Ron Buitenhuis: “We Believe” (Neda’s Song)

July 24, 2009

“We Believe” (Neda’s Song) written and performed Dutch folk musician Ron Buitenhuis. Can’t find any information about him.

It was written in memory of 27 y/o Neda Agha-Soltan who was murdered while standing peaceably in the street during the Iran protests of the election. Dr Arash Hejazi was witness to the murder and said she was shot in the chest from the front by a Basij – not the CIA. Here is Dr Hejazi’s BBC video describing what happened.

Courtesy of LimboLennart

You can see Neda just moments before her murder, walking to the left of her singing teacher–white ponytail and light blue striped shirt–Hamid Panahi. She’s wearing a baseball cap and at (0:43) she turns around and looks at the camera. She is shot shortly thereafter. In a civilized world, we would be watching a video of hers. Women aren’t even allowed to sing in public in Iran.

No violent or graphic footage. No images of her in death or dying.

(LA TIMES)

Gitmo: what's barry saying lately?

January 17, 2009

What are the chances barry closes down Guantanamo Bay on day 1 like promised? What good is an executive order that never gets executed? Anyone think it will happen in his first term? And they sure better not be brought to the US and given rights afforded the people they have vowed (and have gone back) to kill. How many daily briefings is he going to need to figure it out?

(ADAM LEVINE/CNN)

(11-12-08) Washington Post

OBAMA ADVISOR: There is always a risk of acquittal, and there is a risk some people who are released will return to the battlefield. There is no risk-free option.

(1-11-09) This Week. Stephanopoulos asks if barry will close it in the first 100 days?

OBAMA: That's a challenge. I think it's going to take some time and our legal teams are working in consultation with our national security apparatus as we speak to help design exactly what we need to do. But I don't want to be ambiguous about this. (??) We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our constitution.

(1-14-09) DENVER POST

61 of the 520 released detainees have returned to killing Americans. In March, 37. That's an increase from 7% - 11%.

How many innocent Americans can one suicide or car bomber kill? And all 61?

What about the ones who haven't died or been caught? The ones they have lost track of? It has to be much higher number than that. And then add in all the ones they will infect.

They should implant little GPS chips into them. Maybe an anti-detonation device. And then castrate them. Go ahead and sue me. There are a bunch of Yemeni savages who will go home and "marry" their 10 y/o cousins to create more hate and oppression.

Why such care and concern for human rights in a camp detaining criminals sworn to kill when there is none for the little girls whose souls they are killing every night?

How is waterboarding a vowing to continue to kill terrorist compare to the repeated raping of a 10 y/o child by a man 2-6 times her age?

Those cavemen choose their punishment - the little girls do not.

(1-15-09) CNN

Holder's confirmation hearing. A third group of inmates, Holder indicated, can't be tried "for a variety of reasons" but also can't be released because they are too dangerous. For that reason, the Obama administration won't be able to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility "as soon as we'd like."

(1-16-09) NewsOK

There's campaigning and there's governing. There's rhetoric and there's policy...Until Obama figures it all out, the grand pronouncements on Gitmo are just more political grandstanding.

(1-16-09) Washington Post: EU not yet asked to take Gitmo detainees

(11-20-08) English al-Jazeera spin on it

(11-7-08) Four reasons Obama won't close Gitmo soon.

(1-16-09) Excellent recap with barry's own words

Female genital mutilation

From TERRY FRIEDEN
CNN Justice Producer
Don't deport genital mutilation victim.
(emphasis added)

The U.S. attorney general is trying to prevent immigration authorities from sending a Muslim woman to her home country, where she was a victim of female genital mutilation. Attorney General Michael Mukasey ordered an immigration court to reconsider an African woman's case.

In a stinging order overriding federal immigration courts, Mukasey blasted a decision that said a 28-year-old citizen and native of Mali should be expelled "because her genitalia already had been mutilated [so] she had no basis to fear future persecution if returned to her home country."

*In the actual papers filed: "Nevertheless, nothing that the respondent had been subjected to the practice as a young girl and did 'not even recall' the experience, the Immigration Judge found that the respondent had neither proved past persecution nor satisfied the burden of establishing the legal grounds for the relief she sought."*

Subjected to? Practice? Aka torture and mutilation. Satisfied the burden? No basis fear future persecution? Who stopped the first one? And when they find out she sought asylum and brought the issue to light? And if it were a case of an amputated or partially amputated penis? Would they send him back because there would be no reason for further persecution?

The woman, a native of Mali, begged the court not to send her back to her Bambara tribe. The 28-year-old said if she returned and had a daughter, the child also would be subject to mutilation. The woman also said she faced forced marriage if she had to go home.

*In the actual papers filed, she stated that "if she were to return to Mali, she would be forced to marry her first cousin, and that she feared her 'father would hurt her mother' if she resisted 'her father's and her tribe's wishes' in respect to both 'the arranged marriage' and female genital mutilation."*

Do they engage in male genital mutilation anywhere?

Female genital mutilation is not necessarily a one-time event," Mukasey said. He noted that the board in a previous case had granted asylum in to one woman whose "vaginal opening was sewn shut approximately five times after being opened to allow for sexual intercourse and child birth."

So is that the threshold? Did she qualify because it happened "approximately" five times? And what examinations do these mutilated women have to undergo? Who performs them? Men or women? And who oversees that the women are not victimized once again?

The mutilators don't use anesthesia and rarely mutilate under sterile conditions to prevent infection. They hold the girls down and start cutting - the mother and females relatives restraining them. The clitoris has approximately 10,000 nerve endings as compared to the penis, which has approx 3000. The urethra (where the urine exits) is in close proximity to the clitoris and often gets damaged, resulting in life-long urinary difficulties and recurrent infections. The inner walls of the vagina can become scarred, causing any type of sexual activity to be extremely painful - or even walking or contact by clothing. Childbirth can be potentially lethal to both the mother and fetus because of birth canal scarring. The cervix, uterus and the rectum can all be damaged. These mutilations are not done by trained surgeons - they are most often done by the elders.What happens to the men who did it and the mother who stood by and allowed it?

He also concluded that the Board of Immigration Appeals was wrong to assume that the woman "must fear persecution in exactly the same form [namely, repeat female genital mutilation] to qualify for relief."

The woman to qualify for "relief" must "fear prosecutions in exactly the same form"? What woman wouldn't? And what caused the need for "relief" in the first place? As is it won't happen again? Who's going to stop it? Nobody did the first time.

Mukasey had been urged to look into the matter by angered members of Congress in the wake of the January decision.

"This recent action taken by the Board of Immigration Appeals is a step backward for the rights of women worldwide," declared Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, in a January letter.

"Female genital mutilation is a gross violation of a woman's human rights and has traditionally been grounds for the granting of an asylum claim," Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-California, said in the letter.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, issued a statement applauding Mukasey's action, and declaring female genital mutilation a "barbaric practice widely regarded as a human rights abuse."

Leahy sound fmiliar? Barbaric practice? Widely regarded? Human rights abuse? It's far beyond human rights abuse and it should be regarded as so by everyone.

The Justice Department acknowledged it is extraordinarily rare for an attorney general to jump into a relatively low-level immigration case.

Relatively "low-level" immigration case? Would they say that if their son's penis was amputated? What does it take for a baseball player from Cuba to get asylum?

The immigration courts decide about 40,000 cases a year, and an attorney general has issued an opinion on a case only three times in the past three years.

Female genital mutilation is common in parts of Africa, Asia and in some Arab countries, according to the United Nations. The operation is viewed by some ethnic groups as a means to control a woman's sexuality and is sometimes a prerequisite for marriage or the right to inherit.

The procedure can cause tissue injury, severe infection and fever, among other complications. The U.N. has recorded cases in which hemorrhaging and infection lead to death.

And how many more doesn't the UN know about? How many more mutilations have taken place since the UN recorded those cases? And did the UN count the death of their souls?

Attorney General, Michael Mukasey can be reached at AskDOJ@usdoj.gov. He should be applauded for his efforts. I don't, as yet, know who the "Immigration Judge" was. Maybe Nancy Grace will.

See Senator Clinton speak in Beijing China: "Women's right are human rights."

child marriages continue unabated in the Arab world

childhood marriages continue unabated in the Arab world

Amanda Fortini: "Bitch and the Ditz"

November 18, 2008 (contains c-word as a quote)

MS AMANDA FORTINI writes about Senator Clinton and Governor Palin as the "Bitch and the Ditz: How the Year of the Woman reinforced the two most pernicious sexist stereotypes and actually set women back."

I feel for this poor unenlightened girl. My guess is she white, voted for obama (and doesn't know anything about him), is younger than 35, grew up in a privileged setting and the year she was born she couldn't have gotten into the university she went to and that prior to Title IX she wouldn't have been able to do the job she is now. I would even venture a guess that she took a class under the title "Women's Studies".

It's quite humorous in a way. What does she know about "setting women back"? She did so with her very title - she's the one connecting the stereotypes to the women. She has been afforded every opportunity because of Senator Clinton's generation, including the ability to rant about something she knows nothing of. It reminds me of the sadly delusional MS KLIFF, who wrote: "Sorry, Hillary - girls already rule."

If that were true, Senator Clinton would be ruling. It would not have even been close if they were both white men. And had she had a resume as thin as barry's, she wouldn't have even made it to Iowa. Yet she is "setting women back".

Ms Fortini, where do you think you are and how do you think you got there? On you're own merit? And what, exactly, are you doing to move women forward? You do realize that is up to your generation, don't you? You cannot speak of setting women back when you don't know or appreciate how far women have come. You have proven your ignorance by referring to Senator Clinton and Governor Palin without their hard-earned titles.

Senator Clinton's generation had to fight for whatever advancement they achieved. They fought so you could believe that gender equality is a birth right. So you could choose to work outside the home and own your own business. So you could take for granted your right to choose.

How many women do you know were made sterile or died because of back alley abortions? Had entrails thrown at them by Evangelicals? Had their reproduction decided for them by their husbands?

My guess is you weren't even born when Senator Clinton was a member of the Nixon impeachment inquiry staff, that you hadn't yet learned how to talk when Senator Clinton founded Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, were still in grade school when she he was named one of the 100 most influential attorneys (twice) and were just entering college when she was taking on the Chinese like no American man or women had prior (or since), declaring in no uncertain terms women's rights are human rights. Rights you clearly have taken for granted - rights you ridicule in your article. And I am certain you know nothing of what Senator Clinton accomplished in Arkansas concerning children and education.

And yet, you feel comfortable declaring that Senator Clinton has "set women back".

You can no more write about Senator Clinton's generation than I can about ungrateful girls who think they got where they are on their own merit. Do you think you haven't filled a quota along the way? That your appearance and relative shrillness haven't influenced your grades, job opportunities and compensation? Are you so naive as to believe you are equal in the eyes of society to men?

You have attacked Senator Clinton on all fronts, Ms Fortini, without once thinking that she couldn't be a "bitch" unless she had been treated like one. And who is perpetuating it by writing such an article?

Where is positivity? Where is the acknowledgment and congratulations that Senator Clinton got further than anyone thought possible? Where is the perspective from wise women, who were born before they had the right to vote?

Women were no more included in the Constitution than black men - neither could vote. There is not a single black man alive who was born without the right to vote. But there are black women. Black men have been voting since 1870. More black men - former slaves - held office immediately after they got the right to vote than now. It took anther fifty years for women's suffrage.

No matter what barry considers himself - he is a man - and a man as always been president. He does resemble those presidents on the dollar bills - Senator Clinton does not.

The notion, Ms Fortini, that Senator Clinton is "setting women back" is as delusional as your belief that you are treated and given the same respect as men, including and especially by your male peers.

How, exactly, is your article meant to inspire younger girls to want to be like you? How is attacking two women of separate generations that preceded yours, women who had the courage to step forward on the national stage - qualified or not - working to advance women?

How are your words any different than those of misogynists Chris Matthews, Herr Olbermann or Jonjon Alter?

And this:

"The assumption was that these "18 million cracks in the highest glass ceiling," as Clinton put it, would advance the prospects of female achievement and gender equality. It hasn't exactly worked out that way."

"Many will say we’ve come a long way this year. The truth is we have a long way to go."

You do realize, Ms Fortini, that moving women forward is your job and that tearing other women down is not the way to get there.

"Never mind that it's impossible to imagine a male candidate mentioning fatherhood as the source of his readiness to be the nation's second-in-command."

It's not impossible to imagine when it has already been done. Vice presidential debate, Senator Biden: "But the notion that somehow, because I'm a man, I don't know what it's like to raise two kids alone, I don't know what it's like to have a child you're not sure is going to -- is going to make it -- I understand. I understand, as well as, with all due respect, the governor or anybody else, what it's like for those people sitting around that kitchen table. And guess what? They're looking for help. They're looking for help. They're not looking for more of the same."

And he did it while tearing up. Had it been Governor Palin tearing up, Jesse Jackson, Jr. have demanded another investigation. Instead, Governor Palin was ripped apart for not having shown some empathy. And had she? Did anyone question barry for not showing empathy towards Senator McCain's torture-inflicted injuries when he made and approved the ad mocking Senator McCain's inability to use a computer?

Ms Fortini, what did you think as a woman when Senator Clinton was referred to as "It"? Have you written an article on how little society has advanced when a Glenn Beck can call a former first lady and presidential candidate "It" and not be fired?

Were you even aware of it?

Have you written about The Double Standard as pertains barry and his opponents? About Bill Maher speculating how much Hillary's cunt was worth? Would you have written something had he said it in reference to Mrs Obama's cunt?

Ask yourself, Ms Fortini, who is moving women forward by remaining silent and selectively speaking up only when the issue involves race. An injustice to one woman is an injustice to all women. Prejudice is prejudice and there should be no degree to how they are tolerated or addressed.

Who is displaying ignorance by blaming the women attacked for their stereotypes? Who is "setting women back" by not addressing these issues and choosing instead to focus blame and assign cliches?

Women cannot be "set back" if they haven't moved forward in the first place. And women will never move forward unless the next generation chooses to understand and respect the struggles of the women who went before them.

Have you pondered what Mrs Rosa Parks would have felt about this election? What her thoughts would have been on how the female candidates were treated and how they were branded racists by the self-proclaimed Transcender of Race? Would Mrs Parks have believed America has take a full step forward towards achieving a More Perfect Union? Or just a sidestep?

Perhaps in your next article, Ms Fortini, you can demonstrate an understanding of sexism and misogyny as regards the treatment of Senator Clinton and Governor Palin. Maybe even comment on The Double Standard both of them faced and the hierarchy of prejudice in America. Perhaps then your pronouncement would have basis and meaning.

Another historic election: first transgender mayor

November 13, 2008
Silverton, Oregon

Stu Rasmussen, previous Mayor of Silverton - > Stu Rasmussen 2.0, Mayor of Silverton.

Heterosexual male- > heterosexual male who likes to look like a woman.

Male appendage and apparel - > Male appendage, breast implants and woman's apparel.

Ex two term mayor - > beat the incumbent first time in 40 yrs by 13 points

First transgender mayor - > Mayor of Silverton twice.

PENNING

"Rasmussen: I always wanted cleavage, so I went out and acquired some....I'm prejudiced, but I think this is just about the coolest town on Earth," Rasmussen said, just before he broke down, a tear gently running through his eyeliner, and onto his cheek. He can't wait to take office in January. He said he's finally confident enough to be himself, as he runs his hometown, wearing his signature heels."

video by The Oregonian's Kimberly A.C. Wilson via StephanieKayStevens

Girlfriend of 35 years: "Silverton is a place where Mennonites and transvestites can get along."

[Mennonites and men in tights sounds better.]

MAYOR RASMUSSEN: Try to keep something like this hidden, or you've got a secret life like this going on and your involved politics, it gives everybody something to put their spade to...I've blackmail proofed myself.