Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Oliver North :: Townhall.com Columnist
The War on Women
by Oliver North
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


WASHINGTON -- This Sunday we Americans celebrate Mother's Day. It's been that way since May 8, 1914, when the second Sunday in May was designated as a day to honor our maternal parents. For those who are still fortunate to have their mothers with them, they will shower her with cards, flowers, love and affection. Wise husbands among us will do our best to give the mothers of our children a day of peace and relaxation.

But no culture can truly celebrate mothers unless first they respect women. In the United States women hold top positions in government, law, academia, business and even the military. Democrats claim to be the favorite of America's women. Indeed, polling data shows that upwards of 55 percent of American women vote Democrat in national elections. And Nancy Pelosi, the first woman Speaker of the House, insists that Democrats care about women's rights. Unfortunately, if Pelosi and her Democrat Party allies have their way -- 650 million women around the globe may well be abandoned to the most misogynistic abuse imaginable at the hands of radical Islamists.

The masters of the mainstream media routinely report on Islam's violent Sunni vs. Shiite sectarian divide -- most evident in Iraq. But scant attention has been devoted to the No. 1 target of radical Islam: Muslim women. Nor do the potentates of the press bother to identify the principal protectors of Muslim women today: the Armed Forces of the United States.

In Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, Al Qaeda strongholds in Iraq and other countries and regions ruled by radical Islamists, boys become men at 15, but girls are considered women at age 9 -- meaning they can be tried as adults in a criminal court, are liable for the death penalty and can be stoned to death for adultery. Though the legal age of marriage for a girl is 13, a father can make a daughter marry earlier and order her to endure female genital mutilation.

Radical Islamic courts ascribe a woman's testimony to be worth half of a man's and mothers may not act as financial guardians or make decisions regarding their children's residence, foreign travel or medical care. Women must have permission from a father, husband or male relative to travel.

Men have uncontested rights to divorce their wives, and may practice polygamy. Women are not allowed to vote or participate in political debate. They receive half the inheritance of men and if a man dies childless, his entire inheritance goes to his parents, not his wife.

Specific evidence of radical Islamic violence perpetrated against Muslim girls and women in the name of "Islamic purity" has been catalogued by the United Nations, the European Union, numerous human rights organizations and by an increasing number of female refugees brave enough to tell all. In her biography, "Infidel," Ayann Hirsi Ali describes what she calls "Islam's divinely ordained enslavement of women." Her book is a litany of horrors perpetrated against the fairer sex. In Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. military commanders routinely report atrocities perpetrated against women and girls.

On April 28, U.S. soldiers in Tarmiya, north of Baghdad, discovered unexplained buried wires running into a new school for girls. The Americans followed the wires and found them connected to detonators attached to propane tanks hidden beneath the floors and artillery shells secreted in the ceilings and walls. The terrorists who constructed this deathtrap hoped that the carnage would discourage other little girls from attending school.

On May 3, in Gujrat, Pakistan, a terror cell linked to the Taliban detonated a bomb at the gate of a girls' school. The wrath of these radical Islamists was aroused by the notion that girls would learn to read and write.

On April 29, Iranian police arrested 31 women for holding a peaceful vigil outside Tehran's Revolutionary Court. Encouraged by advances being made by women in neighboring Iraq, they were protesting Iranian laws that discriminate against women. The police shoved and kicked the women into a curtained minibus and drove them to Evin prison, where they were blindfolded and interrogated. One of the protesters, Mahboubeh Abbasgholizadeh, told the Associated Press that the police and prosecutors "insisted that foreign governments were exploiting our cause."

These are but a few of the most recent examples of how women are treated by radical Islam. Nearly all of these events are ignored by the mainstream media -- as are the innumerable ways from the Balkans to the Hindu Kush to the Tigris and Euphrates, U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen, Guardsmen and Marines have become the protectors of Muslim women.

Thanks to young Americans wearing flak jackets and helmets, hundreds of schools have been built for Muslim girls, millions of women have the right to vote, scores of female health care clinics have been opened and hundreds of thousands of women now work, have their own bank accounts, use cell phones -- even serve in elected office. But all of these advances may soon stop if our Congress insists that "the war is lost" and U.S. troops must now come home.

Mothers Day. It's a wonderful occasion for Pelosi and her comrades in Congress to reflect on what will happen to millions of Muslim women if Congress pulls the plug on their protectors.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Oliver North is the founder and honorary chairman of Freedom Alliance and author of The Assassins .

Be the first to read Oliver North's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
Yet another slavery! Abusing Women!
And we have forgotten about Saddan's sons (Uday & Qusay) who could legally stalk young women like prey in a jungle....


Missed Opportunity
If only the Repub Party had been paying attention when they had the chance to have a positive influence on the war. Too bad North was too busy cheerleading and staying the course. Oh well. I guess it was a little difficult to think clearly over the Repub Lullaby... "cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, gay marriage, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run ...

"Reason"?
Oliver North was singing 'cut and run'?

What an incredible statement! What planet have you been on?


Shameful......
It's the blatant blind-eye to these atrocities that is the reason why outside of domestic spending(if that), that Dim-ocrats can't be trusted. This also exposes NOW and other feminist organizations on the left for the political-hack mobs that they are.

DarkMessiah: proof we haven't won yet
Yep, there are plenty of men right here at home who'd just love to see American wimmin in exactly the same position -- under the boot heel of men -- as those Middle Eastern women are. We see and hear them bawling on these pages frequently about how Feminazis (uppity wimmin who insist on their place at the starting line to compete without anchors tied to both feet) are destroying the fabric of America and how much better life was when the "Goils was goils and men was men" and the wimmin knew their place and the law kept them in it.

Frankly, Mr. North, you're not going to make any progress calling the national attention to the disrespect and disregard for women in foreign lands when there are still way too many men in THIS land who would be delighted if they could keep Girls out of college, out of law school, our of medical school, out of the police and fire ranks, out of racing cars and out of all the support services thereto, and convince America that the country is being destroyed by Uppity Feminazis who prove they can too compete and sometimes win in the world the men thought belonged to them.

First lets clean up our own house. Then we can go overseas and meddle in other peoples' houses.

P.S. to DarkMessiah: From whom do you think these "fine women" OBTAIN the divorces, the out of wedlock babies, the abortions and the diseases? That would be FROM MEN, wouldn't it?

Extraordinary Reasoning.
"But no culture can truly celebrate mothers unless first they respect women. In the United States women hold top positions in government, law, academia, business and even the military".

After delivering the first sentence of this piece of text, Oliver North somehow manages to slip a rear-view mirror into his brain before typing out the inane paradox that is the second.

And in some of the areas, within those fields that he mentions - government, law, academia (particularly), business and the miltary (ridiculously) - women have often been shoe-horned / affirmative actioned into positions that they not only shouldn't hold, but once there they have ofetn wrought dismay and ill-feeling (as a result of the hateful dishonesty that is their feminist legion) and incompetence (that has sometimes resulted in human lives being lost).

And modern Western womankind - who are the most cosseted human grouping throughout the history of our species - continue to spit venom at those around them, commit homocide upon those within them (if they are inconveniently in the way) and still, no matter what is conceded to their crazed beliefs, demand that everyone should believe that they are still hard done by - and that the whole world and his goat should forever act accordingly.

Oliver North is the epitome of....

Others can decide that.

I could reference 1001 quotes, sayings, parables, analogies etc. etc., all of which would be appropriate to describe yet another buffoon who has been spat out here from a pseudo-religious text of a Women's Studies course.

It beggars belief that supposedly intelligent people, unless they are getting some form of kinky, sado-masochistic thrill out of this type of nonsense, are still actually saying these things.

"But no culture can truly celebrate mothers unless first they respect women" he says!

Finally - let me briefly switch from 'Mother's Day' in May, 2007 to October's 'Woman's Day' last year, 2006, and to the words of the Archbishop of Buenos Aires which I have quoted several times on this website, but which, in the context of the skewed drivel of this article, have never been so poignant

"Feminism is a message of division hatred and death".

The question North asks about the integrity of any occasion that honors women should not be raised from the perspectice of what is happening in the third world - but from what is happening in our own cultures - our own schools, universities, hospitals, law courts and families.

Both unhealthy extremes. But I hesitate to use the word 'opposite', and the word 'antithesis', which means equal and opposite, is certainly not suitable.

Because the extremism that is happening in our own societes (much of which is masked) will prove to be considerably more destructive to ourselves in the long term, than the ill-effects that Muslim attitudes towards women (which are grossly exaggerated by the feminist media) will have upon their own cultures.

Along with many, many other very important factors - family breakdown and respective birth rates alone, if they do not radically change, will make this a certainty.






Hypocrits and liars
Women can't spot hypocrits and liars or they'd never vote for Dems. Take Hillary, please. She is really going to be able to impress world leaders as a strong pres. when she has never been able to keep her own husband from humiliating her with dozens of serial affairs. She has never actually faced an open forum from the press without garbing herself in pink and being tossed softball interviews. She WROTE about how Chelsea was endangered by 911 when Chelsea WROTE she was in uptown NYC in a safe apartment through the entire attack. Not too much lying there. Osama Obama has a white grandmother whom he subs. with a black woman for pictures. He spent his early school years in Muslim private education in Indonesia, not a place where they emphasized the US Constitution I would guess. That's not hypocrisy or lying??? Edwards made his fortune on a lie--that obstetrical procedures produce cereral palsy and other birth defects. He should give all the money back. Gore, who created the internet, single-handedly defended Pork Chop Hill in Vietnam, and now has been canonized as a "green" saint is promoting an entirely specious kind of medieval alchemy in the name of "science" (global warming), so his family can make money selling "carbon footprint"-get-out-of-jail passes for people who use too much electricity--like he does ($20,00 a year in ONE house--he has four). The esteemed Kennedy Family pays no estate taxes, as all their assets are in trusts, and Kennedy and Kerry ("greenies" both) are fighting tooth and nail against wind farming off their summer E$TATES so their views won't be spoiled by windmills when they are boating on their million-dollar YACHT$. And we can't forget Kennedy might have saved a woman from drowning had he not been so bent on saving himself from responsibility 40 yrs. ago. Biden was driven out of his first pres. run by proof of his college plagiarism. No lying and hypocrisy there. I think Dems. have used enough alcohol and drugs over the years that their brains are entirely rewired so they can't tell the difference between a fact and a lie. I hope that's not true of Am. women.

Whoever...
Made the statement above that Rpublicans exploit women must be soft inthe head or a local troll.
Let's talk about that...Tawana Brawley,Monica Lewinsky, Kathleen Willey,Hilary Clinton, the Nappy girls basketball team...Holy cow. YOu miss the point completely...Maybe you should get some education and read "Desert Flower" "Caged Virgin." Or even some fiction by Chitra Divakruni.
Maybe then you'll get a clue.

AudiR10
Your comments are a little surprising, till one recollects that you are a Canadian (perhaps a socialist French Canadian).

Here in Colorado, men didn't want 2 women to get on the Denver Fire Department. Why? Because neither could pass the physical tests! Yet, these babes that physically aren't capable of performing the job, were awarded the job based on their sex (I hope that when the department is fighting fires, these babes are the ones assigned to rescue women from the burning structures). While I was employed by USWEST, Affirmative Action ensured that women were able to get jobs in the construction and repair areas. Could they do the work themselves? They were always asking men to help them setup and move their ladders and moving equipment instead of doing it themselves, slowing the men's ability to perform their own assignments in the proper time frame. And, as in the University of Michigan's Law Department, admittance isn't based on competition but rather on race, then sex, resulting in discrimination against the best.

No AudiR10, US men don’t make a habit of discriminating against women, they just expect women to earn the jobs through competition rather than through the preferential treatment of Affirmative Action (socailism) which has resulted in increased unemployment as many businesses leave the United States for foreign nations that permit competition in the employment arena, ensuring that the businesses get the best employees.

Men don't a problem with women who can earn the positions, they have a problem with those who can't earn the job but still receive it due to preferential treatment.

Even Queen Hilly???
What a problem!! It is easy to respect most women, but to respect Queen Hilly Clinton is just going too far.

RR

Islamists and the religious right.
Sounds like the way Islamists view women is very similar to the way some in the religious right in its quest for Christian sharia'a often do. One example, abortion. They wish to deny the mother's right to live. Only fetuses and nacent babies have a right to life in the religious right's view.

Dont bother the dems with facts
You're wasting your time pointing out Islamic shortcomings. The only thing dems care about is Gitmo, Bush lied, and surrender tactics. They cant see the coming evil that the Islamic world wants to unleash on us. Its only important that Sen. Schumer has shown Sen. Reed impressive numbers on gaining Senate seats. Democrats first, Americans second. Oh yes, I forgot, they have a great concern about Darfur which is surely one of the worlds most important strategic spots.

Safeguard American Women first!
I'm sick and tired of all this preoccupation with how lousy Muslim women have it in Islamic countries! Polygamy and harems have been a staple of life in Arab countries for centuries and nothing is going to change that anytime soon.

I have a radical suggestion--let's put the rights of American women first for a change. An American woman's right to an abortion is in serious jeopardy as male judges insist on treating women like little children who are unable to make important decisions as to whether or not we want to proceed with a pregnancy. If we're not careful and vigilant it's back to backalley coathanger abortions for us. Republicans gave a very clear message to American women during their first debate--DROP DEAD!!!!

AudiR10, enough
You are one, sick woman. You need to get help for your issues.

"still way too many men in THIS land who would be delighted if they could keep Girls out of college, out of law school, our of medical school"

Who??????

Name 3. With evidence. Or STFU.

"P.S. to DarkMessiah: From whom do you think these "fine women" OBTAIN the divorces, the out of wedlock babies, the abortions and the diseases? That would be FROM MEN, wouldn't it?"

So, all the maladies women suffer are the fault of MEN? is that your point?

That's INFANTILE, babe. You're responsible for your own problems, and you freakin' well know it.

BuddhistGhost
"Only fetuses and nacent babies have a right to life in the religious right's view."

Prove that with quotations, please. From MAINSTREAM pro-life sources, not fringe wack jobs.

Or, is it your habit to hurl false accusations against innocent people, just because you don't like them?

titaniczilla
"An American woman's right to an abortion is in serious jeopardy as male judges insist on treating women like little children who are unable to make important decisions as to whether or not we want to proceed with a pregnancy."

Wow, great analysis.

The same judges insist on treating me like a little child who is unable to make important decisions as to whether or not I want to continue to suffer irrelevant fools such as yourself. We need law guaranteeing our Constitutional right to choose (to let our political opponents live.) I think Liberals are just a blob of tissue, and I want to shoot you in the head.

How supportive are you of the "right to choose" now?

Or, might there be some "choices" that just aren't acceptable to civilized society?

The clearest indicator..
...of the genuine character of the political left in America is how they react to their opponents actually helping someone (which, believe it or not, happens pretty often.)

This is an instance. Nobody with even a sliver of a conscience could object to the US military protecting women from the violent attacks of radical Muslims, but the conscience-free political liberals manage it without breaking a sweat.

Liberalism: a morality-free zone.

You don't need
to convince me that Islam is not nice to women. What you do need to convince me of is that we can somehow change this- with our Army, no less.
It's their problem and only they can change it.

Some interesting posts
especially since I generally concur with anti-socialist(8:26AM). The feminist agenda, mirroring to the homosexual agenda, demands special, not equal, rights.

As for the Islamic world, there is no way to turn centuries of tradition around in a blink of history. That doesn't mean we shouldn't promote the elevation of women in these societies, it only means that as Islamic nations become more a part of the modern world, women will find themselves less and less manacled to subservience. A good example would be Dubai, a Muslim country enjoying a widespread economic and social rennaisance, where burkas and bikinis can be seen in the same panorama.

Correction to Songo
Iraq was not "secular" under Saddam. Saddam was not a religious fanatic ruler, but he was a Muslim, and he invoked Islam when it suited him, especially regarding his "policies" toward the US and Israel.

Saddam's Iraq did not have religious police like Saudi Arabia and Iran, and did not specifically avow itself to be under shari'a rule. Tell that to the Shi'as and Kurds in mass graves, and the women slaughtered after their stints in the rape rooms, and see how big a cheer you get. What Saddam had instead was Saddam's inner circle, culled from Sunni Ba'athists, which changed with the seasons since he didn't trust anyone. The only way to exit Saddam's inner circle was to be executed -- either quickly and unexpectedly or slowly, by torture -- and have your entire family and everything you had be killed, sliced, and divvied up among Saddam's relatives.

The Sunni vs. Shi'a divide thrived under Saddam. Sunnis, a minority of the population, oppressed Shi'as in a number of ghastly ways, from gassing them to killing their religious leaders to draining the southern marshes so as to deny them their ancestral way of life. (The Sunni Arabs also oppressed the Kurds in the north, along very similar lines.)

Saddam's origins in Ba'athism gave him Marxist ideas about social and political organization (very common in the dictators of Muslim nations who came to power in the 1970s). He was not a religious zealot who wanted to impose shari'a on the people, but his version of westernism was the worst the Enlightenment West has to offer. If you think women did well under Stalin and Castro, perhaps you would think they did well under Saddam. But the rest of us needn't believe in long-disproven Potemkin villages.

Lynne, 10:36 AM
You weren't completely off base. I went a little overboard on AudiR10. She's a good writer, and thinks very clearly on most subjects, but she's obviously got deep, deep issues regarding men, and articulates them here whenever she can.

Yes, some women suffer because of men. And some men suffer because of women. Some humans suffer because of other humans; it's all too common.

But we seem to have lost the ability to recognize that, first and foremost, most of us suffer because of ourselves. And since we can seldom control what other people do, the key to improving our world lies in our ability to recognize and address the ways we damage ourselves.

Songo, 12:31 PM
You wrote: "NOTHING positive has happened in Iraq since we invaded. Nothing. The place is worse than it was before we arrived. It was bad then; it's worse now."

Here are a few Iraqis who disagree with you:

http://www.theotheriraq.com/

There are lots of other things I could say about this, because there are lots of other things that have been accomplished, but I'll just let the Iraqis speak for themselves at first, and see what you have to say about it.

Songo, 12:31 PM, again
You actually gave away your agenda. You wrote: "...the steady erosion of constitutional rights and consolidation of power."

So, what are the steps along this "steady erosion?" Please be specific. And just saying "The Patriot Act" is not being specific; I'm asking you to name specific liberties that have been eroded during the Bush administration.

Oh, and I'm reserving the right to list REAL erosions of liberties from the Clinton administration, and ask you what, exactly, you said and did in opposition to them. Don't be surprised when I do. And yes, it IS relevant to question whether your concern is genuine concern for liberty, or hypocritical, partisan noise-making.

Then you wrote "Except, of course, that Boosh didn't count on the election of '06."

Which was a relatively tame instance of mid-term reversal, occasioned mostly by conservative displeasure with their own representatives.

The whole truth?
That excellent link fails to mention that Kurdistan has enjoyed its current autonomous status since the early 90s. Using it as an example of positive accomplishments in Iraq should be credited to the United States for enforcing the no-fly zone, not to the current administration for the 2003 invasion.

songo, 10:47 AM
That is where you made your first errors. I think we get it that you don't like the war, maybe never did. But repeating false claims does not help anything unless you are specifically trying to dupe people or you have been duped yourself.

1. Bush II NEVER said Iraq had anything to do with 9-11.

2. Bush NEVER said Iraq was an imminent threat to the US.

3. Bush DID say we CANNOT WAIT for Iraq to become an imminent threat, nor any other country. That is why his policy of preemption caused such a stink among some folks and foreign governments.

Points 1 & 2 you got from some anti-war group or other Libs.

Preemption is defined as "action preventing something" in the Encarta dictionary. Like passing on poison gas or bio weapons and someday dirty bombs to terrorists.

Just like shooting down a few airliners before they took out 3000 souls would have been "preemption."




Immunity from prosecution
North is a man best know for funding terrorists. Maybe he thinks killing women and children in a poor village is OK if the killers support US favored dictators.

Ollie is Good
How do I know? I worked with him in the Pentagon. He was vehemently anti-Communist. He has never opposed a Democratic principle, country, or warrior in his life. Communist are scum and Radical Islam is also an anathema to him. He has served his country and served it well. Those of you that prefer to attack him and have never sat at lunch or worked with him are willing idiots. How could any American criticize what he did for Central and South America. I have lived a life like his and I too hate Communist. The Democrat Party is full of new line Bolsheviks; people like George Soros, Russ Feingold, Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Barney Franks, and their willing idiots like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Maher, Michael Moore ,and Rosie O'Donnell all sleep each night with visions of the Russian Bolshevik Revolution dancing in their heads. These miscreants of deception idolize the likes of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxemberg, Karl Eisner, Kurt Leibknecht, Yagoda, Kaganovich and Marx. Ollie knows and Ollie will never bend a knee to the modern group of Bolsheviks--they fool only fools. There are some on this board.

Songo
Clearly we mean two different things by the term "secular." I don't think we disagree on the facts, so much as on the interpretation.

What "secular" regime would you compare Saddam's Iraq to, to demonstrate its secularism? Merely contrasting it with a regime of shari'a fanaticism is not enough. Apparently you think it is, however.

Turkey is a secular regime (although its status in that regard is beginning to slip). Ankara explicitly avows that it is NOT under religious rule. Singapore is another secular state, explicitly avowing that religions must tolerate one another and that none rules the people through the government. Both nations have had a longstanding commitment to ensuring that secularism has a particular meaning and effect: the prevention of internal religious divisions and strife. Again, this is changing in Turkey -- from the West's perspective, for the worse -- but "secularism," in these countries, is a cultivated -ism, thought to be an improvement over excessive self-identification with religious and religion-based ethnicity.

Within their own closed-loop logic, Communist nations have been explicitly secular, in that they have rejected and suppressed theism of all kinds, as a matter of Marxist doctrine. (One may argue that Marxism itself is practiced as a religion, but that's another issue.)

Nations from the US to India disavow any form of religious testing for civil participation, and any state support of religion, but do not by any means regard themselves as "secular." The practice, for example, of politicians appealing to constituencies because of the religions they may embrace is tolerated and expected, as a civil right.

To say that Saddam's Iraq was "secular" is meaningless except in a defined context. The context you place it in is whether there were veils, burkas, beatings, etc -- presumably directed by the government, since a majority of Iraqi women did, in fact, wear headscarves during the Saddam years, and there WERE "honor" killings (especially among the Shi'as), 9-year-olds given in marriage, and so forth. The government didn't levy or enforce such requirements, but neither did it explicitly lift them, or prevent the exercise of traditional familial privileges under Islam.

Saddam himself was a Muslim who explicitly invoked Sunni Islam in fighting Shi'a Iran, in hating and plotting against Israel, and in supporting terrorism directed against the West. Internally, he encouraged the Sunni-Shi'a rift and reinforced it with Sunni-on-Shi'a oppression and violence.

He also continued (not instituted, but continued) Ba'athist policies that were largely Marxist in origin, one of which was allowing women to participate in law, medicine, and the sciences. Some women did so under headscarves; others did not. All women who did so were from Sunni tribes that embraced Ba'athism.

It is a misleading shorthand to say that Saddam's regime was "secular." It's more than misleading to suggest that it was good for women in the sense that it DIDN'T make a priority of using the state to impose shari'a limitations on them. My analogy to Stalin and Castro stands: having women doctors and scientists -- something the most oppressive Marxist regimes have paraded around like prize poodles -- is not evidence of a regime being good for women.

All that said, if other posters here have suggested that shari'a mistreatment of women was a pretext for invading Iraq, have at them. It wasn't.

Calling Saddam "secular" is being categorical for rhetoric's sake, however. The evidence you adduce isn't even consistent within instances of Islam: Iran's women, under shari'a, are chadored within an inch of their lives, but Iran has women doctors, lawyers, and scientists. From what we know, these options are only available to the wealthy and politically connected, but they are there.

Iranian women also have the vote, while Saudi women do not. Saudi women are more likely to have shari'a imposed on them by Dad, whereas in Iran it is more commonly imposed by religious courts.

It's possible to have education and a title and still be a second-class citizen. Being too categorical about the nature of a particular government in the Islamic world is usually a mistake. Definitions are essential.

Ollie North, Feminist????!!!!!!
Wow Ollie North, the all American patriotic he man a feminist championing the rights of Arab women! Who'd a thunk it!? Where has Ollie been all this time? Veils, head scarves, harems, polygamy, stonings and honor killings have all been a deeply ingrained part of female life in Islamic countries for centuries and that's not going to change anytime soon. Is this the same Ollie North who is probably cringing at the thought that a WOMAN might be elected president of the United States or wants abortion stopped in the United States at all costs. We went into Iraq under the false pretense of finding those nasty WMDS and to get rid of Saddam, not liberate downtrodden ARAB women.

dyerje
Good post, even though a few points I find contentious.

Pakistan under Musharaff might be a better example of a "secular" Islamic nation than Turkey, as Musharaff has, for the most part, total control of the military, while Gul and Erdogan are directly opposed by the Turkish military.
Musharaff, like Saddam, embraces Islam when it is politically expedient.

Ollie North, Feminist????!!!!!!
Isn't it sad when a man, and what man he is, must stand up for women and this time in our history as a nation. Where are the powerful women. Unfortunately, most of them are leftists who tacitly support the spread of Islam and all that it implies, simply because these women hate freedom at its most basic level. They would rather ignore the horrible realities of Islam to further their political futures. Same goes for the support of abortion. Women are controlled by women and unfortunately these women are Hell-bent on control of the worst kind. A totalitarian view inspired by Satan himself. This current world crisis is precisely a battle between Good and evil. May God prevail and may women enjoy their God-intended freedoms love, and respect.

no bs artist - Ollie North, Feminist???

>>>
Wow Ollie North, the all American patriotic he man a feminist championing the rights of Arab women!
>>>

I don't mean to put word into Ollie's mouth, so maybe I am out of line here.

I believe that Ollie North feels that certain rights are endowed to all men (and women) by our Creator as unalienable. Perhaps you feel that only you are endowed and Muslim women are not.

Concerning the rest of your opinion, we went into Iraq under a number of pretenses. One of which was to find WMD and we did. Another of which was to depose Saddam and we did. And another was to liberate the downtrodden and the abused which we are currently doing.

So far these are not FALSE pretenses are they?

Warrior says Ollie is Good
"How do I know? ... He was vehemently anti-Communist. He has never opposed a Democratic principle, country, or warrior in his life."

Maybe Warrior thinks funding known terrorists is OK if they kill innocent villagers in the name of "anti Communist" dictators? We do not leave decisions like that in the hands of middle level military staffers, but top level civilians in the executive and Congress. If Congress pulls the plug, no matter how much Ollie wants to go on killing, he has to stop.

To do otherwise is to betray your country just as surely as Benedict Arnold -- who also thought he was doing the colonials a favor by putting a quick end to their deadly revolution.

A Mother's Day Wish from Barbara Bush!
"But why should we hear about body bags, and deaths, and how many, what day it's gonna happen, and how many this or what do you suppose? Or, I mean, it's, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?" -

Good Morning America, March 18, 2003.

muslims and women
Fiorst. One quick question. Is the missus clinton a women? She comes closer to an alien than any other woman on earth. It seems the muslim men hatre women in gneral because their own society demasculates them. When their pathetic societies dictate behaviors for their citizens it is apparent why they fear women. In western societies women work along men, women contribute to every aspect of our society. We see women as partners in all aspects of our lives and neither fear or fell threathened by their presence of their accomplishments. Muslim men throughout the ME due the backwardness of their sdocieties accomplish little or anything with their lives. Should women gain any level of freedom and take control of their lives it will only serve to see these male dominated societies have truly pathetic they are and how their overall failures contribute nothing to the betterment of mankind. Western societies became wealthy and powerful with the inclusion of women. When you deny one half of your population any rights,at the minimum one half all you potential resources are lost. That is why the ME and all advocatesd of the failed cult remain living in the dark ages. One final question, where are the feminists and their outcries at the ME slavery of women. Obvious hypocrites they have become a one issue group and that is not for freedom of women enslaved in the ME.

Songo
Even the NY times aftger recounting fla. Votes admitrted President Bush won the vote count. Imbeciles such as yourself refush to believe that as well as that the fla supreme court overstepped their bounds. Quit living in the past and wake up to reality. Ignorance is no excuse for continujing lies

Will: You're right
You Dems are in a good place....... "right now".

RINO Rudy's confession of Friday is going to sink him faster than a stone on calm water. It's going to help clarify the race for the GOP. He is toast. See my blog essay of today "Throwing Down the Gauntlet" by clicking my name.

Further, I notice a glaring oversight on your list of GOP nominees, namely Fred Thompson.

Thompson's playing the game exactly right, waiting for the early announcers in the GOP to fade a la Howard Dean, and I predict he'll announce some time in June.

When he does, the whole party will coalesce around the guy, because he's the right man for his time, with the message and persona that will fire up not only the GOP, but the conservatives and Middle America, too.

At that point, you Dems can kiss your butts goodbye.

At that point, it won't be "right now" anymore.




PELOSI'S OWN WAR AGAINST WOMEN

Pelosi probably thinks no further than the marble ceiling above her. She can -- and did -- raise her fist in celebration that women can now do and be almost anything.

Perhaps she was thinking only of American women, whose freedoms are spelled out in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution.

Thank you, Oliver North, for bringing one side of a very ugly picture to the fore. It is likely an aspect of the entire Iraq experience on which many of us have not focused in the past.

Let us also remember that this is the kind of world -- the dismal world Oliver North described -- that the radical Islamists would bring to our own land if they are allowed an inch. Let us not budge that one inch. Let us show some courage.

Let us realize, thank God, that Harry Reid has lost. He can speak for himself only. Harry Reid has lost everything, no matter how hard he may try to backtrack. He is a true loser.

I just knew it would happen, Songo
You are stuck with the baloney of "Bush Lied" because you have nothing else. I doubt anything will open your eyes but I'm willing to give you one last chance before banishing you to the tinfoil-hat-Moonbat-to-be-ignored-catagory.

Just read this article a few times and let it sink in. The poop you claim is Bush's started with Clinton's people like Tenet, who now disavows his "slam dunk" comments about WMD's in Iraq.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

And if you claim the WSJ news staff are in Bush's cabal you get the TFHOTY Award. [tinfoil hat of the year]

LYNNE'S GRIP ON THE SUBJECT

Lynne has her mind wrapped around this subject pretty well.

There are a couple of commenters who might pay her comments a little more attention. Southerner and Peter C come to mind.

That's what I like about this opportunity for all to comment: the ability to see others' points of view. Frequently I guess at the ages of the commenters; frequently I guess at the number of years the commenters have had an opportunity to open their minds and see others' viewpoints. Sometimes it's obvious that no amount of time will help.

Thanks, TH! Thanks, Lynne!

Songo, why I waste my time
I just went back and read your post to Marc, Lynn, et al.

You are a tortured soul. 'Before imminemt' means BEFORE imminemt. I can't believe you can't read a dictionary yet you own a computer.

And who cares what your grandparents did or how they got along in this world? Most children do much better than their grandparents because of education and the rising quality of life in America. Heck even our "poor" have color tv's!

And there are lots of folks who are doing better than me and lots who aren't. It must be your Socialist leanings that tell you we must all do the same as everyone else.

It is too funny that you use the term "they EARNED IT" which came from a Smith-Barney ad for investing in the evil stock market. You know, where the fat-cat Republicans like Bush and Cheney made their "ill gotten gains". Oh yes, like Kennedy, Reid and Pelosi etc do quite well too.

You are so wrong on so many levels.

No Comment?
My general comment on comments: One commenter recently said that I was wrong to support Giuliani (the only Republican who can win) because he was a "socialist." Frankly, someone who calls a lifelong Republican and an American hero a socialist is beyond assistance. Such a person has a right to express himself, but nothing he says will be of any value. Merely reciting right-wing slogans to one's fellow conservatives accomplishes zero. Blowing hot air is not a political action. If you have a problem with Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi or Rudy Giuliani or Newt Gingrich, say what it is -- and what you and others intend to do about it. If you plan to do nothing but write comments, then realize your total futility as a human being. Complaints alone are not enough. Will you contribute money to campaigns? Will you stuff envelopes? Or knock on doors? Or make calls? If not, you might be a conservative, but you're more part of the problem than the solution.

steve
TalkTop65@aol.com

Lynne
"I only hope that Pelosi (and her herd) along with Reid have not done irreparable harm to our troops and our country."

Pelosi and Reid???? How about BUSH?!!! He is a traitor to the Constitution and our country! Pelosi is a commie, but you seem to give Bush a complete pass on his actions.

Steve
I said it and I said it for good reason. Giuliani is pro-amnesty, pro-open borders and anti-gun. He is NOT a conservative. He's just as much slime as Hillary.


how about
Guilian was a competent mayor who was elevated to hero status by doing his job. While mayor Nagin only helped him by being incompetent. Guiliani is not good for the US as President.

Liberty
The past is not always an indicator of the future. Events since 9/11 have changed many perceptions of how the country is run. The illegal immigration problem has also taken on far more importance. In light of today's concern with the terrorists, a stance against gun control in NYC seems almost quaint by today's threats. To say the Rudy as mayor is a complete picture of what Rudy would be as president is disingenuous as its worse. There is essentially no real on the job training for president so I would maintain that many who run and get elected are always unknown quantities as to what type of leader they will become. It almost becomes a matter of faith when entering the voting booth. History has shown that most who were called to be president have never measured up to becoming a great leader. The best we can hope for it that events don't overwhelm the person elected. A clearer indicator might be stated positions and the working relationships they develope over their career. But overall after the elction we are still dealing with an unknown quantity as to how they will lead

wildwest
Giuliani has shown himself to be an enemy of the Constitution. That's enough indicator of what he will do if we was President.

wildwest,
Liberty has this one down right; visit BrianR's blog for more info on Giuliani:

http://viewfromtheisland.townhall.com/

Songo,
ever notice how the moveon people have been unable to do just that?

will,
"To Dems on the site:
If you think about it, we are in a great place to be right now.

All 3 top republican presidential nominees are in varying states of implosion & decay."

I don't know about Dems, but us right-wingers are pretty happy about the Big 3 taking themselves out, saving us the trouble from having to do it.

Steve,
you left out a "'t." As in, "...Giuliani (the only Republican who can't win)...." You can't win without your base, and he's looking more and more baseless.

Charlie
Oh geez, Charlie. How about Giuliani standing against the 2nd amendment of the Constitution? You remember that, don't you? It's the one that says the government can't gun grab. You remember, don't ya?

"HOUSTON - Rudy Giuliani directly challenged Republican Party orthodoxy Friday, asserting that his support for abortion rights, gun control and gay rights should not disqualify him from winning the party's presidential nomination." New York Times, 5-11-07
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_5878172

Charlie -- Bush
You're way too easy, Charlie.

UNCONSTITUTIONAL WARRANTLESS SURVEILLANCE of AMERICAN CITIZENS.

Is that enough for you, or do you want more?

By the way, Charlie boy, I am a traditional conservative. Something you obviously know nothing about, if you're standing up for Giuliani. So stick moveon.org and any other of your BIG government socialistic websites in your ear.

Cheers...

Power and not truth for Pelosi et al
The fact of the matter is that "liberal women" are not interested in the best interests of women in either the US or around the world. They are interested in power pure and simple. How the supposed "feminist elite" in this country can ignore the most abused women in the world never fails to amaze me- though I almost expect it now. Read books by Tammy Bruce and you will see how an insider to the feminist elites (and she was one herself) reveals the power hungry maniacally self interested ego maniacs that the womens movement has become. Facing down the evil conservatives in America has become reason for this self absorbed egoists to exist, while true heroines of the Islamic countries risk life and limb on a daily basis doing what these shrinking violets couldn't imagine. Like voting in a new democracy while the threat to life and limb is literally at every moment a present reality, or protesting and being sent to jail for interrogation or worse most probably. Yet here are these pompous self absorbed egoists pining against women and men who believe in traditional values and seek the best for those in lands where any semblance of freedoms we have are virtually non-existent. Shame on the lefty's in the feminist movements.

Feminists and islam
The ideal feminist it would appear is the missus clinton. She has been their heroine for so long and the person they have pinned all their hopes on that they betray their so called ideals if it can lead to her acheiving the presidency. The vision of the strong independent woman had to overlooked when she found it more convenient to be her womanizing husbands doormat and enabler. Her quest for greed as though some type of reward for her "sacrifices" as a "pulic servant". Personal comfort had become a quicker more acheivable goal and thus eargerly pursued. But now that the missus clinton is close to a possible accession to the presidency she has become the surrogate visionary of the feminists, and the protection of their only issue, abortion on demand. That these feminists who basking in wealth and comfort, act as though the women in the ME do not exist. The old out of sight, out of mind. It is almost as though the muslim women due to the poverty and ignorance they must live with in order to survive are not worthy of the attention of the elitist feminists who think that a woman as president, women on corporate boards and the accumulation of wealth is the basic requirement needed before they will pay attention. That the army and male spokesmen are speaking of the horrific lives of the women in the ME shows how vapid and selfish these feminists have truly become.

Ollie is a liar
He's an admitted liar, but he is either lying about the mainstream media missing the Taliban atrocities or he's willfully ignorant on the subject.

When poppa Bush was in office kissing Saddam's ah...oh, ring and kissing up to the Taliban in Afghanistan, 60 Minutes ran a piece showing a woman being executed in the soccer stadium and women being beaten in the streets for showing a piece of flesh or speaking too loudly.

When asked why they used the soccer field for executions of women, the Taliban spokesman said it was because the world would not build them a proper execution field.

Where was North's concern for women? He had none. This expressed concern on this Mother's day is as phony as North.

Ollie needs to join NOW
Songo, don't you think NOW should give Ollie an honorary membership ?

He's so quick to catch-on to the obvious.

I think you listed a fair representation of the murderous dictatorships that Ollie has either supported or ignored in his defense of women.

I'm certain some of Ollie's defenders here can give us a list of articles he's written condemning the leaders and countries who brutalize women, but don't hold your breath.

Maybe Ollie should run for president of NOW.

Can't you hear Rush Monday calling Ollie a Feminazi?

gamehen1969
Do you even know what Rush's definition of a Feminazi is?

Radical Islam?
Golly Ollie,

You stated:

"Radical Islamic courts ascribe a woman's testimony to be worth half of a man's...".

Well here's what Qur'an 2:282 says about that:

If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, Let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her.

Straight from Qur'an. God's literal word.

Following Qur'an to the letter does not make one a 'radical' Muslim.

Wake up.

Good article Mr. North
Keep it up!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.