<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Rapeutation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rapeutation.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rapeutation.com</link>
	<description>A Distributed Internet Reputation Attack or, What You&#039;re Left With After You&#039;ve Suffered One</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 00:27:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Charity Fraud</title>
		<link>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/28/charity-fraud/</link>
		<comments>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/28/charity-fraud/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2012 07:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rapeutation.com/?p=236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Wikipedia Charity fraud is the act of using deception to get money from people who believe they are making donations to charities. Often a person or a group of people will make material representations that they are a charity or part of a charity and ask prospective donors for contributions to the non-existent charity. [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div align="center">
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/awelldidyouevahmatt12.gif" rel="lightbox[236]" title="awelldidyouevahmatt12"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-247" title="awelldidyouevahmatt12" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/awelldidyouevahmatt12.gif" alt="" width="418" height="364" /></a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">by Wikipedia</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Charity fraud is the act of using deception to get money from people who believe they are making donations to charities. Often a person or a group of people will make material representations that they are a charity or part of a charity and ask prospective donors for contributions to the non-existent charity. Charity fraud not only includes fictitious charities but also deceitful business acts. Deceitful business acts include businesses accepting donations and not using the money for its intended purposes.</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Examples</span></strong></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">On April 20, 1918, The New York Times published an article about a charity fraud committed by the Secretary of the Cripples’ Welfare Society, George W. Ryder. Ryder pleaded guilty to using mail fraud in order to use the donations for his personal gain.[1]</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">On November 13, 1992, The New York Times released an article about fraudulent solicitations supporting a cause. Often, beside the cash register in stores is a collection being taken up for a charity or for people in need. Although there are several real cases of people with ailments that need donations, there are several donations that are used as a marketing scam. In this specific case, the small-change donations were being kept by the vendors. The article states that the vendors paid a two dollar per month fee to use the charity’s name.[2]</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">On May 27, 2009, CNN reported the arrest and sentence of five leaders of one of the largest Muslim charities. These men were found guilty of using donations to aid a Palestinian militant organization labeled as terrorists by the United States.[3]</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Prevention</span></strong></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">There are several controls as well as laws governing charities as well as businesses that accept donations. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS)[1], along with the Better Business Bureau (BBB)[2], has regulations in place that can be found on their websites.</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provides online information about avoiding charity fraud, such as fraudulent schemes that emerge in the wake of natural disasters, claiming to be providing disaster relief. The Internet Crime Complaint Center maintains a list of guidelines to avoid charity fraud when making a donation.[3]</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">It is advised that people should not only follow certain guidelines when they donate but that they should also consult a list such as the one listed on the BBB’s website. This list includes the participants in the BBB Wise Giving Alliance&#8217;s National Charity Seal Program. Participants in this program have met the Standards for Charity Accountability and may have, for a fee, display the seal logo on their websites as well as any other printed documents.[4]</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">See also</span></strong></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Confidence trick</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">External links</span></strong></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: U.S. (FTC.gov) information regarding charity fraud</span></p>
</div>
<div align="left">
<blockquote>
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">AVOID CHARITY FRAUD</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">by Federal Trade Commission</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">A flyer in the mail, a phone call, a personalized email — everyone receives requests for donations in one form or another. Many legitimate charities use telemarketing, direct mail, email and online ads to ask for contributions. <strong>Unfortunately, scam artists also use these techniques to pocket your money</strong>. If someone asks for a donation, take your time and familiarize yourself with the charity:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Ask for the charity’s name, address, and phone number, and written information about its programs. </span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Ask whether the person contacting you is a professional fundraiser and how much of your contribution will go to fundraising costs. </span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Check the history of the organization with the office that regulates charities in your state. For a list of state offices, visit the National Association of State Charity Officials. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">You should also know the warning signs of a scam:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">High pressure pitches. Reject them: It’s okay to hang up.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">A thank you for a pledge you don&#8217;t remember making. Be skeptical; scam artists will lie to get your money. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Requests for cash. Avoid giving cash donations. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Charities that offer to send a courier or overnight delivery service to collect your money. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Charities that guarantee sweepstakes winnings in exchange for a contribution. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Charities that spring up overnight, especially those that involve current events like natural disasters, or those that claim to be for police officers, veterans, or firefighters. </strong>They probably don&#8217;t have the infrastructure to get your donations to the affected area or people. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">For more detailed information about charity donations, read Charitable Donations: Give or Take.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Facts for Consumers</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">by Federal Trade Commission</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Charitable Donations: Give or Take?</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Your charity dollars are an investment in your community, the nation, and the world.<strong> The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the nation’s consumer protection agency, says it’s wise to be cautious when making your donation decisions so you can avoid scam artists who try to make money by taking advantage of your generosity.</strong></span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Charity Checklist</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Consider the following precautions to help ensure that your donation dollars benefit the people and organizations you want to help. They make sense whether you’re solicited by an organization’s employees, volunteers, or professional fundraisers by phone, mail, e-mail, or in person.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Be wary of charities that spring up overnight in connection with current events or natural disasters. They may make a compelling case for your money, but as a practical matter, they probably don’t have the infrastructure to get the donations to the affected areas or people. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Ask for written information about the charity, including the name, address, and telephone number. <strong>A legitimate charity or fundraiser will send you information about the charity’s mission, how your donation will be used, and proof that your contribution is tax deductible. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Contact the office that regulates charitable organizations and charitable solicitations in your state to see if the charity or fundraiser must be registered. If so, check to <strong>make sure that the company you’re talking to is registered.</strong> For a list of state offices, visit the National Association of State Charity Officials at www.nasconet.org/agencies. Your state office also can verify how much of your donation goes to the charity, and how much goes to fundraising and management expenses. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Don’t be shy about asking who wants your money. Some charities hire professional fundraisers for large-scale mailings, telephone drives, and other solicitations rather than use their own staff or volunteers, and then use a portion of the donations to pay the fundraiser’s fees. <strong>If you’re solicited for a donation, ask if the caller is a paid fundraiser, who they work for, and the percentage of your donation that will go to the charity and to the fundraiser. If you don’t get a clear answer — or if you don’t like the answer you get — consider donating to a different organization. </strong></span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Call the charity. Find out if the organization is aware of the solicitation and has authorized the use of its name. If not, you may be dealing with a scam artist. </span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Check with local recipients. If giving to local organizations is important to you, make sure they will benefit from your generosity. <strong>If a charity tells you that your dollars will support a local organization, like a fire department, police department, or hospital, call the organization to verify the claim. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Watch out for similar sounding names. Some phony charities use names that closely resemble those of respected, legitimate organizations. If you notice a small difference from the name of the charity you intend to deal with, call the organization you know to check it out. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Know the difference between “tax exempt” and “tax deductible.” Tax exempt means the organization doesn’t have to pay taxes. Tax deductible means you can deduct your contribution on your federal income tax return. Even if an organization is tax exempt, your contribution may not be tax deductible. If a tax deduction is important to you, ask for a receipt showing the amount of your contribution and stating that it is tax deductible. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Look twice at organizations that use meaningless terms to suggest they are tax exempt charities. For example, the fact that an organization has a “tax I.D. number” doesn’t mean it is a charity; every nonprofit and for-profit organization must have a tax I.D. number. And an invoice that tells you to “keep this receipt for your records” doesn’t mean that your donation is tax deductible or that the organization is tax exempt. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Trust your gut — and check your records if you have any doubt about whether you’ve made a pledge or a contribution. Callers may try to trick you by thanking you for a pledge you didn’t make. If you don’t remember making the donation or don’t have a record of your pledge, resist the pressure to give. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Refuse high pressure appeals. Legitimate fundraisers generally don’t push you to give on the spot. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Be wary of charities offering to send a courier or overnight delivery service to collect your donation immediately. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Consider the costs. When buying merchandise or tickets for special events, or when receiving “free” goods in exchange for giving, remember that these items cost money and generally are paid for out of your contribution. Although this can be an effective fundraising tool, less money may be available for the charity. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Be cautious of promises of guaranteed sweepstakes winnings in exchange for a contribution. According to U.S. law, you never have to give a donation to be eligible to win a sweepstakes. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Do not send or give cash donations. Cash can be lost or stolen. <strong>For security and tax record purposes, it’s best to pay by check — made payable to the charity, not the solicitor. </strong>If you’re thinking about giving online, look for indicators that the site is secure, like a lock icon on the browser’s status bar or a URL that begins “https:” (the “s” stands for “secure”). </span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Checking Up</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Before you open your checkbook, check out the charity you’re considering with these organizations. Note: Many small, new, or local charities may not be rated by the organizations listed here. Some fraternal organizations, like police and firefighter groups, may not be rated at all. If the charity seeking your donation is not listed or rated, follow the precautions listed under the Charity Checklist to help you determine whether it merits your donation dollars.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">BBB Wise Giving Alliance<br />
4200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 800<br />
Arlington, VA 22203<br />
(703) 276-0100<br />
<a href="http://www.bbb.org/charity">www.bbb.org/charity</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">American Institute of Philanthropy<br />
P.O. Box 578460<br />
Chicago, IL 60657<br />
(773) 529-2300<br />
<a href="http://www.charitywatch.org/">www.charitywatch.org</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Charity Navigator<br />
1200 MacArthur Boulevard<br />
Mahwah, NJ 07430<br />
(201) 818-1288<br />
<a href="http://www.charitynavigator.org/">www.charitynavigator.org</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">GuideStar<br />
4801 Courthouse Street, Suite 220<br />
Williamsburg, VA 23188<br />
(757) 229-4631<br />
<a href="http://www.guidestar.org/">www.guidestar.org</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Military Relief Societies<br />
Although the U.S. Department of Defense does not endorse any charity, you can learn about military relief societies at<br />
<a href="http://www.militaryhomefront.dod.mil/">www.militaryhomefront.dod.mil</a>.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Reducing Telephone and Direct Mail Solicitations</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Typically, when you donate to a charity, your name is placed on the charity’s contact list. The charity uses this list to contact you again for future donations, and often rents the list or exchanges it with other charities and fundraisers. If you feel overwhelmed with requests for donations, here are some steps you can take.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Tell the charity to put you on their “do not call” list. By law, the charity must not contact you again. If it does, report it to your state Attorney General (www.naag.org) or your local consumer protection agency (www.consumeraction.gov). You can get the phone numbers for these organizations in your phone book or through Web directories.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Include a note with your donation asking the charity not to rent, sell, or exchange your personal information and donation history.<br />
Ask the organization to limit its donation requests to you to once or twice a year. If the organization fails to honor your requests, you may wish to find a different charity to support. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Sign up for the Direct Marketing Association’s (DMA) Mail Preference Service (MPS) at www.dmachoice.org. The DMA’s MPS lets you opt out of receiving unsolicited commercial mail from many national companies for five years. When you register with this service, your name will be put on a “delete” file and made available to direct-mail marketers. However, your registration will not stop mailings from organizations that do not use the DMA’s Mail Preference Service. The DMA also has an Email Preference Service to help you reduce unsolicited commercial emails. To opt out of receiving unsolicited commercial email from DMA members, visit www.ims-dm.com/cgi/offemaillist.php. Your online request will be effective for five years. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Sign up for the National Do Not Call Registry — the free, easy way to reduce the telemarketing calls you get. While charities are exempt from the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule that implemented the Registry, some will not call you if they know you don’t want to receive calls. To register your telephone number, or to get more information, visit www.donotcall.gov, or call 1-888-382-1222 from the phone you want to register. You will receive fewer telemarketing calls within three months of registering your number. Telephone numbers on the Registry will be removed when they are disconnected and reassigned, or when you choose to remove your number(s) from the Registry. </span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Telemarketing Sales Rule</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule applies to telemarketers who make calls across state lines on behalf of charitable organizations. The Rule restricts calling times to the hours between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. The Rule also requires telemarketers to promptly identify the charitable organization they represent and to disclose that the purpose of the call is to ask for a contribution. Telemarketers may not mislead you or lie to get your contribution.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">For More Information and Complaints</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">To learn more information about making your donations count, visit <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/charityfraud">www.ftc.gov/charityfraud</a>.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">If you believe an organization may not be operating for charitable purposes, or is making misleading solicitations, contact your state Attorney General (www.naag.org) or your local consumer protection agency (www.consumeraction.gov). You can get the phone numbers for these organizations in your phone book or through Web directories.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">You also may file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. </span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The FTC works to prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair business practices in the marketplace and to provide information to help consumers spot, stop and avoid them. <strong>To file a complaint or get free information on consumer issues, visit ftc.gov or call toll-free, 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357); TTY: 1-866-653-4261. </strong>Watch a video, How to File a Complaint, at ftc.gov/video to learn more. <strong>The FTC enters consumer complaints into the Consumer Sentinel Network, a secure online database and investigative tool used by hundreds of civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">***</span></p>
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">PREVIOUS SWEEP OPERATIONS &amp; CASES</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">For Release: 05/20/2009</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">FTC Announces “Operation False Charity” Law Enforcement Sweep</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Agency Joined by 49 States in Bringing 76 Actions Against Fraudulent Solicitors Nationwide</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">In a nationwide, federal-state crackdown on fraudulent telemarketers claiming to help police, firefighters, and veterans, the Federal Trade Commission, together with 61 Attorneys General, Secretaries of State, and other law enforcers of 49 states and the District of Columbia, today announced “Operation False Charity.” <strong>Federal and state enforcers announced 76 law enforcement actions against 32 fundraising companies, 22 non-profits or purported non-profits on whose behalf funds were solicited, and 31 individuals.</strong> These include two FTC actions against alleged sham non-profits and the telemarketers who made deceptive claims about these so-called charities. The FTC and state agencies also released new education materials, in both English and Spanish, to help consumers recognize and avoid charitable solicitation fraud.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">“In these difficult economic times, Americans want to make every contribution count,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “The good news is they’re still being generous and donating to charitable organizations, including those that support our police officers, firefighters, military families, and veterans. <strong>The bad news is that some unscrupulous operators have seized on this goodwill to make a quick buck. The actions we’re announcing today demonstrate that federal and state partners will find charity scammers and we will stop them.”</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">“All of us share a deep trust and respect for our law enforcement officers, firefighters, and military service members,” said Attorney General Chris Koster of Missouri. “The attorneys general across the country will not stand idly by while greedy telemarketers take advantage of that trust and respect.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">“I encourage all donors to maximize their charitable contributions by getting basic financial information about an organization before giving,” said Pennsylvania Secretary of State Pedro A. Cortés. “Trustworthy resources are available through your department of state or attorney general’s office. <strong>By doing research and asking questions of a charity or its professional fundraisers, consumers can help ensure their donations have the impact they expect.”</strong></span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">FTC Enforcement Actions</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The two FTC cases announced today involve federal court complaints and proposed settlement orders against defendants who allegedly tricked consumers into giving by claiming that donations would support police or firefighters disabled in the line of duty, often in the donors’ communities, or that the donations would assist military families in need, and by misleading consumers about how much of the money would go to those causes. <strong>According to the FTC, the defendants used legitimate-sounding names and described sympathetic causes to give their sham organizations a veneer of credibility. Their real goal, however, was to dupe consumers into contributing money that the defendants used overwhelmingly just to support themselves and their fundraisers. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">In the first case, the FTC alleged that three sham non-profit organizations, American Veterans Relief Foundation, Inc. (AVRF), Coalition of Police and Sheriffs, Inc. (COPS), and Disabled Firefighters Fund (DFF), all based at the same address in Santa Ana, California, were created almost entirely to provide profits for the individual defendants and the for-profit fundraisers they hired. One defendant, Jeffrey Dean Duncan, ran COPS and DFF, while another defendant, William Rose, ran AVRF. Another defendant, Kathy Clinkenbeard, managed the telemarketers with which the entities contracted.<strong> The FTC contends that solicitors calling on behalf of AVRF falsely claimed that the money they were raising would support the families of soldiers fighting overseas through a program it called “Operation Home Front.” In fact, AVRF spent virtually no money assisting military families. AVRF’s bogus “Operation Home Front” is not connected to the genuine non-profit Operation Homefront, Inc., a national organization with 30 chapters across the country that provides real support to the families of troops and gets high ratings from watchdog groups.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">According to the FTC’s complaint, the defendants misrepresented that donations would go to a legitimate charity, that the organizations have programs that do not actually exist, and that those programs benefit the donors’ local communities. The complaint also alleges that COPS misrepresents its affiliation with police officers and sheriffs, and charges the defendants with assisting others to commit deceptive acts and practices.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The proposed order settles the FTC’s complaint by barring the defendants from making false claims, or assisting anyone else in making false claims, in connection with charitable solicitations, or in connection with telemarketing. It also prohibits the defendants from violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule, requires that they make certain disclosures when fundraising, and it <strong>requires that they monitor any fundraisers that solicit on their behalf.</strong> Finally, the order imposes on defendants COPS, DFF, Duncan, and Clinkenbeard a judgment of $13.1 million and against defendants AVRF, Rose, and Clinkenbeard a judgment of $6 million. These judgments are suspended based on defendants’ documented inability to pay.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">In the second case, the FTC alleged that defendant David Scott Marleau ran several for-profit fundraisers that solicited money on behalf of sham police, fire, and veterans non-profit charitable organizations. The FTC charged that Marleau and his companies, Jedi Investments, LLC, Impact Fundraising, LLC, Millenium Fundraising, LLC, and PC Marl, Inc., misrepresented the programs for which funds were solicited, misrepresented that donations would benefit the donor’s local community, mailed notices to consumers stating they had made a pledge when they had not even been called, and misrepresented their affiliation with sheriffs and police. Six additional counts in the complaint charged the defendants with multiple violations of the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule, including ignoring company-specific do-not-call requests. The Commission also alleged that their operations often targeted seniors, sometimes debiting their accounts for donations without permission. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The proposed order settling the charges requires the defendants to stop misrepresenting facts, make certain disclosures when soliciting money from consumers, and stop violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule. The order also requires that the defendants substantiate any claims they make about a nonprofit or its programs prior to soliciting consumers, and requires that they train and monitor their telemarketers. Finally, the order imposes a monetary judgment of nearly $1.7 million against the corporate entities Jedi Investments, LLC, Impact Fundraising, LLC, Millenium Fundraising, LLC, and PC Marl, Inc. That judgment is suspended based on these defendants’ documented inability to pay.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The FTC would like to thank the Attorneys General of California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington and the Secretary of State of Washington for their invaluable assistance with these cases. </span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">State Law Enforcement and Public Education</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Law enforcement and public education efforts by the states are integral components of “Operation False Charity.” The FTC would like to acknowledge the following state officials for their participation in Operation False Charity, either by taking enforcement action or initiating consumer education efforts: the Attorneys General of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming; and other state agencies including the Secretaries of State of Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Washington, and the Georgia Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs, the New York State Consumer Protection Board, the Rhode Island Department of Business Regulation, the Utah Division of Consumer Protection, the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Eu Claire County (Wisconsin) District Attorney. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Information about these agencies’ participation is summarized on the FTC’s Web site at <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/05/090520charitychart.pdf">www.ftc.gov/os/2009/05/090520charitychart.pdf</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Private-sector partners included AARP, the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance, the American Institute of Philanthropy, Guidestar, the National Association of State Charities Officials, and Charity Navigator.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Consumer Education</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The FTC today issued a new consumer alert providing tips about charities that solicit donations on behalf of veterans and military families. According to the alert, which can be found on the agency’s Web site at www.ftc.gov/charityfraud/, <strong>while many legitimate charities are soliciting donations to support the nation’s military veterans, not all “charities” are legitimate – some are operators whose only purpose is to make money for themselves. Others are paid fundraisers whose fees can use up most of your donation.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The new alert, “Supporting the Troops: When Charities Solicit Donations on Behalf of Vets and Military Families,” offers the following tips to help consumers ensure that their donations go to a legitimate charity. Many of these tips apply to charitable giving to other types of organizations, as well.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Recognize that the words “veterans” or “military families” in an organization’s name don’t necessarily mean that veterans or the families of active-duty personnel will benefit from your donation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Check out an organization before donating. Some phony charities use names, seals, and logos that look or sound like those of respected, legitimate organizations. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Donate to charities with a track record and a history. Charities that spring up overnight may disappear just as quickly. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">If you have any doubt about whether you’ve made a pledge or a contribution, check your records. If you don’t remember making the donation or pledge, resist the pressure to give. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Call the office in your state that regulates charitable organizations to see whether the charity or fundraising organization has to be registered. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Do not send or give cash donations. For security and tax-record purposes, it’s best to pay with a check made payable to the charity. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Ask for a receipt showing the amount of your contribution. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Be wary of promises of guaranteed sweepstakes winnings in exchange for a contribution. You never have to give a donation to be eligible to win a sweepstakes. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Some sites where consumers can check out a charity include:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">*www.nasconet.org &#8211; National Association of State Charity Officials, where you can look up and contact your state’s charities regulator for more information.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">*www.guidestar.org &#8211; Guidestar</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">*www.bbb.org/charity &#8211; Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">*www.charitynavigator.org &#8211; CharityNavigator</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">*www.charitywatch.org &#8211; American Institute of Philanthropy </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Commission vote approving each complaint and proposed court order was 4-0. The complaint and proposed order against David Scott Marleau, et al. were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on May 19, 2009. The complaint and proposed order against American Veterans Relief Foundation, Inc., et al. were filed in the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California on May 18, 2009.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The proposed orders announced today settle the FTC’s charges against the following defendants: 1) American Veterans Relief Foundation, Inc.; Coalition of Police and Sheriffs, Inc.; Disabled Firefighters Fund; Jeffrey Dean Duncan, individually and as an officer or director of Coalition of Police and Sheriffs, Inc., and Disabled Firefighters Fund; Kathy Clinkenbeard, individually; and William Rose, individually and as an officer or director of American Veterans Relief Foundation, Inc.; and 2) David Scott Marleau, individually and as an officer or director of Jedi Investments, LLC, Impact Fundraising, LLC, Millenium Fundraising, LLC, and PC Marl, Inc.; Jedi Investments, LLC; Impact Fundraising, LLC; Millenium Fundraising, LLC; and PC Marl, Inc.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">NOTE: The Commission authorizes the filing of complaints when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaints are not a finding or ruling that the defendants actually have violated the law. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">NOTE: Stipulated court orders are for settlement purposes only and do not necessarily constitute an admission by the defendants of a law violation. Stipulated orders have the force of law when signed by the judge.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Copies of the complaints and proposed court orders are available from the FTC’s Web site at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. <strong>The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,500 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad</strong>. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">MEDIA CONTACTS:<br />
Peter Kaplan<br />
FTC Office of Public Affairs<br />
202-326-2334</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Mitchell J. Katz<br />
FTC Office of Public Affairs<br />
202-326-2161</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">STAFF CONTACTS:<br />
David M. Horn<br />
FTC Northwest Region, Seattle<br />
206-220-4483 </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Tracy S. Thorleifson<br />
FTC Northwest Region, Seattle<br />
206-220-4481</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">STATE CONTACTS<br />
Available on case list in press packet </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">(FTC File Nos. 092-3065 and 092-3064)<br />
(FalseCharitySweep.wpd)<br />
 </span></p></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: Charity Navigator&#8217;s giving tips including the Top 10 Best Practices of Savvy Donors</span></p>
<blockquote>
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Top 10 Best Practices of Savvy Donors</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">1. Be Proactive In Your Giving<br />
Smart givers generally don&#8217;t give reactively in a knee-jerk fashion. They don&#8217;t respond to the first organization that appeals for help. They take the time to identify which causes are most important to their families and they are specific about the change they want to affect. <strong>For example, they don&#8217;t just support generic cancer charities, but instead have targeted goals for their giving, such as providing mammograms to at-risk women in their community.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">2. Hang Up The Phone / Eliminate The Middleman<br />
<strong>Informed donors recognize that for-profit fundraisers, those often used in charitable telemarketing campaigns, keep a large portion (in some cases all) of each dollar they collect (read our report about telemarketing for more specifics on the costs affiliated with this form of fundraising). </strong>Wise donors never give out their personal information – like credit card accounts, social security numbers – over the phone. <strong>If they like what they hear in the pitch, they&#8217;ll hang up, investigate the charity on-line and send their contribution directly to the charity, thereby cutting out the middleman and ensuring 100% of their donation reaches the charity.</strong> Taking it a step further, donors may want to reconsider supporting a charity that uses an inefficient telemarketing approach and instead identify a charity that does not use telemarketing to raise funds. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">3. Be Careful Of Sound-Alike Names<br />
Uninformed donors are easily confused by charities that have strikingly similar names to others. How many of us could tell the difference between an appeal from the Children&#8217;s Charity Fund and the Children&#8217;s Defense Fund? Their names sound the same, but their performances are vastly different. Would you be surprised to learn that the Children&#8217;s Charity Fund is a 0-star charity while the Children&#8217;s Defense Fund is a 3-star charity? Informed donors take the time to uncover the difference.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">4. Confirm 501(c) (3) Status<br />
<strong>Wise donors don&#8217;t drop money into canisters at the checkout counter or hand over cash to solicitors outside the supermarket. Situations like these are irresistible to scam artists who wish to take advantage of your goodwill. Smart givers only support groups granted tax-exempt status under section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code.</strong> All of the charities evaluated by Charity Navigator meet this basic requirement.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">5. Check The Charity&#8217;s Commitment To Accountability &amp; Transparency<br />
In 2011, Charity Navigator added an Accountability &amp; Transparency dimension to its rating system. It tracks metrics such as whether the charity used an objective process to determine their CEO’s salary, whether it has an effective governance structure, and whether it has a whistleblower policy. This data is critical because <strong>charities that follow good governance and transparency practices are less likely to engage in unethical or irresponsible activities</strong>. So, the risk that such charities would misuse donations is lower than for charities that don&#8217;t adopt such practices.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">6. Obtain Copies Of Its Financial Records<br />
Savvy donors know that the financial health of a charity is a strong indicator of the charity&#8217;s programmatic performance. They know that in most cause areas, the most efficient charities spend 75% or more of their budget on their programs and services and less than 25% on fundraising and administrative fees. However, they also understand that mid-to-large sized charities do require a strong infrastructure therefore a claim of zero fundraising and/or administrative fees is unlikely at best. They understand that a charity&#8217;s ability to sustain its programs over time is just as important as its short-term day-to-day spending practices. Therefore, savvy donors also seek out charities that are able to grow their revenue at least at the rate of inflation, that continue to invest in their programs and that have some money saved for a rainy day. All of this analysis is provided on Charity Navigator&#8217;s website for free, but when considering groups not found here, savvy donors ask the charity for copies of its three most recent Forms 990. Not only can the donor examine the charity&#8217;s finances, but the charity&#8217;s willingness to send the documents is a good way to assess its commitment to transparency.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">7. Review Executive Compensation<br />
Sophisticated donors realize that charities need to pay their top leaders a competitive salary in order to attract and retain the kind of talent needed to run a multi-million dollar organization and produce results. But they also don&#8217;t just take the CEO&#8217;s compensation at face value; they benchmark it against similar-sized organizations engaged in similar work and located in the same region of the country. To help you make your own decision, Charity Navigator&#8217;s analysis reveals that the average CEO&#8217;s compensation of the charities we evaluate is almost $150,000. In general, salaries tend to be higher in the northeast and at arts and education charities. Sophisticated donors also put the CEO&#8217;s salary into context by examining the overall performance of the organization. They know it is better to contribute to a charity with a well-paid CEO that is meeting its goals than to support a charity with an underpaid CEO that fails to deliver on its promises. (Check out our CEO Compensation Study for more benchmarking data.)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">8. Start A Dialogue To Investigate Its Programmatic Results<br />
Although it takes some effort on their part to assess a charity&#8217;s programmatic impact, donors who are committed to advancing real change believe that it is worth their time. Before they make a contribution, they talk with the charity to learn about its accomplishments, goals and challenges. These donors are prepared to walk away from any charity that is unable or unwilling to participate in this type of conversation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">9. Concentrate Your Giving<br />
When it comes to financial investments, diversification is the key to reducing risk. The opposite is true for philanthropic investments. If you&#8217;ve really taken the time to identify a well-run charity that is engaged in a cause that you are passionate about, you should then feel confident in giving it a donation. Spreading your money among multiple organizations not only results in your mail box filling up with more appeals, it also diminishes the possibility of any of those groups bringing about substantive change as each charity is wasting a percentage of your gift on processing expenses for that gift.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">10. Share Your Intentions And Make A Long-Term Commitment<br />
Smart donors support their favorite charities for the long haul. They see themselves as a partner in the charity&#8217;s efforts to bring about change. They know that only with long-term, committed supporters can a charity be successful. And they don&#8217;t hesitate to tell the charity of their giving plans so that the organization knows it can rely on the donor and the charity doesn&#8217;t have to waste resources and harass the donor by sending numerous solicitations.</span></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: The American Institute of Philanthropy [5] and the Better Business Bureau&#8217;s Wise Giving Alliance can also be consulted.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">UK: use the Charity Commission to find out if the organisation you want to support is formally registered.<br />
Its Inquiry Reports list and give details on its latest investigations</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">UK: Intelligent Giving gives an independent analysis of a charity&#8217;s transparency for prospective donors(UK)<br />
Rumours about fraud and related activity are discussed in its Watchdog section</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Charity On Trial: What You Need To Know Before You Give by Doug White</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: [6] Life Cycle of an Exempt Organization</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: [7] Standards for Charity Accountability</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: [8] Haitian Earthquake Relief Fraud Alert</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">US: [9] National Charity Seal Program</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">References</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">1. &#8220;Charity Fraud Pleads Guilty.&#8221; The New York Times. 20 April 1918. The New York Times, Web. 3 March 2010.&lt;http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9D02E2DD1F3FE433A25753C2A9629C<br />
946996D6CF&amp;scp=2&amp;sq=charity%20fraud&amp;st=Search&gt;.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<h2><span style="font-size: large;">Charity Fraud Pleads Guilty.</span></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">George W. Ryder, Secretary of the Cripples&#8217; Welfare Society, pleaded guilty yesterday before Judge Mack in the Federal District Court to a charge of having used the mails to defraud. He was charged with having, by means of &#8220;mite boxes&#8221; and touching appeals by mail to the philanthropic procured money for the society, which he used for his own purposes. He will be sentenced on Monday.<br />
The New York Times<br />
Published: April 20, 1918<br />
Copyright The New York Times</span></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">2. McFadden, Robert. &#8220;Small-Change Donations Going to Vendors, Not Charities, Abrams Charges.&#8221;The New York Times. 12 11 1992. The New York Times, Web. 13 Feb 2010.&lt;http://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/13/nyregion/<br />
small-change-donations-going-to-vendors-not-charities-abrams<br />
-charges.html?scp=1&amp;sq=Small-Change%20Donations%20<br />
Going%20to%20Vendors,%20Not%20Charities,%20Abrams%20<br />
Charges&amp;st=cse&gt;.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<h2><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Small-Change</strong></span><span style="font-size: large;"><strong> Donations Going to Vendors, Not Charities, Abrams Charges</strong></span></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">By ROBERT D. McFADDEN<br />
Published: November 13, 1992</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The New York Attorney General charged yesterday that hundreds of honor boxes and candy-gum vending machines found near cash registers in businesses across the state, with messages seemingly soliciting small-change donations for national charities, are part of a fraudulent and deceptive marketing scheme.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">In a civil suit in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Attorney General Robert Abrams said that merchants were deceived by dozens of private vendors who wore caps and T-shirts with a charity&#8217;s distinctive trademark, implying falsely that they worked for the charity, and that the public was deceived by messages on slotboxes and machines implying falsely that donations benefited a charity.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The suit, against the National Federation of the Blind and 27 independent vendors in New York, said the vendors had paid a fee for the right to use the charity&#8217;s name &#8212; $2 a month for every machine or box placed in restaurants, barber shops and other businesses. But, it said, the vendors kept the donations and none of the nickels, dimes and quarters went to the charity.</span></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">3. &#8220;5 Men From Defunct Muslim Charity Get Long Sentences.&#8221;CNN. 27 May 2009. Cable News Network, Web 3 March 2010.&lt;http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/05/27/<br />
texas.charity.sentencing/index.html?iref=allsearch&gt;.</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="font-size: large;">JUSTICE DEPARTMENT </span></p>
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">5 men from defunct Muslim charity get long sentences</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">CNN</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">May 27, 2009</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Holy Land Foundation, in Richardson, Texas, was once the largest Muslim charity in the United States. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Five leaders of what was once the nation&#8217;s largest Muslim charity were given long prison sentences Wednesday by a federal judge, months after they were found guilty of aiding a militant Palestinian organization.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;These sentences should serve as a strong warning to anyone who knowingly provides financial support to terrorists under the guise of humanitarian relief,&#8221; said David Kris, assistant attorney general for national security.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Five leaders of the now-defunct Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development were convicted in November by a federal jury for providing money and resources to the Palestinian group Hamas, designated by the United States as a terrorist organization.</span></p></blockquote>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Officials Warn Donors To Beware Of Charity Fraud<br />
Donations Being Taken By Groups, Individuals</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Deb Stanley, New Media Producer</span></p>
<p>POSTED: 11:37 am MDT July 27, 2012<br />
UPDATED: 12:03 pm MDT July 27, 2012</p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">AURORA, Colo. &#8212; The Federal Trade Commission and a Colorado District Attorney&#8217;s Office are telling people to beware of charity fraud when donating money to support Aurora shooting victims.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;People are particularly vulnerable right now and want desperately to do something to help,&#8221; said First Judicial District Attorney Scott Storey. &#8220;But as eager as people are to help, we urge them to take a little time to be sure they know where their donation is going.&#8221;</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Colorado Organization of Victim Assistance (COVA) is coordinating donations for victims of the Aurora mass tragedy. Checks can be made out to COVA and mailed to 90 Galapago Street, Denver CO, 80223. Please include &#8220;Aurora Tragedy&#8221; in the check memo line. You can also donate online through COVA’s Giving First profile at https://www.givingfirst.org/cova Link. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper and the Community First Foundation have established a fund called the Aurora Victim Relief Fund. Money donated to that fund will be given to nonprofits helping the victims.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;The money would not go to cutting a check to family members,&#8221; said Marla Williams, president and CEO of the Community First Foundation. &#8220;It would be helping by giving grants to organizations that are helping the families cope financially and emotionally in so many ways.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Donations can be made by visiting http://www.GivingFirst.org Link. For more information contact Karla Maraccinni at 313-866-3700 or <a href="mailto:karla.maraccini@state.co.us">karla.maraccini@state.co.us</a>.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Before giving money to any charity, Storey said you should make certain the organization is legitimate and learn as much about them as you can.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">You can begin by contacting the Secretary of State, 303-894-2214, or its website http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/charities/charitableHome.html Link to determine if the company is registered as required by Colorado State Law.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Next, contact the Better Business Bureau to obtain a reliability report at 303-758-2100 or <a href="http://www.denver.bbb.org/">http://www.denver.bbb.org</a> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>The FTC said if you donate to a charitable group, ask for a receipt showing the amount of the contribution and stating that it is tax deductible.</strong></span></p>
<p>If you give to a charity or individual, it&#8217;s best to pay by check, making it payable to the beneficiary, not the solicitor</p>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Ohio Grand Jury Reindicts in Navy Charity Scam</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">ABC News</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">CLEVELAND July 26, 2012 (AP)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">An Ohio grand jury has reindicted a former fugitive accused of running a $100 million scam collecting donations for Navy veterans.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">State Attorney General Mike DeWine says the 24-count indictment against the man reflects new information since two previous indictments in 2010. Charges filed Wednesday by the Cleveland grand jury include identity fraud and complicity to money laundering.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Authorities say it&#8217;s unclear what the man&#8217;s true identity is. They say he goes by Bobby Thompson and has signed court documents as Mr. X. They say he defrauded donors in 41 states of up to $100 million through a bogus Florida-based charity. Some of the money has been found.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The man was arrested in Portland, Ore., in May and has pleaded not guilty. He&#8217;ll be arraigned Monday. His attorney hasn&#8217;t returned a message seeking comment.</span></p>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Charity Fraud: Disabled Veterans National Foundation Squanders Millions On Marketing Services</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">5/8/12</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Huffington Post</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">A charity that claims to offer services to veterans with disabilities has squandered millions of dollars on marketing costs, instead of addressing the needs of its clients, CNN reports. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Disabled Veterans National Foundation (DVNF), based in Washington, D.C., was slapped with an “F” rating by a charity watchdog group for failing to spend the nearly $56 million its raised since 2007 on actual veteran services. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The organization says its mission is to help underserved veterans &#8212; those suffering from PTSD, brain injuries and battling homelessness –- and to collaborate with likeminded nonprofits, but it appears to have been concentrating its efforts on paying for fundraising services and doling out cheap giveaways. <strong>But according to CNN, the nonprofit has used most of its donor dollars to pay Quadriga Art LLC, which helps the organization with its fundraising efforts. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>&#8220;Up to $2 billion is raised in the name of veterans in this country and it&#8217;s so sad that a great deal of it&#8217;s wasted,&#8221; said Daniel Borochoff, president of CharityWatch, the group that rated the organization. &#8220;Hundreds of millions of dollars of our charitable dollars intended to help veterans are being squandered and wasted by opportunists and by individuals and companies who see it as a profit-making opportunity.&#8221;</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">CNN has tried to contact the DVNF for more than a year, but hasn&#8217;t received any specific replies.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">But DVNF is hardly the exception. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Nearly half of the 39 veterans charities rated by the American Institute of Philanthropy in its April/May 2011 report received F grades, The Huffington Post reported in June</strong>. These nonprofits failed mostly because of their exorbitant fundraising expenses and the fact that they spend a small ratio of their expenses on charitable services.</span></p>
<p>&#8220;[DVNF] sent us 2,600 bags of cough drops and 2,200 little bottles of sanitizer,&#8221; J.D. Simpson of Alabama veterans charity St. Benedict&#8217;s told CNN. His nonprofit was hit hard after last year’s tornadoes.&#8221; And the great thing was, they sent us 11,520 bags of coconut M&amp;M&#8217;s. And we didn&#8217;t have a lot of use for 11,520 bags of coconut M&amp;M&#8217;s.”</p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Feeling inspired to help a veteran in need? Consider donating to the charities below that are working to improve the quality of life of severely wounded vets.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">The Fisher House</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Fisher House provides free housing to wounded troops on the grounds of major military hospitals. &#8220;It&#8217;s a terrific program because otherwise, to have my family with me it would have been a hotel or some other strange place,&#8221; said Bobby Henline, who was badly burned in an IED explosion in 2007 and moved into The Fisher House with his family.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Hero Miles</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Through its Hero Miles program, the Fisher House Foundation also provides free air transportation for the families of wounded warriors who must travel between home and hospital. The program uses donated frequent flyer miles from the public.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Semper Fi Fund</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Semper Fi Fund brings specially adapted clothing to amputees.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Adaptive Adventures</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Adaptive Adventures takes disabled veterans on ski trips. organize adaptive sports, enabling disabled warriors to go fishing, ride horses, mountain climb, even paraglide. Still others provide job counseling and training and help wounded veterans find jobs.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Mission Continues, Project Healing Waters, the VA&#8217;s community-based sports programs, and Disabled Sports USA. These organizations organize adaptive sports, enabling disabled warriors to go fishing, ride horses, mountain climb, even paraglide. Still others provide job counseling and training and help wounded veterans find jobs. They also help finance handicapped-adapted cars and trucks, organize volunteers to run errands, buy groceries and mow the lawns of families struggling with a severely wounded and hospitalized loved one.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Wounded Warrior Wives</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">This nonprofit takes the wives of the severely wounded away from their 24/7 bedside caregiver role and flies them away for a weekend of fun and companionship.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Wounded Warrior Project</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Wounded Warrior Project aims to honor and empower warriors, who were injured on or after Sept. 11, 2001, through its athletic, employment and rehabilitative programs. Their Soldier Ride program is dedicated to getting the wounded up out of their wheelchairs or rehab clinics and out onto bicycles. Both organizations are looking for riders, volunteers and fundraisers across the United States.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">United Service Organizations</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">United Service Organizations aims to boost our troops&#8217; morale through its entertainment and educational programming. From its language programs for those stationed in Afghanistan to its touring musical groups in the Persian Gulf, the USO works to provide &#8220;a home away from home&#8221; for military servicemen and servicewomen stationed in 27 states and 14 countries. </span></p>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Charity Fraud: Is That Celeb Legit?</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">By ABBY ELLIN </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">June 1, 2012 </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">It&#8217;s one thing to think twice before sending cash to a Nigerian ex-ambassador who perished in a plane crash and named you as the beneficiary of his $25 million inheritance. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">It&#8217;s quite another to donate money to Mary J. Blige, whose Foundation for Advancement of Women Now (FFAWN) is being sued by TD Bank for a $250,000 loan that was taken out in June 2011 &#8211;and only $368.33 has been repaid. Or to &#8220;Three Cups of Tea&#8221; author Greg Mortenson, who was recently ordered to repay $1 million in donations to his various charities. Or to phony Hurricane Katrina, Japan earthquake or tornado relief organizations. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;We see a lot of phony charities that pop up after storms or disasters,&#8221; said Katherine Hutt, a spokesperson for the Council of Better Business Bureaus in Arlington, Va. Indeed, the National Center for Disaster Fraud, which the Department of Justice established in 2005 to investigate, prosecute and deter fraud associated with fede</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>The most recent data shows that in 2010, individual Americans donated $211.77 billion to charity, reports the Giving USA Foundation, a research and education group, and its research partner, the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. But while giving has increased, so has the number of fraudulent charities, reports the U.S. Department of Justice. </strong></span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">The tactics range from the high-tech to low-tech. Phishing, for example, is a real hazard: Users simply click on email links that lead to bogus web sites that appear legit but aren&#8217;t. Instead, the users&#8217; credit card information and passwords are stolen. </span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;Legitimacy is a big issue today, particularly in time of crises,&#8221; said Bob Ottenhoff, president and CEO of GuideStar, which collects information&#8211; including nonprofits&#8217; official Web addresses, tax forms and financial data&#8211;on the 1.9 million non-profit organizations in the U.S. <strong>&#8220;Fake web sites pop up. It&#8217;s good to be a little skeptical, and if you don&#8217;t know the charity or haven&#8217;t heard about it before or are not quite sure, that&#8217;s a reason to say, &#8216;I&#8217;ll think about it&#8217;. I often say, &#8216;send me some information.&#8221; Ninety percent of the time you never hear from them.&#8221; </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The best way to protect yourself is to be proactive. Consumer and charity watchdog sites like the Better Business Bureau, Charity Navigator and GuideStar also list nonprofits&#8217; official web addresses, as well as tax forms and financial data. The BBB also rates them based on 20 standards of accountability, including the structure of the board of directors and the transparency of financial data. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;We recommend that donors check out three things before they give,&#8221; said Sandra Miniutti, Charity Navigator&#8217;s vice president. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">First is the charity&#8217;s financial health. Either go onto a charity watchdog site like Charity Navigator, which also rates nonprofits, or ask the organization for a copy of their Form 990, an informational tax return that charities must file annually with the IRS. By law, they are required to provide it to anyone requesting a copy. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">You should also check on issues around accountability and transparency. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Last year, Charity Navigator began tracking whether the charity uses an objective process to determine their CEO&#8217;s salary, whether it has an effective governance structure, and whether it has a whistleblower policy. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;Do they make their 990 readily available when requested? Do they have a conflict of interest policy? Do they have at least five independent board members? A lot of that are details on the 990,&#8221; she said. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Lastly, check on their results. &#8220;Give them a call, find out what challenges they face, what their goals are, and what their accomplishments are,&#8221; she said. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">But what if it&#8217;s a celebrity who, by all accounts, is legit? Should consumers assume that his or her charitable organization is on the up and up, too? </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Ottenhoff advises caution. &#8220;Sometimes celebrities connect with charities and the link hasn&#8217;t been defined,&#8221; he said. &#8220;This happens a lot with the charities of big-name athletes. Often they start a charity not for charitable purposes, but for ways to avoid taxes or to employ friends and family. The whole Greg Mortensen thing. You had a guy who became a celebrity and he didn&#8217;t have a governance structure.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Other times, a celebrity might be able to &#8220;sell the vision&#8221; but doesn&#8217;t know how to process the money, or deliver on the programs, he said. &#8220;Having a good idea only goes so far—then you have to implement it. Celebs get too busy. Somebody could be using their name—the celeb may not know the details of what&#8217;s really happening.&#8221; </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Mary J. Blige, who is the CEO and founder of FFAWN, took full responsibility for its troubles. She told TMZ that the main problem was that she &#8220;didn&#8217;t have the right people in the right places doing the right things.&#8221; </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The DOJ has issued a list of guidelines to consider before making a donation. These include: <strong>Be skeptical of individuals representing themselves as surviving victims or officials asking for donations via email or social networking sites. </strong>Be cautious of emails that claim to show pictures of the disaster areas in attached files, because the files may contain viruses. Only open attachments from known senders. And don&#8217;t feel obligated to say yes. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;We&#8217;re all flooded with requests-email, phone calls, tweets, texts,&#8221; said Ottenhoff. &#8220;There&#8217;s no reason why you have to say yes. Don&#8217;t feel like you&#8217;re personally obligated. Think of the stock market—if you spent your money based on tips people give you you&#8217;re probably do a lot worse than if you spend your time thinking about what is best in terms of investing.&#8221; </span></p>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Specific tips you need to know to protect yourself from charity scams: Internet ScamBusters #97</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">by Scambusters.org</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">NEW: Beware of Haiti Earthquake Scams </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Today&#8217;s issue is on charity scams. Since it&#8217;s getting towards the end of the year and many people do their charitable contributions at this time of year, we thought it would be especially useful to help you avoid falling for a charity scam now. Let&#8217;s get right to it&#8230; </span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Charity Scams</span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Fortunately, many people like to give with an open heart to help others in need. </span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Unfortunately, that means we&#8217;ve created a climate that&#8217;s ripe for fake charity scams and scam artists. They know they can tug at our heartstrings &#8212; and rake in the cash. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Fake charity scams often set up quasi-legitimate agencies so that, at first glance, they look real; they may also name themselves something similar to other legitimate charities. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">They may even carry &#8216;ID&#8217; in the name of the charity, complete with a logo. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">These scam artists use all of the standard methods to collect &#8216;donations&#8217; for their charity scams &#8212; tables at the local mall, going door-to-door, email, and telemarketing. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">All this makes charity scams harder to spot. However, here are 10 tips to help spot charity scams: </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">1. BE WARY of every opportunity that presents itself &#8212; especially when it presents itself in the wake of some big disaster that gets lots of media attention. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">2. Ask for the name, address, and phone number of the charity &#8212; and whether or not it is registered. If the presenters claim that it is registered, get a registration number. The Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance offers information about national charities; you can call 703-276-0100 or go to their website:<br />
==&gt; <a href="http://www.give.org/">http://www.give.org</a> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">If you&#8217;re trying to figure out whether or not some particular charity is worthy of support, check out this section of the site:<br />
==&gt; <a href="http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp">http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp</a> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">They publish their standards for rating charities, and then rate over 600 different charities using these standards. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">3.<strong> Verify with the office of the charity that there is indeed a campaign going on, or that they&#8217;ve authorized the charity drive that you&#8217;re being invited to contribute to. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">4. Don&#8217;t ever donate cash if you can help it. Write a check to the charity &#8212; not to the person standing in front of you. This also helps you document the donation for your records and for your tax return. And don&#8217;t give out bank information! </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">5. <strong>Ask what percentage of your donation goes directly to the cause. Legitimate charities will have ready answers because they are used to the question. <img src='http://rapeutation.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">6. Get a receipt with the name of the charity on it. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">7. Be especially cautious about getting a charity donation request by email. Most legitimate charities don&#8217;t use email for their solicitations. (Some legitimate charities will email people who have donated before &#8212; but never respond to requests where you&#8217;ve never donated.) </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">8. <strong>Be especially wary about charities that claim to be raising funds for the local police or firefighters. Check with them first! </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">9. Don&#8217;t give in to pressure or &#8216;guilt trips&#8217; about &#8216;suggested donations&#8217; or &#8216;requested minimum contributions.&#8217; Once you&#8217;ve determined that the charity is legitimate and you&#8217;ve decided you want to contribute, simply give what you can and want to give &#8212; it will be appreciated. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">10. The best way we know of to avoid charity scams is to decide IN ADVANCE (while you&#8217;re doing your annual or monthly budget) which charities you&#8217;ll support and CONTACT THEM. Then you can gracefully turn anyone else down who comes your way with hat in hand. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>It&#8217;s great to be a giver &#8212; but give cautiously so you&#8217;re not enriching scammers or a questionable &#8216;charity.&#8217; </strong></span></p>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">The 9/11 Charity Fraud Shame List</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">by gawker.com</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Associated Press checked in with 325 charities founded in the wake of 9/11, many of which are still active. Most of them were doing nice things! But a bunch were doing ethically dubious, borderline fraudulent things, frittering away millions of benevolently bestowed dollars. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Examples:</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Arizona resident Kevin Held reportedly raised $713,000 to create a 9/11 memorial quilt &#8220;big enough to cover 25 football fields.&#8221; He gave himself a a $175,000 salary, a $200 weekly car allowance, &#8220;rent reimbursement,&#8221; and unreported &#8220;loans.&#8221; He paid his family members &#8220;consulting fees.&#8221; He apparently said a Catholic priest was the chairman of his charity&#8217;s board, but the Catholic priest wasn&#8217;t even aware of it. He told lies about the origin of his charity. He will soon move into a $660,000 five-bedroom home overlooking a lake, the AP reports. Total memorial quilt output: &#8220;several hundred decorated sheets packed in boxes at a storage unit.&#8221;</span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Connecticut resident John Michelotti reportedly raised $140,000 for his Flag of Honor/Flag of Heroes Project. He used the money to launch a for-profit company that produces flags printed with the names of 9/11&#8242;s dead for $5 in China, then sells them for $25 a pop stateside under the guise of contributing to a &#8220;fund to help those that were affected,&#8221; the AP reports. He hasn&#8217;t donated any proceeds to charity, yet, but he says he&#8217;s going to start soon! He will donate 70 cents from the sale of each flag (pictured above) and keep $19.30 for himself. Oh, and he gave $15,000 to charity once. Good for him.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Based in a church near Ground Zero, Rev. Carl Keyes reportedly raised more than $4 million &#8220;to help victims and first responders&#8221; with the help of a Christian TV telethon. His 9/11 charity, Urban Life Ministries, has accounted for the use of only $670,000 of its funds since 2001, the AP reports. <strong>Keyes says his organization did nothing wrong, they&#8217;re just &#8220;bad managers.&#8221;</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Harley aficionado Theodore Sjurseth organizes an annual 9/11 memorial motorcycle ride. His charity had &#8220;nearly $2.2 million in gross revenue between 2003 and last year.&#8221; It reportedly spends less than 20 percent of the money it raises on charitable causes; the rest goes towards hotel rooms, meals, and entertainment for ride participants. After those other tales of crass greed, this one seems almost quaint! Just run-of-the-mill mismanagement and obnoxious priorities.</span></p>
<hr />
<h2><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Red Cross Probes Post-Katrina Fraud</span></strong></h2>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">February 11, 2009 6:40 PM </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">by CBS News</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Red Cross said Friday it is &#8220;aggressively investigating&#8221; allegations brought by volunteers of outright criminal activity during Katrina, reports CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Former Red Cross volunteer and attorney Jerome Nickerson wrote a blistering investigative report made public Friday. In an exclusive interview with CBS News, Nickerson said he found widespread evidence of theft and fraud — including a veritable black market of disaster relief goods operating out of New Orleans with the knowledge of some Red Cross supervisors.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Red Cross managers, Nickerson said, &#8220;&#8230;were definitely protecting individuals that were engaged in diverting Red Cross supplies, it was absolutely unmistakable. I mean we reported it to the FBI, I reported it to the FBI, I reported it to homeland security.&#8221; </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Nickerson uncovered what he called rogue operations — including warehouses with millions of dollars worth of off-the-books Red Cross inventory. On a tip, Nickerson also seized Red Cross laptops and other equipment allegedly used to steal tens of millions in disaster funds. Along the way, Nickerson says, Red Cross personnel fabricated documents, impeded his investigation, and even threatened him. </strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">After Nickerson turned his report in to Red Cross headquarters, he says he was treated like a pariah and pulled off the job.</span></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: large;">His findings counter what the charity told the public earlier this month in an open letter — that there were no serious fraud or criminal issues at play. </span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>&#8220;It&#8217;s a flat-out lie,&#8221; Nickerson said. &#8220;The fact of the matter is we found numerous individuals that were committing criminal acts and were committing fraud against the Red Cross, and National Headquarters knows it to be a fact.&#8221;</strong> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Red Cross declined an interview with CBS News. But officials say they investigate all allegations, prosecute criminals, and have already recovered more than $2 million. They say this shows that their tough-on-fraud policy is a deterrent.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;Any conduct that violates either the law or Red Cross code of conduct is not tolerated,&#8221; Red Cross spokesman Chuck Connor said Friday, adding that any criminal wrongdoing uncovered by the group&#8217;s conduct and ethics office will be turned over to law enforcement officials. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Allegations of wrongdoing go far beyond what the statement said were &#8220;inevitable &#8230; departures from standard procedures&#8221; after such a catastrophe, according to the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The charity&#8217;s public promise that it is investigating claims comes under increasing pressure from congress.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has said volunteers may have committed criminal fraud. The accusations include improperly diverting relief supplies and violating Red Cross rules by using felons as volunteers in the disaster area. <strong>Grassley has threatened to rewrite or revoke the organization&#8217;s charter if it does not overhaul its operations.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">In a statement Friday, Grassley said he hopes the Red Cross&#8217; investigation will embrace whistleblowers and provide a top-to-bottom review of the group&#8217;s leadership, oversight and openness.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Especially worrying, Grassley said, was the Red Cross&#8217; failure to take seriously the concerns of volunteers reporting the thefts &#8220;until I drew attention to them.&#8221;</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;The Red Cross needs to change its mind-set so it addresses volunteers&#8217; concerns swiftly and appropriately, regardless of whether a Senate committee chairman is asking questions,&#8221; Grassley said.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>The New York Times reported Friday that more than a dozen Red Cross volunteers described an organization that had few cost controls, little oversight of its inventory and no system of basic background checks for its volunteers.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The volunteers cited little direct evidence of criminal activity, but the magnitude of the missing goods had convinced them that the operations were being manipulated for private gain.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">In one case, a kitchen manager swapped 300 prepared meals for parking spaces for Red Cross emergency response vehicles without creating any record of the transaction.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The Red Cross had 235,000 volunteers working in the Katrina disaster area, nearly six times the previous peak of 40,000. The sheer number collapsed the normal vetting process, the volunteers said.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">The charity has said it responded to Katrina as best it could in circumstances almost unimaginable, while acknowledging that it stumbled in &#8220;technology, logistics and coordination.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">That admission was not good enough for Grassley, who said he is set to meet next week with American Red Cross board of governors chairwoman Bonnie McElveen-Hunter.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">&#8220;I hope to understand better what the timeline is for a complete review and reforms,&#8221; Grassley said.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;"><strong>Two presidents of the Red Cross have resigned in a little more than four years. Both resignations came after clashes with the board of governors on the tail of major disasters: Dr. Bernadine Healy stepped down shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks and, more recently, Marsha Evans quit following Hurricane Katrina.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: large;">© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.  </span></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/28/charity-fraud/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SMISH: Social Media-Induced Self Hate</title>
		<link>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/26/206/</link>
		<comments>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/26/206/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 00:53:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rapeutation.com/?p=206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[    A new mental disease for the Internet age is proposed for inclusion in the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders: Social Media-Induced Self-Hate (&#8220;SMISH&#8221;).  This proposal stems from the writer’s inquiry into a closely-related disorder, dubbed SMIDS for Social Media-Induced Delusional Disorder, and explores the likelihood that both SMISH and SMIDS may simultaneously afflict one [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/STOP-SMISHfinalsmall.gif" rel="lightbox[206]" title="STOP-SMISHfinalsmall"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-224" title="STOP-SMISHfinalsmall" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/STOP-SMISHfinalsmall.gif" alt="" width="418" height="276" /></a></p>
<p>  A new mental disease for the Internet age is proposed for inclusion in the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders: Social Media-Induced Self-Hate (&#8220;SMISH&#8221;).  This proposal stems from the writer’s inquiry into a closely-related disorder, dubbed SMIDS for Social Media-Induced Delusional Disorder, and explores the likelihood that both SMISH and SMIDS may simultaneously afflict one individual, with one disorder or the other gaining the upper hand due primarily to the nature of the sufferer’s interactions with Social Media.</p>
<p>The primary subjective characteristics of SMISH are a sense of insecurity and compulsive reinforcement-seeking behavior through Social Media.  Secondary characteristics are a fear of judgment by Social Media Peers (“SMPeers”) and compulsive propitiatory behavior intended to head off judgment and establish trust-links that will protect the SMISH-sufferer from becoming an Object of Hatred among their SMPeers.  A tertiary characteristic is total involvement with the Social Media world and a corollary loss of interest in relationships with Real World Peers aside from interactions within the Social Media world.  At that point, SMISH has ensnared the sufferer in a cycle of addictive behavior from which they will likely exit only after a period of serious self-assessment, or an intervention by concerned friends and relations.</p>
<p>The objective indications of SMISH usually manifest sequentially and in conjunction with the emergence of the subjective characteristics outlined above.  Victims generally progress from incipient SMISH, characterized by an inclination to overvalue SMPeers and devalue Non-Social Media relationships, to acute SMISH, characterized by increasingly compulsive abuse of Social Media, to the third level of true addictive behavior, characterized by frenzied posting and craven toadying to SMPeer authority-figures.  The disease often takes hold in an acute form over the course of a few evenings, and progress to a chronic condition over a period of weeks.</p>
<p>SMISH does not require any particular type of host subject to become established, and the notion that only certain types are predisposed should be rejected at the outset.  Narcissistic personalities might seem less inclined to SMISH than insecure types; however, the desire to gain mass approval of SMPeers appears to reveal hidden faults in even robust personalities, that, like gullies that turn to ravines overnight in a torrential flood, become deep fissures, exposing the raw heart of a painfully-suffering ego.</p>
<p>SMISH can produce consequences that seem merely pathetic, as when one sees a young girl posting compliments in praise of aggressive male personalities in hopes of receiving a word of approval.  For youthful sufferers of this stripe, moderate treatment modalities, including redirection of the individual toward non-Social Media relationships and relationship counseling, may be entirely adequate.  However, SMISH can evolve in two other identified directions: a suicidal state, or SMIDS.</p>
<p>Suicide due to SMISH is an established phenomenon for which a brief online search will provide sufficient anecdotes to eliminate doubt as to whether SMISH can be fatal.  What is essential is that caregivers realize that once suicidal ideation has taken hold of a SMISH-sufferer, the condition cannot be dismissed as merely an Internet neurosis.  Treatment for SMISH-induced suicidal ideation must be as radical as the condition, with the understanding that the stakes are life and death.  The sufferer’s use of Social Media must be terminated immediately, all communication with or about SMPeers must cease, and an intensive program of self-approval must be put in place.  Physical exercise, outdoor recreation, and non-reflective outward-oriented activities should supplant the previous introverted, obsessive attachment to Social Media.  Such an aggressive course of therapy may well produce dramatic results in a short period of time if the disease is caught before it progresses too far.</p>
<p>The evolution of SMISH into SMIDS is far more insidious, however, because SMIDS-sufferers outwardly direct their pain towards the Objects of Hatred who are their chosen online prey.  Like road-rage on the streets and highways, SMIDS creates hazards for other individuals of which society must be mindful.  Since a separate discussion of SMIDS has already been published, we will not repeat that analysis here, and rather discuss briefly why SMISH has the potential to co-exist with or turn into SMIDS.</p>
<p>Simply put, SMISH is at bottom fueled by the fear of judgment by SMPeers.  Among the community of SMPeers, dominant, aggressive personalities skilled in <em>ad hominem</em> argument and the use of pointed invective rule the roost.  SMISH-sufferers are often passive personalities who lack verbal combat skills.  Although initially attracted to Social Media because many of their Real World Peers are interacting online, as they learn to deploy propitiatory tactics such as shilling and toadying for their more aggressive SMPeers, they are seduced by the online environment and become addicted to its self-abasing rituals.  Nevertheless, over time, they find themselves both immersed in self-hate at having sold their integrity for an impermanent sense of personal safety, and walking on eggshells, experiencing profound anxiety about the possibility of becoming an object of online derision, or most fearfully, an actual Object of Hatred (&#8220;ObHat&#8221;).</p>
<p>Many SMISH-sufferers adapt to their passive role online, and master the craven postures of appeasement seen on so many blogs and bulletin boards, where covens of SMISH-sufferers gather around dominant SMPeers in fulsome displays of unwholesome adulation.  Many SMISH-sufferers alternate between SMISH and SMIDS on an occasional basis, joining occasionally with Social Media Mobs to hurl Cybercurses at various ObHats, thereby demonstrating their loyalty to dominant SMPeers, and ensuring themselves against becoming an ObHat themselves.  Although not being entirely committed to the aggressive conduct, they nevertheless engage in it convincingly, much like an ordinary citizen who finds herself caught in a momentary mob hysteria, then later thinks better of it.  Finally, some SMISH-sufferers “ripen” into the pure aggressive neurosis of SMIDS, as they discover that the only way to feel “safe” in a toxic Social Media environment is with a verbal rock in their hand, ready to give as good as they get.  They have contacted their inner brownshirt, and civil society has gained a new enemy.  For further discussion of SMIDS, see the <a title="SMIDS: Social Media-Induced Delusional Syndrome" href="http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/25/smids-social-media-induced-delusional-syndrome/" target="_blank">related article</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/26/206/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SMIDS: Social Media-Induced Delusional Syndrome</title>
		<link>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/25/smids-social-media-induced-delusional-syndrome/</link>
		<comments>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/25/smids-social-media-induced-delusional-syndrome/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rapeutation.com/?p=196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new mental disease for the Internet age is proposed for inclusion in the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders: Social Media-Induced Delusional Syndrome (&#8220;SMIDS&#8221;).  While tentative in its observations, this proposal has a legitimate basis in anecdotal evidence, and discusses the risks of attempting treatment of SMIDS-sufferers. The primary subjective characteristic of SMIDS is the [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new mental disease for the Internet age is proposed for inclusion in the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders: Social Media-Induced Delusional Syndrome (&#8220;SMIDS&#8221;).  While tentative in its observations, this proposal has a legitimate basis in anecdotal evidence, and discusses the risks of attempting treatment of SMIDS-sufferers.</p>
<p>The primary subjective characteristic of SMIDS is the sensation of power gained from being part of a large, anonymous group of social media participants.  By &#8220;anonymous,&#8221; we do not mean that a person who declares their identity cannot be suffering from SMIDS; rather, we mean that due to the large number of people joined in a Social Media Mob (&#8220;SMob&#8221;), each individual experiences the safety of relative anonymity.  By &#8220;the safety of relative anonymity,&#8221; we mean the sense of security derived from the knowledge that there are so many participants in a SMob that it&#8217;s highly unlikely any one of them will suffer negative consequences due to their conduct.</p>
<p>The primary objective characteristic is the tendency to focus on an object of hatred (the &#8220;ObHat&#8221;), which intensifies as the number of SMob-participants grows, manifesting in antisocial cyber-behavior.   Like members of a street mob who ordinarily manifest no criminal characteristics, yet become capable of flinging bricks and mortar and engaging in random violence when gathered in large numbers, members of a SMob may engage in behavior atypical of their usual behavior patterns.  Such behaviors may range from online postings of sadistic wishes that the ObHat should suffer misfortune such as career failure and painful death, sending hate mails bearing similar ill-wishes to the ObHat, sending physical packets of disgusting materials such as offal to the Obhat, and directing Denial of Service Attacks towards websites associated with the ObHat.</p>
<p>The delusory character of the sense of power experienced by the SMIDS-sufferer can be easily discerned, and has tautalogical roots.  In point of fact, the ObHat is unlikely to suffer anything like the severe sentences pronounced upon her by the Smob, unless of course the ObHat falls victim to Social Media-Induced Self Hate (&#8220;SMISH&#8221;). The massed expression of ill wishes by a SMob is thus similar to the effects of primitive curses among the aborigines &#8212; dangerous if taken at face value, survivable otherwise.  Hence, the expression of ill wishes by SMIDS-sufferers are referred to as Cybercurses.</p>
<p>Common battle cries flying from the spittle-flecked lips of SMIDS-sufferers are &#8220;we are the Internet,&#8221; and &#8220;Google never forgets.&#8221;  Such <em>cri de couer </em>reveal the roots of the delusion. The roots of the power delusion lie in the SMIDS-sufferer&#8217;s fear that in fact, he is powerless.  The roots of the corollary delusion that the SMob can destroy the object of hatred by the objective force of massed Cybercurses are an attempt to curb the anxious feeling that participating in Social Media is in fact meaningless.</p>
<p>For ObHats victimized by SMIDS-deluded SMobs, the experience can be painful and shocking; however, unless the ObHat decays into SMISH, their suffering is transient and non-pathological.  The same cannot be said for all those who suffer from SMIDS.  Although at first, joining in SMob behavior may trigger only transient episodes of acute SMIDS, unnoticed by anyone besides the ObHat and the SMob,  like other forms of Social Media dysfunctions, an addictive cycle often forms that leads to chronic SMIDS, with pathological characteristics that beg for treatment.</p>
<p>At present, the occurrence of Social Media induced dysfunctions is in its infancy, and the only known treatment modalities appear to be removal of the initiating stimulus, <em>i.e.,</em> turning off the Internet.  However, for persons who have come to believe that they &#8220;are the Internet,&#8221; turning off the Internet would be the equivalent of suicide, and thus unthinkable.  Were any outsider to attempt to forcibly remove them from the Internet, the chronic SMIDS-sufferer would likely react with violent rejection and excuse-making behavior.  Excuse-making would generally take the form of self-righteous expressions that the SMob merely wants to make a better world, and that the ObHat <em>du jour</em> is a genuine danger to the welfare of all.</p>
<p>For those in the helping professions dealing with SMIDS, and for human resources professionals who encounter SMIDS in the workplace, the first avenue of approach should be indirect.  The serious danger, of course, is that anyone who confronts a SMIDS-sufferer with their conduct may find themselves turned into an ObHat, with all of the risky consequences associated therewith.  A manager confronting a SMIDS-sufferer about lost productivity in their employment might wake up to find themselves the focus of a plethora of SMob attacks: fake Twitter accounts proclaiming that the ObHat must now disclose that they are transsexual, bogus Facebook pages embracing extremist ideologies, and an email box with new messages proclaiming things like: &#8220;Welcome to the Jihad, and Peace be upon you brother.  Thank you for signing up for our Peshawar-based online training program in anti-drone warfare.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/25/smids-social-media-induced-delusional-syndrome/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Rapeutationists</title>
		<link>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/12/the-rapeutationists/</link>
		<comments>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/12/the-rapeutationists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 04:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rapeutation.com/?p=102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The Rapeutationists in the Inman-Carreon-Oatmeal Affair are a mixed bag of people who apparently can&#8217;t find any real issues of importance to focus their attention upon, and have thus devoted themselves to licking Matt Inman&#8217;s hindquarters.  There&#8217;s no rhyme or reason to their involvement, and some have already harvested so many clicks from the fiasco, [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/awelldidyouevahmatt17.gif" rel="lightbox[102]" title="awelldidyouevahmatt17"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-261" title="awelldidyouevahmatt17" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/awelldidyouevahmatt17.gif" alt="" width="600" height="400" /></a></p>
<p> The Rapeutationists in the Inman-Carreon-Oatmeal Affair are a mixed bag of people who apparently can&#8217;t find any real issues of importance to focus their attention upon, and have thus devoted themselves to licking Matt Inman&#8217;s hindquarters.  There&#8217;s no rhyme or reason to their involvement, and some have already harvested so many clicks from the fiasco, that I suggest we proceed in reverse order, from the obscure foot-soldiers to the royalty of Rapeutationists.  And all of you, please be patient.  In the fullness of time, you will find yourselves revealed here.</p>
<p><a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/adam-steinbaugh.jpg" rel="lightbox[102]" title="adam-steinbaugh"><img class="alignleft" title="adam-steinbaugh" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/adam-steinbaugh.jpg" alt="" width="100" height="100" /></a><a title="Adam Steinbaugh" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/adamsteinbaugh">Adam Steinbaugh</a>, an aspiring lawyer externing at <a href="http://www.bknlawyers.com/">Baker, Keener &amp; Nahra</a> who was once the Student Body President at Whittier College, has finally found <a href="http://adamsteinbaugh.com/2012/07/10/one-carreon-offers-to-wrestle-for-charity-another-alleges-hackers-bring-down-site/">a way to get some attention</a>.  Good-looking fellow, I&#8217;d say.  Might have a career ahead of him if he learns that the smell of fecal matter is actually a warning of potential toxicity, not a signal to drive your snout deeply into the source of the aroma.  Almost immediately after I posted this comment on July 11, 2012, Adam responded with a tweet that appeared on his own blog, posting a link back here.  The dynamics of DIRAs generate <a title="strange attractors" href="http://www.stsci.edu/~lbradley/seminar/attractors.html" target="_blank">strange attractors</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/profile_picture_by_odinstrike-d4vrbj7.jpg" rel="lightbox[102]" title="profile_picture_by_odinstrike-d4vrbj7"><img class="alignleft" title="profile_picture_by_odinstrike-d4vrbj7" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/profile_picture_by_odinstrike-d4vrbj7.jpg" alt="" width="100" height="100" /></a><a title="Chris Recovreur" href="https://plus.google.com/113604204682480678709#113604204682480678709/posts" target="_blank">Chris Recouvreur</a>, a <a title="Job Description Walgreens Asst Mgr" href="http://www.careerleak.com/walgreens/assistant-manager-981/" target="_blank">Walgreens Assistant Manager</a>, is putting in so much of his $18/hr time on Charles-Carreon.com that he must be using his work computer to do it.  Chris seems to be having the time of his life using my name as a draw, since his previous attempts to harvest clicks have failed pretty resoundingly.  It&#8217;s really sad the way he&#8217;s posted and posted, and never gotten a comment at <a href="http://deselectedart.wordpress.com/">http://deselectedart.wordpress.com/</a> and <a href="http://odinstrike.deviantart.com/">http://odinstrike.deviantart.com/</a>.  But now that he has my name to work with, things are really taking off!</p>
<p><a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Dave.Felton.blur_.jpg" rel="lightbox[102]" title="Dave.Felton.blur"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-150" title="Dave.Felton.blur" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Dave.Felton.blur_.jpg" alt="" width="100" height="106" /></a>The registrant and creative spirit behind CharlesCarrion.com is an interesting personality who, for the moment, we will call Dave.  Well, I have an income proposal for him.  I&#8217;ve offered to buy a bottle of Dave&#8217;s vanilla extract if he&#8217;ll give me that useless domain name.  Whattaya say, Dave?  Deal?</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/12/the-rapeutationists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hate eMails</title>
		<link>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/12/hate-emails/</link>
		<comments>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/12/hate-emails/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 01:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rapeutation.com/?p=122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As a Rapeutation gets going, many minor league Rapeutationists start to send hate emails.  What is the effect of receiving hate emails, you might ask?  It depends upon a lot of things.  In The Sex.Com Chronicles, I described the anxiety caused by receiving scary faxes (the instant-delivery technology of the day), and you might think [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/awelldidyouevahmatt14.gif" rel="lightbox[122]" title="awelldidyouevahmatt14"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-252" title="awelldidyouevahmatt14" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/awelldidyouevahmatt14.gif" alt="" width="418" height="291" /></a></p>
<p>As a Rapeutation gets going, many minor league Rapeutationists start to send hate emails.  What is the effect of receiving hate emails, you might ask?  It depends upon a lot of things.  In <a title="The Sex.Com Chronicles" href="http://sex.comchronicles.com" target="_blank">The Sex.Com Chronicles</a>, I described the anxiety caused by receiving <a title="scary faxes" href="http://sex.comchronicles.com/pdf/page_d98edc4c03f16b77d921a6d4c8ac6c44.pdf#toolbar=0&amp;statusbar=0&amp;navpanes=0&amp;scrollbar=0&amp;zoom=70" target="_blank">scary faxes</a> (the instant-delivery technology of the day), and you might think hate emails would cause the same response.  But they don&#8217;t.  As I received and read a few hundred hate emails, I experienced a range of responses.  I was mostly amused, occasionally challenged, rarely annoyed, and in the aggregate, somewhat saddened.</p>
<h4><em><strong>Amused</strong> </em>because although the writers were familiar with my name, they didn&#8217;t know me, so much of what they said seemed silly and misdirected.  <em><strong>Challenged</strong> </em>when the writer raised a relevant point that seemed worthy of a response.  <em><strong>Annoyed</strong></em> for a range of reasons that all amounted to one thing &#8212; I had let them get under my skin.  <em><strong>Saddened</strong> </em>because so many people had the time to spit bile at me, over a legal spat about comic websites, while the world is literally burning up around us, while American-made drones hunt humans like video-game targets on the other side of the world, while migrants struggle through the desert a few miles south of here in the Sonora desert, just trying to make it to a place where they can have a decent living.  In that context, wasting time hatemailing me seemed like a terrible waste of mental energy.  But I digress.  This post is to give you access to some of the hatemails I received, to put names to some of the hatemailers, and allow you, dear reader, a view into the workings of a DIRA.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Tim Johnston <a href="mailto:%3Ctimj20@gmail.com">&lt;timj20@gmail.com</a>?</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:54 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Hi</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You, sir, are a fucking idiot</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Matthew Inman &lt;<a href="mailto:oatmealftw@mailinator.com">oatmealftw@mailinator.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:09 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Your recent debacle with The Oatmeal <img src='http://rapeutation.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Hey!</h4>
<h4>I just noticed you&#8217;ve had a slight run in with The Oatmeal. And personally, I think it&#8217;s great! You give me hope that someone who is a complete and utter fucking moron can still get through university and land a decent job along with some degree of fame. Thanks! If you want to contact me back, grab a can of gasoline and add a lighter! Or an email if you survive.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Mr. Eat A Dick &lt;<a href="mailto:Fuckyou@stupidlawyer.com">Fuckyou@stupidlawyer.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Subject: Fuck you</h4>
<h4>Fuck you!! You are categorically a piece of shit for attempting to do anything to the oatmeal.</h4>
<h4>Go fuck yourself.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: You Mom &lt;<a href="mailto:capuaco@live.com">capuaco@live.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 4:55 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: FUCK YOU. BEAR LOVIN&#8217; WINS!!</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>FUCK YOU. BEAR LOVIN&#8217; WINS!!</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Kilgore Trout <a href="mailto:Ewekantspamme@gmail.com">Ewekantspamme@gmail.com</a></h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Libel case</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You, dear sir, a truly the dumbest &#8220;Internet&#8221; lawyer there must be. Not only did you file a phony lawsuit on behalf of a client whose copyright violations were so numerous that it was a running joke, but you failed to even do a basic Google search to figure that one out. Good luck with The Oatmeal, I hope he sues you into bankruptcy, you scum sucking pathetic piece of groveling lawyer shit.</h4>
<h4>Watch out for the Pterodactyls!</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Jimbo &lt;<a href="mailto:m@aol.com">m@aol.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:41 AM</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You are a fucking moron. the internet loves the oatmeal and hates your worthless client. do yourself a favor and resign now you dickless piece of slime.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Anthony &lt;<a href="mailto:notabando@yahoo.com">notabando@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Funnyjunk</h4>
<h4>There goes your career &#8230; kaput.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Hi <a href="mailto:%3Cyouareacunt@jokeyer.com">&lt;youareacunt@jokeyer.com</a></h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You should have pulled the trigger.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Andrew Sledg &lt;<a href="mailto:asledgianowski@gmail.com">asledgianowski@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Leave The Oatmeal alone, stop being a dick!</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Charles,</h4>
<h4>Please leave The Oatmeal alone. Publicly humiliating yourself online is not good advertisement.</h4>
<h4>Sincerely,</h4>
<h4>Another Person That Hates You</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Heather Powers &lt;<a href="mailto:heather-powers@hotmail.com">heather-powers@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:28 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Wow, you&#8217;ve messed up</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;d like to point out a few things regarding your interview with Rosa Golian from MSNBC:</h4>
<h4>&#8220;&#8221;I really did not expect that he would marshal an army of people who would besiege my website and send me a string of obscene emails,&#8221; he says.&#8221;</h4>
<h4>Oatmeal never marshalled anyone &#8212; the @!%#storm you&#8217;re in is just a public outcry versus a stupid law gimmick you&#8217;re trying to pull.  Your site may not have been brought down by sheer amount of visitors if you had halfway decent hosting plan.</h4>
<h4>&#8220;&#8221;It&#8217;s an education in the power of mob psychology and the Internet,&#8221; Carreon told me.&#8221;</h4>
<h4>Again, action and response. You pull off a lawsuit out of your ass (claiming that Oatmeal deliberately planned to manipulate search algorithms seems to be the basis of your &#8220;suit&#8221;, and that IS someone who knows nothing about how internet works who&#8217;s just talking out of his ass) on someone popular, you don&#8217;t get to act surprised when people call you a douche.</h4>
<h4>&#8220;&#8230;and has sent a request to disable the fundraising campaign.&#8221;</h4>
<h4>The best part is that instead of admitting to being a douche and trying to smooth things over, you double down into an ultra-douche mode.  Way to go.</h4>
<h4>Whatever flack you take for this, you deserve.</h4>
<h4>Cheers, you douche.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From Richard Walls &lt;<a href="mailto:richardawalls@hotmail.com">richardawalls@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 8:53 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: On &#8216;The Oatmeal&#8217;, Please Consider Reading</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Dear Mr. Carreon,</h4>
<h4>While I would like to begin with saying that I am not in any way condoning or approving the legal actions attempted by FunnyJunk, I would like to reach out with some sort of non-negative concern and I hope that you haven&#8217;t discarded this email based solely on the subject line. I can imagine you&#8217;ve been flooded at this point with a fair degree of harassment from overzealous internet crusader&#8217;s, well-meaning or otherwise, ad nI would certainly not want to be an addition to that grouping. Instead I would like to say that while I am not sure about your part in determining the process of this legal claim for defamation compensation, I would like to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are a rational person and realize the situation it has caused regardless of how involved you were in the process. Presently the current press is so overwhelmingly negative that I can&#8217;t imagine that you&#8217;ll have an easy time coming out unscathed from the whole ordeal and I would like to do my best to ensure that this damage is minimized.  I am not a legal student, I have no background in law, I don&#8217;t even had a background in business.  Actually, I&#8217;m an Entomology major and while insects must seem a world apart from the world of lawsuits and courtrooms I would greatly appreciate it if you allowed my words not to fall on deaf ears.</h4>
<h4>Mr. Carreon, you&#8217;re in a bind that cannot be broken off with any ease. You have to understand that your letter sparked something that the internet as a whole will react to and you have to be prepared to respond to that. You have done a less than exemplary job of that so far and I would like to encourage you to perhaps fish through the commentary of linked articles for an understanding as to why it has been ineffective. I could summarize it in detail but I feel that a lot of the feeling and intent would be lost in translation. I know you&#8217;re a busy man, or I at least imagine it, but doing so can only help you at this point. I don&#8217;t mean to disrespect but you&#8217;re understanding of the situation initially, as far as was expressed in your letter and in quotes in other media sources, seems lacking and I&#8217;m fairly certain there are men and women around you who would be able to better explain some of the areas that you seem to misunderstand (such as how Google ranks pages for example.) In addition to reading comments I would seek them out as well and return to the media with a better grasp of things.</h4>
<h4>If you have been simply dragged into a legal battle by an overzealous individual, likely the president of Funny Junk (or whomever happens to be running the magic show over there) then I would like to apologize for your circumstances. I would hardly wish to blame you for translating another man&#8217;s ill-intent into legal jargon to make a case. I imagine that&#8217;s a frequent occupier of your time and employment. I&#8217;m not so ignorant as to assume you personally support or even recognize the legitimacy and potential for every letter you write or every case you work on. If I&#8217;m the only person to say this then I&#8217;m sorry for the absent understanding in the internet denizens on their behalf. They know not what they do and all that jazz. If this has all been just your doing your job, whether you&#8217;re able to state it or not (I can&#8217;t imagine the potential for being quoted as not supporting your client&#8217;s position is ignored by you), then I hope that you forgive the sends of every nasty email or poor comment directed at you as best you&#8217;re able, and I do mean &#8216;as best you&#8217;re able&#8217;. I could hardly ask for perfect forgiveness afterall, I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;ve at least considered responding in less professional ways to what you&#8217;ve received.</h4>
<h4>In conclusion, I would advise you with all sincerity to take in the full breadth of the situation and do what is best for you and your career at the end of it. Maybe this has all been repetition of what you&#8217;re already well aware of, maybe you&#8217;ve ignored most of it in fear of all these words being half-hidden jokes about your having a small penis and a slutty mother, or maybe its all been eye-opening but in any case I just wanted to be a constructive person in the miasma in half-spelled racial slurs in your inbox. I&#8217;m certain you&#8217;re not bad enough to warrant it. I wanted to include a picture of your mother in a business suit politely soliciting a bear for consensual sexual intercourse as a layer over the original picture but I&#8217;m afraid I lack that artistic skill.  Maybe the thought, and the humor, counts for something?</h4>
<h4>A concerned member of both Funny Junk and a read of The Oatmeal, Richard Antonio da Silva Walls</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Luke Hopkins &lt;<a href="mailto:lukehop@yahoo.com">lukehop@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 17, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Your a douchebag</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Dear Charles,</h4>
<h4>let me begin to say I&#8217;m astounded by you. You claim to be a buddhist yet you&#8217;re an extortion lawyer. You deserve everything that&#8217;s coming to you. It&#8217;s called KARMA! You couldn&#8217;t have possibly chose a worse subject to threaten money from. This wave on the internet is only just beginning. You&#8217;re going to be forever known as the lawyer that got oatmeal on his face.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Aizou Iji &lt;<a href="mailto:aizou.iji@gmail.com">aizou.iji@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: You&#8217;ve GOT to be kidding me ..</h4>
<h4>To: charles</h4>
<h4>Seriously?</h4>
<h4>You&#8217;re fucking blaming Matt Inman for &#8220;security attacks&#8221; instigated against you?</h4>
<h4>Are you seriously THAT mentally deficient and unaware of how the Internet works?  Good gravy, I sincerely hope they disbar your stupid ass.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: annette easton &lt;annette.easton@gmail.com&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Friendly advice</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Hello Mr. Carrion,</h4>
<h4>I am writing to you with some friendly and well-meaning advice regarding the letter sent to TheOatmeal&#8217;s Matthew Inman. I&#8217;d like to start by saying that my own grandmother was a lawyer, and I have nothing but the utmost respect for the profession.</h4>
<h4>Having said that, I really think that you should stop talking to the media, because you&#8217;re making yourself and your professional look very, very bad.</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;ve just read an article containing responses from you on MSNBC (http://digitallife.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/12/12187665-cartoonist-turns-lawsuit-threat-into-100k-charity-fundraiser) and I&#8217;d like to make a few observations. For someone who lists &#8220;Internet Law&#8221; as an area of expertise, you seem to have a shocking lack of comprehension about how the internet actually works, and the social processes that run it. In fact, you also seem to have a shocking lack of comprehension of the English language. To wit:</h4>
<h4>-It is screamingly apparently to absolutely everyone that the comments that Mr. Inman made about &#8220;your mom seducing a Kodiak bear&#8221; were directed to the owners of FunnyJunk, not at you. Unless you actually ARE the owner of FunnyJunk, which actually would explain quite a lot of things.</h4>
<h4>-You&#8217;ve stated you believe that Mr. Inman&#8217;s fundraising campaign &#8220;to be a violation of the terms of service of IndiGoGo&#8221; &#8211; and yet their own site says &#8220;There is no limitation on who can use Indigogo as long as you have a valid bank account&#8221;. They do not appear to discriminate against the fundraising of money to be given to charity, nor can I see anywhere in their TOS that prohibits raising money for charity.</h4>
<h4>-You&#8217;ve also stated that Mr. Inman marshaled &#8220;an army of people who would besiege my website and send me a string of obscene emails&#8221; &#8211; in fact he did no such thing. In fact your statement could actually be construed as libel, as Mr. Inman most definitely did not even jokingly mention or hint that anyone should contact you in any way, shape or form. In fact the only action that Mr. Inman proposed that was people who supported his position donate to his charity campaign. I fail to see how encouraging donations to charity equates to marshaling an army against you.</h4>
<h4>I also fail to see how you can honestly believe that your action of attempting to obtain money from Mr. Inman was appropriate or reasonable. What you&#8217;ve done is equivalent to a bully saying &#8220;stop complaining about me hitting you and give me your lunch money or you&#8217;re going to regret it!&#8221; Your client was in the wrong, Mr. Inman had every right to complain about it, and then you come at him demanding money and threatening a frivolous lawsuit. How is that appropriate? How is that good legal practice? It&#8217;s not. It&#8217;s disgraceful.</h4>
<h4>As someone who appreciates lawyers and the law, I beg you Mr. Carreon, please stop. You&#8217;re just making yourself look like an ignorant ass. As an onlooker, of course, I&#8217;d urge you to carry on because the stuff you&#8217;re coming up with is just freaking hilarious in a shocking and pathetic sort of way.</h4>
<h4>Even Labatt&#8217;s has recently realized that as far as the internet is concerned, there really is such a thing as bad publicity and it can be incredibly damaging. And bad publicity is precisely what you&#8217;re giving your client, and yourself.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Richard Henderson &lt;<a href="mailto:rhenderson@gmail.com">rhenderson@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:03 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Formal Request</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Sir,</h4>
<h4>This is my formal request to tell you to GO FUCK YOURSELF.</h4>
<h4>You make lawyers the reviled profession it is.</h4>
<h4>If you&#8217;d like to sue me now &#8211; let me know. I&#8217;d love to be able to testify on the record as to what a total FUCKING ASSHOLE you are.</h4>
<h4>I hope you die a painful death.</h4>
<h4>Cheers,</h4>
<h4>Richard</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From DV &lt;<a href="mailto:vindimy@gmail.com">vindimy@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:17 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: My 2 cents</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>You, sir, have brought the public upon yourself. For a lawyer litigating cases that have anything to do with Internet, you have less knowledge on the subject than a 7-year-old. It also appears that you&#8217;re quite a pathetic attempt at a human being. Please go away. That is all.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Paul Brooks <a href="mailto:brooksp@purdue.edu">brooksp@purdue.edu</a></h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 13, 2012</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Mr. Carreon,</h4>
<h4>I really wanted wanted to stay out of this, but the fact that you&#8217;re offering legal counsel to an obviously guilty party for what seems like the sole purpose of a quick paycheck is absolutely abhorrent. Even worse is that after the proof of the illegitimacy of this case has been presented to you, your client, and any of the general public with an internet connection, you still continue to spout a never-ending font of lies, deceit, and fallacies.</h4>
<h4>First, let me inform you that Mr. Inman, the upstanding comic you&#8217;re seeking legal action against, did not recruit me or shanghai me like some sort of uninformed patsy to smear your or your client&#8217;s name or to fill your inbox with &#8220;grotesque&#8221;, &#8220;obscene&#8221;, or &#8220;unsavory&#8221; messages. I&#8217;ve been a long-time fan of Inman&#8217;s website, and once I saw that this case may actually take him to court and threaten his freedom to entertain his audience. I took action into my own hands to find your contact information. No, I did not find it on his website. As much as you insist to the press that he has given out your information for his &#8220;personal army&#8221;, the truth is still that he made it impossible for anyone to gain that information from his website. I do have an internet connection, and do know how to use Google, however. About five minutes of searching led me to find your email, address, and phone number. No, I will not be harassing any of those, but it&#8217;s a good example of what the public can find without the aid of some fictional general. Inman is just the most recent case I&#8217;ve seen of an abuse of the legal system, which brings me to my second point.</h4>
<h4>What you&#8217;re doing is wrong. I don&#8217;t know if you know that or not, but it&#8217;s objectively wrong. I say this, because I&#8217;ve seen all the evidence in regards to this case, and it&#8217;s pretty easy to see that any jury with fourteen functioning brain cells between them will find this case in favor of Inman. In fact, you&#8217;re lucky that Inman simply wants to be left alone; a countersuit would be very unfortunate for you and your client&#8217;s careers. As of right now, your career is already suffering from the mere act of suggesting such a case. I know that law is a very complex field, and that parties can be very persuasive in their case, but you have to step back and look at this from outside the close-minded view of &#8220;I&#8217;ll get paid, what else is there?&#8221; You&#8217;re threatening legal action against a man for slandering your client&#8217;s website. Slander is the act of diminishing a person&#8217;s reputation through the acts of falsehood, deception, or misinformation. So far, Inman has presented no false information, told any lies, or bent any details in his favor. There are literally over a hundred references to your client&#8217;s plagiarizing of his material, and just because it has since been removed does not make his words any less true.</h4>
<h4>What I&#8217;m getting around to is that you are the antithesis of the American dream. When this country was founded and its laws put to paper, our founding fathers wanted citizens to be able to use their talents to prosper, and benefit the greater good of society. This truth has held with Inman&#8217;s website: his comics are a great laugh, and the only profit he makes is from selling his own merchandise. Your client, however, allows these comics, along with other websites&#8217; material, to be stolen, have their credits removed, then posted next to advertising with the intention of generating ad traffic and therefore profit for your client. Your client, and you, are leeching off of society. There is nothing good about what you are pursuing, and there will be no positive outcome for you.</h4>
<h4>As one last note: What is wrong with you trying to shut down Inman&#8217;s charity fund? He&#8217;s raising money for two extremely noble causes, and you&#8217;re upset because none of that money is going to make it into your pocket. When will your greed end? As a relatively successful lawyer, you&#8217;re already set for life. Sure, you may really want that fourth exotic sports car that&#8217;s worth more than five average household incomes, but that is not a valid reason to sully the already tarnishing name of lawyers in this country. Just pack up and go back to your mansion. Cherish what you have: your money, your career, your health, and your (hopefully) loving family. I say hopefully because if I were related to you, and I saw what you were trying to pull off, I would immediately disown myself out of shame and embarrassment.</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;m sorry that there are less tactful people harassing you and your family right now. While you do deserve the public outrage you&#8217;re receiving, you shouldn&#8217;t have to take it home with you. Unfortunately, the internet has made public figures like you quite transparent, and the injustice that you&#8217;ve recently proposed has caused what could be considered a digital riot. Please reconsider what you&#8217;re agreeing to with your client, not for Inman&#8217;s sake, but for your own. I hope that this email actually finds its way to your eyes, and not your junk folder.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Sandwich &lt;<a href="mailto:sandwichclassic@gmail.com">sandwichclassic@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:30 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Negotiating with the community</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You must not sleep at night since you represent people stealing work from an artist for their own profit. If you manage to sleep at night, it must mean you enjoy representing miscreants. What you are doing is wrong. You should have a conscience. If it isn&#8217;t waking up because of this backlash it&#8217;s because it&#8217;s you no longer have one.</h4>
<h4>This is the communities &#8220;negotiation&#8221; with you: Refuse to represent FunnyJunk or ask a judge to dismiss the case WITH prejudice and order your client to pay all legal fees to Inman.</h4>
<h4>You will lose this case and eventually lose your practice because no one will want to associate with you. Is it worth it?</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Todor Kolev &lt;<a href="mailto:tk1986be@gmail.com">tk1986be@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:30 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: About the lawsuit</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You are a douche, you know that, right?</h4>
<h4>So many people write to you hate email &#8211; no smoke without fire, right?</h4>
<h4>Bending the law to the way it suits you&#8230;Suing a comedian is like peeing in the pool = being an asshole and ruining it for everyone.</h4>
<h4>Furthermore, your client is a horrible spam site that earns money on unauthorized copies of work.</h4>
<h4>You shame the profession of advocacy.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4><a href="mailto:From:%20Phil%20Nova%20%3Epnova8@gmail.com">From: Phil Nova &gt;pnova8@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2012 at 12:26 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Please Stop</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Dear Mr. Carreon,</h4>
<h4>I am writing to voice my displeasure with your handling of the Oatmeal situation. Not only did you initiate what I believe is a frivolous lawsuit, now it appears that you are trying to block an act of charity. I would prefer that you not do this.</h4>
<h4>Sincerely,</h4>
<h4>Phil</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Shaun Dynan &lt;<a href="mailto:shaundynan@hotmail.com">shaundynan@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:15 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: More spam</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Here&#8217;s my 5 cents on the latest fj/oatmeal saga. You sir are the scum of society and I despise what you represent</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Joakim Gandara  &lt;<a href="mailto:joaquim.gandara@gmail.com">joaquim.gandara@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:58 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Trying to block a charity?</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You&#8217;re a PR nightmare.</h4>
<h4>&#8220;Personal army&#8221;? I personally do not enjoy the website you&#8217;re legally harassing and couldn&#8217;t care less about his intellectual property, but what you&#8217;re doing is morally reprehensible. How could I not react?</h4>
<h4>Your name is now synonymous with bullying of the worst kind.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Ryan Campbell &lt;<a href="mailto:ryanmatthewcampbell@gmail.com">ryanmatthewcampbell@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:20 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Congratulations on Destroying your Own Reputation</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Sir,</h4>
<h4>Congratulations. Your continued conduct with respect to this Funnyjunk vs. the Oatmeal affair is a travesty. Here&#8217;s some free advice &#8211; match the donations to charity that the Oatmeal raises, drop your client and cut your losses. To continue as your are makes a mockery of yourself and the legal profession. The fact that someone such as yourself can find relative success as a lawyer tells me everything I need to know about the dire straights America is in right now. You are the reason America&#8217;s economy is stalled, and why innovation and talent is feeling the country in droves. I fully respect the good work lawyers do &#8211; many of my friends are lawyers &#8211; but good lawyers comport themselves with far more dignity and grace than you.</h4>
<h4>I hope you find it in your heart to find the error of your ways.</h4>
<h4>God bless,</h4>
<h4>Ryan</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Alex Thompson &lt;<a href="mailto:alex.jr.thompson@gmail.com">alex.jr.thompson@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:36 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Enquiry</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Hey Charles!</h4>
<h4>I hope you&#8217;re enjoying the Streisand Effect. A shame that such a well practiced INTERNET EXPERT LAWYER such as yourself didn&#8217;t know enough about it to just stop.</h4>
<h4>Also, nice try blaming the Oatmeal for &#8220;marshaling an army&#8221; against you. I think you&#8217;re confusing an &#8216;organised hate campaign&#8217; with &#8216;doing something so stupid and greedy that people actively seek you out to send you insults in their free time. Trying to shift the blame to the Oatmeal after they posted a human and funny response to your letter with lawyer-esque threats isn&#8217;t gonna go down well either, just in case you hadn&#8217;t figured that out yet.</h4>
<h4>Oh and the suggestion that you&#8217;d deny charities huge amounts of money because of the &#8220;obscenity&#8221; of an MS Paint image was pretty awesome too by the way. Well done on that. I don&#8217;t think you could have figured out a stupider thing to say if you&#8217;d actually sat down and thought about it.</h4>
<h4>Do yourself a favour and stop now, this won&#8217;t go away, and you&#8217;re going to look like more of a tool every second you keep it up.</h4>
<h4>Go fuck yourself.</h4>
<h4>Sincerely</h4>
<h4>Alex</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: &lt;<a href="mailto:dsander@gmail.com">dsander@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 13, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: [Cornell LII Lawyer Directory Attorney Contact Form] oatmeal</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Mr. Charles Carreon,</h4>
<h4>it is your hysterical behavior on the funnyjunk lawsuit that will define your reputation</h4>
<h4>sorry but you are now a joke to a lot of people, this is my opinion</h4>
<h4>wasted a career, but then most lawyers are a waste of a human being</h4>
<h4>you define, in my opinion, whats wrong with with lawyers</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Alessio Lipperi &lt;<a href="mailto:alelip1992@hotmail.it">alelip1992@hotmail.it</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012 at 6:52 PM</h4>
<h4>Re: Charity</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>WOW!</h4>
<h4>Not only you file an infamous lawsuit against someone who got robbed.</h4>
<h4>Now you try to take the charity money away, too!!</h4>
<h4>These 100k dollars are destined to the national wildlife society and to the american cancer society.</h4>
<h4>You know what?</h4>
<h4>You sir, you are the biggest douchebag in the universe, and I hope you get raped by a bear, and get prostate cancer from it.</h4>
<h4>My worst regards</h4>
<h4>Fuck you.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Maurice Fappeur &lt;<a href="mailto:mfappeur@gmail.com">mfappeur@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:47 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Legal advice request</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>So&#8230;What&#8217;s it like having a Kodiak bear as step-dad?</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Thomas Twenhoven &lt;<a href="mailto:thomas@twenhoeven.de">thomas@twenhoeven.de</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:00 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: The Oatmeal case</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Do you have any kind of ethics or do you just sue anyone if you&#8217;re paid to do it?</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: &lt;<a href="mailto:sexy.clam.digger@gmail.com">sexy.clam.digger@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:02 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: [Cornell LII Lawyer Directory Attorney Contact Form] eat shit, cock jockey.</h4>
<h4>To: Charles</h4>
<h4>Mr. Charles Carreon,</h4>
<h4>Ser Jorah (sexy.clam.digger@gmail.com) has sent you a message via your<br />
contact form.</h4>
<h4>Message:</h4>
<h4>Signed, Ser Jorah Mormont (Of BEAR island)</h4>
<h4>Form sent from:<br />
<a href="http://lawyers.law.cornell.edu/lawyer/mr-charles-carreon-1484363">http://lawyers.law.cornell.edu/lawyer/mr-charles-carreon-1484363</a></h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: &lt;<a href="mailto:adminlead@gmail.com">adminlead@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:06 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Wil Wheaton</h4>
<h4>To: Charles</h4>
<h4>When even Wil Wheaton calls you out for violating his well known rule, you may wish to reexamine your choices.</h4>
<h4>Good luck!</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Bruo Silva &lt;<a href="mailto:silvabruno@me.com">silvabruno@me.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012 at 10:46 PM</h4>
<h4>Re: You Sir</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Are a fuckwad. I&#8217;m a law student at Levin law. You make me sick to be studying this profession. Shut down money for cancer research? Fuck you.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Bruno Silva &lt;<a href="mailto:silvabruno@me.com">silvabruno@me.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM</h4>
<h4>You&#8217;ll have a good time dealing with the Internet crowd. Just google Mr. Thompson. Oh wait, he&#8217;s disbarred. Right, never mind then. Carry on with your sleuthing and suing on behalf of copyright infringing douche bags.</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;m sure there&#8217;s no law against frivolous cases wasting the court&#8217;s time.</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;d draw you a picture, but I think you&#8217;re getting enough of those. You&#8217;re on the front page of reddit again. Enjoy the rainbow colored shit storm headed your way.</h4>
<h4>Oh and the charity you want to shut down? It&#8217;s on their featured page now, with even more funds. Oops!</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From Nelstar Xyrulgile &lt;<a href="mailto:nelstar_2000@yahoo.com">nelstar_2000@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:66 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: FunnyJunk &#8211; TheOatmeal.com &#8211; Defamation and False Advertising</h4>
<h4>To: Mr. Charles Hernan Carreon,</h4>
<h4>RE: FunnyJunk &#8211; TheOatmeal.com &#8211; Defamation and False Advertising</h4>
<h4>I represent the fans of TheOatmeal.com, an authentic humor site. I write to implore that you retract your attempts to stop the efforts to raise fund for charities as you will garner unnecessary hatred, resentment, and even negative publicity in both cyber and media from readers, viewers, and donors from all walks of life. I will even consider writing in to the US Embassy in my country to request the American Bar Association to review your actions which has no beneficial value whatsoever to bears and victims of cancer.</h4>
<h4>First, donations are made in attempt to support bears and cancer victims. These actions made by contributors worldwide knowingly that the money will go to the beneficiaries. In your action to request IndieGoGo to disable the fundraising attempt, it is a petty act from your end which is thoughtless and irrational.</h4>
<h4>Your comments had already been circulated on many forms on social media and the general consensus of your responses to the fundraising efforts is widely deemed as petty and had generated much ill will online.</h4>
<h4>Consider it an act of true if you post on your website that you are really sorry that you even tried to request to disable the fundraising attempt.</h4>
<h4>cc: You may run an article on the lawyer addressed in the To: field on this e-mail.</h4>
<h4>Regards</h4>
<h4>An angered fan</h4>
<h4>Reference:</p>
<p>http://digitallife.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/12/12187665-cartoonist-turns-lawsuit-threat-into-100k-charity-fundraiser</p>
<p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oatmeal_and_FunnyJunk_legal_dispute</h4>
<h4><a href="http://theoatmeal.com/blog/funnyjunk_letter">http://theoatmeal.com/blog/funnyjunk_letter</a></h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Colin van Waardenberg &lt;<a href="mailto:colinvw@gmail.com">colinvw@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:28 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: IndieGoGo &#8220;BearLove Good Cancer Bad&#8221;</h4>
<h4>To: Charles</h4>
<h4>Charles,</h4>
<h4>Why did you send a request to disable the fundraising campaign? Everything else is just not very gentleman like, but trying to block the fundraiser? Who do you think you are? You should maybe google Dave, from Ocean Marketing, he&#8217;s about as big a douche as you are.</h4>
<h4>Sincerely</h4>
<h4>Colin</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Timothy Lewis &lt;<a href="mailto:timothyforhire@gmail.com">timothyforhire@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:18 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: You&#8217;ve made a bad decision and you should feel bad</h4>
<h4>To: Charles</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;m amazed that any lawyer i the world would represent FunnyJunk to try and sue The Oatmeal. His content was stolen and proper credit removed and posted all over their site. He complained about it. You say The Oatmeal did $20,000 in damages? Really? FunnyJunk didn&#8217;t police their own site enough to remove copyright infringing material. If this weren&#8217;t true, this would be defamation of FunkyJunk&#8217;s character. The problem here is that it IS true. Any damages that happened to their business is their own fault. In my humble opinion, it would take a pretty poor lawyer not to see that.</h4>
<h4>You knew this was wrong when you first decided to go ahead with this bogus claim. This attempt to bully $20,000 from The Oatmeal has done more damage to FunkyJunk&#8217;s reputation than the $20,000 you would like to sue for. I can&#8217;t believe that no one involved saw the PR backlash this could have caused. Well guess what? Irreparable damage has been done. The culprit is FunkyJunk&#8217;s greed and incompetence, in my opinion.</h4>
<h4>Stop being mean.</h4>
<h4>You should really consider apologizing. And if you don&#8217;t drop this lawsuit, you must realize that your name will be mud to many people in many industries.</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;m a nice person, so I wish you the best. I hope from here on out you make wise, smart decisions&#8230;and that those decisions help your career and personal life to flourish.</h4>
<h4>Good day to you.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: anthony apostoloff &lt;<a href="mailto:a.apostoloff@hotmail.com">a.apostoloff@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:33 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Another Oatmeal Email</h4>
<h4>To: Charles</h4>
<h4>I understand that this is your job but to try and shut down this charity service that the oatmeal has set up makes you a scumbag. You want him to pay you money for hosting his unlicensed comics on funnyjunk for years without siting his name on said comics? Thats stupid, I dont care what kind of &#8220;slander&#8221; (truth) he said about funnyjunk. You will not come out of this not looking like an asshole</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Praxis Thanatos &lt;<a href="mailto:praxis.thanatos@gmail.com">praxis.thanatos@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:07 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: re: FunnyJunk vs TheOatmeal</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Mr. Carreon;</h4>
<h4>While I understand that you have a job to do, let me assure you that you have failed in an exceedingly  spectacular manner.</h4>
<h4>Popular opinion on both you and Funnyjunk has plummeted due to YOUR attempt to shut down a *CHARITY* which has already earned 7x the ridiculously petty amount that you and Funnyjunk were attempting to extort.</h4>
<h4>Good luck with your court case, sir, and welcome to the Internet.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Sean Reimer <a href="mailto:%3Csean.reimer@gmail.com%3E/">&lt;sean.reimer@gmail.com&gt;</a></h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 13, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Trying to Shut Down the Charity!?</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>I understand your frustration over the backlash of The Oatmeal vs Funnjunk, because you are clearly on the wrong side of things, but trying to shut down Operation BearLove Good Cancer Bad? Do you know how evil that is? Where is your soul?</h4>
<h4>Deal with this losing legal matter however you would like, but just leave the charity out of it.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Matt Henzi &lt;<a href="mailto:climb1028@gmail.com">climb1028@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:30 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: You and your lawyer ilk need to got to hell</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Chas (Douche),</h4>
<h4>I never write angry letters but you need to be made an example of.</h4>
<h4>Quote:</h4>
<h4>You sue a guy for 20k, and hope he&#8217;ll settle &#8217;cause the lawsuit will cost him more than 20k to defend? How many anonymous emails to his email address will it take before this lawsuit ends up costing Chas 20k? It&#8217;s only a matter of time before Googling his name returns pages describing his frivolous lawsuit. We can only hope that this costs him many thousands of dollars over the years. Perhaps this will make him and other lawyers a little less likely to file frivolous lawsuits in the future.</h4>
<h4>Exactly. I hope this move destroys your career and you are made an example to the other lawyers in this country.</h4>
<h4>Shame on you for using threat of lawsuit to make a few bucks and strong arm someone into compliance. That&#8217;s not what our laws are written to do. Just because you *can* use the laws to harass, threaten and make money doesn&#8217;t  mean you should. We all have a stake in not having to live in fear of frivolous corporate money whips like yourself.</h4>
<h4>Matt</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Mark Brelow &lt;<a href="mailto:mbrelow@gmail.com">mbrelow@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:57 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Not such funny junk</h4>
<h4>To: <a href="mailto:chas@charlescarreon.com">chas@charlescarreon.com</a></h4>
<h4>Charles,</h4>
<h4>As a two-time cancer survivor, a successful lawyer and a former technology professional (CS degree and 15 years in the field), I have to raise my voice regarding my disgust for this stupid lawsuit between Funnyjunk and The Oatmeal (far superior and original in my opinion).</h4>
<h4>The fact that you would try to bar someone from raising money for a WONDERFUL cause and one that hits home with me and my friends/family is probably the most egregious form of douchebaggery I have ever seen.  I say that because I cannot come up with a better term right now due to that fact that I am simply astounded by your actions, as well as your inane client&#8217;s actions and pursuit of what you two perceive to be justice of some sort.  The Oatmeal is 100% in the right in this one.  Your client is upset someone has a voice against him (with cause) and I am astounded you think you can make a case here.</h4>
<h4>Let the power of the public Internet prevail.  I cannot wait until you realize how simply stupid you are; I will be following this very closely.  For shame.  I hope this situation blows up entirely in your face.</h4>
<h4>&#8211;Mark</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Shannon Radoll &lt;<a href="mailto:sradoll@yahoo.com">sradoll@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:38 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: re: explain please</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Hey Chas,</h4>
<h4>I am asking for is a simple explanation of the &#8220;Oatmeal Situation&#8221; as it has become known in my community.</h4>
<h4>It is my understanding that your client allegedly copied material from the Oatmeal website and used it without giving proper credit. Even after Oatmeal asked them to either give proper credit or remove the material they did not do either. After using Oatmeal&#8217;s material for over three years, your client (FunnyJunk) decided to sue Oatmeal $20,000 for using their material. I must be missing something because this makes no sense whatsoever. I can&#8217;t even think up a hypothetical situation to make a proper analogy. All I can say is this is really messed up.</h4>
<h4>Here are my questions-feel free to use a simple yes/no for time sake. I&#8217;m sure you are very busy.</h4>
<h4>Are you a real lawyer?</h4>
<h4>What grounds does FunnyJunk have for suing Oatmeal? I am a recent college graduate and in my reasoning, the opposite should be occurring.</h4>
<h4>Did you take on this case just for the publicity?</h4>
<h4>Did you know Casey Anthony is interested in a book deal and might need representation? (I know this is completely unrelated to the a fore mentioned case but I thought it sounded like your &#8220;cup of tea&#8221; as they say!)</h4>
<h4>Did you ever watch that show &#8220;LA Law&#8221;? That was a great show, I really miss it. Where those real attorneys or just really good actors?</h4>
<h4>What about &#8220;Mad Men&#8221;? Are you hooked on that like me and the rest of America? Can you believe that guy hanged himself?</h4>
<h4>Are you actually going to read this, or is going straight to your trash folder? I hope you will respond. After all, I took the time to write you, you should give me the courtesy of responding. Right?</h4>
<h4>What do you think Judge Judy would have to say about this? (I&#8217;m pretty sure she is a real judge not just a TV actor/character.)</h4>
<h4>Now that Oatmeal raised all this money for charity (I heard it&#8217;s over $118,000!), why do you want them to give it back? Do you want people to get cancer or do you just have a thing against bears? I&#8217;m sure there is a term for bear phobia, I&#8217;ll Google it for you (I read you had difficulty understanding how Google works.)</h4>
<h4>I know a bunch of my friends have written you as well, so I would truly appreciate it if you could respond as soon as possible. We are having a little &#8220;contest&#8221;, but I can&#8217;t tell you too much about it in case you might decide to sue us!</h4>
<h4>Thanks bunches Chas (is that your real name or just a nickname?)</h4>
<h4>Shannon in Seattle (my real name)</h4>
<h4>[Obvious Oatmeal Fan!]</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Ryne Andal &lt;<a href="mailto:ryne.andal@gmail.com">ryne.andal@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:48 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: This isn&#8217;t mob psychology.</h4>
<h4>To: <a href="mailto:chas@charlescarreon.com">chas@charlescarreon.com</a></h4>
<h4>This is people standing up for what is morally right and telling you to back off. You&#8217;ve no ground to stand on, and are making yourself looking more egotistical with each passing hour. The child&#8217;s fit of attempting to shut down a charitable fundraiser because you&#8217;re not receiving that money is damn near criminal, from a moral level. I&#8217;d hate to see the massive backlog of bad karma you&#8217;re currently earning. Quit your vendetta against The Oatmeal, because he is all that is wonderful and glorious on the Internet.</h4>
<h4>Sincerely,</h4>
<h4>The Mob.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Corina Garza &lt;<a href="mailto:corina.garza@gmail.com">corina.garza@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:12 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: please don&#8217;t attack charity funds</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Please stop this ridiculous attack on The Oatmeal, it&#8217;s not fair to him or his readers when Funny Junk is at fault. And please don&#8217;t attack the charity funds The Oatmeal has raised, it&#8217;s for CHARITY for crying out loud! Don&#8217;t make yourself look any more horrible. Please.</h4>
<h4>Thank you,</h4>
<h4>Corina Garza</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Mike E. &lt;<a href="mailto:eightthickandhard@yahoo.com">eightthickandhard@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:50 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Litigation against Charles Carrion</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Chuck -</h4>
<h4>Send me $20,000 or I will sue you.  Contact me ASAP for payment details.</h4>
<h4>Best regards</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Team Alpha &lt;<a href="mailto:teamalpha256@gmail.com">teamalpha256@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 6:15 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Hey</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Hey, Fuck you and rot in hell, asstard, you know why.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From:  j s &lt;<a href="mailto:jse_fmsn@yahoo.co.uk">jse_fmsn@yahoo.co.uk</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:28 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: New information regarding case</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You are an evil, sick and twisted person, please do humanity a favour and kill yourself</h4>
<h4>-jse</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Ryan Wells &lt;<a href="mailto:mrryanwells@gmail.com">mrryanwells@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 18, 2012</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Cal. Gov. Code 12598. (a) The primary responsibility for supervising charitable trusts in California, for ensuring compliance with trusts and articles of incorporation, and for protection of assets held by charitable trusts and public benefit corporations, resides in the Attorney General.</h4>
<h4>And also:</h4>
<h4>Cal. Gov. Code 12591. Nothing in this article shall impair or restrict the jurisdiction of any court with respect to any of the matters covered by it, except that no court shall have jurisdiction to modify or terminate any trust of property for charitable purposes unless the Attorney General is a party to the proceedings.</h4>
<h4>In other words, private parties can&#8217;t sue to enforce the statute under which you are suing.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Jason &lt;<a href="mailto:cincij10@gmail.com">cincij10@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:38 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: It doesn&#8217;t work.</h4>
<h4>To: <a href="mailto:chas@charlescarreon.com">chas@charlescarreon.com</a></h4>
<h4>First off, pulling down your contact information from your website does not work.  It&#8217;s out there&#8230;and will be out there.  Forever.  For anyone who&#8217;s willing to type &#8220;Charles Carreon Email Address&#8221; into Google.  Hell, I have your phone number and home address as well if I wanted to send you a post card or ask you if your refrigerator is running.</h4>
<h4>Second, dude.  Stop.  Really.  Just stop.  You can&#8217;t win in this kind of thing.  Even if, in the furthest reaches of unlikeliness, that you someone win this thing in court&#8230;the Internet does not forget.  Or forgive.  Your winning will be the most Pyrrhic of victories, because you will join in the pantheon of reviled people that get email bombed and slandered&#8230;forever.  Your only chance is really to just apologize, shut up, and move on.</h4>
<h4>Just advice from an old Internet hand who&#8217;s seen it all before.  Take it or don&#8217;t, it&#8217;s not my ass that&#8217;s E-Grass.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Fucker McFuckerface &lt;<a href="mailto:fuckyou@fuckyou.com">fuckyou@fuckyou.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:17 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: You are a giant douchenozzle.</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>You have got to be the biggest fucking douchenozzle on the planet. Launching a suit FOR a FUCKING CONTENT THIEF is about the most despicable practice I have ever seen. I hope you have a 10 year bout with brain cancer and that your final swan song is when they remove your cancerous brain and replace it with your pathetic little dick. You fucking piece of shit.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Suzanne Pope &lt;<a href="mailto:spope@sympatico.ca">spope@sympatico.ca</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:49 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: You should be ashamed of yourself</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>You&#8217;re seriously trying to shut down a fundraising drive that will aid cancer research and wildlife protection?</h4>
<h4>Give your head a shake, and become a human being.</h4>
<h4>Yours truly,</h4>
<h4>Suzanne Pope</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Tyna &lt;<a href="mailto:Tynamcnair@gmail.com">Tynamcnair@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:44 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Stopping Fundraising?</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>This is not mob mentality, people are questioning your morals, because you sir, have none!</h4>
<h4>Shame, shame, shame, shame, shame.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Tom <a href="mailto:%3Cbreakfastinbeard@gmail.com">&lt;breakfastinbeard@gmail.com</a></h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 13, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: legal representation</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>My pet bear is very very lonely and has not had any intimate company in a long time&#8230; I am told you are the man to contact for an introduction to someone VERY caring and special.</h4>
<h4>Please let me know her rates and requirements.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: John Dee &lt;<a href="mailto:john_dee_2011@yahoo.com">john_dee_2011@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:17 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Scumbag, lowlife douchebag</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>You&#8217;re why people hate lawyers.  Choke and die, fuckwit.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Robert Rademacher &lt;<a href="mailto:robertrade@yahoo.com">robertrade@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:19 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: what a stupid dork you are.</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120613/01004319296/funnyjunk-lawyer-being-mocked-mercilessly-makes-things-worse-trying-to-shut-down-oatmeals-fundraiser.shtml#comments">http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120613/01004319296/funnyjunk-lawyer-being-mocked-mercilessly-makes-things-worse-trying-to-shut-down-oatmeals-fundraiser.shtml#comments</a></h4>
<h4>It&#8217;s time for you to look for shit law jobs as you do not know what you are doing.</h4>
<h4><a href="http://shitlawjobs.com/">http://shitlawjobs.com</a></h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Michel Boudreau &lt;<a href="mailto:boudreaumichel@hotmail.com">boudreaumichel@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:01 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Please Fuck Off You Twat.</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>Anthony DeLuca &lt;<a href="mailto:anth741@gmail.com">anth741@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 13, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Why are you trying to stop a Charity fundraiser?</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Charles,</h4>
<h4>I don&#8217;t see why you believe its morally right to try to stop money from being donated to the American Cancer Society. Don&#8217;t you have a heart?</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Megan Bowlen &lt;<a href="mailto:megan_bowlen@hotmail.com">megan_bowlen@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:50 PM</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>You&#8217;re a fucking lunatic. I don&#8217;t know what your problem is, nor do I know whats the deal is with your bitchy-ass wife, but that you and that woman have exceeded my wildest imagination of the most horrid and obnoxious display of action on the internet. You should both be ashamed.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Solo Inceptums &lt;<a href="mailto:jakub.lakomski@gmail.com">jakub.lakomski@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Hello</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Hello bottom feeder, i like your little letter that you sent to the oatmeal. You are a perfect example of leeches, and the worst thing is, you are wrong. I would figure someone in your stature would have the brains before you just send out random threats, but looking at your track record i am not surprised. I hope you lose your career, and end up on the streets, broke and starving, it would be nice to drive by and watch you beg for money, which is kinda what you do right now anyways &#8230; so your half way there&#8230;have a wonderful life, may it be dreadful.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From Jonathan Quick &lt;<a href="mailto:Jonathan.quick@gmail.com">Jonathan.quick@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: I need your help</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You, good sir, are an asshat.</h4>
<h4>I hope a dinosaur will ambush you.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Daniel Reiser &lt;<a href="mailto:dreiser0@gmail.com">dreiser0@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</h4>
<h4>Hi,</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;ve written a bot that&#8217;s going to link to your site thousands of times with the words &#8220;I am a bad lawyer&#8221; (for the purposes of humor). Is this legal?</h4>
<h4>Burn in Hell,<br />
SEO master</h4>
<h4>PS My Swedish ass doesn&#8217;t care about your laaaame laws</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From CYPHERDSOUL &lt;<a href="mailto:cypherdsoul@gmail.com">cypherdsoul@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:18 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Work</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Douchebag &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; DOUCHEBAG!!!</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: marc david &lt;<a href="mailto:stat9390@hotmail.com">stat9390@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:17 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: have those papers for you</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>So you expected TheOatmeal to cave, settle out of court and pony up? Now you want to take money from charities? Ever thought of a new line of work? You are clearly very bad at what you do.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: halim SUJANTO &lt;<a href="mailto:alimx@hotmail.com">alimx@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:14 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: please kill yourself</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>uuuuuggggghhhhh</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Briar Wolfbrother &lt;<a href="mailto:the20stonelycan@hotmail.com">the20stonelycan@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Important legal matter</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>This is someones mom.</h4>
<h4> </h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: youradouche &lt;<a href="mailto:youradouche@gmail.com">youradouche@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:36 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: youradouche</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>youradouchewithnosenseofhumorandripotherpeopleoff. way tohelpruinthecountrydouche</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Scotty Doo &lt;<a href="mailto:ace1000%20x@hotmail.com">ace1000 x@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:39 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: I am Disappoint</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You will NOT try and stop thosecharitiesfrom receiving their money!</h4>
<h4>-$</h4>
<h4> </h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Kat L. &lt;<a href="mailto:katrina%20li0381@hotmail.com">katrina li0381@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:30 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Sir,</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>You are a great big sack of dicks.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Christopher Weaver &lt;<a href="mailto:ca_weaver@hotmail.com">ca_weaver@hotmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:21 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Worlds biggest douche and an idiot as well</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Get a life and a brain your an idiot.</h4>
<h4>Chris</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Anthony Glyadchenko &lt;<a href="mailto:iatesnailsonce@gmail.com">iatesnailsonce@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Question in regards to your career</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>YOU ARE A FUCKING ASSHOLE!!!!</h4>
<h4>TRYING TO STOP MONEY FROM CHARITIES &#8230;</h4>
<h4>DISGUSTING&#8230;</h4>
<h4>PEOPLE WILL THROW SHIT ON YOUR GRAVE BECAUSE THAT&#8217;S ALL YOU&#8217;RE WORTH&#8230;</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: steve kwiatkowski &lt;<a href="mailto:kdogg602@yahoo.com">kdogg602@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:17 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Shame on you</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">You are beneath contempt, a sorry example of humanity, and a liar. Nobody &#8220;marshaled an army.&#8221; Individuals with a conscience respond of their own accord. To hell with you and your threats and attempted extortion.</h4>
<h4>I&#8217;m sending money to The Oatmeal so it can be donated to cancer research and the National Wildlife Federatoin. Maybe then bears and other animals will be safe from being molested by your mother. You are obviously a product of an abominable union between woman and beast. You&#8217;re a joke. Thanks for making us laugh, jackass!  Ha-ha!</h4>
<h4>Steve</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Voice Of Reason <a href="mailto:%3Cironic.universe@gmail.com">&lt;ironic.universe@gmail.com</a></h4>
<h4>Date: Jun 12, 2012</h4>
<h4>Subject: Legal Advice</h4>
<h4>To: Chas</h4>
<h4>Can I call you Chas?</h4>
<h4>I have a question:</h4>
<h4>I am trying to sue somebody for damages in the order of $20,000 for defamation, financial losses, and some other legal-sounding stuff I don&#8217;t really know the definition of.</h4>
<h4>Just to be on the down-low (teacher-lawyer privacy rights), I think that this would be considered by &#8220;normal&#8221; people to be a &#8220;frivolous&#8221; lawsuit, but I really need this done right because I had to fire my personal trainer because I couldn&#8217;t afford her anymore, and all my bros are really upset with me right now because she was HOT. I think that also counts as &#8220;emotional damages&#8221; or something like that right?</h4>
<h4>I have heard you are simply THE BEST in the field of &#8220;frivolous&#8221; litigation, and that you are SUPER ELITE.</h4>
<h4>It&#8217;s very simple. I want you to sue the shit out of Kirsty Alley (is that how you spell her skanky-ass name?) She basically put me out of business when she tweeted something to the effect of &#8220;Cupcakes are the DEVIL!&#8221;</h4>
<h4>I make cupcakes FOR A LIVING BRO. Due to her stupid thunder-thighed bitch-ass AND her inability to control her regular inhalation of fucking mocha-fudge brownie-cupcakes, I now have to SUFFER as a young, homosexually inclined small-business part-owner and I DEMAND JUSTICE.</h4>
<h4>I know you can help me, and I am willing to do WHATEVER it takes <img src='http://rapeutation.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' />  to &#8220;retain your services&#8221;.</h4>
<h4>This would work out even BETTER if you would accept your initial legal fees in your choice of 13 dozen FAT FREE FABULOUS CUPCAKES! Just kidding I know you are a REAL professional.</h4>
<h4>Give those Oatmeal bastards hell Chas! Screw those hot-cereal fanatics anyway, whatever happened to Fruit-Loops with orange juice? OMG OMG you may have just inspired a new cupcake!</h4>
<h4>Can I name it after you OMG!!!!! &#8220;The Chas Carreon: The only Fruit-Loop &amp; Orange Juice Cupcake with Low-Fat whipped-cream CENTER OMG!!!!!!</h4>
<h4>You are such a talented man. Please help me sue that fat bitch so I can name a cupcake in your honor.</h4>
<h4>-LA-FAWN (I make cupcakes)</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: avinash ganta &lt;<a href="mailto:avi4ash@gmail.com">avi4ash@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 12:53 AM</h4>
<h4>Subject: You are funny, right!!</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Should have thought twice&#8230;you douche bag.</h4>
<h4>Warmest of Regards,</h4>
<h4>An Oatlet.</h4>
<h4>PS: Don&#8217;t think of suing me, laws in India don&#8217;t work like that. Dumbass.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Trevor Ross &lt;<a href="mailto:trevor.ross@live.com">trevor.ross@live.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: The Oatmeal</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Please stop trying to close down the charity fundraiser. There is nothing bad that comes out of it AT ALL. Doing this makes you look like an evil person and with people already hating you, would you want even more people to dislike you? The main case is one thing (even that is stupid), but this is completely unreasonable. Think about it. Maybe you&#8217;ll come to the right conclusion. If not, I feel sorry for you.</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Tom &lt;<a href="mailto:breakfastinbeard@gmail.com">breakfastinbeard@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:30 PM</h4>
<h4>How&#8217;s it feel to be the biggest asshole on the Internet?</h4>
<h4>***</h4>
<h4>From: Anthony &lt;<a href="mailto:anth741@gmail.com">anth741@gmail.com</a>&gt;</h4>
<h4>Date: Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:05 PM</h4>
<h4>Subject: Why are you trying to stop a charity fundraiser?</h4>
<h4>To: chas</h4>
<h4>Charles,</h4>
<h4>I don&#8217;t see why you believe its morally right to try to stop money from being donated to the American Cancer Society. Don&#8217;t you have a heart?</h4>
<p><img class="mceItem" title="gallery link=&quot;file&quot;" src="http://rapeutation.com/wp-includes/js/tinymce/plugins/wpgallery/img/t.gif" alt="" /></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://rapeutation.com/2012/07/12/hate-emails/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
