Monday, July 13, 2015

Marriage and children are legal slavery

This is a fascinating admission by a UK court:
A hospital consultant has become the first man to be ordered to pay all of his £550,000 assets to his ex-wife, following an extraordinary divorce ruling. Anaesthetist Dr Essam Aly, 54, ‘washed his hands’ of his family after leaving wife Enas, 46, in 2011 and moving to Bahrain - and has not paid a penny in maintenance or child support since 2012.

Out of the reach of the British authorities and courts, it was feared the ‘serial defaulter’ from Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, would never again pay to support her or their two children.

So to ensure that the children and the wife would be secure, a family court judge ordered that their entire £550,000 fortune should go to her. Court of Appeal judges have now upheld the payout.
In other words, if they can't lock down a man's future income, they will take literally everything he has in order to turn it all over to a strong, independent woman who is totally equal to a man except for her complete inability to provide for herself or her children.

I predict the next man in this position is going to be careful to spend his entire fortune before moving on.

41 comments:

D. Lane (#0067) said...

I predict the next man in this position is going to be careful to spend his entire fortune before moving on.

I'd put it all into complicated derivatives trades, transfer the accounts as a part of the divorce, grab a beer and watch. If you're going to lose your assets, you might as well hand the other person time bomb they aren't equipped to defuse.

Shimshon said...

He is an alleged "serial defaulterer" (whatever that means) without offering any evidence that I can see.

In some ways this is preferable to actual slavery, which seems to be the norm in the US, with "imputed income" and all. At least he's free of any future obligations at all, even if he was rendered penniless.

AmyJ said...

It really is amazing that men get married at all, especially wealthy men.

I despair for my brothers. They want families; they don't want the risk of having a family with the wrong woman. The cost is simply too high.

hank.jim said...

This is what happens when people default on payments. The guy is 54 years old. He has less than a decade to make up for the lost of his assets. If he was smart, he could have moved his assets out of the country. I don't have much sympathy for the guy. The courts seize assets for those that default. The next man is wise to have a prenuptial agreement and also to not disappear unless he is dead.

Badmojo said...

"At least he's free of any future obligations at all, even if he was rendered penniless."

Do you really think that's the case? What happens in a couple years (if that long) when the "empowered" woman is penniless and still doesn't have any useful skills?

Alexander said...

The most insane solution (and therefore no doubt one being pushed for) would be to recognize that Muslims have their right to their own court system for civil affairs such as divorce. That way, we can insure that it is only actual English that get caught in rapacious seizures 'for the children', not swarthy gentleman who intend to run off to Bahrain.

swiftfoxmark2 said...

The next man is wise to have a prenuptial agreement and also to not disappear unless he is dead.

The courts in the UK ignore prenuptial agreements. See the post about John Clese.

b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 said...

What probably happened is he filed for divorce with the intention to stay in Britain, but once he got into the process he decided "F this". At which point the assets were already locked down by the wife's attorney. Either that or it is in things that aren't particularly liquid. Marital residence, equity in a partnership, other land in Britain, etc. Because anybody that knows they are going to leave their wife and then leave the country never to return will be able to walk with a substantial chunk (if not most of the non-residential, non-day to day bank accounts/credit cards) without the other person noticing.

Trust said...

Marriage 2.0 doesn't cut it anymore, and Marriage 3.0 and 4.0 won't either. These aren't upgrades or new versions of marriage. They are alternatives to marriage.

We need a new name. After all, we don't call Apple's OS WindowsAP because it's an alternative to windows.

Instead of iOS, husbands could get a uoWife agreement. Wives alternatively get a HusbandOU plan.

Vincent Castrillo said...

To be fair, this man of Islam left his entire family and moved back home four years ago. He should have taken his kids but said "heck they aren't that important". So what he left got taken to support them. I'm not too bent out of shape over this and I am always easily in the camp of stopping divorce rape, overbearing judiciary, etc.

Sometimes you can't simply paint man = in the right and woman = evil one protected by an overbearing state. This is what our enemies always do because they have abandoned both reason and their souls for feels. We don't know this family or the situation. For all we know he is loaded and 550K is an awesome buyout clause to never have to deal with them again. Many of us here can vouch for at least two guys we know whom that figure would have been cause for celebration. We also don't know if he is a piece of garbage or if his wife isn't a good women looking after his spawn with limited income. It is after all possible despite the daily deluge of examples to the contrary.

Yes to many pilers-on this sounds like I'm some sort of modernist, and while it makes me do a double take reading what I am writing, I think the point is valid. He left. He left his kids in a foreign country. For years... Who do you want to support them? The native British? That's surely not financial slavery to the other, is it? Let him be responsible for his own dam family.

At the end of the day it appears that he left his family property in England and now that he clearly does not want his family nor to reside in England, his family should have it. Arguing in defense of this unknown foreigner simply weakens our overall arguments while not even attaining the status of sticking up on mere principle.

Noah B #120 said...

Like badmojo said, what happens when the wife blows the money in a couple of years? The state should probably hold on to it for safekeeping.

Tank said...

Vincent is right. Half of that money was hers to begin with. The guy left in 2012 and hasn't paid a dime for his two kids since (a bad guy). He fled the country. So, to make sure that his kids were protected, the Court gave the balance, 275K pounds to her.

You got a problem with your wife, want to marry someone else, file for divorce and support/bring up your kids. Why should just the wife (or, more likely, taxpayers) have to do it?

It's one thing to leave your wife and try not to be raped by the Courts. This dude has kids. Man up dude. Surprised to see the religious folk here supporting his desertion of his kids.

Eric said...

...they will take literally everything he has in order to turn it all over to a strong, independent woman who is totally equal to a man except for her complete inability to provide for herself or her children.

She's a practicing doctor. It's hard to believe she can't provide for the family.

ajw308 (#98) said...

It really is amazing that men get married at all, especially wealthy men.
In my blue pill/white knight days, I used to joke that Trump married expensive prostitutes. A pre-nup with an exit clause looks like it's the way to plan for a potential outcome.

grendel said...

Maybe he didn't "abandon" the kids. It's not as though he could take them to Bahrain without her permission.

Vincent Castrillo said...

Grendel, He is a muslim from Bahrain. They are legally allowed to travel with their own kids, just like you are legally allowed to bring your kids to England or Italy or wherever. Except in the muslim's case, bringing his kids there and simply staying is legally acceptable and even approved of there. He definitely abandoned them to make a new family.

Don't be ignorant when google is free.

Dexter said...

So will serial defaulter Greece have to pay all of its assets to fat hausfrau Germany?

Zorro said...

I laugh ata every man who is raped in divorce court. Smoking is bad for your lungs. Drinking and driving leads to death. Marriage is for saps.

DUH!

The feminist-infused state has made family life and children a toxic risk for men. To Hell with the state.

Never get married. It's a stupid risk you don't need to take.

grendel said...

https://www.gov.uk/permission-take-child-abroad

I believe this explanation applies since the children were English born. I'm not a certified google amateur internet lawyer though, so I won't make any absolute claims about it.

The Remnant said...

As I've often said, marriage is a vital institution, but it simply doesn't exist anymore. There is no longer any social or legal mechanism to enforce the vows, to constrain divorce to instances of serious fault, or to refrain from punishing the innocent and rewarding the guilty. The proponents of these disgusting changes committed the error of ceteris paribus, i.e., assuming that all other things would remain equal. Big mistake. Since there is now more security outside of "marriage" than in it, growing numbers of men are responding accordingly.

Vincent Castrillo said...

Geez, simply use your common sense instead of trying to find mostly unrelated articles to back your retarded claims. Sometimes we all say dumb things, just move on instead of aspergerly trying to defend them with sniveling minutae. In any Anglo country a father of children not specifically under court order can take his children to a foreign country for vacation, to see family, whatever. Considering the divorce rate, single parents with kids isa common sight at airports.

It doesn't matter what time restrictions or bs since once he is in Bahrain, he can simply stay there and nothing can be done. ANOTHER google search would show that the UK has no extradition treaty with Bahrain so it's even stupider to think they would allow for child extradition from a muslim father once in that nation.

I also know how to read so I read the little link you provided from a 10 second search.

"Get permission to take a child abroad

You must get the permission of someone with parental responsibility for a child or from a court before taking the child abroad."

"Who has parental responsibility?

For children whose births were registered from 15 April 2002 in Northern Ireland, from 1 December 2003 in England and Wales and from 4 May 2006 in Scotland, parental responsibility rests with both parents, provided they are named on the birth certificate, regardless of whether they are married or not."

Considering these are his real kids, he's on the birth certificate. His kids have passports. Without any court orders, a simple arrangement order can be submitted if absolutely needed that she will have a hard time countering. This is if she is even thinking this far ahead of you. As I said, you're simply a dad taking the kids on vacation. Why would you let her know anything else? Simply take them for the week and then bail oversees.

All this is if you want to go completely letter of the law while in Britain. He could easily just take his kids abroad and never come back. Or give "permission" to a relative to fly them to wherever and then meet them in Bahrain. But of course if one is looking for excuses not to raise one's kids then sniveling feminist regulations are sure to stop you. Boo hoo me! So unfair!

But the main point is, if a man really wants to keep his kids, this trifling sh#t is not supposed to stop him. People have
climbed walls and tunneled through filth for less.

This guy is a selfish clown. His family got a little piece of what crumbs he left in Britain. Why so obtuse?

Trust said...

@ Zorro said... I laugh ata every man who is raped in divorce court. Smoking is bad for your lungs. Drinking and driving leads to death. Marriage is for saps.
______

You're a fool. The very survival of society depends on marriage and fatherhood. To laugh at a man burned by it is to further perpetuate the myth that he deserved it, and that ass raping him is just fine.

The shame should be heaped upon the wife who frivorces, the lawyer who ass rapes, the judges who wreck families, and the legislators that make it all possible.

ray said...

"The next man is wise to have a prenuptial agreement and also to not disappear unless he is dead"


Yikes is somebody still selling that prenup green cheese? After all these years? I mean, aside from the ABA?

It sounds like the UK is essentially a copy of the corrupt institutions of America -- courts, law firms, schools, government/laws, media -- that prey on and destroy fatherhood, sonship, and masculinity in general. In service of their own profits and empowerment.

So, to predators upon the sons of the nations: your treachery, cowardice, and betrayals are logged. Put that in your NSA database, chumps. Yea every dollar and every tear. All benefitting from this vileness will answer.

Vincent Castrillo said...

Ray and others - Perhaps it would be best to step back and take a deep breath and stop projecting our righteous views in re this topic on what is probably a louse and child abandoner in a situation that doesn't fit what many here are talking about.

Seems like the judge in his liberal idiocy and for many of the wrong reasons actually managed to save British taxpayers a potential fortune while stealing the British held stash of a slimy foreigner who couldn't be bothered to take care of his family or even simply take them with him back to stankland. Why protect his assets acquired in the West when all he is has ever done for Britain is added to the quantity of more fatherless NAMs?

Derrick Bonsell said...

A question or two.

Is this even legal under British law, and if so, what says that he doesn't have money elsewhere?

Derrick Bonsell said...

A question or two.

Is this even legal under British law, and if so, what says that he doesn't have money elsewhere?

Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 said...

Taking everything to satisfy unplayable debts isn't new - my *cough* "half" of my house was seized with the title quit claimed to my ex by a judge. I never signed a thing. Naturally my name is still first on the mortgage however. If you describe this or similar incidents to anyone still in the matrix they'll tell you that it isn't slavery because you get to keep 10-20% of your before tax income. If it isn't 100% it isn't slavery you see.

Daniel said...

Either that, or they will begin to wash their hands a bit more thoroughly: in the wetworks. £250,000 would purchase a certain level of professionalism, and leave him with more than half. So...better than a typical divorce with probably lower risk of future jailtime.

Double E said...

If he was smart, he could have moved his assets out of the country.

I imagine he did. From what I understand anesthetists ( at least in the US) are bringing in $250K + a year. The $550K assets were probably just a house and maybe a few stray G

bw said...

The Juice

SirThermite (VFM #0025) said...

my *cough* "half" of my house was seized with the title quit claimed to my ex by a judge.... Naturally my name is still first on the mortgage howeve

Can remember a co-worker telling me about a similar situation, where his ex got the house, but when she quit making mortgage payments his own credit was toast. I was 10 years younger at the time and could barely believe it, but such things are lot more believable after the passing of the time. When it all comes crashing down you can bet there will be some black robes swinging from the lamp posts alongside their crony bankers.

liberranter said...

The courts in the UK ignore prenuptial agreements

As they do here in the U.S. in most states.

Brad Andrews said...

Why are someone's children inherently worth multiple millions in support? Is that the case if the couple stays married and doesn't want to plow much of that money into the children? I believe I read that Gates, among others, is not leaving much to his children. Should the courts forceably take that now? Why does it become justified were he to divorce?

You might make an argument for some lower level amount, but arguing that millions are required is bunk.

JP said...

From the name I would have assumed they were married under the holiest law of England, Sharia.

JAY WILL said...

The correct contribution is uncertain, however he has an obligation to provide for his children, not simply in money but in time and genuine interest. Is the traditional idea of half unfair, it doesn't seem that way to me. Don't know the detail of this case, is he being punished more for running off?

The real problem is women who make it hard for men who WANT to do whats right for their children. It is not unlikely that they are actually far less of a percentage than the feckless, abandoning types. Using self-employed nature and accountants to get your perceived wealth down, half of 70% is a big win in an unamicable divorce. Its when women use the state to undermine a man when he is in reality not that bad a guy. Denying him access etc and off the back of lies or exaggerations. But its all his word against hers, establishing the truth seems to be the difficulty. Who is to blame, who's not pulling their weight. If your ex-wife is blowing a lot of what you give her on booze and fags its her, but how do you prove that?

The honourable nature of men is bandied around the "manosphere". I don't buy it, I do see men like that but I think most of them are getting the job done, compromising, even accepting minor unfairness. I don't think in the UK its the nightmare that its made out to be. Perhaps different in US.

RC said...

The best insurance against frivorce for the man who wishes to marry is to find a woman with strong Christian values with a family who would shame her incessantly and forever if she played the Marriage 2.0 game.

hank.jim said...

There is no insurance from frivorce. You're fooling yourself if you think a woman's Christian religion will save a marriage. Shame doesn't work today. People have no shame. It really is a roll of the dice. Anyways, this case is not about frivorce. It was about a man abandoning his family.

Trust said...

Even devout Christian women are swayed in their demeanor by the options afforded to them by the state. Even a woman who seeks to honor her husband and her vows knows that if push comes to shove, she has the hammer, and the gravy train is guaranteed indepedent of her efforts. Even if she isn't consciously aware of it, the marriage will suffer.

Trust said...

I don't think any insurance company would insure for divorce. The risk is far too high.

Brad Andrews said...

The correct contribution is uncertain, however he has an obligation to provide for his children, not simply in money but in time and genuine interest. Is the traditional idea of half unfair, it doesn't seem that way to me. Don't know the detail of this case, is he being punished more for running off?

Why doesn't it seem unfair? It is only enforced upon a divorce, not normal living. That is the huge flaw in your argument and the reason "conservatives" will fail. They are conserving the wrong thing.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.