News

Montreal Café L’Artiste Affamé Endangers A Paying Customer By Posting Roosh’s Location On Instagram

240 Comments

On August 6, 2015, two days before Roosh was to give his speech in Montreal,  the L’Artiste Affame café breached Roosh’s privacy by posting his location on their business Instagram. Roosh stopped to sit in the cafe to get something to drink and he was immediately recognized by the staff. The staff, who was friendly to him and took his money, secretly wanted to alert feminist land whales of Roosh’s presence.

The cafe posted this picture:

Land Whale

Business Professionalism

As a customer you expect the management of any business you patronize to be mature and professional. At the very least, you expect an establishment not to go out of its way to put you in physical danger. This particular café lacked all of these traits when they posted Roosh’s location, along with this quote inciting women to harass him:

Girls you’re main man is here. Roosh V! In the flesh. Should be here til 9 if you wanna come show your undying “love” for the dickbag. The doors open. Make it count MTL.

This cafe accepted Roosh’s business but immediately stabbed him in the back when he wasn’t looking. Worse yet, the events of the weekend show that the café could have put him in direct physical danger by going out of their way to state his location and encourage people to show up. If this were done to an unpopular feminist speaker, it would clearly be called “doxxing” and “harassment.”

In the comment section there were several predictable feminists who wanted to spit in Roosh’s drink, kick him in the nuts, or get him kicked out of the country. This is not surprising behavior coming from feminists—the last few days’ events have shown for us that they are irrational, violent, aggressive, and easily triggered. Roosh’s mere presence drinking a cappuccino triggered the proprietor of this business to breach a paying customer’s privacy.

Yelp

Hate

Soon after the café posted about Roosh’s location, they started to get several negative reviews on their Yelp page. The owner of the cafe was distraught at seeing the reputation of his business go down the tubes, even if he likely deserved it. The business owner decided to flag the negative reviews on the cafe’s Yelp page as spam, even though they reflected the “customer experience” of his establishment. As of now, almost all of the negative reviews have been removed from the page.

This is concerning because Yelp is supposed to inform customers about the products and practices of a business. One thing that is very important for a customer to know is if a business is willing to breach his privacy. If a popular female celebrity were to walk into L’Artiste Affamé, would the establishment leak the location so that she could be swarmed by “creepy” men looking to meet their idol?

Clearly, L’Artiste Affamé has shown that it is willing to breach the privacy of a customer. They have also gone to significant (monetary?) lengths to remove negative Yelp reviews that expose this willingness to endanger their client base. Without those crucial negative reviews, new customers will unknowingly walk into this café and leave themselves vulnerable to being harmed simply because of their political views.

The business owner has not responded to any of my requests for an interview. I am forced to conclude that he remains in support of this action, and regret that future customers will not be made appropriately aware of his shady business practices.

From this stunt, I know I will never do any business with this café. Neither should you, if you care about your privacy.

Read More: Feminist Jessica Lelièvre Assaults Roosh V On Street And Brags About It On Social Media

240 thoughts on “Montreal Café L’Artiste Affamé Endangers A Paying Customer By Posting Roosh’s Location On Instagram”

  1. If they’re willing to spend loads of money on removing their negative reviews, then let’s go ahead and make sure they have to do just that for quite some time. Make them spend their way right out of business.

    1. I agree! In fact, if we can find one of those “Rate” sites independent of Yelp and write a review, we ought take that route as well.

    2. I’m not sure whether he spent so much as a dime to remove the negative reviews. Yelp is probably staffed by the same type of left-leaning people to whom Roosh is the boogeyman.

      1. For real, unfortunately young misguided people are pretty much running the media and most sites on the internet where they inject their bullshit little feelings into everything.

        1. In the future, you will have to verify your account by pleading loyality to the “right” political conviction. Otherwise your reviews will be summarily deleted.

        2. The problem is that lefties started playing politics with every little facet of life since they’re intolerant little miscreants. So they said, you don’t support homosexuals, I will boycott your business. Wish that can of worms hadn’t been opened, now every little fucking thing peple do serves as some sort of political endorsement. Its exhausting.

      2. They removed my first review. On the word of a commenter, I rewrote the review but with five stars instead of one star. Let’s make the muthafucka’s work! Post your review with five stars!

        4. Bad idea! If your 5 star review is not rejected, it will only serve to enhance the reputation of this café—not hurt it. Also, I did some research into the algorithms which Yelp uses to filter out fake reviews. Both 1 star and 5 star reviews are much more suspect. Hence, I would recommend giving them 2 stars. In addition, all the reviews which alluded to this incident have been invariably deleted. So it would be much better to present yourself as an unsatisfied customer—not as someone with a political agenda.

      3. Someone mentioned that Yelp looks at the location of yelpers posting, and age of accounts. So if we can get locals to drip the low ratings it, it will likely do better.

      4. “Yelp is probably staffed by the same type of left-leaning people to whom Roosh is the boogeyman”
        My thoughts too.

    4. I did my part yesterday and posted a 1/2 star review, saying the food and coffee was disgusting, and the owner was extremely rude.

  3. I would first see what criminal charges can be filed against the establishment and I would be talking to my own lawyer as well. That place and the people who own it do not deserve to have a business. All the wrong people have the businesses and assets these days, so there is a wrong that needs to be righted.

  4. Did this cafe owner not act to incite violence against an innocent man? The despicable mangina took Roosh’s money and then, like a coward, urged a mob to attack him.

      1. Oh no, not one of these guys who tries to pass off banal, incredibly obvious statements such as “no law against it” and “life’s not fair.” Damn.
        Hey, jack, if Andy Warhol didn’t already get shot by a feminist, this wouldn’t be as huge a deal as it is. But Warhol DID get shot by a feminist, and this a##hole cafe owner was inviting something like that to happen to his customer.
        So life’s not fair. And it’s not fair if rational people rip his business apart on yelp for it.
        And it’s not fair we gotta have captain obviouses like you point out to us that life ain’t fair.
        So what about it?
        Please, give us some more of your pearls of extremely trite, obvious wisdom.

        1. i hear you. but i can not respect a man who says “X should be Y. it is not fair.”
          change it or live with it.
          the reviews should not be removed? well, who decides? yelp. by which standard? by its own. yelp is a business. it has to make money and if the reviews found there do not aid in that goal, they are of no use to them.
          want to have a rating website that is fair by your standards? create it.
          the etymology of “fair” seems to be “pleasing, attractive”. i guess saying “it is not pleasing” would not have made me write that answer, as i would interpret it as humorous assessment rather than whining.

        2. “Please, give us some more of your pearls of extremely trite, obvious wisdom.”
          Be careful what you wish for….

        3. So where can we start the campaign to malign and exposed the biased policies about removing reviews on Yelp?

    2. I have a feeling it’s because of feminist double standards. Since when you can remove reviews?

  6. The owner likely doesn’t care as his entire client base consists of the same brand of fragile-minded leftists. His doxxing of Roosh acted as an in-group signal: “I’m one of yours”. He showed his colours and as a result, he strengthened his position within the group most if not all of his clientele belong to.

        2. The establishment’s phone line has been suspended(they know what they did was wrong)
          You should sue them for endangering you. This behaviour is nowhere close to the ethics practiced by a business.
          I have a business in Quebec and I can inquire from my lawyer if an establishment can be sued for voluntarily endangering the safety of a paying customer. Let me know if you want to look into this.

    2. I just posted on their FB site. Comparing their behavior to old racial discrimination in the U.S.

        2. what was he doing in that cesspool anyway? if i was from montreal i swear i’d serve those hipsters a nice cocktail.

    3. Sad but true.
      The good news would be that unless less it’s a cat friendly vegan place the loyalty of those fragile minders is normally like a flag in the wind, where as shitty review scores online would last and hopefully hit the pocket.
      Is there anywhere online where the whole manosphere who is willing to help out in truth spreading operations (chnage_org petition signings, honest negative reviews, E-mailing letters to parts of government et al) can register so that when a group show of force effort is needed they can be informed via a mailing list? It wouldn’t matter if some of the other side joined as it would only be used to spread well thought out and crafted truths.

  7. Yelp is not the only review site. Here are sites in addition to Yelp to warn others of the conduct of the staff at this establishment. I you can find others post them so that people may come to learn of their staff’s misconduct.
    https://www.zomato.com/montreal/lartiste-affam%C3%A9-montreal
    https://foursquare.com/v/lartiste-affam%C3%A9/53d950e3498e76755917b0f4
    https://plus.google.com/104859412756692752786/about
    http://www.restaurantsmontreal.net/resto/details/name/l-artiste-affame-montreal-2

  8. Post five star reviews!
    I think the solution is very simple, post five star reviews of the place, and then go into detail about how they tell people you are there (if they don’t like you) so a mob can show up and give you a beating.
    Maybe a ROK special article on the cafe is in order, which will hopefully show higher in the google search results than the yelp, sanitized, results?

    1. Man, thankx!!!!! I just posted a review with one star and, after having read your comment, I edited it to have five stars.

      1. Yelp allows the posting of links, so you can tell people to read the full detail of them calling for a mob on a customer, and then post a link to this article.

        1. my point is: the usual customer just wants a good coffee and is probably a leftist, anyway.
          i bought a punchbag here in munich from a guy who had lots of negative reviews. the reviews were from ladies who said that he was not nice to them and that the place was full of pimps and gangsters. then i read some articles about him suing the city for forcing his son to wear floaties.
          so while all the stuff about him was negative, my first thought was: cool guy! called him, talked to him. he was competent and i got what i wanted.
          if i was a leftist, i could not care less about the cafe exposing an “enemy”.

        2. The cafe does appear to care, since they keep going after the bad reviews.
          I also think that they know what they did was wrong, and do not want other people to find out what they did.

        3. the cafe would be going after those reviews no matter the reason they were published.
          without a set morality or goal, “wrong” does not exist. but it is a possible interpretation that the act violated a morality that they held for themselves or at least believe their customers to hold, therefore logically attempting not to let it be known what happened.

        4. i just understand german, even though it’s not my native language, and it’s confusing enough.

  11. Gentlemen, if your review was removed, you should contact Yelp’s Support Center and demand that it be reinstated.
    Yelp says it generally doesn’t remove reviews.The Q&A indicates that in order for a review to be removed, the business owner needs to present independent evidence for Yelp’s verification, or there needs to be an adjudication of defamation.
    The latter has not happened, and as to the former, there is indisputable evidence that the reviews are justified.
    If I had been sitting at the table next to Roosh and overheard the server call him a “dickbag” or request a mob to come find him, I would be fully justified in writing a negative review of the customer service. This is no different just because you hear about the incident later, particularly when there is photographic proof from the perpetrators themselves. And if you have ever been to this cafe, you are perfectly justified in saying that you will no longer frequent their establishment based on their horrible treatment of fellow customers.
    Present your evidence. Demand reinstatement. Don’t let this weasel minimize the damage he did to himself by treating his customers as if they are beneath him.
    Edit: When you contact Yelp, you may also mention that we are their “customers,” not this shady SJW business owner. If Yelp won’t post honest reviews about customer experiences that are backed up by photographic proof, what good are they?

    1. Might also be worth reminding the business owner that manipulation of reviews on a website is an offence in Canada. Removing a negative review with the aim of misrepresenting their overall rating is a big no no under SJW state law..
      “The Competition Act prohibits the unauthorized use of tests and testimonials, or the distortion of authorized tests and testimonials. The provision also prohibits a person from allowing such representations to be made to the public.”
      http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02776.html
      I’m pretty sure you can file a complaint somewhere on the Canadian Competition Bureau site also.

      1. “Might also be worth reminding the business owner that manipulation of reviews on a website is an offence in Canada.”
        I hear ya, but even the mayor of Montreal wants Roosh out so I’m sure that justice is corrupted.

        1. These laws are far above and beyond the mayor and the municipality.
          If the mayor wants to get involved, let him. Like the SJW’s before him, he will make judgement errors and you will capitalize on them. Just think of the damage to the SJW movement if you can force a resignation from a leftist politician?

        2. Sounds like someone in Canada who knows about these things needs to find all the details.
          Using the law to push the truth sounds like the honorable version of what the loonies would be doing if the boot were on the other foot right now.

      2. This needs to happen then. Shut these feminists down with the laws they thought would benefit only them.

  12. i don’t think these people understand how the Internet works. This was a tremendous amount of free marketing for Roosh. They literally accomplished nothing, promoted violence and mob justice, put money in rooshv’s pocket and denigrated free speech, privacy and civil discourse.
    All in all a great week for this crowd!
    Roosh I will drop the first $100 if you need to sue people, I cant stand when people behave like these twits!

  13. as much as i sympathize with roosh, the logic in this article is stupid.
    roosh is an outsider. a hated person. most people do not care about him.
    it does not hurt their business to hurt and betray him. those people do not think in principles, they think in sympathies. as long as they are on the right side, why should they care what happens to the others?
    this article seems a bit like a handful of gamers protesting against a change in a game they love, only to go out and buy it anyway later.
    i do not like the cafe for what it did. but should the cafe – in the reality we live in – actually care?

    1. I have an idea for an appropriate response: Write reviews praising the food AND how the place is a great for MRA’s and how Roosh regularly eats there. Hehehehehe.
      What possible justification could Yelp show for taking it down? Roosh did eat there, yes? The food was claimed to be good, yes?

    2. No, they shouldn’t care who Roosh is or what they think he is about. Serve coffee and stfu.

      1. they’re people man. from their perspective, why shouldn’t they care?
        i am not on their side, but i am a selfish ass and i fully understand why they would do it.

        1. They aren’t paid or established to care, they are there to sling coffee, not to form a lynch mob.

        2. that depends on who pays them. if their customers appreciate those actions, it is in their interest to pursue them.
          you may say that you in particular did not pay them for that, but then again: you are not the world. if they can manage without you better than with you, why would they want you?

        4. if it is my business, it is my choice. unless your argument is that the owner of the shop would not want his employees to do this, there is not really much but the law to stop them.

        6. i was assuming that the owner did it, for the sake of simplicity. if you can give a valid and realistic reason for the owner not to want to engage in this, feel free to blurt it out.

        7. If you fail to see why an owner of a business would not want to doxx someone and take sides in a matter like this, I have no reason to try to make a case.

        9. As I’ve said before, Tom, you’re a fucking drip. You remind me of Elliot Rodger. PEACE!

        11. Missing the fundamental issue here:
          If the guy had said, “No, I don’t want you here, leave.” I would defend him. If he had then bragged about it: “Hey everyone Roosh V was in here and I threw him out, here’s pics.” No problem, he’s free to do that and it would have helped his business just as much providing these are the demographic he wants to cater to.
          But what he did was to take a pic of a paid customer and then call on the very people who were issuing extreme and violent threats against said customer for days, and inciting them to come there and get him. Whole different ballgame, and anyone should wonder and take precaution of a person or business who sets people up for ambush, and conversely it is justified for people to point out that this is the type of establishment you are dealing with.

        12. it is quite machiavellian in nature, yes. but that is what these people are. if they were my audience, i would fucking do it the same way.
          i am guessing that your argument is that a man who values straightness and honesty would want to avoid generating a reputation of being a brainless mob sheep. if so, i understand. i still give you no credits for failing to formulate it.

        13. I’d say the error is that it’s against the law…incitement to violence. The owner should have just told him to fuck off and not serve him. Like those Christian bakers that refused to make fag cakes.

        14. well, against the law is not an argument for me, considering that the law does some stupid things.
          the reason for my insistence is that i want to understand the underlying moral logic of not doing it. if you can not explain a “should” in terms of how it is beneficial for the person that does it, you do not understand your own advice. it is akin to “feeling that it is right”.

        15. The moral logic is that if you shoot a man for calling you a faggot, you now live in a world where people shoot other people for verbal insults.
          Btw that’s also an argument against those who say “if we become atheists, how the hell will we know right from wrong”.
          A sane person wouldn’t do it because who knows, maybe Roosh has a couple of Russian friends with leather jackets in his whatsapp contacts. Basically it’s: don’t treat other in a way you wouldn’t like to be treated yourself.

        16. I agree with you to a large extent. I am a Reactionary Catholic; in my ideal state, people would behave in decent ways, not primarily because the State commanded it, but because the culture was Catholic and people chose to apply pressure against others who didn’t think like they do. There’s nothing wrong with not wanting certain people in your business, and choosing to cater to people with similar views.
          Where I disagree, however, is in giving them a pass to act without honor. If you don’t like Roosh, tell him to get out of your business. But don’t take his money and act polite while secretly tweeting about him like a chicken shit.
          I’m not even opposed to calling the mob out on someone… but with the caveat that it is perfectly moral and legitimate for a sane mob to string up actual criminals and perverts, whereas it is immoral and illegitimate for an insane mob to string up honorable and innocent men. The error in assuming that “turnabout is fair play,” is the error of relativism. It assumes that they are just as entitled to pursue their interests, as we are to pursue ours. But in fact nothing could be farther from the truth. If you are an effeminate white knight secretly (and two-facedly) calling upon feminist mobs to harangue a man dedicated to the Patriarchy, you are a contemptible creature who merits a contemptible end. The fact that we would gladly hand them over to their deaths doesn’t mean that they are entitled to act the same way in reverse. We have the right on our side to defend justice and civilization, and to destroy its enemies; but they have no right on their side to defend degeneracy and hysteria, by whatever means. They are, from top to bottom, wrong – and altogether without any rights to pursue their unrighteous interests.

        17. Sure, but do you really think the hypothetical increase in SJW patronage can make up for the horrible reviews coming their way, and the concomitant loss of business from the neutrals/passersby who probably make up the bulk of their clientele? And not just now but, one year, three years, five years down the line? As far as gambits go, this one is fraught with risk.
          Personally, I think these fools have signed the death warrant of their own business. It’s difficult to feel sorry for them.

        18. but right or wrong can not exist independently of an ideal. if everybody shared one ideal, it could be discussed which policies are reasonable measures to achieve that ideal. such, when a leftist advocates socialism to achieve the ideal of productivity, he is obviously wrong.
          without an ideal, there is no right and wrong. you could argue that there is an absolute ideal to be distilled out of the mechanics of the universe, but i would doubt you. selling an ideal is like any other kind of persuasion: it has to appeal to the desires of a person. nothing wrong with that, but due to this, an ideal can only be as absolute as human nature.
          to feminists, patriarchy does not seem convincing for some reason. does it make them insane in a way or do they just lack knowledge and understanding? is it the same? not to deny them agency, no, but to expect them to accept your judgment of them as “wrong” would presume that they understood your judgment. and if they did, they quite possibly would not advocate degeneracy further.
          in other words: if they understood their insanity, they would not be insane.
          thus, from their standpoint, it is perfectly logical to act the way they do and any appeal to fairness will only amuse them like their whining amuses us.
          for whatever reason, they believe that degeneracy is noble. and as long as nothing destroys this logical conclusion of theirs – or the axioms underneath – not the greatest suffering will convince them otherwise. and as long as they are in power and majority, they have even the more reason to not care.

        19. i dislike the categorical imperative, for it fails as soon as competition is concerned. everybody wants to win, but nobody wants to lose. but if someone else wins, you have to lose, that is the game.
          it probably comes down to: do yo want to engage in non-violent competition or continue fighting tribal wars like our very old ancestors?
          there is an honesty about the law of the jungle that appeals to me. glory and happiness contrasted by absolute defeat and misery.
          but i am coming to accept that this philosophy may be more suited for a psychopath than for me and that i may not find true satisfaction in it.
          yes, the argument with the russian friends is the best i have heard yet. reminds me of pro gun arguments. if you know somebody has a gun, you do not fuck with them.
          it is not wise to deny the human desire to occasionally fuck someone over. it is wise to create a system where you no longer want to.

        20. well, that is exactly the interesting question.
          i would not feel sorry for them and i do not. i merely question whether this actually hurts them.
          how many of their customers look up their place in the internet before going there? i usually choose my cafes by seeing them while passing by. going in there and trying it out is more valuable to me than reading reviews.
          and knowing about the ways you can fake reviews and having worked at a company who did it, i just do not give a crap anymore about either flowery or negative reviews of a place.
          another angle:
          i studied web design and we had a bit of an introduction to marketing and design, so we skimmed over how detailed you can get analyzing a web presence, for example by following the eyes or the mouse.
          you may think that a 5-star rating with negative text would hurt them. but the reality is that nobody may ever read past the rating. people skim. information may be placed an inch away from where a person would notice it and it is lost.
          the normal person on google will just look at the average rating, as it pops up in the overview. i believe that only a minority is diligent enough to dig deeper. lack of paranoia, i guess.
          that may be the reason why this fight seems pointless to me and why i think that the business will hardly suffer.
          on the other hand, this article may very well rank good on google. we will see.

        21. You make a solid case, Tom, but I would argue that there is very little time committed to this tactic. If it deters even a couple people, cool. If not, no big loss to anyone. Definitely shouldn’t be the only tactic used to battle people who pull stunts like this.

        22. fair enough; if it is the way you want to fight, go ahead.
          i would say that it is useless, but i realize that i may not know enough about (informational) war to make such a conclusion. did not realize it, but this small victory here and seeing the childishness of the feminists on facebook makes me consider it may be able to change something – if simply for the fragility of the enemies whose strength is appearance.

        23. In all reality, it probably will make little to no difference, but they have already shown that they care enough about their Yelp rating to devote resources to clearing bad reviews.
          Fight them on multiple fronts. Keep them distracted with trivialities such as Yelp while mounting up a larger offensive somewhere else. A reactionary enemy can never go on the offense.

        24. “they’re people man. ”
          —like i said, this guy is a factory of Captain Obvious witticisms.

        27. Anybody who views an incitement of violence against a man with a mere shrug of the shoulders deserves our scorn. Anybody who tries to wax profound while shrugging his shoulders, especially when his words are the antithesis of profound, deserves large heapings of scorn.

        28. You are largely right. Right and wrong do not exist without an absolute Good, such that we can say the Right approximates/harmonizes with it, and the wrong differs/is discordant with it. Truly, it is improbable that even great suffering would persuade them, and it is even less probable that reason would.
          However, it is not true that an ideal can only be as absolute as an human person. There is absolutely no reason why real absolutes and ideals cannot exist outside of human persons, and why the failure of human persons to acknowledge and pursue these ideals cannot simply be ascribed to human ignorance and infirmity. I believe that God exists, and I further believe that this can be known with certainty by the light of reason. I believe that the absolute existence of goodness rooted in God is so closely connected to this, logically, that it may also be possible to know with certainty by the light of natural reason; but I would have to think a bit more about it, to state this flatly. In any case, however much you want to stress the subjectivity of the human person, it is not at all a logical consequence of human subjectivity that absolute ideals may not exist independently of human knowledge.
          For my part, after years of philosophical enquiry I have generally come to distrust my personal opinions and abilities, but have been repeatedly convinced of the essential truth of the positions of Catholic moral theology – positions often found, really, even in the best moral philosophy of the Pagans and other infidels. Justice requires that I attempt to “sell” the wisdom of justice to others, up to a point; justice requires that I tolerate injustice, wrong and evil, within certain limits and for certain reasons. But when it comes to modern liberalism, as you point out, since they have proven themselves to be very confirmed in their degeneracy, the requirement to “sell” them wisdom, or to tolerate them, is now well past due. It would be perfectly morally just, and I would not hesitate nor bat an eye, at this point, to kill them all and burn the mountain of corpses in an holocaust of reparation, showing the pile of ashes to our children and our children’s children, and telling them of the malum immane that was there extinguished. There is no longer any sin in doing so (indeed, there is great justice and goodness in doing so), though it is sad that things had to come to such a point.
          The only reason not to do it right this minute, is rooted in prudence – chiefly, that the likelihood of success is not good due to various circumstances. We should be striving to create circumstances favourable to success, and if we cannot produce them, we should wait patiently for them to arrive (since collapse seems imminent), and then set about the Lord’s work. Far more likely, in my opinion, is that a Divine chastisement will soon be visited upon us and the issue will be moot. There are few good men left, these days; and those of us who flatter ourselves in the notion that we try to be good, are so riddled with sins and mediocrity that our hands are not worthy instruments for the punishment of the wicked.

        29. i did not criticize your ruthlessness in standing by your ideal.
          i merely questioned that the ideal is rooted in the nature of the universe somehow, independently of humans. then, of course, you may question whether the universe – as we know it – even exists without human perception. but i am getting abstract.
          we disagree about the existence of an absolute ideal. as i see it, your ideal is likely to be a good one and i will not deny that it most probably applies to my life as much as it does to yours. but for me, it is not a consequence of god, but a consequence of us both sharing the same psychological makeup.
          since all humans are to a certain degree similar, there are systems in which they thrive better than in others. you may call this god. i do not. i simply call it the better system.
          but i have lately come to wonder about how i would go about proving god’s existence to myself if i wanted to. it is as much respect and honesty i can offer to a religion that seems – to me – pulled out of thin air.
          there are many things i have learned just lately in life. many ways of being – as a man, especially – that i did not consider possible earlier in my life. i would be foolish to disregard an experience of god somewhere along the path. an experience i have not yet known.
          but as it is, i can only see it as one possible interpretation of a sense of divinity that is in us.

        30. I understand. I think that, so long as a man maintains the attitude that he would like to know the Truth, and he is resolved to assent to it and to seek it out, even if it is uncomfortable and contradicts his suspicions or even convictions, then he is in as good a place as he may be, short of actually possessing the Truth. I think God will be more lenient on the Doomsday to such persons, than He will be to self-satisfied Christians with shallow and self-serving convictions.

    3. Maybe that owner thought it would’ve been a good way to attract new customers. Buy a latte before you lynch mob another customer in your cafe.

    4. The owner is immature and got carried away by his misplaced righteousness . He should care that all his customers have a positive experience, and not looking to ambush anyone for their opinions. If it was an employee who did this, he would’ve been dismissed immediately for not putting the interest of his employer first – serving happy customers for profit.
      Now do I think we should take away someone’s livelihood for one mistake? Generally no, and especially because this is what the far leftards do – they summarily destroy peoples lives because of ideological differences.
      If he’s guilty of anything, it’s the fact that he jeopardized his business, for radical privileged feminists who have little sympathy or understanding for what it took him to build his business. These are the people who’d rather go to Starbucks than support him.
      Only he knows if the sacrifice was worth it, but from a business perspective, he was certainly misguided and reckless.

      1. i like your stance. quite pragmatic.
        it really depends on whether the employee did it against the owner’s will or if the owner did it.
        if the former is the case, i would fire that person.
        if the latter is the case, well, he will have to see how it turns out for him. it really depends on the audience. scam artists make some money, too.

  14. Wow, I’ve been following this blog for years, and nothing of this magnitude has ever come close to what happened in my city, Montreal. But this doesn’t surprise me, as Montreal has a rep for protesting issues violently.

    1. Montreal has a serious problem with far-left extremists. This has been going on for years.

    2. wait until you see what will happen in Toronto… Pretty sure it’ll be worse!

  15. Cafe owner takes unsolicited snapshot of a paying customer. Posts it on Instagram, and invites strange women to come to his place to harass and possibly attack the customer.
    Cafe owner basically solicits violence on his own premises, with himself as the instigator.
    Cafe owners never has the balls simply to ask the customer to leave.
    Cafe owner is a cowardly vermin.
    Cafe owner sits there all night with a smile on his face, and takes Roosh’s money. Roosh even tips the piece of shit.
    This is what they’re like: literally basement-dwelling, chickenshit rats, who white knight for the dregs of the world.

    1. You forgot: Cafe owner cries like a pussy when his customers don’t appreciate his underhanded condescending behavior and tell the truth about it. Cafe owner tries to rewrite history and pretend it doesn’t exist. Just like the worthless retards he sides with, cafe owner files false complaints with authority figures to cover for his own poor decisions.

    2. The owner of cafe lartiste affame is nothing more than a fuckhead who deserves to lose his business. God knows what else he has done to patrons he dislikes. He might have jerked off in someone’s latte, or spit in it, or dropped his pubes in it. Nobody knows? Now, someone might say this is an isolated incident. But are you really going to take a chance if you go there?

      1. “He might have jerked off in someone’s latte, or spit in it, or dropped his pubes in it. Nobody knows? Now, someone might say this is an isolated incident. But are you really going to take a chance?”
        Good point, and a scary one too. I’m sure Roosh would not like the idea of some guy’s cum in his stomach, but it could be possible.. YUK!

      4. That’s a great point. If someone justifies being dishonest based on their hatred, then they’ll justify anything so long as they really really want to.

    3. Seriously, I would look into the country’s policies for bringing a weapon for self defense if this was happening to me. Not even necessarily a gun, pepper spray would work. I wouldn’t put it past these people to attack him unprovoked (obviously in a group as they are cowards).

      1. Better to hire people to do this for you. If you fuck someone up, even if you were attacked, you could find yourself gracing the inside of a jail cell.

      2. The short version is, in Canada, you can’t carry any item for “self defense”. At all.

      3. I’m Canadian, and guess what? Pepper spray is banned here!!! (I’m not joking).

    4. Yelp says owners can’t pay to alter or remove customer posts – so Roosh and his colleagues who were present can post negative reviews and they should do so.
      Comments from others who were not there can be removed.
      If I were Roosh, I’d also include the person who posted the Instagram in my police report as an accomplice and co-conspirator in a premeditated assault.

    5. I guess we should all get on there and write reviews. They have only had 24 reviews so far so we can really trash the place.

      1. Do what needs doing, but don’t lie man. You see where that kind of thinking gets someone.

    6. I’ve been in liberal college towns where the group think is similarly overbearing and it’s hard to find any establishment that doesn’t cater and give lip service to the harpies. Finding people who think outside the matrix or box in the area are few and far between. Toronto is huge though. We must descend on Toronto like rock stars with superior game and the redeemable will instantly catch our buzz. If drinks fly, it is a pre emptive toast.

    7. People who should know better if they bothered to think twice. That said, I guess he’s getting all the publicity for his new cafe that he could want.

  16. I doubt he’ll go out of business becasue of this but it would be great if he did. Businesses will only support SJWs so long as it makes economic sense to do so, so the task is to ensure that they have disincentives to do so.

  17. The average number of stars is going down.
    When I first looked this morning, it was at 4.5 stars, out of five.
    Now, a few hours later, it is at 4.0 stars out of five.

  18. I’ve been garcon and I’ve been customer in dozens of Cafés all my life and have never had my trust breached so miserably.
    Hint: Ppl can also give him bad reviews on Google Maps if you know the address of the place.

  19. Fuck Canada! How much degenerate this country could be. First degenerates of this nation write petitions to ban Rooshv, and free speech, then they threaten voilently disrupt his lecture, then their feminist sluts falsely accuse him of rape threats, then they physically attack him and harass him, then their mayor tries to defame him, and now we come to know that private business owners encourage people to come and harass him violently, just because they don’t like his opinions! And that also on their own property! How many SJW’s are there in this degenerate nation? Is the nation full of them? Is this a fully degenerate nation? Do any sane Canadians exist?
    Rooshv has delivered his lecture across the world, and in no country has he had to fight with such degeneracy. What the fuck is wrong with Canada?

        8. Lol, the only running I saw was the social construct commie slugs chasing a ghost all over town. The meeting went off and went off well. It’s the weak minded libbies who can’t fess up to their own shortcomings who are mad 🙂

        9. P.S. I love how you guys think you’re fighting the system when the commie cops and media support you and protect you. You ARE the system.

        2. Wrong answer. There seems to be some ailment troubling you son. I give you an A grade on being a degenerate. That’s my diagnosis. Get some help. You may be in fatal danger.

        5. Because there is nothing to treat. You might want to seek one for your clear anger issues though.

        6. There’s a lot. But of course, mental patients often don’t see what’s wrong with them. Rather, they say their illusions are correct, and any sane person contradicting his insanity is insane.

        10. You shouldn’t have a crush on Rooshv anyway. He’s too masculine for you. Go and find another effeminate guy like yourself.

        12. No one minds here. Accept it. Being gay is better than being a psychopath. You’ve already embarrassed yourself here, and proven yourself to be clinically insane. Why not accept that you are gay?

    2. At least Roosh is just passing by and going home soon, the rest of us are stuck here day in day out

      1. As a Canadian you don’t need a visa to travel around much of the world. Gather some cash, and visit some foreign place. Don’t waste your entire life in some feminist matriarchy.

  20. This is communist Russia great purge kinda shit. If not for Canada’s anti-gun legislation and a thin veneer of a justice system (which is becoming increasingly influenced by SJW), Roosh may not have made it out of Montreal alive.
    This is where the rubber meets the road – people like Roosh willing to engage in these ideological battles and face real life consequences (and bring consequences down on the SJWs who try to attack us).

  21. I think you have a case for another lawsuit – inciting mob violence against an innocent man.

    1. Inciting mob violence against an innocent man is not protected Freedom of Speech
      I do think Roosh has a case against the SJW for trying to incite mod violence against him and the other attendees.
      Interestingly, inciting mob violence is not protected in the US as Freedom of Speech.
      It seems somewhat ironic that our opponents are guilty of violating the very right that they tried to deny Roosh.
      Of course, I suppose in the mind of a SJW, that how they ‘feel’ about something makes it right or not.

  22. Guess what Roosh? You wanted to be famous (infamous really) you get to deal with this.
    Now quit crying.

    1. So what you’re essentially saying is it’s acceptable to incite a mob to come after someone you don’t like? Cool, just as long as we’re all on the same page.
      New game plan everyone: Next feminist who annoys us can now be swarmed out in public. Batcountry2 said it’s cool!

        1. Looks like he’s handling it pretty well. He didn’t fall for the feminist’s bait to start any violence. Instead he chose the peaceful solution of leaving the scene and filing a police report.
          Reverse roles for a second. What if Roosh was the one who started the fight and poured beer all over that chick. Would you say the same thing to her?

        2. Roosh did not ask for any of this or engineer this.
          Roosh only wanted to give his lecture. Roosh never tried to get any media attention and did not do any press releases. Prior to last week, I would have never expected the media to report on Roosh or his event.
          The only reason Roosh got media attention is because Aurelie Nix filed a FALSE police report claiming Roosh issued a ‘rape threat’ against her. Then she started mobilizing the media and a mob against Roosh and the event.
          Aurelie Nix is the one who created this entire situation. If it was not for her, outside of this web site, and the few hundred attendees to the lecture, no one would have been aware of the event. Instead, she got Roosh nationwide media attention, and then she failed in an epic manner, in front of the entire country (world?), as the SJWs ran around Montreal, like idiots, trying to find the event.

        5. Was the “chick” a public figure who is well known for advocating raping men?
          Roosh showed his true gamma rabbit and ran.

        6. No, she is known for raising mobs of men to go after people she does not like or agree with.
          So much for the idea of ‘free speech’ in Canada.

        7. Was he arrested for his speech? Nope.
          Then “Freedom of Speech” doesn’t apply. It literally only applies to government censorship.

        8. So a private individual can censor people and prevent them from giving lectures ‘they do not like’?
          You will recall, that Aurelie Nix wanted the GOVERNMENT to deny Roosh entry into Canada, thereby preventing him from giving his lecture. Hence the ‘Freedom of Speech’ violation.

        9. Actually yes they can. If they own the venue the speech is being given in (or can convince the owner to do so).
          And the government of Canada can deny any non-citzens entry (all governments can) for any reason.
          That’s still not infringing on his freedom of speech. That’s preventing a non-citzen entry.

        10. What about if a citizen of Canada wanted to give the exact same lecture, in a building they owned? Would that be ok with you or would you send in the police?
          What if Roosh did the lecture by teleconference, where he broadcast over the internet to the lecture room from outside the country, would that be ok with you?
          What about publishing the lecture in a book, and then selling the book in a book store, would that by ok with you? Or would you send in the police to collect and burn such books?
          I expect that all of those scenarios are NOT ok with you, you want to censor anything you do not agree with.
          Just for the record, I can not see a supposedly ‘free country’, like Canada is supposed to be, denying Roosh entry because YOU do not like what he says. 200+ plus people DID want to hear what he had to say and you have no right (legal/moral/whatever else you think up) to stop it.
          Here are the links on denying entry from the United States into Canada. I do not see ‘because I do not like what Roosh has to say’, as one of the acceptable reasons.
          http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/inadmissibility/who.asp
          http://www.canadaduientrylaw.com/denied-entry-to-canada.php
          http://gocanada.about.com/od/faqscrossingtheborde1/tp/Reasons-You-May-Be-Denied-Entry-at-the-Canada-Border.htm
          I am also sure that there is a treaty between Canada and the United States, (and other Commonwealth Nations?) on allowing citizens from both countries to travel to the other.
          There was an agreement (Treaty) signed in March 2015 about travel between the United States and Canada. The signing of the treaty in the United States makes it law, that even supersedes any conflicts there is with the United States Constitution.
          So no, unless someone falls into one of the exceptions, they can NOT be denied the right, under the treaty, to travel between the United States and Canada, as a citizen of either country.
          If Roosh is ever denied entry to Canada, then Aurelie Nix could be denied travel to the United States for filing a FALSE police report (which is a crime) or Jessica Lelièvre denied travel to her house in Florida, United States for assaulting (a crime) someone (Roosh). Those things are allowed as a valid reason to deny someone travel between countries.

        13. A canadian citizen would be a completely diffent matter. But Roosh is not a citizen.
          Teleconference calls would also be completely different.
          He could be denied entry for the same reason Fred Phelps was denied entry, being found to be in violation of the hate speech laws of Canada.

        15. The owner gave consent and he entered the country leagally. Your grasping out straws now.

        16. I thought those fascist hate speech codes were overturned? Hat tip to Mr. Mark Steyn.

        17. From all that is published here and on the mainstream media, Roosh seems to be handling himself extraordinarily well. Even if you disagree with his views completely, this is the objective truth, Roosh really conducted himself this way under these circumstances.
          Unless you have first hand evidence he is not doing so, you have no grounds to make such statements. You know the only reason you are is to provoke and taunt for attention. Go to Home Depot and buy your own limelight.

        23. Why was the venue changed? Because the owner of the original venue decided to cancel due to who Roosh was. Was this censorship? Yup. Was it in any way infringing on Roosh’s rights? Nope.
          That’s not grasping at straws, those are facts of life.

        24. Fred Phelps is NOT the same as Roosh.
          Phelps travels to places to deliberately engage in confrontations with people who do not want him there (such as protesting outside of a church where a funeral is taking place, saying it is ‘God’s punishment’ or some idiot statement like that), and causes problems with people who do not want him there. Phelps seeks out people to cause problems with. Roosh does NOT do anything like that.
          Roosh was traveling to give a lecture, in a venue that he arranged for, to people that wanted to hear what he had to say. The only people who would have ever heard Roosh’s lecture are people that wanted to go see it. Even now, I do not believe a text of the lecture has been made available, nor has anyone said, with quotes to the lecture, how it was ‘hate speech’.
          You do not even know what Roosh said at the lecture that was ‘hate speech’.
          And since when do YOU get to determine what I am allowed to listen to, or who is allowed to speak?
          That is what I really object to, that you think you somehow have the ‘right’ to regulate and censor what I can listen to or talk with.

        25. Steyn on hate speech code:
          http://www.steynonline.com/4409/gagging-us-softly
          “When I ran into my troubles up north, a very
          few principled members of Canada’s bien-pensants stood up to argue that
          the thought police were out of control and the law needed to be reined in. Among them was Keith Martin, a Liberal MP and himself a member of a visible minority—or, as he put it, a “brown guy.” For his pains, he and a
          few other principled liberals were mocked by Warren Kinsella, a third-rate spin-doctor for the Liberal party and a chap who fancies
          himself Canada’s James Carville. As Kin­sella taunted these lonely defenders of freedom of speech, how did it feel to be on the same side
          as Steyn . . . and anti-Semites . . . and white supremacists? Eh, eh, how’d ya feel about that, eh? ”
          “By contrast, Canada’s “human rights”
          commissions and Britain’s gay-outreach officer and Europe’s various public prosecutors seem to think there should be only one side of the debate, and they’re ever more comfortable in arguing for that quite
          openly. ”
          “You’re accepting that the state, in ruling one opinion out of bounds, will be content to stop there. ”
          “As is now clear, it isn’t. Restrictions on
          freedom of speech undermine the foundations of justice, including the
          bedrock principle: equality before the law.”
          “Or as an ordinary Canadian citizen said to
          me, after I testified in defense of free speech to the Ontario parliament at Queen’s Park, “Give me the right to free speech, and I
          will use it to claim all my other rights.”
          Conversely, if you let them take your right to free speech, how are you going to stop them from taking all the others?”

        26. I don’t. The Government of Canada does when it is within their borders. Especially when is from a foreign citizen.

    3. No. He wanted to give a speech to participants who wanted to be there. The fame part comes in because people want to hear what he has to say and pack of tyranical hypocrites didn’t like that.
      If a homosexual or a feminist wanted to give a speech to be greeted with a littany of threats, that would be ok with you because it’s a part of “wanting to be famous”, yes?

  23. Yet if it were a cafe that asked a woman to cover up her breastfeeding or leave, all hell would have broken loose. That cafe would have been shamed, in the media and I bet those negative reviews would stick..
    This business needs to be put into a position where it can no longer trade or suffers severe financial difficulty. I would have had no issue if the owner had told Roosh to “f off” and refuse service, any business should be able to choose it’s customers. You don’t however serve a customer and then promptly screw that customer.. These lefties are the first to cry about ethics, but they have absolutely none of their own.
    Give the cafe and any business who wants to behave in this manner hell. They deserve everything that comes their way.

    1. ” I would have had no issue if the owner had told Roosh to “f off” and refuse service, any business should be able to choose it’s customers. ”
      Yeah, tell that to the baker…
      http://goo.gl/cylmTF

    2. And extend that to any business (written or otherwise) that treats men poorly. I’ve got a number of corporations I will never in my life buy from. Firestone is one of them, and I did let them know why. The only way to fight these people is by cutting off the money flow. I might not make a difference, but I do my part and that’s enough for me.

  24. Going on Yelp en masse on the same day and not writing anything about the cafe but BS will get you relegated to the TOS violator section.
    There was one of those fake rape incidents at Happy Ending in NYC and of course all of the femtards tried to use Yelp by using it as a platform and giving 1 star, the lowest. A person I know who uses the DinduNottin ID had over 50 of these posts expunged and wrote his own post. It was up for a week but apparently taken down but is still in the area where it can be read. Apparently the femtards since they have nothing to do in life got Yelp to remove it but even Yelp didn’t do this as they did with the 50 TOS violators.Scroll down to not recommended and then further to the 50 expunged that say nothing, just were deleted.
    http://www.yelp.com/biz/happy-ending-new-york-4

  25. More evidence that Progressives are violent, anti-intellectual, authoritarian mobocrats. This is the type of mentality that led to those mass executions of anyone wearing glasses.

  26. They can’t keep up with the bad reviews.
    They are removing reviews but they can’t keep up. As fast as they take some down bad reviews, more appear.
    I expect that at some point, the place will be willing to apologize to Roosh.
    Watch the SJWs throw a ‘real fit’ when there is a photo of Roosh excepting the apology of the cafe owner.

  27. Guys, don’t worry if your review gets taken down. The shitlibs in charge of moderating these things may be on high alert at the moment, but this is a battle of attrition they cannot win, as long as we demonstrate a modicum of coordination.
    I encourage everyone reading this to put a reminder in your phone to leave them a bad review one month from now. Two months. Six months. If even 10% of the people reading this post do this, these fucks will be out of business by this time next year.
    Play the long game, gentlemen.

  28. ROK article is fourth on a google search.
    First, is google plus.
    Second is the facebook page
    Third is yelp
    Fourth is this ROK article.
    Once this article is number one in the listings, ahead of yelp, who cares what the yelp status will be then?

  29. The SJWs and Govt of Canada have without fail confirmed during the last week the worst preconceptions one could have about SJWs.

  30. “L’Artiste affamé” means “The Hungry Artist”. Most of the artists are also leftist, constantly asking for government subsidies to finance their activities. You can count on me : I won’t stop at “L’Artiste affamé” when I’ll travel to Montréal and I’ll pass the word. They’ll change their name to “L’Artiste encore plus affamé” (“The Hungrier Artist”)!

  31. I don’t have Twitter so I’m going to address “Ian Macintyre” here about a comment regarding Free Speech he made on Mayor of Toronto John Tory’s twitter account, Said comment : “Hate speech ain’t covered under free speech, champ.”- Ian Macintyre. Actually yes it is, what is the definition of Free? Free= “Not under the control or in the Power of another, able to act or be done as one wish’s”. And Speech? Speech= “The Expression of or the ability to express thoughts and feelings by articulate sounds.” So when Free is combined with Speech to create FreeSpeech it literally translates into, “Not under the control or in the Power of another, able to act or be done as one wish’s the Expression of or the ability to express thoughts and feelings by articulate sounds”. So when Parameters are set like having limits to speech by labeling certain discussions as “Hate Speech” than you can no longer call it Free-Speech, because now someone has Controlled the Expression of Thought, you can’t have FreeSpeech and than make Exceptions, It’s either Free or Controlled , Why don’t you Oppressive Commie Bastards come out already and just call it what it is, CENSORSHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As Far as Hate Speech is concerned, it’s an ugly reality of FreeSpeech but to limit Speech because of it, begins the Erosion Process of Freedom.

  32. Apparently Yelp is going along with the status quo if they are removing the bad reviews that mention Roosh being photographed and being slandared. Roosh should throw a lawsuit at thst cafe. I’m quite certain there might be a MRA type lawyer in Montreal that could represent him pro bono.

  34. I’m sure others already mentioned it, but there are agencies – like customer protection, business licensing etc. – where official complaints about this business can be sent. hope Roosh will do just that.

  35. This punk needs to feel the wrath for his actions for years to come. Drip the 1 star reviews evenly over the days for maximum impact. Create accounts using disposable email accounts, there are many providers out there. This will create a steady steam of stress and annoyance for this punk ass and others who think they can pull this shit.

  36. I suggest a quarterly yelp review with Roosh’s experience retold, from now until the end of time

    1. I was waiting for this Story to get picked up, i’m Glad Breitbart is spreading the word, and Milo’s articles are fantastic.

  39. “there are multiple charges against him please call the patriarchy”
    Um… Well, I know he was in a police station filing charges against “Jessica Rabbit”. And I know that his itinerary is posted publicly. Either that statement is bullshit or Canadian police are retarded.
    Also, I only speak ‘Merican but I think it seems easy to deduce that a place named safe to assume that L’Artiste… is going to be a liberal shithole. Shoulda gone to Starbucks.

    1. Not necessarily, remember that this is a French speaking area. I would have made no connection to left wing wackos if I came across a café here in the US that was called the starving artist.

  40. Man, calling people to come and attack one of your customers goes back to the old days when blacks would be run out of towns and harrassed by locals when they tried to eat at restaraunts. The whole thing about “social justice” has been turned on it’s head. This place needs to be sued.

    1. I was just thinking how this whole cafe incident reminds me of MLK and what he and segregation era Blacks had to go through.
      Maybe roosh should start calling himself the “MLK of the Masculine Man movement.”
      Has a nice ring to it i think, and it would certainly piss off the prog crowd even if it was a tad exaggerated:D

      1. Man, it’s so much like the Civil Rights Movement that it’s scary. All Roosh and the MRM is saying is that men have become second class citizens. Also, women have their “Game” and men need to develop their own. Taking this power away from women and the vested interests supporting them is driving them nuts. But you can’t call them “Sexist” because they say only men can be sexist, and it goes on and on. It drives me nuts.

        1. The more that they behave like fascist cunts who hypocritically exploit useful idiot white knights to do their dirty work, the more their philosophy is exposed as absurd to people who have a functional brain.
          I actually do think it’s too late for society as a whole though. These prog pricks have been stacking the political deck in their favor for decades now, they won’t give up their powerbase without a fight. There might be more people unplugged from the feminatrix but so long as the progs hold the keys to the circuit breaker we are on defense here.
          When society finally collapses from all this Bs we will emerge from the shadows and rebuild, bigger and better than before.
          We will forge a new Constitution, one that closes all the loopholes from the previous one that allowed homos, atheists, communists, illegal aliens and other progs to undermine it.
          History is written by the winners, but edited by the losers.
          It’s time to take back control of the almighty pen.
          SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS

        2. That’s pretty much how I see it. It’s gone so far one way, and when one group (us men) start speaking up there are so many vested interests shouting us down, that I don’t see how it’s gonna change across the board.
          It’s just up to each individual man to be responsible for himself. I hate to use ad hoc expressions like “Red Pill” and “SJW’s,” the the movement is in it’s infancy and they help to reveal issues.
          If enough men just stop playing the game, there will be women who also stop playing their game. Eventually things will start changing, but it has to start with individuals.
          It’s like the Civil Rights Movement, but for men in general. Before the 1950’s nobody questioned the unfairness in society. It was just accepted. Right now nobody accepts that men are subjugated to special interests and all the rest.

  41. I can hardly wait for Toronto
    Ii looks like more media is starting to pick this up. I wish it would start to run in the United States. So far, only the media in Canada seems to be reporting on it.
    Any SJWs williing to go run the same ‘playbook’ they did with Montreal for Toronto and add the United States media to it? Maybe with a little work from the SJW crowd, we can get this all over North America.
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    1. The US is too distracted by the Kardashitians and football to care. Perhaps this is one of the few occasions this is a good thing.

  42. Virtually every Canadian news outlet is having a Roosh bonanza, we can use your support in the comments sections guys 🙂
    This is generating numbers of comments unlike anything I’ve ever seen for Canadian news

    1. A lot of us aren’t from Canada so we don’t know where to find this stuff to post comments. Throw up some links…

  43. The Cafe owner should have behaved like a man and just refused service to Roosh. Any restaurant or cafe can refuse business and throw out someone if they don’t like them to be there. He could have done that and then posted a message where he describes his “heroic” deed of having ousted the infamous blogger.
    We could have respected that – if you don’t like someone, then ask him to leave – no harm done. That would have been a manly action. Instead the guy continues to serve Roosh his tea, but decides to break the privacy of a paying customer and call upon the mob, so that the feminists can do the dirty deed. Men have become so effeminate and cowardly that they only act upon their convictions when they are backed up by an entire crowd. They essentially act like women shying away from the slightest confrontation.
    Also – they knowingly deleted their social media post on Roosh, because they obviously got some feedback on that with regard to inciting a mob, potentially inciting violence, breaking the privacy of their customers etc.

    1. There is very little honor in men nowadays, he takes Roosh’s money and throws him under the bus.

    2. “Any restaurant or cafe can refuse business and throw out someone if they don’t like them to be there.”
      You haven’t spoken to any christian bakers in the US of late.

      1. Heh – you can refuse when it’s not based on religion, gender, race or sexual orientation.
        Otherwise the mob will come down on you – even if the law doesn’t.

  44. I have an idea for a new product an am looking for investors. It’s called the ‘Pet Mattress’, sort of like the Pet Rock in the 70’s. It will be a miniature scaled down version of what Mattress Girl carried around with her. It can have many uses eg. getting on your knees to give bj’s or just as a cushion. I think that they will sell very well on campus and will make excellent Christmas or Valentine Day gifts.

  45. Not a very bright businessman…. my guess is they’re a trust fund baby, no serious businessman would invite that kind of liability onto their premises.

  47. i saw a roosh article of yahoo canada!! it was about how the mayor of Toronto does not want him to come there.
    And of course majority of the comments were from little bishes.

    1. What exactly are they scared of? That their women are too dumb to know how to refuse a man?

  48. Ironically, I had an actual review of that place- because I gave it a low rating (2 stars), and said the staff was negligent talking on the phone while I waited- Yelp deleted it.
    WTF is this a joke? You as a business owner can now call up Yelp, make up a stupid story, and they’ll delete everything that’s not 5 stars?
    I’ve promptly withdrew all my past reviews on that site, deleted my account, and will be passing this message to anyone who uses that website. Everyone should do the same.

  49. Regarding how some of your reviews are being deleted by Yelp…..
    What about when these feminazi whores and faggots post HUNDREDS-THOUSANDS of bad reviews laced with explicit images on the review or facebook pages of a business that says they dont support gay marriage. I dont think Yelp (would) removed those.

  50. Sue this cafe to the Stone Age. As a business owner, I am very ashamed og this act and I think their business permit should be revoked.

  51. Gents, continue posting yelp reviews regardless of scrubbing & finding ways to link to this story for SEO.
    The tide is turning, keep the heat up!

  53. What this café owner did was super disloyal. Regardless of what you
    think of Roosh’s ideas, whether you agree with him or not, exposing his
    location in real time on a public forum, was not cool. The guy was not
    even talking to anyone, just minding his own business while sipping
    coffee. Is that a way to treat a visitor? What an embarrassment to my
    city.

  54. If I was still in Montreal, I’d DEFINITELY go there and act like a dick (break my cup on purpose, throw a fit, vandalize the bathroom, etc)
    These beta-pussy assholes deserve a taste of their own medicine.

    1. it’s tempting isnt it, good old fashion violence. But I wouldn’t recommend it since our adversaries would only seize on this to paint us as out-of-control thugs.

  55. As another commenter suggested, the most constructive thing to do is mark on your calender to write a negative review a couple weeks from now.

  57. Not sure that you have a right to privacy on someone else’s property but it was insensitive.

  61. Why is he alone? Was he alone? Don’t be a martyr Roosh. I’m really surprised Roosh is moving without security.

  62. What are you doing at place called Café L’Artiste Affamé. The name sounds like it could be a gay bathhouse.

  63. Roosh, the only way you can have that many haters is by upsetting confirmation bias with a broad telling of what is real. I thought that I was adept at that and was proud at my number of haters, but I realise I am a novice. You are my role model …

    1. You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.
      Winston Churchill

  64. You’ve got to hand it to the prick: He didn’t leave money on the table, even took the tip with a dirty smile. That takes some serious red pill skill. But at what cost to future business? Although the bad publicity for him will also be good publicity considering the type of clientele that frequent his cafe.
    The only way he’ll lose out as a result of his actions is if he loses in court.

  69. sorry all, but complaining about this and blowing it out of proportion and making it seem like his life was actually in danger because a bunch of feminists hate the guy is stupid. obviously it was a dick move by the cafe owner but to sensationalize it is exactly the sort of victim complex/accusatory mindset that every feminist involved with Gamergate put on whenever they were ‘threatened’ online. he’s a man, not a woman. my point is that yes it’s fucked up and bad business practice, but when men on this site make themselves seem like persecuted victims it comes off as whiny and petulant. people aren’t going to like what you have to say, and if you’re going to be a public figure advocating for viewpoints current society doesn’t find all that acceptable these things could happen. am I saying the cafe owner was right? of course not. but I’m saying that we all know that this type of sensationalism is counterproductive, not all that masculine, and pretty unbecoming. I’ve been following the publications of this site and others like it for some time. As someone who has a lot of respect for contributors to this space, i feel like you all can do better.

  70. That was a typically fem way of handling it. I’m so glad that I will soon retire and be able to spend several months a year in red-pill places like Southern Spain, Morocco, Southern Italy, Greece and Turkey.

Comments are closed.