The World According To Bob

Bob Allen is a philosopher and cyber libertarian. He advocates for the basic human rights of men. Bob has learned to cut through the political nonsense, the propaganda hate, the surface discourse, and talk about the underlying metamessage that the front is hiding. Bob tells it like it is and lets the chips fall where they may. If you like what you read be sure to bookmark this blog and share it with your friends.

Location: United States

You can't make wrong into right by doing wrong more effectively. It's time for real MEN to stand up and take back our families, our society, and our self respect. It is not a crime to be born a man. It is not a crime to act manly.

Friday, May 23, 2008

“Return Their Children!”

UPDATE May 29, 2008

The Texas Supreme Court today affirmed the appellate court decision. Send the Children Home! Read story Texas District Agent of Satan in black robes of hell, Barbara Walther, has been ordered to return the children to their parents. The highest court in Texas found that the mass kidnappers had no legal justification to steal well over 400 children from their parents. Kidnapping is a hanging crime in the United States. When the “Law Enforcement” refuses to enforce the law, and is in fact the criminals, the people must take responsibility to enforce the law. All of the hundreds of violent criminal kidnappers who took so many children must be executed in accordance with law. Justice must be served.

UPDATE May 23, 2008

Texas CPS lieyers have appealed the court decision to the Texas Supreme court despite having no further legal grounds. Any half decent person would return children to their families, but the criminals in Texas are refusing to do so. Read story Lying scumball media all across American are reporting that the CPS officials discovered that the children were “abused” even though the Court of Appeals ruled that there was no evidence of such abuse.


The Texas Court of Appeals has told Texas CPS lesbitches and a legion of blue gun thug criminals to "Return their children." The Texas Court of Appeals announced the blatant truth that their assault and mass kidnapping of children from the FLDS ranch had "no legal basis." The whole raid and mass kidnapping of children was based on a lie that “Law Enforcement” knew was a lie. The supposed details of the lie were patently false on their face. The alleged “abuser” in the phony story was living in another state under supervision of the Arizona Parole Board. Even a cursory review of their alleged excuse for the mass kidnapping would show that the alleged facts could not be true. It is still not clear if the Texas Blue Gun Thugs and CPS Lesbitches made up the whole alleged “abuse” story as an excuse to pursue their war on minority religions. Readers of The World According to Bob have been following this mass crime in Texas. See Shoot Them On Sight for the background of this story.

What this decision means is that the whole operation was CRIMINAL KIDNAPPING in addition to CRIMINAL violation of dozens of other laws from trespass to perjury. Kidnapping has been a death penalty crime in the US since the Lindberg case many decades ago. Every one of the evil Lesbitches from CPS and every one of the Texas Rangers, FBI, and Local Pigs should be rounded up and hanged for kidnapping. Read Yahoo news piece.

Considering that this is Texas one might suppose that the FLDS families are lucky that they weren't just all murdered by WMD poison gas like the Branch Davidians were in their homes. Some media are already making excuses for the evil scum criminals who wage war on citizens. The mainstream media specializes in kissing the arses of the blue gun thugs and applauding when families and children are destroyed. Don't hold your breath waiting for any of the CRIMINALS to be charged or held responsible for their mass crimes against children and families. The good people of Texas will eventually have to fight them for control of their towns and cities. Shoot them on sight.

Labels: , , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even if it wasn't a lie they have no right.

Men have the right to have young women of childbearing age as wives.

women and other men have NO RIGHT to stop a man from marrying such a female.

ALL people who believe that they have the right to stop a Man from marrying a young woman of childbearing age MUST be KILLED.
(Because they assault and Kill Men, so they must be assaulted and Killed).

Fuck the Law. It's made by women. We shouldn't care a whit about it either way.

Muslims don't, they care about being armed and killing people who invade their little towns to stop them from marrying young females and teaching their children as they see fit and marrying their daughters off young.

Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.

May 23, 2008 11:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We need a revolution. A terrible and bloody revolution. One where our opressors are fed feet first through wood chippers.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."


Thomas Jefferson
(1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President

November 13, 1787, letter to William S. Smith, quoted in Padover's Jefferson On Democracy, ed., 1939

May 23, 2008 11:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you anonymous from May 23, 2008 at 11:29 for being straightforward with your feelings about all this "how young is too young for women to marry men" media paranoia.

As far as I'm concerned it is a non issue. Essentially from a man's standpoint once a young women starts to menstruate and grow breasts she is ready to have children, and if she is physically ready to have children then she should be mentally ready for marriage, right?
Nowadays most young women are NOT ready to be married but many young men are.
Unfourtunately Moms and Dads baby their female children to death so that the thought of their so-called "baby", now 14 years old, getting married is surprising to them.
It is surprising to them because they have coddled and spoiled their young women to continue their childish behavior which will never work in a proper marriage with a proper man.
For all the smart men out there that have noticed that young women can be very beautiful to us but mentally and practical intelligence wise, women do not bring anything to the table in this day in age and that is the second most important reason why young men are not marrying young women nowadays: Young women do not bring any practical around-the-house knowledge or any mental stability to marriage today.
The primary reason why young men are not marrying young women is because young women are being forced and manipulated to think that "I must go to college to prove that I am just as good as any man is" complete and total moronic spoiled entitlement mentality.

This mostly stems from women believing in "feminism" which is actually closet lesbianism in disguise, which is not feminine at all!

So if women did not go to college or indeed public schools which are recruiting useful female dupes for the destruction and marginalization of society, and these women were instead taught useful and responsible duties around the house and told to be proud to be women,
and complimented and taught by their parents,
instead of feeling they must have penis envy and entitlement mentality as in this current societal cesspool; and these young women were told do something by a man they would feel the responsibility to do so instead of ignoring the leadership of men then we could actually marry these beautiful young women because they would be beautiful, useful, responsible and intelligent women ready for marriage to men.

May 23, 2008 5:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope all of us; men, women, masculists, feminists, capitalists, socialists, and anyone else out there, will start listening to the advice Bob has been giving on this subject for years. Dead CPS agents can't kidnap your children.

There's now a glimmer of hope in this particular case. But it comes after a 2 month tragedy, based on nothing more than the government's desire to assert it's power. And I can't help wondering how many of those children are being raped or beaten while in foster care.

Even after this ruling, not a single child is being returned. For the moment, 12 will be allowed to SEE their mothers. They'll remain hostages, they'll just be in a place where their mothers can visit. The involved fathers are still prohibited from any contact with any minor, whether theirs, or otherwise.

The government takes fully half of our money. They're trying to take our guns, our cigarettes, our big cars, and our Big Macs. They tell us what we can't put in our own bodies, and increasingly tell us what we MUST put in them. They actively break up our marriages, ridicule our religions, indoctrinate our children, and encourage foreign invaders to drive down our wages, while fighting a war 10,000 miles away, against people who couldn't invade us if they wanted to. They go to ridiculous lengths to invent reasons to kidnap our children, and they shoot us if we try to stop them. Whether by neglect or intent, they commonly kill the kidnapped children, too.

When is it enough? At what point do we finally fight back? How much more are we willing to let them take from us? They're our servants, not our masters. And they've earned a whipping like none the world has ever seen.

May 23, 2008 5:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent comments,

Anonymous (May 23, 2008 5:08 PM) makes a good point. The feminist indoctrination that modern women have received creates a situation in which she does not bring anything to the table when it comes to marriage and family! Why would a man want to marry when his identity/role is “equally” the same as his wife’s? He can remain single and have the same thing, and get to have lots more sex that single guys do and married guys don’t with out the fuss and legal consequences of marriage? Most young women who have bought in to the feminist dogma fail to see this I think. I’m not talking about the hard core man-haters mind you, but the ones who semi-hate men but still want to get married and have a family.

To tie this to the subject at hand, I believe that a lot of the persecution that the FLDS and similar groups receive is due to their pre-feminist old world lifestyles that is stark contrast with the far left liberal upbringing that the average westerner has been indoctrinated with! This seems to be true these days of most people who even consider themselves to be conservatives as evidenced by the ferocity that the so called “conservatives” on Fox news attacked these FLDS with!

May 24, 2008 5:42 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
You are accurate that a major reason the FLDS is attacked is because the women are living full, rich, wonderful lives with loving families and children. They are a glaring example of the failure of modern feminist hate that destroys families.

FOX and other "conservatives" are as anti-men as the liberals. FOX went nuts over the idea that Elian Gonzales would be returned to his FATHER. FOX NEWS, including O'really and all, hate men and hate fathers.

May 24, 2008 7:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Japanese woman: In those days female staff were expected to arrive 30 minuits before the men, to do the cleaning. That sort of thing would be _unthinkable_ now.


No country is immune. All are cuntries now.

May 24, 2008 7:58 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
That sounds like a good working solution. Why would you call it "unthinkable"?

May 24, 2008 9:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob: that _was_ the solution, but the japanese woman say's it's unthinkable now in modern japan.

IE: japan is feminist. Some peeps think it's the promised land though still...

Did you see the BBC documentary that clip was part of (Hiroshima)? Was pretty good.

May 24, 2008 10:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it true that ingesting floride causes a mild retardation and docileness? Is this why no american men are willing to fight?

If so then there is no way to fight women's rights.

May 25, 2008 12:36 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
The BBC piece was partisan political propaganda produced at taxpayer expense. You can't make wrong into right by doing wrong very well.

May 25, 2008 7:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look at this:

ALL the men think it's wrong to rape their wives. Many say IT's the LAW that you don't!

Even muslims:
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Its non of anyone right to force having sex with his wife.
If a man raped his wife it could be even more dangerous than do it to a stranger. cuz first, the ppl is more hurt when they got a bad treatment from someone they love/like rather from someone they don't know and don't really care about how they see them. second, she will be seeing him every Day since then and remember the hurt he has done to her and it will be more and more every time they meet
having the right to have sex with her doesn't mean to force it on her.

* 2 months ago

This woman has even more anti-men ideas:


I know, you asked the guys...

noone has the right even if it's their wife and they are not willing... if a man can't learn to wait he should have his thing cut off... that's the truth...

* 2 months ago


The only way we will fix this is nuclear war. There are just too many people who's ideas need to be wiped off the planet.

It is the majority (of men and women) who hate men and want to restrict men.

I guess this is because the "beta"s are just happy to have a fuck and will do ANYTHING to get it.

We need to kill everyone who would take action against a man for raping his wife. A man has the right to have sex with her whenever he wants.

Also what about this one, why did this bitch hate her husband for fucking her? Is this how it always is? Women hate men no matter what? Do they need to get shot once they can no longer have children as all that will be left is their hatread for men?


My ex husband did that to me when we were first married back in 1982. I was pregnant, he threw me down on the bed and raped me a few times over a period of time. I hated it and I hated him. Stupid me, I stayed. I felt like I had no place to go. On towards the end of the marriage, he tried doing it again but unsuccessfully. He forcefully had me pinned down on the bed. He told me his intentions were to just take it. He would always tell me that he bought and paid for it so he could take it whenever he wanted to.

And another:
Loret T
Rape is rape. A man that rapes his wife is not much of a man. And a wife should report her husband if he rapes her. I'm not a man but as a woman I know that a husband has no rights to rape his wife. And we all know that man rapes a woman because it gives him power. But the law knows how to deal with them. And jail is the best place for a rapist.


Bob: I hate these people. I want to go up to those 3 women and put 3 bullets in each of their stomachs. I want them to die slowly. I want all women, even if it is the marjority of women, who think as they do to die.

We need to cleanse the world of their genes. Only the docile girls should survive.

And here's some old guy who want's the originating poster to put her husband in jail using the hated (and should be murdered) blue gun thugs:
'ol Geezer
Well, Mommy, everyone seems to agree on one thing; NO !
But is that your REAL question ? Do YOU have a "hidden motive" to ask this question ? WHY are you asking ?
If YOU are a VICTIM, then get of the computer, and get yourself down to the police station and file charges. NOW ! Do NOT let your husband, (or ANYONE) GET AWAY WITH THIS CRIME !

The thing is, women are never repentant for their anti-man hate. They mostly are machines that work only for themselves. Some also work for their children, and those women actually are people, but most don't even do that and are just machines that we should kill. None ever help or care for their husband. They all hate him.

We need witch trials: After most women are past their prime they're accuse of being witches and delt with. They all hate men anyway so what use are they.

May 25, 2008 9:49 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Today's young people have no understating at all of the meaning of marriage. "Rape" is not applicable in a marriage. None of those children who answered have been taught what marriage is even about.

May 25, 2008 10:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If somebody wants to marry a young docile girl, the only way to do it is adopt a child. You may or may not need to be married first to adopt.

Then, as the girl grows up, get her alone. Explain it is always the Father's right to do 'these things' to his daughter. She won't know the difference and you can have all the fun you desire with the young girl of your dreams.

May 25, 2008 3:32 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous (May 25, 2008 3:32 PM)
That is so stupid that you must be a fat feminist sow.

May 25, 2008 5:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think men and women being equal doesn't mean they have to be the same. A woman who stays at home and bears respectful children and keeps a warm loving house and prepares meals and lunches and laundry on time with love and care is, in her way, an equal contributor to a marriage in which the male provides the authority, the money, etc.

I think this might not be a bad form of equality - when men and women each have their own place then there's no need to feel threatened by the other, isn't there?

I don't see why opposing violence against women automatically makes someone anti-man. Men are naturally bigger and stronger than women - they shouldn't HAVE to use violence against them. Our society looks down on people who beat children - why? Because its someone hurting someone smaller and weaker than they are. Isn't that the same with women? I'm sorry, but in my mind a real man, with all the strength and authority of one, would never find himself in a position of such threat where he would need to intentionally injure someone smaller and weaker than themselves. That's not a man - that's a coward.

May 25, 2008 7:01 PM  
Anonymous Lady Liberty said...

Dear Bob,

I've been reading your blog. What a delightful website!

You and your commentator friends repeatedly decry how you feel men and boys are growing up in a society that discriminates and demeans them for their gender while women are getting all of society's perks.


Maybe the erudite commentators on this blog should realize that the acidic bile they've been choking on about how they've been "oppressed" by women is the same bitter medicine that's been forced down the throats of women for 10 000 years being oppressed by men.

It's also amusing and delightful how whenever a serial killer or a murderer happens to kill a random person, if it's a woman, it's "justified" but it's a man, it's just another sign of how society hates men. Even though both men and women get murdered for pretty much the same reasons nowadays. Could you GET anymore self-involved and narcissistic?

YOU guys made the laws a hundred years ago. YOU guys had the power a hundred years ago. You guys had the chance to make the world a better place and you blew it. You "canonize" murderers like Marc Lepine (yeah, I doubt the Catholic church will recognize that, and if you try to tell me the Catholic Church is controlled by women, that'll be the biggest crock of shit dumped yet by this site!). I'm sorry, but if, as a man, you're so threatened by women that you want to kill them, you're barely a man at all.

Ever notice you're a minority? That, uh, you're outnumbered a thousand to one by men who don't mind a damn bit about what the current leaders of the world have between their legs? Who have healthy, contributive relationships with the women around them?

Hmmm. This entire blog is a big, giant example of SOUR GRAPES. "Women don't like me so they must be PURE EVIL. Boo-hoo, I'm oppressed."

You men ruled the world for 10 000 years. Quityerbitchin. It's our turn now.

Best wishes,

Lady Liberty

May 25, 2008 7:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"You men ruled the world for 10 000 years. Quityerbitchin. It's our turn now."

I hear FARC rebels cut off the ears and digits of captured rulers.

Can you handle that being done to you women?

It will happen.

Every ruler has .. her rebel.

And he shows no mercy and draws out the suffering.

May 25, 2008 9:49 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

An anonymous sow squealed, "You men ruled the world for 10 000 years. Quityerbitchin. It's our turn now."

For 10,000 years children were raised in good families and most women were supported. In 10,000 years women's work changed from gathering roots to bring back to a cave to wasting her days watching Ophra and getting fat on chocolate. Now females are hell bent on destroying all of that.

May 26, 2008 6:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If a man believes he has to rape his wife to grab sex, he has no real marriage.

His wife doesn't want him. He sickens her. He can't accept her natural rejection, and continues to behave like a spoiled pig. The marriage ends, with perhaps cruelty charges brought against him.

Duh ---

He was too obtuse to see it coming.

Hey it's simple. Treat each other as human beings worthy of consideration and respect. Then you got a marriage, not a slave labor camp.

May 26, 2008 3:42 PM  
Anonymous Rash said...

"I don't see why opposing violence against women automatically makes someone anti-man. Men are naturally bigger and stronger than women - they shouldn't HAVE to use violence against them."

But what if a 'weaker' person starts using violence towards you or repeatedly taunts you until you snap. Is it OK then to be violent to them? I say it is and you may as well finish them off.

"Our society looks down on people who beat children - why? Because its someone hurting someone smaller and weaker than they are. Isn't that the same with women?"

As Bob often says, it's the mothers who are most likely to beat their children.

"I'm sorry, but in my mind a real man, with all the strength and authority of one, would never find himself in a position of such threat where he would need to intentionally injure someone smaller and weaker than themselves..."

So if a man is faced with a knife-wielding burglar or partner who is smaller than he is, he should use no force, only plead with them not to hurt him?!

"...that's a coward."

So is a woman who is violent towards or makes false allegations against a man, safe in the knowledge the legal system is on her side.

May 26, 2008 4:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's laughable to call those polygamist marriages healthy.

Or to think those teen brides lead "fulfilled" lives. Leave it to Bob to imagine that.

Submitting to marital rape at the hands of your retarded cousin, in some backwoods cult, is hardly "fulfilling". Nor is whelping 10 inbred retards.

May 26, 2008 5:42 PM  
Anonymous Lady Liberty said...

Dearest, adorable Rash,

What amazing, magical town do you live in that sees violence as an acceptable solution for "taunting"?

Of course I don't mean men shouldn't attack a smaller person if they're attacking them with a weapon.

However, raping or beating your wife because she talks too much are hardly proportionate reactions. And cutting off of fingers and ears and shooting women in the stomach because of their political leanings is also seen by normal society as a sociopathic, barbaric action rather then the choice of a rational, enlightened human being.

But I forgot - this is the website that idolizes mentally ill murderers of innocent women.


Lady Liberty

May 26, 2008 6:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And cutting off of fingers and ears... is bad"

I'm suprised you condem your marxist FARC sisters and brothers. They believe in women's rights, even put women as heads of town governments.

May 26, 2008 8:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And cutting off of fingers and ears and shooting women in the stomach because of their political leanings is also seen by normal society as a sociopathic, barbaric action rather then the choice of a rational, enlightened human being."

That is called real politics. It is the true politics that goes on in the rest of the world. It is why most people in the world hate politics.

In the US we do not have politics.

Politics is about hate and opposition to eachother. In the USA all people have been brainwashed alike: what is good for women is good, what is not good for men but good for women is good.

Lady Liberty is the USA's God(dess). It is liberty for women. No liberty nor happiness for Men.

Lady Liberty must die and be replaced by old man Freedom.

"His wife doesn't want him. He sickens her. He can't accept her natural rejection, and continues to behave like a spoiled pig. The marriage ends, with perhaps cruelty charges brought against him."

The wife should be executed brutally if she takes action against her husband. All that support women taking action against their husbands should also share in such a fate.

May 26, 2008 8:59 PM  
Anonymous Feminist Scum said...

lady liberty, women don't rule jack shit, and never will. Manginas rule this Earth, not women.

May 27, 2008 4:48 AM  
Anonymous Lady Liberty said...

Dearest Anonymous "Real Politics"

Looks like someone hasn't evolved past the Middle Ages. I imagine you as a baron on some holding, burning your wife at the stake for bearing a daughter instead of a son. You'd be happier than a pig in shit there, I'm guessing, Bubonic plague and religious persecution and inadequate health care be damned.

I guess it all depends on what the commentators on this site want - actual equality (and yes, that includes opposition to women being treated better than men) or male domination. There is a difference.

You think it is alright for a man to rape and beat his wife, but not alright for a woman to do the same or to express her feelings. That is not equality, it is an imbalance of power just as egregious as the female oppression you continue to bitch about.

I'm all for equality (and I mean man-love and well as woman-love, and fair male treatment as well as women treatment), but some of you border on male domination hypocrites. Watch you works, my lucky lads.

Dearest Regards,

Lady Liberty

May 27, 2008 9:07 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Lady Sow squealed, "Looks like someone hasn't evolved past the Middle Ages."

LOL. The fat sow makes the common misandrist assertion that feminism is "progress" and even "evolution." She uses her ridiculous feminist crap as an insult to a man who refuses to be feminized. She needs to pay more attention to the size of her thighs and leave the deep thinking to someone who can think past the latest soap opera.

May 27, 2008 1:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why would I want to kill my nice obedient wife because she bore a daughter?

I would be very happy with daughters because I would raise them to be good wives and then marry them off (possibly to friends) once they were capable of having children.

I would give other Men good wives. This would be helping men and thus be good.

Those who kill their young daughters do future men a disservice and probably don't like men that much. Men want good little wives. Those who hate men would either kill or pervert said females before they became wives.

Death To women's Rights
Viva Men's Liberties

May 27, 2008 11:55 PM  
Anonymous Lady Liberty said...

Dearest Bob,

Well, even you have to admit that some beliefs about women in those days were just plain scientifically wrong - for instance, a) that their brains were smaller (which is scientifically untrue and actually quite irrelevant to thought capacity) and b) that they were responsible for the gender of their children (wrong again - the male's contribution to intercourse determines a child's gender).

As well, pratices that were popular then are not so much now: witchburning (most often widows and poor women who did what they could to support themselves), footbinding, etc.

I would call that progress, wouldn't you?


Lady Liberty

May 28, 2008 9:08 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

The fat sow squealed, “Well, even you have to admit that some beliefs about women in those days were just plain scientifically wrong

Yes, in previous centuries much of scientific though about MEN and women had errors, and some still does. The history of human society, however, was based on millennia of hard won experience, not on philosophical tripe.

The fat sow squealed, “ - for instance, a) that their brains were smaller (which is scientifically untrue and actually quite irrelevant to thought capacity)

LOL. Your first example is nonsense. Female brains are in fact smaller, on average, and the primary place where female brain capacity is smaller is in the frontal lobe gray matter which does most of the logical and creative thought. The “bell curve” for men’s intelligence is higher than for females. Thanks for your demonstration of this fact.

The fat sow squealed, “ “b) that they were responsible for the gender of their children (wrong again - the male's contribution to intercourse determines a child's gender)”.

Wrong again. Males give females an equal number of sperm of both sexes, and what she does with which one after that is beyond his control.

The fat sow squealed, “ As well, pratices that were popular then are not so much now: witchburning (most often widows and poor women who did what they could to support themselves), footbinding, etc. I would call that progress, wouldn't you?

The historic witch hunt’s were not focused on females as you lying females now claim. In some areas there were more men punished for witchcraft than females. In total numbers, the modern “witch hunt” mentality that has put millions of American men into hellhole prisons is far worse than any historic hunt for actual witches. I would call that an evil feminazi abomination instead of progress.

May 28, 2008 10:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, name some men who were tortured and burned as witches. (not heretics, but witches )

In Salem MA (1692) the majority of witch hunt victims were female. But one man died under torture before they could hang him with the women victims. A little girl was imprisoned with her mother (who was hanged). The child was tortured and suffered mental trauma for the rest of her life.

May 28, 2008 5:02 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Bob is quite familiar with the Salem witch trials. Three of Bob's foremothers were convicted and sentenced to hang during the Salem witch trials. Several men were also convicted. Among the men hanged as witches in the Salem witch trials were John Willard, George Burroughs, George Jacobs, Sr. and John Proctor. In many places in Europe there were many men who were accused of witchcraft, and in large parts of France the men convicted outnumbered the women.

In total numbers, the medieval witch hunts pale in comparison to the modern day "witch hunts" that accuse men of "sexual predators" and similar hysteria. By comparison the whole witch hunt hysteria over several centuries totaled less than half a million, probably closer to 50,000. That compares with an estimated 4 million men currently rotting in hellhole concentration camps in the US.

This line of argument is drifting more off topic. Future comments should be germane to the topic of the criminals who assaulted the FLDS village.

May 28, 2008 5:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The entire incident is based on a Fabrication. The Women who made the complaint is a Black Woman and an Obama Delegate living in Colorado. There is no crime here, and nobody has been criminally charged. This is Waco, Ruby Ridge and abuse by Government on the fundamental Civil Rights of Citizens.

It is brought to you by the Bitch of Big Pharmaceuticals Rick Perry. Who wanted to give the Elementary School Girls of Texas Gardasil. To enrich his buddies in big Pharma.

And who is supporting the NAFTA Super Highway. Sadly Republicans are no better than Democrats in over stepping their Sworn duty to uphold the US Constitution.

Which gives you the right to have strange Religious beliefs. You don't see Moslems who are openly practicing polygamy getting this kind of Treatment. The Men of the FLDS Church offered to even leave the compound with just the Women present.

At least we didn't murder them like the Drunk Gas Em and Burn Em Janet Reno did.

May 29, 2008 9:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The muslims don't get hassled because they fight. They are armed and will gladly fight to the death to keep their wives and kill their attackers.

It seems being non violent makes you a target.

Men should defend what is theirs, what they own. This included their wives.

May 29, 2008 12:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are now 2 separate court orders to return those children. The Texas CPS is currently negotiating with the parents' attorneys, for terms of the release.

In my experience, when a judge issues an order, you either follow it, or you get arrested. Negotiation is neither helpful, nor permitted. I can't say I agree with it, but we all know that's the way it is. Unless, of course, the CPS says otherwise. Does this mean that the Texas government now recognizes the CPS as superior to it's supreme court?

And let's not forget what the judges actually ruled. This wasn't overturned on some minor technicality. Both courts ruled that the CPS illegally kidnapped several hundred children, with no evidence what so ever. The CPS has been deemed, by it's own court system, a criminal agency. Yet these criminals are STILL holding their hostages, and dictating terms for their possible release. Those terms include unlimited, unannounced, free access to all of the group's property, by the same people who multiple judges have described as kidnappers. And everyone over some arbitrary age will be required to attend "parenting classes," at their own expense, of course. In any other country, this would be called forced re-education.

As I write this, the CPS just ended the "negotiations" for the weekend. Big surprise, no deal was reached. Even their own system has lost control of the juggernaut it's created. I continue to predict that few, if any, of those children will ever be returned.

It's not my place to fight for the rights of a man who won't fight for them himself. But if the fathers ever grow a collective pair of balls, and decide to fight for their children, I fully intend to join them.

May 30, 2008 5:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Things are happier in Greenberg, Kansas.

May 31, 2008 4:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perhaps they would fight if they knew others would help them?

Christianity seems to be about turning the other cheek, serving and sacrificing for women, and generally no doing what men would normally or would like to do.

It's a woman's religion today. Maybe it always was.

June 01, 2008 12:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the worst of the worst", law enforcement is calling him.
Your comments?

June 01, 2008 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"All of the alleged victims are female and most are between 2 and 13 years old."

He's actually a pedophile, that's a suprise, they're pretty rare. Most men are not attracted to boxes but are attracted to teen girls.

My opinion... he probably has too much estrogen and not enough testosterone, put him on steroids and his yearning for actual children might go away.

"The judge's order requires that parents allow children's welfare workers to make unannounced visits and that the families notify CPS if they plan to travel more than 100 miles from their homes.

The order comes just days after the Texas Supreme Court said Texas Child Protective Services overreached its authority in seizing custody of the children nearly two months ago."

These christians really are sheep.
Hopefully the CPS will attempt to go after muslim towns next in the USA and meet death and destruction.

June 02, 2008 12:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

* CNN: Photos Appear to Show Sect Leader Kissing Girl (May 28, 2008)
* New York Post: Photos Show Flds Leader with Youthful Brides (May 28, 2008)
* The Vancouver Sun: Court Sees Pictures of Jeffs with His Child Brides (May 28, 2008)
* Photos Show Polygamist Leader Warren Jeffs Kissing... (May 28, 2008)
* ABC News: Photos of Sect Leader's Alleged Child Bride (May 28, 2008)
* The Smoking Gun: The Kiss Of Jeffs (May 27, 2008)
* Salt Lake Tribune: Flds: Texas Court Fight Heats Up (May 28, 2008)
* Warren Jeffs 12 Year Old Wife Photos
* Google News: Warren Jeffs 12 Year Old Wife Photos


Myself: good for him. Too bad he didn't fight to the death to keep his wives, and KILL ANYONE WHO WISHED TO TAKE THEM FROM HIM.


Look: Most men spend much of their lives looking for a good mate. If you've found some nice young women of childbearing age... why don't you fight to the death to keep them? You afraid of dying? Well if you escape what are you going to do...
Yep, look for girls again, that's what your going to do.

Do men NOT enjoy killing their enemies, watching those who HATE THEM die before them?


I suggest Men learn to enjoy killing their enemies: your enemies enjoy killing you.

June 07, 2008 6:12 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:

I moved your comment to this article where it was germane to the topic.

Biblical scholars believe that Mary was probably 12 (or perhaps 11) when she entered into an arranged marriage with Joseph (who was probably 30) and became pregnant with Jesus. That was the STANDARD for thousands of years before feminism "marriage oppresses women" made marriage into a "failure" for young women and a crime for men.

The criminals in the FLDS case are the blue gun thugs, CPS, the evil agent of Satan in black robes, and of course their conspiratorial misandrist media mouthpieces.

June 07, 2008 6:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can anyone name an animal that DOESN'T start reproducing as soon as it's able?

Whether you believe in creation, evolution, or anything else, the fact still stands. The human female is physically capable of reproduction by about 14, usually earlier. Did evolution screw up? Did GOD screw up? Or is the problem simply our insistence on meddling in other people's lives?

In this era of no fault, no reason, divorce on demand, how is a woman hurt by getting married? If she wants out, but she's too stupid to figure out how to get a divorce, even though they're advertised on TV, maybe she's better off with a husband taking care of her. And at least she's probably only sleeping with ONE man. Most single women today are well into double digits before they hit 20.

And on the original subject, I'm rarely so glad to be wrong. But I'm still deeply troubled by the conditions put on those parents, for the "privilege" of seeing their own children. The official position of the state is apparently that having children voids all rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

June 07, 2008 2:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why didn't Jesus take a wife? He was an able-bodied young Jewish man, an established carpenter. All the other men in Nazareth took wives.


June 07, 2008 5:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

St. Paul had it right when he said, "Wives should submit graciously to their husbands. Husbands- love your wives like Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for her." Wives should be faithful and supportive to their husbands, and husbands should love their wives so much they are prepared to die for them if necessary.

Raping your wife is the epitimy of betrayal, as is falsely accusing your husband of such an atrocity. Every rapist should die, and so should every woman who maliciously falsely accuses a man of raping her.

July 17, 2008 10:15 AM  
Blogger Bring The Children Home said...

Dear Bob,

We are not sure if you received this submission earlier.

Here is the solution to the C.P.S. problem:

Please spread the word, we need as much help with our directory as we can get.

Here is our story:

Pursuant To:

Uniform Commercial Code - Article 1-General Provisions Part 2 §1-207
Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.

(1) A party who with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises
performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by
the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved.
Such words as “without prejudice”, “under protest” or the like are sufficient.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to an accord and satisfaction.


James A. Sablan Sr. and Sarah L. Matlock

August 27, 2008 1:46 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to: Sablan and Matlock:
The UCC is not applicable to criminal law. The CPS kidnappers should be caught and hung.

August 27, 2008 4:03 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home