yet another Ahmadinejad's provocation...

Fellow brothers and sisters of Sciences-Po Lille, why was September 24, 2010 a great day? This is a good question and I am going to answer: because Anaïs Caillaud told us (it is enough to brighten up my day) about Mahmoud Ahmadinedjad’s speech at the United Nations Headquarters. And I can assure you that it was fabulous. Proof? I managed to understand everything! I'm sorry about that praise, but I could not resist…

Mahmoud Ahmadinedjad was known for his violent speeches against Israel and the United States, as the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran he is the worthy descendant of those who called for killing the "Great Satan". Indeed, Since his coming into office in 2005, he has never stopped to denounce the Occident in his speeches and each of his visits to the United Nations was marked by tensions. But there a week ago, he has decided to reoffend by joining the September 11 conspiracy theory

What did he said? He accused the U.S.A to have taken part in these attacks for their own economic interests, to invade the Middle East and to support the "Zionist lobby", and everything with the support of the U.S. government. Thus, EU and US representatives have immediately left the General Assembly in protest while some representatives applauded these « courageous » accusations.

In my opinion, the Iranian President needs to be the USA’s number one public ennemy. to exist and to maintain the reign of terror in Iran. If he did not give the impression to be a victim of American imperialism, Ahmadinedjad couldn't hope to keep Iranian people Under his iron rule. This is an additionnal provocation after the game of hide and seek around nuclear "civil" power stations.

To prove its allegations, Ahmadinedjad quoted the report "Loose Change" appeared on the Internet in 2005. Composed mainly of fuzzy images or informations almost impossible to verify, "Loose Change" is the most famous film dealing with the conspiracy theory and it is often referred to by those who think the U.S. government is not innocent in the attacks of September 11. This theory, supported by celebrities as credible as Jean Marie Bigard or Marion Cotillard, is mainly relayed through the Internet and is one of hundreds of suspected governemental plots. It’s a short step form the Kennedy’s assassination to the 51 Area.

The investigation commissioned by Mahmoud Ahmadinedjad in this speech will never see the day, which will allow supporters of the conspiracy theory to suspect an American interference in the affairs of the UN, one more time…

In fact, the problem is not to to believe or not believe to the "official version" of terrorists attacks, it is not, thanks god, a crime to think differently (at least in democracy), and some aspects of the official investigation remain unclear. The real problem is that it is a dictator who is a terrorist of speaking, an anti-Semitic and an Islamist who presents himself as the spokesman of the freedom of speech and the struggle against imperialism in the United Nations...

Is death penalty another gender inequality?

During the last lesson, Mathilde told us about the execution of a woman, Teresa Lewis who were accused of two murders and sentenced to die by lethal injection. If every year people are condemned to death penalty, only eleven women have been executed.

This case led us to discuss if the U.S. society is more violent than european society. The death penalty in some states and the easier access to weapons are obviously not helping reducing violence even if the aim of death penalty is to discourage criminalty.
Then the debate made us wondering each other : Why more men than women have been condemned to die in the United States?

It appeared that women benefit of hardless treatments and sanctions in trials. Once again, it is a proof of gender inequalities.
It is not a surprise to say inequalities according to the gender are numerous in modern western society. In every democracy (and even the most advanced ones), if you were born in a rose you will suffer from lower wedges than men for the same job, cliché of weakness or getting more presure than someone from the masculine type.
The example of Teresa Lewis points out inequalities in trials: an inversed inequality, for once, it's better to be a girl!

In the popular imaginary, women are kind, lovely and sweet. he image of the mother is a deep feeling for everyone. In the other hand, men can appeared rude, violent and cruals. In the universal history, all the barbarians were men: Atila, Hitler, Bluebeard, etc... So, juries are always nicer with women. The numbers show it: only eleven women have been executed in the US whereas several hundreds of men have already been killed.
So, how can we explain it apart from the kindness of juries for women? Are men more violent than women?

It is true men are risen up in a more violent way than girls. Indeed, it's usual to see a little bo playing with soldiers when his sister is with a doll learning how to take care of babies.
There again this advantage is a consequence of all the inequalities that women are suffering from: we usually think that a woman is king, sweet or even easily influencable and it is one of the prinipal sources of gender inequality. Women can also be strong, brave or deal with presure.

Thus, even when a thing is in favor of women, this comes from the masculine domination.

Teresa Lewis case : a mentally weak woman sentenced to death in Virginia.

Last Friday, Justine made a presentation about Teresa Lewis, a forty-one years old woman sentenced to death by the Virginia Court ( USA ) after having hired two men to kill her husband and stepson in 2002. She wanted to get their life insurrances. Teresa Lewis’s final appeal was rejected by the US Supreme Court in spite of her low IQ (72).

The class was very concerned about death penalty and criticized it. It is true that it would be easy to feel pity for Teresa Lewis, dependant on drugs and mentally weak. Should the US Supreme Court have made her a favor because of her low-IQ ?

It is a hard question for French people, as we don’t have the dealth penalty. If we had a similar case, Teresa Lewis would certainly have been sentenced to life imprisonment, and some French people would have said that it is a shame we don’t sentence people to death for such a crime. Or perhaps Teresa Lewis would have been considered as non-accountable of her own acts and would have spent the rest of her life in a mental institution.

I don’t think the US Supreme Court should have been spared her death penalty, as it is the law in the USA. We French people shouldn’t judge so quickly the US legal system : death penalty is part of the american culture and a reflection of the american mentality. Some people may say that so much tolerance endangers justice, but we should not forget that every people has its own conception of it - how do you think the USA consider the french immigration policies ?

This woman planned on killing her husband and stepson : she hired two people to do so and get some money. This is a proof that she was able to think by herself and about the future : it makes her accountable of her acts.

I and a lot of people would never agree for such a person to come out of prison earlier than expected if she was French - and it would probably happen anyway- so why would she have been made a favor in the USA ?

To add a last argument, I think that what appals us against this Supreme Court decision is that Teresa Lewis is a woman, and it always seems more appalling to hurt a woman in our society. Still the gender should never impact a legal decision.