PROHIBITION Women are naturally enamoured with crime and violence, and the tyranny of the New World Order is no exception whatsoever. The first women's issue in politics, after women had gained power through advocacy for slaves and gained the vote with their terrorist suffragism and mad propaganda slogans ("vote for women, chastity for men") the first women's issue was prohibition, luckily not something that was passed in this country. In America howeverit became law, although it was predictably unenforcable and simply made people lose respect for the law and pushed massive amounts of money into the pockets of the organised criminal gangs, something the NWO has taken advantage of ever since. It was the forrunner of the massive "Dark Alliance" Iran/Contra and Vietnamese drug-running scams run by the intelligence services of the western world to raise money for their world controling operations. Since Eve women have always between the tools of choice for the devil, and no doubt at all they always will be. See here: In Conspiracy Nation Volume 8 Number 35 was mentioned how the Women's Christian Temperance Movement (WCTU) and its offshoots were not so much a populist women's movement as they were the hired army of families such as the Astors, the Vanderbilts, the Warburgs, and the Rockefellers. Purpose: to agitate and vote in the 18th Amendment and consequent Prohibition during the "roaring twenties". Prohibition, in turn, had as its purpose the strengthening of gang structures and passive acceptance of gangsters into the society. The feminists were therefore instumental in the rise fo the secret police state we all know and love today. Without them the CIA would have had to obtain its money through constitutional appropriations, which would have been far too much accountability. MI6 involves itself in much the same things, along with subsidies from corporations and money from drug dealing they also get money from various commercial ventures and other organised crime. The money from the Secret Vote is comparatively unimportant. In return feminism got carte blanch, as long as it did what the NWO said it should, which was no problem as their interests lay in the same direction. So why is it that the feminist movement is highly favored by the mass media? It is almost a given that anything so supported and propagandized by the establishment press *must* be in cahoots with the dominant classes. Corporate America's public relations shill, the mass media, makes it obvious who is who by negative distortions of some groups (conspiratologists, for instance) versus positive slants on others. In the case of feminists and the constituent bloc they loudly claim to speak for, the slant is so extreme it is grotesque: the evil male in one corner versus "sugar and spice" in the other. Thank goodness there are plenty of tough cops in television land to save these "damsels in distress"! Not only prohibition, but all moralising movement tend to be dominated by women. The terrible plight of blacks slaves was hijacked by the white women of the abolitionist movement who later used the structures formed for blacks for their own selfish ends. FATHERHOOD (see also here * Two out of three mothers seemed threatened by the idea of a father's equal participation in child rearing. * Mothers themselves may be subtly putting a damper on men's involvement with their children because they are so possessive of their role as primary nurturer. from _The Motherhood Report_ by Louis Geneive and Eva Margolies, 1987. Statistics on Fatherlessness PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PROBLEMS GREAT PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEMS single parent children 3 to 4 times more likely to have emotional or behavioral problems ( Zill and Schoenborn, National Center for Health Statistics, 1990) 84% of teens hospitalized for psychiatric care come from single parent homes (1989 study, cited by Hewlett, When the Bough Breaks) HIGHER SUICIDE RATE teens who attempt suicide similar to non-suicidal teens in age, income, race or religion, are more likely to have little or minimal contact with their father (Study of 752 families by New York Psychiatric Institute, cited by Hewlett) 75% of teens who commit suicide are from single parent homes (Elshtain, The Christian Century, 1993) MORE ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE 18% of children with strict and involved fathers used drugs 35% of children without fathers used drugs (1988 UCLA study, cited by Hewlett) Children in father-absent homes are 4.3 times more likely to smoke as children in father-present (Stanton, Oci, and Silva, 1994 survey of 1037 15-year-olds) GREAT FREQUENCY OF SLEEP DISORDERS more trouble falling asleep, more nightmares, and night terrors (Psychiatrist Alfred Messer, cited by Hewlett) PERSISTENT FEELINGS OF BETRAYAL, REJECTION, RAGE, GUILT, PAIN lasting for years with a renewed intensity at adolescence Two-thirds [of father-absent children] yearned for the absent parent, one-half of those with an intensity we found profoundly moving. (Wallerstein and Kelly, 1980, Surviving the Breakup) LOWER SELF-ESTEEM especially true for girls (Dr. Robert Fay presentation at NCMC conference, 1992) (Davidson, Life Without Father: America's Greatest Social Catastrophe, Policy Review, 1990) COGNITIVE/ACADEMIC ABILITY LOWER ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT 38% of elementary students from single parent homes were low achieving, while 23 % of both parent children were low achieving (Nat'l Assoc. of Elementary School Principals report, city by Hewlett) 30% of children from father-present homes were high achieving, while only 17% of children from father-absent homes were high achieving. LOWER MATH SCORES (Yale University study by Carlsmith, cited by Hewlett) (Cortes and Fleming, 1968) GREATER FAILURE RATE elementary students from fatherless homes or homes with mother and a stepfather have to repeat (National Center for Health Statistics study of 47,000 households by Deborah grades at a rate 2-3 times higher than children with both biological parents Dawson,1991) LOWER SAT SCORES "dramatic" lower scores for students from father-absent homes (Columbia University and Bowling Green State University study of 295 from father-absent homes and 760 from father-present homes, cited by Hewlett) LOWER IQ AND ACHIEVEMENT children who lost fathers before age 5 scored lower on Otis Quick Test and Stanford Achievement Test as junior-high and high-school students (Santrock, 1972) (Hetherington, Cox, and Cox study, 1978) (Cortes and Fleming, 1968) MORE LIKELY TO DROP OUT OF SCHOOL children from fatherless homes twice as likely to drop out of school ( US Department of Health and Human Services, Survey on Child Health, 1993) LESS LIKELY TO ATTEND COLLEGE (Wallerstein, Family Law Quarterly, 1986) ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR HIGHER RATES OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR fatherless children are twice as likely to become criminally involved (Margaret Wynn, 1964) -72% of adolescent murderers, 60% of rapists, and 70% of long-term prisoners grew up in father-absent homes (US Department of Justice data, 1991) GREATER DELINQUENCY FOR BOYS 87% of Wisconsin juvenile delinquents are a product of father-absent homes (Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services, 1994) 70% of juveniles in state reform institutions grew up in father-absent homes (US Department of Justice data, 1988) young black men raised without a father are twice as likely to engage in criminal activities (Hill and O'Neill, 1993) (Matlock in Adolescence) (Siegman, 1966; Anderson, 1968; Kelly and Baer, 1969) GREATER DELINQUENCY FOR GIRLS (Monahan, 1957; Toby, 1957) MORE VIOLENT MISBEHAVIOR IN SCHOOL Children who exhibited violent misbehavior in school were 11 times as likely to live without their father than children who did not violently misbehave (Sheline, Skipper, Broadhead, Aamerican Journal of Public Health, 1994) CHILD ABUSE GREATER CHANCE OF BEING PHYSICALLY ABUSED preschoolers living without their biological father were 40 times more likely to be a victim of child abuse as compared to like-aged children living with their father (Wilson and Daly in Child Abuse and Neglect: Biosocial Dimensions, 1987) premarital pregnancy, out-of-wedlock childbearing, and absent fathers are the most common predictors of child abuse (Smith, Hanson, and Noble, Child Abuse: Commission and Omission, 1980) GREATER CHANCE OF BEING SEXUALLY ABUSED 69% of victims of child sexual abuse came from homes where the biological father was absent (Gomes-Schwartz, Horowitz, and Cardarelli, Child Sexual Abuse Victims and their Treatment, 1988) HETEROSEXUAL ADJUSTMENT FOR DAUGHTERS MORE DIFFICULTY IN INTERACTING WITH MEN AND MALE PEERS daughters of divorcees aggressive, forward with boys and men daughters of widows shy and timid with boys and men (Hetherington, 1972) YOUNGER MARRIAGES daughter of divorcees marry at younger age (Hetherington, 1972) MORE UNWED PREGNANCY girls from fatherless homes 111% (over 2X) more likely to have unwed pregnancy (Warren Farrell presentation at NCMC conference, 1992; Hetherington, 1972) HIGHER DIVORCE RATES girls from fatherless home 92% (nearly 2X) more likely to divorce (Warren Farrell presentation at NCMC conference, 1992; Hetherington,1972) HETEROSEXUAL ADJUSTMENT FOR SONS LESS MASCULINE, MORE DEPENDENT BEHAVIOR (Santrock's study of 4- and 5-year old, father-absent boys) (Rogers and Long's study of 6- too 15-year-old boys where father employed away from home community, 1968) (Hetherington's study of 9- to 12-year-old, father-absent boys, 1966) GENERAL HEALTH MORE LIKELY TO SUFFER ACCIDENTS AND INJURIES fatherless children 20-30% more likely to experience accidents, injuries, and poisonings that did father-present children (Remez, Family Planning Perspectives, 1992) compared to children living with father, fatherless children experience more accidental injury, asthma, frequent headaches, and speech defects (Dawson, Journal of Marriage and Family, 1991) CULTURE WAR: NEGLECT OF CHILDREN The Q Camp, the WWII social experiment where a bunch of trendies were given some delinquents to take into the countryside and look after because the government had more important things to deal with. The children, who were given no discipline and ended up living in squalor (they smashed all the windows, didn't empty their buckets and so on, not to mention using robust language within earshot of the dainty female trendies) and divided themselves into "masters" and "slaves" to give themselves some authority. It was at this point that the Home Office put a stop to things, and rightly so. That's what the takeover of society by trendies really entails. That's what the delicate flowers of the social sciences get up to. WOMEN PROP UP THE RIGHT WING The Americans especially, but also their auxiliaries in the Conservative party and the ranks of the media moguls, would like us to think of feminism as a left wing movement, no doubt this is part of some kind of false-flag political warfare operation. The truth, of course, is quite different. From start to finish feminism has been a tool of the intelligence services, the secret societies and (most important of all) the capitalist class. Of ocurse the Soviet state was itself set up by the bankers, and the french revolution by the secret societies, but feminism is a special creation (along with synarchism) of the intelligence services, in their pseudo-Nazi post-War incarnation. It is the ultimate tool to crush unions, to deter democracy, to infiltrate and destroy the left wing. It's perfect for those who want to remain in power in the face of nationalist, socialist or democratic upheavals, hence its growing popularity in the increasingly corrupt and despotic third world. Colonel Gaddafi has a female bodyguard group. The worst mistake the Liberal Party ever made was to give women the vote. Even worse, in fact, than their decision to side with the Tory and National governments against their former allies and subordinates in the Labour Party. As soon as women got the vote they indulged their pseudo-Nazi, tough-guy-loving instincts by voting for Tories, especially the overly belligerent Curchill. The Tories has over 20 years, effectively in power. Every Government from 1945 to 1979 would have been Labour if only male votes had been counted. Women have also largely been responsible for the frequent schism in the Left, such as the end of the Triple Alliance in the 20s, the falure of the general strike and the shameful feminist activities of miners' wives during 1984-5. TERRORISM WORKS Terrorism works, that much is obvious from historical fact. The Jews in Palestine, the IRA, both effectively won their conflicts through pure terrorist tactics. The only time a government won't surrender to terrorism is on those occasions when the government is behind it, such as the current wave of Islamist terror or the "Communist" terror of the Gladio networks. The feminist suffragists, however, won with their terror campaing because they were supported by the elite. The elite used the feminist terrorists to coerce Parliament to their will. The suffragists undertook a long campaign of terror, at one point blowing up the house of the then-Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George who went on to be the Prime Minister behind the 1918 extension fo the vote to women. The later feminists, commonly called second wave feminists by those wishing to idolise the "first wave" without being associated with the more well-known hatred of the "second wave" although the reality is that the differences between the two wave, and any subsequent waves, are differences solely of Public Relations, not of substance. The later feminists also involved themselves in terror, as any good adjuncts of the CIA must, blowing up a BBC van at the 1970 Miss World competition and attempting to bomb the BT, then Post Office, Tower. DON'T FIGHT BACK But don't surrender either, no-win situation: The Public hardly notices. Mother-love has Hollywood-appeal, Father-love not. Millions cry into their hankies, when in the tear-squeezer "Not without my Daughter” mother-lioness Sally Field abducts her daughter from the care of the Iranian father. Gempp, whose children were torn from his life, at best attracts a few casual strollers to his folding table. Although his children live in the same city, for him they are far away, farther than Teheran, unreachable. No abduction was required, only a light-handed gesture by the mother "I've got the trump card.” Angry telephone calls, a fight in the Court? Very bad, because thereby he showed that he was "hostile”. Youth offices involve themselves. Psychologists are consulted, who judge the "readiness” of the father to have contact with his children, gray-haired women's representatives in Birkenstock sandals, concerned, shake their heads. The best, so advise the veterans, is to bleed silently and to show no concern. Gempp was not successful with that charade, because paradoxically he is exactly the type of man whom the women's movement created with much ado and fanfare: responsible, experienced with men's groups, compassionate, a father who is involved, instead of slinking away. RAPE CULTURE Christina Hoff-Sommers Don't listen to the feminist lies about rape, Brownmiller's "I heard from a judge that only 2% of allegatons are false" rubbish. Ignore them. REAL PAY GAP Gender Pay Gap (women paid more) Proof of what I was saying in an earlier file. ARBITRARY GOVERNMENT Don't Make Her Mad Unforutnately the library computer system won't let me view this relatively innocuous page, which shows the nature of fascist oppression in modern Britain. WHY THE NAZI SUPPORT FOR FEMINISM? I don't make a habit of reading blogs, but this from http://fredxblog.blogspot.com/, specifically from an April Fools joke he seems to have fallen for (I notice it was posted on the first of April), but nonetheless a good point well made. A part reads: "A veteran social democratic politician who wants to remain anonymous says 'We know that women are far more inclined to trust authorities and politicians than men. So for a politician the new development is welcome'." LOL Of course it is. Politicians thrive on that good 'ol female vote. True, too true. ELITE SEXUAL PERVERSIONS AND FEMINISM I've often considered the possibility that Gloria Steinem, among others, very much fits the profile of a Monarch trauma-based mind control sex slave. Now here we are: Google Groups, Paul Wolfowitz fucking an Arab feminist, to the mind conscious only of the cultural screen memories the elite foists upon us a most unlikely combination. MATTHEW PARRIS IN WONDERLAND From the newstatesman: A couple of nights earlier, in a late-night slot, Matthew Parris, the former Tory MP, revisited the Newcastle sink estate where 20 years ago he had spent a week on the dole. He met a father whose four children had featured in the film of his first visit. The father said his three daughters had got jobs, but his son had hanged himself just after his 21st birthday. The young man had attended every government training scheme going, but still couldn't find a job. "He never once moaned," his father said. "On the day he hanged himself, he shaved and had a shower. He'd been practising pull-ups on the rafters to make his arms strong for what he intended to do." Parris said to camera that the visit hadn't changed his views about the dole being kept low to make people look for work. People who hanged themselves might come from a dysfunctional family, and it wasn't fair to blame politicians. After his first visit, one critic called him a "Tory prat". Twenty years on, the views he expressed would be echoed by any member of the Blair cabinet. And from the Populist Pary blog, again about Mr Parris, MP: He was shocked to note that most people were on prozac in the estate he visited. It was pointed out that the young man who killed himself was not, and didn't drink or smoke. With the accompanying decline of religion, there seemed to be few outlets for people other than those which are addictive and health destroying. Matthew Parris criticised them for their lifestyle, but did not touch upon the fact that the Jarrow marchers, who in real terms were far poorer, had their dignity and were far fitter, considering their situation. Why not? Prozac and Valium are flooded into these sink estates to keep the natives from getting restive, by the "mass murderers in white coats" (to quote the book title), to cripple peoples minds so they can't even see anything's wrong. The implication in the above that the suicide victim wouldn't have killed himself if he'd been on SSRIs is totally wrong, the fact is that SSRIs have been shown to increase the risk of suicide. Some use that is!, and anti-deppressant that make people kill themselves. Don't be a mind-slave. Support democracy, which goes with prosperity, long life and mental freedom. INTERNATIONAL MALE CONSPIRACY I think I mentioned that Gimbutas is a Nazi. See also Rianne Eisler, Martian Genesis, Hal Saflienti human sacrifices, etc.. See the former patriarchy.com and here. A spiral is just a spiral. A cup is just a cup. A cigar, as Freud said, is sometimes just a cigar. Of course, he had one in his mouth at the time. FEMINISTS ENEMIES OF JUSTICE I don't normally read MensNewsDaily, it's a right-wing, sentimental feminist rag, nonetheless "Big Daddy Feminist Enabler MND" has this to say: Shame on Michael Nifong who, lacking eyewitness accounts, forensic proof, or DNA evidence, violated a long list of due process procedures. Nifong botched the photo line-up, turned his back on a disconfirming report of the examining nurse, ignored the fact that the accuser repeatedly changed her story, downplayed Mangum’s unsavory occupational activities, prejudiced the jury pool by publicly referring to the players as a “bunch of hooligans,” pandered to voters to secure his November re-election, and intentionally withheld exculpatory DNA evidence from a key report – and that’s only a partial listing. CONFESSION! Confessions of a Feminazi. As I write this, I am aware that I am probably going to offend some readers, but, then again, I have found that we in society are afraid and unaccepting of the truth, therefore taking offense. I can not apologize for what I am about to say, however I can only hope to attempt to undo the wrong that I have done. To start with, here is a little bit about myself. Before I was married, I was an extreme feminist, with the hopes and dreams of equality, having the same thoughts and beliefs as others in the fight for true equality. It wasn't like the feminists of today, who only want to gain complete control, power, and to have revenge, destroying everything that the true feminists have fought so hard for (true gender equality). It is my hope that by posting my story and comments, that it will encourage other women, (we/you know who you are), to come forward and to tell the truth about themselves and their experience. Here is my story, as shameful as it may be. I am a single mother of two. When I decided to leave my marriage, (I was bored), I went to three different lawyers for advice. I was asked by all 3 of them if I was ever abused by my husband. My answer was, never in any way shape or form was my husband abusive towards me. To my utter disbelief, all of them told me the same thing. Unless I accused my husband of abuse, I would not gain sole custody of my children. They also told me that by making these allegations against him, that I would get EVERYTHING and more. When I asked them how we would prove the allegations, I was told that the courts don't require proof, and to go to a women's shelter, and that they would help me, and that it would support my allegations of abuse. Having been brought up in a very religious family, I was very uncomfortable with this advice. I was then told by the lawyers, that if I wanted the full support of legal aid, I had no choice but to make the allegations against my husband. Having no money to pay for legal expenses, I did as I was advised. Reluctantly I took my children to a women's shelter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. On the outside, it appears as they want the public and their funders to see it. This is however, far from the truth. This place was a form of a cult, (for lack of a better term). Male bashing was a top priority, and the administration was very adamant about recruiting yet another woman (me), to join this man-haters club. They even have a game plan on how to win in court. By following their simple plan step by step, I would not only get sole custody of my children, but also the car, house and land, plus finances for the rest of my life. However, if I did not follow their game plan, but if I played fairly, I would lose everything, and I would be endangering the lives of other women, and would jeopardize any funding for them. The administration must have noticed that their brain washing techniques were not working as fast as they wanted, so I was 'thrown' at the other women staying there. Terms such as 'sperm donors', and that all men were abusive and must die, were used on a daily basis. They were very convincing, and not wanting to jeopardize my fellow house mates, I went along with their game plan. As soon as I said that I would follow their game plan, things moved very quickly. I saw the man that I was once married to destroyed emotionally, financially and physically. I was granted sole custody of our children, and because of a restraining order, I gained the house and car, so that our children wouldn't lose everything that they were used to. Not only was there a restraining order against him, he was also charged with assault. The man who had equally created our children, helped raise them, and who loves them dearly, was ordered to stay away from them, and to pay me, (more than I ever needed), support for them. Like I said, I destroyed him, leaving him with very little to survive. My brother is now going through a custody battle, where my former sister-in-law is playing exactly the same game that was taught to me by a women's shelter, and my brother is in the same shoes that I once put my ex in. Knowing how I destroyed my ex, and seeing the wrong that I had committed, I have made it my personal endeavor to help my brother with his fight. He recently joined a men's group, and he receives messages on the net from shared parenting, epoc_news etc. As he was thrown out of his home, he now lives with me, which gives me the opportunity to read the messages from these groups. I must admit, sometimes there is a message or two that is of great help, but for the most part, these groups have to stop playing 'Mr. Nice Guy'. CHEMICAL WARFARE AGAINST MANLINESS ITSELF Phthalates are a common part of women's make-up products but incredibly poisonous. However it is men who are most heavily effected, especially unborn male children who will be poorly endowed if their mothers use make up while they are in the womb. Even worse hormones from birth control pills leak into the environment, poisoning the entire food chain with unneccesary female hormones. Soya, a common ingredient of processed foods and a major export crop from Brazil has a similar effect because of its artificial hormones. Pesticides also take the form, when in the food chain, of female hormones poisoning us. Don't think this is all accidental, it's a conspiracy to removes uppity poor men from consideration and reduce the People to passivity. NO FEMALE TEACHERS John Taylor Gatto: Between 1840 and 1860, male schoolteachers were cleansed from the Massachusetts system and replaced by women. A variety of methods was used, including the novel one of paying women slightly more than men in order to bring shame into play in chasing men out of the business. Again, the move was part of a well-conceived strategy: "Experience teaches that these boys, many of whom never had a mother’s affection...need the softening and refining influence which woman alone can give, and we have, wherever practicable, substituted female officers and teachers for those of the other sex." A state report noted the frequency with which parents coming to retrieve their own children from reform school were met by news their children had been given away to others, through the state’s parens patriae power. "We have felt it to be our duty generally to decline giving them up to their parents and have placed as many of them as we could with farmers and mechanics," reads a portion of Public Document 20 for the state of Massachusetts, written in 1864. (emphasis added) To recreate the feelings of parents on hearing this news is beyond my power. PLANNED PARENTHOOD From a History of PLanned Parenthood: First, birth controllers hoped (correctly) that black leaders would be easier to manipulate than Catholic leaders had been. The movement planned to win black cooperation by placing blacks in highly visible positions. Sanger described this to Clarence Gamble in October 1939. In that letter she described how "colored Ministers, preferably with social service backgrounds" could be used and added ominously, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."[24] RAPE AND LYNCHINGS FAIR ISN'T FAIR Here: Someone suggested that, with the exception of their embarrassing involvement in the Superbowl Sunday hoax, the media watchdog group called FAIR (for Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting) had done a pretty good job. [...] The Women's Desk, directed by Jennifer Pozner, analyses sexism, racism and homophobia in the media and works with activists and media professionals to get a broad range of feminist perspectives included in the public debate. Right there you have a political bias -- an endorsement of "feminist perspectives". Moreover, the blurb shamelessly lumps sexism, racism and homophobia together, implying the usual PC bias. In fact, FAIR's web page "What is FAIR", in which they describe themselves, includes this telling phrase: FAIR [...] works to get feminist perspectives included in the public debate. There are 59 articles linked from the "Women's Desk" page, many of them openly pro-feminist in their titles, and some of them implicitly anti-male (eg. "Are Sexual Assault and Alcohol Abuse Good for Men's Health?") A search within FAIR's website yields 80 articles matching the term "Women's Desk" (and of course, none matching the term "Men's Desk"). A search within FAIR's website for the term "Sommers" yields a review attacking and attempting to discredit the book "Who Stole Feminism", as well as a whole series of correspondences between FAIR and PBS, attempting to get PBS to back down from airing the National Desk series on gender wars which included the episode "The War on Boys". You will also find an article by a FAIR representative openly attacking the Independant Women's Forum (to which Sommers belongs). Incidentally, Sommers wrote an excellent reply to Laura Flanders' published review of Who Stole Feminism, and sent it to the letters section of FAIR's online magazine, "EXTRA!". You will find it in the table of contents, but it is not linked to, so you can't read it. FAIR is not biased? Here are the results of some more searches on their website: "Feminism": 90 matches "Masculism": zero matches "Women's rights": 19 matches "Men's rights": one match (and it's an attack against men's advocates). "Faludi": 11 matches (positive and supportive) "Steinem": 10 matches (positive and supportive) "Sommers": 9 matches (attacking and critical) "Warren Farrell": 2 matches (attacking and critical) "battered women": 8 matches (mostly supportive of the feminist view) "battered men": one match (attacking the premise that men are battered) FAIR's "book store": FAIR operates a "book store" on their web site, in cooperation with amazon.com. Among the titles they feature are: * Real Majority, Media Minority: The Cost of Sidelining Women in Reporting. A collection of essays and interviews analyzing the mainstream media's dismissal of women's issues [(!!!)] * Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women by Susan Faludi * Backlash to Backlash Susan Faludi discusses the press response to Backlash. * Katha Pollitt & Gloria Steinem debate The People vs. Larry Flint There are three prominant feminists featured above, and no men's rights advocates at all. In fact, FAIR is promoting Faludi's "Backlash", one of the most gender-feminist works of the century. "The Feminist Coalition on Public Broadcasting". FAIR is openly a member of a coalition of feminist groups called The Feminist Coalition on Public Broadcasting, and participates in advocacy by that group against media coverage of men's issues. Does this sound fair and unbiased to you? Here: Suppose you were a journalist or a radio talk show host. You make a comment thirty years ago that could be interpreted as being racist. You were not actually trying to be racist though, you were trying to say what you thought was provocative a la Howard Stern or Don Imus. Twenty years ago you become popular. So popular, in fact, that you are interviewed by a national magazine. The interviewer asks if you have ever regretted anything you said. You cite the comment that could be interpreted as racist stating that it was something you regretted saying. Now let's say several years after that interview, someone writes a book calling you a racist. They use that comment from the interview, knowing full well that you regretted it and were only using this as an example of what you regretted. Yet, in the book neither your expression of regret nor the circumstances and the context of the quote are mentioned. Is this is honest journalism? Is this fair and balanced? Well, Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) thinks it is - indicating what a misnomer their name and acronym really are. Instead of reporting the truth, the whole truth FAIR reports only what will furnish the impression it wants people to have. They do this using the guise of a nonpartisan, impartial, media watchdog group. Nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is FAIR is an advocacy group, the objective of which is to discredit conservative media. Discrediting conservative media is fine - except FAIR not only reports ludicrous, erroneous or untrue statements by conservative media, they actually fabricate things and distort things as well. The aforementioned incident is a perfect example of what they do. Rush Limbaugh was a radio talk show host in Pittsburgh in the early 1970's. In his twenties, he was trying to be a Howard Stern type host. He made a comment about a black caller. Twenty years later after becoming the popular conservative talk how host of the present, Limbaugh was interviewed by Newsweek magazine. The interviewer asked him if he ever did anything he regretted, He cited that comment and expressed remorse because it was a racially insensitive thing to say. Jeff Cohen, the former ACLU attorney and the paragon of journalistic integrity that founded FAIR, co-authored a book about Limbaugh in 1994 titled, "The Way Things Aren't." The title was a parody of Limbaugh's best selling, " The Way Things Ought to Be." Cohen used that comment as proof that Limbaugh is a racist. He, of course, never stated the context of the quote even though he knew it. Ironically, the book was criticized by New York's liberal newspaper, Newsday, which said the FAIR book was unfair. "I don't believe Limbaugh is a liar," wrote Paul Colford for Newsday. During the controversy about Limbaugh's ESPN comments about Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb every writer and commentator in the Philadelphia area, and many of the Eagles players were aware of that comment although none knew it was something Limbaugh said as a neophyte and expressed remorse for in an interview. Indeed two columnists sportswriter Phil Sheridan and editorial columnist Acel Moore both cited that comment as an example of Limbaugh being a racist. It was even repeated by the local Philadelphia cable TV sports show. Was FAIR responsible for distributing that information? Their website listed it. They maintain relationships with editors and producers nationwide. They are skilled at propaganda. They certainly could have ensured that the quote was known by journalists in Philadelphia. Yet why would they do such a thing? Simple. FAIR hates Limbaugh and everything that can be considered conservative or that promotes capitalism. Just examine FAIR's board of directors. It contains members of the Democratic Socialists of America such as Edward Asner, and Barbara Ehrenreich, "peace activists" Tim Robbins, and Susan Sarandon, and people like Katha Pollitt, who forbid her daughter to fly an American flag, are advisors or directors of FAIR. L' affaire Limbaugh was not FAIR's first attempt to bowdlerize the radio waves of political commentary with which they did not concur. This was not the first time FAIR wanted to censor a radio personality. FAIR engaged in a campaign against New York City radio host Bob Grant. FAIR sent a letter to Disney, the corporate owner of Grant 's show, which said, "Is Bigotry a Disney Family Value? The campaign led to Grant's firing although FAIR said that was not their intent. Very few in the media mention that FAIR is a liberal organization. Although Howard Kurtz, certainly no conservative, has said that FAIR is a liberal advocacy group. What Kurtz did not mention is that bowdlerizing the conservative media is FAIR's raison d'etre. There is nothing equitable about FAIR. Michael P. Tremoglie EUGENICS Sterilised Nation Wednesday 23 May 11.00-11.30am BBC RADIO 4 During the Seventies, while the majority of middle-class white American women enjoyed new-found freedom over reproductive rights, thousands of sterilisations were being carried out within the immigrant and indigenous populations. This form of birth control was supported by the US Public Health Service and resulted in the loss of reproductive rights for a whole generation of Americans. For Sterilised Nation, MP Oona King travels to the US to hear from Native American, African-American and Hispanic women who were sterilised as part of what many have described as "Nazi-style eugenics". Fearing shame on their families or high court fees, few victims of sterilisation abuse have ever spoken out or sought compensation. Here, King meets the victims to hear their stories and explore to what extent the US Government is culpable for their plight. Presenter/Oona King, Producer/Jo Meek BUSH I, NAZIS AND EUGENICS From Part 13 of Branton's Underground Nazi Invasion series: Twenty years before he was U.S. President, George Bush brought two "race-science" professors in front of the Republican Task Force on Earth Resources and Population. As chairman of the Task Force, then-Congressman Bush invited Professors William Shockley and Arthur Jensen to explain to the committee how allegedly runaway birth-rates for African-Americans were "down-breeding" the American population. Afterwards, Bush personally summed up for the Congress the testimony his black-inferiority advocates had given to the Task Force. Note #2. George Bush held his hearings on the threat posed by black babies on August 5, 1969, while much of the world was in a better frame of mind -- celebrating mankind's progress from the first moon landing 16 days earlier. Bush's obsessive thinking on this subject was guided by his family's friend, Gen. William H. Draper, Jr., the founder and chairman of the Population Crisis Committee, and vice chairman of the PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION. Draper had long been steering U.S. public discussion about the so-called "population bomb" in the non- white areas of the world. [Nothing was said about 'over-population' by the 'white' races. Obviously 'they' consider the 'Caucasian', 'Anglo' or 'Aryan' races to be far superior to the darker races. - Wol.] ... At that point, the American Eugenics Society, still cautious from the recent bad publicity vis-a-vis Hitler, left its old headquarters at Yale University. The Society moved its headquarters into the office of the Population Council, and the two groups melded together. The long-time secretary of the Eugenics Society, Frederick Osborne, became the first president of the Population Council. The Gray family's child-sterilizer, Dr. C. Nash Herndon, became president of the American Eugenics Society in 1953, as its work expanded under Rockefeller patronage. Meanwhile, the International Planned Parenthood Federation was founded in London, in the offices of the British Eugenics Society. The undead enemy from World War II, renamed "Population Control," had now been revived. George Bush was U.S. ambassador to the UNITED NATIONS in 1972, when with prodding from Bush and his friends, the United States Agency for International Development first made an official contract with the old Sterilization League of America. The league had changed its name twice again, and was now called the "Association for Voluntary Surgical Contraception." The U.S. government began paying the old fascist group to sterilize non-whites in foreign countries. The Gray family experiment had succeeded. In 1988, the U.S. Agency for International Development signed its latest contract with the old Sterilization League (a.k.a. "Association for Voluntary Sterilization"), committing the U.S. government to spend $80 million over five years. Back to Index