Glenn Sacks again Attacks Protective Mothers and their supporters

Jennifer Collins is such a brave young woman and by all of her accounts as well as those of her brother and mother, she has lived a rather full life in her short 2 decades here. Yet she is constantly faced with attacks and falsehoods being spread about her. Does Sacks ever publish the fact that she DID attempt contact with her father as an adult woman who did not have to fear his alleged abuse? Did Sacks ever post about her father's response to her during said contact? NO SACKS DID NOT!

He did not do this because it does not fit into his neat little package of all those mean mommies out there stealing children from their fathers. (As if children were indeed 'property' and as such could be 'stolen').

This is just the tip of the iceberg on Sacks. Most of my readers know that Sacks disabled comments long ago on his blog. Thankfully there is no shortage of FReaks on the 'Net hating and abusing women.

Sacks attacks not only Holly Collins and Jennifer Collins, he goes on to attack TC. He does this by posting what should be her information and her child's information through his newsletter and blog. He gives what is presumably a minor child's name and location to his readers, many of whom have admitted themselves on his blog in the comment section to having been accused of sexual attacks on children. Smooth move exlax. Let's just possibly endanger even more children.

He is not even finished there. He attacks BN. He does this inferring that BN must have zero brain cells and is completely unable to make a rational decision on his own based on information he can accumulate on his own. I guess BN must be another one of those manginas that his readers spoke of so frequently.

Surprisingly he left BAZ alone. One must wonder why that is.

He also attacks AR in the same way he goes after BN. Again a lawyer who is highly respected in his field enough so that he can take on a hugely complicated case pro-bono and still maintain his other client load and get a good result for Holly Collins. Oh and lets not forget the mainstream reporters who followed the Collins case and actively reported on it as well. They must have been hypnotized by Holly or Jennifer or both. YEAH! That is it!!! Jennifer and holly are master hypnotists and were able to place ALL of these people under their spell and make them ALL believe EVERY word uttered by them. Yeah there we go!

He goes on to attack several other presenters at the BMCC which will go unnamed as it is simply more drivel and unnecessary to show his absolute hatred of any woman/mother claiming to be a protective mother.

In closing let's look at "HIS" conclusion to his huge "attack" journalism:

Fathers and Families is working for a family court system which properly and impartially investigates abuse claims so that abuse victims are protected but unscrupulous litigants are prevented from employing false claims against the innocent.

Fathers and Families has always been concerned about and stood against domestic violence—domestic violence organizations should make it clear that they are concerned about and stand against false accusers.

My Conclusion:

Fathers and Families is working for a family court system which improperly investigates abuse claims so that abuse victims are not protected but unscrupulous litigants are able to employ false claims against the abused.

Fathers and Families has never been concerned about nor stood against domestic violence—domestic violence organizations are the only ones concerned about and standing against false accusers.

May I also add - how quickly we forget about The Family Place and DART? Or the great work Ampersand from "Alas a Blog" did for TFP regarding the cruel and unusual treatment from Sacks? Or what about his little experiment he undertook in order to "prove" that women's shelters (ummmm duh 'WOMEN'S should give you a clue) were engaging in bias and discrimination against men. That these 'women's shelters' should have their federal funding removed due to this discrimination? How about we start removing the funding from ALL of the Fatherhood Initiative programs that are biased against and discriminate against - mothers?

Ahhhh who cares about poor little women. Ain't got the important parts anyway and all they are good for is making babies for us to control and manipulate and so we can stroke our egos. Visit Jennifer's blog and her two part article to see how much Sacks 'strokes' his own ego. Truly eye-opening stuff there.

Nuff said with this. Ladies (and those few true men who support us) we are in for the fight of our lives. Our children are depending on us.

Protest Glenns Sacks and Father's and Families at the Cincinnati Zoo

Father's and Families supporters will be at the Cincinnati Zoo on September 5th for a "Cheetah Run". I am asking all who live in Cincinnati or those close bring your signs and protest this blogger who would steal a child from a loving and caring mother, this blogger who would lie about an adult child (Jennifer Collins) and her experiences as a young child, and this blogger who only publishes untruths about family court.

If you do manage to get there please send pictures and let us know how it goes. I think this should be done wherever any of these unscrupulous fathers rights activists will be.

Robert Franklin - not too bright?

So he is quoting an article on some psychology website about a study concerning fathers and children. Here is his comment:

Sons who have fond childhood memories of their fathers are more likely to be emotionally stable in the face of day-to-day stresses, according to psychologists who studied hundreds of adults of all ages.

Well duh!!!! I think daughters who have the same thing will get the same benefit. And what about those sons who do not have that same great relationship with dad? What about those children whose fathers are abusive (and by looking at Dastardly Dads we see that bad dads are all too common)? I wonder who will do that study?

Bogus Facts and Bogus Arguments?

So why is it that the anti-dad crowd pretends that the rare instances in which fathers injure their children support the proposition that, as a matter of public policy, fathers generally should be suspect and fathers' parental rights truncated? Mothers injure more and, as the cases mentioned illustrate, every bit as brutally as the worst father.

and this as well:

It's long past time that we stopped using bogus facts and bogus arguments to continue to separate children from the fathers who love them.

I only have one comment for the statement above about bogus facts and bogus arguments:

Well Sacks, we are waiting!!!! When are YOU going to stop using bogis facts and misleading YOUR readers about the goings on of F&F? On Rights For Mothers, there was an article dated August 11th entitled "California Call To Action - Give Children a Voice in Court:

Looks like Glenn Sacks is wrong again. This is from the Center from Judicial Excellence (CJE), who is also helping parents, including father Jayraj Nair, in their criminal complaints against corrupt California custody evaluator Janelle Burrill, in a fashion similar to how AB 2475, which Fathers & Families claims is dead (it’s not), will help all parents get relief from such corrupt, biased individuals. {Read More}

I could also copy and paste every single story at Dastardly Dads but with nearly 3500 articles, that is simply not feasible. Not many of those articles are duplicate "dastardly dads" and you will find several from history databases. Wow! Dads have been killing the kids for this many years and we never knew? Nah, we knew but we are ignored.

Now it is time to ignore the purveyor of "bogus facts" and "bogus arguments" before our children are wiped off the face of the earth. Just watch this little video clip to get an understanding of why moms are as a rule - protective, and dads simply are not (again as a rule).



Dumbo's mom (who has no name) is locked away for simply wanting to protect her child. Are we going to outlaw motherhood as many of the FReaks and FRags would like? Stop outlawing motherhood and return children to their natural parent - the mother.

More goose and gander stuff

Seems too that HE is writing about a mother who has allegedly made false allegations against a father. If this is the case then kudos to the courts for stopping it. But does HE ever write about fathers who make false allegations against mothers? Well, gentle readers, Petunia has been reading HIS blog for nearly 3 years now (and have gone back to his posts from the very beginning) and I cannot say I have ever read a post about a MOM who has had false allegations levied against her.

Well I have been lucky enough to have spoken to a mom who is living this right now. She has asked to remain anonymous due to her children's ages and I will respect that wish. Now for some of her story (I have paraphrased much of this due to length):

I have been a victim of family courts for nearly 3 decades. I was abused as a child and thrown into CPS state courts. I was not believed even though I provided evidence that would prove the abuse happened. I was told to go home and get along with the perp.

My children and I were again victimized by the state and one of my children was murdered by state foster care workers. These workers even had the audacity to show up when the decision was made to remove the breathing tubes in order to see if my child could breathe on her own or if she was indeed brain dead. In case you missed it she could NOT breathe on her own and she subsequently died.

Fast forward to now. Again my children and I are being victimized. Not only by the state, but also by a nasty abusive MAN. He has made numerous false allegations against not only me, but friends and members of my own family as well as numerous daycare providers and school officials. The school officials are apparently too afraid when the child says daddy is mean and scary, fears of daddy hurting the child are made - BY THE CHILD, and it is all ignored. CPS has told me that if one more call is placed then this child will be gone forever.

Now I know I am not perfect, but I did learn from my mistakes. I am a wonderful mother. When the father was confronted about the latest allegation, he stated he knew it was false but he would do it again.

Oh and lets add to the mix that this father is more concerned with how much money he has to pay to the mother for child support than what the child's wises are.

Thank you Petunia and all the other abused moms out there trying to be a voice for me and my children and the many other moms and kids out there. I cannot come forward. To do so would be suicide for me as a mother to my youngest child, at least right now.

Again some of this has been condensed due to the length of this conversation. I took excellent notes and had this mom repeat some of the comments above in order to get them down correctly. I apologize right now to this mom if I quoted her incorrectly.

So now I issue this challenge:

Why do we not see any MOM who have been falsely accused on HIS blog.

{smacks upside the head in the epitome of the duh moments}

It is because how can HE support FATHERS if he supports MOTHERS! Geesh Petunia, you woulda thunk you coulda learnded that by how. Here's yer sign!!!

Criticism of Dowd's recent op-ed piece

Apparently Dowd has written a piece which can be found HERE concerning a fantasy sex game which was dreamed up by some school aged children. Now to say these are children would be correct if we were to look at their actual "age", but any child who has thoughts of victimizing another child or adult, should be treated as an adult. Apparently these "boys" (thought pops into my head - boys will be boys - where have we heard that one before?) thought this game would be cool. Well it was discovered before any girls could be made into unwilling or unknown participants (THANKFULLY).

I guess that is not good enough for HIM though as he must belittle Dowd and MINIMIZE this "act" of these "boys". But does he finish with just that little piece?

OH NO!!!! He must go on to criticize beauty pageants (which have financed many college degrees) and a dance competition video which went viral. Now why is it okay for these "boys" and it can be "explained" when they attempt to sexually assault a female, yet for girls who enjoy an activity (because pageants and dance are activities) it is considered sexualization? Now before I could write about this, I had to do my research. I did find a very recent Miss America pageant winner who did compete in child beauty pageants. Xxxxx Xxxxxx, winner of Miss America in #### competed in child beauty pageants, just a few years before Jon Benet competed. Now is HE going to say that Miss Xxxxxx has issues? Was she sexualized as a child? Or did she simply do something she wanted to do and have her parents support her 100% in that endeavor? Hmmmmmm, you be the judge.

Well Mister what have you to say for yourself now? A very well-adjusted adult woman competed in child beauty pageants and she did not turn out sexualized. She turned out pretty darn great if you ask me.

Letter to the Editor: 'What I know is best for our family has no sympathy in the court system.'

Letter to the Editor: 'What I know is best for our family has no sympathy in the court system.'

This letter is in response to "No Contact Orders Expand State Power, Split Up Families."

I am in a situation exactly like this, my 3 boys are not allowed to be around their father because of a no contact bond for an incident that took place in 9/2009. NO one cares what happens to my family even after a letter written by DFACS that it was unhealthy for our children to be away from my husband, but the DA doesn't care about that or my opinion. I am not a victim of DV and never will be, but what I know is best for our family has no sympathy in the court system. Is this what I pay my taxes for? To be treated like this...I guess so!

- Melinda, Monroe, Georgia

Well.....................

This letter is in response to "No Contact Orders Expand State Power, Split Up Families."

I am in a situation exactly like this, my 3 children are are forced into contact with their father because of shared parenting laws. No one cares what happens to my family even after a letter written by DCF that it was unhealthy for our children to be near my husband, but the DA doesn't care about that or my opinion. I am a victim of DV and always will be as long as these travesties are ignored, but what I know is best for our family has no sympathy in the court system. Is this what I pay my taxes for? To be treated like this...I guess so!

- Jane, Miami, Florida

Just received this letter and the heads up from Jane with link at top to article :-) And I wonder which one is closer to fact?

This is your brain on PAS/PA/PAD

Remember those scare tactic videos about your brain on drugs? Don't know about you but they worked for me. Now lets take this on a new spin. What is someone who believes PA/PAS/PAD doing to their brains? Why are women the only ones ever accused of alienation or gatekeeping? We have a case here which to my eye appears to have the ever present gatekeeping and alienation tactics happening.

So quick run down on this story. Mom "allegedly" kidnaps child and returns to her native country amid accusations by her of violence in the marriage. Mother remarries after divorce has another child and dies in childbirth. Father to older child goes on rampage in order to secure custody of older child - even amid allegations of violence by mother's family in foreign country and mother's widowed current spouse. Father eventually uses American politicians and television news stations in order to carry child out of mother's native country. Now grandparents want to see child, want child to have a relationship with half sibling and father refuses.

What do you mean - father refuses? I thought all family should be allowed a relationship with children? Even with mother deceased shouldn't siblings and extended family of mother's be allowed continuing contact with child?

Apparently not and apparently the well known father's rights blogger, Glenn Sacks, REFUSES to run any stories on this "gatekeeping" of the child by FATHER. Even Ken Walker (kc9bdr@yahoo.com) agrees that Father should be allowed to keep child from maternal family - in fact he even quotes: "The maternal grandparents take the grandson to Brazil for 5 years, (mother dies) then complain when they don't get placement. Give it time!". Mother does this and it is automatically a given that mother is gatekeeping and engaging in PA/PAS/PAD. So why is this not true for FATHER? Is FATHER not gatekeeping and possibly engaging in PA/PAS/PAD? The child in question has been around the maternal relatives for years now. Are we punishing another innocent young child by denying that child the RIGHT to have a relationship with the older sibling?

Well, let me explain this so you get it really good, okay? Just as in this commercial about heroin use, PA/PAS/PAD has some rules too.

Women are the only ones who can gatekeep a child. Ladies, ladies. Here's how it works. It's only PAS/PA when we accuse you of doing it. When WE do the exact thing we just accused you of doing ("gatekeeping," obstructing visitation, etc.) it doesn't count. WE are the ONLY ones who can protect our children. These children are not your children, they are only our children. Just like that nice new car we fought for in the divorce, just like the house. Oh and forget about any equitable split, that is all ours too. Any questions?

So go back and watch the video again.

Frying pan is PAS/PA/PAD.

Egg is your brain.

And the violence you see portrayed is what COULD happen if PA/PAS/PAD is bought hook, line, and sinker. Our children, our future will be destroyed if abusers are allowed to continue to use JUNK SCIENCE in order to remove protective parents from a child's life and place children with an alleged abuser. Do we want to place these children with potential alleged abusers? Don't know about you but I do not. And now a young child is being denied a relationship with a sibling by a father and Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, and who knows who else in the FATHER'S RIGHT MOVEMENT think this father is completely justified. Ken by his own words, and Sacks by his lack of words. Or is it just that as long as it is a father who is being allegedly denied this is a travesty that must (MUST!!!) be rectified, but when it is a mother or maternal relatives - ahhh who cares? One need only look at the case of Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz in Texas to see this is true. Where are the Ken Walker's, the Glenn Sacks for this mom who has proof of abuse, has court orders granting her custody of this child? The courts were TRICKED into turning the boy over to father. He did this ILLEGALLY yet we see nobody in the Father's Rights Movement speaking to the tragedy of this court's actions.

Oh gee I keep forgetting. That is because the parent who is being denied the child is MOM. Who cares about moms right? After all, the only thing moms are good for is carrying the child, giving birth to the child, feeding the child life supporting breast milk. When the child can walk and talk, the mother should be gone. Fathers are the only important ones now.

ANY QUESTIONS?

Ode to Glenn Sacks

There was a triangular man once I heard of...
He says he's Glenn Sacks- did I hear that right?
You google your name and his name as a couple...
And thereby promptly goes your sight.

Your eyes hurt and blink- pain does need super courage,
You can't understand why they give such a flop?
Is that just his Photo, or writing of garbage?
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

Consistence and Glenn Sacks - these two have a rub;
You ask him for truth and like horse - he'll gallop;
These simple requests forever he'll snub,
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

To call him a man would be like hocus-pocus,
Like April Fouls's joke, anecdote at the top,
He bravely beats women - that only his focus;
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

One mom's thrown in jail, while the bum has her kids;
Another one raped, psychopath is on top -
Glenn Sacks runs to help - and he falls and he skids,
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

Glenn's their beacon of hope, and their best spokesman,
Abusers' protecting super fast antelope,
He glorifies rape, he's abusers' TRUE fan,
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

Truth begs, and truth pleads, and reminds, and cajoles
Glenn - loud, and wide, human-like isotope,
But supplications like these went into the black holes, of
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

To make his point here -he claims "corrupt courts";
Next page - his position's bent like periscope;
His "findings" spread; slither, like snakes of all sorts,
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

You will live on the streets, for abusers to see,
With all your belongings and "findings" on blacktop,
Some lessons come hard for half-humans, like YE,
Triangular Man- when your whining will stop?

They's throw you breadcrusts and weep at your site;
You will be discarded, like that poor Mop,
You can't change the truth, it will always stay right.
Triangular Man - when your whining will stop?

So please heed the warnings and destruction avoid,
You sound like well-fed, abuser's pet parrot,
Stop lying, stop twisting and not become unemployed;
Triangular Man - you bring shame to our Planet!

Written by good Mother.

***************************************************************************
Explanation of what Triangular Man looks like (no head basically, and fat downward):

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/TriangularPrism.html

One from the man himself - this needs no commentary

4 Glenn Sacks 01.28.09 at 7:22 pm
Scarlett has a point–When I wrote this I assumed the Minister meant this for cases when the woman was the first one to hit or strike the man. This is actually not clear–the Minister might have only meant the woman initiated the conflict without hitting/pushing, etc. If it’s only words, that’s different–verbal or emotional abuse is wrong, too, but it’s not the same as domestic violence. –GS]

Find this at: http://deanesmay.com/2009/01/28/outrage-justice-minister-fired-for-stating-obvious-truth-about-domestic-violence/#comment-168097

Will the MRA's ever leave Holly Collins and Jennifer Collins alone?????

I doubt it. He is getting too much free press by using this story of heartache. He is using Jennifer, Holly and their siblings in order to further a dangerous stance - the stand that all parents deserve or "have the right" to equal custody. NO THEY DO NOT!!! When on parent is abusive, then he/she shoudl not be allowed to influence children in any way. The children who are now grown have stated the father not only abused their mother, but also them. GS get over yourself and find some other story to talk about. Quit using and FURTHER ABUSING this mother and her GROWN children!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tila Tequila's DV Charges Against NFL's Merriman Dropped, Tequila Plans Civil Suit

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=4222

The bruises are pictured above. They could have been made by Merriman and, frankly, they could be anything. They could be makeup, bruises from something else, bruises because he grabbed her to prevent her driving drunk, or a multitude of other things. Some women bruise very easily--I've no idea if Tequila is one of them.

Okay let's go through these one at a time.

They could be makeup MAKEUP?!?!?!? Like she has the time to do something like this and to even make sure that the bruises "match" as time goes on?, bruises from something else WHAT ELSE?!?!?!?!?, bruises because he grabbed her He should not have "GRABBED HER" PERIOD, he could have alerted law enforcement to prevent her driving drunk, or a multitude of other things WHAT OTHER THINGS?!?!??!?!?!?!. Some women bruise very easily--I've no idea if Tequila is one of them Who cares if she bruises easily or normally or if it takes a herd of elephants trampling her to make her bruise - the point is he touched her inappropriately, she bruised as a result. Whether she bruised or not is irrelevant, he TOUCHED HER INAPPROPRIATELY!!!! He should be charged!!!!.

Now let's go back to the opening sentence in this little diatribe:

They could have been made by Merriman and, frankly, they could be anything.The real question "BS" GS is this:

Should this alleged perpetrator be allowed to put his hands on another person because of his alleged reason? There is ABSOLUTELY no reason anyone should touch anyone else for any reason. PERIOD!!!! Put that in your woman hating pipe and smoke it!!!!!

Now I wonder what his cultists have to say about this issue?

We might get the makings for an omelette very soon

It seems that "certain" mens rights bloggers have egg on their face. Not once but twice in as many days. First as mentioned on this awesome blog "Rights For Mothers" HERE, this MRA/FR blogger also had posted (quite prematurely in fact) that the wife of boxer Arturro Gatti had been charged with his murder. Now it seems to me, that maybe just maybe, this "certain" MRA/FR blogger should really wait before spouting off...... Or he could continue typing and give us the onions, mushrooms, cheese, tomatoes, and peppers for some really decent omelettes. Wonder which he will choose?

I sure would much rather see the veggies, eggs than the pants down as suggested above :-) That is a scary thought......

Ahhhhh he closed comments on that post poor (ball) sacky (oo-pay)...

...couldn't stand it any longer....

He had to go and close comments. Shucks and I was having soooooo much fun posting the rants and raves of the "wonderful" MRA and FR activists...

Oh well there will be another day......Can't keep those loonies down long Glenny.

LINK

gwallan tells it all.....

gwallan says:
I've been reliably informed that New Friend was banned by Glenn Sacks due to persistant personal abuse. Glenn was quite happy to give her an opportunity but her use of a fraudulent email address prevented any negotiation toward that end.


Posted On: Tuesday, Dec. 2 2008 @ 9:30PM

You may access this by clicking here. gwallan lets the world know that the reason for my being banned from Sacks' site is due to personal abuse? Where oh where did I personally abuse anyone? I can name hundreds of instances where "I" was personally abused by his cult followers and "I" reacted in kind, but to say I initiated personal attacks and abuse is....well....typical.....

gwallan says:
Yes new Friend. We understand your paranoia and narcissism. You have our sympathy.

Glenn Sacks has tried to communicate with you over your personal attacks. You made that impossible.

I quote from Glenn...
"New Friend" was banned because she repeatedly violated rule # 1 of My Rules on Blog Comments prohibiting "Personal attacks." Normally when someone violates the rules I send them a note explaining what the violation was. If they continue over and over again, I'll ban them, but usually not until they've had several chances. Because "New Friend" refused to leave a valid email address, I had no way of communicating with her after she violated the rules, so eventually I banned her. She could come back if she wants, but only with a valid email address."

I must also point out that I did come back, provided a "valid" email address (an email address that I created, I use, and nobody else has access to this email address, and not only was I banned, but all of my posts were also removed. How is that for double standards? Petunia already has her opinion...set in stone also I might add. What is your opinion gentle readers?

The KING himself is concerned?!?!?!?!?

2) That being said, Yoshida looks so small and frail that I'm a bit concerned about her ability to handle sharp comebackers. Hopefully she's got good reflexes.

2) She throws a sidearm knuckleball--very rare. The only one I ever heard of doing that was Dan Quisenberry, who only used it for a couple years and it wasn't his main pitch. If she can actually throw this pitch, she may be very durable, considering that the knuckleball takes far less out of your arm than other pitches, and the sidearm motion is more natural than the conventional overhand motion. From the video above, there seems to be very little stress on her arm.

3) One thing that I think will be difficult for her is hitting. Pitchers aren't expected to hit much, but they do have to do it a little. Does anybody know if the Japanese leagues use the Designated Hitter rule? That would increase her chances.

Oh Sackypoo, she is just oh so small and oh so frail, we must protect the little womyn....PLEASE!!!!!! Women can do whatever they want, whenever they want. If a woman wants to be POTUS, then she by god has the right to try to do so. If she wants to care for her children by being a SAHM, then she can do that too. WOMEN do not need tubs o' lard like you to protect us. Lose the knight in shining armor act. It does not become you at all.

Oh and learn how to number too.....

Moms killing themselves? Not likely - dads are beating us to the punch...

These are some of the headlines which greeted Parenting Magazine’s new “Mad at Dad” survey which found that 31% of mothers get “little or no help” with childcare and 46% of mothers “get irate with their husbands once a week or more.” The New York Times called the survey “disturbing,” while a Washington Post columnist announced that mothers are “literally killing themselves.”

This was lifted from Glenn Sacks website (http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3437) - I will not directly link you will have to work to go to his site. My point over this post and Sacks' misinformation is simply this. One need only look at the recent headlines to see that while women work hard, men are actually killing women (and children, aunts, uncles, grandparents, and basically anyone who gets in their way).

In Florida there has been one murder/suicide carried out by a man every week for the last month. People excuse these murders by blaming the economy or anything so we do not have to truly look at the cause of the problem (angry and controlling men). I have to point out that one of these men (the most recent perp of a murder/suicide) decided to try to take out a police officer (he did not succeed with that task thankfully) as well as his girlfriend, her son, and himself. The news reports state that he was in the midst of a foreclosure. Then we have those same reporters go on to discuss the arsenal this man had in his possession and the lethality and cost of those weapons. One of the weapons in this man's arsenal was a 50 caliber ammo and weapon.

One of the local news shows did a recent story on all of the weapons that Langford had at his disposal and by selling these weapons, any "financial" issues that plagued this man could have been dispatched quickly. According to this local news show, a 50 caliber assault rifle can cost anywhere from 2,000 to 12,000 dollars. This was only one of numerous handguns, rifles, and weaponry at this monster's disposal. To see the weapons available to this man click HERE and watch the video.

You can also learn by going through Orlando Senntinel's website coverage of this case that Langford's ex-wife sought dv injunctions on two separate occasions.

Petunia deduces this was not a man ravaged by guilt over financial issues, she believes this was another man who was not able to control his victims any longer.

And in short order we now have more victims to add to the statistics of dv.

Spam?!?!?!? OR Have you missed lil ol' me?

Well I have been super busy this week, brainstorming with my sisters, working, being a great mom to the kiddoes... I have also been cybersleuthing and more. I knew I should have been a PI in another life...well maybe my next life :-)

Now onto today's business at hand. This would be ironic if it weren't so dam funny. I had been on Glenn's email list for quite a while under another email addy, however due to stalking issues by my ex, I had long ago abandoned that email. I however am in possession of his latest tripe over the fiasco by Conway selectman Crow Dickinson's comments regarding domestic violence - he in fact stated that women will use dv as a tool in divorce. His exact comment follows:

"There are a lot of women who use (domestic violence) as a gimmick in divorce proceedings," Selectman Crow Dickinson said in explaining his vote. "All they have to do is call the police and get the person thrown out. If I call the police and say you're abusing me, they'd have to believe me. I wish people would split up and be more polite about it."

Now what is so ironic about this (and hence the reason for the title of this article), is that I want to send out a commendation for Yahoo. Seems Yahoo believes that Glenn Sacks' newsletter is spam!!!! The proof (as they say) is in the pudding and a picture speaks a thousand words. Just see below:



Now I suppose those poor picked on Loonies (as Glenn Calls them) will come up with a reason for this. I am on many mother's groups and seldom does one hit my Spam folder, not on Yahoo, not in Gmail. Now if we could just work on those three little letters (PAS) and have Yahoo declare those Spam as well, abused mothers and children will be safe. Hmmmmmm...............

KUDOS YAHOO FOR RECOGNIZING SPAM AS SPAM!!!!

Moderation????? Hmmmmmmm............

A comment left that may or may not be approved on a fellow blogger's website:

I consider your site essentially no better than a hate crime against children and fathers. You will go down in history as a nut case. Your moderation alone shows you work to prevent the trusth from getting out for some sick motive.

Now why is it not okay for us to moderate our blogs and protect the sometimes very fragile abuse victims who may frequent our sites? Now I am not one of those fragile victims, I am mor in line with a fed-up victim. I am tired of being re-victimized every chance they get. And seriously "Anonymous" (one must wonder about those so afraid to even give a handle - as to what your motives are. May I also point out on Sacks' website, the moderation in place. I managed to "get around" the blocks he had in place against me, only to be deleted. His first excuse? No valid email. One must wonder what his second excuse will be since I GAVE a valid email address at this go-around?

I will not hold my breath awaiting his answer :-)

Now as for this lowly piece of dog doo, come out come out wherever you are. Oh gee I forgot, you can't because you are HIDING (behind that magical word - ANONYMOUS!!!!! The question with you (not Sacks - I am done with him for the moment) is what are YOU hiding from?

Links directly to my posts (and others) that are no longer available?

These are all posts which will no longer work on this page. This is due to the deletion of my 5 or 6 posts. Lets see I will try to recount all of those posts for you. The first one I wrote a vague commentary on the article. mca (menscollegeactivist) then addressed me and his posts were deleted as well. Jason then decided to join his brother in arms with this post:

26
Jason Says:

February 22nd, 2009 at 8:42 pm
"Yet the men on here (and some women) say that when a woman has beaten a conviction in court, she is being given a sentencing discount."

Um... no.

What people mean when they talk about a sentencing discount is that when comparing men and women who have been convicted of the same crime, women tends to receive more lenient punative measures.

This is not the same thing as beating a conviction altogether.

You have misunderstood the terminology and how it is used.

Several more of my posts are then deleted again (again none with foul language, all asking if we could discuss this matter civilly as I had read through most of the report quoted in the quoted newspaper article. Jason then said something to the effect of two other hated female posters on that blog were "attacking" him as was I in his opinion and one of these women had some sort of obsession over his "private areas". I then asked him if he would provide a link to the obsession over his private areas by georgia girl, and he refused (makes me think he quite possibly HOPED georgia girl had this obsession, but again that is just my opinion. I challenge anyone to find this so-called obsession on gg's part over Jason's private parts. I pride myself on being somewhat Internet search savvy, and I could not locate it.

Norman then jumps into the fray by adding his two cents into the mix (which I might add has NOT been deleted):

30
Norman L. Says:

February 23rd, 2009 at 2:12 am
Jason,

sounds like a loser, doesn't she?

If you choose to read the rest of the attacks on New friend or Glenn's Cult (well at least the ones that were left up by GS or RF) you may do so by clicking Petunia.

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747880

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747771

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747799

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747774

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747732

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747860

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747751

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747759

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747830

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747799

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747722

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-747829

Now to show you that these links do work for the active posts which are viewable right now please go to:

jeana's post, one of Jason's MANY posts, now one must wonder why my posts were deleted? I followed GS's rules, I provided a good email address. It is my firm opinion that GS and the others involved in this attempt to beat women down, must not ever allow anyone who shows credibility the permission to post. It also goes against everything the cult followers of this entity state. GS does censore his website. My only question is

What are you in fear of GS?