The battle for the family — Front-line news

August 16, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

 Prison Planet.com » Police Were Ordered To Stand Down As London Burnedwww.prisonplanet.com

Precisely as we reported yesterday on the back of numerous eyewitness reports, it has now emerged that police were ordered to stand down and let London burn during the first few nights of rioting, an action that quickly led to a frightened public to demand troops on the streets, rubber bullets, …

Marcus Simon’s commentary in relation to the causes of the London riots makes sense. It fits something I read a long time ago. I’ll quote that in the first comment after the pointer to Marcus Simon’s commentary.

ConservativeHome’s Platform: Simon Marcus: Listen to the children

conservativehome.blogs.com

Simon founded the Boxing Academy in 2006 which is based in Tottenham and Hackney. He was also the Conservative Candidate in Barking in 2010, beating the BNP into 3rd place. Before this Simon was involved in small business management and…

Children in Quebec

SOS Quebec - A children’s gulag. Corruption and collusion in the Quebec Youth Justice System and DPJ

www.sosquebec.com

In 2006 over 30,000 children were seized from Quebec families by youth authorities (DPJ)in 2006, processed in secret trials, and placed in institututions or forced adoption programs. Years of secrecy and a total lack of accountability have created a culture of impunity …

Harriet Harman, Lord of the Flies, fatherlessness, lone-mother households, looting by kids and adults, total breakdown of moral order, … take your pick or any combination of any and all of the causes and consequences.

UK riots 2011: Britain’s liberal intelligentsia has smashed virtually every social value

www.dailymail.co.uk

Those of us who warned over the years that they were playing with fire were sneered at and smeared as Right-wing nutters.

People are waking up to the consequences of fatherlessness.

What lies beneath the social unrest in Britain?

networkedblogs.com

A surprising range of people (from British Prime Minister David Cameron to reporters and social commentators) are all pointing at the same fundamental problems in the wake of the riots in the UK–the loss of foundational morality and self-restraint, the breakdown of the family, and fatherlessness. He….

When there are not enough men…

Armenia’s villages of women

www.bbc.co.uk

The Armenian tradition of men going away to work in Russia is leaving whole villages almost entirely populated by women, the BBC’s Damien McGuinness reports.
_______________
A few comments about that:

It begins with men being slandered and vilified. Then they are being discriminated against and marginalized. They leave their families or shy away from wanting families and will go to where the jobs are and more security for men can be found. But that is not all.

Take a look at the consequence of socialism with respect to the life expectancies of the sexes in countries where socialism and “equal” rights for women have made the biggest advances:

________

Differences in the life expectancies of the sexes (2009)

fathersforlife.org

Life expectancy of the sexes as per data collected in the year 2009
________

Mind you, Armenian men are still relatively well off. Their average lifeexpectancy (66 years) is only eight years less than that of Armenian women (74 years)

It follows that the lack of men in Armenia is not only due to many of them having gone to work in Russia, but that many of the absent men quite simply died in far greater numbers than did Armenian women. That provides women with a great advantage. It is much easier to blame dead men for the hardships that must be endured by women.

The fact that Armenian men die in much greater numbers than do Armenian women is of course not worth or smart to mention when raising sympathy for women. It is alright to say that “women’s work is never done” or “never seen”, but sacrifices made by men must *NEVER* be mentioned! We do not wish to destroy the illusion that women are the targets of society’s deliberate neglect and abuse.

Justice for judges — we need more of that.

Pa. judge gets 28 years in ‘kids for cash’ case - USATODAY.com

www.usatoday.com

Pa. judge gets 28 years in ‘kids for cash’ case…

More on the London riots:

World Blog - The sad truth behind London riot

worldblog.msnbc.msn.com

Posted in Judiciary, Civil Rights, Economy, Child Abuse, Corruption, Single-Parent, Paternal Rights, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Family, The New World Order, Men's Issues, Divorce, Education, Child Abduction | Print | 1 Comment »

Tom Ball’s last statement

June 17, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

International Business Times US
June 17, 2011 11:55 AM EDT

American Father Self-Immolates To Protest Against Family Courts

On June 15 around 5:30 pm, a 58-year-old New Hampshire father named Thomas Ball self-immolated in front of the Cheshire County Court House.  Ball was pronounced dead at the scene.

Before he died, he sent a letter [to] The Keene Sentinel to explanation his actions.  The full text of the letter can be found here. (Also in PDF format: Tom Ball’s Last Statement; 133 kB)

Ball said he set himself on fire in front of the courthouse because he was “done being bullied for being a man” by the US family court system.

Ball’s troubled started in April 2011.

He said he slapped his then four-year-old daughter, giving her a cut on the lip, when she refused to obey him after three verbal warnings.

His wife then called the child’s mental health provider.  Ball claimed the health provider told his wife that if she did not call the police, both she and Ball would be arrested….(Full Story)
_______________
Note by F4L: That article is full of errors.

• Tom Ball’s problems did not start in April 2011.  They started in April 2001, when the incident with his daughter occurred and he was arrested for the first time in his life, a Vietnam veteran and 48 years old at the time.

• Tom Ball did say that he was “done being bullied for being a man,” but he did not say that he was being bullied just by the family court system.  He did not even single out the family court system, but he felt that his rights were being violated ever since 2001, by the police, mental health providers (not necessarily the mental health provider of the daughter whom he had disciplined, but one for another daughter), the State of New Hampshire, the State Attorney General, the Legislature, the State Governor’s Office, the U.S. Department of Justice, his Congressmen, Senators, the Federal Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, The U.S. Attorney General’s Task Force on Domestic Violence, the Police department in the nation (at least the 93% of them who are actively engaged in the persecution of men), the police, prosecutors and judges in general, the NH police department, the Jaffrey NH police department, Monadnock Family Services, their lawyer Byron, Judge Sullivan, guardian ad litems, and more, but also the federal government for waging war against men since about 1975 and for running an Office on Violence against Women, even though when the government program for the persecution of men started there were equal numbers of female and male perpetrators of domestic violence.

Tom Ball did his research, and he was no crank. He was a man wronged, wronged like millions of other men (and like some women, as well).

His observations regarding the legal system that put the squeeze on him are right on the mark, and especially his remarks regarding the circumstances, origins and workings of the domestic-violence industry are on target.  Still, I should not have to summarize any of the key point that concerned him.  He wrote a very lucid statement, but obviously not just on the day he killed himself.  That statement is 12 to 15 pages long (depending on the font-size your printer uses).  Read it, you will not regret it.

For instance, did you know that 72 million Americans have been made homeless at one time or another during the 25 years or more that the U.S. Government has been waging its war against men and their families?  As I said, Tom Ball did his work, and he did it well.  Read what he wrote.  I included him in the list of men who broke, at Fathers for Life.  He broke, alright, but he did not crack.  I wish he were still with us.

Tom Ball died for you, for me and for all of our children and grandchildren.

Posted in Judiciary, Civil Rights, Child Support, Economy, Child Abuse, Paternal Rights, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Family, Men's Issues, Media Bias, Suicides, Feminist Jurisprudence | Print | 1 Comment »

The Magic Washing Machine

April 9, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Today I ran across a short video that no one should miss watching.

Hans Rosling and the magic washing machine
By Gapminder, featuring Prof. Hans Rosling

“What was the greatest invention of the industrial revolution? Hans Rosling makes the case for the washing machine. With newly designed graphics from Gapminder, Rosling shows us the magic that pops up when economic growth and electricity turn a boring wash day into an intellectual day of reading.” — Gapminder

Watch the video (nine minutes).  It is a fascinating and spell-binding presentation, as all of Hans Rosling’s presentations are, but this one is one of his best.

Prof. Hans Rosling concludes his presentation with:

Thank you, Industrialization!

Thank you, Steel Mills!

Thank you, Power Stations, and thank you, Chemical-Processing Industry, that they [his mother, his grandmother and all other women of the world] got time to read books.

Thank you very much.  (Which was followed by a very large round of well-deserved applause)

It is an impressive presentation about the wealthy in the world, the plight of poor women and their respective levels of energy consumption.

It stresses the power of democracy and that the poor suffering women in Brazil, for example, were able to elect a woman, the former energy minister of Brazil, as their prime minister, but it does not mention that, in doing so, they established an increasingly oppressive, corrupt, communist, totalitarian regime.

It stresses, with very likable humour, that the wealthy of the world need to reduce their energy consumption and replace half of their remaining energy use with energy from green sources.  However, it does not stress that in doing so right now, food prices escalated in the poor nations so much that hundreds of thousands of people now no longer can afford to eat and therefore starve to death.

It praises the advances brought about by industrialization, steel mills, power stations, the chemical-processing industry (which would include many other technological inventions and processes — including the washing machine that gave Hans Rosling’s mother the time to begin to read books)  and that they were inventions that made women’s lives easier, but it does not praise the innovators, men, whose innovations primarily made women’s lives easier and safer.

In all of the presentations by Hans Rosling that I watched over the years, I noticed that he seems to speak about his mother far more often than Liberace used to speak about his, but he never once mentioned his wife and perhaps only once mentioned his dad, and I wonder why that is.  Does his wife not deserve his concern as much as his mother does?  Is she not a mother, too?  Hans Rosling does have a son.

And what about his dad?  Was it not his dad who brought home the money that his family saved to buy the washing machine that gave his mother time to read?

What about all of the men who worked so hard to improve the living standards for all, who made it possible for all to increase their life expectancies by many years throughout the world, but primarily and far more so for women than for men?

To come back to washing machines.  I had a mother, too, as we all had or have, but I also had a father, just as Hans Rosling and everyone else had or has.  My mother used to wash by hand.  I know, I helped her, and so did all of my siblings.  Our family was very poor.  There was not the chance of a snow ball in Hell that we could ever have saved enough to buy a washing machine, as much as we all would have wanted to, not for as long as we were mired in poverty.

My mother was a very smart woman, she read a lot and studied, but she never once thought of building her own washing machine.  My Dad did.  The agitator for that washing machine he built was driven by water pressure from the water tap, using a two-cycle cylinder and piston on the washing machine.

And yes, my mother read and studied even more, thanks to my Dad, and she thanked him for that.  It is something that apparently never once entered Hans Rosling’s mind and that so many of us forget because we take what men do for granted.  For that reason neither Hans Rosling nor most others ever bother to thank men for making the things and the sacrifices of their lives that make women’s lives so much safer and easier.

Posted in Economy, Men and Women Work | Print | 1 Comment »

The Demise of the Family Wage

April 3, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

There are few people today who know what the family wage was.

Three decades before ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), President Kennedy recognized the need for an amendment to the Social Security Act. He suggested improvements to benefits—including benefits for the disabled—in February 1961. His argument was persuasive, and he succeeded in signing the amendments on June 30, 1961. At the signing, Kennedy called the changes “an additional step toward eliminating many of the hardships resulting from old age, disability or the death of the family wage-earner.”

From Call to Action — the Sixth Floor Museum — Disability Rights
http://www.jfk.org/go/exhibits/call-to-action/disability-rights

I earned a family wage supplement in Germany, before I emigrated to Canada in 1962.  Prior to the early 1960s, it was in place in the USA but also in many nations in Europe, but it was one of the first issues on the agenda of the radical feminists that they had vowed to get abolished, because they claimed it was a symptom of patriarchal oppression.

In 1963 JFK had to give in to pressure by radical feminists, and family wages came to an end in the USA.

The women’s movement of the 19th Century struggled to establish not a male but a family wage. It did not favor men; it favored breadwinners. This policy derived from their primary concern that mothers should be able to devote full time to raising children and managing a home. To do that they had to be provided for, and it was the husband and father who had to do the providing, which meant that he had to earn a wage sufficient to support not only himself but his entire family.

The long enduring effort to institutionalize the family wage eventually succeeded. Robertson writes that “it has been estimated that by 1960 a family wage was paid by 65 percent of all employers in the United States and by 80 percent of the major industrial companies.” He adds, “Although feminist historians today call the family-wage ideal a “myth” designed to keep married women oppressed, few myths have come closer to becoming reality.”[4] He later states that “the family-wage economy that prevailed from 1945 to 1970 was the product of an ideal pursued deliberately, primarily by women’s organizations, through the political process….”[5]

The reversal of the traditional family order, the work of countless family women and men during the previous century, quickly accelerated. By 1963, President Kennedy had established a Women’s Commission which was stacked with career oriented women and in the same year Congress passed an Equal Pay Act, which dealt a blow to the family wage concept.

From “Recovering the American Past with Brian C. Robertson”
A review by Frank Zepezauer
http://fathersforlife.org/hist/all_the_past2.htm

It would be interesting, although that is more than I can handle by myself, to determine the exact time and date when the family wage was brought to an end in each of the developed nations.  I am fairly certain that anyone discovering those dates will get a very astounding surprise.

At any rate, thanks to socialist feminism (a.k.a. radical- or Marxist-feminism), now neither men nor women nor the families they provide for get a family wage, but there is now government assistance funded by taxpayer largesse for all destitute single parents in need, the vast majority of whom are single mothers.  Socialist feminism has done much to give us the welfare state, for which we are supposed to be eternally grateful.

Posted in Economy, Single-Parent, Civil Rights, Men and Women Work, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

Men’s activism — Men’s power

January 9, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

A lot of mail comes my way each day.  In many of my responses I recommend to read certain books.  The reason why I do that is because I get the impression that those to whom I recommend those books don’t have a clue that they exist.

About ten years ago or even earlier, that was hardly ever necessary.  Men’s rights activists, then, knew the authors whose books I must now point to because many of today’s activists need to be told about those books , that they need to be read and learned from.

I don’t know why that is, although we could all speculate a lot about how anyone can possibly know much about men’s rights activism without knowing the basics of what to be active about.  Here (in no particular order) are links to information on some books that are essential reading for anyone who is or claims to be a men’s rights activist:

• The Myth of Male Power: Why Men Are the Disposable Sex, by Warren Farrell
  You don’t like reading?  Here is a link to the first part of an audio series on The Myth of Male Power
• The Manipulated Man, by Esther Vilar
• The Case for Father Custody, by Daniel Amneus
• Taken into Custody: The War Against Fatherhood, Marriage, and the Family, by Stephen Baskerville
• Save the Males, By Richard Doyle
• And again. for those who don’t like to read, an excellent series of videos: Man Woman & Myth

Feel free to add to the list, but stick to the blog rules.

Posted in Education, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Civil Rights, Economy, Divorce, Men's Issues, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

LexisNexis contacted Fathers for Life

November 4, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Just about every day I find in our in-box several e-mail messages with link-exchange requests by organizations who wish to advertise the services of lawyers and law firms, at the website of Fathers for Life, for free, so that they can explore and exploit untapped market potential and opportunities.

The legal industry saturated the market and is limited only by the capability of potential legal clients to pay for legal services.  Although until not all that long ago the legal profession was a growth industry and primarily divorce and related litigation still is a fertile and lucrative feeding ground for established members of the legal profession, new, young lawyers entering the market find that the road to success is a steep one to climb, that the going is hard, and that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to succeed with recovering even their initial capital outlay and the debts they incurred to be able to set out on the road to the more and more elusive pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Today I received a request by LexisNexis, the provider of [legal library services and pointers to legal help (2011 03 09 –WHS)].  It is not a link-exchange request, not at first glance, for which reason I did not dismiss it out of hand but responded to it.  Here it is (and my response):

On 04/11/2010 1:18 PM, …Jeanine (LNG-CON) wrote:

Re: Free Legal Resources from LexisNexis

Hi,

I am reaching out to you on behalf of LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell regarding the following page: http://fathersforlife.org/fatherhood/paternity_fraud_compensation.htm

LexisNexis has free educational resources to share with your school. We would like to provide you with a link so that your students can access this information.

Does this seem like something you would be interested in, or would you be able to put me in touch with someone that is responsible for adding resources and updates to the site?

I look forward to hearing back from you!

Thanks!

–Jeanine

To which I responded:

Hello Jeanine,

Thanks for writing.  You have come to the right party.

It seems to me that I have an idea on what you intend to offer, but if it involves money for subscriptions to [legal libraries] or other legal services that will have to be purchased, then we cannot become involved.  Nor will we advertise any legal services, not as long as those services require subscription fees for those most in need of free access to those services.

Those in need would be expunged fathers whose wages have been garnished and whose professional and government-issued licences were cancelled or revoked, whereby they are deprived of any means to make a living and help them get out the hole hole feminist jurisprudence put them in, by preventing them even from being able to obtain legal assistance in the courts.

However, if you wrote to offer free access to [legal library] services to those in need of them, then all of the concerns I outlined would be unfounded.  I merely mentioned those concerns to possibly save you the trouble of having to write with further details of your offer and having me respond along the lines of the concerns outlined above.

My perceptions may be wrong (they were correct on prior occasions) and my misgivings could therefore be out of place.  In that case I apologize and will be willing to pay full attention to further details regarding your intentions in relation to how the website of Fathers for Life can become a better tool for the benefit of those in great need of it.

An aside: You did not identify how or why you searched the website of Fathers for Life to enable you to find the web page that comments on the circumstances of compensation for paternity fraud.  The results for such a search would be incomplete if they were not to include also web pages such as the one at http://fathersforlife.org/Sodhi/YWCA_2001.htm,  [The legal-library service]  Quicklaw is mentioned there, but the reference is not a link).

Regards,

Walter Schneider.

Stay tuned to find out what will develop next.

Note 2011 03 09: Made edits to text, to remove or clarify references to Quicklaw, as required. –WHS

Posted in Economy, False Allegations, Child Abuse, Civil Rights, Divorce, Feminist Jurisprudence, Men's Issues, Paternity Fraud | Print | 3 Comments »

Don’t Marry!?

September 6, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

You may be interested in this exchange of ideas on the advice that people should not marry.

On 05/09/2010 10:35 PM, Dont Marry wrote:

Fathers for Life,

Hello. I am the moderator of a forum, Don’t Marry, and would like to request that you place a link to it on your website in the appropriate place or blogroll.

Two months ago I learned that there are lawyers suing forum owners, bloggers and moderators for reprinting too much of an article in a forum post. The old DGM forum has 120,000 posts and thousands are reposts of articles.

I simple do not have the time to go through every post to bring the content into compliance, so I locked the forum and I have begun copying the most popular and exciting threads over to

www.dontmarry.proboards.com

Our members write about: their avoidance of marriage in America, Marriage 2.0, dating, divorce (some scary stories!), living and working outside the USA, and other relevant topics.

If you would be so kind as to post this link to my forum in your blog roll I would appreciate it.

www.dontmarry.proboards.com

Many thanks in advance.

All The Best,
Lee Raconteur
Administrator

My response to that was:

Hello Lee,

Please understand why I cannot list your URL in our blog roll.  Our website is pro-marriage.  It would be incongruous to link to your website.

No thought experiment is necessary to test the validity of your aim.  In 1918 the USSR did away with church marriages and made it easy to obtain divorces for about a nickel each, simply by having couples intent on divorce make a declaration in front of a neighbourhood magistrate.  The result of that was rampant social chaos.  It is a sad testimony of our growing social chaos on account of identical reasons that you promote what the USSR long ago found needed to be cured instead.

What you advocate is comparable to amputating an arm to cure a hangnail.  Still,

….There is nothing new under the sun. The methods for disfranchisement of parents were a big part of the Bolshevik agenda in the early days of the USSR. That was the wish to deconstruct the institution of the family, so that out of the resulting ruins and rubble of society a bigger and better socialist state could be constructed. That resulted in social calamities that were in short order addressed by the USSR, in order to extricate itself from the social chaos of its own creation.

Free love, as the early communists called it, is today called sexual freedom.
See The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage, The Atlantic Monthly, July 1926   (See also a more exhaustive history of the evolution and destructive social impact of Soviet divorce laws)

In the long run, the USSR and its affiliated nations never escaped the escalating chaos that it had caused for itself by its early family-hostile policies. For instance, the population of the Russian Federation is currently in the order of 140 million and will by 2045 have shrunk to 70 million. Incredibly, though, the Russian divorce laws were imported, verbatim, to the USA in the mid-1940s and became, through the efforts of feminist law societies, part of family-hostile legislation and law in the USA, from where they were then exported to all nations in the so-called “free” West.

In the last days of his regime,  Hitler had these thoughts on disfranchising parents (especially fathers but even more so bachelors who refused to become fathers) but with the aim of producing new human material for the construction of a bigger and better German army. Do the current fascists in power in the developed nations have goals that are any different?
(Source: http://blog.fathersforlife.org/2008/06/20/daughter-vs-father)

Regards,

Walter Schneider

On 06/09/2010 4:33 AM, Dont Marry wrote:

Hello Walter,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

While I think you mis-understand the concept behind our forum, in that it discourages men from marrying due to the severe legal, financial and societal biases against men in the current climate that exist in the USA, and does not encourage divorce on a whim as you seem to believe, I appreciate that you took the time to pen a reply.

All the best in your endeavors,

Lee

Which prompted me to write:

Hello Lee,

Yes, I understand that you emphasize that there is a difference between undoing a marriage and not entering into one.  On the one side there will be the children who will for all extents and purposes be turned into semi-orphans, with the vast majority on account of having their fathers expunged from their lives.  On the other side there will be the creation of comparable numbers of semi-orphans, children conceived and born out of wedlock who may never get to even know their fathers.  The results are the same.

I hope that we can agree that men and women who lead monastic lives (single lives, that is) generally produce children out of wedlock and that even those who cohabit habitually and as a norm for all intents and purposes do the same, as cohabiting couples are even more likely than married couples to break apart and to turn their children into semi-orphans.  The practical difference is that in longer periods of cohabiting it is more likely that the identity of a biological father can be established than is the case in a series of one-night stands.

It seems that you did not take the time to read The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage, The Atlantic Monthly, July 1926, as that article describes in great detail that a most serious problem resulting from the abolition of marriage was the creation of unprecedented numbers of orphans.   That was not the least of the problems.  The USSR also experienced, for example, a massive increase in polygamy.  Still, even there, whether someone pretends to live in a single marriage in each of those ostensibly single but multiple marriages or whether he claims that there is no longer any need or even the wish to become married, thereby through rationalizing to “legalize” his promiscuous screwing around, what is the difference?  The results are the same.

I should not have to describe that to you.  Because you urge people not to marry, you should be interested in all of the consequences of the revolution you thereby promote.  It would be totally irresponsible of you to disregard the consequences of your actions.

Judging from many of the comments by subscribers to your blog, I do not see any evidence that chastity or abstinence is being promoted anywhere at your blog.  What your blog promotes is no better than what the Soviet Union had to cope with, namely the creation of hordes of fatherless children who instead of their natural fathers to guide them experience a succession of unrelated men — ostensibly father figures — in their lives, some of whom are quite likely pederasts or pedophiles but whom even the worst father would not want to have serve as substitutes for the role models the real fathers could and should have been.

You have my fullest sympathy with respect to the need of many men to vent their frustration with today’s deteriorating state of sexual relations, even to the extent of promoting a marriage strike.  However, I regret that you feel the need for that.  It should not be celebrated or promoted.  The mark of a civilization is that it regulates human sexuality.  No civilization can thrive by promoting unrestrained promiscuity.

Whether you promote free love (as the old communists called it), sexual freedom (as the modern euphemism for unrestrained sexuality goes) or quite plain, simple, honest and open “hooking up” (a.k.a. unrestrained promiscuity), it closely fits the lifestyle of our ancestors that still went swinging through the trees.  Although “progressives” consider that to be progress, objectively it must be considered to be a return to the law of the jungle.

No wonder the progress of socialism is so notable in the U.S. and the other developed nations, because the promotion of “free love” is one of the ten planks on which the Manifesto of the Communist Party by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels is based.  Lenin quite openly called people who blindly, inadvertently and unknowingly helped the spread of communism “useful idiots”.  Is that how you wish your children to remember you?

Your blog does not promote a marriage strike, it promotes nothing other than what Marx, Engels, Lenin and any other communist — including radical feminists — ever promoted: the abolition of marriage.  Calling it a strike does not change its aim and social consequences.

Sincerely,

Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org

_____________
Note by F4L: I have no idea whether Lee Raconteur is his real name.  Raconteur could very well be a joke.  It generally means “teller of tall tales,” of which a famous example is Baron Karl Friedrich Hieronymus von Münchhausen (German soldier and raconteur).

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Economy, Divorce, Men's Issues, Propaganda Exposed, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, The New World Order | Print | 2 Comments »

A “fare-well” of sorts

October 10, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

This blog entry is intended only for the serious reader and student of human history and evolution.  Do not bother to read the rest of this entry if you do not like reading or if you merely seek judicial solutions to the damages caused by your divorce and child-custody issues.

Almost three months have gone by since I last posted an entry to dads & things, the blog of the popular website of Fathers for Life. Related to that, I also reduced the frequency of postings to the mailing list of Fathers for Life.

To keep up the frequency of the postings and updates, at the levels to which people had become accustomed to, as well as staying on top of the hundreds of e-mail messages that arrived daily in our inbox, required between 16 to 20 hours of work each day. Obviously and ultimately, that was more than I could cope with.

Little harm is done by me not answering requests for help and information.  Virtually all of the answers I can give are available at the website of Fathers for Life.  Surely, anyone who seeks answers can find them at that website.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and so, as the home page of that website clearly states, is Fathers for Life.  No one expects to be led by the hand to explore Wikipedia….

If anyone wishes to get in touch with me, I still answer my telephone.  People frequently do get in touch by phone.  I gladly sit down at my PC to illustrate to them how to navigate the website of Fathers for Life, explaining to them over the phone which links to follow, while I also offer some common-sense advice to those who appear to be in need of it.

That sort of help is much more and better than what was available to me when I went through my separation and divorce, close to 35 years ago — when it took me about six months to find out that there was an organization in Edmonton that could or should have helped to provide some of the answers I sought but did not, even after I found it.

All of that does not mean that my life stopped.  I still seek answers.  The serious heart attack I experienced in February 2009 was a warning that I had to slow down.  I slowed down but did not entirely stop my efforts to find and understand the driving forces of the motivations for the planned destruction of the family within the context of the program for the re-engineering of humanity, of all of civilization, that is.

Quite some years ago, I posted an on-line edition of a book to Fathers for Life, The  Head of the Medusa. by Perseus.  The book was read by few fathers-rights activists, even then, and is being read by virtually no fathers-rights activists now. Yet, the book clearly identifies the forces that drive the planned destruction of the family within the context of the systematic re-engineering of humanity.

The Trinity of Humanicide — the destruction of the existing form of the human race — is formed by combining three such isms and let’s be honest, didn’t they all sound good when we first heard them? Let’s rip off the shining raiment and see what lies underneath.

• Environmentalism — the war between people and the planet.
• Multiculturalism — the war between the world and its component nations.
• Feminism — the war between the two component human genders.

Unmasked, we can see these three imposters for what they are. They are not a Trinity to bring us together at all. They are three weird sisters met to tear us apart and create disharmony and destruction.

Here we have a witches brew, an all encompassing global ‘ethic’ that is the most powerful mechanism for human destruction in the history of the world. Anyone who cannot see, or understand this — and that is the vast majority of us — must believe that the three components of this spell are basically benign, altruistic aims. But, we have been fooled into biting into a poisoned apple. That is the true heart of this terrible human catastrophe.

In our lack of vision and understanding, we have ourselves become components in the most toxic and most powerful force for evil that has ever been unleashed in the history of human existence.

– The Toxic Trinity of Humanicide, by Perseus

A few days ago I ran across a statement that, with very few words, sums up the fundamental, primary problem cause for what Perseus addressed in The  Head of the Medusa, “Communists are socialists who are in a hurry”.

Communism is socialism, but whether socialism is being put into place through a bloody revolution or through a slow death of a thousand cuts, once socialism is in place, whether its implementation took a hundred years or more or just a couple of years, it will have the nature of a centralized, totalitarian regime.

The Socialist Phenomenon, by Igor Shafarevich (English edition 1980, with a foreword by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and now accessible in full and for free at the indicated link) is required reading.

I came across that book as a result of reading Solzhenitsyn’s 1978 Commencement Address at Harvard.  He stated in that,

….The mathematician Igor Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, has written a brilliantly argued book entitled Socialism; this is a penetrating historical analysis demonstrating that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. Shafarevich’s book was published in France almost two years ago [1976, in Russian] and so far no one has been found to refute it.

Igor Shafarevich is a world-renowned mathematician.  I read substantial portions of his book [2008 12 02 — all of it by now], and I must fully agree with what Solzhenitsyn stated about it.

Solzhenitsyn did not mention feminism as a form of socialism, and neither did Shafarevich in his book, where feminism is not mentioned at all.  Perhaps neither author deemed it necessary to state the obvious, namely that socialism favours the female of the human species as much as anthills and beehives favour the females of their respective insect species.  That favoritism is illusory, as it means nothing more than that females do all of the work, and males serve only a single purpose, to diversify the gene pool….(Full Story: Search-engine censorship, socialism, ant hills and female supremacy)

The Socialist Phenomenon makes for chilling reading and is without a doubt true.  It is even more chilling to consider the extent of censorship that is at work in the West, given that it took a world-renowned mathematician during the existence of the former USSR to provide a clear and concise summary of the pertinent issues, while no one in the West, not even the Pope, did anything comparable.  (–The Communist Manifesto, by Walter Schneider)

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn explained in his 1978 commencement address at Harvard that The Socialist Phenomenon,

is a penetrating historical analysis demonstrating that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death.

Yes, socialism does that and nothing else.  Igor Shafarevich hammers the point home by describing the four major aspects of socialism:

It would seem that socialist ideology has the ability to stamp widely separated or even historically unlinked socialist currents with indelible and stereotyped markings.

It seems to us quite legitimate to conclude that socialism does exist as a unified historical phenomenon. Its basic principles have been indicated above. They are:

• Abolition of private property.
• Abolition of the family.
• Abolition of religion.
• Equality, abolition of hierarchies in society.

The manifold embodiments of these principles are linked organically by a common spirit, by an identity of specific details and, frequently, by a clearly discernible overall thrust.

Our perspective on socialism takes into account only one of the dimensions in which this phenomenon unfolds. Socialism is not only an abstract ideological system but also the embodiment of that system in time and space. Therefore, having sketched in its outlines as an ideology, we now ought to be able to explain in what periods and within what civilization socialism arises, whether in the form of doctrine, popular movement or state structure. But here the answer turns out to be far less clear. While the ideology of socialism is sharply defined, the occurrence of socialism can hardly be linked to any definite time or civilization. If we consider the period in the history of mankind which followed the rise of the state as an institution, we find the manifestations of socialism, practically speaking, in all epochs and in all civilizations. It is possible, however, to identify epochs when socialist ideology manifests itself with particular intensity. This is usually at a turning point in history, a crisis such as the period of the Reformation or our own age. We could simply note that socialist states arise only in definite historical situations, or we could attempt to explain why it was that the socialist ideology appeared in virtually finished and complete form in Plato’s time. We shall return to these questions later. But in European history, we cannot point to a single period when socialist teachings were not extant in one form or another. It seems that socialism is a constant factor in human history, at least in the period following the rise of the state. Without attempting to evaluate it for the time being, we must recognize socialism as one of the most powerful and universal forces active in a field where history is played out.

Igor Shafarevich
The Socialist Phenomenon, p. 200

_________
See also: Abolition of the family (at Fathers for Life)

Above, I mentioned that Igor Shafarevich’s The Socialist Phenomenon does not once mention feminism as an outcome or expression of socialism, but neither does it mention environmentalism.  That brings me to the motivation for posting this commentary.

MUST READ: What happened to global warming?
By Paul Hudson, BBC Climate Correspondent

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought [instead of “thought”, a better term would have been “falsely-alleged” –WHS] to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?  ….

(Full Story)

And this:

From The Times (UK)
October 10, 2009
Power cuts forecast to hit UK in four years
Robin Pagnamenta, Energy Editor

Britain faces a return to 1970s-style power blackouts and disruption to its electricity supplies within four years, the energy regulator warned yesterday.

Ofgem raised the spectre of a return to the three-day week for British industry as the country scrambles to renovate its crumbling power infrastructure ahead of new EU pollution rules that will force the closure of a quarter of UK power stations by 2015….

(Full Story)

That is environmentalism gone insane, and so are comparable efforts, wherever they are being undertaken, such as in the case of the Alberta Government intending to spend billions of dollars for Carbon Capture and Sequestration while it cuts back on health-care spending for seniors and the disabled.  The reality of that sort of thing is that it is absolutely unnecessary, not only that but totally futile.  There is no way that a reduction of man-made CO2 emissions, emissions that constitute no more than 3.6% of the total CO2 content of the global atmosphere, will have a noticeable impact on climate trends.  The question is, what do power cuts and saving the globe have to do with the planned destruction of the family and with the abrogation of fathers rights?

Yes, I know.  A few fathers-rights activists asked me that question over the years, but, although I gave them the answer to that question, few of those who asked that question ever accepted my answer.  Well, if anyone still has a doubt as to whether environmentalism is part of the current program for implementing global socialism, consider how big a part of naziism environmentalism was.

Yes, naziism is a form of socialism.  The term nazi is a nickname for the name of the party that promoted that particular form of socialism, the National-Socialist German Workers Party (the acronym for the nazi party, NSDAP, stands for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei, that is, the National-Socialist German Workers Party –WHS).  If you have any misgivings about the fact that environmentalism was strongly intertwined with Hitler’s National Socialism, read

The Nazi-Enviro Connection: Uekoetter’s “Green and Brown” (2009), at Environmentalism is Fascism, by William Walter Kay

Considering the global attempts under the auspices of the UN to implement international income and asset equalization between have- and have-not nations (true to the communist maxim, “from those who have to those in need”) at any cost, in the order of many trillions of dollars, the income and asset transfers from men to women in the name of women’s rights pale by comparison, and so does the accompanying extent of the human misery, suffering and deaths so created through the planned destruction of the family.

The third member of the Toxic Trinity of Humanicide, multiculturalism, will be covered in another commentary that I will, if time permits, post a few months or so from now.

For now, if we cannot stop the insanity of extremely expensive but totally futile, humanly and economically damaging efforts to implement climate control for the sake of environmentalism in the name of saving the globe, what makes anyone think that the ongoing planned destruction of the family can be stopped? The same organizations and ultra-wealthy individuals who fund and promote “climate control” also fund and control the planned destruction of the family, with the goal of reducing the world population to about 350 million to a billion people.  After all, they consider humanity to be a cancer on the face of the Earth.

If you have not yet caught on to the strong connection between environmentalism and feminism, then consider to what extent you, too, have become indoctrinated:

The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses’ attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision. …

All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be. But if, as in propaganda for sticking out a war, the aim is to influence a whole people, we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public, and too much caution cannot be extended in this direction. …

The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan….

The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.

—Hitler, Mein Kampf, Chapter VI

Walter Schneider

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Media Bias, Civil Rights, Religion, Economy, Education, Divorce, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Family, Men's Issues, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

Roadkillradio.com

May 12, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

FYI,

Here is the chance you were always waiting for, a chance to have your say in public!

RoadkillRadio.com is worth listening to (Tuesdays, PST 7:30 to 9:30 p.m.) and even worth promoting.

Home Page: RoadkillRadio.com

Listen live:

Quoted from that web page:

NOTE: We only Broadcast “LIVE…” on Tuesdays, starting approximately 30 minutes before showtime! If its not Tuesday, you will not get a live stream. The archived shows however, will stream. All archived audio on the web site is of the MP3 file format.

Archived shows:

Archived Shows
All shows [a large and interesting list — WHS] are available for mp3 download

For example:

Download Show 8 Part Two

There will be time for some open-line then an eye-opening, in-depth discussion on Fathers Rights and the Rights of Children.  Vancouver lawyer and well-known advocate Carey Linde will be joining us to talk about this issue and parental alienation.  Are the courts getting it wrong?  (Note: The first third of that portion of the show deals with provincial politics in B.C..  Skip that to get to the interview with Carey Linde.  The discussion of fathers rights, feminist judicial bias, divorce issues such as parental alienation and much more is fascinating.  It is very important for anyone living in B.C. that the discussion contains a recommendation by Carey Linde to copy the results of the poll on shared parenting run by Saskatchewan MP Vellacotte and to forward that to the B.C. Attorney General — in view of the currently going-on revisions to family rights laws in B.C.. –WHS)

From the home page:

Important and Informative! Joins US!!

Broadcasting Live from Vancouver Canada
Unabashedly Canadian, BOLD, No Apologies!
Join Kari Simpson and Terry O’Neill as they expose and examine
the issues that affect your family, rights and liberties.

This Hard-Hitting current events online show dares to be
politically-incorrect and invites all those who have been silenced to be heard!!

May 12th 2009 - 7:30 p.m. - We ran out of time last week, so as promised you will hear a tape recording of a meeting (held on April 29, 2009) between RKR’s very own Kari Simpson, social workers and the parents of three children who are being “investigated” by these so-called child protection workers. Listen as social workers REFUSE to have the meeting taped for accuracy
(click here for an advanced listen part 1).

Then you will hear how they REFUSED to provide the findings of their investigation in writing!!!! (click hear for an advanced listen part 2)

For the rest of the show it is all about the BC Election!! Joining us in-studio will be pollster Glen Robbins from SceResearch and our own, politically in-the-know commentator Ron Gray. Former B.C. Premier Bill VanderZalm will be here and we will talk to candidates as their political fates are decided by BC VOTERS!!!!

We will be taking your calls and emails! This is a must listen… a must tell your friends and family to listen to… RoadKill Radio Rumble!

CALL IN: On-air telephone: (604) 525-4167

Important and Informative!

Your Calls, Your Thoughts, Your Opinions are welcome!

EMAIL THE SHOW LIVE: Roadkillradio@live.ca

WHERE: Listen live - http://www.roadkillradio.com

–Walter

http://fathersforlife.org
http://blog.fathersforlife.org

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Media Bias, Education, Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Economy, Child Support, Judiciary, Divorce, Health, Feminist Jurisprudence, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, Family, Gay issues, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

The economic down-turn and Canada

May 5, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

By Allan Chinnery

It is now official that Canada is in a depression as deep as any that it had been in before.  The Bank of Canada interest rate at 0.25% tells you that they are scared —-less and see no solution to the problem.  However there is a bigger problem.

The smart money, that of judges and lawyers was invested offshore because with Canadas judiciary it is not safe to keep it in Canada.  Such investments lost much of their equity when the banks started going down.  Most notable of interest to members of the Canadian Bar Association would have been UBS and the British banks.

Oh well, that is the nature of the investment game and it had a better chance of survivng there than being raided by Canada’s judges and tax department.  But it is high time Canada came up with a stimulus package for Canada’s divorce industry.

There are rumors floating around among the women of Canada that just stamping their pretty little feet does not add to the national product or in anyway raise the standard of living for Canadians.  What is worse, a few way-out-there females are actually saying it might be possible that Mr. Judge stomping his $400 dollar shoes and blustering about the power of his prison gangs will not produce wealth for anyone in Canada.

These terrible and seditious rumors have caused a serious slowdown in the divorce industry making it almost impossible for the afore-mentioned investors to recoup their losses.  It has been said that there are women in Canada that are working in and outside of the home, maintaining their credit ratings, being financially responsible.  I even heard of one who, for the good of her family, was driving a 5 year old car.

No wonder the auto industry is broken.  As you can see these untruths about how money is made are destroying the whole economy and are putting the judiciary’s credibility and powers into disrepute.

Stevie and the boys should immediately hold a secret meeting on how to infuse millions of dollars into the domestic violence sector to get these heretical ideas from the minds of Canadian women.  Failure to do this will undermine the power of judges blustering and foot stomping as well as perhaps resulting in calluses on the hands of members of the Law Society.

Such things will destroy the Canada that we have known for the last 20 years as it will fall backward in time to a place requiring effort not effect.

____________
Allan Chinnery is an expunged, squeezed-dry father who survives by working as a gardener for about ten to 15 hours a week.

Posted in Child Support, Economy, Judiciary, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Men and Women Work, Men's Issues | Print | No Comments »