Open Letter to Peter Zohrab
Peter Zohrab
I have just become aware that someone has posted an Open Letter to me. That
is an interesting change indeed !
Here it is, with my comments:
"Subject: An open letter to Peter Zohrab
From: Anne Gosnell & David George <gos...@es.co.nz>
Date: 1997/12/01
Message-ID: <65tf9n$e...@Chaos.es.co.nz>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
[More Headers]
Dear Peter, I've ploughed through your manifesto once more."
Congratulations ! It's not a long document, but you show some patience in
ploughing through a document twice, when you've obviously not got the
ability to get to grips with any of the issues it mentions.
"I think you do men a disservice."
That is not for you to judge. I doubt that you have any track record, as
far as service to men is concerned, so you have no credibility when claiming
that someone else does men a "disservice".
"I think women have learned to stand up for themselves-
what is wrong in that? This creates a challenge for men. Why not respond
to that rather than bitching [sic] on about some female conspiracy."
The Manifesto does not complain in any way about women "standing up for
themselves", so your comment is not relevant. The Manifesto is about how
Feminists have used the claim that they wanted "equality" with men in order
to gain the sympathy of the media, the education system, the bureaucracy,
the legal system, and the legislatures of the world -- and it points out how
this "equality" has been selective -- ignoring issues where men and children
(born and unborn) are oppressed.
Men don't want "challenges" from (Lesbian) women. Men (on the whole) want
cooperation from women. Lesbian Feminists have exploited men's wish to
cooperate with women, in order to steal rights away from men, on the
pretence that this is about "equality".
And the Manifesto does not mention the word "conspiracy", or anything
remotely like it. This does not mean that conspiracies don't exist -- but
it is counterproductive to point to them, because the conspirators would
just accuse their accusers of paranoia. The only answer to conspiracy is
counter-conspiracy.
" Of
course some men have been badly treated around the shock-waves created by
women's rights. Of course, why not stick up for them and support them."
Thank you for your (grudging) approval !
"But
over all if we are born male why not be proud of it."
Being proud of being male does not mean becoming a doormat and giving in to
oppression.
"Why not create a more
gentle generation, the first, and possibly for you, the second generation
not embroiled in a world-wide military conflict."
I have to guess what you mean by that. I guess you mean that we have to be
stupid and lull ourselves into a state of complacency, trusting that wars
will never happen, or that they will happen "somewhere else" -- so that boys
can be forced to stop playing with guns and try to become as much like girls
as possible.? I think that's what you probably mean. But what happens if
you happen to live in that "somewhere else" where that war (it is irrelevant
if it is a world war or not) takes place ?
The issue of war is an interesting one. I bet you that when/if war engulfs
the place where you live, you won't see Feminists for the dust that they
create running away and leaving the men to do their dying for them (as in
Bosnia). It's only the stupidity of people who believe that war can never
happen to them which allows Feminists to demand that all men aspire to be as
much like women as possible.
"Wishing you the best of luck,
D.G."
And Season's Greetings to you, and all who inhabit these newsgroups !
Peter Zohrab.
--
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~zohrab for international Men's/Fathers'
resources
(OR http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6708). Email
rdo...@mensdefense.org to subscribe to the Liberator. CO-PUBLISHER OUTSIDE
NORTH AMERICA WANTED FOR 3 BOOKS ON MEN'S RIGHTS.
Patrick Dunford
Whereas "Peter Zohrab" <zoh...@ihug.co.nz> verily didst write on Sat,
20 Dec 1997 08:51:08 +1300...
] I have just become aware that someone has posted an Open Letter to me. That
] is an interesting change indeed !
All you have to do is read this NG to find out WHAT WE ALL THINK OF
THIS RUBBISH.
] "I think you do men a disservice."
HEAR HEAR
---
Patrick Dunford, Christchurch, NZ
Email Name:pdunford
Email Domain:xtra.co.nz
Reader: Forté FreeAgent 1.11/32
Internet:http://www.caverock.net.nz/~pdunford
Avatar
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997 02:03:11 GMT, x@y.z (Patrick Dunford) wrote in message
[<349b231a...@news.caverock.net.nz>]:
>Whereas "Peter Zohrab" <zoh...@ihug.co.nz> verily didst write on Sat,
>20 Dec 1997 08:51:08 +1300...
>
>] I have just become aware that someone has posted an Open Letter to me. That
>] is an interesting change indeed !
>
>All you have to do is read this NG to find out WHAT WE ALL THINK OF
>THIS RUBBISH.
Try to keep the fascism under control, eh Patrick ? Oh, and tell us again
what your bible says about equality of the sexes.....
The fact is, there are parts of the law that discriminate against one sex
or the other. Peter is simply pro-active on those bits that discriminate
against men.
Oh, and Patrick - perhaps you'd also like to explain again your views on
homosexuals ? Should they have equality ? You seem to believe they should
not.
Avatar
--
"It is possible to pay another man's debts on his behalf, but it is not
possible to make a guilty man innocent by suffering in his place."
[Carl Lofmark, _What is the Bible?_]
Join the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email - http://www.cauce.org
Justin
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997 23:12:29 GMT, s...@my.sig (Avatar) wrote:
>The fact is, there are parts of the law that discriminate against one sex
>or the other. Peter is simply pro-active on those bits that discriminate
>against men.
I just wish he'd follow up queries on these letters and posts though.
Ntw...
Justin
Patrick Dunford
Whereas s...@my.sig (Avatar) verily didst write on Sat, 20 Dec 1997
23:12:29 GMT...
] Oh, and Patrick - perhaps you'd also like to explain again your views on
] homosexuals ? Should they have equality ? You seem to believe they should
] not.
Perhaps you would like to quote the context of your statement above?
jac...@melbpc.org.au
Patrick, I don't believe that Peter is doing me a disservice. On the
contrary, it is men and women like you who wish to bury your heads in
the sand or attack (because it makes you feel better - or impresses
your current squeeze). The decline - at law - of men's and fathers'
rights - is justification enough. Lindsay
-----------------------------------
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997 02:03:11 GMT, x@y.z (Patrick Dunford) wrote:
>Whereas "Peter Zohrab" <zoh...@ihug.co.nz> verily didst write on Sat,
>20 Dec 1997 08:51:08 +1300...
>
>] I have just become aware that someone has posted an Open Letter to me. That
>] is an interesting change indeed !
>
>All you have to do is read this NG to find out WHAT WE ALL THINK OF
>THIS RUBBISH.
>
>] "I think you do men a disservice."
>
>HEAR HEAR
>
Patrick Dunford
Whereas jac...@melbpc.org.au (jac...@melbpc.org.au) verily didst write
on Sun, 21 Dec 1997 11:43:25 GMT...
] Patrick, I don't believe that Peter is doing me a disservice. On the
] contrary, it is men and women like you who wish to bury your heads in
] the sand or attack (because it makes you feel better - or impresses
] your current squeeze). The decline - at law - of men's and fathers'
] rights - is justification enough. Lindsay
The men's rights movement is too extremist for people like me to
stomach. I'm not totally happy with militant feminism but I don't
believe the way to deal with it for men is to become militant also.
Avatar
On Sun, 21 Dec 1997 03:01:42 GMT, x@y.z (Patrick Dunford) wrote in message
[<349c82bc...@news.caverock.net.nz>]:
>] Oh, and Patrick - perhaps you'd also like to explain again your views on
>] homosexuals ? Should they have equality ? You seem to believe they should
>] not.
>
>Perhaps you would like to quote the context of your statement above?
No need - anyone with deja news access or the last few weeks of messages
from this group (nz.general) will note that you waver between outright
disgust and barely concealed contempt for homosexuals.
I believe you explained that it was a sin or something, and that they are
bad or something.
Cliff Pratt
Avatar wrote
>Peter is simply pro-active on those bits that discriminate
>against men.
>
Cliff
Peter Zohrab
Patrick,
I've come across your point of view often enough before. It's one of the
main factors holding back the Men's/Fathers' Movement.
Yours is a negative viewpoint. If you share similar sorts of goals, then
it's up to you to show what tactics would actually work -- in your opinion.
We live in a pressure-group Democracy. Pressure groups change Society. If
you don't agree with that sort of approach, then you must be arguing for
Dictatorship.
I am subjected to a lot of unprofessional behaviour (intimidation, female
sexual harassment, anti-male sexual-harassment regulations, assault, lying
and aggressive behaviour by superiors, etc.) by workmates, because I work in
a politically correct environment. Such people are quite happy to thwart
the taxpayer-fuinded careers of people on the grounds of their anti-feminist
political views, and even to try to force them out of their jobs -- and if
you confront them with what they are doing, then they threaten you with
libel action if you tell anyone what they have done. That is dictatorship
of a sort.
If you were to conclude that this sort of dictatorship -- which rules the
Public Sector in western countries -- is invincible by normal means, then I
would expect you to ally yourself with the extreme Right Wing.
Peter Zohrab.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~zohrab for international Men's/Fathers'
resources
(OR http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6708). Email
rdo...@mensdefense.org to subscribe to the Liberator. CO-PUBLISHER OUTSIDE
NORTH AMERICA WANTED FOR 3 BOOKS ON MEN'S RIGHTS.
Max Burke
>Peter Zohrab wrote in message <67mvkm$d9m$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
>Patrick,
>
>I've come across your point of view often enough before. It's one of the
>main factors holding back the Men's/Fathers' Movement.
>
>Yours is a negative viewpoint. If you share similar sorts of goals, then
>it's up to you to show what tactics would actually work -- in your opinion.
>
>We live in a pressure-group Democracy. Pressure groups change Society. If
>you don't agree with that sort of approach, then you must be arguing for
>Dictatorship.
snip...
>Peter Zohrab.
The funny thing is Patrick Dunford, who says :
>>The men's rights movement is too extremist for people like me to
>>stomach. I'm not totally happy with militant feminism but I don't
>>believe the way to deal with it for men is to become militant also.
>>Patrick Dunford, Christchurch, NZ
is a fundamentalist Christian? (religious extremist), and apparently
a fully paid up member of ACT (political right wing extremist), but he
finds the Men's movement too extremist??!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that
they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say
about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.
Robert Kennedy (1925-68), U.S. Attorney General, Democratic politician.
The Pursuit of Justice, pt. 3, “Extremism, Left and Right” (1964).
--
mlvb...@deleteme.co.nz
Replace the obvious with IHUG to reply via email
David McLoughlin
Peter Zohrab wrote:
> I am subjected to a lot of unprofessional behaviour (intimidation, female
> sexual harassment, anti-male sexual-harassment regulations, assault, lying
> and aggressive behaviour by superiors, etc.) by workmates, because I work in
> a politically correct environment.
Get a new job.
For heaven's sake, I work in an environment where 95pc of the staff
including my boss, the managing director and all but one of the
department heads are women.
It's great.
I have never been subjected to intimidation, assault, lying or aggressive
behaviour. I have never anywhere, whether where I work or elsewhere, seen
any anti-male sexual harrassment regulations.
As for being sexually harrassed by my female workmates, if only.....
<sigh>
David McLoughlin
Auckland New Zealand
Cliff Pratt
Peter Zohrab wrote
>
>I've come across your point of view often enough before. It's one of the
>main factors holding back the Men's/Fathers' Movement.
>
ITS AIMS!! You couldn't dredge up enough support to hold a conference
in a phone booth!
Geez! I wish you would take regression therapy and go back to the
toilet training episode that apparently spoiled your life!
Cliff
Patrick Dunford
Whereas "Max Burke" <mlvb...@deleteme.co.nz> verily didst write on
Tue, 23 Dec 1997 17:07:18 +1300...
] is a fundamentalist Christian? (religious extremist), and apparently
] a fully paid up member of ACT (political right wing extremist), but he
] finds the Men's movement too extremist??!!
1. Don't support all Act NZ policies (ACT is not an extremist
political party.
2. Fundamentalist Christianity is not extremist either. It happens to
represent traditional views held by many churches for many years.
Admit it, the word "extremist" is used as an emotional power-play word
and has little to do with reality here.
Peter Ashby
In article <349f52a9...@news.caverock.net.nz>, pat...@dunford.nz
(Patrick Dunford) wrote:
> Whereas "Max Burke" <mlvb...@deleteme.co.nz> verily didst write on
> Tue, 23 Dec 1997 17:07:18 +1300...
>
>
> ] is a fundamentalist Christian? (religious extremist), and apparently
> ] a fully paid up member of ACT (political right wing extremist), but he
> ] finds the Men's movement too extremist??!!
>
> 1. Don't support all Act NZ policies (ACT is not an extremist
> political party.
I would define an extremist viewpoint as one which is held by only a small
minority of the population. Therefore since ACT secured only minority
support in the election (and in current polls) it is at one extreme of the
political spectrum.
> 2. Fundamentalist Christianity is not extremist either. It happens to
> represent traditional views held by many churches for many years.
>
> Admit it, the word "extremist" is used as an emotional power-play word
> and has little to do with reality here.
I refer you to the answer above. Fundamentalist christianity is not
(AFIK) in a majority amongst christians and (practising/committed)
christians are a minority in society. I understand why you regard
yourself as mainstream but you must also undrstand that for large numbers
of people your views are somewhat extreme.
Please don't take this personally, it's not meant to be.
Peter
--
Peter Ashby
Eukaryotic Molecular Genetics
Nat. Inst. Med. Res.
London
Reverse the spam and remove to email me.
Avatar
On Mon, 22 Dec 1997 20:40:25 +1300, "Cliff Pratt" <Cliff...@vuw.ac.nz>
wrote in message [<88277677...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>]:
>Make that OVER-active. No, make that OBSESSIVE...
Wouldn't know. I agree with some of the things he says, some others I think
are open to interpretation, and some are just extremist.
Cliff Pratt
Peter Zohrab wrote:
>
> I am subjected to a lot of unprofessional behaviour (intimidation, female
> sexual harassment, anti-male sexual-harassment regulations, assault, lying
> and aggressive behaviour by superiors, etc.) by workmates, because I work in
> a politically correct environment.
>
an
opinionated arrogant b******, I mean, person?
Cliff
Mark Evans
Peter Zohrab (zoh...@ihug.co.nz) wrote:
: Patrick,
:
: I've come across your point of view often enough before. It's one of the
: main factors holding back the Men's/Fathers' Movement.
: Yours is a negative viewpoint. If you share similar sorts of goals, then
: it's up to you to show what tactics would actually work -- in your opinion.
:
: We live in a pressure-group Democracy. Pressure groups change Society. If
Potential political lobbying can be more effective than voting. Politicians
only have to face their voters every few years. They can have professional
lobbiests hounding them evry day.
: you don't agree with that sort of approach, then you must be arguing for
: Dictatorship.
:
: If you were to conclude that this sort of dictatorship -- which rules the
: Public Sector in western countries -- is invincible by normal means, then I
: would expect you to ally yourself with the extreme Right Wing.
Politics is circular, extremists end up in the same place regardless of
if they started on the left of the right :)
Mark Evans
Cliff Pratt (Cliff...@vuw.ac.nz) wrote:
: Peter Zohrab wrote
: >
: >I've come across your point of view often enough before. It's one of the
: >main factors holding back the Men's/Fathers' Movement.
: >
: ITS AIMS!! You couldn't dredge up enough support to hold a conference
: in a phone booth!
I've noticed over the last few years that just about all
of Peter's posts are followed up by ones with a patronising
and herassing tone. (Which also come from New Zealand).
Following up a post in which Peter claims they have faced
herassment with a post which is herassment is a foot
shooting exercise of first order.
Peter Zohrab
David is a journalist in a western democracy, and he doesn't understand
civil liberties. Worse than that, he shows totalitarian tendencies -- I say
I have been subjected to various forms of unprofessional and illegal
behaviour because of my views, and he says to get another job ! How more
Fascist can you get than that ?
David McLoughlin, having no concept of freedom of speech, is the one who
should resign, and leave journalism (which is supposed to be about freedom
of speech) to people who understand that concept. Pro-men journalists, to
my knowledge, are forced out of journalism into Public Relations or other
powerless jobs, leaving Feminists and their male lapdogs to control,
distort, and filter the information that gets fed to the public.
He says he works in a 95% female environemnt and has no problems. Well, I
wasn't talking about him. I was talking about my experiences. If he has no
problems, then that is because he is the token male and pet poodle who is
careful not to upset his female masters by saying anything too pro-male. He
can also be relied upon to attack pro-men men such as myself on Usenet, and
thereby earn himself brownie points with his female masters. To my
knowledge, he has only ever written one pro-male article.
He says he has never seen any anti-male sexual harassment regulations. That
statement is of no value whatsoever, because he wouldn't recognise one if he
saw one. This is demonstrated by his childish attitude -- sighing at the
thought of being sexually harassed by a female. Men are fired for behaving
in ways that he pretends to wish to be subjected to.
Peter Zohrab.
--
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~zohrab for international Men's/Fathers'
resources
(OR http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6708). Email
rdo...@mensdefense.org to subscribe to the Liberator. CO-PUBLISHER OUTSIDE
NORTH AMERICA WANTED FOR 3 BOOKS ON MEN'S RIGHTS.
David McLoughlin wrote in message <349f3...@news.iprolink.co.nz>...
>Peter Zohrab wrote:
>
>> I am subjected to a lot of unprofessional behaviour (intimidation, female
>> sexual harassment, anti-male sexual-harassment regulations, assault,
lying
>> and aggressive behaviour by superiors, etc.) by workmates, because I work
in
>> a politically correct environment.
>
>
Peter Zohrab
Cliff Pratt wrote in message <34A06E26...@nzsupport.nzdb.com>...
<snip>
>>Have you considered the fact that you may be persecuted because you are
>an
>opinionated arrogant b******, I mean, person?
Cliff, have you considered the possibility that you are a Fascist thug ? If
you had anything between your ears, you would have heard of the concept of
free speech.
Peter.
Peter Zohrab
Cliff is well-known as an obsessed anti-mens-rights poster with a minimum of
brain-matter.
After *months* of reading his negative and content-free anti-male postings
in reply to my ones, I asked him if he'd ever been to the NZMERA website to
see what it was all about. He replied that he hadn't, but he then did go and
take a look and even agreed with some of what he saw there.
So Cliff is like a lot of people -- he doesn't know anything about the
issues, because most of the Feminists and male media poodles tell one side
of the story only.
He knows absolutely nothing about how many people would agree to these views
if the media repeated them as often as they repeat Feminist propaganda. And
he knows nothing about netiquette, because he keeps shouting !
Peter Zohrab.
--
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~zohrab for international Men's/Fathers'
resources
(OR http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6708). Email
rdo...@mensdefense.org to subscribe to the Liberator. CO-PUBLISHER OUTSIDE
NORTH AMERICA WANTED FOR 3 BOOKS ON MEN'S RIGHTS.
Cliff Pratt wrote in message <88285904...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>...
>Peter Zohrab wrote
>>
>>I've come across your point of view often enough before. It's one of the
>>main factors holding back the Men's/Fathers' Movement.
>>
>No, the main thing that holds it back is that NOBODY AGREES WITH
>ITS AIMS!! You couldn't dredge up enough support to hold a conference
>in a phone booth!
>
Peter Zohrab
If you translate "opinionated" and "arrogant", it means that someone knows
something and you are jealous that they know something and you don't.
Cliff Pratt and gossipy in-laws are bound to feel that lots of people are
"opinionated" and "arrogant", because they are hopelessly ignorant and
inarticulate.
Peter Zohrab.
--
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~zohrab for international Men's/Fathers'
resources
(OR http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6708). Email
rdo...@mensdefense.org to subscribe to the Liberator. CO-PUBLISHER OUTSIDE
NORTH AMERICA WANTED FOR 3 BOOKS ON MEN'S RIGHTS.
Kerry Thornbury wrote in message <34a078e5...@news.ihug.co.nz>...
>He works with my sister in law, and this is known to be the case
>
>How perceprtive Cliff ;-)
>
>Merry Christmas!
>
>Kerry
>
>On Wed, 24 Dec 1997 15:06:30 +1300, Cliff Pratt
><cpr...@nzsupport.nzdb.com> wrote:
>
>>Peter Zohrab wrote:
>>>
>>> I am subjected to a lot of unprofessional behaviour (intimidation,
female
>>> sexual harassment, anti-male sexual-harassment regulations, assault,
lying
>>> and aggressive behaviour by superiors, etc.) by workmates, because I
work in
>>> a politically correct environment.
>>>
Cliff Pratt
Peter Zohrab wrote
>
>He says he works in a 95% female environemnt and has no problems. Well, I
>wasn't talking about him. I was talking about my experiences. If he has
no
>problems, then that is because he is the token male and pet poodle who is
>careful not to upset his female masters by saying anything too pro-male.
>
that
*any male* who works in a 95% female environment is a "token male" or
"pet poodle"! You have absolutely no evidence apart from your own
prejudices. Just because you cannot get along with women doesn't men
that other more normal men can't.
>He can also be relied upon to attack pro-men men such as myself on
>Usenet, and thereby earn himself brownie points with his female masters.
The idea of David running back to his bosses and quoting his newsgroup
articles to them to win brownie points is just plain ridiculous and
demeaning to David.
>He says he has never seen any anti-male sexual harassment regulations.
That
>statement is of no value whatsoever, because he wouldn't recognise one if
he
>saw one.
Peter, in contrast you see them where they don't exist! In your dream
world EVERY regulation appears to be anti-male!
>This is demonstrated by his childish attitude -- sighing at the
>thought of being sexually harassed by a female. Men are fired for behaving
>in ways that he pretends to wish to be subjected to.
>
What's childish about that? Any normal bloke would sigh at that *idea*.
You ought to get a life Peter.
Cliff
Cliff Pratt
Peter Zohrab wrote
>Cliff is well-known as an obsessed anti-mens-rights poster with a minimum
of
>brain-matter.
>
I've been insulted by the best, Peter, adn conclude you are only a beginner.
>After *months* of reading his negative and content-free anti-male postings
>in reply to my ones, I asked him if he'd ever been to the NZMERA website to
>see what it was all about. He replied that he hadn't, but he then did go
and
>take a look and even agreed with some of what he saw there.
>
Hmm, let's take that point by point. I first saw your website when it was
a crappy ill-configured thing hosted on Actrix. You whinged and moaned
about it and the fact that it didn't work and even accused the Actrix staff
of deliberately spoiling it. This accusation was without foundation and
you eventually moved elsewhere in a huff, having refused to apologise
to the Actrix staff. Several people pointed out coding errors in your
pages that gave rise to the problems.
At that stage your pages seemed to be mostly links to other places,
and other inconsequential drivel.
I have also seen at least one of the other incarnations, (but maybe
not the latest one). I actually generally take a quick look everytime
you post the URL, though nothing much seems to change.
So it is untrue that I had NEVER visited your site. I'll assume that
when I said that I hadn't visited it *recently* you may have missed
the last word, or some other similar confusion arose.
I certainly never to my memory said that I agreed with anything
in it in general terms. I may agreed partially with SOME things
there but I doubt it.
>So Cliff is like a lot of people -- he doesn't know anything
>about the issues, because most of the Feminists and male
>media poodles tell one side of the story only.
>
Well, I agree with you that Feminists and their supporters
(who you denigrate unfairly) provide only their point of view.
But so do you in your posts.
>He knows absolutely nothing about how many people
>would agree to these views if the media repeated them
>as often as they repeat Feminist propaganda. And
>he knows nothing about netiquette, because he keeps
>shouting !
>
If you look back at my posts you will see that I rarely
shout. The post that you refer to contained about 30
words five of which I uppercased for emphasis.
I base my estimate of how many people would agree
to your views by the number of post you get in favour
and how many you get which are not in favour. I have
not done a count, but most seem to be against.
This is in spite of the fact that you crosspost to the
mens issues groups, which would have the effect
of boosting the number of posts in favour!
Cliff
Cliff Pratt
Peter Zohrab wrote
>
>Cliff Pratt..[snip]... [is] hopelessly ignorant and inarticulate.
>
I don't see any logical argument emerging here...
Cliff
[PS I may be ignorant about many things, but I *resent*
being called inarticulate, and I don't believe it is true.]
Cliff Pratt
Peter Zohrab wrote
>
>Cliff, have you considered the possibility that you are a Fascist thug ?
>
Well yes, if you want to throw around words like "Fascist" you should
really look them up first!
>you had anything between your ears, you would have heard of the concept of
>free speech.
>
Peter, I expressed an opinion on why your movement didn't attract
much attention. I NEVER suggested that you should not be
allowed to express your opinions, did I?
Cliff
David McLoughlin
Peter Zohrab wrote
>He says he works in a 95% female environemnt and has no problems. Well, I
>wasn't talking about him. I was talking about my experiences. If he has
no
>problems, then that is because he is the token male and pet poodle who is
>careful not to upset his female masters by saying anything too pro-male.
Peter is getting funnier even than usual, and seems to have developed
Alzheimers.
Only five months ago I undertook a major project which looked at how
males were disadvantaged in the justice system and how the prevailing
ideology in the police meant many males were ending up in court or jail
following false accusations of rape and sexual abuse.
Peter liked my project so much he publicised it in this newsgroup and
IIRC put it in his newsletter and on web sites! (Much to my dismay I
might add as I do not like being associated with extremist groups such as
his. <g>)
>He can also be relied upon to attack pro-men men such as myself on
>Usenet, and thereby earn himself brownie points with his female masters.
ROTFICH!
Peter, grow up!
Do you think for one minute my female mistresses (not masters, thank you,
cease such sexist language, they are women) spend their days on Usenet
following my posts here?
tricia
On Sat, 27 Dec 1997 05:32:36 +1300, "Peter Zohrab" <zoh...@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:
>He says he works in a 95% female environemnt and has no problems. Well, I
>wasn't talking about him. I was talking about my experiences. If he has no
>problems, then that is because he is the token male and pet poodle who is
>careful not to upset his female masters by saying anything too pro-male. He
>can also be relied upon to attack pro-men men such as myself on Usenet, and
>thereby earn himself brownie points with his female masters. To my
>knowledge, he has only ever written one pro-male article.
Methinks if anyone here has an agenda then that person would be you!!
If you have problems with females perhaps you would do well to examine
your attitudes to them, because I suspect what you see is their
reflection of your anti female views.
Regards,
Tricia
-----
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
ICQ 1378028
Cliff Pratt
Mark Evans wrote
>
>Following up a post in which Peter claims they have faced
>shooting exercise of first order.
>
expresses a view that we should not put our point of view?
At what point do you think that responding to a PeterZ
article becomes harassment?
Peter's cooky views deserve to be answered.
Cliff
Craig
>
>David McLoughlin, having no concept of freedom of speech, is the one who
>should resign, and leave journalism (which is supposed to be about freedom
>of speech) to people who understand that concept
I'm having trouble understanding where you get David has no concept of
freedom of speech? I believe he'd print or allow to be printed pretty much
anything that was ground-breaking, informative, interesting or opinionated
that wasn't globally offensive (and I don't buy his mag. regular
either.....)
cra...@earthling.net.nospam
Craig
--
Cheers
Craig
cra...@nospam.earthling.net
remove "nospam." to reply... and the full-stop eh!!
Cliff Pratt wrote in message <88318005...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>...
>Peter Zohrab wrote
>
>>Cliff is well-known as an obsessed anti-mens-rights poster with a minimum
>of
>>brain-matter.
>>
>I've been insulted by the best, Peter, adn conclude you are only a
beginner.
=============================
HEHE ROTFIFOL well done Cliff
Craig
Doing what job?
--------------------------------------------
--
Cheers
Craig
cra...@nospam.earthling.net
remove "nospam." to reply... and the full-stop eh!!
Craig
--
Cheers
Craig
cra...@nospam.earthling.net
remove "nospam." to reply... and the full-stop eh!!
Cliff Pratt wrote in message <88318686...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>...
>Peter Zohrab wrote
>>
=================================
I don't believe it either.
Craig
Peter, it seems that the content of the postings are moving from contain or
issue related to being personal attacks. Maybe you should move to alt.flame
and have someone meet you there. Your issues and perceptions are important
and your assertions of subjection are quite intriguing. But others responses
to your postings are their perceptions from their subjective experience and
are valid in their own right.
I haven't got anything profound to say, just that it's getting a little
*sharp* in terms of comments.
--
Cheers
Craig
cra...@nospam.earthling.net
remove "nospam." to reply... and the full-stop eh!!
Peter Zohrab wrote in message <680n82$ac1$3...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
>
>Cliff Pratt wrote in message <34A06E26...@nzsupport.nzdb.com>...
>
><snip>
>
>>>Have you considered the fact that you may be persecuted because you are
>>an
>>opinionated arrogant b******, I mean, person?
>
>Cliff, have you considered the possibility that you are a Fascist thug ?
If
>you had anything between your ears, you would have heard of the concept of
>free speech.
>
>Peter.
>
>
Cliff Pratt
Craig wrote
>
>Doing what job?
>
Peter Zohrab is a Public Relations Consultant for the
Ministry of Women's Affairs (unpaid)
Cliff
The Scourge
Cliff Pratt <Cliff...@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in article
<88343506...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>...
It had to be something like that didn't it. I thought he was with the
Biggest Chip company....
--
The Scourge thesc...@hotmail.com
Suppose I say
The vultures smile at me
Suppose I say
I've sent them down
And they plan to pick you clean
(Hetfield)
tricia
>Craig wrote
>>
>>Doing what job?
>>
>
>Peter Zohrab is a Public Relations Consultant for the
>Ministry of Women's Affairs (unpaid)
really?? But surely he is a misogynist?
Tricia
-----
No one knows why, but 90 percent of women who walk into a
department store immediately turn to the right....
ICQ 1378028
Steve Bell
tric...@hotmail.com (tricia) wrote:
>No one knows why, but 90 percent of women who walk into a
>department store immediately turn to the right....
Could the same be true of a Prime Ministership?
Cliff Pratt
tricia wrote
>
>>Peter Zohrab is a Public Relations Consultant for the
>>Ministry of Women's Affairs (unpaid)
>
>really?? But surely he is a misogynist?
>
(Though I do believe he works for a Govt or quasi-Govt
organisation)
Cliff
tricia
Oh well it was a good one cause you got me, actually I am glad that it
was a joke cause I really couldnt nahhhhh I am not even going to think
about it *grin*
Tricia
-----
No one knows why, but 90 percent of women who walk into a
department store immediately turn to the right....
ICQ 1378028
tricia
On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 23:12:09 GMT, s.b...@iecho.co.nz (Steve Bell)
wrote:
>tric...@hotmail.com (tricia) wrote:
>
>
>
>>No one knows why, but 90 percent of women who walk into a
>>department store immediately turn to the right....
>
>Could the same be true of a Prime Ministership?
Only if said PM is female !!
dlin...@ihug.co.nz
>tric...@hotmail.com (tricia) wrote:
>
>
>
>>No one knows why, but 90 percent of women who walk into a
>>department store immediately turn to the right....
>
>Could the same be true of a Prime Ministership?
>
>
When I worked as a TV reporter, I was one time (well, more than one
time, but only one is significant here) at a press conference being
held in a dingy little basement meeting room by the Communist Party of
Canada. My cameraman was trying to line up the shot before things got
underway, and he asked the party leader (whose name escapes me at the
moment) if he could move just a little to the right. "Never!" was the
booming and immediate answer in a mock serious tone.
Who sez the commies don't have a sense of humour?
danny
Dave Joll
Mark Evans wrote in message <67qv71$c...@leasion.demon.co.uk>...
[four WEEKS ago... thanks Ihug... eventually...]
>Cliff Pratt (Cliff...@vuw.ac.nz) wrote:
>: No, the main thing that holds it back is that NOBODY AGREES WITH
>: ITS AIMS!! You couldn't dredge up enough support to hold a conference
>: in a phone booth!
>I've noticed over the last few years that just about all
>of Peter's posts are followed up by ones with a patronising
>and herassing tone. (Which also come from New Zealand).
You may notice that these messages are being cross-posted to
nz.general, nz.politics, soc.culture.new-zealand and a load of
other groups. So it is not at all unusual for one of Peter's
fruitcake posts to be followed by a chorus of disagreement
from other posters. It's called "free speech". Get used to it.
Regards
Dave Joll
Tony Williams
In article <88545250...@Chaos.es.co.nz>, Dave Joll
<URL:mailto:jol...@es.co.nz> wrote:
> You may notice that these messages are being cross-posted to
> nz.general, nz.politics, soc.culture.new-zealand and a load of
> other groups. So it is not at all unusual for one of Peter's
> fruitcake posts to be followed by a chorus of disagreement
> from other posters. It's called "free speech". Get used to it.
I disagree with you. That noise you hear, in response to yet another
of PZ's open letters to nz.*, is a massed chorus of yawns, supported
by a delicate counterpoint of 'delete unread' keys being struck.
--
Tony Williams, Ledbury, UK.
Dave McL
Tony Williams wrote:
> That noise you hear, in response to yet another
> of PZ's open letters to nz.*, is a massed chorus of yawns, supported
> by a delicate counterpoint of 'delete unread' keys being struck.
Not yours, obviously!
Actually I enjoy PZ's posts. They are so off-the-planet they are almost
cultish in a Monty Python way.
Dave McL
Auckland New Zealand