Washington Times Hates Truth About Domestic Violence

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Washington Times Hates Truth About Domestic Violence

Washington Times Hates Truth About Domestic Violence
Regular Contributor
By David R. Usher

A November 11th Washington Times article “Abused wives in India pin hope on anti-violence law” resulted in a number of letters to the editor of the Times, claiming that the article is biased. The Times article blithely repeated an eye-popping claim that “A 2005 U.N. Population Fund report found that 70 percent of married women in India were victims of beatings or rape”, without even questioning it.

On November 17th, the Times published three identical letters to the editor, but prefaced them with this highly unusual editorial set-up:

[Editor’s note: All of the letters below use the same phrasing to try to make a case that women aren’t the only victims of domestic abuse. But the writers detract from the issue. First of all, the article was not biased against men; it set out to report on the new laws in India and it did precisely that. Moreover, writers’ arguments would likely be taken more seriously if they were to dispense with the deceit. We asked each of the writers if they had personally written the letter and each said yes. Obviously, that is not the case. Domestic abuse, whether at the hands of a man or a woman, is a serious offense. Relegating such an issue to chain letters and false claims hurts victims of both genders. We stand by our news story.]

Anyone who has been in politics knows that “form” emails on issues of import are frequently originated by organizations who know the ropes, and lots of little guys send them everywhere. And, what Lilliputian would not like to see his or her name in the Washington Times?

Now we get to the heart of the subject raised in the letters the Washington Times so casually glossed over. The “form” letter was originated by RADAR, a highly credible organization comprised of scientists, lawyers, and scholars in an alert titled Fake Statistics Used to Claim that Wife-Beating is Men’s “Birthright”.

In its alert, RADAR did the research the Times went out of its way not to do. RADAR discovered that the U.N Population Fund never issued a claim that “70 percent of married women in India were victims of beatings or rape”. In fact, nobody knows where this claim came from.

Now, this is not a minor issue, Ambassor Bolton. Misandric claims such as this are presently being misused in vast quantities to drive U.N. policy intended to force radical feminism on every country of the world. This is an international fiasco which, if unchecked, will drag American into untold wars against a growing number of countries who hate our guts.

To make sure there are no misunderstandings on the facts of the matter, RADAR cited a reputable international study on the matter by the reputable Dr. Murray Straus, titled “Dominance and Symmetry in Partner Violence by Male and Female University Students in 32 Nations”. His study proves that international domestic violence is essentially evenly distributed, and calls for substantially different approaches to domestic violence intervention than what is being forced on the world today by power-crazed feminists.

The claim “70 percent of married women in India were victims of beatings or rape” is yet another load of hate promulgated by the feminist rumor mill presently being used by U.N feminists to sieze social control of the world. Their essential goal is a feminist-socialist world dictatorship powered by allegations and fear; a cabal able to seized families, property, cash, and entire governments simply by hollering “abuse”.

Now, let me question my assumptions. Is their claim hate speech? If the Times did a story wherein a white advocacy organization widely espoused that “70% of whites were victims of serious crime”, you can bet that both the Times and black civil rights advocates would be livid.

Given the special preface the letters to the editor were afforded, you can bet it was agreed upon by the entire editorial team in their morning meeting. If so, the Times has now officially staked its name and reputation on hate of men. It now apparently operates as a card-carrying member of the world feminist rumor mill driving hate of America all around the world.

Here is further proof: If the Times was interested in truth, it would have published at least one well-stated original letter instead of spinelessly changing the subject to something completely immaterial.

Speaking of unpublished letters to the Washington Times: I sent them one about their October 6th article “Time to judge the system in domestic violence”. This piece was yet another sacrifice made on the altar of the entitled feminist rumor mill. Since the Times cannot bring itself to publish the truth, here it is:

Dear Editors,

The Washington Times October 6th article “Time to judge the system in domestic violence”, and the approach of the women’s center in Prince George County, are unrealistic and will not result in changes that prevent fatal domestic violence.

Every major credible study tells us that domestic violence is not a gender problem. Women and men are equal initiators of it. Remember the case of Adolphus Jackson, who was beaten unconscious, drenched in hot sauce and bleach, burned with a hot iron, and killed with a skillet to the head by his girlfriend, Dominique.

We also know that a very large number of domestic violence allegations are entirely false: strategic moves in divorce and custody cases to seize control of family assets and children. These false cases are frequently and improperly fed into the courts by battered women’s shelters.

Women’s shelters are hindered by their own success. Many courts now justly doubt allegations of spousal abuse absent a showing of credible evidence, which women’s shelters and attorneys do not provide. In this flood of unverifiable allegations, the real cases often wash through the system.

The answer is not to lower existing legal standards, which are presently so low as to be meaningless. The answer is to raise legal standards to require a showing of credible evidence or intent to abuse. Shelters and courts must assist anyone who needs it, not just women. Women’s shelters must vet their cases better and focus on credible cases to raise their believability in the courts. Finally, judges and prosecutors must become as willing to prosecute those who abuse the system with the same gusto we prosecute abusers.

Those who still do not understand the problems we face preventing domestic violence should carefully study the RADAR (Respecting Accuracy In Domestic Violence Reporting) website at http://www.mediaradar.org.

David R. Usher
Senior Policy Analyst
True Equality Network

I will not allow the Times to change the subject. The new domestic law in India and its progenitor in Prince George County are a dangerous abominations of science and truth. Anyone who hates the truth about domestic violence bears a sick hate of men that is exquisitely dangerous in this world. For purposes of future brevity, I propose we refer to people who do this as “MacKinnon Amazons”.

Those who do not wish to see India become yet another terrorist state need to focus immediately on stopping what feminists are doing in the United Nations. Indians I am in communication with see their new domestic violence law as a “cultural invasion by western feminists”. They know it is phony, and intended to destroy marriage and Indian society by empowering foreign radicals to take over the country and dictate from a pink pedestal of feminist dictatorship. Indians are both terrified and furious. They know this invasion is predominantly coming from America.

This is the stuff Muslim radicalism is built on. Mark my words: if India becomes radicalized against America, we will not be able to say that we did not ask for it. Let us do the right thing and shut down the export of radical feminism now, while we still have a chance.

Let the American people not get caught again between two very radical and dangerous elements. Before we can expect to see declines in Muslim radicalism, we must first reign in the ugly American radical feminists that have made us the most deeply hated country in the Muslim world. A lively, honest, and open national debate about this should commence immediately. Our future national security depends decisively on it.

Perhaps it is time for all men and equalitarian women to cancel their subscriptions to the Washington Times, and take their business elsewhere. Responsible advertisers should do so as well.

Corporations that fund wanton destruction of men, family, and society are hurting future corporate profits. I strongly suggest that everyone who wants to put a stop to the hate of men and the hate of truth at the Washington Times should call all advertisers of the newspaper, and ask them to take their business elsewhere.

Since the Washington Times loves to print form letters, you might wish to copy this article into an email and send it to the Times. Their email address is letters@washingtontimes.com. You might want to copy Mr. Francis Coombs, Managing Editor, at fcoombs@washingtontimes.com.

11-19-2006 12:33 PM

Re: Washington Times Hates Truth About Domestic Violence
Regular Contributor
The retarded far left love adding 0’s to their calculated numbers for the sole purpose of creating more lesbians.

Rough life!!!

Women have been proving for the last 30 years that men have been right for the last 30 centuries!

11-21-2006 09:12 PM

Re: Washington Times Hates Truth About Domestic Violence

The Washington Times has said all it’s going to say about this article, which is sad. They really have done RADAR a disservice, and their readers as well.

There was nothing in there about lesbians.

01-09-2007 11:19 AM

Re: Washington Times Hates Truth About Domestic Violence

This is a very well written analysis, khankrumthebulg! I have written a response to “Another Whore Story” on this forum that mirrors the assertions in this thread that states domestic violoence claims against men by women in the USA are largely the result of false allegations  trumped up under the new “Domestic Violence Act Against Women” to control and subdue men in the course of divorce or separation proceedings. This entire act was written and passed state by state by liberal, democrat, man hating feminists that operated to pass it through the false rumour mill generated by the feminist community that men are out of control monsters that are relentlesly beating their wives. This is a similar strategy used by the feminst agenda in the Washington Times.

You are 100% correct that in the case of true violence, between the sexes, it has been purpetrated by both sides, and no law will stop it if the person about to purpetrate it is determined to do it. In this regard, the old assault laws are more than adequate to incarcerate and punish the offender, as in the case of a severe attack, the perpetrator can be charged with assault 1, or even attempted murder, both of which carry significant prison time.  The difference between the old laws and the new “Domestic Violence Act” is that it’s now emboddied with an entire array of treatment and mandatory course enrollments designed for men by a Minnesota psychologist who modelled the courses for the true abuser who is prone to out of control behavior and violence as a means of dealing with marital or relationship issues. This in reality, only fits 1% or so of the male polulation in this country. The feminists, of course, are not interested in the trurth. They insisted that this model become the “fits all sizes” for men so that any time a women claims abuse, he is considered by law enforcement to automatically be in the 1% group,( therefore an immediate threat and danger to the feminist who wants him out of the house so she can easily plunder his assets through the “no fault” divorce court designed for the feminist)  therefore, the new law requires intervention and prevention, thereby arrest of the man, automatic restraining that prohibits contact with his spouse and restraint from returning to his home ( which will soon become hers if there are children ). In addition, he is told to enroll in the diversion programs ( mentioned above ) that are brainwashing techniques used by feminists to reinforce the notion that his natural yearnings to be dominant, protective and providing for his family are all bad and signs of aggression towards women! ( Because of course, the man is considered dangerous to his spouse as he is automatically dumped into the worst offender lot as these feminists wanted when the Domestic Violence Act was passed.)   These diversion programs are usually offered by the local district attorney as an incentive to avoid a jail sentence if the case is taken to court for prosecution. But again, because they were initially designed only for the true and violent offenders, they have been additionaly designed as brainwashing tools to feminize men and get them to believe that any anger reaction to a womans desire or command is an unnaceptable form of behavior. It never mattered whether the guy who was accused has done anything or is prone to violence or not! The Minnestota model is now the national model and is used on men regardless of what happened. As icing on the cake, you, the guy are also required to pay for these programs out of your own pocket! You are also assigned to a probation officer ( who is a liberal man hating feminist most of the time ) who gets to determine how “fit” you are to return to normal life and makes recommendations to the court as to your progress. By the time they are finished f—-ng with you, you will have spent thousands of dollars in the system at the same time your soon to be ex wife or significant other has taken you through “no fault” divorce court and plundered your assets to 50% or less.

This is all outrageous and 100% true. I have a friend who this has happened to, and know of many other cases through my own research. A logical question to ask about how all of this happened to men behind their backs is to question where the male legislators were to let this happen. The liberal media let this slide without shedding any light on it because they want liberal feminism to thrive. The male politicians are apparently spineless lackeys who feared the typical liberal branding of opposition, which would call them “women haters”, “homophobic”, “racist” , ect. to oppose the act.

Guys, I don’t know about you, but Washington DC and most state capitols have become infected with and attracted this nations worst special interst sewage that is sliming any sense of decency and greatness this country once had through the systematic, relentless assault on on constitution and the liberties that it is supposed to ensure everyone.  Promotion of feminism is now a large part of this rot. I agree with previous posts that one way to deal with radical feminism is to stop marrying women or having their children until these radical woman dominating laws are thrown out and that identified feminists become enrolled in courses that teach them to respect men, along with their natural psychologically wired brains and physically wired bodies.

06-17-2007 04:05 PM

Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

%d bloggers like this: