JUDY WOODRUFF: For more on all of this we turn to NewsHour special correspondent Saima Mohsin. I spoke to her a short while ago from Islamabad, Pakistan.
Saima Mohsin, welcome.
First of all, we know the Taliban are claiming responsibility. What more do we know about that?
SAIMA MOHSIN: Yes, the Taliban has released a statement accepting responsibility and saying that this is because they believe that Malala Yousufzai, this 14-year-old girl from the Swat Valley, stands for a secular state. Because she stood up and spoke up against the Taliban and fought for young girls' rights, girls like herself to go to school.
But, interestingly, they're arguing that this isn't because she's fighting for the right to education. It's because she stands for a secular society and because she's bringing in Western ideals into Pakistan.
And, tonight, they have insisted that should she survive this attack, they will attack her again, and this time they say they will ensure they kill her.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Why do you think they believe that a 14-year-old girl is a threat?
SAIMA MOHSIN: Well, this is something that everyone across Pakistan has condemned, and, indeed, said that, how could a teenager be a threat to the Taliban?
Certainly, this shows how callous and cruel they are, which is what a lot of political leaders are saying today, and the fact that they will leave no stone unturned to get their message out, even if that means attacking a young girl.
Malala Yousufzai was a very important figure in the battle against the Taliban in the Swat Valley and for the rest of Pakistan.
She's a revered and respected teenager, and it was this teenage voice that struck so many people across the country when she started writing a blog and talking about how she longed for an education.
And it didn't matter that she faced the potential of being killed by the Taliban, who had taken over the Swat Valley and her home and neighborhood. She would -- carried on going to school.
In fact, I interviewed her father back in 2008, who spoke to me and insisted that he, as a teacher, would continue to go to school, continue to teach, and he wouldn't stop his daughter from going out to defy the Taliban and attend school.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, how widely is she supported, Saima? Because I also read today that religious parties and mosques were largely silent about this and not condemning the attack.
SAIMA MOHSIN: Yes. As ever, the extreme right and perhaps some right-wing religious leaders will be reluctant to come out and condemn the attack because the Taliban used the name of religion.
But we have seen a reasonable amount of change this time around. Because Malala is a young girl, because she is a teenager and because she was a symbol of the battle against the Taliban, political leaders have come out, they have spoken out against this with unequivocal condemnation this time.
Remember that the terrorists and these right-wing groups are a very small majority of the 180 million people living here in Pakistan.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We also know that, today, Pakistan's top military official, the chief of army staff, General Kayani, went to visit her in the hospital. How significant is that?
SAIMA MOHSIN: Well, that's significant on a number of levels, because, of course, the military has not been able to leave the SwatValley. They still have a considerable presence alongside the civilian administration and the police there to keep it protected, to ensure that the Taliban do not return to that area.
And, of course, Malala's is in a civil military hospital where she's being cared for and operated on last night. General Kayani's statement in particular is of interest, because of what I mentioned, the unequivocal condemnation.
And he is, arguably, one of the most powerful men in this country. And, today, part of his statement said, "The terrorists have shown how low they can fall in their cruel ambition to impose their twisted ideology."
Now, that is crucial because, previously, we haven't heard about how twisted ideology, how the Taliban are using religion in Pakistan to try and gain favor of the local people or to fight this jihad, as they call it. And for the military leadership to condemn the Taliban will send out a powerful message to the people of Pakistan.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Saima, finally, in your own reporting, whom do you want to talk to, to get a better sense of just how supportive the country is behind her and behind what she's doing?
SAIMA MOHSIN: Well, today, for the first time after many, many years, we have seen people take to the streets. And it's the real average man of Pakistan that needs to -- as analysts say, needs come out and stand up against the Taliban, because this is what is being dubbed the silent majority of Pakistan vs. a very vocal minority, which is the terrorist groups.
So people are wanting to see that the people of Pakistan themselves are going to take to the streets to stand up and condemn the Taliban and say that they do not represent us. And for the first time today, we have seen those protests and demonstrations, reasonably small, but in terms of numbers, a couple of hundred in major cities coming out and saying that, we do not stand for and the attack on Malala is not acceptable to the rest of Pakistan.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Saima Mohsin in Islamabad, Pakistan, thank you very much for talking with us.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/july-dec12/pakistan2_10-10.htmlAR Republican Charlie Fuqua Advocates Stoning Rebellious Children, Per Deuteronomy
8OKT12
First, Fuqua is not advocating just any form of execution. By citing those verses from Deuteronomy, candidate Fuqua is recommending stoning rebellious children to death. Here is the scripture Fuqua cites, Deuteronomy 21, verses 18-21, from the King James Version of the Bible:
"Shooting attacks happen every day in Pakistan," as NPR's Philip Reeves reports from Islamabad.
But the shooting of a teenaged girl who became nationally known after she documented the Taliban's cruelty in Pakistan's Swat Valley has caused particular shock in that country, he tells our Newscast Desk.
The Pakistani Taliban are claiming their fighters carried out today's attack. According to Philip, "officials say Malala Yousufzai was outside her school when a gunman approached, and opened fire, injuring her and at least one other child."
The Taliban reportedly say they'll target her again.
As Philip reminds us, "Malala is a national figure. She lives in Swat Valley and was there several years ago when the Taliban took control and began burning down girls' schools. The Pakistani army rolled in, in 2009, to retake the area. Malala wrote an anonymous diary, broadcast on the BBC, about life under the Taliban. She advocated education for girls, and defied the militants' ban on this by secretly going to school with her books hidden in her clothes. Her bravery was recognized last year when she was nominated for the International Children's Peace Prize."
The BBC report, "Diary of a Pakistani schoolgirl," is posted here. In one diary entry, she wrote:
"The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21" - Republican Charlie Fuqua, from his book God's Law
"I think my views are fairly well-accepted by most people" - Charles Fuqua, as quoted by the Associated PressIt has rapidly migrated from the Arkansas Times - which has broken the story about a controversial book written by Republican candidate for the Arkansas Legislature Charlie Fuqua - to the Huffington Post , but so far media has not identified the most astonishing aspects of Fuqua's suggestion, in his e-book God's Law: The Only Political Solution, that rebellious children should be executed in accordance with Deuteronomy 21:18-21.
First, Fuqua is not advocating just any form of execution. By citing those verses from Deuteronomy, candidate Fuqua is recommending stoning rebellious children to death. Here is the scripture Fuqua cites, Deuteronomy 21, verses 18-21, from the King James Version of the Bible:
"18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:Next, Fuqua's view that the American legal system should be based on Biblical Law identifies him as a type of Christian Reconstructionist. On Fuqua's website for his book, he explains,
19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."
"Everything that is wrong with the United States will be corrected only when we turn back to the Biblical principles followed by our founding fathers. The prophets of the Bible told Israel that the nation would suffer as a result of disobedience to God's law. It is no different today. God made the universe and the laws that govern it. Disobedience of those laws always produces bad consequences."As journalist Frederick Clarkson described, in a seminal 1994 article written for Public Eye magazine, a publication of Political Research Associates, titled Christian Reconstructionism: Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence ,
"[Christian] Reconstructionism seeks to replace democracy with a theocratic elite that would govern by imposing their interpretation of "Biblical Law." Reconstructionism would eliminate not only democracy but many of its manifestations, such as labor unions, civil rights laws, and public schools. Women would be generally relegated to hearth and home. Insufficiently Christian men would be denied citizenship, perhaps executed. So severe is this theocracy that it would extend capital punishment beyond such crimes as kidnapping, rape, and murder to include, among other things, blasphemy, heresy, adultery, and homosexuality.Among the crimes identified by Christian Reconstructionists as deserving the death penalty (by stoning) is also juvenile deliquency. Stoning disobedient children is, needless to say, slightly controversial, even among leaders of the hard religious right. As a brilliantly satiric 1998 essay pulbished in the libertarian magazine Reason, by Walter Olson, titled Invitation to a Stoning: Getting cozy with theocrats described,
Reconstructionism has expanded from the works of a small group of scholars to inform a wide swath of conservative Christian thought and action."
"For connoisseurs of surrealism on the American right, it's hard to beat an exchange that appeared about a decade ago in the Heritage Foundation magazine Policy Review. It started when two associates of the Rev. Jerry Falwell wrote an article which criticized Christian Reconstructionism, the influential movement led by theologian Rousas John (R.J.) Rushdoony, for advocating positions that even they as committed fundamentalists found "scary." Among Reconstructionism's highlights, the article cited support for laws "mandating the death penalty for homosexuals and drunkards." The Rev. Rushdoony fired off a letter to the editor complaining that the article had got his followers' views all wrong: They didn't intend to put drunkards to death."Rousas J. Rushdoony held many notable positions, including a rejection of the Copernican model of the Solar System (he was a Geocentrist .) That position provoked a bitter dispute with Rushdoony's son-in-law Gary North, who cleaved to the modern theory espoused by Copernicus and Galileo. But both men were in accord about stoning. As Olsen's Reason article acerbically described,
"when Exodus 21:15-17 prescribes that cursing or striking a parent is to be punished by execution, that's fine with Gary North. "When people curse their parents, it unquestionably is a capital crime," he writes. "The integrity of the family must be maintained by the threat of death." Likewise with blasphemy, dealt with summarily in Leviticus 24:16: "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him."Charlie Fuqua's positions track quite closely with those typical of Christian Reconstructionism along another spectrum as well - Christian Reconstructionism embraces a form of radical economic libertarianism in which the proper function of government is restricted to mainly to the spheres of defense and basic policing but little else. As Fuqua puts it, on his website,
Reconstructionists provide the most enthusiastic constituency for stoning since the Taliban seized Kabul. "Why stoning?" asks North. "There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost." Thrift and ubiquity aside, "executions are community projects--not with spectators who watch a professional executioner do `his' duty, but rather with actual participants." You might even say that like square dances or quilting bees, they represent the kind of hands-on neighborliness so often missed in this impersonal era. "That modern Christians never consider the possibility of the reintroduction of stoning for capital crimes," North continues, "indicates how thoroughly humanistic concepts of punishment have influenced the thinking of Christians." And he may be right about that last point, you know."
" If government gives all of us security in our social status (social security), it takes away our ability to excel or fail. As more of us get economic security from our government, rather than from our productivity, we become more insecure as a nation. This is because more and more of us lose the motivation to work to avoid poverty.As described by researcher Rachel Tabachnick, in an article which maps out Christian Reconstructionism's growing influence at the level of state legislatures, Rushdoony's Theocratic Libertarianism at Work in the Nation's Statehouses , Tabachnick writes,
[...]
...Our founding fathers realized that government was a necessary evil. It is vitally important that we understand both aspects of that statement. Government is necessary to restrain the evil inclinations of individuals who would harm others for their own gain."
"The foundations of Christian Reconstructionism were laid by the late Rousas J. Rushdoony in his prolific writing including his major tome, Institutes of Biblical Law and promoted through his Chalcedon Foundation. Reconstructionism teaches that all institutions of society and government must be reclaimed from "humanists" and reconstructed on the basis of biblical law. Reconstructionists claim that the unfettered free markets are biblically mandated. In other words, God is the invisible hand behind laissez-faire capitalism and government intervention is putting faith in man instead of God. Reconstructionist leaders have overlapped significantly with two other organizations that have sacralized radical free markets - Lew Rockwell's Ludwig von Mises Institute, which promotes Austrian School economics, and the John Birch Society."http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/brucewilson/ar-republican-charlie-fuqua-advocates-stoning-rebellious-children-deuteronomy?page=entire%2C0
Enlarge AFP/Getty Images Malala Yousufzai on a stretcher as she was being taken to a hospital earlier today in Mingora, Pakistan.
But the shooting of a teenaged girl who became nationally known after she documented the Taliban's cruelty in Pakistan's Swat Valley has caused particular shock in that country, he tells our Newscast Desk.
The Pakistani Taliban are claiming their fighters carried out today's attack. According to Philip, "officials say Malala Yousufzai was outside her school when a gunman approached, and opened fire, injuring her and at least one other child."
(Note at 7 a.m. ET, Oct 10: Earlier, we wrote that Malala is 14. That is what The Associated Press, Reuters and other news outlets are reporting. Phil, though, has checked with Malala's school and been told she was born on July 12, 1997 — making her 15. He also spoke with her in August 2009. Malala said then that she was 12.)Pakistan's Dawn newspaper says it has been told by a spokesman for the Taliban that the girl was targeted for spreading "anti-Taliban and 'secular' thoughts among the youth of the area." Malala, Dawn says, was "hit by couple of bullets to her neck and head." While hospitalized, she is said to be "out of danger." She may, though, need to be sent overseas for treatment.
The Taliban reportedly say they'll target her again.
As Philip reminds us, "Malala is a national figure. She lives in Swat Valley and was there several years ago when the Taliban took control and began burning down girls' schools. The Pakistani army rolled in, in 2009, to retake the area. Malala wrote an anonymous diary, broadcast on the BBC, about life under the Taliban. She advocated education for girls, and defied the militants' ban on this by secretly going to school with her books hidden in her clothes. Her bravery was recognized last year when she was nominated for the International Children's Peace Prize."
The BBC report, "Diary of a Pakistani schoolgirl," is posted here. In one diary entry, she wrote:
"I had a terrible dream yesterday with military helicopters and the Taleban. I have had such dreams since the launch of the military operation in Swat. My mother made me breakfast and I went off to school. I was afraid going to school because the Taleban had issued an edict banning all girls from attending schools.http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/10/09/162573135/taliban-say-they-shot-14-year-old-pakistani-girl-who-exposed-their-cruelty?ft=3&f=1001&sc=nl&cc=nh-20121010
"Only 11 students attended the class out of 27. The number decreased because of Taleban's edict. My three friends have shifted to Peshawar, Lahore and Rawalpindi with their families after this edict.
"On my way from school to home I heard a man saying 'I will kill you.' I hastened my pace and after a while I looked back if the man was still coming behind me. But to my utter relief he was talking on his mobile and must have been threatening someone else over the phone."
No comments:
Post a Comment