as the mole rat Robyn Ringler pokes her head up at CSGV and calls us a bunch of meanies for not letting her have an echo chamber. So what does she do? Posts an interview on a blog that also "moderates" comments , makes unsubstantiated claims of racism, and neglects to mention that one of her only supporters was the equally bigoted Alex T. Riley.
I mean really. She used the Gun Guys as her primary information source, played the usual "I don't want to ban guns except" game (and still does), and banned the phrase "gangbangers" to describe, well, gangbangers because she decided that was a codeword for racism.
I take a measure of pride in the fact that she used my post calling her and her supporters on their BS as the 'final straw' as her excuse to close up shop and go home.
Showing posts with label Alex T Riley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex T Riley. Show all posts
Monday, August 18, 2008
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Unpossible..
He who shall not be named specifically stated that we were losing. Why then did the anti-gun bills in PA get thrashed while the pro-rights ones passed? If only "He who shall not be named" was still on the CF PA board. I'm sure all firearms would be banned and confiscated by now.
Will Bryan Miller of CF NJ, who has no affiliation w/ CF PA in any way, claim this as a victory as well?
Will Bryan Miller of CF NJ, who has no affiliation w/ CF PA in any way, claim this as a victory as well?
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Saturday, February 23, 2008
CeaseFire PA are proud of their board members..
So much so that they don't include them in their current listings. Notice who's missing?
Hee Hee.
Thanks to 45Superman via WaronGuns.
Hee Hee.
Thanks to 45Superman via WaronGuns.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Bryan Miller continues to distance himself from Prof. Riley.
In his latest post:
As to your silly hubbub about a CeaseFire PA Board member (that's PA as in Pennsylvania), neither Ceasefire NJ (that's NJ as in New Jersey) nor I have any role in choosing, endorsing, supporting or whatever anyone on CeaseFire PA's Board. It ain't our business. So, the accusatory Comments to my blog about a CeaseFire PA Board member are ridiculously out of place, which is why I deleted all of two hostile and inappropriate Comments (out of nearly 600 appended to my entries). Finally, I have neither time nor inclination to seek information on CeaseFire PA's Board members. As I said, I am busy doing what I do. 'Nuff said. Adio, fellas.
And yet:
And, energetic and strategic leadership has emerged at CFNJ's sister organization, CeaseFire PA, around which all concerned to make Pennsylvania (and, indeed, New Jersey) safer from handgun crime and violence are gathering.
Sure sounds like support to me. Especially since he was the one that co-founded and was Executive Director of CF PA. How would he know that they have "energetic and strategic" leadership if he knows nothing about them? Is that just what the other board members told him? Is he just a mouthpiece regurgitating talking points now or is he actually active in his organization? Is he stating he no longer has any influence in the organization he started?
Notice that he refuses to use Alex Tristan Riley's name? Or that the post he deleted was a link to Riley's "Vermin" blog about the very topic Bryan is discussing? Why would he possibly do that?
You can't make this stuff up.
As to your silly hubbub about a CeaseFire PA Board member (that's PA as in Pennsylvania), neither Ceasefire NJ (that's NJ as in New Jersey) nor I have any role in choosing, endorsing, supporting or whatever anyone on CeaseFire PA's Board. It ain't our business. So, the accusatory Comments to my blog about a CeaseFire PA Board member are ridiculously out of place, which is why I deleted all of two hostile and inappropriate Comments (out of nearly 600 appended to my entries). Finally, I have neither time nor inclination to seek information on CeaseFire PA's Board members. As I said, I am busy doing what I do. 'Nuff said. Adio, fellas.
And yet:
And, energetic and strategic leadership has emerged at CFNJ's sister organization, CeaseFire PA, around which all concerned to make Pennsylvania (and, indeed, New Jersey) safer from handgun crime and violence are gathering.
Sure sounds like support to me. Especially since he was the one that co-founded and was Executive Director of CF PA. How would he know that they have "energetic and strategic" leadership if he knows nothing about them? Is that just what the other board members told him? Is he just a mouthpiece regurgitating talking points now or is he actually active in his organization? Is he stating he no longer has any influence in the organization he started?
Notice that he refuses to use Alex Tristan Riley's name? Or that the post he deleted was a link to Riley's "Vermin" blog about the very topic Bryan is discussing? Why would he possibly do that?
You can't make this stuff up.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Think about this..
This (as Alex puts it) "Shitty little blog" that "nobody reads" and "doesn't matter" has generated more hits on both Paul Helmke's and Josh Sugarmann's Huffpo blogs than either of their organizations or, for that matter, ANY anti-rights blog or organization. And I'm just small potatoes.
Chew on that one for awhile.
Chew on that one for awhile.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Compare and Contrast..
One says "B…R…I…N…G…I…T" and when we do, he scurries away like the sociologically similar vermin he states we resemble.
Now another says "Bring it on". Care to lay odds on a different result?
Now another says "Bring it on". Care to lay odds on a different result?
Hypocritical Quotes of the Day..
Violence is here to stay, I fear, and some of us will choose to use it to protect the people we love from those who will choose to use it to hurt those people. I’m not into the idea of imaginary supernatural beings who will do the moral sorting. I think we have to do it, or it doesn’t get done. And yes, I do indeed take some pleasure in anticipating the doing of moral good by working to prepare myself for that task.
-Prof Alexander Tristan Riley, Ceasefire PA board member
And now contrast that to this quote from his now defunct blog:
What a blueprint for a culture, that of the NRA. Paranoid people who imagine murderers and evil government agents are at every street corner, waiting to strike at innocents, and therefore arm themselves to the teeth, which legitimately terrifies their neighbors and helps produce exactly the kind of distorted world that the gun extremists believe already exists--i.e., a world in which everyone is deathly afraid of everybody else.
So prepare yourself to defend against the violence that is out there and revel in your "Marshall Dillon" complex but don't use a gun to prepare against violence because that's paranoid and increases violence by creating a "Marshall Dillon" complex.
-Prof Alexander Tristan Riley, Ceasefire PA board member
And now contrast that to this quote from his now defunct blog:
What a blueprint for a culture, that of the NRA. Paranoid people who imagine murderers and evil government agents are at every street corner, waiting to strike at innocents, and therefore arm themselves to the teeth, which legitimately terrifies their neighbors and helps produce exactly the kind of distorted world that the gun extremists believe already exists--i.e., a world in which everyone is deathly afraid of everybody else.
So prepare yourself to defend against the violence that is out there and revel in your "Marshall Dillon" complex but don't use a gun to prepare against violence because that's paranoid and increases violence by creating a "Marshall Dillon" complex.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
The position of Ceasefire Pennsylvania board members..
From board member Alexander Tristan Riley, the "energetic and strategic leadership" that they've recently admitted:
And FYI, repeal of the 2nd Amendment is EXACTLY my position. The 2nd Amendment is a relic of history, which in any event has never meant what the NRA thinks it does (at least according to the Supreme Court–but what do they know, when we’re talking about the opinion of Moses and Wayne LaPierre, eh?). No smokescreens from me. Firearms produce very, very little that can be objectively considered social good, and MUCH that is obviously socially destructive.
And:
Bw, a lot of us are working politically to try to take your gun away from you, or at least to make it very, very hard for you to justify your need to have it: http://ilovemydaughtermorethanyouloveyourgun.blogspot.com/.
So is this the official position of Ceasefire PA?
And FYI, repeal of the 2nd Amendment is EXACTLY my position. The 2nd Amendment is a relic of history, which in any event has never meant what the NRA thinks it does (at least according to the Supreme Court–but what do they know, when we’re talking about the opinion of Moses and Wayne LaPierre, eh?). No smokescreens from me. Firearms produce very, very little that can be objectively considered social good, and MUCH that is obviously socially destructive.
And:
Bw, a lot of us are working politically to try to take your gun away from you, or at least to make it very, very hard for you to justify your need to have it: http://ilovemydaughtermorethanyouloveyourgun.blogspot.com/.
So is this the official position of Ceasefire PA?
And who could this possibly be?
David has a troll threatening libel action against us. Homosexual insinuations, ad hominems, claims that we're losing, and lack of the concept of irony:
If you did know anything at all about how the technology works then you'd appreciate that, if I knew what your IP address was, I could make this post of mine appear as though it was made from your computer.
Oh guys! Whatever happened to your powers of detection? Take a look at my IP address. I'm not posting from Lewisburg PA, am I?
You know, the usual.
Obviously DeadEyeTroll is concerned about an independent investigation.
If you did know anything at all about how the technology works then you'd appreciate that, if I knew what your IP address was, I could make this post of mine appear as though it was made from your computer.
Oh guys! Whatever happened to your powers of detection? Take a look at my IP address. I'm not posting from Lewisburg PA, am I?
You know, the usual.
Obviously DeadEyeTroll is concerned about an independent investigation.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Strong (but admittedly circumstantial) evidence..
As has been noted here and other blogs, most recently WOG and SharpasaMarble, several blogs containing racist and other highly offensive and discriminatory remarks have disappeared from sight. This is the information I have available on the original Troll/NRAFOREVER:
And this is what I received later w/ the same IP as Alex Riley when he posted on this site and others:
I'll let others post their own information.
| VISITOR ANALYSIS | |
| Referring Link | No referring link |
| Host Name | 64.178.120.6.dynamic.dejazzd.com |
| IP Address | 64.178.120.6 [Label IP Address] |
| Country | United States |
| Region | - |
| City | - |
| ISP | D&e Communications |
| Returning Visits | 18 |
| Visit Length | Multiple visits spread over more than one day |
| VISITOR SYSTEM SPECS | |
| Browser | MSIE 6.0 |
| Operating System | Windows XP |
| Resolution | Unknown |
| Javascript | Enabled |
Navigation Path
| Date | Time | WebPage |
| 7th December 2007 | 19:41:42 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 19:59:49 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:28:43 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:37:10 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:39:51 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:42:22 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:42:39 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:48:39 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:49:39 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 21:56:48 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 22:14:19 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 22:19:18 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 22:34:32 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 7th December 2007 | 23:43:50 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 13:28:52 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 13:35:57 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 13:41:25 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 14:10:37 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 14:28:41 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 14:35:12 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 20:59:32 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:13:48 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:14:03 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:14:23 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:14:32 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:15:43 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:16:37 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:21:58 | No referring link |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:22:09 | www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=culturologist profile&btnG=Search Days of our Trailers: 2007-09-09 |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:27:19 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:27:20 | No referring link |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:36:59 | No referring link |
| 8th December 2007 | 21:58:59 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 22:08:28 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 22:09:23 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 22:09:58 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 8th December 2007 | 23:29:16 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 9th December 2007 | 12:10:02 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 9th December 2007 | 16:04:32 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 9th December 2007 | 17:23:21 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 9th December 2007 | 20:41:35 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
| 9th December 2007 | 20:42:42 | No referring link Days of our Trailers |
And this is what I received later w/ the same IP as Alex Riley when he posted on this site and others:
| VISITOR ANALYSIS | |
| Referring Link | No referring link |
| Host Name | 64.178.120.39.dynamic.dejazzd.com |
| IP Address | 64.178.120.39 [Label IP Address] |
| Country | United States |
| Region | - |
| City | - |
| ISP | D&e Communications |
| Returning Visits | 47 |
| Visit Length | Multiple visits spread over more than one day |
| VISITOR SYSTEM SPECS | |
| Browser | MSIE 6.0 |
| Operating System | Windows XP |
| Resolution | Unknown |
| Javascript | Enabled |
Navigation Path
I'll let others post their own information.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Racism and Gun Control.
To complement ArmedandSafe's post on the subject:
Alex T. Riley of Ceasefire PA has made the claim the the modern firearm rights movement started as a reaction to the race riots of the late Sixties and that those that support said rights do so in fear of blacks and hispanics. To counter this, I present the words of journalist Robert Sherrill, no friend of gun owners, from his book "Saturday Night Specials":
The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed not to control guns but to control blacks, and inasmuch as a majority of Congress did not want to do the former but were ashamed to show that their goal was the latter, the result was they did neither. Indeed, this law, the first gun-control law passed by Congress in thirty years, was one of the grand jokes of our time. First of all, bear in mind that it was not passed in one piece but was a combination of two laws. The original 1968 Act was passed to control handguns after the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., had been assassinated with a rifle Then it was repealed and re-passed to include the control of rifles and shotguns after the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy with a handgun....
Hmm. It would seem that the modern movement started as a reaction to a knee-jerk reaction. Did people purchase more firearms during the riots? I wouldn't doubt it. That is a well established trend following discord. That, however, does not a political movement make. Why would a movement to keep firearms need to be started unless legislatures were trying to take them away?
But I digress.
In 1988, the Chicago Housing Authority and CPD started the program known as "Operation Clean Sweep". This involved warrantless searches of homes,
mandatory sign in/out rosters, and visitor exclusion rules that included
family members and children. This resulted in the case Rose Summeries, et al. v. Chicago Housing Authority, et al. The CPD and CHA chose to limit their activities instead of going through the courts. Firearms, however, are still banned from CHA buildings.
Virginia courts have upheld a similar ban in the Richmond Housing Authority (Richmond Tenants Org. v. Richmond Dev. & Hous. Auth.) while Federal legislation (HR 3838) was proposed, along with the states Washington and Oregon, in 1994. Maine attempted to ban firearms in public housing in 1995 but this was struck down.
So not only are "gun control's" very origins rooted in racism and efforts to control what are deemed by them to be undesirable elements of the population, their efforts in the latter half of the 20th Century continue this oh-so-fine tradition. This is re-enforced by Obama touting his wife's words:
And by the way, Michelle, my wife, she was traveling up, I think, in eastern Iowa, she was driving through this nice, beautiful area, going through all this farmland and hills and rivers and she said 'Boy, it's really pretty up here,' but she said, 'But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I'd want a gun. Because, you know, 911 is going to take some time before somebody responds. You know what I mean? You know, it's like five miles between every house.'
And then adding:
"So the point is, though, we should be able to do that, and we should be able to enforce laws that keep guns off the streets in inner cities because some unscrupulous gun dealer is, you know, letting somebody load up a van with a bunch of cheap handguns or sawed-off shotguns and dumping them and selling them for a profit in the streets."
In other words, it's alright for the rural folk but you can't trust those 'people' on the streets.
Now what demographics would fall under those brushes again?
Alex T. Riley of Ceasefire PA has made the claim the the modern firearm rights movement started as a reaction to the race riots of the late Sixties and that those that support said rights do so in fear of blacks and hispanics. To counter this, I present the words of journalist Robert Sherrill, no friend of gun owners, from his book "Saturday Night Specials":
The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed not to control guns but to control blacks, and inasmuch as a majority of Congress did not want to do the former but were ashamed to show that their goal was the latter, the result was they did neither. Indeed, this law, the first gun-control law passed by Congress in thirty years, was one of the grand jokes of our time. First of all, bear in mind that it was not passed in one piece but was a combination of two laws. The original 1968 Act was passed to control handguns after the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., had been assassinated with a rifle Then it was repealed and re-passed to include the control of rifles and shotguns after the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy with a handgun....
Hmm. It would seem that the modern movement started as a reaction to a knee-jerk reaction. Did people purchase more firearms during the riots? I wouldn't doubt it. That is a well established trend following discord. That, however, does not a political movement make. Why would a movement to keep firearms need to be started unless legislatures were trying to take them away?
But I digress.
In 1988, the Chicago Housing Authority and CPD started the program known as "Operation Clean Sweep". This involved warrantless searches of homes,
mandatory sign in/out rosters, and visitor exclusion rules that included
family members and children. This resulted in the case Rose Summeries, et al. v. Chicago Housing Authority, et al. The CPD and CHA chose to limit their activities instead of going through the courts. Firearms, however, are still banned from CHA buildings.
Virginia courts have upheld a similar ban in the Richmond Housing Authority (Richmond Tenants Org. v. Richmond Dev. & Hous. Auth.) while Federal legislation (HR 3838) was proposed, along with the states Washington and Oregon, in 1994. Maine attempted to ban firearms in public housing in 1995 but this was struck down.
So not only are "gun control's" very origins rooted in racism and efforts to control what are deemed by them to be undesirable elements of the population, their efforts in the latter half of the 20th Century continue this oh-so-fine tradition. This is re-enforced by Obama touting his wife's words:
And by the way, Michelle, my wife, she was traveling up, I think, in eastern Iowa, she was driving through this nice, beautiful area, going through all this farmland and hills and rivers and she said 'Boy, it's really pretty up here,' but she said, 'But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I'd want a gun. Because, you know, 911 is going to take some time before somebody responds. You know what I mean? You know, it's like five miles between every house.'
And then adding:
"So the point is, though, we should be able to do that, and we should be able to enforce laws that keep guns off the streets in inner cities because some unscrupulous gun dealer is, you know, letting somebody load up a van with a bunch of cheap handguns or sawed-off shotguns and dumping them and selling them for a profit in the streets."
In other words, it's alright for the rural folk but you can't trust those 'people' on the streets.
Now what demographics would fall under those brushes again?
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Merry Christmas to us.
In a conversation last night w/ my ultra-liberal (but still my favorite) cousin:
Me: Westroads forced people who had completely legal CCW licenses to disarm themselves if they wanted to shop there. Why shouldn't they be held liable when something happened?
Cuz: Huh. I never thought of it that way.
And two certain blogs have gone down the memory hole to join their bastard siblings in oblivion.
And a Happy New Year to come.
Me: Westroads forced people who had completely legal CCW licenses to disarm themselves if they wanted to shop there. Why shouldn't they be held liable when something happened?
Cuz: Huh. I never thought of it that way.
And two certain blogs have gone down the memory hole to join their bastard siblings in oblivion.
And a Happy New Year to come.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Obviously they don't teach the concept of Irony at Bucknell
Any idiot who wants to spread ignorance and lies sets up his blog, or logs in to the Dung Heap, and spreads away.
-Prof. Alex T. Riley on his blog.
CeaseFire NJ Reasoned Discourse
Bryan Miller is trying to either ignore or distance himself from Alexander Tristan Riley and lies about it in the process. I posted a link to Riley's latest blog, which he is eminently proud of, and noted that he was a board member of Ceasefire PA, CeaseFire NJ's sister organization. As those of you who have read it know, in between the insults, there are comments on gun laws directly related to Bryan's post about allowing firearms on campus.
Bryan deleted that post as well as the first one. Here's his response:
Catch that? He claims that CeaseFire PA is not affiliated with CeaseFire NJ "in any way". I guess that's why Bryan co-founded, used to be the director of and still works directly with them to pass legislation. He states in a previous article : And, energetic and strategic leadership has emerged at CFNJ's sister organization, CeaseFire PA,
I guess that's not "affiliated with" in Bryan's world.
I didn't have to "attack" him Bryan. All I had to do was link to the various statements he's made and which he is proud of. This is the kind of person you have as "energetic and strategic leadership" and we're going to make sure everyone knows it, no matter how much you try and distance yourself from it.
So Alex, how does it make you feel that your associates are denying you already? Why don't you link to the blogs making what you claim are slanderous statements about you? Are you afraid of people reading what you wrote and later defended? Are you afraid that people won't see your claims of racism or supposed death threats because they aren't there?
Cowards.
Bryan deleted that post as well as the first one. Here's his response:
thirdpower:
Well, I'm going to take down your latest, too. Why? Because you must be confusing me with someone else. I am the ED of Ceasefire NJ, as in New Jersey. And, the person you viciously attacked is not on the Ceasefire NJ Board or affiliated with it in any way. As I wrote above, your comment "has not a thing to do with anything I wrote. It also gratuitously attacks someone not associated with this blog." So, take your nastiness elsewhere, it is out of place situated under my blog.
But, as I've also written before, I do not intend to edit or delete comments that are in response to what I've written, even if they are as foul as that posted above by kels94. I love it when such as kels94 demonstrate for readers their relative class, or lack thereof.
Yep, keep those cards and letters coming!Catch that? He claims that CeaseFire PA is not affiliated with CeaseFire NJ "in any way". I guess that's why Bryan co-founded, used to be the director of and still works directly with them to pass legislation. He states in a previous article : And, energetic and strategic leadership has emerged at CFNJ's sister organization, CeaseFire PA,
I guess that's not "affiliated with" in Bryan's world.
I didn't have to "attack" him Bryan. All I had to do was link to the various statements he's made and which he is proud of. This is the kind of person you have as "energetic and strategic leadership" and we're going to make sure everyone knows it, no matter how much you try and distance yourself from it.
So Alex, how does it make you feel that your associates are denying you already? Why don't you link to the blogs making what you claim are slanderous statements about you? Are you afraid of people reading what you wrote and later defended? Are you afraid that people won't see your claims of racism or supposed death threats because they aren't there?
Cowards.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
CeaseFire PA CYOA
A quote by Alexander Tristan Riley:
I ain't hiding ANYWHERE. I'm out in the world defending my ideas in a community of other people who have actually done their homework and working politically to protect children from you lot.
Yet, when all is said and done, ATR the Culturologist, deleted his blogs filled with hatred, bile, and attacks against gays, Catholics, Muslims, parents, gun owners, sociologists, and anyone he felt wasn't up to his moral standards, just before he became a board member of CF PA.
Why would he do this? Could it possibly be to keep people from reading his ideas about violently assaulting people on the sex offender registry because he considers them a direct threat to his family? Or that he feels parents who let their children play w/ toy guns should be imprisoned? Or howabout his opinions of gays:
"There is a LARGE literature in the medical health field demonstrating the specific health hazards homosexual men run by their behaviors. If you don't know it, you would do well to start reading some of it. I would happily send you pdfs of articles documenting higher anal cancer rates in homosexual men and higher rates of other anorectal disease as well as general anorectal dysfunction. And what about the well-known Cophenhagen study that showed clear and significant differences regarding rates at which the homo- and heterosexual populations they looked at showed evidence of various health problems? To quote it: ”The total burden of infections expressed as the actual number of infections was largest among homosexuals, 40.4%, 22.4%, and 5.3% having one, two, and three infections respectively.”As I said, I have a good deal of stuff in pdf form, should you actually be interested in looking at it. It's a grave mistake to imagine that simply waving your credential and your opinion is enough to settle the question of what the medical literature does or does not show. I've certainly never claimed that the sociological argument is settled simply by me noting that I'm a sociologist and I happen to think X. The material still has to be INVESTIGATED."
or his feelings on "Womens Studies":
WHen I finished, a young woman in the audience (a Womens' Studies major, I learned later) raised her hand to ask a question/respond. Within about 30 seconds of her response, and without having said the slightest coherent thing, she was in tears, crying that people like me were ruining everything, blah blah blah....
In Womens' Studies 81% of all students in all courses receive an A. EVERYONE knows what that is about, whether they will admit it or not--ideological correctness is the grade requirement there, not any actual argumentative or rational prowess. Line up on the 'right' side, learn to hate the 'wrong' side, and fall into hysterical tears as a 'response' to it whenever you come into contact with it, and you get your A."
Or howabout on gays again:
"As for medical evidence, there's a good deal of that showing that homosexual men suffer risks for STDs and other health hazards well above and beyond those that non-heterosexual men face. This topic has been discussed here before. People who engage in anal intercourse open themselves to all sorts of additional health hazards--this has something to do with the actual primary function of the anus, which doesn't involve shoving objects up it over and over again.Those mundane facts of the human body don't go away just because some people decide they want to express their romantic attractions to others by doing such things."
"There's also a good deal of evidence challenging the image you are trying to construct of the 'monogamous homosexual man.' All the data suggest that the average homosexual man has at least several times as many sexual partners as the average heterosexual man. Even people like Jonathan Rauch realize they can't deny this fact--although they work themselves into a sweat trying to shrink the margin as much as they can. It seems pretty clear that this subculture has a strongly entrenched element of promiscuity and there's little reason to believe that allowing them to 'marry' will change that."
Or Feminists:
A walking talking stereotype of the loud shrill feminist know nothing.
I'm sorry, I'm not speaking your language. GRUNT! GRUNT! UGH! UGH!
Or when he deliberately misstates opinions to demonize others:
The real problem is that the Guav’s of the world consider it a dead heat when you stack up a little girl’s LIFE with somebody’s stereo or TV (what the burglar is looking for).
Like his most recent distortion of the facts against a speech by Mike Adams that he (Alex) didn't even attend.
Just one of the blatant misrepresentations:
(e.g., he advocates, one can only hope jokingly, the replacement of Martin Luther King Jr. Day with a day celebrating America’s real “greatest civil rights leader,” John Browning, who Adams apparently believes deserves that title for inventing a kind of firearm that allowed hunters to “kill…more deer in North America than any other model before or since."
When in reality what was said was along the lines of:
He tried to suggest that my reasoning for Browning Day was based solely on the fact that he invented a firearm responsible for killing more deer in America than any other. He failed to mention that my reasoning was also based on the fact that Browning’s inventions helped us preserve freedom (read: civil rights) for all by winning two world wars. This is approximately two more world wars than MLK helped us win – although I do acknowledge that he was our second greatest civil rights leader.
There's more from him in comments, have a read about his opinions of Christians.:
"And this pathetic soul dares to claim he was denied because of his belief in an imaginary SuperMan with a beard?"
Maybe it's comments and actions along those lines that Alex Tristan Riley is trying to now hide from the world since he's become a public figure for the gun banners.
Isn't it ironic that the person who refused to allow anonymous comments on his blogs because he considered anyone who refused to let their name out for their politics to be cowards, deleted his blogs to hide his real feelings on politics?
We all see who the true coward is.
Update: In one of those bizarre timing coincidences, Alex, who now claims to hate blogs even though he used to have three of them, has become so unhinged at Adam's countering his outright fabrications that he started a new one just today for the sole purpose to attack Mr. Adams and all the posters at Townhall.com:
Mike S. Adams Is Vermin
This is the voice of Ceasefire PA and Bucknell University.
Update 2: I posted this link over on Bryan Millers blog as CF NJ and PA are partners. He deleted it.
Here's his reasoned discourse:
thirdpower:
I've never before edited or deleted any of the noxious comments you and your pals have posted, as I want 'normal' readers to read them. You guys make me look so wise.
But, I'm taking down your comment posted at 1:56am today, as it has not a thing to do with anything I wrote. It also gratuitously attacks someone not associated with this blog.
Interesting that you should accuse me above of ad hominem attacks and then embark on same yourself. You'd call that 'rational discourse,' no doubt. Normal folks would call that dishonest. But, such is life, eh?
I don't plan on editing or deleting any further comments, but let's keep it to what I write. OK, fellas?
Keep those cards and letters coming...
The links have also been deleted on both Sugarmann's and Helmke's blogs.
Read Alex's reply in the comments.
I ain't hiding ANYWHERE. I'm out in the world defending my ideas in a community of other people who have actually done their homework and working politically to protect children from you lot.
Yet, when all is said and done, ATR the Culturologist, deleted his blogs filled with hatred, bile, and attacks against gays, Catholics, Muslims, parents, gun owners, sociologists, and anyone he felt wasn't up to his moral standards, just before he became a board member of CF PA.
Why would he do this? Could it possibly be to keep people from reading his ideas about violently assaulting people on the sex offender registry because he considers them a direct threat to his family? Or that he feels parents who let their children play w/ toy guns should be imprisoned? Or howabout his opinions of gays:
"There is a LARGE literature in the medical health field demonstrating the specific health hazards homosexual men run by their behaviors. If you don't know it, you would do well to start reading some of it. I would happily send you pdfs of articles documenting higher anal cancer rates in homosexual men and higher rates of other anorectal disease as well as general anorectal dysfunction. And what about the well-known Cophenhagen study that showed clear and significant differences regarding rates at which the homo- and heterosexual populations they looked at showed evidence of various health problems? To quote it: ”The total burden of infections expressed as the actual number of infections was largest among homosexuals, 40.4%, 22.4%, and 5.3% having one, two, and three infections respectively.”As I said, I have a good deal of stuff in pdf form, should you actually be interested in looking at it. It's a grave mistake to imagine that simply waving your credential and your opinion is enough to settle the question of what the medical literature does or does not show. I've certainly never claimed that the sociological argument is settled simply by me noting that I'm a sociologist and I happen to think X. The material still has to be INVESTIGATED."
or his feelings on "Womens Studies":
WHen I finished, a young woman in the audience (a Womens' Studies major, I learned later) raised her hand to ask a question/respond. Within about 30 seconds of her response, and without having said the slightest coherent thing, she was in tears, crying that people like me were ruining everything, blah blah blah....
In Womens' Studies 81% of all students in all courses receive an A. EVERYONE knows what that is about, whether they will admit it or not--ideological correctness is the grade requirement there, not any actual argumentative or rational prowess. Line up on the 'right' side, learn to hate the 'wrong' side, and fall into hysterical tears as a 'response' to it whenever you come into contact with it, and you get your A."
Or howabout on gays again:
"As for medical evidence, there's a good deal of that showing that homosexual men suffer risks for STDs and other health hazards well above and beyond those that non-heterosexual men face. This topic has been discussed here before. People who engage in anal intercourse open themselves to all sorts of additional health hazards--this has something to do with the actual primary function of the anus, which doesn't involve shoving objects up it over and over again.Those mundane facts of the human body don't go away just because some people decide they want to express their romantic attractions to others by doing such things."
"There's also a good deal of evidence challenging the image you are trying to construct of the 'monogamous homosexual man.' All the data suggest that the average homosexual man has at least several times as many sexual partners as the average heterosexual man. Even people like Jonathan Rauch realize they can't deny this fact--although they work themselves into a sweat trying to shrink the margin as much as they can. It seems pretty clear that this subculture has a strongly entrenched element of promiscuity and there's little reason to believe that allowing them to 'marry' will change that."
Or Feminists:
A walking talking stereotype of the loud shrill feminist know nothing.
I'm sorry, I'm not speaking your language. GRUNT! GRUNT! UGH! UGH!
Or when he deliberately misstates opinions to demonize others:
The real problem is that the Guav’s of the world consider it a dead heat when you stack up a little girl’s LIFE with somebody’s stereo or TV (what the burglar is looking for).
Like his most recent distortion of the facts against a speech by Mike Adams that he (Alex) didn't even attend.
Just one of the blatant misrepresentations:
(e.g., he advocates, one can only hope jokingly, the replacement of Martin Luther King Jr. Day with a day celebrating America’s real “greatest civil rights leader,” John Browning, who Adams apparently believes deserves that title for inventing a kind of firearm that allowed hunters to “kill…more deer in North America than any other model before or since."
When in reality what was said was along the lines of:
He tried to suggest that my reasoning for Browning Day was based solely on the fact that he invented a firearm responsible for killing more deer in America than any other. He failed to mention that my reasoning was also based on the fact that Browning’s inventions helped us preserve freedom (read: civil rights) for all by winning two world wars. This is approximately two more world wars than MLK helped us win – although I do acknowledge that he was our second greatest civil rights leader.
There's more from him in comments, have a read about his opinions of Christians.:
"And this pathetic soul dares to claim he was denied because of his belief in an imaginary SuperMan with a beard?"
Maybe it's comments and actions along those lines that Alex Tristan Riley is trying to now hide from the world since he's become a public figure for the gun banners.
Isn't it ironic that the person who refused to allow anonymous comments on his blogs because he considered anyone who refused to let their name out for their politics to be cowards, deleted his blogs to hide his real feelings on politics?
We all see who the true coward is.
Update: In one of those bizarre timing coincidences, Alex, who now claims to hate blogs even though he used to have three of them, has become so unhinged at Adam's countering his outright fabrications that he started a new one just today for the sole purpose to attack Mr. Adams and all the posters at Townhall.com:
Mike S. Adams Is Vermin
and he lives at the bottom of the festering dung heap that is townhall.com
Here are the headers:
- Dissecting the Fecal Deposit of the Vermin II
- Dissecting the Fecal Deposit of the Vermin
- Other Vermin Squeak II
- Other Vermin Squeak
- The Facts
- A justification for this blog (and if only all blo...
This is the voice of Ceasefire PA and Bucknell University.
Update 2: I posted this link over on Bryan Millers blog as CF NJ and PA are partners. He deleted it.
Here's his reasoned discourse:
thirdpower:
I've never before edited or deleted any of the noxious comments you and your pals have posted, as I want 'normal' readers to read them. You guys make me look so wise.
But, I'm taking down your comment posted at 1:56am today, as it has not a thing to do with anything I wrote. It also gratuitously attacks someone not associated with this blog.
Interesting that you should accuse me above of ad hominem attacks and then embark on same yourself. You'd call that 'rational discourse,' no doubt. Normal folks would call that dishonest. But, such is life, eh?
I don't plan on editing or deleting any further comments, but let's keep it to what I write. OK, fellas?
Keep those cards and letters coming...
The links have also been deleted on both Sugarmann's and Helmke's blogs.
Read Alex's reply in the comments.
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Inadvertant gun rights activists.
or: They can 'scare white people' too.
Anti-rights activists like Alex, JadeGold, and 'Anonymous' are , in my opinion, doing us all a favor. Their profanity laden, hate-filled diatribes do one thing besides waste bandwidth. They make any 'fence-sitters', those with no strong opinions on the matter, think "If these people are this incoherent, maybe the other side has a point." In other words, it encourages them to look at those that our resident venom-spitters are directing their hate towards with a more positive view. I've gotten linked to by several sites that have nothing to do with firearms, their ownership, or rights for the mere fact that these sites have also been the object of similar hate attacks by said individuals. Who do you think the readers of these sites will look more favorably on?
And for Ms. "Anonymous" Lewisburg, PA. Every time you load a page on this site, I get a little money. So, not only are you helping us out with your words, but your actions as well. Thanks to you, I'm well on my way towards another box of ammo.
Thank you all for supporting the cause.
Apparently Sharp as a Marble posted something similar.
Anti-rights activists like Alex, JadeGold, and 'Anonymous' are , in my opinion, doing us all a favor. Their profanity laden, hate-filled diatribes do one thing besides waste bandwidth. They make any 'fence-sitters', those with no strong opinions on the matter, think "If these people are this incoherent, maybe the other side has a point." In other words, it encourages them to look at those that our resident venom-spitters are directing their hate towards with a more positive view. I've gotten linked to by several sites that have nothing to do with firearms, their ownership, or rights for the mere fact that these sites have also been the object of similar hate attacks by said individuals. Who do you think the readers of these sites will look more favorably on?
And for Ms. "Anonymous" Lewisburg, PA. Every time you load a page on this site, I get a little money. So, not only are you helping us out with your words, but your actions as well. Thanks to you, I'm well on my way towards another box of ammo.
Thank you all for supporting the cause.
Apparently Sharp as a Marble posted something similar.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Apparently I haven't been keeping up.
Alex seems to have disappeared. Maybe he traveled to Michigan.
Robyn hasn't posted in nearly two months.
"Where did the guns come from?" should be renamed "Where did the comments go?"
Jade is conducting "Reasoned Discourse" by deleting comments as well.
Well, we still have Paul and Josh on Huffington and Bryan Miller.
Robyn hasn't posted in nearly two months.
"Where did the guns come from?" should be renamed "Where did the comments go?"
Jade is conducting "Reasoned Discourse" by deleting comments as well.
Well, we still have Paul and Josh on Huffington and Bryan Miller.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)