[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

1963 Chrysler Turbine

3I/ATLAS is Beginning to Reveal What it Truly Is

Deep Intel on the Damning New F-35 Report

CONFIRMED “A 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon on 9/11” says Military witnesses on the scene

NEW: Armed man detained at site of Kirk memorial: Report

$200 Silver Is "VERY ATTAINABLE In Coming Rush" Here's Why - Mike Maloney

Trump’s Project 2025 and Big Tech could put 30% of jobs at risk by 2030

Brigitte Macron is going all the way to a U.S. court to prove she’s actually a woman

China's 'Rocket Artillery 360 Mile Range 990 Pound Warhead

FED's $3.5 Billion Gold Margin Call

France Riots: Battle On Streets Of Paris Intensifies After Macron’s New Move Sparks Renewed Violence

Saudi Arabia Pakistan Defence pact agreement explained | Geopolitical Analysis

Fooling Us Badly With Psyops

The Nobel Prize That Proved Einstein Wrong

Put Castor Oil Here Before Bed – The Results After 7 Days Are Shocking

Sounds Like They're Trying to Get Ghislaine Maxwell out of Prison

Mississippi declared a public health emergency over its infant mortality rate (guess why)

Andy Ngo: ANTIFA is a terrorist organization & Trump will need a lot of help to stop them

America Is Reaching A Boiling Point

The Pandemic Of Fake Psychiatric Diagnoses

This Is How People Actually Use ChatGPT, According To New Research

Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani

Man puts down ABC's The View on air

Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka

My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But..

Cash Jordan: “Set Them Free”... Mob STORMS ICE HQ, Gets CRUSHED By ‘Deportation Battalion’’

Call The Exterminator: Signs Demanding Violence Against Republicans Posted In DC

Crazy Conspiracy Theorist Asks Questions About Vaccines

New owner of CBS coordinated with former Israeli military chief to counter the country's critics,

BEST VIDEO - Questions Concerning Charlie Kirk,


War, War, War
See other War, War, War Articles

Title: WHY WE FIGHT U.S. Troops Die For Rapists
Source: Uexpress
URL Source: http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/?uc_full_date=20090507
Published: May 7, 2009
Author: Ted Rall
Post Date: 2009-05-07 20:05:04 by bush_is_a_moonie
Keywords: None
Views: 726
Comments: 27

American soldiers serving in Vietnam wondered what they were fighting for. U.S. troops in Afghanistan don't have that problem. They know exactly what they're fighting for: rapists.

After President Obama's coming "Afghan surge" there will be 72,000 soldiers in Afghanistan. Their primary mission is to prevent Afghans from overthrowing the unpopular regime of Hamid Karzai, the former oil consultant installed by George W. Bush when the U.S. occupation began nearly eight years ago.

America's media repeatedly claimed that Afghan women would be better off under the U.S.-supported Northern Alliance puppet government headed by Karzai than under the Taliban. But when I went to Afghanistan and asked women what they thought, they had a different story. The defeat of the Taliban brought about the collapse of law and order, making life even more dangerous, especially for women. "Under the Taliban," a woman told me, "I watched rapists being executed. Now I see them in the government."

The Afghan women's rights group RAWA has repeatedly told anyone willing to listen that there hasn't been much improvement for women and girls since the U.S. occupation began in 2001. But no one--least of all left-of-center Americans eager to embrace the Afghan war--has wanted to hear what they had to say. "Most women still wear the all-encompassing burqa through fear of attack and social pressure, a third of women in Kabul do not leave the house, forbidden from doing so by the male members of the family, and it is still almost impossible for women to get a divorce," reported The Sunday Herald in 2005.

Liberal Democrats who cling to Afghanistan as "the good war" the U.S. should be fighting are being forced to confront the ugly truth about their ally. Karzai has signed a law that states that "women cannot leave the house without their husbands' permission, that they can only seek work, education or visit the doctor with their husbands' permission, and that they cannot refuse their husband sex," reported the British newspaper The Guardian on March 31st.

The Shiite Personal Status act applies only to devotees of the Shia branch of Islam, which account for between 10 and 20 percent of the population. How can a secular democratic state have different laws depending on a citizen's faith? The answer is: It can't. Afghanistan isn't secular or democratic. The "new" Afghanistan's constitution is based on Sharia law--exactly as it was under the Taliban. But the U.S. media has purposefully failed to report the icky truth about our ally.

The new law requires women to have sex with their husbands at least once every four days unless they are sick or menstruating. "Obedience, readiness for intercourse and not leaving the house without the permission of the husband are the duties of the wife," reads the law of a nation ostensibly invaded by U.S. troops in part to liberate Afghan women. "As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night," it says.

Afghan Senator Humaira Namati calls the rape bill "worse than during the Taliban" and said it was rammed through parliament without debate. "Anyone who spoke out was accused of being against Islam," she said. Several hundred women protesting the law on the streets of Kabul were viciously assaulted by men as police stood back and watched.

In fairness to the responsible male legislators, they did add a provision to protect Shiite women from "dead bed": Afghan men have to put out "at least once every four months."

Karzai signed legalized rape into law in order to appease right-wing legislators in an election year. After international criticism, however, he began backpedaling with the lamest of all possible reasons: he didn't read the bill before he was for it.

"I was not aware of what I had signed," Afghan parliamentarian Sabrina Saqib said Karzai told her. The legislation "has so many articles," Karzai told CNN. "Now I have instructed, in consultation with clergy of the country, that the law be revised and any article that is not in keeping with the Afghan constitution and Islamic Sharia must be removed from this law."

As Karzai BSes for the cameras, hundreds of Afghan women languish in prisons around the country. Their crime? They're teen brides, some as young as 10, who ran away from much older husbands who purchased them. "In President Hamid Karzai's Afghanistan, women are still imprisoned for running away from home," reports The Sunday Herald.

Nice theocracy you got there, Mullah Karzai.

Remember this column the next time you watch a flag-draped coffin returning from Afghanistan. The young man inside that box didn't die for nothing. He died to protect rapists.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 21.

#2. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#0)

The new law requires women to have sex with their husbands at least once every four days unless they are sick or menstruating. "Obedience, readiness for intercourse and not leaving the house without the permission of the husband are the duties of the wife,"

I see zero problems with this law. At least they aren't a nation of out of control sluts who as found in the Western nations.

RO

ReallyOrnery  posted on  2009-05-08   1:16:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: ReallyOrnery, James Deffenbach, Rotara, christine, Jethro Tull, Deasy, farmfriend, bluegrass (#2)

I see zero problems with this law.

Well, having sex against her will can be physically painful and emotionally damaging.

I'd be willing to bet that if you wished to accommodate a large, well hung negro cellmate's advances you could probably manage it. (with proper lubrication, mental prep and lotsa love in your heart)

But, if you weren't so predisposed and he decided to "take what is his" your ass may have a problem even though (what I laughingly refer to as) your mental powers of reason cannot find any fault with it.

And, look at the upside. At least you wouldn't be out on the street whoring that ass in bathhouses all over town, right?

And, since you seem to approve of an Afghan wife having no more rights than a weak cell mate, I'd say you'd be perfect for the job of prison bitch.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2009-05-08   1:43:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: HOUNDDAWG (#4)

I'd be willing to bet that if you wished to accommodate a large, well hung negro cellmate's advances you could probably manage it. (with proper lubrication, mental prep and lotsa love in your heart)

But, if you weren't so predisposed and he decided to "take what is his" your ass may have a problem even though (what I laughingly refer to as) your mental powers of reason cannot find any fault with it.

And, look at the upside. At least you wouldn't be out on the street whoring that ass in bathhouses all over town, right?

And, since you seem to approve of an Afghan wife having no more rights than a weak cell mate, I'd say you'd be perfect for the job of prison bitch.

Excellent post. I see nothing but problems with a "law" that forces anyone to submit to sex if they choose not to. Civilized people don't engage in rape.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2009-05-08   11:50:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: James Deffenbach, farmfriend (#16)

I see nothing but problems with a "law" that forces anyone to submit to sex if they choose not to. Civilized people don't engage in rape.

I suppose that in the past when the little woman was legally required (and by church law morally obligated) to perform her wifey duty, a frustrated, neglected or otherwise dissatisfied husband couldn't just find another willing partner and release the tension without risking the rack, the ducking stool or some other ghastly means of negative reinforcement.

Perhaps a case could be made that fickle women who may have been tempted to use their leverage (besides burning dinner and neglecting to chop up a couple of tons of firewood every ten days of course) should have been discouraged from doing so because the penalties for adultery were so severe.

And, these laws were likely accompanied by the equally binding obligation to produce male heirs, because husbands couldn't be expected to leave their fortunes to their women! (GASP!)

I think if we examine the countries where mandatory consortium laws are extant we will find that male inheritance is still practiced because "the dumbest son is still preferable to the most brilliant daughter" when it comes to running the family farm and keeping the plantation going.

And, what else do we find? Well, educating a woman is like pouring honey over a fine, Swiss watch. It can only interfere with her purpose on Earth, and G_D or Allah (PBUH) wouldn't like that.

I'm a firm believer in equality for wives, which as I explained before makes me a feminist, and I wear that label proudly.

A few years ago I was sitting in the barber shop as my wife was across the street busting her ass chipping ice off the sidewalk, and some of my buddies asked how I could let her do that. Well, after I explained that I was helping her reach her full potential as any enlightened husband would do, well the boyz were ready to heave me up on their shoulders!

And, when I see a gal with a flat tire on the side of a road in a blinding rainstorm, I'm actually thrilled that she'll have the chance to prove herself!

I drive by and give her a thumbs and sometimes I'll even yell, "You've got your own cigarette now, baby!"

Then I roll the window up quickly so I don't get cold or wet.

Brrrr.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2009-05-10   6:12:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: HOUNDDAWG, REDPANTHER (#20)

ping

IndieTX  posted on  2009-05-10   6:35:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 21.

#25. To: IndieTX (#21)

That's an excellent website but I can't read it just now.

Every time I think about our nanny govt wasting billions on Prohibition of reefa it makes me wanna single out some asshole and do horrible shit to him.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2009-05-10 13:18:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 21.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]