That head scarf

It’s no surprise to me that Iran is reneging on its promise to release the single woman amongst the captured British sailors. That was never more than a feint, intended to buy time while Iran keeps the pressure on a paralyzed Britain. What irks me is something different, and petty, since I haven’t walked a mile or a minute in Faye Turney’s shoes: it’s that headscarf she’s shown wearing in the illegal-under-the Geneva-convention videos made of the captured sailors. Has Turney converted to Islam? If she hasn’t, why is she wearing a head scarf? Presumably her captors insisted she wear one, but why isn’t she ripping it off her head. She’s not their willing guest and certainly owes them no respect for their religious beliefs. She’s a British sailor, for goodness sake, not an Iranian woman.

As I’ve said, I haven’t walked in Turney’s shoes, and I don’t know what coercion she’s under but, every time I see that picture of her “scarved,” I want to reach through my computer screen and reveal her blonde, British hair for all the Muslim misogynists to see and fear.

UPDATE:  I’m in good company.  Hugh Hewitt reached the same conclusion I did about that damn little piece of fabric.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. says

    Somehow, I don’t see Iran following the Geneva Conventions. Has any of our beloved terrorists followed the Geneva Conventions?

    The Geneva Conventions were created and signed by civilized nations (mostly Western powers) to maintain some facsimile of civilization in the midst of gruesome war. I wonder if we should adhere to these agreements in the 21st century. It is clear most nations no longer honor them, not even the ones who signed the agreements.

    Yes, we should have very strict guidelines for the rules of engagement under our own USMJ, but to continue with the fiction that these series agreements actually mean anything outside our borders is sheerest fantasy.

    Who knows what kind of coercion Miss Turney is undergoing, indeed.

  2. says

    One of the justifications used to undermine the war effort concerning GitMo, is that if we don’t treat terrorists with the 5 star suite treatment, this would put our citizens at danger…

    As people well know, that kind of mindset betrays a rather disturbing and slippery grasp on reality. It’s like the justification people use to put things off. “Oh, I’ll do it later”. They know they won’t do it later, it is not that they don’t want to do it now, they don’t want to ever do it. But they come up with an excuse and a rationalization for why it is more okay, because presumably saying “we want to protect terrorists because we believe they are better than our side” is not acceptable.

  3. says

    Your point about Gitmo is a good one, Y, in that it exposes much larger differences between American and Iranian society. In Gitmo, we give cold-blooded killers Korans, prayer mats, and hallal food. In Iran, the force a kidnapped military person to don the demeaning clothes of their religion, and force her to display herself publicly in that prisoner’s garb. Our abject multi-culti behavior is utterly foreign to them and almost certainly excites nothing more than their disdain for our weak culture. (Which, of course, doesn’t stop them from using any minor PC failures against us to their own benefit in the popular press.)

  4. says

    Iran understands their enemies, and they also understand their own goals and what they are willing to do to accomplish them. These two things are linked, if only because of Sun Tzu’s rather ancient wisdom set down in… some kind of writing material.

    The Left seems to be very conflicted to me. They don’t understand and they keep arguing, even within themselves. Totalitarian systems are noted for their efficiency, planning, and will. There’s some dissent and difficulties, as Neo wrote about concerning how native Germans got their Jewish spouses released from the Gestapo early on, but in general totalitarian systems of belief empowered by entropy act in a very linear and clear fashion. You can understand them clearly, so long as you make just a small attempt at doing so, whether for Amanie, Hitler, or Saddam. Or Hugo for that matter.

    But the Left’s behaviors and beliefs are not clear. And I’ve said this before. It is sort of muddy, like doublethink. How do you determine which of the conflicted thoughts people hold simultaneously in their heads, is the prime motivator for their actions? You can’t, because all their ideas motivate them. Love of America and hate of America don’t both motivate the terrorists you know. But this dynamic somehow exists on the Left. I’m not going to say it works well… but it exists.

    It is easy to know what is true or not true about a claim, but that’s not the difficulty you see. It is figuring out why people on the Left act like they believe in the things that they say. Do they believe in the things that they say about America and the Islamic Jihad? That’s tricky, because of their doublethink. Triplethink, quadruplethink, and so forth. The smarter a person is on the Left, the more conflicting thoughts they can hold in their heads simultaneously at once. It makes analyzing the motivations of the Left, very hard, even if analyzing the truth of their claims becomes easier. (obviously people who don’t know themselves, won’t be able to know anything else for that matter, so it becomes easier to discard their opinions, plans, and descriptions)

    When the Left talks about diplomacy, they are not talking from their anterior orifices. I mean that only in the sense that a competent diplomat with the resources and knowledge to use them, can take care of Iran easily if backed by the power of the US. That’s why “diplomacy” sounds good, but isn’t very effective. How can it be effective when its prime advocates are either mindless zombies or people with an affliction similar to multiple personality disorder? If the diplomat doesn’t even know himself, his goals, and his path, how is he going to fool or otherwise convince his counterparts in Iran? I mean the more crazy you seem, the less the Iranian diplomats and leaders will pay attention to you. And the Left has been pretty crazy all along. Oh sure, they use that craziness for Iran’s advantage, but then again, that is the duty of a competent diplomat and propagandist. Iran has many of those, the US has… well, the US has people fired by the Senate (bolton).

    The same applies to Geneva or laws. If you enforce them, if people obey them and are made to obey them on pain of death or execution (the two things are similar but not the same), then things will go well. The Left serves chaos, entropy, and insanity far too much to ever make good on their promises of law and order, Book. But many gets swindled anyways.

    You bring up a good subject for a question, Book. Since after all, why are the Iranians better at exploiting our weaknesses than the Democrats are at exploiting the Islamic JIhad’s? The Democrats obviously exploit the Republican’s weaknesses very well, so it is not a matter of competency or willingness. So I think it is a matter of madness and insanity. And that, is something that I don’t think I can explain well or delve into. I cannot delve into the madness of the Left. I can correlate their behavior and describe their actions, but their inner functions and thoughts… are a different order of magnitude.

    Iran probably understands the Left even less than we do. But they don’t need to understand, they just need to exploit. You don’t need to understand anything of the greater wisdom, to exploit, right?

    The Left has a very compartamentalized mindset, either collectively or individually. Or just both in that matter. Compartamentalized because one part of their mind believes in the truth of A and the falsity of B, while another part of their minds believes in the falsity of A and the truth of B…. and that occurs all the time in their minds. All the time.

    This makes their mind endlessly capable of adapating to any sort of “inconsistency”, because it becomes incorporated automatically into the maze of chaos that is their minds. We, if we see something that conflicts with our beliefs, try to understand it and integrate it with our beliefs or change our beliefs. The Left when it sees something that conflicts with a belief in one part of their mind, simply shuts that compartment off by sealing it from the environment (the senses), and then opens up another compartment that agrees with the “inconsistency”, thereby incorporating it with ease. This makes it very hard to crack using analysis models, because how many models are you going to have to use? A lot.

    But there’s one model, Book, that is common to everyone. And that is the human Pavlovian response to pain and pleasure. People do things that they are rewarded for doing, and they avoid doing things that they are punished for doing. By this model you can affect, if not understand, the behavior of ALL humans. And I think it is the model Iran uses, very well in fact. They don’t need to understand the insanity of the Left, they don’t need to debate, they simply use intimidation. And they think their methods are very good, top of the line, and they probably take a lot of pride in their ability to collect confessions and hostages. As with the French version of the Gestapo in Vichy, when he laughingly picked a file cabinet list of names (alphabetically) in order to execute (by the letters, As, Bs, people with names ending/beginning with them). They take pride in their efficiency.

    But that’s a human weakness, Book. Pride goeth before a fall after all. If you are confident… that is one thing, but overconfidence can lead to vulnerabilities in your defense. These vulnerabilities can be exploited, Book, with a competent use of power and fear. However, the people who seem to be in power in the US are either too incompetent or too unwilling, or both as the case may be, to exploit these vulnerabilities.

    So I guess the answer in the end concerning why Iran is better able to exploit our flaws is that Iran just isn’t saddled with conflicting desires. They have one desire, kill Jews and those who protect them. They have one means to do it, murder and terrorism. Simple, right. No endless morality high grounds… no endless debates over right and wrong. Kill a Jew and you will go to Heaven in the Jihad… pretty simple really if not easy. Fanaticism gives them strength, if only by making the Iranians imbeciles and idiot cannon fodder…

    And the Left, to continue the description model, would then be your jesters and mad wizards. Sometimes showing brilliant moves, but most of the time blowing up your own people by accident or intent.

    Certainly Bookworm here gets a lot of court jesters to her mix. The DNC must have had a layoff period or something.

    Main Entry: in·san·i·ty
    Function: noun
    1 : unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that releases one from criminal or civil responsibility: as a : a disease, defect, or condition of the mind that renders one unable to understand the nature of a criminal act or the fact that it is wrong or to conform one’s conduct to the requirements of the law being violated b : inability to understand and participate in legal proceedings brought against one : INCOMPETENCE c : inability to understand the nature and purpose of a punishment (as the death penalty) to which one has been sentenced d : inability to understand the nature and consequences of one’s acts (as making a will) or of events, matters, or proceedings in which one is involved —see also COMMITMENT, DURHAM RULE, IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE TEST, M’NAGHTEN TEST, NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY, SUBSTANTIAL CAPACITY TEST —compare CAPACITY, COMPETENCY, COMPETENT, DIMINISHED CAPACITY, SANITY

    I don’t make this stuff up. That is what insanity is after all, the inability to tell genjutsu from reality. Book, being a lawyer might be familiar with the insanity defense, although it would probably not be common in her business specialization line.

    The insanity defense is used in my view, as a way to say that someone else is to blame, legally. That it is not your fault, you can’t be expected to do the right thing, legally because you’re insane. Ethically speaking, that doesn’t parse. And as we see with Iran, just cause you’re crazy and the West pays you no mind because they think you’re insane and incapable of doing things…. doesn’t mean you’re not dangerous. The Left calls Amanie “exaggerating” about his rhetoric or some such. The Left should know, they’ve been on the side of exaggerations and inability to tell the truth a long time. I’m gonna wrap this up in a few, since I could go on for awhile on this subject.

    In the end, the Islamic Jihad has one advantage that the Left can never equal. The Islamic Jihad understands human nature, the Left does not.

  5. Zhombre says

    There are reports tonight Iran has rescinded its offer to release this young woman. In a “strangely worded” letter, Iran also called for the U.K. to remove its military forces from Iraq; and also condemned the firing of 8 U.S. Attorneys by the Bush Administration as “an affront to law and civilization.”

  6. The Great Satans Sr, Intern says

    The US Military may be forced to fight a war under the rules of the Geneva Convention, and we get a warm glow here at home that we are in some way doing the Lords work on the battle field. Our troops on the other hand know full well they will be in the courts of justice, both here and the “World Court” and MSM,if they do not follow the rules of the G.C., but when you are wounded and on the ground with a knife at your neck you might have a strange feeling the rules of the game are tilted in favor of the terrorist.Not to say we would be right to turn our back on the G.C., but please lets get into the real world for a second and understand wars are not allways fought by the Queensbury Rules. I say follow the G.C. to the letter, No uniform,No flag, no protection, from a stright up fight with a bonified legal standing army.Let the terrorist get in uniform, fly there flag, and treat our troops with the same respect they expect from the free world.Let them try this in real time, in a real world, where they, and the media, both sides, pick and choose who is the bad guy in each battle. Military history is written by the winner, and I hope we will not be reading it in less then english.

  7. The Great Satans Sr, Intern says

    Might the Brits offer to exchange a equal number of gents in white wigs for the poor sceared troops who have good reason to belive they will be just another victim of the political game played out back home. When the Germans in WW-2 put British POWs in handcuffs Winnie put German POWs in handcuffs, Tit for Tat, the handcuffs came off ASAP. These are uniformed troops”Captured” by uniformed troops, do we not hold a few of the Rev. Guard our prisoner? Need I say more, Winnie is spinning in the grave at the behavior of those who not defend the crown, I hope god will step in and once again save the queen.

  8. The Great Satans Sr, Intern says

    The new rage in bumper stickers in England should read, W.W.M.D., what, would, Montie, Do ?., Good question, point to ponder, the German air force could not bring the brave Brits to surrender, now there Grand Children stand in fear of offending someone who spits in the face of the British Armed Forces. May God hold his hand over them, keep them safe from harm, and return them to there love ones, and allow them to stand tall with pride knowing they did the job, as ordered, by there officers, and may he forgive those officers, and political leaders. Amen.

  9. Al says

    It’s mildly amusing that the man on the street in London is asking “what would Monty do?”. Probably puff himself up and call a press conference. A better question is “What would Patton do?”. Presumably, the geography around Teheran is conducive to tank warfare. But I forget. Patton was disciplined after the hugh and cry when he slapped a soldier in shell shock. A traditional soldier sees what appears to be cowardly behavior, and behaves in a predictable manner. The media of today would have had a field day with Patton.
    And that is a major part of the problem. I love ymarsakar’s suggestion that when there is a minaret on the Capital Dome calling Congress to prayer 5 times a day, it won’t be the liberals’ fault because they are insane.
    As far as the Iranians forcing the girl to wear a headscarf,we, or she, may want to count our blessings. The Iranians could easily have separated her from the men. And then most of us could guess what would happen.
    To be fare, we do not know if British forces are or are not planning a rescue. Just hope the NYT doesn’t learn about it.
    Al

  10. Al says

    It’s mildly amusing that the man on the street in London is asking “what would Monty do?”. Probably puff himself up and call a press conference. A better question is “What would Patton do?”. Presumably, the geography around Teheran is conducive to tank warfare. But I forget. Patton was disciplined after the hugh and cry when he slapped a soldier in shell shock. A traditional soldier sees what appears to be cowardly behavior, and behaves in a predictable manner. The media of today would have had a field day with Patton.
    And that is a major part of the problem. I love ymarsakar’s suggestion that when there is a minaret on the Capital Dome calling Congress to prayer 5 times a day, it won’t be the liberals’ fault because they are insane.
    As far as the Iranians forcing the girl to wear a headscarf,we, or she, may want to count our blessings. The Iranians could easily have separated her from the men. And then most of us could guess what would happen.
    To be fair, we do not know if British forces are or are not planning a rescue. Just hope the NYT doesn’t learn about it.
    Al

  11. The Great Satans Sr, Intern says

    General Patton, or his equivelent, would be able to do the job, but no better then his chain of command, and civilian leadership would allow. Seems like today once your party is in power you are blessed with great wisdom of all things military, those who know fight, those who know nothing depend on a list of X military now in Congress, to say the things that will allow them to for a brief second, refight the Vietnam war ,with Mr Ted Kennady adviseing them on the correct way to surrender with honor. If they feel surrender is the right thing to do, not to save the money for more pork in the post war Congress, but to save the life of more troops who will die while they demand action, but are not willing to do the deed by a cut in funding of the war. CONGRESS, STAND UP NOW, DRY YOUR EYES, TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND DO WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST FOR THE NATION, BY RECORDED VOICE VOTE, WITH C-SPAN THERE TO RECORD YOUR VOTE FOR HISTORY. YOU ALL,ON BOTH SIDES OF CONGRESS, SEEM TO CARE MORE ABOUT THE VOTES IN 08 THEN THE TROOPS WHO WILL BE WOUNDED OR KILLED IN ACTION WHILE YOU PLAY GAMES FOR THE KEYS TO THE WHITE HOUSE. May God have mercy on your souls if you continue to add more names for the new wall in DC for those who fight and die while you twist in the wind waiting for “Someone” to take the heat off you by demanding you do the job you feel was your mandate during the last election, quit crying up and down the halls of Congress like little bitches at a Paris Hilton sleep over and act like honorable members of our elected government. PS WE WANT A FUNDING BILL PASSED FOR THE NEW WALL TO HONOR ALL WHO HAVE GAVE THERE LIFE FOR THE REAL WAR ON TERROR

  12. The Great Satans Sr, Intern says

    The matter of a wall to honor our current and future troops who gave all in the war on terror is no laffing matter, even Russia has a memorial to there war dead. I saw lots of open space near the Vietnam Wall, Contact your guy, or girl, in DC and ask just when you can expect the bill for funding to be voted on in Congress, again I would expect it to be fat free, by recorded vote. It could be built for less then 2% of the pork they added on to the surrender bill sent on to President Bush for veto. I would not expect any Congress member to object, after all the pork to tote home for there vote they would do it for the PR value alone. And yes I am writeing, calling, and emailing all my employees from NC in DC about the wall. Will you do the same?

  13. says

    The US leadership has been going down the path of limited wars ever since MacArthur in Korea. It is not just Democrat Presidents either. But all US Presidents, first because of the Cold War and now because… of people acting like it is the Cold War when it isn’t. It is weapons free, there’s no nuclear holocaust going to happen anytime soon (not to the US at least), so go weapons free.

  14. The Great Satans Sr, Intern says

    Thw world was safer during the cold war because MAD, Mutual assured distruction ruled, and both sides considered the risk of war to be unacceptable. The new threat is from a group who had no quams about a few 100,000 deaths to obtain there goals. Atomic weapons that will kill millions are available, and are quite compact, about 8ins wide, 3ft long,worked with them in the military. A good 4 wheeler and a GPS would do the job to bring on across our border. I wish the plan to scrap all weapons would work in the real world but look how well it has worked in New York, Wash. DC, and England. Thats a smaller scale but I guess you can see the point. Work for world peace, yes!!, but keep a good Plan B just in case the other side quits working with you and slings a few nukes to gain the upper hand. In the near future I expect nukes to be common place in the 3rd world, poor mans answer to a large standing army.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply