Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali has an article in Saturday’s International Herald Tribune that contains a shocking statistic: Women go ‘missing’ by the millions.

As I was preparing for this article, I asked a friend who is Jewish if it was appropriate to use the term “holocaust” to portray the worldwide violence against women. He was startled. But when I read him the figures in a 2004 policy paper published by the Geneva Center for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, he said yes, without hesitation.

One United Nations estimate says from 113 million to 200 million women around the world are demographically “missing.” Every year, from 1.5 million to 3 million women and girls lose their lives as a result of gender-based violence or neglect.

How could this possibly be true? Here are some of the factors:

In countries where the birth of a boy is considered a gift and the birth of a girl a curse from the gods, selective abortion and infanticide eliminate female babies.

Young girls die disproportionately from neglect because food and medical attention is given first to brothers, fathers, husbands and sons.

In countries where women are considered the property of men, their fathers and brothers can murder them for choosing their own sexual partners. These are called “honor” killings, though honor has nothing to do with it.

Young brides are killed if their fathers do not pay sufficient money to the men who have married them. These are called “dowry deaths,” although they are not just deaths, they are murders.

The brutal international sex trade in young girls kills uncounted numbers of them.

Read the whole thing...

OUR FRIENDS THE NUCLEAR SAUDIS

German magazine Cicero is reporting details on Saudi Arabia’s secret nuclear program: Saudis, with Pakistani help, working on nuclear programme. (Hat tip: Allah.)

BERLIN (AFP) - Saudi Arabia is working secretly on a nuclear programme, with help from Pakistani experts, a German magazine reports in its latest edition, citing Western security sources.

The German magazine Cicero says that during the Hajj pilgrimages to Mecca in 2003 through 2005, Pakistani scientists posed as pilgrims to come to Saudi Arabia in aircraft laid on by the oil-rich kingdom.

Between October 2004 and January 2005, some of them took the opportunity to “disappear” from their hotel rooms, sometimes for up to three weeks, it quoted German security expert Udo Ulfkotte as saying.

According to Western security services, the magazine added, Saudi scientists have been working since the mid-1990s in Pakistan, a nuclear power since 1998 thanks to the work of the now-disgraced Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.

Cicero, which will appear on newstands on Thursday, also quoted a US military analyst, John Pike, as saying that Saudi bar codes can be found on half of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons “because it is Saudi Arabia which ultimately co-financed the Pakistani atomic nuclear programme”.

HEAD OF ARAB LEAGUE PUSHES NUKE PROGRAMS

Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League, called on the Arab world today to get their nuclear programs going “with all speed and momentum.”

You know ... for peaceful purposes. Nudge. Wink.

KHARTOUM, Sudan - The head of the Arab League called on Arab states Tuesday to work toward “entering the nuclear club” by developing atomic energy — a new concern for a Western world already trying to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions and fretting about a possible Mideast arms race.

Amr Moussa’s comments came as a surprise at a troubled Arab League summit meant to tackle crises ranging from Iraq to the Palestinian peace process. ...

Moussa spoke to the gathered leaders at the opening of the summit, saying, “I would like to call on the Arab world to enter into the world of peaceful use of nuclear energy with all speed and momentum.”

“This is a legal right ensured for all states that are party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,” he said.

Just yesterday, Charles Krauthammer envisioned a nightmare future, not of nuclear proliferation but of hyperproliferation.

That future is headed toward us, and it’s coming fast.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: THE GOOD SIDE OF HAMAS

At CNN’s Anderson Cooper “blog,” Christiane Amanpour shills for the Hamas terror gang: From terrorism to trash collection. (Hat tip: Jon.)

When people ask: “Why did the Palestinian people elect a terrorist group?” The answer is because they see them as a lifeline.

Each time I go to the Palestinian territory of Gaza, I am shocked by the reality on the ground. On a recent visit, I passed through a short tunnel from the First World in Israel and emerged into the Third World that is Gaza. The poverty there is among the worst in the world.

Hamas officials told me they did not expect to win the election as overwhelmingly as they did. They say their main priority now is to meet the demands of the people for a better life.

But that may be impossible, because Israel and the United States refuse to deal with Hamas and have already cut funding to the new Palestinian government.

And the comments are even worse; a mix of suicidal naivete and smug ignorance that has to be seen to be believed.

Hamas is not a terrorist orgnization. Terrorists dont run hospitals, schools and welfare schemes. It was wrong to label Hamas as such. Hope the US govt. corrects itself soon and help the palestinians in their quest for independence.

HAMAS: "DEATH FOR THE SAKE OF GOD IS OUR HIGHEST ASPIRATION"

Meet the new terror bosses: Hamas government approved, vows to fight Israel.

GAZA (Reuters) - A Hamas-dominated Palestinian parliament approved the Islamic militant group’s cabinet and program on Tuesday, clearing the way for it to take control of the government two months after its shock election victory.

Chanting “God is Greatest” after the 71-to-36 vote, Hamas lawmakers hugged and kissed Ismail Haniyeh, their teary-eyed prime minister-designate who vowed to not to abandon the fight against Israel.

“The Koran is our constitution, Jihad is our way, and death for the sake of God is our highest aspiration,” Hamas lawmaker Hamed Bitawi said.

Tuesday’s comments stood in contrast to a more conciliatory speech by Haniyeh on Monday in which he stressed the new government’s push for peace and dialogue.

IBD: A RELIGION OF PEACE?

It’s taken mainstream media an incredible amount of time to reach this point (and the New York Times never will), but an Investor’s Business Daily editorial is finally asking some of the right questions: Religion Of Peace?

What better time for CAIR and other Muslim leaders to step up, cut through the politically correct fog and provide factual answers to the questions that give so many non-Muslims pause?

Generally speaking, those questions focus on whether the Quran does indeed promote violence against non-Muslims, and how many of the terrorists’ ideas — about the violent jihad, the self-immolation, the kidnappings, even the beheadings — come right out of the text? But even more specifically:

Is Islam the only religion with a doctrine, theology and legal system that mandates warfare against unbelievers?

Is it true that 26 chapters of the Quran deal with jihad, a fight able-bodied believers are obligated to join (Surah 2:216), and that the text orders Muslims to “instill terror into the hearts of the unbeliever” and to “smite above their necks” (8:12)?

Is the “test” of loyalty to Allah not good acts or faith in general, but martyrdom that results from fighting unbelievers (47:4) — the only assurance of salvation in Islam (4:74; 9:111)?

Are the sins of any Muslim who becomes a martyr forgiven by the very act of being slain while slaying the unbelievers (4:96)?

And is it really true that martyrs are rewarded with virgins, among other carnal delights, in Paradise (38:51, 55:56; 55:76; 56:22)?

Are those unable to do jihad — such as women or the elderly — required to give “asylum and aid” to those who do fight unbelievers in the cause of Allah (8:74)?

Does Islam advocate expansion by force? And is the final command of jihad, as revealed to Muhammad in the Quran, to conquer the world in the name of Islam (9:29)?

Is Islam the only religion that does not teach the Golden Rule (48:29)? Does the Quran instead teach violence and hatred against non-Muslims, specifically Jews and Christians (5:50)?

There are other questions, but these should do for a start.  Tuesday, March 28, 2006

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog

*

A reader calls our attention to another of the audio tape recordings from Saddam Hussein's office. This one is ISGQ-2003-M0004667, and appears to have been recorded around 1996. Like most of the audiotapes, it is rambling, confusing and often incoherent. The ambiguity of most of what Saddam and his henchmen say is maddening. However, there are some interesting nuggets. This one suggests that the Russians have been paid off:

We have succeeded in a few of the U.N. paragraphs, we have won Russia, ahhh ... we have convinced Russia by way of generous accounts [payoffs], in which, you remember how and why it happened...

Iraq's lies to the U.N. inspectors are again acknowledged, although the actual state of Iraq's weapons programs at the time can't be deduced from the tape:

They have a bigger problem with the Chemical progam than the Biological program, a lot bigger... It is not the weapons, the size of the imported material, the size of [UNINTELLIGIBLE] that we presented to them or the size of the stockpile. They knew that not all of this was true. We have not told them about the size or kind of Chemical weapons that we produced, and we have not told them the truth about the imported material. Therefore, sir, if they want to raise an issue, I mean, they will see that our argument is the issue of the Biological program.

It is clearly stated that nuclear materials were moved out of Iraq, and it seems, although less clearly, that Iraqi "teams" were still working on nuclear weapons:

Sir, where was the Nuclear material transported to? A number of them were transported outside of Iraq. *** Sir, about the Nuclear program, we say that we have uncovered everything. In addition, we have an unannounced problem with the Nuclear program, and I think they know about it. I mean, there is working teams that are working and some of these teams are not known to anyone.

As we've said before, each of these documents is a very small piece of a very large mosaic, and it would be a mistake to try to draw conclusions prematurely. But some of these comments are certainly suggestive.  Tuesday, March 28, 2006

www.powerlineblog.com

*

DEMOCRATS FINALLY AGREE ON NATIONAL-SECURITY MESSAGE: INVADE PAKISTAN

The Democrats plan to announce their new national-security strategy for the 2006 election tomorrow, but Liz Sidoti at the AP reports that advance word has already leaked on the broad strokes. The message? Get tough on Osama while retreating in the face of his friends:

Congressional Democrats promise to "eliminate" Osama bin Laden and ensure a "responsible redeployment of U.S. forces" from Iraq in 2006 in an election-year national security policy statement.

In the position paper to be announced Wednesday, Democrats say they will double the number of special forces and add more spies, which they suggest will increase the chances of finding al-Qaida's elusive leader. They do not set a deadline for when all of the 132,000 American troops now in Iraq should be withdrawn.

"We're uniting behind a national security agenda that is tough and smart and will provide the real security
George Bush has promised but failed to deliver," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday.

Let's get this straight. The Democrats want to retreat against al-Qaeda forces assembled in Iraq in order to invade Pakistan, which is where Osama is most likely spending his time. They want to run away from the operational forces of AQ in a fashion that will remind all of them of Somalia, Beirut, and Teheran -- proving Osama right about American tenacity. Going after Osama is a terrific goal, but unless they have a better plan than to flood Pakistan with special-forces teams and spies that Pervez Musharraf will consider an act of war, then this policy is doomed to failure.

Once again, the Democrats will run on slogans instead of real strategy and tactics. They shrewdly selected Osama as a focal point, reminding the country that after over four years, the Bush administration hasn't captured the terrorist leader. Without a doubt, that has to rankle Americans; it rankles me. However, the Bush administration has isolated the AQ leadership and forced it back into Pakistan, as well as killed off or captured most of the operational leadership in the organization. We removed Saddam Hussein and transformed the geography of Southwest Asia, cutting off the terrorist lines of communication across the Middle East. The US forced the Islamofascists to engage our military on their turf instead of our civilians on ours.

What do the Democrats propose in its place? Disengagement from the only place where we can bring our military force to bear on Islamofascist terrorists, and another ignominious retreat just as we have to show strength in the region to back down the Iranian mullahcracy. The Democrats want to implement the Murtha plan, a strategy that will pull all our forces back to Kuwait, just in case they're needed to support the Iraqi security forces we will be abandoning to the terrorists we swore to fight. And when they are needed, what do we have to do? Redeploy in force across what will now be even more hostile territory after stripping ourselves of all the intelligence and recon we have while we're in place now.

Slogans and Osama-baiting may well work for the Democrats, but in the end we will still wind up fighting the same people we fight now. Instead of fighting them in Samarra and Tal Afar, we will fight them in San Francisco and Washington, DC. We may well fight them in Pakistan, as well as the nuclear-armed Pakistanis, if we openly invade their territory to chase Osama bin Laden. That's not a plan for victory; it's an incoherent fantasy.

ISRAELIS VOTE FOR SHARON'S STRATEGY

The shadow of Ariel Sharon hung over the election today in Israel which saw his Kadima party win its first contest, putting Ehud Olmert in charge and making Sharon's strategy of unilateral border establishment ascendant. In an election that drew an unsually low voter turnout, the ailing former leader's former party found itself struggling to keep from finishing fourth:

ISRAEL’S Prime Minister-elect last night offered to restart negotiations with the Palestinians, after exit polls showed his centrist Kadima party set to form the next government.

In a late-night victory speech Ehud Olmert spoke of a new chapter in Israel’s history, offering peace to its enemies and uniting internal divisions.

Just four months after the party was formed by Ariel Sharon – to whom Mr Olmert paid fulsome tribute – Kadima was predicted to win 28 seats after votes were counted in 50 per cent of polling stations, according to Israel Channel 10 Televison.

The centre-left Labour party came second, winning 20 seats, leaving Mr Olmert the possibility of heading a centre-left coalition with more than half of the Israeli parliament’s 120 seats.

In a major blow for Binyamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister and anointed heir to Mr Sharon until last year, his divided and bickering Likud Party was reduced to a right wing parliamentary rump, predicted to win just 12 seats.

Both the electoral results and the relatively low turnout (around 63%, which in the US would be a record) shows that the Israelis have given up on the hardliner approach to stand their ground wherever Israelis live. With the security wall showing a significant dampening effect on terrorist attacks, they apparently have decided that they want no part of the territories any longer. The nation has explicitly decided to abandon most of the settlements, a development that as recently as two years ago would have been almost unthinkable. Binyamin Netanyahu did not foresee the exhaustion of the Israelis, but Sharon did -- and he may have saved the Israeli center in politics as a result.

So what now? Olmert says he would rather negotiate for the ultimate decisions on borders and settlements, even parting with more Israeli land if necessary to find common ground with their enemy. Unfortunately, they claim far too much common ground for that to be practical. If Mahmoud Abbas could not sell a partition of Jerusalem, the lunatics of Hamas certainly won't -- and that's assuming that Olmert would offer it.

For the first time in years, though, Israel has finally found a way to simply disengage and leave the Palestinians to themselves. It will cost them in the short run, as the IDF will have to re-enact the evictions we saw in Gaza again and again as Israel pulls itself behind their wall. Hamas and the PA will threaten the Israelis, but the fact is that the IDF has built a strong defensive border, and further attacks on it will only force the Israelis to close it even tighter. That may impact the Israeli economy, but it will devastate the Palestinians, just as we see already in Gaza.

A VIRTUAL WALL BRINGS VIRTUAL AMNESTY

The Senate will begin debate tomorrow on the new immigration-reform plan voted out of the Judiciary Committee earlier today. The comprehensive bill will create another pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens twenty years after the last time the government thought that we had illegal immigration licked and waters down the stringent border security that the House demanded:

Under the Judiciary Committee bill, illegal immigrants who pay a $1,000 fine and back taxes would be able to apply for a three-year work visa, renewable for a second three-year period. In the fourth year of work, the visa holder could begin a five-year path toward citizenship. A second guest worker program would open up legal agriculture jobs to 1.5 million undocumented farm workers.

The measure would also add as many as 14,000 new border patrol agents by 2011 to the current force of 11,300 agents and would authorize a "virtual wall" of unmanned vehicles, cameras and sensors to monitor the U.S.-Mexico border.

Unlike the House bill, it would not make illegal immigrants and those who assist them into felons, nor would it authorize the construction of massive new walls along 700 miles of the southern border.

As I have written repeatedly over the past two years, we simply cannot throw out 12 million people overnight, so some sort of guest-worker program is inevitable, if for no other reason than to get an accurate accounting of the aliens in our nation. Either that, or we will have to herd people into concentration camps, a solution that will never pass political muster even if were remotely possible logistically. That program could form a basis of a comprehensive immigration "reform", if properly written.

That being said, the bare minimum necessary for such a program to succeed is border security successful enough that it forces those who want to enter the US to do so through either legal immigration or the guest worker program. And that is precisely where the Senate bill fails, and fails miserably. Rather than build barricades along the border that will force illegals to easily-monitored crossing points, the Senate wants to build a "virtual" wall instead of the real thing. They make it sound very high-tech, and they back it up with a little more than double the current number of border-patrol agents, but in reality all they provide is cameras and sensors to note the passage of ever-more illegals across our border.

Without real security at the southern border, any guest-worker program will fail. Why should the illegals register and cough up so much of their pay when they can easily cross over and keep everything they earn?

Immigration stalwarts might hope that the House approach will prevail in the joint conference committee that will reconcile the two bills, but that hope appears fading at best:

House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said that he hopes the Senate will pass what he called "a responsible border security bill," but he indicated he is willing to rethink the House approach. After meeting with ranchers and law enforcement officers on the U.S.-Mexican border, Boehner said those living on the frontier did not believe the House-passed border wall would work.

"If the people on the border don't believe that the wall will have the effect that people here think, then we ought to reconsider it," he said.

The Israeli wall works pretty darned well -- so well that their entire national-security policy relies on it for protection against the terrorists that want to destroy their country. Such a border barrier would relieve the agents of the necessity of being everywhere at once, and they could instead form rapid-response to attempted incursions before they actually succeed instead of tracking illegals once they've crossed the border. It appears that Congress has not learned from the Israeli experience at all.

Recent demonstrations in Los Angeles and elsewhere seems to have rattled the Republican majority, but they have taken the wrong lessons from these spectacles. The message given by the massive demonstration is that when the government fails to take action in enforcing its own laws and securing its borders, those who break the law start believing they have an entitlement to continue doing so. And why not? They learned that lesson in the amnesty program of the mid-1980s, when the Reagan administration and the Democratic Congress decided that offering those already here an easy path to citizenship would somehow deter further illegal immigration. They also promised strict border enforcement, but somehow Congress never really got around to implementing it. Twenty years later, we're talking about giving a free pass to the next generation of illegals.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Congress appears ready to establish itself as the 109th Asylum, with its fantasy walls and their insistence on granting amnesty while pretending it doesn't exist ... again.  Tuesday, March 28, 2006

www.captainsquartersblog.com

MUCHO CALIENTE

From CNN: Immigration fight looms in Senate

The battle over immigration reform moves Tuesday to the full Senate, a day after a GOP-led Senate committee passed sweeping legislation that sets up a contentious showdown with Republicans demanding a harder line.

Controversial provisions in the Senate Judiciary Committee's election-year bill would create a guest-worker program and give illegal immigrants the chance to work toward legal status without first returning home.

Highlighting the divisions within GOP ranks over immigration, four of the committee's 10 Republicans voted in favor of the bill, which passed 12-6 with support from the panel's eight Democrats.

The full Senate begins debating immigration Tuesday, and it is unclear whether the committee's version will have enough support to survive intact. A procedural vote Tuesday may give some indication of its chances.

Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, told the Senate after the panel vote that he expected "considerable controversy when the bill reaches the Senate floor."

"It is a very emotional issue; it is a very contentious issue," he said.

The biggest bone of contention is likely to be the legalization process for undocumented immigrants already in the country -- a controversial idea denounced as "amnesty" by its critics and opposed by President Bush.

Glenn Reynolds has a good overview of the issue and how it might affect Democrats and Republicans: An immigration brouhaha: Poison for both parties?.

It looks like illegal immigration is shaping up to be the issue of the week, in the wake of mass rallies opposing new immigration legislation in Los Angeles, Chicago, and elsewhere.

Mickey Kaus has been paying a lot of attention to this subject and thinks it will be bad for Democrats.  I think it may well be bad for everyone.

As I've noted here before, I'm in favor of pretty easy immigration -- my family includes immigrants from Nigeria.  But they're legal immigrants, who jumped through numerous hoops to get here and who are, if anything, more unhappy with illegal immigration than most native-born Americans.  If we're going to have open immigration, let's change the law, not achieve that end through failure to enforce the laws we have.  Tuesday, March 28, 2006

MUAMMAR GADDAFI

From Reuters: Libya says it supports Palestinian Hamas: report

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi pledged support for Palestinian militant group Hamas, which faces cuts in Western funding over its refusal to denounce violence against Israel, state news agency Jana said on Friday.

The report came after Gaddafi met Hamas leader-in-exile Khaled Meshaal in Tripoli late on Thursday. Meshaal said this week his group will continue to fight Israel and told the United States its Middle East policy would fuel terrorism.

Meshaal's visit to Libya is part of a tour of Arab states to drum up financial aid and political support for Hamas to head the Palestinian government.

"The brother leader (Gaddafi) told Meshaal that Libya will continue its support for the Palestinian people and its just cause," Jana said.

Little Green Footballs has more.  Monday, March 27, 2006

www.coxandforkum.com

*

IRAN WANTS UN TO PROBE "RIGHTS ABUSES" IN U.S.

The old Tu Quoque diversionary tactic from the model human rights regime of the Thug-In-Chief. From Iran Focus, with thanks to JE:

Tehran, Iran, Mar. 28 – Iran’s Foreign Minister has expressed “concern” over “human rights abuses” in the United States and called on the United Nations to investigate the matter.

Mottaki censured “widespread human rights violations in the U.S.”, highlighting the treatment of black people and Muslims.

He called for the United Nations to appoint a new Special Rapporteur to investigate and report on “cases of human rights violations by America”.  Tuesday, March 28, 2006

http://jihadwatch.org

*

ISLAMIC SOMNILOQUENT DIVORCE

I used to believe it was too easy to get divorced in California, but this is ridiculous: Man Accidentally Divorces Wife in Sleep. (Hat tip: LGF readers.)

NEW DELHI - Village elders ordered a Muslim man in eastern India to leave his wife after he accidentally divorced her in his sleep, a news report said Tuesday.

Aftab Ansari uttered the Urdu word for divorce, “talaq,” three times in his sleep, prompting his worried wife to discuss the matter with her friends, according to the Press Trust of India news agency.

Under Islamic law, a husband need only say “I divorce you” three times to secure a permanent end to his marriage.

Muslim leaders in the couple’s village in West Bengal state found out and decreed that Ansari’s unconscious utterances constituted a divorce, PTI reported.

But 30-year-old Ansari said he had no intention of leaving his wife of 11 years. “I have not given talaq. When I uttered talaq three times I had taken medicines to help me sleep,” he was quoted as saying in the report.

And as usual, the woman gets the short end.

The religious leaders said that before remarrying, the couple would have to be apart for at least 100 days and that the wife, Sohela, would also have to spend a night with another man and then be divorced by him.

In this report on the ongoing socialist tantrums in France, we learn that “youths” from the suburbs are preying on the demonstrators: Hundreds arrested in Paris protests. (Hat tip: Aussiemagpie.)

POLICE arrested more than 100 people during disturbances on the fringes of the Paris demonstration against a new youth jobs law, according to a provisional police count.

Low-level clashes were continuing to take place in the Place de la Republique, the end point of the march in the northeast of the capital.

Police and union marshals intervened after a gang of youths stole mobile telephones and cameras from people taking part in the protest.

Earlier masked youths smashed the windows of a cafe and tried to mug people near the starting point of the march at Place d’Italie, in the south of the city.

Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy earlier warned that gangs from the Paris suburbs could infiltrate the demonstration.  Tuesday, March 28, 2006

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog