This woman deserves unending accolades for sticking up for her beliefs and questioning, like many of us do, why in the fuckin' Hell Halliburton gets all of the bloody money in the federal treasury. If I can find out a way to contact her, I will post it soon. She's a good person that does not deserve the stupidpollitix that are going to try and ruin her soul.
Fuck corporate greed. Fuck pollitix. Fuck religion as a tool of control and ignorance. Fuck the federal reserve. (Hey! Newsflash! The federal reserve is run by fucking Banks! The US government has *nothing* to do with it!)
-AWD
By DEBORAH HASTINGS, AP National Writer Sun Aug 7,12:17 PM ET
WASHINGTON - In the world as Bunnatine Greenhouse sees it, people do the right thing. They stand up for the greater good and they speak up when things go wrong. She believes God has a purpose for each life and she prays every day for that purpose to be made evident. These days she is praying her heart out, because she is in a great deal of trouble.
Bunnatine "Bunny" Greenhouse is the Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting ("PARC" in the alphabet soup of military acronyms) in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Lest the title fool, she is responsible for awarding billions upon billions in taxpayers' money to private companies hired to resurrect war-torn Iraq and to feed, clothe, shelter and do the laundry of American troops stationed there.
She has rained a mighty storm upon herself for standing up, before members of Congress and live on C-SPAN to proclaim things are just not right in this staggeringly profitable business.
She has asked many questions: Why is Halliburton — a giant Texas firm that holds more than 50 percent of all rebuilding efforts in Iraq — getting billions in contracts without competitive bidding? Do the durations of those contracts make sense? Have there been violations of federal laws regulating how the government can spend its money?
Halliburton denies any wrongdoing. "These false allegations have been recycled in the media ad nauseam," the company said in response to a list of e-mailed questions from The Associated Press.
Now Bunny Greenhouse may lose her job — and her reputation, which she spent a lifetime building.
She is a black woman in a world of mostly white men; a 60-year-old workaholic who abides neither fools nor frauds. But she is out of her element in this fight, her former boss said.
"What Bunny is caught up in is politics of the highest damn order," said retired Gen. Joe Ballard, who hired Greenhouse and headed the Corps until 2000. "This is real hardball they're playing here. Bunny is a procurement officer, she's not a politician. She's not trained to do this."
___
Greenhouse has known for a long time that her days may be numbered. Her needling of contracts awarded to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) predated the war in Iraq, beginning with costs she said were spiraling "out of control" from a 2000 Bosnia contract to service U.S. troops. From 1995 to 2000, Halliburton's CEO was
Dick Cheney, who left to run for vice president. He maintains his former company has not received preferential treatment from the government.
Since then, she had questioned both the amounts and the reasons for giving KBR tremendous contracts in the buildup to invading Iraq. At first she was ignored, she said. Then she was cut out of the decision-making process.
Last October 6, she was summoned to the office of her boss. Major Gen. Robert Griffin, the Corps' deputy commander, was demoting her, he told her, taking away her Senior Executive Service status and sending her to midlevel management. Not unlike being cast out of the office of bank president into the cubicle of branch manager. Griffin declined to be interviewed by the AP.
Her performance was poor, said a letter he presented. This was a surprise. Her previous job evaluations had been exemplary, she said. The basic theme was that she was "difficult," and "nobody likes you," she said.
If she didn't want the new position, she could always retire with full benefits, the letter noted.
Over my dead body, said Greenhouse.
"I took an oath of office. I took those words that I was going to protect the interests of my government and my country. So help me God," she says. "And nobody. Has the right. To take away my privilege. To serve my government. Nobody."
She has hired lawyer Michael Kohn, who successfully represented Linda Tripp in her claim that the
Pentagon leaked personal information after she secretly taped Monica Lewinsky's confessions of a sexual affair with President Bill Clinton.
Two weeks after Greenhouse's trip to the woodshed, Kohn wrote an 11-page letter to the acting Secretary of the Army, requesting an independent investigation of "improper action that favored KBR's interests."
He also asked that his client be protected against retaliation under whistleblower statutes.
Then he reminded the Army secretary of Federal Acquisition Requirement 3.101: "Government business shall be conducted in a manner above reproach ... with complete impartiality and with preferential treatment for none."
The status of an independent investigation by the Defense Department is unclear. "As a matter of policy, we do not comment on open and ongoing investigations," said Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Rose-Ann Lynch.
Halliburton is also under federal investigation for alleged favoritism by the Bush administration.
FBI agents questioned Greenhouse for nine hours last November about that probe. In March, a former employee was indicted for taking bribes while working for KBR in Iraq.
Company spokeswoman Melissa Norcross said KBR has "delivered vital services for U.S. troops and the Iraqi people at a fair and reasonable cost, given the circumstances." Meanwhile, Greenhouse has been placed under a 3-month performance review ending in September.
___
When Gen. Ballard hired her in 1997 she was overqualified — three master's degrees and more than 20 years of contracting experience in private industry, the Army and the Pentagon.
"She is probably the most professional person I've ever met, " Ballard said. "And she plays it straight. That created problems for her after I left."
Ballard used her, he said, to help him revolutionize the Corps — by ending the old-boys practice of awarding contracts to a favored few, and by imposing private industry standards on a mammoth, 230-year-old government agency with 35,000 workers. He felt the Corps, which had overseen everything from building hydroelectric dams to the Soo Locks to the Manhattan Project, needed a hard boot into the new age of contracting.
"The Corps is a tough organization. And I'll tell you, it's not easy to be a woman in this organization, and a black one at that," said Ballard, who was the first black leader of the Corps.
He is not optimistic about her future.
"I think you can put a fork in it," he said. "Her career is done."
At Corps headquarters, few speak to her, she said, and her bosses write down what she says at departmental meetings.
Sometimes, as she walks down a hall, someone will mutter, "Go for it, Bunny," or "Give 'em hell," she said. "They pass by saying this while they're looking straight ahead," she recounted, and chuckled.
In a city where politics is everything, including blood sport, she refuses to play. Right down to her clothes.
Bunny Greenhouse does not subscribe to the Capitol chic of a dowdy
Janet Reno jacket and skirt or a boxy
Hillary Clinton suit with buttons the size of quarters. On a sweltering summer day, seated in her lawyer's Georgetown office, Greenhouse wears a vibrant pink-and-black shirt, tight-fitting trousers with creases that could cut butter, and a blazer with a shredded-fabric flower.
Her bag — overflowing with files, papers, pens, wallet, cell phone — rivals the weight of a bound copy of the federal budget. Underestimate her at your peril.
"I have never gone along to get along. And I'm willing to suffer the consequences," she said.
Her contracting staff was sharply reduced, she said, and her superiors have gone behind her back, most notably in issuing an emergency waiver — on a day she was out of the office — that allowed KBR to ignore requests from
Department of Defense auditors who issued a draft report in 2003 concluding KBR overcharged the government $61 million for fuel in Iraq.
"They knew I would never have signed it," she said.
The Army Corps of Engineers declined to comment on Greenhouse's complaints. "It's a personnel matter," said Corps spokeswoman Carol Sanders. "We're not going to go point-by-point with Ms. Greenhouse's accusations.
"They want me out," Greenhouse said.
___
In her job, Greenhouse is mandated by Congress to get the best quality at the cheapest price from the most qualified supplier. Over her objections, KBR was awarded three multibillion-dollar war-related contracts, two of them without competitive bidding.
Together, they are worth as much as $20 billion — the entire cost of the Manhattan Project, adjusted to today's dollars.
Greenhouse's most strenuous complaints were over the Restore Iraqi Oil contract, estimated at $7 billion, originally planned to handle oil field fires that might be started by
Saddam Hussein's troops. When that failed to happen, it morphed into an agreement to repair oil fields and import fuel for civilians and soldiers.
The contract was given to KBR in March 2003. In Greenhouse's view, that process violated federal regulations concerning fair and open bidding. Halliburton denies that.
A month before KBR got the contract — and three weeks before the U.S. invaded Iraq — she had demanded KBR officials be ejected from a Pentagon meeting attended by high-ranking officials from the Corps and the Defense Department. "They should not have been there," she said. "We were discussing the terms of the contract."
Later, she would tell Democratic members of Congress: "The abuse related to contracts awarded to KBR represents the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have ever witnessed during the course of my professional career."
At the Corps, Greenhouse said she was told KBR was the only qualified firm.
With the country on the brink of war, she reluctantly signed the RIO contract. But next to her signature, she boldly wrote an objection to the only thing she felt she could challenge — the contract's length, five years. One year would have been more than fair, she said. After that, it should have been put out for bid among contractors with top security clearances.
"I caution that extending this sole source contract beyond a one-year period could convey an invalid perception that there is not strong intent for a limited competition," she penned in neat cursive.
In June, she was asked to testify before the Democratic Policy Committee — formed by Democrats who said their efforts to get the Republican-controlled Congress to investigate alleged war profiteering had been repeatedly denied.
She was joined by a former Halliburton employee who said KBR fed spoiled food to American troops and charged the government for thousands of meals it never served.
Halliburton would not specifically address the former employee's claims. Norcross said taking care of troops is "our priority."
"I thought she was very courageous to come forward and blow the whistle," Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record) of California said of Greenhouse. "The administration ran around her and ignored her. We owe her a debt of gratitude."
And if she is forced out?
"I would find that outrageous," Waxman replied. "They should be promoting her."
Greenhouse is a registered independent. Her husband, Aloyisus Greenhouse, is retired after a long Army career as a senior procurement officer. They have three grown children.
Bunny grew up in the segregated South, where her parents taught her and her siblings to be proud and hardworking. Her brother is Elvin Hayes, the Hall of Fame basketball player. She followed her husband's military postings, moving and moving and then moving again. In each place she found her own way, and her own job.
Her husband watches what is happening to her and tries to bite his lip.
"Bunny has a lot of faith. She really believes that someone will stand up and say, 'This is wrong.' But I don't think a person exists like that in the Department of Defense."
But in her world, Bunny Greenhouse's faith still beams.
"I simply believe that we have callings and purposes in this life. I walk through this life for a purpose. I wake up every day for a purpose. And every day I say, 'Here I am. Send me.' "
Thursday, August 11, 2005
286 billion dollars toward shitty bridges in alaska
I'm thinking about proposing to the documentary filmmaker on this project.... Chewbacca-fuckin'-absurd doesn't even start to put this in perspective. Power, money. Those make the world go 'round. It's all an illusion.... the prestige, the royalty, whatever. We all crawled out of the same cosmic goo. -AWD
Posted on Mon, Aug. 08, 2005
STATE GETS MILLIONS VIA CONGRESSMAN
Politician paves way for roads in Alaska
By MATT STEARNS
The (Kansas City) Star’s Washington correspondent
WASHINGTON –– You probably never heard of Don Young. But Don Young is mighty thankful for your tax dollars. He just took hundreds of millions of them home to Alaska.
He’ll build two bridges derided by critics as “bridges to nowhere.” One will be named, by law, “Don Young’s Way.” Plus, the state ranked 47th in population will get miles and miles of new roads.
Oh, by the way, the law itself is named after Young’s wife, Lu.
So: Who is Don Young, and how does he get away with it?
Well, when it comes to highways, there are civil engineers and then there are political engineers.
Young is Alaska’s sole member of the U.S. House of Representatives. In office since 1973, he is described in The Almanac of American Politics as “a hot-tempered, salty-tongued true believer” whom one crosses at one’s own peril.
He also is the powerful chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which wrote the House version of the $286.5 billion federal transportation bill that Congress passed last week before recess.
In the nearly 2,000-page bill, Young, like virtually every other member of Congress, tucked away a bunch of money earmarked for specific home-state projects. Alaska wound up with $941 million in projects. Only three states had more.
Plus, Alaska will receive an average of $420 million per year in highway funds, ranking it first per capita among states in transportation spending, about $3,206 for every man, woman and moose in the state.
How does that compare? Missouri will get more, $862 million a year, but it comes out to about $750 per capita. And Kansas? $383 million and about $700 a head.
For every dollar Alaska pays in gasoline taxes, it will get $5.26 back in federal transportation spending, a better rate of return than any other state. By comparison, Missouri will get about 98 cents back on every dollar it pays in gas taxes, with 99 cents for Kansas.
Among the $941 million in Alaskan projects is funding for two bridges championed by Young. A two-mile-long bridge from Anchorage to a sparsely populated region across part of Cook Inlet, will get $229 million to begin construction. This bridge will be known as “Don Young’s Way.”
Young told the Anchorage Daily News that the state’s senior senator, Ted Stevens, is the one who put the naming language into the bill.
“I certainly wasn’t going to turn it down,” Young told the paper.
The bridge’s total cost is estimated at $400 million to $600 million, according to the Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority. Critics contend it will cost twice as much.
Proponents said the bridge would spur development and growth for Anchorage, home to about half of Alaska’s population of about 650,000.
The toll authority plans to release projected usage information on the bridge in November.
“That’s going to be a sweet bridge that six people a day use,” scoffed one Washington lobbyist who did not want to be quoted by name because Young is hosting a fund-raiser in Alaska soon. (You don’t dog the chairman if you want to keep working with him.)
The second project, for $223 million, is for a bridge connecting Ketchikan, population 14,000, to an island that has the city’s airport. Currently, a ferry takes folks between Ketchikan and the Gravina Island airport, which offers seven flights a day on one airline.
“It’s probably the quickest airport commute in the universe,” said Keith Ashdown, spokesman for the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense. “The ferry takes four minutes.”
The bridge’s total cost is estimated at $315 million.
Again, proponents cite the potential for development as the impetus for the bridge project.
By contrast, Missouri’s two major bridge projects are designed to ease existing and projected congestion.
Sen. Kit Bond, who was responsible for much of the Senate’s version of the bill, secured $50 million for the initial work on a new Paseo Bridge in Kansas City. This is projected to serve 140,000 drivers daily within 25 years between downtown Kansas City and the Northland, at an estimated total cost of $245 million.
He also got $75 million for a Mississippi River bridge in St. Louis that the state transportation department estimates will serve 130,000 drivers a day by 2030.
One transportation industry analyst who didn’t want to be quoted by name for fear of antagonizing Young said that congestion relief and economic development can be legitimate reasons for earmarking projects.
“In Missouri, I think regardless of whether it’s earmarked or not, it’s pretty evident that the projections show it’s justified,” the expert said. “In Alaska, you’ve got a different situation entirely. … Have you ever been to Ketchikan? You can spit across it.”
Young, whose office declined to comment for this article, was not the only powerful player working for Alaska’s interests on the highway bill. Stevens also weighed in with plenty of earmarked projects.
But it’s Young, as chairman, whose fingerprints are all over the bill. Even its name.
The highway bill has in recent years been known by acronyms. The 1992 law was known as ISTEA. The 1998 law was TEA-21.
The new law’s name is the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.
Known as SAFETEA-LU.
That LU was added at the insistence of Chairman Young.
Lu being the first name of Mrs. Don Young.
“It might be touching … but I can’t imagine any member of Congress’ wife would want their name attached to a $286 billion bill that spends money like this,” said Pete Sepp, spokesman for the nonpartisan National Taxpayers Union.
There is good news: Even Americans who never go to Alaska will be able to see their tax dollars at work.
A documentary film will be made about Alaska’s improving transportation infrastructure.
There’s no director yet. No distributor either. But the funding is in place.
There’s $3 million earmarked for it in the highway bill.
Posted on Mon, Aug. 08, 2005
STATE GETS MILLIONS VIA CONGRESSMAN
Politician paves way for roads in Alaska
By MATT STEARNS
The (Kansas City) Star’s Washington correspondent
WASHINGTON –– You probably never heard of Don Young. But Don Young is mighty thankful for your tax dollars. He just took hundreds of millions of them home to Alaska.
He’ll build two bridges derided by critics as “bridges to nowhere.” One will be named, by law, “Don Young’s Way.” Plus, the state ranked 47th in population will get miles and miles of new roads.
Oh, by the way, the law itself is named after Young’s wife, Lu.
So: Who is Don Young, and how does he get away with it?
Well, when it comes to highways, there are civil engineers and then there are political engineers.
Young is Alaska’s sole member of the U.S. House of Representatives. In office since 1973, he is described in The Almanac of American Politics as “a hot-tempered, salty-tongued true believer” whom one crosses at one’s own peril.
He also is the powerful chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which wrote the House version of the $286.5 billion federal transportation bill that Congress passed last week before recess.
In the nearly 2,000-page bill, Young, like virtually every other member of Congress, tucked away a bunch of money earmarked for specific home-state projects. Alaska wound up with $941 million in projects. Only three states had more.
Plus, Alaska will receive an average of $420 million per year in highway funds, ranking it first per capita among states in transportation spending, about $3,206 for every man, woman and moose in the state.
How does that compare? Missouri will get more, $862 million a year, but it comes out to about $750 per capita. And Kansas? $383 million and about $700 a head.
For every dollar Alaska pays in gasoline taxes, it will get $5.26 back in federal transportation spending, a better rate of return than any other state. By comparison, Missouri will get about 98 cents back on every dollar it pays in gas taxes, with 99 cents for Kansas.
Among the $941 million in Alaskan projects is funding for two bridges championed by Young. A two-mile-long bridge from Anchorage to a sparsely populated region across part of Cook Inlet, will get $229 million to begin construction. This bridge will be known as “Don Young’s Way.”
Young told the Anchorage Daily News that the state’s senior senator, Ted Stevens, is the one who put the naming language into the bill.
“I certainly wasn’t going to turn it down,” Young told the paper.
The bridge’s total cost is estimated at $400 million to $600 million, according to the Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority. Critics contend it will cost twice as much.
Proponents said the bridge would spur development and growth for Anchorage, home to about half of Alaska’s population of about 650,000.
The toll authority plans to release projected usage information on the bridge in November.
“That’s going to be a sweet bridge that six people a day use,” scoffed one Washington lobbyist who did not want to be quoted by name because Young is hosting a fund-raiser in Alaska soon. (You don’t dog the chairman if you want to keep working with him.)
The second project, for $223 million, is for a bridge connecting Ketchikan, population 14,000, to an island that has the city’s airport. Currently, a ferry takes folks between Ketchikan and the Gravina Island airport, which offers seven flights a day on one airline.
“It’s probably the quickest airport commute in the universe,” said Keith Ashdown, spokesman for the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense. “The ferry takes four minutes.”
The bridge’s total cost is estimated at $315 million.
Again, proponents cite the potential for development as the impetus for the bridge project.
By contrast, Missouri’s two major bridge projects are designed to ease existing and projected congestion.
Sen. Kit Bond, who was responsible for much of the Senate’s version of the bill, secured $50 million for the initial work on a new Paseo Bridge in Kansas City. This is projected to serve 140,000 drivers daily within 25 years between downtown Kansas City and the Northland, at an estimated total cost of $245 million.
He also got $75 million for a Mississippi River bridge in St. Louis that the state transportation department estimates will serve 130,000 drivers a day by 2030.
One transportation industry analyst who didn’t want to be quoted by name for fear of antagonizing Young said that congestion relief and economic development can be legitimate reasons for earmarking projects.
“In Missouri, I think regardless of whether it’s earmarked or not, it’s pretty evident that the projections show it’s justified,” the expert said. “In Alaska, you’ve got a different situation entirely. … Have you ever been to Ketchikan? You can spit across it.”
Young, whose office declined to comment for this article, was not the only powerful player working for Alaska’s interests on the highway bill. Stevens also weighed in with plenty of earmarked projects.
But it’s Young, as chairman, whose fingerprints are all over the bill. Even its name.
The highway bill has in recent years been known by acronyms. The 1992 law was known as ISTEA. The 1998 law was TEA-21.
The new law’s name is the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.
Known as SAFETEA-LU.
That LU was added at the insistence of Chairman Young.
Lu being the first name of Mrs. Don Young.
“It might be touching … but I can’t imagine any member of Congress’ wife would want their name attached to a $286 billion bill that spends money like this,” said Pete Sepp, spokesman for the nonpartisan National Taxpayers Union.
There is good news: Even Americans who never go to Alaska will be able to see their tax dollars at work.
A documentary film will be made about Alaska’s improving transportation infrastructure.
There’s no director yet. No distributor either. But the funding is in place.
There’s $3 million earmarked for it in the highway bill.
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Masculinity Challenged, Men Prefer War and SUVs
AWD says: Well, duh fuckin' duh.... every dick that I see driving an SUV has a bu$h sticker and a yellow ribbon on it (which are made in fucking China, BTW....) Read on, gentle reader. And don't miss the post below this one!
Men whose masculinity is challenged become more inclined to support war or buy an SUV, a new study finds.
Their attitudes against gays change, too.
Cornell University researcher Robb Willer used a survey to sample undergraduates. Participants were randomly assigned feedback that indicated their responses were either masculine of feminine.
The women had no discernable reaction to either type of feedback in a follow-up survey.
But the guys' reactions were "strongly affected," Willer said today.
"I found that if you made men more insecure about their masculinity, they displayed more homophobic attitudes, tended to support the Iraq war more and would be more willing to purchase an SUV over another type of vehicle," said Willer said. "There were no increases [in desire] for other types of cars."
Those who had their masculinity threatened also said they felt more ashamed, guilty, upset and hostile than those whose masculinity was confirmed, he said.
By LiveScience Staff
posted: 02 August 2005
03:58 pm ET
Men whose masculinity is challenged become more inclined to support war or buy an SUV, a new study finds.
Their attitudes against gays change, too.
Cornell University researcher Robb Willer used a survey to sample undergraduates. Participants were randomly assigned feedback that indicated their responses were either masculine of feminine.
The women had no discernable reaction to either type of feedback in a follow-up survey.
But the guys' reactions were "strongly affected," Willer said today.
"I found that if you made men more insecure about their masculinity, they displayed more homophobic attitudes, tended to support the Iraq war more and would be more willing to purchase an SUV over another type of vehicle," said Willer said. "There were no increases [in desire] for other types of cars."
Those who had their masculinity threatened also said they felt more ashamed, guilty, upset and hostile than those whose masculinity was confirmed, he said.
By LiveScience Staff
posted: 02 August 2005
03:58 pm ET
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Sudan: 16-year-old Girl to be Flogged for 'Crime' of Adultery
The AWD posts an international appeal for help:
Amnesty International is calling for the sentence of 100 lashes, passed on a 16-year-old school girl in the Sudanese capital Khartoum for the 'crime' of adultery, to be commuted immediately.
Following the postponement of the punishment from 20 December to 23 January due to the girl's poor health, Amnesty International is also asking people all over the world to write to the Sudanese authorities asking them to stop the punishment going ahead.
Intisar Bakri Abdulgader gave birth to a child in September after becoming pregnant outside marriage. She was convicted of adultery and sentenced by a local court in the Khartoum suburb of Kalakla in July when she was seven months pregnant. The sentence was upheld by the appeal court in August. The alleged father of the child has reportedly not been charged but will have a blood test to establish paternity.
Intisar is caring for her four-month-old son, Dori. She is said to be very frightened at the prospect of the punishment and is reportedly eating and sleeping very little.
Under article 146 of Sudan's Penal Code, adultery is punishable by execution by stoning if the offender is married, or by one hundred lashes if the offender is not married. Adultery is defined as sexual intercourse with a man without being lawfully bound to him. Although the penal codes are based on an interpretation of Islamic law everyone in the north of Sudan is subject to them. Intisar's family are Christians from the south of Sudan who fled to the north to escape fighting near their home.
Amnesty International UK Media Director Lesley Warner said: "The Sudanese authorities must not carry out this vicious sentence on a young girl.
"It is a cruel punishment which completely contravenes basic international human rights law, to which Sudan is a party. The authorities should abolish all these cruel punishments now."
Scores of people were sentenced to amputation or flogging in Sudan last year. Flogging is frequently carried out immediately after sentencing leaving no chance for appeal, even when there are concerns about whether a fair trial has been held.
The Sudanese Penal Code, which is partly based on interpretation of Islamic legal doctrines, allows for penalties including flogging and amputations. Under Sudanese law, all who live in northern Sudan, whether Muslim or Christian (like Intisar Bakri Abdulgader), fall under the penalties of the Sudanese Penal Code's interpretation of religious law. The use of religious law is an issue of contention in the ongoing peace negotiations between the Sudanese government and rebels in the South.
Background
Amnesty International does not take a position on Islamic or any other religious law, but does consider such penalties to be cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments which are inconsistent with Sudan's obligations under international human rights law (Sudan is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). Moreover, the flogging of a child contravenes the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Sudan is also a party.
Take Action
Amnesty International is people all over the world to send appeals as soon as possible to the Sudanese ministers for home affairs, foreign affairs and justice asking for this sentence to be commuted and for the government to abolish cruel punishments.
Individuals can write urging the authorities to commute immediately the sentence of flogging passed on Intisar Bakri Abdulgader, and asking the government to abolish or suspend the punishment of flogging in Sudanese law to bring it into line with the international standards it has ratified.
Appeals can be sent to:
* Major General Abdul-Rahim Muhammed Hussein, Minister of Internal Affairs, Ministry of the Interior, PO Box 281, Khartoum, Sudan
* Mr Ali Mohamed Osman Yassin, Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Ministry of Justice, Khartoum, Sudan
* His Excellency Dr Hasan Abdin Mohammad Osman, Embassy of Sudan, 3 Cleveland Row, St James's, London SW1A 1DD
Amnesty International is calling for the sentence of 100 lashes, passed on a 16-year-old school girl in the Sudanese capital Khartoum for the 'crime' of adultery, to be commuted immediately.
Following the postponement of the punishment from 20 December to 23 January due to the girl's poor health, Amnesty International is also asking people all over the world to write to the Sudanese authorities asking them to stop the punishment going ahead.
Intisar Bakri Abdulgader gave birth to a child in September after becoming pregnant outside marriage. She was convicted of adultery and sentenced by a local court in the Khartoum suburb of Kalakla in July when she was seven months pregnant. The sentence was upheld by the appeal court in August. The alleged father of the child has reportedly not been charged but will have a blood test to establish paternity.
Intisar is caring for her four-month-old son, Dori. She is said to be very frightened at the prospect of the punishment and is reportedly eating and sleeping very little.
Under article 146 of Sudan's Penal Code, adultery is punishable by execution by stoning if the offender is married, or by one hundred lashes if the offender is not married. Adultery is defined as sexual intercourse with a man without being lawfully bound to him. Although the penal codes are based on an interpretation of Islamic law everyone in the north of Sudan is subject to them. Intisar's family are Christians from the south of Sudan who fled to the north to escape fighting near their home.
Amnesty International UK Media Director Lesley Warner said: "The Sudanese authorities must not carry out this vicious sentence on a young girl.
"It is a cruel punishment which completely contravenes basic international human rights law, to which Sudan is a party. The authorities should abolish all these cruel punishments now."
Scores of people were sentenced to amputation or flogging in Sudan last year. Flogging is frequently carried out immediately after sentencing leaving no chance for appeal, even when there are concerns about whether a fair trial has been held.
The Sudanese Penal Code, which is partly based on interpretation of Islamic legal doctrines, allows for penalties including flogging and amputations. Under Sudanese law, all who live in northern Sudan, whether Muslim or Christian (like Intisar Bakri Abdulgader), fall under the penalties of the Sudanese Penal Code's interpretation of religious law. The use of religious law is an issue of contention in the ongoing peace negotiations between the Sudanese government and rebels in the South.
Background
Amnesty International does not take a position on Islamic or any other religious law, but does consider such penalties to be cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments which are inconsistent with Sudan's obligations under international human rights law (Sudan is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). Moreover, the flogging of a child contravenes the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Sudan is also a party.
Take Action
Amnesty International is people all over the world to send appeals as soon as possible to the Sudanese ministers for home affairs, foreign affairs and justice asking for this sentence to be commuted and for the government to abolish cruel punishments.
Individuals can write urging the authorities to commute immediately the sentence of flogging passed on Intisar Bakri Abdulgader, and asking the government to abolish or suspend the punishment of flogging in Sudanese law to bring it into line with the international standards it has ratified.
Appeals can be sent to:
* Major General Abdul-Rahim Muhammed Hussein, Minister of Internal Affairs, Ministry of the Interior, PO Box 281, Khartoum, Sudan
* Mr Ali Mohamed Osman Yassin, Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Ministry of Justice, Khartoum, Sudan
* His Excellency Dr Hasan Abdin Mohammad Osman, Embassy of Sudan, 3 Cleveland Row, St James's, London SW1A 1DD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
