Wednesday, November 12, 2008

FOR ALL OUR NEW READERS

You may have come across a blog called Expose the Truth which attacks the www.familylawwebguide.com.au

ETT is run by a small group of dysfunctional hypocrites who take 1% fact, add 99% fiction and then seek to represent it as some of special truth. ETT puts out so much garbage and pure invention and invective that it is sometimes difficult to determine whether they really believe what they are writing or are under the influence of the medication they have been prescribed.

ETT is so myopic they have even attacked the partners of FLWG programmers, this is akin to “get the women and children involved in our war on FLWG”. But of course anyone with any sense would realise that attacking women as periphery targets really illustrates the absolute hypocrisy of the ETT bloggers.

Rather than bore you with all the ETT stupid rhetoric we have taken a small sample of some of their propanda and added the REAL TRUTH to it just to illustrate the lengths they will go to in an attempt to create a false impression.
Just remember that the ETT bloggers are not concerned with the truth –just smoke and mirrors!

Here’s some ETT nonsense
“Thefamilylawwebguide is a thinly veiled front for the Shared parenting Council of Australia. Dads On The Air, Equal parenting Network, Family Law Reform Association Nsw are all for various aggressive mens groups like and are really just a part of the SPCA and have most members in common.”

Well firstly DOTA is not a member of the SPCA or the portal, its material was put on the site at the request of FACSIA. EPN is not a member of the SPCA. The FLRA which is an SPCA member has a female President and a female General Secretary.

Well, the ETT boggers forgot CRC, Mothers 4 Equality and the SRLR group and since when were these groups part of the SPCA?

Of course the blogger forgot other portal groups such as ‘Mothers 4 Equality’ – because it really does not fit in with their stance of “aggressive mens groups”. The SRLR group frightens the blogger because of its size and the fact that so many women come on the FLWG site to thank it for for the help provided to them - of course the bloggers never mention this, why not let a lie sit in the way of an inconvenient truth?

The SRLR group occasionally gets mention from the blogger usually in the form of childish comments, but what drives the bloggers to frustration is the need for some personal details before you can join; which of course stops the bloggers from getting in. Poor, poor, poor bloggers – just fretting away not having access to more than 40% of the site devoted to the SRLR members areas, and the bloggers think the FLWG is a thinly veiled front for the SPCA?

Of course the bloggers are still a little careful with the SRLR group because they know they are a non gender organisation and worry about the legal wrath that could be unleashed if the ETT fools go too far. Its a pretty fair assumption that the FLWG knows who publishes the ETT nonsnese which probably means the SRLR group do as well.

Of course the bloggers real frustration comes from the fact that some of the groups particularly the SPCA and the SRLR have some special relationships and are listened to by the ‘powers than be’. There is no question that the SPCA are as thick as thieves with FACSIA and the SRLR have some very special relationships in the ‘right areas’. But of course this is natural consequence of those ‘powers that be’ wanting to deal with rational individuals that deal in facts rather than individuals or groups that only seek to introduce/promote conflict to get Government funding and who degenerate meetings into childish hissy fits of who they will not sit next to.

1 comment:

? said...

Why on Earth should I point people to your blog? It would be like directing people to an open sewer. No - your Google count has not increased as I to get figures from Google and ‘Sitemeter’ it not a good guide to traffic. Oh and remember when you insert HTML code ‘some of us’ may be able to put it in this site or comments made on your blog.

Beware, you could be considered implicit in many crimes if you were to direct any people, other than the appropriate authorities, to that blog.