Sunday, July 1, 2012, 5:00 AM
Try as one might, there is no defense against the accusation of bigotry for those who talk about inherently gay predations (that is, that gay people as a whole inherently prey on others) or who believe that there is a radical homosexual agenda that's destroying America. Yes... believe it or not, if you think that gay people are inherently predatory, you actually are a bigot.
And no, nonsense about moral relativism--and especially the notion seemingly pulled out of one's ass that there are a whole lotta gay people (or liberals, for that matter) who talk about individual morality divorced from any and all religious, moral, or social institutions, mores, and norms--doesn't help the bigot's case, based as it is, on straw man fiction.
Arguing for the rights of gay people is in no way analogous to believing in any right or moral license to prey on children, have sexual intercourse with the family pet, or marry like an old-school Mormon. Suggesting that it does--that arguing for ANY change in the laws or moral understanding concerning gay folks is the same thing as arguing for NO laws or morality regarding sexuality at all--is reductio ad absurdum, red herring throwing, nonsensical thinking that exposes an unwillingness to deal with the facts and issues actually before them, and to instead begin tossing out slippery slope "what ifs," and "if..., then...'s," or in this case, linking behaviors together that have no real-world causal link.
Remember, if you equate gay people with predation you're a bigot!...excuses and straw men notwithstanding...
---
Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 8:55 AM
Gay people have "inherent criminal perversions" ... "criminal perversion and depredation [that] is fundamental to the radical left's anything goes revolutionary sexual agenda"?
Donald Kent Douglas at American Power blog says yes. (And yet, Professor Douglas really believes that saying things like this about gay people is not evidence of anti-gay bigotry.)
Free clue, Dr Douglas... The minute one starts referring to groups of his fellow Americans as "these people," he's probably about to make a bigoted statement about them. In Donald Douglas' case, it's almost certain.
(But hey... At least he had the courage to link to post he was whining about, for once... That's progress, right?)
No, I have never in my life defended a person I knew to be a pedophile, whether gay or straight--and obviously, Donald Douglas offered nothing more than his own spurious verbiage-- that is no quote, no link, and no citation--even suggesting that I ever had. I do however defend gay folks as a whole against the kind of ugly sweeping generalizations about them that Donald Douglas and those who think like him so frequently make. See the rest of this post for further examples...
Added: memeorandum: Teen lesbian couple found shot in Texas park (Miranda Leitsinger/msnbc.com) Because after all... You know what those holier-than-thou conservative anti-gay bigots are like... They'd kill you if they get the chance... "Those people..." Yeesh!!
---
No need to visit Marcus Bachmann... According to Donald Douglas, Ph.D, you're not gay... You're a "rim station freak."
Saturday, May 19, 2012, 2:00 AMAnd lest you think Donald's apparent fascination with this "freakish" sex act as performed between two consenting adult men (A fascination that started here, if memory serves... And note: Without sinking to Dr Don's level, this is an act that can be performed by consenting heterosexual adult couples as well, if they happen to be into it -- No word as to whether Donald thinks "normal" couples who do this thing are freaks, as well.) is just benign fantasy, note how he uses it as a slur against men he disagrees with (much the same way he uses "racist," "nihilist" or any of his other bullshit terms of endearment...):
"Like I've been saying, you have to smack down these gay freaks or they'll come after you like the plague." - American Power: Will Smith Slaps Kissing Dude Across the Face at Moscow Premiere of 'Men in Black 3'!
---
Wednesday, July 13, 2011, 6:00 AM:
New York Broome County Clerk Resigns Over Same-Sex Marriage Law
She's probably had it up to here with the rim station freaks.
"Go ahead. Ban me, RepRacistRimStationFreak!" --- RACIST = REPSAC = CASPER = RIM STATION = FREAK!(Like I said before...) Nothin' like attacking a guy by calling him a fag, huh, Donald? I'm sure gay folks wouldn't find that in any way bigoted or offensive, right?
---
Wednesday, July 6, 2011, 12:01 AM:
American Power: The Gay Hate Campaign
"As I've said many times, it's lies, violence, and intimidation that's putting the gay agenda over the top. You gotta call these people out for what that are: Homosexual criminals, mobsters, perverts, and thugs. And that goes as well for the hetero progressives who're enabling the hate."
---
June 21, 2011 9:16 PM:
JBW's in the house so y'll can head out for your Alex teh Gay hookup, you freak.
---
June 21, 2011 5:31 PM:
Something to think about while you're flogging to Alex teh Gay?
---
June 21, 2011 5:07 PM:Nothin' like attacking a guy by calling him a fag, huh, Donald? I'm sure gay folks wouldn't find that in any way bigoted or offensive, right?
Do you beat off when you get mentioned at my blog? YOU have a homo crush, right? Posting, promoting, enabling at your blog workplace intimidation, that's over the line. Been checking Alex teh Gay's site lately? You got off on that, you and JBW? You're just like Alex Knepper? Sick. ASFL.
You have no job and you do the Alex Knepper all day? Sick.
---
Saturday, August 14, 2010, 10:00 AM:While I don't know what possessed Dr Douglas to post the video --a pretty good satire on the ridiculous "why do gays flaunt their gayness in public?" meme-- the "equality makes me sick" reaction he offers is classic for the Donald we've come to know.
Hey, I'm for equal time around here (barf!!). - American Power: Get Your Heterosexuality Outta My Face!
---
Other AmNi Posts:
Yo Donald: Using the Word "Gay" as Pejorative? TISWWT!!
![[photo]](http://rimstation.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/IMG_0501_2.220102653_std.JPG){kind=link}
105 comments:
Closet gays are the most ardent anti gay people there are. I'm not saying Don is gay. I'm just saying.
I wonder if Don knows Ted Haggard or Larry Craig?
NTTAWWT, Truth...
Either he didn't watch it or didn't understand it or else Donald is coming out of the closet.
While I agree with sentiments of this comment I don't recall having made it. I am open to the possibility that I (we) may have developed a split personality not sure it's likely because I haven't used my ex DLB Mr. Hyde in ages. Very strange anyway. May have to sharpen stakes to put into ex-DLB and Fauxmaxbaer and all my other doppelgangers.
You prolly made that comment in response to the initial entry in this "running post," about the "why do straight people flaunt their sexuality" video.
(These "DD on ___" posts can be confusing, comment-wise, 'cause I keep adding to and updating the dates on them as our bumbling hero says something new (or I find something he said earlier) on the subject. Even so, I think it's worth it to have these one-stop shopping citations of his bigoted (or in one case, foolish and contradictory) statements on these topics. As long as folks read the dates on the comments, I think they'll figure out how it works...)
So, reading the dates is fundamental! Thought one of my clones had escaped. Must keep better track of what I say and when. Down, ex-DLB, down!
That clerk upstate said it was against her religious convictions, and so of course I can respect her decision to stand on principle and let the county hire someone with a bigger heart.
Her co-worker, also a county clerk, also quit, but because he said it wasn't worth the additional work he'd have to do for the pittance he's paid. Again, this is a reason I can get behind.
The question is, which one of them gets a respectable job working for a local business for more money (probably packing groceries would pay that) and which one of them flames out on FOX News after her first paid appearance and ends up filing for "the welfare"?
I pretty much agree with you, Carl...
I believe folks who morally object to some portion of their job ought to think long and hard about whether they should continue in that profession, and I have no problem with those who decide they should not.
Folks opposed to oral contraception or "morning after" pills probably shouldn't be pharmacists. Vegans shouldn't work in slaughterhouses. And those opposed to marriage equality shouldn't license or perform marriages they are morally opposed to. If your ethics prevent you from performing the duties of your job you should try to get reasonable accommodation, as long as neither you nor those you serve (employer or customer) is unduly inconvenienced, but if that isn't possible, you should consider finding a new profession.
The one thing I do object to is folks who think they have a right to keep their job, and that their employers and customers just have to accept their refusal to do that thing they oppose. (I seem to recall a story or two about pharmacists who refused to fill contraceptive / RU486 prescriptions, but believed they had a right to keep their job, regardless.)
RACIST = REPPY = LAZY ASS = MOFO = FREAK = RIM STATION = COMMIE!!
Recycling year-old posts, and the stale "HE'S A BIGOT" allegations. Blah. Blah. Blah.
Losers. All of you.
Pathetic. Freakin' knuckledraggin' lazy mofo!!
And criminal too, with your record of workplace harassment and intimidation.
You're a bad man. A criminal rim station freak, RacistRepMasterCommie!!!
"Recycling year-old posts..."
Not recycling... Just adding to. When you say something bigoted about gay folks, it gets posted here, in the order you posted it. (Black folks, muslims, immigrants have their own posts, too.)
"...and the stale "HE'S A BIGOT" allegations."
They ain't all stale. The most recent addition was from last Wednesday, and the one before that was only three weeks earlier, on June 21st, 2011, which ain't all that long ago, Don, my man... (If you grew a bit more heart and stopped making bigoted statements, perhaps these posts would go stale... Hasn't happened yet, though... We are praying for you, however...)
(No point even bothering with the rest... It's all been and done... ...and pretty friggin' stale bullshit and ad hom, besides.)
Thanks for stopping by, though... Always glad to have you come visit, and prove to all concerned that you are just who we say you are.
(Not that I expect you to take my word for it--just as I don't take your word that you have legions of AmPow fans writing to you via private e-mail to whine about me--but folks do occasionally write wondering whether I made you up, as a prototypical composite example of a bad wingnut. These visits help to prove you and your bigotry and bullshit is at least as real as it appears... if not moreso.)
You freakin' idiot!! "Wingnut" is a term of derision. There are no "good" wingnuts, you dolt. And of course you're lying about people "asking" about me. It's just you and exDLB, and he's even deleting his old comments because they're so stupid. And I never claimed "legions". Some of my commenters, Jan for example, have risked their safety to enter into your comment threads to point out your evil. IT'S YOU WHO ARE BIGOTED. You refused to respond to me pointing out your racism and and race-centric identification. I'm color blind in my dealings with people. You, no so much. You even said you look at someone's ethnic background first and box them into corners. I posted links and you never responded, loser. And gay, straight? I don't care. I don't accept the radical gay rim station lifestyle that you always celebrate and defend. That's why you're a rim station freak. Not because YOU are gay, you idiot, but because you endorse and defend a dangerous lifestyle and sick unhealthy ideological agenda.
You're a gross mofo. Sure hope you and DLB are NOT doing mutual hummers up in New York.
Loser. Freakin' douchebag progressive ReppyDoltDickwad loser. You're a legend in your own mind. And Fauxmaxbear's.
""Wingnut" is a term of derision. There are no "good" wingnuts, you dolt."
And yet, even among wingnuts, you manage to stand out as a particularly bad one...
"And of course you're lying about people "asking" about me."
Hey... If you sleep better at night believing that, you just keep on repeating those words...
" It's just you and exDLB..."
And you, of course...
You keep saying no one's reading these posts, but you keep right on charging over to... correct them? (NO, not that... All you seem to do is shout a bunch of meaningless insults--which seems to amuse you, but only makes you look more foolish to the rest of us--and run back to your hidey-hole, where you can control which comments get through, and which do not..) Kinda make folks wonder why you bother...
"Some of my commenters, Jan for example, have risked their safety to enter into your comment threads to point out your evil."
Jan was one of the few (though it was your comment section, on your blog, not mine) who did speak her mind in her own voice, yes. Jan was of course, welcome to her opinion. (Since it was the only opinion she ever offered at your blog, before or since, it's kinda hard to jug it's worth in the grand scheme of things, but at least she did speak up that one time.) I responded with answers to her questions, and my take on the situation between us, and that was that. Since she never said more, it's entirely possible she found my response compelling, and perhaps rethought her whole initial comment. But since she never said either way, we may never know...
"You refused to respond to me pointing out your racism and and race-centric identification."
Pretty sure I did, Don... I'll take a look, and if you are correct, I'll be sure to do that soon... I have no problem discussing your weird allegations of racism... As far as I'm concerned, they only show how desperate you've become to pin something of substance on me... (If I have ALREADY responded, I'll point you in that direction, so you can read what you seem to've missed.)
"I'm color blind in my dealings with people."
Colorblind. Right.
I'm sure anyone following that link can see how colorblind you were when you made those posts... Keep telling yourself that it ain't bigotry to post photoshops of Obama as a pimp, or go into that faux black dialect, Don... The posts don't lie, my friend. No matter how many times you deny it, folks can see it for themselves...
"You even said you look at someone's ethnic background first and box them into corners."
No, what I said was, it isn't racist or bigoted to include ethnicity or race when describing a person. It is no more eeeeevil or raaaaacist to say a black person is black or a japanese person is japanese than it is to say a guy dressed in a dark suit with a striped tie is wearing a dark suit and a striped tie, or a bald guy is bald. Including the race or ethnicity of a person is descriptive, not bigoted. Every mention of race is NOT inherently racist. And you're grasping at non-existent straws to suggest otherwise.
"And gay, straight? I don't care. I don't accept the radical gay rim station lifestyle that you always celebrate and defend."
But you seem to attribute this "evil" lifestyle to all gay folks. Don't you think it's possible that some of the gay folks who might've gone to the former Broome County clerk for wedding licenses had she not resigned might not've been "rim station freaks"? (And by the by... There was also a timing flaw in your argument; Since the law was only just changed, and no gay folks had yet applied for a license from her, or any other county clerk, what makes you think she'd had it up to here with "rim station freaks" (gays), in the first place? Exactly how or why was she coming into contact with them at the job she just left, if she hadn't issued marriage license #1 to a single one of 'em, yet? Something to consider, that...)
If you really didn't think less of gay folks, you wouldn't use homosexuality as a slur against folks you disagree with... but, you do. (You're even kind enough to include a brand new example in your comment, lest there be any doubt: "Sure hope you and DLB are NOT doing mutual hummers up in New York.") Why would it matter if we were, if, as you claim, "And gay, straight? I don't care."? You seem to care... alot. And Donald, that kinda thing says alot more than your worthless dime store denial.
"...it's entirely possible she found my response compelling."
You freaking bonehead.
We're good friends and she routinely communicates her nausea at your extremism, stalking, hate enabling, workplace intimidation, and devil worship. She thinks you're evil. So no, nothing you've ever said was compelling. You're a bad man. It matters little whether you acknowledge it or not, but Jan's not alone. She only entered the comments because she could no longer stand your genuine evil. She says that, you racist freak.
Others are reviewing your evil slanders as well. Yes, people are reading your stuff. You should rethink your diabolical attacks.
"If you really didn't think less of gay folks, you wouldn't use homosexuality as a slur against folks you disagree with... but, you do."
That's a lie, again. I already said I slam you because you back an extreme lifestyle, you dolt. My alleged "bigotry" is an invention in your mind. It's the same kind of invention that got Scott Eric Kaufman in trouble and liable to potential criminal charges and/or further legal action for contacting my employment. And you are an accomplice to the same attacks at my workplace. Nothing anyone has alleged is true. It's all lies and smears. It's unacceptable. If you had a moral bearing you'd be ashamed, but you don't. And the reckoning is coming. Are you ready? You should apologize, like Scott Eric Kaufman has done. You should apologize for inventing all these "harms." As you always say, "it's just words." Or, just words when you say them, no matter how sick or libelous. But now you're getting in trouble with your false allegations of bigotry. You should really rethink. Defamation is not legal.
So much hilarity Don. Really glad Reppy invented you.
Some of my commenters, Jan for example, have risked their safety to enter into your comment threads to point out your evil.
Don't worry Jan is safely tied up in the Rim Station basement. Soon as I get my Snidely Whiplash moustache grown out it's the railroad tracks for her. Hope Amtrak is on time.
Lucky we're all such fags over here or we'd be having our way with her. Well, late for mutual hummer time. Toodles Donnie! And don't worry you are still the wingnuttiest wingnut on the internet. Sorry was that derisive?
BTW, if defamation is illegal you really should stop defaming yourself. The Obama Kops are watching.
"We're good friends and she routinely communicates her nausea at your extremism, stalking, hate enabling, workplace intimidation, and devil worship."
Perhaps she does make these routine observations... privately, to you. But she only spoke publicly that one time, and that's all I have to go by... Whatever she's whispering in your ear--or not whispering in your ear, since you might be making that up, for all the rest of us know--in pretty much the same way you allege I'm inventing the folks who wonder if I created you as a bad example, btw...--her opinion is only worth something to the folks she's speaking to directly. Third party reports from biased sources are worth every cent you pay for 'em... if not less. If she really is saying those things to you, I'm glad you have a supporter, and I hope you folks are friends for a long time. But until she once again speaks to me on the subject in her own voice, I'm stealing the Herman Cain line. "I does not care."
"Others are reviewing your evil slanders as well. Yes, people are reading your stuff. You should rethink your diabolical attacks."
Without agreeing to your characterization of what I say (or "theirs," whoever "they" are), I post 'em for "others" to read. I'm glad "they're" reading them. Nothin' wrong with the marketplace of ideas... ...or with folks disagreeing, either. If everyone thought I was right, or you were right, it'd be a far more boring--and dare I say, fucked up-- country. America is built on exactly that kinda marketplace of ideas and disagreement. (Otherwise it'd be a monarchy, or dictatorship.) NO-ONE person, party, or faction is right all the time. A good part of America's genius rests on that tension and disagreement between we Americans.
" I already said I slam you because you back an extreme lifestyle, you dolt."
Sorry, Don... Suggesting that Kevin and I may be sucking each other off is not slamming me (or him) because either one or both of us back a lifestyle with which you disagree. It's calling straight men gay, in an effort to insult them... and it is insulting... not so much to Kevin or I, but to gay folks, for using who they are as a verbal attack, as though being gay--or calling someone gay-- makes one less of a person than we straight folks.
"It's the same kind of invention that got Scott Eric Kaufman in trouble and liable to potential criminal charges and/or further legal action for contacting my employment."
I don't know anything about Scott contacting anyone, but if he did contact LBCC, I think he went too far (just as I think the other's who've done so have gone too far.)
His "invention," though--if it was that thing about posting young hotties on your blog--was sound. If you have a blog that you even occasionally suggest your students read or refer to, it is kinda unprofessional to post photos of student-aged hotties in their underwear on that blog. It's just an opinion--and you are of course, free to have a different opinion, at least unless/until someone whose opinion you respect (or have to respect) suggests that you rethink your opinion--but as far as I'm concerned, I think Scott was correct. It's free speech, and it's legal, but it isn't professional, and it isn't smart.
"And you are an accomplice to the same attacks at my workplace."
Look... I'm sure there are lawyers who will do anything for money. But I really don't believe that anyone with legal ethics will find that I am responsible because back in 2009, another author--who no longer even posts here--reposted publicly available information over my documented objections, after the fact, on a blog I administered. Perhaps I'll be proved wrong... but Donald, I just don't think so.
"And the reckoning is coming. Are you ready?"
That sounds like a threat, Donald. I really hope you're not making threats.
"But now you're getting in trouble with your false allegations of bigotry. You should really rethink. Defamation is not legal."
I'm repeating your words and photos, and expressing my opinion about them. (Surely it is still legal to say what one believes about a thing, isn't it?) The words and pictures are there, with links to where and when you said them, in full context. People can make up their own minds as to whether or not you say bigoted things. I'm just expressing my own opinion.
Besides... You have frequently alleged I am a racist, have you not? If what I'm doing is defamation, isn't what you're doing defamation, too, or is this another of those double standards, where "it's wrong for thee, but not for me?"
While I don't happen to think it is defamation to express an opinion, I certainly would present evidence of your specious allegations of my supposed racism, if ever called upon by anyone to do so... You can't have it both ways, Dr Douglas (at least not logically, ethically, or legally)... If you believe it's defamation to suggest that someone has engaged in bigoted or racist speech, than it's defamation when EITHER of us (or anyone) makes such a suggestion... I'd mull that over some, Donald... I think you're arguing against your own interests, here...
The "marketplace of ideas" does not include attacks on one's employment. Period. You're an accomplice to the intimidation. YOU should be apologizing.
And you idiot, you're supposed to be an "expert" on my blog. I DO NOT RECOMMEND my blog to students. I haven't for years, precisely because SEK began a campaign to get me fired, based on the same kind of criminal allegations you make and continue to make. Besides, even if I did recommend my blog, the college has already determined, and the police have been informed, that what I do on my blog is my business. There is no college nexus. The more you advocate, promote, agitate and attempt to destroy me in your wicked campaign of intimidation the more legal ramifications YOU will face. YOU NEED to apologize on the record, like Scott Erik Kaufman has done. YOU are a criminal. YOU have slandered my reputation with falsehoods and malicious libels, because that's what rim station freaks like yourself do.
Asshole.
You're in denial, as well. You know Jan comments to me, in private and in public. It matters to you because you are desperate to not be evil, but you are, and my friend Philippe Öhlund has also repudiated your evil, and he runs the New Testament blog. Basically, folks with a Christian background think your work is the devil.
Time for a public apology. YOUR deathly advocacy has no place in proper discourse. And it's not "free speech."
Huh. as I remember Philippe thought the "Donald the Buffalo Humping Moose" post was kind of funny.
Nobody here at American Nihilist want you fired or intimidated at work Professor Douglas. We support moose buggerers as much as any of kind of buggerer.
'Nobody here at American Nihilist want you fired or intimidated at work Professor Douglas.'
Another lie.
Carl Salonen is making a home here in the comments, making threats, and this is fully endorsed and promoted by RACIST = REPSAC = CASPER = RIM STATION = FREAK.
It's all on the record. Thanks guys. Keep it up. This blog is a criminal enterprise. Looking for that apology before things get worse for you, much worse.
Criminals. Losers. Fail
I meant on the rolls of AN. That's Kevin, Reppy and me. Who's Carl Salonin? I don't keep up with everyone who thinks you're a shithead Professor. That would be far more work than my old Nihilist ass is willing to do.
"The "marketplace of ideas" does not include attacks on one's employment. "
You can't cite a single time I've ever made an attack on your employment. I've regularly and consistently spoken out against it when others have contacted LBCC about your blogging activities, in fact.
I think the folks at LBCC should be paying attention to what you write, sometimes, because I believe you're hurting their brand and steering some folks away from that institution, but whether they do or not is up to them, not me.
" I DO NOT RECOMMEND my blog to students."
So, who was it who posted this? "I recommend my blog for students to read, on a voluntary, non-assignment basis. Occasionally I'll pull up an academic post in class as a lecture launcher -- and actually, THAT'S A GOOD TEACHING THING!!" Was that guy lying, or are you?
"I haven't for years, precisely because SEK began a campaign to get me fired, based on the same kind of criminal allegations you make and continue to make."
So, SEK was lying, and "criminally" wrong when he quoted you saying that two years ago... ...but you don't recommend that your students read your blog anymore, anyway. Right. Makes perfect sense.
"Besides, even if I did recommend my blog, the college has already determined, and the police have been informed, that what I do on my blog is my business. There is no college nexus."
I suspect there may be some clause about defamation toward the college and it's employees --(which I suspect, is why you removed that post where you called some of your fellow professors lesbians, communists, and communist lesbians, or whatever-- no, it may not be an exact quote, but the gist is right...)-- and I would think it prudent for any/all to contact LBCC if you ever admitted to or advocated anything criminal on your blog, especially anything involving the school or it's faculty, staff or students, but other than that, I agree completely. What you post on your blog is not an LBCC issue, and shouldn't be made one... not even by them. I've never said anything different, ever.
"The more you advocate, promote, agitate and attempt to destroy me in your wicked campaign of intimidation the more legal ramifications YOU will face."
I'm only blogging, Don. I'm quoting you, and expressing my opinions. I'm pretty sure there are no legal ramifications to doing either, but if you intend to pursue some kinda legal thing over it (which is sounding more and more likely, the way you're talking), I guess we'll see. Stranger things have happened, I guess... But I gotta tell ya, Dr Douglas... You're coming off like a big ol' crybaby, if you're really running off to lawyers because I quote what you say, and then express my opinion about it, right here on the internet. That's what bloggers do. If ya ask me, the answer to blogging you don't like or agree with should be more blogging, not legal action...
"e. YOU NEED to apologize on the record, like Scott Erik Kaufman has done."
I don't recall SEK's public apology or the circumstances of it. As recently as July 11th (six days ago) you were still requesting "...a formal apology and witten retraction" from him on your blog, and I don't see where you got either one since. Any chance you can post a link to exactly what he said where and when?
"YOU are a criminal."
I really don't believe I am... but if I am--at least based on the allegations you're making--a whole lotta bloggers, including you, yourself "am" criminals, too. That, and freedom of expression is dead.
"YOU have slandered my reputation with falsehoods and malicious libels..."
Cite one falsehood. I fucking QUOTE you, Donald. I CITE the blog post from which I take the quote, too, so that anyone who wishes can go back and read what you wrote in full context on your blog (or the blog where you made the comment, if not yours).
You (and perhaps others) may disagree with my OPINION about what you've said, but opinions are not factual statements, subject to allegations that they are lies. (I disagree with a whole lotta your opinions, too, but they ain't lies, either.) Opinions (mine and yours) can be debated, but they are neither objectively "truthful" or "lies."
Cite the falsehoods, Donald. Don't tell, SHOW!!, and let folks judge for themselves whether or not either of us is lying.
"You know Jan comments to me, in private and in public."
I only know what I see, Dr. Douglas... And I can only recall one comment from Jan on your blog in toto, and certainly only one about me. You are free to cite others (of either variety), if you wish to allege that I am mistaken (or lying). Barring that, I'm sticking by what I said...
Philippe Öhlund is a somewhat pleasant fellow, but I don't put a whole lotta stock in what he says, either... I'm all for redemption and all, so I don't hold his admitted Nazi past against him, but he also advocates that some books (such as the Koran, and Mein Kampf) should be banned. (Of course, HE was able to read both without being corrupted--thus being able to issue these warnings about their danger--but lesser men might not be able to handle them.) As with Jan, I'm glad he agrees with you, but in his case, I'm not sure I'd be advertising it, if I were you... Christian or not, some of his views are a little bit "out there," especially for us Americans.
I'm not denying that there are people who agree with you Donald. Of course there are, and more power to you all... I'm just saying that I don't agree with a whole lot of what you say, and I'm taking to my own blog, to explain what I believe thinking like yours represents.
"YOUR deathly advocacy has no place in proper discourse. And it's not "free speech.'"
Once one gets the government involved (in the form of the US legal system), it's all free speech, Donald. As with Philippe's advocacy of book-banning, your suggestion that my posts are somehow "criminal," or "not free speech" is nutso, at least to me... Others, may of course, differ with that opinion... (Will it be "criminal" of them to write a post or comment saying so? Stay tuned, dear readers (Kevin, at least)... stay tuned...)
Oops... missed a link, re SEK's apology. That paragraph should read:
I don't recall SEK's public apology or the circumstances of it. As recently as July 11th (six days ago) you were still requesting "...a formal apology and witten retraction" from him on your blog, and I don't see where you got either one since. Any chance you can post a link to exactly what he said where and when?
"Shhh... Be wery, wery qwiet... Donald is wooking faw SEK's witten wetwaction..."
(Yeah, I know... Making fun of the speech-impared, and Donald's typo, too... But in fairness... Well, I just couldn't resist. Guilty as charged.)
((There goes my politically correct moonbat merit badge, I guess... Too bad...))
This blog is a HATE site.
And you don't know shit because not everything that's happened is posted at a comment thread, you freaking stooge.
'I've regularly and consistently spoken out against it'.
Having your cake and eating it. Asshole. We've been through this before. You're shocked, SHOCKED!!!, that anyone on YOUR blog would threaten my employment. This is what you do. This is what AmNi is all about. It's a harsassment and bullying blog.
You don't have a clue. My college is in the loop in a way that you and your accusers can never be. Nope. No recommendations. That's the policy. SEK's complaint was libelous, because he made allegations of CURRENT violations, you dolt, which included claims that I impersonated him. He had ZERO evidence. Zilch. He was made to eat shit. He's now sulking to stay out of legal trouble. And you are furthering the harassment on this blog. THIS blog is furthering the harassment!
The "I recommend my blog" comment was written in 2-freakin'-009. SEK's been on the warpath since then. I do NOT recommend the blog and even if I did that's NOT an assignment, which is what both SEK and Carl Salonen alleged in their complaints to LBCC. You have furthered the complaints with continued LIBELOUS threats on THIS blog. Do you have a lawyer?
Get a clue and get a life. You are a progressive bully.
The SEK apology's in. Why do you think he's totally AWOL? Not because a friend died. He's been proved depraved and beaten at his demonic game of intimidation. Now, YOU need to quit your bullying and criminal harassment campaign on this blog and issue an apology, at the least.
It is not "just" blogging when you sponsor workplace intimidation on your blog. Not only should you be ashamed, you should be worried.
You CANNOT do what you do. You are engaged in online bullying, harassment and workplace intimidation. That's illegal.
Apologize publicly on this blog. Let's see it ...
First off, (just in case ol' Don wanted to make any specious SPAM FILTER ISREAL!!! allegations about my temporarily censoring him, like the last time this happened)
In spam folder: DD Comment spam photo #1
Checked, and ready to be released (includes time): DD Comment spam photo #2
Released (again, including time): DD Comment spam photo #3
Now...
"And you don't know shit because not everything that's happened is posted at a comment thread..."
Unlike you, Don, I'm only discussing those things that are posted. I'm sure there are many things that occur in other spheres of your life--including conversations with all manner of folks, on all manner of subjects, perhaps even including me--but if it isn't said to me or within my earshot (digital or otherwise), I really have no interest. Really, I don't.
I mean, you're free to report that "Jan said this about me when you had lunch with her last week," or "reader X sent you an e-mail wondering how long I've been a devil-worshiper," but if they're not willing to say it to me themselves, in their own voices, and in a place where I can respond, you might as well be reporting that you saw Elvis dancing with ET last week. Without proof, it's just your pretty obviously biased say so... Their opinions are noted, and summarily dismissed. (by me, anyway... You and yours can give 'em all the weight you wish.)
"You're shocked, SHOCKED!!!, that anyone on YOUR blog would threaten my employment."
No, I'm not in the least bit shocked. I just think that no one, not on my blog or anywhere else, should do that, barring real threats to the college or anyone associated with it. And that's what I've consistently said.
But just because I don't think Octo should've suggested that anyone contact LBCC in his post here--(as I recall, he never actually did contact either of those two men, did he?)--that doesn't mean I was obligated to remove or censor his post. I spoke out against it, and gave him the responsibility for doing the right thing, or suffering the consequences of not rethinking his post. (Which I expected would be online recrimination for a few months... not frivolous lawsuits against third parties, over two years later.) And Donald, my man, this, too was in "2-freakin'-009," wasn't it?... (And, at least I'm not trying to turn *my* old reference into some kinda retaliatory legal fantasy facade.)
"SEK's complaint was libelous, because he made allegations of CURRENT violations, you dolt, which included claims that I impersonated him."
" I do NOT recommend the blog and even if I did that's NOT an assignment, which is what both SEK and Carl Salonen alleged in their complaints to LBCC."
Again, I have no clue what the fuck you're talking about, because apparently, all of this happened without you, either one of them, or anyone else saying anything about it publicly. Should any of you actually speak on the record, perhaps I'll give my opinion, but until then, all I have to go by is what y'all have said publicly, and that's all I've discussed in this or any forum... ...you dolt.
"You have furthered the complaints with continued LIBELOUS threats on THIS blog."
Dude, put up or shut up. Don't tell folks what I did, SHOW ME ACTUALLY DOING IT. Quote and cite these supposed threats I've made "on THIS blog," (your words... As far as I'm concerned you can quote and cite any threats you believe I made concerning you anywhere you think I made one) or stop making the specious claim. Because as far as I know, I have made no threats on this blog or elsewhere, libelous or otherwise. And your allegations that I have ring kinda hollow if you're not willing to document a single threat.
"He's now sulking to stay out of legal trouble."
"The SEK apology's in. Why do you think he's totally AWOL? Not because a friend died. He's been proved depraved and beaten at his demonic game of intimidation."
I kinda doubt it, Donald... You seem to think you have far more "american power" than you actually do, my friend. You can believe whatever you wish, but I think SEK is far more worthy of trust than you are, so I hope you won't mind if I take him at his word, rather than take you at yours. (This is one of them "opinion" things, Don. Unless you can prove he's scared of you, and not grieving a friend, I call bullshit on your bullshit (and kinda inhumane, and unfeeling) allegations.)
As for the rest (what appears to be some kinda threat of legal action), all I can say is I'll have to deal with it as it comes.
As far as I can tell, I'm not doing anything different than other bloggers do... including you, Dr. Douglas. I quote you, and I discuss what I think of what you have to say.
Allowing another author to repeat public information on a blog I administer, or to allowing him to suggest that those offended by you use that information to contact the folks listed, even, is almost certainly not illegal. I was not legally obligated to stop him from doing so before the fact (Like commenters, the authors here at AmNi can post at will... No one's posts or comments are vetted for acceptability before the fact here. The only "vetting" is after the fact by the readers, via their comments), or to censor or remove his post after the fact.
I spoke out against his post shortly after he posted it, and I subsequently censored it, once he stopped blogging here--(two months later, give or take a week... He left because he was pissed off that I disagreed with him about that same post, ironically.)--and I wasn't legally obligated to do either of those things, either.
Morally, I think that whoever suggested contacting--or actually did contact--anyone associated with LBCC about your blogging practices was wrong to do so. But legally, I don't believe even THOSE folks are in any legal jeopardy, let alone me. If I'm wrong, I guess I'll learn and grow from having had the experience. I'm here in the meantime, and until Dr Douglas and his lawyers shut me down... (Also kind of ironic, no?)
You're mighty testy Professor. The fact is that myself and at least two others offered to write letters supporting your right to run your blog should your superiors attempt any censorship or disciplinary actions.
For what it's worth, I'd still do that.
But as to all these "emails" you receive from "supporters" why don;t they all just leave a comment in your comment section? I think most of your "supporters" live in your mind or are smart asses like us who like pulling your chain buddy.
I support your right to post pics of semi nude chicks on your blog. You're even welcome to use Bertha and Donetta if you think that would provide titallation to your thirsty for intellectual neo con meat would sate them.
But c'mon Professor. You do posts about "rim jobs" and "toilet sex." and stuff like that, what do you expect?
'Allowing another author to repeat public information on a blog I administer, or to allowing him to suggest that those offended by you use that information to contact the folks listed, even, is almost certainly not illegal.'.
You don't sound so sure of yourself. Mighta thought that one through a bit more before sponsoring campaigns of workplace intimidation. Workplace harassment can take place by someone outside of the employee's workplace. YOU have not only posted, promoted, and recruited workplace attacks against me, you still host threats at this blog since the investigation began.
Let's see your full apology.
SEK's is on file. Not believing me is not in your interest. He submitted it after I slammed him in his commments. He's begging off now, pleading, beaten, so that I won't blog about him any more. I do reserve the right to publish it at any time. And I reserve the right to publish Carl Salonen's attacks, which you are now being an accomplice to. Don't kid yourself about how these aren't published, blah, blah, blah. SEK has not updated his blog and he's not responded to me in the comments, because he's beaten. Shouldn't have started it.
'...legally, I don't believe even THOSE folks are in any legal jeopardy, let alone me.'
You're not too smart, Reppy. The investigations are continuing. This blog is an attack blog and a hate blog. YOU do not have a free speech right to attempt to get someone fired from their work. That's harassment. That is against federal and state law. YOU are a bully.
Let's see that apology. Publish it here at the blog ...
And the reckoning is coming. Are you ready?
Don's coming boys, and Hell's coming* with him!
*For legal reasons I must state that it is not my intent to imply here that Don and the many denizens of Hell are engaging in any type of simultaneous orgasmic release, locked in a sweaty passionate embrace, their bulbous and flaming bodies intertwined as one, mutually masturbating and/or fellating each other to an orgiastic crescendo echoing throughout the very halls of the LBCC and the multiple ears of Cerberus itself. That is not my intent at all. Perhaps I should lawyer up anyway though, just in case.
This stuff is great. When I said that your entertainment value alleviates my boredom with you from time to time Don, this is what I meant. I say you love devil cock; is that libelous? Tell your cadre of lawyers to do their worst. BWAHAHAHA!, etc, etc.
JBW!!!
Are you really interesting in getting involved? RACIST = REPSAC is a criminal conspiracy mastermind!
Looking for that formal apology any time now.
Good fuck, you're insane Don. Do you allow your students to hand in work with no footnotes or references or some such. Yet you come here and offer no links to any of your specious bullshit. You are truly the Frank Burns of the internet.
Reppy, thanks for providing the sanity breaks in between Don's spittle flecked diatribes (sorry is that defamation). Do you think Don might be too delicate a flower for the internet?
JBW where'd you come from? Must have popped in while I was enjoying the thread. Good to see you bro. Glad to see you chiming in on teh defamation of Donald. We're gonna bend him over and defile him later. Then it's mutual hummers.
Reppy can we work mutual hummers into the blog name or wouldn't google like that? Just say we all got humvees.
Don!!
YOU = CLOWN SHOES.
I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll and masterminded the Watergate break in. I kidnapped the Lindburgh baby and assassinated Archduke Ferdinand. I caused the mortgage crisis and that was my spooge on Monica's dress. I was around when Jesus Christ had his moment of doubt and pain and I made damn sure that Pilate washed his hands and sealed his fate.
Golly, I sure hope I haven't left myself open to any type of totally serious legal prosecution like all these dirty rim stationers...
Hey Kevin (or ex DLB or Fauxmaxbaer or Keyser Söze or whatever alias you're using now), glad to be in on teh fun. I've summoned the ghost of Johnny Cochran with my ouija board so I think I'm safe from Don's legal arsenal (if Don's crazy as shit, you must acquit) but the rest of you guys are on your own. Hummmmm...
Fauxmaxbaer, failed blogger, worse-than-troll commenter, says:
'Yet you come here and offer no links to any of your specious bullshit.
Don't blame me. Blame Scott Eric Kaufman. He put conditions on the apology. But since Reppy's been working with SEK in the campaign of intimidation, he can easily confirm with an e-mail to Scott. Reppy notified SEK of blog posts at AmPow, and SEK then posted at LGM, etc. You guys are one big team. Great job in possibly breaking state and federal law with criminal harassment.
This blog is a hate site. You're all involved in a campaign of intimidation and harassment, and you have been for some time. Trying to get me fired crossed lines. Flame wars, etc., no problem. But REPSAC = RACIST = CRIMINAL has been implicated.
"You don't sound so sure of yourself"
I'll confess to not being so sure of what some lawyers will do if you pay 'em enough money, that's for sure. I do trust the legal system, however....
That said, I hope you don't mind if I wait to recieve whatever it is you and your legal team intend to send, and then have my legal team look it over, before getting all excited about any of this. While I'm not absolutely certain, I do suspect that first amendment protections favor my position, given what you are (and more importantly, are not) alleging.
"YOU have not only posted, promoted, and recruited workplace attacks against me..."
Heh.
"...you still host threats at this blog since the investigation began."
Oh, now I only *host* threats...
Don, the only threats I see on this blog are the ones you're posting. If you're alleging otherwise, I once again invite you to put a quote / citation in place of all this blabber and blather. No more tell; SHOW. If someone said something "threatening" here that has your Antonin Scalia/Clarence Thomas underoos all in a bunch, I cordially invite you to be more specific, so we can intelligently discuss it, whatever *it* may be...
"SEK's is on file. Not believing me is not in your interest. He submitted it after I slammed him in his commments."
Maybe it isn't in my best interests and maybe it is, but as long as you refuse to show it, I refuse to believe SEK's "apology" is what you say it is, assuming any such thing exists, in the first place...
(Back at 12:34 PM (seven hours ago, give or take), you were saying Scott's apology was "...on the record...", which I (foolishly, I guess) assumed meant it was, ya know, on the record, publicly, where folks could actually see it. Silly me...)
If it's just another of those things privately whispered in your ear, well, like I said, I'm just not interested in your "secret" claims of wonderfulness and vindication. If it ain't public, it ain't worth the electrons it takes you to even bring it up.
"And I reserve the right to publish Carl Salonen's attacks, which you are now being an accomplice to."
First off, I don't know anything about Carl's attacks, either... Far as I'm concerned, he's just blogging & commenting, the same as the rest of us. (You have alleged that he contacted LBCCC, too, but if that's even true, I'm neither aware or involved in any aspect thereof, regardless of your specious "accomplice" allegations.) He seems to give at least as good as he gets, and I understand that he's hurt your feelings a few times.
But c'mon... Donald... Are you really trying to say that bloggers are legally accomplices to every word anyone posts in a comment on their blog?
I mean, I like Carl, n'all... But he's just a commenter here, same as you... ...and as such, I really doubt that I can be held legally responsible for what either one of you says, here. (...even more than I doubt that I can be held legally responsible for what another author says here, I mean...)
"The investigations are continuing."
I'll be here, at least as long as they are (and I suspect, far longer...)
"YOU do not have a free speech right to attempt to get someone fired from their work. "
Considering I have never once attempted to do any such thing, I'm not quite sure it matters.
(But for the record, I'm pretty sure I could allege you were an awful, rotten, dishonest, biased professor who should be fired... ...if I were one of your students (or the parent of one of your students), and presented evidence to back up my claims; and that even THAT would be perfectly legal protected free speech.)
"YOU are a bully."
I really don't believe I am... ...but even IF I were, being a bully is not against the law, either, so please don't include that among your specious legal charges. (And if your lawyer is telling you he can sue for "Acrimonious Bullitude," or something, I'd ask to see his credentials... He's prolly not a real lawyer.)
You sure get around Don. I don't think I've visited LGM more than three times over the years.
But for all the nonsense you accuse us of, you're the biggest shit stirrer there is Don. Not that I care. I'm relieved that JBW came clean about spooging on Monica's dress. I've been scared all to hell the Clinton's were going to lay the blame on me for supporting Obama in the primary.
You're a piker Don. Don't mess with the Clintons.
'Considering I have never once attempted to do any such thing...'
Well, innocent until proven guilty, I guess.
You're an accomplice, one who actively participates in the commission of a crime.
'Even if an accomplice does not carry out the crime, in the eyes of the law the accomplice's pre-crime assistance makes him or her just as guilty as the person who does the deed itself'.
You've endorsed (you're own confirmation), sponsored, and recruited bloggers to AmNi Shithole to stalk, publish workplace contacts, and agitate to get me fired. Basically, YOU RUN A HATE SITE. You've also forwarded AmPower blog posts to SEK, and he then wrote these up at LGM and his own blog. When I responded at my blog, he freaked, stupidly, and overstepped the proper boundaries. You also have Carl Salonen making additional threats in your comment threads, and all this is noted for further investigation. It's wrong and evil. You're an accomplice. You can confirm everything with your henchman SEK.
And I'll be looking for your published apology ....
What's your real agenda Don? Trying to get some kind of concession to impress a girl or maybe a right wing blogger of real renown?
Your last statement about Reppy recruiting bloggers to get you fired is utter bullshit. Reppy and I have both said we would support you if your blogging caused you to lose your job or face disciplinary action.
Or, and I'm speculating, you are in trouble at work and you're using AM as a scapegoat. Typical behavior when employees are in trouble. They accuse others of causing the problems or think it will employers overlook their discretions if they think someone else was worse.
You can tell the old union rep and vice president Don. Of all of us you seem to dislike me the least. Which is it Bro? One of the things I suspect or maybe you were just bored and wanted to screw with Reppy.
"Blame Scott Eric Kaufman. He put conditions on the apology."
Assuming that's even true, these are conditions that you just said you don't believe you have an obligation to adhere to... (or did we all misunderstand that bit where you just said I do reserve the right to publish it at any time.""?) It's time to stop hedging, and to put up or shut up, Donald.
"But since Reppy's been working with SEK in the campaign of intimidation, he can easily confirm with an e-mail to Scott. Reppy notified SEK of blog posts at AmPow, and SEK then posted at LGM, etc. You guys are one big team."
And I suppose you have some kinda proof that SEK (& God knows who else) is "working" with me in some kinda conspiratorial campaign of intimidation against you--all the while never doing anything to intimidate anyone myself, y'understand--rather than just being one among a good number of bloggers you've taken on in the last several years, I mean--all of whom independently post about you (when you visit and post comments at our blogs, or attack us on American Power, especially.)
No proof?
No, I thought not.
Some of us have gotten to be online friends and acquaintances, thanks to you, but no, Donald, there is no liberal blogger conspiracy against you... ...just folks responding to the crap you post, on their blogs and on your own.
And by the by... I'm awful surprised your lawyer hasn't suggested that you not make these attacks--especially on "our" blogs--if you're trying to prove some kinda unprovoked malice by me and the rest... I mean, aren't you encouraging a good bit of the treatment you're receiving, by posting comments on the blogs of these "awful, demonic" folks? Wouldn't you be better off if we was attacking you, rather than your coming here (and going to SEK's blog, and perhaps to Carl's as well) to attack us? I mean, I'm just sayin'... You might want to check with your legal team about whether your excursions into our comment sections--or attacks on us posted on your blog, even--are in your best interest, legally-speaking, Donald...
(You're always welcome to comment here--or to attack me on your own blog--of course. I'm always willing to reply, assuming you say something worthy of reply, that is... But given some of what you're alleging, I just wonder whether it's in your best legal interest to be seen as the instigator and the aggressor, here.)
My God is this hilarity still going on? Donald I believe if you were actually talking to any lawyer who existed outside of your head he would be telling you to STFU and not be over here trolling.
And if you won this imaginary lawsuit what would be the damages? I know next to nothing about law but since I'm writing on the internet why let that stop me. In what way have you been monetarily harmed? You still have your job. You still have your reputation as the looniest loon on the web. Your blog is monetized. If anything we may have actually helped drive some traffic to it.
I presume this is a civil and not a criminal case and you're not seeking capital punishment for us. So WTF are you suing us for monetarily?
I'm awful surprised your lawyer hasn't suggested that you not make these attacks--especially on "our" blogs
Yeah, and Don if the judge happens to be one of those "queers" you seem to go on here so much about, you might want to fuhgedaboutit.
Reppy, maybe you know. What's Don suing us for in terms of cash? I don't want to help him out or anything, but in what ways has he been damaged? I don't think we're responsible for his spiral into total wingnutitude (that's derisive you know).
'It's time to stop hedging, and to put up or shut up, Donald.'
Who's hedging? The case is out there. You're an accessory to bad acts, perhaps even criminal.
SEK responded to Serr8d at his last blog post:
'You honestly believe this is an appropriate post to make that kind of comment on? Well then, I suppose this speaks more to your politics than mine.'
But he never responded to me at the thread. Why? He's a loquacious blogger. He's never ignored a debate or challenge. It's obvious. He's beaten. And he forwarded the formal apology. A beaten man.
You're beaten too, loser.
I'm looking for your apology. SEK's made his. He's your buddy. You coordinate with him. Check it out. Scott's frankly embarrassed at his own stupidity, and you're following up right behind.
Now it's time for you to do the right thing. YOU have participated in possibly criminal activity. YOU have a chance to finally do a decent thing. Just publish an apology right here at the blog.
"You're an accomplice, one who actively participates in the commission of a crime."
From Donald's own link (Emboldened by me): "To prove that a defendant is an accomplice, the government must prove that he or she intentionally aided in the commission of a crime. This means that the defendant must realize that the principal is going to commit a crime and that the accomplice intends to help the crime succeed."
Good luck with that, Donald. There's a long record of my saying that I don't believe it is a crime to contact the people for whom you work, beginning a day or so after Octo's post, and including comments made an hour or so ago, right here.
Even right this very minute, I don't believe that ANYONE among your many enemies committed any crime, including the folks who did actually contact the college, or whoever. Harassment may be illegal; sending an e-mail or making a phone call (or even two, or three) ISN'T harassment, and ISN'T illegal.
And besides all that, there is ZERO evidence that I knew ANYONE was going to contact LBCC or anyone else, until after these things happened, and YOU posted about them.
"You've endorsed (you're own confirmation), sponsored, and recruited bloggers to AmNi Shithole to stalk, publish workplace contacts, and agitate to get me fired."
I'm pretty sure everyone involved--up to and including Octo, if asked--will attest to the fact that none of that was in the AmNi brochure.
It was a joke, son. Folks got the joke of you calling every one and everything with which you disagreed "nihilist," and they liked the blog, so it kept going. That's all there ever was to it.
(Granted, I was never particularly good at the funny, and tend(ed) to use my posts to straightforwardly respond to things you said, but that isn't a crime, either.)
There is nothing you can post or offer that has me saying (or sponsoring, or cheering, or egging on, or in any way approving of) ANYTHING about getting you fired or harassing you at your job, from day one of this blog to this very day. Your allegations in this regard are pure fiction.
"You've also forwarded AmPower blog posts to SEK, and he then wrote these up at LGM and his own blog."
No, I'm pretty sure I've never even sent SEK an e-mail of any kind, on any subject. If I had to venture guess as to how SEK learned about posts that you publicly published on your blog, I'd say HE FUCKING READ THEM, RIGHT THERE WHERE YOU PISTED THEM. (That, or perhaps he read them at this blog, here at AmNi.) Neither is a crime. (And for the record, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be a crime if I had forwarded posts to him, either. It is legal to talk about you behind your back (or are you now admitting that you have been/are in a criminal conspiracy against me with Jan, too? Them's the choices, Dr Douglas. Either it's legal to discuss bloggers with whom you don't agree behind their backs, or it isn't. Think about it, and get back to me...)
"You also have Carl Salonen making additional threats in your comment threads, and all this is noted for further investigation."
No, I'm pretty sure that Carl is his own devil. I hold no power over him, and cannot "have" him doing anything he doesn't wish to do... ...and you're still not pointing to any of his "threats," either. I'm inclined to believe you're making those up, as well. He has posted nothing (here or elsewhere) for which I am legally liable. (As far as I'm concerned, he has posted nothing against you at any site for which HE is legally liable, either... ...but that's between you and him... ...and the lawyers, of course. [If he needs a deposition, fine, but otherwise...])
"You can confirm everything with your henchman SEK."
Henchman... That's pretty funny...
I know it's hard for you to accept, but you've engendered this goodwill among all these "enemy" blogs and bloggers all on your own, Dr. Douglas. We're all independent souls, from SEK and Carl, to Octopus, Kevin, Truth, DR Biobrain, and anyone else who's ever authored a post, posted a comment, or even read something here at AmNi.
This "criminal conspiracy" of yours sounds more like a paranoid delusion to me... ...but I'm not a doctor, so you might want to consult one.
"But he never responded to me at the thread. Why? He's a loquacious blogger. He's never ignored a debate or challenge. It's obvious. He's beaten."
Anything's possible, Donald... (Then again, maybe he's just tired of your rim station freakiness, like that woman from Broome county.)
Since he's barely posting anything at all, I'm inclined to think his silence has nothing whatsoever to do with you or your "criminal conspirator," Suck8d. (See... I can make up stupid names for bloggers, just like you...)
I'd respond to the rest... ...but it's all just more repetition and more evasion...
Put up or shut up, Donald --bring forth the quotes and citations in support of these crazy things you allege-- or at least say something new or different... Your whole act--such as it is--is getting kinda stale...
"I don't believe that ANYONE among your many enemies committed any crime, including the folks who did actually contact the college, or whoever.
Harassment is not a protected freedom of speech. The police department will put a restraining order on anyone I ask. Outside harassment disrupts the operation of the college, takes time out from people who would be working on other things, possibly puts students in danger, and threatens my own safety and rights. The fact that SEK is now begging off, so he can avoid greater liability is telling. He agreed that he'd crossed the line. Blogging, flame wars, name-calling. That's all fine. Contacting someone's work, especially with bogus claims of sexual harassment, etc., is not only wrong but criminally negligent. YOU sound "paranoid delusional." In fact, you're in a deep state of denial so as to continue your diabolical campaigns of harassment. Really, you should issue that apology. Just publish it right here at the blog and it can go into the record of the investigation, which is continuing.
Be smart. Do the right thing. You'd be better off retiring this blog to avoid the liability, but short of that, the apology would be a smart move. I'll be looking for it. YOU have crossed the line. SEK finally acknowledged it. YOU are an accomplice. The record speaks for itself. YOU need to do the right thing and make it right by apology. I thought you claimed to be so morally righteous. YOU'RE a bully and a coward. "Anti-bullying" activists like you are the biggest bullies. And you're a sick stalker too.
"But as to all these "emails" you receive from "supporters" why don't they all just leave a comment in your comment section?"
Because if they did, we'd STALK them, too... Their only protection is whispering in Donald's ear in person or via private e-mail, and allowing him post what they tell him... ...or something... (I'm too lazy to find it, but that is the REAL excuse Donald gives when asked that question. His readers--everyone except him, apparently--are all afraid of us.) ((Is it bullshit? Likely. Even I give Don's readership more credit than he does... ...some of 'em, anyway... ...and that was back when he had folks commenting, too.))
---
"Reppy can we work mutual hummers into the blog name..."
I'll have to give that one some thought... (Mostly, I'm trying to stick' with the new word for "nihilist" as fast as he cranks 'em out...) But maybe...
"I presume this is a civil and not a criminal case and you're not seeking capital punishment for us.
I don't know, Kevin... He's alleging CRIMINAL acts, and citing CRIMINAL law... I think he believes disagreeing with him on the internet is a crime, or something...
---
"What's Don suing us for in terms of cash?"
Dude, I'm as new to this as you are, and you know everything I know... Unless/until I see anything official, I'm not sure he's doing anything more than pissing into the wind and claiming he's getting rained on... ...and that it's all my fault he's getting wet, besides.
Beyond that, we shall see...
"Harassment is not a protected freedom of speech."
Harassment may be illegal; sending an e-mail or making a phone call (or even two, or three) ISN'T harassment, and ISN'T illegal.
"Outside harassment... blah, blah, blah ...my own safety and rights.
All very interesting... but, since I never once wrote a single e-mail, telephoned, or even sent smoke signals to anyone at Long Beach City College, or had prior knowledge about anyone else doing so either, it's all kinda academic. Not only haven't I harassed Donald Douglas; I haven't harassed anyone else at LBCC, either.
"The police department will put a restraining order on anyone I ask."
I kinda doubt they'll just blindly slap restraining orders on ANYONE you ask... I suspect that they have to have a good faith basis (if not actual documented threats) before slapping any such thing on anyone.
And besides... Maybe I'm confused, but I'm pretty sure the issuance of restraining orders is a function of the courts, rather than the police. Even in CA, I'm pretty sure they have that same "separation of powers" thing as the rest of the country, and that the police are a part of the executive branch of government.
If the police are telling you that they can issue restraining orders, you might wanna check to see if their badges are made of plastic and smell suspiciously like caramel popcorn and peanuts. (Any red, white, and blue paper wrappers laying around? A picture of a guy in a sailor suit on 'em, perhaps?)
~~~
Donald, I just spent a few minutes checking into your claims.
I was right. the police cannot issue restraining orders, not even in CA. You'll need a court of law, for that, as well as copious evidence of actual threats or harassment. I'm not saying you won't get one against me, but I do kinda doubt it.
Even if you do, it'll only prevent me from doing things I've never done before, and have no intention of doing in the future, either, like visiting you at home or at work, calling you, or sending you an e-mail. A restraining order cannot prevent me from blogging--not even about you.
The statute of limitations on libel/defamation in CA is 1 year from first publication. All that whining about Octo's 2-frickin'009 post is outta date, my friend. Even if there once was a case against one or both of us for his post, the time has run out.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act contains pretty strong protections for bloggers, even if their commenters make actual libelous comments on their blogs. You might want to read up on it...
I'm not saying you may not prevail in some kinda legal proceeding claiming... well, whatever it is you're claiming... but the cards appear to be stacked against ya, bud.
'Harassment may be illegal; sending an e-mail or making a phone call (or even two, or three) ISN'T harassment, and ISN'T illegal.'
No links? Comment fail. You're clueless. You haven't the foggiest idea ...
And you're really freakin' over this. I have direct experience, when Alex Knepper was contacting the college, and E.D. Kain, and ... well you get the point. The police asked me if I wanted them to get a restraining order. I speak directly with the precinct captain. Look up all the laws you want. I'm telling you that my college considers all these calls, emails, letters, which have now been repudiated by their authors, as harassment. AND THESE HAVE CROSSED THE LINE FROM ONLINE "DEBATE" TO REAL LIVELIHOODS. It's wrong. It's harassment. SEK issued an apology because he crossed that line. But you obviously don't care, BECAUSE YOU HATE.
The college considers my blogging private. Outsiders are told they can seek civil remedies if they have issues. They cannot HARASS and IMPEDE COLLEGE BUSINESS.
But's that's what you're defending and that's what you WANT to do.
Think man, you idiot.
If someone was making legitimate complaints then we'd be talking about something else. But these are not legitimate complaints. Yours are demonic progressive complaints to shut down speech of which you don't approve. Evil libels to get people fired. That's why SEK's submitted an apology. Try as you might, the evidence and case history show that I'm fending off harassment, specifically designed to threaten and intimidate. YOU are an accomplice to that. YOU have posted my college information and you are an accessory to continued harassment. Not legitimate complaints. Harassment. The college is defending me against them. You need to get that through your thick skull.
'A restraining order cannot prevent me from blogging--not even about you.'
You idiot. You are an accomplice. The college is RIGHT NEXT TO AN AIRPORT. Duh. That's the first thing police said when I told them the complainants were on the East Coast. They're not taking chances.
Spin this as you wish. Basically, the offer still stands for you to issue an apology. You have continued threats on this blog now, not 2009. Why you allow it I'll never know, except that you are an evil stalker and a demon.
Here's the Alex Knepper communication, which was on Faceook. I saved it.
Two police officers came to my office the next day for consultation.
I tried to warn him. Knepper later deleted his Facebook account because he was getting himself in all kinds of trouble. I see you've deleted your Facebook just like Knepper. I'm not surprised at all. Two peas on a pod.
When you involve the college you raise public safety issues. My lawyer got involved to protect me. My college authorities have sought to protect me. Don't assume anything from some lame unsourced Internet searches.
You should just say I'm sorry. Say, "I was wrong. I repudiate the workplace intimidation and campaigns of harassment and I will not allow it at my blog ever again."
That should work.
Correction: That's an email exchange. I'm checking for the Facebook exchange now ...
And here's the Facebook exchange.
Again, the college considers this private business. Knepper was out of line, and in fact authorities at my school thought he was deranged. I'm sure they'd think the same about you when I show them this blog, which is like a crazed loner's shrine to some obscure neocon blogger. NO ONE does the shit you do. You're sick, just like KNEPPER.
YOU have stalked. YOU have recruited nihilist harassers to make campaigns of intimidation. Police have been involved. Lawyers. The freakin' AG of California's been involved. YOU think you have a freakin' leg to stand on!!??
YOU are a deranged stalking asshat. Lots of evidence. In fact, the OCTO case is on file. It's a continued pattern continuing to this day, not some old case from 2009, you dolt. YOU really should stop. Think. Apologize. It's not too late to do the right thing. I have screencaps. God is watching.
"The police asked me if I wanted them to get a restraining order. I speak directly with the precinct captain."
If that's what you say you were told, then that's what you were told...But it doesn't change the fact that the police cannot issue restraining orders. There are several forms to fill out, and at least one visit to a courtroom. The precinct captain may be able to supply you with the forms--and perhaps even deliver them to the courthouse for you, initially--but they cannot actually issue either a temporary or three year restraining order. You need a judge for both (and an appearance, for the latter).
"I'm telling you that my college considers all these calls, emails, letters, which have now been repudiated by their authors, as harassment."
That may be... ...but I never once contacted anyone at LBCC by any means. I have never contacted you at home, at work, or anywhere else you may frequent via any means, either. All I've ever done as regards you is read (and, back before you moderated for content, commented) on your public blog, and posted here on my public blog. There simply is no harassment in anything I've done, where you're concerned. LBCC is not going to do anything to/about me, and I strongly suspect that any reputable lawyer has or will tell you that you can't, either.
"SEK issued an apology because he crossed that line. But you obviously don't care, BECAUSE YOU HATE."
No, I don't care because I don't believe you. I think you're untrustworthy, and neither you or he has put his supposed "on the record apology" on the record.
And, even assuming SEK DID use the word "sorry" in an e-mail to you or whatever, I've seen how you "misunderstand" things, sometimes... ...and you're giving folks nothing more to go on than your word... which ain't worth the hot air and flying spittle it's created with, as far as I'm concerned...
THAT'S why I don't care.
"But's that's what you're defending..."
Defending, Donald?!?
REALLY?!?
Where???
(Just cite one example of my defending ANYONE contacting LBCC... Just one citation. You won't, because you CAN'T. You're making it up.)
"...and that's what you WANT to do."
Mind-reading? How novel... Perhaps you can get one of the actors from Minority Report to arrest me for my "thought crime," now...
" Yours are demonic progressive complaints to shut down speech of which you don't approve."
Donald... "Mine" don't even exist... I've never MADE ANY complaints... ...which is why you cannot cite any. Again... I've never spoken to anyone at LBCC. Not one time.
If you believe otherwise, and [t]he college is defending [you] against [harassment]" the way you say they are, have them contact me... I'm sure they have my contact info from all those e-mai... no, but perhaps the phon... no... what about the return addresses on the lett... no, again. THERE HAS BEEN NO CONTACT BETWEEN LBCC AND ME. NONE. Chances are slim they're going to defend you against me, because there's nothing to defend. There's no "there," there.
But all that said, have 'em contact me, if you really think they will... My info isn't all that hard to find... While I'll never contact LBCC--barring a belief that you may harm someone at the school, which I honestly have never thought, no matter how nutty you've gotten--I wouldn't mind speaking to one of them, if they wish to contact me...
"You are an accomplice."
Donald, there isn't even a CRIME, let alone an accomplice.
If there were, you would've had someone charged with something by now... but not a single one of the folks you've mentioned as having contacted the school, has been charged with anything as a result of your actions or those of LBCC. None of the folks who blog about you have been charged with anything, either.
Further, neither you nor anyone else has even alleged that you've taken out any restraining orders; not against Alex, and not against anyone else, either. (And judging by your bragadociousness and false bravado up to now, it's almost certain that if there were even one, against any of your many folks on your "enemies list," you would've said so by now...) I'm not saying it's not possible for you to keep your mouth shut about such a "success" as getting one of "them" to leave you alone... I'm just saying that it's not very likely.
"When you involve the college you raise public safety issues."
To whatever extent that's true, I have never involved the college in anything, so I fail to see how that applies to me.
"Say, "I was wrong. I repudiate the workplace intimidation and campaigns of harassment and I will not allow it at my blog ever again."
I have always repudiated workplace intimidation and harassment, and have said so each and every time the issue has come up. I have never engaged in any, either. Beyond that, you might just as well eat wet sand, Donald. I've never "allowed" anything of the kind, here... ...and you know it.
No matter how many times or ways you try, you cannot blame me for something another author wrote. Personal responsibility (and the law, for that matter), won't stand for it or support it.
(Yeah, I see you've posted yet more, but I'm done with you, for tonight at least... I hope tomorrow brings you more sense than you've shown today...)
Reppy, gotta say I admire your stamina. Nice work on the whole restraining order search there. I don't know how many ways you have to tell him that we don't exist outside this blog as far as he's concerned. No matter how close the AIRPORT IS TO THE COLLEGE. YIKES!
BTW, have you ever contacted LBCC in any way or suggested that anyone contact them? Oh that's right. No, and neither has anyone else associated with this blog.
I never followed the Knepper thing. If Knepper broke any laws and was actually a pedophile that would seem to be a matter for the police, if they weren't too busy getting restraining orders for Donald. Otherwise, it sounded like Alex should have been the one getting the order of protection against Don.
We may still be in trouble though cause I hear there's a different level of proof on demonic progressive complaints than there is on the old run of the mill kind. I'd kinda like to be there when Don goes in to file his demonic progressive complaint just to see the look on their faces.
Anyway, good luck if you choose to soldier on with hitting you head against this wall. Really enjoying your half of the exchange.
And Don, once again I implore you, if you are not seeing a psychiatric professional on a regular basis please at least consider it. Maybe a touch of Zoloft or Thorazine would help.
"Again, the college considers this private business."
Again, me too.
"I'm sure they'd think the same about you when I show them this blog..."
Whatever happened to "private business?" Considering I never brought LBCC into any of this in any way, shape or form, why would you, unless you're being a hypocrite, again, saying that YOUR blogging is a private matter which is no business of LBCC, whereas MY blogging on the other hand, deserves their scrutiny?
One set of standards that applies to all, friend and foe alike. One day you may get the concept, I think...
(That said, it's a public blog... Go ahead and bring it to their attention, if that's what you want to do... Sure, it'll prove your hypocrisy, and perhaps it may cause one or two of 'em to look a little closer at your public blog, besides, but you go right ahead and involve your job in our "private business," if that's the play you wish to make. If you do, though, just remember that it was you who brought them in, not me...)
"YOU have stalked."
No, I haven't.
"YOU have recruited nihilist harassers to make campaigns of intimidation."
Even the people you're calling "nihilist harassers" deny that, Donald. All the people who have been or are authors at AmNi, are people who you attacked on your blog (or theirs, or both) long before I ever invited them to write here. If anyone "recruited" them, it was you. (The same is true of every blog and blogger in our blogroll, by the way... ALL of them have been attacked by you.) And no, I never instructed or in any way suggested that anyone say or do anything to intimidate you or anyone else.
"Police have been involved."
Not by me... ...and as far as I know, not regarding me, either.
"Lawyers."
Again, not by /about me...
"The freakin' AG of California's been involved."
And yet again, I have nothing to do with his/her involvement.
"YOU think you have a freakin' leg to stand on!!??"
My left leg is the First Amendment.
My right leg is the law.
Yes, I think I have one or two good legs to stand on... ...because for all your whining, I have never contacted anyone at your place of employment, and never stalked or harassed you in any way. I have never done anything in furtherance of anyone else doing so, either.
All I've ever done is respond to things you've posted on the internet, using quotes and linked citations back to the original sources. Many of my posts and comments have been responses to personal attacks you've made on me or on other people.
Besides... Look at the most recent evidence... You've made 16 comments here at this blog in the last two days... Kinda hard to claim I'm "stalking" or "harassing" you, when you're actively seeking me out, to the tune of 16 messages in two days.
(To be clear, you're always welcome to come and to comment, Donald... I'm not suggesting that your sixteen comments constitute stalking, harassment, or any other illegal or immoral act... What I AM saying is, it's kinda hard for you to make a case for either stalking or harassment, given your own behavior.)
So yes, Donald... All that considered, I think I have a "freakin'" leg to stand on...
"In fact, the OCTO case is on file. It's a continued pattern continuing to this day, not some old case from 2009, you dolt."
If you're trying to suggest that the CA statute of limitations on defamation doesn't apply to you, I suspect that you're going to be very surprised when you discover that it does. (Besides which, you never had a "case" to start with... ...not against Octo, and certainly not against me.)
Look Donald... I'd just as soon not speak to anyone from LBCC, the CA police, your legal team, or whoever else you may intend to sick on me... I will, if any of 'em get in touch, but I'd rather I didn't have to...
But dude, if this (any of this) is the route you intend to take, stop with the veiled and not so veiled threats and all this other verbiage, and just do it already... I call... Show 'em or fold.
"BTW, have you ever contacted LBCC in any way or suggested that anyone contact them? Oh that's right. No, and neither has anyone else associated with this blog."
It's possible that Octo did, back in Feb, 2009... I can't recall, either way... But if he did, he didn't do so under orders (or suggestions, psychic hints, ..., ...,) from me... I balked at the suggestion pretty much from the moment he posted it.
"If Knepper broke any laws and was actually a pedophile that would seem to be a matter for the police, if they weren't too busy getting restraining orders for Donald."
Kepper was a 20-something (something young... 21?, 22?), openly gay conservative, who continued to frequent a site for gay teens after he ceased being a teen himself. He was outed as a pedophile by the folks at Horowitz's site, along with Donald, and some other members of the holier-than-thou con-blogging community, despite the fact that there is zero evidence that he ever did anything more than talk and share site-specific in-jokes with any of the teens, some of whom he'd known from the site for years.
I have no dog in the hunt, but considering that when I was 18, 19, 20... practically everyone I knew had a girlfriend who was younger than them (and even a few cases where it was the boyfriend who was younger), I kinda think there ought to be a whole lot more common sense where statutory rape / pedophilia charges are concerned.
The con mob with the torches and the pitchforks got their boy, though... He was removed as a blogger at several con /rightwing blogs over the scandal, and other than Donald verbally confronting him at one of them CPAC gatherings, I haven't heard much of anything from/about him since...
"Anyway, good luck if you choose to soldier on with hitting you head against this wall."
Just building the record, Kevin... The more Dr Douglas speaks, the more he reveals about who and what he really is... ...especially where this kinda thing is concerned.
Missed a word...
That sentence should read:
"Kepper was a 20-something (something young... 21?, 22?), openly gay conservative blogger, who ..."
DD thinks contacting his publicly acknowledged employer is intrusive?
I have to laugh. And DD knows why I'm laughing.
DD, your attorney and I have an agreement. As far as he's told me, you'll live up to that agreement.
I see you are not doing so. Consider this some friendly advice, even tho I know you'll claim yet another threat: Since this is a third party blog, no one can dispute the validity or factual basis of any evidence obtained from this site.
Are we clear here?
'Considering I never brought LBCC into any of this in any way, shape or form ...'
Wrong. You brought my college into this by recruiting, endorsing, and sponsoring campaigns of workplace intimidation and harassment. The attacks are continuing. Commenters here continue to make threats against my employment. You are the blog administrator. YOU are responsible for the campaign of demonic hate.
BECAUSE YOU HATE.
My blogging is private. YOUR campaigns of workplace intimidation have upset the operation of a public college.
YOU are in demonic denial.
YOU are an evil person.
YOU should be ashamed but are not obviously, because you have no sense of right or wrong. YOU seek to destroy, which is why you allow those who seek to get me fired to comment freely on this blog.
As long as you have attackers commenting here, you are continuing the harassment.
Looking for that apology.
"While I'll never contact LBCC--barring a belief that you may harm someone at the school, which I honestly have never thought, no matter how nutty you've gotten--I wouldn't mind speaking to one of them, if they wish to contact me...
This is where you cross the line. YOU openly state you have an interest in getting me fired. That's why you've recruited, endorsed, and sponsored bloggers who contact my place of employment.
YOU are an evil man.
ALL of your words are lies.
YOU are sick. A nihilist. NO FREAKIN' VALUES.
Donald, you've ceased to be the slightest bit responsive, and are just repeating the same tired lies...
Come on back when you have something new to say, buddy... ...otherwise I'm done with this one...
"...otherwise I'm done with this one..."
BEATEN!!!
You are beaten loser. YOU claim an interest in speaking to my employers. Why? There is no justifiable interest, because there's not a single issue you could raise. YOU don't like my blogging. YOU don't like my ideology. Thus, YOU recruit, endorse, sponsor, agitate for, and promote workplace intimidation. OCTOPUS is an alumnus. YOU sponsored his workplace attacks and campaigns of harassment and intimidation. YOU continue sponsoring threats by your nihilist allies.
YOU are a bad man. What YOU have done and continue to do is WRONG!!
AND NOW YOU ARE BEATEN!!
BEATEN!!!!
REPSAC = RACIST = BEATEN = LOSER = HARASSER = COMMIE = ASFL!!!!
Gotta go with the Nutty Professor on his last comment Reppy. You are indeed a "baaaaaaddd mother fuck......"
I can dig it.
You done yet Don?
"YOU claim an interest in speaking to my employers."
Not only do I explicitly say exactly the opposite--:
"Look Donald... I'd just as soon not speak to anyone from LBCC, the CA police, your legal team, or whoever else you may intend to sick on me... I will, if any of 'em get in touch, but I'd rather I didn't have to..."
--you're forgetting one thing... The only reason I'd have to speak to anyone from LBCC (or anyone else, for that matter) is if YOU put them in contact with me, which you seem to be threatening to do...
(What I said in that earlier comment was I wouldn't MIND speaking to someone from LBCC, if you were capable of actually bullying someone from the school into contacting me (which I kinda doubt, anyway.) Donald, my boy, I have no interest in speaking to anyone you may choose to send... but I will, if they get in touch...)
Beaten
'What I said in that earlier comment was I wouldn't MIND speaking to someone from LBCC, if you were capable of actually bullying someone from the school into contacting me......
WTF?
The cops looked me up when Alex Knepper's harassment triggered an investigation. That is bullying. And YOU are a bully. YOU have said YOU have an interest in speaking to my college, for only one purpose, to malign and libel and to get me fired --- simply because YOU disagree with what I have to say. YOU have defended racists. YOU have defended intimidation and attacks. YOU have endorsed "letters to local newspapers" to get me fired. YOU allege constantly that I'm a bigot with nothing more than your opinion. YOU hate. YOU need to issue the apology. YOU have a long record of sponsoring, promoting, recruiting and publishing at this personal attacks against me for the sole purpose of political destruction.
Renounce your allies' campaigns and attacks against me at my place of work Publish a full and unequivocal apology at this blog. That's the least you could do. YOU run a hate site that has long coordinated and abetting possibly illegal attacks and harassment. That is wrong. YOU are wrong.
Looking for that apology ...
Correction: "YOU have a long record of sponsoring, promoting, recruiting and publishing at THIS BLOG personal attacks against me for the sole purpose of political destruction."
Looking forward to that apology. Do the right thing. Do the decent thing. Repudiate the hate. Repudiate the campaigns of harassment. Issue that apology and for once, BE good.
The quotes, linked citations, photos, and screen grabs supporting my positions and opinions are posted all over this blog, Donald... Folks can read and evaluate your claims and accusations here and throughout (and mine, as well) however they will, using the brains and common sense God gave 'em...
I stand behind my posts and comments, and am happy to discuss them with anyone interested... (even Dr. Douglas, if he can manage to stop repeating the same tired slogans, and actually engage the words folks say to him -- I've twice said I have ZERO interest in speaking to anyone from LBCC, and would only do so if Donald's actions make them contact me, but he comes right on back claiming (without quote, of course) that I said I want to speak to folks from the college... How fucking dense and/or disingenuous can one be? If I actually WANTED to speak to someone from LBCC, *I* would contact *them*. I still know where to find their contact information, were I to actually want it, the way Donald claims I do. My saying I wouldn't MIND speaking to them if Donald has them contact me, is in no way the same as WANTING, or having any INTEREST in their contacting me. I don't see how I can make that any more clear, but I still expect Donald to hold firm to his specious claim that *I'M* looking to speak to *THEM,* rather than my being willing to engage his threat to involve LBCC in my life, should he attempt or actually do so.)
I can appreciate that some might not see an issue my way, but that doesn't preclude our discussing it... (And obviously,) all are welcome.
"Looking for that apology ..."
You'll be looking for a good, long time, Dr. Douglas... (Let's just say I don't recommend holding your breath or going on a hunger strike until it comes...)
*this comment is an updated version of my previous deleted comment.
'My saying I wouldn't MIND speaking to them if Donald has them contact me, is in no way the same as WANTING, or having any INTEREST in their contacting me.'
That's a lie!!
You've long been on record claiming you'd love to contact my college IF you had something actionable!!
And I've never said I was to have the college contact you. The college got involved when Alex Knepper harassed me at my workplace. YOU have sponsored the same harassment. YOU have rounded up bloggers to post here with the express purpose of intimidating me and to seek retaliation against views you simply disagree with. AmNi is an attack blog. AmNi is a HATE site. YOU are a hater. YOU have endorsed the campaigns. YOU do not denounce them now. YOU do not apologize for bloggers here who have published attacks on my livelihood, with my contact information. YOU need to denounce and apologize. YOU are on record of hoping to contact the local media but didn't have enough evidence. YOU said you'd contact my college if YOU had more evidence of wrongdoing. YOU still DO NOT have any such evidence, so now you lie, LIE!, and claim you have no interest.
YOU HAVE ALWAYS HAD AN INTEREST. But you have failed to make a case. This blog is an attack blog.
Waiting for that apology. I deserve it. YOU have crossed the line.
This did not go through, you ASFL freak comment troll.
Deleted at AmPower comment moderation:
'Looks like I struck a nerve there, Donald...
Sorry to see that you're so thin-skinned, but attack posts like this one (ESPECIALLY like this one, since it is so very obviously forced as to make you look desperate) is not the answer.
(Instead, you might wish to try being a better man, and perhaps dealing with the substance of posts, rather than calling the authors of them silly names or having a friend create nonsensical pictures of people for you to post.)
MORE INTIMIDATION AND HARASSMENT!!
YOU are banned from my blog. YOU do NOT have authorization to comment there. But YOU don't care about common courtesy. LOOKS like I struck a nerve. I've called you out for your demonic campaign of hatred and you continue to assault, intimidate, harass, and stalk.
YOU have proven once again that YOU have no values. NONE.
YOU do not reside in the world of decency, and YOU have proven it by your failure to take responsibility for YOUR actions.
Again, do not comment on my blog. YOU are harassing me at my blog and YOU are promoting harassment at this blog.
That is wrong. YOU are wrong. YOU must issue the apology to rescue your soul from the depths.
Donald, If YOU refuse to back what YOU claim I've said with actual quotes and citations, and cannot manage to do anything but repeat YOUR ridiculous and spurious accusations, YOU might just as well stop commenting...
We've heard YOU, and we think what YOU'VE said up to now is demonstrably a pile of shit.
Thanks for playing n'all, but YOU'RE not impressing anyone with these diatribes laced with ungrammatical word capitalizations...
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
"YOU might just as well stop commenting...
Musta struck a nerve!!!
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!
You've got nothing. It's all true, loser:
"YOU have said YOU have an interest in speaking to my college, for only one purpose, to malign and libel and to get me fired --- simply because YOU disagree with what I have to say. YOU have defended racists. YOU have defended intimidation and attacks. YOU have endorsed "letters to local newspapers" to get me fired. YOU allege constantly that I'm a bigot with nothing more than your opinion. YOU hate. YOU need to issue the apology. YOU have a long record of sponsoring, promoting, recruiting and publishing at this personal attacks against me for the sole purpose of political destruction."
All true. All your own words and statements and actions.
Looking for that apology ...
Then Donald, you're just going to have to do something about it... Show my Bolger to whomever you think you have to show it to (LBCC, the Long Beach Police, the Donald Douglas "somebody on the Internet hurt my feelings" legal team, or whoever) and force me by law to stop quoting your posts and commenting on them here.
But for fuck's sake, stop repeating your silly allegations and threats here in my comment section, and take 'em to someone that you believe cares (because Donald, that person most assuredly isn't me... ...at least, not until there's more to your threats of legal action than words on a blogspot comment screen, anyway.)
I've said my bit. Do whatever it is you think you need to do...
Bolger = blog
"As long as Donald Douglas is posting a public blog that accepts comments, I'm going to continue to comment on what he posts, whenever and wherever I choose."
YOU know what you've said, you liar!
CRIMINAL HARASSMENT!!!
Now you try to deny! REPSAC = LYING = ASSHAT = AGAIN!!!
YOU ARE AN INTIMIDATOR AND HARASSER. Your own words prove it. Now look what you've done. This blog sets the demonic standard. YOU have an evil record of sponsoring, promoting, recruiting and publishing personal attacks at this blog for political destruction. You defend racists. YOU are a self-admitted racist. YOU allege constantly that I'm a bigot with nothing more than your opinion. YOU hate. YOU need to issue the apology. YOU have defended intimidation and attacks. YOU have endorsed "letters to local newspapers" to get me fired.
Have a SHRED of decency and apologize. It's the least you could do after all you've sponsored, endorsed, stated, abetted, encouraged, and cheered.
CHEERED!!!!
By refusing to denounce the actions of your allies you CHEER the intimidation and criminal activity.
Have you no decency??!!
U is the 21st letter in the English alphabet. EWE is another word for a female sheep. EWE is also a Niger-Congo language spoken in Ghana, Togo and Benin by approximately six million people. UWE is a common British abbreviation for "undoubtedly well endowed". YEW is any of several poisonous evergreen trees or shrubs. YOO is the last name of an attorney who said it was legal for the Bush administration to torture people. YU was the Internet country code top-level domain (ccTLD) that was assigned to Yugoslavia and was mainly used by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and its successor Serbia and Montenegro between 1994 and 2010. YUE is the dialect of Chinese spoken in Canton and neighboring provinces and in Hong Kong and elsewhere outside China.
Glad I could help. Oh, and Reppy: God is watching (Don lose his damn mind). Sad. YOU have the patience of Job, my friend.
My blogging is private.
Really? Despite the fact your students say that you make them read your pathetic little blog?
Suddenly you're all about "respecting privacy," Donalde?
I wonder...
Reppie,
Leave the "good" professor to stew in his own juices. I could post plenty of instances where you've done quite the opposite of what he claims, but that would violate confidences and privacy.
The people who matter know you for whom you are. DD does not matter. An insignificant little wimp who has a load of karma riding right down on him.
And no, DD, that's no threat. I've retired from bothering with you.
I hurt you. I hurt you badly. That's why I agreed to stop. I didn't care about winning, like you do. I don't believe in Pyrrhic victories. All I wanted you to know was that you'd been in a fight and to stop hitting yourself.
Donald if being a troll and commenting where you weren't wanted was a crime you'd be headed to the 'lectric chair. Please seek psychiatric help.
[This comment is directed at Repsac3 and not the other commenters.]
REPSAC3: The comments above demonstrate all of my points exactly.
This is a hate site. Your blog is a coordination point for workplace attacks. Comments being made here are false, libelous, and malicious. You claim to be so good and righteous, but you've aggregated a bunch of enemies opposed to my commentary. Amazing how much hate a little "nothing" blogger can generate.
In any case, YOU continue to publish demonic attacks on me and my blog. YOU and your commenters revel in making libelous allegations and heaping ridicule. YOU are cheering workplace intimidation. See how easy it is to show you a liar? Cakewalk. And again, for what? I speak the truth about all of you and you don't like to be exposed, so you do the most deranged, wicked deeds to seek revenge. And you thought you were so enlightened. YOU are a loser and YOU're hanging out with a bunch of losers. ASFLs.
So keep it up. Keep up your hate. Keep up your attacks. Keep up your vile lies. This is what you do. This is what you promote. This is what you're all about. Pathetic little RACIST = REPSAC. A big man on his own little bloggy portal of hatred.
This blog represents the "best" of the progressive blogosphere. The "best" in lies, defamation, scurrilous and malevolent attacks.
THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ALL ABOUT. RENOUNCE THE HATE. MODERATE YOUR COMMENTS TO REMOVE THE LIES AND DEFAMATIONS. ISSUE APOLOGIES FOR ALL THE WRONG YOU ARE INFLICTING. PAY GOODNESS DUE BY MAKING AMENDS. HAVE A SENSE OF DECENCY AND RENOUNCE ALL THAT YOU STAND FOR HERE.
Saint Donald, bringer of truth and light and sweetness, has spoken. His will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.
Lead by example, Donald...
You want an apology?
Apologize to the blogs and bloggers listed in AmNi's blogroll, all of whom you've smeared one time or another with all manner of epithets, ad hom and lies, beginning with your once favorite go-to attack, "nihilist."
Go to each of their blogs, and post a comment publicly admitting that they are not nihilists, that it was false, libelous, and malicious to ever say they were, and apologize for ever having done so.
Then gather the toadies and henchmen in your conservative criminal conspiracy, over whom you obviously hold sway (suck8d, SheepybyCarol, lonelygalconservative15, ...) ((Haters all), and make THEM apologize, too.
Crazy?
Fuck yeah, crazy...
And so are you, Dr. Douglas, if you think that *I'M* the reason folks you've incessantly attacked on your own blog and theirs don't like you, and say so here and elsewhere... You brought it all on yourself, Donald... YOU'RE the reason that folks respond to you as they do... YOU'RE reaping what YOU'VE sown.
But, like I said, lead by example...
If you want an apology, give the folks you've attacked apologies. You want me to stop posting about you on this blog? Stop posting about the folks you hate on your own...
Lead by example, or stop begging for things that are just never going to happen...
Really, Don... All this whining and crying, and gnashing of teeth over an apology you're almost certainly never going to get (because you refuse to lead the way by modeling the change you wish to see in the world around you, and changing your OWN heart before you set about trying to change the hearts and minds of others) is starting to sound REALLY pathetic...
Give it some thought, Dr. Douglas... God is watching, and we have some screenshots, as well... (as does He, I'm sure...)
ROTFLMAO!!!!
BWAHAHAHHAAAA!!!!!!
OMG!! (Getting up off the floor slowly ...)
That's good RACIST = REPPY!!
Don't change ever!!
You brought it all on yourself, Donald... YOU'RE the reason that folks respond to you as they do... YOU'RE reaping what YOU'VE sown.
Practically every other post you write something like, er, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the ...." Or, "I'm all about free speech ..."
Blah, Blah.
You're not. Asshole. Name one time I've launched a campaign of workplace intimidation. Name one time I've tried to get someone fired. Name one time I've posted contact information AND exhorted readers to contact employers?
(Tap, tap, tap ...)
Uh huh. Got it. You can't asshole!!
OCTO, Eric Kain are only a couple of freakin' progressive tools who went completely limp at the TRUTH. Progressives are commies, killers, evil big state destroyers. I speak the truth and progressives go for the fully INTIMIDATION strategy. That's all they've got.
I stand by what I write. I stand for freedom against your destruction. YOU enable the hate. YOU sponsor the attacks. That's no free speech. That's not debate. That's the politics of personal destruction. YOU have crossed the line. WHAT you do, and what your allies do, crosses the line.
BWAHAHAHHAAAA!!!!!!
YOU FREAKIN' LOSER!!
Right here in the comments YOU are slapping high fives with your mob. RACIST = REPSAC's mob. Ann Coulter's exactly right. One does not back down to the mob. I do not back down to your intimidation and hatred. I will stand up to you and the hordes of hate right in this thread.
YOU apology is for sponsoring the hate and intimidation. Blog about ideas all you want. But YOU do not have a right to try to get people fired with YOUR campaigns. People are cheering right now in THIS blog. THIS hate hole.
Do the right thing. Renounce the attacks. Renounce the hate. This has crossed a line. A line you once said you would not cross but now endorses.
GET THAT?
YOU now endorse what your once rejected. YOU become a personal cancer of hate.
Cleanse YOURSELF. You'll feel better and YOU will be accepted in HIS eyes of you denounce it.
This is your chance.
(Because Donald tends to be satire-impaired):
Donald... Pay close attention before flying off the handle with another inane, inappropriately punctuated and capitalized rant:
1) I don't expect you to apologize (though it would be the right thing to do.)
You have your fucked-up view of the world and the people in it, and you have every right to express it on your blog.
So do I, on mine.
2) I don't think your blogging buddies are your toadies and henchmen, that they do your bidding, or that you in fact, have any control over them, at all. I also don't believe that the fact that you folks sometimes echo and amplify each other's posts, including attacks on me and other liberals (or the fact that S3rhd makes all your photoshops, since you seemingly cannot) means that you folks are in any kinda conspiracy, criminal or otherwise.
Bloggers in similar situations (folks that share a worldview, or who've all been attacked by the same blogging blowhard, fer'instance) tend to write similar posts about similar things, often completely independently...
Same goes with we bloggers on the left. YOU have attacked each one of us. Doesn't take a degree in sociology or group dynamics to understand that we each might well respond to your bullshit posts with posts of our own, without the slightest bit of coordination or conspiracy...
Capiche?
God I hope so... but I ain't holding my breath...
(I ain't kidding about how pathetic you sound begging for the apology, though... That part's the real deal...)
---
(Too late. He's already rushed over... Ahhh well...)
Yes, Donald, I removed, edited, and reposted this comment from 10 -15 minutes earlier... Typed "sarcasm" when I meant "satire." Shit happens.
"Name one time I've launched a campaign of workplace intimidation. Name one time I've tried to get someone fired. Name one time I've posted contact information AND exhorted readers to contact employers?"
You cannot name one time I have, either... Not a single quote, citation, link, letter, phone call, smoke signal, psychic thought bomb, etc... I have never done any of those things, made anyone do those things, or in any way supported any of those things. And you know it...
But that said, go on and make your case... Prove your inane allegations. YOU wont. YOU CAN'T. All you can do is talk, talk, talk, bullshit on bullshit on bullshit...
We'll pray for you and your fucked up soul, Donald... to whatever "demonic" "rim station radical" Gods we have...
In the meantime, you just keep right on talkin' your crazy conspiratorial nonsense... Apparently, it's all you have...
'You cannot name one time I have, either.'
No.
And I don't claim to, you dolt.
What I've said all along is that YOU sponsor it. YOU are the admin. of AmNi. YOU recruit bloggers who you allege I "attacked" when I exercise my free speech rights. YOU endorse campaigns of intimidation on this blog. YOU say I had it coming, which violates free speech. YOU further malicious slanders right here on this blog. YOU have not a shred of decency. YOU do not denounce the hate. YOU once previously denounced the hate but now further it at YOUR blog. That makes you an even sleazier dirtbag than YOU already are, since it proves that you run a MOB racket.
I don't back down to YOUR MOB of hate ... YOUR mob of shame and malice.
Kingdom come and you'll see. Wicked fail asshat = W. James Casper.
This is why you should renounce the hate. Repudiate the haters and apologize for your long sponsorship of the harassment and intimidation. YOU are an accomplice to the hate. That makes you just as guilty to harassment in the eyes of the law.
Issue the apology. That's the least you could do, to do right by HIM.
Look, Donald...
Here's the deal. You can keep repeating the same tired bullshit allegations and accusations in the comments of my blog as often and for as long as you wish. The more you do so, the more you expose yourself for who and what you really are... (...and while you seem to've backed off all the legal threats of days past, should you ever decide to pull that trigger, they will be evidence of the patterns in your online behavior, as well.)
But Donald, as long as you're here exposing the same proverbial tiny dick to us that you've been exposing for days and weeks and years (that is, repeating these same crazy paranoid allegations and accusations about this blog and the folks who write for, comment on, or read it), without adding so much as a new pubic hair's worth of content to the dick-waving rant (or God forbid, actual evidence or proof of anything you're saying), I'm done talking to you about it.
I'm not going anywhere, Donald. I'm at least as stupid and stubborn as you are, and I will not be intimidated. I will not grow bored. I will not just ignore you, letting you get your way because I have better things to do. As long as you continue to act like an ass on the internet, I will keep standing up for myself and for the others you attack, pointing at you and laughing as often as possible, the same way I have for the last several years...
So apparently, neither of us is going to back down... I guess you'd better just get used to having me around, Dr. Douglas, and stop with all the whining...
...or don't.
I'll be here either way.
Bwahahahahaha...
Yes Donald. The malicious one has returned to proclaim a new era of apathetic maliciousness to all you hold dear. We shall revel in malicious orgasm each time you get mad at our maliciousness.
When you look at your students and realize they care less about your silly adherence to a bullshit philosphy of neoconservatism you will see us dancing in malicious rapture.
When you go to your church and you or the preacher speaks in tongues know that we Nihilists are enjoying malicious pleasure from the tongues of your rule 5 models.
Yes Donald. We're devoted to malice and anarchy. For that we shall never apologise.
Unless of course a hot chick makes that a condition debauchery.
As long as you're having all those malicious orgasms, 101, there will be no high fives for you until after you wash yer damned hands...
I'm just sayin'...
You recruited bloggers to harass, ridicule, and intimidate:
'I intended for American Nihilist to be a one off joke on the silly "nihilist" meme you created. I sent invites to all the "nihilsts" I could find, thinking we'd all just have a quick laugh at the expense of the silly little meme, & that'd be it... But some of 'em wanted to sign up, and once they did, and started writing--in character--it became something better than the one off joke I intended...'
YOU CROSSED THE LINE!!!!!
These are your words. They are posted at your own blogs. You thought it be just a laugh, but quickly escalated into workplace intimidation and outrageous campaigns of harassment. THAT IS ILLEGAL. YOU HAVE LEGAL LIABILITY AND YOU ARE ON RECORD. Your very words show you ORGANIZED a conspiracy. And you have people currently in your threads making threats, issuing taunts, and spiking the football.
YOU've not denounced a bit of it. Why? Answer that. Why? Because I blog and "attack" people. That's what you say repeatedly. Because I blog and "attack" people you decided to round up a lynch mob. YOUR words. This is what you have done and continue to do. YOU are on record.
YOU are the administrator of this blog and YOU thought it perfectly fine to publish this.
When that was posted you didn't reject it. YOU didn't repudiate it. YOU endorsed it and clapped about how my my college administration should "be aware of his antics." Then later you pulled the post when your lackey left you hold the bag of sh*t. YOU f**ked up. It was never the right thing to do. Always an evil act. It's done. It's on record. YOU are the accessory to make this happen. That sucks you got used. But you recruited people who then f**ked you up. Sucker!! You deserve it. It's you who organize the hate. Make it right by apologizing.
And YOU continue to promote the hate. YOU consort with criminal progressives who continue their campaigns. YOU are doing this. YOU sponsor it right here in this thread. THIS thread.
YOU pledged an intimidation campaign: "As long as Donald Douglas is posting a public blog that accepts comments, I'm going to continue to comment on what he posts, whenever and wherever I choose'
I banned YOU. But you publicly admitted my wishes were to be disrespected and that you would taunt, harass, and intimidate "whenever and wherever I choose."
And one of those places was my college. YOU had henchmen do it for you so you could claim plausible denial. But the cat's out now. YOU are liable.
And YOU ignore, deny, distort and blow of the facts of YOUR evil as some 'crazy paranoid allegations'.
Not.
Don't deny. Don't ignore. Don't dismiss. Don't prevaricate.
Man up to your program. THIS is what you do.
These are your words. YOU recruited all you could find to harass, ridicule and intimidate. YOU endorsed, as the admin, a campaign by (O)CT(O)PUS. And YOU have defended all the others right here in this thread. YOU do not denounce the hate and criminal activity.
YOU are the ringleader of hate. THIS is a hate site. I POINT OUT your evil action. YOU deny because you're without a shred of decency.
You need to be right with goodness in the world and issue that apology!!
I'm sorry, Donald, but the quote you offer simply doesn't support the claims you are making.
"You recruited bloggers to harass, ridicule, and intimidate."
First off, the quote pretty clearly says I never intended for AmNi to be an actual blog with bloggers or posts at all. I clearly say, "I intended for American Nihilist to be a one off joke... ... we'd all just have a quick laugh at the expense of the silly little meme, & that'd be it..." When I sent out invitations, it was to look at and laugh at a one time joke. I was not recruiting bloggers at all, for any purpose.
Second, there is nothing in my words that explicitly or implicitly talks about or in any way suggests harassment or intimidation of you or anyone else. All I talk about is a one time joke that turned into a pretty funny satire of your blog, for a time there. All your talk about intimidation and harassment is coming from inside your head. I have never said or done anything to harass or intimidate you myself, nor have I ever said or done anything to direct or suggest that anyone else intimidate or harass you. There is no evidence of it because it never happened.
Ridicule is another matter. Yes, Donald, both the one-off joke blog frame I created, and a whole lot of the posts by me and others since have been jokes at your expense. We have laughed at you and the things you've posted often. What can I say? A whole lot of what you say and how you reason is very funny... Between the weird capitalization and punctuation, the BWAAAHAHA ROFLMAO temper tantrums, and your penchant for cursing folks out using symbols for the vowels, you come off as pretty ridiculous...The fact that it's largely (if not totally) unintentional makes it even funnier.
So yes, we have ridiculed you.
" You thought it be just a laugh, but quickly escalated into workplace intimidation and outrageous campaigns of harassment."
No, Donald, it really didn't...
One guy wrote one post about contacting two of your supervisors at LBCC, because he apparently felt that your online behavior toward others (including the fact that you flatly refused to abide by his wishes not to comment at his blog, ironically, but also your comment in "faux black dialect" on a post about the Heritage Trail in Boston, which he believed showed you to be a bigot) made you a liability to the college. At no time did he discuss his plans or the content of his post with me prior to publishing it. At no time beforehand or after did I come out in favor of the post or of his contacting anyone. In fact, I posted several comments against the idea, both at this blog and at his.
No one else from this blog made any similar posts, or contacted anyone associated with LBCC. It was one post by one guy, who fairly soon after left this blog--and removed my authorship privileges at his, as well-- because I stood against his post and his actions.
I don't happen to believe that what he did was illegal,--assuming it was only one letter or call--though it was certainly immoral, and foolish--but if you or the school believe or know otherwise, you ought to peruse it. But Donald, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that I played any part in his post or his actions, before, during, or after the fact.
The one thing I DID do is uphold his right to post it, and to make the decision as author, as to when or whether to take it down or otherwise censor or retract it. You can certainly argue as to whether my upholding his free speech was at the expense of some of my moral capital, but neither his post or my insistence that HE decide when / whether to retract it was in any way illegal.
Soon after he removed himself as author here, I censored the workplace information from the post, which is yet more evidence of my true intent toward you and anyone else at LBCC.
Aside this one incident, no one here has done anything to intimidate or harass you, Donald. There have been rude posts, sarcastic posts, and straight up serious posts, but no campaign or conspiracy of hate, intimidation, or any of the other things that you're alleging.
The other folks who either threatened to or did contact LBCC are not bloggers here. Three of them come from the right side of the political fence (Whether you personally agree that their politics should be considered right of center is beside the point. They all wrote for fairly well-known libertarian or conservative blogs.) And more importantly, none of them were ever authors or even regular commenters here. (I think one of 'em posted a comment or two after I wrote about their experiences with you.) and the last two, while left of center, are also not authors here. One has posted a few comments, most (if not all) of which came after his offline run-in(s) with you or your representatives. And, because no one has posted the most recent story/ies for online consumption, I have no idea what did / did not happen between any of you.
The suggestion that I "made" any one of these people contact LBCC on my behalf, in order to maintain plausible deniability, is so obviously false as to be an actual libelous charge. (That is no excited utterance or opinion; you are alleging a fact about me that you must certainly know to be untrue.)
"Because I blog and "attack" people. That's what you say repeatedly. Because I blog and "attack" people you decided to round up a lynch mob. YOUR words."
No, Donald, those are not my words. I have never organized a lynch mob, nor have I ever said I organized a lynch mob... ...not even as a joke.
I have said you attack people on your blog. You do. And yes, the folks at AmNi do, also. The morality of it can be questioned--especially depending on how you attack--but it's a little hypocritical to question someone else's morals for doing a thing that you do, yourself... (I trust you're not trying to deny that you attack others on your blog... That'd be pretty obviously dishonest.)
"YOU consort with criminal progressives who continue their campaigns"
While I confess that I can't be absolutely certain of anyone, including you, Dr. Douglas, I strongly doubt that anyone posting or commenting at this blog is a criminal...
And Donald, this is where the paranoia comes in... There is no conspiracy. There are no campaigns.
"I banned YOU. But you publicly admitted my wishes were to be disrespected and that you would taunt, harass, and intimidate "whenever and wherever I choose."
No, what I said is that I would comment on your posts, wherever and whenever I chose. I never said anything about taunting, harassment, or intimidation. (That was you, Donald.)
While it might be rude of me to suggest that I can submit posts to your moderated blog against your wishes, (thus making you actively refuse to post them) there is no law against it. Even out-n-out trolling a blog is not a crime. At worst, it's a netiquette faux pas...
And Donald... How often have I actually attempted to post a comment at your blog, since your all-powerful banning? If you use all ten fingers to count 'em, you're lying... It is entirely possible that I said that just to watch you freak out about it... And as I recall, you did...
"And one of those places was my college. YOU had henchmen do it for you so you could claim plausible denial. But the cat's out now. YOU are liable.
I already addressed this, but I wanted to be sure it was highlighted again. Either you really are delusional, or you're telling a plainly obvious untruth in an attempt to sully my reputation. Either way, I feel bad for you (whether you believe that or not.)
Perhaps in your next comment, you could more clearly spell out one, some, any of these threats or intimidation tactics aside Octo's 2009 post... I mean, while you're almost certainly wrong on the laws involving blogger liabilities, at least I understand where you're coming from with that one... But that was one post over two years ago by a guy who hasn't blogged or commented her pretty much since... What other "crimes" against you are you alleging I've masterminded and directed my nihilist henchmen to perform for me?
And, another question...
Why do I seem to be your only target, here? If what these people who actually contacted LBCC did was a crime, why aren't you in the comment sections of their blogs, accusing them?
(Sometimes I wonder whether I'm the only one you target, because I'm the only one who actually pays any attention to you, and how you'd react, if I just stopped.)
Douglass only made that qualification so no one could accuse him of being gay, Reppie.
Glad to see you're still kicking hard
Some say that neocons have inherent criminal perversions. They're probably right.
Post a Comment