Women’s rights? Bah…who needs ‘em [View All]

[Roland99]

http://www.conjur.com/blog/2005/08/22/womens-rights-bahwho-needs-em/

I wonder how the Propagandist is going to spin *this* Flip-Flop!

Let’s take a short trip back into recent history. Specifically, about 18 months ago on March 14, 2004 when the Propagandist said this, “The advance of women’s rights and the advance of liberty are ultimately inseparable.”

Very profound words and some with which I actually agree. Let’s see what his Labor Secretary (Mrs. SonofaMitch McConnell, my “glorious” US Senator) Elaine Chao said just about a week before that, “The commitment of this administration to women’s rights in Iraq is unshakable.”

I wonder what the First Lady had to say about women’s right almost exactly a year after Mrs. McConnell’s…er…Ms. Chao’s…er….statement, “President Bush has made the advance of women’s human rights a global policy priority. … We all have an obligation to speak for women who are denied their rights to learn, to vote or to live in freedom.”

And, even the new U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, said just a mere two weeks ago, “There can be no compromise on the principle that Iraqis can each have an equal role in the building of their country’s future without regard to their ethnic or religious background or gender.”

What was that again, Mr. Ambassador? “There can be no compromise on the principle….”

No compromise, eh? Strong words. And, one thing this administration has been is one that doesn’t “waver”.

Oh wait....

Conservative Shias, dominant in the Iraqi government, had clashed with Kurds and other minorities who wanted Islam to be “a” rather than “the” main source of law.

According to Kurdish and Sunni negotiators, the US ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, proposed that Islam be named “a primary source” and supported a wording which would give clerics authority in civil matters such as divorce, marriage and inheritance.

If approved, critics say that the proposals would erode women’s rights and other freedoms enshrined under existing laws. “We understand the Americans have sided with the Shias. It’s shocking. It doesn’t fit with American values,” an unnamed Kurdish negotiator told Reuters. “They have spent so much blood and money here, only to back the creation of an Islamist state.”

Dozens of women gathered in central Baghdad yesterday to protest against what the organiser, Yanar Mohammad, feared would be a “fascist, nationalist and Islamist” constitution. “We are fighting to avoid becoming second class citizens,” she said.

What was that about “no compromise”, Mr. Ambassador?

Umm…First Lady Laura? Any thoughts? How about you, Ms. Chao? Propagandist? Anything you want to add as the Asshole-in-Chief? No? Just more propaganda on a whirlwind tour of uber-red states?

Figures.