Sunday, July 26, 2009
Yeah, they know where you live.
Over at Hunter's, commenter "Martin" knows how to intellectually engage those uppity broads:
Good plan, Martin. And then you can post her address, and phone number, and maybe where she works, too. I understand that's how conservatives deal with dissent. It's the manly thing to do.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
did some browsing; her last name may be brindle. no guarantees.
Who's Martin talking to? Not fern hill?
oh! not hunter? darn. still, "brindle" should give her a start.
oh, i had it right the first time. but now i realize "brindle" probably won't phase her at all; she tends to dogs.
Hunter? "Martin" is one of ours?? Nah.
OK, maybe I'm confused ... who is "Martin" threatening to out?
Hunter's first name is Brenda. I'm not planning to out her. Never said I was. I plan to direct a few of the groups she volunteers for to her blog, that's all.
I'm not a fan of that kind of thing myself. Isn't that just a odd way of saying you're outing her to specific people? Not cool. And that was a creepy way of putting it. Let's not stoop to that gloating level.
She trains guide dogs for blind, deaf and autistic children. What if one of her dogs is assigned to one of the many groups of people she hates? would she let the dog go?
she's a nutjob and needs to be exposed.
Martin, the goals sound laudable, but did you really have to post such a creepy comment? It comes across as a threat and I know many women bloggers who are threatened by just that type of stalker comment on their sites.
I don't condone it at all, regardless of who does it.
It had to be "Brenda," of course. I've never met one Brenda I've ever liked. There's one from university the memory of whom, to this day, sets my teeth on edge. All Brenda's are evil. ;)
I don't necessarily condone or condemn outing; it depends on the circumstances. It's how the world works. If you're going to use your anonymity to vilify, defame and incite hatred of entire demographics, I think you've it got it coming.
She looks like the Sunday comics
She thinks she's Brenda Starr
Her nose job is real atomic
All she needs is an old knife scar
Yeah, she's so dull, come on rip her to shreds
She's so dull, come on rip her to shreds
At this point, I refuse to take a position on this. I'm thoroughly exhausted from being lectured that we on the Left are "better than that" and that "we shouldn't stoop to their level" and so on.
I'm particularly tired of being lectured by Canada's whackjobs about accountability and how actions have consequences, only for those same whackjobs to shriek inconsolably when someone suggests they deserve the same treatment they've been dishing out.
Do what you want. I'm not getting involved.
that we on the Left are "better than that" and that "we shouldn't stoop to their level" and so on.
That always gets my blood boiling. I don't think of myself as objectively better than anyone. I just try to be as ethical as is humanly possible.
Besides, it's always struck as the rationalisation from rather cowardly people in the face of what is arguably a very real threat coming from these radical right wing reactionaries.
Besides, "rising above it all" has not been working.
I'll get involved. Martin, if you are still reading this thread, don't be a twat. It sounds like your distaste for Hunter has gone beyond the realm of ideological opponent or blogging foe. It sounds very much like you have taken up a vendetta and stalked the person in question. Revile her, snark at her, give her lip in the comments. Taking after her outside of these forums is shitty and wrong. Maybe she is the vile creature she portrays online. Maybe not.
I've spent enough time with CC in meatspace to know that he is far more pleasant than his blogging persona or taste for big hair, crap rawk would indicate. If you go after he in real life then you are targeting what might be the only positive contribution she has to offer society. If you take her down from a volunteer position training guide dogs, you might be creating a void in that system that cuts the number of dogs reaching those in need. The fact that she is a volunteer is a tiny slice of redemption, don't go crapping on that.
In short Martin, grow the fuck up and stop being a creepy stalker.
The definition of a liberal is someone who can't their own side in an argument.
let her have it, martin.
i've always said, it's incumbent upon the individual to protect their own anonymity. as brenda has already demonstrated her lack of respect for anonymity, she deserves to see her own accorded the same.
The stalker thing doesn't fly. I bet I don't spend any more time at Hunter's place than the rest of you.
She talks about her dog gig all the time. All it took was our good friend google to do the rest. Time in, 5 minutes. Hardly stalking.
Imagine if Huntsy got word that own of her dogs was going to an autistic muslim kid? It's not inconceivable to think that she might interfere based on what she's written on her blog.
This is what pisses me off about blogging, people expect to set up camp online, say whatever the fuck they want and never get called on it. Bullshit.
Hunter is a detestable woman, Lindsay's argument that her dog training is somehow redemptive and therefore it's OK that she's a bigot is just stupid. If I can fuck with her a little, I will.
With respect, I don't need clearance from anyone here. Who died and made you all the last voices in web ethics?
"say whatever the fuck they want and never get called on it"
"Who died and made you all the last voices in web ethics?"
you can't have it both ways.
and neither can brenda.
Martin, hunter is low hanging fruit. She's a mere party volunteer. It seems to me there are some CPC insiders involved there. You have noticed she always has the latest Party talking points. I've seen articles by Monte Solberg, for example, using exactly the same wording as hunter used the day before. The recent "lefties are envious of those who have more than they do" theme comes to mind. She's definitely connected, and I believe some of her commenters could be from the CPC caucus or their underlings.
Out one of them and you get a gold star!
Taking from the blogosphere to the meatosphere is good form Martin. I have never seen it end well, it has happened to me, it has happened to Balbu and Ian Scott and or course it has happened to CC.
Thnis type of crap always has nasty blow back
Just my ywo cents
When you lie with dogs, you're liable to get fleas.
Are you sure Ralph, cause I only felt the need to scratch since you showed up ;-)
nuk nuk nuk
From one person who does 90% of his activities online under his real (as in on my birth certificate, on my passport etc) name to one who, you know doesn't:
I'm only commenting because word verification came up as, no shit, 'lancer'.
Any number of ways someone could go with that one.
Oh, hell. No philosophical argument or statement about 'left vs. right', I'm just never going to agree with outing in any form. So, what Lindsay said.
Let me put it this way. There are a lot of people who think that us folks have dangerous views too. I mean, enough that they raised a systematic campaign to out CC. I'd rather not feed that energy creature and deal with the collective escalation.
It's probable that Hunter in real life is a competent dog trainer, regardless of who receives those dogs. It's better to leave it at that. It'll become a tit-for-tat game quickly. Blowback.
Posting under your real name certainly is admirable. But let me know how you feel the next time a Neo-Nazi calls your house and threatens your life. Tell me what a tough guy like you would have done instead.
RA - Did that happen to you!?
yeah, raph left a message on his own machine nyuck nyuck nyuck. seriously raph, what would inspire a "neo-nazi" to call your house? you hold common cause on more issues than you disagree on. you don't like the gays, the canadians whose names aren't derived of western european stock, you don't like the non-subservient women, the other third of the abrahamic faiths. forgive me if i don't place much stock in your protestations.
martin, there are douchebags and assholes on both sides of the political divide. you appear to be one of them.
RA - Did that happen to you!?
It happens to him every day. But those aren't neo-nazis. They're his family members.
I really shouldn't have to go into the whole reasons why saying "I know who you are" or "I know where you live" is threatening.
The issue of "outing" is irrelevant, I have an issue with vaguely threatening comments left on sites. It's wrong and it's creepy. If you want to out someone, state your intentions and reasons.
Don't leave creepy stalker comments on blogs.
"yeah, raph left a message on his own machine nyuck nyuck nyuck."
LOL, somehow I can actually picture that happening. (sorry RA)
"It happens to him every day. But those aren't neo-nazis. They're his family members."
BWAHAA!! Oh, you guys are hot tonight!
RA, is it true? Are the calls from the Nazis coming from inside the house??
Oh man, I think everyine needs a flea bath tonight
"Don't leave creepy stalker comments on blogs."
yeah, i would have just dropped "brenda" into the discussion somewhere. give her a double take.
"Posting under your real name certainly is admirable."
and so is pretending to post under you real name. don't be so hard on yourself, "ralphie"....
"neo-nazis"! lol! now i've heard'em all. get caught in one lie, make up another to excuse yourself. you're a piece of work, "ralphie", ya' miserable cunt, ya'.
If you want to out a CPOC poster over at Hunter's try "GABBY". He always has the talking points down pat.
In my mind I usually refer to "GABBY" as the GABBESSE.
I suspect “Raphael Alexander” was insinuating that wild-eyed liberals phone his house threatening his life, but was simply re-contextualizing for the sake of argument vis-à-vis Cameron by using neo-Nazis instead. In either case, it’s almost certainly total bullshit.
In my mind I usually refer to "GABBY" as the GABBESSE.
I've called him variously "Twitty," "Bitsy," "Chirpy," etc.
Fuck off. Sanctimonious dick. You folks over here sure have an inflated sense of your importance.
And Lindsay? Claiming to be a songwriter in your google profile doesn't really make you one. Think about that for awhile, will ya?
kisses martin. i suppose the fact that i'm a songwriter limits the amount of time i'll need to spend thinking about being a songwriter. as for sanctimony, who's the one deciding to go judge and jury on a stupid blogger?
"This is what pisses me off about blogging, people expect to set up camp online, say whatever the fuck they want and never get called on it. Bullshit."
i guess you aren't just sanctimonious, you're a barking hypocrite as well. you've just been called for saying whatever you want, get over it. and have a fucking off kind of day yourself.
Now we know how the Republicans felt when the Quitbull "went rogue".
Boo hoo. I wanted to comment over at PR's but for some reason cannot get a comment box.
It would seem his blog has literally gone the way of the dodo (same symptom).
Raph, given that I've had conversations face-to-face conversations with Neo-Nazi's that went like this:
Skin1: I'm going to take this guy out (pointing to some other dude)
Skin2: and if this guy moves I'm going to do him (pointing me)
Cameron: and if you take one more step towards me I'm going to hit you in the head with this chair.
Skin2: Fair enough
I think that a few phone calls would be dealt with like this: record phone call, keep log, call police, deliver phone call, log etc and pester them till they do something about it.
I'm not a tough guy, but I'm saying that mocking people and talking about outing people etc etc while hiding behind your fake name that you only admitted was a fake name when caught in a lie about it is a fucking pile of hypocritical bullshit.
I didn't realize one's middle name is a "fake name". I suppose that eliminates Jean Chretien from contention of having a "real name".
Way to miss the point there, Raphie.
Ooooh.. "very soon"?
Oh, fuck off, Twatsy. You know my address, so serve me with papers and shut the fuck up. Jesus, you can be tiresome. Yap yap yap yap yap.
"the statements you made were demonstrably untrue."
lol! how's your sister, twats?
twats, i'm pretty sure you have to specify if you want this to be considered good faith.
Dear Twatsy: Sue me or fuck off. And if you finally decide to consult a lawyer, make sure you tell him about your accusation that I "stalked [Dick Evans' kids] to their school." Because if I actually did that, I'm sure you would have no trouble telling everyone here what school they attend, and how you learned that from something I wrote. And how that would even be possible given that I haven't been to Calgary in over 15 years, and I have no idea where they go to school and never have. But, hey, feel free to keep making that libelous and defamatory accusation, you brainless prat.
Now, once again, Twatsy, either serve me with papers or shut the hell up. You're not scaring anyone, you're just being a mouthy mullethead, and everyone here is laughing at you.
Hey PR, fix your blog so I can comment and mock you there. Maybe that's why nobody comments there. Or maybe there's another reason.
What is with all this extrajudicial shit anyway? First we have "Raphael" claiming neo nazis phone him while he doesn't follow what everyone knows to do with crank calls. Now we have PR trying the poor man's SLAPP, instead of doing what everyone knows to do with perceived libel.
What is this, amateur night? Sheesh!
I think PR must have read this and didn't realize it was satire.
Fuck off PR. You are the one constantly threatening legal action. Now you demand CC take you to court?
Since he has repeatedly laughed at your idle threats you have only two options. Either man up and sue, or endure endless ridicule of your whining and attempts at intimidation.
I think you'll do the latter because you are a coward and a liar. Not to mention you have no case.
Shorter CC: "Back up your defamation, Twatsy."
Shorter Twatsy: "No."
By the way, Twatsy, please fuck off and stop commenting here. You have a blog, why don't you use it? Everyone knows that the only reason you stop by and stink up the place here is that no one reads that shithole of a blog of yours.
So I'm asking you nicely, Twats -- go away. You have nothing of any value to say, all you're doing here is trying to get attention from more readers than you've ever seen in your mullet-headed life.
once again, twats: if this was supposed to be your attempt at mitigation prior to filing, you're gonna have to be specific. you can't say to a judge "i gave him a chance!!1! see??1?" and point to this as your proof. well, you can, but the judge is gonna tell you to fuck off, too.
fuck off, twats. donate to orly.
For the love of God, Twatsy, would you please just shut up and sue me already? Is that what it would take to shut you up? You're just another NAMBLA Dick -- all yap and no follow-through.
So sue me or fuck off. Please! You're boring all of us to death here.
If you continue to attempt to comment at this blog, I will take that as an implicit and unambiguous admission that you do, in fact, condone and encourage the murder of abortion providers.
And since absolutely no one is forcing you to comment here, whether or not you finally make that admission is entirely your choice, and no one else's.
And that, kids, as they say, is that. At this point, I will take it as established that one Patrick Ross of the "Nexus of Assholery" does, in fact, condone and encourage the murder of abortion providers. Feel free to mention that to your friends.
So PR, who else are you unsuccessfully trying to intimidate today?
Do you in fact support or condone the killing of abortion doctors?
Jesus Christ, Twatsy, but you're a fucking retard.
And everyone else nods knowingly ...
Could you simply provide an answer to the question, your great superiorness?
Do you in fact support or condone the killing of abortion doctors?
You say you answered some time ago, yet when told today that your continued spamming this blog means you agree with one allegation on this, you simply continue to show up, shrieking libel, yet never giving a restatement of your position, making it reasonable to assume your position is as CC now alleges.
This makes it clear that your position is not very deeply held, and is a mere prop for your continued virtual vigilante campaign. Anyone could reasonably presume you hold either position on the question, since you refuse to simply answer unequivocally when clearly asked. Instead you obfuscate, try to make it into your casus belli.
Why is it that if the opinions of you held by the denizens of CC's blog are meaningless, you keep showing up? Try claiming you are merely responding to being maligned, but that is simply not true. I have seen very little mention of you at all until you decided to again show up here.
Good old selective quoting, eh?
You draw a false equivalence. Nothing new there.
However, you have now given some indication of your position, i.e. "my numerous statements opposing all abortion-centred violence, including that against abortion providers, clinics, or their staff".
Whether it is true or not that you have made "numerous statememts", this statement now would constitute a reasonably clear statement of your position. Even if you had an equal number of statements to the contrary elsewhere, your statement here is now clear.
But that does not make earlier allegations about your views actionable, made when your position was unclear, when you were refusing to make a clear statement, i.e. higher in this very thread.
Besides, claiming that you hold some opinion is itself an opinion, and not actionable, you silly buffoon.
Nobody has claimed you support the murder of abortion clinic providers. Many of said clinic providers probably don't know that the clinic will be used by abortion providers. But you made such a statement just now. So you lied again, and you libeled again.
Why are you continuing to talk of action, while taking none?
Because your case would fail, that's why, and you know it.
Your past obfuscation gives plenty of room to question what your views are today, since you have not been consistent in stating them. Recall 20 requests for clarification met with stonewalling. That allows assumptions to be made, and unfortunately for you, you will simply have to state your view clearly every time that happens.
There is no cause of action in continuing to ask someone's position when they often refuse to answer. There is no cause of action in assuming their position when they have a past history of refusing to be clear.
You painted yourself into this corner, PR. Tough shit.
Actually, I have claimed that Twatsy condones the murder of abortion providers. 'Cuz i've heard that. Somewhere. Can't remember where, but I'm pretty sure I heard that. So it must be true. You know, sort of the way that Twatsy has accused me of "stalking [Dick Evans' kids] to their school." Sort of like that.
Is everyone else as bored by this as I am?
Abortion providers, yes. Abortion clinic providers, like the bricklayers electricians and carpenters that build the clinics, I don't think so. But PR just claimed you said he supports the murder of these construction workers. I don't think that's any more of a ridiculous parsing of words than PR does every day.
PR will often argue some miniscule part of an issue and then at the end say he supports the other side of the larger issue. For example, I don't think he's against gay marriage, yet he'll argue forever about religious freedom for people who are not actually clergy, so he would support provincial marriage commissioners refusing gay marriages.
Gorbachev's policy of openness, complete with gift bags
Ah, quite right, LS, that's just Twatsy constantly embellishing his lies a little more each time, hoping no one notices.
Stop poking the mulletard.
Post a Comment