Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
tapirmusic

Liberal Blogger Fabricates Rape Threat

31 posts in this topic

The University of Wyoming Police Department issued a

citation to Lanker-Simons for “interference” for “false statements she

made to the UW Police Department,” according to a UW statement referred

to by Laramie Boomerang Online.

“Subject admitted to making a controversial post on UW Crushes webpage

and then lied about not doing it,” according to the citation.

The University of Wyoming also confirmed a statement that the police

had “”obtained substantial evidence verifying that the offending

Facebook post came from Lanker-Simons’ computer, while the computer was

in her possession.”

According to a Facebook page that apparently belongs to Lanker-Simons

she is a member of the University of Wyoming Gender & Women’s

Studies group as well as the school’s chapter of The Nonviolent

Communist.

The message that supposedly came from a conservative, until the police discovered that a well-known female liberal blogger and radio host at the University of Wyoming (UW), Meg Lanker-Simons, fabricated the message, then used it to have a whole conversation with herself, is below:

“I want to hate **** Meg Lanker-Simons so hard. That chick that runs her

liberal mouth all the time and doesn’t care who knows it. I

think its hot and it makes me angry. One night with me and shes gonna

be a good Republican b****.”

this reminds me of something else...

Lesbian who carved cross into own chest in fake hate crime gets seven days in jail, probation

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/lesbian-who-carved-cross-into-own-chest-in-fake-hate-crime-gets-seven-days

and this:

Democratic Party HQ in Denver vandalized...by A DEMOCRAT!

http://lagniappeslair.blogspot.com/2009/08/democratic-party-hq-in-denver.html

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idiocy is not owned by one side or the other, both sides have more than their share of jerkwads.

But, IMHO, constantly pointing your finger at one side and having no real balance is not a symptom of a critical thinker.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why nobody takes extremists seriously.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that lies about rape deserves to be arrested themselves and go to jail.

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that lies about rape deserves to be arrested themselves and go to jail.

Absolutely! That's just sick.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another chance for me to talk about the concept of pious fraud.

People seem to have an intense desire to have others think as they do, to the extent that they readily justify dishonesty to achieve it. Even books in the Bible are known to be frauds (not actually written by who they are claimed by) and passages have been added to Holy Scripture and other ancient sources fraudulently.

Nowadays people make no end of claims out of thin air, and load them with little details to add credibility; often they even come to believe in the truth of these tales themselves. Immense amounts of time and money are spent creating some of these frauds. The sad thing is that the people who do these things are good people who want good for others.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another chance for me to talk about the concept of pious fraud.

People seem to have an intense desire to have others think as they do, to the extent that they readily justify dishonesty to achieve it. Even books in the Bible are known to be frauds (not actually written by who they are claimed by) and passages have been added to Holy Scripture and other ancient sources fraudulently.

Nowadays people make no end of claims out of thin air, and load them with little details to add credibility; often they even come to believe in the truth of these tales themselves. Immense amounts of time and money are spent creating some of these frauds. The sad thing is that the people who do these things are good people who want good for others.

I'm sorry are looking at the same OP? just kidding. given the ratings of most liberal radio programs I guess she had to do something to be heard.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem liberal radio has in the States with ratings is that its natural audience is urban and busy doing other things while the conservative audience is out in the country with not all that much else to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Another chance for me to talk about the concept of pious fraud.

People seem to have an intense desire to have others think as they do, to the extent that they readily justify dishonesty to achieve it. Even books in the Bible are known to be frauds (not actually written by who they are claimed by) and passages have been added to Holy Scripture and other ancient sources fraudulently.

Nowadays people make no end of claims out of thin air, and load them with little details to add credibility; often they even come to believe in the truth of these tales themselves. Immense amounts of time and money are spent creating some of these frauds. The sad thing is that the people who do these things are good people who want good for others.

You had me until you said they were good people trying to do good. Fraud is not to be confused with compassion. Edited by whitelight
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had me until you said they were good people trying to do good. Fraud is not to be confused with compassion.

That is too absolutist for my taste. We need to be aware ("wise") of people's failings but also compassionate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem liberal radio has in the States with ratings is that its natural audience is urban and busy doing other things while the conservative audience is out in the country with not all that much else to do.

Huh? Do you mean the people who have working farms, yet still cannot earn enough money to make ends meet and also have to work a full time job? Cities have some of the most expensive real estate where the richest, most spoiled people live. Except, of course, for the slum areas that are left to the government housing projects. They pay for the maintenance without any physical effort on their part at all. You won't find them wasting their Sundays outside mowing, raking and weed eating theirs lawns or trimming the hedge.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to tune your sarcasm detector.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to tune your sarcasm detector.

:blush: Well. you could give us a hint...I never know with you. :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is too absolutist for my taste. We need to be aware ("wise") of people's failings but also compassionate.

Absolutist? Really? Now, define to the people reading this why you describe me an "absolutist" and yourself as "wise". I don't play your stupid simple games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying any "sin" is always bad is moral absolutism, which never works except for fanatics (there are always exceptions to any moral rule -- I can think of times I might play a fraud -- such as in combat to fool the enemy). The "wise" part is not wisdom in the usual sense but the "wise" sense with a wink. I hope that will help get you off your horse.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude pipe down. You sound like a liberal blogger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of us sometimes have other business.

I like the word "sin." It has a nice ring to it, full of the devil and pulpits and repelling demons.

I would challenge you to find something "bad" that can't have a good side and something "good" that can't have a bad side. I'm not a moral relativist -- I think right and wrong are objective realities -- but the list of sins and virtues that we are usually fed is far too simplistic.

Honesty is an example. There are plenty of times when it would be seriously wrong to tell the truth if its going to hurt someone.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to a Facebook page that apparently belongs to Lanker-Simons

she is a member of the University of Wyoming Gender & Women’s

Studies group as well as the school’s chapter of The Nonviolent

Communist.

Anyways, she sounds like a great girl.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of us sometimes have other business.

I like the word "sin." It has a nice ring to it, full of the devil and pulpits and repelling demons.

I would challenge you to find something "bad" that can't have a good side and something "good" that can't have a bad side. I'm not a moral relativist -- I think right and wrong are objective realities -- but the list of sins and virtues that we are usually fed is far too simplistic.

Honesty is an example. There are plenty of times when it would be seriously wrong to tell the truth if its going to hurt someone.

Is that like saying a father avenging the death of his son by killing the killer would be a case of finding good in something bad like murder?

Or less criminal, a father killing an intruder in his own house that is attacking his family would be a case of finding good in something bad like murder?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wether or not to kill Hitler when one has the chance always makes a good example for murder.

This is actually a very hard matter and I think why Jesus substituted "Love" for the Law, or why the Buddha preached "Compassion" and "the Middle Way."

I like that you edit the posts and distort the exchange, It shows you have no morals,

Please demonstrate.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with whitelight Frank. I'm off to bed...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks; its morning here so I have all day, although the way my computer is acting I think I may have to reboot soon. I'm actually rather puzzled by his reaction so I will have to hang around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wether or not to kill Hitler when one has the chance always makes a good example for murder.

This is actually a very hard matter and I think why Jesus substituted "Love" for the Law, or why the Buddha preached "Compassion" and "the Middle Way."

Please demonstrate.

What the hell are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question as I see it is how do we determine right from wrong. It started out with my pointing out that we need to be cognizant of the fact of pious fraud -- a fraud done with no visible motive except to convert or persuade. Then I for some reason I forget mentioned that not all frauds are necessarily "sins" (when I use that word it is tongue-in-cheek -- what I really mean is "bad." The example was pulling a fraud in combat in order to fool the enemy. One might point out that God had the Israelites pull frauds of this sort several times.

The problem as I see it is "moral absolutism," wherein we take it on ourselves to judge the moral standards of others. I think we can judge an individual act based on the harm or good it does, but not a person. For ourselves we constantly need to make moral judgments, and I think the "rules" (such as, say, The Ten Commandments), while perhaps well meaning simplify our moral task too much. I would suggest you pick up a good summary of Kant (I wouldn't try reading him going in without first a commentary) to see if that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Frank, pretty sure Whitelight's a troll. You're not going to get anywhere with him.

As far as judging acts as opposed to judging the people who commit them, when all I have to go on is what a person has done that's what they're going to be judged by. I agree in practicing tolerance and the middle road, but if I always judged acts as isolated from the people who performed them, I probably wouldn't be here posting.

Edited by Nathan DiYorio
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.