Genghis Khan, a well known historical figure who conquered a substantial portion of Asia during the 1200s. If he had done so today, he would have been known as a perpetrator of mass genocide.
After defeating the Tatars, Genghis Khan ordered the slaughter of all people taller than a cart handle, ensuring the loyalty of the next generation. Genghis Khan’s conquests include 30 countries with well over three billion people.
The mongols used psychological warfare which made them superior in winning battles. They destroyed cities and spared a few to spread news of their terror. Deception was also used to surprise their enemy by splitting into three groups prior to the battle and seemingly appearing out of nowhere giving the visage that his army was larger than it was. Other techniques included were luring the opponent into vulnerable positions by appearing from a hill and then disappearing into the woods whilst aligning their soldiers to come from all sides.
In our modern world, humanity has evolved to far more superior methods of genocide. United nations definition of genocide is:
General Assembly Resolution 260A (III) Article 2
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
Over the years statistics have revealed what has been defined as a femnicide: the killing of women and girls. What has not yet been highlighted enough is the silent slaughter of women and children affected by family violence. Whilst family violence has been described as a gender neutral term, the statistics of gender and research on gender power reveals a very ugly side of patriarchy that is thriving upon these brutal conquests.
In recent times, we have had a very open and vocal group who define themselves as, "Mens Rights Advocates". They are against current protection laws, research and present statistics that reveal this silent epidemic of violence against women and children. Even the terminology has become an information war as propaganda is spread online and through other sources of media to dilute the public awareness of intimate partner terrorism that effects one third of the population of women. The impact of their presence has resulted in the rise of murder - suicides in the US, maternal deprivation in the UK and a rise in family violence in Australia.
Just about everywhere these mens groups have had a presence, the erosion of support for women and children in funding of services, advocacy in the media and protective laws have become prevalent. The definition of intimate partner terrorism is very true to many survivors who have endured it.
"Intimate terrorism is the kind of intimate partner violence that involves a batterer who terrorizes and takes complete control of his partner through the use of violence in combination with other control tactics such as threats and intimidation, economic control, psychological abuse, isolation, and the assertion of male privilege. In heterosexual relationships, intimate terrorism almost always involves a man terrorizing a woman, although in rare cases men are terrorized by their women partners. Although intimate terrorism is much less frequent than is situational couple violence, it is estimated that more than two million women are victims of this kind of abuse in the United States each year—and this is the intimate violence that is most likely to destroy lives." -A Sociologist’s Perspective on Domestic Violence: A Conversation with Michael Johnson, Ph.D. Interview by Theodora Ooms, CLASP
Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstances unjustifyable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideaological , racial, ethnic, religious, or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them;
The Lone fathers association, Barry Williams began with a protest at parliament steps where 300 men threatened to invade parliament if they did not provide men with equal benefits as mothers.
The president of the FLAG, submission can be found
here.
Links to Fathers Online, Directed by Warwick Marsh can be found
here.
Links to the Shared Parenting Council can be found
here.
In 2002, a man by the name of John Abbott, set up a militant fathers group called the Black Shirts to stalk and harassed women whom were divorced. He claimed to have 300 fathers on his registry.
He was ordered not to harass women for five years or face a four month jail term. One year later the shared parenting bill was introduced.
The Shared Parenting Bill itself is designed in such a way that corners victims of child abuse and domestic violence. Here is how it has this effect:
- "Unsubstantiated" allegations of violence or child abuse is interpreted is "False".
- "The burden of proof" is solely upon the parent to provide the evidence.
- The definition of violence was altered from, "fearful of" to "reasonably fear" resulting in every victim being scrutinized with a confirmatory bias of being mentally ill.
- A paper reduction section was introduced to limit crucial evidence to being submitted.
- "meaningful relationships" was physically placed above consideration for welfare of the child.
- Restraining Orders were used as evidence against the victim.
- Resident Parents were forced by order to provide their address even when it was not safe to do so.
- Police station visits are seen as "hostile" environments for children.
- Taking Children to see a counsellor over abuse is considered, "Medical abuse".
- Evidence gathering itself is interpreted as "abuse" and in cases where substantial evidence was provided, the parent was more likely to be punished for accessing services to provide evidence.
- Victims cannot relocate without a court order or permission from their perpetrator. They have the same ratio as a patient in brain surgery in success and if they speak of family violence, it is much less of a chance.
So in the Legal framework, like Genghis Khans psychological warfare, perpetrators have their victims surrounded.
The same tactics of confusing the enemy is the illusion that the custody is shared. Along with the changes, mens advocates assisted with indoctrinating psychologists with the following junk psychology:
No scientific body in the world has accepted any of these as real syndromes. Yet, this is in reality a diversion for researchers as the information has been spread like a virus all over the internet. They have become obstacles to be debunked, whilst rogue psychologists are providing their expertise affecting real life court cases. In the mean time, the more and more each stakeholder is convinced that these syndromes are real, the more the perpetrators have seized their team-players in their monopoly resulting in the isolation of their victim.
Arming their members with the information on how to conquer intervention order cases, the mens movements also engage in providing "advocates" to arrive on the scene with police in domestic violence call outs.
The three different groups reflects Genghis Kahns strategy of positioning three or more groups coming from different places to illude the enemy into believing that they are surrounded. This is very much the case for groups seeking to defend women and children. In the list of family law
submissions, the groups represented had the same people contained, but authored by different members. The number of groups obscured the decision makers into believing that there was more support than there actually is. This is the same as the military strategy that Khan used when his forces were less than the opponent.
The desire to "conquer" women and children's rights is prevalent and evident in the campaigns and strategies used resulting in the success of the shared parenting bill. The results where women who were determined to protect children lost custody is also part of the genocide definition. In United States, where similar cells have been more established, shared parenting was in reality an entrenched pathway with numerous traps which led to the surge in men securing children as they secured property. Of course if their perceived assets did not perform to their liking, the mother and child are often punished with enforced isolation from each other commonly known as, "Maternal Deprivation".
An even more concerning trend, jihad supporters have also aligned themselves with these groups in United States. Apart from the christian based fathers rights groups, both groups are parallel in their beliefs and fit the criteria in furthering the goals of terrorism. Terrorist network operatives have successfully infiltrated South East Asia(Abuza, 2004), by building alliances with groups aggrieved with government. An example of this is the successful alliance of the Khmer Rouge that assisted in infiltrating Cambodia. It seems like a more unlikely scenario in the western world, however these mens movements are well suited in furthering their interests. They have already done the hard work in unraveling the stability of government to conform to their goals and have similar beliefs in regards to the rights of women and children.
Posts
