Risky Business

[steviej]

Not to shift the blame but I would think that cases when women come to US with the plan to file fake DV are pretty rare.   I've read enough of MOB forums and I gotta tell you that most of those DV cases are based on real abuse toward those women.   

It's hard to know what's real and what isn't because there is no "due process". Meaning, a woman can "point the finger" and the gun is fired. So, how many of these cases are real or not, no one can tell because there is no requirement to prove anything at all, let along "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Oooops, I was like you before. I didn't think that women would really take advantage of this. But, I have learned a lot from my friend. Women here know about this, and they use it and manipulate it all the time. Are any MOBs abused? Perhaps. Is it any more common than any marriage in the FSU between FSUW/FSUM, or in USA between AW/AM?  Probably not. Are any such substantialted cases sensationalized? Oh yes, big time, both in US and in FSU press. I remember two big news stories over the past year or so. One was an AM killed his FSU bride. Big news. Another was, an FSU bride killed her AM husband, trying to get insurance or something. Big news. However, police statistics prove that most murders are committed by one spouse against another. So the fact that it happens in an international marriage situation isn't any different. American feminists jump on every one of these cases and use it to attempt to restrict the freedom of American men to seek a wife elsewhere than the USA. They do not want men to have this freedom. It is a significant threat to them and they work actively to curtail it. And they are smart politicians. They are well organized. Can you imagine, Oooops, that have even passed a law, this IMBRA law, to do this.

It is amazing to me that AMs are so politically passive, and unaware. The price of this ignorance and passivity is becoming increasingly high.

And, from what I know directly in my own life, it seems to me that most AM/FSUW marriages are happy. My wife and I know several AM/FSUW couples, and they are successful marriages. I don't know any divorces. But, of course, maybe the divorces happen quickly before the more established "crowd" gets a chance to know them.

[Ooooops]

American feminists jump on every one of these cases and use it to attempt to restrict the freedom of American men to seek a wife elsewhere than the USA. They do not want men to have this freedom. It is a significant threat to them and they work actively to curtail it.

Why?   I thought that those extremists hate men.   

I gotta read up on that IMBRA law, I'm not familiar with it.  Thanks.

[topofthekey]

Because of KenC's thread I went to agencyscams.com just to read about the negative side. If I learned anything it would be to really take my time. The stats this guy copied from .gov websites were very surprising.

I was reading one letter that the guy posted on his site about a western guy saying that basically since he didn't sign the paperwork to keep her in the country and on a path to citizenship (since he was divorcing her) she filed DV charges against him. I think that is a pretty obvious example of a loophole.

[steviej]

Why?   I thought that those extremists hate men.   

I gotta read up on that IMBRA law, I'm not familiar with it.  Thanks.

Oh yes, you are right - they absolutely hate men. According to some recent article I read (which could be true or false), about 5% of American women consider themselves "active" or "radical" feminists. Of those 60% considered themselves "lesbian" or "bi-sexual." However, their political organization is very effective. They are very intelligent and they know how to get things they want through the system. I am an avid Russian historian, and I call the American feminists America's Bolsheviks. But, most Americans do not understand that at all. The Bolsheviks were political geniuses who were able to get large numbers of people under the control of an ideology that only a very small percentage actually supported. The Bolsheviks were also masters of propaganda and knew now to manipulate information to influence and control people. America's feminists are excellent at this, and have learned how to adapt these strategies in the media-centric democratic environment. They are very good.

[Ooooops]

Oh yes, you are right - they absolutely hate men.

But don't you think that there should be some ground for that?   I'm sure that lots of real victims of DV are very happy that there are laws that can protect them.    And of course, as any other good deed, it gets twisted and misused now and then.   But on the large scale it's good to be under laws protections, I tell you that as ex-citizen of the country where mostly law of the jungle and the golden fleece works... 

[KenC]

But don't you think that there should be some ground for that?   I'm sure that lots of real victims of DV are very happy that there are laws that can protect them.    And of course, as any other good deed, it gets twisted and misused now and then.   But on the large scale it's good to be under laws protections, I tell you that as ex-citizen of the country where mostly law of the jungle and the golden fleece works... 

Oops,
Any man that abuses his wife (Russian or otherwise) should be strung up by his balls with no mercy IMO.  However, when there is a law or a guideline that does not allow for the accused to have due process of law to have his side heard, something is very wrong.  The way Russians "handle" (or in fact refuse to handle) such events in their motherland is probably more wrong than the way we do things here.  They are just at polar opposites of the spectrum.
KenC

[Ooooops]

Ken, I agree with you.   But you know, all of this "feminism" is still pretty new to the scene, so the pendulum should swing back sooner or later.   It's just blown out of proportion by long time idea that woman is a lesser human being.   Kind of property with boobs.   

[AnastassiaAsh]

I know you are not familiar with legal principles in US, but one of the long-standing tenets of law is "the presumption the accused is innocent". This is one of the most important legal principles of all time. It means the state, or angry individuals, cannot ruin your life unless the state can prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that you are guilty.

Why did you assume i am not familiar with that? As far as I remember i learnt about that when I was 9 or 10 y.o., don't know about you.  And 'legal' or 'court' movies are actually my favourite.  I may know more about US legal system than any common American, let's put it that way.

[KenC]

Ken, I agree with you.   But you know, all of this "feminism" is still pretty new to the scene, so the pendulum should swing back sooner or later.   It's just blown out of proportion by long time idea that woman is a lesser human being.   Kind of property with boobs.   

I dunno, Oops,
It has been going one way for about 38 years now!  (Since about 1970)  I don't know how "new" that is and it certainly shows no sgn of reversing anytime soon.
KenC

[Ooooops]

I dunno, Oops,
It has been going one way for about 38 years now!  (Since about 1970)

Exactly.  38 years.   Not even a lifetime. 

[KenC]

Exactly.  38 years.   Not even a lifetime. 

Yes, but those 38 years are within my lifetime, so forgive me if I think it is a long time!   I really cannot see anything on the horizon that will force the pendulum back the other way either. :noidea:
KenC

[steviej]

I guess if I can't convince Ooops and Anastasia, then there really is a "battle of the sexes". It's sad. It's sad to hear women on this forum say that are willing to let innocent men's lives be destroyed just to make sure they get those abusive men punished. As they say, "That's easy for you to say." I'm sure both of you are familiar somewhat with the dark days of the Soviet Union and Article 58? These new laws, I kid you not, operate like Article 58 basically. Once an "enemy of the people" is accused, that's the end. It's all over.

It's not a question of whether you think abuse is OK or not. Do you think robbery is OK? Do you think murder is OK? Why do you expect "due process" for other crimes, but are willing to sacrifice it for domestic violence allegations? Should we live our lives in fear of what allegations anyone else might make against us? Isn't that Stalin's favorite method? Should I be afraid to walk into a store, knowing that anyone can call the police and say they "are afraid and feel that I wll steal something", leading to my arrest? No, I insist. This is insanity and unconstitutional. In trying to stick to the thread, I should add, this is a risk with any AW, not just something specific to an FSUW.

[topofthekey]

Isn't that Stalin's favorite method? Should I be afraid to walk into a store, knowing that anyone can call the police and say they "are afraid and feel that I wll steal something", leading to my arrest? No, I insist. This is insanity and unconstitutional. In trying to stick to the thread, I should add, this is a risk with any AW, not just something specific to an FSUW.

Nice example man. Many minorities struggled to go shopping at certain places because they faced these forms of discrimination. So what did they do? They filled a civil suit against these companies. When you file these fake DV charges you are causing damages to a guy's life. Much more so than a simple shoplifting accusation. I wonder if a guy who's going through a divorce and faced a false DV claim ever eventually filled a civil suit.

[OlgaH]

It's sad. It's sad to hear women on this forum say that are willing to let innocent men's lives be destroyed just to make sure they get those abusive men punished. .

steviej,

we are willing the lives of innocent women would not be destroyed by those abusive men  There should be such act to protect the women, I'm also not against IMBRA, but the fact that IMBRA is  one-sided and imperfect is the other question 

[Jet]

At the risk of making Anastasia and Ooooops angry (which I *really* don't want to do). I recall arguing the finer points of IMBRA on a feminist blog about a year before it was passed. It's not that the Feminist movement hates men - the feminist movement hates men they can't control. When I suggested that the proposed law be more comprehensive, perhaps making it part of the marriage license application process (disclosure by all brides and grooms of their past criminal histories) they were utterly appalled and went on the attack like a pack of rabid dogs :zappedhim:. This suggested to me that they really weren't out to protect the women so much as punish the men who refused to comply with their version of the way things are supposed to be. In another argument on a similar blog I was athoritatively informed than a full 5% of all women in abuse shelters were "mail order brides"! I asked where the other 95% came from... I was unceremoniously banned 

Abuse is a very real and very dangerous problem. Women DO need the full protection of the law, but not at the expense of suspending Due Process of Law as guaranteed by the 5th and 14th amendments. IMBRA targets a very minute subset of the general population in a pure violation of their natural and legal rights on any number of different levels. 

[Ooooops]

I wouldn't compare this law to Article 58 - nobody sends those guys to GULAG.  Yet.   

[steviej]

...we are willing the lives of innocent women would not be destroyed by those abusive men  There should be such act to protect the women, I'm also not against IMBRA, but the fact that IMBRA is  one-sided and imperfect is the other question 

Well, with Olga, that makes all three women that have commented in the same position: if domestic abuse is alleged by a woman, they want the man crushed whether he is innocent or not. (Doesn't that sound like a typical Russian?) Due process? Nope ... get them all, then, even though you have crushed innocent men, at least you know you'll get some of the guilty. I honestly didn't think these women would respond this way. I'll tell you one thing, it shows the amazing wisdom of the Founding Fathers of the American Constitution. They understood people and they knew that people would be more than willing to forget "due process" to attack the alleged enemy of the moment. That's why those 3 most important concepts are incorporated into the American constitution: Habeas Corpus, Due Process and Presumption of Innocence. However, the current state of law in USA on alleged domestic violence violate all these. Sadly, that's how the women want it

[steviej]

Jet .. well said!

[Ooooops]

Well, with Olga, that makes all three women that have commented in the same position: if domestic abuse is alleged by a woman, they want the man crushed whether he is innocent or not.

Can you give me a quote where any of us says anything like this, please? 

[Maxx2]

i would say i am really glad that this kind of law exists. i am really sorry for Jack and think it is absolutely wrong for a woman to take advantage of this law, but what if it really happens, what if it's true and a man is to blame? It seems to me that there are much more cases with horrible men abusing women than vice versa. And i actually feel protected to have this law on my side.

So in my experience i am on the other side, guys. A man is always stronger physically and there is always a possibility or 'risk' for it get out of control against a woman....

My guess stevej had Anastassia's comments in mind when he wrote

Well, with Olga, that makes all three women that have commented in the same position: if domestic abuse is alleged by a woman, they want the man crushed whether he is innocent or not.

Meaning that the way the law is structured without the legal checks and protective balances in place both innocent and guilty get crushed. That this law is OK with Anastassia even though she sees taken advantage of the law in an unfair way as "absolutely wrong" it is an acceptable law because there are some guilty men (actually allot in her opinion) out there. In the process the innocent get crushed but that is an acceptable condition if it punishes the guilty. Of course this goes against English common law that much of the US justice system was built upon "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," English jurist William Blackstone. And the Bible
Deuteronomy 19:15 "A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.
And for Russian " friends" who will lie in court to help the accuser secure her green card, The Ninth Commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour (or Husband). (Exodus 20:16)

The way the law is structured and the rewards to take unfair advantage of it make it a guarantee that massive fraud will exist. With the INS (USCIS) that I have come in contact with most have a very poor opinion of Russian women. They see them as mostly cheaters that are quick to file false charges. I was even called by a INS special agent who warned me of this after he noticed I had returned from Russia. His words "There are many men like you with spotless records who now have criminal records because they married Russian women". I asked him why and he said "because they file false charges on them so they can stay in the country. Be very careful you are walking on thin ice". I thought the guy was prejudice. Two years later I am walking into the Bloomington Minnesota INS office to withdraw my AOS and the guards passed me through like it was just a daily happening. I found out later it was. In fact a guy I know said they said to him that at least two men a day pass through there pulling their AOS. The woman that took my withdrawal of support asked me what nationality my wife was was. I said "Russian". She said "Ah those kind have it planned before they even come". My first ex-wife works in a medical clinic near a women's shelter. She told me she would see Russian/Ukrainian women at the clinic every day getting their free medical care and that they were from the shelter as they always had this one heavy set women interpreter with them. I met last year a number of Russian women here in the US. More than half claimed to have been abused and got their green cards this way. IMO this is a very big risk as the title of this thread states  "Risky Business".

Maxx

P.S. I believe there are plenty of good Russian women out there just as there are plenty of the ruthless variety in amongst them.
         

[topofthekey]

And the Bible
Deuteronomy 19:15 "A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.
And for Russian " friends" who will lie in court to help the accuser secure her green card, The Ninth Commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour (or Husband). (Exodus 20:16)

I'm with you on your viewpoint 100%, but in saying that I had to pull out this part of what you wrote. Personally I'm agnostic so I'm not out to attack people that believe in god, but I don't suggest you put it in your legal argument- or for that matter to defend your human rights to be treated equal and your secular rights under our constitution to due process. I agree with you man, and religion is your right to practice. However, you can't back up a legal argument with it.

The supreme court isn't going to overturn IMBRA because of your religious believes- and truthfully thats a good thing. Theocracies right now are a big problem in our world. In those country's they use their "bible" the koran to justify beating their women. Again not attacking your believes- but they aren't helping you legally here. And in fairness to any Muslims reading my comments- they were only focused on Muslims in the muslim world that can't seperate church from state and believe in what I mentioned above. This is in no way an attach on the moderate American muslim.

[Gator]

Let us not forget that the A in IMBRA stands for Act.  Yes, it was passed by Congress in all of their infinite wisdom.  We elected them so we can blame only ourselves. 

It was an initiative of Bill Clinton, designed to garner the feminist vote.  IIRC,  Republicans had a majority at that time.  Why would they enact a law that would appease constituents who would never vote Republican? 

[Maxx2]

I put it in there not to back up a legal argument but because most Russian women claim to be Christian and believe in the Bible. To put one's hand on a Bible and swear to "tell the truth, the whole true and nothing but the truth" and then make up wild stories all the while claiming to be Christian and following the Bible? Many believe in karma.

In regard to what Gator just wrote. IMBRA passed during the Bush regime. It was was VAWA which IMBRA grew out of that passed under Clinton. Most Republicans see voting for either one of these Acts as the thing to do. The risk of voting against them could rile the women voters who act upon emotions such as what Anastassia wrote "And i actually feel protected to have this law on my side." The thinking (feelings) stops there with most voters and the lawmakers and feminists know this. Bush and crowd knew about emotional issues when they took advantage of 911 (the date not the phone number) and passed the "Patriot" Act taking away our civil liberties. America is dying I am afraid.   

Maxx

[topofthekey]

I put it in there not to back up a legal argument but because most Russian women claim to be Christian and believe in the Bible. To put one's hand on a Bible and swear to "tell the truth, the whole true and nothing but the truth" and then make up wild stories all the while claiming to be Christian and following the Bible? Many believe in karma.

In regard to what Gator just wrote. IMBRA passed during the Bush regime. It was was VAWA which IMBRA grew out of that passed under Clinton. Most Republicans see voting for either one of these Acts as the thing to do. The risk of voting against them could rile the women voters who act upon emotions such as what Anastassia wrote "And i actually feel protected to have this law on my side." The thinking (feelings) stops there with most voters and the lawmakers and feminists know this. Bush and crowd knew about emotional issues when they took advantage of 911 (the date not the phone number) and passed the "Patriot" Act taking away our civil liberties. America is dying I am afraid.   

Maxx

If a Russian women takes the bible literally then you have yourself a point (I have no idea if they do). Many in religion (at least here in the United States) don't take it word for word literally. Not everyone that believes in god believes Noah got on the arc and forgot the unicorns or that the earth was made in 6 days plus sunday as the day of rest. if you believe it word for word- hey thats your right to do. if you dont- thats also your right.

as for politics- i argue against the law because it ignores due process and doesn't treat people equally. i'd hate to get in a political argument because blaming one party or another wont get it fixed.

[msmoby_ru]

Not to shift the blame but I would think that cases when women come to US with the plan to file fake DV are pretty rare.   I've read enough of MOB forums and I gotta tell you that most of those DV cases are based on real abuse toward those women.   

Some readers might remember that I jumped in rather quickly concerning DV - in the context to obtaining a Green Card - and looked silly.

Perhaps I should keep quiet - but I was one of the rare "victims" of a DV accusation - within the UK, by my ex-wife ... yet I still support the need to "protect" the woman - particularly where kids are involved.

I won't go into details, other than to say the laws of England and Wales were, and may be still, are stacked in favour of the accuser. I was accused of DV to my ex-wife during the time I was divorcing her - no -one else involved .. and subsequently to / on her new partner,too..

Her aim was to "bankrupt me" and to stop me having access to the kids  - which was later, demonstably, proved...


BUT.. some "mud sticks" as they say..  some folk believed her. it shouldn't matter - but it did - and worse, she refused access to the kids for 5 months - not approved by the family court -  Madam was censured for that, too... Damage done. Kids thought I was "bad"...  One daughter has always kept in contact - despite Mum's best efforts - numerous Family court orders are simply ignored after a few months... What can / could  a judge do? - put HER in the cells, HA! She has residency rights, and this would upset the kids...

So. and I KNOW I am in the minority... ladies *are* capable of using a law to get what they want..( but even *I* think they'd have to be REALLY calculating and the man a real "softie" ) for this to be a scam to get a GC..  I'm not saying it doesn't / hasn't happen.. just that it must be really rare -

  I still feel they ( ladies ) need the benefit of the doubt as, before and after my experience, I still think the man has to control his anger - and walk away - and get a third party to mediate when he thinks he is "sane", but can't seem to do anything right !

BTW - I made SURE my wife knew about this - before we even met ...