Welcome to Licentia Loquendi, founded January 2009. L2 is a team blog that focuses primarily on political, military and Constitutional issues with a Conservative Christian slant. We are two college students, a Navy corpsman, an Army sniper and a Vietnam era Army veteran.

Each writer has free reign over postings. One writer's views are not necessarily the views of all writers.

09 February 2009

Don't Mess With Poland

Yesterday, my parents and I stopped at Ft. Indiantown Gap's PX. I was surprised by the amount of alcohol stocked in such a small store.

According to the London Times, Poland has "promised to track down and 'punish' Taleban terrorists who beheaded an engineer in Pakistan's lawless North West Frontier Province" (Times Online). The Polish Foreign Minister has "promised that Poland would try to bring the perpetrators of the killing to justice" (Times Online). However, this is going to be quite difficult, as "Pakistan's tribal regions remain largely lawless and overrun by the Taleban" (Times Online),though this hasn't stopped Poland from issuing arrest warrants against the suspects. Still, if and when these murderers are captured, will they truly be brought to justice? Or will international law and human rights intervene? We can always ship them to Rep. Murtha's district.

On a happier note, SSG Daniel Barker and soldier Adam Krause were reunited with two dogs they saved from starvation while serving in Afghanistan. "Dogpile.com . . . [paid] for the dogs' journey to the U.S. and stay in Customs" (FNC). Follow their story at Dogpile.com, complete with their arrival video!
I wonder if this sort of thing happens more often. I can recall reading a story about a dog named Lava who was rescued by some soldiers. They dewormed her with tobacco and got rid of her fleas with a kerosene bath. As far as I know, Lava is living somewhere in the States with one of the soldiers.

Princess Amira al-Taweel of Saudi Arabia has declared that she is ready to drive (women are currently forbidden to drive in Saudi Arabia), as she already drives in other countries when she travels. Her husband has already stated that "he would be the first to let his wife and daughter drive if the ban was lifted" (FNC). The ban requires families to either "hire live-in drivers . . . [or] rely on male relatives to drive them to work, school, shopping or the doctor" (FNC).
In my opinion, that's more of an inconvenience than allowing women to drive themselves. The argument against women drivers is that they "will unduly expose their eyes while driving and will interact with male strangers" (FNC).
As a driver, my eyes are on the road. I'm not checking out the guy passing me on the interstate. If women (or men) are going to be ogling one another while on the road, they clearly shouldn't be there in the first place. And if men are worried about women interacting with police officers and mechanics, can't they simply veil before the police officer strides up to the window, or have their husbands take the car to the mechanic? Clearly, I'm oversimplifying the matter, but the point is that in my opinion, these arguments are unfounded.

"Be nice to terrorists. Read them their rights!" -Judge from An American Carol, on the ACLU

No comments:

Post a Comment