You are here:   Forums2
Register   |  Login
etter_Future_Ahead_01

Forums to Disseminate Information

Minimize
 
ForumForumDiscussionsDiscussionsIgnorMANus Parent ForumIgnorMANus Parent ForumMan-Hating Wome...Man-Hating Wome...Miranda Devine Man-hater and false friend of menMiranda Devine Man-hater and false friend of men
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post
 5/4/2012 4:27 AM
 
And her is another woman I have been waiting to out as a MAN-HATER and a false friend of men. Miranda Devine. She is right up there with Bettina Arndt and Ita Buttrose. It s about time that women like this were outed as the man-haters and false friends they are.

Here are some emails I exchanged with Miranda Devine in 2009. Take a look what this "champion for men" is really like.

New Post
 5/4/2012 4:28 AM
 
 Modified By host  on 5/3/2012 10:29:02 AM

-----Original Message-----
From: peter@peternolan.com [mailto:peter@peternolan.com]
Sent: 26 February 2009 13:59
To: devinemiranda@hotmail.com
Cc: peter@peternolan.com
Subject: I keep writing to you and you keep not answering

Hi Miranda,

I was reading your article just now...

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/if-you-...

It is elegantly argued and well written. I like what you say.

I wonder that since the SMH actually publishes it whether you mean this or whether what you write is merely part of the dis-information and faux-opposition the Illuminati like to run to 'divide and conquer'. It is, sadly, difficult to find out of a person is 'real' or an Illuminati stooge offered as 'faux opposition'.

For example, you will be aware of Ron Paul. What you might not be aware of is that he's also an Illuminati stooge who is only being put forward as a 'faux opposition' so that people will follow him and then be led up a garden path like the sheeple they are.

You may not be aware that for my efforts of speaking the truth and attempting to push the conversation in the SMH blogs towards the question of WHO instituted the biased, discriminatory laws against men in our country and WHY did they do it I have been banned by Sam deBritto just yesterday.

This depite numerous supportive posts by other men......it seems that freedom of speech is censored if it 'upsets women' to hear the truth. That is merely one more reminder of how unequal women are. They are not even able to tolerate the truth when posted to a blog and have to shout abuse and complaints until the truth is suppressed and they can go back to their la-la land of totalitarian communism which they will be surprised one day to wake and find has turned into a police state where they have no rights at all...not even the right to life, which women have been want to remove from their unborn babies so removing it from themselves will also be no problem for the new regime the Illuminati are bringing in. Real men never, ever censor other men speaking. Only evil men do this.

So, Miranda, how about it? You are a writer. You want to write to me? You want to ask me what you can do to save your fellow women from waking up one day in a totalitarian state run by men? Because make no mistake, men are running everything. The only two women at the top of this tree are the queen of England and the Netherlands. Everyone else is a man.

This is the really funny thing about women so vehmently attacking men. They have completely missed the fact that feminism was invented by men and injected into society via women in order to oppress ALL members of society, not just men. You don't have to look past Russia and China to see where feminism leads you. In this world women simply do not have the capacity to be truely evil like men do. No woman ever murdered millions of people. They may have stood back and applauded but they didn't do it. This is because evil men will never, ever allow women to control positions of true power, merely of faux power. That women are the mere pawns of the Iluminati in feminism and "womens rights" is proven beyond all doubt. I wonder if you know that.

In fact, I am the person MOST committed to improving the quality of relationships between the sexes and protecting my fellow citizens from the coming police state.......that is what got me banned...the Illuminati know this of me and they do not want someone who knows how to reconcile the sexes speaking out. They need the attack by women on men to continue. They need the hatred of men by women to grow. It's going to get much worse yet. The main reason they need this is so that when the Illuminati start killing women and children in their billions, as is their published plan, they need the men to stand back and "let it happen". Which, at the rate women are abusing men, is going to happen. 

And if you don't believe me that the SMH wants to censor any 'reconciliatory' types of posts where women of true quality who speak out are quoted I put the post that got me banned below. It is the story of my first ex and how she treated me at my personally devastating experience of burying my cousin when I was just 18. You will see how much love and respect we had for each other....She was truely one of the most woderful women I ever knew and I loved her deeply as a 17 year old. That 15 years later I felt I could not meet her even for dinner because I was fearful I would put myself in a position where I might be tempted by the one other woman in the world I had such deep feelings and she accepted the compliment shows you the respect and feelings we had for each other.

Sam deBritto and your Illuminati masters do not want stories of exs that still care for and respect each other around.......that tells you all you need to know...

So what are you going to do Miranda? Are you going to join your editor, and the two Sams in backing your Illuminati masters and betraying your fellow citizens by being the propaganda mouthpiece for the Illuminati? Or are you going to speak out against the Illuminati and be a partriot and attempt to protect your fellow citizens. An action that may even cost you your life. It's a tough question when you think about it. One may cost you your life. The other will undoubtedly cost many billions their lives if we cannot stop the Illuminati cull of the worlds population...many of whom will be your loved ones.

Take a read of what I wrote....and ask yourself "why was this the 'final straw" that got Peter banned.

Best Regards

Peter Nolan

Gee Sam,
so much negativity and hostility about exs. Please allow me to share my positive story about my ex when I was a kid. I hope you post it as it is very positive. This is about the girl I dated as a 16-17 year old. My first 'real' gf. The split was ALL my fault. (Your readers will believe that.. ;-) ) I was young and immature and did some things that I later apoligised for when I realised what it was I had done. (13 years later...I am a slow learner....) This is what lovely girls/women used to be like. I thought all women were like this to their bfs at 18.

So, anyway. At 18 I left my country home (400kms away) to start work/uni as a trainee at BHP. A stressful time for a young man. About three months later my new gf decided she did not want to be my gf, fine, my grandfather died a week later. Not so fine but he was very ill. Then one of my two closest cousins died in a car crash. Very unfine indeed.....My ex came to his funeral because she knew him well. Indeed, his sister introduced my ex to me when I was just 15....I was very distraught as my cousin and I were closer than most brothers.

At the funeral it rained just as his coffin was being lowered but I was so distraught I could not move. I just stood in the rain and cried for the first time since I was a little boy. I had never known hurt like this. Putting my cousin in the ground at 18  hurt more than I knew how to deal with. My ex came over to me and the conversation went:
X: "How are you?"

P: "Really, really bad."

X: "I understand......I am surprised your grandfather is not here, where is he?"

P: "Oh, he is here all right, he is just there" and I pointed to his grave which was only about 10 along.

And Sam, I will never forget what she did next. This is what ladies do. She just looked me in the eye and said "You poor thing" and held me close to her and hugged me as I cried ever so hard on her shoulder for what seemed like forever in the rain. Later, back at the house, she talked with me and comforted me in my pain and sorrow. She did everything she could to comfort me.

Now THAT is how loving and caring an ex can be. As two people who still had very deep feelings and respect for each other one could offer support and care when the other needed it. Remember, she was just 18. This is just what women were like when I was young. All the girls who were my friends were kind, caring and respectful of me. I thought this was 'normal'.

Three years later, as luck would have it, my ex and I bumped into each other at the 21st of my dead cousins sister. We both had new bf/gf whom we both went on to marry. It was clear we still had deep feelings for each other so we were a little awkward. In the intervening three years we both came to realise more clearly we wanted very different lives and there would have been no way we could have married. Our problem was there was still wwaayyyy too much feeling there to just be 'friends'. I shook his hand and wished him the very best. I congratulated him on choosing so wisely........I even joked with him that in his town, he had definitely selected the best woman there was. She was equally complimentary about me to my new gf. We all got along just fine. 13 years later, after my long overdue apology, we became 'pen pals' and then 'email pals' as we kept up to date with each others lives.

When I was young hostility in a break up was almost unheard of, even in the very rare divorces that happened. When relationships broke down everyone gathered around to support each person in their time of sadness and need. In breakups that were not divorce no-one was ever 'blamed'. It was taken as 'fact' that the two people involved had figured out between themselves that they did not want to be married so they split. This was not considered 'bad'. It was a normal, natural and necessary thing because, just like me, it is too much to ask to find the woman you will marry in your first serious gf at 16 or so. This is obvious. Given this, we are each of us going to have some relationships that are not going to work out.

With this ex? Heck, many years later I was working not more than 1 km from where she was working in melbourne. I even had her mobile number. We were emailing. We emailed about meeting up for dinner since we were within walking distance of each other.......And you know? In the end I said no and told her that even with all the intervening years those feelings ran too deep and she was the one and only woman in the world who might 'tempt' me as a married man. She laughed at the tremendous compliment claiming she was not quite so young and attractive any more and I might well be safe...LOL!! What class!!! So we agreed we would just stay pen pals and continue on with our lives without the personal contact. Now, if only more women could have the class of this ex. The world would be a better place. She is a truly wonderful woman.

Sam, the level of hostility between the sexes and exs that is so commonly reported on the blogs here is a new phenomenon. I can testify that this stuff was very, very rare when I was a kid. Don't you wonder 'why'?

New Post
 5/4/2012 4:29 AM
 
 Modified By host  on 5/3/2012 10:30:27 AM

-----Original Message-----
From: peter@peternolan.com [mailto:peter@peternolan.com]
Sent: 27 February 2009 21:20
To: devinemiranda@hotmail.com
Cc: peter@peternolan.com
Subject: read your article today.....you hit the nail on the head

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/yearnin...

Hi Miranda,
I hope that thanking you for your column is something that is good for our country. I do wonder what your particuar motivations are and how that works....and whether it is in the interests of our country.....

But in this phrase you hit the nail on the head:

"For all their blokey bravado, they come to realise that true freedom lies not in doing whatever they want to do but in doing what they know in their heart will preserve their integrity and self-respect."

Women know nothing of Integrity, Honesty and Self-Respect now. They have been programmed by the Illuminti though the device of newspapers like the SMH as you well know. I am sure that if you look up conversational hypnosis you will realise that Sam Brett engages in using it to program her female audience. There are many articles in the SMH doing the same....as with all MSM. The Illuminati are programming women, and to some similar extent men, in order to further their goal of one world government.

Men know all about Integrity, Honesty and Self Respect. Since we were trying to kill the odd mammoth or sabre tooth tiger when commitment and willingness to do ones task even if it cost him his life men have co-operated to the death. Women talk about how there are so many 'bad men' but they totally ignore the fact that in times like WW II these 'bad men' went off in their tens of millions to fight to the death for their beliefs and societies.

Integrity among men was a survival mechanism. When killing the mammoth all the men had to do their job or the mammoth may kill many of them. Therefore men made the penalty for 'cowardice' in the face of death also death. It is this 100,000 years of cultural conditioning of men that had the call "women and children first" answered by men.

All through history, MEN and ONLY MEN have willingly sacrificed their lives to the benefit of their society. From hunting mammoths to fighting WW II. MEN and ONLY MEN went to almost certain death with honour, dignity, integrity, and self respect in tact.

And how do you women repay the men of your society. By claiming men oppressed them and abusing those very same men who would fight and die for them.

Hardly any wonder us men are just a little bit sick of listening to mindless, thoughtless 'wimmin' spouting the programming of the Illuminati called 'feminism'.

If women today were a little more like my female cousins, my mother, my aunts, and my grandmothers they would be happier people.

The trouble with women today is that they can never be happy with what they want because the Illuminati has programmed them to want ever more....Ka Ching! Women have been exhorted by the the Illuminati to spend money on ever more wasteful possessions....just because they can...just look at retail stores...all geared towards women because women spend most of the money in society now.

Miranda. I hope you are getting these emails. I am not sure why you would refuse to acknowledge a correspondence. Perhaps you are merely a part of the Satanic Illuminati plot to install a one world government, who knows? Not me.

But if you are not...if you are a christian woman, or even if you are a woman who does not wish to see the death of 80-90% of the worlds population, which is going to happen real soon now, then I suggest you join in to help put a stop to the New World Order. Women will suffer just as much as men will if the Illuminati install their New World Order. Nazi Germany, Communist China, Communist Russia? These regimes will look like heaven compared to what David Rockefeller and his cronies have planned for us.

And Miranda, unless you already have your pass to one of their underground cities you are out of luck. Those who have been selected to survive already know who they are. This is how close we are to the coming tyranny. Those who will escape the nuclear winter underground already know who they are. The 200 people the Australian Government just killed in fires? The 35 they killed at Port Arthur? These pale into insignificance compared to the million or so they have killed with Fluoride. Nor the millions more they are going to kill.

Do you want to help men like me stop the slaughter of 80-90% of the global population or not? It is a really simple question.

You are someone who is in a position to make a contribution to stop the Illuminati from killing your loved ones. Are you going to use it?

And Miranda, please do not kid yourself that this danger is not real. Everyone who looks into this comes back with the same answer. The conspiracy is real. It is 95% of the way to the 'end-game'.

We have less than 3 years to stop this descent into tyranny.

Will you help us?

Best Regards

Peter Nolan


New Post
 5/8/2012 12:26 PM
 
My thanks to one of our list members for bringing this to my attention. The man-hater and false friend of men, Miranda Devine, is trying to spread her lies in this article.

http://www.articlesaboutmen.com/2010/...

28.10.2010 | Author: Miranda Devine | Posted in Stereotyping of Men



Miranda Devine, high profile News Limited columnistONE sunny morning last week a 55-year-old advertising executive and father was walking to work on Sydney’s North Shore when he came across a toddler wandering by himself just 10m from busy Military Rd (in North Sydney), no guardian in sight.

“Where’s your mummy,” he asked the small boy, who didn’t respond and kept walking towards the dangerous thoroughfare.

Against his instinct, the man did not pick up the boy, for fear of being accused of being a paedophile abductor.

Instead, as the child kept moving towards danger, he called to a lady in a nearby shop to ask if the boy was hers. She ran outside and chased the toddler down.

In the commotion the mother emerged from a nearby shop, apparently unperturbed.

But the man was angry.

“What would have got her upset is if I had picked the boy up when I saw him, which was my first instinct,” he said.

These are just ordinary men, fathers, grandfathers, brothers, uncles, who have been made to feel like criminals around children.

In the commotion the mother emerged from a nearby shop, apparently unperturbed.

But the man was angry.

“What would have got her upset is if I had picked the boy up when I saw him, which was my first instinct,” he said.

In 100 different ways every day the same scenario is played out, reflecting a profound and largely unspoken shift in the way decent men view small children.

These are just ordinary men, fathers, grandfathers, brothers, uncles, who have been made to feel like criminals around children and obliged to suppress their natural, healthy instinct to protect the most vulnerable members of our society.

In the same way, you can understand why men using the change rooms at a public swimming pool in a northern Sydney suburb last week might be concerned about the presence of unsupervised young boys undressing nearby.

Afraid of being falsely accused of being paedophiles, several men complained to pool management that they felt uncomfortable undressing in front of the schoolboys, in an increasingly febrile atmosphere in which even the mildest accusation of sexual impropriety can be ruinous.

So the boys were banned from the change rooms of the Hornsby Aquatic Centre and reportedly had to ride back on the bus to school in wet swimsuits.

Nobody comes out of the story feeling better about themselves, but who can blame the men for wanting to protect themselves from complaints?

It has happened before.

One of the many heartfelt comments from men responding to the story on The Daily Telegraph website last week detailed the experience of “RM” when he took his four-year-old niece and two-year-old nephew to a playground and saw a little girl hurt herself.

“I was asking if she was OK, which one is her mum etc, only to have a woman (who turned out to be the child’s mother) rush up and yell, ‘what are you doing?’ Thankfully another mother there came to my defence.”

RM was critical of the mother who had left her child unsupervised while she went across the road for a coffee.

In the UK , a notorious case a few years ago highlighted the dilemma men are finding themselves in when a truck driver saw a two-year-old girl wandering alone along a village road but decided against stopping to see if she was OK for fear of being accused of bad intentions.

The child drowned in a pond and the poor man has to live with the crushing guilt.

Much of this modern paranoia is due to revelations of child sexual abuse over the past decade – and increased knowledge of the predatory activities of sneaky paedophiles such as “Dolly” Dunn – making Australian parents hyper vigilant.

I remember as a reporter covering the shocking paedophilia revelations of the Wood royal commission more than a decade ago, feeling suddenly over-protective towards my toddler son in the supermarket, wondering if there were lascivious intent behind the innocent smile of a male shopper. The natural interest and regard between older and younger males became verboten.

Mothers began to worry about allowing their small boys to go alone into shopping centre urinals, and the sight of anxious women loitering around male toilets, eyes glued on the door, became disconcertingly commonplace, as did the phenomenon of women bringing sons as old as eight or nine into female bathrooms.

It was a sad but understandable shift in attitudes towards men. Now they were all suspect.

We have seen the consequences for families in the tragic story this year of a mother jailed in Amsterdam for kidnapping her young son and spiriting him out of Australia because of her apparently mistaken belief that her husband had paedophile tendencies. Once the seed of doubt is planted there’s no telling how far it can go.

Previously there was a widespread societal denial that such foul behaviour was even possible and certainly not from seemingly avuncular types such as Dolly Dunn, a kindly faced teacher who took a special interest in the problems of his young charges.

But this sort of squeamishness about acknowledging paedophilia had conspired to allow past cover-ups and deny victims natural justice. In some cases, even mothers of victims refused to believe such wickedness was possible, thus compounding the crime with their tacit approval.

It was a deliberate decision by clear-eyed judges and prosecutors such as Margaret Cunneen SC, who prosecuted Dunn, to make explicit the true nature of paedophilia.

Earlier this month, in sentencing the unspeakably vile paedophile David Shane Whitby to 26 years in jail for the rape and ongoing sexual abuse of eight children as young as 14 months, NSW District Court Judge Peter Berman declared that, distressing as they were, the offences should be detailed explicitly and publicly as a warning .

“I’ve never seen a human being treat another in such a vile manner … there are people like Mr Whitby in the world and it is necessary to describe the evil that people do because as Shakespeare reminds us, ‘that evil lives after them’,” he said.

The pendulum needed to swing in the direction of disclosure in order to strip paedophiles of the cover of our ignorance.

But demonising men won’t prevent child abuse. In the interests of children, we women must force ourselves to reclaim the notion of male innocence.

The male protective instinct, after all, is one of the most crucial safeguards of childhood.


Previous Previous
 
Next Next
ForumForumDiscussionsDiscussionsIgnorMANus Parent ForumIgnorMANus Parent ForumMan-Hating Wome...Man-Hating Wome...Miranda Devine Man-hater and false friend of menMiranda Devine Man-hater and false friend of men