29/09/03

They are Watching!

Hi AH,

Seems so trivial to email you about this, but I personally find black on green just fine. In fact studies have indicated that green is easier on the eyes than any other.

On a more important note you've stated in no uncertain terms that "important people" read your site. Now perhaps I'm simply slow in regards to this but how can you be sure of this? (Unless of course you're kidding. BTW, a great deal of the time I easily understand your humorous sarcasm and satire. Makes it much more entertaining to read while acquiring important information).

Just a curious reader. Thanks and take care. you're doing a great job.

C

Hi C

Thank you for the colour information, but, even more especially, for your comments about my humour. I'm never quite sure if it goes down very well. 

With regard to how I know that - using my own words - "many of them ['important people'] are actually reading the words of Angry Harry to see what might be coming their way unless they are careful." ... ...

1. I often get in touch with various official departments/journalists/editors etc and give them the URL of a particular piece, and the website stats then often show a large increase in the number of visitors to that piece shortly thereafter - an increase that usually goes way beyond the number of people that I actually contacted.

2. Many of my government-oriented pieces consistently get read even when I do not refer to them. And they seem mostly to be read by a number of people that is clearly inconsistent with what most of AH's 'overt' readers claim to have recently read - if you see what I mean.

Also, for example, such pieces (e.g. the one about the phony Home Office sex-assault figures) get read consistently **every week** by people who have turned up from nowhere - i.e. the readers did not get to the article via a search engine, or via a link at angryharry, or via a link at any other website. The pattern of entries to such pieces is completely different to that of other pieces.

3. Sometimes I get contacted by insiders. (And even a government website in Scotland has a link to angryharry!)

4. Those in power can only remain in power by keeping a very close watch on their potential enemies. It would astonish most people to see how many resources are committed to such endeavours. This is not something that is particularly sneaky or underhand. After all, these people want to be able to take account of - and understand - all the arguments that might be coming their way. The internet is jam-packed full of activists - at all levels. And many of them are 'professionals' whose job it is to monitor the situation as it applies to their bosses e.g. party strategists, security agents.

Indeed, there are reportedly some 50,000 police officers in the USA alone whose main job it is to monitor online activity. 

5. The men's movement is, potentially, a very, very, very serious threat indeed. It has the potential to cause huge problems throughout the whole of the nation. It could cause prison riots. It could lead to hundreds of thousands of claims from very angry fathers - and duped fathers - for huge sums in compensation. (And they would not likely take NO for an answer.) It could increase violence across the board. It could easily destabilise, demotivate and disorient important male-dominated government services e.g. in the police and prison services, in the military, and in certain trades union groups. It could cause racial tension, a backlash against gays, bursts of outrage among the underclass, a rise of hatred toward Muslims and/or Jews. And goodness knows what else.

The men's movement has to be watched. It has to be reported on. It would be a gross act of negligence by certain government officials (especially in law enforcement) for this site not to be monitored closely. Those professionals who are 'concerned with the welfare and/or the security of the nation' and the numerous political 'strategists' of the main political parties are expected to keep their eyes on such things. That is their job.

And, of course, the people at the top are, mostly, not stupid. They would be crazy not to monitor Angry Harry and his ilk. These people manage to rise to the top and stay there because they are forever watching their own backsides and because many of them have underlings who are monitoring possible sources of serious problems for them.

And, of course, many of them will actually want to see the aims of the men's movement succeed. 

After all, even those at the top are human beings!

And they are mostly men.

And this alone is a big headache for the powers that be - because there will be thousands of 'hidden' men's movement supporters well within their own ranks.

In summary, the men's movement is a serious threat!

6. Good strong arguments backed by the strong possibility of significant aggression - verbal or otherwise - gain an awful lot of attention. Unsurprisingly. And they usually win the day very quickly indeed. 

Clever people know this.

Instinctively.

Furthermore, the people at the top have a great deal to lose in the face of such a force, and so they are alerted to such things very quickly. They are extremely sensitive to such things.

And so, of course some of them are reading Angry Harry!

And some of them will just be getting reports about it.

And they will start adjusting their positions pretty quickly as the chatter moves along the chain. This way they can take some of the wind out of the movement and, hence, reduce some of the potential heat.

Furthermore, this site is about 'empowerment'. And these people in particular will love it. It is what they yearn for.

These people know 'empowerment' when they see it. They live off such a skill. And many of them are just as fed up with the feminists as I am. But they just cannot say so without jeopardising their positions.

For example: It was only about two years ago that The Times (London) printed an article in its newspaper by a "senior barrister" who said that the law was, in many ways, biased against men.

But they kept his name anonymous!

For three decades the media have been positively deluged with highfaluting lawyers (mostly female) mouthing off unrestrainedly and without caution about how discriminatory was the legal system against women - which is rubbish - and you would watch their careers fly! But a barrister who wishes to write a fairly innocuous article pointing out that there is **some** unfairness to men in the legal system is too damn scared to attach his name to it!

And some barrister that I met a couple of years ago also told me quite categorically that if you spoke out against the feminist agenda your legal career was not going much further.

And the same is true for the UK's highest ranking police officers. They have been politically-corrected through and through. And so my point about empowerment is this.

Some people in powerful positions are being liberated by sites like Angry Harry. And they will be clever enough to know this. They will hate what feminism is doing. And they will want to join the war against it - bit by bit.

They are our friends.

Further, this site not only helps to empower them by virtue of the most magnificent of arguments that are often presented on it - thanks to the help of **many** men's activists from all over the world - the overt verbal aggression actually gives these powerful folk even further power with which to clobber the enemy.

"Well, er, if we don't do this, then those men's activists, sometime in the future, are likely to convince men to ... etc etc etc ... and we shall then be forced into the position of having to ... etc etc etc ... so we might as well get ahead of their game and ... etc etc etc"

That's the way that it works.

And this is how websites such as this will promote change. By empowering men, and by empowering those with power.

And remember that those in power are competing with each other. As such, anything that gives them an 'advantage' can be worth a goldmine to them. 

In a nutshell: There are are many cognitive cluster bombs on Angry Harry and the men's movement is a potential nuclear weapon. And some of the people 'up there' know it.

Trust me.

They are watching.

They are here.

And all I can say to them is this. 

Good! Well Done. Keep reading.

Finally, feminism is the walking dead. There is no future in it. There is no future for any society that follows it. As such, it will soon be destroyed by cultures that compete with it - especially by those that can grow from within.

And, as far as feminism vs the men's movement is concerned, my belief is that I can now see Checkmate through so many different avenues and spheres of action that I have given up the need to think about it any more. 

Some 70% of these 'moves' are already on this website - and astute readers will notice them. The remaining 30% have yet to be posted on it. (Roughly speaking, of course.)

But - and this is most important - many of those 'up there' (a few percent perhaps) will be well ahead of people like me. There are some very talented people in high office. I'm not even in their league. And if I can see what is likely to happen in the near future, then they most surely can.

There will be police officers, politicians, judges, academics, scientists - whoever - who already know that the feminists - come what may - are going to be vaporised, and who can see the writing on the wall for our own survival if we do not quickly destroy their malevolent influences.

In other words, Angry Harry and his chums have friends in high places!

And, having a particularly sensitive nose in this area, I can already sense the signs of a few of them stirring.

Not many.

But a few.

AH