You really cant tell can you? (Wife leaves me)

Post by **Aardvark** » November 2, 2011, 4:30 pm

I did post a reply, but it either went missing or was removed. Anyway who cares, jackspratt rules supreme

Post by **BenZona** » November 2, 2011, 6:00 pm

Aardvark wrote:Plus "SHE" gets every consideration and Monitery consideration including Govt financed Lawyers, and "He" gets f....d over big time Thank you Germain Grear and the Sisterhood, it wont be long before Slavery is re-introduced and I just know who the Slaves will be

I could beat her lawyer on my own, in half an hour.... but.... You are correct on all you just wrote except one thing it is ME who is gong to F^^k HER over, legally of course. She might have the communist shelter feminazis on her side, but, outside of their mutual minge appreciation society they are just useless idiots who think wimmen can make u whatever the hell they like to get one over on a man By the time i have finished with her she might as well go and get a tattoo saying "lying unfit mother" on her forehead

im going to get my son back home...thats a promise.. thats what parents do, fight for their kids.. no one comes in between me and my children, especially not a visa scamming lying violent cheat

Post by **ronan01** » November 2, 2011, 7:35 pm

Ben - setting out to f..k yuor wife is not a good idea. It will distort yuor perception and cloud your judgement. Australian family law courts take a dim view of this behaviour and do not permit themselves to become part of a "revenge" action. As jackspratt pointed out - the basic approach is "no fault" and they tend to put childrens interest ahead of partners issues.

Setting out to achieve the best outcome for your son is a good thing. That must be done within the rules and constraints of the family law court - not a good idea to take on the court or give them cause to consider you a "problem".

You will need to present yourself as a reasonable person with a reasonable. Think it a good idea to get into "character" by referring to your wife as the "plaintif" or "opposition" - a good discipline that may prevent an inadvertant outburst at official meetings.

The court is not interested in "feminist" issues or communists. Focus on court proceedings and what can be said there. These "nazi" issues are a distraction and will take up valuable "mindspace" and with no positive benefit.

Moderate your language and re-focus on main game - it will be better for you in every way.

Eventually you will have to let the hatred go. May as well be now, direct your energy to legal process instead.

Post by **BenZona** » November 2, 2011, 7:53 pm

ronan01 wrote:Ben - setting out to f..k yuor wife is not a good idea. It will distort yuor perception and cloud your judgement. Australian family law courts take a dim view of this behaviour and do not permit themselves to become part of a "revenge" action. As jackspratt pointed out - the basic approach is "no fault" and they tend to put childrens interest ahead of partners issues.

Setting out to achieve the best outcome for your son is a good thing. That must be done within the rules and constraints of the family law court - not a good idea to take on the court or give them cause to consider you a "problem".

You will need to present yourself as a reasonable person with a reasonable. Think it a good idea to get into "character" by referring to your wife as the "plaintif" or "opposition" - a good discipline that may prevent an inadvertant outburst at official meetings.

The court is not interested in "feminist" issues or communists. Focus on court proceedings and what can be said there. These "nazi" issues are a distraction and will take up valuable "mindspace" and with no positive benefit.

Moderate your language and re-focus on main game - it will be better for you in every way.

Eventually you will have to let the hatred go. May as well be now, direct your energy to legal process instead.

Thanks Ronan, Im fully comprehending all aspects of the legal process (ive done it before) and know exactly what i have to do in order to get custody of my son. I might insult her on here now and again, but that means nothing in the context of evidence against me in relation to my parenting.

sorry to sound harsh before but, no fancy cover up will change the fact that this is now a legal war, and i am going to win, because that is what's best for my son, and my daughter.. Id actually like her to stumble on this forum and print off this whole thread to try to use against me, for i am sure it will not work out as she thinks

I am going to expose her for what she is and bring my son home, thats all mate, nothing fancy, just cold hard evidence

Post by **Bandung_Dero** » November 2, 2011, 7:57 pm

Very sensible post Ronan.

Just to add:-
His last comments posted at 18:00 hrs, that must have been some sort of a 'counter lunch' session. Had a drink or two have we? Can beat her lawyer, will take custody of you son. That sounds like the piss talking not a rational man seeking justice.

Post by **jackspratt** » November 2, 2011, 8:06 pm

BenZona wrote: ME who is gong to F^^k HER over, legally of course........... communist shelter feminazis ............ mutual minge appreciation society.............. useless idiots........ wimmen can make u whatever the hell they like............. to get one over on a man............... tattoo saying "lying unfit mother" on her forehead.

.................. visa scamming lying violent cheat

Ya couldn't make it up.

Sorry (assisted by Aardvark) for earlier taking the thread off-topic Ben.

But one good way to get the focus back on the central character is to make a few extreme, and obviously absurd, comments.

I eagerly await the next chapter. $\:D/$

Post by **BenZona** » November 2, 2011, 8:39 pm

jackspratt wrote:
BenZona wrote: ME who is gong to F^^k HER over, legally of course........... communist shelter feminazis ............ mutual minge appreciation society.............. useless idiots........ wimmen can make u whatever the hell they like............. to get one over on a man............... tattoo saying "lying unfit mother" on her forehead.

.................. visa scamming lying violent cheat

Ya couldn't make it up.

Sorry (assisted by Aardvark) for earlier taking the thread off-topic Ben.

But one good way to get the focus back on the central character is to make a few extreme, and obviously absurd, comments.

I eagerly await the next chapter. $\:D/$

Bandung_Dero wrote:Very sensible post Ronan.

Just to add:-
His last comments posted at 18:00 hrs, that must have been some sort of a 'counter lunch' session. Had a drink or two have we? Can beat her lawyer, will take custody of you son. That sounds like the piss talking not a rational man seeking justice.

I cant help it if some men are so pathetically weak that they would not fight for their kids. I have actually met a few in real life, and it is very sad. Just because you would go ass up and give up at the first hurdle, does not mean i have to
Just because to are to weak to stand up and fight for what you think is best, does not mean i have to

The absurd comments did not just come from me Jack, it came from YOU TWO spineless nothings. Are you that weak in real life? Do you buckle under pressure? Would you give up on your kids? Because it seems like thats what you are saying i should do............. I can just imagine how you would buckle and fail if, god forbid, you had to stand up for what you believe is right, now.... what is so absurd about thinking you are going to win a case you are fighting? i am all ears... (my guess is what comes next is clichéd 20th century stereotyped arguments based on gender)

Its only absurd to you jack because, if you were n my position you would only know how to pump lawyers full of cash in return for every other weekend with your Kids, im not like that, i think its a sad way to be.

oh, and i dont drink alcohol.. bandung and anyone with half a brain would realise that i am not in Thailand, and therefore it was not 6pm.. senility is a hard thing to cope with isn't it?

Post by **kjellsnell** » November 2, 2011, 8:52 pm

BenZona wrote:
jackspratt wrote:
BenZona wrote: ME who is gong to F^^k HER over, legally of course........... communist shelter feminazis ............ mutual minge appreciation society.............. useless idiots........ wimmen can make u whatever the hell they like............. to get one over on a man............... tattoo saying "lying unfit mother" on her forehead.

.................. visa scamming lying violent cheat

Ya couldn't make it up.

Sorry (assisted by Aardvark) for earlier taking the thread off-topic Ben.

But one good way to get the focus back on the central character is to make a few extreme, and obviously absurd, comments.

i dont like this tread cause to many talk to bad of each other and i feel sorry the it get out "in the wood" cause its an importent task ruined by the writers............its time to push the reportbutton here!
I eagerly await the next chapter. $\:D/$

Bandung_Dero wrote:Very sensible post Ronan.

Just to add:-
His last comments posted at 18:00 hrs, that must have been some sort of a 'counter lunch' session. Had a drink or two have we? Can beat her lawyer, will take custody of you son. That sounds like the piss talking not a rational man seeking justice.
I cant help it if some men are so pathetically weak that they would not fight for their kids. I have actually met a few in real life, and it is very sad. Just because you would go ass up and give up at the first hurdle, does not mean i have to
Just because to are to weak to stand up and fight for what you think is best, does not mean i have to

The absurd comments did not just come from me Jack, it came from YOU TWO spineless nothings. Are you that weak in real life? Do you buckle under pressure? Would you give up on your kids? Because it seems like thats what you are saying i should do............. I can just imagine how you would buckle and fail if, god forbid, you had to stand up for what you believe is right, now.... what is so absurd about thinking you are going to win a case you are fighting? i am all ears... (my guess is what comes next is clichéd 20th century stereotyped arguments based on gender)

Its only absurd to you jack because, if you were n my position you would only know how to pump lawyers full of cash in return for every other weekend with your Kids, im not like that, i think its a sad way to be.

oh, and i dont drink alcohol.. bandung and anyone with half a brain would realise that i am not in Thailand, and therefore it was not 6pm.. senility is a hard thing to cope with isn't it?

Post by **jackspratt** » November 2, 2011, 8:54 pm

BenZona wrote: oh, and i dont drink alcohol..

Hmmm.....given it away since you got back from Thailand?

by BenZona
June 12, 2011, 1:05 pm

Nutty park Gossip
Thanks for the info Mr Mash,will avoid Nutty Park like the plague,no point going there for a beer if am having to throw it up the next minute by some scary creature in a dress.

by BenZona
June 11, 2011, 10:52 pm
I usually drink ar Tongs when in Udon but as it is closed at the moment i had the misfortune to have to spend a few hours in this nutty park place. It was the first time, and the last time i will ever go there.

Its seedy, cheap looking, and 98% of the girls looked like heffers on legs. Considering what is around it, not very nice at all. I saw at least four bars for sale, and one of them i was told was only sold seven months ago. Me and my friends ended up next door, to the right of the front entrance where there is a new open air bar that served fantastic food, cheap beer and had gorgeous girls who were, to say the least, very friendly

http://www.udonmap.com/udonthaniforum/p ... ml#p265377

Post by **BenZona** » November 2, 2011, 9:03 pm

jackspratt wrote:
BenZona wrote: oh, and i dont drink alcohol..
Hmmm.....given it away since you got back from Thailand?

by BenZona
June 12, 2011, 1:05 pm

Nutty park Gossip
Thanks for the info Mr Mash,will avoid Nutty Park like the plague,no point going there for a beer if am having to throw it up the next minute by some scary creature in a dress.

by BenZona
June 11, 2011, 10:52 pm
I usually drink ar Tongs when in Udon but as it is closed at the moment i had the misfortune to have to spend a few hours in this nutty park place.

Nice Try .. but an epic fail, unlike you alcoholics I see this as me saying I DRINK there, not drink ALCOHOL. I do believe water or juice in liquid form is a drink... Also, people i go out with might well drink beer so i might well know that one place is cheaper than the next for beer... You actually went off and searched my posts for signs of alcohol use... how sad... why even waste your time .. what you doing Jack, Cyber stalking me??? Maybe i should get a DVO out on you (giggle)

now, try answering my question about what is absurd.. plz

Post by **jackspratt** » November 2, 2011, 9:23 pm

BenZona wrote:
Nice Try .. but an epic fail, unlike you alcoholics I see this as me saying I DRINK there, not drink ALCOHOL.

Of course Ben.............if you say so.

Can you explain again what this means:

.............no point going there for a beer if am having to throw it up the next minute

No point in who going there for a beer?

I reckon it is going to take a bit longer than 30 minutes for you to beat her lawyer.

Post by **bamakmak** » November 2, 2011, 9:26 pm

BenZona wrote: I see this as me saying I DRINK there, not drink ALCOHOL.

I think your earlier statements are clear that you drink alchohol. It's really nothing to be ashamed about unless you feel that it in some way diminishes all of the indiscriminate accusations you make that anyone disagreeing with you must be an alcoholic.

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave . . ."

Post by **pompui** » November 3, 2011, 2:40 am

jackspratt wrote: Can you explain again what this means:

.............no point going there for a beer if am having to throw it up the next minute
No point in who going there for a beer?
.

What the **** is going on here,that is my post Jack,not Benzona's

If you have the time,read my post in the context to responding to a Mr Mash post

Post by **BenZona** » November 3, 2011, 6:26 am

pompui wrote:
jackspratt wrote: Can you explain again what this means:

.............no point going there for a beer if am having to throw it up the next minute
No point in who going there for a beer?
.

What the **** is going on here,that is my post Jack,not Benzona's If you have the time,read my post in the context to responding to a Mr Mash post

What get me riled Pompui is these idiots try to score old man back slapping points by raising pathetic facts taken out of context in order that they can high five each other at the night meetings.

Jack full well knew that was not me saying that, that is why he PURPOSELY left out the quoter's name.

All of a sudden Jack has become troll numero uno in this thread, lying, avoiding questions, attacking me with pointless arguments that do nothing except , well refer to my first sentence....

In all reality, what the hell does it matter if i did have one beer some months ago, I don't drink, end of story... I certainly do not have to lie about my alcohol consumption to continue a conversation with a few pensioners whos 19th century views seem to indicate that they take abuse from lying wimmen laying down....give up their kids, and then line the pockets of the tramp forever.... (classy outlook guys) and if it was at nutty park i slipped in a beer, it was probably to wipe away the lingering sight of loads of old men draping their wallets around young girls and claiming it as love

Is that the best you can do Jack, cos its pretty LAME, and Bam... don't be an troll, quoting things i supposedly said, and then not including the quotes make you look like a bit of a dingus ... so how about backing up what you say with the actual quote please..

You guys (the trolling foursome) would be lost in an evidence based proceeding, you are pathetic and if it makes you feel better thinking i was drunk at 6pm when i wrote that (even though it was 9pm and i was sober)then go ahead and think it. I could not care less and you make yourself look even stupider to anyone who looks in

Post by **Bandung_Dero** » November 3, 2011, 7:17 am

BenZona wrote: You guys (the trolling foursome) would be lost in an evidence based proceeding, you are pathetic and if it makes you feel better thinking i was drunk at 6pm when i wrote that (even though it was 9pm and i was sober)then go ahead and think it. I could not care less and you make yourself look even stupider to anyone who looks in

Oh stupid me! Troll #3, I think

. 18:00 or 21:00 Late counter lunch or a few with dinner, who really cares? Those were not the comments of a rational person so if sober was it the type of outburst that really pushed you ex into the direction she took? Just to be shot of you and find someone more stable!

BTW. I speak for myself why I’m posting here. To be honest it’s the entertainment value, you started this and now I’m running with it. Surely you weren’t thinking you would get ALL the UdonMap Members in your corner with a common out poring of sympathy especially after some of your antics.

Post by **BenZona** » November 3, 2011, 7:29 am

Bandung_Dero wrote:
BenZona wrote: You guys (the trolling foursome) would be lost in an evidence based proceeding, you are pathetic and if it makes you feel better thinking i was drunk at 6pm when i wrote that (even though it was 9pm and i was sober)then go ahead and think it. I could not care less and you make yourself look even stupider to anyone who looks in

Oh stupid me! Troll #3, I think . 18:00 or 21:00 Late counter lunch or a few with dinner, who really cares? Those were not the comments of a rational person so if sober was it the type of outburst that really pushed you ex into the direction she took? Just to be shot of you and find someone more stable!

BTW. I speak for myself why I’m posting here. To be honest it’s the entertainment value, you started this and now I’m running with it. Surely you weren’t thinking you would get ALL the UdonMap Members in your corner with a common out poring of sympathy especially after some of your antics.

1: I don't want anyone on side, I could not give a toss..... once again, you miss the point of 22 pages... Try looking
2: I think its pretty sad that you consider that a parent wants to fight for his children a; absurd b; irrational c;wrong

it is pathetically spineless weak men like you who are the irrational ones. Sad old men who grasp at a bit of love via their wallets with no fight in them at all....and once again you make yourself look even more pathetic by stating that the very thing you said did matter a few posts ago, (and matters so much that you and jack go off searching my posts in order to support your delusions) now does not!

I wont even mention the newest groundless accusation to come out of your infantile brain.. people can see it for themselves
troll

Post by **BenZona** » November 3, 2011, 8:09 am

Bandung_Dero wrote:
Oh stupid me!

I believe you should have quit at this first, rather candid comment, you see.. we DO agree.. because you are

Post by **jackspratt** » November 3, 2011, 8:10 am

Credibility is going to be important when you are sitting in front of the Family Court magistrate or judge, Ben.

Pomps - sorry, I should have looked at the original post, rather than just the search results.

Post by **BenZona** » November 3, 2011, 8:40 am

jackspratt wrote:Credibility is going to be important when you are sitting in front of the Family Court magistrate or judge, Ben.

and who do you think has it Jack... the guy who is a single parent who has busted a gut to bring his partner out here and raise a child and as a vent calls the visa cheating dog exactly that..... or a woman who admits in court to being a visa cheat, gets told she is lying about her understanding of English, does not want a kid to see her own brother, who was forced to drop allegations of DV in a courtroom, by a magistrate and who (has under oath) said it is ok to say she would have me killed because "he is not dead"

I know where my money lies

fancy a bet?

Post by **jackspratt** » November 3, 2011, 8:57 am

A bet would be interesting Ben - but then you would have to give all the details, including access to the court records/transcripts.