The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ADC-ITF] Kuwait vs. Iraq

    Sorry for the belated response,

    My email address notebook on Netscape crashed last Tuesday and I lost all of my
email lists and email addresses. The matter has finally been resolver only today.

    People are free to comment or post want they want regarding articles they read on
lists, usually. So if Moonirah has anything to add on this subject I would be
interested to learn about it. The guidelines of a list are made by its owners, not me,
so they decide what they feel is pertinent to the list subsject or not. My own opinion
is that this post was taken from an anti-sanction on Iraq list to start with, that it
concerns issues related to Kuwait and Iraq and that this is enough to classify it as
pertinent. The context of the post was the Kuwaiti parliamentary vote of last week
against allowing voting rights to Kuwaiti women. It showed the hypocrisy of the
position of British and U.S. governements on the defense of human rights, Iraqi or
Kuwaiti for that matter. When a Secretary of State is on record as saying that she
doesn't give a damn about the death of 500 000 children under 5, she certainly won't
give a damn about the plight of 605 possible Kuwaiti hostages either, nor about
women's rights which have now been pushed back three decades in Iraq and seem to be
none existent in Kuwait, I did say «seem».

    So, for me, the post was related to the pro-sanctions movement and its
hypocritical politics and policies thus highlighted. As for the inquiry about the
author, unless everyone participating or posting to SOC-CASI has to present his own
pedigree each time he or she posts, I don't see it has a pertinent remark. As with
everything one reads on the internet, including my own posts, use your own critical
sense. The list in which Mr. Griswold's article was taken from is a U.S. labor union
based one. That's already more than I can say about the origin of some other posts I
see everyday on this and other email lists.

Marc Azar

"Moonirah - Voluntary Co-ordinator:H.E.L.P." a *crit :

> >         Moonirah respectfully asks for participants' comments please:
> >         As the item was based on Kuwait V Women, may I post the truth
> >         about that very 'subject matter' which BBC Radio Wales News
> >         interviewed me "live" on when The State of Kuwait's National
> >         Assembly was debating the matter ?  It has been indeed proven,
> >         I have the approval of Kuwaiti women to comment on their matters.
> >         It would also have nothing to do really with the world political
> >         games being played inside the UN whilst innocent Iraqi people &
> >         605 detainees belonging to eight countries are suffering every day
> >         inside Iraq, but what the heck - it seems now that anything goes ?
> >         Even biased political articles from the USA.  Enlighten us too -
> >         who is *Deirdre Griswold.
> >         As long as any participants include several words with 'sanctions'
> >         anybody can automatically post an article regarding other issues.
> >         have I understood correctly here...participants comments please ?
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >         Marc Azar wrote:
> >
> >         KUWAIT VS. WOMEN
> >
> >  Women have once again formally been denied political
> >  rights in the oil-rich statelet of Kuwait. On Nov. 30 the
> >  Parliament voted against a bill that would have allowed
> >  women to vote and run for office. Hundreds of men cheered
> >  after the vote was taken.
> >
> >  In neighboring Iraq, women have long played a prominent
> >  role in society. Women vote and work outside the home.
> >  Many doctors, teachers and government workers are women.
> >
> >  The Western media would have us believe that the problem
> >  in Kuwait is Islamic fundamentalism. But the people of
> >  Iraq come from the same religious background as the
> >  Kuwaitis. It's not religion but imperialist politics that
> >  have reinforced extreme reaction in Kuwait.
> >
> >  It was the former colonial power, Britain, that divided
> >  the area into different countries. When it set up Kuwait,
> >  it made sure that the richest oil fields were under the
> >  control of a feudal family, the Al-Sabah dynasty, groomed
> >  to protect imperialist interests as well as its own. This
> >  dynasty enshrines male domination in Kuwait even today.
> >
> >  But Iraq had an anti-colonial revolution in 1958 that
> >  led to a secular state and the development of a modern
> >  infrastructure. Iraq's refusal to knuckle under to U.S.
> >  and British imperialism is the real reason it is under
> >  sanctions today--sanctions that threaten to destroy the
> >  progress Iraqi women and men have made since the
> >  revolution.
> >
> >  --By Deirdre Griswold
> >                           - END -
> >
> >  (Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to
> >  copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
> >  changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
> >  Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
> > For subscription info send message
> >  to: Web:
> > --

This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
For removal from list, email
Full archive and list instructions are available from the CASI website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]