J.P. Morgan Chase Funding DART Hate Advertising

I recognize much of this article as my own words, which I composed for RADAR’s Nov. 2nd alert at http://www.mediaradar.org/alert20081102.php. It looks like you took the RADAR alert, added a bit at the beginning, retargeted it to J.P. Morgan Chase instead of DART, and presented the entire thing as your own article. Your article would have been just as effective if you had credited your source.

MBR, that may be right, but a good idea is worth emulating and progressing.

I question though whether it is such a good idea to counter one mendacity with another. On the one hand we have DART and The (misnamed) Family Place casting a calumny on fathers with medacious statistics, and on the other, you doing the same to mothers.

The Stats about mothers killing and abusing children, presented in such a way, is mendacious. It is the same false impression generating AgitProp as Feminazis use. 71% indeed. 71% of what? You know full well, as I do, and any fair minded man does, that the mothers who kill children are less than one hundreth of one percent of mothers, just as abuse by men is in reality by a tiny fraction of men and is blown out of all proportion.

By all means expose LIES and Mendacities. Expose the evil people behind them. But if you are going to use grey propaganda yourself, be very careful that you, too, are not exposed. It makes us all look bad.

Ulf Andersson did the right thing. Cleanly and honestly.

All,

Mark Rosenthal of RADAR sent a very insulting email out to a large list suggesting that I stole RADAR’s alert in the writing of this piece. Therefore, I must respond publicly.

This article was derived from an email sent by Ulf Andersson to Jeremy Swanson, which Jeremy forwarded to me. RADAR was not credited or mentioned in Ulf’s email. In the above piece, I used the credits provided in the email. The writing was decent. I do not have time to rewrite everything as an original masterpiece. the intent was to amplify Ulf’s work.

RADAR removed me from their DL when I left it back in August, after about 2-1/2 years of heavy involvement with no compensation. Since RADAR no longer sent me anything, I was not aware that some of the text came from a RADAR alert.

My readers know that I always give credit if the source is known to me. I am somewhat unusual in this regard.

RADAR does not credit anyone who does their work. I wrote many alerts, and spent 14 days last December researching and writing the first draft of the RADAR report “Myths of the ABA Commission on Domestic Violence“, and recieved no credit.

Therefore, I have requested that RADAR amend the above report on the ABA CODV, and related Alerts, to give me credit for my work. I am considering requiring credit for all Alerts that I wrote for them as well.

I’m with you on this, Dave. 100%. Enough said.

I had no way of knowing that you had received the alert from some other source who’d removed the identifying information. It was a mistake for me to have ascribed intent to you, and for that I apologize.

You were never removed from our distribution list. When you informed me last Monday that you hadn’t been receiving our alerts, I checked the list and found that your email address had never gotten updated, and our alerts were still going to your old email address. I’ve now updated it so alerts should go to your new address. Did you not receive the email I sent explaining this? If you don’t receive alerts in the future, please let me know so I can debug the problem.

Mark,

1. RADAR was sending alerts to my current address and my discontinued address, until I left, when alerts stopped coming to my new address. Since my leaving was under rather ugly circumstances created by Ed Bartlett, which you backed up 100%. I saw no reason to “demand” being put back on the list. I was just readded to the list, at my request, but not in time to get the alert.

2. Your nasty email is just one more example of why I left RADAR. My excellent work, which played a major role winning the U.N. Third Committee Campaign, and the PBS “Breaking the Silence” campaign went unrecognized by the board and steering committee. My suggestions on matters of importance went fully ignored. All recognizance was handed to Ed Bartlett on a silver platter. I introduced Ed Bartlett to Phyllis, and then he went to extensive lengths to wall me out of the Eagle/Heritage DV conference. RADAR blew the conference by never presenting even one real policy change recommendation (which is exactly what I predicted would happen and one of the important things I wanted to cover). The conference was an excellent litany of complaints, but not one solid policy answer was presented to redirect Heritage’s thinking so we can actually win. You backed Ed 100% on all of this. I’m a very tolerant and giving individual, but I will not be treated like a cow or a peon.

3. If you have no way of knowing, do not assume a ripoff and start a public war. contact me and find out whats going on.

4. I insist that credit be added to the ABA CODV report as an author. No more free lunch for RADAR.

David,

Well, although it is a public airing of laundry I welcome it! I am glad that you are still writing and that RADAR has lost you as that ABA piece was very effective. In fact it has been percolating through my brain for some time as I hope to do the same thing in Canada (time permitting).

But, why am I happy about you drawing blood in public? Because it is Men’s way – Gladiator style – except no one gets killed. Let’s keep it that way and maintain the spirited debate against the nanny state.

Cheers, crj
Edmonton AB

Hi crj,

This is the first time I have shared anything about my leaving RADAR. I was tempted to after they sent out a somewhat terse message to a number of folks announcing my departure.

There have been a number of things going on behind the scenes. When Mark blew the cork, it was time for me to finally weigh in.

RADAR is still doing good work educating folks about “the problem”, and has done a fantastic job addressing the impossible biases about domestic violence. Without changing their goals and management style, I question whether RADAR will grow to succeed. I wish them well at it.

There are lessons in this for everyone:

1. Do not do volunteer work for an org if you will not get public credit for the brilliant things you do. Otherwise they run off with everything.

2. Those who run orgs should always keep an eye open for talent, and then let that talent do what it wants to do. Volunteers are generally not happy when ordered around to do things they are not good at or do not enjoy doing.

3. If you run an org, always give credit and thanks to those who have done something brilliant. Do not sop it for yourself. Do not order volunteers around like chamber-maids. The best leaders are those who harness and orchestrate a motivated, dedicated, and brilliant following.

4. All leaders should guide folks to the “answer”. The focus is on policy changes that everyone will want. The ultimate focus MUST be on framing legislation that has political and policy aspects that are saleable in your state. No legislation = no change. Do the math. I can tell you from personal experience that there is nothing more exhilarating for a group than to see your legislation get passed and signed into law.

5. Protest is often needed. If you are not good at that, hook up with a group in your area that is good at it. They protest on the issue du-jours, while you go in the front door with the white hats on to deliver the answer.

6. The best leaders teach everyone everything they know, and hope that somebody can do it better than they do. Trained volunteers get more done, and you can delegate to them. If you are lucky, you might just launch a luminary that can actually put everything over the top.

7. If things are not working out with an org, try to clear the air openly and honestly. If you are stuck in an org with leadership that sucks the life out of you, or is dishonest with you, or leadership that only focuses on complaining about problems, move on quietly if possible. There are other orgs. If your ideas are good enough, start your own org or execute them yourself (that is what I am doing these days — announcements will be made at the appropriate time).

8. Everyone’s work should go towards changing policies for the better. Complaining and sitting on the pity pot in discussion groups is a waste of energy and does nothing that makes one ultimately feel good. Select doable goals, map an intelligent path to achieve it, the do the best you can to win. If you are not a planner, hook up with an org thats “doing it” and do it with them.

To all men out there:

We need to immediately drop our differences and get along.

Some very talented people like myself enter the MRM only to find a bunch of tomcats tearing each other apart.

The IMBRA fight has died because the moderator of OnlineDatingRights.com, whom I found and educated about that law, decided to never speak to me again a year ago because I was getting antsy that he seemed to be doing nothing to try to get a challenge going within the decade.

You can see how this feud would have realistically ended the chances of anyone getting a challenge going against IMBRA. Anyone visiting ODR now would just get lulled into the sense that complaining about IMBRA for years is all that is needed.

Then it is no secret that Marc Rudov hates my guts and those of anyone else who would try to give him healthy feedback. Heck, he feels that the rest of us MRAs should pay him $250 per hour.

Marc earned the wrath of many men when he said that he would never mention IMBRA on TV because he assumed that male Fox News viewers would think of dating foreign women as “sex tourism” and condemn it (never mind that Marc, himself, fully understands that the real issue behind IMBRA is whether the government has the right to stop men from saying hello to women in general).

Maybe MND should have a monthly voice conference where people who are not speaking with each other will HAVE to do so or simply lose power in the MRM by not participating.

I look at the MRM and see cat fights and know that this is the reason why NONE of us are getting funded.

But now that the Republcans SHOULD have learned that they have been going in the wrong direction regarding MEN, we do have an opportunity if we get organized.

Regarding Chase: I wish I could move my account but there are not many banks left to move to.

Above I only mentioned the ego problem in the MRM of people “not talking” to others within the movement for more or less personal reasons and, thus, thwarting progress. I noted correctly that they way to solve that problem is to practically force people to debate and publicly justify their positions rather than sulk and say “I don’t want to be criticized” or “it is my way or the highway”.

But there are also several fault lines within the MRM about overall ideological strategy as well.

MND was seen as pro-McCain while a ton of would-be MRAs saw themselves as libertarians, socons or Democrats.

Libertarians, Socons and Democrats completely disagree on major issues and we would need monthly conferences to sort those out as well.

That wouldn’t be so hard to do. I have helped get a lot done by putting people together to talk.

By the way, I just read the excellent article Marc Rudov wrote about McCain being a Cadaverick. See http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2008/11/06/john-mccain-the-cadaverick-marc-h-rudov/

But note that Marc never explains VAWA on Fox News like he does in his articles. I heard him mention VAWA once on TV and the female opponent, whom he was unnecessarily antagonizing, was able to say “what is wrong with VAWA” and he did not answer. Instead he went back to a generic message of “women are entitled.”

There is a disconnect and he says that he is not censored. He told me several times that he purposefully tailors his message to what he thinks the male Fox News viewers want to hear and he assumes that they do not want to hear DETAILS about how their personal liberties are under attack. He assumes they just want to hear about how women shouldn’t like men for their money.

IMHO, the MRM needs to spread DETAILS to men about how their rights are SPECIFICALLY under attack.

Dave Usher correctly points out that Chase JP Morgan is a specific example of a corporation attacking men, probably by thinking it is politically correct and a good tax write-off to support a feminist shelter.

I hope Glenn Sacks can discuss Chase JP Morgan on television.

hi,

i would like to show and shock some people in the UK with what lies ahead for us ……

Do yoiu know how I can get individual and higher quality images of these adverts?

Best wishes,

Tony Stott
http://www.healing-men.net
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
07934 419 699
02920 193 968

PS – great website and content ……. keeps me going sometimes when the going is tough ….. T.