Archive for May, 2006

Pakistani Torture of Women

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

“KARACHI, Pakistan – Ayesha Baloch was dragged to a field, her brother-in-law held the 18-year-old down, her husband sat astride her legs and slit her upper lip and nostril with a knife.

They call such assaults on women a matter of “honor” in some Pakistani communities, but for the majority it is a source of national shame.

Married less than two months ago in Pakistan’s central district of Dera Ghazi Khan, Baloch was accused of having sexual relations with another man before marriage.

“First they tortured me and beat me. I started screaming. Akbar then caught my hands and pulled me to the ground. Essa sat on my legs and cut my nose and lips,” Baloch mumbled through her bandages at hospital in the city of Multan.

“I was bleeding and started screaming after they fled on a motorcycle. People heard me and rescued me and took me to my mother’s home.”

At least she wasn’t killed.

More than 1,000 women are slain by their husbands or relatives, and that is just the reported, not actual, number of “honor killings” in Pakistan each year.
Pakistanis try confronting shame of honor killing continues…
Many killings are planned rather than done in rage, and the motive often has more to do with money or settling scores..

Honor killings are known as “karo-kari” killings.

A woman is deemed a “black woman,” a “kari,” once she is accused of having sex outside of marriage and is liable to be killed..
The custom is rooted in tribalism, although a strict interpretation of Is-lam’s hudood penal code also rules that adulterers should be stoned to death.

Wer’e talking about Family killing their girls and women.
Did you get that?
Fathers, brothers, son-in-laws, uncles, cousins, brother-in-laws…torturing , mutilating and killing their female daughters, wives, daughters, sister- in laws and sisters.

Kicking, cutting flesh, biting, choking, strangling, hitting, pushing,and assaults with weapons are behaviors most often associated with hard core criminals, not with ones father or brother.

Torture is used to hurt, degrade, dominate, humiliate and gain power over the victim. Are all women thus viewed by their own flesh and blood as potential victims?

The causes and roots of this familial violence are embedded in attitudes toward women which have existed for thousands of years.
In Muzlim societies, women are treated as the property of their husbands and he is seen, according to some, as having the right to use physical force in relating to her, if necessary.

I guess in the case of 18 year old Ayesha Baloch ..the male sadists “deemed it necessary.”

Does the “PC Machine” acknowledge this horror publicly or is that part of Izlam just another form of cultural “expression”?
The torture and murder of women has, for far too long, gone unnoticed, been tolerated, or been given attention sporadically if at all.

Why haven’t we put an end to this barbarism?
Is it due to:
a lack of understanding?
a lack of recognition?
Denial of the severity of the problem with many still believing it is a private religious matter within the Muzlim faith instead of a violent, criminal issue and, therefore, best left alone?

To those whom this does not matter…….
I have four words.
What About the Victim?

Diane’s Stuff has open posts and goodies.,Stop the ACLU has the latest on Iran.,Point Fivehas the latest on John Murtha.,Freedom Watch has an amusing but telling photo.,Blogbathas the latest on Cindy Sheehan and Hollyweird., For updates on media bias and Iraq see:Church and State,TMH’s Bacon Bits has Open Posts and updates on just about everything!

WomeN in Combat..Hmm..

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

“Why are our generals trying to push women into ground combat in Iraq despite Pentagon regulations and congressional law against it? What is it about civilian control of the military that the generals don’t understand?
Women Don’t Belong In Ground Combat adds..

The advocates of women in combat say the front line is everywhere in Iraq. They continually try to fuzzy over the difference between being subject to risk (such as being ambushed by a car bomb) versus the task of aggressively seeking out and killing the enemy.

Army Chief of Staff General Peter J. Schoomaker tried to laugh off the difference by saying that “maybe since we’re killing 40,000 people a year on the highways, they [women] shouldn’t drive. That’s very dangerous, too.” Comparing the risk of highway driving with engaging the enemy in combat is insulting to our intelligence and common sense.

Putting women in military combat is the cutting edge of the feminist goal to force us into an androgynous society. Feminists are determined to impose what Gloria Steinem called “liberation biology” that pretends all male-female differences are culturally imposed by a discriminatory patriarchy.

History offers no evidence for the proposition that the assignment of women to military combat jobs is the way to win wars, improve combat readiness, or promote national security.

Women, on the average, have only 60 percent of the physical strength of men, are about six inches shorter, and survive basic training only by the subterfuge of being graded on effort rather than on performance. These facts, self-evident to anyone who watches professional or Olympic sports competitions, are only some of the many sex differences confirmed by scholarly studies.

Denial of physical differences is an illusion that kills. That’s the lesson of the Atlanta courtroom massacre where a 5-foot-one, 51-year-old grandmother police guard was overpowered by a 6-foot-tall, 210-pound former football linebacker criminal; so now three people are dead.

Every country that has experimented with women in actual combat has abandoned the idea, and the notion that Israel uses women in combat is a feminist myth. The armies and navies of every potential enemy are exclusively male; their combat readiness is not diminished by coed complications or social experimentation.

No country in history ever sent mothers of toddlers off to fight enemy soldiers until the United States did this in the Iraq war. We hope this won’t be the legacy of the Bush Administration.”

I know I know I know.
It’s controversial..Feel free sweet readers to share your slant on this one.
What is for me most offensive about women in combat is the total denial of male /female differences and the negative consequences this has on morality and ultimately relations between the sexes.

The “Political Correctness Machine” has made it embarassing for men or women to think of women as “ladies”. Women used to be known for their high standards of moral behavior, for knowing what’s “proper”, for politeness. Men felt a need to protect and defend women. This “Machine” has stolen true male heroism from the world.

The softness and empathy of women and the risk-taking of men used to complement one other. (which is not to say women don’t take unique risks..After all every woman risks her health and life in childbirth alone..)

But what has happned to the Titanic cry of “Women and children first”?
The man churned out by the “PC Machine”is supposed to abide and cheer women on if they wish to enter combat and risk their lives.

He dare not treat her any differently than his male counterparts. He can now freely cuss and spit in front of her, tell crude jokes,all the while no longer feeling the need to even protect her.
After all, being just like a man…….she can take care of herself right?

Not quite sweet readers:

Around the world, at least one in every three women has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused during her lifetime by a man.
Heise, L., Ellsberg, M. and Gottemoeller, M. Ending Violence Against Women. Population Reports, Series L, No. 11., December 1999

Nearly one-third of American women (31 percent) report being physically or sexually abused by a husband or boyfriend at some point in their lives, according to a 1998 Commonwealth Fund survey.
The Commonwealth Fund, Health Concerns Across a Woman’s Lifespan: 1998 Survey of Women’s Health, May 1999

Nearly 25 percent of American women report being raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or date at some time in their lifetime, according to the National Violence Against Women Survey, conducted from November 1995 to May 1996.

In the year 2001, more than half a million American women (588,490 women) were victims of nonfatal violence committed by an intimate partner.
Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief, Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001, February 2003

On average, more than three women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends in this country every day. In 2000, 1,247 women were killed by an intimate partner.
Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief, Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001, February 2003

Women are NOT men.
And what of the moral implications?

“Lt. Col. Stephen Smith, a Gulf War mechanized infantry commander, told the Commission (November 1992, the 15-member Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces) in Los Angeles:

“By introducing women, even women who have the physical capability to lift the rucksacks, walk the distances, raise the hatches, load the TOW missiles, break the track on those vehicles and put it back together again, you are still introducing into that equation other factors that weren’t there before: sexual jealousies, intentions, our own social or moral values come into play, and they make more difficult that job of that commander who is forward.

“It has been said that in combat the important things are simple, and the simple things are difficult. We are making this more difficult by doing that …. I believe that women in those squads would reduce the combat effectiveness of those squads, and I think we would pay for that in lives.”

The issue of violence against women was crystallized when former prisoners of war appeared before the Commission, including one of the two women captured during Operation Desert Storm. Testimony about the indecent assault on one of the women drew further attention to POW training programs already in place that “desensitize” male POWs to the brutalization of women with whom they may be held captive.

An interview with trainers at the Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape training center at Fairchild Air Force Base uncovered a logical but disturbing consequence of assigning women to combat:

“If a policy change is made, and women are allowed into combat positions, there must be a concerted effort to educate the American public on the increased likelihood that women will be raped, will come home in bodybags, and will be exploited..”
Case Against Women in Combat
Allowing women to fly combat missions would dramatically increase the probability the United States would have women become prisoners of war. In Vietnam and Operation Desert Storm, the great majority of POWs were combat aviators. Col. John Ripley, USMC, told the Commission in June, “When that airplane, with its female pilot, returns to earth or collides with earth or she must bail out of it, she is no longer a female pilot; she is now a victim.” …

The presence of women would increase morale problems for male prisoners, as well as their vulnerability should the enemy torture women prisoners to coerce cooperation from the men, as highly decorated American aviators who spent years of captivity in Vietnam told the Commission.”

Women are not Men.
Should I repeat that?
The argument that men and women are the same is essentially based on Marxist theory. Simply substitute “gender” for Marx’s category of “class,” and hence…We are all the same.
This “gender” theory is a dangerous form of political moralism, with the same totalitarian characteristics as other versions of Marxism.
Ah..We are all the same.
The American ahem.. “Imperialists” are the same as the Muzlim terrorists and their actions, therefore, seen on the same scale and judged as morally equivalent.

Men and women advocating women in combat?
I suppose if one believes that gender differences are the result only of arbitrary social convention.
But if that is the case, I suppose men should be wearing the mascara and high heels and women need not worry about rape any longer eh?

I remain bewildered and astonished.


Bennings Writing Pad keeps us informed bout illegal immigration and the latest fiasco.,Freedom Watch shows us someone with national Pride., TMH’s Bacon Bits shares insights bout John McCain and betrayal., Updates on the Fair Tax Movement over at third world county

Guard the Borders Blogburst

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

by Heidi at Euphoric Reality


The new immigration bill (the most “sweeping reform in 50 years”) S. 2611 is an amalgam of petty causes, illogical provisions, unstructured “solutions” with zero allowances for implementation, and self-contradictory language. Despite the mess, it was passed by self-righteous politicians who repeated the mantra “it’s better than doing nothing.” This from the same gaggle of do-nothings who outright rejected the House’s law enforcement bill.

The Senate bill has our President’s full support – this same bill is a derivative of one structured by Ted Kennedy and John McCain, and supported in full by the majority of Democrats. That alone ought to give one pause – President Bush, a Democrat?

ThE NeW PhobiaS

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

“As the battle over marriage gathers momentum in Australia, senior politicians have admonished a local authority in Sydney for allowing council-run daycare centers to expose young children to books depicting same-sex parent families.

Defenders of the books say they are merely promoting acceptance and tolerance, but critics see the move as a calculated bid to indoctrinate the youngest children.

‘Gay-Friendly’ Child Care Under Fire continues……
The four picture-story books comprising the “Learn to Include” series feature same-sex parent families. One, called Going to Fair Day, has a little girl attending a Mardi Gras “gay pride” event with her “two mums,” and meeting a friend there who has “two dads.”

The books are designed for beginning readers aged 5-7 or to be read to children of any age up to eight. Sam Byrne, the mayor of one Sydney region where the “gay-friendly” books are being used, said they were “broadening the minds of our future generation.”

“Research … has shown that children learn discriminatory behavior at an early age, so advocating anti-discrimination values at an early age will be valuable for the child’s long-term social development,” Byrne said.

So “gender” is the enemy now eh?
Gender is being construed as oppressive and evil, because it creates what liberals insist are artificially constructed roles of the feminine and masculine.
We are all familiar with the common assumption of this school of thought, namely, that women and men are almost identitical in their makeup and that differences were only imposed from without.

Belief in the sanctity of traditional marriage is now viewed as a psychological condition ascribed to homophobia and believers are seen as the enemy as long as they are complicit in the past and present oppression
of homosexual couples who now wish to marry and indocrinate youngsters with their beliefs.

Before you toss any rocks..let me state this clearly.
Believers in marriage and um..God – also believe that there are innate and immutable differences between women and men. The complimentarity between men and women should be valued, preserved and protected. And children deserve to reap the benefits of this natural union.

This attempt to politicize children is nothing more than self-indulgent adventurism. These ahem..’activists’ are no longer content carving a niche in their own communities. They are on a quest to liberate gender in the larger society and ultimately the world.
Of course those shouting sexism, racism or homophobia at every turn purport to be beyond prejudice or insensitivity……

..except when it comes to accepting religious and moral values and tradition. But of course.

Acording to their ahem…logic….They must be feel threatened by values , morals, and Faith. I suppose that would render them valuephobic, moralphobic and Faithophobics eh?


Freedom Watch has Open Post and assorted goodies., third world county has Open posts and some beautiful insights bout our Founding Fathers.,Plancks Constant has Open posts and insights about euthansia.
A Ladys Ruminations is celebrating her blogiversary!,All Things Beautiful has a brilliant overview of Iran and the U.S. Gov’t.,Leaning Straight Up has a great take on peaceful protesters!

Small Victories eh..

Monday, May 29th, 2006

Remember this Y’all?
“Pop group The Pussycat Dolls are set to become real-life dolls – toy firm Hasbro is creating plastic figurines of the sexy six-piece..” band.
Hasbro To Market Pussycat Dolls Toys Towards Six-Year-Olds
Hasbro says the $15 action figures are aimed at children aged six to nine, despite The Pussycat Dolls’ risqué image.

Angel’s Rant

Update time:
Hasbro Ends Plans for ‘Pussycat Dolls’
Published: May 26, 2006
Hasbro has canceled plans to produce a line of fashion dolls modeled on the pop act the Pussycat Dolls after parents objected to the group’s racy image.

Well, well, well.

Censoring “AmericA”

Monday, May 29th, 2006


“Censoring the word “America” from our own schools is something Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden would never have thought possible. Michigan has done it without a whimper.
Keep America’ in Michigan schools State bureaucrats want to do what Stalin, Osama could only dream about continues..

In perhaps a well-intentioned, but pernicious example of political correctness, the Michigan Department of Education is attempting to ban the “America” and “American” from our public schools. Even though the word “America” appears in the department’s own civics and government benchmarks, the department’s style protocol for the Michigan Education Assessment Program requires that “America” and “Americans” be expunged from our testing and grade level expectations. Last week, the department ordered that our hard-working teachers not utter the words.

We’re all ‘North Americans’

The Department of Education asserts that “Americans” includes Mexicans, Canadians and others in the Western Hemisphere, so referring to U.S. residents as Americans is inappropriate. In the department’s view, “America” happens to include South, Central and North America. Accordingly, when referring to the colonial period, the state bureaucracy requires teachers to refer to “the colonies of North America” or “North Americans.” After the American Revolution, the nation is called the United States (not of America).

The state’s edict would be laughable if it were not so disgraceful. Instead of focusing on better teaching methods and educational resources to help our hard-working teachers and parents, the Department of Education spends its energy on confusing, misleading, historically inaccurate and counterproductive wordplay.

One can only imagine how teachers struggle to meet the semantic dictates of an educational bureaucracy gone awry. According to the department, before the American Revolution, George Washington, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were North Americans. But so were the French colonists in the Louisiana Territory, the Spanish settlers in Mexico and the British colonists in Canada — not to mention the Native Americans.

No ‘American’ Revolution?

After the American Revolution, the Founding Fathers no longer qualified as North Americans, but apparently the British, Spanish, French and Native Americans did. What people in the United States are to be called after the Revolution is not clear, so long as they are not referred to as Americans.

Although the style protocol does not require educators to change formal titles such as “America the Beautiful,” the students will apparently now believe the song is about a hemisphere and not a nation. The American Revolution is now the North American Revolution. Little did the writers of the Contract with America in 1994 realize that they were making an agreement with Mexico and Canada. The Voice of America obviously is broadcasting the inspirational messages of Brazil and Belize across the globe.

‘Internationally friendly’

The Michigan Department of Education considers the dictate “internationally friendly.” Why being friendly to an international audience or perspective is important in teaching and learning American history is incomprehensible.

That we would sacrifice our language to the altar of internationalism is a betrayal to the American spirit. Indeed, the whole idea of America is to be a beacon of light, a shining city on the hill, which inspires the rest of the world.

The word “America” is the most important word of all in learning about the history of the United States and our civics. America is an inspiration and an aspiration for generations of souls who strove, and continue to strive, for freedom and liberty.”

Ahhhhhhhh…so now the politically correct war machine thinks it is about to hijack our very birthright too.
Have we ALL lost the compass for what is right and sane?
The liberals are marching forth with Orwellian fervor and are now attempting to rob our children of the honor and pride of country, living inside their little hearts… and all the guts and glory that made this country develop from nothing but wilderness into the beacon that it truly is.
America’s schools are morphing into politically correct incubators to feed this rampant epidemic.

This is nothing short of a declaration of war.
Parents had better arm themselves and learn the meaning of the word “no.”
AMERICA: We will not quell that word.
The greatest Nation on Earth. That’s right.
Arrogant?..nah…simply truthful. But sometimes……..
Truth hurts doesn’t it?

usa ani.gif

Tel Chai Nation suggest Tancredo for Pres.,third world county has some insights about life and Open posts., Check out The Amboy Times for a great post on the way things ought to be!


Monday, May 29th, 2006

This is for mah Canadian pals who have a sense of humor..Heh
Noooooooooo offense eh?

This is the actual radio conversation of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October 1995. Radio conversation released by the chief of naval operations, 10-10-95.

CANADIANS: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the south to avoid a collision.

AMERICANS: Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the north to avoid a collision.

CANADIANS: Negative. You will have to divert your course 15 degrees to the south to avoid a collision.

AMERICANS: This is the captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.

CANADIANS: No, I say again, you divert YOUR course.

AMERICANS: This is the Aircraft Carrier US LINCOLN, the second largest ship in the United States Atlantic Fleet. We are accompanied with three Destroyers, three Cruisers and numerous support vessels. I DEMAND that you change your course 15 degrees north. I say again, that’s one-five degrees north, or counter-measures will be undertaken to ensure the safety of this ship.

CANADIANS: This is a lighthouse. Your call.



Monday, May 29th, 2006

Sooooooo..What time’s the barbeque huh?


Sunday, May 28th, 2006

Raging floods in the heartland had forced a man to the second story of his home. Rescuers in a boat came by and pleaded with the man to jump in. “No,” he said. “My faith will save me.”

Soon, the rising waters forced him to the roof. Another boat came by, again calling for him to jump in. “No. My faith will save me.”

Finally, while standing upon his chimney, a helicopter flew by with a ladder lowered, and yet again called for him to save himself. Steadfast, he cried out that his faith would save him and waved the chopper on. The water rose, and the man drowned.

In the Afterlife, while standing before the Supreme Being in which he believed, he asked, “Why did you let this happen to me? I believed in you!”

The Supreme Being replied “Hey, I sent you two boats and a helicopter. What more do you want from me?” Heh.


Sunday, May 28th, 2006

Click on Image for Stunning Tribute.

Curtsey to:Mensa Barbie