Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - DLove

Greetings to all and by the way good to see you again Factory, sure do miss the rag. Dr. E many of us old timers are still here, lurking just not posting SYG remains home as this is where we found each other in those dark days. My 2˘ on the current happenings with the discontentment voiced by Factory and many others as to the current direction of AVFM and those of us around long enough to remember the previous meltdowns of mensnewsdaily as well as many others (Where is Gonzo when you need him?). A comparison can be made to the Black civil rights movement of the 60's where you had opposing views from Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Elijah Muhammad, Political leadership and even White political activist... all had a different vision toward achieving albeit similar outcomes via different approaches. None of them more right or wrong than the others. The nation settled on a hodgepodge mixture not pleasing to all but then again not displeasing to most either. Seem political consensus is the way it's done in this country when the voices of dissent are loud enough to threaten the established quo. Just as the inclusion of women into the workspace change that environment in many ways that were detrimental to men, the passive alliance to homosexuals changes the MRM in many ways not fully predictable and certainly ostracizes many men that have issue with that sort of fraternization.  Even those whose motto "live and let live" find the original message somewhat diluted like a line being redrawn in the sand and rightfully voice their discontent. Fear not because we will get there, yet "there" might not be what you thought it should be but just someplace better that what is now.

Main / Re: MRM pro gay?
May 25, 2012, 09:29 PM
(just the sound of me lurking around and deciding to comment)

Dr.E, your right! Science does not have a definitive answer and in all fairness the possibilities are extremely complex and yet this is nothing new as far as human evolution, aberrations as you called it have always been part of the human experience. But the difference now it is being used as a political and social wedge to further fragment the citizenry. The fight between those that believe that this is just another step, in a series of missteps leading toward in our moral degradation as a society and those that believe the unalienable rights of life, liberty and happiness  were not granted (with limits) by a creator but exist as a fulfillment of personal desire. While it's none of my business or concern ones' sexual proclivities, how can I as a man who is emasculated by society support the legal sanctioning of aberrant behavior that will not alleviate my condition and mostly likely will further erode my position?  Very similar events occurred to black males in '69 - '70 where they had 2 or 3 short years of government attempts to rectify past wrongs and then suddenly women emerged as the new wrong minority and those black males were left in the dust never to be mentioned again. While we bicker about the true meaning of civil rights, the band plays on - the race to the bottom gets even closer and men...all men are no closer to due process than they were 10 years ago. 

Main / Re: New Male Studies Journal Online
Mar 22, 2012, 07:55 AM
Another good referenced resource. Thanks

As a kid growing up in So Cal in the 60's it was not uncommon to use hitchhiking as a form of travel from one city to another. Ah... remember the adventure of hitching a ride from strangers...share some good smoke and good vibes. Power to the people. Right On! How far we have fallen from peace, love and happiness.

Article Here
Man Who Offered Lift To Teen Girls Says He's Victim Of 'Good Deed Gone Wrong'

March 16, 2012 11:31 PM
Rodney Peterson says he shouldn't have been charged for offering a ride to two teen girls during a snowstorm. (CBS)

BARRINGTON, Ill. (CBS) - Two 13-year-old suburban girls are being credited with helping police catch a man who offered them a ride home.
Barrington police say the teens were alarmed and disturbed by the offer and took down the man's license plate. But as CBS 2′s Mai Martinez reports, the man says he was only trying to help the girls, not harm them.
"This is a good deed gone wrong," Rodney Peterson says.
During a March 2 snowstorm, he saw two teen girls leave a Shell station while he was pumping gas.
"I just noticed these girls, that they had no umbrella, no coats or hood or something of that nature and I just felt like I should help," Peterson says.
When he drove off, he saw them a short distance away on Prospect Avenue near Waverly.
"I just pulled up and said 'How far do you have to walk?' And one of the girls just replied, 'We're OK,' and waved me on."
Peterson says he drove off and thought nothing of it until Barrington police showed up at his home three days later.
The married father of three, who has a fourth child due in June, listened in disbelief as police told him the girls reported the encounter and he was being charged with disorderly conduct.
His explanation did not assuage the police. Peterson's wife of nearly 12 years can't believe it.
"It really was a good deed, just misinterpreted," she says.
Despite his being charged, the Petersons don't blame the girls, their families or even police for following up.
"The question comes into why I was charged," Rodney Peterson says.
Peterson is due in court on Monday. He's facing a maximum $750 fine.
Barrington's police chief said the girls in this case were "alarmed and disturbed" by Peterson's actions. He said the right thing to do in a situation like that is to call police and tell them that the teens need a ride.

Since it was a man - imagine the worst possibility regardless of good intent. How a female feelings warrant fine/arrest is beyond me but this should serve as a warning to all men of days to come.

Main / Re: Look what I found
Mar 16, 2012, 09:53 PM
Excellent, amazing, fantastic....a good (long) read on so many levels. Thanks Virtue, definitely well worth the download for personal archives.

Main / Re: SPLC has the MRM in its sights.
Mar 09, 2012, 06:42 AM
Cordell hit the bulls' eye re: Morris Dees and chief hatchetwoman/propagandist, Heidi Beirich who have made quite a tidy profit peddling a once noble and viable moniker (SPLC) and turning it into a squelch box of spewing intolerance for anyone they determine to be outside the parameters of their self proclaimed and defined groupthink of anti American/racists/sexists/homophobics/patriots/misogynists. If you look at their scam agenda here or see their profits and motives exposed here or even this fine article on Lew Rockwell, their position in the pecking order of media outlets will become clear and you will understand they are just minions doing the governments' dirty work, propagandizing the undesirables for profit.  Still rough waters ahead folks as the big boys are beginning to take a more active role ramping up the negative imagery hoping to demonize and isolate by creating discord and mistrust amongst the rank and file. A cog in the thought police machinery, ever vigilant, preaching intolerance to the unwashed. YAWN.

This has been nothing more than a circular argument. Has there been study done as Larivee keeps asking that has made a connection between lewd and provocative clothing (Which by the way is not a right of free expression but an ever- changing fashionable custom - a LIMITED social privilege practiced in western society) and the prevalence of violent stranger rape?  No, of course not, no study that addresses this argument has so far reached the public sphere. Do the comments being made here and elsewhere by both men and women that common sense should dictate a woman should use some decorum of dress in public to reduce or minimize the potential of violent stranger rape make any sense? Some say yes and some say no. Without knowing all the various mental trigger mechanism that are involved in the mechanics of violent stranger rape in the real world, one without a 24 hour personal body protector (preferably male) Cordell, quite aptly analogously illustrated that an ounce of prevention may help to minimize that risk. Not the proof you are asking for Larivee, which doesn't exist as a sociological study. But it is not blaming the victim giving good sound advice to hedge risk by being a bit more modest in public attire since we all agree there will always be humans who for a myriad of reasons will, if they believe they can get away with it, do wrong.  No matter how utopian your ideals are, reducing those odds is in our own best interest.

Main / Re: U.S. credit rating?
Aug 06, 2011, 05:37 AM
I have to agree dr e, men will be blamed and also with davis2ab that the problem is not self-correcting. Sure we may see somewhat less government spending on feminist & social pork barrel programs but that alone is not enough to curb the eminent financial collapse of the debt which has been allowed to grow to 17 trillion. It would take a new invented technology similar to what computer technology has done to change old global paradigms and helped create new industries - even that might not be enough because the real issue (as I put on my tin hat) the real goal, the move toward one world government can happen only through the collapsing of the old and emerging as a savior to the woes of the sheeple. The oligarchies that control us now with little or no opposition, have after all already largely disenfranchised the male incentive to rise up and protect against them, have and will continue their world strategy plan with only murmurs of resistance.


Actually Kay is wrong the "wage gap" can be shut. Simply keep doing what they are already, pay women far more money for LESS work at the SAME job than men.

I find this comment enlightening for two reasons.

(1) As Kate noted in her Scandinavian comparisons giving women the option or choice they will always choose their own best interests and in most cases it is not being chained to the grindstone for eight hours a day. Maybe four hours if you have a government daddy willing to pick up the difference in cash or benefits privileges.

(2) I think I am beginning to understand that we are all chasing a mythical creature, general female happiness one that will forever remain just slightly out of grasp which disappears and reappears again almost if by magic just a few feet away only to appear and disappear again and again.  And like a tantrum child always selfishly whining and demanding. The answer is there is no answer because most women have the capacity and prerogative to change what they want from moment to moment to any given moment.   

Main / The Noose Begins to Tighten
Aug 03, 2011, 09:39 PM;siu-container

How the new 'Protecting Children' bill puts you at risk
By Violet Blue
August 1, 2011, 11:37pm PDT

Summary: A bill now makes the online activity of every American available to authorities upon request under the guise of protecting children from pornography.

Last Thursday the U.S. House of Representatives' judiciary committee passed a bill that makes the online activity of every American available to police and attorneys upon request under the guise of protecting children from pornography.

The Republican-majority sponsored bill is called the Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.

It has nothing to do with pornography, and was opposed by over 30 civil liberties and consumer advocacy organizations, as well as one brave indie ISP that is urging its customers to do everything they can to protest the invasion of privacy.
"Protecting Children" forces ISPs to retain customer names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and dynamic IP addresses.
It's like having your wallet plus the web sites you visit tracked and handed over on request. These logs are now going to be retained for the scope of one and a half years.
(I have to wonder if ISPs can sell this data, too.)

This has nothing to do with porn. In case you're like the Reps that passed this nightmare and you've forgotten: pornography is legal in the United States.
It is pedophilia that is illegal. But for the sake of harnessing hysteria to get a bill passed, clearly these particular Republicans find it convenient to conflate "pornographers" as pedophiles. Last time I checked in on the matter, pedophiles did not operate within the laws surrounding adult pornography.

Personally, I'm insulted as a porn-loving American girl to be included by way of consumer participation in this disgusting and misleading characterization. And that my privacy has just been sold for something that doesn't actually help the children.
I don't feel confident that treating us all like the criminals our system can't catch is going to protect any children, especially when the people who passed the bill can't - or won't - distinguish the difference between legal adult pornography and pedophilia.
CNET's Declan McCullagh reminds us that "the mandatory logs would be accessible to police investigating any crime and perhaps attorneys litigating civil disputes in divorce, insurance fraud, and other cases as well." CNET reported that mandatory data retention was being fast-tracked in January, 2011.

The fact that civil litigants could subpoena your internet activity and the contents of your wallet has nothing to do with the labeled and stated purpose of this bill.
"The bill is mislabeled," said Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the senior Democrat on the panel. "This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It's creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes."

However, this bill has a provision stating that a court does not need to approve administrative subpoenas used by U.S. Marshals who might use it to 'track down unregistered sex offenders.' This received strong arguments against giving Marshals too much power.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation spearheaded consumer and privacy groups' opposition to the bill and hosted a one-click letter-writing campaign. This included the ACLU, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, Patient Privacy Rights and many more.
Because of the way the bill requires information to be collected and stored, the EFF called the bill "ripe for abuse by law enforcement officials" and said that because the laws designed to protect the private data of consumers from government access are insufficient and out-of-date, it creates "a perfect storm for government abuse."

While consumer groups opposed it and tech news outlets I trust are spelling out concerns, it was when my own ISP made a blog post that it was clear that this bill isn't just a problem for privacy proponents.'s CEO Dane Jasper personally posted Help us, protect your privacy online.
Today we retain most IP allocation logs for just two weeks; we don't need them beyond that period, so they are deleted. Storing logs longer presents an attractive nuisance, and would potentially make our customers the target of invasions of privacy.
Any lawyer can simply file a Doe lawsuit, draft up a subpoena and request a customer's identity. It's far too easy.

Do the wheels of justice - or investigation - move too slowly, and should data be retained for a long time to allow for legitimate investigation? No, there are already tools in place that law enforcement can easily use to ask ISPs to preserve log information of real online criminals.

The 1996 Electronic Communication Transactional Records Act allows law enforcement to require an ISP to keep data for 90 days upon law enforcement request, giving time for a legitimate search warrant to be reviewed by a judge and issued.
The CEO points out that because the bill applies to commercial providers, naturally it won't catch people pursuing criminal activity, who can simply use public Wi-Fi.
Or 4G wireless, such as through a cell carrier.

One nice feature of the PCFIPA of 2011 bill is that it doesn't include cellular data, so if you've thought about switching to 4G wireless data at home you'll soon have another reason.

That's right: wireless carriers are exempt from having to store all your data and provide it on notice. This is likely because unlike small ISPs such as Sonic, wireless carriers lobbied the bill authors to get out of it.The Department of Justice fought against the mobile exemption. Obviously if someone is going to distribute pedophilia they could do it over a 4G wireless card just as easily as their DSL account, so in a certain context, the wireless carriers have lobbied their way out of the cost burden.

That also makes this bill anti-small business, because smaller ISPs like Sonic have to bear the costs, while Verizon and friends, don't.

I think that ultimately, the ones bearing the true costs will be us.
And don't give me that 'if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry' line. It's as ripe as Congressman Weiner's old line, 'my account was hacked.'

Republicans & Democrats two sides of the same coin and the sooner we see it and start to do more than we are doing now, the better off some of us will be cuz, you had better believe there's more poo poo coming down the road . What appears to be going on all around us is a whole lot of misdirect, lies, obfuscation, greed and thievery as the sheeple are willingly led into bondage. Not unlike a chess master playing a game against a novice, I'm just saying..... seems like things keep getting worse.

Yeah, Shane will certainly enter the Hall, it's just a shame to see him not only  like most fighters go out with whimper but to be a poster boy for why a woman's greed and the law continues to make a farce out all marriages. "Move along....nothing to see here, just another man tied to the whipping post".

Main / Mosley loses title belts in divorce
Jul 15, 2011, 12:04 PM

Mosley loses title belts in divorce

Not only has Shane Mosley been on the losing end of his latest boxing matches, he is also losing the fight in the courtroom as well. Per TMZ Sports, Mosley's ex-wife Jin Mosley will be awarded 3 championship belts as part of their divorce settlement. Ouch. Here are some details:

The settlement provides that ex-wife Jin "shall maintain custody and control of three championship belts for each of the respective parties' three minor children."  Each of the kids get a belt when they turn 18.
And Jin will get half of Sugar Shane's cut of profits from videotapes and DVDs of his big fights, including bouts with Oscar De La Hoya, Miguel Cotto and Fernando Vargas.

Since the divorce was filed in California and community property rules apply, Jin gets half of Sugar Shane's fight purses during their marriage.

Shane Mosley won't have to split the $3mil he pocketed for his sparring match fight with Manny Pacquiao as the fight took place after the 2009 split, so there's a small silver lining to an overall disappointing judgment. Not to mention the 21-year-old bombshell Bella Gonzalez that Shane has bagged, so I think Shane is sleeping well. Or not at all, depending on how you look at it.


In his prime HE was one of the best fighters in his weight class. Yet it is SHE who never entered the ring to earn 1˘ gets to take half of what HE earned in those fights. Why....well because SHE like all women are considered entitled to the fruits/sweat of a man's labor if she considers divorcing him. As most can see this gives potential carte blanche gold digging powers to all women for that which they could never earn or deserve. This is the single most important reason why men should never marry. There is no incentive/downside to prevent her at any time from taking the money, kids and house she is entitled to and kicking him to the curb.



Tuesday, July 05, 2011 A.D.

Exclusive: Court Subpoena for Obama's Original Birth Certificate Served to Hawaii Health Department.


by Sharon Rondeau

The United States District Court for the District of Hawaii issued and served a subpoena on July 5, 2011 to the director of the Hawaii Health Department for Obama's original birth certificate

(Jul. 5, 2011) -- A process server has delivered a Hawaii court-issued subpoena to Loretta J. Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, commanding her "to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and permit their inspection, copying testing, or sampling of the material:" original 1961 typewritten birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, III [sic] issued 08.08.1961, signed by Dr. David Sinclair, Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and registrar Lee, stored in the Health Department of the State of HI from 08081961 until now.

The subpoena allows Fuddy until August 8, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. to produce the document.

The designated place of production is noted as:

Health Department
State of HI
1250 Punchbowl str. room 325
Honolulu, HI  96813

Above the date, the following text appears:

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena, and Rule 45 (d) and (e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential consequences of not doing so, are attached.

The subpoena is signed by a deputy clerk as evidenced by an underline appearing beneath that term under the signature line.  It is dated "0705.2011″ just above the signature.

A second page titled "Proof of Service" reads:

This subpoena for (name of individual and title, if any) Loretta Fuddy
was received by me on (date) 0705.2011

A box is checked and the following preprinted text states:

I served the subpoena by delivering a copy to the named person as follows:

and the lines are completed with the following:

by certified mail return receipt sent to Attorney General of HI, 485 South King str, room 200, Honolulu, HI 96813 on (date) 07.05.2011; or

The checkbox and line below are blank.

Zeroes appearing on lines with dollar signs indicate that there are no fees charged for the service.

A final statement reads:

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:  07.05.2011

The server's signature appears in cursive writing and is printed on the line below.  It is stamped with the following below the process server's signature and printed name:

Law Offices of Orly Taitz, Esq.
29639 Santa Margarita Pkwy. Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA  92688

Proof of Service of the Subpoena from the U.S. District Court in Hawaii to the Health Department Director and the Hawaii Attorney General

Envelope in which Dr. Orly Taitz received a copy of the subpoena and its second page, which is the Proof of Service document

Loretta Fuddy and Dr. Alvin Onaka, Registrar of the Hawaii Department of Health, had previously refused Taitz's request to release Obama's original birth certificate, citing  concerns for "privacy."  Taitz responded to Onaka's refusal with a letter copied to several congressmen, putative Attorney General Eric Holder, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, and the statement:

...we have an individual with a forged birth certificate and an invalid Social Security number usurping the position of the US president and Commander in Chief of the whole US military. Your and Ms. Fuddy's refusal to provide access to the original birth certificate can be viewed as aiding and abetting to uttering of a forged document and elections fraud. Based on all of the above, I am respectfully requesting an administrative review of my appeal and granting access to the original document in question. If the appeal is not granted within 30 days, I will be taking further action.

On April 27, 2011, the White House released what it claimed was a certified copy of Obama's long-form birth certificate on television and the internet.  However, numerous document examiners, typesetting experts, and graphics consultants have come forward to state in formal presentations and reports that the image presented to the public is a poor forgery.

© 2011, The Post & Email. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.

Rocky,  Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat....first let me button up my sleeve..........

Is Taitz's issuing her own subpoena?

This is truly a gem for the record books as we spiral further down, down the hole of inevitability.