Tuesday News Bucket

19 Comments

1. 

   CabinGirl on June 12, 2007 at 6:53 am

   When they issued this fatwa: NYT

   First came the breast-feeding fatwa. It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times, to establish family ties.

   Unreal.  

   • 

     JanetT in MD on June 12, 2007 at 1:32 pm

     Okay, so in order to establish “family ties” and be able to work (presumably while still wearing hijab, which varies from simple headscarfs to fully covered, depending on where you are), an unmarried woman (ie, one presumably with little or no experience of sexuality) must permit strange men, who could be her age or much older, a degree of liberty usually only given a husband, one that even the most “liberated” of American women wouldn’t feel comfortable with….

     This makes absolutely NO SENSE…. unless of course the real intent is to keep young unmarried women from working outside the home or family business at all. Which is probably more the point.

     • 

       CabinGirl on June 12, 2007 at 3:45 pm

       And this is to be done to protect the woman’s honor.  Never mind the fact that unmarried women who haven’t had children have little reason to lactate…  🙂

       The whole thing is gross.

       • 

         JanetT in MD on June 13, 2007 at 1:44 am

         Yeah, that suddenly hit me later…. D’oh!!!

   • 

     Gaianne on June 13, 2007 at 12:53 am

     When I start believing the NYT on matters of Islam, you have my permission to shoot me.  

2. 

   CabinGirl on June 12, 2007 at 7:05 am

   Musharraf’s rule coming to an end? TPM Muckraker

   Since September 11, 2001, the U.S.’s Pakistan policy can be summed up in two words: Pervez Musharraf. But within the U.S. intelligence community, and in Pakistan, there’s a growing belief that the U.S.-friendly military dictator’s days are drawing to a close — and possibly within the next few months. It may be time for the U.S. to face what it’s long feared in the nuclear state: the prospect of chaos, rising Islamism or anti-Americanism that follows Musharraf.

   Just what the world needs…will W be nuking them after Iran?

   • 

     JanetT in MD on June 12, 2007 at 1:47 pm

     Unlikely… Pakistan has nukes of its own.  But without Musharref, Pakistan is going to become the most dangerous wild card in the region.  

     Iran isn’t paradise, but it’s relatively stable and prosperous, with a functional government, and not sympathetic to Al-Qaeda (regardless of what Bush & Co. want us to beleive). Their president has a big mouth, but no real power, so overall they aren’t a threat unless they get backed too far into a corner (which Cheney seems  eager to do).  

     Pakistan is a powder keg, Al-Qaeda is already THERE, and if Musharref goes down, there’s no telling who will end up on top, with access to their nuclear arsenal (or even their conventional one).  And with our military stretched to the breaking point, the only option we would have in a crisis situation is bombing… which will kill many more civilians…and that will only make things WORSE.

     • 

       Gaianne on June 13, 2007 at 1:11 am

       And with our military stretched to the breaking point, the only option we would have in a crisis situation is bombing… which will kill many more civilians…and that will only make things WORSE  

       I don’t think I hold with your casual approach to US-launched nuclear war.  

       In fact, contrary to our paranoid delusions, we do not HAVE to do ANYTHING about Pakistan–although you have read it right in one sense:  We probably will–though  there is very little we CAN do to good effect.  We learned to live with Russian Communists, if a bit uneasily, for the better part of a century.  If we are willing to keep our wits about us, we can certainly live with Islamic Pakistan.  

       Whether we choose to do so is another matter.  

       Do you think the US can launch a nuclear war against a nuclear power without taking casualties, including nuclear casualties?  I can only suggest you think again.  

       Well, will it happen?  Maybe.  But we certainly not encourage our demented leaders in this.  

       But without Musharref, Pakistan is going to become the most dangerous wild card in the region.

       Wrong.  

       Pakistan is not, and will never be as dangerous as the US.  It has neither the capability nor the mind for it.  

       • 

         JanetT in MD on June 13, 2007 at 2:27 am

         I was thinking conventional bombing, actually, not nuclear. (Nuclear is to me unthinkable, sorry if that wasn’t clear).  Which seems to be the usual MO these days, because of the relatively lower casualty rate to Americans. US forces seem to frequently call for airstrikes whenever they face enemy fire, or when they think they are facing enemy fire… or when they think they know where a terrorist group is meeting… and even with conventional bombs, there are civilian casualties.    

         My concern with Pakistan is that Al Qaeda is already there, and because of US bombing in the past (in search of “terrorists”) which has resulted in numerous civilian casualties, and because of US support of Musharref, it’s very likely that if another faction or group takes Musharref down, they will not be friendly to the US, and they might be friendly to Al-Qaeda. And reportedly, Pakistan does have nuclear weapons. Most likely the fall of Musharref would result in internal struggles for power, and there’s no predicting who will come out on top. Or who will be guarding the most dangerous weapons in their arsenal in the meantime.

         You’re right that we shouldn’t have to be involved… but Bush & Co don’t seem capable of knowing when to leave bad enough alone. (And of course, if we weren’t in Iraq, a change of government in Pakistan wouldn’t be a concern.)

3. 

   on June 12, 2007 at 7:09 am

   DREAM, yes this is why they want an “immigration bill”.
   http://www.defenselink.mil//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=46369

   • 

     on June 12, 2007 at 7:22 am

     And I bet .0000001% of Americans know what TILMA is and how it will affect their future.
     http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5924
     SPPNA,Amero,Nascocorridor
     “Immigration Bill” my ass.

   • 

     CabinGirl on June 12, 2007 at 7:35 am

     Yep, they just love to prey on the poor and the desperate when they need cannon fodder.

4. 

   ask on June 12, 2007 at 7:54 am

   US air strike mistakenly kills Afghan police

   US-led forces mistakenly killed seven policemen in the eastern province of Nangarhar, bordering Pakistan, Afghan officials said today.

   The deaths came when Afghan police at a remote checkpoint mistook American troops for Taliban fighters and opened fire on them. The US forces fired back and called for an air strike.

   A policeman said officers called out for the US forces, who were on a night mission, to stop their attack.

   “I thought they were Taliban, and we shouted at them to stop, but they came closer and they opened fire,” Khan Mohammad, one of the policemen at the post, told the Associated Press.

   • 

     ask on June 12, 2007 at 7:58 am

     Afghanistan conflict worsening, says Red Cross

     The humanitarian situation in Afghanistan is worse now than a year ago with “civilians suffering horribly”, the International Committee of the Red Cross said today.

     In a bleak assessment, the agency said the conflict had significantly intensified in the south and east of the country and was spreading to the north and west. The result had been a growing number of civilian casualties.

     “Civilians suffer horribly from mounting threats to their security, such as increasing numbers of roadside bombs and suicide attacks, and regular aerial bombing raids,” said Pierre Krähenbühl, the director of operations at the ICRC.

     The updated assessment comes amid growing fears in the US and Britain that Nato forces have lost the initiative against the Taliban, which has gained momentum, particularly in the south.

   • 

     CabinGirl on June 12, 2007 at 11:53 am

     Wow, just how similar do US troops and Taliban fighters look, anyway?  

     Another happy war story courtesy of Bushco.

5. 

   ask on June 12, 2007 at 8:05 am

   Somali region says U.S. planes hunting Islamists

   BOSASSO, Somalia (Reuters) – U.S. aircraft are hunting foreign jihadists in the remote mountains of northern Somalia where American forces launched air strikes earlier this month, a regional official and residents said on Tuesday.

   Ibrahim Artan Ismail, security minister in the regional Puntland government, said his administration was working closely with the U.S. military to help target the fighters.

   “We are aware U.S. planes are searching for the suspected Islamists,” Ismail told a news conference in Bossasso. “As you know, the suspected Islamists fighters are still on the run. Puntland is working closely with the Americans to seize them.”

   He gave no other details, but residents said suspected U.S. aircraft were often seen in the skies over Puntland these days.

   “The planes are terrifying, sometimes they even fly very low. They must be looking for something. This is unusual,” said one local, Said Mohamed.

6. 

   boran2 on June 12, 2007 at 9:28 am

   Wow, news other than I/P stories!!!  Who would have thought such a thing?!!!

   • 

     CabinGirl on June 12, 2007 at 10:21 am

     Hmmm…Tuesday News Oasis?

7. 

   cruz del sur on June 12, 2007 at 9:51 am

   In Chile,a former chief of the secret police (DINA) Raúl Iturriaga was sentenced to five years in prison (and Manuel Contreras, who also palned the Embassy Row bombing in DC in 1976 got another 10 years) for the disappearence of a leftist activist) Iturriaga has also been convicted in Italy to ten years for gunning down Mr and Mrs Leighton and  is awaiting trial for the double murder of Mr and Mrs Prats in 1974 in Argentina.

   It seems they will never see the day of light again!