Women's Rights in Iraq

by Seáinín Sun Aug 31, 2003 04:46

Yawn, more junk mail, begging letters, rubbish.

by asdf Sun Aug 31, 2003 11:44

He/She/They post(s) comments to indymedia to try to get
a rise out of people and waste their time.
Trolls are an unfortunate feature of the internet.
They are people who abuse the open publishing systems
of the internet with behaviour that is intended to be
destructive, either because of a twisted personality,
or a desire to destroy the project.

DO NOT RESPOND. DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.

by JMcK Sun Aug 31, 2003 12:19

"Ali la Pointe" , the link you gave is to an advertising site , so here are a few to the organisation, based in LONDON, you are quoting from.

These people openly advocate sectarianism and the persecution of Islam in the guise of defending womens rights. Nadia Mahmood is at least right when she says, "the scenario of the Taliban is being repeated". When the US could not control or buy Afghanistan they ran a massive sectarian propaganda war against Islam and hey presto we all agree it was better to bomb 12,000 innocent people to death that to let the "evil Taliban" continue. Now Afghanistan is worse than before with girls as young as 9 being raped by the US allies, the Northern Alliance.

Iraq is now an unwinnable war for the US so we are being prepared to see it's people and Islam as subhuman "backward" and intrinsically evil.

I hope men AND women who genuinely want to see ALL human being live in peace with dignity will support the women, children and maybe even the men of Iraq through non US-backed organisations instead of giving any creedence to this US backed sham ? Don't fall for it !

It was the US and their Kurdish thugees who faccilitated the one and only meeting of the "Organization of Women's Freedom of Iraq" in the city of Sulaymania Sunday 10th Aug 2003. It did not have "thousands" attending but rather was a small group of Kurdish/Us propagandists, held in the Governors mansion , protected by US troops. Yet, Nadia urges us to bombard Paul Bremer with their letters of protest. His e- mail address is Jerry.Bremer@marsh.com, she tells us.....

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english.htm

"backward religious traditions" / "discrimination encouraged by Islamist activists"/ "Islamic submissive lifestyle..... does not allow women basic standards of human dignity "/ "Islamist misogynist practices".

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/htm/campaign250803.htm

"Islamic groups are taking revenge " (on women)/ "threatened by Islamic groups"/ "killed by the Islamists".

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/htm/sakar250803.htm

"... Islamic Sharia law, which is highly discriminative against women, treating women as second-class citizens could be clearly seen in the personal status law. In this law we can see many articles and decrees that discriminate against women, and consider woman to be dependent on men, a commodity "/ "backward attitude towards women".

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/htm/sul250803.htm

"Islamic groups... very dangerous for women... the ideology of these groups is based on sexual apartheid and nothing else, and they are discriminatory against women.
So Islam is based on oppressing women "and nothing else"?

I would like to see such sectarian slurry removed but perhaps it would be better left up as an example of the new spin / propaganda the US is putting out.

by Lone Gunman Sun Aug 31, 2003 13:48

James Mc Kenna hiding under a weak cover again.
More I hate America nonsense from the world of paranoid James. Dont ask for proof folks.Its all in his mind.

by Ali la Pointe Sun Aug 31, 2003 17:15

I have to confess to laziness in posting this article without checking it out any more than giving it a single reading. JMcK, you may have some points there which should alert me to the need for more careful consideration in this. In my haste I posted this up, trusting the person who mailed it to me, as they are usually reliable.

The point I thought the article made was that the occupation, and by implication US dirty tricks, had unleashed all sorts of reactionary forces following the collapse of the Baathist regime. That, from a women's rights point of view, rape and murder is a tragedy, whether it is at the hands of the occupying forces, Baathists, opportunists, or followers of reactionary Islamic clerics, and that they are on the increase, with enormous consequences for women in their everyday lives in Iraq.

I too am uncomfortable with terms like "backward" etc. with their racist overtones, as I accept fully that not all political Islam is the reactionary and mysoginist monster its detractors like to portray it as; indeed I know that there are very progressive strands of it, and that western interference tars all groupings with the same brush while encouraging the flourishing of the more dubious strands with catastrophic consequences - viz Turkey, Algeria, the Najaf bombing etc.

But my reading of the article was that it was as critical of the US as it was of autochtonous political groupings. The central message being that women, who are written out of political and human rights discourses, even on indymedia, are suffering a specific repression in Iraq at this point.

As I said I do not know anything about the background of the organisations behind this article, and wait to be enlightened by indymedia readers in this regard, but fear that not raising the point, even at the risk of playing into the hands of Islamaphobes, would be to collude in covering up the specific nightmare that women are experiencing.

I am looking forward to some productive discussions in this regard.

by R Isible Sun Aug 31, 2003 19:02

I agree with James McKenna that this may be preparation for a US-pullout, but that doesn't mean that Sharia law (specifically and not Islam in general) should be defended. The post makes the point that this is similar to Afghanistan in that the US has destroyed or tried to destroy a non-Islamic, "modern", regime and as a result is creating a power vacuum which can/is/will be filled with unpleasant types that none of us would wish to defend. It may well be that WFI are a cat's paw for US-policy in Iraq but that doesn't mean that their substantive claims about the emergence of anti-woman behaviour are not true.

by Copirineo Sun Aug 31, 2003 23:59

Although I have no first hand experience of Iraq I have lived in an Islamic country for 9 years and the sentiments expressed about the rise of fundamentalist Islam and its effects on women are entirely consistent with my own experience. Fundamentalist Islam (and Christianity and Judaism for that matter) are inherently misogynistic. They put less value on the lives of women than men. Practices mentioned in the article such as honour killing where women are murdered to protect the honour of the man are common practises where fundamentalism takes hold. It is a highly dangerous and destructive force and merits outright condemnation.

In Iraq it is a very short sighted and regressive policy. In an unstable situation such as Iraq where disparate groups are vying for power the capacity of women to bring warring factions together and mediate between them is undisputed. Conflict resolution groups have always stressed the need to involve women extensively at every level where political compromise is elusive. Their exclusion is not only unjust it is downright stupid and this is the policy of fundamentalist Islam.

by JMcK Mon Sep 01, 2003 00:10

Islam may seem exotic or even extreme in the modern world. Perhaps this is because religion does not dominate everyday life in the West today, whereas Muslims have religion always uppermost in their minds, and make no division between secular and sacred. They believe that the Divine Law, the Shari'a, should be taken very seriously, which is why issues related to religion are still so important.

From a Muslim womans perspective , it is the Western world that treats women appalingly. If you are in Dublin you might like to drop into the Islamic Centre and talk with some women there. There is a lovely restaurant and shop and it is a peaceful place to contemplate. They will explain Islam in it's totality, not just a selected snippet.

In the propaganda war that surrounds the US's New World Invasion, Islam and Muslims are unfortunately being treated very badly. Obedience and fear of earthly powers are not so easily instilled in Muslims so they are all potential "terrorists" because they are so "fundamental" in their beliefs, i.e. there is a God.

How do Christians deal with Jehova Witnesses or others sects who will not allow their children to have certain medical treatment that may result in death? What about Ian Paisley? Where is the work of Jesus in him? What of the Catholic church??? What of Rome and all the centuries of human suffering it has caused? Is the Queen of England really the head of a Christian Church? Buddhists reincarnating as worms? Hindus worshipping monkeys? Mormons "listing" everyone for God?

We could all go around ridiculing each other till the cows come how I guess. But maybe we shouldn't in case we find some of our own "beliefs" the most bizarre of all. To live at peace and have respect for each other may be the biggest "jihad" any of us will have to achieve.

by KJIFAN Mon Sep 01, 2003 09:26

No matter what the imperialist say, Saddam Hussein is the real president of Iraq, because he was chosen by the Iraqi people. He got 100% of the vote. This situation and lawlesness is yet another mistake committed by the imperialists. Saddam must come back and end the suffering of Iraqi people. If he would just adopt the immortal juche idea created by great leader Kim Il Sung would he be invinsible!!

Great anti-imperialist leader

by JMcK Mon Sep 01, 2003 09:53

Shame!

These US lies against Islam are a poor excuse for the mess the US has made of Iraq.

I notice that Caoimhe Buterly , whose oppinion I would trust, doesn't mention this "Islamic" abuse of women that is supposedly so widespread -because it isn't takng place.

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=60788

Caoimhe does mention "Yanar Mohammud as being continually verbally abused by (US)soldiers for her presence( at protests ). Of course when you have an agent at work in a community it may be good to pretend that is the one person that is your "real" enemy. It's called "giving credibility to a suttled agent".

Why is there a link to the US Department of state in this article?

http://www.state.gov/g/wi/rls/22492.htm

Total propaganda ?

Women are being raped and attacked in Iraq by criminals the US has unleashed by it's failure under the Geneva Convention to protect a civilian population they have illegally invaded.

Don't try and blame the pain of the Iraqi women (Men and children too) on Islam but put the blame fairly where it belongs , on the illegal invaders who have created this social mess.

by ec Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:40

is a different thing.

by Andrew Mon Sep 01, 2003 13:00

One of the side effects of this more open phase of US aggression in the Arabic world is this sort of 'Socialism of fools' we see here. In previous decades the fact that US imperialism was in conflict with Stalins Russia or Maos China was used to try and silence criticism of those regimes here. All bad stories that emerged were simply dismissed as US propaganda by people who should have known better. And all for nothing as the parties built on that basis collapesed in the 1990's once reality became known.

First time as tragedy, second time as farce. Now we get the sort of reactions seen above. The idea that there may be a nasty authoratarian side to Islam is to be dismissed as US propaganda. Even where this criticism is one being made by Muslims. And even where such criticms are ones that go back years, to long before this current round of interventions.

You'd think here in Ireland where we have lots of bad experience of fundamentalist churchs demanding and suceeding in having their word made law we would have more sense. Whether its swings being chained up on Sundays in childrens playgrounds in the north or the ban on divorce down south religious fundamentalism has been a problem.

I've little doubt that even today you can find women more then willing to defend the anti-women religious politics down south including the denial of access to contraception and the civil service marrage ban. And I've also little dougbt that a good place to look for such women would be in an institution run by a religous body.

Indeed if such women want to quit work when they marry then that is their right. The problem is that the system they defend is one where the unbeliever and the half-hearted believer also has to live by their religous law. As does the believer whos life is somewhat different from what is laid down in the holy book they follow. Such people exist among Muslims as they do amongst Jews and Christians.

It's quite possible the mail above originates from some group with connections to US imperialism. This need not be so, in both Iraq and Afghanistan there were and are groups that opposed religous rule while opposing imperialism as well (RAWA for example). These should be supported, religion of any flavour should not.

by Andrew Mon Sep 01, 2003 14:24

Diversity in Islam for Absolute Beginners
Roughly 1 in 5 of the world's population is muslim - that's over a billion people. Yet for all the talk about a global society with the telecommunication revolution bringing knowledge to the masses, what most westerners from christian backgrounds know about Islam can be written on the back of a small postage stamp
http://struggle.ws/issues/war/afghan/pamwt/islam.html


On the Latest Confrontation Between the Worker Communist Party of Iraq and the Islamic Groups in Nasiryiah
On July3, 2003, the supporters of Muqtada al-Sadr working under the name of Hawza al-Ilmiya attacked a several-thousand strong demonstration organized by the Union of Unemployed People in Nasiriyah, demanding jobs or $100 a month as unemployed benefit
http://www.wpiraq.org/english/hizb10803.htm

Testimonies:Why I Left Islam
"Despite appearances, the fact remains thousands have left Islam behind along with other childish beliefs from Father Christmas to the Tooth Fairy. Here we are not celebrating those who have left one form of unreason only to adopt another form of unreason, but those who face unflinchingly a world devoid of fantasy, who look the world in the face without the crutches of irrational dogma"
http://www.isisforum.com/testimonies/index.htm

by Copirineo Mon Sep 01, 2003 18:32

JMcK's titles his first response 'So Islam is "Backward and "Evil"?' yet nowhere in the original article is Islam referred to as either 'backward' or 'evil'. So wherever JMcK gets his adjectives from they are not from this article. This defensive posture serves to obfuscate the very real issue of the treatment of women in Iraq under the present occupationary forces. In fact the occupationary forces and the fudamentalist Muslims have far more in common than either would like to admit if you recall Bush's good vs evil speech. So yes it is possible to be opposed to the US forces in Iraq and the fundamentalist Islamic forces which are being unleashed. A possibility that 'JMcK' seems loathe to admit.

JMcK's second title is "US PROPAGANDA FEATURED ON INDYMEDIA?" and he mentions a link to the US Department of State's material on Iraqi women. Yet when you look through the other links you find sites that are very critical of the US invasion of Iraq. The word which comes to mind here, and 'JMcK' might be unfamiliar with it, is 'balance'. Perhaps 'JMcK' would prefer if only those links were featured on Indymedia which were consistant with his own viewpoint?

Amidst all this 'JMcK' studiously avoids responding to the point mentioned in the article about 'honour killings'. Anyone with any experience of living in a muslim country will know that honour killings are common practice. For example if a daughter runs off with a man without permission, the father of the woman is honour bound to murder her. So women are killed frequently to restore the man's honour. How can this practise be condoned 'JMcK'?

I say this as someone who has studied Islam and is very aware of the rich heritage that Islamic Scholars have left us and from which we still benefit today. Nevertheless this article raises a very important point about women's experience in Iraq, an experience of pain and suffering and injustice which we would do well to listen to.

by R Isible Mon Sep 01, 2003 21:11

Include the abuses of the Taliban in Afghanistan: http://www.fancymarketing.net/ The stoning of women to death in Nigeria: ttp://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/29/1428227 Yes, Xians have been guilty of similar behaviours, but that just indicates that religious nutters should be opposed whatever their denomination whether they're death-penalty christian democrats or woman-hating wa'habis.

by caspian Tue Sep 02, 2003 03:16

Coperieno, thanks for your sensible contribution. Mcay or whatever you are called you are talking shite! Come to the islamic centre in Dublin indeed. What the hell is an Islamic centre doing in my beloved Dublin? Get the hell out of Ireland.
For twenty five years or so I have supported the Palestinians in their fight against the Zionists who have occupied their land but my God sometimes I think what the hell am I doing wasting my time when they are all turning into crazy Islamic fundementalists? Is this what I have been supporting all these years?
Look at the recent pictures of the wailing bunch of pathetic brainwashed morons screaming and crying as they followed the funeral of the cleric killed in Iraq. Yes it was a terrible crime and 75 people died, tragic. Where were the women in the crowd of mourners? They are never to be seen. Where are the women in any of these islamic societies? Did God say from on high that women must cover up and hide their hair? Why are these un-evolved Arab men so terrified of women? What is all this honour crap about? When are these Islamic men going to grow up and start thinking for themselves? A bit of independent thought would not go amiss amongst the Arab masses. To see those pathetic men yowling and screaming after the coffin of one power hungry priest turns my stomach. Not an individual among them. No wonder the like of evil Saddam can rule over them. They long for another Saddam to tell them how to live. Immature, un-evolved dickheads every one of them. Violent too with their cowardly honour killings.
Yes I support the Palestinian people in their struggle but not if they get rid of one oppressor and allow themselves to be ruled by a tyrant called Islam. God forgive me, but maybe the Israelis are right about the Arabs. Did I really say that?

by Ali la Pointe - an t-intifada fáda Tue Sep 02, 2003 17:34

The [a]bove cited site [now hidden as it is anti-semitic, R Isible - IMC Editorial] is full of anti-semitic tripe of the Zionist/Jewish (where the two terms have been made interchangeable) conspiracy kind , it masquerades as being pro-islam, but is nothing of the sort. It is a hate site. Could the editorial collective kindly excercise the censorship clause with which I wholeheartedly agree and remove the above post?

by Righteous Pragmatist Wed Sep 03, 2003 21:22

These Islamic fundamentalists are the same type of loons who hijacked those Aerrican airliners and crashed them into the WTC towers, Pentagon and Pennsylvania.
The reason was because Osama Ben-Laden and all the other religious morons hate the liberal secular world.
In America, Britain, Ireland, France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands and most of the countries in the European Union, western society has severed the relationship between church and state in reality if not in name. We are open minded tolerant liberal and secular. Our morality comes from conventions, common sense and scientific knowledge.
The Islamic countries hate us because our society has produced the economic miracle of capitalism.
Captitalism produced space travel, the internet, the internal combustion engine, solar energy, air travel,telecommunications and motion pictures.
Since when has the religious oligarcies of the Middle East produced anything but religious fanatics?

by Andrew Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:43

"Captitalism produced..."

Presuming 'Captitalism' is meant to be capitalism rather then an ironic reference to the porn industry you seem to be under the odd impression that what exists in Saudi (for example) is something other then capitalism. Capitalism has been more then happy to use Islam as a weapon against both anti-capitalist and nationalist movements in the region.

You seem to imagine that the fight against religious run states has been won in the west a long time back. Yet when I turned 18 not that many years ago I lived in a country where I was unable to get contraception unless I was married and had a doctors prescription. Divorce was not allowed and neither was abortion. Religious bodies controlled most of the schools and the hospitals. Sex between consenting men was punishable by seven years in jail.

Some of this has changed but much has not. I don't think the struggle to separate church and state is over yet.

Most countries with a majority Muslim population are not Islamic states. Rather they exist with the sort of religious influence over the state comparable with Ireland in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's or even today depending on whether we are talking of Tunisia or Egypt or Algeria or Libya or Malaysia. The battle to separate church and state is being fought in all those countries, sometimes only from below, sometimes as part of state ideology, sometimes as in Algeria in a very brutal and repressive form.

In terms of justification for repression there is nothing on paper that makes Islam worse then Christianity. In some ways the Quoran is an advance on the Christian bible, in particular in comparison with the insanity of the Old Testament. and what it has to say about the cores issues of individual rights and the rights of women and people not of 'the faith'.

The problem for the people of the region is both that many Muslims take the Quoran seriously in a way that most Christians in the west no longer do but also that the west has tended to promote Islamic movements in order to prevent the emergence of nationalist democracies. Whether in the 'middle east' or Latin America the reality is that dictatorships are often the tool capitalism uses to drive down wages and ensure profits flow back to the imperialist countries.

Check out who the west has helped into power in Afghanistan, and the Gulf States. Look at who they are putting on their puppet government in Iraq. When Bush and Blair declared that 'Islam is not the enemy' the were speaking FOR western capitalism rather then on behalf of Muslims. They both realise the value of having a bit of opium lying around for the people.

As for your invention list, true but probably the most single useful invention was either fire or the wheel and I wouldn't suggest returning to the Stone Age on that basis. And few 'free market' capitalists would hold up NASA as a model!