January 12, 2009
Categories: domestic violence, Homicide, terrorism, The Angry Mens Movement, Violence Against Women . . Author: anonymums . Comments: Leave a comment
From Intimate Terrorism to Terrorism: The Fathers Terrorist Movement
Bruce Pardo, who dressed up as Santa and killed his ex wife amongst her nine guests on Christmas Eve
“I have to agree, Yuri. Whilst we here on this site can all understand what might have pushed this guy in that direction -to murder and suicide- in the end its a crime, especially when you consider that innocents were murdered. I’d be lying if I said that such extreme fantasies didn’t cross my mind when I was being tortured by the system, the ex, the courts, community, and feminist organizations. More than once I felt like putting a stop to it in the most extreme ways imaginable. It may be that a majority of men in such an untenable position entertain such thoughts.” – Jason Thompson, Fathers4Equality
“Mr. Pardo lashed out at those responsible for, and the enablers of, the Misandry Machine so prevalent in today’s society. My thoughts are for Mr. Pardo, and not anyone else. He was backed into a corner and he fought back. Good for him. More men are waking up to the misandry. Mr. Pardo, you are my hero.” – Arden Linoge, Mens Activism
Danny Platt who murdered his two and a half year old baby son
“I appeared on the Al Rantel Show on KABC AM 790 in Los Angeles Monday night to discuss the horrific Danny Platt murder and the child support issue in general. I pointed out that the child support system has many flaws, chiefly its inflexibility in dealing with fathers who suffer drops in income or who get laid off. “- Glenn Sacks Fathers and Families
Sympathy and Excuses for Perpetrators
An Excerpt from, “How the Fathers Rights Movement Betrays Victims and Protects Perpetrators”
By Dr Michael Flood.
This tendency is evident also in expressions of sympathy or justification for men
who use violence against women and children in the context of family law
proceedings. Over the past several decades, individual men have exacted violent
revenge against the Family Court, their ex-partners and their children. They have
committed murder-suicides, stabbed or shot ex-partners outside the Family Court,
hired hit-men to kill their ex-wives, murdered a Family Court judge and the wife
of another judge, bombed the home of another judge, and bombed a Family Court
(Milburn, 1998). Men’s murders of their ex-wives and children and subsequent
suicides have been justified by some spokesmen for men’s rights groups as
understandable responses to the “raw deal” men get before the Family Court
(Maddison, 1999, p. 39). For example, when a man in Perth gassed to death his
three young children and then himself in 1998, following a Family Court ruling
restricting his access to two weeks out of three, a spokesman for the Men’s
Confraternity commented that he was “probably a decent, hard-working man who
was pushed too far by the Family Court.”[1]
When fathers’ rights groups acknowledge men’s violence against women and
children, typically they ignore its impact on its targets and blame the violence on
factors outside the men who perpetrate it: the Family Court, the Family Law Act,
or the residential parent. Thus, “[i]n an ironic twist, male violence is used by these
groups to demonstrate how victimised men are by the family law system” (Kaye &
Tolmie, 1998, pp. 57-58). Indeed, fathers’ rights groups at times have used the
threat of men’s violence against women and children to hold the community to
ransom. They stress that unless family law is changed in line with their agendas,
more women and children will die (and more men will kill themselves).
|
Muslim Extremists |
Men’s Rights Activists |
Muslims demand rape law reverseBruce Loudon The AustralianONLY 10 days after Pakistan’s military-led Government reformed the country’s medieval rape and adultery laws, Islamabad appeared poised for a major backflip on the issue yesterday in an effort to pacify Islamic fundamentalists who have signed a fatwa against the historic changes. Hardline Pakistani religious leaders have labelled the reforms “un-Islamic, immoral and unconstitutional” and evidence of “Western values infiltrating society”. In response, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has authorised the Pakistan Muslim League to negotiate with religious scholars and leaders of the powerful Islamic opposition alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), over changes to the rape bill. The reforms to the rape laws were acclaimed by women’s rights groups in Pakistan and around the world as an overdue change to a system that has long been regarded as an affront to civil liberties. But as much as it won global plaudits, and the firm backing of President Pervez Musharraf, the bill evoked fury among the Islamic fundamentalist parties that are supportive of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and are seen as a growing threat to the Pakistani Government in elections scheduled for next year. The MMA, which has strong representation in the central parliament and controls the legislatures in two key provinces, has threatened to lead a mass movement to depose the Government, sparking a serious rethink on the rape laws. Negotiations over the bill follow two days of fury in mosques across the country, with Muslim priests leading attacks on the changes, denouncing them for their “Western values” and attacking those who supported the reforms. Under the changes, complaints of rape and adultery will be dealt with under the country’s civil penal code rather than under an obscure Islamic sharia ruling imposed in 1979 that demands that four male witnesses testify before a rape charge can be proved. Reports said yesterday that as part of the attempt to curb the gathering campaign against the rape law changes, police and paramilitary forces had ringed the headquarters of the fundamentalist Jamaat-e-Islami party in the Punjab capital of Lahore, where thousands of protesters led by the MMA were gathering to demonstrate against the changes to the legislation. A leader of the group said: “The MMA remains absolutely committed to stop these changes, and if necessary to bring about a change in the Government.”
|
Children need. . . THIS? THE FATHERS RIGHTS MOVEMENT: IN THEIR OWN WORDS Liz Richards The Liz Library “Specifically, husbands no longer enjoy an assurance of a monogomous sexual relationship with the wife… not even a right to be informed of an abortion, much less a veto…” “The husband’s claim on the wife’s love is no longer recognized at all. Worse, it has been criminalized and is now known as “marital rape”. WOLFGANG HIRCZY De MINO, Ph.D
“[Sex offenders] … could serve a USEFUL purpose to society also, by being ordered, and they would probably happily comply, to go out and rape and pillage all the damn man hating Feminaz’s!!!!!!!!!!”
GEORGE GILLILAND “We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape… we called it exciting.” as quoted in December 1977 Penthouse article, “Incest: The Last Taboo,” by Philip Nobile A review of Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say WARREN FARRELL, Ph.D.
|
Jemaah Islamiyah Adopts the Hezbollah Model
Sound Familiar?
 |
 |
 |
|
January 10, 2009 Islamist terrorism may have its roots in the Middle East, but it has long since expanded globally. Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, is no exception. Jemaah Islamiyah has for more than fifteen years fought to transform Indonesia into an Islamist state. In recent years, its terrorist campaign has suffered setbacks. As Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it builds upon the experience of Middle East terrorist groups. From Al-Qaeda, it adopts philosophical underpinnings that guide its dual strategy. From Hamas and Hezbollah, it borrows an “inverse triangle model” in which a broad network of social services supports a smaller jihadist core, and from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf emirates it adopts a model of charities and NGOs that help Jemaah Islamiyah advance its jihadist goals.
 —————————————————————Jemaah Islamiyah’s engagement in politics is a cynical short-term tactic in its long-term strategy to eradicate democracy. Founder Abu Bakar Ba’asyir has said, “The democratic system is not the Islamic way. It is forbidden. Democracy is based on people, but the state must be based on God’s law—I call it Allahcracy.” —————————————————————- Jemaah Islamiyah was founded sometime in 1992 or 1993 by former members of Darul Islam, an Islamist movement that emerged during Indonesia’s fight for independence from the Netherlands but that continued armed struggle for more than a decade after independence. Members of Darul Islam grew especially frustrated with their political emasculation under Muhammad Suharto’s rule (1965–98). Jemaah Islamiyah’s founders, Abdullah Sungkar and Abu Bakar Ba’asyir, conceptualized the group as a covert organization that would topple the secular state through a combination of political agitation and violence. Jemaah Islamiyah’s primary founding document, Pedoman Umum Perjuangan al-Jama’ah al-Islamiyyah (PUPJI, The general guidebook for the struggle of Jemaah Islamiyah) outlines the role of clandestine cells and describes the Islamist struggle in terms of guerilla warfare. By the end of the decade, Jemaah Islamiyah had become an Al-Qaeda affiliate, receiving financial and material support from the group. Several top Jemaah Islamiyah operatives even received instruction in Afghan training camps.[1] Soon after its founding, Jemaah Islamiyah became an Al-Qaeda affiliate. Jemaah Islamiyah sought advantage from the collapse of Suharto’s authoritarian rule and Indonesia’s descent into a chaotic decentralized democracy. Beginning in 1998, Jemaah Islamiyah launched the “uhud project,” whose goal was ridding regions of the country of both Christians and Hindus in order to establish pure Muslim enclaves, governed by Shari‘a (Islamic law). Its two paramilitaries, Laskar Mujahidin in the Moluccas and Laskar Jundullah in Central Sulawesi, engaged in sectarian bloodletting against Christians and Hindus until, in 2002, the government was able to broker the Malino accords, enabling a fragile truce. Meanwhile, Jemaah Islamiyah began a bombing campaign in 2000, killing several hundred people, including 202 in one attack in October 2002 at a Bali disco. Indonesian authorities fought back. Security forces arrested more than 450 Jemaah Islamiyah members, prosecuted over 250 terrorists, and eviscerated the organization’s regional cell system. Victory was not complete, however. More than a dozen hardened Jemaah Islamiyah leaders remain at large; some, such as Noordin Muhammad Top, have significant organizational skills. Others, such as Zulkarnaen and Dulmatin, have technical and military capabilities. As recently as June 2008, police raids have netted large caches of bombs and bomb-making material,[2] suggesting that Jemaah Islamiyah’s commitment to terrorism remains high. Justifying a Soft Power StrategyWith the exception of Ali Ghufreon (known also as Mukhlas), awaiting execution for his role in the 2002 Bali bombing, Southeast Asian jihadists have no important homegrown theoreticians. Jemaah Islamiyah has filled the gap by drawing upon the works of Al-Qaeda’s three most important thinkers-Abu Musab as-Suri, whose main work is the 2002 tract “Call to Worldwide Islamic Resistance”; Abu Bakr Naji, who wrote the 2004 document “The Management of Savagery”; and Abdul Qadir (Dr. Fadl), who, in November 2007, penned “Rationalizing Jihad in Egypt and the World.” Together, these authors provide theoretical sustenance to Jemaah Islamiyah’s revitalization of Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, a civil society organization affiliated with Jemaah Islamiyah, and other overt organizations. Suri, for example, argued that Al-Qaeda’s blanket opposition to democracy was counterproductive and that jihadists should instead work with Islamist political leaders and parties. Naji concurred. “If we meditate on the factor common to the movements which have remained, we find there is political action in addition to military action,” he explained. “We urge that the leaders work to master political science just as they would to master military science.” Naji’s specific recommendations that jihadists be able to justify their actions in Islamic law and reach the people directly without reliance on state media parallel the strategy implemented in Egypt by Sayyid Qutb who, in the Muslim Brotherhood, combined a mass-based movement and a network of covert cells. Jemaah Islamiyah has also adopted the substance of Qadir’s tract which argued that most terrorism is illegal by Islamic law, that violent jihad should only be waged in defense, and that fighting Muslim leaders, even those decried as apostates, is illegal unless rebellion would lead to tangible improvement in Muslims’ lives.[3] Today, Jemaah Islamiyah pursues a three-front strategy of recruitment and expansion of cells, religious indoctrination and training of its members, and instigation of sectarian conflict. Indeed, Noordin Mohammad Top wrote an 82-page tract about how to establish jihadi cells on a six-month timetable. The PUPJI outlines the three phases of jihad: iman (faith of individuals), hijrah (building a base of operations), and then jihad qital (fighting the enemies of Islam). One section of the PUPJI, “Al-Manhaj al-Harakiy Li Iqomatid Dien (The general manual for operations),” states that Jemaah Islamiyah can engage in overt activities in order to proselytize and build a base of support. But the bulk of the document is a guide for clandestine operations and cell-building, the path Jemaah Islamiyah leaders most closely follow. The ReboundAfter the Indonesian crackdown that began in 2003, Jemaah Islamiyah reverted to recruitment and indoctrination for several years, but it has again begun to build a base of operations, especially in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas. As the group sought to recover from the blows inflicted by Indonesian counterterror forces, debate raged about how to move forward. The International Crisis Group’s Sydney Jones, a leading expert on Indonesia, describes factional rifts inside Jemaah Islamiyah between proponents of sectarian bloodletting and those who wish to target the Indonesian government and Western targets.[4] Such strategies, however, are not mutually exclusive. Since 2004, Jemaah Islamiyah has increased bombings, assassinations, and raids on military and police facilities. The November 2005 beheadings of three Hindu schoolgirls was meant to undermine confidence in the state.[5] By provoking sectarian attacks, Jemaah Islamiyah can broaden its definition of a defensive jihad. Such vigilantism enables it to contend that Jakarta has abdicated responsibility by not coming to the defense of the Muslim community, enabling Jemaah Islamiyah to pursue its goals with greater popular support. Since mid-2006, the Indonesian police have taken seriously the threat of sectarian violence after uncovering documents emphasizing the centrality of sectarian bloodletting to Jemaah Islamiyah’s efforts to regroup. Religious indoctrination has become a parallel component of Jemaah Islamiyah strategy. The group has sent high-level cells to Pakistan for advanced religious training. In 2003, for example, Jemaah Islamiyah sent nineteen children or brothers of high-ranking Jemaah Islamiyah members to study in the Lashkar e-Toiba madrasa, an Islamic school in Lahore, Pakistan, which has ties to the Taliban. Although Pakistani security arrested and deported them in fall 2004,[6] Jemaah Islamiyah has been able to conduct more such training in Indonesia where the group runs a network of approximately sixty madrasas and has launched its own publishing houses: Al-Alaq, the Arafah Group, the Al-Qowam Group, the Aqwam Group, and Kafayeh Cipta Media.[7] Such a strategy is not unique to Indonesia and, indeed, has been frequently practiced in the Middle East. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood regrouped in the wake of the Egyptian government’s mid-1990s crackdown by concentrating on mosques, publishing, and proselytizing.[8] Likewise, for more than a decade before Israeli Arabs became involved in Palestinian violence, the Islamic Movement within Israel maintained its own educational institutions and publication houses in the Israeli town of Umm al-Fahm.[9] Lebanon, too, has become home to a number of Islamist publishing houses. Jemaah Islamiyah’s Inverse TriangleLike many Middle Eastern Islamist groups, Jemaah Islamiyah has embraced the inverse triangle in which a broad range of charities and nongovernmental agencies (NGOs) serve as cover for a narrower terrorist mission. And like many Islamist groups in the Middle East, as Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it shows no intention of abandoning its core ideology even as some Indonesian officials wishfully see moderation where none exists. As the organization seeks to rebuild, it becomes an example of how Al-Qaeda affiliates, beaten back by successful counterterror strategies, regroup using both the democratic process they simultaneously fight and the legitimacy naively bestowed by the international community on any organization that calls itself a nongovernmental organization. Jemaah Islamiyah has adopted a Hezbollah model of social organization in which most of the group’s activities are overt charitable work and provision of social services even as a component of the organization clandestinely pursues terrorism. Beginning in the 1980s, Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shi‘i political group founded by Iran in the wake of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, began to construct a large network of educational institutions and social services both to complement their military wing and to serve as a recruitment tool. Slowly, Hezbollah built a state within a state in Lebanon, preventing anyone within its territory the option of remaining outside the group’s influence. Even as Hezbollah conducts terrorist activities against Israel and within Lebanon itself, many in the international community refuse to define the group as a terrorist organization, in effect arguing that social work is exculpatory.[10] Hamas has implemented the same model. While Hamas is a lethal terrorist organization that has employed at least sixty suicide bombings since the second intifada began in September 2000, many Palestinians and Europeans argue that the group’s network of schools, orphanages, clinics, and social welfare organizations bestows some legitimacy.[11] In Iraq, too, militia leaders pursue the same strategy. Abdul Aziz Hakim, the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, has employed not only the Badr Corps, which has sponsored terrorism and conducted violent operations, but also the Shahid al-Mihrab Foundation, a charitable organization run by his son, Amar al-Hakim. In Jemaah Islamiyah’s case, the base of the inverse triangle is Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, an umbrella organization for political parties, NGOs, civil society organizations, and individuals committed to transforming Indonesia into an Islamic state.[12] Created in 1999, the organization has an office in Yogyakarta, publishes conspiracy-laden and vehemently anti-Semitic and anti-American books through Wihdah Press and its own magazine, Risalah Mujahidin, lobbies political officials, and in 2001 and 2003, held high-profile national conferences.[13] Muhammad Jibril, son of Jemaah Islamiyah leader Muhammad Iqbal Abdurrahman, runs Ar-Rahman Media, its multimedia publishing house. The use of diverse institutions is deliberate, even as the antipathy toward Indonesian democracy is pronounced. Muhammad Jibril told Al-Jazeera,
At a November 2006 sermon at a mosque in Kediri, East Java, Jemaah Islamiyah founder Ba’asyir urged his followers to go abroad to wage jihad, though without explaining why. “If you want to go on jihad, do not do it here [Indonesia] but in the southern Philippines or even in Iraq.” He said the Bali bombers were legitimate jihadis even if their jihad was “not at the right time or place.” Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia may have switched tactics with regard to the desirability of terrorism inside Indonesia, but they have not altered their commitment to violent jihad. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has to some extent become Jemaah Islamiyah’s equivalent of Sinn Fein, the political party that existed solely to mirror the Irish Republican Army’s aims. Jemaah Islamiyah uses Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia to achieve whatever aims it can through the democratic process. Thus, the Majelis Mujahidin advocates for Islamic law components to all major bills and laws. It seeks, for example, to push Indonesian penal law into conformity with Islamic law[15] and has urged local Islamic communities to lobby regional representatives for Islamic law at the local level.[16] It is a strategy that is both well organized and effective. Nearly forty regional governments have taken steps to implement Islamic law, regulate interaction between men and women, obligate Qur’an reading, and ban alcohol.[17] The group has also pressured the media to replace secular programming with Islamic programming, legislating to force civil servants to wear Islamic dress, and mandating Arabic literacy. Jemaah Islamiyah’s engagement in the political process is a cynical short-term tactic in its longer-term strategy to eradicate democracy. “The democratic system is not the Islamic way,” Ba’asyir explained. “It is forbidden. Democracy is based on people, but the state must be based on God’s law-I call it Allahcracy.”[18] “Islam’s victory can only come though da’wa and jihad, not elections.”[19] Many of Jemaah Islamiyah leaders hold concurrent positions in Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, giving themselves a patina of legitimacy and political cover. Since his release from prison in October 2004, Abdurrahman (Abu Jibril), for example, has used Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia as his base of operations. But his message has not necessarily changed. In one recruiting film produced by Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, Abdurrahman calls on his congregants to wage a violent jihad. Armed with a pistol extended into the air he exclaimed, “You can’t just have the Qur’an without the steel. You will bring down the steel.”[20] His younger brother remains Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia’s director of daily operations.[21] Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has grown increasingly confident and combative in dealing with the government, which it accuses of leading a witch hunt against Muslims. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has begun issuing “summons,” or official complaints, to the police in order to intimidate them and influence investigations of suspected terrorists. In May 2006, for example, it issued a summons to the Indonesian National Police specialized counterterrorism unit, Detachment 88, for their raid on a Jemaah Islamiyah safe house in Central Java, in which two suspects were killed and two others were arrested.[22] As Ba’asyir said, “The struggle for Islam can only come through crisis and confrontation.”[23] Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia also serves as a link between Jemaah Islamiyah and Saudi financiers. Many Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia leaders hold or have held concurrent positions in Saudi charities and their Indonesian counterparts that have been used to support terrorist activities.[24] These include the Saudi Al-Haramain and the International Islamic Relief Organization. Two Indonesian charities, KOMPAK and the Medical Emergency Relief Charity, respectively serve as their counterpart or executing agencies. While U.S. Executive Order 13224 and the U.N.’s 1267 Committee on January 22, 2004, designated the Indonesian branch of Al-Haramain as a funder of terrorism, four months after the designation, Al-Haramain was operating openly in East Java.[25] KOMPAKJemaah Islamiyah used or co-opted many of these charities between 1999 and 2001, during a period of sectarian bloodletting in the Molucca Islands between Jemaah Islamiyah’s paramilitaries and Christian and Hindu citizens. Dewan Dakwah Islam Indonesia, a hard-line Islamist offshoot of the Muhammadiyah, the national Islamic organization, established KOMPAK in late 1998 ostensibly to provide relief assistance to people in conflict areas, such as Kalimantan, the Moluccas, and Central Sulawesi. It immediately partnered with the Saudi International Islamic Relief Organization although it recently suffered a setback when, on August 3, 2006, the U.S. Treasury Department designated the Indonesian branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization, along with the Philippine branch and a Saudi director of the International Islamic Relief Organization, for financing terrorism, including Al-Qaeda. The United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee acted in concert although it did not designate the Indonesian branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization as a financier of terrorism until November 9, 2006.[26] While KOMPAK did not engage in conflict directly, its aid won support for Jemaah Islamiyah and its paramilitary organizations such as Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujahidin. Of the thirteen regional directors of KOMPAK, at least three were top-level Jemaah Islamiyah operatives.[27] KOMPAK, however, only came to the assistance of Muslim communities, which it worked to radicalize. KOMPAK officials, while acknowledging that they operate in regions struck by sectarian conflict such as Aceh, Poso, the Moluccas, and Bangunan Beton Sumatra, assert they alleviate the crises and provide necessary relief. They deny any links to jihad activities.[28] In 2003, Indonesian forces arrested several KOMPAK leaders for their involvement in sectarian violence and terrorism; several others went underground. As with other jihadist organizations and corollary charities in North Africa, Iraq, Chechnya, and elsewhere, KOMPAK’s support is not entirely indigenous. It serves as the executing agency of many Saudi and Persian Gulf funds, including from Al-Haramain and the International Islamic Relief Organization. Aris Munandar, a top KOMPAK and Al-Haramain official, was a key financial conduit between Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah. Agus Dwikarna not only served as head of KOMPAK for South Sulawesi but also was the regional branch officer for the International Islamic Relief Organization and treasurer of Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia. Munandar, who was a leading member of Jemaah Islamiyah, used KOMPAK to support both the sectarian bloodletting in the Moluccas and Sulawesi and Al-Qaeda operatives’ training of Jemaah Islamiyah members.[29] KOMPAK also produced a number of jihadi videos for fundraising and recruitment purposes. The Indonesian crackdown broke KOMPAK into disparate cells, but the organization did not cease its commitment to radicalization. One such splinter group, KOMPAK in Ambon, conducted the October 2005 Bali II bombings. Indonesian prosecutors believe that one mid-level Jemaah Islamiyah operative, Abdullah Sonata, received 11 million rupiah (US$15,000) and 100,000 Saudi riyals ($36,500) in 2004 from a Saudi named Syeikh Abu Muhammad to finance militant operations and to send Jemaah Islamiyah terrorists to Mindanao. Other KOMPAK members acquired weaponry with which to instigate a new wave of sectarian bloodletting in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas.[30] Dulmatin, who is one of Jemaah Islamiyah’s leading operatives and has been in hiding in the southern Philippines since early 2004, ordered other KOMPAK members to dispatch suicide bombers to the Philippines. Abdullah Sonata asserted that he sent ten although only four got through.[31] It is clear, therefore, that the KOMPAK network, funded by Saudi charities, helped develop Jemaah Islamiyah. It also illustrates clearly that terrorist organizations can be created from social networks. Hambali, Jemaah Islamiyah’s top operative in Malaysia, established other charities including Pertubahan el Hassan, as conduits for funds to both Jemaah Islamiyah, its paramilitaries in the Moluccas, and the Medical Emergency Relief Charity. Initially, these charities served as ancillary organizations used to assist with jihadist activities. Over the last two years, however, Jemaah Islamiyah has begun to focus far more on charities. While the Indonesian military has made inroads tracking down terrorist leaders, the Indonesian government has been more willing to tolerate Jemaah Islamiyah charities in the belief that it can wean Jemaah Islamiyah leaders from violence and that it is better to have them involved in overt and nonviolent activities. Jakarta has, therefore, been unwilling to enforce United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee or U.S. Department of the Treasury designations, which make it illegal to raise funds for or donate to any proscribed individual or organization. The Indonesian government’s strategy appears to mirror that of the Lebanese government’s strategy with regard to Hezbollah. Beirut and many Western powers long tolerated Hezbollah, convinced that incorporating it into the Lebanese government might moderate the group. However, in Lebanon, such accommodation backfired precisely because the charities were only one aspect of a much broader strategy that included immutable commitment to jihad. Tsunami and EarthquakeThe December 2004 tsunami and the May 2006 earthquake in central Java, both massive humanitarian crises, provide a window into just how Jemaah Islamiyah and its charities operate to further Islamist agendas. On December 26, 2004, an earthquake off the coast of Sumatra caused a tsunami which killed more than 165,000 Indonesians and displaced half a million others. Jakarta, overwhelmed by the magnitude of the disaster, sought to tap Jemaah Islamiyah’s social service network. On January 4, 2005, Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia dispatched the first group of seventy-seven volunteers to Aceh from their Yogyakarta based headquarters.[32] Among them was a top Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia official who was a suspect in the October 12, 2002 Bali blast that killed 202 people.[33] Not all Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia personnel were engaged explicitly in humanitarian work; the group indicated that their primary goal was to provide “spiritual guidance” to victims, assist in the reconstruction of mosques, and guard against proselytizing by non-Muslim relief agencies. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia’s non-humanitarian agenda led the Indonesian Air Force to expel nineteen Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia members from Aceh on January 11, 2005.[34] Abdurrahman’s Laskar Mujahidin also used the tsunami to propel itself to new relevance. Founded in January 2000 by Abdurrahman and Hambali, both of whom had experience fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, the group fielded approximately 500 armed combatants in the Moluccas who were equipped with high-speed motor boats, which they used to attack remote Christian and Hindu communities. After the tsunami, they established four base camps in Aceh including one outside the airport, adjacent to the camps of other domestic and international relief organizations, beneath a sign that read, “Islamic Law Enforcement.” Unlike Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, which was more concerned with providing “spiritual guidance” and restoring “infrastructure in places of religious duties,” the Laskar Mujahidin was deeply involved in relief work, including the distribution of aid and especially the burial of corpses.[35] Though the organization is vehemently anti-American, it gave cautious backing to the presence of U.S. and Australian troops.[36] It was clear, however, that their lobbying did persuade the government to call for the early departure of foreign troops. Joining Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia and Laskar Mujahidin was the Medical Emergency Relief Charity (MERC), an Indonesian executor agency for Saudi funding.[37] Established on August 14, 1999, amidst sectarian fighting, MERC now has twelve offices in Indonesia, concentrated in the regions most directly affected by sectarian violence. In 2000-01, MERC produced two well-publicized jihadi videos for fundraising purposes.[38] While MERC was never directly implicated in supporting Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujahidin paramilitary operations to the degree that KOMPAK was, its one-sided approach to the Moluccas conflict, as well as the actions of some individual members, raised suspicions. There is some evidence that MERC received funding from the Indonesian branch of the Saudi-funded International Islamic Relief Organization.[39] MERC operations abroad, in particular in Iraq, the Palestinian territories, Afghanistan, and Chechnya, have also raised concerns about it being a conduit for terrorist funding. MERC sent a team of four doctors and other staff to Iraq in 2003. In 2004, U.S. forces killed one MERC employee, an ambulance driver, in a firefight. The group’s website stated that they operate in the tribal areas of Pakistan with the support and permission of the Taliban. Other Islamist organizations such as the Islamic Defenders Front and Hizb ut-Tahrir, though not directly connected to Jemaah Islamiyah, have also become active in Aceh in the wake of the tsunami. Both groups have engaged in sectarian violence.[40] The Islamist charities flocked to Aceh for three reasons. The first was to garner good press and media attention, providing a needed makeover for groups associated with terrorism and sectarian violence while simultaneously highlighting the secular government’s failure. Second, the Islamist charities sought to counter any Western influence.[41] Hence, Din Syamsudin, the head of the quasi-official Indonesian Ulema Council and president of the second largest Muslim organization in the country, Muhammadiyah, who has subsequently acted as a fundraiser for Hamas, warned:
Paranoia about Western influence has become a prime motivator for Islamist groups in the Middle East. Prior to the rise of Al-Qaeda, for example, Saudi clergy preached that the Muslim world was subject to a Western “cultural attack” and “intellectual attack.” In 1981, the World Muslim League, a Saudi NGO, published a book entitled, The Means of Combating the Intellectual Attack on the Muslim World, which highlighted a theme developed by ‘Abdullah ‘Azzam, a professor at King ‘Abd al-‘Aziz University in Jeddah and mentor to Osama bin Laden.[43] Defense against a “cultural NATO” is a theme that Iranian hardliners have also recently adapted.[44] Hence, almost two years after the tsunami, Ba’asyir declared that “naked women are more dangerous than bombs” in his salvo about spiritual pollution and Western culture and values degrading Islam from within.[45] Third, these groups saw the disaster as an opportunity to proselytize. Several groups in addition to Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia indicated that their primary goal was to provide “spiritual guidance” to victims, ensure that Islamic law was being followed, and to assist in the reconstruction of mosques. With 400,000 refugees and mosques at the center of rural community relief efforts, the potential for influence was great.[46] The cynicism of the Islamist parties grated on local political movements. While Aceh is nearly 100 percent Muslim, the Acehenese secessionist movement, the Free Aceh Movement known by its acronym GAM (Gerakan Aceh Meredeka), urged the international community to force the Islamist groups to leave in apparent frustration with the government’s unwillingness to do so:
Tsunami relief efforts provided a template for subsequent operations, most notably in the May 27, 2006 earthquake in central Java. The magnitude 6.2 earthquake killed more than 6,000 people, injured 78,000, and left up to 1.5 million homeless. The United Nations’ World Food Program moved quickly into central Java and chose Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia as one of eight partner organizations to deliver ninety-five tons of food aid. The Australian government immediately protested Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia’s contract,[48] but World Food Program spokesman Barry Came said, “We don’t pick groups to distribute aid based on their religious or political beliefs. We choose based on the ability to deliver, and so far they’ve performed up to standard. We have no complaints.”[49] He backed down, however, under international pressure.[50] Both Ba’asyir and Abdurrahman had been proscribed under U.N. Security Council 1267 Committee lists as specially designated terrorist financiers, and Ba’asyir, just released from prison, was reportedly planning to deliver the World Food Program aid personally.[51] The episode highlights a major problem facing the West when combating Islamism: The United Nations and international agencies either refuse to perform due diligence or use moral equivalency to justify support for Islamist organizations. Not only do such organizations receive Saudi support as they pursue sectarian radicalization, but too often they also indirectly receive subsidies from Western taxpayers who fund international organizations. ConclusionThe Hezbollah model is not new to terrorist organizations, but it is new to Jemaah Islamiyah. Jemaah Islamiyah has taken advantage of an opening: Political will in Indonesia to dismantle terrorist infrastructure has waned as the nature of the group’s militancy has become apparent. Released from prison, the group’s leaders have been able to focus on political, religious, and charitable work. The civilian infrastructure they have developed will make the group-still committed to terrorism-more durable over the long term. Policymakers in Indonesia need to understand precedent. The existence of charities and social service networks has not made Hamas or Hezbollah any less violent although they have contributed to de-legitimization of governments. The Indonesian government should do what the Lebanese, Israeli, and Palestinian Authority governments did not: They must uproot social networks. Few governments have put forward a comprehensive strategy for dealing with the phenomenon of the inverse triangle, and most disaggregate the terrorist and social welfare arms and fund raising. There is intense international pressure on the Indonesian government to ban Jemaah Islamiyah, but no politician in the world’s largest Muslim community has the political courage to do so. As Indonesia’s top counterterrorism official, Ansyaad Mbai, stated, the reason there is no ban on Jemaah Islamiyah “is because the political situation is still very sensitive.”[52] Complacency and political expediency rule the day in Jakarta. As long as Jemaah Islamiyah members do not blow things up or simply target Western interests, Jakarta will do little. It is not just courts and counterterrorism officials who have grown frustrated. A handful of Muslim reformers and liberals have been at the center of a push to rewrite Law No. 8 (1995) on nongovernmental organizations to tighten both the process of NGO incorporation and increase oversight. The proposed law will make fundraising by unregistered (or de-registered) NGOs illegal. The proposed law would make Jemaah Islamiyah’s fundraising illegal under Indonesian domestic law.[53] This unwillingness to take on terrorist infrastructure is regrettable. First, like Hezbollah and Hamas, Jemaah Islamiyah has a long-term timetable. Second, by pursuing overt strategies, Jemaah Islamiyah is able to forge closer ties and common cause with Islamists who might otherwise eschew their violence. Many Indonesians no longer see Jemaah Islamiyah as a radical fringe organization even though the group’s agenda has not changed. Third, there is little evidence that Jemaah Islamiyah will abandon terrorism. Tactics may shift, but strategy does not. Herein, Hamas again provides an example that should worry Indonesian authorities. Its assumption of political control in Gaza has not tempered its commitment to terrorism; indeed, Hamas has become even more aggressive since the January 2006 Palestinian elections. Herein, Washington and other Western governments have an interest. Indonesia may be half a world away from the United States, but any Islamist gains in the archipelago nation will have profound repercussions on U.S. national security. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, and the United States should not cede the Indonesian population to the same Saudi-funded Islamists who radicalized their Arab brethren, recruited unencumbered for years in Afghan and Pakistani refugee camps, and profess an inflexible hatred of the United States, Israel, and the West. Washington should pressure Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines to uproot Jemaah Islamiyah’s overt presence and cede them no political space where they can recruit and indoctrinate anew. Targeting their financial and social networks is essential to the long-term fight against terrorism. —— |
Calling all groups for an Official Revolt against Fathers Terrorist Movements.
Definition of Terrorism
…activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and… (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States… [or]… (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States…”
- The fathers rights movements seek to call upon a western version of Sharia Law.
- They seek to rip away the liberties of women and children within the fathers manifesto
- The seek to incite terror into the hearts of those who oppose their regime.
- They promote pedophile supportive concepts
- They have formed judicial corruption rings internationally.
- They promote fraudulent councils that exploit children’s rights in favor of the father.
- They push their radical agenda against same sex families.
- They seek to further violate human rights of children and their mothers by influencing the laws
- They want to continue silencing the voices of the abused.
- They oppose anyone who dares to speak out against their abuse
“The “Blackshirts” is organised along paramilitary-style lines, adopting tactics including telephoning women it says are having extra-marital affairs to interrogate them and sending letters to their neighbours outlining the alleged infidelity.
Members, garbed in black, have turned up at hearings in the Family Law Court. The group insists its activities are all in the name of protecting children and the family unit as a value in the Australian community.”
Members, garbed in black, have turned up at hearings in the Family Law Court. The group insists its activities are all in the name of protecting children and the family unit as a value in the Australian community.”
Fathers Rights Movement Must Condemn Darren Mack
“When a bullet ripped through Nevada Judge Chuck Weller on June 12th, the public debate surrounding the family court system shifted. Reno businessman Darren Mack is suspected of shooting the judge whom he blames for the ‘unjust’ conditions of his divorce. He is also charged with slashing his estranged wife Charla to death. Through years of effort, father’s rights activists had pried open the lid of debate on whether family courts are biased against men. Mack may well have slammed it shut again. If he is guilty of either crime, then Mack is the walking stereotype of an abusive man from whom society and children need to be protected. The public debate is already reacting to the stereotype. On June 16, the U.S. Senate approved the long-delayed Court Security Improvement Act of 2005 which expands security for judges, prosecutors, witnesses and their families. The bill was championed by Nevada representative Harry Reid in specific response to the Weller shooting. Meanwhile, media headlines such as “Police Find Bomb Materials and Ammo in Mack’s House” stir further concern about estranged husbands and dads.”
“The outrages over the years – including the murder of the Family Court judge David Opas, and of Family Court justice Ray Watson’s wife, the bombings of Justice Richard Gee’s home and a Jevovah’s Witnesses meeting, and in Western Australia, Norman Drummond’s murder of his children and his suicide, followed in similar fashion by Ronald Jonker, and by Barbara-Anne Wyrzykowski and Mark Heath – all showed that passions can reach a point where virtually nothing can be done, apart from locking up the potential offender.”
Threats and abuse: family lawyers want help
“Family lawyers have complained to Attorney-General Rob Hulls about repeated threats and harassment from disaffected Family Court litigants. The death threats and abusive late-night phone calls do not come from their own clients, but from the clients’ ex-partners – or from the parents of the children that lawyers are representing. Meanwhile, lawyers visiting the Family Court have been verbally abused by Blackshirts and other men’s group activists who regularly station themselves outside the Family Court.”
VISAKHAPATNAM: The District Court complex witnessed tense moments for a couple of hours on Monday following a bomb threat to the Family Court.
“More than 60 hoax bombs have been sent to family court offices around Britain as part of a militant campaign by suspected extremists demanding better rights for fathers.
The disturbing attacks mark a huge escalation in the tactics of radical fathers’ rights activists who complain that they suffer discrimination at the hands of the family courts system. The Observer has learnt that the elite anti-terrorist police group SO13 has now been brought in to investigate the hoax campaign amid fears of more serious attacks in the future.”
Bomb threat closes Melbourne streets
“A MELBOURNE court building has been declared safe after a bomb threat caused 200 people to evacuate and shut down major city streets for two hours. The Melbourne Magistrates’ Court was evacuated just before 11.30am AEDT on Tuesday after a staff member received a threatening phone call. “
We now call on everyone who opposes this type of tyranny, to add your name and link below:
Arson Mystery; War on Women
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0811/14/ijvm.01.html
ISSUES WITH JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL
Arson Mystery; War on Women
Aired November 14, 2008 – 19:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JANE VELEZ MITCHELL, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, an ISSUES special investigation. The war on women. Thousands of women are brutalized and murdered every year. Some just disappear and are never seen again. We`ll look at several controversial cases where a trail has gone cold.
Natalee Holloway, the pretty 18-year-old who vanished in Aruba. Now, the prime suspect is back in the picture. Joran Van Der Sloot caught on tape in a sex sting that could finally put him behind bars. We`ll break down the case.
Also, the search continues for the killer of this popular Arkansas anchorwoman. Police have found DNA at the murder scene but have no idea who or where the killer is. We`ll talk to Ann Pressly`s close friend to see where this case is heading.
And police respond to a roaring house fire in Pennsylvania, only to discover the body of an infant and the mother gone. We`ll join forces with America`s Most Wanted in the search for answers.
An ISSUES special investigation starts now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VELEZ MITCHELL: Welcome to this ISSUES special investigation. For the next hour, I will bring you the very latest in some of America`s most shocking, unsolved crimes against women. On this program, we promise to shine a light on these cases.
We call it the war on women, because that`s precisely what it is. Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women. Up to 95 percent of domestic abuse victims are female. More than 1,000 women are killed by an intimate partner each year. And perhaps most disturbing, 73 percent of all domestic violence goes unreported.
So tonight, we will open up some cold case files in the war on women. We`ll try to find out what happened, why it happened, and what you can do to help. I won`t let stories like this go away until violence against women goes away. That`s our goal.
So first, let`s remember Natalee Holloway. She disappeared on May 30, 2005, during a high school graduation trip to the Caribbean island of Aruba. She was last seen by her classmates in a car outside a nightclub with three men: Joran Van Der Sloot and two other local men, the Kalpoe brothers.
They initially said they dropped Holloway off at her hotel and never saw her again. Then, the story changed, multiple times. They were arrested more than once on suspicion of involvement in Holloway`s disappearance, but each time they were released without charge due to lack of evidence.
Holloway`s body has never been found. Aruban authorities believe she is dead.
Meantime, in February of this year, after the case had been closed, stunning undercover video footage caught former suspect Joran Van Der Sloot saying that Holloway died on the morning of May 30 and that he disposed of her body with a friend`s help. Van Der Sloot has since recanted the so- called confession, and Aruban officials refused to charge him.
Joining me with details on where that case stands today, my dear friend, Ed Miller, correspondent for “America`s Most Wanted.”
Ed, great to see you. Van Der Sloot back in the headlines this week in another undercover camera sting. If we had any doubt that this guy was a sleaze, this story confirms it. Fill us in on some of the details of this really bizarre hidden camera sting out of Bangkok.
ED MILLER, “AMERICA`S MOST WANTED”: Well, first of all, we should point out that this has absolutely nothing to do with Natalee Holloway, these latest claims against Van Der Sloot. What it really does, it goes toward his character.
And in essence, he is caught on tape arranging for Thai women to be smuggled into the Netherlands as prostitutes. He says we`ll promise them that they can come over to the Netherlands as models, but once they get there, they`ll become prostitutes.
So what this is, is his involvement — and cash does change hands on the tape — his involvement in a sex slave smuggling ring, which is rather shocking when you think about what he is accused of or has been accused of in terms of Natalee.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Now Ed, authorities are apparently translating this documentary to try to determine whether he broke any laws that they can file charges against, but some who have seen the entire two hours say, “Hey, he always uses models, dancers. `You`re going to come over and be a model. You`re going to dance for ten hours.`”
Apparently, he may not use the word “prostitution.” Is that a loophole?
MILLER: Absolutely. But you know, there is another thing on that tape that maybe they haven`t gotten to yet, is that he certainly indicates that there will be some forging of documents, that he will get them there under false pretenses in terms of this — these documents.
Again, this has so much to do with your theme against — of war against women because again, we`re talking about how he feels about women.
Let me just take you back to Natalee for just one second. Not on undercover tapes but after the original Natalee Holloway investigation was finished, he did interviews, public television interviews that were seen all over the world in which he said she was there, Natalee was there for him to have sex with. That he says she was there. She begged him — his words — to have sex with her and then he was to discard her. And he openly said that, that that was his feeling about it, that she…
VELEZ MITCHELL: That was his M.O. I mean, he has complete and utter contempt for women. He would prowl the nightclubs in Aruba and lure these women. And now, he`s sort of luring women in another format, but essentially the same spirit.
MILLER: Yes. It goes back to the character. The other thing is you have to ask yourself where does a young man like this get money for an airline ticket…
VELEZ MITCHELL: Oh, yes.
MILLER: … to fly all the way from the Netherlands to Thailand? If his dad — if Dad is funding this, wouldn`t you say, “Hey, son, the American Express bill came in. What`s this rather expensive ticket to Thailand? What`s going on?
VELEZ MITCHELL: I hear you, Ed. Stay right there because I want to bring in my fantastic panel for tonight: Wendy Murphy, a former prosecutor, author of “And Justice for Some” and law professor at the New England School of Law; and Jami Floyd, host of In Session.
Jami, let`s start with you. Would it be fair to say this really isn`t the Holloway case, your classic cold case, in that there was this bizarre hidden-camera confession. And even though Joran recanted it, a lot of people believe it`s true, that she did die in his arms and that he disposed of the body with the help of somebody else.
JAMI FLOYD, HOST, “BEST DEFENSE”: Well, I think it`s very important when it says that this is not about — the latest revelations are not about Natalee Holloway.
And yes, I`m over at In Session, but my show is called “Best Defense.” And so I`m defense minded. And that`s why this war on women, this is tough stuff for me, Jane, because obviously, I`m a feminist. I`ve worked with battered women in domestic violence shelters. I understand and agree that there is a war on women, but there`s also a war on our Constitution. And Joran has not been charged in the Natalee Holloway case.
At the same time, there is a sex trade of multi-million-dollar proportions in this world. And we don`t address it as much as we talk about drugs and guns, the other two international crimes of multi-million and -billion-dollar proportions. It is very common for young women to be lured from their home lands with promises of modeling, with promises of dancing, and then to be turned, against their will, most often, to prostitution.
So I`m not saying that Joran is guilty of this, and nor do I think it`s related to Natalee Holloway, necessarily, if at all. But it is so wonderful that you`re talking about it, because we don`t talk about it enough in this country.
VELEZ MITCHELL: I agree. We do not talk about it enough. And you know, as you were talking about Joran, I have to say, we have an open invitation for Joran Van Der Sloot or his father or their attorneys to come on this program and tell their side of the story. We have reached out to Joe Tacopina, the attorney for Joran Van Der Sloot, and have not gotten a comment. But we want to hear both sides of the story, so you are invited if you want to say whatever you want to say. We`re here to hear it.
Now, you know, what I find fascinating, Wendy Murphy, is that Jami Floyd pointed out, you know, he deserves the presumption of innocence and said that he hasn`t been charged? My question is why hasn`t he been charged? He confessed on tape. They caught it on tape.
And before you answer that, here`s exactly what Dutch reporter Peter De Vries got from Van Der Sloot earlier this year on hidden camera about the Holloway case. This appeared on “Good Morning America.” Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT, ARRESTED FOR SEX TRAFFICKING: (SPEAKING IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE)
GRAPHIC: Joran: Patrick, I had absolutely no bad feelings about it. I have not lost one night of sleep over it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ MITCHELL: We`re dealing with various languages here, from what they speak in Aruba to the Netherlands to Thailand, but in that case, he did tell De Vries on hidden camera, De Vries` people, that Natalee died in his arms. And he even said something like, “I was shaking the” — “B” word — “trying to see what happened, and I couldn`t believe this was happening.”
So given that, if this case were happening in the United States, would he Joran Van Der Sloot be charged right now?
WENDY MURPHY, LAW PROFESSOR, NEW ENGLAND SCHOOL OF LAW: Yes. You know, what a nice guy. “I was shaking the `B` word.” Oh, my God.
You know, this is a guy who has been so arrogant about it that you think somebody might say, even if we`re going to lose, let`s just go forward, because you don`t want to send a message that women`s lives are so devalued that an arrogant guy like this should be able to flaunt it and walk around free, as if he`s been spitting on the sidewalk.
Look, you know, there`s a confession. I don`t care if somebody wants to say, “Well, it`s not a real confession, and then he recanted.” It`s a confession. And if that were the only thing we had, I`d still be pushing.
But we have what I call a confession plus in this case. And you`ve ticked off some of the evidence, Jane. Plus multiple inconsistent statements. And he was the last one seen with her. If that isn`t a strong case, I don`t know what is.
But here`s the point. We don`t value women enough in this country or in any other country. And when you talk about an American women`s life here, that`s bad enough. An American women`s life in a foreign country?
Ed Miller, everybody`s saying there`s no connection between these two cases. I happen to disagree. The commonality is his contempt for women and how he treats women.
Now, I don`t know why the Aruban authorities can`t see his latest behavior and either say, you know, this is part of a pattern of behavior toward women or perhaps the Thai authorities charge him and put pressure on him to spill the beans about the first case and say, if you want to spend the rest of your life in a Thai prison, don`t say anything, but if you want to go back to Holland, talk.
FLOYD: I`m troubled by a few things. First of all — and again, I do agree that the lives of women are not valued, certainly, in many other countries. I don`t want to single out countries, but in many other countries, we need to export our values about women as equals and our democratic values about women as full participants to those countries.
However, in this country, we have 1 in 100 Americans in prison. There is no lack of prosecution in this country. And Wendy Murphy knows it. We don`t…
MURPHY: What?
FLOYD: Wait. Let me finish. Wendy Murphy said…
MURPHY: Don`t put those words in my mouth. That was a false statement.
FLOYD: Wendy Murphy, you just said that we don`t value the lives of women in other countries.
MURPHY: We don`t. In this country and in others.
FLOYD: And in this country. And that`s what I`m saying. We have 1 in 100 people in prison. There is no lack of prosecuting people in this country.
VELEZ MITCHELL: I agree with you there. I agree with you there. We`re prosecuting people on all sorts of things.
(CROSSTALK)
VELEZ MITCHELL: When one person really calls out to be prosecuted, we go…
FLOYD: Please let me finish my point. I waited kindly and respectfully for you, Wendy Murphy. You said that, even if you knew you would lose, you would bring this case. That is not our system of justice.
MURPHY: Yes, it is.
FLOYD: Prosecutors are not supposed to use their prosecution power as a bully pulpit on issues that we all care about, including issues related to women.
(CROSSTALK)
VELEZ MITCHELL: Ladies, I have to leave it there because guess what? We have to go to commercial break. I will let you respond in a second. But the point is that we do have to look at this. And I love the fact that all of us women are so passionate about waging this war on women and doing it in the right way.
Coming up, the latest on the search for the killer of Arkansas TV anchor Ann Pressly.
And in Pennsylvania, a single mom goes missing. Her house is burned down, her infant son inside. You won`t believe the gruesome scene and what they found out. Oh, it`s awful. Coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ MITCHELL: Popular Arkansas TV anchor Ann Pressly found October at 4:30 a.m. on Monday, October 20, 2008. It was a half hour before she was due to appear on local CNN affiliate KATV`s morning program. Pressly was bludgeoned beyond recognition. The bones in her face were broken. Her left hand was broken. Her upper body was pulverized. Pressly was hospitalized, never regaining consciousness, and died five days later.
Little Rock police say robbery is the suspected motive. Her purse was discovered missing, and her credit cards may have been used several miles away. As of today, her killer remains a mystery and at large.
Joining me is Wally Hall. He`s a reporter with the “Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.” He`s an acquaintance of Ann`s.
Wally, I understand your daughter and Ann went to high school together. Ann was a year older. You often ran into Ann, reporting in the field. First of all, thanks for being with us. I know this has to be very difficult. But paint a picture for those who have never had the opportunity to meet her. We certainly know she wasn`t running with the wrong crowd. That`s for sure.
WALLY HALL, REPORTER, “ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE”: No offense to anybody in the industry, but she did not come across as a TV personality. She came across as the girl next door. She could be in a room with 500 people, and she would make you feel like you were the only one she was interested in talking to.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Now, she was apparently just a very, very careful, well-behaved, well-groomed, hard-working, no-trouble kind of gal. She lived in a very good neighborhood near a country club where, as you said, stealing a lawn ornament is considered a big deal. So it`s very unlikely that this would be a random case in this neighborhood, and yet that`s what police are indicating, a random robbery. Do you buy it?
HALL: I think they`re giving out all the information. I`ll be honest with you, Jane. I can explain the nuances of the spread offense, but an investigation into this kind, I don`t know. This is just — you know, this was devastating to her parents, but it was a real tragedy to the entire city and community and all those who knew her. She was just a truly, truly special young lady.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Now, of course, she was horrifically beaten, and people do describe her as a fighter. Her left hand was broken. Do you think she put up a struggle?
HALL: I hope she beat that guy as hard as she could.
VELEZ MITCHELL: And one last question. In terms of the Arkansas state fair, you have a theory, or a possible theory, anyway, that hey, you know, the fair was in town, and that brings a whole new crowd of people. What are your thoughts on that?
HALL: Well, it had been a big weekend for her. She had debuted in the movie “W.” And also, she`d been working out at the state fair that whole last week, all the television stations out there. And it just happened to be leaving town the same day that she was — that she was attacked.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Well, let`s hope that the authorities follow up that lead. That sounds like very good detective work on your part. Our hearts go out to this entire community. Thank you so much, Wally, for taking the time to speak with us today.
HALL: Jane, I have to say something real quick.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Sure.
HALL: I really appreciate, as the father of an only child, a daughter, I appreciate the attention you`re bringing to this violence on women.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Thank you, sir. Thank you for saying that, because the first thing we have to do when we want to change something is state our goal. OK? And our goal has to be stopping the violence. Until we articulate that and say this is what we`re aiming for, we`re not going to improve. So that`s what we`re doing here at the very least, is saying we as a society have a goal to stop the violence against women. Thank you so much, Wally.
Now, the one thing the police have revealed in the tragic murder of Ann Pressly is that the killer is a man and some are saying the intensity of this attack suggests that this was personal, that perhaps Ann knew her murderer.
Back with me, our fantastic panel: we have Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor and author of “And Justice for Some”; and we also have Michelle Sigona from “America`s Most Wanted.” Also, Jamie Floyd, host of “Best Defense.”
Michelle, we`re going to start with you. Police have implied this is a random robbery. Can that really be the whole story, given the horrific brutalization?
MICHELLE SIGONA, “AMERICAN`S MOST WANTED”: You know, at this point, it`s really difficult until we know who the suspect or the suspects are. You know, we don`t know if there was one person or two people, but police have definitely confirmed to us that when they got there on the scene, that her back door was open. Now, whether Ann left that unlocked, or whether the suspect left out of the back door, we don`t know or not.
You know, we don`t know if that person`s familiar with the area or if they have been following her. It`s really hard to tell.
But I can tell you that, in a small town like that and in this neighborhood, where no other robberies have been apparent, there have been no other attacks like this that we know of and that police have come forward with, you know, because I`ve asked these questions specifically. I can only at this point seem to be ramp up (ph).
VELEZ MITCHELL: Jami Floyd, your analysis of this case?
FLOYD: Well, we do know that most women, when they meet a violent end like this, meet it at the hands of someone they know. Random attacks do happen, but if you look at the FBI statistics, they`re extraordinarily rare against women, against children, really against any victims.
So I think it`s very important to allow the authorities to do a proper investigation without too much speculation, because we do know that too much media speculation can get in the way of effective turnout.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Wendy, we have just two seconds. What do you think? Random or somebody newer?
MURPHY: It`s certainly rageful, so maybe it`s random, but this person hated women. So can I say something about this?
VELEZ MITCHELL: When we come right back. I want to get you — there`s so much to talk about and we have more in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ MITCHELL: More analysis from my wonderful panel tonight in just a moment, but first, immediately after hearing about Ann Pressly, I thought about the possibility that a stalker may be involved. That occurred to me. Stalkers do crazy, violent things sometimes.
Remember the recent story of a stalker who killed herself outside Paula Abdul`s house? There is a long history of women in the spotlight and dangerous stalkers.
Here with more insight into the mind of stalkers, Rhonda Saunders, a former criminal prosecutor and an expert in the area of stalking and domestic violence. Thanks so much for joining us. You know, police haven`t said anything about stalking in this case, but since they don`t know who did it, and they seem to be sort of at a loss, how can they possibly say that it is or isn`t the stalker at this point?
RHONDA B. SAUNDERS, FORMER PROSECUTOR: I think at first, that there was speculation that it could be a stalker. And you have to consider that when you have anyone, someone who is in the public eye. And you don`t have to be a celebrity like Madonna or Steven Spielberg or Gwyneth Paltrow in order to get a stalker.
You have someone who is seen on television every single night. You have fans. And then you have fanatics who focus on that person. They begin to feel that they know the person. They have a relationship with the person. And that love or adoration can often turn to hatred. And once, the people may want to harm that celebrity.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Well, a couple of thoughts here. Police apparently said that they checked out one guy, who had been sort of a mild stalker, sending e-mails, that he has been cleared.
However, as an anchor/reporter, and I was an anchor/reporter in local markets for many years, you go out and you meet so many people. You interact with so many people over the course of a week. I mean, they have to cast a really wide net, because who knows what she said to any one person or what they may have said to her that could have triggered something like a stalking.
SAUNDERS: And there`s another dynamic working here, also. We`re talking about violence against women. Yes, she was a celebrity in her state as a newscaster, but stalkers also go after ex-partners, people who they want to have a relationship with.
In fact, the celebrity stalking is only maybe 1, 2 percent of the cases we see. The majority of the cases we see involve domestic violence. Whether it`s in a marriage, whether it`s in just a relationship, boyfriend/girlfriend relationship. And when the woman decides that she wants out of the relationship, what we`ve seen is that it can turn to violence.
VELEZ MITCHELL: She apparently was not in any kind of serious relationship.
I want to pint out that there have been some famous stalking cases involving females. For example, Teresa Saldana, she was an actress who was in “Raging Bull,” and she was stalked and repeatedly stabbed. Thank God this woman survived.
But unfortunately, Rebecca Schaeffer, an actress on a popular sit-com, was stalked and murdered by an obsessed fan in 1989.
You know, obviously Ann Pressly was good-looking. She was charismatic. All the qualities that lead to stalking.
SAUNDERS: Absolutely. That Rebecca Schafer case, that was so sad, because she had this fan who focused on her. His name was Robert Bardo. And he believed that she was communicating with him. So when he received an autographed picture, he thought that she had sent it personally.
VELEZ MITCHELL: Well, you know what? We`re out of time, but I just want to say that you give us some really good information. There`s a lot of sickos out there, and we have to be on alert. Thank you, Rhonda.
If you have any information that could help Little Rock police find and arrest Ann Pressly`s killer, whoever this person or persons are, call Crimestoppers tip line, 501-371-INFO. Forty-eight-thousand-dollar reward.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HEADLINE NEWS ANCHOR: A fire broke out at a Pennsylvania home of 33-year-old single mom Joey Offutt in the early morning hours of July 12, 2007. When the smoke cleared, the remains of Offutt`s six-week-old-son were discovered in the burned ruins of the home and Offutt was missing.
Her car found abandoned. Four days later, several miles away police now know that not only was Offutt missing from her home, but that nobody had seen or heard from her for several days before the fire. Authorities believe the fire was the work of an arsonist.
Aft still missing at this hour and police suspect foul play. Of course, at this point there are few leads.
Michelle Sigona from America`s Most Wanted has the details on this case. Michelle, this is just one of the thousands of cases of women who go missing under mysterious circumstances.
MICHELLE SIGONA, AMERICA`S MOST WANTED: You`ve got that right Jane.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes.
SIGONA: That`s great that you are addressing this especially for women tonight, so we are all grateful for that. But this case in particular is out of Sykes, Pennsylvania and the arson fire what I learned from the investigators actually happened on July 12th, 2007.
But the last sighting of Joey Offutt was actually July 5th, 2007 from a local youth pastor. And at that point, she was with her, her youngest son, only six-weeks-old, his name is Alexis. Excuse me his name was Alexis and she also has two other children, a toddler and another 8-year-old girl who were actually visiting grandparents at the time in Virginia.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tell us about this horrific connection to some meat with maggots in it and what it says about the case.
SIGONA: Absolutely, this is very interesting in going out there in working in this case. And a lot of times, as you know, you`ve worked hundreds or maybe thousands of these cases. When you get out there in the field, you start to find out more little nuggets about the case that you can throw out there to the viewers.
And what I learned was that there was a package of meat that was left on the counter. And that forensics technicians came in and there was maggots all over the meat and thankfully the meat did not actually burned up on the fire. And they tested the maggots and they were able to tell from the maggots that the meat was placed on the counter sometime around July the 5th.
The way that the meat was placed, it looked like something startled the person, or they had a major change of plans because it was half open like they were getting ready to prepare and put it down pretty quickly.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, well this really turns my stomach because the implication or correct me if I`m wrong that it would seem to me that the implication could be that something untoward happened to the mother on that date and then this child could have been in that home for days before the fire was set.
I mean, I don`t even want to think about the possibility that this child was left there to die.
SIGONA: I know. It`s absolutely horrific. Six weeks old and you know what? Thank goodness, I mean, I tell you. Everything happens for a reason. These firefighters were out there after they knocked down this fire; one of the places that the fire was set was in the bathroom.
And that`s where the baby was found. But the baby was at the bottom of a bathtub. And the firefighter said that when they were in the room, with the fire investigator all of a sudden, something fell down from the ceiling and the water separated and they looked down and that`s when they saw this — well, they didn`t know if it was a baby. They didn`t know really what it was, they thought it was a pet at first. But thank goodness that happened.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Is there any way they can tell how this child died? In other words was it killed before and then was just left there, for the arson fire or whether it died during the fire? Which is far more frightening in the sense.
SIGONA: Well, we do know for sure that this baby was in fact killed before the arson fire.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We do?
SIGONA: We do know that, how? We don`t know. Investigators certainly did not push him but they did say that the child was in fact either — died on its own or murdered or whatever the case maybe before the arson fire was set.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, well, this is a fascinating and gruesome and just horrific case. I want to fold in once more, the rest of our really fabulous panel, Wendy Murphy, a former prosecutor and author of “And Justice for Some” and Jami Floyd, host of “Best Defense”.
Wendy, we have arson, we have the murder of a child and we have a missing mom. What does this all add up to you in your mind?
WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, first question, where`s the baby`s daddy? I`m sure that they`ve done some DNA tests. I`m sure they have people there concerned about. There`s no question this was not random. Obviously, the effort was made to destroy this poor little baby. Was it because of child support concerns?
Where was this woman`s car found? At some other place where she lived, somebody drove the car there. Somehow, her car got to another location and now she`s missing. There`s so many important questions to ask.
But look, I want to say something in general about violence against women. One of the reasons women are dying in huge numbers in this country is that we treat it like a cheap crime.
Men know they can get away with beating the hell out of a woman because this is going to be handled in traffic court. Men know they can rape women because less than two percent of rapists spend even one day behind bars. This is an epidemic.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Absolutely.
MURPHY: They disrespect woman, and these kinds of cases, the fact that they`re unsolved is a reflection of the nature of the epidemic and the lack of respect. You know what we need to be calling this starting tonight and on your show I`m going to say this every time I`m on, this is a hate crime.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes.
MURPHY: It is a civil rights violation.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Right on.
MURPHY: And let`s start calling it that.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: I agree. You discriminate on the bases of race and gender. So killing a woman because she`s a woman I think should be considered a hate crime.
And we`re going to get to that in a second at the end of our broadcast. We`re going to this, let it fly and everybody give their opinions about what the solutions are.
But I want to get back to this case, Jami Floyd. The car that was found in another town was neatly backed into the parking spot. The family of the missing mom says she would never do that. She`s also known to have gone on the Internet and made friends with people on Internet whom she sometimes met afterwards.
JAMI FLOYD, HOST, “BEST DEFENSE”: Yes, well listen, there are very important lessons in all of these stories you`ve covered tonight, Jane. This one, of course as well for us as women and for our daughters; that they start to make their way in the world. Making friends on the Internet, if you`re a mom with little kids, and going out and meeting those folks, I`m sorry ill advised and that is not to blame the victim but we have to try and learn from our mistakes.
Now, we don`t know that she is dead, the mom. We don`t know if she is somehow involved. We have to be very careful about speculating, about fathers of babies. Or ex-boyfriends or even someone she may have met on the Internet.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Absolutely.
FLOYD: But this is one of the most bizarre mysteries that we`ve seen recently with all the twist and turns just as they get started. So I think there`s a whole lot more that has to come out and it sounds from what I`ve read and heard as though despite what Wendy says, the authorities are taking it very, very seriously down there even though the mom may have been victimized, as well as children who are victimized too often in our country.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, we`ve been talking about the dead, Michelle Sigona, of America`s Most Wanted, you interviewed the on again, off again, boyfriend, the father of the dead baby. He has his own theory as to what happened. Let`s listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you think happened?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know there was talk of post partum depression on herself, but if an accident happened, where`s Joey now? For her to be —
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, Michelle, he`s not considered a suspect. He has been reportedly cooperating with the authorities. What do we know about him and his relationship with the missing mom?
SIGONA: Well, here`s what I can tell you, they do have two children together. They also have a toddler who he has custody of right now. The oldest child is actually from a previous relationship and the grandmother has custody of that little girl.
But basically, they were still together, but they were living in separate homes. He lived not too far away from where Joey Offutt`s home was. So he had a pretty good relationship, especially with the children.
I can tell you that the weekend before 4th of July, so as we know July 5th is the last date that Joey Offutt was seen. The weekend before, which took place about June 30th, that Alexis — baby Alexis and also Joey Offutt all got in the car and they took the girls down to visit the grandmother and came back.
So there was a fight for sure we do know on July 3rd, an argument, I can`t really say a fight, there was an argument. And he called her from what he tells me the next day to apologize, but after that, he didn`t have any contact with her and so he filed a missing person`s report on July 12th which was the same day that the fire was started.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, we want to stress, this man is not considered a suspect.
SIGONA: That`s right, no suspects.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: There are no suspects at this time. And theoretically Jami, this is a missing person`s case so theoretically, the mother could be alive.
FLOYD: Yes.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: And something unfortunately could have happened to the child. And she could have left and decided to drop the car and come back and maybe set the fire.
FLOYD: Yes.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m not saying that happened but hypothetically, it`s something that the police have to consider.
FLOYD: All things are possible. It`s certainly a missing person`s case as to the missing mother. And I`m deeply troubled by the fact that we have three children, with three different custody situations. That tells me something right there, women need to start to take charge of their lives, get organized and don`t get so consumed in a relationships with men that you don`t think safely and that you don`t think clearly.
But it is only missing persons as to her. We do have the dead child and then there`s a real question about what happened to that child and who is responsible.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: This is just one of so many cases.
Wendy Murphy, according to the National Crime Information Center`s missing person files, the number of missing women up until September 1st, 2008 is mind-boggling, 54,505 active cases. That just blows my mind.
MURPHY: Well, it should and it should not just blow your mind it should make you crazy, angry, outraged. And it should make everybody watching this program, do something about it.
Look, I know we can speculate about the fact that she might have disappeared or run away. And my eyes glazed over listening to all the defense theories in Scott Peterson`s case and all the nonsense about how it was the woman`s fault.
I got a different message. I don`t care if she has 12 babies with five husbands and was doing naked cartwheels down the middle of Main Street.
Nobody has a right to beat, much less kill, another human being. So let`s be clear about the message tonight, shall we? I don`t care what she did. I don`t care if she was not moral and upstanding and a nice girl.
FLOYD: We don`t know she`s dead, Wendy Murphy. I want to remind you very clearly of the run away bride. That poor groom who had simply been left at the altar, had been convicted and hung before the woman had been found and lo and behold, —
MURPHY: That`s not true.
FLOYD: She was alive.
MURPHY: That`s not true.
FLOYD: It is certainly true.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: This is not a war on men. This is not a war on men.
MURPHY: I condemn her.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: There are many men who protect women and take care of women.
FLOYD: Maybe not for you Jane.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: But what we are doing is looking at this issue. And I think you`re both right. I think that, we have to say that there`s no excuse for violence against women, but we also have to give women some tips to protect themselves. And acknowledge of course, that there are many good and wonderful men who protect women, who investigate cases when women are tragically murdered.
So all of you ladies stay right there, we have so much more to talk about. We`re going to bust this whole issue wide open.
Just a reminder, anybody with information on Joey Offutt, pleas call 1(877)440-Joey or just contact the Pennsylvania State Police. They need your help.
We`re going to talk about violence against women in just a second. Solutions, should we march on Washington?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`re talking about the epidemic of violence against women in this country. I call it a war on women because that`s precisely what it is.
I`m joined once again by my fantastic panel for this hour. Wendy Murphya former prosecutor, author of “And Justice for Some” and law professor at New England Law of Boston; Jami Floyd, host of “Best Defense and Michelle Sigona of “America`s Most Wanted.”
We`ve kind of been debating here what the solution is to this epidemic of violence against women.
Wendy Murphy, I am inspired by the women of Northern Ireland who decided many years ago and they wanted to end the violence there after a baby was shot during the course of some sectarian violence. And people scoffed at them and said, oh, please, you women are not going to achieve anything.
And they banded together and they stated their intention and they did reduce sectarian violence. And what they said was the most important part of that process was stating the intention. In other words, saying, enough we are not going to take this anymore.
MURPHY: Right.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: And I think that`s what we have to say with this violence against women. This horrific violence, rape and murder, enough, we are not going to take it anymore whether we have to march on Washington, whether we have to contact our Representatives and demand hearings, something has to be done.
MURPHY: And I vote for you.
I`m so inspired and I`m so glad that you just said it in that way. We have to rise up, which is the quintessential American thing to do. When horrible acts of violence are being perpetrated against a targeted group of citizens, rising up is what we are supposed to do as Americans and we haven`t done that.
As women, including men but on behalf of women, we haven`t done that ever. 30 years ago, we had a law reform movement it was worth a whole lot of nothing; consciousness raising yes, law reform, no. We still have the same low rates of reporting when it comes to rape and domestic violence. And it is embarrassing.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jami Floyd, I want to bring in other solutions, too. When I look at this problem, I think start early. Start with peaceful conflict resolution in the schools. How many times have you and I both covered a case where somebody is sent to anger management; too late they`ve already exhibited the fatal anger.
FLOYD: In prison.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, exactly.
FLYOD: It does a whole of good. I guess it helps. It helped inside the prison population.
Look, first of all, I agree with Wendy. Greater and not always still we, a greater accountability from prosecutors, I`m all for that especially as a defense attorney.
I also think that we spend inordinate sums of money in this war on drugs. That is what consumes most of our criminal justice system while violence against women does go too often, ignored.
So we`ve got sort of an inverse problem. We care about drugs in the schools, but we don`t care as much about violence or violence against women in schools and then beyond.
And I agree with you, I think it starts very early and I think we need to teach our daughters to think not like victims, to not allow themselves to be victimized, to speak up when other young girls are being victimized. And it does start in their schools then it`s just about teaching girls, it`s about teaching boys to respect women.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Exactly.
FLOYD: About teaching boys to be feminist as well.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Michelle Sigona, every time I have suggested something like group therapy in the schools, in the public school, so kids can learn how to deal with their emotions, —
SIGONA: Oh, yes.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: And learn, why am I so angry, and what can I do with this anger in an intelligent way, I`m called a flake.
SIGONA: Here`s the thing, Jane. I think what a great idea would be is to get out there obviously, into the schools, not just educating the young women youth, but also the young male youth. And the different problems that exist out there and a lot of times, they`re learning from their parents.
So they`re — a lot of times, women are involved, they`re moms are involved in these domestic violence situations. Their dads are a part of it. This is all that they know when they`re growing up. And this is all that they trickle and that they with them throughout they`re adulthood.
So if we can get out there and we can get them young; and we can get them involved in programs and get them education and make a rally. And to go out there inch and have an assembly for them and to not make it fun, but to make it appealing to them. Then we can educate them on a different level and starting at a younger age.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: But I mean, how do we implement this, Wendy? We`re talking about doing things on the local level in schools; we`re talking about national efforts. And perhaps going to Washington and demanding Congressional hearings on violence against women.
It`s a lot of talk, but how do we actually turn this into action, especially in this post-feminist age when so many women who maybe decades ago would mobilize and actually go on a protest march, they`re too busy making money or trying to survive or trying to take care of their kids to really do anything like this in an activist sense.
MURPHY: No, it`s true, it`s true. I have five kids. I`m often too busy to be an activist. But I think the time has come when we have to make that choice. Let`s not cook and clean for a while, let`s march on Washington and that would be a fair choice and a good way to get started.
I think one of the things we have to do is call it what it is and as you said, measure it well.
Joe Biden did this in the early `90s to support the Violence against Women Act. He produced some pretty shocking data and some things came from that. I think it`s time to do new measurements.
And it`s also really important and I emphasize this again, and this is going to sound irreverent, we have to call it what it is; a hate crime, a civil rights violation.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes.
MURPHY: If a Muslim woman gets raped, we call it a hate crime. If a white woman gets raped, we call it bad sex. We need to knock that off.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Jami, jump in there.
JAMI: Well, I want to weigh in on the Violence against Women Act. I want to recognize that that was a tremendous step forward when Joe Biden and others enacted, and it was a real push to get it enacted, the Violence against Women Act.
But to draw the analogy to civil rights — and I think that is part of what Wendy is trying to do — I think we have to recognize, and it gets back to Jane, your proposal, that the law can only do so much. If you put in legislation, yes, that is important, and we have seen that with civil rights. But think about how much school segregation we still have. Think about all of the problems we still have.
And so we really have to start at the ground level.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: That music says please stay right there. We`re going to have some final thoughts when we come right back; fabulous insights. Thank you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Some final thoughts now from my fantastic panel. Michelle Sigona with “America`s Most Wanted.” We imprison more people in this country than any other country in the world and as Jami Floyd pointed out, a lot of this is for drug crimes and indeed nonviolent drug offenses. But yet the crimes against women don`t seem to be addressed. There is something out of balance with this system.
SIGONA, “AMERICA`S MOST WANTED”: There is something out of balance, and especially — especially with all of the cases that we see against women.
I mean, just one this week. The missing woman out of Wisconsin. And, you know, just last night, her — excuse me — ex-husband was actually just named a person of interest. I mean, we have that case. We have the Stacy Peterson case, we have the Lisa Stebbock case out of Chicago. The list just goes on and on and on.
And it seems like — thank goodness, you are putting a spotlight on this issue and we are able to keep bringing these issues out there and bringing these cases out there. And hopefully the more attention we draw and put towards it, Jane, especially you yourself; hopefully the more attention and the more workshops and the more programs we can get out there for women and educate them.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Jami, we can`t prosecute this problem away. Again, we`re locking up so many, so many people and yet the violence isn`t going down, necessarily.
FLOYD: Yes, I think a lot of it is cultural; you can`t legislate cultural change. We have got to change the way we think about women. We have to think — change the way women are portrayed in the media, in our music, in movies and film, on television. All of that has to change over time.
We have to remember, also, and teach our daughters, that it wasn`t very long ago that women were property in this country; and as — in this country, as were children. And women didn`t even have the right to vote until this century. So —
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes.
FLOYD: We have to really realize how far we have come. But we have to recognize how far we still have to go.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: I agree with you. We need to have a feminization of the post-feminist generation. Wendy, you have about 20 seconds; I`ll give you the final word on this.
MURPHY: Walk and serve is a good moral kick in the fanny so we do have to start with law and hold law accountable when it fails women disproportionately by treating robbery as a more serious offense than rape and battering. That`s the first line of defense. And let`s talk about the value of personal autonomy, bodily integrity, fundamental human rights; this is what we`re talking about at the most basic level.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We are out of time. But we`re going to do another show and talk about all these issues that you fabulous women have brought up.
Thank you and thank you for joining me on this very important discussion on this crucial issue.
You know, there`s lots of people talking on TV. Too few of them are saying anything that helps you and me make sense of the world. I`m trying to change that by keeping it real.
I`m Jane Valez Michelle. Have a great night and join us every week night at 7:00 p.m. Eastern. Goodbye.
END
Dehumanizing Motherhood
“
t the core of evil is the process of dehumanization by which certain other people or collectives of them, are depicted as less than human, as non comparable in humanity or personal dignity to those who do the labeling. Prejudice employs negative stereotypes in images or verbally abusive terms to demean and degrade the objects of its narrow view of superiority over these allegedly inferior persons. Discrimination involves the actions taken against those others based on the beliefs and emotions generated by prejudiced perspectives.
Dehumanization is one of the central processes in the transformation of ordinary, normal people into indifferent or even wanton perpetrators of evil. Dehumanization is like a “cortical cataract” that clouds one’s thinking and fosters the perception that other people are less than human. It makes some people come to see those others as enemies deserving of torment, torture, and even annihilation.” – The Lucifer Effect By Philip G. Zimbardo
From the vulgar term, “breeder” to the subtle condescending references to motherhood that imply single mothers as societies burden rather than backbone. Paula Caplan and Ian Hall – Mc Corquodale (1985) analyzed 125 articles from from nine psychiatry journals found 72 types of psychopathology that attributed to mothers. This included:
- Failure to Mourn
- Arson
- Anxiety
- Depression
- Delusions
- Poor Concentration
- Narcism
- Dependency
- Fetishism
- Self Induced Television Epilepsy
- Scapegoating
- School Drop out
- Tantrums
- Truancy
- Frigidity
- Scapegoating
- Loneliness
- hyperactivity
- Inability to Separate From Mother
- Incontinence
- Incest
- Isolation
- Moodiness
- Avoidance of peers
- Chronic Vomiting
- Marijuana Use
In the book “Bias in Psychiatric Diagnosis By Paula J Caplan and Lisa Cosgrove”, it states:
“Mother Blame has of course always been a favorite psy sport: From the refrigerator mother who is said to cause autism, to the skitzophrenogenic mother to the mother who was said to inspire juvenile delinquency in her young”
Mother blaming has not been contained in the world of psychiatry that has formed the grounds for school yard teasing in its relentless pursuit to label all human beings in hope that one day the world will be dependent on the pharmaceutical distribution to cure perceived illnesses and disorders.
In the world of politics, we have seen time and time again the battles between opponents over who will solve the burden of young mothers or single mothers. The media has visually hypnotized the public with the perception that a single mother is a drug addict with a cigarette hanging from her mouth with a baby in the other arm. In dramas about custody cases, little appreciation is attributed to her endearing sacrifice to her body, livelihood and well-being to give the child life. Her contributions to humanity is reduced to nothing but a childish tug of war. Truth be told, that it was never a fight between two equals, but an opposing battle between david and goliath as the struggle of equality for women to be equal to men was not yet won, let alone the rights of mothers who were well behind the status of women. In nearly all cultures, men over represent leadership in law making, politics, workplaces and religion. Mothers voices have often been hushed within these realms and the reflections of public perception is the key evidence in the harsh climate for mothers.
The effects of degradation and humiliations consequence ironically spawned the “bad mothers” we see today as the incentives for good motherhood to grow is scarce. As pointed out in Motherhood:
“They were wrong for working and leaving their children, they were wrong for being poor, they were wrong for leaving abusive relationships and maintaining the “status quo” that would have harmed or even killed them, they were wrong for nurturing their children(alienating).”
There is so much work that needs to be done in the area of mothers humanity and dignity. If we truly value human life then we must value motherhood. We need to cease blaming others and look for the true causes so that one can endeavor to solve it with integrity.
Motherhood
The campaigns for fathers ended up degrading and excluding single mothers from all walks of life. They were wrong for working and leaving their children, they were wrong for being poor, they were wrong for leaving abusive relationships and maintaining the “status quo” that would have harmed or even killed them, they were wrong for nurturing their children(alienating). A few years ago, I saw many grumpy mothers in the supermarket, now I see grumpy fathers – mothers were never any worse at raising children, they just did it more, thats all. The difference?
Single mothers are still being degraded no matter what they do and considering she has risked her life and body to bring each and everyone in the world, its about time, people began to show her a bit more gratitude and respect. Single mothers cannot continue to endure the wrath of the community for another lifetime, its bad for our youth and bad for society. It says to the rest of the world: “We as Australians are selfish and undeserving of the life that our mothers have given us”.
The solution is that Australians need to be more aware of this factor. This also includes same sex parents who can raise their children just as well, but should not be treated like baby factories and have abusers walk all over them to resolve “fatherlessness”. Its about time these fathers learn to take some of the responsibilities as to why a mother might be apprehensive at contact for the child. There is a real undermining of her reasons with little and in some cases large amounts of evidence as to why she would sacrifice the little time she has to herself to have the children stay with her for longer periods of time.
We need to ask ourselves:
Why are we calling mothers abductors of their own children?
Why are we looking down upon mothers for trying to bring food into their homes by working?
It is no wonder women want to abort and more are choosing to have children later in life .
We didn’t just throw the baby out with the bath water – We threw the mother out too.
Bring back Motherhood.
A new low: SPCA attacks journalists reports of victims of violence
*
News, Articles & Press Releases
Below is a media release from the SPCA claiming that statistics on violence against women are flawed. They appear to cover themselves in saying that they support initiatives in protecting women and children, but note the word, “reasonable”. Sound Familiar? This word “reasonable” was used to trivialize experiences of violence against women in their access to family court and with a 14 percent increase in homicides since the family law changes, it is no wonder.
They claim that what is more prevalent is violence against men by women.
It is evident within their forums that they continue to support men claiming to be falsely accused of domestic violence, yet little regard is given to the truth of the matter. A confirmatory bias is often applied that every man must be innocent. Statistics all over the world proves this to be incorrect, history of power of men over women proves this to be incorrect and not to forget empirical research on domestic violence figures proves that mostly women are indeed victims of violence. The conflict tactics scale that most mens groups seem to rely on have been largely debunked by the scientific community, yet the propaganda continues.
Its revealing the when the attacks are aimed at women and children’s accounts of violence. Despite the persuasive attempts in the language, it becomes clear what the agenda is:
Silence the Victims
01 December 2008
One in 10 (10.8%), or 809,000 men, were the victims of violence according to the 2006 ABS survey. 10.4% (780,000 men) experienced physical violence (including physical assault, attempted assault, or the threat of assault).
Most of this includes men vs men and has no specific links to intimate partner violence
0.6% (42,000 men) experienced sexual violence (including sexual assault, attempted assault, or the threat of assault). In homes where domestic violence occurs, children are also at high risk of suffering physical and emotional abuse.
Welcome to The Sydney Morning Herald. Skip directly to: Search Box, Section Navigation, Content. Text Version.
MEDIA RELEASE
SPCA
SMH violence reporting claims flawed
The Shared Parenting Council of Australia strongly supports all
reasonable initiatives designed to protect women and children from violence.At the same time the Council points out that the recent “exposure” of this subject in the SMH seriously understates the full extent of the problem of family violence. The Sydney Morning Herald articles in question limited the discussion to battering of wives by husbands this type of violence is indeed a serious matter, deserves condemnation and merits protective programs.
However, family violence is a more complex issue and includes also serious instances of
female violence towards men, women and children. The incidence of maternal violence to children, both physical and emotional, is especially worrying yet attracts no media attention. The media have a duty of care to report accurately and the public have a right to know who are the real perpetrators and the real victims. The narrow focus of the SMH in reporting only mens violence against women ensures that the other groups affected by violence remain hidden from public view and leaves the vast majority of victims of violence without a voice and a campaign that speaks for them.The claims by SMH journalist Ruth Pollard (Courts put kids at risk, 25/11/08), that changes to the Family Law Act are
compelling courts to hand children over to violent fathers are false and scurrilous. These claims are an insult to judges and magistrates who apply the law and deal daily with serious relationship issues.There are precise safeguards in the Act to exclude shared parenting and joint parental responsibility in cases where there are real issues of violence, conflict or abuse.
The allegation that women are being “forced” into mediation with violent ex-partners is particularly mischievous. The Act does nothing of the kind, and mediators and community agencies have screening strategies to identify cases in which mediation is inappropriate.We welcome the Federal Attorney General’s statement that he is consulting with all stakeholders in examining the real effect of the shared parenting legislation.
We urge him to reject the arguments of biased advocates, more concerned with advancing their own agendas than with the real interests of children and women. Reducing mothers to victim” status is a favoured strategy of radical feminists opposed to men and does nothing for the protection and welfare of women and children.The Executive Secretary of the SPCA, Wayne Butler said, Recent judgements show clearly that it is a complete nonsense to suggest that the Family Law Act has in any way softened the approach of the judicial officers to cases of family violence and alleged violence. In particular I refer to Miller & Brass [2008] FamCA 944 (30 September 2008) and Short & Trevilian (No. 2) [2008] FamCA 215 (25 March 2008).
In both judgements, reference is made to the new Act, particularly with regard to the impacts of s60cc in these cases. The court acted to prevent exposure of the children to potential violence even though it was considered improbable that any violence would occur. The judgements in those cases make it crystal clear that safety and the interests of the child continue to be paramount.
The SPCA will suggest to the Attorney General that he consults widely with the judges, magistrates, lawyers, mediators and counsellors who deal regularly with separated families in and outside the courts. Reports that have come to our attention speak favourably of the application of the shared parenting legislation and the new collaborative approach to sound parenting post divorce.
We strongly suggest that nothing less than five years would provide adequate time, experience and material for a full and careful review of the effects of the reformed Family Law legislation.We trust that the Attorney General will not be persuaded by anything less.
Ends
Additional important stats ABS 2006
MenOne in 10 (10.8%), or 809,000 men, were the victims of violence according to the 2006 ABS survey. 10.4% (780,000 men) experienced physical violence (including physical assault, attempted assault, or the threat of assault).
Most of this includes men vs men and has no specific links to intimate partner violence
0.6% (42,000 men) experienced sexual violence (including sexual assault, attempted assault, or the threat of assault). In homes where domestic violence occurs, children are also at high risk of suffering physical and emotional abuse.
Women
1.6% (126,100 women) experienced sexual violence (including sexual assault, attempted assault, or the threat of assault). In homes where domestic violence occurs, children are also at high risk of suffering physical and emotional abuse.
Did “reasonably” include these victims?
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/remembering-the-victims/2008/11/23/1227375062026.html
Remembering the victims
Karen Bell with three children who were killed by their father in the small southern NSW community of Perricoe.
Latest related coverage
Dying to be heard
Audio slideshow: The Herald spent weeks with women in domestic violence refuges. Here are their stories.
Advertisement
November 24, 2008
Jack, Maddie and Bon Bell
The children were killed by their father Gary Bell in a murder suicide on June 28. In the days leading up to their deaths, Bell had been arrested for domestic violence but was released soon after. His estranged wife Karen, pictured above with the children, had taken out an apprehended violence order against him, and the Department of Community Services had been notified there were problems in the family.
Rachael Young
Rachael was shot in the head by her estranged partner, Stephen Downey, in front of her six-year-old daughter in 2006. Downey had been sentenced to nine months jail for breaching his apprehended violence order but was released on a good behaviour bond. He killed himself after he killed Rachael.
Jean Lennon
Jean’s estranged husband, Hoss Majdalawi, shot her five times on the steps of Parramatta Family Court in 1996, after two years of breaches of apprehended violence orders and threats of suicide. He was sentenced to a minimum of 14 years in jail for the crime, which was described as an execution.
Jody Galante
Mark Galante was sentenced to 27 years’ jail for the murder of his pregnant wife, Jody. He reported her missing to police on January 7, 2006, saying he had last seen her when he dropped her near Parklea Markets. Her body was found in the Blue Mountains.
For help or advice regarding domestic violence in NSW call the hotline on freecall 1800 656 463 or 1800 671 442 for people with a speech or hearing impairment.
Are they Stating that the Prime Minister is wrong?
PM hits at ‘great silent crime’
- Brendan Nicholson, Canberra
- September 18, 2008
PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd has declared violence against women “the great silent crime of our time” and warned that the attitudes of men must be changed.
In a speech to the White Ribbon Foundation’s annual dinner, Mr Rudd said that from birth, it must be drilled into the conscious and the subconscious of all men that there were no circumstances in which violence against women was acceptable.
The foundation highlights such violence.
Mr Rudd announced last night that the Government was putting up to $2 million into research and analysis of community attitudes towards violence against women.
He said that in any year, nearly half a million Australian women experience physical or sexual assault by a current or former partner.
Mr Rudd said one in three Australian women had experienced physical violence and one in five had experienced sexual violence, but less than a third of all physical and sexual violence was reported to police. About 90% of women who experienced sexual assault did not access crisis support, legal help or other support services such as telephone helplines.
“It is the silence that makes it the most insidious,” Mr Rudd said. “Because it prefers the darkness. Because if it stays in the darkness, it cannot be discussed, debated — let alone dealt with.
“On violence against women, we have simple, clear policy in two words: ‘zero tolerance’. That needs to be heard from every husband, every father, every partner.
“From every celebrity, from every business leader, from every football player, from every bricklayer, from every bus driver, from every factory worker, from every office worker, from every lecturer, from every teacher, from every student and from every politician of every political persuasion.”
Secrets and Lies: Responding to attacks on domestic violence campaigns
Dr Michael Flood
Contemporary campaigns and programs addressing men’s violence against women are under sustained attack. They are subject to hostile criticism by anti-feminist men and men’s networks. Anti-feminist men’s and fathers’ rights campaigners claim that domestic violence is in fact gender-equal, and domestic violence efforts should reflect this. More broadly, they claim that men are being vilified and discriminated against by a self-serving domestic violence ‘industry’. Anti-feminist men claim that domestic violence efforts use excessively broad definitions of violence and inflate the evidence of violence against women, assume that only men can be violent and only women can be victims, and focus too much on gendered causes of domestic violence.
The most recent version of such claims appears in a document titled ‘Dishonesty in the Domestic Violence Industry’, circulated by Michael Woods. Woods’ document is prompted in particular by the White Ribbon Campaign. Woods mistakenly describes the White Ribbon Campaign as: ‘[t]he major national campaign sponsored by the Federal Government’, perhaps confusing it with the Government’s advertising effort, ‘Violence Against Women, Australia Says NO’. The White Ribbon Campaign (WRC) in Australia is organised by a national group of men and women from a variety of organisations, businesses, and workplaces. It is self-funding and run almost entirely by volunteers.
Defining and measuring violence against women
One of the standard criticisms offered by anti-feminist advocates is that domestic violence campaigns use inflated and abnormal definitions of violence. Woods criticises the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS), of which the Australian component was released in 2004 by the Australian Institute of Criminology. He claims that the survey ‘includes as violence anything that can leave a woman feeling ‘put down’’. This misrepresents the IVAWS’s treatment of psychological forms of violence.
The survey does define violence in terms of three forms: physical, sexual, and psychological, in line with definitions specified by the United Nations and affirmed by other international agencies. But it does not include psychological violence in its calculations of the prevalence of men’s violence against women. For example, in stating that 57% of all women have experienced violence at some point in their lives, the report makes clear that this refers only to physical or sexual violence. At the same time, they tend to co-occur: women who experienced controlling behaviours from an intimate partner were also more likely to have experienced physical or sexual violence at his hands (Mouzos and Makkai 2004, pp. 48-49).
Woods also criticises the use of lifetime estimates of violence in White Ribbon Campaign materials, claiming that such measures are rare and inappropriate. He is mistaken. In the field of interpersonal violence, lifetime estimates of violence are a standard inclusion in survey data.
This is in part because experiences of abuse can have long-lasting effects on people’s health and wellbeing. Thus, we do not want to know only how many people were assaulted in the past 12 months, but how many have ever been assaulted. The surveys on which the WRC has drawn, both the IVAWS and the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Personal Safety Survey (PSS), cover both. More generally, lifetime estimates of a particular disease or condition are standard in epidemiology and other disciplines.
‘Normal’ definitions
Woods comments that anti-violence efforts such as the White Ribbon Campaign give an inflated sense of the extent of violence against women, because ‘normal’ understandings of violence refer to severe harm and anti-violence efforts do not acknowledge their broader definitions. I have five points in response.
While it is not clear what Woods means by ‘normal’, perhaps it refers to ‘commonsense’ definitions held by lay members of the population. Certainly it is true that community understandings of ‘violence’ or ‘domestic violence’ centre on severe physical aggression and harm, and these are narrower than the definitions enshrined in the law, used by scholars, and advocated by service providers. Community definitions are shaped by social stereotypes and gender norms. For example, the stereotype is that rape takes place in dark alleys and parks, is committed by strangers and psychopaths, involves weapons, and causes injuries. The reality is that most sexual assaults take place in the home of the victim or the assailant, and most are by people known to the victim. Weapons are rarely used, and coercion is often psychological rather than physical.
Second, Woods is incorrect in suggesting that anti-violence advocates do not acknowledge their ‘unusual’ – broader and more inclusive – definitions of violence. In fact, most advocates actively encourage such definitions. For example, information regarding the different forms of domestic violence is a routine inclusion in educational materials. Yes, social marketing materials such as television advertisements may not spell out the definitions on which given statistics are based. This is not practical. Nor would it be desirable to construct statistics only for those incidents or acts which do fit community perceptions. This would simply cement narrow understandings of what counts as violence and would under-report the extent of violence in our communities.
Third, such definitions are standard and credible elements in international scholarship. The definitions used in the IVAWS are standard in international scholarship, and the IVAWS is part of an international effort involving two United Nations criminal justice agencies.
Fourth, in assessing the extent of violence against women (or men), relying on narrower ‘normal’ definitions would be highly problematic. We would fail to count as ‘violence’ the experiences of women raped by men known to them, women who did not suffer physical injuries, women raped by men without weapons, men raped by women, and so on. When a woman is forced or pressured into sex by a male partner or ex-partner, she may not identify this as ‘rape’ because it does not meet narrow community definitions, even although it meets legal definitions of sexual assault.
There are good reasons for including these different forms of abusive and harmful behaviour in assessments of violence. Above all, these various behaviours do harm, physical, emotional and/or psychological, to the victim. Naming them as violence is accurate. And it also communicates to the community that such behaviours are both harmful and unacceptable.
Fifth, yes, anti-violence advocates must use methodologically sound and transparent definitions of violence. The PSS provides a useful object lesson in this. It tells us that in the last year, 73,800 adult women experienced at least one incident of physical assault by a current or previous male partner (ABS 2006: 30). But to the extent that we use the term ‘domestic violence’ to refer to women’s experience of chronic abuse and strategies of power and control by a partner or ex-partner, we cannot claim that every woman here is a ‘victim of domestic violence’. Some, perhaps many, of these 73,800 women have lived in fear of violent, controlling men. But for others, the physical aggression they experienced was isolated, did not escalate, did not involve injuries, was not accompanied by other strategies of control, or was even reciprocal.
Violence by women and against children
Woods criticises the IVAWS for failing to address violence by women. This is informed by the broader concern that domestic violence efforts focus only on violence by men and neglect violence by women. However, the White Ribbon Campaign is typical of domestic violence efforts in recognising that both men and women can be perpetrators, and both men and women can be victims, of violence.
Feminist scholarship has long recognised women’s violence. This began with scholarship on and service responses to violence in lesbian relationships, and it has been extended in feminist work on women’s abuse of children, the sexual assault of males, and women’s violence against intimate male partners. It is simply false for anyone to claim that feminist or women’s efforts
regarding domestic violence assume that only men can be violent and only women can be victims. To give a scholarly example, the feminist journal Violence Against Women has had three special issues on women’s use of violence. To give a community example, feminist and women’s organisations have pioneered services for male survivors of sexual assault.
Like many other forms of men’s anti-violence activism, the White Ribbon Campaign focuses on the positive role that men can play in helping to stop men’s violence against women. Because of its focus on men’s roles in ending violence against women, and its recognition that women are most at risk of violence from men, the WRC focuses on the positive steps that men can take.
Supporters of the WRC would agree with Woods that violence against children is perpetrated by both men and women, although not necessarily that they are equally likely to do so. The PSS described by Woods as ‘the ‘gold standard’ of research on interpersonal violence in Australia’, does not support his claim of gender symmetry in assaults on children. Of people who experienced physical abuse before the age of 15, 55.6% were abused by a father or step-father and 25.9% by a mother or step-mother. For people who experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, fathers, step-fathers and other male relatives made up 43.7% of the perpetrators and mothers and other female relatives made up only 1.7%. In any case, violence against children is not the focus of the WRC.
Violence against males
Woods’ document is one of a series of recent commentaries which draw on the PSS to argue that domestic violence against men is almost as common or as serious as domestic violence against women. I have critiqued such claims elsewhere (Flood, in press). Here, I critique the notion that those who focus their efforts on men’s violence against women necessarily are declaring that other forms of violence are acceptable or non-existent.
The organisers of the White Ribbon Campaign share Woods’ concern about the high rates of violence inflicted on males. As the 2006 Resource Kit states:
Males too are often the victims of violence. While boys and men are the large majority of perpetrators of violence, boys and men often are also the victims. Males are bashed up, bullied and sexually assaulted… Ending violence to girls and women and ending violence to boys and men are part of the same struggle — to create a world based on equality, justice and non-violence.
We would be thrilled to see a major public campaign in Australia addressing the violence that men experience. This would be an invaluable complement to campaigns such as the WRC. A campaign focused on violence to males would start with the recognition that males are most at risk of violence from other males. Of the 485,400 men in Australia who were physically assaulted in the last 12 months, 89% were assaulted by other males (ABS 2006).
The WRC focuses on men’s violence against women because men’s violence against women is an important social problem that deserves attention. There are important reasons to have a campaign focused on men’s violence against women, rather than having a general campaign addressing all violence.
First, men’s violence against women has specific dynamics that should be the focus of specific attention. For example, while the violence that men experience often occurs in public and by perpetrators who are unknown to them, the violence that women experience from men often occurs in relationships and families and by perpetrators known to them.
Second, men’s violence against women has specific causes that should be the focus of specific attention. For example, men’s violence against women is sustained in part by cultural beliefs (held by a minority) that men have the right to physically punish their female partners, males should be dominant in households, and some women ‘ask’ to be raped. Similarly, men’s violence against other men is sustained in part by cultural beliefs that if a man’s honour or status is challenged, he must respond with violence, and violence between males is legitimate and exciting.
If we had a campaign that lumped together these different forms of violence, we would be unable to address their specific features. And our campaign would be ineffective as a result. (For the same reason, campaigns focused on other social problems such as tobacco smoking or drink-driving often focus on specific populations and/or specific forms of this behaviour, as well as giving out the general message that such behaviours are unhealthy or wrong.) The White Ribbon Campaign is compatible with, and would complement, campaigns focused on other forms of violence.
The Personal Safety Survey
Woods’ document includes a series of tables he has constructed using the PSS, but some figures are incorrect or misleading. His table ‘Perpetrators of physical violence’ draws on percentage figures given on page 30 of the PSS, but Woods appears to have misunderstood these figures. For example, using Woods’ own table, it would appear that, among men physically assaulted in the last 12 months, 27% were assaulted by a female current or previous partner and 16% by a female stranger. This is incorrect. Instead, these figures refer to assaults as a proportion of all assaults by a female perpetrator. Of men physically assaulted by a female perpetrator, the assailant was a current or previous partner in 27% of incidents. The percentage figures Woods quotes refer to perpetration by a specific sex of perpetrator, not all perpetrators.
If we calculate these figures correctly, to give the breakdown of all perpetrators for physical assaults against men and against women, we arrive at the following:
Perpetrator of physical assault in previous 12 months
Male stranger Female stranger Male current or previous partner Female current or previous partner
Male victims 65% *3% – *4%
Female victims 15% 9% 30% –
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006 Personal Safety Survey Australia, ABS, Canberra *estimate has a relative standard error of 25% to 50% and should be used with caution.
Thus, of all males physically assaulted in the previous 12 months, only 3% were assaulted by a female stranger, and only 4% by a current or previous female partner.
Gender isn’t everything
Another criticism often offered by anti-feminist advocates is that domestic violence efforts focus too much on gendered causes of violence. Again, this representation is ill-informed. Addressing contextual factors which contribute to relationship violence such as alcohol and substance abuse and poverty is a routine element in contemporary policies and interventions regarding domestic and family violence in Australia. Feminist scholarship on men’s violence against women takes it as given that gender alone does not and cannot account for violence, and that explanations and interventions must address the intersections of class, race and ethnicity, and other social divisions and factors (Russo 2001).
The White Ribbon Campaign (WRC) reflects this understanding. As the 2006 Resource Kit states: ‘Violence against women also is shaped by poverty and community disintegration, alcoholism and drug abuse, and mental illness.’ Other White Ribbon materials, such as the leaflet are too brief to go into the complexity of the causes of men’s violence against women, but we do recognise that these causes are multifaceted. At the same time, aspects of traditional male roles, sexist beliefs, and power inequalities are central in explaining violence against women.
Because the WRC is defined by a focus on the positive roles that men can play in helping to stop men’s violence against women, it highlights gender, without assuming that gender alone explains this violence. Indeed, if men’s violence against women were the simple outcome of maleness, then the central premise of the WRC – that most men are not violent and that most can play a positive role in ending violence – would be void.
We see the WRC as a complement to policies and initiatives addressing other social factors which sustain violence against women, such as poverty and substance abuse. And we encourage people to adopt the campaign to suit their local communities and contexts. For example, members of particular ethnic or spiritual communities who support the WRC have spoken out about the forms of tolerance for violence against women which are specific to, or more common in, their communities.
A ‘domestic violence industry’
Finally, Woods offers a hostile and inaccurate slur on those working on the problem of domestic violence. He writes of a ‘domestic violence industry’, implying that the individuals and organisations working in the field of domestic violence are motivated by financial self-interest rather than a desire to respond to and prevent domestic violence.
The White Ribbon Campaign is self-funding and run almost entirely by volunteers. Those of us involved are committing our own time in the interests of changing what is a significant social problem. More generally, individuals and organisations tackling domestic violence work in a field which is under-resourced and cannot meet demand. For example, refuges for women and children escaping domestic violence routinely are forced to turn victims away every day because their beds are full.
Woods also claims that ‘sections of this industry are engaging in the use of dishonesty to further the interests of organisational growth’, using ‘falsely inflated figures’ to this end. Instead, advocates on domestic violence draw on nationally and internationally credible statistics, giving voice to the very real experiences of physical and sexual harm inflicted on thousands of women and men around Australia. Of course our definitions and measurements of violence must be methodologically rigorous, transparent, and informed by contemporary scholarship. The definitions and measurements of violence on which the WRC and other efforts draw meet these criteria.
Woods’ piece offers an inaccurate and ill-informed account of the White Ribbon Campaign and the surveys on which it and other domestic violence campaigns draw. His document is a distraction from the very real and urgent work of addressing the violence which women, and men, suffer.
References
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2006, Personal Safety Survey Australia Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra (Cat. 4906.0).
Flood, M (in press), ‘Violence against women and men in Australia: What the Personal Safety Survey can and can’t tell us about domestic violence’, DVIRC Newsletter.
Mouzos, J & Makkai, T 2004, Women’s Experiences of Male Violence: Findings from the Australian Component of the International Violence against Women Survey (IVAWS), Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra
Russo, A 2001 Taking Back Our Lives: A Call to Action for the Violence Against Women Movement, Routledge, New York
* This image has no relation to this article
Mediation laws failing victims, say experts
Mediation laws failing victims, say experts
Ruth Pollard and Carol Nader
November 25, 2008
CHILDREN are handed over to violent fathers, while women are exposed to further harm in family mediation sessions enforced by changes to the law that too often put parents’ rights above the safety of children, experts warn.
Two years after their implementation by the former Howard government, changes to the Family Law Act have forced women with apprehended violence orders against their partners into mediation where further threats of abuse occur.
And domestic violence or child abuse made little difference to whether fathers were given overnight access to their children, research by the Australian Institute of Family Studies found, prompting calls for urgent reforms to the system and better training for magistrates and mediators.
The supervising solicitor in the Women’s Legal Resource Centre domestic violence advocacy service, Karen Mifsud, said many women felt pushed into mediation.
“This is sometimes because they are financially unable to pay for legal representation to go to court but do not qualify for legal aid,” she said.
“We have had clients reporting that they do not want to go to mediation because they feel intimidated or scared but feel they have no option as they need to get some sort of arrangement for children in place.”
Domestic violence is listed as an additional factor in considering the best interests of the child under the Family Law Act, Ms Mifsud said. “However, it is only one factor, and the case law indicates that there needs to be exceptionally high conflict between parents or extreme domestic violence for such issues to be taken into account when the court is determining children’s orders.”
Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland said the Government was aware of concerns over the way shared parenting provisions in the act had been applied in cases where domestic violence was present. The Government was implementing new accreditation standards that would require all professionals from mediators to judges to be able to identify and respond to evidence of domestic violence.
Meanwhile, submissions to a Government plan to reduce domestic violence have called for increased access to emergency accommodation and legal services for women and their children fleeing such violence.
As part of White Ribbon Day today, Women’s Affairs Minister Tanya Plibersek will release the progress report into work of the National Council to Reduce Violence to Women and their Children. The council has received more than 2000 submissions and will deliver a draft plan to reduce domestic violence to the Government by the end of the year.
S
Custodians of abuse
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
          |
|||||||||||||||||||||
     |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| home | feedback | about the phoenix | find the phoenix | advertising info | privacy policy | the masthead | work for us | |||||||||||||||||||||
| © 2003 Phoenix Media Communications Group | |||||||||||||||||||||
Anonymums's Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.