4 sisters returned to Italian father after their Australian Mum took them to Australia.....dragged kicking and screaming onto the plane.

[AmberLeaf]

Apparently the girls aged between 9-15 are dual citizens.

Link sorry its the DM.

Do they not take the childs view into account in Australia?

It is always possible to ignore posts which don't help a debate.

Derail by a late-arriving poster. Pity.

It is usually, but not when a couple of people are determined to be childish

There are nine posts deleted on this thread, all towards the end and all for childish tit-for-tat insults, presumably reported as such.

It must be a pain in the arse for mnhq to have to referee as though they dealing with a couple of toddlers.

I made no posts that I regret, why they were deleted is beyond me, oh no, probably because someone reported them. Not necessary IMO, Id rather everything hannah said to me had stayed too, however insulting or ridiculous it was.

The 'debate' was going fine until hannah made an amatuer attempt at delving into my supposed 'wounded psyche'

In the spirit of openness and honesty, I reported the posts from Hannah from 0600 onwards. They were a mixture of Personal Attacks (on me), ones that used 'hate' language and goading posts.

I did not report any posts from before that time, nor any posts from Amberleaf. I expect MNHQ read the thread following my reports and made the decision to delete other posts themselves.

Thanks LtEve and fair enough as you were perfectly within your rights to do so given their nature.

LtEve, we do disagree but if I told you where then you might disagree about where we disagree and the debate would become deeply metaphysical....

Oh look! Some lint in my bellybutton...gotta run...

Sorry LtEve, I wasn't getting at you.

You and I have managed to disagree pretty thoroughly on this thread, but still be civil (I hope) which is of course the way it should be

I think you were both as bad as each other actually, amberleaf, so I understand completely why both your posts were deleted.

Honestly Redsilk, I am very interested, I have looked and really cannot see where I have disagreed. I would appreciate knowing where we have 'disagreed fundamentally on everything else' because I just cannot see it

Hey Mary, no I know that, we are cool .

LtEve, huh?
Oh, sorry...still gazing away here...
Where we disagree is in the benefit of the doubt you're willing to give the mum and her version of events. Based on what has emerged, I'm not willing to do that. (I was more sympathetic to her at an earlier time when I first learned of the case, not now.)
I think we both agree that the girls need counseling, and mom needs some serious help, no matter whose version is believed.
I'm not a "truth is somewhere in the middle" person when it comes to abduction. I'd say it is reality vs fantasy.
And I think we disagree when I said that it's women like Laura Garrett, with false claims of DV, who make things so difficult for women who are truly abused.
And now back to my naval....

MaryZ I obviously disagree.

hannah was repeatedly attacking me personally, I think I was refrained in my responses.

Redsilk round again it goes...but is it disputable that there was in fact DV? even if it was historical?

Ok, well that is fine. I suppose the biggest difference is that I do believe the mother was a victims of DA and you don't. There is nothing either of us can do about that, and the only people that know are the man and woman involved.

I don't believe the DA excuses what she did, more that I can understand why she made that terrible (and frankly idiotic) decision.

differentnameforthis

My apologies, I read your 09:26am post as being from hannah, which is why I said about the preceeding posts, which of course weren't yours. My point about them still stands though.

hahahaa

AHEM
Good evening all. Here is
a link to our talk guidelines
for anyone who may need it.

It is very disputable and highly improbable. Garrett has been show to fabricate accusations and use the girls in her war against the dad.

If you believe in coming down hard on DV, as I do, then it follows that false accusations must not be tolerated.

Now, seriously, we've reached a point in our going around and around that my naval here is much more interesting than my posts. And I suspect you'd agree on at least that....

good morning . i see that the judgements are flowing, which is normal for people to do. blame is being apportioned.
i read that the father can be blamed for not being here and..
for manhandling his daughters.
i read that the mother can be blamed for irrepairably damaging those four girls psyches , and doing it for selfish reasons.
i read much, much more but most if it is the same thing over and over.
i read that people are trying to explain the mothers actions, to minimise her actions? i think so.
I see people are even creating things that aren't there in order to ease pain that they feel in their own lives.
this also is expectable in that we all have emotions and some of us have unresolved issues. I don't feel bad for those people, life is just life and although i can detect this phenomenon, i know nothing more and can't comment on that issue any more really.
I see divisiveness, lots of it..its father vs mother..a reflection of the adversarial system that judged/ will still judge this matter.
pursuant to that, right now the father is winning.
for two years or so the mother was winning.
but before that remember , the children were winning.
i see some pettiness, some childishness which is ok too.
Do i feel bad for coming here apparently causing trouble? no. i think its a healthy thing, all factors considered. Do i feel bad for using bad words? im trying to feel bad but i just don't.
i feel much more sorry for those four girls, there may be worse to come still for them.
what i will continue to see is two posters that will bring the same issue up, the same issue which i consider ambiguous and frankly minor.
what i saw to those two posters is, pull your heads in and get over it.
Are these debates/ discussions about the issue of this judgement , or about us?

Aye, you're not wrong Redsilk! Well, agree to disagree about the DV then, the best we can do in the circumstances. We won't find common ground here.

Let's wish the best to the girls, and leave it at that.

Agree on that!

i seem to remember that the father was in fact in Australia to collect his daughters but the courts decided to pander to the lying mother and refuse to permit his daughters to go with him?
can it be the case do you suppose lteve, that he didnt want to make the same trip again, a matter of weeks or months later, for nothing?
he travelled here once, at expense..for nothing. if he was going by previous judgements in Australia whereby the mother alleges dv, then im sure he thought he had no hope.
I too would have stayed in Italy.

Well, I?m a supporter of the mum, and always have been. But then that is my natural bias. Those of you supporting the father would have a natural bias towards him. Bias leads all of our deeply rooted opinions; the rationale follows. Speaking of the adversarial system ? which someone raised before - I suspect a lot of judges have an innate bias towards the offender rather than the victim, because I think lenient sentencing is a reflection of basic values. Judges would disagree and say they are bound by this or that, but when sentencing against victims is predominantly lenient, you have to wonder at the relative worth they give to people. The gender divide would have to be one of the most intrinsic biases.

So the mum supporters aren't any more deserving of psychoanalysis than the dad supporters. But generally, the mum supporters tend to be less aggressive. Considering that the pro-mum or pro-feminine group is anti-dominance this would make sense. The pro-dad or pro-masculine group does have a tendency to mitigate domestic violence. We make ethical rules in our heads to match the flavour of our bias.

Things get heated when our sense of justice is challenged. In our view of the ?just world? whenever there is a dispute between a man and woman the preferred gender will win.

Some people are lucky in that they love their mum and dad equally and don?t view either parent with fear or distrust. I guess these are the most well-grounded and well-balanced people.

Um, I'm a bit pro-dad in this and have been from the start. But I haven't been aggressive or anti-women in any way (just slightly open-mouthed at the turn the thread has taken).

I don't, by the way, prefer my dad over my mum or vice versa or view either of them with fear or distrust.

So I don't really get that post either .

I tend to be generally pro-law-abiding people, men or women.