Cult to show where I was abusive to any other poster. I was NOT. This blog/forum owner simply does not want to be challenged in his views. A commenter on my blog stated it so eloquently. They use stats and surveys but they only present half of it or they misinterpret.

So who is only giving "part of something" now?

Obsession? Hmmmmmm...........






Steve Gill, on November 20th, 2009 at 8:32 pm Said:
Wow. These false accusers really are becoming obsessive now. A sure sign of fear… and not of being physically attacked, but rather of being exposed for being the frauds that they are.


When we post something or discuss something or write about something, we are obsessed. When they do it, they are "concerned fathers"?

UPDATE: Swanson has now (between himself and his bullying friends) created nearly 60 comments on his dossier. Now is this obsession?

How to undermine mom (in the Father's words of course)

Brian Says:

November 20th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Funny thing about when Mom tries to make Dad look bad to the kids......it only works until Mom is exposed when Dad comes through in a big way on something, like taking the child to something that they asked for and were denied by Mom.


Okay so let me make sure I understand this. Mom is saying no that a child cannot go somewhere or do something so child just waits until it is dad's parenting time and asks dad, dad realizes mom has said no, so what does he do? Rather than respect her wishes regarding a decision based on an action done (or not done) while the child was with mom, dad says sure go ahead - you can do whatever you want when you are with me, what your (hack cough hack puke) mom says MEANS NOTHING. I do not respect your mother and her wishes and you do not have to respect your mother and her wishes.

Okay I see how it works now.




November 20, 2009

Action alert to protective parents in Arkansas!!!



Please go HERE and read this page. If you are as horrified as I am (no mention of what needs to be done in cases of abuse or dv) then boycott this candidate. Post it to twitter, Facebook, Myspace - GET THE WORD TO ALL ARKANSAS RESIDENTS!!!




UPDATE: I was sent new information by a reader about his website. he now has information about protecting children on his website, but clearly it is still not enough. He MUST protect all victims of abuse (including adult victims) and must protect mothers who have been abused. Lip service is all well and good but not enough is being done to protect women.

November 17, 2009

Mark Godbey writes: Pig Pen Members Continue Online Libel – Craig Hensberger Father Libeled

A clear case of Libel from one of the members of the "pig pen"

" Lorraine Tipton is a concerned and caring mother who has tried for the past
three years to obey a court order even though it meant forcing her daughter to
go and stay with her sexually, and otherwise, abusive father. Michaela (now 11
yrs old) says that she is absolutely terrified of going to her father%u2019s,
that she is not safe with him, and now insists that she simply can and will not
go. Lorraine has spoken with her daughter, but can no longer find it within
herself to force her daughter to willingly accept further abuse. "

From the below link:

http://familycourtcrisis.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/ptarget-pa-hrefhttpwwwthepetit\
ionsitecom217petitionforlorrainetiptonandmichaelahttpwwwthepetitionsitecom217pet\
itionforlorrainetiptonandmichaelaa-p5000-psponsored-pa-hrefhttpwwwthepetitionsit\
ecomfeedba/

For those who doubt that Parental Alienation Syndrome is a pattern of
denigration of one parent by another, in order to alienate a child from the
other parent, nothing could be more proof than libelous attacks that members of
the "pig pen" cult of followers that attack fathers only, and labels all mother
and children as "battered" and the fathers as "abusive".

Are these "protective parents" ?? No one buys their "victim" status anymore.
Judges know that parents who deny children the right to see the other parent are
the real "abusers."


Well all of us in the "pig pen" cult pooled some money together and we bought you a lifetime supply of (drumroll please....)









































We thought you might be able to use this since your probation is clearly at risk of being revoked.

Have a nice day :-)

We forgot to mention one thing, you will have to share this with several others, including the one you "claim" we libeled.




November 14, 2009

Amanda from Pandagon gets death threats








antimisandry.com - View Single Post - Amanda Worried about Rise of MRA's

Re: Amanda Worried about Rise of MRA's permalink

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Got to love this bit:


Quote:
for abusers to get automatic joint custody of their children

Well, she's a feminist so obviously in her mind 'father' and 'abuser' are interchangeable terms.

If I met that woman she would die quickly.

Fish or Flannel?



Need I say any more?




Hate Crime Question and my thoughts on that issue






Well Jimmy my thoughts are you should really really really stay away from the mind altering substances. If you are not imbibing, then I really really really suggest you get some professional help dude. The life you save could be mine!!!!! LMAO :-)

Hello,

I have a question for you all out there in the Fathers Rights.

Other day I was talking to my Ol’ Buddy Stan, and I ask him this question.

And I will ask it to all of you and see if we come up with the same answers that I got from a lot of folks.



You know we live in the Political World of every type if rights for special interest groups, I mean at times I want to throw up.



You know that the Gays’ and Lesbians’ Groups are demanding rights that are above the Rights of God and once they have those rights they are demanding more and more.



And if you do anything like speak your mind against these special rights then you are none as a Begat, Races, Homophobe, Anti Gay and god knows what else they can come up with.



Well the questions is this: What if a Gay Man goes out and get a Straight Woman pregnant, and she turns him into the Child Support Recovery Services, and they go after this Gay Man, Is that not a Hate Crime? Because they are singling him out for child support and being gay he can’t be held accountable for that.



I mean that Congress has made it where these people are an Endangered Spices and if you do anything against them then you can be held accountable by the Federal Courts. And looking at it this way, is going after them a Hate Crime?

I would like to know what your thoughts are about this.

Jimmy

A Viewpoint






I can only say don;t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out....Buh Bye!!!!!

Jimmy Lehew (jimmylehew@yahoo.com) says:

Hello,

I wanted to tell you about what happen to me the other day.

As fathers we all know that they DHR, DHS, and ORS is just another form of a Legalization of Gestapo that has taken our children from us, for Money and Power from the Fathers.



But due to the many lies that were told by me by my case worker at ORS and I could never get the truth from them. I call a so call friend of mine that works for the Child Support Service in Salem Oregon .



And due to the point that I will have them paid off here next month and I wanted to see if I could pay the State of Oregon for a case in Missouri , and knowing that my associate has some of the same political view points that I have I call her to get the low down on this.



Well as many of you know that once I pay this off I’m moving to Brazil and will not come back only when my Dad pass on.



But through the conversation something was ask of me about getting my passport release, and I made the remark that yes Jan, 2010 I’m a Brazilian and she ask me why and I went through all the Bullshit that the Courts and Child support services has put my kids through and I had enough of the shit watching the country that I fought for going to hell from Special Interest Groups.



And she laugh and she said that I was the 30th father that had call in saying that once they had there child support paid and they were out of the ream of the Gestapo Hands they were moving to Mexico, Panama, Brazil, and many other places in South America. So I got out the Ol laptop and look up the on Google to see how many men were leaving the USA each year and moving to South America , and do you know what? There is over 300,000 professional men leaving the USA each year for just that reason, and moving to South America . They are tried of the Bullshit and watching their country going to hell for the same reasons.

Have a good one,

Jimmy

Child support idiocy and father's rights activists






Well the two go hand in hand let me tell you. First check out what the guy is saying (not highlighted portions). Petunia Commentary to follow...

Laryy Broyer (ldbroy2001@yahoo.com) says:

I'm curious if anybody has sued thier EX for making false
statements, regarding support payments. My Ex is playing games,
Gonna have to hire a lawyer etc. etc. I've been through so much
crap with this women, and her sneaky underhanded actions, continue
to surprise me.
I've got lock solid proof her accounting practices are far from
reality. There has to be away to teach her a lesson, to never again
temped to manipulate the system for personal gain.
I'm old now, and really just don't want the added stress of dealing
with this stuff anymore. 28 years of constant attacks is enough.
Gonna hire a lawyer, and be done with it. Can't afford it, but
what else can I do. All those years of stress, have taken thier toll.
Recently the company I was working for closed. They always seem to hit
you when your most vulnerable. Then thiers my son, he doesn't need this crap either, can I sue on both of our behalfs.

Larry Broyer


Well doing the math would love for you to point out to me why you have been dealing with this for TWENTY EIGHT (28) years? The longest period of time to be paiyng child support is generally 18-22 years (if you must continue through college). generally though it is 18 years of age. So an extra 10 years on top? Maybe, just maybe Lumpen Larry, it is because you did not pay what you were supposed to pay and she got a judgment for interest. Now you will be paying this for a very long time. Should have saved your self some money and aggravation. A bank would have been cheaper from which to borrow than the state.

Do we have to spell it out for these guys?

Paternity Fraud? WHATEVER!!!!!






Thea Artis (f4vahr@yahoo.com) has forwarded this email to many father's rights groups. If there is a way to contact whomever or whatever is funding this project in order to stall funding please do so:

Sharon Squires, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Sociology at California State University-Domingue z Hills, and Carnell Smith of Citizens Against Paternity Fraud, have joined forces to develop a new on-line survey, the first of its kind, which will examine the emotional, financial, legal, and social impact of paternity fraud on men. The survey is at http://www.paternit yfraud.com/ pfsurvey. php

A news release about the survey and about the appearance of Squires and Smith at the next screening of "Support? System Down" in Atlanta is available at http://news. prnewswire. com/DisplayRelea seContent. aspx?ACCT= 104&STORY=/www/story/ 09-23-2009/ 0005099699&EDATE=

Looks like we need to contact California State University to see about the funding issue as well as the of one of their professors engaging in such a thing, which villifies women and children.


UPDATE:

If a child has only known one man as their father and there are many years (child is now 6 or 12 or 17) and the parents divorce, the father who has been the defacto father should continue - whether he provided the DNA for said child or not. Can you imagine the heartache that would be piled on this child (or chidlren if more than one) with the only man she or he has known as dad suddenly says I am not dad go away? Children are already fragile due to developing and learning and becoming independent - they do not need for an asshole to say go to hell kid. You were good enough to call me dad when I was married to your mom (or when mom and I were together) but now you are a bastard kid - so sad so sorry for your luck.

PUHLEASE!!!!!

Wisonsin mother jailed over pre-teen refusal to visit abuser dad






I have had much sad news over the last few weeks. First we hear of Anonymums untimely passing (we will never be the same without her). Then a near and dear friend of mine, Lorraine, and her daughter M are going through the hell of family court. M will NOT visit her bio-dad because he:
A. Abused her
B. Abused her mother
C. Is a severe alcoholic
D. Drives drunk

Then we have the issue with bio-dad's mother. Her list of transgressions against M include:
A. Drinking to excess
B. Taking M to a bar
C. Being sooooooooo drunk she cannot even recognize her own vehicle
D. Driving drunk on this night with M in her vehicle
E. Forcing M to eat her own vomit after becoming ill

I could go on but these are just a few of the major abuses that M has had to tolerate.

So imagine my surprise as we join forces in order to publicize this child's/mother's tragedy to see this:

Message from Chief Justice

Dear Friend:

Welcome to the Wisconsin court system. The courts of our state belong not to the lawyers and the judges, but to you - the public. Perhaps you have come to us because you are involved in a case, or maybe you have been called to jury duty. Or perhaps you are simply interested in learning more about the courts - about careers in the law, volunteer opportunities, or the workings of the third branch of government. Whatever your reason for visiting our Web site, we are glad you are here. Your understanding of - and support for - our independent courts is critical to the integrity and effectiveness of their work.

The court system exists to help the people of our state to resolve their disputes peacefully, and to dispense justice fairly, impartially and according to the rule of law. This is the cornerstone of our democracy.

You have my commitment that the Wisconsin court system will always strive to be open, understandable and affordable. You are welcome here.

Sincerely yours,

Shirley S. Abrahamson
Chief Justice


How can this "chief justice" claim that these courts are OPEN??????? One of the judges in her very court is refusing to listen to a child, he is refusing to use evidence which without a doubt shows that M's father should NOT be allowed to continue in parenting access. He has denied a mother due process and has removed her freedoms from her (there will be another post on this one, coming soon). The family is already stretched to the max with all the back and forth in court brought on by fisherman (and sometimes cross dresser).

So I am sending out a challenge to Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson:

Look in your house!!! See what your judges are doing to families (specifically look at Judge David Miron



and see what he has done to families. Lorraine and her family want this information out there. How many are too afraid to tell their story? I also challenge You Ask We Investigate of NBC Channel 2 in Wisconsin to look into this case. Contact the loving STEPFATHER of M and husband to Lorraine and see what he has to say.

This is nothing more than threat therapy. Well guess what Judge Miron - you have met your match. Lorraine will continue to protect M and your UNCONSTITUTIONAL jailing of Lorraine for 30 days, then 30 more days, then 30 more days - until the child goes to the abuser's house, will not continue.

So here is the challenge:

Chief Justice look in your house! Clean it up!
Channel 2 investigate this matter!

Help this chidl have her mom home. Make the abuser accountable for his actions.

Provide your email contacts so the public can express the outrage they feel about this issue. Quit hiding Judge Miron!!!!!
enter