Student secular society’s website deleted after “ominous” threat sent from Saudi Arabia

http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/07/student-secular-societys-website-deleted-after-ominous-threat-sent-from-saudi-arabia

The Manchester Free Speech and Secular Society’swebsite has been deleted, shortly after the group received a message warning they would “feel remorse” if they didn’t stop criticising Islamic fundamentalism.

The Free Speech and Secular Society (FSS) was sent a message, from an IP address in Saudi Arabia, which warned: “Please stop mocking Muslims otherwise you will feel remorse.”

A spokesperson for the Society said that on the same day the sinister message was received, “someone tried to get access to the website, as multiple accounts received password reset prompts that weren’t initiated by the account holders.”

Despite not thinking much of the initial apparent threat or the attempts to hack into the website, by the 27 June the Society found that their website had been deleted entirely. The hacker “deleted everything that could be deleted,” according to the FSS. “No message was left on the site.”

The FSS contacted their webhosting service who confirmed unambiguously that it was not their doing or the result of a technical error. The Society sent a response to the email address used to issue the warning, but has had no further reply.

“Given the timing of the ambiguous message, we inquired with the sender whether he had anything to do with it, but as of yet we have received no response,” the FSS said in a statement.

They added that it was “quite shocking” that even a “small and insignificant society as ours, promoting liberal values, was targeted all the way from Saudi Arabia. This just adds to the sad reality that free speech today is very much under threat.”

The FSS said that they had “some articles critical of Islamic fundamentalism” on their website, and also commentary about their Student Union’s decision to ban the FSS from displaying the ‘survivors’ edition’ ofCharlie Hebdo published after the attack on their Paris office.

The Society writes that their focus is on “free speech and secularism” and that they have been “hacked and threatened for supporting free speech”.

The historian Tom Holland said the society had been “menaced” by “enemies of free speech”.

Ben Jones, the National Secular Society’s communications officer, commented: “This appears to be a particularly sinister attempt to stop debate, criticism and commentary about and around Islam. We hope the Manchester Free Speech and Secular Society have their website restored soon and can recover from the attack quickly. We offer our solidarity and support. No-one group or individual should be left to face the danger of defending free speech alone.

“Threats to freedom of expression are coming thick and fast and from all quarters. Whether it is student unions censoring student comedy shows for ‘blasphemy’, or university administrators cancelling events about Islam to avoid causing ‘offence’ or on other spurious grounds, or the invidious prosecution of Christian preachers for criticising Islamic beliefs, the right to freedom of expression must be defended.

“There are concerted attempts to establish global blasphemy laws coming from the OIC, who still long for a global law against the ‘defamation of religion’; from terrorists using violent jihad; moves by complicit student unions and universities to indirectly support these efforts in the interest of ‘cohesion’; and in this case from hackers and what the FSS call ‘cyber-jihadists’. No matter what form the attack comes in, free speech must be defended.”

Elizabeth Sandlin, 20, of Chester consent to rough sex and called cops when it get “rough”

http://www.returnofkings.com/66904/british-woman-consents-to-rough-sex-calls-cops-when-it-gets-too-rough

 

 

..

A British woman has had a man convicted of assault after engaging in what appears to be consensually rough sex with him, after it got allegedly too rough for her tastes. Elizabeth Sandlin, 20, of Chester, had been having an ‘on-off’ relationship with Samuel John Price, 24, also of Chester.

For his trouble, Price was brought before the courts and sentenced to a 12-month community order with unpaid work for the assault.

Sandlin met Price and they ended up in bed together on Valentine’s Day after an exchange of text messages. The especially rough sex they had that night included sinking his teeth into her body and pulling her hair. She called the police after leaving his apartment in a taxi cab.

Price told police that Sandlin had been “moaning” and enjoying herself, and that he bit her on the bottom to turn her on.

The white knights of the Magistrates’ bench in Mold, North Wales sided with Sandlin, and convicted Price of common assault on the after being shown pictures of the bruising on Sandlin’s body. He was slapped with a £200 compensation order, court costs of £850 and 40 hours of unpaid work, or “community service.”

There would have been a time when a woman would, even had she felt, in a position like Sandlin’s, aggrieved at a bit of rough hanky-panky gone awry, never have entertained the notion of airing such laundry in public. Now, snowflakes like Sandlin, who attended a £11,700 a year private school, are ready to have the graphic detail of their sex lives  on the court record and in a national newspaper.

Price’s lawyer told the magistrates that, “Rough and playful sex was part of their relationship.” Sandlin knew what she had signed up for. On the night in question, Price being extremely drunk, things got out of hand.

Price was getting into it and even choked his cohort, after which she ran off to the bathroom coughing. But, surprisingly, she still went back to bed. What better way to send mixed signals about sex that is supposedly “too rough”?

 

Sandlin, had she even a dram of that commodity so rare in our present times—honour—would, before calling the police, have taken stock of the situation. Yes, Price might have gone over the top. But what had been the result? A couple of bruises. No more than she might have incurred in any of their other rough sessions.

She might have decided to write the incident off, perhaps never see Price again, but opt not to call the police on the basis of some remote empathy and willingness to see the big picture, that dictates that to leave a young man with a criminal record for life is something of a drastic and irreversible step.

But no, Sandlin had to invoke the get the police involved. Roosh Valizadeh has written that men are nothing more than clowns to the modern woman. It looks like Elizabeth Sandlin had the clown she wanted. Regular, casual sex on tap, and rough into the bargain. Just how much of a replaceable clown-for-hire Price was to her is given away by one small detail revealed—she stopped seeing him for six months when he broke his leg.

The Feminist Martyrdom Complex: Climbing Up on the Digital Cross

http://theothermccain.com/2015/06/30/the-feminist-martyrdom-complex-climbing-up-on-the-digital-cross/

Laurie Penny (@PennyRed) is a bisexual Marxist with a history of severe mental illness, but other than that, I can’t imagine why her writing would be controversial or attract angry criticism. On the other hand, being a Marxist weirdo also gained the young British blogger a prestigious Nieman Fellowship at Harvard University (the Ivy League having become a place where heterosexual capitalists are unwelcome). Finding that her 2014 book Unspeakable Things approvingly quotes love advice from Soviet commissar Alexandra Kollontai, I remarked:

Anyone who cares to read Unspeakable Things . . . will discover that Laurie Penny is as wholehearted an evangelist for sexual perversion as she is a wholehearted enemy of democratic capitalism.

This is not to say that Ms. Penny lacks talent. Indeed, she is a clever, articulate and persuasive advocate of pure evil. In this, she is much likeJean-Paul Marat or Leon Trotsky — remarkably intelligent, possessed of impressive talent as writers and capable of penetrating insight and yet, unfortunately, fanatical devoteés of dangerous and antisocial ideas. Trotsky was no doubt hard at work thinking up some new plan to advance the worldwide proletarian revolution right up to the instant Ramón Mercader‘s ice-ax slammed into his skull.

This is not to say that Ms. Penny lacks talent. Indeed, she is a clever, articulate and persuasive advocate of pure evil. In this, she is much likeJean-Paul Marat or Leon Trotsky — remarkably intelligent, possessed of impressive talent as writers and capable of penetrating insight and yet, unfortunately, fanatical devoteés of dangerous and antisocial ideas. Trotsky was no doubt hard at work thinking up some new plan to advance the worldwide proletarian revolution right up to the instant Ramón Mercader‘s ice-ax slammed into his skull.

One of the wonders of democratic capitalism is how it gives its worst enemies weapons with which to attack democratic capitalism. The wealth that provided Ms. Penny’s education (her parents are successful lawyers who sent her to posh schools) was created by the economic system she desires to destroy, and her weapon is the high-tech system of computer-assisted communication whose development was funded by the white, male capitalists she so ostentatiously despises. This petulant and selfish brat was raised in affluence and grows richer every day as she is paid handsomely to spew her degenerate sentiments onto the Internet, collecting royalties from (and generating profit for) her publisher.

Having made a success of this ironically lucrative racket, and admired by the kind of fools who typically admire such monsters, Ms. Penny nevertheless has a persistent problem: People who don’t like her also have access to the Internet, and employ this technology to tell her what a deplorably bad person she is. Well . . . how dare they?

You come to expect it, as a woman writer, particularly if you’re political. You come to expect the vitriol, the insults, the death threats. After a while, the emails and tweets and comments containing graphic fantasies of how and where and with what kitchen implements certain pseudonymous people would like to rape you cease to be shocking, and become merely a daily or weekly annoyance, something to phone your girlfriends about, seeking safety in hollow laughter.
An opinion, it seems, is the short skirt of the internet. Having one and flaunting it is somehow asking an amorphous mass of almost-entirely male keyboard-bashers to tell you how they’d like to rape, kill and urinate on you. This week, after a particularly ugly slew of threats, I decided to make just a few of those messages public on Twitter, and the response I received was overwhelming. Many could not believe the hate I received, and many more began to share their own stories of harassment, intimidation and abuse. . . .
In my experience . . . the charges of stupidity, hypocrisy, Stalinism and poor personal hygiene which are a sure sign that any left-wing columnist is at least upsetting the right people, come spiced with a large and debilitating helping of violent misogyny. . . .
If we want to build a truly fair and vibrant community of political debate and social exchange, online and offline, it’s not enough to ignore harassment of women, LGBT people or people of colour who dare to have opinions. Free speech means being free to use technology and participate in public life without fear of abuse — and if the only people who can do so are white, straight men, the internet is not as free as we’d like to believe.

Ms. Penny’s 2011 column at The Independent is a typical feminist gesture:“They hate me because I’m a woman! Misogyny! Harassment!”

How much did The Independent pay her for that column?

Think about this. Ms. Penny was only 25 years old at the time and yet, because of her privileged background and elite education (Wadham College, Oxford) had managed to get herself hired as a political opinion columnist at an influential publication. Is anyone surprised that her impudent know-it-all tantrums provoke outrage? And is it surprising that, when readers become (quite understandably) irritated by lectures from this arrogant whelp, they respond by targeting her with what we might callad feminem slurs and threats?

Like so many other feminists, Ms. Penny would have her readers believe that only feminist writers are subjected to online abuse, and that only “white, straight men” perpetrate it. Let anyone inquire with Michelle Malkin, Sarah Palin, Katie Pavlich, Dana Loesch or Ann Coulter if they wish to learn what sort of hateful misogyny the Left directs against conservative women. Nor, for that matter, are women the only ones who must endure such abuse. Go ask Rick Santorum, Herman Cain or Marco Rubio what kind of harassment, threats and smears they have been forced to endure. Indeed, you could ask Jeff Goldstein what it was like to beharassed by the dangerously deranged Deb Frisch.

The Left celebrates cruel, selfish cowards like Laurie Penny, who gain fame and wealth by denouncing the success of honest, decent people. She is a typical totalitarian, dishonest and sadistic, her politics inspired by a malign appetite for the power to make other people shut up.

All because she is so “lonely . . . ugly and unloveable,” you see.

Having secured herself a platform from which she can promote bad ideas — and get paid for doing it — Ms. Penny then got paid for writing a column in which she demanded action to silence those who criticize or disagree with her. And she wonders why people consider her a Stalinist.

Leon Trotsky could not be reached for comment.