I think it's going too far to indict an entire lifestyle instead of the one person that is fucking him. Indict her. In the butt.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: No, I just see that their lifestyle may be implicit in allowing Carrier to continue affiliation despite there being a complaint and despite knowing what he was up to regarding students. Carrier made it very clear where he drew the line, and it went way past Camp Quest's line. But they kept him.
Carrier: Hey, I'm really sorry about what happened with Darlene. Total misunderstanding.deLurch wrote:One item that sticks out for me in Carrier's testimony is that he says that his statement was shown to his accuser via SSA and that she found it acceptable. But the account he tells is of a different woman. What if the SSA showed Carrier's statement to the woman that it involved, and not the one that had made the complaint.
It would certainly explain a lot as to why Carrier's story doesn't mesh as he was continuing to conflate two different women.
I should have said there is no evidence, not there is no ménage a trio.Really? wrote:You have to admit that it's pretty fishy when you go to the Camp Quest and SSA Facebook pages and see each organization commenting on the wall of the other, knowing that all the comments might be typed on the same laptop.HunnyBunny wrote:There is no ménage a trios. There is no evidence of involvement by the Executive Director of SSA in the relationship between his wife and Carrier. There are no photos of Carrier and the husband together that I can find despite the fact that'll three attended the same co free cels. They aren't friends on Facebook.
:laughing-rollingyellow:CommanderTuvok wrote:Carrier: [looking smug]...so, Columbo, looks like the phantom face jizzer is going to get away with his sexual harassment at Camp Quest?
Columbo: Sure seems that way [puts the hand he is holding his cigar in to his head].
Carrier: Well, now that you've wasted three days dogging my every move, you can now move on knowing you've been defeated by an intellectual colossus. Move along now.
Gee, shucks, I guess so. You sure are smart! [Columbo walks towards the door, getting half outside, while Carrier begins to pour himself a glass of Champagne......but then Columbo pauses, and turns around...]
Columbo: Just one more thing, Sir.
Carrier: What is it now, you irritant?
Columbo: This photograph, Sir. [Columbo whips out the photo of Carrier at Camp Quest and shows it him] This is you at Camp Quest, with the tattoo.
[The screen freezes with a smiling Columbo holding up the photograph....yellow title fonts roll]
It's not canon, I'm in the process of just trying to get the threads together in my Mind. So has Amanda been in his lap for the whole road trip ?HunnyBunny wrote:Also Brive, your timeline is wrong. I know it's sacrilege to say this, I'm sorry.
The incident where Carrier appears on the main Camp Quest page in a photo was a Secular Day event, where Amanda Metskas, Director of Quest was an invited speaker, as was Carrier. At this event both SSA and Camp Quest had groups officially representing them.
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:CommanderTuvok wrote:Carrier: [looking smug]...so, Columbo, looks like the phantom face jizzer is going to get away with his sexual harassment at Camp Quest?
Columbo: Sure seems that way [puts the hand he is holding his cigar in to his head].
Carrier: Well, now that you've wasted three days dogging my every move, you can now move on knowing you've been defeated by an intellectual colossus. Move along now.
Gee, shucks, I guess so. You sure are smart! [Columbo walks towards the door, getting half outside, while Carrier begins to pour himself a glass of Champagne......but then Columbo pauses, and turns around...]
Columbo: Just one more thing, Sir.
Carrier: What is it now, you irritant?
Columbo: This photograph, Sir. [Columbo whips out the photo of Carrier at Camp Quest and shows it him] This is you at Camp Quest, with the tattoo.
[The screen freezes with a smiling Columbo holding up the photograph....yellow title fonts roll]
Berry Whites 'Practice What You Peach' seems appropriate.comhcinc wrote: Fuck me I have a sinus migraine. We can keep talking lets just turn the lights out. Maybe light a candle, put some Berry White on...
Is "a grey" aussiespeak for something? Hair color?Brive1987 wrote:A grey. A fucking grey.
Carrier gets weirder and weirder
https://2dbdd5116ffa30a49aa8-c03f075f81 ... 4.6881.jpg
I think it might be something to do with those extraterrestrial anal-probers. Carrier sure is a kinky boi.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Is "a grey" aussiespeak for something? Hair color?Brive1987 wrote:A grey. A fucking grey.
Carrier gets weirder and weirder
https://2dbdd5116ffa30a49aa8-c03f075f81 ... 4.6881.jpg
In which case he'd best hope alien semen isn't similar to face-hugger acid.Tigzy wrote:I think it might be something to do with those extraterrestrial anal-probers. Carrier sure is a kinky boi.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Is "a grey" aussiespeak for something? Hair color?Brive1987 wrote:A grey. A fucking grey.
Carrier gets weirder and weirder
https://2dbdd5116ffa30a49aa8-c03f075f81 ... 4.6881.jpg
Guys, I suppose I should have brought this up earlier but Anna Racoon has a different take. For example from The Savile Memorial Celebrations…Jan Steen wrote:Erm...Shatterface wrote:If the Jimmy Savile affair teaches us anything, it's that these creeps look and act just like the rest of us.HunnyBunny wrote:Wonderful, so happy for her. I'm sure almost every person who has committed sexual assault or rape has been nice to some of the people they met in life. This doesn't preclude them having committed the crimes they were accused of. The Yorkshire Ripper's wife claimed she had no idea he was a murderous bastard who hated women. Nice manners doesn't mean you are innocent. Just means you could be duplicitous. Or fail at life and don't understand personal boundaries because your pecker's gotten excited over the nubile young thing sat next to you.
http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dyn ... 379792.jpg
This is only the tip of the Iceberg. Ms Racoon has written extensively on Jimmy Saville and the events surrounding said same and he conclusion is that he was fitted up. Go ahead, follow the 1st link and a few others and see if what she says adds up.I have followed this story more closely than most – and I’m still not convinced that Savile was a paedophile. I’m even less convinced than I was before I read the Dame Janet Smith report.
My guess would be the story is difficult to distill into a few sentences, like everyone can understand Carrier going to a blog and spamming the comment thread with semen fetishism, here we got many people and organizations and a fairly complex timeline. Also it happened right in the middle of Orlando, Cox and Brexit.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:I'm also frankly surprised Thunderfoot or Sargon haven't mentioned anything yet on their channels. I think Tfoot would be particularly interested in Carrier's shenanigans.
The Secular Student Alliance does not tolerate sexual harassment of its members. A recent post alleging inappropriate conduct by one of our former speakers, Richard Carrier, requires us to respond. After an internal investigation, Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance.
Friday the 13th: Camp Quest II.
"...to cut a long story short, I calculated that the probability that Jesus existed is at best about 33%. Did I tell you already that I have a PhD in ancient history?"
"You're incredibly erudite, Dr. Carrier."
"It's nothing compared to your beautiful hair.""
"Huh?"
"Are you dating someone?"
"Dating? Was that what having a boyfriend was called when you were young, Dr. Carrier?"
"You know, if you ever get tired of your boyfriend, I would be more than happy to date you."
"Fuck off, you creep."
"Hey, no problem. You're free to say no. You don't know what you're missing out on, but hey."
"OK, I'm going to complain about you with the organization."
"Good luck with that. I happen to fuck the boss of this fucking organization. Hahaha."
Without even looking I am going to guess that the woman claimed rape because she was too drunk to consent and therefore it is all the fault of the penis bearer.Sulman wrote:Interesting case regarding two barristers getting hammered and getting in on outside Waterloo station during rush hour:
https://johnjamessite.com/2016/04/26/mo ... pitude-iv/
I understand it's been thrown out, but a good example of what appears to be some pretty careful use of sexual assault laws.
Nerd of Redhead has retired recently. You should get in touch, go on some fishing trips with him.Brive1987 wrote:Same company but I've done three distinct roles there of escalating scope. And yep, first company out of University. There were a few good reasons I stayed as long as I did. And probably a couple of bad ones.rayshul wrote:Congrats on... 25 years of your life... ending. ^_^ Was this the first job out of school?Brive1987 wrote:Well, it's Friday 5.00pm and I just left my job of 25 years.
In honour of Dick, my farewell email rickrolled the whole company. I find shit like that amusing.
Less amusing was that group of 20 somethings who didn't know what a rickroll was. Obviously as students they never did SSA.
Don't you skeptic bro? ;)CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Is "a grey" aussiespeak for something? Hair color?Brive1987 wrote:A grey. A fucking grey.
Carrier gets weirder and weirder
https://2dbdd5116ffa30a49aa8-c03f075f81 ... 4.6881.jpg
Does he do road trips?ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:Nerd of Redhead has retired recently. You should get in touch, go on some fishing trips with him.Brive1987 wrote:Same company but I've done three distinct roles there of escalating scope. And yep, first company out of University. There were a few good reasons I stayed as long as I did. And probably a couple of bad ones.rayshul wrote:
Congrats on... 25 years of your life... ending. ^_^ Was this the first job out of school?
Other quotes from the press:A solicitor will not be charged with sexually assaulting a female barrister after police found two witnesses who said she was a willing partner in the drunken romp
Ya ya ya. It is all the fault of the penis bearer. A woman never has agency, makes a wrong decision etc. etc. then lies about it and throws her partner in crime under the bus.The female barrister said through her solicitors Bindmans: 'I reported an incident to police in good faith having carefully considered the implications and only because I believed it was the right thing to do.
'I would never make a deliberately false allegation of a serious criminal offence and any suggestion that I did so is deeply offensive and upsetting.'
She is still fighting to quash her caution, while facing a Bar Standards Council investigation into her behaviour.
Critics have expressed concern that the anonymity law could have been used to keep the woman's name secret – and pointed out that a prosecution of Mr Stening for sexual assault would have been fatally flawed by the caution she signed admitting consensual sexual activity.
A source familiar with the case told the Mail: 'I can't believe the police will accept her attempt to withdraw her acceptance of the caution. If her attempt were to be successful, she would surely have to be charged with outraging public decency – and appear in court after all. Witnesses claim she was an active participant in this 'romp'.'
The first evidence of her being with him is May 25th In Salt Lake City. She was also with him in Kansas City on the 28th/29th. In all of Carrier's posts about the trip he talks about 'We' or 'Us'.Kansas City was the last stop before Columbus.Brive1987 wrote:It's not canon, I'm in the process of just trying to get the threads together in my Mind. So has Amanda been in his lap for the whole road trip ?HunnyBunny wrote:Also Brive, your timeline is wrong. I know it's sacrilege to say this, I'm sorry.
The incident where Carrier appears on the main Camp Quest page in a photo was a Secular Day event, where Amanda Metskas, Director of Quest was an invited speaker, as was Carrier. At this event both SSA and Camp Quest had groups officially representing them.
Oh do let us know how events unfolded after that.VickyCaramel wrote:
I forgot all about Spear Chuckers, jungle Bunnies and the rhyming slang "Macca" (from Macaroon).... Political Correctness has obviously been very effective as they have slipped from my lexicon. I must remember to use them next time I am at KFC.
Bolding and underlining mine.It wasn’t until months later that I learned that that person, whom I did wrong, did not file a complaint; but that Amy had. Which left me perplexed. Our interaction did not match what I was being told. I discovered who the actual complainant was when I was later a volunteer driver for an SSA conference she attended (unbeknownst to me) and the SSA asked me to keep my distance from her at her request.
Well there was the case of the Liberal MP last year.AndrewV69 wrote:A quick search reveals this:
Woman sex case QC was 'a willing partner' in drunk romp: Solicitor will not face charge of sexually assaulting barrister after two witnesses said she consented (but she still can't be named)
Mind, this is from that bastion of professional journalism the Daily Flail:Other quotes from the press:A solicitor will not be charged with sexually assaulting a female barrister after police found two witnesses who said she was a willing partner in the drunken rompYa ya ya. It is all the fault of the penis bearer. A woman never has agency, makes a wrong decision etc. etc. then lies about it and throws her partner in crime under the bus.The female barrister said through her solicitors Bindmans: 'I reported an incident to police in good faith having carefully considered the implications and only because I believed it was the right thing to do.
'I would never make a deliberately false allegation of a serious criminal offence and any suggestion that I did so is deeply offensive and upsetting.'
She is still fighting to quash her caution, while facing a Bar Standards Council investigation into her behaviour.
Critics have expressed concern that the anonymity law could have been used to keep the woman's name secret – and pointed out that a prosecution of Mr Stening for sexual assault would have been fatally flawed by the caution she signed admitting consensual sexual activity.
A source familiar with the case told the Mail: 'I can't believe the police will accept her attempt to withdraw her acceptance of the caution. If her attempt were to be successful, she would surely have to be charged with outraging public decency – and appear in court after all. Witnesses claim she was an active participant in this 'romp'.'
That is of course if you believe the media about anything.
Why? How is this behavior out of the ordinary for barristers or any other member of the legal profession?VickyCaramel wrote:This presents some interesting dilemmas even without the woman alleging sexual assault.Sulman wrote:Interesting case regarding two barristers getting hammered and getting in on outside Waterloo station during rush hour:
https://johnjamessite.com/2016/04/26/mo ... pitude-iv/
I understand it's been thrown out, but a good example of what appears to be some pretty careful use of sexual assault laws.
I hope they are both disbarred.
Added to the above, given Amy's position with SSA as a chapter President, and given that she was publicly seeking funding to attend the conference, SSA must have been aware that the complainant in a sexual harassment case was coming to the very conference that the perpetrator of the sexual harassment was acting in a volunteer capacity as. They must have been aware because they warned Carrier to keep away from her.HunnyBunny wrote:Further questons:
In the 'Regarding the Accusations' post Carrier says he resigned as a speaker for SSA.
On the facebook post by SSA, they say "Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance."
On the 'Regarding the Accusations' post Carrier states:
Bolding and underlining mine.It wasn’t until months later that I learned that that person, whom I did wrong, did not file a complaint; but that Amy had. Which left me perplexed. Our interaction did not match what I was being told. I discovered who the actual complainant was when I was later a volunteer driver for an SSA conference she attended (unbeknownst to me) and the SSA asked me to keep my distance from her at her request.
If Carrier was removed as a Speaker by SSA, and no longer had any affiliation with SSA, why was he months later acting as a volunteer driver at an SSA conference?
I remember reading that, but it didn't register. So Carrier was not EMPLOYED by SSA, nor was he ON THE SPEAKERS' BUREAU and had no affiliation with SSA, but he was driving young women around from place to place.HunnyBunny wrote:Further questons:
In the 'Regarding the Accusations' post Carrier says he resigned as a speaker for SSA.
On the facebook post by SSA, they say "Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance."
On the 'Regarding the Accusations' post Carrier states:
Bolding and underlining mine.It wasn’t until months later that I learned that that person, whom I did wrong, did not file a complaint; but that Amy had. Which left me perplexed. Our interaction did not match what I was being told. I discovered who the actual complainant was when I was later a volunteer driver for an SSA conference she attended (unbeknownst to me) and the SSA asked me to keep my distance from her at her request.
If Carrier was removed as a Speaker by SSA, and no longer had any affiliation with SSA, why was he months later acting as a volunteer driver at an SSA conference?
I was going to say something like that. But I will restrain myself and merely point out that she would have to copy/paste from the Slymepit and the fallout, would be much more problematic than say her Donald Trump like styling comb over for her receding hairline.feathers wrote:Fixed that.CommanderTuvok wrote:Since it is 24 hours since the news broke, shouldn't Ofie the Transphobe havebanged outcopypasted 14 articles on it by now?
My kid attended one of the regional Camp Quest summer camps twice, at ages 16 & 17. The 2nd year they told the parents ahead of time there'd be discussion with the teens about consent (re sex), & IIRC you could opt your kid out. I asked my kid afterwards about the week & it sounded like they'd had some educators from Planned Parenthood come to camp for part of a day, & whatever they talked about it paled in comparison with condom water balloon tossing.JackSkeptic wrote:If there was ANY sexual content in what the kids were taught at Camp Quest I would radically change my position. Not only for that but for the fact SJW's are more than happy to indoctrinate into their political philosophy, the same as most relegions will. Teaching kids they must listen and belive, thinking for yourself is bad and that they must think only the 'one true way' is in itself a form of abuse.
But I see no evidence of that. Maybe I am naive though.
As Aneris pointed out, these people are not going to engage in good faith, and they are going to litigate every single point. If you want to interact then keep both those issues in mind. Note how they've already rolled out the line that Carrier's only involvement with Camp Quest since 2009 was a single volunteer day, when the truth is he's still on their list of volunteers and friends, is very, very close with their president, and apparently close enough with the rest of the staff to have his picture posted (with links to his profile) on their facebook. SSA will pull similar stunts. They'll point toward the investigation and how Carrier was removed from the speaker's panel ("resigned" says that dishonest fuck) and say this proves they behaved like professionals, but the truth is that's bullshit. Carrier driving women around on their behalf is involvement with the SSA, period. If someone can't see that an insists on an SSA pay stub with Carrier's name on it before they'll recognize the obvious, then that person is just trying to waste your time.Really? wrote: I remember reading that, but it didn't register. So Carrier was not EMPLOYED by SSA, nor was he ON THE SPEAKERS' BUREAU and had no affiliation with SSA, but he was driving young women around from place to place.
Carrier's an Ubercreep.
I don't necessarily think that what you describe is a bad thing. To be honest, I might be a little annoyed if Planned Parenthood came in and preached an SJW version of consent. And I'm not sure what that has to do with science and skepticism, but I can live with it. You tell kids that "no one should touch the no-no spot" or "You must make sure that you have absolute confirmation of consent before you engage in sexual activity"...fine. I can see letting that go.Skep tickle wrote:My kid attended one of the regional Camp Quest summer camps twice, at ages 16 & 17. The 2nd year they told the parents ahead of time there'd be discussion with the teens about consent (re sex), & IIRC you could opt your kid out. I asked my kid afterwards about the week & it sounded like they'd had some educators from Planned Parenthood come to camp for part of a day, & whatever they talked about it paled in comparison with condom water balloon tossing.JackSkeptic wrote:If there was ANY sexual content in what the kids were taught at Camp Quest I would radically change my position. Not only for that but for the fact SJW's are more than happy to indoctrinate into their political philosophy, the same as most relegions will. Teaching kids they must listen and belive, thinking for yourself is bad and that they must think only the 'one true way' is in itself a form of abuse.
But I see no evidence of that. Maybe I am naive though.
It seemed like the focus otherwise was solidly on fun sciencey & critical thinking skill-building, and many if not all the kids are atheists. My kid loved it.
FWIW that was our experience & YMMV at other locations.
And she re-doxes the kid in her video.free thoughtpolice wrote:In noncarrier news, did you know Becky is anti-doxxing?
[youtube]UusuQYluhEk[/youtube]
From the comments:Wow. What kind of scumbag would dox someone just because they happen to have different opinions on things or get angry at their sense of humor?
From what I have read, it sounds like a great experience. I'd probably consider sending my kids to one if they were around our way. I don't think there can be any question of conduct issues at the camps, there is absolutely no evidence of that.Skep tickle wrote:My kid attended one of the regional Camp Quest summer camps twice, at ages 16 & 17. The 2nd year they told the parents ahead of time there'd be discussion with the teens about consent (re sex), & IIRC you could opt your kid out. I asked my kid afterwards about the week & it sounded like they'd had some educators from Planned Parenthood come to camp for part of a day, & whatever they talked about it paled in comparison with condom water balloon tossing.JackSkeptic wrote:If there was ANY sexual content in what the kids were taught at Camp Quest I would radically change my position. Not only for that but for the fact SJW's are more than happy to indoctrinate into their political philosophy, the same as most relegions will. Teaching kids they must listen and belive, thinking for yourself is bad and that they must think only the 'one true way' is in itself a form of abuse.
But I see no evidence of that. Maybe I am naive though.
It seemed like the focus otherwise was solidly on fun sciencey & critical thinking skill-building, and many if not all the kids are atheists. My kid loved it.
FWIW that was our experience & YMMV at other locations.
Important dot connecting there!HunnyBunny wrote:Added to the above, given Amy's position with SSA as a chapter President, and given that she was publicly seeking funding to attend the conference, SSA must have been aware that the complainant in a sexual harassment case was coming to the very conference that the perpetrator of the sexual harassment was acting in a volunteer capacity as. They must have been aware because they warned Carrier to keep away from her.HunnyBunny wrote:Further questons:
In the 'Regarding the Accusations' post Carrier says he resigned as a speaker for SSA.
On the facebook post by SSA, they say "Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance."
On the 'Regarding the Accusations' post Carrier states:
Bolding and underlining mine.It wasn’t until months later that I learned that that person, whom I did wrong, did not file a complaint; but that Amy had. Which left me perplexed. Our interaction did not match what I was being told. I discovered who the actual complainant was when I was later a volunteer driver for an SSA conference she attended (unbeknownst to me) and the SSA asked me to keep my distance from her at her request.
If Carrier was removed as a Speaker by SSA, and no longer had any affiliation with SSA, why was he months later acting as a volunteer driver at an SSA conference?
Fucking appalling conduct by an organisation working with young people.
Part of why I'm in such a tizzy over this is because I believe in the value of this organization and Carrier is tanking that value. He and the people that let him run amuck are nothing less than a cancer that needs to be burned out of my beloved atheist community. What I'm saying is it's time for a new atheism :twisted:Skep tickle wrote: My kid attended one of the regional Camp Quest summer camps twice, at ages 16 & 17. The 2nd year they told the parents ahead of time there'd be discussion with the teens about consent (re sex), & IIRC you could opt your kid out. I asked my kid afterwards about the week & it sounded like they'd had some educators from Planned Parenthood come to camp for part of a day, & whatever they talked about it paled in comparison with condom water balloon tossing.
It seemed like the focus otherwise was solidly on fun sciencey & critical thinking skill-building, and many if not all the kids are atheists. My kid loved it.
FWIW that was our experience & YMMV at other locations.
Atheism: The super-mega-double-champagne-deluxe edition.jet_lagg wrote: What I'm saying is it's time for a new atheism :twisted:
So am I. :popcorn: :popcorn:deLurch wrote:I don't think you are wrong.Bourne Skeptic wrote:Seems to me some people here smell blood in the water and are getting caught up in a feeding frenzy.
My 2 cents.
I think that people are excited to see what happens when Carrier gets measured by his own average stick. We also know how these hunts tend to end. People are expecting a huge dose of schadenfreude.
We are...Bhurzum wrote:Atheism: The super-mega-double-champagne-deluxe edition.jet_lagg wrote: What I'm saying is it's time for a new atheism :twisted:
You're either with us...
Ahahahahaha. Just could not help myself.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
This is apparently the "veiled death threat" I made. Right here: hereRichard Weed Kirbmarc • 10 months ago
Regarding threats on the Pit: I can't seem to post links here but check out the veiled death on the Happy 3rd Pit Birthday thread posted on Tue Jul 07, 2015 by AndrewV69 (post # 1238).
This is the whole point. Carrier was and is one of the many people who "raised awareness" about sexual harassment in the atheist and skeptic communities. A decade ago, you could go to a conference and maybe have drinks with a likeminded adult who was your own age, give or take, and maybe make a stronger connection. It's been happening forever.Aneris wrote:So far, I remain unconvinced. We know that the story doesn't add up, or Carrier's SJW-lawyering style of argumentation is in the way, as I suggested pages earlier, but once more: it's vague as always and I'm long past the point where I trust these people that they really mean the same thing when they utter “harassment” or similar terms. It could be about anything. Further, these organisations offer different positions, and, yet another area of confusion, it's totally unclear which one he occupied, when, and what that means. For example in SJW-lawyering land, a “volunteer” could be a specific role, but a driver who helps to build up things beforehand might be a different thing — I don't know. All we know is that Carrier did something with Amy Frank, who then complained. I haven't seen what she complained about in concrete terms, whether it was actionable, whether they simply agreed in good terms that Carrier does something differently from then on, and so and and so on. This is a non-story full of usual speculations, hypothethicals that again bury anything substantive. Is even known in what capacity she was there?
And to iterate the other point I made: the atheist PR problem existed since the very beginning for me and there was no point, ever, when it was any different. I went with Discordianism after all, truthfully, still somewhat randomly even when I admittedly didn't think it would be THAT bad for atheism at first. I thought, the Rusty Porcupine Hazing and all that was limited to FTB (but also colossally bad PR, imagine how perplexed I was to learn that these were the Good Atheists, and then see how we had to denounce photoshops or whatnot, and that came from David Silverman, AA president himself).
In addition, see what kind of people make the news about the atheist movement. Amanda Marcotte, Phil Plait for Slate; Adam Lee for Guardian; Kimberly Winston for Religion News Services, which is syndicated to all sorts of mainstream news, e.g. Washington Post. They all write the SJW narrative, are all anti-Dawkins and when they cite someone for their theses, it's Usual Suspects from Greta Christina, Ophelia Benson, Amy Roth, Rebecca Watson and so forth. Greta Christina herself also wrote about the movement for Alternet when I recall correctly. Then you have NYT columnist Oppenheimer or what his name is, same story. ...snip
"Special donors" indeed!Brive1987 wrote:So within 30 days of having banned her harrasser, SSA were throwing money at his accuser.
http://i.imgur.com/1v3WcTL.jpg
:think:
Secular Student Alliance
16 June at 07:20 ·
The Secular Student Alliance does not tolerate sexual harassment of its members. A recent post alleging inappropriate conduct by one of our former speakers, Richard Carrier, requires us to respond. After an internal investigation, Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance
Okay, so. The Secular Student Alliance, one of the best run and most important atheist community organizations we have, is running a fundraiser this week. They want to reach 500 new donors by June 17th. I asked them what minimum donation would count and they said $5. And I said “phhhhllllt!” to that. For my haughty self will only count donors who give at least $35, the minimum to become a supporting member for a year. Because, hey, You Should Join the SSA (At the Very Least!). I mean, if you want to cultivate the best future for atheism, or do not want to live in a world where Campus Crusade for Christ outspends us tenfold on winning over college students. So I’ll ask the SSA after the 17th if they got at least 500 donations of at least $35. And if they do, this is what I’ll do…
if you’ll be attending a conference I’ll also be at, and you bring the game you want to play, etc.
:think:Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance
Oh Jeeze. A MP? You know it does not help that it is a "Liberal MP". If I do a search on "sex liberal MP" I getfree thoughtpolice wrote: Well there was the case of the Liberal MP last year.
About 784,000 results (0.72 seconds)
How about some more keywords to narrow things down a little? Or better still a link thingy?About 596,000 results (0.42 seconds)
Why the fuck would they take his call mere weeks after "negotiating" his apology to the woman he sexually harassed?HunnyBunny wrote:Secular Student Alliance
16 June at 07:20 ·
The Secular Student Alliance does not tolerate sexual harassment of its members. A recent post alleging inappropriate conduct by one of our former speakers, Richard Carrier, requires us to respond. After an internal investigation, Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student AllianceOkay, so. The Secular Student Alliance, one of the best run and most important atheist community organizations we have, is running a fundraiser this week. They want to reach 500 new donors by June 17th. I asked them what minimum donation would count and they said $5. And I said “phhhhllllt!” to that. For my haughty self will only count donors who give at least $35, the minimum to become a supporting member for a year. Because, hey, You Should Join the SSA (At the Very Least!). I mean, if you want to cultivate the best future for atheism, or do not want to live in a world where Campus Crusade for Christ outspends us tenfold on winning over college students. So I’ll ask the SSA after the 17th if they got at least 500 donations of at least $35. And if they do, this is what I’ll do…
if you’ll be attending a conference I’ll also be at, and you bring the game you want to play, etc.:think:Mr. Carrier was removed from our speaker’s list last year, and no longer has an official or unofficial affiliation with the Secular Student Alliance
https://web.archive.org/web/20160618012 ... hives/7671
[youtube]hJZqPCvKRgo[/youtube]Brive1987 wrote:I'm watching my 15 yo daughter play basketball with 15 and 16 year olds. They are squealing kids.
It creeps me out that a guys not much younger than myself could be checking his watch for consent to tick over.
"If there's grass on the wicket, it's time to play cricket."Brive1987 wrote:I'm watching my 15 yo daughter play basketball with 15 and 16 year olds. They are squealing kids.
It creeps me out that a guys not much younger than myself could be checking his watch for consent to tick over.
