You mean now young girls might have trouble getting taxi rides? False rape accusations against taxi drivers hit women hardest!!!™ 

This result was only a matter of time as young women find it necessary to justify their feral behaviour by falsely accusing cabbies rather than own up to banging some thug and finding herself

1. Pregnant..
2. Bf finds out and requires excuse..
3. Cannot afford cab fare..
4. Just being a PP and making stuff up just to destroy other peoples lives for fun..

What a class act they have become and ofcourse all this came about thanks to feminism and the atrocious laws they put into place plus the endless hype these PP are given in the media on how they have reached and achieved perfection and will, when facing court just be given a slap on the wrist (that's finally reducing). The real world is apparently too much of a culture shock for them to handle..
Why not just ban them altogether..

Taxi Drivers Hesitant to pick up females in fear of false rape accusations.

A taxi company official in St. John's says some of his colleagues are thinking twice about who they pick up downtown because they fear they'll be falsely accused of doing something wrong.
"It's unfortunate but today, young single females or even two females in the car... bad news. Especially if they're intoxicated," said Doug McCarthy, general manager and a driver with Co-Op Taxi in St. John’s .
McCarthy said some young women are drunk and pass out on the way home. He said that when the driver wakes them up, they can't remember where they are going. In some cases, he said they threaten to make false accusations against the driver to avoid paying their fare.
“You touched me or you did this or that or you made a proposition,” said McCarthy, describing what drivers have told him.
McCarthy said fear that they'll be the victim of a false accusation, such as assault of inappropriate touching, has left some drivers struggling with the decision to pick up a young girl and bring her home if she is alone.
"Rule of thumb used to be pick up young girls first, take them home, pick up couples seconds and last, pick up the guys and take them home. Now, it's reversed," he said.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...-women-118.html 

To be honest, I could not finish reading this story as it did hit too many nerves and issues that is rampant in society today, at the behest of a movement that is determined to ensure that every man, anytime, can be destroyed and obliterated by precisely what happened here. That movement is active today and will ensure that every opportunity is taken to ensure that men's lives are destroyed and left to wither and die.
Alone, no assistance, no help, no guidance available and everyone associated to that abuse industry is quite aware that this is going on and no one gives a damn, including politicians, law enforcement, the judiciary and all those other groups who claim to be for humanity and claim to be there to help, one and all, as they just disappear into the woodwork and claim either ignorance, feign interest or demonstrate total bias..
 This is what feminists have created and it's this is what we need to face head on and defeat, or you and your sons will be next..

This is why the MRM (Mens Rights Movement) has been forced to exist to exist. This is why we will win..

Just A Man Writing

Join me now in the final chapter of this 'almost fictional' tale that is trying to illustrate what a false accusation of rape can do to a man just like YOU. Click here for Chapter one

Just a little more about the never ending false rape saga that law enforcement and the judiciary seem to completely ignore and like to pretend it does not exist because women are involved and they are too cowardly to break the golden rule "Never criticise a woman" which apparently still reigns supreme in those areas of cowardice and ignorance..

The Truth Behind Legal Dominance: Feminism's "Two Percent False Rape Claim Figure" 

I thought I'd create a new post because it includes another study done by the Air Force on False Rape Allegations.
I was doing some research into false rape allegations and while our NotCompensating Guest here cites a study that seems to debunk what Tyreal has posted, I actually checked the source as well as several others that report a low rate of false rape allegations, which all have one thing in common. They get reports from police departments, study a small number of cases ("False allegations of sexual assault: an analysis of ten years of reported cases" involved 136 cases) and have a very narrow criteria for what constitutes an actual false claim. They often exclude unfounded reports where no evidence presented actually implicates the accused, and only count reports where the “victims” claim was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be false, as actually constituting a false claim. Cases that did not proceed were also excluded as well as some where they did proceed but the claim was dropped (unfounded) or the accused as acquitted. They also ignore those who have been wrongly accused and jailed despite their innocence being proven later through DNA testing, which Greer’s report addresses as significant enough to be problematic and why. Once you account for variable such as these, we are already influencing the outcome of the reports significantly enough to basically disregard what many MRA’s are claiming, that it’s a woman’s world where she can cry rape all she wants and will likely avoid any consequences of committing perjury in a court of law because studies like these trivialize false rape claims by minimize what constitutes an actual false claim.
This is interesting considering they have at the same time broadened the definition of rape, which I also think is important when doing this analysis. By including any unwanted sexual conduct as grounds for rape, a term that can broadly be interpreted, the defendant in an allegation would be hard pressed to prove his innocence, and likely the case would end up as either a conviction, or an unfounded claim because our assumption that women are innocent. We label her as a victim and not a plaintiff, which reinforces the idea that the crime took place before due process and that when we have such a broad definition of rape, then almost anything flies such as talking in a manner that is sexual and unwanted.
If you think about it the chances of it being counted as a false claim are extremely remote considering the accused living within the same geographical region as the accuser and having even talked to the accuser is enough to dismiss the idea that there was never any misconduct in the first place, therefore making the idea that the claim was false almost entirely impossible. On top of that, a defendant having to prove his innocence that does just that will be unlikely able to counter sue and thus prove that the rape charge was indeed a false allegation which would be the only way a unfounded charge or one in which the process did not convict, could ever be moved into the category of false allegation.
If these and among other variables were ever considered, then we would see a much higher rate of false rape claims, which interestingly enough the Air Force actually did consider when doing their study. Initially they found 27% of claims to be false but then using these admitted false accusations they developed 35 criteria distinguishing false accusations and compared it to the other claims and discovered that potentially 65% of claims may in fact have been false. I say maybe because it’s important to remember that nothing is definitive when looking back over a previous allegation because unlike a current assessment, not all the evidence is present to consider. Let us not forget that sometimes where a real case of rape occurs sometimes the defendant gets away with it, but I would logically assume what with all the current legislation dealing with rape claims, that the percentage of those getting away with the crime is extremely low and practically non-existent, just like claims of false rape allegations are according to feminists.
In conclusion, false rape allegations are real, probably because women know that they can get away with it, even if they are unfounded or proven to be false because we rarely see the courts prosecuting serial accusers. It also depends on where you are located; for example, colleges and the military probably have much higher rates of false claims than inner city areas. Matter of fact I’m fairly certain of it, but that’s just my conclusion after reviewing the evidence. Even if false rape claims are a small percentage, there should be a zero tolerance policy just like there is for sexual misconduct, and those who do present false claims should be prosecuted the same way any individual would for committing perjury in a court of law.
I have not reviewed this comment, but taken bits and pieces of an essay I wrote about rape and false rape claims.

We are already well aware that the natural ability of women to tell lies is already written in too many studies for me to list here and why would I even bother since you are already well aware as well as witnesses. But the scale at which they carry out this ability is just mindboggling to say the least, to try and destroy someone's life out of sheer malice is really something else that most of us cannot even fathom let alone. condone or ever encourage..

Here is an update from the FRS site regarding the DSK trial that we have already been lied to and exaggerated about, by feminists ofcourse, who stands the most to gain for spreading the malice..

Comments by K..


How do you tell a Feminist is lying? Her lips are moving. The truth about the egregious extent of deliberate and continuous deceit by the Maid is revealed in the following document. When the Prosecutors cannot get a straight story, when it changes multiple times, when an electronic card swipe disputes the accuser's story, as the DA you are screwed. When she admits lying to the Grand Jury, when Feminist Lawyers know this and deliberately lie to the public. They are Nifonging another Dominant Male. It does not matter that there is zero proof, that the facts dispute the Accuser's story. They want an accusation to mean automatic guilty verdict. Screw them.

Friday, August 26, 2011

Women's advocates do disservice to rape victims by telling them that justice was not served in the DSK case
FRS Reveals What's In the Motion to Dismiss: It's Eye-Opening

This is a post intended for rape victims. Although this blog gives voice to victims of wrongful rape charges, we also want rape victims to be able to seek healing and justice. A close a family member of mine was a victim of a brutal sexual assault. We do not harbor rapists at FRS nor do we advocate for them to elude justice.
To all victims of sexual assault we say this: do not -- we repeat -- do not allow the decision by New York County prosecutors to dismiss the charges against Dominique Strauss-Kahn ("DSK") to dissuade you from reporting that you've been raped.

You are being terribly misled if you listen to the persons or groups who suggest that the DSK case sends a "very bad message to women vulnerable to sexual abuse" that rape victims have to be "perfect" in order to get justice. It is most distressing to read the following: ". . . for many feminists and victims' advocates, the victory for Strauss-Kahn is a defeat for women who have been sexually assaulted or raped, and who may already have been nervous about coming forward." See here.
By failing to tell the whole story, and by publicly insisting that women can't get justice unless they are "perfect," those victims' advocates, themselves, are improperly discouraging rape victims from coming forward.

The accuser in the DSK case, whose name is Niasfatou Diallo, wasn't just not perfect; according to the very prosecutors who arrested and charged DSK (and allowed him to experience a humiliating and high profile "perp walk"), she was "persistently" and "inexplicably" untruthful to prosecutors. But don't believe me -- read the motion to dismiss that was filed by prosecutors. I suspect that very few, if any, of the persons who are alarming rape victims have read it. See here: http://www.scribd.co...tion-to-Dismiss We are going to explain it, below. We suspect it will be eye-opening for a lot of people.
In their motion, the prosecutors make clear: "That an individual has lied in the past or committed criminal acts does not necessarily render them unbelievable to us as prosecutors, or keep us from putting them on the witness stand at trial." But the prosecutors explained that Diallo's case was different: ". . . the nature and number of the complainant's falsehoods leave us unable to credit her version of events beyond a reasonable doubt . . . ." They explained that Diallo's "credibility cannot withstand the most basic evaluation. [She] has provided shifting and inconsistent versions of events surrounding the alleged assault, and as a result, we cannot be sufficiently certain of what happened."

The lesson, as shown below, is that in rape cases, which often hinge heavily or even entirely on credibility, rape victims need to be completely honest with prosecutors. I am aware of many rape cases brought to trial where the accuser was herself accused of making prior false rape claims, but this did not dissuade the prosecutor from bringing the rape case to trial. Having an imperfect victim does not normally preclude charges from being brought to trial. But lying to the prosecutor, whose job it is to try to weave a credible narrative for the trier of fact, will.According to the motion to dismiss: "In virtually every substantive interview with prosecutors, despite entreaties to simply be truthful, [Diallo] has not been truthful, on matters great and small . . . . Over the course of two interviews, for example, [she] gave a vivid, highly-detailed, and convincing account of having been raped in her native country, which she now admits was entirely false."

Diallo's "longstanding pattern of untruthfulness" includes some false statements under oath about this case to the grand jury, which would have been revealed at any trial. Diallo admitted that she lied to the grand jury about her activities in the immediate aftermath of the alleged incident. And it wasn't even limited to that. Diallo "displayed a repeated lack of candor about a wide range of additional topics concerning her history, background, present circumstances, and personal relationships." She has been "persistently" and "inexplicably" untruthful to prosecutors, the motion said.

Let's focus on one. Diallo gave prosecutors "irreconcilable accounts" of what happened in the immediate aftermath of the alleged incident. From May 14 to June 28, Diallo told prosecutors that after the incident, she immediately fled DSK's suite at Room 2806 of the Sofitel Hotel near Times Square and went to the far end of the 28th floor hallway. She claims she spit out semen on the carpet of the hallway.

On June 28, however, she admitted that she had lied under oath to the grand jury and that she had been untruthful with prosecutors on material points about this incident. For the first time, she admitted that immediately after the incident, she went to another room, room 2820, to finish cleaning it. She detailed her activities in cleaning in that other room. Then, she said, she returned to DSK's room and began to clean it as well. Then, she happened to encounter her supervisor when she went to a linen closet to retrieve supplies.

Prosecutors checked out the electronic swipe records and determined she was only in room 2820 for a very short time -- less than a minute -- and could not have engaged in the cleaning activities she detailed.

On July 27, her story changed again. This time, she said she had cleaned the other room, room 2820, earlier in the day, not after the alleged assault. She said that after the alleged incident, she ran into 2820 only momentarily to retrieve cleaning supplies. And, importantly, she denied that she told the same prosecutors a different version of the story on June 28, as noted above. That latter denial caused the prosecutors to call her credibility into question on a most fundamental level. (The suggestion from the motion is that they lost all faith in her.) Prosecutors said they had no confidence as to whether Diallo would tell the truth on this issue at trial, which is highly problematic. They simply didn't know what to believe.Diallo also lied to prosecutors about being gang raped in Guinea. Again, much misinformation about this lie have been floating around the press. On May 30, she told prosecutors a powerful, emotional, and convincing account of being gang raped in the presence of her 2-year-old daughter. But on June 8 and 9, she admitted "that she had entirely fabricated the attack." Asked why she had lied, she told prosecutors that she had relied on the incident in her application for asylum (in fact, she had not), and besides, she said, her prior statement to prosecutors wasn't under oath.
Have you read enough yet?

Wait, she's not finished. Then, she admitted that she had learned the gang rape tale by memorizing a fictional rape recounted on a cassette tape because she intended to use it when she sought asylum. But she decided not to use the tale in her written asylum application.
Prosecutors found it fatal that Diallo had lied with with the same conviction about the alleged gang rape in Guinea that she employed to describe the alleged incident at issue. On June 9 and 28, she insisted again that she had been raped in other incidents in Guinea, but prosecutors had no way to investigate these alleged incidents.

Beyond that there were other credibility problems. She repeatedly committed fraud in seeking low income housing. Moreover, she had a telephone discussion with her alleged fiance about financially profiting from the DSK incident. Despite insisting she did not want to benefit financially from the case, she later filed a civil action for money damages.

In addition, the motion painstakingly details the fact that there is no physical evidence of forcible compulsion or lack of consent.
The prosecutor, the motion explains, has an obligation not just to the "victim" but to society. He has a duty to seek justice, not just win cases. His or her obligations are bottomed on the "fundamental value determination of our society that it is far worse to convict an innocent [person] than to let a guilty [person] go free." While charges may be brought on probable cause, felony prosecutors in New York County have a policy of only bringing cases to trial where they are personally convinced of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, they were not so convinced.
My summary can't do justice to the motion. The cumulative effect of a cavalcade of lies, both big and small, under oath and not, and especially the lies told to the prosecutor whose job it is to present a credible narrative, was overwhelming.
To suggest that the charges were dismissed because Diallo is not a "perfect" victim is a gross and puerile distortion of reality and can only dissuade rape victims with legitimate claims from coming forward. To better serve both rape victims and the presumptively innocent accused of heinous sex crimes, we need to move the discourse to a more mature level.

It is well to note that no one else, aside from women's advocates, are spreading the view that justice was not served here. There is, in fact, a widespread international consensus among objective observers -- observers who do not speak regularly on gender issues and have no axe to grind in the matter -- that the sexual assault charges against Dominique Strauss-Kahn were properly dismissed. That consensus was generated not by any sympathy for Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who is by no means a sympathetic figure, nor by antipathy for his accuser's gender, race, or ethnicity, but because it is painfully self-evident that the charges simply are not sustainable. Many thoughtful observers, including feminist Naomi Wolf and a host of serious commentators in the European community, viewed with alarm American law enforcement's zealousness in bringing the charges. Those who condemn the dismissal of these charges voice a position that is so extreme and discordant with fundamental values cherished by our jurisprudence, and that strays so far from the mainstream of serious and reasoned thought, that they have lost any rightful claim to participate in the public discourse about the serious issues relating to sexual assault.
The prosecution of sexual assault raises a host of complex issues that require the nuanced balancing of critical and delicate interests: we must, on the one hand, strive to punish malefactors, and on the other, insure that the innocent are not punished with the guilty. The balancing of those two imperatives is difficult enough in the rape milieu without injecting childish and shrill politicization into the discourse.
False rape accusers should not come forward, eveyone with any sense agrees with that. But by any measure, justice for DSK should not stop rape victims from coming forward. Those who suggest otherwise are hurting rape victims.

Link to the Motion: http://www.nytimes.c...smiss-case.html

Posted from the False Rape Society web site.

If there is one thing you can state about the opposite sex it is that they are soundly devoid of any sense of social justice. It is for this reason they have no issue whatsoever about defending one of their own after she has murdered either her children, her Father, Husband or anyone else for that matter. They will come to the defence of that female criminal without hesitation and make some standard, well rehearsed, well worn, claim. Whether or not they are totally untrue or a downright lie is completely irrelevant, they want to keep the image of womanhood untarnished and undisturbed, a bit late for that I would have thought. But here are some examples of their irrational reasoning..

1. He must have deserved it..
2. He must have abused her..
3. She was depressed..
4. She was (add you own excuse right here as there are plenty)

Very rarely will you ever hear any female state that the woman deserved to go to jail or be given that final injection which some of them well deserve but very rarely get..

So it continues. The spate of false rape claims is still on the rise and will continue to be while suckers associate with them and the feminist courts, Police force and the judicial system just let them walk under the ridiculous claim that they are doing so because if they did not, any "real victims" would not come forward. As a matter of fact, I find it hard these days to actually see or read any articles that shows some female was raped at all. Even the statistics shows that it's on a downhill spiral over the last 10 years and yet that well rehearsed excuse is used by feminist sycophants continually like it's new..

The NoNonsense Man® » Rape Fraud 

False allegations of rape are believed to be more common than many persons realize. These are the findings of four research studies:
A review of 556 rape accusations filed against Air Force personnel found that 27% of women later recanted. Then 25 criteria were developed based on the profile of those women, and then submitted to three independent reviewers to review the remaining cases. If all three reviewers deemed the allegation was false, it was categorized as false. As a result, 60% of all allegations were found to be false.1 Of those women who later recanted, many didn't admit the allegation was false until just before taking a polygraph test. Others admitted it was false only after having failed a polygraph test.2
In a nine-year study of 109 rapes reported to the police in a Midwestern city, Purdue sociologist Eugene J. Kanin reported that in 41% of the cases the complainants eventually admitted that no rape had occurred.3
In a follow-up study of rape claims filed over a three-year period at two large Midwestern universities, Kanin found that of 64 rape cases, 50% turned out to be false.4 Among the false charges, 53% of the women admitted they filed the false claim as an alibi.5
According to a 1996 Department of Justice report, “in about 25% of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI, ... the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing.6 It should be noted that rape involves a forcible and non-consensual act, and a DNA match alone does not prove that rape occurred. So the 25% figure substantially underestimates the true extent of false allegations.
And according to former Colorado prosecutor Craig Silverman, “For 16 years, I was a kick-ass prosecutor who made most of my reputation vigorously prosecuting rapists. ... I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations that were made to the Denver Police Department. ... A command officer in the Denver Police sex assaults unit recently told me he placed the false rape numbers at approximately 45%.”7
According to the FBI, about 95,000 forcible rapes were reported in 2004.8 Based on the statements and studies cited above, some 47,000 American men are falsely accused of rape each year. These men are disproportionately African-American.9
Some of these men are wrongly convicted, sentenced, and imprisoned. Even if there is no conviction, a false allegation of rape can “emotionally, socially, and economically destroy a person.”10 

1 McDowell CP. False allegations. Forensic Science Digest, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 1985
2 Ibid.
3 Kanin EJ. An alarming national trend: False rape allegations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994 http://www.sexcriminals.com/library/doc-1002-1.pdf
4 Ibid., p. 2, Kanin reports that in the city studied, "for a declaration of false charge to be made, the complainant must admit that no rape had occurred. ... The police department will not declare a rape charge as false when the complainant, for whatever reason, fails to pursue the charge or cooperate on the case, regardless how much doubt the police may have regarding the validity of the charge. In short, these cases are declared false only because the complainant admitted they are false. ... Thus, the rape complainants referred to in this paper are for completed forcible rapes only. The foregoing leaves us with a certain confidence that cases declared false by this police agency are indeed a reasonable -- if not a minimal -- reflection of false rape allegations made to this agency, especially when one considers that a finding of false allegation is totally dependent upon the recantation of the rape charge."
5 Ibid., Addenda.
6 Connors E, Lundregan T, Miller N, McEwen T. Convicted by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial. June 1996 http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt
7 TheDenverChannel.com - Kobe Bryant Trial - Craig's Court: I Call Them As I See Them
8 Federal Bureau of Investigation. Forcible rape. February 17, 2006. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offen...ible_rape.html
9 Innocence Project: Facts on post-conviction DNA exonerations. The Innocence Project - Facts on Post-Conviction DNA Exonerations
10 Angelucci M, Sacks G. Research shows false allegations of rape common. Los Angeles Daily Journal, Sept. 15, 2004. GlennSacks.com
xhttp://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php

This story surfaced like some type of revelation and ofcourse with a "female" victim involved plus the ongoing fake claims of the world being drenched with Rohypnol, which every feminist was convinced to be a conspiracy that all men were being supplied it as their desperation levels were so high that they needed it just to get some sex, they ofcourse forgot to add that women were generally bending over backwards and offering a quickie with every McDonalds burger, would you like a hump with that..

So that combinations went free-fall as the Main Stream Media does not mind screaming load and long when the woman is a supposed victim, the usual "find the victim" methodology as a precondition on any article was paramount as they played the feminists tune.(refer the Spin Sisters in the 1990's)..

So, and as usual, the bitch was lying. Why would someone lie about something that serious, only a female can answer it and they haven't yet. Not the real reason anyway. Oh sure, we have had the morning after the night before, where she wakes up in bed with someone she does not know and the whole regret issues whelms forth and justification must take place in her mind and screw the consequences on the other person..

No wonder we have a site like "American Women mostly Suck", the "mostly" was just them being sensitive..

MEDIA: HALLIBURTON PAID DICK CHENEY TO COMMIT RAPE IN IRAN
August 3, 2011

A front-page story by James Risen in The New York Times on Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2008, reported on a "troubling trend" of sexual assaults committed by American employees of military contractors in Iraq. The centerpiece of his story was Jamie Leigh Jones, who claimed to have been brutally gang-raped in 2005 while working in the Green Zone. 
(Risen also interviewed other women claiming to have been sexually assaulted in Iraq and -- for journalistic balance -- their attorneys.) 
Jones famously claimed that days after arriving in Iraq with KBR, then a subsidiary of Halliburton, she had been drugged and gang-raped by fellow employees and then held at machine-gunpoint in a tiny shipping container by KBR managers, with no food or water for 24 hours, as retaliation for reporting the rape. 
You may have heard about Jones' sensational allegations –- invariably reported as fact -- on ABC's "20/20"; CNN; CBS News' "The Early Show," MSNBC, National Public Radio, in every major U.S. newspaper and international media. 
All she had to do was mention the words "rape" and "Halliburton," and the automatons went wild! 
Jones told her tale before congressional committees, on numerous TV shows -- and in a book she is actually writing, titled: "The Jamie Leigh Story: How My Rape in Iraq and Cover-up Made Me a Crusader for Justice." (Scheduled for release the third Tuesday after never.) 
Then-senator Barack Obama demanded a State Department investigation into Jones' claims. 
But no one jumped on Jones' story with more self-righteousness than Sen. Al Franken. He used her story to jam through a grandstandy "anti-rape" amendment to an appropriations bill prohibiting defense contractors from including mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts, thus depriving mountebank trial lawyers like John Edwards from collecting massive damages awards from illiterate jurors. 
The 30 Republican senators who voted against Franken's pro-trial lawyer amendment were promptly denounced as "pro-rape" across the Internet, on liberal talk radio and in mass phone calls to their offices. 
And then a few weeks ago, the Times ran a microscopic, one-paragraph Associated Press story on page 13 of a Saturday paper, reporting that a jury looked at the facts and found that ... Jones made the whole story up. 
Maybe the Republican senators should have sponsored a no-false-rape-allegation bill for defense contractor employees. 
When the time came to put up or shut up, Jones' "gang-rape" claim simply disappeared. DNA evidence showed she'd had sex with one only man, and he claimed it was consensual. 
In fact, the whole crime disappeared: After an investigation, no criminal charges were brought. 
Instead, Jones' lawyer brought a civil suit against KBR and its employees -- with a much lower burden of proof -- alleging only a routine he-said, she-said date-rape case. 
Jones' claim that she had been drugged with Rohypnol was demolished by tests taken by a female military doctor the day after the alleged attack. Rohypnol is detectable for 72 hours, but there was no trace of it, or any "date rape" drug, in her system. 
Jones said the attack was so brutal that her breast implants were ruptured and her pectoral muscles torn, requiring massive reconstructive surgery. This was contradicted not only by the female doctor who examined her the next day, but also by her own plastic surgeon back in Houston. 
Her claim that KBR management had held her at gunpoint in a shipping container vanished when it turned out she had only remembered that part of the story two years after it supposedly happened (coincidentally, just as the media frenzy began). 
Perhaps the Rohypnol made her forget something else: KBR employees, including security guards, don't even carry guns, much less machine guns. 
Having showcased Jones' original, false accusation in a 1,500-word article splashed across its front page, as soon as her story unraveled, the Times stared at its shoes and said nothing. In another six months, liberals will once again be citing Jones' case as evidence of the "troubling trend" of sexual assaults among military contractors. 
If only Jones had accused Bill Clinton or any member of the Kennedy family of rape, the mainstream media might have treated her allegations with a little more skepticism. But she accused employees of a company with a tertiary, long-ago, six-degrees-of-separation relationship with Dick Cheney. This was no time for journalistic integrity. 
Still, wasn't it the tiniest bit suspicious that Jones claimed KBR management responded to her rape claim by locking her in a shipping container? 
Why would a company that already had a PR problem stick its neck out to protect accused rapists? Isn't it more likely that a corporation would sell out even innocent employees accused of rape? Wouldn't it have occurred to them that she'd eventually get back to the U.S.? 
From the beginning, Jones' story was that she woke up remembering nothing of the night before ... and then suddenly realized she must have been slipped the "date rape" drug Rohypnol, beaten and gang-raped! 
How do you go from total amnesia to deciding that you were the star of your own Lifetime made-for-TV movie? I don't remember offhand what I was doing last Tuesday, but this does not automatically lead me to assume I was gang-raped. 
Even before leaving for Iraq with KBR at the age of 20, Jones had made rape accusations against two other men. A few years earlier, she told a doctor her boyfriend had raped her, and right before leaving for Iraq she accused a KBR supervisor of raping her. There was no evidence she was raped in Iraq other than her word -- and she was already 0-for-2 on rape allegations. 
Just a few years after humiliating themselves over the Duke lacrosse case, it's nice to see the media weren't the least bit hesitant about leaping on another ludicrous rape claim. 
Perhaps liberals were slipped Rohypnol, and that's why they can't remember that not every woman claiming she was raped is always telling the truth. 
COPYRIGHT 2011 ANN COULTER DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK 1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

Just some more information on the blatant lies that feminists and their supporters indulge in which not only muddies up the actual situation but also destroys any effort for the truth to surface. Continually lying about rape does not in any way enhance the way it's treated but only attracts scorn and derision as the truth of the situation is ALWAYS overstated by feminists whose sole consideration is purely motivated towards more funding. They have already demonstrated that they are not really interested in stopping or helping rape victims but only interested in spreading their hate message to anyone requiring that assistance, even encouraging false claims to ensure those vacancies are filled to inflate the numbers. Only feminists and their misfits occupy those places where real victims of rape can go but fails to be assisted in any meaningful way..

Those centres are not staffed with professionals but only paid workers with one precondition and that is that they have to be pro-feminist. We have already read many articles by Carey Roberts, a professor, who has repeatedly demonstrated that those centres are run by incompetent, irrational, biased females whose sole purpose has been stated above. So it is about time that professional people were installed into those centres rather than letting real victims suffer even more..

The entire "Rape Industry" is designed to further the feminist cause and as they are not even slightly interested in getting to the bottom of this harrowing crime, be it either male or female victims, it would appear that help from those "centres" are only ever superficial and at best, only slightly helpful if being helpful is indoctrination..

While the lies continue, no positive outcome will ever be realised and it's only ever the victims who suffer the most..

Lies, Damned Lies, and Dr. Phil 

False Rape Society.

by Archivist 

I read a startlingly inaccurate assertion that is repeated, in one form or other, in many places:
"There is no empirical data to prove that there are more false charges of rape than of any other violent crime. Estimates indicate that only 2 percent of all rape reports prove to be false, a rate comparable to the false report rate for other crimes." M. Torrey, "When Will We Be Believed? Rape Myths and the Idea of a Fair Trail in Rape Prosecutions" (forthcoming 24 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1013 (1991)); Parrot and Bechholder, eds., "Acquaintance Rape" at 28 (1991) ("(A)ccording to police records, false reports are no more likely for rape than they are for other serious crimes.")
Sound familiar? Of course it does. Anyone who advocates for persons falsely accused of rape and similar offenses encounters it routinely.  It is as offensive as it is dishonest, and even though it was debunked long ago, it is repeatedly trotted as fact. See, e.g., E. Greer, The Truth Behind Legal Dominance Feminism's 'Two Percent False Rape Claim' Figure, 33 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 947 (2000), a scholarly law review article that painstakingly traced the two percent canard to its baseless origin.
No, I didn't copy the above quote from the literature of a college's women's center.
It's from the Congressional Record.
Specifically, it was in a Report by the Committee on the Judiciary in connection with the Violence Against Women Act. Senate Report 102-197 (102 S. Rpt. 197), Pub. L. 102-197 n. 48 (Oct. 29, 1991). Even though it was as wrong as can be, it was accepted as evidence to justify passage of VAWA.
Why is this important today? Because we are in danger of having history repeat itself.
Dr. Phillip McGraw, a/k/a Dr. Phil, made claims at a recent Senate committee hearing that some are calling "reckless and false."  http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/25/3792668/dr-phils-testimony-was-reckless.html
"During his testimony, Dr. McGraw made repeated statements about violence against women, but glossed over the widespread problem of abuse against men. McGraw made a number of claims that were flatly wrong, SAVE alleges."
"Dr. McGraw asserted that 'Domestic violence is now the most common cause of injury to women ages 15 to 44.' But the actual leading causes of injury to women are falls, overexertion, and car accidents. McGraw told the senators that 'In too many situations violence against women, young and old, is almost treated as an 'acceptable crime.'"' But that statement ignores research showing over 90% of Americans abhor domestic violence."
Id.
If this is correct, then we're about to see more lies about men and women find their way into the Congressional Record.
Will things be different this time?
Incidentally, I found something else in that same Senate report. A tidbit dripping with irony:
Testimony before the committee reported that "(m)ost of the NCS (National Crime Survey) crime screening questions are very concrete." For example, victims are asked, "Were you knifed, shot at, or attacked with some other weapon * * *?" For rape, the person is asked, "Did someone try to attack you in some other way?" As the National Crime Survey itself puts it, "No one in the survey is ever asked directly if she has been raped." "Women and Violence," hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, 101st Cong., 2d sess. 29 (Aug. 29, 1990) (testimony of Dr. Mary Koss) (quoting National Crime Survey).
Why is this ironic? Because in the infamous Ms. Magazine/Koss study, where Mary Koss that found 25% of women are raped, "[r]ather than asking female students about rape per se, Koss asked them if they had experienced actions that she then classified as rape." See here. It turns out that only 27 percent of the women Koss said had been rape actually believed they had been raped. See here. As Heather MacDonald put it: "In short, believing in the campus rape epidemic depends on ignoring women’s own interpretations of their experiences—supposedly the most grievous sin in the feminist political code."
That did not find its way into the Congressional Record

I have received a request from the False Rape Society to enter a comment on the Salon site, a feminist site that on the odd occasion does actual carry an article that has some pro-male merit. Rare ofcourse..

Here is my comment after signing in..

Christian J. 

Just as the so called "victim" is protected it should also be the case that one is innocent until proven guilty. Too many false rape charges have destroyed the lives of men and for no other reason that someone felt it necessary to make a false charge for whatever reason they choose, imaginary or otherwise. It is a miscarriage of justice and should not be condoned. At the moment, any woman can make a false charge against any man for just about any reason as the law has been changed to such a degree regarding rape that it is basically unworkable and thereby makes a victim out of any real victims. Statistics demonstrates clearly that false rape charges are on the increase and those women who falsely claim rape are not even held accountable. Miscarriage of justice does appear to sum up the entire "Rape" industry and it is a disgrace..

And just to balance out the argument. We have the opposing side, another example of the feminist hate that we are already aware exists but choose to ignore for some unfathomable reason..

Maybe you could make her a member of your fan club..!!

She is a prime example of today's women as well as a shining example as to what happens to you and your sanity  when you follow and become involved in that lying mantra and doctrine, it will without doubt affect your sanity as well as your daily activities as witnessed below. Spend you life raging and hating everyone appears to be the order of the day..

Wednesday, July 27, 2011 08:46 AM ET
MISOGYNISTS!!!1!!!1!
Yes, I am here to pre-emptively accuse all of you MISOGYNISTS TROLLS who are out in force to comment on this vile article!
As any infallible feminist can tell you, GUILT MUST BE PRESUMED whenever one of you penis-bearing SCUM is accused of perpetrating a Vaginal Holocaust with your filthy patriarchal flesh-sword.
HANG YOUR HEAD IN INDELIBLE SHAME, MISOGYNIST!!!11!
Vigilance, Sisters!
—Linney Uston

What a charming human being. But it's a feminist and that's all we need to know. Guys, behold your enemy..

Please add your comment to Roy Black's article at Salon
from The False Rape Society by Archivist
Here: http://www.salon.com/news/crime/?story=/mwt/feature/2011/07/27/dsk_kobe_assange_flatley

Here is my comment:

My Web site, False Rape Society, is dedicated to giving voice to the community of the falsely accused, and I find many of the comments here -- which seem to insist that men and boys falsely accused of rape arent't even worthy of discussion -- to be morally grotesque.

We have the utmost respect for our sisters who have been raped, many of whom have told us they share our loathing of false accusations. We believe that rape is a problem; we also believe that false rape claims are a problem. It isn't "either/or." Mr. Black's article happens to be about false rape claims, but I suppose one article about the falsely accused is one article too many.

On my site in the recent past, we've reported on women who've made false rape claims for the following reasons: the accuser’s boyfriend took too long to buy cigarettes; several women didn’t want to pay cab fares, so they accused innocent cab drivers of rape; a girl wanted to get back at her teen ex-boyfriend — her rape lie not only got him convicted, but two of his friends as well; a woman wanted to get back at her ex-boyfriend for breaking it off, so she falsely accused him of rape and candidly admitted: “I just wanted him to be hurt because of what he’d done”; a young woman said she wanted her young ex-boyfriend “to feel extreme pain”; a woman sent a man to prison for five years because she said she was bored; a woman was bent on revenge after a road rage incident; a man refused to give his false accuser a beer; a maid falsely accused her employer of rape because she didn’t like her workload; a girl falsely accused a man of rape for throwing a flower at her; a woman caused three men to be interrogated for rapes they didn’t commit because she wanted a day off from work; and an 18-year-year-old young man was hauled out of class, arrested, and jailed for a month on a random false rape claim by a girl he had never even met.

What's the harm to men falsely accused who aren't convicted? It ranges, but at the very least, most are forever tainted by the accusation. Some extreme examples are unspeakably awful:

There was the woman who lied to her cousin that her boyfriend had raped and beat her. She asked the cousin to shoot him in the penis "so he don't use it no more." In the end, the boyfriend and his friend were shot to death.

Then there was the case of six young men who beat a man with a claw hammer at a false accuser's request while the false accuser sat in a van outside.

A girl lied to a 17-year-old boy that another youth raped her. The boy confronted the youth, and during a confrontation, the youth's father accidentally shot the boy dead.

A 15-year-old girl falsely told her boyfriend that an 18-year-old man raped her. The girl, the boyfriend, and another man drove to the innocent youth’s apartment, and one of the men shot him through a peep hole.

Two teenage girls lied to a 19-year-old man that another 19-year-old had raped one of them, so the first man broke into the accused man's home and beat him to death with a baseball bat while he was sleeping.

A 47-year-old prominent businessman suffered devastating brain injuries in a vicious attack after a woman's brother was wrongly convinced the man had raped his sister, so the brother thrashed him. So terrible was the man's beating, he had to “learn everything again.”

A man came home unexpectedly from a trip when he found his wife and her lover together. To cover up her affair, the wife falsely told her husband she had been raped. The husband killed the wife's lover.

And we could go on and on. But, you see, the falsely accused don't deserve ANY advocacy on their behalf. In the minds of some, they aren't worth discussing.