Monday, July 29, 2013

Contribute to keep Hillary out of the Whitehouse

From Stop Hillary PAC:

Hillary Clinton and her political team have taken notice - and they feel threatened.

Just look at the email I received below - written moments after the release of our hard-hitting Stop Hillary video. Hillary's team is using the success of our new video to launch a counter offensive and ramp up their organizing efforts.

Will you help me fight back?

The movement to stop Hillary is off to a great start - but I need your immediate help today.

You see, Stop Hillary PAC is just three days away from the end of the month where we face a critical fundraising deadline.

Will you help me send a loud and clear message to Hillary by making an urgent end of the month contribution of $25, $50 or even $100 to fight back?

Fundraising deadlines are critical benchmarks to show the left-wing media and Hillary herself that Stop Hillary has the momentum and backing to fight toe-to-toe with Hillary and ultimately ensure she NEVER becomes president of the United States.

Please, before you put this email down... click here and make an urgent contribution in the final three days before our fundraising deadline.

For America,

Senator Ted Harvey (R)

Contribute to keep Hillary out of the Whitehouse

Saturday, July 27, 2013

Tell McCain not to let go

DOJ disregards McCain, McCain fails to react
by Robert O'Hara

(July 25th, 2013 Washington D.C.) As reported by AVFM News on June 28th, Arizona Senator John McCain sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder concerning the May 9th “blueprint” letter, sent to the University of Montana as a settlement agreement to what can only be described as a hysterical witch hunt by the DOJ. McCain pointed out several serious concerns regarding expanding the definition for sexual harassment, the virtual re-writing of law without involvement of the legislative branch and the erosion of due process for those accused of sexual harassment. McCain’s letter, sent out on June 26th, imposed a deadline of July 17th for Holder to respond.

It has now been over a week past that deadline and the DOJ has yet to respond in any way to McCain’s letter.

AVFM News made several calls and email inquiries to both the DOJ and John McCain’s office for comment regarding the letter and the past deadline but was unable to receive a statement from either. However, Chris Thomson, University of Montana’s Men’s Issues Group founder, did receive a letter from Dr. Sandra Stover from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights in response to his request that the DOE “expediently respond to Senator McCain’s query dated June 26, 2013 concerning apparent improper proceedings of the Department of Justice.”

She stated in her reply:

“OCR and DOJ’s May 9 resolution agreement and letter to the University of Montana require that the University take steps to prevent sexual harassment from creating a hostile environment for any student, and to eliminate and redress any hostile environment that arises. The agreement and letter are entirely consistent with the First Amendment, and did not create any new or broader definition of unlawful sexual harassment under Title IX or Title IV.”

This is not true. The May 9th resolution agreement broadly defined sexual harassment as “any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” including “verbal conduct.” And that this “need not be subject to objective definitions.”

Thomson sent the following counter response to Dr. Stover’s email which includes McCain‘s exact questions posed to the DOJ in his June 28th letter:

“Ms. Stover;

To begin, thank you for addressing the queries I have as a father of four sons who will enter the Montana University System in coming years. As concisely as possible, I respectfully resubmit Senator John McCain’s queries as the July 17, 2013 date has passed and, to my knowledge, there has been no formal response from the DOE.


1. From what source does DOJ claim its authority to revise Court-approved Title IX jurisprudence through the settlement with the University of Montana rather than by judicial, regulatory, or legislative means?

2. How do you specifically define “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature”? Having promulgated a new regulatory standard regarding the definition of sexual harassment, how does DOJ plan to ensure consistent application of that standard to avoid undesirable outcomes, including vexatious litigation?

3. To what extent does the broad nature of the new and judicially untested “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” standard, increase the risk of a wrongful conviction.

4. Could the following scenarios constitute “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” and demonstrate reasonable grounds for filing a sexual harassment complaint under the new definition:

a. A professor assigning a book or showing a movie that contains content of a sexual nature.
b. A student who makes a joke of a sexual nature to a friend and is overheard by another student.
c. A student asking another student on a date.
d. A student listening to music that contains content of a sexual nature overheard by others.
e. A student giving another student a Valentine’s Day card.
f. A student or professor using masculine terms for generic pronouns (e.g., “Each student must bring his own laptop to the exam.”)

5. What safe harbors are available to students and teachers so that they can be assured that innocent behavior is not investigated and punished?

His email, dated July 21st, has yet to receive a reply.

A broad coalition of groups led by The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is exerting greater pressure for action against the May 9th blueprint. In an open letter dated July 16th including numerous signatories from the ranks of civil libertarians, attorneys, and academics FIRE charged:

“The blueprint mandates a shockingly broad definition of sexual harassment—“any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” including “verbal conduct”—and rejects the inclusion of a “reasonable person” standard, endangering academic freedom and freedom of expression on campus. The blueprint also requires university employees to report protected speech for mandatory investigation, allows for punishment before the completion of an investigation, and instructs UMT to keep records of the names of all students and faculty accused of “sexual harassment,” even if no wrongdoing is found.”

It is unclear why McCain, in light of increasing controversy, has uncharacteristically failed to respond to the DOJ’s delinquency in answering his inquiry regarding the basic protection of constitutional rights on U.S. campuses. AVFM will continue to cover this story.

Source:click here

Let's ask McCain

I'm serious let's contact him and tell him not to let up. That we men are a voting bloc too.

Ariel Castro is misunderstood

Ariel Castro

Charles Ramsey

Everyone is so quick to paint Ariel Castro as the bad guy just because he let 3 women stay with him thus offering them his protection. Ariel Castro gave these women a purpose. The only purpose they are on this earth for and a white knight who is a felon himself put these women back on the street where they can face real danger. When you get right down to it Ariel Castro is not really a bad guy just as Charles Ramsey is no saint. Charles Ramsey has been in and out of prison a lot and he even tried to kill his wife. No one takes into consideration that Castro himself is victim of child abuse and they don't care that some felon has added to that abuse. They don't care that a matriarchial society has victimized Castro because all they want is the blood of a man,any man. When Charles Ramsey goes on to victimize one of your brothers,uncles,fathers,nephews or male cousins then we'll see if you still regard him as a hero.

Feminists hate boys and want to hurt them

Feminists target lecture on boys’ education
By Della Burton

MR-E hosting lecture on boys in education.

Men’s Rights Edmonton has arranged a lecture event to be held on July 29th at 7pm at the Edmonton Public Library (Stanley A. Milner branch) with Dr. James Brown, author of Rescuing our Underachieving Sons.

The Stanley A. Milner Library is located downtown at 7 Sir Winston Churchill Square.

Dr. Brown, a career educator with a doctorate in education and post doctoral diplomas in Educational Administration and in Curriculum and Instructional Leadership, will be discussing the challenge of improving boys’ education.

Due to opposition by local feminists, promoting the event has been a challenge.

According to Eric Duckman, posters advertising the event have been vandalized with paint or torn down almost instantly after being put up.

This leads to the question, why would feminists be so opposed to a lecture by a highly respected and credentialed educator on improving boys’ performance in school?

There may be an opportunity to get an answer to that question at the event, as a counter-event has been organized to take place at the site. The event, titled “Feministing at ‘Rescuing Our Underachieving Sons’” is described by its organizer Brittany Kustra as a chance to confront attending men’s rights activists over their “Don’t be that girl” poster campaign, and to “see who is behind the group.”

In other words, she plans to protest a scheduled lecture on an unquestionably positive topic with demands to discuss another, unrelated topic, and she will be mining for group member identities.

MREdmonton and AVoiceforMen invited live debate on blog talk radio following news coverage of the posters, and feminists everywhere, including the most vehement critics of the campaign, lined up to not take them up on it. In light of that, it’s odd that Brittany should think it necessary to disrupt an unrelated event to revisit the controversy.

Rather than take the offered chance to have all of their questions answered, this feminist group has decided to disrupt an event held for the benefit of boys who are underserved by their education system. One cannot reasonably argue that after disregarding such an open opportunity, the goal of feminists planning to converge on Dr. Brown’s lecture is merely to ask questions. Without that as a possible motive for the protest, that leaves their other goal of identity mining.

However, a group with that goal in mind would have been more sneaky than to alert the very people they seek to identify. The Facebook event page for Feministing at “Rescuing Our Underachieving Sons” is public, and they’ve made sure that the MREdmonton group would be aware ahead of time that they were planning to crash the lecture. That seems counterproductive, unless there is a different goal.

Could it be that Brittany and her friends just absolutely hate little boys, and want to deny them any effort that might be made to improve their circumstance within the education system, or are they maybe planning to hijack Dr. Brown’s lecture and distract from its intended purpose just to draw attention to themselves?

Source:click here

This is proof feminists hate boys. This is proof that the term "feminazis" fits them to a tee. What other conclusion can you come with? the proof is in the pudding and this is the proof.

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Spearhead smears real activists

I was at the Spearhead reading an article entitled: Something is in the air,it started out well but then went downhill but the following is completely out of line:

Although I understand that Razz might put his job at risk if he revealed his identity, he’s doing so anyway. If he’s discovered, after all, then the effect will be the same. And because he won’t own up to his campaign, people will be under the impression that he knows he’s doing something wrong. It would be better, I think, to face the chief of police and ask whether men are any more likely to rape women than women are to lie to authorities. But to get back on subject, it does seem that there truly is a growing national interest in “MRA” or men’s issues. Maybe the work I and others have put in is starting to pay off. The activism some are engaging in might be catching people’s attention.

It's catching on because those of us who actually do activism are the ones making those in office and society in general know about our concerns and that our concerns are valid. Without us you guys would be were you were in the '90's. I couldn't believe Price has the audacity to ride on our coattails. If Price were a fellow activist I would have no problem with his article but he's not. If he were he would have published this but he didn't. If he claims it was similair to Auntie Pheminizem's comment and that is why then why did not publish it then why did Auntie Pheminizem receive some many thumbs down if he were off base? If Auntie Pheminizem were wrong then why no rebuttals? Bitching on a blog alone accomplishes nothing.

Razz,like myself,would face persecution if we revealed our true identities. Feminists have vowed to shut me up anyway they can. I'm not going to make it easy for them. Canada murdered Earl Silverman so I can imagine Razz doesn't want to be next. Also MRA's have face active persecution in Canada. Some have been jailed. Not only that but Canadian feminists are exceptionally psycho. We've seen the videos on A Voice For Men we know they are true.

In fact I even asked them what activism have they engaged in. Not only was the question not answered all I got was 14 thumbs down votes. There are talkers and there are doers and I'm a doer is getting tired of these talkers. Real tired of them.

Monday, July 15, 2013

Bad news on Kellett situation

Breaking news: Mary Kellett free to practice law
by Robert O'Hara

(Washington D.C. July 15th, 2013)

Justice Ellen Gorman has allowed corrupt Assistant District Attorney walk with a slap on the wrist.

Just after 10:00am today the disciplinary hearing for Mary Kellett, Assistant District Attorney for Maine’s 7th prosecutorial district, was held in Portland concerning her mishandling of the Vladek Filler case. For those new to the case, Ligia Filler falsely accused her husband Vladek Filler of domestic violence and spousal rape. Kellett in her role as Assistant District attorney withheld exculpatory evidence and made misleading statements to the jury in her closing remarks, leading to Vladek Filler’s conviction. The hearing was brief and followed a closed door meeting involving Kellett’s attorneys and representatives from the Overseers of the Bar. A plea bargain was submitted to Justice Ellen Gorman, presiding, who suspended Kellett and then promptly suspended her suspension resulting in Kellett facing no consequences for her gross misconduct during the Filler trial. She is still free to practice law and still acting as Assistant DA.

Kellett made a statement of apology before the judgment was handed down saying that she “went too far” and that it “wouldn’t happen again.” After her apology Filler was given fifteen minutes to speak. AVFM’s acting correpsondants said he was very emotional when he spoke as he told the court how Kellett’s actions have permanently damaged his life and that of his children’s. After the judgment was handed down Kellett exited through a back door leaving our correspondents and reporters from other news sources including Channel 2 News WLBZ from Bangor with no comment.

Acting AVfM Correspondents Scott Soly, Sean Campbell and Chris Caldwell conducted a video interview with Vladek Filler. This will be available later this evening along with other details.

Editorial note:
The entire staff at AVFM and many others to numerous to mention here extend their thanks to Scott Soly, Sean Campbell and Chris Caldwell who all heard the call to attend this hearing. These men did this on their own time and this was the very first time all of them had engaged in any activism of this kind. By each of them taking initiative they have sent a message that we are all watching. Please join us in thanking them in the comments below.

Source:click here

That is fucking bullshit. What a fucking whitewash. The people of the State of Maine,especially the men,are screwed. What we have here is women protecting women. The sisterhood comes first. The men of Maine? Not among the top 10 concerns of the sisterhood. This is a sad day for the men of Maine,they're lives can be reduced to shambles if rouge prosecutors like Kellett can get away and apparently they can and not have to worry about any accountability. Now Kellett is more dangerous than before because she is protected.

Sunday, July 14, 2013

They're not alone

Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton: Don’t be THAT stupid

On July 11th, A Voice for Men received an email from a law firm claiming to represent a noxious hate group in the Edmonton, Alberta area of Canada calling themselves Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton. They are threatening AVfM with legal action for hosting a thread on our forum entitled “Don’t be that girl”; Men’s Rights Edmonton’s parody posters were uploaded to that thread.

This group, Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton, was founded in 2009, and has no affiliation at all with the respectable Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a Washington DC-area group founded in 2008 which does good work that we fully support.

It’s an interesting coincidence that a group called “SAVE” in Canada that promotes demonizing literature targeted at men’s sexuality apparently stole the name of a legitimate group called SAVE that attempts to bring public attention to false accusations in the United States, and to non-sexist treatment under the law for all victims.

In fact, by the same logic they’re using to threaten AVfM, Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton are on shaky ground referring to themselves as “SAVE.” As such we’ve decided to rename the Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton. We have dropped the V from their acronym since that group is only a voice for the cash cow sexual abuse survivor and only while she can be milked for moolah. Let’s add in an “S” to reference their sociopathic propaganda and, viola! We have Edmonton’s Sexual Sociopaths’ Assault, or Edmonton’s SS-A, for short.

Edmonton’s SS-A has hired attorneys to attempt to censor and harass the Men’s Human Rights community, and exert control over discourse on the Internet. This is not just our own publication at stake, or even the men’s human rights movement itself, but anyone on the Internet who might happen to annoy Gender fascist groups. Or even anyone who just disseminates a witty meme with a photo they haven’t copyrighted.

Yes. Edmonton’s SS-A has declared war on Grumpy Cat. First they came for Insanity wolf…

The email, with a PDF attachment, is from the offices of Parlee McLaws, LLC drafted by Michael W. Sharp MWS.

In lieu of publishing the entire email received by our mail servers this is the list of angry demands from Edmonton’s SS-A:

Edmonton’s SS-A’s demand we comply with their attempt to censor… the entire internet.

The phrase “Don’t Be That Guy” is a trademark of the hate group forthwith known as Edmonton’s SS-A and any use of it on A Voice for Men violates their Trademark as well as their copyright.

* Any phrases such as “Don’t be THAT girl” or “Don’t be THAT [anything]” (like “Don’t be that shyster” or “Don’t be that false accuser,” “don’t be that abusive mother,” “don’t be that hatemongering feminist,” etc.) violate their trademark and harm their business and we should cease and desist and forbid any use of the “don’t be that” phrasing.

* Don’t print or reprint their photos in any way

* Deliver up for their inspection all information we have on three of our community members (including one known as “anon,” who, as everybody knows, has been a well-known and distinguished writer for many thousands of years).

* Termination of several of our community members’ accounts

* Undertake never to do or say anything naughty that might cause them discomfort again.

* Oh, and by the way, don’t print this letter either.

Now still we could have ignored all of this, but then at the bottom of the letter appeared a section so outrageous, we simply could not resist. They demanded that we have someone sign and date the above–although who exactly they are after is never clearly stated–and get it back to them no later than July 16th, 2013.

What follows is the response of the Editorial team at AVfM.

We, the editorial team at AVfM, acting in our capacity as duly authorized representatives of A Voice for Men, hereby refuse to undertake the commitments laid out in your letter dated July 11, 2013 – specifically, we refuse your request to cease mention or discussion or parody or satire of any reference or representation of “don’t be that guy.” Your claim of copyright or trademark on “Don’t be that…” is frivolous at best, as is your claim that it is in any way a threat to your client’s disgusting business. Edmonton’s SS-A (Formerly Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton, founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) is in our view a hate group that promotes sexual assault and sexist bigotry. Indeed, as a team we DECREE–EX-CATHEDRA, FOREVERMORE AND HENCEFORTH FOR ALL ETERNITY AMEN! that as matter of policy anyone acting under the authority of AVfM is to refuse to do anything whatsoever requested by or on behalf of the disgusting hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A unless those requests involve things like telling them to go fly a kite or helping them dismantle their entire hatemongering sociopathic operation.

We furthermore solemnly swear and affirm that it shall from this day forward be the editorial policy of A Voice for Men that Edmonton’s SS-A shall always be referred to as a vile hate group, and/or a fascist group of censorship-minded thugs who hate freedom of expression and who seek to control discourse on the Internet so as to silence all criticism of their propaganda. We further decree, in response to this pernicious attempt at barratry by Edmonton’s SS-A that we believe that Edmonton’s SS-A’s business operation clearly intends and desires to manufacture more victims of sexual assault for profit and to marginalize unprofitable victims of sexual assault in Canada, and that Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and not in any way affiliated with the praiseworthy group SAVE founded in 2008), is otherwise a bunch of vile thugs who shouldn’t be allowed to operate any businesses at all within any respectable community anywhere in the world, and should probably be kept out of reach and out of sight of children if at all possible.

It will also henceforth be A Voice for Men’s goal to, at every opportunity, make completely truthful statements with full intent to discredit the business, wares, and services of Edmonton’s SS-A, and to bring direct public attention to the hateful, hurtful, damaging, and rape-encouraging and victim-blaming nature of Edmonton’s SS-A advertising, services, business, wares, and to use the phrase “Don’t be THAT…” as often as humanly possible in our headlines and materials in order to mock, deride, annoy, and otherwise satirize this vile hate group. We very much hope to see them completely change their business model (which we repeat, appears to be to create more victims of sexual assault in Canada), and we frankly hope to see them driven completely out of business, as their ilk has no place whatsoever in a decent, civilized society.

We further pledge to regularly alert the public that Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) regularly operates its business in a manner contrary to ethical standards of business, commerce, or victims advocacy and in a manner directly antithetical to human rights for men, for children, and even for the women it so dishonestly purports to advocate for.

It shall furthermore be our goal in response to this puerile attempt at bullying and barratry and internet censorship to identify to the public the names and faces of all individuals in leadership positions within the Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008), in order to alert the world to the sort of vile, bigoted, sexist, racist thugs who run hatemongering campaigns like “Don’t Be That Guy.” Finally, please advise your client that as a direct result of their puerile attempts at censorship, we will be regularly featuring images and articles using the phrases “Don’t be that guy,” “Don’t be that girl,” “Don’t be that scumsucking shyster crap-weasel,” “Don’t be that hatemongering feminist bigot,” and so on for the direct purposes of satire, parody, and news reporting, and shall otherwise endeavor in any way we can think of to defame, humiliate, tarnish the reputation of, and generally embarrass the hatemongering crapweasels at Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008).

We also pledge to not just make regular use of the images of the despicable hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) for purposes of satire, criticism, political commentary, and news reporting purposes, but also for the purposes of, in any way legally and ethically allowable, driving these scumsucking vermin out of the public square and into the ashbin of history’s discarded lies as soon as humanly possible. Their “business,” such as it is, is no better than the “business” of Neo-Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan, and, like the neo-Nazis and the Klan, we hope to see them disappear from human civilization forever.

We will otherwise be refusing any and all requests made in this letter dated 11 July 2013, and are fully ready to do whatever it takes to continue to refuse to comply with the wishes of the vile hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008).

To you, SS-A, and indeed, to anyone who attempts to silence us, we respond: Don’t be that stupid.

Also, fuck you.

Thank you very much for your kind attention, and warmest regards.

The Editorial Team,

A Voice for Men

The real SAVE

Source:click here

We're standing in solidarity with AVFM in telling these femihags to go fuck themselves. We're not helping them in any way. The only thing we will give them in unending defiance. No MRA's have to cooperate with them and we never will. We will stand toe to toe with them and we won't let up.

Saturday, July 13, 2013

On Julia Gillard

I was reading on A Voice For Men this article by Jim Muldoon and found it excellent. There are some things I wanted to touch on:

This shame is because Abbott stood beside a sign saying “Ditch the Witch”; Alan Jones, a radio presenter, questioned Gillard’s sanity; sexist comments from soccer coach Hosiek; A sex scandal in the Army, with the absolute certainty that there is a possibility that some soldiers may get charged with something.

Yeah,if you take a risk of getting killed defending an ungrateful nation then you should have a lifestyle devoid of fun. It's not like you're a civilian with a boring job who needs to liven things up. You're not a woman who leeching off the system with a bullshit title like "gender equality minister" and all that. You have the fun of getting shot at.

Gillard’s time in office was supposed to be a “golden era for Australian women.” Why? Says who? Says Gemmell. But what Gemmell really wanted was a golden era for Gillard personally.

What they got was the golden shower for Australian men and boys.

Friday, July 12, 2013

August Lovenskoids article on A Voice For Men

I was reading an article on the A Voice For Men website,an article by August Lovenskoids about Jessica Valenti and how she is going to shame and browbeat men into supporting feminism. I liked it for the most part however the following I had a problem with:

And, anti-feminist musicians like Woman of the Year winner Katy Perry and Album of the Year winner Taylor Swift are hotter than Helen Reddy any day. Source

You're shitting me right?

Let's take a look at the following videos:

Apparently some people's interpretation of "anti-feminism" is very far from the actual definition and it shows.

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Tell the Hancock County Officials in the Maine Legislature to hold Mary N. Kellett accountable

Kellett’s dominos need to fall

Word has reached editors of AVfM that a plea deal is forthcoming in the case of corrupt Bar Harbor Maine prosecutor Mary Kellett. We are not pleased by this deal and we urge legal authorities in Maine to reject it in favor of a full public airing of the charges against Kellett.

While a guilty plea might bring some small measure of satisfaction to Vladick Filler, we suspect that Kellett’s corruption did not begin and end with his case, and indeed, all of Kellett’s cases, regardless of their outcomes, deserve a full public review, and all the guilty pleas and verdicts obtained during and under Kellett’s tenure as prosecutor should be thrown out.

We understand that, for the legal system in Maine, this would cause an expensive legal nightmare that could drag on for decades. Real justice, however, is not easy or cheap. A corrupt prosecutor can force the innocent to make otherwise unconscionable plea deals. A corrupt prosecutor can obtain faulty and unjust convictions. A lone defendant, facing the awesome power of the state, is in a bad enough situation already without the evil machinations of an evidence-hiding, man-hating ideologue behind the prosecutor’s table.

The legal authorities of Maine have no one to blame except themselves for tolerating Kellett’s antics for so long. The trail of unstable dominos built over the years by Kellett and those in her office need to start falling, and falling hard, on camera and in public, to send a clear message that Justice still matters in a culture that seems increasingly content to blame the innocent for the crimes of others.

Additionally, the people of Maine should demand, as the editors of AVfM do, an additional inquiry into the office of Kellett’s supervisor, District Attorney Carletta Bassano, to determine her degree of complicity in Mary Kellett’s malfeasance. Corruption usually starts at the top, and attempting to shield the District Attorney’s office by cauterizing Kellett’s crimes should be rejected by the people and authorities of Maine.

The world is watching.

[In October of last year JTO madethis impassioned rant and, in response, Suzanne said this:


JtO, thanks for this; it’s perfect.
My suggestion to every person reading this, is to link and/or copy and paste it in an email, or print it as snail mail, and send it to the Maine state legislature.

Hancock County Officials of the Maine Legislature

This site has contact information for every member, including home emails, phone numbers, and addresses.

Open it and spend an hour sending emails.

We here at AVfM are asking you to do just that right now. If you're in Maine, contact your state legislature, if you're outside of Maine, Hell, do it too.

And if you can get to Portland Maine, give JTO a shout at:

We've managed to push this rock up to the top of the hill and if we manage just one more ounce of effort, it'll finally be over the crown and then there's no stopping it.

Just DO it!--AVfM Editors]

Source:click here

Kellett is going for a plea bargin,backroom style

In a startling last-minute development, AVfM received word that a backroom deal has been struck for Mary Kellett, the corrupt prosecutor in Maine. Giving as little advance notice as possible, a hearing for disgraced Bar Harbor prosecutor Mary Kellett was finally scheduled for the early morning of Monday, July 15th in Portland, Maine. This is some three hours’ drive from Kellett’s home territory of Bar Harbor. We have been informed by reliable sources within Maine that Kellett has arranged a plea bargain and will be pleading guilty to something, but no one is saying what exactly she will be pleading guilty to. Vladek Filler will be coming in to give a statement on what was done to him but is unavailable for direct comment to the press. In the meantime, it still appears at press time that Kellet’s boss, D.A. Carletta Bassano, will not be facing any formal repercussions for allowing a subordinate in her office to behave in such despicably illegal and unethical fashion or whether Bassano’s other employees have employed similar tactics and simply not been caught out yet.

At this point we believe it is of interest to everyone in the Men’s Human Rights Community to contact Maine officials with their objections; Kellett’s behavior is far more than unbecoming of a public official, it is outright corrupt and illegal and has doubtless resulted in more than one man being wrongly imprisoned in Maine. It is also fair to ask about Bossano’s competence as administrator and to ask what of Kellett’s conduct is typical of Bossano’s entire office in Bar Harbor or to Maine prosecutors in general. The fast scheduling of this sudden plea deal is also an affront to justice, giving Filler and others with an interest in the case little notice to appear and/or show support for ousting the corrupt Filler. We further suspect that locating the hearing in Portland and at such notice in the middle of July, when people frequently vacation, was done by design to minimize press presence at the event.

Gordon Smith, who was vindicated from a string of false allegations from his ex- in Delaware late last year, is attempting to attend the hearing in support of Filler and against the corrupt Kellett. We would also encourage others in the men’s community to attend the hearing and give a show of support and a report on events to AVfM and the wider men’s community. The information is here:

Judge: Maine Supreme Judicial Court Associate Justice Ellen Gorman
Hearing: Monday, July 15, 2013, 10:00 AM (might start earlier)
Location: Courtroom # 10
Cumberland County Courthouse
205 Newbury Street, Portland, Maine

Prosecutor Mary N. Kellett is represented an unnamed Assistant Attorney General. The Board of Overseers of the Bar is represented by Bar Counsel J. Scott Davis.

John Hembling is our AVfM coordinator for anyone who can make it to Portland, Maine in the early morning of July 15th, so people can meet up with each other and help each other to go. He can be contacted at the following phone number: 325-718-4635 and his e-mail address is:

We can’t let these people get away with this.

We also have a list of several dozen reporters we would like to contact and could use volunteers to help emailing all these reporters/media outlets so they know what’s happening making possible a greater chance of mainstream press coverage.

Source:click here

If you can make it to the event that is great. If you are unable to attend it email the Hancock County delegation in the Maine legislature and let them know about what Kellett has done to Vladek Filler and other men. Let them know about The Filler Fund,let them know we demand justice:

Richard H. Campbell

Ralph Chapman

James S. Gillway

Brian L. Hubbell

David D. Johnson

Walter A. Kumiega

Lawrence E. Lockman

Louis J. Luchini

Richard S. Malaby

Beth P. Turner

Edward Youngblood

David Burns

Brian Langley

Monday, July 8, 2013

Mary N. Kellett may go for a plea bargin

Is Mary Kellet cutting a deal?
by Paul Elam


Most of you who follow this website are familiar with the case of Vladek Filler, formerly of Gouldsboro, Maine. Filler was engaged in a child custody dispute for his two children when he became relentlessly pursued by prosecutor Mary Kellett for allegations of sexual assault made by his estranged wife, Ligia.

Kellett got a conviction in the case but it was set aside and overturned by the State Supreme Court due to prosecutorial misconduct on her part. Subsequently, Filler filed a Bar complaint against Kellett, where a three member bar panel ultimately found her guilty of nine instances of misconduct and conduct unbecoming an attorney. That resulted in the historic move of Kellett being the first prosecutor in the history of Maine to be referred to the State Supreme Court for disciplinary hearings that could result in the suspension of her license to practice law.

One of the matters before the Supreme Court is the fact that Kellett instructed law enforcement officers not to comply with valid subpoenas from Filler’s attorney to produce evidence held by the police departments relevant to Ligia Filler’s credibility as a witness. Evidence such as a withheld witness statement written by Ligia Filler, 911 tapes of her calls, and video and audio recordings of Ligia Filler making statements and threats against Vladek Filler and police officials. Those records were repeatedly requested and eventually the Court had to Order Kellett to turn them over to defense. To put it nicely, Kellett failed to do so, even after repeated requests from Filler’s attorney months after the Court Order. Put directly Kellett ignored the Order and simply refused to turn over the material to defense.

Among other violations, the Disciplinary Panel found Kellett guilty of suppressing and not providing exculpatory evidence. If that finding is not disturbing enough, a crucial video and audio recording that was Court Ordered was later destroyed without any chance of ever being produced to defense after Kellett told Filler’s attorney she would not provide it to him.

The recording was of an April 24, 2007 incident where two Washington County Sheriff’s Deputies apprehended Ligia Filler and secured her in the back of a cruiser which had a video camera running and recording all her statements and accusations. Filler’s Bar complaint alleged that the recording contained exculpatory statements by his accuser. The cruiser recording was not the only one made at the time as the responding Deputy also used his pocket recorder to captured 1 ½ hours of the incident in non-continuous bits and pieces.

Initially, Kellett did not even disclose the April 24, 2007 incident to defense despite her office obtaining the incident report just a few weeks later. In October of 2007 Kellett finally provided a copy of a brief incident report after defense made specific discovery requests. It took over 1 year of further requests, a discovery motion, a Court Order, and several more months of demands and threats of sanctions before Kellett would provide defense with a copy of the incomplete and chopped up audio recording captured by the Deputy’s pocket recorder.

The continuous and unedited audio recording which was captured by the video recording system inside the Deputy’s cruiser was withheld and denied to defense. Even months after the Court Order was issued for its production, Kellett told Filler’s attorney Daniel Pileggi that the video tape didn’t really show anything and couldn’t be copied for defense (despite a Court Order). Kellett then tried to mislead Filler’s defense attorney by claiming the chopped up audio recording she was willing to provide was copied directly from the video tape, hence could not contain anything different than the video tape that was being withheld. She told Filler’s attorney that if he still wanted to see the video that “didn’t show anything” he should make his own arrangements and “go watch it”. As it turned out none of what Kellett represented to Filler’s attorney was true.

Kellett’s position now is that the Court Ordered 911 tapes and video/audio recordings were not provided because of Washington County Sheriff’s Department’s insubordination to DA office’s requests for all the material. Essentially, Kellett is blaming Washington County Sheriff’s Department for mishandling and even destroying crucial evidence in a major felony case months after the Court Ordered its production, after Kellett alleges she tried to obtain it, and after numerous defense subpoenas that were not complied with.

Washington County Sheriff’s Deputy Travis Willey testified before the Bar’s Disciplinary Panel that almost immediately after the April 24, 2007 incident he quickly acted to preserve all audio and video recordings he made because he knew all this evidence was important in a case where criminal charges were filed. He wrote up his report and made copies of his digital audio recording from his pocket recorder on to a CD.

He then hand delivered his report to Mary Kellett’s office where it was stamped “Received May 29, 2007”. He testified that his cruiser mounted recording system at the time was a low tech standard VHS taping system. He readily located the VHS recording and had a chance to review the lengthy tape although not all the way to the end. He testified the video tape was eventually destroyed.

Vladek Filler’s Bar complaint alleges that months after the criminal trial and during a pending retrial, in a telephone conversation Deputy Willey suggested to Filler that the video recording in question might be made available; that it was not in his physical possession at the time and that everything was provided to Kellett’s office. Willey told Filler he needed to direct all his requests to Kellett’s office and get their approval even for the deputy’s compliance with any future defense subpoenas.

Filler’s defense attorney Daniel Pileggi testified that he repeatedly tried to obtain the video tape or even have an opportunity to view it, but it was never made available to him by Mary Kellett’s office nor by the Washington County Sheriff’s Department.

Pileggi made numerous discovery requests to Kellett, and further issued subpoenas to Kellett’s investigator Stephen McFarland, his co-investigator in the case Guy Wycoff, and to Washington County Sheriff’s Deputy Travis Willey. After all his requests were ignored, Pileggi was granted a Court Order and sent numerous additional requests demanding Kellett’s compliance. Filler’s Bar Complaint included copies of several discovery requests and subpoenas. Pileggi subpoenaed Deputy Willey a second time to produce the withheld video tape for Filler’s January 2009 trial but again it was not provided. Pileggi told the Disciplinary Panel that eventually he learned the video tape was destroyed which usually happens when prosecution does not request for it to be produced.

It would seem unlikely for Washington County Sheriff’s Deputy to take it upon himself to destroy a vital video tape which existed throughout 1 ½ years of repeated requests, several subpoenas, and a Court Order in light of the deputy’s clear testimony that he immediately understood the importance of all the evidence he had in his possession and took specific steps to preserve it.

But if Mary Kellett’s explanation is true and her office is absolved of responsibility through the upcoming Supreme Court proceedings then the failure to produce all the Court Ordered 911 tapes, audio, and video recordings will fall directly on the Washington County Sheriff’s Department. It would be a violation for both, the exculpatory 911 recordings that were withheld from Filler in violation of a Court Order, and for the video tape which was actually destroyed while in custody of the Sheriff’s Department despite being:

• Available

• Preserved

• Readily located

• Previewed/viewable

• Low tech VHS tape

• Known to be important/sought after evidence in a major class A Felony case

Despite the seriousness of the Bar Panel’s historic decision against Kellett and Bar Counsel’s complaint to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court calling Kellett’s misconduct “inexcusable”, if Kellett’s version of events is accepted or not addressed by the Supreme Court judge, then it would leave numerous law enforcement agencies responsible for taking it upon themselves to violate valid defense subpoenas and even violate Kellett’s alleged instructions for their compliance.

In the case of Washington County Sheriff’s Department, the responsibility would include destroying exculpatory Court Ordered evidence in violation of criminal statutes.

A Voice for Men News Director Robert O’Hara contacted Washington County Sheriff Donny Smith’s office for a comment on this. He reached Deputy Willey who refused comment. O’Hara also sent an email to the Washington County Sheriff which went unanswered.

The concerns about this case right now is that after several years of malicious prosecution against Vladek Filler and a number of other men, it appears as though Kellett might be orchestrating a back room deal to avoid responsibility for those abuses.

The only way to prevent this is for there to be a public, comprehensive disciplinary hearing of Kellett’s case before Maine Supreme Judicial Court Justice. Additionally, the Bar of Overseers, through Bar Counsel Scott Davis must seek full punishment for the “inexcusable” prosecutorial misconduct that has already been established at the Bar hearing.

There are further ramifications of allowing Kellett off the hook without a full trial and punishment.

She has prosecuted 1100 cases in just 10 years and if not removed she will be allowed to have at least another 25 year remaining career to continue practicing her ideological interpretations of criminal rules, court rulings, orders, and high court decisions.

Kellett has consistently refused to take any responsibility whatsoever for her own conduct which has been substantiated by the Supreme Judicial Court and the Board of Overseers of the Bar. Kellett told the Disciplinary Panel she would not do anything differently in the future as she has a philosophical disagreement with the trial Court and the Supreme Court judgment concerning her conduct.

Through a plea deal with Bar Counsel or through a negotiated and controlled weak case presentation, a Ruling by the Supreme Court Justice could absolve Kellett of all her misconduct and further embolden her to legally terrorize other innocent victims like Vladek Filler.

Her deal, should it happen, will shift the blame for the illegal withholding and disposal of exculpatory evidence onto other law enforcement agencies and police officials who were simply following her orders, as well as onto defense attorneys like Daniel Pileggi.

Kellett is the first prosecutor in Maine’s history to face disciplinary proceedings for misconduct, the significance of which cannot be overstated. Allowing her to be absolved or even to continue practicing law as a prosecutor following these proceedings would send the most detrimental message to the entire legal and law enforcement community in Maine and beyond. It would be the ultimate betrayal by the Board of Overseers of the Bar and the Supreme Court of all ethical prosecutors, defense attorneys, police officers, and the citizens who live or visit Maine.

Bar Panel Decision

Source:click here

They better not drop the ball on this one. We will raise holy hell if they did. Kellett is a criminal and she should be behind bars for years for her misandric crimes. The only way the likes of Kellett learn is if someone yangs their license to practice law. Kellet was never really a prosecuting attorney she is more of an persecuting inquistor to push radical feminism. Let's make sure juctice prevails and Vladek Filler sees his tormentor get put through the grinder,the same grinder she knowingly put innocent men through.

Sunday, July 7, 2013

Radfem 2013 cancelled

From A Voice For Men:

Radfem’s wretchedness In Toronto
by Dan Perrins

On July 5 – 7, 2013 society’s ‘sisters of misandry’ had plans for an event they called “RadFem Rise Up! 2013 Toronto Conference” to be held at the Beaver Hall Gallery in Toronto Ontario. Unlike previous radfem events, this one had its location and program kept secret. No doubt this is due to the cancellation of their London event earlier this year.

Right now in the wee hours of the morning as I write this the situation currently stands like this; there is the claim that the Beaver Hall Gallery has canceled the booking by the radfem organizers. The radfem organizers are claiming their event is still on. While it is difficult to pinpoint exactly who originally leaked the location of the event, the complaints about radfems were the same as before: ‘radfems are anti trans’ and ‘radfems are anti sexworker.’

I have to say I am disappointed in two ways. First not only are radfems anti-sex-worker and anti-trans, they are extremely anti-male. From their ideology to the comments in their essays they demonstrate the most outspoken form of male hatred hidden behind the neoteny of the female face that I’ve ever witnessed. The fact that their hatred for half the human race is overlooked in the complaints about the radfems is something that should not, nay can not be ignored anymore.

No society, movement, or activist can truthfully claim to be about equality when they overlook hatred for males. Or any other enumerated group for that matter (Hello SPLC are you paying attention yet?). I am also disappointed to hear that they had their event cancelled. I was actually hoping they would have a venue to speak at because I wanted to go and hand out flyers with some of their classy comments.

For those of you not familiar with those loving radfem quotes, let me provide you with some examples. On October 5, 2011 at 6:33 am a user on the radfem hub named Lilith had this to say about radical feminism entering the 21′st century;

Even if we killed off 90% of men, the majority of women left over would do their best to keep the oppressive system. I’d dare say we’d have to kill off all the women too and leave the little girls and radfems to create the utopia. Great post. Just what I’ve needed to read to help clarify what exactly Radical Feminism is today.

From the Agent Orange Files we have a wonderful quote by Luckynkl alluding to biological solution to gendercide;

So if we can come up with a biological weapon that can be ingested and kill off the Y Chromosome in a man’s sperm count, we’re almost home. We can all get hired as waitresses or chefs or work at McDonald’s and sprinkle it into the food or something… It’s not a quick solution. It will take about 2 generations to cull males. But it will work.” (Don’t worry ladies in the full quote she lets us know she wasn’t going to ask your permission to ‘cull’ off your male children.)

Can’t you just feel the love being sprinkled forth by Lucky?

On a blog called in the comment thread from an article called “Militancy is our only option“ we find these gems discussing the killing of males;

survivorthriver says:
25 April, 2011 at 00:19
Hey, thanks BB for sending me over here, and here I am! I do remember feminist discussions in the early 1970′s where a conscious choice was made NOT to be militant because the MIC is so over-powerful we’d just be wiped out before any spread of the feminist meme was possible. I heard elsewhere that a good model for targeting militant action was SHAC (Stop Huntington Animal Cruelty) where some individuals researched those responsible, and had a Tor browser protected wiki site where they reported their findings, and other individuals were free to take direct action against those individuals/sites. The researchers must not recommend any actions, nor have any connection to those who would take direct action.I’m thinking that the ancient female wisdom of poisoning is relevant. The elites require 4,000 remoras (think those tiny fish that groom the sharks) for maintenance. A well-connected caterer needs lots of part-time remoras and who would know if a friend sashayed in with a vial of….please let me know if this violates security speech or if there is a better venue for details…”

The reply from FAB LIBBER (site owner)

FAB Libber says:
25 April, 2011 at 00:48
“Hiya ST, welcome.
Many good things to think about. Definitely divvying up roles within the (non-)organisation is a good thing. We also might need things like a pool of funds for bail money and stuff. But, probably best not to talk in too much detail in public. (emphasis mine)The important message that the dudes need to understand – you have pushed us far enough, and we will fight back. Totally sick of your pornsick, dickcentric world. An uprising is coming, it is in the wind.”

Then those fun time radfems eventually let their inner child free and coin the term ‘menocide play’

joy says:
25 April, 2011 at 21:10
Menocide play, yes, I do think I like that.My tactic right now is to say it in that “joking” tone of voice that I have — the one I’ve cultivated that confuses men more than usual, “Is she serious, is she joking, or is she just so much cooler than I am that I don’t get it? Must be that, so I should play along lest she stop thinking I’m cool.” (It’s a reversal of a concept in the SCUM Manifesto, actually, and it plays on male insecurity the way they typically play on ours. Also, I really am just a lot cooler than any given dude anyway.)So they laugh, “Haha, menocide! I don’t get it. She’s just really radical and making a really radical joke that I don’t get because I’m square. She wouldn’t really ever do anything bad though. I do get that!”Boy, won’t they be really surprised someday.But it was all in play, officer. You can’t take any of this seriously. After all, when you come right down to it, it’s just a man’s word against mine, and we all know men lie out their asses all the time.”Sargasso Sea says:
25 April, 2011 at 21:21
“Joy is my sister!”

I can certainly see why the SPLC doesn’t consider these loving ladies a hate group, what with how they keep on talking about putting a ‘special-radfem’ dash of love into all our meals. These are the comments and thoughts I would have loved to pass-out on behalf of the radfems around their event. I really and truly wish to be helpful in spreading their words around. They typed them out with full knowledge of what messages the words carried. I want society to be able to decide for themselves about radfems.

Let the radfems be known by their words and actions, I say.

That brings me back to the organizer I spoke of at the beginning of this piece. I think its time to introduce her and for us all to get better acquainted. On twitter she goes by @demonista she runs a site called and describes herself as a “FREEGAN VEGAN RADICAL FEMINIST, WITH ANARCHIST LEANINGS”

Her real name is Winnie Small.

On her twitter page shortly before midnight last night she tweeted that the radfem event was still on.

Winnie Small ‏@demonista 6h
RadFem Riseup! via @wordpressdotcom #radfemriseup is still on.

Winnie’s tweeted article is a short 7 sentence paragraph. Given she is one of the organizers and tweeted it we can come to the conclusion she knows the contents.

Despite hundreds of threats of death and violence directed at women and at the venue staff, the RadFem Riseup conference IS GOING FORWARD. We are having a great time with some wonderful women, gearing up for a day of presentations and strategy tomorrow. For every threat of violence we receive, another woman wakes up to the reality of the situation. Every death threat strengthens our resolve. We will not be prevented from meeting. We will not be prevented from organizing. We will not be prevented from rising up.”

The author claims there were numerous threats directed at women and venue staff.
Around 1 am last night a tweet by Janelle Flemming informs us that Winnie and the author (lexyjohn) are lying.

Janelle Flemming ‏@janelleflemming According to a gallery committee member, Beaver Hall Gallery did not receive any death threats #lies #radfem #RadFemRiseUp #sexwork #topoli

As one of the organizers, Winnie would have a history of correspondence with the hosts of the radfem event. Therefore, it would be easy for her to request an email, text a witness statement, or a copy of the evidence to corroborate the claims in the announcement posted by lexyjohn. And if she did have evidence of what is claimed why is it not being broadcast for the world to see? If there were threats made, why haven’t the police been notified? If the police were notified why has Winnie or lexy not announced it?

What does this mean? Is the event cancelled, or is it still on?

I find it easy to believe that Winnie and the wonder-womb warriors are still going to have their talks in or around the Toronto area this weekend. I also believe the hashtag #lies used by Janelle in her tweet refuting the claim of threats made by Winnie and the coven of crazy is accurate.

I know that Winnie and the radfem’s allegations are without merit and unsubstantiated, and that behind closed doors and left to their own devices the radfems will enjoy discussing and planning their Menocide play.

Source:click here

Let's get the jokes out of the way. Thanks to Dan Perrins for writing this article. I know Dan is disappointed the event was cancelled because he wanted to pass out flyers stating the facts that radfem would rather keep quiet. I put up flyers advertisizing The Liberator that was published by the Men's Defense Association back in the '90's before the internet was made public. I also wrote letters to the editor at my local paper and others protesting misandry and female privilege. I received no help from other men and a lot of women attacked me. But I felt like I made a difference. I can understand Dan being disappointed. I look at it this way: we've done our job. Our job was to expose their vile misandry to the public and we've done that. We've let the world know what they are about and the world has rejected them. Which it should. There is no need for Dan to feel bad. He has done his job just like the rest us have and that is something to feel good about.

Saturday, July 6, 2013

Reminder about Stony Brook petition

In the comments of fighting back against dear colleague the following comment was left and I thought it should be made front and center:

Anonymous Chuckles the Clown said...
Thanks for the resources mm. I'll help to spread the word.

Meanwhile, can you help us get some signatures and comments on this new petition? Thanks!

This is what he is refering to

In fact I promoted the Stony Brook petition here.