Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - woof

When is the defence going to request that all charges be dropped?   :-\
This is classic!.......... I don't suppose she can see anything wrong with this statement and her actions.  ???  :o ......higher education my ass!

Holloway was one of 88 faculty members at Duke who endorsed an ad last April in the campus newspaper that included anonymous quotes from students discussing racism and sexual assault on Duke's campus.

"Despite our judgments about the prosecutor's own lack of principled conduct, it is not ours to become the judge or subvert the process," she wrote.
Main / Re: "The Orwellian Bubble"
Jan 07, 2007, 07:13 AM
I'm not sure where this quote comes from, I think it's a Buddist(sp?) saying.

"We don't see the world the way it is, we see the world the way we are."...... in other words we  only see what we believe we see.

The power our beliefs can be seen in Iraqi, with the suicide bombers.  :(

In a lot of ways mordern feminism looks like a cult, because of how you have to "blindly" believe what they say, and anyone who "questions" it is condemed and scorned.

I think that the children born under the feminist flag will set things right, in time..... 8)
This father wrote a book about the very corruption that this judge is talking about only to have his book banned from publication.

Lowell Sun - Judge bans book - beginning to get noticed!

Posted in News by ANCPR on the March 29th, 2006

Lowell Sun Online - TODAYS HEADLINES


METHUEN -- With the stroke of a pen, a Family Court judge has "swept away the Bill of Rights" by banning content in a Methuen father's book, a fathers' advocacy group charges.

Judge Mary McCauley Manzi issued an order last week restraining Kevin Thompson from using impounded court records, pictures and personal information in his new book, Exposing the Corruption in the Massachusetts Family Courts -- an autobiography about losing full custody of his 4-year-old son, Patrick, whom he is allowed to see 10 hours each week.

Describing the ruling as an attack on his constitutional rights, Thompson said he has no doubt that the judge's decision is personal. An entire chapter in the book is dedicated to Thompson's dealings with Manzi.

"These people working in the courts with black robes on that we have to call your honor, have no honor," said Thompson, 44, and a physics teacher at Methuen High School. "This action is exactly the kind of thing my book is about, the unfair treatment of fathers and the constitutional rights that are violated every day in family courts."

After last Wednesday's hearing at the Essex County Probate and Family Court, Thompson had to wait to receive the judge's ruling, which arrived in the mail on Friday. Along with the complete case file, Manzi impounded her decision in the Lawrence court, not to be accessed until 2021.

The judge did not return The Sun's phone calls, but noted in her ruling that "impoundment is necessary to protect the best interests including the privacy interests of the parties' minor child."

Attorney Debra Dow, who represents Patrick's mother, Kathleen Moran, said the judge acted in accordance with the law. Thompson, said Dow, used information and testimony for his book from Department of Social Service reports that had been impounded since June 2004. Dissemination of personal information including mental health, medical issues, daycare providers and photos were also prohibited by the court, said Dow.

"My client has sole physical and legal custody so (Thompson) does not have the ability to utilize that information without her permission," said Dow.

Thompson said nothing in the book endangers his son's well-being, and argues all content is necessary for substantiating his claims that the state's family court system is corrupt.

"To ban that information pretty much makes my book meaningless," Thompson said.

Moran didn't know the book existed until Patrick brought to her attention that his father had written it and promised to let him read it when he was old enough.

So Moran asked the court to ban portions of the book that were "unacceptable for publication." She said publishing the book without her and Patrick's personal information shouldn't impact Thompson's message.

"It's very sad," said Moran, also a schoolteacher in Methuen. "All the arguing, it's been a terrible, awful struggle. I feel like (Patrick) is being robbed of his childhood."

Seeing her son's photo on the back cover of the book, added Moran, was jarring.

"My son and I are two real-life, flesh-and-blood victims of the corruption described and sustained in my book," said Thompson, who has fought for joint physical and legal custody for the past three years. "The picture puts a face to that injustice."

Thompson's book does not grace shelves at local bookstores. Finding it requires an Internet connection. It is self-published and available through, an independent publishing marketplace. Consumers can download a copy for $9, or buy a printed book version for $20.

According to the Lulu Web site, it is a "technology company, not a publisher."

"If anyone calls with a plausible legal issue, we would suspend the content," said Stephen Fraser, spokesman for

As of yesterday, Fraser said the company has received no word from the courts, or from any individuals disputing the book.

Thompson hasn't appealed the judge's order yet, but says he is planning to take his case to federal court.

"I'm ignoring (Manzi's) ruling. The judge had no jurisdiction in making the ruling," he said. "It is null and void."

Meanwhile, Ned Holstein, founder of the parental advocacy group, Fathers and Families, pledged to stand by Thompson -- who currently represents himself -- and "uphold his First Amendment rights." Holstein believes Manzi should have recused herself from the case due to a conflict of interest since the book criticizes her judicial actions.

"The Family Court has lost all sight of the Constitution in this matter and in many others," Holstein said, calling the ruling a "trifecta of tyranny."

Manzi's ruling, according to Holstein, is the latest attempt at halting grass-roots efforts to change child-custody laws in Massachusetts by silencing supporters. Different versions of "shared parenting" bills, giving equal time with kids to both parents, have been filed on Beacon Hill for the past five years, but none have been voted on. The most recent, House Bill 919, calls on judges to begin custody cases with a presumption of joint legal and physical custody unless a parent is deemed unfit. Holstein fears, like the bills before it, this one will also lose steam.

"I wish we could put this bitterness aside," said Thompson. "A child needs both parents in their lives."

Rita Savard's e-mail address is [email protected].

Margaret Chan has taken up her position as the new head of the World Health Organisation and said she wanted her leadership to be judged on how she helps improve the health of women and Africans.
Ok, you got it.
Women already out live men around the world so, I would say that this goal makes you a sexiest pig and a dumb ass.
From amazon......

Book Description
For the first time, a sitting judge blows the whistle on America's out-of-control courts.

A judge for more than twenty years, Robert Dierker has enjoyed a distinguished legal career. But now that career may be on the line. Why? Because he is breaking the code of silence that has long kept judges from speaking out to present a withering account of how radical liberals run roughshod over the Constitution, waging war on the laws of nature, the laws of reason, and the law of God.

Even those outraged by America's courts will be shocked by Judge Dierker's story of activist judges, deep-pocketed special interest groups, pandering politicians, and others who claim to stand for tolerance, equal rights, and social justice, but actually stand for something quite different--something closer to totalitarianism.

Citing not only Judge Dierker's own experiences but dozens of other recent court cases, The Tyranny of Tolerance shows how the courts enable left-wing activists to ram their dangerous agenda down the throats of the American people. Consider:

Why do the courts claim the power to tax us?
Why is a Christian fired when he voices opposition to his employer's favoring homosexuals?
Why are airline pilots sued and sent to "diversity training" for recommending that suspicious-looking people of Middle Eastern appearance be kept off planes?
Why does a judge who defends a monument to the Ten Commandments in a courthouse lose his job?
Why are speech codes imposed on employers, university students, lawyers (and judges!), while "artistic" indecency is protected from even the mildest regulation?
Why are peaceful abortion protesters thrown in jail, their right to free speech crushed?
Why are white and Asian students denied admission to colleges and universities in the name of "diversity"?
Why is an enemy fighter captured in Afghanistan granted access to U.S. federal courts, overturning judicial precedent safeguarding the president's wartime powers--to say nothing of common sense?

With this passionate insider's account, Judge Dierker reminds Americans what's at stake in the battle for the courts: the Constitution, the success of the war on terrorism, the freedom to worship God, the ability to keep our families safe, the institution of marriage, and much more.

Fortunately, Judge Dierker shows how we can defeat the radical liberals' tyranny of tolerance. By wresting back control of the courts and restoring the legal, moral, and religious principles embedded in the Constitution, we can ultimately reclaim the republic the Founders bequeathed to us.

About the Author
Robert H. Dierker Jr. is a circuit judge of the Twenty-Second Judicial Circuit of Missouri. Before becoming a judge in 1986, he clerked for the Missouri Court of Appeals, worked in private practice, and served as assistant and associate counselor for the City of St. Louis. Judge Dierker holds his A.B. degree from St. Louis University, his J.D. degree from the University of Missouri at Kansas City, and his LL.M. degree from Harvard University.

My hats off to Mr. Robert Dierker!
There is clearly a need for this law, but I find it hard to believe a judge would put a mother in jail.......too many knights needing to save the fairy princess.  :o

40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the fathers visitation to punish their ex-spouse. ["Frequency of Visitation" by Sanford Braver, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry]
50% of mothers see no value in the fathers continued contact with his children. ["Surviving the Breakup" by Joan Berlin Kelly]

  * "Mothers may prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their marital or post-marital relationship." (Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family, Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)
    * In a study: "Visitational Interference - A National Study" by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent. In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept. 1992

Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated 16%.(Source: EDK Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November 1994, p. 36)
    * "The former spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent contact with the children." (Source: Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July 1991.)

  The following are recent statistics about children of divorce and separation from the newsletter Common Sense & Domestic Violence, 1998 01 30

Allegations of family violence are the weapon-of-choice in divorce strategies. Lawyers, and paralegals in women's shelters, call them "The Silver Bullet". False abuse allegations work effectively in removing men from their families. The impact that the removal of fathers has on our children is horrific.

The Impact on our Children Inter-spousal violence perpetrated by men is only a small aspect of family violence. False abuse allegations are only a small tile in the mosaic of vilifying the men in our society. They serve well in successful attempts to remove fathers from the lives of our children.
Main / Re: Women are superior in every way.
Jan 02, 2007, 06:11 PM
"In twenty years men's dominance will be broken and women will have more power in society. There will be more female CEO's and the wage gap will favour women," researcher Ingemar Gens told magazine Att:ention.

Experts have also observed that smart women are struggling to find common ground with members of the opposite sex.

"There will soon be a large collective of uneducated, low-paid men who don't have any friends, and are unmarried and alone - as well as uninteresting for women looking for a relationship."

"This is already happening, but the problem is beginning to accelerate. This is a huge danger for men," said Gens.

LOL.......what are they smokin over in Sweden these days! .....this is comical!!  :D

Didn't they just pass a law that forces companies to have X amount of female excutives?

Are there that many woman who want to be married to a company being a CEO, (not very touchy feely) vs having a family?

Excuse me, but if smart women can't find smart men to hang out with, who's problem is it?
Note what a burden this law would put on the legal system and not one word about the best interest of the children. Anyway, progress none the less, if passed.

Martinez files child custody bill
December 26,2006
Elizabeth Pierson
Monitor Staff Writer

AUSTIN -- State Rep. Armando "Mando" Martinez, D-Weslaco, has filed a bill that would make violating a temporary child custody order punishable by two years in jail.

Violation of a temporary order from a judge is already a crime because it is considered contempt of court. But Martinez's bill would place the violation in the penal code on the same level as violation of a permanent order.

Martinez had personal experience with a temporary child custody order earlier this year, during a heated divorce battle with his ex-wife. When repeatedly asked whether he filed the bill based on that experience, Martinez refused to say.

"All I'm going to say is that when a temporary order is violated, it's not enforced; but it is signed by a judge, so that's what gave me the idea," he said. "I believe a temporary order should have the same type of bearing."

Even if the bill passes, district attorneys will almost certainly not prosecute, said Jack Sampson, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law and expert in family law and legislative process.

Slapping criminal charges on a party during a messy divorce dispute could make a bad situation worse for all parties involved, especially before the court has made its final determination about what is best for the children, he said.

When asked whether district attorneys would be unlikely to prosecute under the proposed law, he said: "I think 'unlikely' states it too mildly. 'Assuredly' is more accurate."

With larger, more important cases not prosecuted because of lack of resources and overcrowded jails, local prosecutors have to pick their battles, he said.

"One thing the Legislature can and does (do) every session is pass a whole bunch of new laws making additional conduct prosecutable by criminal (statute)," Sampson said.

"But the county commissioners would freak out if somehow everybody who got cross-eyed over a divorce somehow ended up ... in the Travis County or the Cameron County jail."

Martinez said he simply wants to make sure district attorneys have the option of prosecuting when a temporary order is violated.

"Hey, that's up to them if they don't want to prosecute it," Martinez said.
Main / Re: Define "victory"
Jan 02, 2007, 07:35 AM

At what point does the men's movement declare "Mission Accomplished" and close up shop?
When woman re-discover the value and virtrues of men.
Main / Re: Are men evil?
Jan 01, 2007, 05:08 AM

This guy thinks that men who support mens rights are potential abusers.

In his book examining the nature of evil Roy Baumeister (1997) describes a number of key characteristics of perpetrators of violence:

They often feel their actions are justified, as they themselves are victims.
They often have over-inflated and fragile egos or sense of self-worth.
Their identity is strongly tied to identifying an "in-group" and demonising outsiders
They often downplay the importance of their actions.
They commonly set up situations in which violence is almost inevitable.
They tend to think in terms of short-term gains, rather than long-term consequences.
They tend to deal with being confronted with their actions by citing external causes.

Read the whole article on the link.
Please discuss.

Look at his references.......Solanas, Flood, National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women........trash in = trash out.


Access Economics, 2004, The cost of domestic violence to the Australian economy : part I. Partnerships Against Domestic Violence, Office of the Status of Women, Canberra.

Baumeister, R. F. 1997, Evil: Inside Human Cruelty and Violence. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York.

Dubin, M. 2003, Men As Victims of Intimate Violence, Communities Against Violence Network.

Flood, M. 1999, When men are subject to violence.

Kimmel, M. (2002). "Gender symmetry in domestic violence: A substantive and methodological research review." Violence Against Women, Vol. 8, No. 11. Special Issue: Women's Use of Violence in Intimate Relationships, Part 1.

O'Neal, D.,2004, Men's Rights, Altnews.

Solanas, V. ,1971,. SCUM (Society for Cutting Up Men) Manifesto. London, Olympia Press: Pans.

Walter S. DeKeseredy and Martin D. Schwartz, 1998,. Measuring the Extent of Woman Abuse in Intimate Heterosexual Relationships: A Critique of the Conflict Tactics Scales, National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women.
Main / Re: Another Way to Have Hubby Arrested
Dec 31, 2006, 08:03 AM

I hope his wife who controlled the finances was dependant on his income. If she was all he has t do is open his own  bank account when he gets annother job. I say when he gets annother job because I doubt he has a job after two months in the county lock up.
I would venture a guess that the same DV law that would allow for him to be arrested for using his own car would also make it illegal for him to do this.
He needs to get away from her, hopefully their are no children to keep him around, cause if it worked this time it will work again.

I met a guy who was arrested for hot wiring his own car. His wife was yelling and hitting him, and when he tried to leave she took the keys to the car, and rather than try and wrestle them from her, he hot wired the car and left........he was the one arrested for DV!
Main / Re: More Title IX Nonsense
Dec 30, 2006, 05:34 AM
Kudo's to the Michigan High School Athletic Ass'n for fighting this crap!

Don't expect shit to happen.

In a statement, the bar said it opened a case against Nifong in March 30, a little more than two weeks after the party where a 28-year-old student at North Carolina Central University hired to perform as a stripper said she was raped.

They knew early on that the case was crap but they haven't acted or even said anything when he was up for election. It is just a CYA move by the BAR who will later say there was nothing they could really do.

Yes.  I was left wondering the same thing.  If they were aware of the infractions back in March why would they wait until now to spring it on him?  CYA seems to be one of the possibilities.  I would like to know how these cases are usually handled before coming to any quick judgements here.  Does anyone know of a case like this where something similar happened?
I agree, it's a CYA move, but Nifong's going to be the fall guy. If there wasn't so much media attention the whole thing would probably be swept under the rug.
I suspect that the NC Bar is trying to keep the Feds from investagating their whole office so they are going to throw Nifong in with the sharks, to placate the masses.
Well, I think that this law makes all woman designated drivers for their man who can drink when they go out to a party.   :D