Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Education Medicine News Science

Another Afghan School Poisoned — 160 Girls Hospitalized 474

Posted by Soulskill
from the setting-a-bad-precedent dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Back in April, we discussed news of an anti-education attack on an Afghani school, which poisoned 150 Afghan schoolgirls. Now, a hospital in the same province has admitted 160 more girls who seem to have suffered a similar attack. 'Their classrooms might have been sprayed with a toxic material before the girls entered, police spokesman Khalilullah Aseer said. He blamed the Taliban. The incident, the second in a week's time, was reported at the Aahan Dara Girls School in Taluqan, the provincial capital. The girls, ages 10 to 20, complained of headaches, dizziness and vomiting before being taken to the hospital, said Hafizullah Safi, director of the provincial health department. More than half of them were discharged within a few hours of receiving treatment, Safi said. The health department collected blood samples and sent them to Kabul for testing.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Another Afghan School Poisoned — 160 Girls Hospitalized

Comments Filter:
  • by slackware 3.6 (2524328) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @02:38PM (#40146005)
    Not anti-education.
    And that is why there are a bunch of hairy dudes cuddling each other in caves in the mountains instead of being at home cudling with their wives.
  • by dskoll (99328) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @03:07PM (#40146449)

    No, not at all. But study the Qu'ran. It justifies (in fact, demands) violence to convert non-believers to Islam.

    Just because all religions are bad doesn't mean some religions aren't worse than others. We see a lot more religiously-motivated violence from Muslims than from other religious groups; that's just a fact.

    Islam is a colonialist ideology whose goal is world domination. This is plainly stated in its writings.

  • by dskoll (99328) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @03:09PM (#40146471)

    No, you have your head in the sand. Read the Qu'ran sometime and some of the other Islamic writings. They demand that Muslims emulate Mohammed, and they go into great excited detail about how Mohammed massacred people who mocked him. See for example Sahi Bukhari :Volume 5, Book 59, Number 443 which describes a massacre in great and gory detail.

  • by Sparticus789 (2625955) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @03:13PM (#40146537) Journal

    The Nazis were stopped because they blatantly violated (nearly) everyone's rules of Universal Human Rights -- so much so that many of their own detested it.

    I would have to disagree. After Pearl Harbor, U.S. declared war on Japan, Japan declared war on the U.S., Germany declared war on the U.S. Then the war machine started cranking and the Allies took back Europe. Allies stumbled across concentration camps, and the world learned how evil the Nazis really were. We didn't enter WWII because they "violated human rights." We entered because the Axis attacked us.

  • Re:Mass Hysteria (Score:4, Informative)

    by gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @03:17PM (#40146587) Homepage

    Ummm, except this is hardly the first time school girls have been targeted with poison, or acid, or fire, or gunshots.

    It's not like we need to come up with alternate explanations because poison is implausible here -- this is straight out of the Taliban playbook.

    Are you asserting this or things like this haven't happened? I'm not sure why you're suggesting we need an alternative explanation which implies this didn't really happen.

  • by dskoll (99328) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @03:22PM (#40146671)

    No, you have your head in the sand. Although there are more Christians than Muslims, the number of religiously-motivated violent attacks by Muslims today far outweighs religiously-motivated attacks by Christians.

    Currently, there are religiously-motivated wars and attacks in Mali, Kenya, Nigeria. There are religiously-motivated bombings, suicide attacks, etc. in Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, Phillipines, Thailand. I could probably think of 100 examples in the last year if pressed.

    On the Christian side, I can think of Brevik and the Oklahoma CIty bomber and maybe some attacks on abortion providers. Very small-scale indeed compared to Islamic religious violence.

  • by GodfatherofSoul (174979) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @03:25PM (#40146713)

    They're not anti-girl, they're anti-empowered girls.

  • by Sparticus789 (2625955) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @04:46PM (#40148021) Journal

    First, there are hundreds of officers that sit around and create potential scenarios for war from basically every country you can imagine. So in that sense, we are "always" preparing for some sort of armed conflict. Now those guys are borderline paranoid-insane, the stuff they come up with is amazingly detailed and would make for some great movies.

    Second, perhaps my definition of "war machine" was a little vague. U.S. officers were fighting for the British Air Force as early as 1938 (maybe 1939?) in an unofficial capacity. When I say war machine, I mean every factory started making bullets, the draft started, Freedom gardens got planted, etc. In other words, everyone in the country knew we were at war and were focused on that single task. We were doing a lot of that once everyone realized Hitler was a power-hungry maniac, but ordering Americans into harm's way didn't start in an official capacity until post Pearl Harbor.

  • by cavreader (1903280) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @08:02PM (#40150319)

    Also don't forget the the US provided Russia with trucks, ammunition, food, fuel, and other war related items until the Soviets got their war production up and running. They also had to hunt down quite a few of their key scientists and engineers who had been sent to the Gulags to design and build their own armaments. Russia's initial strategy was to hope the Germans ran out of ammunition before Russia ran out of people charging the guns.

    England would have fallen without US supply convoys. Before the US declared it's official entry into the world quite a few US merchant marines were killed while trying to send supplies to England while Congress dithered and did nothing. FDR was actually counting on the Germans attacking US merchant ships to give him a reason to enter the war. And the Germans tried to avoid firing on US ships but they made a few mistakes which provided some motivitation from the US public to try to do something. As it was FDR made a mockery of the US Congress with his lend-lease and safe zone expansion. If the US had not been successful in the war he would have been impeached. He also blatantly defied the US Congress ban on domestic spying looking for German agents. Right after Congress passed their law he just issued a Presidential memo to the justice department telling them to ignore Congress. FDR blatantly violated the US constitution with his actions but I saw a documentary where Presidents Carter, Clinton, Bush 1, and Bush 2 all agreed there are times when breaking the rules are justified and they would have did the same type of things that FDR did. Carter's response to this question was the most unexpected. Of course Lincoln also violated the Constitution during the Civil War as another example of a President trying to help the country regardless of the political BS involved in running a war.

  • No, you have your head in the sand. Read the Qu'ran sometime and some of the other Islamic writings. They demand that Muslims emulate Mohammed, and they go into great excited detail about how Mohammed massacred people who mocked him.

    Mind you, the same is true of the Old Testament and Yahweh.

  • by master_p (608214) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @02:37AM (#40152533)

    If you had drawn a crucifx in urine 500 years ago, you would have been burned alive.

Our business in life is not to succeed but to continue to fail in high spirits. -- Robert Louis Stevenson

Working...