Green Consciousness

Solutions to Gender Inequality: Arm Them and Train Them to Defend Together

2009-07-10T11:20:00.001-05:00

The Two P's of Gender Inequality: Prostitution and Polygamy – How the Laws Against Both Are Underenforced to Protect Men and Subjugate Women

2009-07-10T08:57:00.007-05:00

By MARCI A. HAMILTON

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20090709.html

Last week, the Dean of Villanova University School of Law, Mark Sargent, tendered his letter of resignation, and the University accepted it. He will not be returning even as a faculty member. According to a number of Philadelphia news sources, a Pennsylvania State Police report states that Sargent was a customer at a brothel when it was raided last November. The owner of the home where the brothel operated was sentenced to 5 to 23 months in jail. Sargent, however, was not charged, apparently because he cooperated with the authorities. Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer experienced the same fate when it was publicly disclosed that he had frequented a high-priced call-girl ring, spending approximately $80,000. He lost his public job, but he was not charged with any crime.

It appears that those who administer our justice system believe that when a successful man has lost his job because his liaisons with prostitutes became public knowledge, he has suffered enough. Even though what Sargent and Spitzer were doing was illegal, and even though both played prominent roles in the world of the law (with Spitzer even backing an anti-prostitution statute), they were not even given a slap on the wrist. Just a walk.

These men, though, are absolutely essential to make the prostitution system flourish. Without them, prostitution operations would go the way of all businesses that fail to attract paying customers. Conversely, letting these men in high legal positions avoid legal consequences furthers the business. When prosecutors do not charge prominent men like Sargent and Spitzer they are wasting a valuable opportunity to hurt the business of prostitution and to deter the next takers.

The Argument for Charging Prostitutes' Customers with Crimes: The Inherent Harm to Women

As Melissa Farley and Norma Ramos wrote for Newsweek.com on November 10, 2008, prostitutes'; customers "buy and sell women for sex. . . . [and there is] growing evidence that prostitution is emotionally and physically harmful to those used in it." Prosecutorial decisions not to charge "johns" contribute to the degradation and commodification of women and girls.

According to Farley and Ramos, there are volumes of evidence that prostitution arises out of adverse social conditions such as being sexually abused in childhood, poverty, racism, lack of educational and economic opportunities, disability, and a culture that increasingly commodifies girls." In other words, these careers are not about choice, but rather about enduring, and attempting to survive, difficult beginnings and coercive environments.

The argument against charging the male customers appears to be that they have been through enough.

For the prosecutors in these cases, the focus is on the "suffering" of the prominent men who are caught, and whose successful careers crash and burn. Their needs are placed above society's need to stop this cycle of vile treatment of girls and women. Surely, the latter is more socially valuable.

Favoring Privileged Men Over Underprivileged Women in Both Prostitution and Polygamy Cases

For those women who grew up during the 1970s and saw a brighter horizon for women than had ever existed before, these developments should be troubling. Top-level decisions are still being driven by an overly-solicitous concern for protecting men, at the expense of the women and girls involved. When placed in the balance, the men's careers and beliefs are seen to weigh far more heavily than even the women's basic well-being.

The same sort of calculus sheds light on the embarrassingly low number of prosecutions in the United States of polygamists, especially the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS), whose practices are well-known. These are inherently unequal relationships – one man is involved with multiple women. It is a gender inequality issue first and foremost.

In recent years, only Texas has indicted more than one religious polygamist at a time, and states where their population is large, like Arizona and Utah, give a pass to religious polygamists all the time. The (typically male) prosecutors weigh the interests of the men in their "religious" practices far more heavily than the interests of the girls who are repeatedly subjected to statutory rape and the women who are trapped in an aggressively coercive patriarchal universe. (They also value their own political careers more dearly than protecting the women and girls trapped in the FLDS system.)

The Core Evil of Prostitution and Polygamy: the Fundamental Lack of Gender Equality

The prosecutors who decline to proceed in both prostitution and polygamy cases also paper over the core constitutional and social evil in both prostitution and polygamy – the fundamental lack of equality between the genders.

In prostitution, the woman is nothing more than an item to be bought and sold. The man controls both the financial transaction and the choice of physical act. His "manliness" is reinforced while her humanity is reduced to being a source of personless pleasure.

In polygamy, also not a victimless crime, the practice is built on the subjugation of women to the men';s needs and demands. Moreover, for many of the religious polygamists, the women are nothing but the means to a particular doctrinal end – creating more children to increase the man's odds of getting into heaven. Again, the men control the finances and the women are commodities, carrying out the sexual goals of the men. There can be no gender equality in this scenario, which is incapable of being squared with any viable theory of women's rights.

Infamous FLDS polygamist Winston Blackmore is currently on trial in Canada for violating the laws against polygamy. His lawyer has put together a clever, if sickening, strategy of arguing that poor Winston has been the target of prosecution "shopping." In other words, Blackmore himself is supposedly the real victim here. When one ties that theme to the FLDS's public relations cry of "religious persecution," one almost expects Blackmore to walk out of court one day, singing, "Why's everybody always pickin' on me?"

It is an intoxicating cultural combination constructed to suppress the fact of the second-class status of women. The Sargent and Spitzer universe is hardly different. Whether the man's motivation is physical, spiritual, or both, the law is being applied to prostitution and polygamy to perpetuate the entrenched preference for men's welfare over women's well-being. The way in which the law is being pursued in these arenas shows that the subjugation of women in favor of powerful men is not a pale memory from the past. To the contrary, male chauvinism continues to thrive and drive prosecutorial results.

Women will not be the equal of men in the western world before this insidious and cynical approach to the law of prostitution and polygamy ends.

This fine analysis came through the Dignity listserve. Marci Hamilton, a FindLaw columnist, is the Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and author of Justice Denied: What America Must Do to Protect Its Children (Cambridge 2008). A review of Justice Denied appeared on this site on June 25, 2008. Her previous book is God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law (Cambridge University Press 2005), now available in paperback.

R.E.A.L. News

2009-07-07T08:19:00.006-05:00

Responsible for Equality And Liberty organization (R.E.A.L.)-- website: http://www.realcourage.org/

Additional Reports on War on Women can be found at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waronwomen/http://www.realcourage.org/category/womens-rights/

Italy: Al-Qaeda threat against MP sparks Muslim support -- Souad Sbai-- "she received threats in an Internet video message by an alleged Al-Qaeda supporter in Italy"http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Politics/?id=3.0.3511422226---

- June 18, 2009: "Italian Muslim Women's Rights Leader Souad Sbai in Court Over Islamic Supremacist Death Threats to Her"http://www.realcourage.org/2009/06/threats-to-souad-sbai/

Pakistan: "122 cases of women being burnt were reported in Lahore" -- just from April to June 2009http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/13+domestic+violence-za-02

UK: Report on Sharia courts state women's word not sufficient - even in abuse caseshttp://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/uk-report-on-sharia-courts/-- Daily Mail: "Sharia law UK: Mail on Sunday gets exclusive access to a British Muslim court"-- "If the husband has disputed his wife's word, the court demands her account is corroborated by otherwitnesses - preferably male.

If the wife refuses to agree to give the husband access to their children, even incases of possible child abuse, the divorce is stalled until that issue is resolved."--

"Dr Hasan tells them that in every part of the world, there can be only one authority."-- "'In Britain, the ultimate authority is the Prime Minister. In an army, it is the commander-in-chief. On the bus, it is the bus driver. And in the house, the smallest unit of society, sharia says authority must be with the man to maintain the house."-- "'The woman's duties are much harsher. Biologically, she differs,' he says. Her duties lie with the cleaning and childcare."-- "

The mood turns black as Dr Hasan continues that under Islam, the woman is seen as someone who needs theprotection of a man. In matters of divorce, the right of ending a marriage lies with the man because 'women haveemotions, whereas a man thinks first before he speaks'. "http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1197478/Sharia-law-UK--How-Islam-dispensing-justice-side-British-courts.html

IPT: "Soraya's Warning to the Mullahs (A Film Review)"

Jordan: Man who kills raped sister in "honor killing" gets jail time cut in half http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/jordan-honor-killing-sentence/ Jordan; Court halves man's jail term for 'honour' killing
http://www.smh.com.au/world/court-halves-mans-jail-term-for-honour-killing-20090708-dc5d.html

-- "A court on Tuesday halved the jail term of a 29-year-old Jordanian man who shot his raped sister 12 times "in the name of honour",a judicial official said."

-- "The criminal court initially sentenced the man to 15 years with hard labour for killing his sister in 2008 in Mowaqqar, southeast of the capital Amman, but immediately reduced it to seven-and-a-half years."--

"'The woman disappeared from home for six months after she was raped last year,' the official said."-- "Police kept the woman in custody for protection and later handed her over to the family, but the brother shot her 12 timesin different parts of her body once she arrived home, killing her immediately."--

"The man told police that he committed the crime 'in the name of honour,' according to the official."

(Pakistan) "Honour killings in Sindh rise in second quarter: report"
http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/pakistan-sindh-honor-killings/

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=186990

-- Sindh: Last three months: 416 cases of violence against women in Sindh
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\07\08\story_8-7-2009_pg12_10

(Pakistan) "Newly-wed girl strangled to death" - by husband

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\07\08\story_8-7-2009_pg12_11

(Pakistan) Punjab: ICC Report: "Police Brutalize Christians after Robbing their Homes" - in Punjab's Wazirabad-- ICC reports on brutalization of Christians and attacks on Christian women

http://www.persecution.org/suffering/newssummpopup.php?newscode=10420&PHPSESSID=89e7cc4dd7d59373f16d478d78a74ebd

http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/pak-police-brutalize-christians/

(Pakistan) Punjab: ICC Report: "Update: Jihad Attack on over 100 Christian Homes in Pakistan"-- ICC reports on mob violence and attacks on Christian women

http://www.persecution.org/suffering/newssummpopup.php?newscode=10422&PHPSESSID=89e7cc4dd7d59373f16d478d78a74ebd

http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/pakistan-icc-report-jihad/

Saudi Arabia: Brother kills two sisters in Social Affairs shelter over "honor"

http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/saudi-arabia-honor-killing/

-- Arab News: "Man in "honor killing" may face death penalty"--- "A man may face the death penalty if found guilty of gunning down his two sisters as they were being dischargedby Social Affairs officials into the custody of their father."---

"The two women had been caught in suspicious circumstances with two unrelated men on Thursday."---

"Police believe the brother murdered his two sisters to save the family honor. The names and ages of the young womenand their brother were not made public."---

"According to Riyadh police, the man followed his father to the social protection home and then waited until the women came out. He reportedly shot one sister in the head and discharged three bullets into the other. He then tossed the gun near the bodies.

Guards at the Social Affairs shelter quickly apprehended the man."--- "The man will face the death penalty unless his family forgives him. If he is spared capital punishment he will still facejail time served in the name of the public right."---

"Women are usually turned over to Social Affairs shelters if they are caught with unrelated men until their guardianscan get them out of custody."

Saudi Arabia: Abused woman flees shelter; shelter "accused of helping woman flee"
http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/saudi-abused-flees-shelter/
-- Saudi Arabia: Shelter accused of helping woman flee
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&article=124360&d=8&m=7&y=2009&pix=kingdom.jpg&category=Kingdom

--- "The woman ran away while police were preparing to take her to jail in line with a court order while it examined her case. Samar fled her parents' home after accusing them of abusing her and sought refuge at the shelter."--- "A source closely involved with her case told Arab News that the father is mentally unstable and that he would beat herand take away her salary."---

"He added that there are two lawsuits relating to her filed in court. The first case was filed by Samarâ€™s father who accused her of running away and disobeying her parents.

The second was filed by Samar herself against her father demanding that he be removed as her guardian."---

"The source also said Samar has been called to court five times and that she has failed to appear each time."--- "The source criticized the shelter, accusing it of accepting cases without proper investigation, something that he said has caused 'chaos.' He accused the shelter of helping the woman flee."

Iran: Concerns Over Detained Iranian Christian Women Amid Political Turmoil - may face execution for religious freedom
http://www.realcourage.org/2009/07/marzieh-and-maryam/

-- Concerns Over Detained Iranian Christians Amid Political Turmoil-- "two detained Christian women are 'in danger of being forgotten' amid concerns they may face execution, Iranian Christians said Tuesday,

July 7"-- "Marzieh Amirizadeh, 30, and Maryam Rustampoor, 27, have been held for over four months in Tehran's notorious Evin prison apparently for converting to Christianity from Islam"

http://www.bosnewslife.com/8217-concerns-over-detained-iranian-christians-amid-political-turmoil

Sarah Palin is a threat to free women

2009-07-05T11:30:00.016-05:00

Some feminists go all over the web spreading the myth that Palin is a feminist and really is for contraception and is no threat to abortion rights.

I have opinions of these "feminists" which I will refrain from writing. What I will say is that I will not be bullied into defending women who will destroy my own freedom. There is a whole bunch of women on the web ( some who are men posing as women)who urge feminist to just get over abortion because it excludes "many" women, women like Carrie Prejean and Sarah Palin. These men in woman's voices tell us that we should not object to pharmacists who refuse to fill birth control perscriptions or the morning after pill and who humiliate women who come to have their perscriptions filled.

Web feminists urge us to defend all women when they are attacked. Even those powerful women who will destroy other women's freedom. Because these "feminists" think women can be demigodded to act against their own interest FOR the interests of the elite's wolves in sheep clothing.

I have limited funds and energy. Phyllis Shaffely is funded to the tune of over hundreds of thousands of dollars by wealthy Conservatives - let Shaffley use their money to defend Palin. I am not being paid to do it. I will defend the woman of Iran instead of poor Palin. Just because they play the woman victim card does not mean intelligent women will Sig heil and salute our enemies.

On an I blame the Patriarchy thread "Pheenobarbie" and "Paige" made comments I want to preserve forever on this blog -- then I can just give this cite which contains Sarah Palin's views in her own writing.

Then, I will just give a link to this page the next time I hear someone ask us to disbelieve what we see with our own eyes when we look at the Palin family; their hypocrisy, their religion, their lack of compassion for any species except fetuses, their typical "breed recklessly for Jesus even if you are a child" so called morality, and most of all, their failure to teach their own child to prevent reproduction while a teenager. It is nauseating to listen to this failing child seek to regain her self worth by lying to other children so they also get pregnant. That is what free women will get from Sarah Palin defense.

Right now there are only about 1,500 abortion clinics open in the US and they are under constant threat. Most states have enacted expensive, humiliating, regulations and restrictions on the procedures. State attorneys are harassing doctors with lawsuits, which is a reason to defeat republican and democrat anti abortion state attorneys. As a woman who had a butcher abortion when it was illegal and watched my friends butchered, who saw women bear children they did not want or wanted only to trap a male into economic support and who also witnessed a woman die from her own self induced abortion, I agree with this next comment.

pheenobarbidoll
July 3, 2009 at 9:23 am

Oh? I seem to recall I revile that jackass Hugo pretty thoroughly. I don’t have a high opinion of Amanda and I no longer read Pandagon because of all the male posters who claim to be feminist but in reality are there to give Fresh!Manly!Wisdom! and berate feminist posters.

Abortion rights are crucial. There are no buts after that.

The hot second you (general use) try to control my reproduction is the hot second I toss you into the Deserves A Kick In The Face Repeatedly pile.

That includes Palin, and I’m not going to give her slack when I Do Not give anyone else slack on that issue. I’m not going to be lenient on MY reproductive rights because other people apply double standards.

This isn’t an academic debate. This is my life. If anyone sticks their nose in my uterus, they can expect to have it cut off.

Paige
July 4, 2009 at 11:25 pm

It’s really important to call out sexist attacks on Sarah Palin, of which there are lots, just as it’s important to call out sexist attacks on anyone.
But I also think we should be clear about who Sarah Palin is and what her politics are.

I find it very problematic to read Violet Socks’ blog posts on her own blog about Palin (and her comments here) that try to paint Palin as far more feminist than she really is, and far more moderate than she really is. I don’t know why Socks is doing this, but I would like to say to everyone who is interested in this issue: do not just take someone’s word for it that “smears” against Palin have been “debunked”! Check for yourself.

It’s true that Palin is pro-contraception. But she also has aligned herself with the extreme anti-contraception (and Orwellian-named) anti-choice group “Feminists for Life.”

When it comes to sex ed, the picture is even more mixed. In 2008, when she was running nationally for Vice President, she expressed support for teaching both contraception and abstinence, which sounds reasonable.

But that’s a different tune than she sang in 2006 when she ran for Governor, when she signaled her approval of the Eagle Forum’s preferred “abstinence-until-MARRIAGE” (barf) sex ed program (and what about people who won’t/can’t get married? Don’t worry, one of Palin’s “top priorities,” she says, is “preserving the definition of marriage” to keep gays out!).

These particular comments are not just from casual remarks quoted out of context or anything like that, but from Palin’s carefully composed, written responses to a series of questions in 2006 from the Eagle Forum:
(see here)http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/01/palin-s-record-on-family-issues.aspx(or see full questionnaire here)http://irregulartimes.com/eagle-forum-2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html
Excerpts:
1. Complete the sentence by checking the applicable phrases (you can check more than one).Abortion should be:
* Banned throughout entire pregnancy.* Legal to save the life of the mother.* Legal in case of rape and incest.* Legal if the baby is handicapped.* Legal if the baby has a genetic defect.* Legal in the first trimester.* Legal in the second trimester.* Legal in the third trimester.* Other:__________________

Sarah Palin: I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent’s life.

3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

Sarah Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

8. Do you support parental choice in the spending of state educational dollars?

Sarah Palin: Within Alaska law, I support parents deciding what is the best education venue for their child.

12. In relationship to families, what are your top three priorities if elected governor?
Sarah Palin:
1) Creating an atmosphere where parents feel welcome to choose the venues of education for their children;
2) Preserving the definition of “marriage” as defined in our Constitution, and
3) Cracking down on the things that harm family life: gangs, drug use, and infringement of our liberties including attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights.

That first question makes it very clear that Palin — unlike McCain! — thinks abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape and incest.

The only exception Palin would allow is to save a woman’s life
(she of course calls it a “mother’s” life as though anybody who is pregnant should already be called a “mother,” regardless of whether they have children, because the fetus makes a woman a “mother”! Barf.)

Palin’s is a very extreme view. Some defenders of Palin like to say that Palin is just in favor of “the will of the people” deciding questions of abortion. But that’s just code for overturning Roe v. Wade and letting the states enact whatever restrictions they want.

2. Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?

SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught. (and this means birth control education kiddies)

Other defenders of Palin always bring up the fact that one judge she appointed once was pro-choice. But in fact, as Caroline’s comment above explains, that was not a pro-choice move by Palin at all, but a Conservative move to keep an environmentalist off the Alaska court.

In a different appointment situation, where Palin could appoint anyone she wanted to the post of Alaska Attorney General, she picked the extremely, extremely egregious Wayne Ross, who denies making the most impressively horrific comment he is accused of making

(”If a guy can’t rape his wife, who’s he gonna rape?”) but that comment is just the tip of the iceberg.http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-13/palins-new-disaster(Any thoughts about Wayne Ross, all you defenders of Palin out there?)

I hate to keep harping on the rape kits story, but here, too, the supposed “debunking” of the “smear” gets ahead of itself.

The “debunking” of the rape kit story consists of showing that it was supposed to be the victims’ insurance companies, not victims themselves, who got the bills for the rape kits. Well, that’s obviously way better than charging rape victims directly. But that doesn’t make it magically okay.

Call me old-fashioned, but my view is that rape is a crime, and the police need to pay for investigation costs, just as they do with all other crimes.

If I am raped, I don’t want the bill for investigating the crime to go to my insurance company (which might then get to decide what investigative services to “approve” or not, especially because Palin’s police budget eliminated the state money for the kits [see Jill's link above];

which could certainly ask me its own set of intrusive insurance-company questions about what happened; and

which ultimately could charge me anyway or could charge me more for health insurance to recover these costs).

No. I’m sorry, but it needs to be the way it is in most states (not all) and the way it was in Wasilla until Palin’s new chief of police arrived and changed the policy: a police expense. Not a victim or victim’s insurance expense.

So in conclusion, I think we should all agree to:(1) call out sexist attacks on anyone, including Sarah Palin(2) don’t believe every bad thing you read about Sarah Palin, because some of it is exaggerated, AND ALSO

(3) don’t believe every “debunking” of a “smear” against Sarah Palin, because a lot of the “smears” are actually true, despite what you might read on certain blogs that are heavily invested in defending Palin for whatever reason.
-----------------------------------------------------

HERE IS A DECENT THREAD ON SARAH PALIN THANKS TO UPPITY WOMAN, AND GREAT CAT VIDEOS TOO!

Freedom

2009-07-05T09:59:00.011-05:00

Nothing is more important than freedom. In every issue of your life ask what contributes to more freedom for you personally and make that your politics. In Iran the people do not have guns and they are slaves without freedom. Choose Freedom with complete responsibility to do no harm to the god in others - no force anyway. You have the right to defend your self and your freedom. Learn to establish boundaries with such integrity that you are not forced to hurt space invaders.

From Song's Blog

This July 4th, pagans are writing about the Goddess of Liberty and Democracy.

Sia at Full Circle Lady Liberty: The Goddess of Democracy

The Goddess of Freedom: from Libertas to Lady Liberty
by Selena Fox

Pagan Values by Inanna

And when we think about freedom, you may want to read Sia on the Shadow. She found the perfect excerpt from TS Elliot:

Between the conception and the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Lies the Shadow

- T.S. Eliot

Picture Here.

Press conference talking about Afghan Women

2009-06-30T18:26:00.004-05:00

Here is a lot of talk about what the Ambassador thinks about things in Afghanistan but very little information on actual programs the US is funding and supporting. Nothing about linking US women with those projects and Afghan women through the army; nothing about the regional women's centers; nothing about domestic violence shelter/villages; nothing about training women police; nothing about arming women; nothing - except they are "expanding" programs.

Women: Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues Melanne Verveer on Her Recent Visit to Afghanistan and the U.S. Commitment to Afghan WomenTue, 30 Jun 2009 15:09:13 -0500
Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues Melanne Verveer on Her Recent Visit to Afghanistan and the U.S. Commitment to Afghan Women
Melanne Verveer
Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues
Washington, DC
June 30, 2009

MR. WOOD: Good afternoon, actually. Good afternoon, all. We’re very fortunate to have with us this afternoon the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues Melanne Verveer. And she’s going to talk to you about her recent trip to Afghanistan and talk about how the U.S. is supporting Afghan women. So without further ado, I’ll turn it over to the ambassador.

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Hello, everybody. I’d like to make a few points before taking your questions.

The women in Afghanistan are critical to progress and stability in their war-torn country. It is in Afghanistan’s interest that human development and the unity of action take place. Only by men and women working together can Afghanistan move forward. The Secretary of State and Ambassador Holbrooke asked me to go to Afghanistan to reaffirm the United States’s commitment to Afghan women and to underscore the President and Secretary’s personal commitment to women’s rights.

We know that no country can prosper if half its people are left behind. And as the President said in Cairo, we recognize that our daughters can contribute as much to society as our sons. The truth of the matter is that countries that repress women also tend to be backward economically, and are more likely to be failed states.

Three points: First, we are reshaping our programs and intensifying our efforts to help women to participate more fully in society, thereby helping them to increase their contributions to their communities and their country. This includes working with men, working with community leaders to make it possible for men and women to jointly determine Afghanistan’s future.

One example of that reorientation of programs is the announcement that Ambassador Eikenberry and I made in Kabul of a new $27 million fund of small, flexible, rapid response grants targeted to empower Afghan women-led NGOs at the local level to serve their fellow citizens by providing them with technical assistance and support for programs ranging from economic development, literacy, training, skills training, and healthcare, among other programs that make a difference for all Afghans.

Second, Afghanistan is in the midst of an election campaign both for president and for the provincial councils. We have called for a campaign that is credible, inclusive, and secure, where men and women candidates can campaign with no restrictions on their freedom of movement and can be assured of protection. Further, the candidates should engage in a vigorous debate on all issues, including issues of concern to women. And women are likewise raising issues of concern to them with the candidates.

More women are running for provincial councils than did in the last election. And my travels took me to the Baghdis province, which is one of the poorest and remote parts of Afghanistan. And there, 11 impressive women are running for the provincial council, hoping to make a difference for the future of their country. Women want to be part of the solution.

Third, there is progress in some areas, but not in others. Security remains a paramount challenge. Violence against women and girls is endemic and much remains to be done, including access to institutions of justice, civic education, and prosecution of the crimes. More girls are in school, but the Taliban have eroded some of that progress.

Last year alone, they burned or shut down more than 700 schools, and thousands of girls are now without access to formal education.

More women are participating politically in the parliament and in local government. Many are engaged in the media, which is defined by freedom of expression. Civil society is more robust. Women’s organizations increasingly speak with a collective voice and act in a coordinated fashion. They are a stronger and more unified constituency today than in a few years back.

And there is a cadre of women leaders – business, government, and media, civil society – and they are an impressive group, yet their potential is not fully tapped. There is only one minister in the cabinet and she is powerless. There is a low percentage of women in the civil service.

There is only one governor, in Bamiyan. And women are rarely invited to decision-making forums.

Economic opportunity is critical if the people are going to see results in their everyday lives, and we are committed to a greater focus on activities like agriculture, animal husbandry, and other kinds of productive livelihoods, including access to microcredit focused on very small business development, which is also critically important. Progress in Afghanistan must be measured not just in military terms, but also in terms of social, political, and economic participation of women in rebuilding Afghanistan and in the safeguarding of their human rights.

And now, I’m happy to take your questions.

MR. WOOD: Before asking your questions, if you could just identify yourselves and your news organizations, we greatly appreciate it.
Why don’t we go to Kim.

QUESTION: I have one quick question about the number of women running for local council. I don’t know if you know that. But also, I wanted to get an update from you on what you heard in your conversations in Afghanistan about the Personal Status Law, which has been under review. Just a few days ago, there was a demonstration in support of that law. A thousand people turned up, including 300 women. What is your assessment of how women feel about the law, and what President Karzai is willing to do about it or not in parliament?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: I raised the Shia Personal Status Law with the minister of justice who has had it under active review, as well as with President Karzai, as well as with the women leaders in civil society.

Where it stands now is the women have told me that they are pleased with the commitment that is represented in the revisions and reforms that have been made, as they have seen that draft. And only a few days ago, they met with President Karzai who told them that he would support those revisions and reforms. The women are hoping that this will take place before the election, but it is not clear.

So that’s where things stand. The minister of justice has incorporated the revisions and reforms that the women have been seeking. They have told me that they are satisfied with those that they have seen at the last such opportunity. And President Karzai has assured them in a recent meeting that he will sign on to them. So that’s the current status.

QUESTION: What if it doesn’t pass through parliament before the elections?
AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, there – no one has indicated that it’s going to take effect prior to any action. And if it doesn’t take effect prior to the election, we can only imagine whether or not there will be changes made that aren’t satisfactory or what will occur. So I think that’s one of the reasons that the women’s community is quite eager to see a satisfactory resolution, one that they have personally reviewed, and are satisfied with actually taking effect. But it hasn’t happened yet.
MR. WOOD: Elise.

QUESTION: Elise Labott with CNN. Thank you. Just to follow up on that – I mean, and the fact that you were talking about there’s only one minister, and that’s she’s powerless, and that women are not invited, it sounds like there’s a problem with the culture within the country of not treating women equally that is from the top down and the bottom up.

And so given all the kind of security issues and important kind of national security issues that you have with Afghanistan, how do you instill upon the government how important that is to you? I mean, you know, are there aid programs you can condition to make sure that they treat women better? And, you know, if the government isn’t going to make this a priority, how can you ensure that they do so?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, I think that’s a very good question. And I do think there are issues of culture, but there are also issues of political will, and that is one of the reasons I made the trip and why I met with so many of the ministers, as well as candidates for president and members of the parliament. In this upcoming election, we made it clear that it is important for the candidates to have women’s platforms, to discuss the role of women in Afghan society and the reforms that they are endorsing and the kind of progress they want to see. And the women are eager to see that kind of discussion as well.

It is interesting that in the last few days, several of the candidates have spoken about their women’s platform and President Karzai met with key members of the women’s community and said to me that he was intending to meet with them again just a few days later.
Now, we know what the hoopla of a campaign can mean even in this country. But I think it is critical to reinforce the importance of these issues in the next two months in which the campaign will ensue.

Clearly, there has to be a will at the top and there’s got to be heat at the bottom. And these kinds of progressive steps are only going to happen to the extent that there is that will, there is that sense of greater empowerment and participation on the part of the women, and that there is a visible sense of the reality changing on the ground in terms of progress.

And to the extent that women can participate both in the decision making and in actually working with the men in their localities and their provinces to bring about that kind of change, particularly economic change, that will devolve to the kind of cultural changes that are critical.

But as I said to the leaders, it is important that they speak out about these issues both in terms of women’s participation, but also in terms of some of the egregious activities that are ongoing in the society. And more specifically, I underscored the violence against women, which is certainly not acceptable.
MR. WOOD: Goyal.

QUESTION: Thank you. Goyal Raghibur from India Globe and Asia Today. Madame, your mission to Afghanistan to meet especially the women’s groups may be first of its kind. What have you seen after talking to those women that they are fearing any threats from al-Qaida (inaudible) going to school and all that? Those are still there?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, certainly, they are still there. There are – as I said in my opening statement, that there are ongoing problems. But what I also saw are women who clearly want to be part of the solution. They want to be able to make a difference in their society. And most basically, they want to be able to see the kind of change in their lives that will give them a sense that a better future is possible for them and their families. And they are acting on all levels.

I mean, as I mentioned, we went out to a province that was extremely remote and extremely poor. It’s difficult to describe the environment. And there, I saw men and women in a room talking about their aspirations for this election, the women candidates speaking better than I at this microphone in terms of the compelling nature of their efforts to run for office. They clearly wanted to be protected in that process. They clearly wanted to be able to move around. But they want to make a difference. That’s the bottom line. They want a better life. And what we are trying to do is help galvanize those kinds of efforts so that indeed they can pay off in a better future.

QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up. In the past, there were some reports that they were not very much happy with President Karzai’s government because al-Qaidas were there to help them out rather than the government or the government officials because of corruptions and other. So how are they going to come off now or coping with this problem?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, it’s an ongoing effort, clearly, and there has been progress. And they see every tangible step forward as something that will eventually get them to their ultimate goal of a better future for Afghanistan. But it’s a process that is not a neat one that goes in a linear line, and there are setbacks as much as there are steps forward sometimes. But there is certainly an effort on the part of the women with whom I’ve spoken and met with at great length to really be full participants in creating that better future.
MR. WOOD: Mary Beth.

QUESTION: Ambassador, thank you. When you mentioned the $27 million fund, the Rapid Response grants, is that part of – I think in the supplemental there was $100 million – am I correct – for Afghanistan, for women’s NGOs. And how does that compare to what existed before? Is this a big increase, a small increase, or –

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, some of the money, Mary Beth, comes out of the pipeline. Some of it is existing money that is now being moved into this area. Some of it will come out of the supplemental. There are additional resources there that will be tapped. But it is a response to the ongoing request that more progress could be made at the local level if resources could go in. And these are not huge grants, a grant at a time necessarily, but grants that can go in can make a real difference, can contribute to the betterment of what is taking place in the local areas and also grow the capacity of the women to make a greater contribution.

So there will be more of that, because it’s obviously – it’s going to be something that is very closely overseen by our Embassy in Afghanistan. Ambassador Tony Wayne has arrived there in the last week to oversee our assistance programs, and he will be playing a pivotal role in this. He was present with me on some of my travels outside of Kabul, as well as for this announcement.

So we are making a more concerted effort to empower people locally to bring about the kinds of changes that can show immediate results in terms of their lives and their ability to make a contribution.

QUESTION: Hi, Farah Stockman with The Boston Globe. I just got back from Kabul, actually, and I guess we overlapped. But when I was there, one of the things a lot of people were talking about in the aid community was the proliferation of ambassadors at the Embassy. I think you’re one of eight ambassador-level people who were going in and out of Kabul.

How does that work? I mean, is it a total net gain for us? Or, I mean, can you describe that?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: I think it’s a net plus for us, frankly, because it shows a real commitment. And there’s delineation of authority in all of these people who are arriving, some with considerable experience. And I think that particularly, for example, in Ambassador Wayne’s case, to have somebody truly focused on this piece, working in close collaboration with the leadership team there, will make a difference.

So I think it’s – it wouldn't be done if we didn’t see it as something that will really create a greater continuing, ongoing emphasis in those critical areas that these individuals are going to oversee.

QUESTION: Lalit Jha from Pajhwok Afghan News. What will be your recommendation to the new Afghan president to improve the (inaudible) of women in the country?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, you know, women want the same thing the world over, and that is they want to have their rights protected, they want to be respected, and they want to make a contribution in terms of the life of their society economically and politically, and they want to access education and healthcare. That’s what any leader should try to make happen, because all the data today shows that investments in women have the single most effective payoff in terms of poverty alleviation and the general prosperity of a country; and where the exact opposite takes place in its worst forms, we have imploding societies and failed states.
So it is in leaders’ interest to make these kinds of investments. But as I said earlier to the answer to the first question, what’s often missing is the political will to do that. But in the long term, it would create a far brighter picture in terms of future progress.

QUESTION: Do you think the condition of women has improved post-Taliban era? Are the women –

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, as I said, there have been many improvements, which I pointed out in my statement, but there hasn’t been enough. And so we have to keep working at these issues, and certainly on behalf of the women there if we want to bring stability and a better future to the country.

QUESTION: Ambassador, good afternoon. (Inaudible) from Voice of America. You said the role of women in politics needs to be taken seriously. What did you hear are the issues that are mostly standing out on women’s paths in political field? And also, how many womens are being supportive of other candidate women that are there, I mean, for presidential or provincial elections?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, there are two female candidates for president. I think they’re both still in the race. And then there are a hundred and some – and we can get the exact number – running for the provincial councils, but in excess of the actual number of seats allotted to women for the provincial councils. So there’s been more – there is more participation at this point, which is very gratifying.

The women want to make sure that in terms of their campaigns and their efforts at their election, that they have that kind of freedom of movement and protection to enable them, just as the male candidates want to have the same ability to move around to make their voices heard and to be protected in the process.

Beyond that, the women are very eager to have the candidates talk about the issues that are of great concern to them. Often these are issues that are never raised. And the issues range from the security issue, which is paramount, to issues of participation, to the quality of their lives, to their representation and decision making. It’s a range of issues. And I think to the extent that there is a more robust discussion of those issues, it has to devolve ultimately to the betterment of their situation.

QUESTION: Like women in parliament, did they gather around and show some sort of a support for these candidates?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: For the women candidates?

QUESTION: Did (inaudible) have any reservations? Yes.

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, the parliamentary elections will be coming up and they will be running themselves. But the women in parliament have become much more sophisticated in terms of the role that they play, in terms of the issues that they are putting forward. For example, there’s a law for the elimination of violence against women, which is a critical piece of legislation that has been undergoing review, a satisfactory review to this point, and will shortly be within the committee process in the parliament where the women, among others, need to be playing a very significant leadership role.

QUESTION: Thank you.
MR. WOOD: Right here, please.

QUESTION: Thank you, Ambassador. My name is Monica Gabriel. I’m with CNSNews.com. My question is: Have you noticed a conflict between steps being taken to defend against human rights violations and inequality, and Afghan women’s desire to protect Afghan culture and even their Muslim faith? And if so, what steps are being taken to deal with that?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, that kind of reconciliation between particularly religious views in the culture and with progress are often viewed as somehow in opposition. But some of the progress that’s been made has been made thanks to mullahs, who take up these issues in their Friday services in a very constructive way. Violence against women is not something that is condoned in the Koran. Women’s economic participation fits in with Khajida and her role in terms of the history of the religion with the prophet.

So there are – religion in and of itself is not the problem. It’s what extremists and others do to say that religion condones this kind of horrific behavior to women. And so I see more and more women using their religion in a very positive way to support the kind of progress they want to see occur. I see more women joining them in that progress, particularly some of the success with the mullahs. But that’s not to say that there isn’t a long road to go.

QUESTION: Right. And when you spoke of reorienting programs, are programs such as family planning programs part of it? And if so, does that meet some kind of cultural faith-based opposition?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: That does not seem – the family planning issue has not risen, to my knowledge, as an issue in that category. But women’s health, and related to that family planning, is a very critical issue. Women suffer the highest – or second highest mortality rate, maternal mortality rate, in Afghanistan. The lifespan for women is 40-some years. One out of every four children dies below the age of five. So there are very, very, very serious health issues that have to be addressed. A lot of the work we’re doing, in fact, goes to those issues. That’s why I met with the minister of health, who has got a real serious effort that’s gone forward.

Certainly, we have, in the 13 PRTs in which we’re engaged to put a focus on that, working with the ministry and other governments are doing that in the areas in which they are engaged, as well as the multilateral institutions. So this is a very big challenge in the country, the quality of health generally, but particularly the health of women and children.
MR. WOOD: The last two questions, Lach and then Jill.

QUESTION: Okay. I’m Lachlan Carmichael from AFP. Hi, Ambassador. I just wanted to check that you’re on the same wavelength with people at the local and national levels in Afghanistan. Do (inaudible) accept easily your point that women’s development is key – sorry, including women is key to the nation’s development, or the corollary that if they fail to include women, they’ll have – hamper development?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, I guess it depends who you talk to. Some people implement it vigorously, and others don’t pay any attention to it. So I think it is something that we need to put forward more vigorously, which is what we’re doing, which is one of the reasons I made the trip. It is really critical to seeing progress in Afghanistan, and it is – it’s got to work in mesh with everything else that we’re doing. But --

QUESTION: Who doesn’t see it that way? Can you --

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, obviously, you can look at the evolution of what’s happening in the country, and there are forces that are resistant, clearly. But I think if people see more progress at all levels, men and women, then this is going to be something that we might call a no-brainer.

QUESTION: You’re saying it’s not at the provincial level, that they don’t see it?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: I think more has to be done at the national level, just as more has to be done at the provincial and local levels. But where it’s happening, there is a lot of coming together in a successful way.

MR. WOOD: Last question, Jill.

QUESTION: Thank you. Jill Dougherty from CNN. Civilian development is so important to the strategy in Afghanistan. And when you were on the ground actually seeing what’s going on, was there anything that changed your mind about the strategy as it’s being carried out right now, anything that you would change? And if there’s feedback, how do you formally present that – to the Secretary, to the President, or how does that happen?

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Well, one of the things that was reinforced on the ground is how critical it is for people at the very local level to see change in their lives, to be able to have a livelihood, to be able to care for their families, to be able to not feel threatened in terms of their well-being from the conflict that surrounds them. So that, and I think the fact that we are moving more and more of our efforts to that level, is something that we have heard and seen and are responding to. So that’s really important.

In terms of ongoing feedback, we are now speaking to a wide range of Afghans both in the capital, beyond the capital, in the provinces. And they know, both in terms of working with increasing numbers of members of the Embassy staff who are moving out across the country, as well as to us and others who are in direct contact with them, that they’ve got an open line to tell us how it’s going, where the progress is coming, what the setbacks are, what the obstacles are, and how we might better help them in the future.

MR. WOOD: Thank you all.

AMBASSADOR VERVEER: Thank you.
# # #

Today the World Mourns A Pedophile

2009-06-26T10:10:00.002-05:00

And the media idolizes him as well. He bred children to rape. He paid off family after family whose boys he sodomized. And in his adulation we see how much the right to lifers really value children.

Filth and corruption comes from child abuse and child abuse produced Michael Jackson, the wealthy man who was allowed to rape children at will because money can buy anything in the corporation of the United States of America.

In the meantime, people who fought for freedom are being tortured in the dark and bloody cells of Iran. Silence - the media is rhapsodizing over a dead pedophile.

The Whole World is Watching

2009-06-25T08:48:00.003-05:00

Please wear green bracelets to show solidarity with the Freedom Fighters in Iran. Do not intellectualize and rationalize in order to kiss Obama feet although it is true that the only people with good jobs in the US are working for the government. Be brave - wear the green cloth.

Thanks to Uppity Woman for this video.

NOW IS OVER

2009-06-24T08:44:00.017-05:00

The anti choice, Palin, Prejean, Transgender Rights, people beat the Woman of Color slate in NOW by 8 votes and we are supposed to care. The anti choice women say,we are sick of abortion being the only issue, we are not against Roe but let the states decide what restrictions they want to impose and no tax dollars for abortion. Later it will be contraception. Be reasonable, the anti choice NOW women say, - too many women have been excluded because of the rigid affirmation of a woman's right to choose. Sara Palin is for choice - really! REALLY all that stuff people say about her born again politics is just LIES -- her daughter? You should not talk about her daughter's hypocrisy, I mean, transformation.

Neither of those NOW slates will/would do anything for women's RIGHTS except dilute what exists now. Neither has called for action for women in Iran; just as during the war they could not open their mouths for Muslim women lest they offend their democrat party. Now they say Obama is just right on veils and Iran. NEOCONS, the left democrats faux feminists say---oooo shiver --the revolution in Iran is all an evil neo con plot to embarrass Obama.

The so called neo conservatives were the only group in the history of this country who made the status of women an issue in foreign policy decisions. Condi Rice was and is the only Sec of State who made the status of women an actual priority, not just talk, in the state dept. The feminist movement might have joined them and corrected deficiencies but no -they were silent. Now they say they are in the State Dept working on "more comprehensive" programs. But HERE is the moment and once again they are silent and this time receiving actual pay for their silence.

All the crap on Allegre about how Hillary is going to perform for women is just empty cheerleading. Here is the moment and Hillary is silent while her sexist boss dithers and fails the women of Iran unlike other foreign leaders. And the NOW lurches along beside them, carefully turning their eyes, using NEOCON as their excuse to betray women AGAIN! What decent woman can stomach these politicians?

The woman who won, O'Neill, ran the direct mail campaign for donations for NOW. Many of us wrote all over those mailing - nothing came of it - they went in NOW's garbage. NOW does not poll the membership on financial priorities and most of the money goes to pay national staff. The presidency is a $200,000.00 a year job and there is money in donations and memberships. That is what the NOW elections were about not all the crap they are saying to get your money. What will they do? Nothing except become an embarrassment to feminists. They will become as the NAACP is today for blacks, a relic with vultures sitting on the funds.

They promise the ERA will be their priority. The ERA does not mention Woman or Women - this it what it says:

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

O'Neill, the new NOW president savior spent the last few years working on a transgender rights bill which passed. Can you Guess what the ERA campaign is going to uncover and can you imagine the anti-choice amendment the new NOW will stick on it? Just so it can pass for their new NOW constituency.

Start your own organizations on new models - be like dandelions - spread everywhere in small or large cell groups of friends in each city - keep in touch on line -- use list serves and do similar actions around a common theme that unites you. Have fun - ignore Roberts Rules of Order. Ignore Order - be wild and unorganized.

UPDATE: It has come to my attention that most younger women do not understand the feminist objection to transsexualism being funded with women's movement money. I am not going to explain it - read read read feminist classics for you get pap in the writings of the third wave. To understand the feminist analysis of transgender/sexual ism, read:
The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male (Athene Series) (Paperback). It is important to get the new edition with the new introduction that addresses the post modern criticism of the book and updates you on the doctors.
From the publisher:
Fifteen years ago, when it was first published, "The Transsexual Empire" challenged the medical psychiatric definition of transsexualism as a disease and sex conversion hormones and surgery as the cure. It exposed the anti feminist stereotyping that requires candidates for transsexual surgery to prove themselves by conforming to subjective, outdated and questionable feminine roles and "passing" as women.

Then as now, defining and treating transsexualism as a medical problem prevents the person experiencing so-called gender dissatisfaction from seeing it in a gender-challenging or feminist framework. Transsexualism goes to the question of what gender is, how to challenge it, and what reinforces gender stereotyping in a role-defined society.

In the new introduction to this feminist work, Raymond discusses how these same issues are now debated in the context of transgender. Transgenderism reduces gender resistance to wardrobes, hormones, surgery and posturing - anything but real sexual equality.

It assimilates the roles and definitions of masculinity and femininity, often mixing and matching, but never really moving beyond both. In a similar way, transsexualism is thought to be a radical challenge to gender roles, breaking the boundaries of gender and transgressing its rigid lines. But if the transsexual merely exchanges one gender role for another, and if the outcome of such a sex reassignment is to endorse a femininity which, in many transsexuals, becomes a caricature of much that feminists have rejected about many-made femininity, then where is the challenge, the transgression, and the breaking of any real boundaries?

This book will be used as a text in women's studies, psychology, sociology, technology and public policy, as well as by medical students, law students, and all who have an interest in feminist issues.

From an email on the subject:

I remember at the college I went to there was a survey of gender identity and the men were more ambiguous in gender identity and the women tended toward a more masculine (strong and assertive?) identity. I don't know how relevant that is but it seemed to reflect a kind of reality. I've always felt that gender identity was less fixed and along a continuum

This is truth and why we cannot let the profiteers butcher away the truth of human nature - the differences between the sexes are not as great as the boys would like -- yes there is a continuum with masculine at one end and feminine at the other but there are women on both ends and men on both ends and radical feminists say; that is the truth and sex role stereotyping is the lie -- therefore no one should be excluded because of biology and where their nature places them on the continuum as long as they do not attempt to lie or deceive women as to what sex they are naturally. All people should have equal rights and responsibilities regardless of where they are on the gender continuum -- this means we accept feminine men -- we do not force them to hack off their penis to fit into a male defined sex role.

About 4 % of babies are genuinely sex dissociative and I believe in the operation for them. The rest of the transgender nation is women with mothers who sexualized the parental relationship and men with fathers who did same and or homosexual individuals, none of whom can openly express their sexuality or deal with their psychological issues; none of whom see accepting your nature as differing from mass culture is a political act which makes the world more authentic and the truth/answers possible about root parenting behaviors.

Where you give money is a political act. Pay attention and reject those who tell you to give up your rights for the big tent. There is no big tent but if you do not fight for them, your rights will be gone. Only our votes matter and that is the system that needs reform. Working class people are losing democracy through a two party system that is really one corporate party.

Songs of the New Dawn in Iran

2009-06-23T10:16:00.004-05:00

I offer this for Iran; slightly adapted from the work of P. R. Sarkar from his Songs of the New Dawn

They have broken down, weeping
They are red with blood
Those who have lost all
Have broken down in despair.

Let them bathe in their ocean of light
Restore their trampled dignity
Remove all their deprivations
Refresh their will for self-determination
Fulfill all their needs

And as for U S

With our hearts overflowing
Let us give them Love
Let us give them respect
Let us see their truth and beauty
and condemn those who use violence against them.

Let the sufferings of each
Be healed by all
For we are one species and
the earth is our one mother.

Wear Green Ribbons For Iran

2009-06-22T08:33:00.008-05:00

On June 22th, 2009,

Read Chesler on Sarkozy vs Obama on The Burqa

President Nicholas Sarkozy stated that he viewed the full-body burqa and niquab as a sign of the “debasement” of women and that it won’t be welcome in France.

According to the glorious Sarkozy:

“In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity … The burqa is not a religious sign, it’s a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement — I want to say it solemnly, it will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic.”

Now, contrast Sarkozy’s words with what President Obama said in Cairo on June 4th, 2009.

“Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.
read more here..................

Best Comment:

29. Tina Trent:

Obama is untroubled by the troubling strain of misogyny that runs through the left in America, and this is one of his most frightening attributes.

Through working in politics, I gradually came to realize that the self-identified leftists simply despised women — a hysterical contempt that began with the Herb Aptheker-era activists who shaped the president’s political philosophy.

Totalitarianism is now strongest in those states where “liberation” and “justice” movements hinge on oppression of women. Obama not only doesn’t recognize this: he supports it.

Tim Maguire may feel that wearing the burka is a neutral personal choice: it is not. It is an expression of hatred and contempt for all women and especially those who do not wear it. It stands for enforcing a code on all women, unlike most other religious orders’ garb.

It also shows how far American feminism has fallen that they (selectively) cannot attach a negative value to the submission of women.

For the best coverage of the Iran revolution on feminist blogs go to:

Uppity Woman and Angry for A Reason

Today on the Summer Solstice salute those who are going to death and torture for freedom's sake.

2009-06-20T08:21:00.031-05:00

NEDA

The Divine Calling

On your way to the stadium
what bright light impels you
forward
even though
they have the force and the power
even though
you know you
are betrayed.

As you splashed cold water
on your face this morning
did you hear
the cadence ring?
What music
for warrior priests?

I am nothing here
no help for you
but I know

I know what they have done
Here and there.
I know who has betrayed you
Who will try to crush you
Silence you.

They are the same
here and there.
Smiling faces, civil and courteous,
here and there,
even as they pull you up slowly
with the crane.

They buy and sell us
health care reform
which profits the insurance and pharmaceutical industry.
The poor are sweated to pay
while Medicare is depleted.

Free money for Wall Street
pink slips for workers
losing everything
to the predatory lenders
dying and blinded from disease that
the rich have conquered
taking our homes for taxes
drugs the only escape
living among the killers they send
to our quiet neighborhoods.

I know who they are
what they have done
and what they will do to you today.

I know we are one people
and you are showing the way,
leading the way.

I am with you
will be with you
soon we all will be with you
for they have destroyed democracy there
and here, our votes worthless.

The light which impels you
is growing with your blood sacrifice
spreading
to and through the weary
workers of the world
Your courage is
contagious.

May the puzzled weary faces of the defeated
smooth into resolve
as we watch
as the whole world watches
today.

Obama turns away
don't want them to think the US
is taking sides
his personal media outlets
ever the lapdogs of power
go dark
they bring us Angelina Jolie and Casey and Caylee Anthony and Jon & Kate
and the CIA lies and Henry Kissinger and street people who say, it is not a Revolution, it is a civil rights march. Listen to the march leaders, they say, ignoring the fact that march leaders have been conveniently silenced leaving interpretations to Hamas loving Berkley students who say,
Really the people do not want regime change.

Do not worry about Obama's media sisters
your blood
calls out to us
beyond their power to distort and smear.
People to people
woman to woman
we hear you and
understand your sacrifice.

Today FOX News mourns the death of the "free" markets
and warns of socialized medicine and
calls the murdered doctor who stood with women
Nazi baby killer
while you die at
the hands of real Nazi killers.
Yet, FOX has gone to
constant coverage of Iran's martyrs
while others turn away.

Obama turns away
he wanted to talk with the Nazi.
Made Hillary wear a veil to show
it is fine with him
and his catholic advisers
Obama's version of choice for women
No Problem.

Black leaders ignoring
their own history to make apologies
for Obama's betrayal.
Obama who never walked into tear gas
or dogs
or water cannons
or clubs.

Hillary's State Dept tells the press
these protesters want to move away from military dictatorship
into strict Islamic religious law
that is what the old men at
the CIA tell them.
So they cover the
shame of their betrayal.

Pay no attention my sisters
we the people know why you are giving your life today
and it is not for the veil
Obama's veil of shame.

You are dying for freedom
You are shouting for freedom
You are raising your hands to grab at freedom
the end of shame
the end of lies You are chanting
Do not be afraid
we are all together
Victory to you my sisters

Don't look to Obama
He is just talk covering
another theocrat.
He bows to the Saudi princes
who hold women as slaves.
Obama bows to them.

Look to the British, and the French.

The true leader of the opposition
is a woman
and has
an army
the US bombed to appease the mullahs
who gave nothing but derision
in return.
Maryam-rajavi

Do not be afraid

We are all together.

Thank You
sisters and brothers and sisters
of the light.

Tomorrow I will wear a green ribbon on my wrist.
Let everyone see those of us who are not afraid to be with you
despite Obama and his pretense at wisdom
which is only the apeasement of power
to which he bows
low.

Help Iran

2009-06-19T05:44:00.005-05:00

Public Statement

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMIDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (617) 590-1665 OR press@wfafi.org

Women protesting for change and paying the price with their livesOver the past several days, the world community has seen first hand what the Iranian people, especially women, are willing to do for a free and democratic Iran.

The price of freedom has taken lives of many in recent days, including several women. Thousands have been arrested and taken to notorious torture chambers of the Iranian regime in various cities.

Among those women have lost their lives, are:

- Fatemeh Barati killed in University of Tehran

- Mina Ehterami killed in University of Tehran

- Zohreh Peeshdadian stabbed to death in the suburb of Karaj

According to the latest report from Iran, at least 58 people have been killed and more than 200 people have been kidnapped in the last 72 hours.

The fact is the post-election rallies and protests speak of a much larger movement for real change that has now erupted and it is clearing any doubts about the undemocratic and fundamentalist nature of the regime in Iran. It is shameless to be silent and not speak in support of the Iranian people. It is shameless to place "national security interests" before speaking out in defense of basic human rights.

President Obama must take a much tougher stance in response to the Iranian movement. He should stand on the side of the Iranian people who shout "down with the dictatorship." Washington's focus must be on Iranian's outcry and not the regime in power.

The US President is correct to assume there is no difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. In addition to their joint position on nuclear issue and terrorism as pillars of Iran's foreign policy, both Ahmadinejad and Mousavi were directly and indirectly engaged in:
- The 1980 engineering of "Cultural Revolution" in the universities and the subsequent crackdown on all opposition groups and student leaders from 1981- 1987 which led to mass arrests and executions, including execution of pregnant women, 9-year-old girl and 70-year-old grandmother.

- The 1988 massacre of political prisoners which led to execution of thousands including many women.

- The chain killings of the writers and intellectuals with at least 133 people killed, mostly in Tehran, during the 1990's.

- The worldwide assassination of exiled political opponents which took lives of at least 210 people from 1991 to 1997.

- The crushing of student movement, mass arrests and executions in the summer of 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003.
- The crackdown and mass arrest of women on International Women's Day in 2004, 2005, and 2006.

- The weekly public hanging including several hangings and stoning of women in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Therefore, it is unacceptable to attribute what is happening in Iran to just an outcry over the recent election results. There are much more radical dynamics on the ground than what is reported in the western media about Iran. Based on the reports Women's Forum has received from Iran, the banners reading "where is my vote", is not in support of Mousavi, rather it is a direct challenge to electoral process and the 'republic' claim of this regime.

The silent march and ongoing protests are not "pro- Mousavi rallies", rather people are using the political opportunity that has presented itself given the infighting among the theocratic factions of this regime.

Iranian people are demanding real change by rejecting this regime in its entirety. As the message of real change becomes louder, Mousavi will face a choice of either settling with the theocratic regime or pay the price just as the people in the streets face bullets and violence.

There is no doubt the Iranian regime will escalate the current conflict with more suppression and violence in coming days. The world community has a choice to stand in silence or speak in support of the Iranian people and their desire for an internationally monitored election.

This is a call that has also been renewed by the exiled leader of Iran's main opposition group, Maryam Rajavi. Let us hope Washington is taking notes.

________________________________________
email: press@wfafi.org
Media Inquiry: (202) 726-3653
web: http://www.wfafi.org

Don't Just Watch: Freedom Is Calling For Help

2009-06-17T08:14:00.003-05:00

PLAY/LISTEN TO BOTH OF THESE AT THE SAME TIME

THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING

2009-06-15T19:45:00.022-05:00

Iran and North Korea

This revolution for democracy in Iran is monumental. We ought to be arming the people - ought to be sending in the women’s army we have marginalized to the camps at the border.

RECOUNT OF "SOME" BALLOTS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE -- LET INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS COUNT ALL THE BALLOTS IN A NEW ELECTION -- FREE ALL THOSE ARRESTED.

Now is the time to help anyway you can!

The same so called feminists who did not support the liberation of women in Iraq and Afghanistan are now supporting Hillary and Obama in doing nothing. Patience they say because their heroes support the dictators by refusing to act. Soon the word feminist will stink to the heavens. Don't follow leaders. Support this democrat revolution in Iran. Pressure our so called leaders to support it. Stop parroting the male left who never met a sexist oppressor they did not love. Women support Women! Stop whining about the Carrie Prejeans of the world and support women who are braving torture and dying for freedom. Let the world know we are on the side of any people who fight for democracy. There are many ways from diplomacy to global united actions to arming the revolution. DO SOMETHING! DO EVERYTHING! Speeches are not enough except for the Obama/Clinton groupies.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,986213,00.html
Read the woman's army leader's blog Here.
NEWS ON HER BLOG
Iran: At least 10 protesters killed and hundreds injured
Monday, 15 June 2009
Mrs. Rajavi calls for formation of international mission to investigate the deaths and arrests
In yet another criminal act, agents of the Revolutionary Guards on Monday afternoon killed at least one protester in Tehran and injured many others.
Read more...

Iran: Barbaric raid on Tehran hospital to arrest the wounded, medical staff resist
Sunday, 14 June 2009
Agents of the regime’s notorious Ministry of Intelligence and Security and anti-riot forces launched an inhumane raid on Tehran’s Hezar Takhtekhabi Hospital at 01.30 am on Sunday to arrest those injured during clashes on Saturday. The agents assaulted the medical staff there. The suppressive forces continued with their pressures until 03.30 am when they were finally forced to leave following resistance by the medical staff and the relatives of those injured. In the course of the standoff, treatment for the injured had to be put on hold even as the number of injured people transferred to the hospital increased.
Read more

FROM Women Against Fundamentalism in Iran,

Iran election protester details encounter with riot police militiamen
Iran election protester details encounter with riot police, militiamen 15 June 2009 The Los Angeles TimesBy Borzou Daragahi

A bag that an activist left with strangers during a Tehran protest against election results leads to an interview in which she recounts a frantic search for her brother and beatings by police.Anousheh's hazel eyes burned from the smoke. She caught her breath. Up the boulevard, amid the hazy din, the riot police were beating people with batons and threatening others.

Screams erupted, as young men and women ran for cover.

The 29-year-old Iranian interior designer and her brother, Babak, had just been up there, at the northern end of Tehran's Africa Boulevard, where the crowds were chanting, "Death to the dictator!" -- a burgeoning mass of hundreds of people protesting alleged vote count fraud in the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

As bearded, truncheon-wielding Ansar-e Hezbollah militiamen began storming the gathering crowds, Anousheh and Babak sprinted down the street, losing sight of each other in the chaos. She searched for him on side streets with no luck.

She thought about going back home, but knew there was no way her protective big brother would leave the scene without first finding her. She imagined him lying in agony on the roadway, or locked up in a wagon and taken to prison, perhaps Evin and its solitary confinement wing, where she said her mother had spent 40 grueling days in 2003.

Before going back into the crowd and risking arrest or a beating, she decided to jettison her backpack, which contained a digital camera packed with potentially provocative images of stone-throwing demonstrators, a wallet full of identification cards, and her and her brother's cellphones, with numbers of all their contacts. "Can you please take this?" she said to a group of strangers sitting in a car, observing the unrest ahead. "I need to find my brother."

The baffled passengers took the bag, opened it quickly to be make sure the contents were not dangerous, and watched as she sprinted back into the melee, a solitary figure in a beige coat and light green head scarf. READ MORE in their newsletter - scroll way down the page.

Iran E-Zan Newsletter
June 15, 2009

With the widespread protests in full swing, Iranians are sending a strong message to the world that there is no republic in the "Islamic Republic of Iran". Iranians live under a system of theocracy which makes mockery of democratic processes such as elections. Still, the doubtful White House refuses to call the recent elections in Iran a sham and rigged because it is pinning is hope on negotiation even with the unelected and Supreme-Leader-selected Ahmadinejad.

The fact is, theocracy has been in full swing since 1981. Over the past four years, many have come to know what Ahmadinejad is all about, the excitement is now over the new guy, Mirhossein Mossavi. A quick glance on history of crackdowns, massacres and wave of suppression, however, implicates both Ahmadinejad and the so-called "opposition candidate" Mossavi.

Both men were directly and indirectly engaged in:

- The 1980 engineering of "Cultural Revolution" in the universities and the subsequent crackdown on all opposition groups from 1981-1986 which led to mass arrests and executions, including execution of pregnant women, 9-year-old girl and 70-year-old grandmother.

- The 1988 massacre of political prisoners which led to killings of thousands including many women. - The chain killings of the writers and intellectuals with at least 133 people killed, mostly in Tehran, during the 1990's.

- The worldwide assassination of exiled political opponents which took lives of at least 210 people from 1991 to 1997.

- The crushing of student movement, mass arrests and executions in the summer of 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003.

- The crackdown and mass arrest of women on International Women's Day in 2004, 2005, and 2006

- The weekly public hanging including several hangings and stoning of women in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

So, even if the Supreme Leader, Khameini, would have sanctioned Mossavi's presidency, he is still responsible for his crimes against the Iranian people given the above glimpse into his past. One has to keep in mind that the post-election protests in Iran is not about Mossavi. It is about rejecting the regime in its entirety.

As the demonstrators shout "down with dictatorship", they are taking advantage of the opportunity of regime's infighting to press for their demands and desire. Unfortunately, the mainstream western media and analysts have failed to recognize this glaring fact.

The world community must look beyond Mossavi and take note of the message that is coming from the Iranian people. It is time to isolate the regime and recognize its illegitimacy of all its factions. It is unacceptable that as Iranian people paying the the price of freedom with their lives, the world continues to "monitor the situation" in silence.

Washington needs to be reminded that democracy is more than the mocked elections that just took place in Iran. The ongoing protests is about human rights, equality, respect for civil society, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of association and that is the weapon Iranians are using against the regime in Tehran.

Iran Freedom Fighters Need Help

2009-06-14T18:36:00.004-05:00

They are beating the press - they are torturing the protesters - tying them up in stress positions and leaving them in the basement torture cells the press must leave tomorrow -- put out the drones -- don't let the country go black while the sharia police repress the people fighting for democracy.

The people of Iran need guns and armor NOW!

For the Women of Iran: May You Be Free

2009-06-14T12:17:00.003-05:00

From Songs blog

Song has posted a terrible beautiful video you must hear and see. If you have come here you will want to go there

The dead-can-dance-the-host-of-seraphim

To The Brave Women Of Iran

2009-06-10T08:13:00.009-05:00

We are with you and admire you. May you find in this election some relief from the misery you are forced to live under because of the religious fundamentalists who have taken power by force in your homeland. We are watching and are with you in spirit. May you be free.
--------------------------------------------
Everyone Knew They Would Do It - Liars Hypocrits Lack Any Real Ethics - Their morality police will club the people.
THE BRAVE PEOPLE ARE IN THE STREETS
US WOMEN MUST SUPPORT THEM AND DEMAND OUR GOVERNMENT SUPPORT THEM

They stole the election in Iran. They have rigged elections and taken the people's democracy. The people know it. Now there is only reform of the electorial vote, meaning supervised by NATO (they cannot trust the Saudi controled UN) or revolution.

-----------------------------------------------------

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- There's no doubt that Iran's election will be a major test for incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But many Iranian women hope the results will also shake the current status of women in the Islamic republic.

Zahra Rahnavard, wife of Iranian candidate Mir Hossein Moussavi, has taken a visible role in the campaign.

"Thirty-four million women demand to have female Cabinet ministers; 34 million women demand to be eligible to run for president," Zahra Rahnavard, wife of reformist candidate Mir Hossein Moussavi, told CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

"Thirty-four million women want the civil law to be revised; 34 million women want the family law revised."

Whether her husband wins or loses Friday, Rahnavard has broken barriers for women just by appearing on the campaign trail with her husband, a rarity for political wives in Iran.

"We look at her, and we say, 'We want to be like her in the future,' " said Shakiba Shakerhosseie, an Iranian woman who packed into Tehran's indoor Azadi (Freedom) sports stadium along with nearly 12,000 others to hear Rahnavard speak in March.

Rahnavard is a mother of three, as well as an accomplished artist and academic. She has been compared to first ladies in the United States, including Michelle Obama, for her visible role in her husband's quest for the presidency.

"I am here to say that men and women are equal," Rahnavard said.

Iran became an Islamic republic in 1979 after the ruling monarchy was overthrown and Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was forced into exile. The revolution also ended the ceremonial role of first lady that the last queen, Farah, enjoyed.

Commentary: Iranians favor U.S. peace deal
More women than men have voted in the past few elections, and Rahnavard has made a promise to her female supporters that their vote will count this time if Moussavi wins.

"We have made this promise to the women, and we will stand by it," she said.

Iranian women remain second-class citizens in criminal matters, divorce, child custody and inheritance cases, despite making up 65 percent of university students. Ahmadinejad's fundamentalist government has tried to make it easier for men to take more than one wife while restricting public sector careers for women.

This year, for the first time, the Guardian Council announced that a woman could legally be among the final candidate list. Out of the 42 women who registered, however, none was ultimately allowed to stand.

Even Zahra Eshraghi, granddaughter of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Khomeini, was banned from running for parliament as a reformist.

"For Ahmadinejad's government, women are just living things," Eshraghi said. "A woman is there to fill her husband's stomach and raise children." Watch one analyst talk about women in Ahmadinejad's Iran »

Moussavi is not the only candidate calling for a stronger role for women in Iran. Mehdi Karroubi, the only cleric in the presidential race, has promised to campaign for women's rights. Hard-line conservative candidate Mohsen Rezaie also said he would have female ministers if he wins the election.

Political science professor Mohammad Marandi downplayed Rahnavard's impact on the outcome of Friday's election. He said she may win over reformists and women, but what will win the election is a solution to the floundering economy and a strong performance in the debates. iReport.com: Iranians rally in large numbers

"If Ahmadinejad does well in the debates, I don't think anyone will be able to defeat him," Marandi said.

But try selling that to Rahnavard's enthusiastic supporters.

"This is the first time after the revolution we see a lady behind the president," Farhad Mahmoudi said. "And this is why we're so happy, because we can have a first lady."

Burka Fashion Show

2009-06-09T19:22:00.000-05:00

Read Chesler

2009-06-08T19:41:00.008-05:00

All feminists are disgusted by Barrack Hussein Obama's filthy sexist attitude toward the slave clothes of Muslim women and his filthy sexist comments implying that they freely chose to confine themselves by "choice" "choosing" to wear the veil. Immediately afterward Hillary appeared on western TV with a head scarf in front of a Mosque. Condi Rice never stooped to wear a head covering. Only the Democrat Obama groupies would demean their self and betray free women that way to obey their leader, just as they did during his election. Obama is destroying democracy. He is worse than Bush for women. He has knowingly appointed an anti choice woman to the Supreme Court and his Secretary of State is freely choosing to cover her hair like a slave to the patriarchy.

Please read Phyllis Cheslers latest post: Obama Throws Muslim Women Under the Bus

...And, when it comes to diplomacy, reciprocity is even more important than relativism. Why do Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi wear “shmattas” when they accompany the President to Saudi Arabia or when they meet with Syria’s President (whose own wife does not cover her hair?) Surely, since this is the case, we would expect the (non-existent) Arab Muslim female diplomats to the West or at least the male diplomat’s wives to follow Western customs when they are in the West.

However, this is not what they do. In fact, David Rusin, at IslamistWatch has just posted a piece titled “Hijab bullies want everyone to cover up.” He notes that a British Muslim dentist in the UK refuses to treat women who are not wearing hijab—not even if they are in pain; and that a schoolteacher assistant of Pakistani descent in Norway has tricked six year old girls into wearing hijab because, they were told, it would make them “prettier.”

Rusin’s conclusion:
”People like (the dentist) and the pushy classroom helper (in Norway) thus provide a service of sorts. By crossing a line that wiser Islamists do not cross, they expose Islamism for what it is: a radical ideology whose adherents will prolong tooth discomfort and pressure six-year-olds in order to have their way. (Thanks Rosanne Klass for calling this article to my attention).

....here’s what Ayaan Hirsi Ali had to say in an interview with Jeb Golinkin for the New Majority.

ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS:

President Obama’s speech didn’t do much for Muslim women. He defended their rights in Western countries to wear the hijab. He didn’t touch on Muslim women being confined, being forced into marriages or being victims of honor killings: These traditions and principles in the Koran and in Islam are being practiced in the West. He didn’t address that.

I think he was just appeasing the Muslim world because they perceive–they have these notions that Muslim women in Western countries–are not allowed to wear the headscarf or cover themselves. I mean you can wear whatever you want in the United States.

In Egypt where he spoke, women who do not wear their veil in public are subjected to very obscene remarks on the street and even sexual assault. Nowadays, even if they are covered they become victims of the same things: That is, in public, in Egypt, as a woman, you run 80% of the time the risk of being assaulted simply because you are a woman walking down the street.

They are forced into marriages; their testimony in countries where Sharia is law is just half of that of a man. They can be divorced with no rights. They need guardians, a married guardian or they cannot sign any legal papers. The President simply did not address Sharia or Islamic law in relation to women.

In his speech in Cairo, President Obama threw Muslim women under the bus. He threw Muslim feminists, reformers, and dissidents under the next bus. Obviously, I will return to this subject soon again.....................READ MORE HERE

Obama's Inner Muslim veils Hillary on Mideast tour and appoints anti choice person to HSS

2009-06-06T09:20:00.011-05:00

On the day hundreds attended services for Dr Tiller, murdered by the right to life movement and their media allies, I found out Obama appointed an anti choice Catholic to DHSS who vows to cut women's access to abortion clinics. ARE WE STILL HEARING THE RATIONALIZATIONS FROM SO CALLED FEMINISTS ABOUT OBAMA NOT ASKING SOTOMAYOR THE CATHOLIC HER VIEWS ON ABORTION AND THE REASONING IN ROE ?

BO DID NOT ASK BECAUSE HE KNOWS THE ANSWER.

Did not ask Sotomayer because he does not want an expansion of women's rights. Did not ask because he is a sexist.

Hillary wore a head covering on his Mideast tour because she is an opportunist. BO gave a speech about how OK it is to cover your face head and body if you WANT to and Hillary obligingly put on the slave clothes to make his point. Bo also said the thing Muslims should do for women is education. He did not mention the honor killings, stoning, beatings and slave status under law. He doesn't seem to know much or care much about female slavery or even the working class rights as compared to his Wall Street friends. Oh well, those working hicks are just afraid of floods of illegal immigrants taking their jobs and are clinging to guns.

Get over it free women. We are on our own. Feminist groups better act like they have a commitment to women, not the self aggrandizing Democrat Party or their 10 remaining members will also be gone. Hillary - never again.

This is from Alegre's corner. Alegre will defend Hillary until her death seeming regardless of anything Hillary does to betray women --- no women's rights work in the state dept - covering her head in the land of the patriarchs --kissing BO's rear... but Alegre has a good blog and you should read her posts.

Anti-Choice Nominee for HHS Post
by: Alegre
Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 21:56:25 PM EDT

Bad idea - even worse timing. The president is looking to reduce the need for abortion, but his anti-choice nominee has vowed to reduce ACCESS to abortions.

Disturbing doesn't begin to describe this latest move from the White House - especially given the elevated role of this office now that we have a Democrat in the Oval Office.

One would think that - given his campaign rhetoric - he would do his best to remove barriers to women in accessing whatever legal health care services we care to seek out.

From Sarah Posner of the American Prospect...
ABORTION FOE TO LEAD HHS FAITH-BASED OFFICE President Obama has appointed Alexia Kelley, executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG), to head the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services. ... Kelley has made clear that she seeks instead to reduce access to abortion.

"As Catholics for Choice points out in its press release criticizing the pick, "the Department of Health and Human Services is responsible for providing and expanding access to key sexual and reproductive health services. As such, we need those working in HHS to rely on evidence-based methods to reduce the need for abortion. We need them to believe in men's and women's capacity to make moral decisions about their own lives. Unfortunately, as seen from her work at CACG, Ms. Kelley does not fit the bill."

That is an extremely disturbing development, especially coming this week in the wake of George Tiller's assassination.

Under George W. Bush, the faith-based centers didn't play a policy role. But Obama has expanded the faith-based project to include a policy side, and one of its chief goals is to reduce the need for abortion.

I have opposed this, because reproductive health is a public health, not a religious issue. Also problematic: It is counterproductive for Obama to appoint someone who disagrees with the administration's stance.

Obama finds himself now in the difficult position of having elevated the importance of religion to making policy, and having appointed a religious figure whose opinions on policy conflict with his.

Kelley and CACG have made clear they are committed to Catholic doctrine on abortion and birth control. CACG has supported the Pregnant Women's Support Act, aimed at stigmatizing abortion and making it less accessible.
I have a problem with this on so many levels I don't know where to start...

First: elevating a religious office to one involved in making healthcare policy - when Bush wouldn't even do that? Second: appointing someone who's diametrically opposed to your stated goals? Third: an anti-choice activist???!!??! Fourth: now? Just days after the cold blooded murder of Dr. George Tiller, who was one of the few doctors still willing to perform late-term abortions (a very legal procedure under certain circumstances)????

If the White House wanted to rub salt in the wounds of everyone who was shocked and angered by Dr. Tiller's assassination, he's just managed to do it with this nomination. File this one under what was he THINKING?

I know what he was thinking ..............

Comment on Alegre's post:
*[new] Did everyone else already see this? (0.00 / 0)
The White House, in talking points distributed Tuesday to senators, casts Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor as a model of judicial restraint who strictly adheres to precedent and is willing to take on abortion rights supporters and side with conservative judges.
http://www.politico.com/news/s...
Public Health Care is the New Cool

The White House, in talking points distributed Tuesday to senators, casts Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor as a model of judicial restraint who strictly adheres to precedent and is willing to take on abortion rights supporters and side with conservative judges.
The talking points, detailed in a memo obtained by POLITICO, are an attempt to combat conservative criticism of Sotomayor, a federal appellate judge, as a judicial activist who injects her personal feelings into court decisions that further her liberal agenda.
The memo — titled “SONIA SOTOMAYOR: A NONIDEOLOGICAL AND RESTRAINED JUDGE” — cites a 1998 New York Times story in which a conservative lawyer is quoted calling Sotomayor “exactly what conservatives want: a nonactivist judge who does not apply her own views but is bound by the law.”Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23272.html#ixzz0Hf5lzbUm&C

DOMESTIC TERRORISM FROM THOSE NOT NAMED IN THE HOMELAND SECURITY REPORT BY NAPOLITANO

2009-06-01T14:35:00.023-05:00

George Tiller, Abortion Provider, Shot Dead in Church

Dr. George Tiller, a provider of second trimester abortions, was shot and killed inside the lobby of his Wichita, Kansas church, reports AFP and other media outlets. There are only three abortion providers who will do late term abortions and now there are only two. George Tiller, 67, was shot dead as he was walking into the Reformation Lutheran Church on the east side of town around 10 am this morning. George Tiller was pronounced dead at the scene. He is the fifth abortion provider to be murdered or maimed in the U.S. by those who love God and hold all life to be sacred.

It is worthy of note that Dr Tiller was persecuted and made to defend himself in court before his murder by the very legal system that ignored the threats on his life and left him unprotected from the frenzy the right wing prosecutor whipped up against him. This was a political witch hunt - a burning, and resulted in Tiller's death for which the prosecutor and his right wing supporters are morally responsible.

Tiller was exercising his legal right to preform abortions and like all the tolerated harassment of unnecessary delays, unscientific lectures, shouts and slurs, here the court lent itself to legal harassment with the purpose of destroying a citizen who offended the politics of a prosecutor making a career out of serving the religious right by attacking those who served the poor and disenfranchised. But a jury of citizens found him not guilty. Yet, there are no civil rights laws which allowed Tiller or his family to recoup his attorney fees and costs. The prosecutor knew there was no precedent for his criminal charges but there is no legal way to stop him and others like him. Thus, women's rights are under constant attack in a sexist society.

Tiller was the victim of violence before. On June 9, 1986 someone detonated a homemade bomb on the roof of his Wichita clinic. No one was hurt except for being terrorized. During the Summer of Mercy in 1991, protesters blocked the entrance to his facility before a federal judge ruled the protesters be arrested. Two years later, Dr. Tiller was shot outside his clinic the evening of August 19, 1993. His wounds were not life threatening. Abortion opponent Shelly Shannon was convicted of that shooting and sentenced to prison.

What more do you need to know these religious hypocrites are nothing more than misogynists who have no respect for women or human rights o??.
Every time you hear these fetus worshippers bleating about the sanctity of life, remember George Tiller. Remember a hero who gave his life for women and our freedom from slavery. Thank You Dr Tiller.

AND REMEMBER;
Dr. Barnett Slepian was shot and killed in his home in Amherst, New York .

Officer Robert Sanderson was killed during a clinic bombing in Birmingham, AL.

Emily Lyons, a nurse at the clinic was severely injured and still deaf and disfigured from the blast.

Dr. Jack Fainman was shot and injured in his home in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

An unnamed physician was shot at in his home in Rochester, New York.

Dr. Hugh Short was shot and injured in his home in Ancaster, Ontario.

Shannon Lowney and Leanne Nichols were shot and killed by John Salvi at two clinics in Brookline, Massachusetts. Five others were injured in the attacks.

Dr. Garson Romalis was shot and seriously wounded in his home in Vancouver, British Columbia.

Dr. John Bay0ard Britton and his escort, James H. Barrett were shot and killed in front of a clinic in Pensacola, Florida

Dr. George Tiller was shot and injured by Rachelle Shannon at his clinic in Wichita, Kansas.

Dr. David Gunn was shot to death by Michael Griffin in Pensacola, Florida.

You must review the post at: Violence & Harassment at U.S. Abortion Clinics because murder is not all these people do - the danger providers live with daily is reflected in the amount of bombing detonated at the clinics. Which brings me to the point of this post. Homeland Security published,
Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano included only a footnote attached to the report wherein right wing extremism in the United States" is defined as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. "It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," the warning says.

First of all, MAY??? With the list of bombings and murders??? MAY INCLUDE??
Second, illegal immigration opponents, open border opponents, out and in sourcing opponents, fair trade advocates, animal rights groups and environmentalist activists have been specifically named, targeted and infiltrated by FBI undercover agents and not one of those groups has ever killed a human being. There has been some property damage to vacant facilities but not by animal rights groups which just free tortured animals. The full force of the government has been brought in prosecuting these groups under a bill written by the animal exploiters.

Yet, here is another murder by an abortion clinic terrorist who had been stopped previously with explosives in the back seat of his car.

I guess Napolitano's politics determine that fantasy immigration and animal rights terrorists must be prosecuted rather than those that kill and maim. Stopping illegal immigration is termed terrorism by those who want to use it to create a political base for the democratic party. But a woman's right to choose?

BO is too delicate to ask that question of his supreme court nominees.

We have right to know if this president is committed to women’s rights or just open borders, by testing his nominee's response to specific questions about the incremental challenges to Roe v Wade which limit its' application to poor, military and global women.

We want to assess her tolerance for limits to our right to control our bodies by unnecessary and anti scientific restrictions which limit the free access to abortion, the morning after pill and birth control by catholic hospitals and pharmacists.

How coy were BO's reassurances — he never asked, he says. Are we to admire his sensitivity and be shamed into also not asking?

The Supreme Court has ruled in REPUBLICAN PARTY OF MINNESOTA, et al., PETITIONERS v. SUZANNE WHITE, CHAIRPERSON, MINNESOTA BOARD OF JUDICIAL STANDARDS, et al, that we DO have the RIGHT to such info from judicial candidates - not specifically how they will rule in the future but if they agree or disagree that the reasoning is correct in prior decisions.

So there is no reason for BO not asking Sotomayor her position on Roe v Wade AND subsequent decisions. Except that he doesn’t want us to know.

Last, how many male respectables go over the line in the media to incite violence against Abortion providers. I feel Bill O'Reilly does. I like the way O'Reilly defends children from pedophile loving judges so it pained me to hear him incite violence against Dr. Tiller and I heard it twice.

It was disgusting and if i were a relative of Tiller I would look into a lawsuit.
Salon article, O'Reilly's campaign against murdered doctor
The Fox News star had compared Tiller to a Nazi, called him a "baby killer," and warned of "Judgment Day"

He accussed Tiller of being a millionaire from killing babies for any reason as long as women had the money -but he didn't talk about his trillionaire church making billions off the baby trade in adoption and the his catholic church's pedophilia that feeds off unrestrained breeding. O'Reilly did not talk about right wing prosecutors who bled the doctor of legal fees. Reilly did not talk about a killer who never supported any of the fetuses he killed for his belief in life.

You can honor Dr Tiller by helping poor women obtain needed abortions AND defeat the women haters by donating to fund a woman's abortion.

In Wisconsin, poor women face major obstacles in order to terminate pregnancies. Many of these women already have too many children and various medical problems. YOU can help if you have any extra income. The Women's Medical Fund collects donations to pay one half of poor women's abortions. 100% of your donation will go to these women - their books are open. You can read about the women's stories on their website.

SUPPORT THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT WHICH B OBAMA PROMISED TO SIGN WHEN HE WAS A CANDIDATE

From Wikipedia

The Freedom of Choice Act (H.R. 1964/S. 1173) was a bill in the 110th United States Congress which "declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.
It prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively.

It also authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action."[1]
Earlier versions of the bill were introduced in 1989 and 1993.[2]

Findings
The bill states in its findings section that Congress has the affirmative power to legislate abortion based, in part, on the crossing of state lines by abortion providers, women seeking abortions, and medical supplies used in abortions.[citation needed]

[edit] Sponsorship
The Freedom of Choice Act was sponsored in the House of Representatives by Congressman Jerrold Nadler, and originally co-sponsored by Congressman James Greenwood, Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, and Congresswoman Diana Degette. In the Senate, it was sponsored by Senator Barbara Boxer, and originally co-sponsored by Senators Jon Corzine, Patty Murray, Frank Lautenberg, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Maria Cantwell, Jim Jeffords, Joseph Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Paul Sarbanes, and Barbara Mikulski. The bill was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on January 21, 2004, and in the United States Senate on January 22, 2004.

[edit] Status
The bills were referred to the Judiciary Committees of the respective Houses. Neither bill received further action in the 108th Congress. The bills were reintroduced in the 110th Congress, but, like their predecessors, were referred to committee without further action. As of June 2009, the bills have not been introduced in the 111th Congress.

During his tenure in the United States Senate, Barack Obama co-sponsored the 2007 Senate version of the Freedom of Choice Act (S. 1173). Responding to a question regarding how he would preserve reproductive rights in a speech given to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund on July 17, 2007, Obama declared, "The first thing I'd do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."[3]

In a press conference on April 29, 2009, President Obama said that although he supports a woman's right to choose, passage of the Freedom of Choice Act was "not highest legislative priority."[4]

[edit] Description
The bill is described by NARAL Pro-Choice America president Nancy Keenan as a bill to "codify Roe v. Wade" which would "repeal the Bush-backed Federal Abortion Ban," referring to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, "and other federal restrictions".[5] Opponents of FOCA assert that it would, if passed, invalidate every restriction on abortion nationwide, including parental notification laws, informed consent laws, and bans on partial birth abortion.[6] In the 50 American states, there are currently over 300 such laws.[citation needed]

Broccoli Kitten

2009-05-30T17:21:00.003-05:00

WHAT FEMINIST MUST DO TO MAINTAIN REPRODUCTIVE CONTROL

2009-05-30T12:02:00.005-05:00

Take Action: End Funding Restrictions on Abortion
FROM THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

A poor woman in Texas, relying on public assistance to make ends meet for her family, decides that she can’t continue an unwanted pregnancy. But a first-trimester abortion costs more than her monthly rent, and she soon finds out that Medicaid, which covers almost all other medically necessary health services, will not pay for it. So she puts off having an abortion until she has saved enough money for it, even though the longer she waits the costlier and riskier the procedure will be.

When abortion was first legalized in 1973, federal funds were available to low-income women on Medicaid who sought abortions. But four years later, Congress enacted the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding for abortion except under extremely limited circumstances: rape, incest, and danger to the mother’s life.

The Hyde Amendment has prevented millions of low-income women from making their own decisions about whether to have a child, forcing some to continue with a pregnancy even when it jeopardizes their health. According to the Guttmacher Institute, as many as 35% of women eligible for Medicaid who want an abortion will not be able to get one.

Many other women who rely on the federal government for health coverage—including women in federal prisons, federal employees, and Native American women—have also been deprived of their right to abortion. Washington, DC is prohibited by federal law from using even its own funds to cover abortion services for poor women. And women serving in the military can’t get abortions on their bases even with their own money.

A key goal of the Center’s Federal Policy Agenda is expanding access to abortion for all women, and we are calling on President Obama to strike these funding restrictions from his 2010 proposed budget. You can help us: Tell President Obama that the government should not intrude on a poor woman’s decision whether or not to continue a pregnancy.

In Wisconsin, poor women face major obstacles in order to terminate pregnancies. Many of these women already have too many children and various medical problems. YOU can help if you have any extra income. The Women's Medical Fund collects donations to pay one half of poor women's abortions. 100% of your donation will go to these women - their books are open. You can read about the women's stories on their website.

Sotomayor is not a victory for women's rights.

2009-05-29T05:24:00.037-05:00

I am watching the usual suspects push the personal story of Sotomayor's life while ignoring her decisions on the second circuit. They are not talking much about attendance at the private and expensive elite universities but instead emphasizing the part about living in subsidized housing after her parents came to the US. Her mother came from Puerto Rico. I am less clear about her father who died when she was nine. Her mother, a nurse, is given credit for Sotomayor's success. She is always referred to as "a single mom" who worked two jobs. No further details available except that somewhere a stepfather appeared as he was mentioned at the announcement of Sotomayor's appointment.

No mention of this country's political and economic assistance which would interfere with the Horatio Alger myth. Interfere with the propoganda designed to make us say, she is one of us as we would like to be. Why should we care? Because class is not the criteria for assistance and it is time to equalize that aspect of the ladder to success in this country. Economic criteria should become the only criteria for affirmative action assistance. Also, because all this emphasis on immigrant success is a substitute for US political action and economic development in the countries of origin.

There is a conflict of interest between the US classes over immigration. It is in the interest of the working class to raise standards all over the world.

It is in the interest of corporations and predatory lenders to flood this country with cheap immigrant labor and bust unions, lowering the income of the working class world wide.

Politicians satisfy their corporate funders by encouraging illegal immigration while simultaneously developing a voter base for their own party. That is why the Cuban voter block in Florida and the open Mexican border.

Illegal immigration results in cheap union busting labor for the elites and a voting block for politicians. The working class picks up the costs with no corresponding benefits. The middle class benefits with cheap household workers, maids and nannies, yard work, remodeling workers, cheap day labor. Corporations and agri-business benefit by profits from imposing working conditions that no US citizen will accept in their butcher slaughterhouses, factory farming animal containment factories, and toxic, unsanitary, genetically modified, food producing fields.

So the masses are bombarded with feel good stories of immigrants and derided as racists if they object to open borders, conditionless, unfair trade treaties and taxpayer subsidies of illegal immigrants for corporate profit. Meanwhile, our cities, where the middle class does NOT live, deteriorate and living conditions become unbearable. Only the worker upper class, govt workers, cops and firefighters, court workers continue to prosper and believe.

Thus, the working class is confused about their right to protect their own standard of living while Wall Street enriches their own class by in sourcing and out sourcing. Meanwhile, California, the open borders gateway, can no longer meet its' welfare obligations and its gangs control the streets and prisons. Diversionary arson is out of control.

Now what do I mean by subsidies? The Wisconsin legislature is passing a bill that will allow the children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition at the University of WI, at a time when working class citizens, ineligible for minority subsidies, can no longer afford tuition. Right now veterinarians are graduating with 150,000.00 in student loans when the working class cannot afford to take their animals to the vet because of the high fees vets must charge to pay off their loans.

The Dept of Workforce Development subsidizes United Migrant Opportunity Services with about about 25 million in state workforce development funds to house illegal aliens, provide them with day care, job training, English lessons and education so they can be cheap labor for corporations and bust unions. UMOS is in every state - in WI it OWNS about ten homes, to house immigrants and gets millions in tax payer dollars to screw the working class. How many battered women's transitional houses are owned by the shelters?

How can this happen? Corporations fund politician's political campaigns and this is their reward. Just as the condition free bail outs were BO's reward to Goldman Sacks and AIG. Just as medical "reform" will benefit the insurance industry while cutting benefits to seniors.

*United Migrant Opportunity Services/UMOS INC. Milwaukee, Wisconsin ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
UMOS statements for this report. The Statement of Financial Position and Statement of ... Note payable to U.S.Department of Agriculture due in annual payments of ... 8062011. Principal payments due by year are as follows: 2009 ...
www.umos.org/corporate/financial_audit.pdf - Similar pages -
• UMOS - Home

So I am not interested in Sotomayor's fantasy background and in fact am disgusted by the half truths of the BO propaganda machine. This is what does interest me. The second circuit reviews a majority of the immigration cases. A majority of US citizens (75%) are fed up with illegal immigration, and all the US subsidies of illegal workers at the expense of US taxpayers. Yet, we are not given a history of Sotomayor's decisions on immigration cases. I want a review of every immigration decision she has participated and/or written. I am especially interested in her Homeland Security decisions involving airlines and entrance requirements.

I am also disgusted by the so called feminist groups' blind faith in Obama's commitment to women's right to choose.

The majority of Catholic Hispanics oppose abortion although there are some studies done of self reporters which obscure this reality. The way we are losing the right to abortion is by increments. First, poor women lost funding, then military women, then women in foreign countries, then there are the endless state restrictions demanding fake medical advice and delays. In the meantime doctors are being prosecuted and killed, while states continue to attempt to pass legislation denying women their constitutional rights. Women need a Supreme Court appointment who will strike down these impediments to the full exercise of our constitutional right to control our own bodies.

Sotomayor is both Hispanic and Catholic and has written at least one decision hostile to a woman's right to choose. We know Planned Parenthood and NARAL do what Obama tells them to do regardless of the effect on women's rights. Only one group, the Center for Reproductive Rights is sounding the alarm. I urge readers to go to their site and keep informed.

Center for Reproductive Rights

Judge Sotomayor has not ruled on the constitutional right to abortion. However, in 2002, she authored an opinion in a case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights (at that time the Center for Reproductive Law & Policy), challenging the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule or “Mexico City Policy,” which prohibited overseas organizations that received U.S. funds from providing abortion services or
engaging in speech intended to ease restrictions on abortion.

The Center filed Center for Reproductive Law & Policy v. Bush on behalf of itself and its attorneys asserting that the Center’s work overseas with women’s rights organizations seeking law reform to address the deaths and harmful consequences of unsafe abortion would be hampered by the Global Gag Rule.

Writing for a three judge panel, Judge Sotomayor relied on previous Second Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court decisions to reject the Plaintiffs’ First Amendment, Due Process and Equal Protection claims. Sotomayor is gnerally bad on first amendment rights favoring the right of authority to regulate speech in the interests of order bla blaa bla.

The opinion focused on the application of legal precedent and did not express a view on or discuss the impact of the Global Gag Rule on abortion law reform efforts around the world.

On January 23, President Obama rescinded the Global Gag rule.

For the harmful effects of the Global Gag rule during the Bush
Administration, see Breaking the Silence: The Global Gag Rule’s Impact on Unsafe Abortion and How the Global Gag Rule Impacts U.S.Foreign Policy and Harms Women’s Health.

Make sure to check in at the "I AM NOT SORRY" blog. And the home page with the picture.

The other objection to Sotomayor is her attitude toward second amendment right to bear arms. Women need the right to defend themselves as there is a war on women in the US. Battered women need to defend themselves. Women in parks and lonely roads should be able to carry guns. Women walking to their cars or at bus stops should be allowed to carry guns. Sotomayor rules that the right to bear arms is not an individual right.

I think Obama supports the Muslim theocrats and will sacrifice the rights of women in order to support alliances with Muslim theocrats. I think Obama supports open borders, and is willing to suppress women's rights when it is expedient to do so. The latest wave of Muslim immigrants has resulted in an increase in the number of girls who are isolated in home schools. Changes in women's rights are occurring in the Courts and Universities. I think Obama's campaign operatives know they can satisfy corporate funders and build their voter base by encouraging an open borders policy. I think we saw Obama's attitude toward the working class in the different way he treated the Wall Street bail outs and General Motors. Busting union contracts and pensions while allowing billion dollar bonuses for failed Wall St executives and bankers until the public rebelled.

I think Sotomayor is an appointment in line with his goals and not in the interests of women.