Same news: hundreds of thousands die, millions are displaced, while the government of Sudan, and Western investors thrive on Sudanese oil and selling of arms.
Umm, it's China that's investing in Sudan and it's China that's selling Sudan its arms. The US and the EU have had an embargo against it for some time now.
I dunno, I think it's an interesting article - if for any other reason than that the theory put forth by the article (with the noteworthy weasel) didn't bear any truth in its unveiling at all. From the article:
Some left-wing commentators have interpreted the motive behind Washington's newfound concern for Darfur - as well as the British and Australian governments' volunteering of troops for a phantom UN intervention force - as an effort by Washington to justify an Iraq-style invasion of Sudan to achieve "regime change" and seize control of its potentially massive oil reserves.
There are still sanctions against Sudan and nothing much has changed. The US doesn't have control over Sudanese oil, Sudan hasn't turned into an American neo-colonial paradise, and in fact there are currently more sanctions against Sudan than when that article was written.
One thing the article fails to mention is how long the teacher has been working there. There's a big difference if she's only been teaching there since September vs 3 years. I understand working with little kids is not the best way to learn religious taboos, but too much backstory is missing. The judge seemed to be acting as fairly as possible, and if 15 days is the worst she has to suffer... too many people get whipped, maimed, or imprisoned for years because of minor misunderstandings. She's got my sympathies, but the government is being moderately reasonable. They're not out to persecute her.
One thing the article fails to mention is how long the teacher has been working there. There's a big difference if she's only been teaching there since September vs 3 years.
Why would it make a difference? Would her newness to Sudan would make her less culpable? Consider that Sudan not less than a month ago executed a 16 year old boy for a crime - I don't know that there's therefore legal precedent for making an exception for an educated woman in her 50s, choosing to live in a country that follows the laws of sharia.
No, he was talking about should she have known that naming a teddy bear after a prophet would sacrilegious. Assuming she could absorb cultural information, if she'd lived there for 3 months, MAYBE that hadn't been brought up yet, but if she'd lived there 3 years, then she should have known better.
Mayby she could have pleaded the Bill and Ted defense..."Um...I meant Mohamed...Peterson." Along with Bob Ghengis Kahn, Socrates Johnson, and...uh, Abraham Lincoln.
Sharia law blows my mind. It would be like us handing over our justice system to Jim Bakker and Pat Robertson and telling them they had free reign to gang rape Planned Parenthood employees. Ugh.
I'm not entirely convinced on this and am completely willing for someone to tell me off on it, but I tend to think of the modern push to sharia as an extension of Qutbism and post-colonialism (and Qutbism I really put into the context of post-colonialism as well). Much like the role of Communism in East Asia as an independence movement first and as the consignment of actual socialist principles secondary, with its similarly draconian measures, I think a lot can be made out of the metaethnic nature of rule by sharia (that doesn't exist in America) and out of the attempt to build a cultural asabiya in places that have little cultural reason to exist
( ... )
with small children, the teacher has to be directing the class- be in charge.... an adult in that situation with children is responsible for the goings on and has an impact on the students. I believe it's part of the position. You are welcome to disagree and debate it forever.
I don't see how a teacher can be held responsible for how students vote, nor do I think that rigging elections is inherently a part of a teacher's position. It's possible that the teacher should have told them that their votes meant nothing and that she, as instructor, retained the right to not consider their vote. I don't know that that's a lesson the Sudanese need outside instruction in, though.
I don't think it was in her lesson plans to disrespect the Muslim prophet Muhammad - there are assuredly more direct ways to do that - so it would be a hard sell to convince me that, as per your original statement, she was on some sort of evangelizing mission to "(spread) her ... disrespect of Mohamed to the students". Unless it was something of which she wasn't aware, of course.
Comments 22
Scandalous.
Reply
Reply
(btw I was trying to remember the exact date of the sanctions found this in bookmarks from a while back-- it's pretty interesting http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon08092004.html)
Reply
Some left-wing commentators have interpreted the motive behind Washington's newfound concern for Darfur - as well as the British and Australian governments' volunteering of troops for a phantom UN intervention force - as an effort by Washington to justify an Iraq-style invasion of Sudan to achieve "regime change" and seize control of its potentially massive oil reserves.
There are still sanctions against Sudan and nothing much has changed. The US doesn't have control over Sudanese oil, Sudan hasn't turned into an American neo-colonial paradise, and in fact there are currently more sanctions against Sudan than when that article was written.
Reply
Reply
Why would it make a difference? Would her newness to Sudan would make her less culpable? Consider that Sudan not less than a month ago executed a 16 year old boy for a crime - I don't know that there's therefore legal precedent for making an exception for an educated woman in her 50s, choosing to live in a country that follows the laws of sharia.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
an adult in that situation with children is responsible for the goings on and has an impact on the students. I believe it's part of the position. You are welcome to disagree and debate it forever.
Reply
I don't think it was in her lesson plans to disrespect the Muslim prophet Muhammad - there are assuredly more direct ways to do that - so it would be a hard sell to convince me that, as per your original statement, she was on some sort of evangelizing mission to "(spread) her ... disrespect of Mohamed to the students". Unless it was something of which she wasn't aware, of course.
Reply
Leave a comment