Wednesday, April 19, 2006

---Crystal Gail Magnum, there I said it!

What’s in a name? Allot apparently.

As long as there is great copy in it. And if you can plaster a shitload of pictures with it, well then that’s all the better.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

It started with a whole team, 46 players. Or was it 54. 31? Eh, who cares anyhow? Then it went to three specific men, and then it went to two completely DIFFERENT men. Maybe a third, we’ll decide who that is later fuck you very much. Plastered all over the MSM. Their names, addresses, shoe size, and circumcised status are news! Good news. DNA? What's that stand for, Do Not Acquit?

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

Protect the victim, ALWAYS, and crucify the accused. That is how system works.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

Well, that is not entirely true. Actually, when the crime is rape, and the victim is a woman (‘cause men are never raped donchaknow!) and the accused is a rich white boy. THEN, and only then is that how the system works.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

So we have the MSN (Main Stream Media), every feminist in every corner of the world, the women firsters, and every single men=bad, women=good blog touting the feminist line. CASTRATE THE PRIVILEDGED WHITE BOY RAPISTS! Guilt is a given. Proof is irrelevant. Why in good goddess’ name would a women lie about such an atrocity? Women don’t lie dammit! Especially about something so traumatic as rape!

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

MSM is protected by the 1st amendment. The accused are supposed to be protected by the 6th. Well, part of the 6th anyhow. The trial by jury and such trivialities part that is. But what happened to the right to face ones accuser? Isn’t that part of the 6th?

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

To whit;

The Sixth Amendment, vital to prevent a justice system from railroading relatively powerless defendants, supposedly guarantees any accused the right to a speedy and public trial, and is assisted by counsel. It also is supposed to guarantee that they shall know the nature of the charges against them and be allowed to subpoena witnesses in their defense. Furthermore, it also says the accused "shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him." In other words, face your accuser. (Note: in this case we will just leave the pronoun intact, no need for gender neutrality)

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

What does that mean, in this day and age? Nothing. Zip. Nadda. Well, if you’re a privileged white male anyhow. Having a well-to-do family is synonymous with the patriarch ™ and the KKK donchaknow. You are not in the “powerless defendants” group that the SC Justices as well as the original pens of the constitution were referring to. You are privileged.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

In 2004, the Supreme Court of these United States voted in a 7-2 ruling, reiterated this. No. Really???? Yep. Crawford vs Washington. The Justices (now if that isn’t an oxymoron) barred such bullshit like secondhand information and hearsay testimonies unless the defense (accused) has had an opportunity to question the accusing witness.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

Yea, well, so what! They are rich white boys! They deserve what’s coming to them! Especially that one that went to an all male elitist school ‘cause when boys are edumacated in this sort of environment, without the nurturing and positive influences of the wonderful world of feminism, they become racist evil rapist! It’s true! Just ask and professor of wymins studies!

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

So now what happens the original three men, or the rest of the team? How about the coach? What can be done about all the MSM and femi-speak that has all but ruined THEIR reputations? What about their rights? Rape shield laws, in principle, were meant to protect the victims from being keelhauled through the mud. A reasonable if not correct assumption, when looking at how MSM loves a good mud bath.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

But what about the initially accused; or the second pass accused? Are they NOW not the victims? Are they not the victims of a lynch mob mentality? Are they protected by the constitution as AMERICANS just like the accuser? Is there such a thing as trauma for the falsely accused? How many retractions have you seen in the news lately? How many apologies to the remaining men have been printed? How many femikook sites that initially crucified the WHOLE TEAM, CITY, SCHOOL, and MEN IN GENERAL have said, “sorry” to the other team members… to the coach. Uhuh, thought so.

Crystal Gail Magnum & Kim Roberts

Proof? We don’t need no stinkin’ proof! What we need is votes! We need a conviction! We need to prove that we will protect the ‘innocent’ at all costs! Not the alleged, the “innocent until proven guilty”! The term “alleged” is just a term. It has no real meaning. It’s just a name we use when a mother, woman, or any other protected class is accused of ‘indiscretions’.

But, what’s in a name…

Crystal Gail Magnum, multiple felon, stripper, hooker, and liar. A name that should NEVER EVER be forgotten.

Kim Roberts, felon, thief, and liar as well. Looking for a good "spin" doctor.


Sunday, April 09, 2006

---A Mothers Love knows no bound!

So I am cruising the Internet reading, as I usually do at the wee hours of the day. Bored with the garbage emails that I appear to be inundated each day with and I come across this ditty:

Making fun of boys totally fair

Somewhat irritated, I search further and discover that COOLTOOLSFORMEN has covered this individual already.

reading further, I discover an additional morsel;

Gender divide is a royal pain

OK, now I am actually pissed off at this woman. She not only treats her son with such discontent, but she goes even further and uses him as a stepping-stone for ridicule and humor in her columns.

I e-mail her.

Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2006 3:21 AM
To: Shapiro, Treena
Cc: me
Subject: Nice articles

IT is so pleasing to see the equality that you hold so dear to your heart is being applied to your children. [/sarcasm off].

I wonder how Corwin, you know, that evil little male in your house, will feel as well as act towards women when he comes of age. I’ll give you a hint. You already called Sloane (nice name BTW) by the appropriate term, "princess". This poor lad is going to grow up will all sorts of issues when it comes to interactions with men and particularly women.

You are married as well. Funny how your mangina of a husband seems to just ride the feminist dogma wave and allows you to psychologically abuse this poor child. All in the name of equality eh?


A father of a boy AND a girl.


I expect nothing in return, as I usually do. They never respond to fork-tongued males. Amazingly, I DO get a response.

I'm not interested in arguing whether I'm sexist or not, although I will defend my son. The column points out that I think he's smart.

The only reason I'm responding at all is because for the past week I've been getting hate mail from men who are threatening violence against me and since you seem to be more interested in written abuse rather than physical or sexual attacks, I'd really like to know where you read this. The column was originally published in January and has been taken off our website, so it's clear people are reading it somewhere else.

I know that you'd probably love it if these men actually followed through with what they're threatening, but I'm hoping that out of the kindness of your heart you might be able to tell me if they are reading this locally or in another state.

Notice that she is so typical with her answers, any one of us could have responded identically. They never seem to have anything new to say. Same-ole, same-ole.

So I respond back.

First and foremost, both of your columns are posted on the Honolulu Advertiser. Nice picture BTW. I can see the nurturing motherly instinct and love just oozing from that smile.

Sure you "say" that he is smart, but you treat him as a second class citizen, as you columns seem to imply. Instead of just telling him that Sloane can be king if she wants to, you blind the genders lines and belittle him by ignoring his pleas. Explaining to him that there is nothing wrong with her wanting to be king, AS WELL AS nothing wrong with HIM wanting to be king, I surmise, would have been more 'motherly' of you. But, you chose to "refuse". Thus refusing his feelings as well. This is sexist and you are sending him a message that a woman can do as she pleases and can do no wrong, but a man... well.... they smell, throw rocks at them.

This is what is wrong with the genders. When MEN & WOMEN stop this we are smarter or better or always the victim, then the issues that keep coming up between the sexes will subside. I truly believe that. Sure, they will never go away, but they certainly would crawl back under the rock from which they came from and belong.

Men and women are different. Fine. Men and women are pretty much interchangeable when it comes to doing 'things', fine. But belittling a male child all the while placing his sister on a pedestal does nothing but create contempt in that lads mind. If you truly believe in equality between the sexes, I should not have to tell you this.

So the Feminist Mantra comes forth. I, as a male, write you stating my distaste of your insensitive (almost abusive) parenting towards your son as well as your columns, and you immediately accuse me of the ATYPICAL feminist favorite. I am "abusing" you in writing rather than one of the other male-only goodies; physical and sexual. Gee, thanks. And you claim MEN have issues. You appear to be willing to raise the 'victims chalice' at any cost. As long as it is women who drink from it, I assume.

"Written abuse"? Hardly. If I wanted to abuse you (in writing) I would have. Insulted? Sure. Slightly angry that you would treat your son this way? Most definitely. But I tend to use a forked tongue rather than abuse in my writings. Being a feminist, you should be all too familiar with this type of writing. Whereas it is quite visible and apparent in your columns.

Lastly, I take exception to your insinuation that I would "love" it if these alleged men were to physically assault you. Where would you get an idea like that? Because I disagree with you? Because I am male? Because it is in the genetic makeup of all males? Thus, I must be a part of the "Patriarchy (tm)" that thrives secretly on the abuse of women? Come now, you appear to be somewhat learned. You cannot honestly believe that just because I disagree with your ideals, that I would want you hurt... That is just plain ole silly-willy emotionalism.

One last note, think about how your son will feel when he is older; old enough to go to the library and look up his mom's writings. Better yet, uses the Internet, just as I have. Ever think about how he will feel when he sees what he may have always felt or thought? You favor his sister based solely on her sex, and dislike him (based on his sex) so much that you use him as a tool for humor and ridicule in your columns. A mother’s love knows no bounds.


It will be interesting to see if she responds back again.

Here is her email address:

Friday, April 07, 2006

---Evil, evil Men. Pack of wolves. Elitist boys. Rapists. All 54 of them.

Those are just some of the names thrown around in the media as well as the blogsphere. Funny thing is, there are so many issues with this situation, one cannot seriously take the ‘victim’ side. Lets look at a few very simple and telling oddities….

First off, the ‘victim’ is a 28-year-old police psychology student at North Carolina Central University. Her parents said that she is trying to maintain a low profile to protect her children, ages 5 and 7. She works for Allure Escort Service. Yes, you read that correctly. She is holding a low profile yet she is a hooker. Uhuh… OK. Yes, that is what she is. Fact, deal with it

Then, supposedly, three of these young men had sexually assaulted this stripper/hooker.. er sorry ‘escort’.. Yet all 54 are paying the consequences for three (alleged) specific individuals. And there are consequences. They are being branded as rapist in class, by teachers, the media, and the town. Innocent until proven guilty eh? John Adams must be rolling in his grave right about now.

Not only that but, the coach has been pretty much beaten to a pulp to the point of resigning. Nice system. Oh, lets not forget that the media, in all its manipulative glory identify it as “a gang rape”. Thus implying that all 54 and their male cousins were involved. Nice copy that makes eh? Selling many papers lately?

Next we have the initial release of the allegations with the publishing of all the men’s names ad nauseum. Oddly, her name is nowhere to be seen. What happened to equal protection under the law? Facing ones accuser? nnocent until proven guilty? Oh wait, I forgot, protect the fema…er victim.

Enter the femishark frenzy in all its glory. Short of castration, these men, all 54 of them are guilty, plain and simple. Why? Because they are men, they are rapists. Young men from affluent families, but men none-the-less. Thus is the standard MO of the DV and rape industry. Yes, they are an industry, contrary to popular feminist dogma.

So now we start to look into this whole pathetic news story with a microscope. Mainly because the story is beginning to break down and the media has to somehow villify themselves by 'misdirection" and refocusing the story somehow. You know, to ensure that the victim is protected and the evil vile men are punished, at all costs.

Additional stories such as two women actually showed up, were contracted to do a strip tease act for the sum of 800.00 for a couple of hours, only to attempt to leave after 3 minutes.

This supposed event is again extended to a member of the team soliciting sex from the alleged victim for $300. She agreed, but later backed out for some reason. When the team member demanded his money back, she declined, and then requested $1500 or else she would claim she was raped. This would fit with the fact that she left the party, but was then convinced come back in the house.

Then there is the email claiming that they (the team) were going to get black dancers to the party for no other reason but to kill her (them). Notice now that it’s not just a rape issue, but also the tried and true, ace in the hole; race, has been brought to the table. Where is this critical piece of evidence? Has anyone see it? With Duke being virtually as ‘diverse’ as one can get, with approximately 47% black and 48 white (Fox News), you would think that the race issue wouldn’t even be brought up. If race was indeed so problematic at Duke, why is there not a cornucopia of stories with race being the center of the horn? But I digress.

Then we have the ole DNA angle. One would suspect that having all 54 men tested for DNA would either identify and thusly convict the proper assailants and vilifying the remaining 51 or so men (52 if you count the coach). But noooo. Gottah go forth with the new and improved Salem witch hunts. AP reported that the DNA results have been completed as much as 5 days ago. So why haven’t we heard the findings? Why are these men being raked through the coals? Why has their season been cancelled due to only three alleged assailants? Release the damned DNA findings and close this stupid case already. Incedently, the AP has also reported that a second battery of DNA test has been ordered... why? WTF was wrong with the first set? I know! They were 'unconclusive'. Translation, they proved that the men were not lying.

I wont even get into the part about the team, yess all of them, offered to take lie detector tests (actually truth verification tests) and the honchos that be declined. Again, why? Why would they not want to have this on their side during the trial as proof!? Hmm Maybe because it will once again prove that this is nothing more than a freakin witch hunt.

In my opinion, denying truth verification tests and holding back the DNA findings proves that there are issues with this whole thing. If DNA proves that the rape occurred, wouldn’t you think that they would want to get that information out, go to trial, convict, and then enable the poor victim “to begin the healing process”. Oh, and while we are at it, all the other men to get on with their lives too…If you don’t mind too much.

But wait! Just when you think this cannot get any more ridiculous than it already has, out comes a police report from 2002. According to a 2002 police report, the woman, a 27-year-old student at North Carolina Central University at the time, gave a taxi driver a lap dance at a Durham strip club. Subsequently, according to the report, she stole the man's car and led deputies on a high-speed chase that ended in Wake County.

Hold your horses now, there is more.. She claimed to have only doe this sort of employment twice! So cronologically, it must have been that one time in 2002 and then this time, in 2006. Yea! That's the ticket! Back to the facts...

Apparently, the deputy thought the chase was over when the woman turned down a dead-end road near Brier Creek, but instead she tried to run over him, according to the police report.

Additional information notes that her blood-alcohol level registered at more than twice the legal limit.

Wow! Now if that doesn’t make one wonder. Ponder for a second what the motives of this poor victim truly are. I’ll wait.

Now, I am NOT implying one single bit that these sorts of atrocities happen. But when an equal, and sometime more disturbing atrocity happens such as the media and campus conviction of these men without due process… well I have to call a spade a spade.

So far nothing is concrete with the exception of “no evidence has been found at the site of the alleged attack”, as stated by the local sheriffs office. Additionally, the prosecutors claim that 4 fingernails were found at the scene. Two questions, why did the local officials claim that nothing was found then. Secondly, she claimed to have scratched one of her assailants, which caused her fake nails to come off. Well, shoot, check the boys then! At least one of them MUST have some sort of superficial wound indicative of the supposed actions. Nope. No information on that either.
Oh and lets not forget this little nugget; “The identity of the 911 caller, however, is not yet known. She identified herself only as someone passing by the house, located on Buchanan Street near Duke. Although police generally have information about a 911 call location, as well as who placed it, a Durham police spokeswoman said Thursday they have neither in this instance.” Well, well, well, isn’t that convenient. Personally? I think that it was her gal pal that called the police. You know, to corrobera.... er protect her friend from the evil males.

So I ask you, why the filler busting hold up? Why are the DNA results being held? Why is there no corroboration of the supposed scratches of one of the assailants? What of the police that respond to a call where they somehow, unbeknownst to the whole freaking world, cannot verify who placed the call and from where.

There are just too many questions, with too many inconsistencies. Way too many PC angles with very little or actual investigative process.

With that, I leave you with the biggest question of all. If this supposedly happened, WHY HAS NOONE ACTUALLY BEEN CHARGED YET?