Daily PUMA Column - Commentary by Alessandro Machi

Showing posts with label outrage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label outrage. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

The Love Boat Docks at Haiti for Good Times and to donate some supplies as some of the on board tourists express outrage.


Yahoo has posted a story about a Royal Caribbean Cruise ship docking at a Haiti Resort that they own so their guests can jet ski and have some fun on the beach while the rest of Haiti suffers from their devastating earthquake. Click here to read the story. 

Royal Caribbean defends its actions by claiming they have donated supplies from the ship to Haiti, and that by docking they are actually helping the resort workers by bringing them commerce.

Some of the people on the cruise ship apparently have freaked out over Royal Caribbean using a remote part of Haiti so their tourists can have fun and frolic, while bodies are being piled up in the streets of Haiti.

The solution cannot be found on board the ship that has already docked. The solution could be found if Royal Caribbean were to SEND ANOTHER SHIP, chock full of donated supplies and volunteers.

So while everybody continues to argue over the outrage of the first ship docking... Does Royal Caribbean Cruise Line have a spare ship nearby?


Thursday, April 2, 2009

Afghan law requires wives to have relations with their husbands every four days, Not much different than Dr. Laura's Viewpoint actually.

Afghan Law Requires Women to have Relations every fourth day.

I would add the following rules to this law.

Rule number one. Woman should not be forced to get married, nor should they be discriminated against when it comes to employment and wage earnings if they remain single.

Rule number two. If a woman agrees to marry, she should be read the intimacy requirement prior to the marriage and voluntarily agree to it, or have the husband waive the rule should she not agree to it but still want to get married.

Rule number three. The intimacy clause should be negotiable every so often by both sides.

Rule number four. The mandated time for sex for both parties must be the same. If the woman must put out every fourth day, then so must the man, presuming the woman desires it. To have it be 4 days for the woman to put out, and 4 months for the man to put out, is unfair.

Rule number five. Counseling and instruction must be made available at any time if either person is unhappy with the other persons performance.

In my opinion this law was passed too hastily. I also am dismayed that this story is being described as "legalized rape". What it is is not thoroughly thought out and woman were probably not allowed to contribute their viewpoint to the law. It is shocking sometimes to see how manipulative the original headline from the original new story can alter what the real story is all about.

For you Dr. Laura fans, you know she advocates "taking care of your man." Is Doctor Laura wrong for taking that position? If not, then lets focus on what is weak about the law rather than condemning it with a catch phrase such as "legalized rape". I don't see the AP proclaiming that Dr. Laura advocates legalized rape even if she agreed with the four day rule.

---------------------------------------------

Critics assail Afghan law that 'legalizes rape'
By FISNIK ABRASHI – 3 hours ago
KABUL (AP) — A new Afghan law makes it legal for men to rape their wives, human rights groups and some Afghan lawmakers said Thursday, accusing President Hamid Karzai of signing the legislation to bolster his re-election prospects.
Critics worry the legislation undermines hard-won rights for women enacted after the fall of the Taliban's strict Islamist regime.
The law — which some lawmakers say was never debated in parliament — is intended to regulate family life inside Afghanistan's Shiite community, which makes up about 20 percent of this country of 30 million people. The law does not affect Afghan Sunnis.
One of the most controversial articles stipulates the wife "is bound to preen for her husband as and when he desires."
"As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night," Article 132 of the law says. "Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband."
One provision also appears to protect the woman's right to sex inside marriage saying the "man should not avoid having sexual relations with his wife longer than once every four months."
The law's critics say Karzai signed the legislation in the past month only for political gains several months before the country's presidential election.
The United Nations Development Fund for Women, or UNIFEM, said the law "legalizes the rape of a wife by her husband."
"The law violates women's rights and human rights in numerous ways," a UNIFEM statement said.
The strongest criticism came from Canada, a country that has lost 116 soldiers fighting the Taliban and spent up to $8 billion to support the Karzai government.
"The concept that women are full human beings with human rights is very, very central to the reason the international community is engaged in this country," Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said this week in London, where he's attending the G-20 summit.
Canada's Defense Minister Peter MacKay said he will use this week's NATO summit to put "direct" pressure on his Afghan counterparts to abandon the legislation.
The issue of women's rights is a continuous source of tension between the country's conservative establishment and more liberal members of society. The Taliban government that ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001 banned women from appearing in public without a body-covering burqa and a male escort from her family.
Much has improved since then. Millions of girls now attend school and many women own businesses. Of 351 parliamentarians, 89 are women.
But in this staunchly conservative country, critics fear those gains could easily be reversed.
Fawzia Kufi, a lawmaker who opposed the legislation, said several of its articles undermine constitutional and human rights of women as equals and take the country backward.
"All the efforts that were made in the last seven years to enhance women's rights will be undermined," Kufi said.
Karzai has not commented on the law. A spokesman, Waheed Omar, said the president is "aware of the discussion surrounding the law, and is looking into the matter."
Brad Adams, the Asia director for the New York-based Human Rights Watch, said the law is a "dramatic setback for women's rights."
"It directly contradicts the freedoms enshrined in the Afghan constitution and the international conventions that Afghanistan has signed up to that guarantee the rights of women," Adams said.
Safia Sidiqi, a lawmaker from Nangarhar province who condemned the legislation, said she cannot remember parliament debating or even voting on the law and she does not know how it came to be signed by Karzai. She called for the law to be recalled to parliament for debate.
"It is impossible in a two-month session for parliament to pass a law more than 200 pages long," she said of the 263-page law.
Sayed Hossain Alemi Balkhi, a Shiite lawmaker involved in drafting it, defended the legislation saying it gives more rights to women than even Britain or the United States does. He said the law makes women safer and ensures the husband is obliged to provide for her.
As Karzai seeks re-election later this year, he is courting voters in the Shiite community, Kufi said. Women voters are presumed to vote as their husbands do.
"Women's basic freedoms are being sacrificed for the political and electoral gain of a few parliamentarians," Human Rights Watch's Adams said.
Associated Press writers Rob Gillies and Charmaine Noronha in Toronto contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

The Nuttiness of MSNBC Exposed.


When John McCain wanted to cancel the first presidential debate and go to Washington so he could be involved in the design of the first bailout bill, MSNBC accused John McCain of using the bailout bill as a "diversion" to avoid debating Barack Obama.

The day the first bailout bill was to be voted on by Congress, MSNBC's position was that the bailout bill was just supposed to pass. Instead of objectively reporting about the bailout bill congressional vote, MSNBC openly lobbied that the bailout bill WAS SUPPOSED to PASS or there would be catastrophic consequences.

When the first Bailout Bill vote failed, MSNBC accused John McCain of not being able to deliver any votes towards the PASSAGE of the first vote on the bailout bill. This despite the fact that americans were calling in 20-1 AGAINST the Bailout Bill. MSNBC was tell dictating how John McCain should vote or risk being ridiculed on air!

When the second bailout bill passed, MSNBC portrayed Barack Obama as scholarly and intelligent and "working the phones" behind the scenes for its passage.

At one point, MSNBC promoted a ridiculously unscientific hastily put together automated phone poll that showed an overwhelming amount of americans felt the candidates should debate and NOT use the bailout bill as an excuse to cancel the first debate. MSNBC flogged this quickie phone poll over John McCain's head as "proof" that John McCain was afraid to debate Barack Obama when the public wanted it.

Based on John McCain's statement that McCain wanted to cancel the first debate and go to Washington and deal with the bailout bill, MSNBC set up John McCain to be mercilessly flogged no matter what McCain did next. When John McCain acquiesced to the MSNBC led pressure to not cancel the first debate, McCain was then accused by MSNBC of being a flip flopper for going to the first debate!

Ed Rendell and a few other top democratic officials created the same talking points that John McCain's "flip flopping" proved he couldn't run the country. It was as if MSNBC and company had shared a Destroy John McCain playbook and were reciting the same lines.

Now its 7 weeks later, and I witness Rachel Maddow on her show last night "incensed" that the bailout bill was rushed. YOU RUSHED IT! YOU, Olbermann, Matthews, Schuster, Contessa Brewer, ALL OF YOU RUSHED the PASSAGE of the BAILOUT BILL DURING YOUR BROADCASTS and USED IT AS A POLITICAL COMMENTARY TOOL against John McCain.

On practically a daily basis, I believe Maddow, Olbermann, Matthews, Schuster, Gregory, and Brewer blur the line between political COMMENTARY and NEWS reporting, I call it SPEWS.

MSNBC perpetually spews forth their commentary blather while masquerading it as news.

Until there is a big fat COMMENTARY splattered on the television screen for most of MSNBC's daily broadcast, MSNBC will continue to browbeat Women Politicians and anyone who is not for Barack Obama, while pretending they are just reporting the news.

I believe it is going to take intelligent filings with the FCC to reign MSNBC in.

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers
Serious Customers Welcome.

Share Gadget

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com
Would this be a good way to win funds for Louisa's Law ?