Advertisement

BANGKOK, Thailand -- Police in Saudi Arabia stopped and fined at least 16 women who intentionally drove cars on Saturday (Oct. 26) after the monarchy and Islamist clerics refused to support demands to give drivers' licenses to females.

Police had received an advisory describing how to deal with female drivers, including a suggestion that they should be taken into a side street, issued a warning, made to promise not to drive again, and their car keys should be given to a male guardian, according to the British Broadcasting Corporation.

"Police stopped six women driving in Riyadh, and fined them 300 riyals (about 80 US dollars) each," said the capital's police deputy spokesman, Colonel Fawaz al-Miman, according to Agence France-Presse.

Police stopped six other women in Eastern Province, plus two in Jeddah and two more elsewhere in the kingdom, local media reported.

More than 60 women claimed to have driven on Saturday, activists said.

Aziza Youssef, a Saudi university professor and activist, said 13 videos plus 50 phone messages from women showed or claimed females drove cars that day, Associated Press reported.
As the Syrian crisis continues to play out according to the brackets of a chemical weapons agreement, one thing is certain. Politicians inside the beltway persist in contributing to the discussion. From the Left, the situation in Syria is a tragedy but falls short of a warrant for American intervention. From the Right, the crisis has cried out for U.S. action since protests began two years ago. Amidst this political back-and-forth, however, one salient group remains in the background, if not ignored altogether. This group is defined by academics who have actually studied the matter at hand.

Whereas politicians used to be consulted through the mainstream media in order to gain valuable information, they have now become ends in themselves. A congressman or congresswoman who appears on any news program is now merely offering his or her opinion regarding Syria. Should the United States intervene in Syria? Politicians spent a great deal of time appearing in several venues to offer their perspective on this question.

A common angle from the mainstream U.S. media is that NSA leaker Edward Snowden will regret his asylum in Russia (rather than life in prison in the U.S.). A quote from ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern was used in support of that theme, but he has asked the New York Times to clarify it.

I was quoted in Steven Lee Myers's "In Shadows, Hints of a Life and Even a Job for Snowden," published by the New York Times on Oct. 31, as saying (about former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden), "He's free, but not completely free" in asylum in Russia.

An unfortunate juxtaposition in the text of Mr. Myers's piece has led several acquaintances to misinterpret my words. I trust you will agree that the issue is of some importance; thus, my request that you publish this clarification.

The Guardian is about to face investigation by the British Government. The London-based newspaper has been at the forefront of the global surveillance controversy since their journalist Glenn Greenwald published in its pages Edward Snowden's revelations last June. Supported by Prime Minister David Cameron, a parliamentary committee is due to launch an inquiry to determine whether the Guardian's publication of Snowden's leaked documents was a threat to national security.

In a functioning democracy it is expected that a free press would come to the defence of a fellow news outlet facing governmental interference for publishing information about a matter of public interest. Britain has prided itself on having some of the oldest and strongest press freedoms in the world. Yet for all that, the powerful media barons in the UK have all fallen in step with the government's line on security: that the Guardian has helped terrorists.

A bunch of crazy-looking bearded freaks have just won the World Series. YEAH!!!!

They’re our beloved 2013 Boston Red Sox, led by the massively good-humored Dominican slugger David “Big Papi” Ortiz and a Japanese relief pitcher half his size.

All season they’ve played like a cross between Biblical zealots on fire for their craft and crazed hippies out dancing around the campfire---just like it should be when grown men devote themselves to a kid's game.

They pull each others’ beards, laugh, high five, yell and hit. And they have just now blown organized baseball, with all its slick hype and moneyball millions, back to where it belongs.

So too the Hub, city of my birth.

This spring it was shattered by a senseless bombing at our gorgeous Marathon. For more than a century the town faithful have packed streets once run by the Sons of Liberty, now by Marathon runners from everywhere, conquering Heartbreak Hill to bask in the glories of a hard-win finish and a tank of Sam Adams.

It was hellish to have all that so insanely assaulted. It’s a hurt that will never entirely go away.

Most Americans probably take the right to travel for granted until this right is lost or curtailed. Passports are, of course, required for most international travel. When our group (Jesselyn Radack, Thomas Drake, Ray McGovern and Coleen Rowley) recently traveled to Moscow to meet with Edward Snowden and present him with the Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence, we depended upon our fundamental right to travel.

The intelligence whistleblower whose integrity we honored, however, has been deprived of that right. Vindictive U.S. officials revoked the passport of Snowden, whose disclosures have informed and educated the people of the United States and the world about secret surveillance and massive data-gathering that the NSA and other government agencies are engaged in within the U.S. and around the world.

If you’ve already signed the RootsAction petition urging that Snowden’s passport be restored, please forward this email to people you know and urge them to do the same. If you haven’t yet signed the petition, you can add your name by clicking here.

BANGKOK, Thailand -- Turkey's first sex shop for devout Muslims has opened for business online, prompting a debate among Turks, Islamists and local media about the role their religion should play in the sale of such items.

The website Bayan describes its aphrodisiacs, creams, condoms, alcohol-free lubricants and other intimate products as safe and "halal" -- which it spells "helal" -- meaning they conform to Islamic traditions.

"Scream Orgasm Cream" sells for 74 Turkish lire (about US $38.00).

"Bella Donna Spanish Fly" is available for 34 lire ($18.00).

"We don't sell vibrators for example, because they are not approved by Islam," said the website's owner, entrepreneur Haluk Murat Demirel, 38, according to Reuters.

"There are also other sections on the website that discuss sexual intercourse in terms of Islam," Turkey's Hurriyet Daily News reported.

Turkey's Muslim majority are Sunni and the government is
The U.N. and Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International recently released a flurry of deeply flawed reports on drone murders. According to the U.N.'s special rapporteur, whose day job is as law partner of Tony Blair's wife, and according to two major human rights groups deeply embedded in U.S. exceptionalism, murdering people with drones is sometimes legal and sometimes not legal, but almost always it's too hard to tell which is which, unless the White House rewrites the law in enough detail and makes its new legal regime public.

When I read these reports I was ignorant of the existence of a human rights organization called Alkarama, and of the fact that it had just released a report titled License to Kill: Why the American Drone War on Yemen Violates International Law. While Human Rights Watch looked at six drone murders in Yemen and found two of them illegal and four of them indeterminate, Alkarama looked in more detail and with better context at the whole campaign of drone war on Yemen, detailing 10 cases. As you may have guessed from the report's title, this group finds the entire practice of murdering people with flying robots to be illegal.

When you run a well-oiled political machine like Michael Coleman, you don’t expect to hear any squeaks. The Mayor’s commitment to pass Issues 50 and 51, the Columbus School levy issue and the establishment of an independent School auditor, appeared to be a non-controversial landslide.

Imagine his dismay now, with less than two weeks to go before Elect

ion Day, knowing opposition is spreading spontaneously in unexpected places. First, “It’s OK To Vote No on the Columbus City Schools Levy 50 & 51” popped up with a strong internet presence. Then “No Cheaters, No Charters Columbus” began placing “Vote No on 50/51” yard signs around the city. But the Mayor knew he was in for a battle, looking genuinely stunned and agitated when the Columbus Council of PTAs unanimously rejected his levy proposals.

Pages

Subscribe to ColumbusFreePress.com  RSS