MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Treating non-abductor as though they were the abductor Germany

Filed under: General — MurrayBacon @ 8:24 pm Thu 29th October 2009

One eyed “judges” handling of parental child abduction

Michael’s story is long and shows much wastage of the joy and happiness that family life would normally bring.

However, it is a story that shows huge amounts of taking improper illegal treatment on the chin, and then going back for more. Shear persistence, in the face of mindless official corruption and judicial relationship vandalism.

And, in the end, more than half-winning!!

I hope that you can see this as a good example of never giving up, for your children.

Parent’s who usurp their children, by unilaterally relocating them, are NOT good parents – except by incompetent judgement! Personality disorders lead these parents to delude themselves that they are all that the child needs. Typically, these unilateral parents are the biggest danger to their children – especially in the absence of the competent parent.

Please EMAIL your own comments, to the players in this story. Their EMAIL addresses are given at the foot of this article, so that you can comment directly to them.

Look before you leap!
Be very cautious before choosing to have children, with a German or NZ??? parent!!!!!

John Hickman’s experience of abduction of his children to gERMANY by their mother:

German Jugendamt unlawfully blocks father’s contact with children

September 14th, 2009 LAIGLESFORUM Posted in Uncategorized | 9 Comments »
See our prior article on the persecution of home schoolers in Germany: Also note:
New link: We have added a permalink to the Home School Legal Defense Association ( on the left sidebar under “Friends of Laigle’s Forum.” We urge you to check their site from time to time to update yourselves on the issues surrounding home schooling throughout the world. Our movement for freedom of speech and thought is worldwide and we are happy to say that, along with Laigle’s Forum, HSLDA is a vital part of it!

The unlawful abduction of my children John-Michael and Sebastian Hickman from Durban South Africa to Wilhelmshaven Germany in November 1995
September 12, 2009
by Michael Hickman

On the 29 November 1995 my two children disappeared without my knowledge or permission together with their German born mother from our home in Durban South Africa.
The first knowledge I had of their whereabouts was obtained from a letter written to me in German sent to me from a then unknown German institution known as Jugendamt. The letter demanded child support from me for my children that had been unlawfully abducted from my home a few weeks earlier.
Six months passed and although I had spent thousands of South African Rands on lawyers both in South Africa and Germany I had not been able to gain contact to my children, I therefore finally decided to travel to Germany.
On arrival in Wilhelmshaven Germany I went to the florist shop belonging to my wife’s parents to ask were my children were to be found, there I was greeted with hostility and within minutes two police officers arrived dressed in camouflage uniforms and carrying sub-machine guns. I was promptly arrested for disturbance of the peace. Hours later after paying a considerable amount of bail I was set free, my next stop was the office of the German Jugendamt. Although they knew where my wife and children were and had telephone contact to her they would not assist me in gaining contact to my children neither would they tell me where to find them.
Two weeks later the matter finally went to court and within the first five minutes of the court hearing I realised that my attorney was not representing my interests but those of the German parent and the German Jugendamt so I told him to sit down and keep quiet. At the proceedings the German Jugendamt demanded of the judge that I have no contact to my children whatsoever because I could possibly abduct them and take them back to South Africa.

>>>**One eyed “judges” handling of parental child abduction
(The fact that my children had been abducted to Germany in contravention of Germany law by the German parent a crime that I later discovered has a maximum sentence of up to five years appeared to not be taken notice of by the judge, my attorney or the representative of the Jugendamt).

I finally after over two hours of debate I was granted the right to see my children on three occasions each time for one hour under the supervision of the Jugendamt.
At that point in time little did I know what supervised contact by the Jugendamt meant until I arrived at the offices of the Jugendamt and was locked into a very small upstairs room and put under guard by two social workers of the Jugendamt. A half hour later my children arrived, the door was opened and they were brought into the room, the door was again firmly locked and in addition guarded from outside as well. During my one hour with my children who were terrified by the experience I was not allowed to speak English to them. At the end of the one hour the door was opened and my children were taken away under guard, I was again locked up with two guards inside and a number outside the door for about half an hour. These actions I later discovered constitute a criminal act in Germany with a sentence of up to ten years in jail. Again my lawyer even after I complained to him was quite happy with the situation he certainly did not advise me of the criminal aspect of what has occurred to both me and my children, he certainly did not advise me to take criminal action against the social workers of the Jugendamt, he was clearly in collusion with them.
After I returned to South Africa I was once again denied all access to my children via the telephone. All further attempts to have contact to them both on visits to Germany and via the telephone were denied on the recommendation of the Jugendamt in Wilhelmshaven.
In November 1999 I again travelled to Germany to attempt to gain access to my children which failed as a result of the recommendations made to the family court by the German Jugendamt in Wilhelmshaven. While in Wilhelmshaven I was approached by the police officer Dieter Has, the third of the meetings with him were held in the offices of the Jugendamt under the supervision of the psychiatrist Renate Terlinden. (I later discovered on gaining access to my Jugendamt file that police inspector Has had been commissioned to carry out the terror tactics against me by Rita Eden-Reske of the Jugendamt) The object of the meetings was clearly to attempt to intimidate me by means of psycho-terror, I was instructed by police officer Dieter Has to return to South Africa never to return to Germany, to abandon all attempts to gain access to my children and to make sure that I send regular child support payments to the Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven for the upkeep of my children. Police inspector Has warned me that if I did not heed his warning that he would personally see to it that if I ever should be unwise enough to return to Germany that I would be arrested on trumped up charges such as the possession of drugs and that I would be sent to jail for a considerable period of time. I reported these facts to my German attorney who did absolutely nothing about the matter. On returning to South Africa I wrote a full report on the matter which I sent to the South African Government representative to International Social Services for her information and action. My report with a covering letter was send to International Social Services in Germany for information and comment.
In April 2000 I travelled without prior announcement together with my mother to Wilhelmshaven, Germany in a further attempt to see my children. The Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven soon got word of my visit and within no time at all I was arrested by the German police on the grounds of insult (Beleidigung). Apparently the social worker of the Jugendamt in charge of my case, Rita Eden-Reske had felt insulted because of my report on the terror tactics used on me by police inspector Has. I believe that it was a further attempt to intimidate me into giving up my campaign to gain access to my children. I was released from custody after having paid a very large amount to bail. I handed over the bail money with the firm understanding that I would only do so provided that I could personally represent my case before court in Germany.
In July 2001 I returned to Germany to participate in a hunger strike at the Alexanderplatz in Berlin together with a group of other foreign parents who were also victims of the German “Regime” in order to bring the international spotlight on the blatant violations of fundamental freedoms and human rights as well as the total denial of both international and local legal rights by the “Regime”. After spending three weeks on hunger strike were where finally received by representatives of the German government and political establishment, we were made many promises, none of which have been fulfilled to this date. While in Germany I attempted to find out what had happed in connection with the charge of insult made against me and when I could expect a hearing only to discover that my trial had been held without me being present, without me having legal representation. I had been found guilty and charged the exact amount as I had paid bail. All attempts to gain a copy of the sentence have failed to date. All requests for an explanation as to how I could be tried in my absence have gone unanswered. In 2006 I applied for and gained a police clearance from Germany, which stated that I have a clean record all attempts to get a refund on my bail money have also failed.
While in Germany following the hunger strike armed with the assurances given by the German Government and German politicians I once again scheduled a court hearing in Wilhelmshaven in an attempt to gain access to my children. The family court of Wilhelmshaven granted me the right to meet with my children once for three hours once again under the supervision of the Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven. This meeting was to take place one day before my intended return to South Africa. A few hours before the intended meeting with my children I received a phone call from Rita Eden-Reske of the Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven to inform me that the meeting with my children had been cancelled indefinitely. I immediately cancelled plans to return to South Arica and decided to stay in Germany until I had resolved the issue of contact to my children who had until this time been held virtual hostages in Germany by the Jugendamt in close co-operation with the district court of Wilhelmshaven. In all I remained in Germany three and a half years without gaining official access to my children even although most of the time I lived directly across the road from them. On the odd occasion that my children dared to make contact to me and it was discovered they were subjected to severe punishment such as house arrest for long periods of time without being allowed to view television, Play computer games of have friends visit them. I have been told on good authority that this under strict instructions from the Jugendamt.
As I had long suspected that my German lawyers had been misrepresenting me I took over handling my legal affairs myself. When I finally was give permission to review my family court file I was shocked to see to what extent my lawyers had double crossed me, therefore my advice to any foreigner with similar problems never trust your own german lawyer, only use one if you absolutely have to do so and then keep him on a very short leash.
Once again I took the matter to court this time being self represented, once again I and my children were denied justice, the strategy of the court was forced to alter, and they simply moved the goal posts so that I could not gain justice. When the Family court Judge Martin Staubwasser realised that he could not hold out much longer against my attacks against his denial of justice he drastically altered his tactics. Judge Staubwasser appointed the psychiatrist Dr. Heinz Winterscheid of the state psychiatric hospital Wehnen to do a family psychological assessment of me to determine if I was a fit parent to have access to my children. As I was very suspicious of the circumstances
surrounding the appointment of Dr Winterscheid and the brief that he had been given him I wrote a letter to the court informing them that I could meet with Dr Winterscheid on certain days and times and that I would be accompanied by a private psychiatrist of my choosing and that further still I would have a cameraman digitally record the entire interviews and put a copy on the family court file. As a result of my letter Judge Martin Staubwasser tried every tactic possible to force me to see Dr Winterscheid without my witnesses and without digitally recording the entire interviews. Finally he ordered that Dr Winterscheid do a psychiatric assessment of me in my absence, which he did. Based on the 15 page psychiatric report done on me in my absence judge Martin Staubwasser simply went ahead and ordered that I have no access to my
eldest child John-Michael until he was adult and to Sebastian until the end of 2007.
The fiasco of the psychological assessment that was made without the psychiatrist Dr Heinz Winterscheid ever having set eyes on me soon became know to the German psychiatrist Dr Klempel who came to Wilhelmshaven at his own cost to meet me and to make an independent psychiatric assessment of me. In his 64 page assessment of me he very clearly states that he found no psychiatric abnormalities and could furthermore find no reason whatsoever why I should not have access to my children.
Armed with the psychiatric assessment made by Dr Klempel I again made representation to the family court of Wilhelmshaven in November 2004. Up till today the 11.09.2009 I have not been able to get this matter on the agenda. No doubt it is just too hot for Judge Staubwasser to handle.
In this particular case here has very clearly been a blatant example of criminal collusion between Dr Uwe Biester the lawyer representing the children’s mother, the family court judge Martin Staubwasser and the psychiatrist Dr Heinz Winterscheid of the state psychiatric hospital Wehnen in regards to doing a psychiatric assessment of me in my absence and then using the assessment to deny me access to my children. It could not have been done in a more blatant manner.
Hello, this is Don Hank interrupting Michael’s story momentarily. I am sure you are hopping mad by now, and as in the case of the Swedish boy snatched from the plane (our story was later picked up by Bob Unruh od WorldNetDaily, BTW—praise the Lord!), there is something you can do about this now. There is more to this story, but please read this first:
The responsible persons in my case in Germany can be contacted by email at the following addresses.
Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven
Carsten Feist [email protected]
Rita Eden-Reske [email protected]
Mayor of Wilhelmshaven
Eberhard Menzel [email protected]
Family Court Wilhelmshaven
Richter Martin Staubwasser [email protected]
Dr. Uwe Biester [email protected]
[email protected]

Please bring this evil situation regarding child abduction to Germany to the attention of the entire world
President of the European Parliament.
Prof. Jerzy Buzek [email protected]
And to anyone else who may be able to help the thousands of families both foreign and German who are the victims of the German Regime and its family police known as Jugendamt
This is an attempt to tie all this together:
Now back to Michael’s story:
Let me explain the situation more clearly to you, Dear Reader.
This entire episode was played out under the watchful eye and close supervision of Dr Uwe Biester who is the lawyer who represents the children’s mother. Dr Biester simply closed his eyes to what was going on although I made the fact know far and wide and reaped the benefits by winning his case for his client.
Dr Uwe Biester on the one hand in his civil capacity practices law and represents his clients in court in Wilhelmshaven where Martin Staubwasser is a family court judge.
On the other hand Dr Uwe Biester is a very prominent political figure in Wilhelmshaven, in his political capacity he is a member of parliament, where he sits on the law commission. Therefore one of his portfolios is law and order where he is partly responsible for appointing and promoting judges in addition to being the law and order watchdog. In effect he is the boss of the presiding judge in this case judge martin Staubwasser. I see this as a very clear and serious conflict of interest that would be highly illegal certainly in South Africa, New Zealand and I presume any other modern western democracy in the World, clearly this is not the case in modern Germany.
Dr Uwe Biester very clearly abuses the system to influence the decisions of judge to further the interests of his law practice and to has done so to deny both me and my children justice in fact he has blatantly and deliberately committed a heinous crime against us.
Furthermore Dr Uwe Biester knows that judge Martin Staubwasser has refused to process my application to court and to give me a court hearing in regards to the psychiatric assessment made by Dr Klempel since November 2004. Possibly he has done so on orders from Dr Uwe Biester as I clearly have all the aces and it could open a huge can of worms if it went to trial.
Two weeks after my eldest son John-Michael turned 18 he made contact to me in South Africa. Since then he has visited me twice in South Africa, unfortunately he has been damaged for life by those who had the best interests of the child at heart in Germany. Those who believed that the South African father whould be a bad influence on the child. Instead of having been brought up in a loving caring Christian environment he was brought up as a German. He under the good influence of the German regime and the German Jugendamt has learned to become dependant on large amounts of alcohol. He experiments with all manner of drugs, he is obsessed with having sex with mostly very young girls, he is a declared paganist, he is also deeply involved in the death metal, black metal cult.
Since the first visit of John-Michael to South Africa I made application via The Hague Convention article 21 to have access to and knowledge of Sebastian so that I can try to attempt to avoid him landing up in the same situation as his brother. I very unfortunately have to report that the German “Regime” has once again gone out of it’s was to delay and hinder proceedings. The Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven has once again recommended that I have no access to Sebastian who is almost 16 years of ago. 14 years later I have still not gained access to my youngest son Sebastian, 14 years later the Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven is still doing all in its power to deny me access to Sebastian.
The result of the unlawful abduction of my children to Germany and their being held virtual hostage by the “Regime” for so long has been that they have been damaged for life. They have been culturally alienated, they have been alienated against their English roots, language and family, there is only one fitting term to describe the situation. My children have been germanised and made into freaks of modern German society. The situation would have been far different if they had been allowed contact to and been allowed the loving caring influence of their foreign roots and culture.
To further inform the reader as best I can in regards to child abductions to Germany and the role of the family police known as Jugendamt I have added the following
This case is very typical for what goes on in most child abduction cases to Germany and there are thousands of them that I know of.
To start with to help with understanding the situation as regards child abductions to Germany and the subsequent holding of the children as virtual hostage until their germanisation has been successfully completed where they become their own jailers never allowing themselves to escape the prison camp Germany. Something I have not mentioned in the body of the report is the fact that my fight from day one has not been a fight with the German mother. From day one the german Jugendamt declared war on me and my family, my fight has from day one been with the German regime in particular there family police know as Jugendamt. In fact it would appear that the German parents have no say in these matters that they are dictated to by the family police know as Jugendamt. For instance from day one I was instructed to pay child support to the Jugendamt and not to the mother. In this manner the family police know as Jugendamt have a hold over the german parent because they then hand over the money to the German parent with strings attached.
For instance to this day the children’s mother has made no allegations against me as to why she left me and abducted the children to Germany, she has given no explanation as to why she has prevented me access to the children. She has aired no dirty washing at all nor has she tried to fabricate anything negative against me the foreign parent, not that there was any dirty washing that I know of to air.
To date no one that I know of has been able to get the reason for the children’s mother having left me or why she has prevented me access to our children all these years. The only answer that I have ever been able to obtain from her, the only answer my mother was ever able to get from her was that if she told us we would not understand.
In April 2000 as mentioned earlier I went unannounced to Germany together with my mother. Within 2 days my mother was able to convince the children’s mother to allow her to stay with her and my children in their apartment and a day later she was able to convinced the children’s mother to allow me to have access to our children. For just over two weeks the children’s mother picked me up from where I was staying before breakfast at 0800 in the morning and took me back to where I was staying mostly after midnight. I had full and free access to my children, on one occasion the children’s mother went out all day together with my mother leaving me alone with our children, she even gave me a key to her apartment. My mother told me that on more than one occasion she overheard conversations between the children’s mother and social workers of the Jugendamt in Wilhelmshaven, from what she was able to overhear and from what the children’s mother told her they were putting extreme pressure on her not to allow me to have access to our children. After we left and went back to South Africa, the Jugendamt apparently put overpowering pressure on the children’s mother under which she once again cut off all contact between me and our children, she even stopped sending photos of my children to my mother and allowing them to phone her and my father because I was not to be allowed to see photos of or have information in regards to my children.
I can not prove it but I am most certain that in my case and in most if not all others cases the German family police known as Jugendamt is the one who forbids and ensures that there is no contact between the children that have been abducted and unlawfully held hostage in Germany and their foreign families.
It is so sad to see what they have done to John-Michael who is now an adult. It is even worse to see what they are still doing to my minor son Sebastian and I am not allowed to have any contact to him to give him some positive direction in life because of a band of criminals dressed up as politicians, family court judges and social workers..
Clearly the German regime is afraid that I may pass on some of my good Christian morals and principles to him and teach him to be a free spirit and lateral thinker like myself.
Please do what you can to help my children and the many, many thousand other foreign children who have been abducted to and are being held hostage in Germany by the German „Regime”.
Please pray for my children
The responsible persons in my case in Germany can be contacted by email at the following addresses.
Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven
Carsten Feist [email protected]
Rita Eden-Reske [email protected]
Mayor of Wilhelmshaven
Eberhard Menzel [email protected]
Family Court Wilhelmshaven
Richter Martin Staubwasser [email protected]
Dr. Uwe Biester [email protected]
[email protected]

Please bring this evil situation regarding child abduction to Germany to the attention of the entire world
President of the European Parliament.
Prof. Jerzy Buzek [email protected]
And to anyone else who may be able to help the thousands of families both foreign and German who are the victims of the German Regime and its family police known as Jugendamt


  1. Wow! You have always taken keen interest in abductions Murray. Well done!

    Is Germany not under the Hague laws?

    What about Fiji? Last I knew you could still fly your children to Fiji and then abduct them from there.

    Comment by julie — Fri 30th October 2009 @ 9:41 am

  2. Michael Hickman wrote the article, I have just introduced it and reposted it.
    Germany has signed the Hague Convention on Child Abduction, but enjoys vociferous complaints about it’s frequent refusal to honour it, in particular from France and USA. As a result, it is little better than Iraq or Afghanistan or Russia, all nonsignatories. Murray.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Fri 30th October 2009 @ 10:10 am

  3. fijian indian women aren;t any better than what is described above.. except they do it internally in NZ.

    Comment by karanjiharr — Fri 30th October 2009 @ 3:32 pm

  4. Sad to hear this about Germany. There is talk that they are doing well for men’s rights. Maybe they need more work?

    Comment by julie — Fri 30th October 2009 @ 8:05 pm

  5. Dear Karanjiharr,
    thank you for making this point.

    In my opinion, the root cause of almost all “familycaught” problems, is unilateral removal of children from the agreed residence location, by one parent.

    Whilst you have drawn attention to fijian indian women, the problem unfortunately applies to about 4,000 to 6,000 (DVPO!?) of the about 15,000 relationship breakups per year.

    Looking at it the other way – isn’t it amazing that 11,000 breakups don’t degenerate to that level, when the opportunity is given to them?

    These parents can see that to abuse each other through caught-abuse, in the end they are wasting their own life and their children lives too, in the long run.

    We need to spread these parents wisdom, to help the parents who can only see short-term.

    The familycaught, instead of requiring that things be returned to the agreed status quo, increase their powers to extort. They remove and extract other people’s hard earned wealth, by compounding the problems, for their personal financial benefit.

    I guess that it is a big ask, that familycaught act to protect children, when they can steal more money by exacerbating and extending the problems?

    Cheers, MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sat 31st October 2009 @ 7:47 am

  6. Dear Julie,
    before we criticise Germany, we should give a little thought to NZ’s record, at returning abducted children – it is unusual for even 50% of the children to be returned.

    This is NOT the impression that you would get, from reading published judgements!!!! …. and the whole truth!

    Whilst slightly better than Germany’s record, it is also dismal.

    I cringe at the thought of a NZer daring to criticise Germany, but be silent about what goes on in our own familycaughts, at least one case per week.

    This is why NZ is presented internationally as an international abductor’s paradise. We even give the foreign abducting parent legal-worker’s-aid!

    This generates more “legal work”, by attracting parental abductors to our shores (at cost to our taxpayers of nearly $10 million per year).

    Absolutely revolting, this trading and profiteering in children who cannot defend themselves, from either their abducting parent or the NZ familycaught system.

    International abductions are more common, than the public is lead to believe by the restricted profit-media newspaper reporting.

    50 abductions to Hague countries a year, maybe as many as 100 for all abductions, seems small. Not much risk of your own child being abducted????

    When we consider it as a fraction of the fractious separations, then 100 abductions out of 4000 DVPO – we are looking at 2.5% of children under DVPO are internationally abducted within a year or two.

    2.5% is quite a high figure – this is the level of risk that familycaught “judges” often ask a father to accept, to show that they trust an untrustworthy mother!!! (About 15% of abductors are fathers, damn them too.)

    Only a fool would take such a high level of risk voluntarily.

    Only a valueless “judge” would make such an order onto an unwilling father, or mother.

    We could protect our children much better, if we faced the reality of what is happening each week and reacted to the facts, rather than hiding the unpalatable facts from our eyes, like fools.

    International abductions are like a litmus, for abductions within NZ. Many of the principles are much the same, just the costs to sort out the problem are much more family-destroying.

    As Karanjiharr essentially says above, unilateral removal of children from a marital home – is a major problem for children’s safe and healthy development.

    Cheers, MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sat 31st October 2009 @ 8:27 am

  7. I think the underlying issue for international abductions is that the Hague convention came into being based false feminist assumptions. It was thought that fathers who got screwed out of being involved with their parents by family courts would abduct their children. The feminist assumption was that fathers do bad things and need to be restricted by international laws. In practice 85% of international abductions are by mothers. So the officials are faced with a paradox. They are bound by an international law but the offender is the mother. Hence they squirm around looking for or creating loop holes to avoid up holding the law.

    Comment by Dave — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 1:19 pm

  8. Dear Dave,
    you have hit the nail on the head, but really the officials easily slip themselves out of the problem, by leaving it to the father to lay a complaint and if the police don’t get around to prosecuting (which is almost always the case!) then for the father to privately prosecute the abductor!

    This is a pretty stiff expectation of the father, as it is a severe conflict of interest. He needs to maintain a working parenting relationship, for the sake of the children, to be able to parent effectively. Who would sacrifice that, to prosecute their own ex-wife, or ex-husband – when the prosecution might not succeed anyway? The police know that there is little point in prosecuting women abductors, if the “judge” will probably spring the accused out.

    I believe that you are wrongly putting down feminists. They might have said these things, but they never really had the influence or power to bring them into law. The legal-workers saw their opportunity.

    Laws which would “legally” enable abuse of both men and women, that would stop them talking to each other to defuse the dispute. In fact, the legal-workers would interpose in the communication, unchecked and would be unrestrained at escalating disputes, for their financial advantage.

    I see the feminists as innocents, compared to the legal-workers who championed the DV Act, such as “Sir” Douglas Graham. They ignored the social research available at that time, which warned that the approach laid out in their new legislation would never work. They knew their income projections would work out OK and pressed on regardless.

    As Deep Throat said, “follow the money!”.

    Cheers, MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 8:34 pm

  9. all women belong in the kitchen

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:15 pm

  10. women should have the right to vote removed

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:16 pm

  11. all women are men abusers

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:16 pm

  12. all women are child abusers

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:16 pm

  13. women are guilty because they are less then us males

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:17 pm

  14. women should only speak when spoken to

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:17 pm

  15. women should cover there faces in public

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:17 pm

  16. or is it all of or most of the above is how women see men

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:18 pm

  17. poor poor women say something that hurts her feelings and they slap a protection order on you how sad….. I say harden up what happened to freedom of speech
    say something she doesnt like and your made into an abuser to shut you up haha what a freaking joke

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:21 pm

  18. having been labeled a women abuser i am yet to hit a female

    wonder if it will make my dick hard if i do lolol

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:22 pm

  19. ya cant even joke these days the worlds fuck use dark humour an some pussy gets all upset and goes crying abuse huh billy T james would have been locked up 10 times over in todays world if he was still alive given some of his jokes

    Comment by jeff — Mon 9th November 2009 @ 11:23 pm

  20. I met Billy T James sister years ago. Wow! Talk about kids being raised in a ‘once were warriors family’.

    I am not sure Billy T would be upset with all the things that go on today. He would probably be upset with the sisterhood but I don’t think he would be upset with the Maori caring about the same issues in a better way.

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 7:46 am

  21. You are probably labelled a possible woman abuser. That’s how the feminist system works. Everyone is evil to begin with and then you have to prove you’re not.

    You can even loose your children over a possibility of emotionally abusing them. And you never have to actually do it for it is a precaution. Every mother is candidate for possibility.

    Men on the other hand have already been sentenced as possible rapists, possible physical abusers, possible emotional, financial and psychological abusers. You are a hated species for anyone who is brainwashed into feminist ideology.

    Mothers haven’t had is as bad in the public sphere but it will come soon enough. When they say women and children first what they mean is: “Men will be attacked first, then women, then children”.

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:49 am

  22. Having a hard time, Jeff?

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:51 am

  23. Maybe, but men are better cooks. 😀

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:53 am

  24. I wonder how many women think their vote matters. I voted for the ‘no smacking referendum’ but where did that get me?

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:55 am

  25. There’s some truth in that!

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:55 am

  26. Yeap! That’s what they say. All men are rapists and all women are child abusers.

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:57 am

  27. Definitely “out there’ black humour!

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 8:58 am

  28. Are you pro state control by chance?

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 9:01 am

  29. Why? You will still see your mothers face and sisters face in the family home. If you have a wife you will have to see hers also.

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 9:05 am

  30. I think you nailed it on the head!

    This is how men and women are seeing each other these days.

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 9:09 am

  31. My ex-wife’s complete knowledge of cooking was knowing where to find the tomato sauce for the fish ‘n chips. I believe she has recently progressed to making 2 minute noodles.
    Her laziness forced me to become a competent cook. Her loss, my gain.

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 9:37 am

  32. That is sad SicKofNZ, but TBH, I was no better.

    When I was dating my ex, we went on a weekend trip away and hired a caravan in a area with lots to see and lots to do. It was supposed to be fun and romantic but…

    I thought I would cook something and burnt it. I didn’t even know how to boil an egg.

    I was too embarrassed so I packed up and wanted to go home. Poor man. It took him half an hour of being overly nice to me for me to tell him I couldn’t cook. 😀

    When we were first married, my mother in law gave me a packet of shreddo and said, “this is my son’s favourite dessert”. I looked at my husband and said, “Oh no, you got dessert too.”.

    They were funny days. Honestly, there is more than one way to read recipes and directions. Just take an oven tray for example. How is one supposed to know the oven rack is not the oven tray? But I sure learnt how to clean an oven well.

    Anyhow, I learnt how to cook. I found it funny when my brother in law’s girlfriend would come over. She is Maori and could make a mean feed. I liked the idea of using just one pot and throwing everything in.

    BTW, I do feel sorry for men these days.

    Comment by julie — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 10:08 am

  33. She could cook really well but instead chose to sit on her chuff and not make any effort. She was just lazy. I think I’ve got the only three kids in NZ that hate take-aways.
    I had a choice to either cook dinner for my family myself or eat fish n chips every night…. I cooked.
    All of my children can cook decent meals because I bothered teaching them.

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Tue 10th November 2009 @ 10:49 am

  34. Michael Hickman’s children are now grown up and can make up their own minds about where they live and who they will see. They are now doing this. Through both his patience and his persistence, Michael is now able to have a human relationship with his two boys.

    In making that statement, I am in no way condoning actions of familycaught$ against the children’s interests, to serve their personal financial interests, or the mother’s view of her own interests.

    Michael has documented his experiences with the german familycaught$ and in this respect he gives a very good example of the type of documentation that is necessary to drive public exposure and to possibly lead to prosecution of these judge’s crimes, incompetences and malfeasances. Certainly, complaints through official channels about judges, are valueless while the complaints authorities are compliant ineffective elements of the systems that they are supposedly meant to be policing.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 1st September 2013 @ 8:26 am

  35. Court refuses to send quake-affected boys [back] to NZ

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 29th January 2014 @ 8:01 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar