Cross Post from Jack Yoest

Helena Yoest, [center, The Dreamer to right, Charmaine on right] bows her head in prayer before taking part in demonstration, to call for a stop to the prosecution of Abdul Rahman. Difficult to have a business conversation when heads are being sawed off as a matter of personal conviction. Uncertainty is bad for commerce.

So. In my dual goals of 1) World Peace and 2) Keeping the little woman out of Nordstrom's, I dispatch Charmaine on a bit of civil(ized) disobedience. She takes two of my little women to attempt to cause havoc in Your Nation's Capital. Protesting at the Afghan Embassy last Friday.

From the Agence France-Presse:

Helena Yoest, 9, bows her head in prayer before taking part in demonstration, in front of the Embassy of Afghanistan in Washington, DC, to call for a stop to the prosecution of Abdul Rahman.

Prayer in public. The Horror.

Was this helpful? Do comment.
Consider a free eMail subscription for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:
From AFP:

The AFP brand: A guarantee of excellence.

The AFP team: More than 2000 employees worldwide.

AFP products: Agence France-Presse produces each day 400,000 - 600,000 words in text, 1000 photos and 50 news graphics.

AFP around the world: Journalists in 165 countries, 5 regional headquarters.

Hugh Hewitt has more pictures.

Michelle Malkin has the story and an excellent round-up. She was there at the Embassy.

Posted by Charmaine at 01:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

He says that Sharon's stroke is a "calamity." That this "could prove to be one of the great disasters in the country's nearly 60-year history."

Via Memeorandum.

Posted by Charmaine at 10:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The USS Pueblo
is a popular tourist attraction
on the Taedong River in Pyongyang
North Korea

North Korea is trying to use the USS Pueblo to force Condi Rice to make nice.

Won't happen.

Captured Crew Members
USS Pueblo, 1968

It isn't ladylike, but Condi is smart enough to remember the strategic use of "The Hawaiian Good Luck Sign."

This is an update from my post Indra Nooyi: Meet the USS Pueblo and Digitus Impudicus.

Outside the Beltway has the story at North Korea Offers.

A Salute to Open Post at Mudville Gazette

And thanks to Outside the Beltway's postings at Traffic Jam.

Posted by Charmaine at 09:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Read Michael Ledeen today on NRO -- he questions whether the London bombings were really suicide attacks . . . and presents compelling evidence that the bombers themselves were actually murdered. Ledeen believes they were duped into believing that they were just couriers, and that the bombs were then exploded by remote control.

I know it's a bit hard to work up sympathy for these men who murdered so many innocent people. But it does go to the utter inhumanity of the terrorist planners.

There is a reason for the development of Just War theory. Sometimes one does have to fight. But when a nation must fight for a just cause, one requirement is giving the men asked to lay down their lives every possible opportunity to survive. . .

Murdering your own in cold blood? Very good clue something is amiss.

This excursion into stating the obvious, was given in honor of Julianne "we are terrorists" Malveaux and Annie "martial law" Lammott. . .

***

Take a minute to stop by Mudville's Open Post . . .

Posted by Charmaine at 06:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Hasib Hussain
The London Bus Bomber
with the bomb on his back

Nasra Hassan is an international relief worker based in Vienna who has recently completed a book on suicide bombers, based on her interviews with some 250 people "involved in the most militant camps of the Palestinian cause: volunteers who had been unable to complete their suicide missions, the families of dead bombers, and the men who trained them."

Reading her account today in the Times of how suicide bombers are recruited, trained and prepared for death -- their victims and their own -- is horrifying:

Just before the bomber sets out on his final journey, he performs a ritual ablution, puts on clean clothes, and tries to attend at least one communal prayer at a mosque. He says the traditional Islamic prayer that is customary before battle, and he asks Allah to forgive his sins and to bless his mission. He puts a Koran in his left breast pocket, above the heart, and he straps the explosives around his waist or picks up a briefcase or a bag containing the bomb. The planner bids him farewell with the words "May Allah be with you, may Allah give you success so that you achieve Paradise."

The would-be martyr responds, "Inshallah, we will meet in Paradise."

Hours later, as he presses the detonator, he says, "Allahu akbar" -- "Allah is great. All praise to Him."

Recommended by Stanley Kurtz at the Corner.

Posted by Charmaine at 12:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Damare Garang

Damare Garang is a 15-year-old Sudanese Christian. When Damare was seven years old, he was captured from his village by militant Islamists and sold into slavery. His master punished Damare for sneaking away to attend church:

The master found a large board, several rusty spikes and a hammer and dragged Damare out to the edge of his compound. He forced Damare’s legs over the board and drove the long nails through his knees and feet. Then he turned and walked away, leaving the boy laying in the field screaming from pain.

Find out how Damare was rescued, and about Christians around the world who are being persecuted for their faith -- and what you can do about it -- at Persecution.com.

Thanks to Townhall.com.

Posted by Charmaine at 11:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On the plane with Richard Branson

Two things are abundantly clear in traveling with Richard Branson and the ONE campaign activists: first, they know they have to address the corruption question; and two, their responses to the question are pro forma because they view the issue of corruption (despite protestations to the contrary) as being somewhat peripheral.

Scott Johnson at Powerline writes about the Live8 phenomenon today and quotes his reader, Julian Biggs, who argues:

Time after time, the TV announcers [covering Live8] reminded us that things are "even worse in Africa than they were before Live Aid 20 years ago!" Clearly, none of them considered this might tell us something about the efficacy of Live Aid and its use of cash to solve problems caused by massive political corruption.

Good point. So why do Branson and Co. treat "massive political corruption" as peripheral?

Photo op on the tarmac at Heathrow: Bob Geldof, Djimon Hounsou, Richard Branson, Female British rocker, Natalie Imbruglia, Charles McCormack, President of Save the Children

In responding to a question about corruption at yesterday's press conference, Branson said, with a clearly well-worn joke, that corruption was something like marital affairs -- people like to blame men, but "it takes two to tango."

Much overly hearty laughter at Sexual-Joke-Made-By-Rich-and-Famous-Man.

Foreign companies, he argued, should be penalized if they try to bribe lobal officials. BUT, he emphasized, "a lot of African companies are getting it together on corruption." Nigeria for example. (Coincidentally, this week saw the launch of Virgin Nigeria, the newest Branson venture.) He argued that it is "quite easy" to blame a lack of investment in Africa on corruption, but that "as a business man, my belief is that corruption is on the decline."

Branson emphasized that investing in Africa "makes good business sense. It's not a charity."

Later, as we walked toward boarding the flight to Heathrow, I asked him if Africa was going to be a focus of his business expansion beyond his investment in Virgin Nigeria. "Yes." (He stood in line with everyone else to board the plane, greeting all comers very congenially.)

There was one person who seemed to take the corruption issue more seriously: Djimon Hounsou, the Oscar-nominated actor from Amistad and Gladiator, was the first one to raise the issue of corruption, even before the question from the floor. Perhaps not coincidentally, he was also one of the very few actual Africans present. He is originally from Benin, which is in West Africa. He argued that in order to combat corruption, elections in Africa need to be monitored, and the use of aid monies must also be monitored.

On the tarmac at Heathrow

Tomorrow, I'll be attending a briefing on "What the G8 Must Do on Debt" hosted by the Jubilee Campaign. (As well as trying to avoid rioting anarchists.) This reflects the One Campaign's call for debt cancellation. Anyone have questions they'd like to have asked? Shoot them to me!

Challies asks, "What to change the world? Go to church." Not Live 8.

Junkyardblog has Madonna and the digitus impudicus at Fooling. Thanks to PyroManiac and Challies

USS Neverdock asks,"Looking for justice", "start a revolution", "create good government", are these people seriously talking about, dare I say it, regime change?in Africa, Are You Listening?

WILLisms says, "I have no doubt that Bono is sincere in his concern for Africa, but, watching Live 8, the effort really just missed the point. Millenium Challenge Accounts are what the world needs to get on board with, not awareness for the sake of awareness." Read more at Certified Classy #5

Digitus says in Recent Articles about Live8 performers that "They were there to reach down and help us help the poor, but meanwhile, backstage they while snarfing up the lobster, caviar, and $14,000 gift bags given for free to the A-listers like Madonna..."

Posted by Charmaine at 05:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (2)

My new blogging buddy, John Aravosis, who is staying in a different hotel than I am, was caught in the riots earlier this evening here in Edinburgh and detained by the police. . .

My family is very pleased that I wasn't nearby, but (since he is okay), I am planning to give John grief for landing in the middle of the action without me.

More seriously, this level of rioting when the summit doesn't even begin until Wednesday doesn't bode well for this city. Pictures on the local news of children sobbing in the streets are heart-breaking.

Riding into the city on the bus this afternoon, we passed a Starbucks with enormous glass windows in the downtown area, and Greg Beals, a globe-trotting journalist on assignment here with NY Newsday, predicted it would be smashed by week's end . . .

Wizbang asks Will Live Aid End Poverty?

Read David Adesnik (Oxford and UVA) on Oxblog and the Starbucks irony at Letter From a Victim of Starbucks. Frothy.

Posted by Charmaine at 05:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

When we touched down in Edinburgh earlier this afternoon, two very different welcomes greeted us: Bobbleheads and Cutie Pies.

Okay, so the whole kids with flags waving thing was totally staged. But it was adorable -- who can resist those rosy Scottish cheeks and the hand-drawn "Welcome to Edinburgh" sign?

Inside the terminal, however, the welcome was a snarky one. The Bobbleheads awaited.

No one ever explained exactly what the Bobbleheads were about -- maybe it was all just for laughs? Kind of Disney-esque? John and I stood surveying the scene and debated as travellers vied to get their picture taken with the Bobs. Could have been. . .

But when I arrived at Allison House, there they were, featured in the local paper -- the very same Bobbleheads marching carrying a "Make Poverty History" sign. Something of local celebrities apparently.

Was it meant to be all in fun? Nah.

The Bobbleheads' shoes . . .very European.

Villainous Company says that Live8 is, "a fundraiser in which not one thin dime is going directly to the intended recipients" in The Song Remains the Shame.

In the Agora points us to organizations needing donations through The ONE Campaign.

The Great Separation reminds us that American Out Gives Europe 15 to 1.

Posted by Charmaine at 02:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

My dear, Heather. It's not about YOU.

Heather Thibault was a medic in Iraq with the Army National Guard and recently returned home from Camp Anaconda, north of Baghdad. A profile of her in yesterday's Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter was titled Limits on combat upset female medic. The subtitle: "Ready, willing and unable to fight."

Because, of course, it's all about Heather. Heather is, "upset." Heather is, "feisty." Heather is, "buff." Heather is, "angered."

Why is she angry? Because Heather has, according to the paper, "Right uniform, wrong chromosome."

Heather Thibault
Photo Credit:
Meryl Schenker
Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Well, before we get too worked up about that wrong chromosome, here's another thing Heather is:

Heather is, "barely 5 feet" tall. Doesn't say whether that includes her combat boots. It does say that Heather is, all of 125 pounds.

Her service to our country should be honored -- the article says she has nightmares from her experiences caring for the wounded in Iraq. Her hands were bloodied in the care of wounded, as nurses did during Vietnam, and other wars.

But battlefield medics are charged with evacuating wounded. While the reporter is busy venting spleen over the big, bad "military policy" keeping Heather out of combat -- as if engaging the enemy is some glorified Disneyland ride that they kept her from experiencing -- the article doesn't express any interest in Thibault's ability, or not, to carry a 180 pound soldier (plus 80 lbs of battle rattle) out of harm's way.

The article snears at this concern as a "weaker sex" argument. So be it. I wouldn't bet my son's life on her upper body strength.

NO one has a "right" to go into combat. We're facing a relentless drumbeat from the media, with stories of individual women who "should be allowed" to go into combat. But it's not about them. It's not about the individual. Combat is about the mission, unit cohesion and survival.

Those men we do ask to risk their lives -- and the hopes and dreams of all those who love them -- by going into combat have the right to expect us to do everything humanly possible to give them the best chance of coming out alive.

That's the only right we should be concerned about.

There's a subtext to this story that is worth mentioning. The article mentions that since returning from Iraq, Heather has been visiting local schools to talk with young people. Here's what she has to say about the war on terror:

We're throwing rocks at a hornet's nest, turning moderates into religious fanatics, and you're going to inherit the problem. ...

It kind of sucks when you piss off the whole world.

Maybe she forgot that whole World Trade Center meltdown thing. . .

* * *

Thanks Mrs. Greyhawk for Open Post at Mudville.

And check out Wizbang's Carnival of the Trackbacks. . .

Then dance over to Beth's Vast Right Wing Conspiracy and her Open Trackbacks. . .

More women a-fighting at Shakespeare's Sister at BlogWhoring.

Knowledge is Power has some thoughts and appreciation for sacrifice women make.

Posted by Charmaine at 12:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (2)

Should Americans care about the vote to ratify a Constitution for the European Union? Following Monday's "non" vote from the French, the 16 million Dutch voted NO yesterday, with a resounding 62 percent rejecting the proposed EU charter.

European Union Flag
Dutch and French say Nee et Non

Should we care? It's a very interesting development for political scientists, but how 'bout for real-world Americans?

The answer, surprisingly, comes from: Indra Nooyi, President of PepsiCo. In her speech to Columbia University where she compared the world to a hand, and the United States to the middle finger, Nooyi told us that the index finger, the European Finger, points the way:

Our index, or pointer finger, is Europe. Europe is the cradle of democracy and pointed the way for western civilization and the laws we use in conducting global business.

There is an attitude, among the international intellectual elite, that Europe does point the way. I use the word "international" elite deliberately: it's not just Europeans; it's not just Indra Nooyi. There are those among the American elite who would like us to move toward a more "multilateral" approach, adopting a more deferential stance toward international opinion and mores -- but most troubling, international law as well.

In an essential article in the Winter 2004 issue of the Public Interest, "Multilateralism Comes to the Courts," Ken Kersch, of Princeton, lays out in exquisite detail the movement among many American legal scholars to establish international norms and treaties in authority over domestic sovereignty. (The link goes to the Public Interest home page; to access the article, navigate to Winter 2004 through the "Archives" link.) Kersch's quotes from scholars like Peter Singer of Princeton, author of One World (and infanticide advocate) and Martha Nussbaum of University of Chicago, and Rogers Smith of University of Pennsylvania, are troubling. But it is his citations of "cosmopolitan" attitudes among our sitting Supreme Court Justices that are particularly noteworthy:

In Grutter v. Bollinger, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (joined by Justice Stephen Breyer) cited both the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (which the United States has ratified) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (which it has not) as evidence of an “international understanding of the office of affirmative action.” In Justice Ginsburg’s view, these international conventions provide the grounds for “temporary special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality.” (Bold emphasis mine.)

In Lawrence v. Texas, Justice Anthony Kennedy prominently recurred to a friend-of-the-Court brief on foreign law and court decisions filed by Mary Robinson, the former U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, and to a key decision of the European Court of Human Rights.

(See here for my article about sovereignty concerns related to CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women.)

But a funny thing happened on the way to the (legal) forum -- the subtext about yesterday's vote: the European Finger seems to have a wrist below -- the (pesky) people -- turning the hand in another direction. That's the populous uncertainty with a referendum, a democracy. . . it's called a vote.

The intellectual elite -- whether they be the American, European, or UN variety -- don't seem to understand the central importance to "We The People" of national identity. Or, more precisely, they don't care. But that is a strategic miscalculation: they fail to appreciate the cohesive power that identification produces.

Nee et Non. Now they have to care.

LINKS:

Welcome Instapundit readers. See Glenn's analysis of the vote here.

John at Powerline has two good posts on the EU votes, here and here.

Also see what King at SCSU Scholars says about the EU vote more generally (Cool graphs at his site.)

Posted by Charmaine at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

Napoleon was stepping through battlefield carnage when an aide grieved over the horrific loss of life. Bonaparte replied that France could replace the bloody losses in a single night from a Paris whorehouse.

Image Credit: Liberation

Today's European leaders seem to have a similar lack of regard for the French citoyen. To the horror of the European ruling elite, the French have rejected ratification of the European Union constitution fairly soundly. However the Daily Telegraph says that the EU leaders view the vote as merely a disappointing speedbump in their resolute march to unification:

Ignore all the febrile threats of chaos. Far more accurate was the analysis given by Jean-Claude Juncker, the Prime Minister of Luxembourg and currently the holder of the EU Presidency: "If it is a 'Yes' we carry on; if it is a 'No' we carry on." There you have it: as neat a statement of the EU's guiding philosophy as you could ask for. The project is far too important to be denied by the ballot box.

(From Chrenkoff, who covers the vote with outstanding links, including this one to Mark Steyn, "EU just won't take 'no' for an answer.")

Of course, as leaders throughout history (including Napoleon) have learned, political hubris can lead to stunning miscalculation. It isn't all that easy to ignore the will of the people. And it appears that the French may have to contend with their own "red-state/blue-state" issues.

Or orange and blue, as Liberation styles it. (This via Bad Hair Blog with excellent reporting and analysis.)

The vote map (above) shows "blue states" voting "oui;" light yellow voting 50-50% "non;" darker yellow voting 55-60% "non;" and orange voting over 60% "non." Just like recent American elections, there are clear regional patterns of voting. One of the more interesting results is the dark orange swath of voters in the northeastern area of France: the area closest to Brussels, the seat of the EU.

And, indeed, sovereignty was a real issue in this vote. The Washington Post reports on the non vote:

"I voted no out of a concern for democracy," said Gilles Noeul, 28, an engineer who attended an opposition victory rally Sunday night in Paris. "For me, the decisions should not be made by Europe, but by each nation. I want France to make decisions for herself."

Still, though Americans instinctively tap into this "defense of sovereignty" angle of the vote, it is important to avoid imposing an American filter on the French vote. Bad Hair Blog provides a translation of a Spanish blog which lists five reasons for the vote. I want to emphasize the first two: concern over high French unemployment rates (it's 10%) . . . and concern over the EU's, relatively (compared to France), greater emphasis on free-market principles.

Right. Fix unemployment by going more socialist?? Again: avoid looking at this vote through an American lens. These citoyens ain't us, ain't U.S.

No, the French have a Gallic reasoning all their own. And those who remain optimistic about EU prospects, in the face of this defeat, might do well to recall the French retreat from NATO in 1966.

This is not the first time the French have waved le tricolore and distanced themselves from international partnership. Then-French President Charles DeGaulle stated that NATO was unnecessary, because France would have an independent nuclear striking force or force de frappe. By 1967 the French had built a fleet of nuclear bombers.

During the Cold War the French did not want to subordinate the defense of France to NATO. And now the French don't want to surrender sovereignty to the EU.

(So, yes, there are two, two times that the French wouldn't surrender. Three, if you count speaking French in Quebec.)

All fun French jokes aside, it's a cautionary tale for EU enthusiasts.

Image Credit: BBC
Nine countries have ratified the treaty: Austria, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain.

LINKFEST:
Ahoy to Captain's Quarter's

Polished red apple to Betsy's Page

More at Jackson's Junction who alerts us to Iowa Voice

Another interesting angle on this story: the Left is divided, a complicated story which defies easy summary. . . See Daily Kos here.

Right Wing News writes well on the EU as bad news.

danieldrezner has an excellent international relations (IR) take.

Posted by Charmaine at 08:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)