Posts Tagged ‘crimes against women’
Posted in Human Rights, misogyny, sexism, violence against women, Women, women and girls, Women's rights, tagged #BringBackOurGirls, crimes against women, Ellen DeGeneres, human rights, John Lewis, kidnapped girls, Nigeria, Nigerian schoolgirls on May 8, 2014| 2 Comments »
Posted in misogyny, Pakistan, Women, women in government, Women in History, Women's rights, tagged Benazir Bhutto, crimes against women, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, misogyny, Pakistan, women in government, Women's rights on November 5, 2011| 5 Comments »
From Shaan A. Khan, CNNNovember 5, 2011 — Updated 1517 GMT (2317 HKT)
Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) — Seven men, including two senior police officers, were indicted Saturday for conspiracy to commit murder in the killing of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, a defense attorney told CNN.
Bhutto was assassinated on December 27, 2007.
I just received this. Sickening. I have no words.
U.S. Strongly Condemns Stoning Of Woman in Orakzai, PakistanPhilip J. Crowley
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public AffairsWashington, DCSeptember 28, 2010
We condemn in the strongest possible terms the brutal stoning of a woman in Orakzai, Pakistan, allegedly by members of the Pakistani Taliban, which is depicted in a video circulating on the internet.
This vicious attack, carried out as a crowd of onlookers watched, violates all norms of human decency and is a chilling example of the cowardly disregard violent extremists have for human life. There is no justification for such barbaric and cruel treatment of a fellow human being.
Posted in Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, U.S. House of Representatives, US Department of State, women in government, Women in History, Women's rights, tagged crimes against women, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, suffrage, voters' rights, women in government, Women's rights on August 18, 2010| 29 Comments »
This showed up in my inbox a little while ago. No she did not use a salutation, a nicety that has gone by the boards since the “new leadership” has taken over this party. (Of course this was addressed to my real name and I responded with that.)
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Jen O’Malley Dillon, Democrats.org <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
For the first 144 years of this country’s existence, women were not guaranteed the right to vote — and winning that right did not come easily.
Women’s suffrage took a movement. It took organizers who worked tirelessly and allies who fought for the cause in the halls of power. On August 18th, 1920, when the legislature of the state of Tennessee voted to ratify the 19th Amendment and affirm its place in the Constitution, it passed by a single vote.
Because of the work of those who came before me, my right to cast a ballot was never in question. From the first time that I stepped into a voting booth to the day when I became the executive director of the Democratic Party, I’ve been deeply mindful of that fact.
Last week, President Obama asked us all to make a commitment to vote this fall. To me, that promise isn’t just about choosing the direction I hope to see this country take — it’s an opportunity to honor those who didn’t have the right to vote but fought so that their daughters and granddaughters would not be denied the full measure of citizenship.
Will you join me and commit to vote in this year’s election?
The movement for suffrage began before the Civil War. Women faced prison sentences — even beatings — to cast ballots as a gesture of protest. Even before the right to vote was won, women like Victoria Woodhull and Belva Lockwood ran for office. States across the country began to grant suffrage, and on the eve of the First World War, Woodrow Wilson — a Democrat — became the first president to take up the call.
Susan B. Anthony devoted her life to the cause of equality, and in 1897, decades before her fight was won, she wrote “Suffrage is the pivotal right.” In the 90 years since the 19th Amendment became law, that statement has borne out.
Today, in the United States, there are more women registered to vote than men, and the gap stands at nearly 10 million. From House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, women hold office at every level of government.
But the fight for full equality is not finished. In 2008, a woman in the United States earned only 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. For women of color, the disparity is even greater.
We have a choice with this election about whether we want to continue the fight to bring down barriers — whether we want to move forward or backward. We’ll decide whether we want to honor the legacy of those who couldn’t vote but reached for that right. But all those decisions begin with the promise that you will participate in the fall elections.
Commit to vote:
Jen O’Malley Dillon
Democratic National Committee
Here is how I responded. I did not bother with the nicety of a salutation either. Neither did I bother to “click to commit.” Oh, and I disabled the link on this post. If you want to click to commit, you’ll have to seek out their website. A little cutting and pasting will do it. But I do not think the Homegirls and Homeboys here will want to do that. 😀
I vote in EVERY election. I voted in my state’s presidential primary on Super Tuesday in 2008. I also saw my governor shred my vote on the convention floor in Denver. It seems to me that the last people in the world who care about my vote are the Democratic Party leadership. Donna Brazile famously told the base in 2008 to stay home!
So NOW you care about my vote? And you DARE to invoke the name of Hillary Rodham Clinton? Wow! The party must be in trouble! If the Democratic Party wants to hang onto the Oval Office, it needs to wise up. The only candidate who can keep this party in power is Hillary Rodham Clinton, the woman whose nomination this party torpedoed in 2008. When this party corrects that error, I will consider myself a Democrat again.
Beg her, and pray that she accepts. I am not talking about any “supporting role.” She has been doing that assiduously since June 2008, and, frankly, I’m done with that. TOP OF THE TICKET FOR HER! Then I will know this party honestly cares about women, suffrage, enfranchisement, honesty, and fairness.
Now you KNEW I would not end this without a pic of the Homegirl-in-Chief!
Posted in Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, misogyny, Secretary of State, sexism, US Department of State, violence against women, tagged crimes against women, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, misogyny, Secretary of State, sexism, State department, U.S. Department of State, violence against women on November 25, 2009| 2 Comments »
“Elimination of Violence Against Women” Day
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
November 25, 2009
“Today, a woman somewhere in the United States will be physically assaulted by her husband. In a remote village on the other side of the world, traffickers will lure a young girl away from her family and sell her into sexual slavery. In towns in every region of the globe, groups of men will harass young women as they attempt to go to school. And in a conflict-ravaged land, armed men will brutally rape a mother and her daughter, part of a deliberate strategy of war. Today and every day, women and girls all over the world will face violence simply because they are female. This gender-based violence not only harms the victims and their families, it shreds the fabric that weaves us together as human beings.
“Violence against women cannot be accepted as ‘cultural’ — it is criminal. Today, as we mark Elimination of Violence Against Women Day, let us recommit ourselves – men and women in every country – to work together to end these atrocities, to hold those who commit them accountable, and to support the survivors. No woman or girl anywhere in the world should have to walk in fear or live under the threat of violence.
“When women are accorded their rights and afforded equal opportunities in education, health care, employment, and political participation, they drive social and economic progress. They lift up themselves, their communities, and their nations. But none of these benefits is possible unless girls are able to learn without fear and women are able to have autonomy and decision-making over their own lives, and those are the very things that violence and the fear of violence take away.
“The United States will continue to stand with women around the world to ensure that their rights are protected and respected, and that they have the opportunity to pursue an education, find a good job, live in safety and fulfill their own God-given potential.”
The Obama Administration has made women’s empowerment a core pillar of American foreign policy. Earlier this year, the President appointed Melanne Verveer to be the first ever Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues. In August, Secretary Clinton traveled to the Democratic Republic of Congo to shine a spotlight on the use of rape as a tactic of war. And in September, she chaired a United Nations Security Council session that passed Resolution 1888 to prevent and respond to sexual violence in armed conflict.
Posted in Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, misogyny, Secretary of State, sexism, US Department of State, tagged crimes against women, Dennis Miller, Dick Morris, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Lame Cherry, Michelle Obama, misogyny, Sarah Palin, Secretary of State, sexism, State department, U.S. Department of State on November 21, 2009| 5 Comments »
Man! Or anyway THIS man! Right on the heels of all the cute body language stuff in the previous post, this comes up on one of the news feeds, and I am amazed since heretofore Dennis Miller has been pretty positive about our Head Homegirl.
Speaking with Palin, Dennis Miller transitions from calling Newsweek cover ’sexist’ to insulting Hillary Clinton.
Earlier this week, Sarah Palin wrote on her Facebook page that Newsweek’s choice to use a Runner’s World photo of her in running shorts for its cover was “unfortunate” and “sexist.” Palin’s criticism has since been echoed on both the left and right. Interviewing Palin on his radio show yesterday, Dennis Miller added his voice to those calling the cover “sexist.” But he then did something that most of the other critics haven’t done. He immediately followed it with a joke about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that could also be easily characterized as sexist:
MILLER: Listen, Sarah, I have to ask you. This Newsweek cover. First off, I have two thoughts on this. To me it seems blatantly sexist and secondly I’m just glad they didn’t decide to do it with Hillary during the primaries. But your thoughts on it. You a little POed at this? I mean this was for another magazine, right?
Well, it is sexist, Dennis, and now you are on my list that includes Bill Maher, Dana Carvey, and Robin Williams, for making nasty comments or innuendo about our Homegirl’s appearance. Actually, Dennis and cohorts, physical features and their appeal are very much a matter of taste. I, for one, just do not think Sarah Palin is all that attractive, although it seems a lot of guys think she’s hot on that Newsweek cover.
I have, but will not post, two very hot pictures of Hillary Clinton wearing less than what Sarah is on that cover – in a bathing suit – and she is very beautiful. She has a very curvy figure, a tiny waist, nice bust and hips, and yes, pretty legs and looks smashing – very feminine. So, Dennis, I do not know what you mean.
I am really sick of men who think they are so hot (and are not) making remarks about women’s physical appearance. This goes for you, Dick Morris, and for you too, Lame Cherry, too cowardly to come out from behind your screen name making negative comments about Michelle Obama’s appearance.
These women (all women) have their own personal styles. The cover picture on Newsweek (I will not give them the satisfaction of a link) was an inappropriate choice, and I believe Mrs. Palin (she is not Governor of anything anymore) should have been allowed input as to what picture went on the cover.
But, reality check, Dennis and the rest of you: You and your “parts” (that includes the parts between your ears) are none too attractive to me! You are not going to make headway with women by speaking with forked tongues – by petting Sarah then slamming Hillary. I am boycotting the appearances of all these guys on my list and invite my Sistah Homegirls to do he same. The portrayals by all of them of Hillary were shameful. Shameful!
Posted in Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, US Department of State, tagged crimes against women, David Miliband, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, Sri Lanka, State department, Tamil Tigers, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Department of State, United Kingdom, United Nations on October 3, 2009| 16 Comments »
UPDATED AGAIN: 10-12-09
The Tamil point of view which never was represented in the comments are is represented in this article:
US responds to Sri Lanka protest over Clinton remark
The United States, responding to protests from Sri Lanka over remarks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, said it had no recent evidence of women being raped while in Sri Lankan government custody.
In a letter addressed to Sri Lanka’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Rohitha Bogollagama, the State Department noted that the US government and international human rights groups over the years had detailed “numerous cases of rape and sexual violence in Sri Lanka, particularly acts committed against women held in detention by the government.”
However, the letter signed by Melanne Verveer, ambassador at large for global women’s issues at the State Department said that “in the most recent phase of the conflict, from 2006 to 2009 … we have not received reports that rape and sexual abuse were used as tools of war, as they clearly have in other conflict area around the world.”
“We hope that this clarification puts the issue in its proper context,” the letter said, adding that Washington remains concerned about extrajudicial killings, disappearances and detainee abuse in Sri Lanka.
“Secretary Clinton believes that Sri Lanka must focus to the future and move forward on the promotion of peace and the protection of human rights,” the letter said.
Well, I don’t know whether that makes things all better, but where this goes on, Hillary will call it!
Ever since early February, when, just weeks into her tenure as Secretary of State, Hillary joined U.K. Foreign Minister, David Miliband in calling for a halt to human rights abuses in Sri Lanka, both Miliband and Hillary have come under attack by that government as well as by the secessionist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The Clinton-Miliband joint statement of February 3, 2009 is below:
Earlier today at a meeting, Secretary Clinton and U.K. Foreign Secretary Miliband discussed their serious concern about deteriorating humanitarian situation in northern Sri Lanka caused by the ongoing hostilities. They affirmed their insistence on a political resolution to this longstanding conflict. The time to resume political discussions is now and we will continue to work with the Tokyo Co-Chairs, the Sri Lankan government, and the UN to facilitate such a process.
Secretary Clinton and Foreign Secretary Miliband call on both the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE to agree to a temporary no-fire period. Both sides need to allow civilians and wounded to leave the conflict area and to grant access for humanitarian agencies.
We welcome today’s statement by the Tokyo Co-Chairs (Norway, Japan, US and EU) jointly expressing their great concern about the plight of thousands of internally displaced persons trapped by fighting in northern Sri Lanka. We join the Co-Chairs and call on the LTTE and the Government of Sri Lanka not to fire out of or into the safe zone established by the Government or in the vicinity of the PTK hospital (or any other medical structure), where more than 500 patients are receiving care and many hundreds more have sought refuge. We also call on both sides to allow food and medical assistance to reach those trapped by fighting, cooperate with the ICRC to facilitate the evacuation of urgent medical cases, and ensure the safety of aid and medical workers. The LTTE and the Government of Sri Lanka must respect the international law of armed conflict.
The picture in this Madam Secretary blog post WANTED: Clinton, for aiding terrorism, most disturbingly hammers home the level of vitriol with which the Clinton-Miliband team is viewed in Sri Lanka.
Again in early May, they spoke up together calling for an end to the conflict.
Indeed, in late May, the government forces finally did overcome the LTTE forces and a quarter century of conflict came to an end, but as in so many cases of civil conflict, the human rights issues did not cease with the ceasefire. Camps for the displaced and victims of the war are essentially holding areas where innocent civilians and combatant LTTE are intermingled. As the camps filled in late May, UNICEF called for a quick screening by the government to identify those who are true victims and had no part in the conflict so that they might receive the humanitarian aid they required.
As we all know, our indomitable Homegirl acted as President and Chair of the U.N. Security Council this past Wednesday putting forth the U.N. Resolution on Violence Against Women and Girls which was adopted with no objections. The full transcript and text is at the link above. Part of what Council President Hillary Clinton (typing that felt so good!) said is below.
Council President HILLARY CLINTON, Secretary of State of the United States, speaking in her national capacity, said: “We are here to address an issue that has received too little attention, not only in the Council but also by all Governments around the world.” That issue went to the core of protecting the safety of citizens in all countries. It also went to the responsibility under the United Nations Charter to protect the lives of all, including women. That responsibility was particularly acute in circumstances where peace was challenged.
Noting that women and children were often the victims in wars for which they bore no responsibility, she said the resolution just adopted was a step towards protecting women in conflict zones. It built on resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008). Violence against women and girls during conflict had not diminished, in fact, in some cases it had escalated. The use of rape as a tactic of war had been used in Bosnia, Burma, Sri Lanka and elsewhere and the perpetrators were not being punished. That impunity encouraged further attacks. In Goma, Democratic Republic of the Congo, which she had visited, and where thousands of cases of rape were being reported, she had met the victims. The toll on them, their family and society could not be quantified. “It shreds the fabric that weaves us together as human beings.” It also undermined economic progress.
There is nothing particularly anti-Sri Lanka in that statement as I read it. It is a simple statement of the fact in the context, as Hillary always puts such acts, of the need for the government to seek out and punish the guilty – on both sides of the conflict. It seems, however, that the government of Sri Lanka has taken exception to her remark. On my Hillary news feed today, this article popped up: Sri Lanka Protest Clinton’s Rape Remark.
Well, it seems you just cannot please everybody. The North Koreans made remarks about her which, if comically cryptic and contradictory, were meant to insult (she laughed). Last week on Larry King, Hugo Chavez was equally complimentary: “Hillary Clinton is lost. America should be concerned about that.” And now The Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka continues its attacks on our Homegirl.
Hillary Clinton picks her fights and issues. Last week represented a milestone in Hillary’s career-long battle for the rights of women and girls. That men and military regimes will not necessarily agree with her positions is a no-brainer. But, like Joan of Arc or SuperWoman, she will continue her fight. If these guys despise her, we love her all the more. I don’t think the Homegirls need to worry about Hillary going on a trip to Colombo any time soon.