July 29, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

STARVING FOR JUSTICE.

Guest story by George Rolph

Writing in the Independent Johann Hari reported on July 2nd 2010 how Goldman Sachs and “its swarm of Wall Street allies” had been causing massive starvation and riots around the world by trading contracts made between farmers and traders as futures on the stock exchange.  (You can read his excellent piece here:  http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-how-goldman-gambled-on-starvation-2016088.html  )

In the article referenced above you can read the story of Abiba Getaneh. She is an Ethiopian mother. Pay attention to what she had to say about her hunger: “I felt like battery acid had been poured into my stomach as I starved….” She goes on to talk about the effects on her children too. My readers will, I am sure. feel horrified that the acts of some powerfully greedy little men and women in the West can have such terrible effects on people all over the world as their starvation buys these disgusting dead-hearted people a new work of art to hang in their massive houses or perhaps, a nice diamond bracelet to impress associates with.

This week I spent over four days with a man who knows the terrible pain that Abiba Getaneh and her children went through. He is feeling it right now. Today. His pitifully thin body has began to eat into the muscles because there is no fat left to consume as a source of energy. In his hollowed out face his eyes burn with a revolutionary zeal. His lips are set in grim determination. His skin, burnt by the sun to the colour of dried tobacco, is stretched tightly over his weakening skeleton. Every now and again his head and body lurch to the side as he retches. All that leaves his stomach is the water he has been drinking. Today, his pain has lasted twenty seven days and no end to it is in sight.

The differences between this man and Abiba are many and varied. There are, however, some differences that are deeply tragic. Abiba’s pain has ended now and she can eat again. His pain has not ended. It is fashionable for many in the rich West to feign concern for the Abiba’s of this world and to discuss her plight and those of her countrymen and women around the table at their dinner parties. Others have a genuine concern and will work themselves into the floor trying to get food aid to the starving all around the world. Still more will pour their money into charities like Oxfam, Save The Children, Christian Aid and others, with the poor giving proportionately more than the rich and not trying to claim it back on their taxes. This mans pain does not qualify for aid and even donations have been thin on the ground for his supporters. Unlike the Woman’s Movement who receive millions of pounds in aid from the government, the police and the public every year, the Men’s Movement get nothing and that is a quite deliberate political decision.

It has been ever thus. When I was once starving hungry it was a poor man and his wife who fed me from their meagre food supply. The rich turned away, muttering that I should, “Get a b****y job” and then walking on. Happy that they had voiced the outrage of their ‘enlightened’ selves, their colleagues and political masters but never once asking me how I came to be in that mess. Talking to me was beyond their Pharisaical nature. It was easier to walk by on the other side.

This starving man is called Len Miskulin. He is 59 years old. A deeply wounded father. An ex hard working and successful BT engineer, he is on a hunger strike and he is one of those sitting opposite Parliament on the pavement. He too has suffered the insults shouted from passing cars that he should “Get a b****y job.” Insults resulting from feelings stirred up by irresponsible journalists and the many thieving politicians in Westminster who would rather forget their own version of benefit fraud. Len receives no benefits from the State but loudmouthed, self righteous fools in passing cars do not know that.

Originally from Croatia he has been in this country for thirty five years. It was this country that stamped all over him. It was this country that invented the system that ripped his heart out. It was the people of this country that, by their complicit silence in the face of staggering pain and injustice for thousands of fathers like Len, walked by on the other side. It is the people and the governors of those people who allow thousands of men like Len Miskulin to suffer unbearable pain because of their inflexibility and sheer naked, ideologically driven greed, that seems coupled with a staggering degree of misplaced hate. Unlike Abiba there is no fashionable concern for Len. He is homeless. He is starving because no one cares. He is starving because of a deeply held grief that will not leave his soul in peace. When that battery acid pain that Abiba felt tears into Len’s stomach lining it serves only to bring to mind his two children that he has not seen in ten years and to increase his determination to go another day without food.

At the State opening of Parliament Len watched as the Queen and her retinue drove past in the carriages of State. He wondered if she noticed him sitting outside of his tent in clear view of the road as she went by. A huge sign telling any who would look his way that he was starving himself because of her judges and her politicians.

Did she look his way? I have no idea. What I do know is that she is not ignorant of what is being done to men like Len. Fathers4Justice campaigners who stormed her London palace in 2004 made sure of that. The contrast between her condition, described at the time by journalist Phillip Johnston writing in the Telegraph as, looking like “a picture of health” and the pitiful condition of Len Miskulin could not be greater.

Len Miskulin. Starving for Justice.

As I contemplated that contrast I amused myself with a fantasy to help break the depressing reality of Len’s condition threatening my mind. I imagined the impossible. The Queens carriage coming to a halt opposite the green at Westminster and her royal figure alighting from the carriage and walking — in all of her robes of state — over to the mess of tents. There she walked among some of her people who were, for a myriad of personal and political reasons, not enjoying life in her country. In my imagination I saw her leaning forwards to speak to Len who made no attempt to rise from his seat and saying, “And what do you do?”  Then I saw in my mind, Len push himself painfully from his folding chair and stand proudly before her on unsteady feet. I saw him fix his eyes upon hers with an unwavering and piercing gaze and tell her, respectfully, but forcefully, “I starve, your majesty, because your courts stole my children and stripped me of all my assets and my children’s inheritance.” I wondered if she would blush. I finally decided that she would not. Her mind would probably have wandered away from Len a split second after she had asked a question whose answer she had no interest in. Perhaps I do her an injustice. I doubt it. She has done nothing to show any support for the nations fathers since the feminist inspired war on them began. There is no capital to be gained for her, unlike during the war when her parents visited the bombed out buildings in the East End and announced that they could now look people in the eye. Somehow, between then and now the Royal family have lost their humanity and common touch. The Queens heart has hardened and she no longer cares except where she must pretend too care for reasons of diplomacy or publicity.

On Sunday evening I travelled from my home in Bromley to Len’s tent in Westminster to sit with him through the night in case the bailiffs came to turf him off the green so that Boris Johnson and those other stalwarts of humanity in the Houses of Commons and Lords would have a little less to complain about. I knew that the bailiffs would come with the police to back them up. I also knew that things might get nasty and if they did, the police would have their black uniformed thugs nearby at hand to stamp on those who resisted and possibly those who could not resist, like Len. I was determined to do what I could to passively protect him from any blows that might come his way. His health could not have stood a Tasering or kick to the belly from a psychopathic thug in armour. I wanted to try and see that such a thing did not happen to him. The bailiffs did not come that night. Instead, the police drove periodically around the green at four in the morning with the sirens screaming in an effort to make sure that no one slept. Coupled with the fact that they had made sure many of the toilets nearby were shut and, I am told, all water stand pipes had been shut off, who ever gave those orders to those unthinking robots who carried them out were like nasty children bullying the helpless for fun. This is what our country has come too and it is also the reason the camp on the green exists at all. Earlier in the day I had heard one of the peace camps inhabitants speaking to a foreign journalist who had said, with a nod towards the House of Commons, “Those people think you are nuts.” “Yes well.” The hippy replied. “Like attracts like so they could be right”

Today, Len is still there. He is enduring another day of self imposed agony because he has no other way to express his rage at what has been done to him. Unlike the feminists, the amorphous International Men’s movement has refrained from using violence to get its message across. Today, like every other day he has been there, the common tourists will come and speak to him and he will tell his tale for the thousandth time. They will photograph him and sympathise and hopefully, go home to tell their friends in their own country how the once most democratic country in the world is sliding into barbarism against its own fathers.

A few days ago, a male teacher led a sizable party of school children onto the green. They gathered around Len and began firing their questions at him in a polite and slightly bewildered way. Unable to raise his voice above the din of the traffic and weak from the sun and the corrosive acid eating at his stomach lining, I spoke up for him. As I told his story and answered their questions the teacher said nothing. He was letting the children experience the raw emotion of the situation for themselves. I was aware of the need not to frighten the children but also, not to shield them from the realities of life in the country they live in. I saw the shock in their eyes and knew they would talk about what they had heard to their parents and friends. Getting the message out to those who still have hearts that can feel compassion for their fellow man. Before they left I told them that their generation needed to find a better way than our incompetent generation had for dealing with the issues of family breakups. Len and I thanked them for asking their questions and being interested. Something we could not say to a single MP. One bright looking young girl replied, “No. Thank you both for being brave and telling us.” I was deeply moved. Both by the children’s natural concern for another and by the teachers amazing instincts for letting the children learn about life outside of their own realities. Something both politicians, the legal system and journalists are often reluctant to do when it comes to their own people.

Abiba Getaneh suffered her pain because of the impersonal and irresponsible greed of Goldman Sachs and others. Len is suffering his pain because of the closed minds of politicians and the greed of lawyers and judges who have devised a system steeped in astonishing cruelty and a secret process they can spin out for as long as they wish in order to keep the money rolling in. Tonight, somewhere in this country, a judge and lawyer will be dining out on money made from the misery of thousands of men like Len. All in the best interests of the child, of course. Most of those men will suffer in silence. Some will squeak out a weak protest online or by letters to their MP’s. Most will take pills for the depression they feel and try to go on living. Still more will kill themselves or drift into homelessness because their future has been stolen from them. Like those other victims of injustice, the men who are abused by their wives and partners in their homes everyday, they will look at people like David Cameron and Boris Johnson with undisguised disgust. They will do the same to our almost silent press who collude with MP’s, feminists and the police to walk past on the other side and to present misinformation to the public (See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKXVcUSBKH4  ) in a deliberate policy of propaganda and deception. And that is a further difference between Abiba Getaneh’s pain and Len Miskulin’s pain. Hers was caused by unthinking greed. Len’s is caused by greed and lies.

In his latest article for the Independent, brilliant journalist Johann Hari inadvertently mirrored the attitude of the establishment to fathers deprived of their very basic human right to have contact with their own children and be involved in their upbringing. He wrote about the Peace camps protesters and spoke eloquently and movingly about why their presence on the green was more important than Boris Johnsons aesthetic sensibilities, but he skimmed past Len Miskulin’s story with barely a nod in his direction.

He writes:

“As the months went on, the tent city developed and mutated each time I visited. More protesters arrived, with a more eclectic range of grievances. A man appeared announcing he was starving himself because the courts wouldn’t let him see his children: he hasn’t eaten for more than 20 days.”

This is the story behind the announcement Johann Hari so briefly reported. It is as moving and as sad as Abiba’s story and just as unnecessary. It is time we spoke out about these men like Len and let the world know that Britain does have a heart after all.

It does, doesn’t it?

Tomorrow is day twenty eight for Len’s pain. If you can pray and know how, please do.

George Rolph
Bromley. Kent

___________
Follow-up:

Video of Len Miskulin’s eviction from the Peace Camp, opposite from the Parliament, in London (video link provided by George Rolph).

I am sure that quite a few of us can say: There, but for the grace of God, goes I.

Posted in Civil Rights, Paternal Rights, Divorce, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards | Print | No Comments »

June 25, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Today I received a request for help in solving a man’s confusion about his alleged paternity of a boy born about 15 or more years ago.  The confusion about paternity that is exhibited in the text of the e-mail message quoted farther on (my responses are interspersed) is mind-boggling but nothing new.  It is as old as civilization.

Mothers are fonder than fathers of their children because they are more certain they are their own. — Aristotle

The advent of civilization is strongly connected to the regulation of human sexuality through marriage.  Marriage laws somewhat relieved possible confusion about paternity, while the abolition of the institution of marriage, an age-old primary objective of communism, set back certainty about paternity to a state closer to that existing prior to the advent of civilization.

Here is the e-mail message.

Hello Jim [not his real name],

You wrote:

So here is my question to you, Do you think I have any options.

Of course you have options.  The most obvious one is to do nothing.  However, I am not sure what that option entails.  Did the mother drop the paternity assertion?  Are you paying child support?

To explore all of the options (and their consequences) available to you, get in touch with a fathers-rights organization in Oregon, provided that that is where you are located (other than your e-mail address, you provided no information on that).

I finally found my paternity test that we took in 1995, and I have been talking to numerous paternity testing facilities and they are pretty much telling me the same thing, that it’s not a very conclusive test. They tell me that each locus should be tested twice.

Well, they are the experts.  I am not.  I am more of a historian and do recall many instances in which paternity test results were falsified.  I recall the case of a Chicago lab in which a technician falsified a large number of test results, wrongly assigning paternity to many men that had been fingered (in California, and elsewhere probably too, it is a common practice to pick the name of a prospective “father” out of the phone book).  She falsified those DNA test results simply because she hated men.

You should have the paternity test repeated.  Not only that, but you should obtain two samples and have the DNA test done by two independent labs.

for each locus both mother, child and father must have 2 alleles indicated not only 1 (es. father 6,7 is ok but 11 it isn’t ok it must be perhaps 11,11?). The value of CPI must be very high to have a reliable test (130 isn’t a sufficient value).

  I had a DNA test done back in 1995, the results showed me to be 99.29% the child’s father, with 6 alleles tested.
I think the results are wrong,

What you think is immaterial.  All that matters is what you can prove.

mother 10,11….           child 10,11……            me 11                 (1.78%)
mother 8,10…..            child 10,11…….           me 11                 (3.52%)
mother 6,8……              child  7,8………           me 6,7                (3.38%)
mother 32,6…..             child  6…………           me 5,6                (1.75%)
mother 9,10…..             child 9………               me 9,10              (2.30%)
mother 10,12….            child 10,12…..           me 10                  (1.65%)

CPI 130-1
POP 99.29%

So now I’m not sure what to do, I would like to find out if he is my son, If he’s not my son well then that would be upsetting.

But I probably still would  be liable to pay child support….just because I signed the paternity papers at the hospital and also because I have a default judgment against me. The default judgment papers I received out of the blue with no court papers before them.

What’s kinda weird is, back in 1998 i think, she was suing me for child support and I contacted the [] lab that did our DNA test and I paid them the rest of the monies to get the results back.

I sent the results to Humboldt County and a month or two later I received a letter back saying that they were dismissing the entire action against me, without prejudice. I still have that court document.

I’m so confused about this whole thing,

You confused me, too.  The mother appears to have lied, either when she asserted that you were the father or when she changed her mind and asserted that you were not the father.  However, you don’t make it clear what the mother actually claimed and claims now.

What emerges quite clearly in my mind is that for unspecified reasons you declared yourself to be the father.

In cases like yours (I assume that you were not married when you made your paternity declaration, but you gave no indication of that), the chances that a man like you is not the father are about exactly 30 percent.

I Just want to know the truth.

Well, then the answer is simple.  Have another DNA test done.

If he is my son I want to know him, which she has never let me do. I seen him 2 times that’s it. Then she moved away.

Does she or doesn’t she claim that you are the father?  In either case, you need her cooperation to obtain another DNA sample.  The problem is that if she insists that you are not the father you will most likely not be able to get her to agree to provide one.  It is then also extremely unlikely that any court will override her wishes.

And if he isn’t my son, what can I do?

Thank you very much
Jim

In that regard, what you can do is not as important as is what you want to do.  Do you wish to be held to the obligation of providing financial support for another man’s child or not?  If not, then talk to a lawyer and have him take the necessary actions to have your declaration of paternity removed from the birth registry.  The decision by the Humboldt County should help you with that.

When you are done with that, put all records of that in a secure place, try to forget about it all and hope that she will never change her mind about you not being the father.

I assume that you are presently not paying child support and that you have never done so. You stated nothing to prove that assumption to be wrong.  Did you ever consider what will happen if she decides that you must be the father after all?  If she does that, you will most likely be made to pay child support arrears going back to the date of the boy’s birth, including the medical expenses associated with her hospital stay.  Do you want to do that?

The complication that would arise is that even if you were to pay those child support arrears, that would still not ensure that you will ever get to see the boy.  Even if you were to get to see the boy, your chances of establishing a bond with him would be extremely slim to non-existent.

Regards,

Walter

Post script 2010 07 02:  Jim wrote back and explained that the mother of his alleged child, the woman who left Jim years ago to spend her life with another man whom she had known at the time that Jim was supposed to have fathered her child lost custody of the child.  She separated from the other man, and Jim is now paying child support to that man.

What would you do if you were Jim?  Consider that, whether the child is Jim’s child or not, Jim has no contact of any sort with him, but that Jim pays and pays and pays….

Posted in Child Support, Civil Rights, Paternal Rights, Men's Issues | Print | No Comments »

June 21, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Videos of Father’s day Protest in Bangalore, India

By Anil Kumar <newageindian@gmail.com>

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:35:08 +0530

Hello Ed and all,

…videos of Father’s day protest at downtown Bangalore. The men shouted slogans against judiciary and Government for denial of access to children and shared parenting. Some men and children dressed up as mythological heroes. This is the 3rd year of Father’s day protest. They also made many conservative women to join the protest to support men.

• News in TV (1:46 min):
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC8OT1j-blE
• Detailed Video (6:31 min):
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxudTMMVFZc

www.crisp-india.org is the father’s and children’s rights front of men’s rights movement in India.

Best Regards
Anil

Posted in Civil Rights, Paternal Rights, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards | Print | No Comments »

April 5, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Today  a deserted and frustrated father wrote to me about his on-going attempts to follow his ex for thousands of miles, so as to be able to continue to play a role in his daughters’ life.

While the man was involved in custody hearings in a province in Central-Canada, his ex-common-law-wife had moved to a city in Western Canada.

Here is my response.

Hello Bill (not the real name),

As I read your account, the first thing that came to my mind is that you described a case of parental kidnapping.  Of course, I have no way of knowing whether a visitation agreement was in place then (you stated that you were fighting for one) and whether the visitation order included a provision for prohibiting one or the other parent from moving away from the other, beyond a specified distance or travelling time.

I am getting a bit too old for all of this (I am 73), but it appears that you are quite right, you need to get in touch with people in your locality.  There used to be about three organizations in Calgary that were active, but lately I have not heard much from or about them (MESA, Family of Men and ECMAS).

Here is the latest list I know that contains links to Alberta organizations, some of whom are located in Calgary.

http://www.canadianequalparentinggroups.ca/

From that:

Alberta
Fathers For Life (ours, near Edmonton)
Family of Men Support Society (Calgary)
Men’s Educational Support Association (M.E.S.A.) (Calgary)
Movement for the Establishment of Real Gender Equality (M.E.R.G.E.) (Edmonton, but that organization focuses primarily on equitable “gender” rights for all seven “genders”)
Orphaned Grandparents Association Resource Centre (near Edmonton, as far as I know)
The Equitable Child Maintenance and Access Society (E.C.M.A.S.) (Edmonton chapter; the founder was the same as that for MERGE; there was once a separate Calgary chapter that formed a separate organization under the same name after a rift with the Edmonton chapter had developed)

A few observations on Fathers Rights or Parenting Rights organizations

There are close to 50,000 active case files that are being held by Alberta Maintenance Enforcement.  Roughly one-third of those involves cases in the Calgary area, another third involves cases in the Edmonton area, and the remaining third involves the rest of the province.

I have been actively involved with fathers rights since about 1990, which led me in about 1994 to begin with the website Fathers for Life.

Right from the start I noticed that there was hardly ever more than about a dozen or a little more of truly active fathers rights activists in Alberta.  The largest public demonstrations that were ever held (in one case a picketing action in front of Anne McLellan’s constituency office) mustered no more than about 60 picketers from a large variety of organizations of whom some only remotely ever worried about fathers rights.

It can be argued that personal agendas and lack of charisma of the leaders led to low membership numbers of various Fathers Rights or Parenting Rights organizations, but it would be wrong to put too much blame in that respect on the leaders of such organizations.

The problem is universal.  It applies in all major Canadian cities and in all provinces across Canada.  The apathy exists as well in all of North America and throughout all of the developed nations.  Increasingly, the general apathy emerges in the developing nations.

It may be looked at as battle fatigue by people who wish to uphold family values in a culture that actively promotes an all-out war against the family; there is that and much more involved.  The website of Fathers for Life extensively explores the concept of the war against the family and related concepts that apply.

The fact remains that not only active participants and victims of judicial persecution such as you are largely apathetic, but that the general public is apathetic as well.  There is not a ground-swell of support for the family.  The lack of public support means that politicians do not have to give pro-family sentiments a great deal of attention, which is the major reason why for every dollar of funding for programs and actions in support of the family there are about a thousand dollars of funding to sponsor programs and actions that aim at dismantling and systematically deconstructing the institution of the traditional nuclear family.

Given the lack of concern by politicians, a plethora of government agencies has a free hand to pursue its family-hostile aims.  Those aims — let there be no mistake about it — strongly lean toward the extreme radical left.  Their leanings are strongly Marxist.  Marxism has throughout its existence been strongly anti-family.  That is not too surprising, as the historical roots of Marxism (an age-old yearning toward Paradise on Earth, that is, a socialist Utopia) have always been strongly anti-family.  Socialism, especially in totalitarian socialist regimes throughout history aimed at best at strong state-control of the family and at worst at the total abolition of the family.

Igor Shafarevich, a world-renowned mathematician and a contemporary of Alexander Solzhenitsyn expressed those ideas best, in his book The Socialist Phenomenon.

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.

[200]

Igor Shafarevich
The Socialist Phenomenon, [7] p. 200

All of that is a lot of information you did not ask for.  However, I feel that the best service I can provide for you is to put your personal experiences regarding the futility of your attempts to enforce your paternal “rights” into the context of the history of the social evolution and the apparent current decline of civilization.

Posted in Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Judiciary, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Child-Custody Awards, The New World Order, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction | Print | 1 Comment »

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 »

April 5, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The Toronto Star
3 April 2009

Children harmed by sole custody, report says

Canadian judges rarely use voluntary arrangements in which kids live with each parent roughly equally

By Susan Pigg, Living Reporter

Family court judges are misguidedly harming children by granting sole custody to one parent - usually the mother - in bitter divorce battles, says a comprehensive new report.[*]

Too many children are being “robbed of the love of one parent” by a legal system that is out of touch with the needs of children and treats them like property to be won or lost, says Edward Kruk, an expert on child custody issues….(Full Story)
__________________
* Note by F4L:

The report by Edward Kruk, Ph.D.:

• Shared Parenting: Child Custody, Access, and Parental Responsibility
• More information by Edward Kruk at Fathers for Life

Posted in Divorce, Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Health, Men's Issues, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, Child-Custody Awards, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

April 4, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The Free Lance-Star

March 29, 2009 1:14 am

AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND:UNWELCOME REALITY

By Stephen Baskerville

–The decline of the family now affects virtually every American and seriously threatens not only social order but freedom and constitutional government. G.K. Chesterton once observed that the family checks government power. He was writing about divorce: Despite other threats to the family, divorce remains the most serious.

Americans would be shocked if they knew what goes on in the name of divorce. Divorce today licenses unprecedented government intrusion, including the power to seize children, loot family savings, and incarcerate parents without trial.

The full implications of the “no-fault” revolution have never been publicly debated. Divorce today seldom involves two people simply parting ways; 80 percent of divorces are unilateral. Under “no-fault,” divorce becomes a power grab by one spouse, assisted by judicial officials who profit from the ensuing litigation: judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, and social workers. Involuntary divorce involves government agents forcibly removing innocent people from their homes, seizing their property, and separating them from their children. It requires long-term supervision over private life by state functionaries, including police and jails….(Full Story)

Posted in Divorce, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, Propaganda Exposed, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »

March 17, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Fathers rights activists like Stephen Baskerville, PhD., have advocated for years that to have children is suicidal and recommended to young men — to be able to survive and to avoid being criminalized as fathers:

Do Not Marry, Do Not Have Children

Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D.

2007-11-14 at 11:36 am · Filed under Men and Mating, Vox Populi

Marriage is a foundation of civilized life. No advanced civilization has ever existed without the married, two-parent family. Those who argue that our civilization needs healthy marriages to survive are not exaggerating.

And yet I cannot, in good conscience, urge young men to marry today. For many men (and some women), marriage has become nothing less than a one-way ticket to jail. Even the New York Times has reported on how easily “the divorce court leads to a jail cell,” mostly for men. In fact, if I have one urgent piece of practical advice for young men today it is this: Do not marry and do not have children….(Full Story)

Stephen Baskerville merely points out the circumstance of fathers expunged from their families — collateral damage resulting from current global population policies.  A far less personal issue that universally affects global population trends is the circumstance that populations in all developed nations, and increasingly in ever-increasing numbers of developing nations, are shrinking.

The plan is to reduce the global population to a population level between 300 million to a billion people.   You think that is an alarmist view of demographic trends? Well, think again.

 OneNewNow.com

Planting the seeds of a demographic winter

Robert Knight - Guest Columnist - 5/14/2008 2:10:00 PM

Did you know that planting a tree won’t save the earth? You’ve got to plant 483 trees just to offset your household’s carbon footprint. And that’s just for two people.

We know this because the Washington Post Home section on May 8 featured a cover story encouraging folks to plant trees while sternly warning them that this won’t help much because people are a cancer on the planet.

Okay, they didn’t quite put it that way, but it would be hard to miss the message. A graphic with 483 little green trees illustrates this stat from the EPA: “A two-person household is responsible for releasing 41,500 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. To offset that, each household would have to plant 483 trees and let them grow for 10 years.”

If a two-person household is that bad, what does that make families with children? Environmental criminals, at the least, and maybe earth wreckers….(Full Story)

Consider this:

How to Take the Chill Out of Demographic Winter

A speech by Don Feder to the New Generation Church, Riga, Latvia, November Nov. 15, 2007

….In half-a-century or less, Europe will be populated by strangers — who will wander by the continent’s cathedrals, museums, statues and battlefield monuments wondering what it all meant.

This catastrophe in the making can be most clearly seen in Russia. What Lenin, Stalin and Hitler failed to accomplish, the Russian people are doing to themselves. You might call it auto-genocide.

In Russia, the fertility rate is 1.17 (down from 2.4 in 1990, a decline of over 50%). Russia is losing three-quarters of a million people a year. Its current population of 145 million is expected to be reduced by a third by 2050. In Russia today, almost as many children are aborted as are born alive (1.5 million to 1.6 million)….

In terms of population replacement, Europe is going out of business. Of the 10 nations with the lowest fertility rates worldwide, 9 are in Europe. No European nation has anything approaching a replacement-level birthrate….(Full Story)

By now you must wonder how we got from the 1960s UN objective of Zero-Population Growth to the present calamity of accelerating population reduction.  It was easy.  It required a motivator that the social engineers in charge and control of global population growth could make palatable and have the masses swallow: Save the Planet — Reduce the Human Population.

Here is how that is made to work:

http://www.co2science.org

Your “Carbon Legacy”
Volume 12, Number 11: 18 March 2009

---

Politicians who bow to the demands of the world’s climate alarmists have long sought various means of reducing anthropogenic CO2 emissions. To date, the measures they have proposed have been rather mundane, focusing primarily on reducing emissions associated with one’s household activities and transportation habits. For example, we have been encouraged to replace our incandescent light bulbs with more energy efficient ones. We’ve also been asked to participate in municipal recycling programs, to drive less, to car pool or to utilize public transportation. But the “rules of the road” will soon be become much more stringent, and you and I may be asked - if not mandated by law - to make an unprecedented lifestyle change that could dramatically curtail one of our most cherished personal freedoms, all in the name of “saving the planet.”

Writing for the scientific journal Global Environmental Change, two academics at Oregon State University - Paul Murtaugh and Michael Schlax - identify this lifestyle change in a paper entitled “Reproduction and the Carbon Legacies of Individuals.” In this treatise they attempt to quantify, in their words, “the carbon legacy of an individual,” and to examine “how it is affected by the individual’s reproductive choices,” based on the premise that “a person is responsible for the carbon emissions of his descendants, weighted by their relatedness to him.” So what did they find?

The two researchers calculated that a woman in the United States would reduce her lifetime CO2 emissions by about 486 tons if she implemented the green-approved household and transportation activities mentioned previously. But they estimate that if she were to have just one child, that child, over its lifetime, would eventually release nearly 20 times more CO2 to the atmosphere than the reductions achieved by its mother via her more mundane green activities.

In light of these calculations, Murtaugh and Schlax conclude that “the potential savings from reduced reproduction are huge compared to the savings that can be achieved by changes in lifestyle,” adding that “enormous [our italics] future benefits can be gained by immediate changes [our italics] in reproductive behavior,” and, therefore, that “an individual’s reproductive choices can have a dramatic effect on the total carbon emissions ultimately attributable to his or her genetic lineage.”

We can only hope, in this regard, that everyone’s future reproductive behavior will continue to be a matter of choice. But in light of the supposedly “enormous” CO2-related “benefits” of curtailing child-bearing - especially in the United States - no one can assume that such will continue to be the case, especially in light of the claims of climate alarmists such as Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama, who consider CO2-induced global warming to be the greatest threat to the survival of civilization ever to be encountered. Faced with such a unique and unparalleled threat, we could well awake one morning and find ourselves with no choice in the matter, mandated by law to only procreate to the extent deemed ecologically appropriate by those enlightened few who somehow simply “know” what is best for the biosphere.

It may seem unthinkable today that our government - of the people, by the people and for the people - would ever assume the power to tell us how many children we can and cannot have. But much has happened in the past few months that truly was unthinkable, and only a single year ago. And if it’s happened before, it can happen again; for in times of crisis - either real, as in the current economic crisis, or imagined, as in Al Gore’s climate crisis - normally-rational people can do some wildly-irrational things. We must, therefore, maintain the eternal vigilance that is needed to preserve our God-given rights that no one has the authority to rescind. Stand up with us and demand that your elected officials carefully scrutinize both sides of the CO2-climate debate and think for themselves. We need thoughtful men and women of integrity to guide our nation, not mindless lemmings.

Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso

Reference
Murtaugh, P.A. and Schlax, M.G. 2009. Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals. Global Environmental Change: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.10.007.

That editorial by Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso is also accessible as a video (4.5 minutes) at YouTube.

Posted in Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Religion, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Health, Propaganda Exposed, Family, Men's Issues, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »

February 6, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Divorced father seeks equal protection
Custody challenge cites discriminatory decisions
Posted: January 28, 2009
10:09 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A case is developing in a Tennessee divorce dispute that one attorney believes could impact custody decisions nationwide because it calls down the authority of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause to help fathers who are good parents and want to remain involved in their children’s lives….(Full Story)

Posted in Civil Rights, Judiciary, Paternal Rights, Shared Parenting, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child-Custody Awards, Women's Violence | Print | 5 Comments »

February 2, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

National Post
January 30, 2009

by Kelly McParland and Barbara Kay

In what has been called a “stunning and unusual family law decision” released Jan. 16, a Toronto father was awarded sole custody of his three daughters, aged nine to 14. The “persistent and overwhelming” campaign by the mother over the course of more than a decade was recognized as emotional abuse by Ontario Superior Court Justice Faye McWatt, and the children have been sent to a California therapeutic recovery centre for treatment.

The couple, known as A. L. and K. D., have had a volatile relationship since they met 15 years ago. In spite of K. D. falsely alleging that A. L. sexually abused their first child, the couple had two more children between bouts of disaffection. K. D. — herself dominated by a vindictive mother who had beaten her in childhood– repeatedly called police after provoking physical confrontations with A. L., and frequently bad-mouthed him in front of the children….(Full Story)

Posted in Paternal Rights, Child-Custody Awards, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »