IMBRA - Deems American Men Abusers

Meeting a Foreign women over the internet

Try to put all of this into perspective. The majority of testimony offered against the Mail Order Bride industry referred to an implied possible interpitation of the descriptions given the women of the Philippines. While I personally advocate against derogatory comments in reference to Philippine women I personally find comments and site description of groups on some of the sites exempted by the IMBA laws more offensive.

A google search for the term Filipina Groups yields the No.1 result for the term which leads to another yet exempted site, Yahoo groups.

The No.2 group filipinaangelheartspenpals is mostly comprised of message titles I can not say here.

My point is simply this. If the TRUE intention of the law was to protect Philippine women then how could they exempt such businesses that offer exploitive materials such as those.

Truth of the matter is this.

The Feminist organisations that pushed the new IMBA laws sold out to the Big Corporate interest of Online Dating and wrote exclusions in the law that allowed them to continue these practices. The small Mom and Pop web based businesses this law will effectively put out of business have a vested interest in outcome of the unions formed by there businesses. These GIANTs of the industry could care less.

The incidence of SEXUAL EXPLOITATION will rise dramtically.

The Feminist here in America have effectively ushered in a new age of oppression and sexual exploitation for women of the Philippines.

Well, well, well.... I see the feminists are in over drive. I happened to search for IMBRA on google and found this blog after seeing it mentioned on filipinaeyes.

I have actually read the law so I was able to get a sense of the law. What we have here is backdoor legistlation to regulate immigration. The kind if immigrants that American women hate. "Pretty Traditional Ones."

You mention illegal Mexicans and I think it is funny in a way that they are protected. Of course they are here with boyfriends and husbands mainly so not much threat to the American women.

All I can say is laws like this do not accomplish anything and everyone knows it. Men are not going to stop finding international brides because of IMBRA. What this will do is drive a bigger wedge between American men and women. If that is the goal of the feminists then they are headed down the right path.

I happened to look at the N.O.W. website the other day and this looks like a bulletin board for communism. These people have totally lost their minds. I encourage any normal human being to look at this website and see if you get the impression of communism. It is scary to think these nut bags are parenting legislation that ends up as law effecting all of us.

Then I found something else. this petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/imbra05/petition.html which is to repeal IMBRA. It already has a couple thousand signatures and appears to be a newer petition. I encourage you to go read the comments from these guys (and a few ladies). I think this petition has touched a nerve in the American man and the signers of the petition are pouring out their emotions. Actually, some of them make a lot of sense.

I am glad I found IMBRA, and that I can watch this whole thing unfold. I have a feeling that IMBRA might become a very popular topic over the next year. It touches on many things including the divide between men and women in the country, free speech and the pursuit of happiness.

Guys, I am impressed that you are fighting back and I wish you the best. This law may be the straw that breaks the camels back and turns the tide of feminism back just a tad. Peace out!

The law has created many obstacles. If that is the goal of the feminists then they are headed down the right path. All of them equally live separately. For them the family values are not important.

THE U.S. CITIZENS FOREIGN FAMILY VISA AMMENDMENT
The current U.S. Visa policy towards family members of U.S. Citizens in foreign countries is destructive to familial relationships. Treating American Citizen’s foreign family with dignity and respect will pave the way towards strengthening the common bonds American Citizens share with our families in countries all around the world.

To view the ammendment and post your comments go here:

http://usforeignfamily.blogspot.com/

As an American Citizen I have served my country for nearly 20 years, either in the military (U.S. Marines), Law Enforcment, or other Classified positions. I am appalled at this IMBRA law and have written all appropriate politicians with my dissatisfaction. I have shed blood for my country and my community. I have no personal prior legal violations, thus no issue against this law other than it potentially inhibits my search for life, liberty and happiness. The violation of certain citizen rights by this law are a disgrace. These rights are supposed to be protected by the constitution for which I have personally sacrificed to defend.

Since I have been married and divorced more than once, I have decided that I do not want an American woman for a life partner, as their values are not centered around the most important part of what makes our country great, The Family! (It won't be great for long if the current trends continue.)

I for one, will not succumb to this law and will therefore continue to seek my life partner abroad in the manner of my choosing. If this law is not repealed or declared unconstitutional, it may very well be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back and I will consider the possibility of moving to her country or possibly another country more interested in protecting the rights of its citizens first.

The new Law IMBRA will have nasty effect on American men and overseas ladies thru out the world. The men will have to bare their souls to the Gov't and to her too. Before even attempting to communicate. I am in (maybe was)in the process of bring a Flippina in to be my wife. I am even having second thoughts of doing that. Even under the K-3 it looks like the same thing. I do not have nothing to hide but still the Gov't telling me who to marry and who not to! I think not. We did meet on web site ( home office in USA) that does allot of introductions thru out world. It has not put anything about the new Law; and looks like it never will. It could lead to denied petition too if you decide to be honest. I know that this law came about because of 2 very terrible cases that the women died because the men was control freaks they went to extremes. It was also dreamed up by a single female congresslady; who told the the 2 families she will do something about inacting a law about marriage brokers. If the gov't had some checks and balances in the process for the K-1 at the time; they would have found out and done something about it. There really is NOT much choice guys. You could marry her in her country and then bring her here. But I think the IMBRA law would apply for that too (k-3)! The next choice is to leave this country and live in her country if you could. That could be the best choice yet. Lastly, start looking the USA again or cry in your beer. AS for me i will try once with a k-1 if get denied then it is a k-3 then if that gets denied. I will retire and move to her country. Meanwhile I have lost about 2 years of time with her; with all of this gov't BS. Plus about 10K; for flights, lawyers, fees, and other stuff too. IF all this fails; I think will become a monk!

I found out about IMBRA in a NYT article, and frankly it makes me sick. I've been married and divorced once to an American girl, who was "Spend, Spend, Spend" while I was fighting for my country in Iraq last year.


I have a Filipina girl waiting for me, who was more faithful, concerned and caring while I was fighting for my country than my wife. Thankfully she's almost finished with college, which I hope will allow her a better chance with INS; and because I want her to be independent; if she wants to get a job teaching, then great. But this law is totally absurd, since most of my personal information is already in gov't databases, because of my military service, and this law requires that I repeat it all? I carried a rifle every day in Iraq, for Pete's sake, and it was bad enough that I had to pass a background check against domestic violence to do that.


The Founding Fathers established this country on the principles of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, as well as guaranteeing my freedom to choose whomever I wanted to marry under the provisions of the First Amendment. I find it irrational that 230 years after we fought a war with England for our independence, we have to choose a domestic bride as our mate.


I say this to the feminazis who wrote this, and seemed opposed to foreign spouses (unless they're already here illegally), and to the monkey who signed it into law: "Just deal with it."

best thing to do is just leave the usa

Here's the letter I'm going to send my Congresswoman:

---
Dear Representative:

Please repeal the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (IMBRA).

IMBRA is a federal law regulating international correspondence services that help Americans find foreign pen pals interested in marriage. About 4,000 to 6,000 immigrants – a very small fraction of the total number of immigrants – come into the U.S. every year by this route, many of them from the Philippines and Russia. A 1999 study funded by the Immigration and Naturalization Service entitled The "Mail-Order Bride" Industry and its Impact on U.S. Immigration found that "marriages arranged through these services would appear to have a lower divorce rate than the nation as a whole, fully 80 percent of these marriages having lasted over the years for which reports are available."

Although IMBRA was intended to help protect the women who sign up for these services from abuse, it has many serious flaws. Among IMBRA’s troubling provisions are several that call for the disclosure of arrest records of clients for certain crimes, regardless of whether a conviction occurred. This could result in an innocent person being unfairly punished. If an American client had been wrongly accused of distributing drugs, for instance, he might have great difficulty finding a foreign woman to marry, since IMBRA would require any prospective pen pal to be notified of his arrest record.

Moreover, IMBRA imposes burdensome paperwork requirements on introduction agencies. Many of these services charge nominal fees (e.g. $4 or $6) for addresses and cannot afford the overhead associated with mandatory background checks, processing of documents, and translation of forms into the recipient’s native language. Several services have suspended operations while they analyze the law’s implications.

Lastly, IMBRA’s constitutionality is suspect, because it limits the right of Americans to say “hello” to prospective pen pals – a likely infringement of free speech rights. There have been several court challenges to this law, resulting in conflicting judgments in various jurisdictions. However, each member of Congress has a moral responsibility to oppose unconstitutional legislation, regardless of what the courts decide.

International correspondence agencies provide a valuable service to Americans. Please repeal IMBRA.

I worked in Congress (both teh House and the Senate) and I can tell you the Cantwell Bill (IMBRA) was passed because it met all the requirements of a "perfect" piece of legislation in the 2006 Congressional environment:

1) Stirs up strong (though completely irrational) emotions in a large voting bloc (in this case, women.)

2) Almost impossible to articlulate a good argument against it without being instantly labeled a "chauvinist", a "cad", or even generating aspersions and insinuations that you might be a criminal or an abuser yourself.

3) Relatively weak and unfunded opposition who rely only on making logical arguments, but don't have a political war chest behind them to give large contributions to Senators and members of Congress.

4) Allows the proponents to easily score cheap, low-risk political points. Politicians who oppose the bill on principle can be branded "cads", "chauvinists", "anti-women", and even closet abusers, just like their constituents who oppose it.

5) Therefore it's almost guaranteed that there will be virtually NO DEBATE in Congress -- both Democrats (needing to appease their feminist "base") and Republicans (needing to portray an image of being for "law and order" and "morality") will both support the bill. Therefore it's almost a sure winner.

6) The bill is practically revenue-neutral. All costs are thrown on the consumers and the marriage brokers. Government bears little or no costs.

You have to remember that very few bills that Congress considers meet all these requirements so perfectly. Therefore, from the start, this bill was a guaranteed winner and virtually all possible public opposition to it was destined to fizzle and fail. Members of Congress naturally climb over each other scratching and biting to find a piece of legislation or a policy idea so PERFECT. Cantwell, with the help of some "feminist" constituents (whose motives are suspect) found such a perfect bill, and milked for everything it was worth, like any cunning and clever politician.

IMBRA will no doubt be declared unconstitutional. It is only a matter of time. I am a long standing immigration lawyer and former appellate court judge. My experience and knowledge of the law tell me this without much problem whatsoever.

RRB

This law is totally misleading and was passed without reading the real contents. It is not affecting marriage brokers that much than the indivisual. This law clearly reflect that our lagislators are too racist. Instead of curbing it they are promoting it by way of legal means. In fact this law reflects the wrong mentality of the members who passed it or it was there mere ignorance to pass a law without fully reading and foresighing it.
We expect them to be our role model.

Thanks

Hey guys, I have a question. Is the INS currently denying requests for K-1 and K-3 VISAS for men who have current convictions, or are they just requesting that this information be revealed on the application?

Lonnie