Sunday, May 29, 2011

And the war drags on . . .

This morning, on Liane Hansen's last Weekend Update (NPR -- last as regular host, she may fill in as a guest host in the future), Iraq was seriously addressed. Liane spoke with the US weapons inspector sent to Iraq (after the start of the war) to find WMD, David Kay. And the broadcast featured a report by Kelly McEvers on Nouri's recent declaration that, if the majority of the political blocs agree, US troops can stay on the ground in Iraq beyond December 31, 2011.

Kelly McEvers: Before the speech, few thought Maliki would be bold enough to take such a position in public, mainly because many Iraqis still view an American troop presence as an occupation. Now, though, Maliki's advisers, along with officials in the U.S. military, are working on changing the narrative. They're not combat troops anymore, they say. The soldiers who'd be here next year wouldn't even be advisers. [. . .] Analysts in Iraq say a new agreement between the U.S. and Iraq to authorize some 20,000 American troops beyond December is likely; there are just under 50,000 troops now. But like other political debates in this deeply divided country, analysts say, it's going to be a long and drawn-out fight.

This morning, on Weekend Edition, NPR told you the truth that all the other outlets have ignored. For weeks now, relying on the Arab press, we've told you about the pressure that is taking place to extend the arrangement. Day after day, the US press has ignored it. And, in the beggar media (the so-called alternative press), they've flat-out lied and told you nothing or told you it's all Robert Gates. Robert Gates is stepping down as the US Secretary of Defense. When that happens, who are these cowards going to hide behind to avoid placing the blame where it rightly goes?

And how are they going to continue to spin and protect their cult leader if US troops remain on the ground in Iraq past 2011?

They'll surely find a way because their alleged desire to end the illegal war faded years ago and was replaced with the mission to protect and defend Barack Obama. Such is the Cult of St. Barack. So the members of the Kentucky National Guard that David Williams (WAVE) reports are about to deploy to Iraq? They're on their own apparently. It's more important to defend the War Hawk than to end the war.

They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)

Last Sunday, the number of US military people killed in the Iraq War since the start of the illegal war was 4455. Tonight? PDF format warning, DoD still lists the the number of Americans killed serving in Iraq at 4457.

Reuters notes a Baghdad sticky bombing injured "a political analyst and university lecturer," another Baghdad sticky bombing injured a police officer, a police officer was shot dead in Mashahidah, two Baghdad bombings claimed 1 life and left six people injured and a Mosul sticky bombing injured Maj Gen Khalid al-Ubaidi and his bodyguard.

New content at Third:

After Ken Clarke's rape comments - we must defend the right to say no

comment on article | email | print
Share on: Delicious | Digg | reddit | Facebook | StumbleUpon

by Viv Smith

Justice secretary Ken Clarke’s comments about rape rightly caused an outcry last week.

He was talking about a proposal to cut sentences for rapists in cases where the accused admits their guilt.

On BBC radio, when asked about the lowering of rape sentences, Clarke replied, “A serious rape where, you know, violence and an unwilling woman, the tariff’s [sentence] much longer than that.”

When the interviewer responded by saying “Rape is rape”, Clarke contradicted her saying, “No it’s not… they include date rapes which, eh, date rapes can sometimes be very confusing.”

His attempt to distinguish between “serious” rape, and “other kinds” like date rape, and his use of words like “unwilling”—implying that some women are raped willingly—sparked outrage.

Alongside these comments there is the ongoing campaign by Tory bigot Nadine Dorries MP to blame girls and women for teenage pregnancy, rape and abuse.

And both follow the emergence of the SlutWalk protests—with one to be held in London on 11 June—which were launched in response to a cop advising students in Canada not to dress like “sluts” if they want to avoid rape.

Suddenly the question of a woman’s right to control her body and life has sprung centre stage.

For decades women have fought for the right to say “no means no”, no matter the circumstances—whether we had dinner, or I gave you my phone number, or I was wearing a short skirt.

And while the personal experience of rape may vary, it is a profoundly traumatic experience.

There is more at stake here than changes to sentencing laws.

The comments by Clarke, Dorries and the cop in Toronto reflect women’s oppression and inequality in society.

We are told that violence that against women is unacceptable, but around 2,000 women are raped every week in Britain. As many as 95 percent of rapes are never reported, according to government figures.


Only around 6 percent of rape cases that make court result in a conviction, compared with 34 percent of criminal cases in general.

It wasn’t until as late as 1991 that rape within a marriage was even accepted as a form of rape at all.

Nothing a woman does can get a rapist a higher sentence, but her behaviour can get the sentence reduced

And last year, leaked police documents showed that officers breached rules in several rape cases, writing off allegations in a bid to improve their “clear‑up” rate.

The reality is that the state—from the police to the courts, from national to local government—fails to take the oppression of women seriously.

Violence against women is one of the most extreme expressions of oppression that exists.

The system we live in, far from tackling this, alienates and destroys people to such an extent that they are capable of rape and violence.

Tory funding cuts are making life harder for women.

In London, despite promises to fund four Rape Crisis Centres long-term, Boris Johnson has only funded one, and only half that money has appeared.

One in four local authority areas offer no support to women suffering violence, and more are cutting their services.

The proposed changes to sentencing are crucial to the Ministry of Justice’s cost cutting plans. The department will save some £130 million a year by 2015 if they are implemented.

As socialists, we don’t believe that longer prison sentences will prevent crime—or that prisons are the answer.

But the government’s proposals on sentencing will mean nothing to victims of rape while the “blame” culture still exists.

Women who are victims of rape or violence should be provided with support, safety and the justice of having their case taken seriously.

The Tory cuts expose the class nature of the system. Their cuts target the most vulnerable and oppressed, while the government protects the interests of the rich.

There should be a demand, taken up by every anti-cuts group, for more resources to support women suffering violence.

© Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.

The e-mail address for this site is