Mountain Sage

26 Responses to “Video – Jon Stewart Takes On 30 Republicans Who Voted Against Franken Rape Amendment”

1. Posts about Jon Stewart as of October 20, 2009 » The Daily Parr Says:
   October 20th, 2009 at 7:36 am

   [...] about Jon Stewart as of October 20, 2009 Video – Jon Stewart Takes On 30 Republicans Who Voted Against Franken Rape Amendment – mountainsageblog.com 10/20/2009 One would believe that there is one thing that everyone [...]

2. Valuable Internet Information » Video – Jon Stewart Takes On 30 Republicans Who Voted Against Franken Rape Amendment Says:
   October 20th, 2009 at 7:45 am

   [...] Originally posted here:  Video – Jon Stewart Takes On 30 Republicans Who Voted Against Franken Rape Amendment [...]

3. timesr Says:
   October 20th, 2009 at 10:52 am

   “They are probably the same senators who would deny the woman a right to an abortion resulting from the rape.”

   and support insurers declaring her injuries a pre-existing condition(s) and reason for denying coverage.

   From Wikipedia

   “Further, the lawsuit filed by Jones’ attorneys cites the following: “When she awoke the next morning still affected by the drug, she found her body naked and severely bruised, with lacerations to her vagina and anus, blood running down her leg, her breast implants ruptured, and her pectoral muscles torn – which would later require reconstructive surgery. Upon walking to the rest room, she passed out again.”[5] Jones’ account was confirmed by U.S. Army physician Jodi Schultz.[6] Schultz gave the rape kit she used to gather evidence from Jones to KBR/Halliburton security forces, after which the rape kit disappeared. It was recovered two years later, but missing crucial photographs and notes. [7]

   Jones was confined by armed guards to a shipping container containing only a bed, under the orders of her employer, KBR. She says she was denied food, water, and medical treatment. After approximately one day, says Jones, a sympathetic guard gave her a cell phone and she called her father, Tom, who in turn contacted Representative Ted Poe (R-TX) who contacted the State Department. Agents were dispatched from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and removed Jones from KBR custody.”

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Leigh_Jones

   That must be one helluva corporate culture – literally.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 20th, 2009 at 12:31 pm

   The men who did this to her are scum of the earth and the people who covered up for them are as bad.

4. Desert Sage Says:
   October 21st, 2009 at 4:06 pm

   “…proposed an amendment that would deny defense contracts to companies that ask employees to sign away the right to sue.”

   I don’t think the “scumbags” as you call them were necessarily making any statements about their thoughts on rape or abortion. This is all extrapolated by you, i.e. putting words in their mouths, which you so vehemently despise.

   Their decision, I suspect, doesn’t have anything to do with this particular case, but the implications it could have on future contracts with defense service providers. Each civilian employee and/or contractor that signs up for this kind of job is usually paid a very princely sum for their efforts. They willingly enter into this agreement because of that, knowing that the risk of harm due to operations in a hostile environment are high. That is why there are caveats in the contract that restrict the employed from filing civil law suits. If they were allowed, the companies that provide these valuable services would be overwhelmed by civil suits and the awards thereof.

   That being said, in this particular case, the accused are being prosecuted in a criminal law suit for the crime of rape. I don’t have any doubt that each of those you call scumbags are all for prosectution of the real scumbags who perpetrated the crime. Those responsible for covering up should also be criminally prosecuted. Both of the parties, the rapists and the obstructionists, should be individually held responsible in civil court for emotional damages.

   And again, and I’ve been just as guilty at times, Wikipedia is usually not a good source to base fact vs. fiction when it comes to such politically and emotionally charged events.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 21st, 2009 at 4:36 pm

   How’s that criminal law suit coming along? I can’t find anything about it. And she was raped in 2005…..4 years later these guys aren’t in prison.

   And do I really need to tell you what you can do with your great concern over companies who provide “valuable” services? Do I really need to tell you what you can do with those future contracts?

   Anybody who would put business as usual before a human being who suffered what Jamie Leigh Jones suffered is a scumbag.

   1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).

   17.7 million American women have been victims of attempted or completed rape.

   9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003. SOURCE

   I’m friggin’ sick of business as usual. I’m sick of women having to be scared because it’s business as usual. SCREW business as usual.

5. Desert Sage Says:
   October 22nd, 2009 at 2:46 pm

   “Anybody who would put business as usual before a human being who suffered what Jamie Leigh Jones suffered is a scumbag.”

   How did I, or anyone else for that matter, suggest that this case should be handled as “business as usual”.

   Just how do you arrive at the conclusion that civil suits will lead to social justice for rape victims? You’re clueless.

   Simple emotional extrapolation and putting words in peoples mouths. LOL

   And thanks for calling me a scumbag. I see that civil dialogue is just an expectation for everyone else.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 22nd, 2009 at 8:02 pm

   If the shoe fits.

   You said:

   Each civilian employee and/or contractor that signs up for this kind of job is usually paid a very princely sum for their efforts. They willingly enter into this agreement because of that, knowing that the risk of harm due to operations in a hostile environment are high. That is why there are caveats in the contract that restrict the employed from filing civil law suits. If they were allowed, the companies that provide these valuable services would be overwhelmed by civil suits and the awards thereof.

   And what about that criminal case? How’s that working out?

   

   Desert Sage Reply:
   October 23rd, 2009 at 3:03 pm

   @Sage,

   Obviously in your mind emotional drama trumps logic.

   The criminal case? I can’t tell you… why don’t you fill me in on the details since you’re so personally engaged with the prosecution.

   You continue to base all of your judgments on tabloid journalism but fail to ask yourself the logical question. If there’s a fire, where’s the smoke? Why aren’t prosecutors, or the woman’s representation pushing for criminal prosecution? Perhaps because there isn’t a case? Are they pushing for prosecution for the obstructors? Or is there no case here as well because it didn’t happen.

   The only information you have is what the media has seen fit to report. You don’t know jack about what the real story is, so for you to hyperventilate about this and call people scumbags is at best a wreckless approach.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 23rd, 2009 at 4:11 pm

   You’re the one that assured me they were being prosecuted in a criminal case, weren’t you?

   That being said, in this particular case, the accused are being prosecuted in a criminal law suit for the crime of rape.

   It’s you who obviously hasn’t read the story and you were just blowing smoke when you made the above statement.

   As for the emotion involved, everyone should be furious when a woman is raped and then held hostage for 24 hours so she couldn’t report the rape. Your comments about me being too emotional is a typical sexist tactic men like to use against women.

   So take your condescending bullshit somewhere else.

   

   timesr Reply:
   October 23rd, 2009 at 11:06 pm

   @Desert Sage, “You don’t know jack about what the real story is, so for you to hyperventilate about this and call people scumbags is at best a wreckless approach.”

   Apparently you don’t know jack about the real story and yet are ready to jump to conclusions about Sage. What’s up with that?

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 23rd, 2009 at 11:33 pm

   He’s slamming me about the criminal prosecution when in fact it was he that said they were being prosecuted criminally. He can’t defend, so he attacks.

   Here’s what he said:

   That being said, in this particular case, the accused are being prosecuted in a criminal law suit for the crime of rape.

   When I asked him about it he turned around and told me I didn’t know jack and basically used the argument that I’m just a hysterical female…LOL Wow, that’s a new tactic….NOT.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 2:28 am

   LOL…..you are criticizing US for relying on tabloid news when YOU stated emphatically that there was a criminal prosecution going on because you HEARD it somewhere? And nobody should have an opinion unless they were there in person?

   Let me explain some things so that even you can understand them. You said:

   They willingly enter into this agreement because of that, knowing that the risk of harm due to operations in a hostile environment are high.

   She wasn’t shot by a sniper or blown up by a terrorists car bomb, she was raped in a KBR camp, allegedly by fellow employees of KBR and a cover up of that rape was instigated by KBR.

   In her lawsuit, Jones’ lawyer, Todd Kelly, says KBR and Halliburton created a “boys will be boys” atmosphere at the company barracks which put her and other female employees at great risk.

   She wasn’t allowed to seek immediate help because she was held unlawfully by KBR:

   Jones says she was held in the shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water by KBR, which posted armed security guards outside her door, who would not let her leave

   When she was treated the rape kit disappeared:

   Jones told ABCNews.com that an examination by Army doctors showed she had been raped “both vaginally and anally,” but that the rape kit disappeared after it was handed over to KBR security officers.

   A congressman had to intervene to get her released:

   Her father called their congressman, Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas.

   “We contacted the State Department first,” Poe told ABCNews.com, “and told them of the urgency of rescuing an American citizen” — from her American employer.

   Poe says his office contacted the State Department, which quickly dispatched agents from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to Jones’ camp, where they rescued her from the container.

   As far as criminal prosecution goes:

   Legal experts say Jones’ alleged assailants will likely never face a judge and jury, due to an enormous loophole that has effectively left contractors in Iraq beyond the reach of United States law.

   As for her civil case:

   Since no criminal charges have been filed, the only other option, according to Hutson, is the civil system, which is the approach that Jones is trying now. But Jones’ former employer doesn’t want this case to see the inside of a civil courtroom.

   No woman signs away her rights as far as fellow employees RAPING HER and the company they work for COVERING UP FOR THE RAPISTS.

   If you don’t understand the obvious differences in what you suggest is just a fact of life of danger in a war zone and her employer not providing a safe environment in their own camp, but additionally the employer engaging in a cover up of rape perpetrated by her fellow co-workers, then you are either being deliberately obtuse or you are just plain ignorant.

   employment lawyer Cathy Ventrell-Monsees said that Halliburton won more than 80 percent of arbitration proceedings brought against it.

   A lot of good arbitration would do when Halliburton wins 80 percent of the arbitration proceedings.

   Halliburton, which has since divested itself of KBR, says it “is improperly named” in the suit.

   How convenient for Halliburton.

   All of the above quotes from http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=3977702&page=3

   Now, maybe you worship at the feet of capitalism and your corporate gods, and all of your concern is for the poor little corporations having problems with future contracts, but I don’t give one rat’s ass about their contracts. A woman was raped, she was violated and the company she worked for did it’s damnedest to cover it up. They should be sued and they should have to answer for that in a court of law, not in the privacy of their bullshit “arbitration” where the deck is stacked in their favor.

   “The safety and security of all employees remains KBR’s top priority,” it said in a statement. “Our commitment in this regard is unwavering.”

   Yeah, we can tell. I guess that’s why they locked her away for 24 hours.

   After 15 months in arbitration, Jones and her lawyer realized the same thing and went to court to fight the arbitration agreement in the hopes of bringing her case before a jury. Jones argued that the alleged gang rape was not related to her employment and thus, wasn’t covered by the arbitration agreement. Finally, two years later, a federal court has sensibly agreed with her. Tuesday, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2 to 1 ruling, found her alleged injuries were not, in fact, in any way related to her employment and thus, not covered by the contract.

   One of the judges who ruled in her favor, Rhesa Hawkins Barksdale, is a West Point grad, Vietnam vet, and one of the court’s most conservative members, a sign, perhaps, of just how bad the facts are in this case. It’s a big victory, but a bitter one that shows just how insidious mandatory arbitration is. It’s taken Jones three years of litigation just to get to the point where she can finally sue the people who allegedly wronged her. It will be many more years before she has a shot at any real justice.

   In the meantime, her case may bolster pending legislation that would ban mandatory arbitration clauses in employment and other consumer contracts. SOURCE

   So, obviously a judge found her credible so your insinuation that there is no smoke or fire or whatever ignorant thing you said is untrue.

   As for the new law not providing comfort to victims, how the hell do you know? That’s your stupid assumption in an effort to defend corporations from having to take any responsibility for the welfare of their employees.

   You seem pretty hung up on the messenger but this isn’t about Jon Stewart, it is about a woman who was raped….her name is Jamie Leigh Jones.

   If you still believe that she shouldn’t have a right to sue in court, then yes, I think you are a scumbag. If you would take that same attitude in favor of corporations over a woman who was raped if that woman was your wife, lover, daughter, mother, then I think you are a sick puppy. If you wouldn’t take the same position if it were someone you loved then you are a hypocrite.

   Clear enough?

   

   timesr Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 11:56 am

   @Sage,

   One of the things I appreciate about your blog is that amount of research you do and your desire to get information right.

   IMHO, it is a virtue to feel outrage at injustice. It indicates a functioning, compassionate, empathetic human being.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 1:47 pm

   Thanks, timesr.

   Rape has become way too commonplace and is often treated like it’s just an inevitable fact of life. There is a young woman who attended Virginia Tech who disappeared from a concert over a week ago. I have every idea her body will be found and that she will have been raped. If people would get as upset about rape and violence against women as they did terrorists, maybe we could make some progress in stopping violence against women.

   

   timesr Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 11:48 am

   @, “Just pay the victim a lot of money and her suffering is OK… now that’s a load of condescending bullshit.”

   Where decency is lacking, the ability to sue is a free market remedy. While it doesn’t change history or make suffering go away, it does affirm the right of the victim to be treated with a certain amount of respect as a human being and not be harmed. It reinforces a cultural standard that says it is not okay to rape and imprison women.

   In this instance the corporation was up to its eyeballs in the cover up as corroborated by the army doctor, the congressman, and those sent to release her, one way to get the message across that this is wrong is to make the corporation pay lots and lots of money. It is a way to influence future behavior, to convince the people in the corporation that doing what’s right is a good idea even where an internal compass is missing.

   Do you think it would increase suffering to say you were raped, injured, and held captive and there’s nothing we’re going to or can do about it?

   

   Desert Sage Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 6:08 pm

   LOL, you two really missed the point didn’t you. Note that the every one of the authors of your “sources” cited that she was the “alleged” vicitm. They don’t even know the facts, but they sure have lots of opinions about what happened.

   You both have convicted the acused based on simple tabloid journalism. You’re both so wrapped up using this case as a cause celebre for rape victims when the truth is you don’t have any clue as to if the event even occurred. Yes, the media presents a good story to support the accusation, but the criminal cases haven’t progressed. Why not?

   You keep watching Oprah and arm-chair quarterbacking doing research sitting on your ass surfing the internet. I’m going to wait and see if our justice system sorts out if this is truly a real case or just another Tawana Brawly moment.

   If it is real, I hope they duly prosecute the perpetrators and any other obstructionists to the case.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 8:48 pm

   LOL, you two really missed the point didn’t you. Note that the every one of the authors of your “sources” cited that she was the “alleged” vicitm. They don’t even know the facts, but they sure have lots of opinions about what happened.

   No, you missed the point of the whole post. The point was about corporate interest being put before human rights. Everyone should have the right to address a wrong in court. And OF COURSE the word alleged was used. Until someone is tried and convicted there is nothing but an allegation. That’s why she deserves her day in court.

   You both have convicted the acused based on simple tabloid journalism. You’re both so wrapped up using this case as a cause celebre for rape victims when the truth is you don’t have any clue as to if the event even occurred. Yes, the media presents a good story to support the accusation, but the criminal cases haven’t progressed. Why not?

   Because, yo yo, the rape occurred in Iraq and is outside U.S. jurisdiction. Of course, if you actually read what I wrote and comprehended it you would know that.

   You keep watching Oprah and arm-chair quarterbacking doing research sitting on your ass surfing the internet. I’m going to wait and see if our justice system sorts out if this is truly a real case or just another Tawana Brawly moment.

   I guess you did your research in person? You went and interviewed people in person, right? No, you didn’t did you, hypocrite. I’ve never watched Oprah and your condescending, patronizing sexist comment is noted. It was nothing unusual coming from you.

   What part of the rape happened outside of U.S. jurisdiction did you not get? And Halliburton is still arguing that she shouldn’t be allowed a civil case.

   A judge heard her case and determined it was credible. ABC is not tabloid journalism and is certainly more balanced than your Manhattan Institute source.
   Here’s a suggestion for you….PISS OFF. Go patronize someone who doesn’t see through your comments for the sexism they are.

   

   timesr Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 9:16 pm

   @Desert Sage, “You both have convicted the acused based on simple tabloid journalism. You’re both so wrapped up using this case as a cause celebre for rape victims when the truth is you don’t have any clue as to if the event even occurred.”

   Republican Congressman Ted Poe seems to be convinced that the rape occurred, perhaps he has more credibility with you.

   http://poe.house.gov/news/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=80702

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 9:31 pm

   Just a few quotes from that link. Thanks for posting it, timesr.

   Also, hundreds of American civilians like Jamie are in Iraq working in support of America’s military mission. When these American civilians become victims of crimes by other Americans, it is unclear who’s enforcing the law. Our government must clear up this confusion, because currently there seems to be an environment of lawlessness. These criminals must be held accountable.

   My tremendous case worker, Patti Chapman, worked with Jamie since her rescue and has helped her in this most tragic case, and helped her in a compassionate way. Patti Chapman, like many congressional caseworkers, are angels to the people in our communities.

6. Desert Sage Says:
   October 24th, 2009 at 6:15 pm

   Here’s some more “research” for you to digest…

   http://overlawyered.com/2007/12/halliburton-gang-rape-and-fear-of-arbitration-the-jamie-leigh-jones-case/

   Probably a little more “balanced” viewpoint.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 7:06 pm

   Balanced? LOL Olson is a member of a CONSERVATIVE think tank and is so pro business it’s ridiculous. You just keep on worshiping your corporate masters, just don’t do it here.

   I thought the Manhattan Institute rang a bell. It’s the think tank that the wacko Betsy McCaughey was a part of.

   Information on the Manhattan Institute

   The Manhattan Institute received $19,470,416 in grants from 1985-2005, from foundations such as the Koch Family Foundations, the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc., the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Scaife Foundations, and the Smith Richardson Foundation. The Manhattan Institute does not disclose its corporate funding, but the Capital Research Center listed its contributors as Bristol-Myers Squibb, Exxon Mobil, Chase Manhattan, CIGNA, Sprint, Reliant Energy, Lincoln Financial Group Foundation, and Merill Lynch.

   And for missing the point, look in the mirror. Jamie Leigh Jones’ case is not the point of the original post. Corporations using employee contracts to deny employees rights is. Whether or not she was raped is not the issue. The original comment of “scumbags” had nothing to do with the Jamie Leigh Jones case, it had to do with putting corporate interests before human rights. Everyone should have a recourse when an employer violates them as human beings.

   And just in case you didn’t get the message in the other reply, PISS OFF. You’re not going to continue to be a sexist, condescending asshole here.

   

   timesr Reply:
   October 24th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

   @Desert Sage, “…overlawyered.com…

   Probably a little more “balanced” viewpoint.”

   Balanced? Hmm, with a name like “overlawyered”, I think its safe to assume, shall we say, a certain bias.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 25th, 2009 at 1:24 am

   DS pulled out the last typical sexist attack by telling me I’m unstable. I wish I had a dollar for every time I’ve seen that used against a woman by a man on Internet discussion boards….usually by a man who really can’t defend his position. He still insists that all of our information was from tabloids…..if he considers ABC tabloid journalism, I’m not sure where one should get their news. According to him, his source of course has no bias in spite of the fact that the website he named is nothing but a right wing site that hates lawsuits because corporations get held accountable by lawsuits.

   

   timesr Reply:
   October 25th, 2009 at 11:50 am

   @Sage,

   Is it rational to question that a rape took place in the face of documented extensive injuries and medical opinion that exists in this case? I think Desert Sage is projecting his irrational position on you.

   The article DS linked doesn’t mention Rep. Poe and his first hand knowledge. From his article, “I haven’t seen any support for the contention that there is a loophole that leaves an American contractor’s attack on an American outside the scope of criminal prosecution, as some blogs have claimed.” I guess the author hasn’t talked to Rep. Poe. Poe said, “When these American civilians become victims of crimes by other Americans, it is unclear who’s enforcing the law. Our government must clear up this confusion, because currently there seems to be an environment of lawlessness. These criminals must be held accountable.”

   Adam Smith, the patron saint of the free market, never claimed the invisible hand could preform its magic outside a moral society. Compassion and the ability to feel empathy is the emotional foundation on which morality is built.

   Three cheers for emotionalism based on fact.

   

   Sage Reply:
   October 25th, 2009 at 1:45 pm

   Thanks, timesr. He’s a corporate stooge.