NO STATISTICS NEED APPLY: Statistics concerning campus assault!

FRIDAY, APRIL 3, 2015

Part 5—Unresolved dueling claims:
Some of our most important statistics are the ones we never hear.

The American public never hears about black students’ large score gains in reading and math on the NAEP. Some undisclosed “invisible hand” seems to keep those statistics disappeared.

The American public never sees the statistics about per capita health care spending in other developed nations. In part for this reason, no discussion ever breaks out concerning the way Americans of all political stripes are being looted in this major area.

You don’t see those statistics on MSNBC, a corporate liberal “news channel.” A cynic might even say this:

The children on The One True Channel keep us busy with other topics—topics which are safer for the plutocrats who pay them their seven figures.

That’s what a cynic might say! Here’s what a finder of accurate facts would say:

You never hear about black kids’ score gains on The One True Channel. Beyond that, you never hear about the massive problem, and apparent injustice, of black incarceration rates.

Michelle Alexander wrote the book on the subject—“The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Color Blindness.”

Alexander’s book has been widely praised in progressive circles. But according to Nexis, she has never appeared on The Rachel Maddow Show, whose host prefers to discuss the evils of botched executions.

Alexander has appeared on The Last Word just once, in June 2011. She answered exactly two questions from Lawrence at that time.

Needless to say, Alexander has never appeared on Hardball. She has appeared on All In just once, to do a segment in 2013 about a Dream Defenders sit-in in Florida.

On our corporate liberal channel, you never see Michelle Alexander, certainly not in prime time. You never hear the statistics about mass incarceration.

You also never hear the statistics about the score gains achieved by black and Hispanic kids. Instead, they keep us happy with months-long discussions the latest “murdered” black youth. Lawrence swings into action at such times, inventing piles of bogus facts which help create “perfect examples.”

In such ways, the creepy people who host these shows keep themselves in their high-paying jobs while keeping their bosses untroubled.

(Don’t miss the Maddow Show tonight! In the Friday Night News Dump, you’ll see the fiery progressive host presenting her favorite segment, in which she gets to play tape of herself from the week’s previous shows.)

Some of our most important statistics are the ones we never hear! Another important batch of statistics are the ones we constantly hear, even though they’re bogus.

In the old days, such statistics typically came from the right. Today, we liberals have our own favorite bogus statistics. On TV, our corporate stars like to bruit them forward.

Routinely, newspapers like the New York Times can’t seem to handle statistics. Sometimes, this problem may occur because journalists are deferring to preferred elite narratives.

Presumably, this explains the constant refusal to tell readers about the rise in black kids’ test scores. For whatever reason, the nation’s elites love to say that absolutely nothing has worked in the nation’s schools!

(Why doesn’t Rachel tackle this topic? We’d have to say she’s the whitest white liberal we’ve ever seen on earth—a throwback to late 60s white liberalism. In a sign of her throwback moral greatness, she’s opposed to botched executions!)

Sometimes, the New York Times seems to defer to preferred elite narratives. Sometimes, though, papers like the Times just don’t seem to have the chops to handle important statistics.

The paper spends a lot of money marketing itself as smart. Simply put, it isn’t. On the whole, the work performed by the New York Times just isn’t especially sharp.

We’re left with one more type of statistics. We’ll call them dueling statistics.

At present, there are dueling sets of (rather shaky) statistics which concern the frequency of police shootings. Another batch of dueling statistics concerns the frequency of rape and sexual assault on the nation’s campuses.

(No one seems to care a whole lot about the frequency of such crimes off campus. Can anyone figure out why?)

To what extent are young black men being shot by police? To what extent are young black men being “targeted” by police in such instances? Is the rate of such shootings on the rise? What are the real statistics?

The New York Times is unlikely to help you sort such things out. Beyond that, you shouldn’t expect to see these questions explored on The One True Channel.

The truth is, there is no sign that either news org actually cares about those questions. For whatever reason, dueling statistics about police shootings go unexplored, unresolved.

The same is true of the dueling statistics concerning campus sexual assault. There’s no sign that anyone actually cares about the truth in this area, though many people seem to enjoy advancing the various narratives.

To cote one example, are we experiencing an epidemic of campus rape? We don’t have the slightest idea! In large part, that’s because we read the nation’s leading newspapers.

Are we experiencing an epidemic of campus rape? In recent months, the ludicrous people at Rolling Stone invented a “perfect example” to illustrate the alleged epidemic, which may or may not exist. The nation then watched as their “perfect example” fell apart.

This embarrassment tells us nothing about the actual rates of assault, of course. But what are the actual rates of rape and assault? And are they on the rise?

Dueling statistics seem to abound. News orgs like the New York Times aren’t likely to puzzle them out.

Some of the most dramatic claims in this area are coming from the “left.” In last Sunday’s New York Times, a professor extended some familiar portraits as she challenged this earlier piece by Judith Shulevitz:
LETTER TO THE NEW YORK TIMES (3/29/15): I am dismayed by Judith Shulevitz’s belittling response to student trauma. I teach an undergraduate class on “Sexualities and Race.” We discuss challenging issues like campus rape, human trafficking, pornography and sex work. “Scary ideas” certainly. Tragically, for some students these ideas are also scary realities. My students engage these issues with intellectual rigor and great courage. Yes, I give trigger warnings, and try to make my class a safe space.

Five students in my class were recently raped. One sits at the back so she has walls behind her, close to the door in case panic overwhelms her. I wonder how Ms. Shulevitz would deal with a student triggered into a major panic attack. Or a student whose friend was murdered by a cop. Making cheap jibes at a safe room with “cookies” and “Play-Doh” infantilizes the real-life traumas these students face too young, and belittles their right to face these intellectual and personal challenges in safe ways.

ANNE McCLINTOCK
Madison, Wis.

The writer is a professor of gender and women’s studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
We thought Shulevitz was a bit snarky about some of these matters too. That said, were five students in that class (apparently out of 36 students in all) “recently raped?”

We have no way of knowing. That said, this anecdotal claim advances the notion that an “epidemic” is taking place on the nation’s campuses.

In her letter, this professor also paints a picture of students being “murdered” by “cops.” It hasn’t been long since our latest “perfect example” of this alleged behavior basically fell apart.

Is an epidemic of sexual assault occurring on the nation’s campuses? You’d think news orgs would want to explore such important claims, but the New York Times doesn’t seem to want to be bothered—and neither does The One True Liberal Channel!

On The One True Liberal Channel, one time capsule host from the late 1960s is worried about botched executions—but she hasn’t examined the dueling statistics concerning that other topic. Is there any chance “network” doesn’t want such downbeat fare discussed?

Is a rape epidemic occurring on campus? Like you, we have no idea. In December, Emily Yoffe discussed the dueling sets of statistics in this lengthy piece at Slate. (Scroll down to Part 4.) In Yoffe’s view, “the studies suggesting this epidemic don’t hold up to scrutiny.”

That may or may not be an accurate judgment. In this earlier piece at Slate, Emily Bazelon challenges the methodology of one of the surveys Yoffe cites, a survey which has found a relatively low rate of assault.

That said, the gaps seem to be extremely large between the dueling sets of statistics concerning this important topic. But so what? Despite this widely-noted paradox, our major news orgs make little effort to analyze these important statistical claims.

Given the way our major news orgs stumble and fumble around with statistics, that may be a blessing of sorts.

The New York Times had a rough time with statistics last week. On Tuesday, the paper did a truly terrible job examining a new study of the gender income gap. One day later, the paper did a peculiar job with a Justice Department report which apparently found that Philadelphia police do not disproportionately “target” blacks when they use their guns.

The paper had its usual tough time handling some basic statistics. We’ll close with a couple of thoughts:

Our public discourse routinely turns on bogus statistics—bogus statistics designed to drive some preferred narrative. In many areas, if it weren’t for bogus or selective statistics, we’d have no statistics at all!

All in all, facts play an increasingly minor role in our clownish public discourse. Again and again, we end up debating anecdotal events designed to showcase some alleged problem—anecdotal events in which basic facts have been disappeared or invented.

More and more, we spend our days thrashing “perfect examples” of some alleged problem. As soon as one such case falls apart, we go out and invent another.

For liberals, it should be embarrassing to see the extent to which our tribe now plays this game.

It should be embarrassing, but it isn’t. Our perfect examples keep falling apart. Long live our perfect examples!

Coming tomorrow: What Lawrence said this past Wednesday night!

This week’s perfect examples: For this week’s perfect examples of evil, once again, just click here.

56 comments:

  1. 23 paragraphs before Bob Somerby gets to the headlined topic. It was a nice long trip but I felt like I had visited many of the spots Bob led me past before.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have. This entire week has been a replay of "Boxcar Bob's Greatest Hits."

      Just go back to Part One then keep track of the plowed ground Bob covered this week.

      Clearly, a sad case of a stand-up comedian who has run out of material, so he is trying to recycle the old stuff and calling it new.

      Delete
    2. I enjoyed it. No question Somerby identitfies some legitimate problems within both "high end", and "liberal" corporate news media. A fine summary.

      "The children on The One True Channel keep us busy with other topics—topics which are safer for the plutocrats who pay them their seven figures."

      It rings so true.

      Delete
    3. Legitimate problem identified by Somerby:

      "In her letter, this professor also paints a picture of students being “murdered” by “cops.”"

      Actually the "blogger" illegitimately misrepresents what the professor said.

      Delete
  2. It's quite OK to put the heat on Rachel Maddow for not covering some important topics, but let's not forget she does cover many subjects of interest to progressives, and had Elizabeth Warren on for 15 minutes the other day. Who outside of MSNBC would have done that? And Rachel even noted and queried Warren about -- Warren avoided a direct answer -- how much better than Republicans on banking issues key Democrats are, including Schumer, of course, but also Hillary Clinton.

    For the record, the "pro-Wall Street" Clinton voted for Dodd-Frank, while every single Republican voted against it; this notion that Clinton is no different from a Republican is ridiculous, and, in effect, by suggesting it makes no difference if middle class or lower income voters don't bother to vote, is really advocating on behalf of Republicans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hillary Clinton is a lock, stock and barrel corporate candidate with strong neo-con foreign policy and neo-liberal economic tendencies. That said, if I lived in a competitive state I would consider voting for her if for no other reason than the issue of the Supreme Court.

      Delete
    2. R.M.'s epic failure in conveying facts is well established.

      1) The bridge in Minnesota collapsed because of Republican spending cuts. (A year-long government investigation determined it was a design flaw.)

      2) A census taker was murdered by right-wing anti-government types. (Another lengthy investigation established that he killed himself for the insurance money.)

      3) Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped in Iraq. (The alleged victim — who by the age of 20 had already accused three men of rape — eventually admitted it was just one man, and the jury in her civil case concluded Jones was lying.)

      4) Gun rights activists holding a rally on the anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord were, in fact, celebrating the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing.

      5) Elizabeth Warren is a Native American.

      6) The U.S. hanged a Japanese soldier for water-boarding prisoners.


      Delete
    3. You are claiming Maddow said these things with not one ounce of evidence that she actually said them. Your claim that she did is not, to say the least, evidence. Indeed, the fact that you are making these claims that might be seen by some as air-tight evidence that you are misquoting her.

      Delete
    4. Clinton is not a neocon.

      Delete
    5. 2:55: There is a lot to support what you are saying, but even the most Third of Third-Way Democrats will vote for many things that no Republican will vote for. Go look at Hillary's actual voting record in the Senate. It was one of the most liberal records in the Senate. She would vote for minimum wage. She would vote for card-check. She advocated a public option in her proposed healthcare bill. She would vote for billions of spending on infrastructure and job creation. As President she would nominate Supreme Court and other (extremely important) Federal judges who wouldn't make you wretch.

      In this day and age, because of the iron-clad discipline the party imposes, the one and only priority is to get Republicans out of office, period. The only way to do that is to vote for, and advocate for whichever Democrat happens to be running against a Republican. Until progressives recognize this and stop (once the primaries are over) saying a pox on both your houses or tilting at windmills with third party candidates, they are handing elections to Republicans. They don't want to hear that, but it is indisputable.

      Delete
    6. What a great idea! Kill yourself for the insurance money! Why have so few thought of that before?

      Delete
    7. @ urban,

      Have you actually watched R.M. other than the one time?

      MADDOW: Jamie Leigh, four years ago, you were drugged and raped for working as a contractor in Iraq that led to, not only this legislation, but to the outrage over the people who voted against this legislation. Can you tell us briefly what happened?

      "Last night on Countdown Rachel Maddow made a very moving and eloquent case that the Minnesota Bridge Collapse is a perfect symbol of the rot and decay that anti-Government/anti-People Conservatism has wrought."

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/08/04/366693/-Maddow-vs-Malkin-on-the-Bridge-Collapse-and-the-Kossification-of-America

      A census taker was murdered by right-wing anti-government types.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IonOwup_Ixo

      "We hanged people for waterboarding as a war crime, in Dick Cheney's lifetime."

      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21495.htm

      Buying into Warren's Native American claim

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLtj3NlwWB8

      Delete
    8. @ Unknown,

      So few? You never heard of people committing suicide and making it look like murder so their family can benefit from insurance policies?

      Delete
    9. Cheech's lastst ad:

      Got a poster who bothers you? someone with a differing opinion? maybe someone who think cheese rages harder than Phish?



      HIRE ADUBVU TO TROLL THEM FUCKERS



      for the low low price of a trash bag of K and per diem chardz, Adub will troll the fuck out of whoever you please so you have time to have a life.

      Delete
    10. The parent "organization" for informationclearinghouse.info is World News Daily, founded by this guy:

      Farah, Joseph (2010). The Tea Party Manifesto: A Vision for an American Rebirth.

      The 2008 determination that a support gusset was to small to handle the stress was a year after the article cicero cites in support of his boneheaded contention that Maddow lied when she blamed the bridge collapse on Bush's screwed up priorities. She was merely being honest: (Wikipedia) -

      Since 1993, the bridge was inspected annually by Minn/DOT, although no inspection report was completed in 2007, due to the construction work. In the years prior to the collapse, several reports cited problems with the bridge structure. In 1990, the federal government gave the I-35W bridge a rating of "structurally deficient," citing significant corrosion in its bearings. Approximately 75,000 other U.S. bridges had this classification in 2007.

      According to a 2001 study by the civil engineering department of the University of Minnesota, cracking had been previously discovered in the cross girders at the end of the approach spans. The main trusses connected to these cross girders and resistance to motion at the connection point bearings was leading to unanticipated out-of-plane distortion of the cross girders and subsequent stress cracking. The situation was addressed prior to the study by drilling the cracks to prevent further propagation and adding support struts to the cross girder to prevent further distortion. The report also noted a concern about lack of redundancy in the main truss system, which meant the bridge had a greater risk of collapse in the event of any single structural failure. Although the report concluded that the bridge should not have any problems with fatigue cracking in the foreseeable future, the bridge instrumentation by strain gauges and continuous structural health monitoring had been suggested.

      In 2005, the bridge was again rated as "structurally deficient" and in possible need of replacement, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Bridge Inventory database. Problems were noted in two subsequent inspection reports. The inspection carried out June 15, 2006 found problems of cracking and fatigue.On August 2, 2007, (Republican) Governor Tim Pawlenty stated that the bridge had been scheduled to be replaced in 2020.

      Instead, Bush invaded Iraq.

      Cicero and his NRI bullet points. What a tool.

      Delete
    11. POTUS Obama pulled all combat forces out of Iraq....Then he reinvaded Iraq. with U.S. combat forces. Why doesn't Obama draw libs ire for Iraq War III?

      http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/obama-sends-more-us-troops-into-iraq-1.291369

      Delete
    12. And immediately, cicero drops support on this lie, and switches gears to see if he can confuse you on something else.
      cicero is what they call a U.S. modern conservative, where they pay no price for being caught BSing the public.

      Delete
    13. @ 8:44 & AD

      The only gear working for the both of you is reverse.

      "Federal regulators said support plates that were about half as thick as they should have been were the likely cause of the August 1, 2007, bridge collapse in Minnesota that killed 13 people and injured 145."

      "An NTSB report released Friday said the board's investigation found that 24 "under-designed" gusset plates were not discovered in reviews during the bridge's design and construction. The bridge opened in 1967."
      http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/11/14/bridge.collapse/

      Delete
    14. So it was all POTUS LBJ's fault.

      Delete
    15. @ 11:12

      Uncle Cornpone had plenty disasters of his own making. How about blaming Sverdrup & Parcel who designed Bridge 9340.

      Delete
  3. I'm not arguing whether conservatives are less dishonest than liberals, but liberals today are too often willing to ignore dishonesty by their guys. E.g., Harry Reid (D., Nev.) appears to have believed that the ends justified the means when he used the Senate chamber to level unsubstantiated accusations against the Koch brothers and former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. In his first television interview since announcing his retirement last week, Reid shrugged off criticism that his infamous claim, without any evidence, that Romney never paid any taxes was “McCarthyite” and a reflection of what is wrong with Washington. “Well, they can call it whatever they want,” a coy Reid told CNN on Tuesday. “Romney didn’t win, did he?” He also defended his repeated rants against Charles and David Koch in the most recent election cycle...

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/416226/harry-reid-defends-baseless-romney-claims-romney-didnt-win-did-he-andrew-johnson?target=author&tid=903247

    Actually it was always obvious that Reid's attacks were based on lies. But, how many liberals were embarrassed? How many commenters here feel embarrassed right now by Reid's conduct?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I'm not arguing whether conservatives are less dishonest than liberals, but ...."

      Dinky starts out with a lie and then clutches his pearls about Harry Reid. You just can't make this shit up!

      Delete
    2. From the Huffington Post:

      National Review's original article, "Plagiarism in Elizabeth Warren's 2006 Book" accused Warren's book All Your Worth of "plagiarizing from the book Getting on the Money Track," but it was "the other way around," according to the correction.

      The May 18 correction, which is published in place of the original report, reads:

      "I took down my earlier post on Elizabeth Warren plagiarizing from the book Getting On the Money Track. On Amazon.com, the Warren book All Your Worth is listed as having been published January 9, 2006. As it turns out, that is the paperback publication date; the hardback book was published in March 2005. As such, it appears that Getting on the Money Track (published in October 2005) plagiarized from All Your Worth, not the other way around."

      Delete
    3. From mediaethics.org:

      National Review posted a note Sept. 19 to disclose that its Oct. 1 print issue's cover was an "altered" photo and "should not have been attributed to" Reuters and Newseum, Jim Romenesko reported.

      The National Review cover shows an image taken from behind Barack Obama speaking to a group of people holding blue signs saying "ABORTION."

      A Charlotte Observer photographer, Todd Sumlin, provided Romenesko with a similar photo of the same event pictured in National Review without alterations to show what had been changed. Sumlin pointed out that his photo indicates National Review "changed" the wording of posters being held "from 'Forward' to 'Abortion.'"

      Delete
    4. From Gawker/Playbook:

      Former Buzzfeed Viral Politics editor Benny Johnson, who was fired in July for multiple instances of plagiarism, has certainly rebounded quickly: Playbook reports he'll start on Monday as National Review's social media director.

      Rich Lowry, editor of National Review, spoke to Playbook's Mike Allen about the decision to hire Johnson:
      "Benny made a terrible mistake. But he has owned up to it and learned from it. He's a talented journalist, with obviously a lot to contribute. He knows he's joining a storied institution at NR, and we look forward to his helping us carry on our mission across all platforms."

      Playbook adds that Johnson's "youthful digital fluency" and "red-state instincts" likely added to National Review's ability to look past his 41 counts of plagiarism.

      Johnson's eagerness to join National Review should, of course, come as no surprise: the conservative publication is one of the dozens of online sources from which he plagiarized.

      Delete
    5. @ 6:55

      Somebody wearing pearls gave Harry Reid his new face.

      Delete
    6. In defense of Rich Lowery, it's sometimes difficult for him to see from under the white hood.

      Delete
    7. liberals wearing the outfit have no problem navigating while hurling imprecations at Israel .

      Delete
    8. cicero,
      Have you criticized any actions of the POTUS?
      If so, take a bow you anti-American.

      Delete
    9. @ 12:39

      That means libs must have abdominal fatigue from the 15 years of bowing.

      Delete
  4. Five rapes most likely means five drunken encounters and buyer's remorse when he didn't call.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "most likely"

      You poor, poor prat.

      Delete
    2. OK, some were not drunken.

      Delete
  5. The NY Daily News published an editorial against the campus rape hype. Good. The tide is turning. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/editorial-campus-sex-assault-crash-article-1.2165087

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NY Daily News - a tabloid barely fit to line a birdcage.

      Delete
    2. As Mother Jones, Rolling Stone, The Nation are not tabloids what's there excuse for not being fit to catch bat guano?

      Delete
    3. You still need a liner, cicero? mom didn't teach you to wait until you were out the cave door?

      Delete
  6. I am so sad that Brian Stack is leaving Conan to join Colbert.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ 10:34

      Has Colbert broken apart again?

      Delete
  7. "Routinely, newspapers like the New York Times can’t seem to handle statistics. Sometimes, this problem may occur because journalists are deferring to preferred elite narratives."

    Boston Bob the Blogger from Baltimore started a week ago with 4 articles from the NY Times to which he linked as the start of his week series "No Statistics Need Apply."

    When he started I commented thusly:

    Statistics on "New York Times Can't Handle Stats"

    Number of NY Times articles linked by Bob: 4
    Number of statistical errors identified by Bob: 0

    After a five part effort, I need write nothing new.

    Gack! Bob had to top a week of peeing his pants in public with this solid dropping in his trousers as his final act of self humiliation:

    "For liberals, it should be embarrassing to see the extent to which our tribe now plays this game."

    It is embarrassing to watch what you have become. Not what you seem to have become. What you have become.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a master of shame metaphor you are. So much of your psyche drips from these revealing nuggets you keep posting.

      Delete
    2. I started my critique with no metaphors at all. I'll restate that simple, unrefuted fact. It is now about a week old. It contains statistics even a dishonest man like Bob Somerby can understand:

      "Statistics on "New York Times Can't Handle Stats"

      Number of NY Times articles linked by Bob: 4
      Number of statistical errors identified by Bob: 0"

      Refute it with whatever nuggets you like and pardon me for not masking my disgust with a more acceptable literary device. Perhaps I should have said Bob Somerby seems to be suffering from intellectual incontinence which, coupled with his diarrhea of rhetorical repetition gives offense to many an olfactory.

      Delete
    3. Announcing that you cannot follow Somerby's arguments about statistics doesn't make him look foolish.

      Delete
    4. Being unable to refute a three line statement doesn't make you look like you have the proverbial "two IQ points you can strike together."

      I follow Somerby's arguments quite well. I also follow the many commenters who, over time, have demonstrated Mr. S. is quite adept at manipulating, misrepresenting, and even inventing statistics himself.

      Delete
    5. The rest of us didn't have problems understanding Somerby's argument. You did, but that is because you lack the requisite intelligence and that's OK!

      Delete
    6. I also understand Somerby's argument about statistics perfectly.

      And I happen to think it's pretty damned stupid.

      But you go ahead and pretend that Somerby is communicating at a level so far above the rest of the human race that he so disdains.

      Bet that helps both you and he deceive yourselves into thinking your smart.

      Delete
    7. It's you're. Which statistical bungling pleases you the most and the one you'd like to see ignored, unnoticed, and uncommented on by everyone, including Bob, for the greater good?

      Delete
    8. I wish no one ever, ever, ever made statistical errors so that you and your hero wouldn't have to cry yourselves to sleep.

      Or is it "you'reselves"?

      Delete
  8. Conservahero here. Bob is much too wordy and pulls almost ever punch. I don't see bloggers be as non committal as Bob very often. He is picking on easy targets like MSNBC too

    ReplyDelete
  9. How I Get My Husband Back With The Help Of Dr Brave

    An amazing testimony on a spell caster who brought my husband back to me. My name is Natasha Johnson,i live in Florida,USA,and I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband ,with three kids. A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster. So, i will advice you out there to kindly visit the same website { http://enchantedscents.tripod.com/lovespell/},if you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to the Dr Brave for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again. { bravespellcaster@gmail.com }, Thanks..

    Sent from my MetroPCS 4G Wireless Phone

    ReplyDelete

  10. Yay!! you cannot believe what this spell caster Dr Brave just did for me!!! Was this all a magic?? "This is totally a Easter miracle for me lol" My mouth are short of words. “I got a divorce from my husband when I was six months pregnant with my second child. We had only been married for a short time and had another child who was 1 year old. We had been arguing and quarreling nonstop since the day our first child was conceived, no love nor trust from him anymore so he divorced. And all these whiles, I have been trying all different means to get him back, I also tried some different spell casters from other countries, but none of them could bring Richard back to me. It was only Dr Brave who guaranteed me an urgent 48 hours spell casting, and he assure me that my husband will be with me before Easter day. I am writing to offer my thanks and deep gratitude to you for keeping your promises, and for using your gifted and great powers to bring him back today 2nd of April 2015.. I was thrilled to know that you are specialized in reuniting Lovers. I never thought, in my whole life, that I would be writing to thank someone for casting a love spell on my marriage, but that day has arrived! I have never been happier in my life, and I feel like all of my dreams has turned into reality now. Thank you, Dr Brave , for helping me through the worst times of my life, for being such a great spell caster, and for giving me a love spell that has brought me so much joy. If you doubt his ability, trust me. You should take a chance. It pays off in ways you could never even imagine, Contact him through his website: http://enchantedscents.tripod.com/lovespell/ or his Email: bravespellcaster@gmail.com . thank you so much sir (Mary Owen from UK)

    ReplyDelete

  11. How to solve relationship and married problem !!

    I can say am the happiest woman on earth because of what Dr Frank Ojo has done in my life for restoring happiness and love back to my family. My name is Helene Wilson. I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband with two kids. A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past 9 months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster. So, If you have any problem contact him, I give you 100% guarantee that he will help you, Thanks to Dr Frank Ojo for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again, SO HERE HIS EMAIL ADDRESS { Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com } WEBSITE ADDRESS : http://lovespell2.yolasite.com, Thanks you Dr Frank Ojo, i Helene will always be testifying about your good work.

    ReplyDelete