BAGHDAD - Sharp differences between Iraq's U.S. administrators and the Iraqi Governing Council over the country's future burst into the open yesterday when leading members of the U.S.-appointed body unanimously declared Islamic law must prevail.
[. . . .] Paul Bremer, the American who heads the coalition provisional authority, which holds power in Iraq, said three days ago that Islam could be a source of inspiration for Iraq's legal system, but he would veto any attempt by the Governing Council to adopt an Islamic legal code.
"Our position is clear," Mr. Bremer said. "It can't be law until I sign it."
[. . . .] Among the laws at risk if Iraq adopts an Islamic legal code are those passed in 1959 that guarantee women equality with men in divorce hearings and inheritance matters. Under Islamic law, it is difficult for women to get divorced and they inherit only half of what a man does.
Protecting women's rights is something Mr. Bremer has spoken about frequently and with great passion.
On the streets of Baghdad it was nearly impossible to find anyone opposed to Iraq adopting an Islamic legal code, but the term means different things to different people.
"It's none of the American invaders' business what we decide about this," said municipal worker Ibrahim Al-Disuqi. "We definitely want Islamic law. It is right that Muslims should follow Islam."
It doesn't do the men any harm, either, does it? Now, Canadians, do you really think that if we allow immigration of enough Muslims here, they won't want the same thing? Think about it. Look at some of my past posts and previous posts today -- and think again. NJC
What are the Optics on This?
Email:
Read the excerpt . . . Add this to Stronach campaign manager John Laschinger's statements in his book about falsifying polls and other tricks to mislead. . . . Is this what we want in our Party? Doesn't the public expect us to be an alternative to the Liberals, not a carbon copy of them? This reflects negatively, not only on the Stronach campaign but the new Conservative Party. This is not at all what we need. R***
A prominent Montreal lawyer convicted in the United States last year on charges of conspiracy and falsifying documents for his role in a $17-million U.S. stock manipulation scheme is co-hosting a private reception tonight for Conservative party leadership contender Belinda Stronach.
[. . . .] In February 2003, Mr. Bloomfield was convicted of one count of conspiracy and 16 counts of falsifying business records after a trial in New York. He was sentenced to pay a $6,000 U.S. fine, put on five years probation, and ordered to perform 500 hours community service in Canada.
His lawyers have appealed the convictions. Mr. Bloomfield said he and his attorneys in New York are certain he will be acquitted.
[. . . .] News of Mr. Bloomfield's association with the Stronach campaign comes after it was revealed that two of five former Quebec Conservative MPs who endorsed her campaign for the leadership last week were embroiled in career-ending political scandals. Gabriel Fontaine was convicted in 1999 of defrauding taxpayers of $100,000, and Michel Cote, a former industry minister, was fired by ex-prime minister Brian Mulroney in 1988 for breaching conflict of interest rules.
Stronach organizers . . . said the candidate herself was unaware of the men's political pasts. [. . . and] he has "no official role" in her campaign.
At his trial, the Manhattan court heard evidence that Mr. Bloomfield and Stuart Creggy, a London lawyer, persuaded a Liberian diplomat to sign documents that falsely said he was the beneficial owner of 16 offshore companies. Those companies were used by U.S. stockbrokers to buy and sell stocks of companies while ratcheting up their prices before selling out at huge profits, in what regulators call a pump and dump scheme. Investors lost millions.
