The wonderful world of Peter Zohrab
I’ve never met Peter Zohrab, but most people online in the 90s would have seen his posts on Usenet about the feminazis. Anyway, at the weekend I happened to be searching the NZPA database on my name (looking for an old article) and I saw an article with a quote about how I should be convicted for my comments re Clayton Weatherston.
I thought I would recall such an article, so I opened it, and it turns out it was a press release (NZPA carry them if you pay for it) from a “PeterDouglas” which I am sure is abbreviated from Peter Douglas Zohrab.
I enjoyed his press release so much, I just had to share it. The amazing thing is he turns up to select committees also, and uses much the same language. Extracts:
The female-dominated professions of Psychology ( http://equality.netfirms.com/ispsycho.html ) , Law ( http://equality.netfirms.com/islaws.html ) , and Journalism ( http://equality.netfirms.com/ismedia.html ) have generally very low standards of intelligence and non-existent standards of political objectivity. This no doubt results from being dominated by women who are more interested in people than in ideas, and who see a clitoro-centric universe as their Feminist birthright.
A clitoro-centric universe!
Now, this Associate Professor of the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behaviour in a given context finds it “hard to imagine” why a man would not act like a robot in an extremely stressful immediate context, which itself was the culmination of an extremely stressful ongoing context.
This just reinforces my impression (from long and varied experience of them) that Western universities ( http://equality.netfirms.com/iseducat.html ) are little more than instruments for the fulfilment of Lesbian Feminist fantasies. It is impossible for men to do well in universities, when competence in man-hating is a prerequiste for achievement and promotion. Universities should all be abolished, the staff sacked, and the education system rethought from square one.
I’m curious as to what is a lesbian feminist fantasy, and you subscribe to it on Sky?
Michael Laws is an honorary girl. Of course, he is — otherwise the female-dominated media wouldn’t allow him to have a newspaper column.
Of course that is the reason!
October 26th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Therefore, the Government should immediately give Weatherston a full pardon and pay compensation both to the family of his victim and to Weatherston himself, since the situation which developed was in part the Government’s own creation.
Has he been admitted to the bar yet? If so, he can represent Clayton at his appeal.
October 26th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Peter has nailed the psycho babble witches, eunuchs, slippery Sue journalists and the hairy fairy academic brigade of turnip suckers. As for the Law’s girl, does his eye liner run all over his mob jacket or is it the mayoral rob or Masonic cloak? It’s a great pity the freemasons wouldn’t admit Peter to the bar. Legal eagles are feminazi controlled scum. Peter would be a great judge.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Don’t know about admission to the bar, but he’s not registered as having a practising certificate with the Law Society.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
I haven’t seen or spoken to Michael since our schools days .. I have E-mailed him during his incredibly stressful times with his little girl but that doesn’t mean I’m some sort of apologist for him .. apart from the time he slagged off people who joined and worked for the Railways (as I did) as it was some kind of benefit scheme, I have agreed with everything he has said over the years .. it’s scary actually.
Now I am getting pissed off over shit for brains Joris De Bres or Bro whatever and I have made queries on who to lay an official complaint about the fuckwit.
Now, as far as Law’s wearing eye liner .. so does Ma Nonu Nonu .. people will have Michael on about it but how many will go up to Ma and call him a gay big womans blouse???
October 26th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
well we have always lived in a clitiro centrist universe – doesnt eveyone one else???
October 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Peter’s admission to the bar was rejected by the feminaziss a couple of years back.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Don’t know about admission to the bar, but he’s not registered as having a practising certificate with the Law Society.
I’m surprised. I would have expected some sour grapes invective against the law society in his rant.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
The law society is a powerful regime metcalph, lots of doe rae me in the fund.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
I once asked PZ what pain laid in his past to bring him to his current position, and I was told I would not be given the opportunity to psychoanalyse him! Fair call, but with his utterings being so prolific, I thought knowing the background would be akin to a disclosure statement.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Just another of those who live in the la-la land of conspiracy theories …
October 27th, 2009 at 12:46 am
His theory on my “troubles” (as someone once rather grandly called them) was that I was the “victim of a feminist conspiracy”. All attempts to convince him that my tormenters were predominantly male, and predominantly wearing blue uniforms, would not sway him from his belief. After all, what did I know?! I was only there.
Another resident of Wainuiomata, I’m afraid. Well known to the locals for somewhat strange behaviour, especially if confronted by someone of an obviously different belief system, such as a Muslim or a Jew.
Still, I think Peter performs a valuable role. Way out there on the “feminazi conspiracy” side of the seesaw, he helps counterbalalnce those who are just as far out on the oppositie side. And goodness knows, we have enough of those about.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:11 am
Speaking of feminists..
I was watching Close Up tonight and they had the person on who headed the study about how 1 in 10 businesses have a psychopath working there (DPF posted on it a while back).
Anyway, he was listing some of the behavioral traits of psychopaths and I was ticking them off in my head against the previous leader of our country; yes, old Helen fits the profile perfectly..
October 27th, 2009 at 3:39 am
1. Someone called Petal wants a disclosure statement. OK, once all the Feminists in NZ have made a disclosure statement about why they are Feminists, I will consider doing that too. Feminists only want disclosure statements from me so that they can concentrate on personalities and gossip — the only level at which they are competent.
2. Widerstrom’s house was on the same street as my second address in Wainuiomata, but we never lived in that street at the same time, to my knowledge. His gossip about “strange behaviour” when “confronted by” Muslims or Jews is either fiction or a second-hand, contrived interpretation of some long-forgotten event(s). I never had proof that his case involved a Feminist conspiracy, of course, but there are plenty of males wearing blue uniforms who are Feminists. See http://equality.netfirms.com/ispolice.html . As far as I know, he knows very little about Feminism.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:04 am
My favourite Usenet flame of all time was in respect of a campaign by PZ against what he saw as disproportionate spending on screening for breast cancer as opposed to prostate cancer. Someone (don’t remember who) replied “don’t worry about prostate cancer , Peter, where you’ve got your head, you’ll see it coming!”
October 27th, 2009 at 8:08 am
AFAIK Peter is still in the process of applying to the High Court for admission. This is the route one takes when the Law Society considers the application to be a ‘hot potato’. In this regard, Clint Rickard’s application was only a very warm potato.
Perhaps he could be admitted on condition he stays away from the Family Court.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:10 am
The Family Court has made several Peter’s bitter peterwn.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:07 am
I know, and there is yet another Peter trying to make things better – if that is possible with some of the stuff the poor Family judges have to try and sort out.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Men, particularly fathers have legitimate complaints about how the law discriminates against them. Unfortunately, Peter Zohrab could be counterproductive to help correct injustices against men and fathers if anybody thinks he speaks for any group of men. If he does it would be a small group of nutters. I quote the last paragraph of the article David linked to.
The latest blog about changes to rape legislation is a good example. Government funded groups and the Ministry of Women’s Affairs make submissions about the proposed legislation but there is no funding for men’s groups and certainly no Ministry of Men’s Affairs. There are also social sanctions against men if they complain about reverse sexism. They can be linked to misogynist like Zohrab and somehow condone rape.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Peterwn, if you are referring to Peter Boshier I do not think he is trying to make things better for fathers. He will not even meet with fathers like his predecessor, Patrick Mahony was prepared to do. I do not care if a judge is a man or woman as long as they have a sence of fair play. Jan Douge would make a much better Principal Family Court Judge.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
dad4justice (5423) Says:
October 26th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Peter has nailed the psycho babble witches, eunuchs, slippery Sue journalists and the hairy fairy academic brigade of turnip suckers.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Peter’s admission to the bar was rejected by the feminaziss a couple of years back.
Looks like the real Peter Zohrab just put his hand up
October 27th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Chuck If the Family Court is no more favourable to men under Judge Boshier’s stewardship, at least he seems to be trying to make it more ‘transparent’ so people can see why it seems unfavourable to men. Perhaps he won’t speak to mens groups because he has had one too many missive from you know who.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Peter, if a judge is going to judge fathers in general because of a few extremists he has no business being a judge let alone Principal Family Court Judge. I was part of a group of about 20 fathers who met with Judge Pat Mahony. We asked what we should call him at the start and he said Pat. The meeting went well even if did not change and thing. There was good will on both sides. Boshier’s refusal to meet with fathers while he meets with women’s groups show bias and further brings the Family Court into disrepute.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
My favourite Usenet flame of all time was in respect of a campaign by PZ against what he saw as disproportionate spending on screening for breast cancer as opposed to prostate cancer.
There is disproportionate spending on screening for breast cancer versus prostate cancer. Look it up.
Since that spending is the result of femi-centric sexism bought into by the likes of you, you (others are not) will no doubt be surprised to find out that more people die from prostate cancer than breast cancer. How much have you heard about prostate cancer versus breast cancer? Our sexist society largely focuses on breast cancer as they’re not truly concerned about cancer and people dying: they just want to jump on whatever politically correct bandwagon is going around.
Deaths from breast cancer are no more or less to be avoided than are deaths from prostate cancer. But, the disparity in spending shows where the sexism actually lies in society.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Now why oh why does this guy need seven mirrors of his site?
October 29th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Widerstrom’s New Zealand First party is an anti-immigrant party, so his fiction about some “confrontations” I might have had with Muslims or Jews was probably intended to reassure people like himself that I was neither a Muslim nor a Jew.
When I suggested in a webpage ( http://equality.netfirms.com/femsetup.html ) that Widerstrom might have been set up, I did not mean necessarily that the Police did it. New Zealand girls know, thanks to Feminism, that they can do anything they like to older men, and it will be the older men who will face the charges. New Zealand girls get taught Feminism at school. For example, I know of one school where all the Dyke NZ schoolgirls decided that they would have a slave market to raise funds for charity — but only boys were to be allowed to be slaves. That is “equality”, as defined by thickshits like Farrar and Chuck Bird.
Chuck Bird, by the way, is a scrawny North American who is so obsessed by homosexuality that he addressed a meeting of “Gays” in an attempt to get them to become Christians and scrawny like him.