Private Investigator Under Investigation for Setting Up Men to Help Wives in Divorce Cases

by W.F. Price on October 18, 2011

In the latest bit of news highlighting the disgusting nature of American family law, Christopher Butler, a Californian PI, has come under investigation for using honey traps and DUI setups to give wives the edge in custody disputes. Setups are very common in divorce, and are usually aimed at guileless husbands. Manufacturing domestic violence “incidents” is very common, and quite easy when emotions run high. I’ve spoken with men who have noticed strangers staking out their houses when their wives came over, and I’ve personally been subject to provocation while being taped by third parties (it didn’t work). People get dirty in divorce.

However, in most cases setups are carried out by the individuals involved (and often their friends and family). Where this story is different is that a man was running a business and making good money by setting men up during divorces. Although it sounds shocking, I find it difficult to believe that this is an isolated case. Evidently, Mr. Butler would hire attractive women to ply men with drinks and then encourage them to drive somewhere, upon which he would tip off the police and have the men arrested for DUI.

Butler worked not only with the women, but their attorneys as well. His services proved effective in giving wives the advantages they sought in custody cases, which is where the real money comes into play:

Reporting from Martinez, Calif.— David Dutcher met Sharon on Match.com in late 2008, a few months after separating from his wife. “We had a lot in common,” he recalled. Sharon loved four-wheel-drive trucks and sports.

They met for coffee, then dinner. Sharon was tall, slender, blond and beautiful. She moaned that she had not had sex in a long time. She told him he had large, strong hands and wondered if that portended other things. She described his kisses as “yummy.”

[...]

On their second date, Sharon suggested they join one of her friends “who was partying because she had closed a real estate deal,” Dutcher said. They drove to an Italian restaurant in a suburb near San Francisco. Sharon’s friend, “Tash,” was a loud and raucous brunet who was pounding down shots.

[...]

Sharon had trouble finishing her tequila shots and asked Dutcher to help, he said. When the women went to the bathroom, two men at the other end of the bar peppered Dutcher with questions.

“Are you a celebrity?” they wanted to know.

The women suggested going to a house with a hot tub that Tash was housesitting, Dutcher said. He followed them in his truck. Within a few minutes, a flashing red light appeared in his rearview mirror. The officer said he had been swerving.

Three months later, Dutcher’s wife filed a motion in their divorce case, telling the court that her soon-to-be former husband had been arrested on suspicion of drunk driving and that she feared for their children’s safety. The judge ordered that Dutcher’s visits be supervised.

Yes, it is that easy for a man to lose normal access to his children. One mistake during a night out and he will be ordered to have “supervised custody,” which means the children are not allowed to be alone with their father, who is judged too dangerous to be around his own children.

Fortunately, a man who had previously worked for Butler cried foul and an investigation was opened. The FBI got involved, and it emerged that some cops had been taking bribes to arrest the hapless husbands. The women Butler hired were often prostitutes, so the cops may have been receiving sexual services as well.

Butler was flying high — even Dr. Phil promoted him:

In May, the FBI took over the probe, interviewing Dutcher and other ex-husbands arrested on suspicion of drunk driving. A federal grand jury indicted Butler and two of the officers in August and September. The charges included drug dealing, running a prostitution business and illegal possession of a weapon.

More indictments are expected. A third officer, implicated by Butler in the DUIs, faces state charges of accepting bribes to make arrests.

Stunned prosecutors combed through pending criminal cases and eventually dismissed charges in at least 20 DUI and vice crimes, tainted by the involvement of the accused officers. Two of them had once worked with Butler on the police force of the East Bay city of Antioch.

Butler also apparently hoodwinked reporters. His agency received national attention for employing gumshoe “housewives” who juggled soccer games with undercover spying. People magazine and Dr. Phil did stories. An East Bay magazine reporter who went on a ride-along with Butler later discovered that everything he had witnessed had been staged.

It would be hard to imagine a sleazier line of work than separating children from their fathers, but amazingly, in today’s America one can actually be celebrated for such efforts.

As the evidence is collected in the Butler case, hopefully people will become aware of the deep sickness that has come to characterize American family law.

{ 106 comments… read them below or add one }

Futurama October 18, 2011 at 13:34

There is a unique twist to this in NYC.
My business put me in touch with some divorce attorneys over the years.

Here is a technique that only a few know about. Divorce attorneys hire young aspiring female actresses or other females capable of networking with women married to high earners to prime the pump for divorcing their husbands and selecting the right attorney.

This uses females’ weaknesses against them in the most effective way I have ever seen.

You would be amazed at the resources aimed at social networking by these attorneys. This predates the web and I am sure that the latest batch of land sharks are employing new technologies in this arena.

Note to W.F. Price: I have to stay very anonymous (see my email) as I know major players personally. This is very big in NYC. I understand if you cannot print, but this might peak your interest.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 4
Anti Idiocy October 18, 2011 at 13:49

It’s testimony to the self-control of the great majority of men that so few go medieval on their abusers.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 0
Poiuyt October 18, 2011 at 13:51

The following links gives illustration of a similarly motivated wind up mangina [... a WUM] of a man plying his trade using the offices of Police to keep up appearances of legality.

A googling of this dipshits name gives evidence of the multiple paid jobs, appointments and consultances he holds surrounding the trumped up hysteria of domestic violence … which he as much as any so called perpetrator does as much to stoke up and inflame by his own unique efforts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288563/Senior-policeman-calls-thug-beat-SEVEN-girlfriends-named.html

“””A senior police officer, Brian Moore today called for the naming and shaming of a vicious thug who attacked seven different girlfriends in just two years.

The Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police, Brian Moore, wants to see the introduction of a domestic abuse register to identify yobs who beat their partners.

Citing the case of the offender who beat seven partners, Mr Moore said: ‘Shouldn’t the public have a right to know when such information is in our possession?

‘Then victim number eight can ensure she is not a victim.’

Mr Moore, who did not name the offender, said that each police force should compile a list of the ‘top 10′ possible victims of domestic violence – and visit them every day to make sure they are safe if they are living with a known offender.

Speaking to Federation magazine Police this week, Mr Moore said he wants the estimated 25,000 serial domestic abusers in the UK to be identified to stop them moving from ‘victim to victim’ every few months.

The chief constable also said that police forces around the UK should focus less on robberies and thefts and target the estimated 25,000 serial domestic abusers in the UK.

He added: ‘Police strategies, taskings and briefing processes for every force – day in, day out – should ask ‘who is vulnerable – are they being visited by police to keep them safe?

‘Every day, victims of domestic abuse should be visited by a police officer so we know how they are.

‘These are the things we should do and frankly, nothing should stop us.’ He said this week: ‘Offenders are going from victim to victim to victim across relationships and there are 25,000 of these today.’

He said that he wanted to see domestic crime take priority over other crimes such as theft, adding: ‘We have to cut some slack about chasing numbers around acquisitive crime.

‘I am saying that we crush this thing (domestic violence) and if it is to the detriment of other things, then so be it – this is saving people’s lives and saving them from untold misery.’

The chief constable said that the ability to ‘track and flag’ the serial offenders should be ‘enshrined in law’ and that the public had a ‘right to know’ about serial attackers.

One officer from Kent Police said one of the main problems was that victims of domestic abuse often do not press charges against their attacker – leaving them free to attack their next partner and continue the cycle of violence.

He said: ‘A lot of the calls we have to deal with are domestic violence incidents and more often than not charges are not supported by the victim or it is simply not reported to us.

‘We need to make a stand to stop this cycle of violence among the men – and occasionally women – who think they can go from relationship to relationship abusing their partners.”””

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Craig Himself October 18, 2011 at 14:12

Men “batter.” Women “use force.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 1
Opus October 18, 2011 at 14:24

@ Pouiyt

I entirely agree with the unnamed officer from the Kent Police who said:

‘the victims of domestic abuse often do not press charges against their attacker leaving them free to attack again their next partner and continue the cycle of violence’. What he failed to explain was that these victims are MEN.

If everytime a man was assaulted by a woman, the police were called, the work of the police force would grind to a halt. In so far as the victims might be women the officer overlooked the fact that women are turned on by violent men, and deliberately goad men into violence against them thus gaining the moral upper-hand. Even my own paternal grand-mother said it was good to have marital arguments as it was nice making up afterwards!

I may add that in my time as a lawyer dealing with domestic violence (I know I’ve written this before) I never saw so much as a bruise, never mind a cut (or for that a medical certificate attesting to the same) and any ‘fear’ alleged by the woman against her husband, was always clearly fake or vastly exagerrated – the couple would even on occasion make-up as soon as an order had been made. In short it was all made-up, which is perhaps doubtless why they never went to the police; after all, all they wanted was to have the house and children to themselves, and they did not need the police to achieve that. Mind you, men who are arrested for driving under the influence are clearly unlikely to be a threat to the children as they will be banned from driving. California seems to resemble one of those film-noirs.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
Jim October 18, 2011 at 14:33

While in no way do I condone adultery, there’s always two sides to the story which me believes is entirely none of my business, not mine to judge and best left to those directly involved. Although, there’s something to be said about the vermin who intentionally seek out to make a living by using entrapment to ruin an individual. Unfortunately, my intense hatred for those who ensnare and rat especially for a monetary gain is so great there’s just no way of expressing it cleanly so I refrain from doing so to avoid any violations stipulated on this website.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
greyghost October 18, 2011 at 14:37

This is another great story to bring to the public eye. Let’s forard this to ole Dr phil’s web site and get his take. What does manboobz have on this?
MGTOW fellas.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Kyo October 18, 2011 at 14:39

“He said that he wanted to see domestic crime take priority over other crimes such as theft, adding: ‘We have to cut some slack about chasing numbers around acquisitive crime.”

Translation: Go ahead and steal from others; all we care about is keeping women “safe”. Even property rights are unimportant when the ultimate trump card — women — comes into play.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 0
doclove October 18, 2011 at 15:20

People be they men or women who are family court judges, divorce attorneys for women, and others such as Butler who try to set up and destroy men especially married men are vermin and should be treated as such whenever possible. I have no problem with divorce attorneys who work for men and consider them good people if they genuinely try to do their job well even under trying circumstances when it may look like they aren’t trying hard enough. The system is so rigged against men is the reason I say this. I’m not saying that men are always the good ones or that women are always the bad ones, but it doesn’t change the fact that the system is rigged against men, and it’s wrong.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
Boxer October 18, 2011 at 15:56

Although, there’s something to be said about the vermin who intentionally seek out to make a living by using entrapment to ruin an individual. Unfortunately, my intense hatred for those who ensnare and rat especially for a monetary gain is so great there’s just no way of expressing it cleanly so I refrain from doing so to avoid any violations stipulated on this website.

That’s pretty much my position too.

Anyone associated with the USA family courts is persona non grata to me. I’m sure they’re not all bad (like NAWALT, you know) but the system is so skewed and men get fucked over so universally that I simply can’t err on the side of caution. Faggot attorneys, mangina judges, idiot social workers, and anyone else gets no respect nor help from me under any circumstances whatever.

If the system changes to reflect an equal, just system, I’ll change my views. Until that day (which will probably be never) I’ll stick with my policy of having nothing to do with them.

It’s really nothing personal. I don’t have anything to do with the mafia, organized narcotics importation cartels, etc. either. It’s safe to say that they’re all composed of people unfit to associate with, so I abide by the prejudice gladly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3
TFH October 18, 2011 at 16:37

As the evidence is collected in the Butler case, hopefully people will become aware of the deep sickness that has come to characterize American family law.

I wouldn’t count on it.

OJ Simpson : A crime provoked by unfair family law is turned into a ‘race’ crime.

Duke Lacrosse : A story about misandric law is turned into a ‘race’ crime.

Nothing that risks making single mothers look bad will ever be allowed to spread. A single mother is the ideal voter that the state likes.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0
TFH October 18, 2011 at 16:40

Someone should write and maintain an article that chronicles how so many misandric events are either packaged as something else, or suppressed totally :

OJ Simpson : Misandry, not race.
Duke Lacrosse : Misandry, not race
Thomas Ball : Blacked out story
Salon shooting : Misandric laws, not some random nut.

That will help with the dot-connecting.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Rebel October 18, 2011 at 16:52

Some low-life “people” will do anything for money.
There is a limit to indecency that no one should cross.
Past that limit, one deals with scum.
In the hands of such scum I would “brew my own beer”.

I say that such a degree of high treason must be dealt with personnally.
There is no law on this: one has to improvise..

Is there a fairer judge than oneself?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
TFH October 18, 2011 at 17:13

Some low-life “people” will do anything for money.

Even that is not as bad as someone ideologically committed to misandry.

A ‘low life’ would similarly be available for hire to off false-rape accusers or castrators.

But ideological misandry would have no such market-balancing…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Jim October 18, 2011 at 17:25

And men still marry. Go figure.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
greyghost October 18, 2011 at 18:09

Jim
Men still marry because many believe they have rights as written and taught by the constitution. And nowhere in society at any level is that lie not told to keep the chump inline to his slaughter. Look at what this private eye was doing. He got a married man to have a few with a woman other than his wife and then got him to drive. Easily explained away by a man living under the blue pill as a man that shouldn’t have drank and drove. Some men know something is up but the truth is horrible and will remove the essence of who the man is and some people would rather die than give up a lie that they made as part of who they are. Besides that to emotionally survive we will lie to ourselves to the point that we make our selves believe misandry is reserved for bad guys and I’m not bad.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
CorkyAgain October 18, 2011 at 19:25

OT, but did anyone watch the GOP candidates debate in Las Vegas and catch Michelle Bachman’s over-the-top feminizing of the mortgage crisis? The problem, she wants us to understand, is that it’s *women* who are losing their houses. And the problem with unemployment is that husbands are getting laid off — and that affects *women*.

(Oh yeah, it also affects the women’s children. Not his children, mind you. Hers.)

I wouldn’t have voted for her anyway, because of her knee-jerk support for Israel, but if I had been so inclined, her remarks tonight would have been the last straw.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0
Survivorman October 18, 2011 at 19:34

“Evidently, Mr. Butler would hire attractive women to ply men with drinks and then encourage them to drive somewhere, upon which he would tip off the police and have the men arrested for DUI.”

Yet another tool in the emotional terrorist’s arsenal — A guy’s at his lowest point.. and thinks he’s catching a break, and maybe even “getting lucky”, and BAM !

I honestly hope there is a *HELL* ..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
oddsock October 18, 2011 at 19:57

Boxer October 18, 2011 at 15:56

“Although, there’s something to be said about the vermin who intentionally seek out to make a living by using entrapment to ruin an individual.”

It’s called marriage !

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3
TFH October 18, 2011 at 20:13

It would be hard to imagine a sleazier line of work than separating children from their fathers,

And yet, of the tens of millions of fathers subjected to this, we don’t have even a small number of them banding together to seek out such lowlifes and drive them out of this line of work.

Given the vast diversity of skillsets that disenfranchised fathers would collectively ad, why aren’t they at least uniting towards at least this cause?

I mean, an org. like ‘Fathers for Justice’ should make getting such people too afraid to practice this line of work, their top priority. He is a man, after all, so no feminists and whiteknights will defend him either.

A low-hanging fruit for anyone advocating father’s rights.

At least this article by WF Price will taint this PIs reputation for ever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
doclove October 18, 2011 at 20:32

@ Boxer
Thanks and I agree with what you added.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
doclove October 18, 2011 at 20:33

@ TFH
Making brillant comments as always I see.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
doclove October 18, 2011 at 21:05

Look at reality. Our American Republic has been under durress since the Seneca Falls meeting in 1848. They managed to change the divorce laws for the American Civil War Veterans 1861-64. Before this, if there was a divorce, the man got the house and the children unless something was seriously wrong with him. Divorce rates were only a measley one percent and a spouse still had to prove fault and it wasn’t easy to get a divorce and not everyone could get one. Divorce rates rose to 10% by the end of the First World War, and why shouldn’t they as women usually got the house and kids even under a fault system. Then just in time for the Vietnam War, the divorce laws were changed to no fault and the wife still got the house and kids like it was after the American Civil War unless something was seriously wrong with her. After the Vietnam War, marriage was a man’s fool game tp play and to be honest after the American Civil War it was starting to get a little bad too.

As most of you know, I’m a 43 year old White man and a Christian and a Catholic as well as an U.S. Army Veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m also a bit of an amatuer historian. The Roman Republic rose for two imporatant reasons although they weren’t the only ones but I believe they were crucial. Enforced monogamy even if the husband but not the wife was allowed in practice if not theory to commit adultry. Pater Potentas, Father’s power, was the other reason. A man had a right to harm or kill his wife, children even unmarried adult female children, adult male children even if theoretically elected to the highest office of the Republic, Consul. He also had the right to harm or kill his grandchildren and great grandchildren. He had the right to harm or kill his descendants wives, slaves, his descendants slaves, his descendants wives slaves or any freed slave by him or them. He had a right to do this without being questioned. Not even the Taliban would allow such a thing as a man needs sufficient reason to do so. When these rights were lost by the Roman Empire among other reasons as well, Rome started to eventually lose. The same process is happening in the USA and we had a much more pleasant patriarchy for the Females even before 1860 than the Roman Republic ever did. As I said above even the Taliban was more pleasant to females than the Roman Republic which our founding fathers based much of our American Republic on. Although it emotionally and in a moral Christian Catholic sense offends even me, in order to halt and reverse our decline we may need to reinstitute some Ancient Roman Republican laws. There’s a reason the Roman Republic crushed all before it, even after suffering fearsome losses in battle and horrific defeats. I see no other logical way. By the way I’m of Polish and Irish descent and not of Italian descent. For as painful as it is for me to admit this, I logically can see no other way to prevent the coming collapse. If someone disagrees with me, please logically prove me wrong as emotionally and morally I would accept and love it. I mean this.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 5
Eric October 18, 2011 at 21:16

Before I became self-employed, I used to see these same kinds of traps set for men in the workplace. The ‘higher-ups’ would pay off some female employee to seduce a man and then set up him for a false accusation—that’s a way they got rid of guys quietly.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
Boxer October 18, 2011 at 21:18

Dear Doclove:

I’m a 43 year old White man and a Christian and a Catholic as well as an U.S. Army Veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m also a bit of an amatuer historian.

I’m a professional historian (of the 19th century north american variety — that’s what my degree says, anyway, and that’s why I get my pitiful paychecks these days). Good to meet a peer. Thanks for an interesting post. I read this blog for about a year before I ever posted on it, and I love the spearhead for people like you.

Our American Republic has been under durress since the Seneca Falls meeting in 1848. They managed to change the divorce laws for the American Civil War Veterans 1861-64. Before this, if there was a divorce, the man got the house and the children unless something was seriously wrong with him. Divorce rates were only a measley one percent and a spouse still had to prove fault and it wasn’t easy to get a divorce and not everyone could get one.

Everything you’ve written lines up perfectly with my understanding of the situation. I differ with you not on fundamentals but on the emphasis.

Yes, divorce law was radically changed, but is this “good”? If so, how?

In the 17th century a man had to prove fault to free himself from a woman. Those were the days before DNA tests, mind you. It was incredibly common for a man to be raising up one or more kids who looked suspiciously like the guy who went from town to town buying and selling stuff from a cart, or like the egg farmer, or like the postman. The phrase “red-headed stepchild” didn’t come from nowhere.

Should a man go into the divorce courts of that bygone era with suspicions only, he’d be laughed out of town in the best case, run out of it on a rail usually, and occasionally lynched. Even if a fella did have proof, he’d owe the hoe alimony once he was rid of her.

Literature paints the most convincing portraits of life in those days. Read Edith Wharton’s novel “Ethan Frome” for one of many examples.

My point is that marriage 1.0 was a shit deal for our grandfathers, just as marriage 2.0 is for our fathers and brothers. Our grandfathers got caught up in the moment with some sexy fox, and once their first anniversary rolled around, the sex largely dried up and they were chained to a whining, miserable, money-wasting trollop who fucked around on them all day while they slaved away at a thankless job from sun to sun. If they wanted to get free, they got to eat a shit sandwich much like men do today.

Why would we want to inflict that sort of hell on other men?

What I hope is for the younger brothers (younger than both of us) to dream up a new social order where men can be relatively free to start families in relative safety (in the real world, there’s no sure thing, but we can do far better than we’re doing now) if they want; while, at the same time, allowing for those of us (like my own bad self) who do not want to permanently marry any woman to continue working and enjoying life.

Now is the time for new ideas. The old ones don’t work. None of them.

Best, Boxer

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 4
Eric October 18, 2011 at 21:19

I wonder how the ‘Tradcon’ types like Dr. Phil—characters who are always promoting the idea that ‘women have all the power in relationships’ feel about how that power’s used? LOL.

It’s heartening to see, though, the FBI putting their heel on this guys neck. I wonder how many others out there who haven’t been caught yet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
CorkyAgain October 18, 2011 at 21:44

OT (sorta)

Some Ry Cooder came up in the playlist tonight. I can’t stand his leftist politics, but man does he have some musical chops.

My copy is from the Bop Till You Drop album, but this live performance is also very good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRAg7ixYaeE

Lyrics:

My father told me, lying on his bed of death,
Boy, he says, woman she’s gonna make it, don’t fool your self
‘Cause she’s got something to make a man lay that money, uh, right in her hand
And the very thing that makes her rich will make you poor
The very thing that makes her rich will make you poor”
That’s right!

Well, I put you behind the wheel of a deuce and a quarter, yes Idid
Had you living like a rich man’s daughter, yes I did, I sure did

While you were living high on the hog
You had me down here scuffling like a dog
Well, the very thing that makes you rich makes me poor
The very thing that makes you rich makes me poor

Don’t you never ever make such a bad mistake
You know I’d rather climb into bed with a rattlesnake
Then to work hard every day bringing that woman all my pay
The very thing that makes you rich makes me poor,
Makes me so damn poor
The thing that makes her rich makes me poor
The very thing that makes you rich make me poor
Very thing that makes you rich makes me poor
Makes me so damned poor

Money won’t change it, no no…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
doclove October 18, 2011 at 21:47

Before any of you think I’m too harsh or crazy, read what I have to say below. The first story is from Iraq. the second is from Afghanistan. I realize these are extreme outliers for women, but it underscores what pieces of human garbage our American women have become on average even though there are excetions and degrees. I’m not saying our American men are great human beings, but they are not only more likely to suffer for their own sins and shortcomings, they are for the women’s sins and shortcomings too. Women seldom suffer the full punishment they deserve, unlike men. Over 70% of the men who commit suicide in the U.S. Army and Marine Corps. do so because their wife or girlfriend is leaving them and taking the children if there are any . She often is cheating and taking(stealing) his money. There is a reason why I am seriously contemplating the Ancient Roman Republican laws listed above as possibly the only way to save or civilization. Here are the stories below.

I had a friend in another battalion, but same brigade whose friend commited suicide in Iraq by shooting himself in the head with an M-16 rifle in a portapotty in installation. I knew the man who committed suicide, but we were aquaintainces and not friends. I had to spend one night desperately trying to convince my friend not to avenge his friend’s death even though I emotionally agreed the wife should be maimed, mutilated or killed. I told him legally and morally it was wrong to do so and he would be made to suffer by the law if he fufilled his wish while he sobbed in front of me. He finally agreed not to kill her. His friend made a Dear John telephone call to his wife asking and sobbing as to why she was stealing all his money and being impregnated by a neighbor he considered a friend and she threatening to leave him with the children. She told him to kill himself so she could get the life insurance money. He did so as I described above, and it was his 3rd tour to Iraq. There was a rash of soldiers in the brigade who threatened suicide after this including one soldier in my batallion who walked up to my battalion commander, a lietenant colonel, pulled out an M-9 hand gun and threaten to kill himself in front of the same battalion commander. All of these men were experincing the same problems except for the impregnation by other men.

While in Afghanistan my friend’s Sergeant and Non Commisioned Officer in charge of him was a divorced man with a child. The former wife hooked up with Mr. Thug Life while still recieving payment from the former husband. He had a Rest and Recreation leave(vacation or holiday) scheduled for him to be home for his only child’s, his daughter’s 3rd birthday. Mr. Thug Life had physically abused the daughter several times before, and finally killed her a week before her 3rd birthday. He returned home on emergency leave to bury his daughter and attend the funeral. He returned to Afghanistan despite the company commander, a Captain, and top non-commisioned officer in charge of the company, a First Sergeant, giving him permission to stay home, and they were at first upset at his return until he expained why he did so. He did this because war and being around his comrades was more normal to him, and he realized there was nothing he could do, but sulk about his only child, his daughter, who was muredered. Most of us thought he was a ticking time bomb, and he changed from a genuinely happy person through and through to one who you could always see the internal sadness no matter how much he smiled or laughed. It was truly tragic to see and hear.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 1
doclove October 18, 2011 at 21:56

@ Boxer
Thankyou for the kind resonse. If you’ll notice my second paragraph further down to the one you referenced, I mentioned the possiblity of instituting the Ancient Roman Republican laws of enforced monagamy especially on the wife who was not in practice allowed to cheat while the the husband was allowed to do so. In theory, it was frowned upon for both sexes. You’ll also note that I believed that the return of the Ancient Roman Republican Pater Potentas, Father’s power, may be in order too which allowed him to harm or kill anyonne considered underneath him in his family.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
doclove October 18, 2011 at 22:06

@ Boxer
Maybe instead of marriage 1.0 found before 1860, we need marriage 0 as the Ancient Roman Republic had.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
doclove October 18, 2011 at 22:20

@ Boxer
The Roman Empire brought forth Marriage 0.5, and Christianity grought in Marriage 1.0 because they adopted it from their Jewish ancestors and made it kinder. There’s a reason the Ancient Roman Republic conquered the Jews and not the other way around. Actually, the Romans conquered everybody they could because of enforced monogamy and Pater Potentas, Father’s Power.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
keyster October 18, 2011 at 22:26

“If someone disagrees with me, please logically prove me wrong as emotionally and morally I would accept and love it. I mean this.”

There’s a balkanization of sorts coming. The multi-culti utopia that Westerners thought could exist is not happening. People of similar cultures (races) are self-segregating anyway. We’re tribal by nature, we like living with our own kind.

The United States will begin to break up much like the former Soviet Union, as certian states go their own way or form state coalitions. 330 million people and trying to police the world is getting too unwieldy and expensive for one federal government to handle. They either need to downsize, start letting go or face dissolution as a “United” country. We will look back on the Obama administration’s policy of deficit spending into the Trillions as the beginning of the end.

We’ll lose Texas first and then perhaps California, looney Vermont not long after. Arizona will become part of Mexico demographically as well as Hispanic population growth throughout the land, (much like Muslim growth in Europe). Small enclaves of who were once known as Euro-caucazoids, will huddle in gated communities (like ex-pats do now in Mexico) or move to more caucasian friendly country-states such as Wyoming, Montana, Utah and Idaho or “Cracker Land”.

You see as feminism alienated women and men from each other (beginning in the 1960′s) among the white (and black) race, while making motherhood wholly unpopular as a concept, they stopped procreating the next generations in numbers needed to maintain power and control. Meanwhile patriarchal hispanics (and Musilms in Europe) are having as many as 8 kids per mother AND continuing to immigrate from their own countries. This will usher in the great Latinization of America, (along with their typical systems of banana republic governance).

The Palestinians and Israelis are in this population battle right now. Females on both sides are trying to pop out as many babies as they can because they both know he who has the most people “gets” the land.

This is why ultimately feminism destroyed America; by destroying the family for men and destroying motherhood for women and leaving world power in the hands of (ironically) more patriarchal cultures.

Do feminists even have the propensity to comprehend this happening?
No. And we let them do this to us with nay a whimper of dissent.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 5
DarkTriumvir October 18, 2011 at 22:28

Doclove my friend, I must say your stories have reached even my jaded heart. I believe the time is almost at hand for us to do what is necessary, and to demand justice in this Kafkaesque nightmare. Misandry must no longer be tolerated.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Mr. J October 18, 2011 at 22:36

@TFH

Yes, you would think so, but, still, after all the untold injustice and criminality, most men choose to obsess on stupid shit like “superbowl”, etc…etc…….instead of actually DOING anything.
EVEN after EVERYTHING that has been shown and taken place…….STILL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Bob Smith October 18, 2011 at 22:46

Another unsurprising bit of sexism in this case is that while Butler is being charged with conspiracy to put people in jail, among other charges, the story notes his female accomplices haven’t been charged with any crimes in connection to this case.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
doclove October 18, 2011 at 22:46

I reserve the right to declare the Ancient Roman Republic marriage laws as Marriage 0.0 and that even the Ancient Jewish Marriage was Marriage 0.5 at best. Feel free to use the Word Marriage o.0 as you see fit, but please use it properly. Even the Taliban in Afganistan is similar to the Ancient Jews in marriage in that women had more rights to their lives than in the Ancient Roman Republic although the Ancient Roman Republic allowed women more rights to their property and perhaps divorce. however, since the men over her family that she married into could trump that with the right to maim, mutilate and kill her without reason; and not even the ancient Jews or the modern Afghan Taliban allow that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Boxer October 18, 2011 at 22:52

Dear Doc Love:

Thanks for an interesting response.

I don’t know that much about classical antiquity (I had a couple of classes, but they were years ago, and very basic). Anyway, what you’re talking about re: classical Rome sounds reasonably accurate as far as my memory serves.

Rome wasn’t all that pleasant a place to live in, in my book. They spent all their time fighting their neighbours and at its height, Rome was a place where life was pretty cheap. Your own contentions make that point. I’d have hated to have had parents and grandparents with the power to kill me. I’m pretty sure they would have, many times over.

Re: colonial and revolutionary North America, 1650-1750 seems to have been pretty similar to what you contend. Fathers had ultimate power, perhaps, over their wives and children, but they were relatively powerless before the state, and women had the spare time and inclination to make their husband’s and father’s lives a living hell. Men had the sole responsibility to slave away to support their wives, who spent all day fucking the bad boys of the era (salesmen, preachers, wanderers, etc.) and if the husband complained he’d find himself dodging rotten tomatoes in the stocks. A guy like me would still be living in his father’s house, and would be seen as a dreadful asshole for refusing to enslave himself to one of the usual unfaithful, unchaste harridians for the rest of his life, until he finally escapes marriage by beating his way out of town in the middle of the night, or by dying after a long, tedious and miserable life, raising up her children (who weren’t always his) and getting no thanks for his endless toil.

Going back to some sort of “golden age” is not the answer, in my view. The experts have a phrase for this (they call it retrocultural nostalgia). It’s a common response to social stressors to imagine that there was some lost paradise that we devolved from. The problem is, we don’t live in classical Rome or early America. We live in a postindustrial, postmodern, mechanized, advanced industrial society. I agree with you, that we need to carefully pick out things that worked in the past and try them on, but we need to also be open to innovating new customs more keeping with our current environment.

I do think it’s a good idea to revisit these old ideals and perhaps take what works from them, though I’m hoping for something new, that will be open to all men of all types, and will maximize personal freedom while protecting those (like Welmer, and your boys in your military detatchment) who do decide to “man up and do the right thing”. Whether this is possible is an unanswered question, but I think it’s worth striving for.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
doclove October 18, 2011 at 22:54

@ Keyster
For as painful as it is for me to admit you’re right and not wrong, I admit you are right. There is no other logical conclusion. Still, the only way for Whites to survive the oncoming onslaught to the best of their ability and aviod conquest and possible extermination or genocide is to at minimum readopt Marriage 1.0 and this may not be enough. Whites may need to reinstitute Marriage 0.0(see my posts above) and even this may not be enough, although it may or may not be better than Marriage 1.0, but you decide for yourself. I’m divided as to whether Marriage 1.0 or Marriage 0.0 is better, and may be for the rest of my life.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Mr Stricter October 18, 2011 at 23:24

I’ll fully admit I want an 80/20 land (80 White/20 Other) as it was when I was young but mixing with the Hispanics who are part White is not Rwanda style genocide. I don’t think the Hispanics have that in mind nor does anyone other than a few crackpots

Heck though I am not into either mixing with Asians is not going to hurt anyone either. Its not the best outcome but it ain’t an endgame.

Also before preaching White doomsday, 50% of all babies born are still White. And so are some Hispanics . A lot of those guys are White, Spaniards mostly with very little Native Blood. Their ancestors were Iberian Celts.

As for returning to more traditional means of marriage, not gonna happen until well after the collapse if at all. Its not much fun for men or women either .

More importantly it won’t work if we allow another stupid group of rich people to extract our wealth from us. Why in the heck should men work many extra hours so some bloated aristocrat can steal it all for his palace or another needless war Screw that. If I can’t have I’d rather give it to a welfare queen. At least it’ll buy social insurance and she’ll spend every penny on something. The rich are just mostly a bunch of misers and cheats.

With money unless we really want to go for a Hobbes style Man vs. Man scarcity environment we need people to not save too much. Put a little aside to retire or for a rainy day but for a modern economy to work it needs to be “use it or lose it”

And lastly if doclove is right and I doubt it, its better to not think about where run and to concentrate not on worrying about women and sex and concentrating on a plan to get “them” before they get “us”. The tech is there, the science is there people just have to have the will to use it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
Euclid October 19, 2011 at 00:48

I can absolutely attest–PI’s help manufacture evidence all the time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Anonymous October 19, 2011 at 02:26

To Doclove,

The Roman Republic was a slave based police state that rivaled the soviet union. Do you want to institute slavery to the point where 60-70% of the population is composed of slaves who can be tortured to death, humiliated or murdered for any reason? We are talking of millions of people torn apart from their families, raped (male female children), professionally and systematically broken and turned into speaking beasts.

Slavery was so pervasive and profitable that citizens made a game of finding things for them to do.

The republic was also notorious for its sexual immorality. Among women and men. Caesar was hated by many because he was suspected of affairs with their wives. Consider that.

The Empire/Republic invaded one country after another, crushing and murdering their way, and you admire this nightmare?

The Jews lost because they were not properly unified in their goals. Marriage if anything, gave them the best chance to stop what was by then known as the Empire. No one else successfully held off as many legions for as long as they did, causing horrific losses to their enemies. Contra Apion writes that the wars nearly destroyed the empire. Later historians cite the depletion of manpower from those wars as one of the causes of the decline and later fall.

I am not a professional or amateur historian. But this subject is of great interest to me, because i am a descendant of those very hard to kill Jews. I am even now trying to rebuild the land those Romans shattered and ruined thousands of years ago. That you would want such a thing again is to my mind shameful and shows you admire murderous totalitarian systems.

What Americans need is FREEDOM, not military adventures that destroy the minds and bodies of their best. Freedom, not court imposed “rights to muder” (which is what is being suggested with Roman family laws!) that would turn our women into fearful backstabbing slaves. Slaves betray, they have no loyalty, because their loyalty is coerced.

Americans need the freedom to choose what contracts they wish in marriage without having judges decide to throw out those contracts on a whim (ie the joke of prenups). They need freedom from federal laws that disempower their State and local governments, which consequently disempowers them, you have far less say and influence in the federal level than you do on the State level.

I would like to say further, a Jewish model of marriage (the biblical version) is superior in my mind to what we have now. Anyone who understands game, will immediately grasp why having three wives is far more stabilising to the individual relateionships than having one (preselection, jealousy, power, aloofness, etc). If that offends you, then look at the success Mormons have with polygamy. It clearly works.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Dj October 19, 2011 at 05:02

Being in the middle of negotiating a paternity agreement, I have to say, thank God I have dirt on the mother, but what I’m really thankful for is that I never married her. That would have meant I’m screwed. As it stands, I’m legally not the father of my child, and my name isn’t even on the child’s birth certificate, so if she ever decided to come after me, she’d have to go to court to establish paternity. But given the dirt she knows I have on her, she absolutely wants to avoid that. I have a file an inch thick on her, I collected information for a year in preparation. Guys, watch your backs, if I had married her my situation would be 10 times worse.

Even if you do have dirt on her, in a divorce it wouldn’t be as effective I’d imagine.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Avenger October 19, 2011 at 06:34

doclove-the Roman Republic which replaced the Kingdom lasted for 500 years and I’m sure they went through a lot of laws and customs and the head of the family was not permitted to act with such impunity. If he killed his wife or kids the wife’s family may have taken vengeance on him, not to mention that he’d be forced to return the dowry or property he got as a marriage settlement.
One thing was true though, females and slaves were not permitted to drink wine. It wasn’t until the end of the Republic and beginninf of the Empire that they were permitted and it was only because the physicians of the time were promoting wine drinking for health reasons. I guess that after hundreds of years they had forgot why females were prohibited from drinking wine. It goes back to the ancient Greeks and the cult of Bacchus and the problems caused by females when they drank. The Bacchae written by Euripides was from 400BC and I’m sure that the Romans during the Republic all knew it. The Hebrews did too which was also why they were careful of allowing females to drink and they could only do it under the supervision of family for religious ceremonies etc. That prohibition against females drinking and especially in public lasted right up until fairly recent times whether by law or just societal prohibition. No respectable female would go into a bar either to drink or buy alcohol and it wasn’t until they began selling it in grocery stores (John Walker) that it was easy for them to buy. If they drank their husband’s stuff they might be chastised for drinking (yes a husband had this right) And btw, most drug addicts in the 1800′s were females because it was easy for them to go into a chemist’s shop and buy some medicine (opium tincture)
So I guess that from a very early period men realised that the female was more likely than the male to cause a lot of havoc in society when permitted to drink and also bring a lot of bastards into the home when they got knocked up. I guess they didn’t worry much about the female’s “medicine” , opium, becuase it tends to calm and reduce sex drive.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Boxer October 19, 2011 at 06:37

DarkTriumvir:

Keep writing! You have a gift for prose.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel October 19, 2011 at 07:46

Keyster

The United States will begin to break up much like the former Soviet Union, as certian states go their own way or form state coalitions. 330 million people and trying to police the world is getting too unwieldy and expensive for one federal government to handle. They either need to downsize, start letting go or face dissolution as a “United” country. We will look back on the Obama administration’s policy of deficit spending into the Trillions as the beginning of the end.

We’ll lose Texas first and then perhaps California, looney Vermont not long after. Arizona will become part of Mexico demographically as well as Hispanic population growth throughout the land, (much like Muslim growth in Europe). Small enclaves of who were once known as Euro-caucazoids, will huddle in gated communities (like ex-pats do now in Mexico) or move to more caucasian friendly country-states such as Wyoming, Montana, Utah and Idaho or “Cracker Land”.

I agree with all of that. I spend a lot of time now thinking about the best way to provide a sanctuary for my kids in the decades ahead. My conclusion is that the best state to live in may well be “looney Vermont.” A libertarian state (the wrong kind, left-libertarian, but what can you d0) with secessionist tendencies, and too small for the Feds to focus on if the shit really hits the fan. If not Vermont, any rural red state with a population not dependent on government handouts would be a good idea.

Motivated people can achieve great things in the battle against (cultural) Marxism. If you need a little inspiration, Google Rhodesian Light Infantry . I considered joining this unit in 1980 after leaving the British Army, but the conflict ended right around that time. With the benefit of hindsight I’m glad I didn’t. Idealistic young men don’t understand they are risking their lifelong mental health when they fight old men’s wars.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Firepower October 19, 2011 at 08:18

Boxer

Faggot attorneys, mangina judges, idiot social workers, and anyone else gets no respect nor help from me under any circumstances whatever.

If* the system changes to reflect an equal, just system, I’ll change my views. Until that day (which will probably be never) I’ll stick with my policy of having nothing to do with them.

*”If” is a big stretch to take from mere wishing, to actual reality.

Those judges, attorneys and court workers really don’t care WHAT you think – or what your personal opinion is of them. That’s because they have power – all of it. Power they are also paid well to use. Paid with YOUR tax dollars. They have real power to actually wield against you, and all you have is name-calling or withholding favorable opinion. That, is like a jailer worrying about what an inmate thinks of him; not gonna happen.

What I hope* is for the younger brothers (younger than both of us) to dream* up a new social order where men can be relatively free to start families in relative safety

*Hoping, dreaming and wishing only gets you so far. It’s a process of gaming yourself for personal delight, which is why women indulge in it. It’s a pretend game.

Sadly, when comparing today’s “younger brothers” to all past generations (say, the kind that won WW2, for one) I realistically see no such bold initiative for restructuring the entire American, western, social order. In over ten years time, that generation has only accomplished OWS – and getting Obama elected.

If you hold such grand aspirations, the entire mrm would like to see you reveal their foundations so we can stop “hoping”

and start doing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8
keyster October 19, 2011 at 08:49

“…dream* up a new social order where men can be relatively free to start families in relative safety…”

What form this takes and how to go about creating this “new social order” is what’s never made clear, other than a personal apathy towards the existing system, (or camping out and embracing your inner Bohemian/Rastafarian in city parks with like minded folk).

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
…. Abraham Lincoln (otherwise known as Lincoln quotes Obama will never be heard using)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
How To Become A Private Investigator October 19, 2011 at 09:03

I think it is sad that someone would stage something like this so that a father could not visit there children. It is sick that ex wives would eve go this far to discredit there ex. Anyways makes me want to be come a honest PI just so I can make sure things like this dont happen at all.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
John Boy October 19, 2011 at 09:26

When I hired my divorce attorney some time ago it was the first time in my life when there was actually someone who advocated me as a man. It was quite a liberating feeling after having been tied up with a legal, social, and cultural system that always seemed to advocate for mommy, even when it was purportedly neutral. After having been burned too many times it was reassuring (and expensive) to finally know that somebody had my back. Whatever slime my ex-wife and the legal system could throw at me, my attorney would be out front catching it and fighting back.

I picture the Men’s Rights Movement to look like something similar albeit on a much larger scale. The backbone of the MRM would be organizations with a fiduciary interest to advocate for men irrespective of the circumstances or how much social pressure comes to bare. This has been a big part of feminism’s success. They have ruthlessly and unapologetically used the legal system to get what they want. I would love to see Butler and his accomplices’ get a taste of their own medicine in a civil trial. As my attorney once told me when a false witness my wife was using opened herself up to a conflict of interest, “I would waive my fees to be able to cross examine her”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Firepower October 19, 2011 at 10:28

John Boy

When I hired my divorce attorney some time ago it was the first time in my life when there was actually someone who advocated me as a man.

You paid him. Very well, I presume.

I picture the Men’s Rights Movement to look like something similar albeit on a much larger scale.

See above.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Firepower October 19, 2011 at 10:46

Boxer

Rome wasn’t all that pleasant a place to live in, in my book. They spent all their time fighting their neighbours and at its height, Rome was a place where life was pretty cheap.

As mrm’s newly christened resident historian, you can not tell us any contemporaries of Rome where life was not pretty cheap and they didn’t fight each other.

Carthage
Persia
India’s Indo-Parthian kingdom
and
China’s Three Kingdoms…

Were ALL bloody places – without any enduring great artifacts like Rome’s such as law, art or even Coliseums. The main difference being, they didn’t even have their own comparative to Rome’s literature and language developed enough on their own to record the violence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
Firepower October 19, 2011 at 11:23

W.F. Price

In the latest bit of news highlighting the disgusting nature of American family law

These instances are NEVER going to stop on their own.

Court/law tampering of this sort is the greatest offense to a society that prides itself on obeying “the rule of law.”

Unless action is taken – these injustices perpetrated by COURTS will actually get WORSE as The Establishment realizes all those who oppose it are powerless.

And, thus free to be robbed to pay for $16 muffins and King Barack’s luxury bus processions.

The very second the State realizes it has the power to oppress certain groups

…it WILL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
keyster October 19, 2011 at 12:29

“The very second the State realizes it has the power to oppress certain groups …it WILL.”

Right.
Certian groups that have no “identifiable” organization, go unrepresented by corporate interests and are not permitted a voice in the MSM, (lest it be “hate speech” or dissent from political correctness to protest); such as the fathers, sons and brothers of the “privilaged white male” class.

They lack the resources and will to resist.
Do with them what you will, as they slowly disengage from society and watch the special indentifiable victim groups, lacking any perceivable oppressor, destroy each other.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
MWPeak October 19, 2011 at 13:02

America cannot survive the breakdown of its justice system. It is one of the important pillars to a free society. Too many people (such as vindictive wives) are striving for what is “fair,” but that is subjective and emotional. Justice needs to be objective and respected all involved, including lawyers. Lose that and madness will ensue.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
ecnayonna October 19, 2011 at 13:27

abit off topic but i read this just now:

http://www.news.com.au/national/woman-gets-no-jail-for-sex-abuse/story-e6frfkvr-1226171268758

it appears in Australia now, if your a woman that got kids drunk with the intent to have sex with them, with low self-esteem, you can walk away with no jail time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
keyster October 19, 2011 at 13:35

“Justice needs to be objective…”

And yet even our highest court in the land is divided down conservative vs. liberal ideological lines (save for perhaps Kennedy). Their belief system, their world views, colors their various “interpretations” of the Constitution. This is evident at the state level as well and trickles right on down to the county level family court systems. Scary isn’t it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
RL October 19, 2011 at 15:31
Boxer October 19, 2011 at 16:06

Dear RL:

BRAWHHHLOLOLOL! Nothing brightens my day like the prospect of Naomi Wolf getting tasered or maced by a cop. Not to worry. OWS are theatrics orchestrated by the children of the men and women who sip champagne. She wouldn’t have had the balls (I’m not convinced she’s a female, but she still wouldn’t have the balls) otherwise.

Maybe next time… we can wish, anyhow…

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
RL October 19, 2011 at 16:13

Would Naomi object to fast food staff scrutinizing her payment notes, and maybe should give those guys a slap for daring?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Boxer October 19, 2011 at 16:28

Would Naomi object to fast food staff scrutinizing her payment notes, and maybe should give those guys a slap for daring?

With her robust girth betraying a truly astonishing appetite, I think scrutiny on that subject would take more than a few minutes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 19:17

It’s testimony to the self-control of the great majority of men that so few go medieval on their abusers.

No,it’s the fact that a lot of men are pussy whipped eunuchs is why they don’t go off.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Avenger October 19, 2011 at 19:21

Well, at least OWS is eating well :) This may even be a good place to take a date out for some gourmet food. Free, no tip required:)

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/occu_pie_the_kitchen_PIZ7EsDJEZqzPgzzEWKX7I

And this guy is doing a boom business

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/favored_pizzeria_making_big_dough_9j5G8H1kVQMCQgrPPL7rWO

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 19:42

some people would rather die than give up a lie that they made as part of who they are.

If that is what it takes. Not a problem.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 20:20

OT, but did anyone watch the GOP candidates debate in Las Vegas and catch Michelle Bachman’s over-the-top feminizing of the mortgage crisis? The problem, she wants us to understand, is that it’s *women* who are losing their houses. And the problem with unemployment is that husbands are getting laid off — and that affects *women*.

Sounds like she committed a “Palin”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 20:24

And yet, of the tens of millions of fathers subjected to this, we don’t have even a small number of them banding together to seek out such lowlifes and drive them out of this line of work.

The American father is a pussycat or is that just a pussy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 20:34

I logically can see no other way to prevent the coming collapse. If someone disagrees with me, please logically prove me wrong as emotionally and morally I would accept and love it. I mean this.

Translation: How do we solve this in a way that doesn’t compromise my chivilaristic christian beliefs?

You’re a war veteran and you don’t know what to do? What do you do over there? You shot the enemy. What are American women? The enemy. How do you solve it? I believe I just answered that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 20:55

Mr. Thug Life had physically abused the daughter several times before, and finally killed her a week before her 3rd birthday.

Why didn’t your friend kill this asshole. Oh,yeah you talked him out of it. He had a chance to avenge his daughter’s death and you talk him out of it.

It’s guys like you who make me sick.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 21:00

This will usher in the great Latinization of America, (along with their typical systems of banana republic governance).

A foreign patriarchy beats an American matriarchy any day.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 21:16

Before any of you think I’m too harsh or crazy,

Actually I thought you were a wuss.

I have a question for you: which one of these wars do you NOT kill the enemy: The Iraqi war,the Afghan war or the gender war?

Answer: none

In war you kill the enemy.

War is war,end of story.

This is how I look at it: http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/chivalry/did-they-get-what-they-deserved/#more-15767

I also said the following:

I’ve read about a lot of guys who were attacked by women and didn’t fight back. They died because of it too. If it comes down to me or her she’s going to die,that’s all there is too it.

Fuck anyone who has a problem with that.

Chivalry and compassion are handicaps,I suggest you purge them ASAP.

Like a I said this is war,death to the enemy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Masculist Man October 19, 2011 at 21:41

The Roman Republic was a slave based police state that rivaled the soviet union. Do you want to institute slavery to the point where 60-70% of the population is composed of slaves who can be tortured to death, humiliated or murdered for any reason?

To control women,yes it is necessary. Women are subhuman filth,to hell with them. If the enemy are slaves then we do what we want to them and it doesn’t bother me if a few of them perish. Good riddence.

If we have to implement a masculist third reich I have no problem with that either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Anonymous age 69 October 19, 2011 at 21:51

Someone said Hispanic women are having 8 kids apiece. Where? I’d like to know.

I usually live in rural Mexico and the large families are now rare. Most women pull the plug at about 3. I have read a similar statistic on-line as well.

Muslim women, maybe.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
doclove October 19, 2011 at 22:04

@ Dark Triumvir
What you wrote on your article, Pandora’s Box, on your site ties in nicely with what I wrote, dont’ you think? Thankyou for the response.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
CorkyAgain October 19, 2011 at 22:22

this is war,death to the enemy

Listen to the latest episode of AVfM Radio, the one on Rape Hysteria. Pay special attention to the segment where they discuss the question, “What do the powers-that-be hope to achieve by constantly ratcheting up their misandric laws and policies? ”

(The news from India is stunning: their Supreme Court has essentially ruled that there is no such thing as a false rape claim. A woman’s testimony is to be accepted at face value, and no cross-examination or rebuttal of it will be permitted. Wow.)

Once you’ve listened to that episode, come back to these threads and ask yourself whether some of the commenters are best described as provocateurs, who are trying to egg you into exactly the kind of violent response our rulers want.

Yes, this is war. All the more reason not to go off half-cocked and blundering into the ambush they’re trying to steer us into. It behooves us all to think, speak, and act very carefully.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
doclove October 19, 2011 at 22:25

@ Boxer
I’m not saying anything in the past including Ancient Roman Republic Marriage 0.0 was perfect, but there were certain intriguing things about it. I’d like to go to a marriage 1.0 with updates which ensure man’s rights such as DNA testing. There may be other improvements others can think of as well. I’d go to this because I try to do unto others as I would have them do unto me or at least not do unto others as as I would not have done unto me. Don’t get me wrong many women deserve marriage 0.0, but I sure would hate to be a woman under this system. I’m more about fixing things than vengence especially against the yet unborn females who have done nothing wrong as of yet. The living females are by and large garabage who deserve Marriage 0.0, but men or women or children will do what you let them get away with. I know you may not like the Roman Republic, but if you lived long enough, you as aman would have power over your family as an old man the same way your father, grandfather and great grandfather had over you. your mother and other females even your ancestors would never have such power over you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
doclove October 19, 2011 at 22:44

@anonymous
Rome was pretty harsh. I don’t advocate that we do everything they did. I don’t think we could anyway. The world for better or worse has moved on and gotten soft. It’s a shame that your people the Jews were crushed, but the Romans infiicted at least 10 times the casualties on the Jews out numbered at least 10 to 1. i admire the Jews’ verve, but they were out of their league fighting the Romans. There’s a reason for it is all that I’m saying. Strict monagamy and Pater Potentas is crucial to understanding why the Romans won. Polygamy is a bad idea as the men who don’t or can’t get a wife won’t fight as hard. They also have less to lose if their society is conquered. You can point to suicide bombers, but if the USA was really serious about ending it, it would proceed to tell the enemy the next time it happens we march in and murder your children before your eyes. I guarantee it would eventually put an end to it if we were successful. I’m not saying it’s morally right because it’s not, but the Soviet Union did it to Terrorists families after suicide bombers and murderers attacked them in the 1980s. It put an end to attacks on the USSR. The problem with Rome is that it had to many slaves which eventually leads to loss of productivity and innovation as well as people who care about the society. The Romans eventually gave up on their civilizationas the lower classes realized there was nothing in it for them. Augustus tried to tax and shame Roman men into marrying, but it didn’t work as marriage became less man friendly and more woman friendly. I’m more for liberty of people than the Romans were. I’d rather not be a slave in their system. St. Paul was a Jew and early Christian and Roman citizen who avioded torture because he was a citizen. Gaius Julius Alexander was an apostate Jew and the second in command when Jeruselem fell in 70 A.D. written about by the court historian also a Jew, Josephus.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
doclove October 19, 2011 at 23:08

@ Masculinist Man
First get your facts strait. I never said a word to the Sergeant in Afghanistan about his dead daughter. I did advise the soldier in Iraq not to kill his dead friend’s wife to save him. She may have deserved to die, but he would have suffered for it. I laid out cold hard facts. He may have been a great ruck marcher and shooter, but that means squat in prison where bigger more violent better fist fighter men would destroy his skinny white rear end. Prison is also a place where if you are of the wrong race in the wrong cell block you can count on serious attmpts tp pound and anally rape you no matter how tough you are. Good Luck surviving, hero or should I say dumbass.

Without sufficient organization behind you, you are most likely done on any issue you fight for should the better organized and numerous enemy decide to quash you.

Calling me a wuss. Well that’s a hoot tough guy. In order to win swagger will not do. Cold blooded and calculating ruthlessness will as this will ensure greatyer success at victory. Save your swagger for gullible females as I as aman am not impressed. And another thing, real men like me are not impressed by assinine behavior like women are so since the majority of people here are men perhaps real men or at least men who desperately want to be real men take your assinine behavior elsewhere like maybe to your local neighborhood bar for bar skanks. You’ll get better results if someone doesn’t cstrate you in your favorite watering hole. I guarantee it, sweetie. Or you could come back here and keep flapping your gums and make my dick hard as we say in the military, bitch.

You remind me of how someone tried to convince me that the 2nd George Bush was a braver man and a better war time President than his father, the First President George Bush. I was incredulous. The 1st won is a recipient of the Navy Cross(on par with the Army’s Distinguished Service Cross and the Air force Cross), the second highest medal for valor in the U.S, Military. The second Bush has no such medals. The 1st Bush executed the Persian Gulf War with cold calculating brutality, and everyone feared U.S. military might when he left office. He also knew what he could and could not accomplish is why he won. He was against guerrilla war for good reasons. His son squandered all of that in Iraq and Afghanistan, but boy, he sure knew how to swagger better than his father. You’re a moron. Swaggering will get you or those you love harmed. Act like a man with cold blooded calculating precision, know what you can and can not accomplish, execute your plan well, and make assessments before and afterwards. Discard what doesn’t work and do what does work again. Improve. Repeat. I’m glad I could school you on how to be a real man.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
Avenger October 20, 2011 at 01:57

@anon @2.26- You may want to get an education before posting a comment. You know, I read a lot of things on the Internet, most having nothing to do with men’s rights, and I’d estimate that 99% of the people have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. It’s like their education was composed of watching Hollywood films and reading comic books.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
CorkyAgain October 20, 2011 at 02:44

@ Avenger

Indeed. Too many people seem to have gotten their knowledge of Roman history from watching an HBO miniseries. Even worse if they got it from Showtime.

FWIW, if anyone is looking for a good, highly readable account of the fall of the western Roman empire, I recommend P.J. Heather’s Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians. Here’s an excerpt from a customer review on Amazon:

Notice the title of Peter Heather’s fascinating study of the final centuries of the Roman Empire. It is a clear tribute to Gibbons, yet the “Decline” is intentionally missing. Because according to Dr. Heather the Roman Empire never declined; its fall was due to external, rather then internal, forces, and the perpetrators were two: the Huns and the Goths.

Heather rejects the theories that see the cause of the fall of the Roman Empire in internal maladies. Contra popular opinion, he argues that the division of the Empire to Western and Eastern parts was rational given the increased size of the Roman population. As the Roman way of life spread, and more and more conquered people became Roman citizens, the patronage that had to be distributed became too enormous for any single Imperial Court – hence, the need for two Courts.

Nor is the fault in the Christianization of the Empire; although he acknowledges that the rise of Christianity brought a Cultural Revolution (separation of the Living from the Dead; Equality of all before the Lord; diminished importance for the educated Romans in comparison with the simple true-believers, pp. 121-122), Heather doubts it effected the functioning of the empire much. The Roman Empire was still perceived as divinely blessed “only the nomenclature was different” (p. 123), Christian theology fitted neatly into Roman Chauvinism, and it was only as consequences of defeat that St. Augustine started to develop his anti-Nationalist theology (pp. 230-232).

The best evidence against the “internal decline” thesis is that the Roman Empire did not actually collapse – only it’s western half did. In the East, the Roman Empire soldiered on, until another powerful foreign threat – Islam.

Therefore, Heather suggests, the answer is external: As a consequence of the exposure to the Roman world, the Germanic tribes confronted by the Romans have changed. An agricultural revolution took over the German world, increasing its population and changing its organization: along with surplus, there developed inequality, with powerful leaders and kings solidifying larger and larger groups of so-called “Barbarians” (pp. 87-94).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Avenger October 20, 2011 at 05:34

Because according to Dr. Heather the Roman Empire never declined; its fall was due to external, rather then internal, forces, and the perpetrators were two: the Huns and the Goths.

They had little effect on the Empire and were mostly just a nuisance. The Hunnic Empire didn’t create anything and mostly just raided and stole stuff. Attilla died in 453m this was after the Empire had been divided. The Roman Empire was at it’s height in 550 under Justinian. It lasted until 1450 with Constantinople as the capital. They may have had to use Revenna to govern from and the Pope may have had to take refuge but the Huns really couldn’t occupy the country and had a lot of problems elsewhere. But the city states in Italy proper became powerful before after the fall of the East and had their armies as did the Pope. It may not have been like an Empire but they were still pretty strong in Europe. Charlemagne was then the Roman Emperor and the Lombards still controlled a lot of Italy. Sicily, the largest island in the Mediteranean was lost but practically everyone from from the Norman Vikings to the Arabs were trying to control it although it was eventually taken when the Italian Republic was formed after 1860. So in 3k years even with all of the wars and disruptions Italy ended up ranking 5th in the world in GNP. Dropped to 8th but that’s due to China’s rise with 20-30x the population and a couple of other countries with large populations.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
oddsock October 20, 2011 at 05:43

What have the Romans ever done for us ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
CorkyAgain October 20, 2011 at 07:53

“They had little effect on the Empire and were mostly just a nuisance.”

Heather’s thesis is more along the lines that the Huns had an indirect effect on the Empire. The Goths had a more direct effect.

The really crippling blow, as Heather tells the story, was when the Vandals took Carthage and deprived the Empire of that source of revenue. (He also debunks the myth that the Empire fell because of overtaxation.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
CorkyAgain October 20, 2011 at 07:56

… but yes, there are still scholars out there who are defending the thesis that the Empire’s fall was due to internal causes. It’s a fascinating debate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Boxer October 20, 2011 at 07:57

Dear Doc Love & Anonymous:

Thanks for interesting comments. They’re quite refreshing here in the sea of mediocrity vomited forth by the two barely literate halfwits (Keyster and Firepower) and their sockpuppets. The prospect of “Roman Literature” is keeping me laughing this morning, as is Keyster’s incoherent rant about “male unity”, given that he regularly writes racist and anti-semitic screeds here and elsewhere (I guess it’s OK to attack men if they don’t belong to his favourite religion, political party or race). In any event, the cretins exist to entertain their intellectual and physical superiors, and we must thank them for their efforts. Please see below.

Anonymous writes:
Anyone who understands game, will immediately grasp why having three wives is far more stabilising to the individual relateionships than having one (preselection, jealousy, power, aloofness, etc). If that offends you, then look at the success Mormons have with polygamy. It clearly works.

Yeesh. I loathe the thought of chaining myself to a single female. I can’t imagine the living hell that three of them would bring to a fella. I’ll cop to the fact that I have never met any Mormon polygamists personally, so maybe there’s some secret key to happiness in kissing multiple women’s asses that traditional marriage doesn’t provide.

Funny thing though, when I see these guys in the media, they all look fairly scrawny and unhappy, contrasted with often stout (though not usually huge and disgustingly fat, like the average Ameriskank) wives. Their wives seem to have permascowls and be surrounded by a gaggle of kids. I think Mormon fundamentalist type marriage is a pretty hard life for everyone involved, but especially for the men and children.

I know you may not like the Roman Republic, but if you lived long enough, you as aman would have power over your family as an old man the same way your father, grandfather and great grandfather had over you. your mother and other females even your ancestors would never have such power over you.

I don’t dislike it, and I enjoy talking about it with you. I think I may be unusual for this forum (filled as it often is with angst) in that I really don’t want to have power over anybody. My life is great (and getting progressively more so). I have money, a nice place to live (though by no means opulent), I have no debt and no worries. I am currently dating three women on my own terms, having (protected) sex with all of them, while keeping them at arm’s length. I enjoy my job, am in good health, and have no wants. My countries (I have two of them, getting technical) are not loyal to me, so I don’t feel any need to go out of my way for them.

Why would I need a wife or kids? There are, what, seven billion people wandering around on planet earth? I don’t think I need to be adding any more. The way I see it, all my fathers and grandfathers and great grandfathers all the way up the line struggled and fought so that I could enjoy my life. I am living it in honor of them. For that matter, I give credit to elder brothers like you. I exercise self-control, and that is enough of a challenge. I wouldn’t want to be paterfamilias too.

Peace, brothers. The day begins. Go enjoy it.

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
oddsock October 20, 2011 at 10:00

Boxer

I actually like reading quite a few posts made by Keyster. They are certainly interesting but as you have pointed out, some comments start going a little AWOL as regards politics and race

You see Boxer, I am always left caught between a rock and a hard place, because we are all awakening so I try to give the benefit of the doubt when possible. I just find it increasingly difficult to believe a poster, one who appears pretty damn smart and then tries to promote ANY political party or process. Red pill totally absent I suggest?

IMHO it is only those that have really started to swallow the red pill that would laugh at such an idea.

Forget firepower.

Hey Keyster could be a firepower sock puppet for all we know ? They both share very similar beliefs on politics and race.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
Firepower October 20, 2011 at 10:23

oddsod

I just find it increasingly difficult to believe a poster, one who appears pretty damn smart and then tries to promote ANY political party or process.

But, America blowing up the World Trade Center – THAT you buy hook, line and sinker.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
oddsock October 20, 2011 at 10:36

Ooh thanks firepower.

Correction.

I just find it increasingly difficult to believe a poster, one who appears pretty damn smart and then tries to promote ANY political party or process. “And believes the nonsense that two airplanes can bring down three buildings and all falling in their own foot print and near free fall speed. Three buildings !

If it wasn’t so tragic I would be laughing. Gotta love you Americans, so naive, it is often quite cute.

Firepower. I keep asking you. Are you still working in China ? You don’t answer. Is this a problem?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
Firepower October 20, 2011 at 11:25

oddsod

And believes the nonsense that two airplanes can bring down three buildings and all falling in their own foot print and near free fall speed. Three buildings !

Gotta love you Americans, so naive, it is often quite cute.

You believe Americans blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Fine.

Naivete of Americans has nothing to do with it – you know NOTHING about America or Americans.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
oddsock October 20, 2011 at 11:52

Hmmm, So I take it you must still be working in China.

Quite odd really, given your ” support” for America. If I remember correctly? You packed up and sold everything and moved to China to get away from what America had become.

Is this why you refuse to give a clear answer ?

P.s.

I know it is a regular thing with you, accusing others of things they never said. ( a major indicator of an emotional terrorist ) What I am saying is that I do not believe and never will, that two planes can bring down THREE buildings in their own foot print and at near free fall speed. Do I take it that you believe this possible ? It wouldn’t surprise me.

The main reason why I believe there “could” be blood on the hands of your government is not just because of so many lies and deceptions along with iffy dealings that have been uncovered, it’s because of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. You know, the incident that was eventually de classifie and therefore proven to be a false flag op to take the USA into the Vietnam war ? How many innocent people died ? How many millions ?

Who was responsible for 9/11 ? Perhaps we will never know but the longer it goes on the closer we will get to finding out the truth.

PPS

I know as much about Americans as you do about Brits etc etc. Actually, I know quite a few Americans that are really awake and on the ball. Really good guys too and as far as the internet will allow, good friends.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Firepower October 20, 2011 at 12:08

oddsod

I do not believe and never will, that two planes can bring down THREE buildings in their own foot print and at near free fall speed. Do I take it that you believe this possible ? It wouldn’t surprise me.

…it’s because of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. You know, the incident that was eventually de classifie and therefore proven to be a false flag op to take the USA into the Vietnam war ?

Who was responsible for 9/11 ? Perhaps we will never know but the longer it goes on the closer we will get to finding out the truth.

Your continued rantings on “the USA’s Controlled Demolition of the twin towers on 9/11″ is not laughable anymore (as is your Rothcschilde Rants on on Bildergurgers) – your rants are now quite disturbing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
doclove October 20, 2011 at 15:19

@ Boxer
Your life sounds good, and I wouldn’t want it changed if I were you. However, I’m not advocating any ideas. I’m merely suggesting them. Parts of one thing and parts of another plus something new may restore civiliztion in the West. My point was to illustrate that when the men didn’t have anything to gain by playing society’s or civilizations rules, that civilization declined. We in the USA and the West in general are heading for a collapse for as much as I wish it weren’t so. Too many things are going wrong all at once. Developed East Asia: Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Homg Kong and Singapore may survive the collapse, but they will be hurt a lot too because of not enough in it for the men. The West has even more problems than that. I wish all well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Boxer October 20, 2011 at 17:43

Dear Oddsock:

I actually like reading quite a few posts made by Keyster. They are certainly interesting but as you have pointed out, some comments start going a little AWOL as regards politics and race

I like reading Keyster’s posts very much too. I’ve always been a fan of what you might call kook literature, and many of his rants stack up with the best of them.

The problem Keyster causes here is not a lack of entertainment, it’s the inherent splintering of the stated purpose of this site and those like it. For example: People will start talking about the inherent difficulties of males in the present sociocultural superstructure, and Keyster will inevitably inject his ever-so helpful, unwanted, unasked for advice into the matter. For example, we could be discussing VAWA, and Keyster would interject with “no you IDIOT! The real problem is with the NIGGERS AND JOOZ! God you’re so dumb! That’s why the Mexican Army is now massing on our southern border, it’s people like YOU!”

His rants in themselves are incredibly entertaining and laughably amusing, however, they remain destructive. About half the aforementioned Hebrews and Negroes which Keyster hates with such an irrational fury are men, after all. As far as the Mexican Army, which he is convinced is about to invade the USA, 80 percent are male. What Keyster is actually revealing is his own misandric bigotry and anti-male hatred.

In short, the mangina Keyster spends most of his time spewing yet more hatred of men, and obfuscation of the real issue, which is the lack of solidarity between men. The mangina Keyster is so pitifully simpleminded, that he’ll point this out himself, not even realizing that he’s reversed himself in the process.

Again, it’s priceless entertainment from a quasi-illiterate halfwit, but it’s also static on a forum dedicated to the same people he spends his substandard life hating. The fact that Keyster blames blacks, Jews and Mexicans for his innumerable personal failures was established long ago, is not the topic of this forum, and runs contra to the stated purpose of this board.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
Firepower October 21, 2011 at 11:02

Poxer

Keyster would interject with “no you IDIOT! The real problem is with the NIGGERS AND JOOZ!

I have not seen him ever call anyone a “nigger.” If I’m wrong, I’m sure you’ll provide the links to such quotes.

<In short, the mangina Keyster spends most of his time spewing yet more hatred of men…The mangina Keyster is so pitifully simpleminded

Again, it’s priceless entertainment from a quasi-illiterate halfwit…/blockquote>There are, however, plenty of instances of you demonizing male posters with outright insults, epithets and ad hominem when your flimsy arguments fail.

Two “mangina” slurs in a single post.

If mrm falls to following the likes of you and your emotional, screeching Jeremiads – instead of the logic-based writers – then mrm is lost to an inferior, feminine-type thought process.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Firepower October 21, 2011 at 12:05

Firepower October 21, 2011 at 11:02

Poxer

Keyster would interject with “no you IDIOT! The real problem is with the NIGGERS AND JOOZ!

I have not seen him ever call anyone a “nigger.” If I’m wrong, I’m sure you’ll provide the links to such quotes.

In short, the mangina Keyster spends most of his time spewing yet more hatred of men…The mangina Keyster is so pitifully simpleminded

Again, it’s priceless entertainment from a quasi-illiterate halfwit…There are, however, plenty of instances of you demonizing male posters with outright insults, epithets and ad hominem when your flimsy arguments fail.

Two “mangina” slurs in a single post.

If mrm falls to following the likes of you and your emotional, screeching Jeremiads – instead of the logic-based writers – then mrm’s path is lost to your inferior, feminine-type thought process.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Anonymous October 21, 2011 at 15:51

I miss not being able to downvote idiots like Flowerpowder. :-(

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Avenger October 21, 2011 at 17:18

@oldsock
Quite odd really, given your ” support” for America. If I remember correctly? You packed up and sold everything and moved to China to get away from what America had become.

The US used to make a lot of cheap stuff too. Now it’s made in China but China also makes a lot of very high quality and high priced items too. They’re just not sold at Walmarts. The US still has a lot of manufacturing and still has to supply many of these other country’s factories with the raw material.

**************
The WTC buildings were hit by two planes and that was what destroyed them, not some government plot to blow the buildings up. They were designed to collapse the way they did.
After those planes hit the buildings there was the FBI, owner, insurance adjusters, fire marshall etc on the scene and they MAY have very well agreed that the fire could not be put out and that the buildings would eventually fall in some manner that would cause damage to nearby buildings and perhaps kill 1000′s of more people. So perhaps they did use some demolition team to bring them straight down quickly but that’s not the same as saying that this was some gov’t scheme to destroy the buildings.
Of course the government is not going to tell the people the truth because there were still some people in the buildings and there’d be no end to the lawsuits and criticism about how the gov’t intentionally killed people. The average person is very simple minded and can’t be told the truth. No one knew exactly when the buildings would collapse so to send in another 100 firemen to try to locate anyone in the building may have just resulted in all of them dying. btw, 350 firemen were killed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
SM October 22, 2011 at 04:51

@Masculinist Man wrote…

——
Good stuff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous October 22, 2011 at 10:51

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
…. Abraham Lincoln (otherwise known as Lincoln quotes Obama will never be heard using)

Sorry bro. Lincoln never said that.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4053

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
oddsock October 23, 2011 at 03:07

Avenger

My comments about China was not related to anything about exports and goods etc. It was a personal dig at firepower. He sold up and moved to China.

With regards to your views on the WTC !

Good grief ! !!!! The evidence is stunningly overwhelming that the buildings were demolished. There is even video evidence of the order being given to “Pull” building 7. It takes feckin days to plan such an operation and not done within hours, especially whjen the place is on fire. There is even a video of a BBC reporter anouncing that she had just been informed that a third building has now collapsed. It was still in plain feckin view behind her and stood for a long time before it was actually ” Pulled”. (Somebody got their timing and wires crossed very badly )

IT was all very clearly planned. Who by ? Perhaps we will never know? But it was certainly planned.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
oddsock October 23, 2011 at 03:32

Avenger

Sorry. I forgot. You was the plant pot that tried to tell me the USA Dollar is not a fiat currency. That explains why you believe the nonsense of a story the USA government gave.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Firepower October 23, 2011 at 09:36

oddsod

With regards to your views on the WTC !

Good grief ! !!!! The evidence is stunningly overwhelming that the buildings were demolished.

American blew up the WTC?

Where DO you mongers get this stuff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
oddsock October 23, 2011 at 11:16

hahah Jizum boy

You can’t seem to get out of the habit of accusing others of things never said.

Classic traits of an emotional terrorist.

Oddsock

“IT was all very clearly planned. Who by ? Perhaps we will never know? But it was certainly planned.”

Your way too easy lol.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Firepower October 23, 2011 at 11:32

oddsod

With regards to your views on the WTC !

Good grief ! !!!! The evidence is stunningly overwhelming that the buildings were demolished.

I guess in englanistan, when a monger uses words like “evidence” we’re supposed to think you mean something else. That way, we give you a way out – when you want to change your mind later – to get upvotes. Very principled and noble of you to tailor your beliefs that way.

Classic traits of an emotional terrorist.

Sorry to have ruffled your emotions old chap.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
oddsock October 23, 2011 at 15:30

LMFAO

“Good grief ! !!!! The evidence is stunningly overwhelming that the buildings were demolished.”

Your still trying to use the same tactics sweet pants. They don’t work on me. But hey, your getting the attention you crave.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Nemo October 23, 2011 at 19:44

When you discuss marriage in the US before 1900, remember that a man could simply *leave* his wife and she had no real means to track him down. Once there was no more frontier, freedom started to vanish.

Women KNEW that bad behavior could make their provider leave for California. This had a subtle yet powerful effect on their behavior.

Only a closed society – one where it’s difficult for men to physically leave – can sustain feminism for a century or more.

Many men expect that the US will close its borders to keep men in quite soon, just like East Germany built the Berlin Wall.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Firepower October 24, 2011 at 09:24

oddsod

With regards to your views on the WTC !

Good grief ! !!!! The evidence is stunningly overwhelming that the buildings were demolished.

Your still trying to use the same tactics sweet pants. They don’t work on me.

Didn’t know quoting your actual words was some sort of “tactic.”

You shouldn’t be so embarrassed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
oddsock October 24, 2011 at 11:59

Hey Jizum boy

I can almost hear you stamping your feet in another one of your little tizzy’s.

Hey, just curious, are you related to Paul Elam ?

Feckin brilliant !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: