Political Groundswell Against IMBRA

I have recently gotten the following e-mail, and I share it with CF readers because I think it is newsworthy:

Here is the latest on the upcoming court battle to fight the IMBRA law (dating site regulation), which is galvanizing the nascent Men’s Rights Movement. There are a number of US Senators who will not be reelected in 2008 without paying attention to men’s rights. We gave Conrad Burns and Jim Talent early retirement last year. If we do not see action from Republican leadership organizations like GOPAC, we will have to give early retirement to overly feminist-friendly Sununu and Coleman next year.

Please forward this message to important contacts and please do something about our getting an American female plaintiff quickly.

The linked article shows that the background checks on American men are not the main outrage of IMBRA. Please read this and the attached law review. The main outrage is that the requirement for foreign women to give “written approval” of every contact completely destroys communication when the women do not have email addresses or constant access to the Internet:

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/10/24/
imbra-completely-stops-communication-between-adults-background-checks-
are-a-secondary-concern/


We have the active duty Iraq War vets ready to be plaintiffs. We have foreign women who want to be plaintiffs in a US federal courtroom.

But we need an American woman plaintiff to knock this bizarre law out of the ballpark. If I were living in the US, I could find one within 48 hours. But I live in Europe.

Here is why an American woman needs to volunteer to walk into a federal courthouse and lay down a Pro Se challenge to IMBRA before some male does the same but also asks the conservative courts to declare matters such as domestic violence to be States Rights issues. This would eliminate VAWA and the OVW at the Department of Justice.

It is in everyone's interest to prune back on legislation that has gone too far. This law, if upheld and enforced, will cause major backlash from the type of white male professionals who have supported feminist initiatives up to the present time.

Remember: In the 1980s, corporate sex harassers did not fight back as legislation was made against them. In the 1990s, stalkers did not fight back as legislation was made against them. But in the 2000s, innocent American businessmen and servicemen WILL fight back as legislation is made against them simply for wanting to say hello to women who want men to contact them.

And we are not going to give up:

1) IMBRA steals the right of anonymity from Internet communications. If someone is OK with laws that make it illegal to lie to someone on the Internet or cheat on one's spouse, the loss of anonymity would still be a huge loss.

2) There is no such thing as a Mail Order Bride. Every American on the street agrees that the US Government must stop using that term. Our plaintiffs will be the foreign women themselves besides active duty Iraq War veterans (currently fighting in Iraq). IMBRA takes away the right of foreign women to decide their own level of security. Women without email have the right to request to be phoned or telegrammed, both of which do not lend themselves to signing "written approval" of contact with a man. If this were a privacy issue, then the law would say that the foreigners should sign in writing that they are OK with being members of a social interaction site, but investigating the specific criminal backgrounds of the Americans and then getting the mostly impossible "written approval for each contact" goes way too far.

3) IMBRA violates the Right to Assemble. It causes excessive delays. Russian women without email want to be contacted immediately and they have the right to allow themselves to be called or telegrammed at their home address. Despite district court rulings to the contrary, there actually is a fundamental liberty interest in an American contacting a foreigner and, no, contacting a gun shop owner does not require a background check.

4) The book 1984 dealt with a government interfering with a relationship and "disclosing" important information to the woman in order to break up the relationship.

5) There is no such thing as a Marriage Broker. The IMBRA definition says it is a social interaction site with less than 50% American women on it. That is insane. It could also include Adultfriendfinder and Match.com.

6) The Tahirih Justice Center is the main author and defender of the law. They do not represent foreign women, but rather rake in some good salaries while they claim to represent some battered women. Absolute proof that they are dishonest comes in the way they say "More than 50% of US women's shelters have reported some kind of abuse of a [foreign born Internet bride]". Anyone who knows statistics can easily see that it would not indicate any trend at all if 100% of US women's shelters had experienced at least one case of such abuse. The fact that only 50% of shelter's saw such abuse indicates that foreign brides are treated much better than domestic brides who suffer a 7% abuse rate that causes 100% of shelters to experience a case.

Tahirih actually used the phrase "mail order bride" in that sentence but I cannot bring myself to use that racist, derogatory phrase which is designed by Marxists to belittle their "wards" whom they say they want to "protect." In court, Tahirih will face real foreign women who despise how Tahirih is trying to run their lives and “represent them”.

7) Domestic Violence is not an enumerated power of the Congress and it should have nothing to do with how people meet each other.

8) One cannot allow the existence of new technology to make paper letter writing illegal. That would be like saying that riding a bike is illegal because the car was invented. You cannot ask a website or an American serviceman to take 3 months to send each man's background check by snail mail around the world and get a signed response back that contact is OK with that one man. IMBRA seems OK only because it would not hamper communications much if all women used anonymous webmail dating sites like Match.com. US legislators pathetically assumed that the world's women would "get with the program" and go high tech and go paranoid in their communications with men.

9) IMBRA is like the 1907 Expatriation Act where a male-dominated Congress tried to stop American women from marrying foreigners without loss of American citizenship.

10) You cannot take a subset of Americans and say they "tend to be violent" and take away their rights a priori. The government cannot enforce background checks on inner city black men who go to liquor stores and then use dating sites. One cannot ask gay men for AIDs test results before being able to say hi to gay men on Gay.com.

11) The trend in extra-jurisdictional lawmaking has to be stopped. The use of the Internet by Americans overseas for non-criminal purposes cannot be regulated.

We businessmen and veterans are not a criminal class to be background-checked because it is supposed to be "suspicious" that we travel.

The official definition of "marriage broker" is any social interaction website where the quota of American women is less than 50%. That is insane social protectionism. IMBRA was made by some insecure radical feminists to protect American women from competition.

Of course, IMBRA is also part of the $Billion "Domestic Violence Industry" as described in the following two articles:

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news10.htm

http://www.newswithviews.com/Roberts/carey193.htm

Finally, does anyone here agree with what a Republican Judge Thomas Rose said about IMBRA:

"There is no fundamental liberty interest in an American contacting a foreigner". May 26, 2006 (just before Memorial Day)


Jim Peterson

Veterans Abroad

www.veteransabroad.com

Fidelbogen says: Here we see the beginning of an organized lobbying movement for men's interests, along with an awakening male solidarity that uses the BALLOT BOX!! Let's keep an eye on this, and hope that the IMBRA campaign is just a taste of many things to come in the field of electoral politics.

By the way, if anybody has any doubts about the full scope of the feminist-instigated marriage crisis in the USA, these developments show pretty dramatically what a hot-button thing it truly is! A lot of people feel mighty strongly about this stuff, and it's plain to see that they aren't fooling around!

Addendum: I would encourage others in the Movement (such as my fellow bloggers) to visit the Veterans Abroad website linked above, in order to inform themselves on this and related matters of interest. And then, if it seems right to you. . . spread the word!