The Chances of Holding Your Son Responsible for a Rape He Didn’t Commit Have Just Skyrocketed

by pierceharlan on April 13, 2011

You will excuse me if I dispense with the carefully laid out introduction and the painstakingly crafted prose, but I write about a matter of grave importance, and there isn’t time for either.  False Rape Society has written in excess of 2,000 posts, and this may be the single most important topic we’ve ever reported on.

In an age when young men are a distinct minority on our nation’s college campuses, the Obama administration has just declared open season on the dwindling relatively few who actually bother to attend college.  The United States Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights issued a letter dated April 4, 2011 to colleges setting forth unequivocal guidelines for handling claims of sexual harassment, including claims of sexual assault, in disciplinary proceedings brought against students. Of course, the overwhelming majority of sex claims, especially serious claims such as sexual assault, are lodged against male students.  According to the letter, from now on, to be in compliance with Title IX, all disciplinary proceedings involving claims of sexual harassment (which includes claims of rape and sexual assault) ”must use a preponderance of the evidence standard,” as opposed to the “clear and convincing evidence” standard (evidence of a high probability that the offense occurred) currently used by many schools. Vice President Joe Biden, chief architect of VAWA, unveiled the new procedures earlier this month.

What this means is that a male accused of sexual assault may be expelled from college, and his freedom to go on to graduate school and obtain decent employment may be curtailed and even destroyed, even if there is only a very slight probability that he committed the assault.  The school can have a reasonable doubt about whether he did it, and the evidence need not even show that there is a strong likelihood of it.  If the disciplinary hearing board finds that the complainant’s story of the alleged incident is more credible than the accused’s, even by a 50.0001 to 49.9999 percent margin, he packs his bags and is banned from the school forever. Forget law school, forget medical school, forget graduate school of any kind. And good luck explaining that to prospective employers. His life has been effectively destroyed.

Former Education Department lawyer Hans Bader posits a well-reasoned argument why the Education Department is wrong as a matter of law: “The Education Department’s position is based on a misunderstanding of who is subject to Title IX, the federal law banning schools from committing sex discrimination. Title IX’s requirements apply to schools, not individual students.” Read the entire piece here.

While it is a terrible thing for a young woman to see her rapist escape without punishment, it is an even more terrible thing to hold a young man responsible for a rape he didn’t commit. The chances of the school making a mistake and doing exactly that — holding a young man responsible for a rape he didn’t commit — have just skyrocketed with the Education Department’s April 4 directive. 

A student’s interest in obtaining a college degree, with all it entails, is of such weight and gravity that colleges should justify any decision to deprive a student of that interest with proof more substantial than a mere preponderance of the evidence.  Even for legal actions seeking only money damages, some states impose the enhanced “clear and convincing evidence” standard to prove claims where fabrications are easiest to make (e.g.,claims of oral contracts, fraud, and promissory estoppel).  That standard is all the more appropriate in “he said/she said” claims of sexual assault, where lies are easy to tell, too frequently made, and incredibly destructive of the men about whom they are told.

Schools are already lowering their standards of proof in response to the April 4 directive. Yale announced Tuesday that it is lowering its standard to “preponderance of the evidence.” Stanford has also just done it. (Associated Students of Stanford University President Angelina Cardona applauded the move, noting: “Lowering of the standard of proof is absolutely crucial to the women’s community.”)  Brandeis, too, will shift its standard of proof for internal hearings on sexual assault to a lesser burden, a university official said, to comply with the directive. Harvard Law School and U.Va. are feeling the heat as well: both are under investigation because they require sexual assault victims to prove their allegations by “clear and convincing evidence.” One or more schools are lowering the standard in the middle of an ongoing hearing.

Stanford Dean of Student Life Christine Griffith doesn’t seem to have any concern about the school getting it wrong and punishing a young man undeservedly. “For people who might be concerned about the change in the burden, the standard of proof, then [it is] probably an opportunity for people to be saying to themselves, ‘I need to be really educated about these issues because I don’t want to find myself in this circumstance,’” she said.

Our sons have found themselves in the cross-hairs of another politically motivated effort to appease a vocal interest group that has declared them enemy number one.  The Education Department’s directive was premised on research finding that one in five college women are victims of sexual assault or attempted sexual assault.  The survey that concocted that outrageous number utilized self-selecting respondents, and the problems with such methodology are many and insurmountable.  See here.  Heather MacDonald summed it up succinctly: the one-in-five stat is ”bogus.”  This is not even to mention that the the one-in-five figure yields numbers wildly inconsistent with even the  inflated 90 percent under-reporting standard sometimes cited by the sexual grievance industry to justify its existence. See here.  The fact is, if that one-in-five figure were accurate, our college campuses would be more dangerous places than even the Tadmor Prison in Syria, where the bloodthirsty guards butcher inmates with axes for the fun of it. 

If you need further proof of the Department of Education’s blatant bias against presumptively innocent males, the April 4 letter also says that under Title IX, when there is an accusation of sexual assault, the school must take appropriate interim measures before the final outcome of the investigation. These measures include separating the alleged perpetrator and the complainant. All well and good — but that’s not all it says. It goes on to state the following: “When taking steps to separate the complainant and the alleged perpetrator, a school should minimize the burden on the complainant, and thus should not, as a matter of course, remove complainants from classes or housing while allowing alleged perpetrators to remain.”

The import is clear. In “he said/she said” disputes about sexual assault, he is presumed the guilty party from the moment of her accusation.  At least the Department of Education is up front with its misandry.

It is not hyperbole to assert that under this new Department of Education directive, an accuser and a school are free to destroy the life of a young man even if there is only a very slight probability that he did anything wrong.  And I ask, why is there not widespread outrage about this?

{ 102 comments… read them below or add one }

scot April 13, 2011 at 07:57

There are now so many false rape accusation on university campuses that it is a barbaric time in the history of American law enforcement that allows even more protections of the innocent to be eroded.
The more young men who get falselly accused of rapes that never happened…the quicker will be the collapse of the perverts behind the perversion.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Keyster April 13, 2011 at 08:06

How is this being publicized on college campuses, (with the same ferocity of “take back the night” and other rape culture campaigns), to WARN YOUNG MEN?

Warn them that certian situations involving women could possibly lead to sexual assault charges, and a ruined life. “Sexual Assault” being defined as anything from verbal suggestion, staring “innapropriately” and “unwanted” touching, up to and including actual penetration of penis to vajay-jay.

It’s key that young men be warned to avoid ALL CONTACT with females on or anywhere near a college campus….because all she has to say is four magic words, “he sexually assaulted me” and he’s done for.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
Miley Cyrax April 13, 2011 at 08:13

The message is clear: Disparate impact is okay when the affected party is presumed to be young white males. Nothing new to see here though, please move along.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Migu April 13, 2011 at 08:16

Never pay retail for your college education.

http://www.garynorth.com/public/729.cfm

You can get a degree just as good as most others, and you never have to step foot in a classroom. If you have kids, you can have them drop out of high-school and Emancipate them With a B.A. or a B.S. when they are 18.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Aharon April 13, 2011 at 08:21

Pierce,

Thanks for all the work you are doing with the False Rape Society. This case is another ‘tip of the spearhead’ event. Campuses are the beginning. Later it will spread to the Criminal Court System covering society as a whole and to include new, even more misandrist, workplace sexual harassment rules. Beyond that, this evolving (or de-evolving) new legal standard will probably embrace most or all other areas of laws throughout society. America is going fascist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 08:24

Oh. No. There could not POSSIBLY be a conspiracy with an agenda to oppress males. Nope. You’d have to be a f***ing nutter to think this could POSSIBLY BE PLANNED.

It’s all just one big bad COINCIDENCE. Nothing to worry about. They are just MAKING A MISTAKE. If we just explain their mistake, surely they will fix it, right? Surely Mangina Biden could NOT POSSIBLY BE TAKING ORDERS from anyone.

Ok…..So I have this nice beach front property in Nevada. It’s got great ocean views. You can hear the surf. And it’s going for a song.

How much shit has to happen before you mean realise.

THIS IS PLANNED TO BE THIS WAY.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 6
Uncle Elmer April 13, 2011 at 08:27

It’s a juggernaught.

Yesterday was driving through town and a city bus passed by. The entire side of the bus had the slogan “We are not for sale!” and a multiethnic potpouri of innocent children staring grimly at the camera. Child sex trafficking! Shame on all males!

Follow the money.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Alan B April 13, 2011 at 08:28

since title IX is supposed to be about Equality, and these days equality is about equal outcomes, i wonder what would happen if a rash of boys started screaming rayyyyyype on campus. i mean if there is a 20% rapeage of women on campus, that MUST mean there are at LEAST that many boys being raped.
Just simply STATING there was some sexual hisassment going on should get a girl kicked out of school ASAP. doesn’t even have to be rayyyyype.
boy: dean, i was drunk and this sophomore chick just wouldn’t leave me alone. she kept pressuring me to go back to her room, and i was so ashamed that i dint want to go (me being a testosterone fueled beast-thing), and everyone was watching, so i just went.. omg.. and and and.. she RAAAAAYYYYYYYYPPPEEDD MEEEEEe……
dean: are you sure?
boy: i dunno, i was drunk, but i don’t remember saying yes at all, and my penis was in her mouth and and and… *cry*.

and that should be the end of it.. there should be no questions, complaints or anything since its strictly he said. the other party obviously gets no say. i wonder what would happen.
i also wonder what would happen if a girl accused another dyk.. um girl of rape.

the way i see it, if the language of the law is sex identity free (complainant, plaintiff, accused), it should be be pretty easy for anyone to just start pointing fingers.

i also wonder how this applies to teachers. since title IX is about the SCHOOL and not the student, i wonder if u can just get a teacher kicked out immediately, tenure or not, just by laying the accusation.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Congo April 13, 2011 at 08:29

I notice the gov’t didn’t institute this policy in senior citizen homes. The sexual trade union is hard at work making it as costly as possible for men to date young nubile college-aged women. The sexual jealousy feminists have against actual women manifests itself in harsher and harsher legal penalties and demonization of the men who date them. Who wants to date a feminine 18 year old college freshman when you can date her middle aged feminist college professor, hairy warts, crows feet and a repelling large and in charge attitude to boot. Check out TheAntiFeminist, one of the only blogs in the manosphere able to touch upon the taboo subjects of the sexual trade union (rape, pedophilia, prostitution, human smuggling) etc.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
slwerner April 13, 2011 at 08:35

”If you need further proof of the Department of Education’s blatant bias against presumptively innocent males, the April 4 letter also says that under Title IX, when there is an accusation of sexual assault, the school must take appropriate interim measures before the final outcome of the investigation. These measures include separating the alleged perpetrator and the complainant.”

Aside for all the appropriate outrage at this clearly misandric directive, I’m curious as to the use of the Dept. Of Education as the mode to further disadvantage men.

Was this just simply a way that allows for the norms of “due process” to be dispensed with entirely, or might this be seen as a pre-emptive strategy to do and “end-around” law enforcement, the criminal courts, and the rights of the accused.

Has the work of The False Rape Society in exposing the prevalence of false claims of rape, even on college campus’s been so effective at creating negative publicity that those who make up (what has been termed) the Sexual Grievance Industry fear that they can no longer rely on law enforcement to be their “rubber stamp” in persecuting men?

This new directive (not a law, but a thinly veiled threat to cut-off Federal funding if schools refuse to comply) creates a means for young women to see a man severely penalized without the need for those pesky investigations, which are increasingly uncovering evidence that the alleged crime never occurred. It provides legal “cover” for any school to expel any young man, at the whim of any young women.

Might this do some good in removing those who’ve actually sexually assaulted another person? Sure. But couldn’t it just as easily be abused to allow a woman to punish a man with whom she may have an issue (not necessarily even sexually related)? To some entitlement-minded young women (yes, yes, I know. When speaking of college women toady, this is just redundant, as there are few, if any, who aren’t entitlement-minded), this might even be a useful tool in eliminating the competition, giving them a way to steal even more potential advancement from those men whom they cannot out-perform in the classroom?

Well, since women have been documented making false rape allegations against men for reasons such as the man refusing to buy a beer, or taking a phone; and women liberally use false rape allegations for every self-serving purpose from hiding illicit sexual activities to simply being late to work, I cannot imagine that it would very long for some clever, conniving young women to realize what a potential advantage this will provide for her when something as (eventually) lucrative as a slot in medical school is on the line.

The real test of this new rule will be when some young man gets sexually assaulted by a woman (we all know that it does happen, especially when women have been drinking), and reports that assault. When the situation arises in which the rule will apply against a woman, will they still have the nerve to apply it equitably? The skeptic in me would guess that in such a situation, the way to separate the parties will be to remove the victimized man from the school.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
Alcuin April 13, 2011 at 08:36

There is disbelief in Asia when I tell people about western anti-male laws. But I worry how long it will take to spread here.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 08:37

Gents.
Those of you here who refused to educate yourself?

You refuse to learn that no allegation made without a supporting affidavit is worth a damn?

You refuse to learn the common law?

You refuse to form juries?

You refuse to offer the protection of the law to these lads?

YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE LADS BEING ABUSED.

You men want to know who is really letting men down? Check out the man in the mirror. Unless the man in the mirror knows how to do all the things I have been teaching you and telling you and publishing for you? The man in the mirror is THE PROBLEM.

How many men here just talk? Plenty.

How many men here have committed themselves to forming juries and putting federal politicians of his country on trial? Oh…that would be just me.

A false rape allegation causes injury, harm and loss. You can see your guvment is doing this deliberately. Yet you stick your heads up your collective arses and TALK about it. How bad does it need to get before you DO something about it? How many more young mens lives have to be ruined before you DO something about it? Ten thousand? One HUNDRED thousand? A MILLION? TEN MILLION?

What is it going to take to get you men to pull your collective heads our of your arses?

Pierce. Not to be down on you because part of what you do is important. But in the time you have been WRITING about this stuff? You should have been READING about how to create a remedy. Just like I did.

One of the BIGGEST problems with you MRAS is you NEVER F***ING LISTEN to what is being said. You are TOO F***ING BUSY TALKING. And in the DIN of the INANE F***ING IGNORANT TALKING you don’t listen to THE REMEDY.

You guys are f****ing frustrating to deal with. You think women are stupid? I’ve got NEWS for you. Women are dumb as rocks, sure. But how much dumber are people who are smart enough to learn the remedy BUT REFUSE TO? You men are DUMBER than the DUMBEST woman. You don’t like me saying that? PROVE ME WRONG!

You men here are throwing your fellow men under the buss while lamenting that they are being run over by that bus.

How about a little LEARNING about the VERY BASICS OF LAW, eh? Nope. That would be TOO F***ING MUCH to ask.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 14
Richard P-Man April 13, 2011 at 08:43

Without well educated men, our society will collapse.

If it ever does, hopefully, it will be remembered that it was WOMEN and FEMINISTS that destroyed it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
alexamenos April 13, 2011 at 08:48

this will mean fewer young men going to college, which will make it harder for girls to get boyfriends.

yet another patriarchal law which victimizes young women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
slwerner April 13, 2011 at 08:54

Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) – ”Those of you here who refused to educate yourself?
You refuse to learn that no allegation made without a supporting affidavit is worth a damn?
You refuse to learn the common law?
You refuse to form juries?
You refuse to offer the protection of the law to these lads?”

Peter,

With due respect, this is NOT an issue of law. This does not involve police, police investigations, legal proceedings, courts, nor trials. If fact, it seems much more a way in which the legal system can be shut-out, and the rights of the accused completely eliminated – along with any pretense of “due process”.

This is a directive, issued by the US Dept. of Ed., threatening to cut-off funding if schools refuse to comply. This will open up the use of false allegations which would have otherwise been so dubious that they would have probably never been made to the police. Now, the police will not need to be involved, and the schools can merely pronounce the man “more likely guilty than not”, and wash their hands of the whole affair.

A lot of people distrust law enforcement. I understand that. But, as the False Rape Society has been publicizing, the police are often determining that alleged college campus rapes and sexual assaults have been fabrications. This provides a way for police to be shut-out of investigating even highly dubious cases, so that injustice can be rendered free from the entanglements of such matters as “evidence”.

Frankly, given the numerous instances in which men have been exonerated due to police investigations, onerous as the police may seem, they are a far sight better than what this new rule portends. No man will ever be “exonerated” under this travesty.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 08:56

OT…
And in more news that will surprise no-one…another single mother…three more dead kids.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/13/us-drowning-family-idUSTRE73C4CH20110413

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5
livingwell April 13, 2011 at 09:05

Record every fucking thing you do. Voice record it. Video everything in pubic. If anyone so much as stares at your crotch…File the complaint. Flood the system boys. As males run from our colleges, prepare for more aggressive female behavior as the male population thins. Use it to your advantage, we should be telling all males to fuck with the system at every opportunity. I’m doing my part, I work as little as needed and buy very little…Starve this mess as this is no longer a society for men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
livingwell April 13, 2011 at 09:07

“public” Freudien slip perhaps.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Pierce Harlan April 13, 2011 at 09:11

slwerner is correct. This was an end run around the law unlike anything I’ve ever seen in this area.

With an enhanced standard of proof (e.g., “clear and convincing evidence”), many college disciplinary boards historically have been reluctant to become involved in “he said/she said” sexual assault disputes — and for good reason. There often is no way to figure out what happened for sure. They’ve been known to use the standard of proof as their reason not to proceed.

Those days are over. “He said/she said” disputes will now be determined by the panel — there’s no way around it. And as anyone who’s ever tried a case knows, that’s a crapshoot. Especially if you only have to believe one side a little more than the other. Anything can happen.

This new rule will also embolden some young women who know their claims are crappy (because the facts are murky) to plow ahead and bring the guy down. My guess is that within a couple of years, we’re going to be seeing a spike in the number of claims that go to hearings.

Folks, I can’t emphasize this enough: this is a HUGE victory for radical feminism. The chances of grave injustices occurring to innocent young men just skyrocketed.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 09:13

slwerner April 13, 2011 at 08:54
“With due respect, this is NOT an issue of law. ”

I don’t give a f*** if you respect me or not. How about f***ing educating yourself? This IS an issue of LAW. It’s called COMMON LAW and men like you are too f***ing stupid to LISTEN to the TRUTH. Instead you take your advise about ‘law’ from Liars called LAWYERS. I just got through telling you THEY ARE ALL LIARS.

I’m really sick of you guys. I really am. I am going to hammer stupid f***ers who say stupid things. Ok? I’ve given you enough time already.

These lads are being caused INJURY, HARM and LOSS. This is being done UNLAWFULLY according to the LAW OF THE LAND that applies in north America which is COMMON LAW based on the Manga Carta and Bill of Rights. These two documents define the RESTRICTIONS OF THE KING/Government. They are inalienable and may NEVER BE REVOKED by the King or Government.

NEVER BE REVOKED.

It does not matter WHAT your guvment says. They MAY NOT REVOKE the provisions of the Magna Carta and Bill of Rights. And if ANY Guvment tries there is a provision in the Mang Carta for LAWFUL REBELLION against the King/Guvment.

But now. You are TOO STUPID to bother reading the Magna Carta Slwerner. So let me SHOVE IT DOWN YOUR THROAT UNTIL YOU ARE READY TO PUKE. OK?

+ (39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

+ (40) To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.

(45) We will appoint as justices, constables, sheriffs, or other officials, only men that know the law of the realm and are minded to keep it well.

(52) To any man whom we have deprived or dispossessed of lands, castles, liberties, or rights, without the lawful judgement of his equals, we will at once restore these. In cases of dispute the matter shall be resolved by the judgement of the twenty-five barons referred to below in the clause for securing the peace (§ 61). In cases, however, where a man was deprived or dispossessed of something without the lawful judgement of his equals by our father King Henry or our brother King Richard, and it remains in our hands or is held by others under our warranty, we shall have respite for the period commonly allowed to Crusaders, unless a lawsuit had been begun, or an enquiry had been made at our order, before we took the Cross as a Crusader. On our return from the Crusade, or if we abandon it, we will at once render justice in full.

Now. What does all that mean? It means YOUR GUVMENT CAN NOT DEPRIVE YOU OF YOUR PATH TO AN EDUCATION BASED ON A FALSE ALLEGATION. THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS.

And I am going be real f***ing angry towards any men who refuse to educate themselves in this matter. Mens lives are at stake. But you have your head up your arse. How long has the REMEDY been available? MORE THAN A YEAR NOW.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 14
van Rooinek April 13, 2011 at 09:14

“…. a male accused of sexual assault may be expelled from college… even if there is only a very slight probability that he committed the assault… Forget law school, forget medical school, forget graduate school of any kind. And good luck explaining that to prospective employers. His life has been effectively destroyed…”

What a great way to create a large pool of highly intelligent, alienated, insanely angry revolutionaries. Do the liberals WANT to be violently overthrown? Do they have a death wish?

“This is a directive, issued by the US Dept. of Ed., threatening to cut-off funding if schools refuse to comply….”

Memo to young men: ATTEND NO SCHOOL THAT ACCEPTS FEDERAL FUNDING (and don’t let any such school get a dime of your parents’ hard earned tuition money either). Try Hillsdale, Patrick Henry College, etc.

Otherwise… announce yourself as “gay” the day you arrive on campus, have no association with women at all while you’re there (tell them you’re “gay” if the issue comes up), and maintain the phony “gay” front til the day after you graduate. If you can’t wait til graduation to begin your wife-quest, get on dating websites and go out with girls that have no affiliation whatsoever with your school.

“…This will open up the use of false allegations which would have otherwise been so dubious that they would have probably never been made to the police. Now, the police will not need to be involved, and the schools can merely pronounce the man “more likely guilty than not”, and wash their hands of the whole affair….”

Until they start getting hit with 7 figure defamation lawsuits. Sue, sue, sue, eventually someone will will big. Bleed the beast.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Mr. N April 13, 2011 at 09:20

But if Big’Sis at TSA puts her hands down the panties of a 6 year old girl that is just protecting our borders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba030UmbkCo

When the USSR fell how many people thought the tyrants would simply immigrate to the US and be welcomed in the bureaucracy with open arms?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Pierce Harlan April 13, 2011 at 09:20

For anyone not convinced what a big deal this is, just consider this: many schools previously had the “clear and convincing” standard precisely because of fears that innocent persons might be held responsible for wrongs they didn’t commit. That’s the ONLY reason. By lowering that standard, the government is saying, we aren’t going to worry about the innocent any more; we want to nab more rapists.

I don’t know what scares you, but that scares me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
AlphA April 13, 2011 at 09:21

Right. And this is surprising……how exactly?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 09:23

Pierce Harlan April 13, 2011 at 09:11
“slwerner is correct.”

Pierce. Slwerner is an idiot and dumber than the stupidest woman and dumbest rock. Period. And you are a complete idiot as well. Get used to it.

How about you men actually start to READ THE MAGNA CARTA.

Oh. No. That would be too much to f***ing ask wouldn’t it. It’s only THE MOST IMPORTANT LEGAL DOCUMENT EVER WRITTEN IN THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD.

No point reading THAT is there? After all? We’ve got our LIARS/LAWYERS to tell us what it says, right? There’s no reason why we should actually READ IT FOR OUR F***ING SELVES when we have someone else to INTERPRET IT FOR US.

Here…let me repeat this bit.

+ (39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

Which part of that don’t you understand? Which part of that do you need a LIAR/LAWYER to explain to you? Eh? Are you so STUPID you can’t understand what this says Pierce. Go ahead. Tell me which bit of this says the guvment can deprive a free man of his educational opportunities based on a FRA. I can ‘t find that bit. So you find it and point it out to me, ok?

Your guvment is a bunch of criminal scumbags. As are your LIARS/LAWYERS.

So you will form courts, form juries, put them on trial, find them guilty and then take THEIR property off them. Or just shut the f*** up and bend over and don’t expect lube.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13
Rebel April 13, 2011 at 09:31

” Richard P-Man April 13, 2011 at 08:43
Without well educated men, our society will collapse.

If it ever does, hopefully, it will be remembered that it was WOMEN and FEMINISTS that destroyed it.”

You owe society zilch! So, let it drown!
You owe your country nada! Just let it die!

The U.S. is doomed anyway. My solution: leave the country that’s slowly killing you. A nation of women is NOT a nation for men.

All hands abandon ship. The patient is dying. Let America rest in peace and then forget about it.

It’s the fastest and easiest solution. I emigrated once and it’s truly no big deal.

Russia begins to look mighty interesting. They are severely short of men there..

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
AfOR April 13, 2011 at 09:32

As is said on the FRS, the problem with “the preponderance of evidence” is that it is a flat out fucking lie.

There will be zero EVIDENCE, there will be ACCUSATION.

The plural of accusation is not data, but that is how it is treated in both civil and family courts, and how it will be treated in these centres of learning.

So I hope you all learn the lesson they are so determined to teach you, men are subhuman scum with zero rights.

So learn the lesson, and apply it fully, those with zero rights have zero responsibilities.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
slwerner April 13, 2011 at 09:33

Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) – “I don’t give a f*** if you respect me or not. How about f***ing educating yourself? This IS an issue of LAW. It’s called COMMON LAW and men like you are too f***ing stupid to LISTEN to the TRUTH. Instead you take your advise about ‘law’ from Liars called LAWYERS. I just got through telling you THEY ARE ALL LIARS.”

How is a knowledge of the Magna Carta supposed to help the guy who finds himself before a schools disciplinary panel? Especially when the school faces the loss of funding if they do not take steps to “remove” him from his alleged victim?

Your referral to a reliance on Common Law is simply too “pie-in-the-sky” to be useful in real situations whether they be in the US Criminal Justice System, or outside that system – as this new rules provides for. Invoking the Magna Carta and Common Law will be no more useful than is your penchant for telling other to go “F” themselves.

But, tell you what, Peter. If your so sure of your tactics, why not move to the US, enroll in a college, try to get yourself accused of sexual assault, and then you can prove me wrong if you succeed in forcing that school to abide by the Magna Carta and Common Law.

As for myself, I think that a legal challenge to this edict is a more useful and rational approach. As Peirce noted, it is a misapplication of Title IX, and therefore open to legal challenge.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 09:34

van Rooinek April 13, 2011 at 09:14
“What a great way to create a large pool of highly intelligent, alienated, insanely angry revolutionaries. Do the liberals WANT to be violently overthrown?”

Yes. The Illuminati want to create WW III. They want to cut the population back to 500M people. Can you think of a BETTER way to do that than to endlessly abuse men and not give them the protection of the law? I can’t. Short of nuclear holocaust.

They did the same in Russia in 1917-23. Guess what happened. FAMINE f***ing happened. That’s what happened. Guess what happens when FAMINE happens. A shit load of people die and ‘no one is really responsible’ so no-one figures out it was planned by the Illuminati to cull the herd a little. It ‘just happens’.

Well? Who controls your food? Who controls your water? What happens if LOTS OF MEN STOP WORKING AND START FIGHTING? Famine happens.

Damn you men are stupid. Take a look at the Georgia Guidestones. “maintain humanity at 500M”. You think the other 6 Billion are going to go quietly?

Codex is in place. They are destroying the nutritional value of your food. They are going to starve you and they are already poisoning you. But nope. You men can’t come at that idea.

“Our politicians are honest” is your mantra.

Really? Joe Biden is an honest man? Here…let me sell you some more beach front property in Nevada.

This is ALL planned. This is ALL deliberate. It’s so f***ing obvious that it is INSANE you men can not see this. It really is. You men must be so f***ing stupid of you STILL can not see this is all planned.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 12
slwerner April 13, 2011 at 09:42

van Rooinek – ”Until they start getting hit with 7 figure defamation lawsuits. Sue, sue, sue, eventually someone will will big. Bleed the beast.”

Except that this new rule provides the legal cover for schools to act – without due process and without regard to evidence (or the lack thereof). The legal liability on the school is removed as they can simply state that they were following Federal guide-lines.

A former student at Brown University had his wrestling scholarship withdrawn and was forced to leave the school after a girl he merely chatted with was convinced to accuse him of having raped her. His lawsuit against Brown U is now in Federal Court.

This new rule by the DOEd will prevent wrongly expelled students from seeking redress against the schools that expelled them. This new approach is both very devious and very clever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 09:42

slwerner April 13, 2011 at 09:33
“How is a knowledge of the Magna Carta supposed to help the guy who finds himself before a schools disciplinary panel? Especially when the school faces the loss of funding if they do not take steps to “remove” him from his alleged victim?”

Um. Which part of this can you not understand?

+ (39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

I mean to say. If you can not comprehend that this is saying that the GUVMENT SCHOOL may NOT deprive ‘a free man of his standing in any other way’ then just F***ING SHOOT YOURSELF and throw your body into my rose garden. Because you are obviously not doing ANYONE any good above ground. You would be more use to the world growing some roses for me to sniff in the evening air.

HOW SIMPLE DO I NEED TO MAKE THIS FOR YOU STUPID MEN? EH?

READ IT AGAIN! FFS.

+ (39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

To do so is a CRIME that can be tried before a COMMON LAW JURY. The people on the panel are COMMITTING A CRIME if the man claims his LAWFUL RIGHTS AND PLACES THE GUVMENT ON NOTICE OF ITS RETRICTIONS UNDER THE MAGNA CARTA AND BILL OF RIGHTS.,

YOU MEN ARE SO DUMB YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO CLAIM YOUR RIGHTS YET. IT IS ABOUT TIME YOU LEARNED. AND IT IS ABOUT TIME YOU TAUGHT OTHER MEN.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9
slwerner April 13, 2011 at 09:47

Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) – “Um. Which part of this can you not understand?”

Those pesky little details such as how a profanity-laced tirade invoking the Magna Carta is actually going to keep a given accused young man from being expelled from a school which is acting under a US DOEd guideline, and not under any US Federal or State law.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
slwerner April 13, 2011 at 09:53

Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) – “To do so is a CRIME that can be tried before a COMMON LAW JURY. “

Perhaps it would be helpful if you’d enumerate some of your many success in forming Common Law Juries, having cases heard before them, and having their judgments be accepted by any recognized government.

Surely, you must have had many.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 09:56

Gents.
I have been telling you these things for more than a year now. Indeed from November 2009. You WILL NOT LISTEN.

YOU DESERVE YOUR SLAVERY.

Now. You men will READ THE MAGNA CARTA AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS. These documents define the LIMITATIONS PLACED ON YOUR GUVMENT OFFICIALS. They do NOT define your rights.

If you do NOT read the Magna Carta? You will STOP WHINING LIKE WOMEN!!

I am no longer going to tolerate STUPID MEN WHINING LIKE WOMEN unless they can quote the Magna Carta article 39 to me and tell me how that says it is lawful to mandatorily arrest a man based on a false allegation. Only AFTER they can do that can they whine like women in my presence.

YOUR GUVMENTS AND LAWYERS ARE CRIMINALS.

ALL OF THEM!!!!!

RON f***ing PAUL is one of the BIGGEST CRIMINALS OF THE LOT!!! FFS!!!

IT’S A CON JOB. FROM START TO END. OK?

IT IS A CON JOB!!!!

Get over it.

Start to FIGHT BACK LAWFULLY!!!!

You have EVERYTHING YOU NEED. This is what we are doing in the Free Man area. I’ve banged on the heads of men in the mens RIGHTS area for 18 months because I thought you WANTED YOUR RIGHTS RESPECTED. I didn’t realise you were a total bunch of gutless wonders who are mangina f***ing zeta f***ing losers!!!!

I was TOLD you were by Padre Illuminati. But I didn’t believe him.

Well? NOW I HAVE TO AGREE WITH HIM UNLESS THERE ARE SOME MEN HERE WILLING TO PROVE HIM WRONG.

WELL?

ARE THERE?

http://www.tpuc.org/Acts_and_Charters

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 14
Fabron April 13, 2011 at 10:07

Progress is being made to refute feminist statistics. Here is an article from today’s Wall Street Journal:

There Is No Male-Female Wage Gap

A study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30 found that women earned 8% more than men.

By CARRIE LUKAS

Tuesday is Equal Pay Day—so dubbed by the National Committee for Pay Equity, which represents feminist groups including the National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority, the National Council of Women’s Organizations and others. The day falls on April 12 because, according to feminist logic, women have to work that far into a calendar year before they earn what men already earned the year before.

In years past, feminist leaders marked the occasion by rallying outside the U.S. Capitol to decry the pernicious wage gap and call for government action to address systematic discrimination against women. This year will be relatively quiet. Perhaps feminists feel awkward protesting a liberal-dominated government—or perhaps they know that the recent economic downturn has exposed as ridiculous their claims that our economy is ruled by a sexist patriarchy.

Read the full article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
M-effer April 13, 2011 at 10:20

peter, that’s retarded

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 13, 2011 at 10:20

slwerner April 13, 2011 at 09:53
“Perhaps it would be helpful if you’d enumerate some of your many success in forming Common Law Juries, having cases heard before them, and having their judgments be accepted by any recognized government.”
You are such a f***ing idiot. You really are. On our CAF site, link below, which I have referenced here MANY times, is published what we are doing. Retards like you could not be bothered reading what we are doing or learning about what we are up to. Some men have been working TWENTY YEARS on this. And you, you little shit, won’t pull your head out of your arse long enough to learn what these men are doing. You are disgusting. You really are. Your father should have strangled you at birth you are that f***ing useless.

We have taken the time and effort, at enormous personal cost to many men, including torture and incarceration of some of them (even police murder now), to prove beyond ANY DOUBT that the guvements are fully criminalised and so are the LIARS/LAWYERS and the police force. We have also given them EVERY CHANCE of reform.

Now? We have held two grand juries in Australia. There are grand juries formed all over the US. And brave men are risking their lives for the LIKES OF MISERABLE SHITS LIKE YOU!. Rather than EDUCATE YOURSELF you sling rubbish at men who are TEN TIMES if not a HUNDRED TIMES YOUR BETTER.

YOU ARE NOT EQUAL TO THESE MEN.

This week we will see common law criminal courts proclaimed into existence in Australia. Guess what? ONLY THREE MEN FROM HERE HELPED ME AT ALL? Did Mangina Christan J help? No. He didn’t.

When we get the courts properly and lawfully assembled? I will be putting on trial Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Robert McClelland (AG), two lawyers Justin Dowd and Greg McCray, two Magistrates Louise Henderson and David Dunkley. Further? I will be putting on trial every federal member and every member in NSW.

Will miserable little shits like you actually HELP? No. You will say “Tell me how you go with that”. You disgust me slwerner. You really do. And the problem you have? You know I am right to do so.

You think it was EASY for me to do this?
http://www.youtube.com/user/peternolan1109?feature=mhum

I knew full well I was risking my life to do this. I knew full well they would steal as MUCH as they could off me to try and stop me from doing more. My best mate, and many other men, said that was one of the bravest things they had seen a man do. Guess they never saw warfare. And what do miserable little shits like you do? You throw sly little insults.

That court meeting was in November 2009. That court meeting PROVED the remedy I had spent the prior 18 months developing WORKED. I gave it to the MRA area FOR FREE and you men have dissed it. Gee. Thanks for ALL YOUR GOOD HELP.

Well? Take a look at the men suffering FRAs since November 2009. Take a look at the men who have lost their kids since 2009. And ask yourself. WHAT DID YOU DO TO STOP THAT? And the answer in most cases would be NOTHING.

You JUST TALKED. You just threw insults.

You think it is EASY taking on federal governments out of your OWN pocket? Thanks for nothing swelner? I hope YOU are a victim of an FRA and don’t know enough to get out of it. It would serve you right.

Just this week I have loaned a man $A2,000 who is helping me in this fight. He has been persecuted for 11 years. He’s been tortured. But at least he’s having a go. There are few finer men on this planet. I would rather ONE friend like him that a MILLION ‘friends’ like you slwemer.

http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums.aspx

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12
dragnet April 13, 2011 at 10:26

@ Miley

“Disparate impact is okay when the affected party is presumed to be young white males.”

Yah totally because this policy does not affect black, Asian, or Latino men. Just whites.

MORON.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
Opus April 13, 2011 at 10:27

PAN for some reason keeps slipping into Latin. Does The Great Charter apply atall in the U.S.A.? I am not even sure whether it applies here in England.

I am sorry to hear about the plight of Male Students in America. Over here the other day, our Prime Mininster made an attack on learning at no less an Establishment (since the 1220s) than Oxford University insisting that people should be admitted even if they are either incapable or not as good as other prospective candidates. That is not how he put it, but that is what it amounted to. So clearly all is not well in Academia.

As a Law student there were just four women in my class. One was married (to a fellow student), and of the remaining three only two were hot. I and the other members of our small gang always sat in the row behind them in a vain effort to see up their mini-skirts. Should I have been summarily expelled? Perhaps the answer is to segregate Education and then there will be no problems, (other than females attempting to sneak into male Colleges).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Angelo April 13, 2011 at 10:30

Maybe it is time for men in general to refuse to have sex with women outside of marriage. Outside of brief moments of pleasure, what has it gained us other than false accusation, destruction of the unborn and endless child support?

Granted, it would take some intestinal fortitude and forward thought, but we are men after all! It would be a shock to the wimminz of the world when they realize their power over us is lost forever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
chi-town April 13, 2011 at 10:32

We are entering the phase of baby boomer woman post binged on her scag with no sexual power. It will become increasingly female given longevity and the power of the senior vote. They unleashed their sexual power in the free sex movement. Now they are trying to close the gap and remove it since the weapon works against them.. These are the very architects of our society and have been for a long time(the front women anyway, there is still finance behind it). All I can say is brace for impact.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
post-modern devil April 13, 2011 at 10:41

All the liberals are doing here is hastening the destruction of post-secondary education. Women overwhelmingly go into fields that don’t produce anything and are oversaturated at that and is increasingly subject to the law of diminishing returns. Creating even stronger impediments between young men and a post-secondary education simply means less men will go to post-secondary schools when word of mouth of horrible treatment spreads outside the MSM coupled with limited employment opprotunities for college graduates anyway.

The Democrats won’t even be able to bail out the institutions soon enough because post-secondary education will no longer benefit their corporate puppet masters what with the critical mass of student loan debt caused by women who couldn’t be relied upon to pay it off and the Democrats who gave them the loans regardless and the GOP will use post-secondary education to bury the Democrats when the public’s confidence in the system erodes when the student loan debt bubble bursts.

Its inevitable simply because half of the Democratic leadership are ****ing stupid and completely ingulfed in idealogy and will have no reality based idea on how to salvage their sinking ship WHILE the GOP and the corporatists will actually benefit from the destruction of post-secondary education and have no real reason to save it.

What the MRM needs to do here is simply warn young men of the fire and to spread the word of the education racket further; the system will simply collapse in on itself through the laws of reality and the competing interests of the elites (which exists to SOME extent Nolan).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
shiva April 13, 2011 at 11:01

If one accepts the Roissyan point of view, then one of the ways to protect yourself from false rape allegations and other forms of feminist-inspired malfeasance is to act like an alpha. Women love alpha males, even feminists. Just look at the abused women who stand by their alpha lovers. You can get away with more this way. They will not want to hurt you in the first place, rather they will revere you.

* I hate the alpha/beta categorization and it’s oversimplistic, but I believe there is a real dynamic at work here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
shiva April 13, 2011 at 11:03

Oh yeah, and this doesn’t apply to BPD’s, who can be a hazard to anyone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Herbal Essence April 13, 2011 at 11:08

Wow. This really sucks. This is obviously another “misandry overreach” as TFH talks about in the Misandry Bubble. The femi-marxists are doubling down and trying to get what they can while the getting’s good.

On one hand, we should not take this lying down. If we can get some attention on this i.e. “Dear Parents: Your Son Is A Rapist Whether He Did It Or Not” it will be good for us.
But ultimately, if men simply stop enrolling at participating universities, it will hurt the colleges and benefit more fair-minded institutions. When a university has to make cuts, feminists lose their wings.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Acksiom April 13, 2011 at 11:19

Peter, it appears to me that you believe that angrily expressing your frustration like this is going to get you the reactions you want from the readers here. By my observation, though, I don’t think it’s working that way.

I think you’re a very smart guy, and that you have done a lot of hard work both developing AND DEMONSTRATING your alternatives to the current systems and dominant paradigms. But now, to expand, you need to market them, and I get the impression that your methods for accomplishing that are primarily based on what would work on you and thus only the extremely miniscule fraction of a percentage of the population that have similar intellectual and character resources.

I’d like to see your models reach a wider audience with greater acceptance, because I think they’re interesting, and potentially very transformatory in that we’re actually transitioning to a more privatized Citizen-State relationship, despite the current surface trends towards collectivist authoritarianism.

The best toolset I know of to help make that happen faster and better is neuro-linguistic programming. Do you have any familiarity with that?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Peter April 13, 2011 at 11:44

If one accepts the Roissyan point of view, then one of the ways to protect yourself from false rape allegations and other forms of feminist-inspired malfeasance is to act like an alpha. Women love alpha males, even feminists. Just look at the abused women who stand by their alpha lovers. You can get away with more this way. They will not want to hurt you in the first place, rather they will revere you.

Fair enough. So let’s say you learn some basic “game” techniques and get a girls number; she opens her legs for you within the first date, or if she’s a “good girl” within 3-4 dates. Then you do what Roissy calls “reveal your inner Beta” – you get clingy, or act weak, or fail a s*** test. She starts to lose her attraction to you.

Then you go ahead and do the same filthy move that you did just a couple of nights ago without any issues. But now in her eyes you’re a Beta and all of a sudden, it’s not cool anymore. She says “you didn’t ask permisson before doing that”… you get defensive, she gets more angry at your supplication and weakness. She calls you a wuss or gay, you respond by calling her a whore and slut.

Guess what she does then?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
silent April 13, 2011 at 11:47

Mr. Nolan,

Ron Paul is one of the criminals? I agree that he’s still a politician so there’s automatically something wrong with him lol, but I thought he was one of the good ones. Well… the only good one.

PS
What happened to the voting system, Mr. Price?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
van Rooinek April 13, 2011 at 12:08

Angelo: “…Maybe it is time for men in general to refuse to have sex with women outside of marriage…we are men after all! It would be a shock to the wimminz of the world when they realize their power over us is lost forever”

Full circle: back to the Bible. And not a moment too soon.

However, this doesn’t protect men totally, because a false accusations include not only consensual encounters that are re-imagined as crimes ex post facto, but also encounters that **never occurred at all **. So even a virgin man can be falsely accused.

That’s why I suggested earlier, seriously, to not attend any college that accepts federal funding. Deny them your presence, deny the girls male company (already scare in college), deny the institution your tuition money…. just opt out, starve the beast, go to a conservative institution that won’t take the Fed’s 30 pieces of silver…er, fiat…. you know what I mean.

I also facetiously suggested, if one MUST attend a federal slave school, that one adopt a totally phony “gay” public persona for the entire 4 years (and do all your dating off campus, with women totally unconnected to your school). Protesting in front of a board of inquisitors, “It was consensual”, or “It never happened”, or “I’m a Christian virgin, saving myself for my future wife, of course I didn’t do it!”, is highly unlikely to persuade them to exonerate you…indeed, the last objection will probably inspire them to hurt you as much as they can. But if you’ve been skillfully playing an “out” gay for several semesters – and dressing the part — it’s far, far less likely that a charge of false sexual harassment will ever stick, or even be made in the first place. (One thing though…. warn your parents in advance that it’s all just an act. It would be a shame for them to find out, second hand, and think it was for real!)

slerner: “…. this new rule provides the legal cover for schools to act – without due process and without regard to evidence (or the lack thereof). The legal liability on the school is removed as they can simply state that they were following Federal guide-lines…

Okay, if you can’t sue the school, sue the GIRL. Ask for 7 figure damages in compensation for denying your education. What good is her “career” if she’s facing ruinious garnishment for the rest of her life? Better yet, sue the school AND the girl — and offer each a deal that you’ll drop their suit if they testify against the other! College will throw girl to the wolves in a heartbeat, and vice verse.

Ya gotta get vicious. As vicious as they are.

A former student at Brown University had his wrestling scholarship withdrawn and was forced to leave the school after a girl he merely chatted with was convinced to accuse him of having raped her. His lawsuit against Brown U is now in Federal Court.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
van Rooinek April 13, 2011 at 12:11

oops…pasting error… left a superfluous paragraph at the end.. sorry

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Miley Cyrax April 13, 2011 at 12:23

@ Dragnet

“@ Miley
‘Disparate impact is okay when the affected party is presumed to be young white males.’

Yah totally because this policy does not affect black, Asian, or Latino men. Just whites.

MORON.”

Key word: Presumed. Policy-makers here have white bros in mind, to prevent their precious college-aged slam-pieces, err I mean women, from being fed one too many Jungle Juices before slobbering on some frat cock and potentially regretting it. Reading comprehension there buddy. Is there a single population feminist hags and manginas hate more than white bros? See: outrage directed toward Duke Lacrosse and the Kappa Sig rooftop guy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Robert April 13, 2011 at 12:27

Alan B April 13, 2011 at 08:28
since title IX is supposed to be about Equality, and these days equality is about equal outcomes, i wonder what would happen if a rash of boys started screaming rayyyyyype on campus.

1) Treat/speak to the victim as if he were/was a lying whore.

2) Tell him he got lucky (even if he was/were ass-raped [ or otherwise]

3. Either: “sorry we can’t/cannot[refuse] do anything about it.

4. Shame and blame the Male victim.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Opus April 13, 2011 at 13:22

No doubt about it: Alpha’s get away with everything, whereas Betas, that is to say ordinary guys, who do behave with more caution, get blamed, and usually all they are actually guilty of is being incompetent lovers. We all have to learn, and it is by mistakes that we learn. It appears however that females never have to learn anything- on the one hand delicate like a Disney Princess on the other Strong and Aggressive.

Criminalising normal Hetero-Sexuality (whilst giving an open-pass to females) is sure eventually to produce repurcussions, either of a devil-may-care attitude from the men or a withdrawal of affection and perhaps withdrawal from College Education. ‘May we live in interesting times’.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
blert April 13, 2011 at 14:01

Co-ed sex is so freely available on campus today it’s hard to imagine ANY dude raping a co-ed.

On the contrary, it’s easy to imagine many a co-ed trying to duck being slut-shamed by false allegations.

——

As for gals dropping the ‘rape-bomb’ — I’ve had it happen to me. The loony bitch was my tenant. For reasons too crazy to figure out — out of spite she simply proclaimed that I’d raped her!

As if I’d want that poon if it was on a platter!

Ultimately she retracted her claim — but not before giving me a lot of grief.

Jump forward six weeks — and guess who is waving to me flying down the freeway?

Absolutely nuts, she was.

They ARE out there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Lettow-Vorbeck April 13, 2011 at 14:42

This sounds like something that justifies a flyer campaign in campus bathrooms. Just to make sure young men know what is going on. It would be easy and safe for someone who attends an American school to do. Just print off a few sheets with a paragraph written in plain language concisely explaining the law and what can happen if they are accused. Stress that it can completely ruin their lives, that they don’t have to be guilty and that avoiding co-eds is a perfectly valid option. It should also have a picture of a happy looking college girl like in a lost dog poster.

Bathrooms are private areas. A few seconds would be enough to put up a flyer anonymously in an empty bathroom. Replace ones that are taken down. After a few weeks, there should be a bit of a buzz and it could be followed up with WW2 era style posters for warning soldiers about venereal disease.

”Is this gal worth your future, son?”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Lord Viktor April 13, 2011 at 14:59

I didn’t have time to brainstorm this one, so forgive me if this is a bit disorganized and repetitive.

The feminists are effective because they use FEAR as a weapon to get what they want.

We can play that game, too. For example, when they use fear about what women will do to men as an excuse to oppress them, use fear as you present what these measures will do to their SONS if such an evil law is allowed to flourish.

Women use the fear of rape to get women’s support.

We men need to use the fear of injustice. But there needs to be FEAR. Not just a simple, “Oh yeah, that’s kinda interesting, I never thought about my son or husband being unjostly tossed in the legal meat grinder. Oh, well!”

That’s not gonna get us anywhere. We need to sow TERROR among the mothers. We need to sow DREAD among the wives, we need to sow DISTRUST among sisters who have little brothers.

Like I said, we need to use fear, but a different kind of fear. The fear of injustice. The fear of having your finances and reputation and family destroyed because of some spiteful bitch in the workplace was offended that your husband looked at her one split-second too long.

The fear of having the government tear apart the lives of their nephews right before their eyes on the word of some college slut who didn’t want her boyfriend to find out she was banging sixty guys.

I could go on and on, the basic point is FEAR.

The feminists tug on women’s heartstrings and their sense of fear.
We men can do it, too.

Instead of sitting here, insulting women and berating them and telling them how inferior they are to us, we should to use them.

The feminists aren’t afraid to use women’s emotions to destroy us. We can use women’s emotions as a weapon to fight them, as well.

Women and their emotions are POWERFUL weapons. Don’t spurn them, USE THEM!!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Traveller April 13, 2011 at 15:48

Lord Viktor
“Oh yeah, that’s kinda interesting, I never thought about my son or husband being unjostly tossed in the legal meat grinder. Oh, well!”

Come on, do you really think feminists care about husbands? Do you really think modern liberal mothers care about their sons (and daughters, when they compete with them for the attention of the same boys)?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Sedulous April 13, 2011 at 15:51

From Hans Bader’s article:

[quote]The Education Department’s reasoning for imposing a low “preponderance” standard on school disciplinary proceedings is that this “is the standard of proof established for violations of civil-rights laws” in lawsuits brought in federal court. Therefore, it claims, preponderance must also be “the appropriate standard for” schools to use in “investigating allegations of sexual harassment or violence.’”

It is completely true, and completely irrelevant, that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies in lawsuits in general, as well as civil-rights cases. [b]But that burden of proof applies to whether the school violated Title IX by behaving inappropriately, not whether students or staff engaged in harassment. Students cannot violate Title IX; only schools can be sued under Title IX, not individuals. (See, e.g., Smith v. Metropolitan School District (1997).) Moreover, Students “are not agents of the school,” so their actions don’t count as the actions of the school.[/b][/quote]

Contact your Representative and State Senators about this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Gilgamesh April 13, 2011 at 16:21

Just made a flyer containing excerpts from this article. Download it and print some out.
http://www.2shared.com/document/oYJyXRd8/flyer.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
greyghost April 13, 2011 at 17:42

Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)
Here in the United States the cops beat your ass ,taze you or kill you and make up a story. A guy accused of rape…. fuck the evidence blow his ass away. that is why these men me included are not educated. Our government kills and is good at it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Words Twice April 13, 2011 at 17:57

Pierce Harlan April 13, 2011 at 09:20 “By lowering that standard, the government is saying, we aren’t going to worry about the innocent any more; we want to nab more rapists.”

They so desperately want the fake rape statistics to be true that they have set up these tribunals in order to make them true.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
greyghost April 13, 2011 at 17:57

Lord Viktor is on track but way off. Traveller gets it. Remember game and what we have taught each other about women. Wmomen are selfish no woman fears what happens to someone else only what happens to them.Indifference is what women fear the most. do not use logic on thgis one. It is all pure knowledge of women and common sense. A woman will indure pain of cosmitec surgury, wax jobs , and eye brows plunked for the attention of suitable men. Susan Smith drowned her sons to be more able to land the man she wanted. Indifference fellas is where it is at.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
GT66 April 13, 2011 at 19:14

Well, let’s look at the silver lining. Got a son preparing to enter college? Send him abroad. Benefits: 1) learns about another culture 2) Becomes familiar with a foreign country (easier emigration from this hell hole) 3) He can experience the joy of being with non feminism infected women 4) he will bring monetary benefit and the benefit of his skills to a country more appreciative than this one. 5) He will actually be a positive part of society instead of its scourge

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Donn April 13, 2011 at 19:55

Oh Goodie, guess who WON’T be going to Law School now? I’m getting out of college asap, and recommend all other male college students to do the same

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Donn April 13, 2011 at 20:00

“Miley Cyrax April 13, 2011 at 08:13

The message is clear: Disparate impact is okay when the affected party is presumed to be young white males. Nothing new to see here though, please move along.”

You ignorant worm. Tell that to my school’s administration who wanted to deal with me because some white “lady” student said I was harrassing her when I never did anything of the sort. But they took her seriously regardless because her mommy works for the school. Oh btw I’m black too, try again.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8
Anonymous age 69 April 13, 2011 at 20:14

PAN, we don’t listen to you, not because we are stupid, but because we are NOT stupid. You would have us believe you can make out a piece of paper, or declare yourself some kind of jury, and the entire world does poopy in its pants.

The fact you are not in prison right now probably has more to do with where you are, than the success of your insane ideas about the laws and the courts.

You are not only insane, you are past boring with your babble about common law.

Go pound sand.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
greyghost April 13, 2011 at 20:16

Rebel
“Russia begins to look mighty interesting. They are severely short of men there.”

You know that was really interesting. I wonder if the Russian government would be receptive to the idea of a million american men moving there. Man that would make some international waves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
universe April 13, 2011 at 20:18

It appears quite discouraging to read about these ever continuing female led campus campaigns against ever expanding definitions of sexual harassment deliberately aimed at the young men.
And while it isn’t enough to learn about the ever dwindling burden of proof that isn’t even required to tar a young man for his entire life we learn that mere accusation alone forever bans any young man from his chosen study environment, dwindling as that is, too.
This latest assault upon the sensibilities has the appearance of deliberate attempts to exclusively domain colleges as yet another jealously guarded female territory.

But never mind that for a moment. The fact that time was spent to write this informative lead article above gives me solid confidence that things are going to change in due time.
Hope and change (uh-oh, we’ve heard this before) is on its way. First, one shines a light upon the foundation of vile ineptitude and deliberate conflagration. Rectitude and restorative recompense follows.
Sometimes later than sooner, but still it happens, shallow and petty dictatorships eventually suffer resounding defeat. Only this time the bevy of the power mad have previously demanded equal outcome of events similar to those of their declared oppressors/victims. Justly, it may likely be deservedly handed to them.

Thanks be to you again, Mr. Harlan, for another well written informative article.

Although subjective derived, the following is an apt metaphor to Pierce Harlan’s article.
Today I saw two back-to-back billboard advertisements. On one side was advertising for the Titanic artifact exhibit tour currently on a stop-over in my city. Participants in a men’s board know this imagery quite well – expend the men to save the females. Only this time there are no battered boats and icy waters. Just icy hearts battering the innocent.

On the opposing side of this advert board is a donation appeal to the Women’s Foundation of Canada for the funding of the minority of those requiring the protection of a women’s shelter. And it isn’t billy goats that these minority of females are escaping from.
Mens’ image and futures sacrificed to preserve the females.

When the spirit of the even keel sweeps over these lands I shall shed nary a tear for those exerting such profound evil influence toward the state’s measure of judgement.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
piercedhead April 13, 2011 at 22:38

I’m beginning to think TFH was far too conservative in predicting 2020 as the year the misandry bubble bursts. I’d place it less than 5 years away now.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
andybob April 13, 2011 at 22:53

“That’s not gonna get us anywhere. We need to sow TERROR among the mothers. We need to sow DREAD among the wives, we need to sow DISTRUST among sisters who have little brothers.”

Lord Victor, you give credit to women for actually caring about the men in their lives. I’ve used this on women before (asking them to consider how vulnerable their brethren would be) and have been met with vacant stares; they’re waiting for me to make my point. FRA’s must affect a woman’s wallet or status or shopping time for them to give a fat rat’s. You cannot underestimate them too much.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Robert April 13, 2011 at 23:48

Donn April 13, 2011 at 19:55
Oh Goodie, guess who WON’T be going to Law School now? I’m getting out of college asap, and recommend all other male college students to do the same

Some might laugh but I suggest doing research and finding universities that offer classes online. You can get the education/degree you desire while avoiding any threat(s) regarding rape, sexual assault/assault/violence.

Very excellent article Mr. Harlan. I posted this article and the link to both The Spearhead and The False Rape Society to a nationally used news blog. I wanted to bring this to the largest audience possible. Men planning to attend college, and their parents, need to know about this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 04:18

Opus April 13, 2011 at 10:27
“PAN for some reason keeps slipping into Latin. Does The Great Charter apply atall in the U.S.A.? I am not even sure whether it applies here in England.”

Opus. The magna carta and bill of rights applies in all english speaking countries as the founding law for the creation of the governments. ALL english speaking governments around the world have THEIR power restricted by these two documents. Any action in excess of these two documents is a CRIME. Therefore ALL the mandatory DV arrests are crimes of the man does not consent. All alimony and child support deductions are crimes if the man does not consent.

This is why, in the Australian Parliament, you will find reference to the Magna Carta.

The link below is a speech given by Robert McClelland that specifically states that the constitution of Australia does NOT deal with individual rights and that such rights were left to the protection of the common law.

I have quoted in the spearheard VERBATIM Blacks Law dictionary that clearly states that the founding common law is the law that the USG is bound by. Men simply will not listen. The love their slavery. I’ve been telling men here this for 18 months. I have provided MOUNTAINS of evidence. There has NEVER been a rebuttal of ANYTHING I have placed with respect to law here.

Yet? Still the stupid ignorant sheeple pretending to be men sleep walk like zombies. And can I get ONE LAWYER IN THE WHOLE WORLD TO ACTUALLY TELL THE TRUTH? Nope. Can’t find that one lawyer. I refer you to the email trail with Justin Dowd.,

Men here pretend to be ‘Piercing the Shield of Ignorance’. It’s a joke. Men here are totally, completely and UTTERTLY committed to their ignorance. Sure. They might nibble around the edges. But they will not pierce the area of ignorance of “how do I claim my rights? Where do my rights come from?”

There is barely a SINGLE MAN here who can answer the question “Where do my rights come from?” The answer is “they come from yourself and your claim of your rights”. I have published my common law claim of right over a year ago. How many other men have then claimed their rights? One, I think. Well? Guess what? If you do not claim your rights what rights do you have? None. If you rely in the criminals in your government to claim your rights for you and protect you? You are THEIR slave.

The entire fraud is perpetrated via the word person. I have published links in here to John Harris material over and over again. Men here choose to be wilfully ignorant. If you bothered to read my intro post in the forums, which has 4000+ views, you will be pointed to more than enough materials to back up the truth of everything I have posted. Count them. 4000+ views and ONE man used it. That’s how pathetic you men are.

Pierce is WRITING about FRAS and talking about how BAD it is when he would be better served by READING and EDUCATING himself on the REMEDY which is readily available.

But no. You men are stupid. You are dumber than rocks because you have the intellect to understand what I am saying but you wilfully refuse to educate yourselves to a level you are perfectly capable of do so. That makes you MUCH worse than the women you are criticising in my opinion. Now. If you have a rebuttal for my opinion, like something I have said is FALSE then go ahead. But in the meantime? How about you EDUCATE YOURSELF from the MANY LINKS and VAST AMOUNT of published materials I have FREELY given you?

Or. Just read the bloody book that was written through me. It tells you EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW.

STOP TALKING AND START READING.

http://www.peternolan.com/Forums/tabid/420/forumid/36/threadid/535/scope/posts/Default.aspx

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 04:24

piercedhead April 13, 2011 at 22:38
I’m beginning to think TFH was far too conservative in predicting 2020 as the year the misandry bubble bursts. I’d place it less than 5 years away now.

Misandry is over. All men who read the book written through me and claim their rights and live in freedom are no longer significantly affected by feminism. That you have a book that tells you “Living Free in a Fem-Nazi World” and you will not read it and will not use it?

Who’s problem is THAT? Here is a hint. NOT MINE.

I am not subject to fem-nazi legislation because I learned how to rescind my consent to be governed. Did you?

Or did you choose to willfully refuse to read this book and willfully refuse to educate yourself?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 04:32

silent April 13, 2011 at 11:47
“Ron Paul is one of the criminals? ”
Ron Paul has been wandering around flashing his little Illuminati diablo hand signals and doing his masonic handshakes for years.

You men who willfully refuse to educate yourself on the signs and signals of those who enslave you deserve your slavery. There is NO politician of ANY note who is not dirty. Either willingly or by compromise. When they stop doing as they are told? They are killed. Or have you never heard of the name ‘Kennedy’?

“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it”. Attributed to BOTH Lenin and Stalin but it’s a pretty obvious ploy.

George Washington being one of the best examples of a traitor leading the opposition. Ghandi is another. What was Ghandis job? He was a lawyer FFS. Who did he make oath to serve? The BAR! What did he do? He was the key player migrating India from a tyranny with obvious oppression to a tyranny with non obvious oppression but oppression none the less.

I’ve done my bit. Almost NO other men here are doing theirs. You are a really disappointing bunch. Sure. Tell the young men marriage is a trap. By all means. But won’t SOME of you educate yourselves on law? Won’t SOME of you learn the very basics like “Where do my rights come from then?” You men have not even answered THAT simple question. You’ve been blathering on for 30 years in the Mens Rights Area and haven’t yet answered the question “Where do my rights come from?” How dumb can you be?

It took me about 3 months to realise I am responsible for claiming my own rights because I too was sold the lie that my GUVMENT tells me what my rights are. NOPE. I TELL ME WHAT MY RIGHTS ARE because I am a sovereign and I outrank my former guvment in law.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11
Avenger April 14, 2011 at 06:09

(which includes claims of rape and sexual assault) ”must use a preponderance of the evidence standard,” as opposed to the “clear and convincing evidence” standard (evidence of a high probability that the offense occurred)

I can’t see how some college committee can even make a ruling or has the jurisdiction to do so in these cases where a male student may be expelled or barred from graduate school; these two standards of evidence depending on the case are used in a regular court in civil actions and the defendant is entitled to a jury trial and of course the defendant can challange a juror for cause or just a peremptory challenge . If found guilty it usually results in some monetary judgement and occasionally injuctive relief.
College committees were not intended to judge these sort of alleged rape or harassment cases. And even the preponderance of the evidence standard used in most civil cases still has to be proved and every element of the offence must be proved to win your case. Eg. if you’re suing for defamation you must prove every element of defamation to win a case. These sex harassment cases almost always come down to she said/ he said. A female’s allegation proves nothing even by the lowest standard of the preponderance. The only way to stop these kangaroo court committees is for male students to start suing false accusers and the University and it’s committee. Yes, it’s going to cost time and money and is going to distract and cause mental anguish for the male student who just wanted to concentrate on his studies but I’m afraid it’s the only way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 14, 2011 at 06:11

*its :)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 14, 2011 at 08:45

Wow. Now there’s really no point in being a father now. What’s wr?ng, Barack Hussein ?bama, (yeah, he’s a 6’4″ mangina and I would call him that if both his parents were white) d?n’t want y?ur daughters to have a “right t? a g??d reputati?n” violated? Bullshit.

Notice how not a single boy has spent even one term in the White House in decades.

“President Barack Hussein Obama” anagram: “His crank abuse impedes boar tan.” (Sorry to all the boars in America; 28 states, the nation’s capital and Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district gave their electoral votes to one of the few crank addicts who is not lily-white.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
LOL April 14, 2011 at 08:49

“Ron Paul has been wandering around flashing his little Illuminati diablo hand signals and doing his masonic handshakes for years.”

“When they stop doing as they are told? They are killed. Or have you never heard of the name ‘Kennedy’?”

Hahahahaha, Illuminati and assassination conspiracies? I bet you’re gonna tell me all politicians are shapeshifting reptiles now too. Get the fuck out.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5
Paradoxotaur April 14, 2011 at 11:59

Just wanted to highlight:

@Lord Viktor: “present what these measures will do to their SONS if such an evil law is allowed to flourish.”

@greyghost: “Wmomen are selfish no woman fears what happens to someone else only what happens to them.”
“Susan Smith drowned her sons to be more able to land the man she wanted.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Libertad April 14, 2011 at 12:17

LOL:
” Hahahahaha, Illuminati and assassination conspiracies? I bet you’re gonna tell me all politicians are shapeshifting reptiles now too. Get the fuck out.”

You just proved Peters point about the stupidity of the average man. Or, you are being payed to be stupid, or you are a computer program ( see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euaAPC1-PmY&feature=player_embedded)

Peter, I feel your pain. I thought that the male members of my own family were not too stupid, that was until I tried to get them to invest in gold & silver. All the persuasion, nagging and informing made not one bit of difference. Most people are surrounded by an invisible, impenetrable wall of stupid.

Also why can’t I vote comments up or down? If I refresh the page my vote is gone, even using different browsers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 14:04

greyghost April 13, 2011 at 17:42
“Our government kills and is good at it.”

Are you suggesting I don’t know this? This is why I have proposed to use the outlawry rule of common law. By the way. Shaefer Cox up in Fairbanks Alaska reports that they have a malitia numbering 3,500 armed men. He reports that when some feds turned up to give some guy a hard time. They surrounded the feds with armed men and were ready to shoot because the officers werer not obeying the law. Last I heard? Alaska was still in the US.

If you are not ready to take up arms against you oppressors? Bend over. Don’t expect lube. In Australia? We are trying to settle this peacefully….as are guys like Tim Turner and Sam Kennedy in the US. We have been disarmed in Australia and men need to arm themselves against their government in Australia. Your Thomas Jefferson had plenty to say about a well armed Malitia opposing government oppression. How to deal with government oppression is in the book. Welmer does not want anyone talking about shooting cops around here. Bad for business.

The men working this are under no illusions that the USSA, USSK, KANADUH, OZTRALUSSA are all totalitarian police states and all that this implies. Did you miss the bit that we have now linked an alleged murder directly to the police and suppression of this murder to our intelligence agency? You guys in the USSA are not the only ones with a guvment who liked to kill people. So don’t think yourself too special on that account. All the men I am working with know we are poking the wooly mammoth with a blunt stick and it might just stomp on us. But what else to do. Wait until the knock at the door like cowards as the Russians in St. Petersberg did?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5
Opus April 14, 2011 at 14:17

@ Peter -Andrew: Nolan(c)

I am certainly no Legal Historian but I must say my understanding of Magna Carta or what is left of it would not IMHO support your intentions. It is section 29 that concerns you I think. (I cannot of course speak for Australia or any of our former American Colonies as to its force there.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 14:24

Libertad April 14, 2011 at 12:17
Today a colleague said ‘men are apathetic’. I said ‘no, they are stupid and willfully ignorant. There is a BIG difference’.

Yep…I have quite a few of these trolls following me around.

I started publishing what I was learning in May 08. I have the rather nice badge to wear of having ASIO create a hate site dedicated to slandering me. I also drew NINE ASIO troll ids to the Free Man Ireland site to throw abuse and hatred at me and dis-info at the other members. The owner of the site, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, did not realise this was a VICTORY because it PROVED that one of the members of his site was hitting on information so go and so damaging that ASIO were out in force to denounce it. He, instead, felt that the site was being damaged by MY presence despite the fact it was ASIO damaging the site.

Manginas, They all have shit for brains. Just like I used to so I know what I am talking about.

Our ASIO friend ‘Illuminati Ingrid’ is watching what I am doing so closely that just two days after I went over to Maggies site and linked it back here she bothered to come over and post her hate site onto Maggies blog and try her slander over there. Illuminati Ingrid has also tried to contact my business partners slandering me. They laughed their arses off.

So. To have my own little internet troll following me around? Keeping her hate site updated? Hell. She is even slandering OTHER men on MY hate site like her budget does not extend to some more free hate sites!! LOL!! I think I am doing pretty well. Not even Alex Jones or David Icke has one of these following them so closely!! I wonder why I am so privileged? Maybe it’s because the book written through me is actually really important? Nah. Couldn’t be THAT, could it??

One I loved was the soft harassment of calling me on my cell with machine noises in the background and sound distortion on the voice telling me I should stop what I was doing! LOL!! That was HYSTERICAL. I was like “This is the BEST you can do?” I also asked the guy “Are you telling me that this actually intimidates some men? What a pack of f***ing whimps they must be. I mean, you wouldn’t try something this stupid on me unless it worked with other men, right?” The guy doing the calls was a bit taken aback and didn’t seem to know how to answer me when I was laughing at him and telling him “Well, since you have my cell phone, you can obviously find my location and you have my photo from my site so you know what I look like. So come over for a chat face to face. I’d like to meet you!” I gather that not many men actually tell these people they would like to meet them face to face.

Then there was all the hookers they booked in my real calling (like anyone does that) and were sending to hotels. The hookers would call me from the foyer of the hotel and ask my room number. I would be in the office so I would have to step into the hall to apologise to the hooker as the victim of a guvment scam. Then they started booking hotels and airline tickets etc and I would get calls to fax over my credit card image. It was all fun and games for a while. But they soon got the idea. They would have to kill me. And they won’t do that because I have taken the appropriate precautions.

This is the supposed ‘intelligence’ community. The stupid is strong with them too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 14:44

Libertad April 14, 2011 at 12:17
PS. We have now recovered firm evidence of the Freemason Gangstalking Process. Link below. It is really important that the Gangstalking process is exposed. We have developed evidence that there are 10,000+ people in Australia being gangstalked at any given time. This is also in real life and not just on line. Things like car accidents, dog baiting, accidental ‘bumping’ into you to provoke a fight. This man has been subject to gang stalking for 11 years and we have evidence of this. We have developed evidence that some 6,000 new Targeted Individuals (TIs) were targeted in Australia in about 7 months. That is a LOT of tax dollars.

There is also early emerging evidence that the ‘divorce epidemic’ is being increased by the Targeted Individual Program world wide. It appears that agents approach the women and sell them on the whole divorce thing. It also appears agents turn up in the womans life and ‘sweep her off her feet’ only to then encourage the woman to move a long way away, even overseas. Evidence is emerging that mens families are being directly attacked in this gangstalking process.

Now men might be a little more pissed off at their guvment as we uncover evidence that they are not only creating the legislational environment to destroy their families but that they seem to also be sending agents directly into the lives of families with the deliberate intention of destroying the family. How about that?

How long can it be before we turn up evidence that a part of gang stalking and the Targeted Individual program is false rape allegations and other false allegations? I assume this is the case but we don’t have evidence yet. What better tool to use than for an Targeted Individual persecuting agent to make a false allegation? I can’t think of a better one.

Remember. I am told some 4-5% of the general population are willing accomplices. Though the vast majority do not know that they are ‘useless’ idiots. They just get told they are part of ‘the great work of the ages’ and made to feel special and told what to do. Nothing more. They will get their demise pill when it is time too. Yep. The evidence we are now getting on ASIO? It’s pretty good!

http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/39/threadid/71/scope/posts/Default.aspx

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 14:54

Opus April 14, 2011 at 14:17
“I am certainly no Legal Historian but I must say my understanding of Magna Carta or what is left of it would not IMHO support your intentions”

Yes. You might say that. Which means you mis-understand or you are lying. Good thing I didn’t ask for your opinion then, isn’t it! I have posted links to TPUC and British Constitution Group in this site. You can get from their sites the fact that Magna Carta can never be repealed. You can get from there that what I am doing is supported by the Magna Carta. Indeed. You can get from the speech by Robert McClelland that the magna carta is the founding law of the Australian guvment and is superior to the Australian guvment. Roger Hayes is the guy who arrested the judge recently.

Indeed. You claimed you are a lawyer so you can do all this work for yourself. I really like how you lawyers come along claiming to be lawyers yet you also claim not to know that the magna carta is in force to limit the actions of the king/guvment and that it is a perpetual document that can never be over-ruled. This is why I don’t trust ANY of you. Some of you may be honest, sure. But if ONE was honest and stayed honest? We would have seen our first lawyer confirm what we are saying. But we haven’t. Well. Mark McMurtrie is an EX lawyer and he confirms all this.

Seems the law society kicks out any lawyer who actually dares to speak up and this is well known. So no more speak up. They go along with the scam once they are faced with the overwhelming evidence. Just like the criminal scumbag Justin Dowd at Watts McCray in Sydney. Here. You might want to read this.

http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/97/threadid/186/scope/posts/Default.aspx

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5
Opus April 14, 2011 at 15:03

@PAN

As I understand it the Magna Carta has largely been repealed. Clause 29 protects your liberties but subject to ‘the laws of the land’. I cannot see that should Parliament see fit, that the remaining sections could not be repealed. Anyway you are not In England so English Law is not applying to you.

It seems to me therefore that unless you have might on your side, whatever you are doing cannot have the force of law. I, at least, would not fancy your chances in The Court of Appeal, if any action ever got there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
LOL April 14, 2011 at 15:05

Libertad:
“You just proved Peters point about the stupidity of the average man.”

Yeah, sure, whatever. Look, I’m not against “guv’ment conspiracies” or whatever you guys are on about. But to be honest? The whole “Illuminati” bullshit is just getting old. I rarely trust people when it comes to politics, but I don’t think they’re necessarily part of some huge organization to kill us all.

And to be honest, it’s pretty hilarious. The way you preach it, I mean. You act as if every single person who doesn’t believe you is stupid, and toss around insults like a child. Seriously, if you want to help people then just tell them once. If they don’t want to believe, then that’s their problem, but don’t come here whining about how few people on this site will believe you, or about what they say. Typing huge, several paragraph long posts really isn’t going to help anything. Honestly, even if I did believe such things, I wouldn’t care to believe your word because of how ruthless you are in your words of others. To be truthful, I have to say that the way you act also shows that if you yourself were in a position of power, you would have no problem using and abusing others. Grow up.

inb4guvmentspy

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
LOL April 14, 2011 at 15:06

(Whoops, I meant to mention that I was talking about Peter’s posts in that last paragraph. My bad)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Anonymous April 14, 2011 at 15:07

Hyperbole and conspiracy theorists are like peanut butter and jelly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) April 14, 2011 at 15:48

OT…but shows just how dirty the IRS is. They want to LEGALLY tax ILLEGAL income…LOL!!

http://sanityisdead.blogspot.com/2009/01/taxes-irs-and-bullshit.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
Anonymous April 14, 2011 at 15:50

Remember when there was this little thing called presumption of innocence?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Carnivore April 14, 2011 at 17:30

PAN:
OT…but shows just how dirty the IRS is. They want to LEGALLY tax ILLEGAL income…LOL!!

Yes, but this is nothing new, just saying. Many have been sent to the slammer for failing to pay taxes on income from illegal activities – activities which the government had been unable to convict them on. Most notable example was Al Capone in 1932.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Carnivore April 14, 2011 at 17:42

@PAN:
“There is NO politician of ANY note who is not dirty. Either willingly or by compromise. When they stop doing as they are told? They are killed. Or have you never heard of the name ‘Kennedy’?”
Yes, I’ve often thought that IF Ron Paul and son are really sincere, they are, at most, being tolerated to give the impression of “democracy”. However, if they did achieve any measure of real power, they wouldn’t last long. After all, Kennedy was stepping on what, two toes? – the military/industrial complex and the CIA. Paul is stepping on those two plus Wall Street/Bankers, Israel, entrenched government workers, big businesses receiving government handouts, etc.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Robber April 14, 2011 at 18:17

I know this may make those concerned with privacy shiver, but there are ways to generate exonerating evidence.

If you have a smartphone with GPS, install the Google Latitude App. This links to a free web-based service which enables you to track exactly where you have been over time. If you are accused of something, be sure to get the accuser to allege exactly WHERE and WHEN the alleged offence took place. You can then use your Latitude data to confirm you were in fact somewhere else. If they don’t believe what Latitude says (e.g. they say you gave your phone to someone else) you can get it confirmed by other evidence, such as CCTV footage, which you can find once you track exactly where you were at the time of the alleged offence.

This won’t help if you’ve been accused following consensual relations with a woman, but it WILL protect you from others who make accusations.

Sure, it means Google knows where you have been, and may sell that information elsewhere. But if it’s a choice between Google knowing where I have been, and having GPS evidence showing I was NOT in the vacinity of a complainant at the time she alleges the offense took place, I’m prepared to trade a small amount of privacy for a lot of peace of mind.

At least it’s surveillance that YOU choose to use. If we’re going to be under surveillance all the time anyway, we might as well use some of it for our own benefit.

BTW – do NOT tell anyone you are recording your position at all times. This monitoring must be kept secret to maximise its effectiveness if you are accused.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Jean April 15, 2011 at 07:39

We need to get sports teams to have a go here.
The football team, for instance, schedules a party for just before practice – and then, when the girls won’t let them leave immediately, those girls can all be charged.
Let’s see how the shoe fits now, ladies.

(And it’s still nicer than my immediate response.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Jean April 15, 2011 at 08:09

Peter-Andrew:Nolan:
I am not a legal scholar, but…
You said, “… I have posted links to TPUC and British Constitution Group in this site. You can get from their sites the fact that Magna Carta can never be repealed. You can get from there that what I am doing is supported by the Magna Carta. Indeed. You can get from the speech by Robert McClelland that the magna carta is the founding law of the Australian guvment and is superior to the Australian guvment. Roger Hayes is the guy who arrested the judge recently.”

Well, here in the US, we have a thing called a Constitution. ;-)

Care to guess how much has been repealed by law? Or how about what’s still in effect, after the literal laws are done, amendments passed and ratified, executive orders signed, budgets fought, acts of congress, government agencies’ regulations, Supreme Court decisions…?
I’m trying to be “cute” about this, but basically – The Constitution isn’t a “living document” as some here (the US) wish to tell us – rather, it is DOA, Do Not Resuscitate. Exactly as “The Elites” want it.
And most of the change is from things the average American doesn’t even KNOW about – RICO laws, IRS audits, EPA acts, Clean Air, Clean Water, Military Appropriations bills (with riders for pork or other garbage), Executive Orders…
Truth is, a lot of our parent’s “bad wiring” came from the Hollywood films, and the human mind doesn’t update very well – and it doesn’t discriminate in what it takes in visually, there’s no filter – so you can’t tell the difference between a buffoon on TV/movie and someone acting stupid in real life. This is no longer Jerry Lewis (“Hey, Nice Lady!”) or Wile E Coyote vs RoadRunner; now, we see VERY realistic murders and deaths, lewd sexuality, crassness, vulgarity of all stripes – and it is piped directly into our brains, we can’t even unravel the messages – it’s too fast-paced. It’s only looking back with a critical eye that we even get close, and even then – re-watch it a few times. Even the old cartoons I used to watch, Smurfs, Snorks, He-Man, GIJoe, Transformers – NOW I see much more than I did when I was young, but ONLY because I know to look for it. Same with music, even the “bad” stuff I listened to was better than the mainstream today (Lady GaGa, anyone? And I like her music, but it’s the videos that carry the messages).

We’re on our own, and the Elites (Politicos, Illuminati, or little green men from Mars, makes NO DIFFERENCE…) are using such things as the media and economics to SPECIFICALLY destroy our culture – while hiding behind alphabet-soup agencies, bureaucrats, red tape, and limitless funding (for them).

Why destroy a country through oppression, when you can sit back and let it destroy itself through excess? Or better yet, set up puppets, let them “duke it out,” and scrub out whichever one wins, so you can start a new experiment – moving your wealth and capital to the new game, of course. Say, set up a repressive Socialist/Communist regime, and a Democracy, and see who wins and why, then change the basic humanity involved, move to a new playing field (China or India, anyone?) and tweak the experiment a little, see if it works this time? Hey, the US was ripe for that, and had ALREADY been set up, so co-opting the goals of the society is easy…

Add in the Liberal (Big-L) penchant for theatrics and mass adoration, with a love of power over others… And Conservatives (Big-C) too dumb and ponderous to see and react (which, BTW, puts Cons in a very WEAK position, RE-acting instead of just ACTING – framing issues, framing debate, setting the ground rules, etc – conservatives (small-c) are waking up to this and complaining, but may be too little, too late, as the Big Two are thoroughly entrenched and control the arena…) But we, as Americans, ARE in a position to start ACTING, we just need to be willing to shed some blood – Whether Big-L, Big-C, or R or D, metaphorical is hopefully enough, but may not be – and we need to accept that. We also need to accept the lay of the land, as it is – Identity Politics, Feminism, the “Divide and Conquer” model worked well, and we need to change our approach so we have commonalities again – IE, not {whatever}{Hyphen} Americans, but AMERICANS who HAPPEN to be White, Black, Yellow, Red, or Chartreuse – The COLOR is secondary to the Allegiance. If I said I’m Irish-American… then my interest is not in the American part, and I’d need to be “corrected”. No Japanese Americans, any more than “Woman Americans” or “Masculine Americans”.

Unfortunately, such an idea is probably gone forever. But maybe there’s a way to resurrect it over time; and there is the Singularity, which will turn the wheel until we go a full revolution, the question is – how long will that take, and what costs will we endure (and maybe our children, and the world even) until that turning is completed?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
migu April 16, 2011 at 01:56

Look down. Hundred dollar bills are floating right by you. Buy a copper sieve and learn how to use it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Tyrone April 17, 2011 at 21:32

We have the globalists being blatant with their tyranny, and we still have many here who refuse to acknowledge their existence and call those who are enlighten conspiracy theorists. Feminism is just a tool they used to destroy the family, and just attacking feminism will do no good.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Guy April 18, 2011 at 21:03

Unfortunately this will be self-justifying. Lowering the standards for a conviction means more convictions will take place. An increase in the number of rape convictions will fuel more rape hysteria, even though the increase was due to laxity in due process.

In my opinion, this isn’t really what is intended to disadvantage men (although it certainly does, given that even if a man is acquitted, due to the “separation” of the accuser and accused, he will probably have missed large amounts of class and have his reputation ruined, while the accuser will be shielded). This is really just to increase the number of convictions, which will justify whatever measures come next, the measures designed to REALLY disenfranchise men.

Whatever happened to the police/law enforcement handling rapes? In any case, this new standard will probably carry over into state/federal law fairly soon. This will be especially bad in states like Oregon, where only a MAJORITY and not UNANIMOUS decision must be reached by criminal juries in all but first-degree murder convictions. (See: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20090527.html for an example of a rape conviction by majority) Lowering the standards of evidence + majority decision = huge increase in number of men in jail. So many innocent men have escaped false accusations by the skin of their teeth only because of a lack of evidence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
The Truth April 19, 2011 at 23:18

This is how students at elite universities respond:

http://tusb.stanford.edu/2011/04/why-do-you-hate-justice-stanford.html

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2011/04/18/op-ed-standard-of-proof/

Once again proving that the people at these Universities aren’t necessarily all that bright.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Doug1 April 21, 2011 at 10:37

These campus discipline panels are heavily influenced by feminists and often staffed partly by them. Feminists claim that women VERY rarely make false rape accusations. In fact they claim they do only 2% of the time. That’s bogus and is more like 40-60% of the time according to studies explicated at the False Rape Society site, but feminists don’t buy that. Further feminists have vastly exaggerated, but I mean vastly, the occurrence of sexual assault on campus, claiming that one in five women will have had it or the attempt of it happen to them by the time they graduate. This was cited by the Dept. of Ed in issuing this directive apparently.

Given this atmosphere, it seems to me that EVERY TIME a girl claims false date rape, no matter what the guy says or what the truth is, if he can’t prove he didn’t have sex with her that night and doesn’t have the act on video, he’s going to be found guilty of date rape in a she said he said situation. EVERY DAMN TIME.

So it’s all up to the girl. Her word means his conviction. Every damn time. Talk about absolute power leading to corruption.

This is truly appalling. I’m praying that say Harvard Law school publicly refuses to implement this standard for the reasons I’m saying and Pierce has said, and encourages other universities to refuse for the same reason.

The Dept. of Ed would back down if there was widespread rebellion, I’m sure of it, given how legally appalling this is.

Let me say I also can’t stand the reaction of some around her along the fatalistic lines of “what do you expect”. Time to fight back guys!!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Human-Stupidity.com April 23, 2011 at 01:19

I am surprised nobody mentions:

1) as women tend to be always believed, and given 10 times more credibility then the men defending themselves, men will now be expelled if it looks like there is an 11% chance the accusation is right and an 89% chance that his defense is right.

2) Never forget what “rape” is, nowadays.
There is 5-seconds-rape, there is the I-must-go-home-now-rape, there is the kissing-underage-girlfriend-rape, the fake-id-involuntary-statutory-rape. And for all these absurd “rapes”, the burden of proof will be nil now.

“Rape is rape is rape” is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape!
http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/social-rules-habits/manipulate-language/rape-is-rape-is-rape-is-a-lie-joe-biden-20-different-types-of-rape

When rape is not rape
http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality/when-rape-is-not-rape

3) If we start removing this pesky “due process” from murder, arson, bullying, intimidation, robbery, drug running accusations, we can easily eliminate all gangs, the mafia, and bring all criminals behind bars.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: