Fascinating fight between openly WN and far right lawyers versus revenge porn sites

Radical Right-Wing Lawyer Fights With Revenge Porn Site On Twitter — Everyone Wins

I’m saving the comments, not the post. Jason Lee Van Dyke doesn’t backpedal or apologize for being friends with Kyle Bristow, and when some leftie tries to shame him, he says he has a signed copy of White Apocalypse on his bookshelf.

What is so great about this is that White Nationalists are open and professional and middle class and operating in society without restrictions. It’s like the end of Jim Crow for Blacks, or the emancipation of Jews in England in the 1820’s-1850’s, or post Stonewall for the gays.

This is our emancipation right before our eyes. Kyle Bristow and Jason Lee Van Dyke are making a middle class living and being open and out and proud!

Thereas Onableman • 3 hours ago
JLVD’s buddy Kyle also wrote a book called “White Apocalypse”. Nice company you keep there JLVD.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Thereas Onableman • 2 hours ago
I have a signed copy on my bookshelf. The company I keep is none of your business. I somehow doubt you’re a lawyer or a law student, but I would put my money on Kyle to mop the floor with you in court any day of the week.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
MC • 2 days ago
I literally have no idea what’s going on in this story. None.
63 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Very_Small_Rocks MC • 2 days ago
Took the words out of my mouth.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
SonOfPE Very_Small_Rocks • 2 days ago
OK so its not just me. . .
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Puest SonOfPE • 2 days ago
It’s NEVER just you.
/s anyone who has witnessed the illiterate incompetancy of Simple JoePa.
(yea, I am bringing back the full nickname in full force…you fucking suck Simple JoePa)
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar

ExJAG Puest • 2 days ago
A little too fixated.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
MC Very_Small_Rocks • 2 days ago
After re-reading it a couple of times, I realize that when Patrice writes “without further ado,” what he really means is “without any sort of meaningful context.”
21 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
The_Haterade MC • a day ago
That’s just a perfect summation. I honestly cannot believe that someone who writes as horribly as Joe:

1) Got into law school

2) Graduated law school

3) Can tie his own shoes

4) Has not been shitcanned for his awful hackery.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
ExJAG The_Haterade • a day ago
Yet here you are, completely fixated.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dick Whitman MC • 2 days ago
What else is new?

20 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brocaine_Brandy • 2 days ago
FUCK YEA JLVD!!!! No idea what’s going on here since JoePa wrote it, but I saw porn and JLVD so hopefully that means he’s not raping and pillaging his way through a petting zoo right now.

EDIT: Wait, JLVD is against the porn? WHY JLVD? WHY?
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Puest Brocaine_Brandy • 2 days ago
WON”T SOMEONE THINK OF THE GERBILS!!!?
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Brocaine_Brandy • 2 days ago
I am not against pornography. Pornography is legal and should be legal. But in the words of Marc Randazza (and I may be paraphrasing a bit), there are two very basic rules that should be applied to it: (1) Those depicted must be adults; and (2) Those depicted must be CONSENTING adults. I think the words were something along the lines of “just because a girl consents to being fucked doesn’t mean that everybody gets to fuck her”.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brocaine_Brandy Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
This is vastly more eloquent than JoePas drivel above, though the Akin Gump parter defending the comfort women statue might quibble with it
18 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
disqus_hLK7S864J1 Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
jason, i’m proud of you.

/s your internet dad
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
gotmyjd Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
Well, the two (or more) participants in the videos DID consent to the taping at the time the video was made, right? So, what’s your deal?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
celinadlittle Brocaine_Brandy • a day ago
just before I looked at the receipt ov $8130 , I
didn’t believe that my sister woz like actualy bringing in money part-time from
there pretty old laptop. . there aunts neighbour has been doing this 4 only
about 22 months and at present repayed the mortgage on their appartment and
bought themselves a Chrysler . see here C­a­s­h­f­i­g­.­C­O­M­
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
SonOfPE • 2 days ago
PS to JoePa: the SPLC’s categrization of a group as a “hate group” can be like the John Birch Society’s classification of someone as a communist. I don’t know JLVD but you should have more sense than to parrot as undisputed truth, a label from a labeler.
31 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
GentlyWaftingCurtains SonOfPE • a day ago
At my school we had “straight power” rallies all the time; it was no big deal.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke GentlyWaftingCurtains • 18 hours ago
We did too. I think they were called “fraternity parties” 🙂
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brocaine_Brandy • 2 days ago
Isn’t everyone’s favorite attorney cum congressional candidate named Christina in Cali a big revenge porn opponent, or enthusiast, or participant, or something? Why isn’t she involved here?
7 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
BlackstoneMN Brocaine_Brandy • 2 days ago
I think this is Jason’s attempt to court her.
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
vinceclortho1 • 2 days ago
Oh, great…. Joe’s back…..
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
BlackstoneMN vinceclortho1 • 2 days ago
Said. Nobody. Ever.
30 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
successful troll • 2 days ago
Jason, I’m very surprised to learn you were charged with weapons safety violations.
37 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
BlackstoneMN • 2 days ago
Twitter used to be such a friendly little place too … /sigh
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
I am going to simply use this space to request that the ATL permit me the opportunity to write an article responding to JoePa and explaining this case.
41 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
SonOfPE Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
Please do! Preferably aided by images of blondes, and brunettes.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Concerned_Pastafarian Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
Join.

I also had a comment moderated today, which is weird. I assume it’s a result of a photo (that I never saw) that ppl were offended by, but wtf? I’m left to marinarate about what happened.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brocaine_Brandy Concerned_Pastafarian • 2 days ago
In bolognese or Alfredo? Remember, the latter be white
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
learned paw Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
I doubt they will let you post an article but if you post it somewhere else they might link to it.
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
psu2006 learned paw • a day ago
And likely cut-and-paste between 80 and 99% of it.
14 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guesto Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
JLVD, you should know the drill by now:
e-mail Lat at tips@atl.com/dickpix and attach your CV and dickpix.
cmon this is 1L stuff.
20 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JackieChilesIsSpeechless Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
You might want to consider posting a response on a site that has a higher readership rate than ATL, e.g., I hear the Skokie, Illinois Public Employees Union website is accepting submissions for its August announcements page.
13 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Mary Jo Butterfiasco Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
Jason – you have to make a YouTube video, shirtless, while you dance with a cat. that’s the only way it’ll get on ATL’s gaydar/radar.
7 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
SonOfPE Mary Jo Butterfiasco • a day ago
good god, don’t suggest more weird stuff for JoePa to post.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Pol Pot Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
American David Lat should allow counterpoint article. Like when TamTam have fake outrage counterpoint article. Besides it will help drive traffic, everyone love school yard fight.
And American David Lat, just to sweeten the pot I will refrain from mentioning your friend Haller Jackson IV or leather cleaner for a week if you allow JLVD counterpoint article.
–Brother Number One
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JustAwful Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
Godspeed deciphering JoePa’s writing in responding to any points that he tried to make.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
ExJAG • 2 days ago
The Southern Poverty Law Center is hardly about poverty. It’s a victimology group – i.e., they have the magic incantaion to let you know whether, for example, Sears is part of a hate group because it doesn’t stock condoms in the toy department.
16 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guesto ExJAG • 2 days ago
Sears is still around?
Talk about a hate crime.
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Norman ExJAG • a day ago
This is political drivel. The reality is that even law enforcement around the country relies on SPLC for their database and expertise on the nutjobs of America. Apparently their targeting various right-wing groups offends some people’s FoxNews sensibilities.
4 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brocaine_Brandy Norman • a day ago
Hai there mister SPLC intern! Pretty sure the SPLC would consider my yacht club a hate group given the chance.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
SonOfPE Norman • a day ago
It offended us too, back in the day.
-John Lennon
-M. L. King
-targets of Nixon an LBJ tax audits
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Norman • a day ago
Do you want to know what it takes to designate someone a hate group? it’s this easy: I officially declare the Southern Poverty Law Center to be a hate group. There. Now they have officially been declared a hate group in the ATL comments forum. That was easy! In all seriousness though, being designated as a hate group by the SPLC is similar to getting a traffic citation from an ice cream truck driver: it is completely and utterly meaningless. My guess is that the only thing law enforcement relies on their inappropriately named “intelligence reports” for is to clean up dog shit in the animal control division.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Norman Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
I guess you, Mr. Van Dyke, are hoping that no one will pay attention to the actual facts because they’re seduced by your generalized rant about ice cream trucks.

With Bristow as chairman of the “Young Americans for Freedom” group, the group held an anti-gay demonstration in downtown Lansing that it entitled “Straight Power.” During that demonstration, which protested an equal protection ordinance passed by city council to prohibit anti-gay discrimination, his members carried signs that said, “End Faggotry” and “Go Back in the Closet.”

The group co-sponsored another event called “Catch an Illegal Immigrant Day,” and another one called a “Koran Desecration” competition. The group posted “Gays Spread AIDS” fliers across campus. Completely consistent with these disgusting and repugnant views of Bristow and his fellow members was the invitation to speak, as the Master of Ceremonies no less, at one of their events extended to a man named Preston Wiginton. Wiginton is an open neo-Nazi. He won the “Strongest Skinhead” contest at “Hammerfest” in October, 2005, which is apparently a fascist scumbag-fest that white supremacists hold every year.

If all of these activities are what you consider to be the equivalent of an ice cream truck driver getting a traffic citation, I feel sorry for your sundaes. (Edit: Mea culpa that I conflated Van Dyke with Bristow in the original version of this comment. Edited to reflect the accurate facts.)
8 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
ExJAG Norman • a day ago
Yes, because you don’t like the speech, the speech must be eradicated.

There, friends, is the leftie mantra on tolerance: Agree with us and we’ll tolerate you.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Norman ExJAG • a day ago
“Leftie mantra” is a really fun phrase to use, isn’t it? Actual analysis of the law is not quite so fun, though. It appears here that your real objection is to speech, i.e., the speech expressed under the 1st Amendment by SPLC. You claim to be a free speech advocate, but SPLC is a private entity and it has an absolute constitutional right to declare to the world that Bristow’s group advocated hate (which, by the way, it did.) This appears to make you unhappy. I suggest you spend some time curled up by a fire one day and a copy of the Constitution. An annotated version would be helpful.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Norman • 18 hours ago
But free speech is not unlimited. That is one of the arguments I made in my response. I would agree with you that the SPLC has a right to make a list of hate groups, as repulsive as they may be, and add a buddy of mine to that list (I am sure that I am in there somewhere as well). I would say that the SPLC is walking a very thin and dangerous line, however, when they place a group that opposes illegal immigration and homosexuality in the same category as actual neo-nazi and klan-affiliated groups.

Words like “racist”, “bigot”, “intolerant” and even terms like “white supremacist” and “hate group” have become so overused as political rhetoric that they have been deprived of all discernible meaning. Can we really say that there is any universal consensus on the type of person that words like this describe anymore? The answer is probably no. They are political hyperbole and the SPLC gets a pass there.

The terms “Nazi”, “Neo-Nazi” and “Klansman” I think are different. Even though they are used – sometimes by both parties -as political hyperbole, they are words that still mean something. A “Nazi” or “Neo-Nazi” is still commonly understood to be someone with connections to some form of a National Socialist political party or organization. Although there is no more centralized KKK, the word “Klansman” would still refer to a member of the Ku Klux Klan. So, my theory is that when stating someone is a Nazi, a Neo-Nazi, or a Klansman (when they are not), it could amount to actionable defamation.

The SPLC walks a fine like because they post a group of hate groups. They do not distinguish between a group that strongly opposes homosexuality and the KKK. They don’t distinguish between those who hold major events to oppose illegal immigration and the National Socialist Party. That is dangerous territory. Sooner or later, someone is going to get into some form of trouble because of their inclusion on the SPLC’s list. That could land the SPLC in trouble for defamation and false light. It would be an uphill case – as well it should be – but it would be interesting to see what a court would say.
• Reply•Share › Show 2 new replies
Avatar
Norman Jason Lee Van Dyke • 17 hours ago
You say: “But free speech is not unlimited.” This is an absurd thing to say about a group that very clearly is exercising its free speech rights as intended by the First Amendment, by someone whose publicity-generating machine’s very lifeblood in fact depends on those rights. But this would require intellectual honesty on your part. From what I’ve seen of the groups you openly associate yourself with, Mr. Van Dyke, intellectual honesty isn’t your strong suit. And to be clear, I am completely in favor of the full, unfettered free speech rights of the racist scumbags that you and your buddy associate with, and the SPLC. It is you and a few other critics of SPLC who seem very offended by SPLC’s expressions of its opinions. Your defense of the First Amendment is anything but viewpoint-neutral.

You also say: “The SPLC walks a fine like because they post a group of hate groups… They don’t distinguish between those who hold major events to oppose illegal immigration and the National Socialist Party… That is dangerous territory. Sooner or later, someone is going to get into some form of trouble because of their inclusion on the SPLC’s list. That could land the SPLC in trouble for defamation and false light.”

Stick to your day job, Mr. Van Dyke. I’ve seen no evidence of expertise on your part on the law of defamation. Your statement here is an unclever disguise for, again, a threat that hopes (though in vain even if anyone at SPLC was paying attention) to quell free speech. Not only do you associate with bigots, but you’re also willing to use courts of law to try and crush ideas and speech that you don’t like. There really isn’t much redeeming about your cause at all, the more I learn.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Norman • 18 hours ago
I honestly don’t care one way or another. He’s my friend and I’ve got his back. Especially against annoying leftists and “hacktivists” (which I didn’t even know was a word until about 24 hours ago)
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Chuck Baggett Norman • 15 hours ago
The ice cream truck driver is giving tickets, not getting them, in Van Dyke’s comment.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thereas Onableman Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
And yet you’re not trying to argue that your friend is or was part of a group that conducted rallies that would make the nazis proud.

BTW do you want to know what it takes to actually win a lawsuit? A live human on the other side. Good luck collecting a default judgment from the internet.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Thereas Onableman • a day ago
This is not about a money judgment. This is about injunctive relief. I needed damages to get my injunctive relief and figured that a $1 million judgment, even though not collectable, would send a good message.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thereas Onableman Jason Lee Van Dyke • 7 hours ago
Right, because once you have that “injunctive relief” it will actually mean something. After all, the internets have to observe an injunction. And when the website keeps on operating, what then?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Thereas Onableman • 5 hours ago
I am wondering if you bothered to read the petition.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
ExJAG Norman • a day ago
The problem with apologists like you is that you’re categorical and reactionary. “Right-wing” groups, Fox News – the usual suspects in the “progressive” amusement park.

The problem with Southern Poverty Law Center is that it is not about “the south” or about “poverty” and even less about the law. No one is defending the Nazis (except perhaps the ACLU in the Skokie march), but that’s the model of villany that preocuppies you, along with “anti-LGBT” protests.

What you really don’t like are ideas that outrage you, and you believe that your outrage should be imposed by law. You confess more with what you try to mock than what you actually have to say. Pointing vaguely at the “rightwing” and Fox News as your examples of unacceptable ideas that should properly be targeted for elimination demonstrates with great precision that you’re just another petty left-wing zealot who wants opposing ideas squelched. The people can’t think so I must think for them. The people don’t realize the danger so I must eradicate it for them.

By the way, before you try to lump me into any particular category, I’m a Democrat – one that prays for the day when zealots like you release their hold on my once-noble party.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Pol Pot ExJAG • a day ago
Hey now when I was leader of Khmer Rouge we used to impose our outrage by law and squelch opposing ideas all the time, it was no big deal.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Pol Pot • 18 hours ago
Just so you know, I was rooting for you when they featured you against Saddam Hussein on “Deadliest Warrior”. I think you should demand a rematch.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Eileen • 2 days ago
The only comprehensible part of this article was the complaint.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
RACEISM monitor lizard • 2 days ago
apparently my original post is being moderated. There are some side issues here, but bascially Jason I support your cause
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
disqus_hLK7S864J1 RACEISM monitor lizard • 2 days ago
Except for the chick beating. We aint down with that.

That said, kudos to JLVD for tricking some woman into dating him
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
RACEISM monitor lizard disqus_hLK7S864J1 • 2 days ago
We’re in agreement. My full thoughts which were expressed with words used in the original article, if you can call it that, and which by the way is now in moderation, focus on the revenge thing. I have no interest one way or another in supporting JLVD as a person.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
disqus_hLK7S864J1 RACEISM monitor lizard • 2 days ago
word, my lizard, word.
i’m honestly also kinda proud as i am kinda assuming JLVD isn’t a virgin. all these years, i thought he was cray because his cherry hadn’t been popped. now i will assume he’s cray because he’s fucking cray. but at least he’s been able to experience the touch of another human being. we all deserve that. cray or not.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Puest RACEISM monitor lizard • a day ago
It went something like this:
Woman: Jason. For the 500th time please clean up your room and try and wipe better when you go BM. Your undies are not toilet paper!
JLVD: SHUT THE FUCK UP MOM!!! *PUNCH*
*sirens*
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke RACEISM monitor lizard • 2 days ago
I appreciate that. Thank you.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
RACEISM monitor lizard Jason Lee Van Dyke • 2 days ago
Well you got some splaning to do. I don’t abide by the revenge thing. I also don’t abide by beating women. A lot of beating cases get dismissed. Doesn’t mean a woman didn’t get beat. So, what the fuck happened?
4 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Mary Jo Butterfiasco RACEISM monitor lizard • 2 days ago
she might have run into his fist while riding her bicycle down the stairs
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke RACEISM monitor lizard • a day ago
I got into a verbal altercation with my college roommate and the cop interpreted the domestic violence law to apply to living situations other than what we would traditionally think of in the context of domestic violence. The state couldn’t even have proved a prima facie case and it was dismissed rather quickly along with the other bullshit charges. In fact, my history is clean. Everything that happened back then was either dismissed or subsequently set aside.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guesto Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
a few questions, JLVD:

1. what was the topic of the verbal altercation?
2. what time of day/night was it?
3. what was the sex of your college roommate?
4. what were you two wearing?
5. was booze involved?
6. any hanky panky?
7. assuming yes to 6, were photos taken?
8. assuming yes to 7, are those photos now being used as revenge porn?
9. are you a black belt yet?
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Guesto • a day ago
1. I do not remember. It was almost 14 years ago.

2. Evening. After dark. I don’t remember more than that.

3. Male
4. I don’t remember. I remember it was opening day in Michigan, which is November 15, so probably a long shirt and long pants.

5. No.
6. No
7. N/A
8. N/A
9. No
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guesto Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
haha…dude you’re all sortsa nuts but as has been mentioned before, you’re a good sport.
i’d probably have a beer with you or something.*

* as long as you were behind glass or bars and definitely unable to reach for your weapons
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Guesto • 18 hours ago
Come find me in the metroplex and I would be happy to buy you a beer. And you wouldn’t have to worry about weapons. I wouldn’t want to risk spilling my beer by reaching for one.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guesto Jason Lee Van Dyke • 5 hours ago
I don’t know what a metroplex is — is that a movie theatre of some sort?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jackie Chiles Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
Who won the altercation?
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guesto Jackie Chiles • a day ago
Society lost. that’s for sure.
4 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Jackie Chiles • 18 hours ago
Nobody won. The fact that I can’t remember what it was about probably means that it was over some stupid, immature, and petty nonsense. I was 20 at the time, after all.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Pol Pot • a day ago
I break my boycott of JoePa only to see everglorious JLVD information.
But damn JoePa, I know am all anti-intellectual and everything, but can you learn to write a freaking coherent article? Your articles have the organization of maggots eating a rotting corpse (and that no compliment no matter what you think about Democratic Kampuchea).
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thereas Onableman • a day ago
So JLVD served a lawsuit on a website? Is a website a legal entity that can be sued? I don’t think it is.
Wouldn’t JLVD have to sue the owner of the website?
Is anyone else surprised that JLVD can’t see that the “attorney” is mocking him and that the attempted service on someone who is obviously not affiliated with the website won’t get JLVD anything?
Good luck collecting a judgment from a website when you can’t even figure out who owns it and where to serve them.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dick Whitman Thereas Onableman • a day ago
They are seeking injunctive relief, not damages, you chucklefuck.
PI OR GTFO.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thereas Onableman Dick Whitman • 7 hours ago
Really? Check out the prayer for relief at paragraphs 9.1 c and d. At least $1,000,000 and exemplary damages sound an awful lot like damages to me. Care to explain that or do you just not understand how a prayer for relief works?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
gotmyjd • a day ago
The term “Revenge Porn” is utterly ridiculous and misleading. The porn itself wasn’t made through and act of revenge. It was totally consensual at the time it was made. It’s otherwise just ordinary, homemade porn. It’s the dissemination of the footage that’s done out of revenge.

Why are we painting this as something awful? The girl chose to participate. This is just more nanny state legislation.

Ps thank you ATL (and Mr. Duck Dynasty), I had never heard of pinkmeth before this article. I will now do some research…
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thereas Onableman gotmyjd • a day ago
Just for the sake of argument, how do you know it was consensual? Couldn’t there be porn on these sites that was recorded without consent? It’s not like leaving a computer’s webcam on would be that hard.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
gotmyjd Thereas Onableman • a day ago
My understanding of revenge porn in the classic sense has been: 1) couple consensually makes video while in relationship, 2) couple undergoes messy breakup, usually bc girl cheats or otherwise wants out, 3) guy release video out of revenge.

Now, if the video was not made consensually, then I am not in favor of that, and I believe there are already laws on the books about that.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke gotmyjd • 18 hours ago
Ok, so by your logic, I get to go get a blowjob from every girl that has ever given one. After all, that girls first blowjob was totally consensual at the time it was given. Its just an ordinary blowjob, after all, and she was the one who have it to some other guy so, in all fairness, I should get one too? It’s absurd. Just because a girl consents to allow someone to see he naked does not mean that she has consented to allowing the whole world to see her naked. If find it rather ironic that I, and even a lot of people I usually disagree with, seem to have a basic understanding of this concept. Yet, I am often accused of being a woman hater.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CornellUG1993 Jason Lee Van Dyke • 18 hours ago
Did you just compare female sexual slavery to copyright disputes? When I look at my friend’s Mickey Mantle baseball card, are we forcing Mickey Mantle to rise from the grave and do something as a result?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke CornellUG1993 • 17 hours ago
This is a bit more than a mere copyright dispute I am afraid. These people are soliciting and even paying those bitcoin things for pornographic pictures of women. They are then posting them for all the world to see. But they are doing more than that. They are posting personal and social media information as well (as if simply posting nude photographs of someone without their permission wasn’t bad enough). Pornography is one thing. Women in the pornography industry are being photographed with full knowledge that the whole world is going to know what they look like naked. There is disclosure there. They know what they are doing. A woman that takes some naughty pictures of her husband or boyfriend is clearly doing that just for him. She isn’t doing it so that the whole world can see her in the buff. I am shocked that you fail to grasp this concept.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CornellUG1993 Jason Lee Van Dyke • 17 hours ago
Oh I grasp that concept. I don’t grasp how a scorned ex distributing pictures they were lawfully given with no explicit conditions on ownership is the same as sexual slavery. That’s what you compared it to. That’s freaking insane.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
gotmyjd • a day ago
Can’t even get on the site, because of a surge in traffic.

Great job, Duck Dynasty, all you did was draw attention to a site that most of the mainstream public had never heard of.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thereas Onableman gotmyjd • a day ago
LOL – “Duck Dynasty”
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dick Whitman Thereas Onableman • a day ago
WREKT.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
Well, for those of you who wanted to see me write something for publication on ATL, you got your wish. See page three. I only had a few hours to write this and didn’t have someone here to proofread it, but I did what I could.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dick Whitman Jason Lee Van Dyke • a day ago
Nicely written. It’s too bad it’s not a separate article, given the fact that it makes an average Joe Pa article look like it was written in crayon by a preschooler* and/or Cooley 1L.

*No offense to all the regular readers that are still in preschool out there. I know getting compared to Joe Pa could cause emotional distress, and the comparison was merely made to show Mr. Van Dyke’s written supremacy.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Dick Whitman • 18 hours ago
Thank you, but I give credit where it is do and I do have to give some to JoePa here for having the courtesy to publish my response. He didn’t have to and I certainly appreciate it.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alexander Doubleyou Jason Lee Van Dyke • 18 hours ago
So why are you shutting down criticism on your own facebook site and bringing the “ban hammer” down on legitimate criticism of your decision to sue The Tor Project? Only responses for you and none for your critics? I understand the more abusive comments, but banning people for respectful comments that argue you should apologize makes you look extremely thin skinned.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Alexander Doubleyou • 17 hours ago
Well, let’s see. First of all, it’s my Facebook page and I can do with it as I please. This is ATL’s blog and they can choose to do with it as they please. I didn’t send out a bunch of fake emails, make hundreds of abusive phone calls, order pizza to Lat’s house, or accuse anyone of molesting little girls: I asked politely, prepared a response, and the ATL staff decided to publish it. They didn’t have to publish that response any more than I have to allow public criticism – especially by people who have never been to law school – of a decision to add anyone as a party to a lawsuit. That isn’t what the page is there for.

I have been more than happy, on a number of occasions, to explain the rationale behind my decision. I have done so with two reporters and have even agreed to attend a local event to explain it in person – so long as I am treated respectfully. The simple fact is that we believed that TOR was running a service similar to a web hosting company (one over which they exercised some degree of control). If that had been the case, I think I could have proven that they were knowingly allowing illegal activity to occur if not tacitly encouraging it. I am not a computer guy and really have no idea how TOR works. My understanding of it now is that it is more like that Bittorrent network. There are ways of accessing this massive and unregulated network (and how it works is still a mystery to me), but there is no single person or entity that is capable of controlling it. Once I learned that much, I was happy to dismiss TOR from the lawsuit. After speaking with their attorney, it would appear that a number of law enforcement agencies have had similar misunderstandings with TOR in the past so I really don’t think my belief was unreasonable.

I also don’t mind people who have actually hired me to be their attorney using websites like Facebook, Avvo, and Yelp to review those services. What I absolutely will not stand for is people who pose as my clients and then leave false and defamatory reviews. Some have even threatened to file BBB complaints and bar grievances over this and there is a 110% chance that everyone who does that is going to end up being sued. My firm sued a kid today for leaving a false review and then encouraging people to launch a DDOS attack on my website (among other things). I simply have no tolerance for that type of behavior. That is what was being exhibited on my page, and so the ban hammer fell.
see more
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alexander Doubleyou Jason Lee Van Dyke • 17 hours ago
I didn’t ask why you had the right to do it, I asked why you did it. “It’s my Facebook page and I can do with it as I please.” isn’t an answer to a question of why you did something. I didn’t send any fake emails, make any abusive phone calls, order any pizzas to anyone, or accuse anyone of molesting little girls. I respectfully argued you should consider apologizing for wrongfully suing The Tor Project considering the clear impropriety of doing so, rather than releasing a begrudging “press release.” I did so without being abusive or calling you names. If ATL can overlook the abuse they demonstrably endure every day and refrain from banning respectful criticism (and even some less respectful criticism), why can’t you when it comes to a respectful criticism? Are they more resilient than you? As I said (and as is my right to say), it makes you look thin skinned when you delete all criticism, no matter how respectful.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Alexander Doubleyou • 17 hours ago
Except that they were not wrongfully sued. Under Rule 13 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, pleadings are presumed to be filed in good faith. To the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and after conducting a reasonable inquiry, we believed that TOR was providing services to PinkMeth. Therefore the suit was not brought in bad faith and was not brought solely for the purpose of harassment. It was brought for the same reason the rest of the suit was brought: to destroy PinkMeth. In short, I have nothing to apologize for. If TOR had been providing services to PinkMeth (as I believed they were at the time we filed it) they would still be a party to the lawsuit.

ATL is a blog. They have set it up for people to argue, criticize, and tease each other. My law firm facebook page exists for one reason: marketing. I have no duty to provide a forum for people to criticize me on. If I wanted such a forum, I would start a blog.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alexander Doubleyou Jason Lee Van Dyke • 17 hours ago
They were not wrongfully sued? Just because your mistake may not cross the line into sanctionable conduct (and I’d argue it does, you had absolutely no basis for your belief that they provided domain name services, you literally made that up from nothing), does not mean your actions weren’t wrongful. You had no legal claim against them, they did nothing to injure your client, and you caused them hardship anyway because if your mistake. That’s wrongful. You called them “unscrupulous” without any basis. Instead of pretending you actually have a legal claim against them and just don’t want judges to de-facto ban them as a result of your actions rather than the legislature, *oh benevolent you*, how about apologizing for causing them a headache. Or, if that’s too much of a hit to your ego, just say nothing, rather than making a press release continuing to attack a group you know you have no legal claim against.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jason Lee Van Dyke Alexander Doubleyou • 5 hours ago
I’ll tell you what: I will apologize to TOR when they apologize to all of the innocent women that have had their lives ruined because they saw fit to make it easy for perverts like PinkMeth to commit crimes and torts online without repercussions.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guest Jason Lee Van Dyke • 18 hours ago
JoePa did it for the page views. That’s the only, I repeat, ONLY reason ATL does anything.
1 • Reply•Share ›

Avatar
Guesto Jason Lee Van Dyke • 20 hours ago
well done JLVD.
while i have newfound respect for you, i’m still going to tease you for being…you.
don’t go changing.
5 • Reply•Share ›

Advertisements

About mindweapon

A mind weapon riding along with Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.https://en.gravatar.com/profiles/edit/#
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Fascinating fight between openly WN and far right lawyers versus revenge porn sites

  1. an organization recognized by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a bona fide hate group.

    Hipster Intelligence Agency recognizes the Southern Poverty Law Center as a bona fide hate group.

    Of course I totally tried to look up myself (and my ex-girlfriends) on that revenge porn website but I couldn’t load it. Then again, I once did an “artsy” porn movie that can still be found online, so it wouldn’t be that big of a deal anyway.

    No, I’m not going to tell you how to find it.

  2. Kyle says:

    We also submitted an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in which we argued in defense of Western civilization.

    http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2014/03/michigan_gay_marriage_ag_bill.html

    • mindweapon says:

      Kyle,

      I am honored to have you commenting here! Do you have a WordPress blog? If so, what is it, and if not, please get one.

      WordPress is, for whatever reason, the ideal platform for long form and middle brow pro-White discussion. Mostly because of the reblog function. We all reblog each other a lot, and that’s how we find more people.

      Anyway, I’m sure your pretty busy with your lawyering, so no problem if you don’t have time for blogging. Keep doing what you’re doing, and thanks much for dropping by!

    • mindweapon says:

      Here’s what I say to liberals:

      Inevitably, there will be the normalization of pedophilia and a push to lower the age of consent to around 12 years old. I just want to get your commitment that when this day comes, you will stand with us intolerant bigots against the legalization of child rape.

  3. Jason L. Van Dyke says:

    I wonder that the jackasses at the Southern Pervert Lunatic Center thought of what I had to say about them in the comments section on ATL. I noticed that they liked the article on their Hatewatch blog. If those trolls come after me, I intend to make their lives extremely uncomfortable.

    • mindweapon says:

      Glad to hear it, Jason. They have hurt a lot of people.

      The ADL used to cause a lot more trouble to anyone whom they perceived as a threat to Jewish interests. They were much more aggressive, like the $PLC is now. Then they did their No Place for Hate thing in Massachusetts, but then Abe Foxman said things that the Armenian community interpreted as denying the Armenian Genocide, and anti-ADL sentiment spread like wildfire through Massachusetts, and the No Place for Hate program was kicked out of most, if not all, Massachusetts towns. Since then, the ADL has kept a much lower profile.

      But the $PLC goes after people who do nothing more than write a book, or get people saying the Mantra, which incidentally does not advocate or incite violence. They ruined poor Farnham O’Reilly, who did the horrible crime of writing some articles at the Occidental Observer and wrote a book advocating white settlement of the Northwest. When the SPLC outed him, he lost his job, his wife divorced him, his family denounced him, and he fell apart.

      I think O’Reilly had every expectation of privacy. I can understand that when people advocate assassination of politicians or other kinds of violence, there is a reasonable cause for concern and investigation to prevent violence. But people who exchange ideas that have nothing to do with violence or assassination should be left well enough alone.

      Chances are the $PLC won’t come after precisely because you will fight back.

      My one piece of advice — always hold the moral high ground and NEVER incite or advocate or fantasize on the internet about committing violence. It does no good anyway, and it gives them exactly what they are looking for. We are already violent people, and inciting violence is a textbook case of carrying coals to Newcastle.

      As a lawyer, you have more powerful weapons than hot lead and cold steel anyway.

    • @Jason L. Van Dyke

      The “ice cream truck giving traffic tickets” analogy was brilliant. Good show!

      The $PLC has been thoroughly discredited; they get the lowest ratings from charity watchdogs and the FBI dropped them as a “partner” when they started attacking mainstream Christians for supporting traditional marriage.

      Here’s a bit of $PLC humor I wrote a while back:

      http://eradica.wordpress.com/50-pounds-of-heidi

      • Wally says:

        The FBI didn’t drop them as a partner. The FBI may have taken their name off of their website, but they still work with them. I read a story recently in a Cleveland Jewish paper about some meeting in which an SPLC guy was giving a talk about “white supremacists”. An FBI agent was there with the SPLC guy.

  4. Cj aka Elderofzyklons Blog says:

    Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s