Post: #26

Must be a slow day in the office over there.

Don't they have some violent, bomb making, gun toting, groups to keep track of!?!?

Next, someone guy will get arrested for "going direct".

Post: #27

This is ridiculous. Good article in the Reason. This seems to be a little unsettling:

"**In case that part's not clear: I'm not talking about (ruining) social capital, but the fact that the SPLC's Intelligence Report gets sent to every law enforcement agency in the country. "

Post: #28

At the expense of sounding like a fear-monger, this is very disturbing. I don't want my IP address associated in any way with any data base that says "hate group". I don't want some NSA geek's algorithm picking my IP address, sending it McLean and having it make the rounds of Homeland Security, FBI, Department of Treasury banking lists, etc.

This forum has been fun for shits and giggles - but this shit is not worth making a no-fly list or the dreaded "T"-watch list.

Think I'm full of shit? The proprietor doesn't want to disclose his location due to the attention he draws - all via the web - in an ex-Soviet backwater. Now we've got the "tolerant lefties" condemning this behavior. I sat next to a church group on my flight to Chisinau - right wingers who were part of evangelical christian network, going there to work on exposing the sex-trade business and the men who engage in it.

Adios amigos and safe travels.

Post: #29

I share all of your outrage. That avoiceformen response was measured, articulate, and compelling. I doubt it will taken into consideration.

This should serve as a warning to us all to protect yourself from revealing too much identifying information in your manosphere dealings and too much of our thoughts in settings that don't protect your identities. If, unlike guys like Roosh, you are still tied or dependent on the mainstream grid, you can be ruined and blacklisted (or simply harassed and inconvenienced) for standing up for your rights as a man.

Tragically, it is a dangerous time to be a regular man.

Post: #30

The Federal Government of the United States is a hate group. Look at it's foreign policy.

Post: #31

I bet this will get Roosh an IRS audit.

Aloha!

Post: #32

(03-09-2012 03:17 PM)Kona Wrote:  I bet this will get Roosh an IRS audit.

Aloha!

...Why are you Aloha!ing that?

I hate to shatter realities about privacy, but if you've ever posted a picture anywhere, filled out an online survey, registered for an email address or social networking site or used a cell phone with an SIM card, the government already knows enough to violate your privacy. You think anything as pervasive as the internet wasn't first doctored to learn to exploit people?

Post: #33

you would be surprised how many ugly feminist women run organizations like this or have position of influence in these type organizations. They take out their lack of sexual partners on guys who choose sexier women by trying to give them negative labels. Its an institutional form of Negging that they hope will lead to you altering your behavior to fit into their idea of right or wrong.

I can't speak to the other sites on their list because I've never visited them but this isn't a hate site. Though I have heard some fringe ideas being purported on the board like they're facts . For the most part though a lot of guys think like the guys on this site. Its called being a man.

Post: #34

This is the woman in charge of SPLC department who put out the list:



http://www.splcenter.org/who-we-are/staf...eirich-phd

Post: #35

(03-09-2012 04:09 PM)Roosh Wrote:  This is the woman in charge of SPLC department who put out the list:



http://www.splcenter.org/who-we-are/staf...eirich-phd

Could have fooled me.

Post: #36

I guess I called it about these types of organizations being run by fat/ugly/ feminist. Now keep in mind not all liberal organizations are run by women like that, Some actually have causes that help society. However to put this board on a hate list, probably means that the organization will likely be ran by a woman like that. She just wants to scare guys away from seeking better looking women. Its sad in a pathetic way if you think about.

Post: #37

Lawyer up and sue her personally for slander. The SPLC has a well armed legal department, but if you sue her personally then she'll have to pony up the legal fees. I would love to see it.

From now on if anyone Google's your name, the SPLC report will come up and she is cherry picking quotes to defame you and associate your name with rape. I'd also have my lawyer sue the SPLC as well. Make it expensive to make these claims against you.

Maybe you can find a fellow lawyer in the manosphere who will do it pro bono for you. If not, lets have a forum fundraiser.

It doesn't surprise me that a disgusting, obese, porcine sow of a woman is running that department. Pathetic.

Post: #38

(03-09-2012 04:43 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Lawyer up and sue her personally for slander.

This is precisely the worst thing Roosh or anyone else named on the list could do.

Post: #39

(03-09-2012 04:48 PM)jdevoy Wrote:  

(03-09-2012 04:43 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Lawyer up and sue her personally for slander.

This is precisely the worst thing Roosh or anyone else named on the list could do.

They want you to be afraid, so don't be. Taking a legal stand against someone slandering your name is essential. What is he supposed to do? Cower?

At the end of the day, by publishing that report the SPLC has permanently associated Roosh's name with rape. They made it sound even worse - like he wrote a rape guide to teach men how to rape women in Iceland. Any future employer or business associate can find it by just Googling his name. By suing, even if he loses, it will be expensive for the center to defend (and expensive for her to defend). At some point they may think twice about including him on a list if they know it will result in a lawsuit.

Conversely, it could blow up and you could get even more bad press. You could ignore it and hope that never write about you again. That just isn't as satisfying as thinking of that morbidly obese woman paying to hire a lawyer to defend herself in court.

Sorry - did a quick edit before I saw you quoted it.

Post: #40

(03-09-2012 04:56 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

(03-09-2012 04:48 PM)jdevoy Wrote:  

(03-09-2012 04:43 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Lawyer up and sue her personally for slander.

This is precisely the worst thing Roosh or anyone else named on the list could do.

They want you to be afraid, so don't be. Taking a legal stand against someone slandering your name is essential. What is he supposed to do? Cower?

At the end of the day, by publishing that report the SPLC has permanently associated Roosh's name with rape. Any future employer or business associate can find it by just Googling his name. By suing, even if he loses, it will be expensive for the center to defend (and expensive for her to defend). At some point they may think twice about including him on a list if they know it will result in a lawsuit.

We need a probono manosphere lawyer to file the paperwork.

A defamation lawsuit would fail. defamation by implication would be prohibitively expensive to litigate (six figures for anyone competent to take the case, easily), if it would even survive a motion to dismiss based on being a statement of the SPLC's opinion - let alone privileged because it's distributed to law enforcement officers nationwide.

Speaking of privileges, know anything about anti-SLAPP statutes? Some, like California's and Texas', would pretty quickly dispose of a defamation suit brought over these statements. Worse, they would stick Roosh or any other unsuccessful plaintiff with a bill for the defendant's legal bills. Even in states with weak anti-SLAPP laws (like Nevada and Arizona), speech made to the government - like the SPLC's reports to law enforcement agencies - are protected and suits intended to silence them may be punished with the same fee-shifting provision as California and Texas have. Even if the suit were brought in Alabama, which has no Anti-SLAPP statute, the SPLC would probably move to dismiss the complaint and then seek sanctions against the plaintiff and/or his attorneys. From what I gather, SPLC attorneys are not cheap.

Think that being called a hate group is incorrect? Then say so. Don't try to muzzle or punish them with a stilted, questionable lawsuit. A lawsuit is a terrible idea, and would boomerang back into good press for the SPLC as it defeats a lawsuit brought by one of its alleged hate mongers, and gets a 5-figure payday at his expense.

Post: #41

(03-09-2012 04:48 PM)jdevoy Wrote:  

(03-09-2012 04:43 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Lawyer up and sue her personally for slander.

This is precisely the worst thing Roosh or anyone else named on the list could do.

I agree that draws attention to this drivel. The worse thing you could do is give this woman an excuse to send out dozen of press releases explaining how she is victim of a personal lawsuit due to her "standing up to Misogynist websites". A lawsuit would only add fuel to the embers she is trying to spark and allows her to take her cause to the media and spew her bias views as to why she is the victim of lawsuits due to her moral cause.

The best thing to do is ignore this and carry on, Like I said that initial list was her Negging this board and those sites in the hopes they would act ashamed and run.

Or if they fought back by doing something drastic like suing for slander. It would give her organization an opportunity to send out press releases stating they are the victims to media outlets. At worse right now this story gets on DemocracyNow. If they send out those press releases it could end up as a segment on Fox news or MSNBC.

So with that said the best reaction is to not react and go about business as usual. The letter by that one site was the best response I could think of. At the moment this is an issue of opinion between two relatively small communities. There is nothing to be gained by fighting this list with a lawsuit and having it become any bigger of an issue than what it is, just one groups opinion of another.

Post: #42

I am no lawyer. I think he should consult one and get a professional opinion.

Maybe Roosh could use the press. If it lands on Fox News or MSNBC his book sales would skyrocket. Something to think about.

Post: #43

(03-09-2012 05:18 PM)durangotang Wrote:  I am no lawyer. I think he should consult one and get a professional opinion.

Maybe Roosh could use the press. If it lands on Fox News or MSNBC his book sales would skyrocket. Something to think about.

You are right publicity is publicity.

However, not all publicity is good publicity, regardless of the saying. Plus add in the legal fee's the defamation to his name while the trial is going on, the obvious fact that this board will be bombarded by lames and feminist as it become known in the mainstream and well I hope he doesn't do it.

Post: #44

If you think this is bad, can you imagine the fallout from Bang Israel. The ADL makes the SPLC look like a quaint little southern social club.

Post: #45

OK, now I get it. Here's a visual description of my thought process:


+

+

=

Post: #46

(03-09-2012 06:01 PM)46. Wrote:  OK, now I get it. Here's a visual description of my thought process:


+

+

=

Post: #47

(03-09-2012 04:09 PM)Roosh Wrote:  This is the woman in charge of SPLC department who put out the list:



http://www.splcenter.org/who-we-are/staf...eirich-phd

If my name was on that list, I would mail her a giant vibrator and a coupon for a free Whopper at Burger King.

Of course you understand PR, if you rattle the hornets nest a little harder you should be able to use this to get yourself on any major US TV talk show.

Post: #48

Oh man I just go so exited by the thought of Roosh on The View! How awesome would that be.

Post: #49

It's fucked up but it doesn't surprise me. Though a fat bitch for a leader just is icing on the cake. America's turning into a police state though, and it's just getting more absurd. Move to poland, keep fucking eastern european girls, and sue the thundercunt.

Post: #50

(03-09-2012 06:01 PM)46. Wrote:  OK, now I get it. Here's a visual description of my thought process:


+

+

=

LOL!

POTD?