here is an article that is trying to make an issue about something that is a free choice of the policy of a company. they own that media, and they have decided to act upong that ownership in the way they want. technically, they owe no one any reason, and even less a good one.

now, we may not agree with this. we may imagine nefarious ends that may be true, but still, it is their right to do what they want with their property. people can protest, i wouldnt say they cant, that too is their right. Ultimately though, its nothing more than tryting to control something by some external force because someone wants them to do something else with what they own.

or am i missing something?

If you feel American women are superior to foreign women, then why are no other country’s males even thinking of an MRM? Men run other societies. In our society, we are second class citizens. Men in other countries are not background checked before they are allowed to talk with American women.

Please read http://www.online-dating-rights.com. The issue is supported by Glenn Sacks and Marc Rudov and this issue is integral to fighting feminism in the US, not least because it should be the easiest law to overthrow in the courts and hopefully bring a bunch of other laws down with it.

The use of the word “troll” instead of “look” was highly offensive.

Only 8% of the women on, for instance, http://www.aforeignaffair.com, are dishonest.

Normally, if a gorgeous 19 year Russian woman is not attracted to a middle aged American male, she will politely reject him.

Now, Neither Eduardo Porter nor Dimitri Vassilaros held that “macho” point of view that its better to date in a narrow small pond than in a wide ocean. But somebody above them probably did have the personal point of view that he was somehow macho because he dated or married an American woman.

Eduardo Porter of the New York Times called me on August 5th, 2006 to do a story on IMBRA, the law that forces American men to have background checks before being allowed to say hello to foreign women online. In mid-October he released a big story…but his editors had completely rewritten it to portray the opposite of what he wanted to get across (he had wanted to show how unconstitutional the law was). This is all discussed at http://www.online-dating-rights.com.

On April 10th, 2007, Dimitri Vassilaros, Columnist for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review at dvassilaros@tribweb.com and 412-380-5637 phone, asked me to call him about IMBRA and spent 5 weeks preparing a big story from his libertarian angle. But on Friday the 18th of May 2007 he told me that he could not publish his completed story.

I asked him “Who pressured you” and he answered “You know I would not be able to tell you who would have pressured me or whether I was pressured”.

I then said “If there was a funded men’s rights organization or news outlet that would gladly pay you a higher salary than you are getting now, you would probably be able to do something about your having been compromised like this”.

He answered gruffly along the lines of “if that ever happens”…meaning Dimitri doesn’t believe that the feminists will ever be countered in the media, much less defeated.

And Dimitri would have good reason to think this:

His boss, Richard Mellon Scaife, funds the Heritage Foundation which practically runs the Republican Party. The Heritage Foundation is very much infiltrated with supposedly conservative women who hate men (Erica Little and Karen Czarnecki who has since moved to the Department of Labor to do men damage there). Scaife seems to have found what he thought was a winning formula when Republican males supposedly hated Bill Clinton for having sex with a 22 year old intern in the 1990s. Scaife believes that the Republican Party can be fueled off the hatred of older American women for men who have sex with younger women.

So with this billionaire off the deep end, our only hope is that Steve Forbes or Rupert Murdoch will come around or we find a Saudi billionaire to save us.