Glenn's Cult?: false accusers

Showing posts with label false accusers. Show all posts

May 21, 2009

The TRUTH about FALSE allegation in his eyes

My momma oinked at me and said Petunia young lady patience is a virtue. Now being as how I have four legs, it is kind of hard to do anything with my hooved feet (including all this typing I do), I just waited and waited. I waited some more. I knew the day would come and one of them would say it. I knew it would come. And to what do my wondering eyes should appear? Nope not a jolly little man and eight tiny reindeer (that is another story folks), but this:

8
Pierce Harlan Says:

May 19th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Corrrect, Thomas. "Unfounded" should be regarded as the moral equivalent of "false."

Yep there you have it folks!!!!! Unfounded "should" mean false..... Do I need to say anything else? I guess I can quit blogging now? Nope not on your life!!!! I will expose these "men" (cough snort gag cough hack puke) until my little hooves cannot move. Why? Because we must show the truth!!!! When women and chidlren are no longer penalized for making good faith reports of abuse and when women are not penalized and branded with the letters FA (false accuser), then and only then can I rest. Sorry Pierce you now join the ranks at Petunia's club for good. We badasses will be watching you......

May 12, 2009

duncan if you ACTUALLY defneded female victims of abuse....

Then I would agree with you. However since you only defend male victims of abuse (how quickly you have forgotten your attacks of me and several other female victims of abuse at the hands of their now ex-husbands). Or do I need to search these out and point them out to you? Won't be too hard as Google and the wayback machine are wonderful inventions. For now lets just read what you wrote on that female hater board.

77
duncan macleod Says:

May 11th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
so ill ask do you feel its " our turn" or do guys like me who will defend any wrong deserving of support?

NO COMMENT!!!!

May 5, 2009

A database of "alleged" false accusers?

18
E. Steven Berkimer Says:

April 29th, 2009 at 11:20 am
.....I post here under the username wolfboy69. I am now a contributor, along with Pierce Harlan over at www.falserapesociety.blogspot.com. We are currently working on a database of false accusers, that will allow you to search by state/country those who falsely accuse, by name (where possible), date and location. It should be available by the end of May (hopefully).

Advocates out there, this should be something very interesting to keep an eye on. What will determine if it is truly a false allegation? Will it be if charges are pressed and then dropped? Will it be if the alleged attacker is found not guilty (which is much different than innocent)? What will the standrads be for determining if an allegation is false? I wonder what protections these two (or more) alleged woman haters will have in place in case of a "false" report of a false allegation?

Keep an eye on falserapesociety.blogspot.com for answers to those questions and more.

April 17, 2009

More manure spewing from Duncan Macleod....

First without further ado, please visit this site before you jump to conclusions.....False rape has been statistically proven to be between 2-8%. False Rape does NOT include cases in which a jury found the perp "not guilty" - that simply means they did not believe it was a proven case, not that it was false. You mehnz sure do need to clean out the wax in your ears, shut your pieholes and listen for once....

131
duncan macleod Says:

April 16th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Seriously . are you even on this planet ?????? you have been posting here for how long now and you still trot out the 2% lie ............ http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cdc+false+rape+claims&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

A few links to data, cdc uk information the lot that shows the 2% fact is a lie.

We never generalize "ALL WOMEN"...

Lying Sacks of horse manure...

93
SteveinTX Says:

April 16th, 2009 at 11:49 am
All women lie, at times.

Feminists lie at all times. (e.g. GG)

SteveinTX

Another one for the L on your forehead award

89
Pankaj Says:

April 16th, 2009 at 11:27 am
"And yes I think you'd be naive to believe he didn't tape his romps without intending to drool over them at a later time."

Ah! What a terrible crime! drooling over something - sure throw him in prison for that

Ahh it matters not that quite possibly the woman did NOT wish to be video taped, nor did she give consent to be taped, and even more possibly she had been not able to give consent....

Oh yeah this one gets an Honorable L on the forehead award....

And you, Rubic, are not very bright - you must look at all state statutes....

87
Rubic Says:

April 16th, 2009 at 11:25 am
According to http://definitions.uslegal.com/v/voyeurism/ his actions do not necessarily constitute voyeurism for one key reason: He was recording himself. Now, if it was provable that, despite filming himself and this woman for private use, that he also planned to sell and distribute the video, then it would be chargeable as voyeurism.

long story short: He's not legally a voyeur since it cannot be proven that he wasn't recording to see himself in the act. That would, instead, be narcissism, which isn't illegal as far as I know.

Now how do you explain to all those MEN out there who have taken to running around with a digital camera or camcorder in order to catch women unawares and take either still pictures or video up the skirt shots? And most all of these MEN claim that these pictures/videos were for their own personal enjoyment....I am tired of posting the video so why don't you RUBIC, shut YOUR piehole?

Actually yes in the US voyeurism IS illegal

77
gwallan Says:

April 16th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Maybe I'm a bit late but is "voyeurism" actually illegal?

Why do you think there is publicity about MEN trying to shoot still and moving pictures up women's skirts and how when these MEN are caught they get prosecuted?

Oh yeah I forgot - it is because all of you men are just so horribly persecuted.....

Why don't YOU, gwallan...

April 16, 2009

Woohoo this video is coming in very handy!!!!

55
duncan macleod Says:

April 16th, 2009 at 6:57 am
...Fact ......... it was coke that was used, not a " date rape drug " ( of which there has been no case ever seen in the uk ) if she had been drugged she would have been unresponsive, there would have been proof in the video that she was not capable.

I have only 3 things to present to you DUNCAN MACLEOD....

1. UK bans date-rape drug

2. Date Rape Drug find in victim for first time

and last but certainly not least

WARNING!!!!!!

WARNING!!!!
I must warn all who come to this blog about clicking any links I provide. Unless I state this is a safe website you should take precautions in visiting any site listed as an MRA/FR site. To do so one could open up oneself to being stalked, hunted down, victimized, and even in worst case scenario - assaulted in real life or even killed. The men (and sometimes women) who post on the MRA/FR sites can be dangerous. One nly needs to read the venom spewing from their moouth to see evidence of that. I also post this due to the recent blogs and forums I have discovered over the last few weeks. These will slowly be added to the Cult Wall Of Shame. Please take adequate precaution when visiting these sites.

Fair Use Doctrine

Section 107 of the Copyright Act, entitled, "Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use," is the statutory codification of the fair use doctrine. This judicially developed concept strives to balance the public's need to know and be informed against authors' incentives to create. The copyright law contemplates that fair use of a copyrighted work without permission shall be for purposes such as (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching, and that such fair use will not result in the infringement of a copyrighted work. As one may expect, authors and publishers usually take a restrictive view of the fair use doctrine, while users of copyrighted materials generally take a more expansive view.

http://www.publaw.com/work.html

Thank you too!!!!

I am now friends on a message board with a wonderful man. And you all thought we hated men :-) We despise abusive controlling men and women. We like men and women who are decent, honest, and caring. I will say no more as I do not want to ruin this. But those who fight this same fight, keep going!!! We are being seen and our message is getting out there.

Thank you. And thank you for the important work that you do. It gets my dander stirred up when little men hide behind a pen or a computer and spew out fear, hate and stuff that they think makes them look like "real men" but in fact exposes them for the big bullies that they really are. My father and mother are both deceased. But my dad treated my mother the way every man should treat his wife. She was the Queen in our home and he doted on her like she was still his sweetheart until the day she died at age 84. Abraham Lincoln once said, "The greatest gift a father can give to his children is to love their mother." So many men are unhappy with their own lives and they blame women. That way they don't have to accept responsibility for their own shortcomings. Sad. Pathetic. Again, thank you for your very good and important work.

And thank you for giving us hope as well - the hope that there are good and decent people out there - both men and women.

My blog, My rules.....

I would like to welcome everyone who has arrived here - no matter the road you traveled. I only have some very simple rules. Please try to keep your comments clean (I am a mom and as such I do not like extreme vulgar language). I despise the "c" word so it will never be published. Otherwise I will be very lax as I want this site to be a release to those of you who have an issue with the MRAs in general and Sacks and his followers in particular.

I must also slide this little disclaimer in here too (just to protect myself from those pesky little creatures called lawyers and those MRAs who would think they will file a lawsuit or something silly like that against me). I am using YOUR WORDS on this site as well as publishing my opinion of those words. Nothing more, nothing less. I am "not" responsible for comments made by others on my site and if MRAs can behave then they might very well be allowed to post here. Like I said, this is intended to be a release for the women who have been attacked on various sites online to have a little comic break from these constant attacks.

I am posting this blog and all of my comments as a naturally born citizen of the United States and am exercising my right to free speech.

I must also caution my followers and posters against posting any identifying information. This is for your own safety, as I foresee this blog quickly becoming a very hated tool against MRAs who abuse and those who assist them. I mus also make one additional rule concerning posting other people's (such as our exes) personal information. I have been through a very nasty divorce and I know how our exes can react. As such I must make it a number one rule, as much pleasure it would give us, against posting any information which could identify our exes. First names (or initials if the name is uncommon) is fine but no last names. This will be enforced on this blog, unlike "other blogs."