The end of TLC and LLM is coming

[Heat]

The problem is that the feminist activists have revived the "International Marriage Brokers" act and cleverly placed it (maybe sneaked it) into the VAWA renewal bill. See Title VIII, Protection of Battered and Trafficked Immigrant Women, Subtitle D, International Marriage Broker Regulation.
Go to S. 1197 (RS Reported in the Senate, as opposed to just Introduced in the Senate).
""

Does this mean the end of TLC'S fat Bruce and the Latin Life Mate fraud sellers?  Are American agencies headed for the toilet?

This might mean that LLM will have no more 90 year old marring 20 year old green card sharks.  And fat Bruce will be selling used cars.

You guys had better get off your asses and  contact your senators or I will have no one to kick around.

[Hamlet]

... in response to The end of TLC and LLM is coming, posted by Heat on Sep 28, 2005

I sent an email opposing the bill to my US Senator.  A few hours later I got this reply, which seems to be computer generated due to the speed of the reply and the fact that he thinks I support the bill.

September 28, 2005

Dear [Hamlet]:

Thank you for your letter concerning the Sexual
Trafficking Victims Protection Act and the Violence
Against Women Act. VAWA was included in H.R. 3244, The
Sexual Trafficking Victims Protection Act, which
passed the House of Representatives and the Senate by
a vote of 95-0 on October 11, 2000.

On June 8, 2005 Senator Joseph Biden
(D-DE)introduced S. 1197, a bill to reauthorize the
Violence Against Women Act of 1994. This bill has been
referred to the Judiciary Committee where it awaits
further action.  I will keep your comments in mind should S. 1197 come to the floor for a vote.

In a world of increasing economic and political
turmoil, the 'people trafficking' industry is
growing. According to a recent Congressional Research
Service report trafficking is the third largest source
of income for organized crime: behind drugs and guns.
An estimated one to two million women and children are
sold internationally each year and about 50,000 come
to the United States. This is a problem that knows no
borders and feeds off of the population of less
advantaged nations.

I was an original cosponsor of the Violence Against
Women Act (VAWA) of 1993 while serving in the House
of Representatives and have supported the
reauthorization of it. Like you, I realize the
importance of deterring violent acts against women and
to provide tougher sentencing against the criminals
who commit such heinous crimes.

Thank you for writing to share your concerns. I look
forward to hearing from you again. If you would like
more information on issues important to Colorado and
the nation, please log on to my website at
http://allard.senate.gov.

Sincerely,
A Wayne Allard
United States Senator

[OkieMan]

... in response to Response from my US Senator, posted by Hamlet on Sep 29, 2005

Hamlet,

So, Joseph Biden sponsored this stupid bill?  It figures.  Another liberal Democrat who can't keep from interfering in everyone's lives! What a goober!

                             OkieMan

[Pete E]

... in response to The end of TLC and LLM is coming, posted by Heat on Sep 28, 2005

Seems the stupid if well intentioned??? law Will just drive all agencies offshore. I would think it would be easy to get around.Gary Bala  could probably give us a 2 miniute answer.
Heat I never understood your anger gainst Bruce and Jim.
Bruce has been very successfull.I wouldn't pay up for a tour,but other guys choose to.Cali Pro goes to most of the tours and we don't call him pro for nothing.The tour concept introduces guys to this process,then we get to know them here sometimes.Probably alot of our friends here started with that.As far as big age differences that can happen anytime the woman will go for it.
So why not just let them be unless there is something someone really needs to be aware of that is not apparent?
Otherwise its just negative energy here,which I think we should try to minimise.

Pete E

[Heat]

... in response to The end of TLC and LLM is coming, posted by Heat on Sep 28, 2005

Posted by Papi on another site.

I will say this, I very recently ran into one of his ex-employees and was told by them that Jim was apparently tossed out of his office next to the Andes Plaza and Jim is alleged to have cheated his ex-employees on back wages and was apparently sued by them in Colombia.

[OkieMan]

... in response to LLM gossip in Bogotá, posted by Heat on Sep 28, 2005

So, does that mean that LLM is going out of businss quickly; or does it mean that they are already out of business, or what?  I have never used their agency, but they do have some nice looking ladies on their website.  It's too bad that the Bogota agencies don't seem to want to to a "per cita" rate, and get away from that lifetime membership crap.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I just don't see that as the way to go. Now, it's money in the bank for the agencies, at least short term. But pretty soon, men catch on.  So, they constantly have to get new guys who don't know there are better options.  Once someone has travelled to Colombia even once, they should know better than that.  At least, that's my opinion.  Of course, I know that you don't need the agencies much anyhow, since you are fluent in spanish.

                          OkieMan

[Patrick]

... in response to The end of TLC and LLM is coming, posted by Heat on Sep 28, 2005

"Are American agencies headed for the toilet?"

Short answer:  Yes

The sad thing is that all the "protections" these people are trying to legislate for the women will be totally ineffective, because they can't control a foreign owned business operating outside the US.

They should put more effort into protecting the women and less into trying to put the agencies out of business.  They should make all the things they're legislating, including background checks, part of the immigration process.  That way women represented by US-owned, or foreign-owned agencies would have equal protection.

One thing that's unclear to me is whether agencies owned by US citizens operating outside the US would be affected.  If not, then I don't think this will have too much impact.

[wizard]

... in response to Re: The end of all US-owned agencies, posted by Patrick on Sep 28, 2005

If this legislation passes, it will do nothing to curb the international match-making business... Domestic agencies will find a way around it... Foreign agencies will just laugh at their good fortune as a result of the US government doing away with some of their competition... Nothing will change...

Compare the business model of your typical MOB website/business with say, match.com or amigos.com or friendfinder.com or any one of the 5000 that are out there... Both have websites which charge an access fee to contact other people around the country / world... The only real difference is that the MOB industry runs a beds-n-breakfast and arranges appointments... WTF is the big deal!!! Is the government going to legislate those companies out of business too???

Unfortunately, our government thinks that they can legislate everything from our speed limits to our personal lives... For being the land of the free, we sure have alot of people trying to tell us how to live our lives...

Besides, it doesn't take a lot of $$$ or intelligence to set up an off-shore corporation... Agencies owned in the US will likely set up shop somewhere like Belize, Costa Rica, Panama, etc... If it comes to that... There are other benefits to operating off-shore, but that's a different topic...

[OkieMan]

... in response to Re: Re: The end of all US-owned agencies, posted by wizard on Sep 28, 2005

Wizard,

Or they could register in the Land of Oz! ha.  By the way, the idiots that want to control everything are lawyers and politicians (who are mostly lawyers).  No offense Utopiacowboy. But, the concept that you are talking about is Socialism, or Social Engineering, etc.
We do need some good basic laws to protect people in certain situations, but the government finds a way to intrude into every aspect of our lives.  I am not paranoid, but I am concerned that some of our basic rights are being taken away more each year.  Having said that, the War on Terrorism has made it necessary for more surveillance on the general population.  But, then you have the left wing wackos who talk about personal freedoms, and then do something like try to implement this new stupid immigration law.  

                             OkieMan

[buster40]

... in response to Re: The end of all US-owned agencies, posted by Patrick on Sep 28, 2005

"One thing that's unclear to me is whether agencies owned by US citizens operating outside the US would be affected. If not, then I don't think this will have too much impact."

Patrick, of course they will be affected.  The penalties are civil AND criminal.  Never mind if the owner has any assets subject to forfeiture back in the U.S.  Do you think a U.S. citizen wants to risk having an indictment lingering back in the States that carries a 1 to 5 year penalty range?