So what do you think? "Avi's story"

[Doll]

I have finished reading GQ's posts.

[Daveman]

Guys, I am in a "fake" marriage!    I did all the above!

OMG!

LoL.. some scams DO take a little longer to unfold than others!  :evil:

[Doll]

LoL.. some scams DO take a little longer to unfold than others!  :evil:

That's right!
I also leave my husband eat alone (OMG!) when he doesn't behave. Seriously!

[Doll]

Maxx, just a question- are you dating now or what?

[OlgaH]

The subliminal definition behind the phrase 'traditional women' are 'submissive', dependent & helplessness. Perfect companion for one who is lonely, desperate and controlling. AWs have done away with these silliness and these men know that full well...so they search in FSU.

and those lonely and desperate men who turns or maybe not into a "highly controlling John Frankenstein" are also an easy prey for FSUW predators who knows how to play the cards. Their (FSUW's) submissiveness, dependency, helplessness, traditionalism, loveliness, tenderness, thoughtfulness whatever your call it will disappear in the right moment, and they already know about shelters, who to contact to and how to scratch and bruise themselves. One guy probably will think twice before going the painful road after being blackmailed by his "lovely  traditional wife", the other guy will pick up the "tomahawk". Some AW, btw, also know how to play tricks and do not hesitate to,  especially when it comes to "who will get custody of a child".

[Doll]

and those lonely and desperate men who turns or maybe not into a "highly controlling John Frankenstein" are also an easy prey for FSUW predators who knows how to play the cards. Their (FSUW's) submissiveness, dependency, helplessness, traditionalism, loveliness, tenderness, thoughtfulness whatever your call it will disappear in the right moment, and they already know about shelters, who to contact to and how to scratch and bruise themselves. One guy probably will think twice before going the painful road after being blackmailed by his "lovely  traditional wife", the other guy will pick up the "tomahawk". Some AW, btw, also know how to play tricks and do not hesitate to,  especially when it comes to "who will get custody of a child".

True.

[Maxx2]

Here is a video of Ilana, Avi's first wife in Russian. I have never had this translated to me. Also I am working on the Russian interview of Zoya that I should have posted in the next day or two. I may have a few clips of Avi in English after that.

Overall what I am working on is winding up this story and then go on to another one and so on. These are not just 'men done wrong' tales. There are the 'women done wrong' as well. A few interviews with Russian women attorneys and a surprise I'll keep for the end.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjX3ION0rVg[/youtube]
 

[Misha]

2) Brain scatter, ramblings and Russian problems with gender identification If you notice at 2:44 of the second clip Ilana says "he cheated on him". You have to listen close. I noticed Avi saying in clips (that I didn't use) his getting the right gender wrong with his "he's" and "her's". I noticed this with Zoya as well. I asked a Russian woman I know about this and she said this mistake was common with Russians. Is this true? Have you noticed this?

Yes. My wife still slips up from time to time. It is quite common as a person is learning English.

[Lily]

Here is a video of Ilana, Avi's first wife in Russian. I have never had this translated to me. Also I am working on the Russian interview of Zoya that I should have posted in the next day or two. I may have a few clips of Avi in English after that.

Overall what I am working on is winding up this story and then go on to another one and so on. These are not just 'men done wrong' tales. There are the 'women done wrong' as well. A few interviews with Russian women attorneys and a surprise I'll keep for the end.

Good job, Maxx2! So far I cannot see anything about the 'women done wrong'. On the video, I can see one good woman who protects her ex because they are still friends.

[Maxx2]

Good job, Maxx2! So far I cannot see anything about the 'women done wrong'. On the video, I can see one good woman who protects her ex because they are still friends.

That will be in other videos I will post. These are of completely different people from the ones in "Avi's Story".

[GQBlues]

There has been many good signs lately 

That's good to know Maxx. Keep it up!

I appreciate your scepticism. That is your taking a deep critical look at these tales of woe. Scepticism keeps things honest and ourselves as well. In the near future I plan to release more films on this subject right here on RWD. I would appreciate very much your scepticism of the subjects of these films. They need a critic. Could you do that for me?

Then allow me to make my first installment...

My skepticism arose from a few things in this video. Let me try and see if I can clearly spell them out for you for no other reason that just to give you a counter perspective. If there's a purpose in making these videos, I think it'll help your cause immensely to present from the most objective & neutral position. Otherwise, it easily mark these videos at best as biased and one-sided. At worst, a witchhunt.

1. Interview the other party. Give your audience the benefit of hearing the other side. Imagine this a court of law. You presented the plaintiff's case including all the circumstantial evidence, witnesses, etc...and expect your audience then to become judge, jury, and executioners without the benefit of hearing the defendant's side of the story. That's likely fine to many, like this thread clearly shows, but not to everyone. If that is the type of audience you're trying to reach, then nothing more I need to add. Without both sides of the story getting equal representation, then it's empty and far too inconclusive.

2. In this video, you showed the woman and her alleged boyfriend walking together, standing in front of the elevator, etc...then concluded they've been having 'sex'. Then left it up to the audience to speculate and assume they've been having torrid sex despite the absence of irrefutable proof. Spending night/s in his apartment doesn't automatically mean they're having intimate relationships, does it? I've had more than a few friends spend the night in my crib habitually before but sex was hardly a consideration let alone a foregone conclusion. They did it because they knew me enough as a friend.

Another thing that just doesn't sit well with me is the whole storyline that somehow this woman and her alleged boyfriend rode this experience to somehow save the man a few dollars it cost of immigrating her to the US. I don't know about everyone else here but for me I'll be damned if I even remotely consider going through the silliness of watching my girlfriend shack-up with another man for a few months as boyfriend/girlfriend - husband/wife just so I can save a few dollars for the cost of immigrating her. I mean, can YOU do that? Can any of the men who automatically pronounced this woman guilty as charged honestly tell you they fully understand the logic of this decision and that this is more than just imaginable? I doubt it.

However if there's any validity to the notion that this acidic frugality reigns supreme in some men, then dive into that. Find out from the actual men, like the one in this video, the reason/s and the logic why they would allow themselves, and their girlfriend/s, to go through such situations.

Lastly, since you asked I be a critic...the other players are far too rigid and too rehearsed. They are hardly, IMHO, convincing.

[Maxx2]

That's good to know Maxx. Keep it up!

Then allow me to make my first installment...

My skepticism arose from a few things in this video. Let me try and see if I can clearly spell them out for you for no other reason that just to give you a counter perspective. If there's a purpose in making these videos, I think it'll help your cause immensely to present from the most objective & neutral position. Otherwise, it easily mark these videos at best as biased and one-sided. At worst, a witchhunt.

1. Interview the other party. Give your audience the benefit of hearing the other side. Imagine this a court of law. You presented the plaintiff's case including all the circumstantial evidence, witnesses, etc...and expect your audience then to become judge, jury, and executioners without the benefit of hearing the defendant's side of the story. That's likely fine to many, like this thread clearly shows, but not to everyone. If that is the type of audience you're trying to reach, then nothing more I need to add. Without both sides of the story getting equal representation, then it's empty and far too inconclusive.

2. In this video, you showed the woman and her alleged boyfriend walking together, standing in front of the elevator, etc...then concluded they've been having 'sex'. Then left it up to the audience to speculate and assume they've been having torrid sex despite the absence of irrefutable proof. Spending night/s in his apartment doesn't automatically mean they're having intimate relationships, does it? I've had more than a few friends spend the night in my crib habitually before but sex was hardly a consideration let alone a foregone conclusion. They did it because they knew me enough as a friend.

Another thing that just doesn't sit well with me is the whole storyline that somehow this woman and her alleged boyfriend rode this experience to somehow save the man a few dollars it cost of immigrating her to the US. I don't know about everyone else here but for me I'll be damned if I even remotely consider going through the silliness of watching my girlfriend shack-up with another man for a few months as boyfriend/girlfriend - husband/wife just so I can save a few dollars for the cost of immigrating her. I mean, can YOU do that? Can any of the men who automatically pronounced this woman guilty as charged honestly tell you they fully understand the logic of this decision and that this is more than just imaginable? I doubt it.

However if there's any validity to the notion that this acidic frugality reigns supreme in some men, then dive into that. Find out from the actual men, like the one in this video, the reason/s and the logic why they would allow themselves, and their girlfriend/s, to go through such situations.

Lastly, since you asked I be a critic...the other players are far too rigid and too rehearsed. They are hardly, IMHO, convincing.

Hello GQ

I think a lot your questions would be understood by you if you had made a documentary film on this subject or any subject involving people.  There are limitations of what is possible to present. As example your observation that the people seemed rigid and rehearsed. Half the people in this story were reluctant to get on camera. They were not used to being on camera especially with all the lights, the boom mike hanging over their head and a wireless mike up their blouse/shirt.



They did it because Avi thought it might help him somehow. And it did help him but I will say how that was when I cap off this story. That is for later. Back to the subject. They were not comfortable but they were  probably not comfortable testify in court either. Oh and case you say they were pressured by Avi. They were. Elizabeth said "I had to get involved in the case". That is somewhere in the beginning of this video. This was because she was subpoenaed while on vacation and had to cut it short. She came to court. Told the truth. And Avi won. So putting pressure on people to help is not the same thing as getting them to lie. Sorry I am just trying to anticipate your next observation OK?

The part about appearing rehearsed. I didn't see that although in another video of Zoya there was a point where we were  searching for the right English word Zoya could use to describe Avi. She said it in Russian but her limited English the right word couldn't come to her. So the Russian woman that helped me with this that was there (BTW most of my help were women) explained it to me and we came up with "easy to fool". "Michael said Avi was easy to fool". The Russian translation of this word I will ask Lily, OlgaH or Doll when I post this interview in Russian. I think the right word might be "dupe", "smuck", "fool" or something else derogatory. But this another example of limitations with stories like these.

About my assumption of their being romantic. The first sign of this was in his e-mail to Avi's wife. The one dated 2 weeks after Avi married her. Michael calls her "kitten" and "my love" and says "Miss you a lot!" "love ya" "Yours, the one and only crazy one". Then he takes a vacation with her and they stay in the same hotel and spend the night together. Zoya in the Russian interview gets more in detail with this.

Finally it's near impossible to get both sides to tell their story. We try. We call them but they run. We send e-mails and they go unanswered. We get a calls from a father or wife saying don't bother my son or husband.

So what to do? I post a variety of different stories then let everyone decide for themselves what is what. The big challenge is going to be to the ones here. Will they be as balanced in their criticism and scepticism of American men, immigrant men, American women and Russian women?  Will they subject those in the videos to the same standard of judgment? Then afterward some given a thumbs and others not. Or will all these people be lumped together and called losers? And if so could we not say the same for all of us?

[GQBlues]

Hello GQ

I think a lot your questions would be understood by you if you had made a documentary film on this subject or any subject involving people.  There are limitations of what is possible to present. As example your observation that the people seemed rigid and rehearsed. Half the people in this story were reluctant to get on camera. They were not used to being on camera especially with all the lights, the boom mike hanging over their head and a wireless mike up their blouse/shirt.

Maxx-

I got on a syndicated national TV talk show, so I know what it's like to be in front of cameras, lights, make-ups (though that didn't help my ugly mug at all) and more especially a raucous audience bent on putting all of us on hay burner. As a matter of fact, the pre-show spat was that they wanted to make a presentation of couples married through the MOB from a positive angle. What they didn't tell us was that they were planning on exploiting the ugly side of it for the show in front of a hostile crowd. We received no script, no rehearsals and worst, no warnings. They were hoping for a heigthened ratings a la Jerry Springer. It backfired on them.

So putting pressure on people to help is not the same thing as getting them to lie. Sorry I am just trying to anticipate your next observation OK?

I never implied or inferred someone or anyone was lying. When I said 'rehearsed', none of the folks actually paused, stuttered, etc...considering the degree of, and presumably the weight of, what they were actually doing it for. It almost appear like a recital as oppose to a candid interview. Natural English speakers have a hard time doing this let alone foreigners who are obviously challenged with the language - like myself  

About my assumption of their being romantic. The first sign of this was in his e-mail to Avi's wife. The one dated 2 weeks after Avi married her. Michael calls her "kitten" and "my love" and says "Miss you a lot!" "love ya" "Yours, the one and only crazy one". Then he takes a vacation with her and they stay in the same hotel and spend the night together. Zoya in the Russian interview gets more in detail with this.

As for the assumption of romantic liasons, I still contend much of what you've given so far are mere 'circumstantial'. It proves nothing. It means nothing. You will be hard pressed to convict anyone by merely presenting terms of endearment as sole proof for sexual relationships. LOL. I had a friend who's married now and lives in New York. She used to write me emails and ends it with "Give it to me hard big boy!". We never had sex, Maxx and we've hung out for years. Based on that term of endearment compared to the ones you cited above, I must be having orgies on a batstick with this gal, no?

There had been a few women who had sent me flowers, long stem chocolate cookies, etc...on my birthdays or other special occassions or just because - with silly terms of endearments but it doesn't mean we gitdown'ndirty. Like I said, it'll only help the cause more if you can show more proofs e.g. PDA, Got Milk-like photos, etc...instead of idle  assumptions. Do you not agree?

Finally it's near impossible to get both sides to tell their story. We try. We call them but they run. We send e-mails and they go unanswered. We get a calls from a father or wife saying don't bother my son or husband.

No one said these things are easy, but like I said, if you want to present this from a neutral objective position then you have but one thing to do. It isn't an option. I'm sure you've seen journalists trying to do this many times despite unwilling parties...they'll show doors being shut, cameras being shoved away, etc...but clearly, if nothing else, the effort to do so exists. The burden of proof lies upon you. If you assume that burden, then you can't just simply dismiss it for being difficult to do and not even make a declaration 'why' you don't have it on your videos.

Anyway, was there a bigger payback for the guy (and gal) other than just the monies saved for the cost of immigration for the woman? You didn't actually address this matter on your last post.
 
Once again...I'm not saying bad or good to any of the party. I remain indifferent until I hear the other side of the story and had seen all irrefutable proofs given and accepted by the law. I'm not as quick as the others to make a judgment until I hear all sides of the story. Right now, most of my points are aimed at the people on Avi's side, and Avi himself, for no other reason than they're really the only ones talking.

[Maxx2]

I had a long post prepared and almost finished but my computer crashed so I will answer this part.

Maxx-

As for the assumption of romantic liasons, I still contend much of what you've given so far are mere 'circumstantial'. It proves nothing. It means nothing. You will be hard pressed to convict anyone by merely presenting terms of endearment as sole proof for sexual relationships. LOL. I had a friend who's married now and lives in New York. She used to write me emails and ends it with "Give it to me hard big boy!". We never had sex, Maxx and we've hung out for years. Based on that term of endearment compared to the ones you cited above, I must be having orgies on a batstick with this gal, no?

There had been a few women who had sent me flowers, long stem chocolate cookies, etc...on my birthdays or other special occassions or just because - with silly terms of endearments but it doesn't mean we gitdown'ndirty. Like I said, it'll only help the cause more if you can show more proofs e.g. PDA, Got Milk-like photos, etc...instead of idle  assumptions. Do you not agree?

You had a real strange life with women. Too bad they were not as honest as Billy was with Meg.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFWGOKuFyjk&feature=related[/youtube]

But at least it beat my life with women

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMWpxTK7q2s&feature=player_embedded#![/youtube]

[Lily]

What would the two last videos have to do with the thread?

Nice song in the movie. What is the whole thing with prononciation of [poteito - potAto] and the other words, can someone explain?

[SANDRO43]

Nice song in the movie. What is the whole thing with prononciation of [poteito - potAto] and the other words, can someone explain?

American vs. British English, Lily .

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJz7bIl0kRw[/youtube]

Let's Call The Whole Thing Off, a song written by George and Ira Gershwin for the 1937 film Shall We Dance.

[Maxx2]

What would the two last videos have to do with the thread?

Nice song in the movie. What is the whole thing with prononciation of [poteito - potAto] and the other words, can someone explain?

It's GQ and I teasing each other. I got to be careful not to get sidetracked.

I am working on the next video in Russian.

[Maxx2]

Here is Zoya. As Avi calls her "wife of boyfriend". I have not heard the Russian translation of what she is saying. Anyone here that could give us a brief outline of what she said I would much appreciate it.

Part 1 of 2
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk7dqgJzWLs[/youtube]

[Maxx2]

Part 2 of 2

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLrZ_e9TMdc[/youtube]

[Doll]

Part 1 of 2
 

Just a question- how did Zoya come to the USA? She says "they met each other in Russia. came to the USA and got married here"
Like tourists?
Just a "side" comment- how is it possible to live in the country for 15 (?) years and to not have a clue how to handle the finances? She has never been to the bank, etc.
It is another warning to women.
Sort of off topic.

BTW, Ilana still is not saying why she divorced Ivy.
Another detail- age gap! Nothing new though. 35 years old and 54-55?

[Doll]

One more: they said Yelena "met" Mike when she "already had her visa". So, there was NO initial intention to come to the USA to "mess with another man".

[Doll]

Here is Zoya. As Avi calls her "wife of boyfriend". I have not heard the Russian translation of what she is saying. Anyone here that could give us a brief outline of what she said I would much appreciate it.

Part 1 of 2
 

She is telling   her and Mike's "love story", then how he changed . Not sure what was going on in her family before but she said that "there was no life anyway". So, she herself suggested  divorcing. Her husband just agreed.
 As for DV or not- she is just giving her assumptions and generalizations regarding "Russian women coming to the USA"
Yet same question- how did she come to the country? If she does not speak a decent English now, 15 years later, then what brought her here? I mean- how?

[Doll]

Avy says he "lost his finances". How? If the marriage was annulled?

[Doll]

In part 2 Zoya is wondering why RW come to the USA and want to get married right away (for her 2-3 months is "right away")- she says that Americans live 5-6 years together and then get married.
How nice! Would be helpful before saying it get to know the K-1 visa requirements.

 

[OlgaH]

Just a question- how did Zoya come to the USA? She says "they met each other in Russia. came to the USA and got married here"
Like tourists?

I think they immigrated.

BTW, Ilana still is not saying why she divorced Ivy.

Ilana said she and Avi became more like relatives than a husband and a wife.

One more: they said Yelena "met" Mike when she "already had her visa". So, there was NO initial intention to come to the USA to "mess with another man".

Zoya and Avi said that Yelena met Mike (Zoya's husband) through a dating site. When Yelena got her visa and came to the US she still continued her internet dating.  Avi showed Mike's love letter to Yelena that was dated March 3, 2005, the marriage certificate of Avi and Yelena's   was dated February 23, 2005. It was just 15 days. According to Zoya Yelena openly stated that she needed Avi just to come to the US.
Yelena came to the US on January 23, it was the time when Mike sent Zoya to Moscow to visit her parents, though Zoya always went to Russia in April, but it was Mike's idea that Zoya should go in January.