ON THE ROAD TO SERFDOM IN AFRICA: MORE STATE-SANCTIONED LOOTING IN ZIMBABWE

Mugabe - who's doing to Zimbabwe what Castro did to Cuba: destroying it - is stepping up his planned takeover of the mining industry:

President Robert Mugabe has already presided over a grab of white-owned farms without compensation -- not to help rural peasants but to hand over assets to his supporters. Those farms are not being run efficiently as they were by their white owners. A kleptocratic government that inherited a country once seen as the southern African region’s bread basket is now responding to the fact that the state-owned granaries have less than a couple of weeks’ stocks of wheat by putting the army on high alert as a precaution against food riots.

Non-agricultural industry, too, is all but moribund as private-sector firms close down because of the chronic shortages of raw materials and foreign currency that the Mugabe regime has inflicted on them. ... Now, the Zimbabwean mining industry is facing the threat of expropriation. Mugabe’s cronies want an immediate handover of 25% of all mines to be followed by a further 26% by the year 2009. Sure, the 26% will be paid for, but payment will be in virtually worthless Zimbabwean dollars ... Effectively, then, this is confiscation. And will Mugabe’s looters stop there?

RTWT. (Allende would've done this to Chile.)

WHEN WILL THE WEST PREEMPTIVELY ATTACK IRAN AND DESTROY ITS NUCLEAR ASSETS?

I have long argued that the OUTSIDE date for a preemptive attack against Iran's nuclear and military assets is December 2008 - after the next US presidential election and before the next inauguration.

I have felt for a long time that Bush would not leave this problem to the next president. And I felt for a long time that Sharon withdrew from Gaza IN PART in order to be able redeploy the IDF which had been stationed there, and to redploy them closer to major population centers and more strategic locations in order to withstand a likely pan-Arabic counter-attack after the preemptive attack. (I feel that the recent Hizballah War served this end too: wiping out or at least greatly reducing Hizballah's stockpiles - and the stocks of Hizballah's suppliers - in anticipation of the next round with Iran.)

Here's an item which reinforces my conclusion - from the JPOST:

'Barrier will be done by end of 2008'

Construction of the West Bank security barrier will be completed by the end of 2008, a senior defense official involved in the project told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

Just in time. Just about when the West will have to make a move. The West, meaning either the USA or Israel, or NATO or all of the above. If it's the USA, then Israel might be the only nation in the world to get a heads up. (I would've included the UK if Blair had managed to stay on, but he'll be gone by then, and on the GWOT his replacement - Gordon Brown - is an unknown quantity.)

The only thing which can prevent this preemptive attack from happening is a democratic revolution in Iran. And there is no sure sign that this will happen in time - though it might if student protests can gather a lot more momentum. Sadly, Iran - like China - is enough of a police state to really make this REALLY difficult. Remember Tiananmen? It failed - in part because of surrender-monkeys like James A. Baker - who was Secretary of State at the time. (He also left Saddam in power, too - and also abandoned the Shias in 1991. He was a disaster then, and his ISG Report would be disaster for us now, too.)

BOTTOM-LINE: The withdrawal from Gaza and the fence were not two isolated decisions, each made in a vacuum; they're part of a coordinated effort to strengthen Israel's defenses in advance of a MAJOR war between Israel and her neighbors - the likes of which we haven't seen in a long time. I feel that this war will likely start in the aftermath of the West's preemptive strike against Iran, and that this will not be later than 12/31/06.

WHAT DO DAVID DUKE, HARVARD'S JOHN MEARSHEIMER, AHMADINEJAD, JIMMY CARTER AND JAMES BAKER HAVE IN COMMON?

They all think it's the JOOOOOOOOOOOOZE fault.

As the Kid From Brooklyn says, "TINKABOUDIT!"

IMHO: Anyone who agrees with either Duke or Ahmadinejad on anything must be suspect. To agree with them BOTH makes one dangerously wrong - and obviously on the enemy's side, too.

More on Duke and Harvard HERE. More on Duke and Assad HERE. More on Duke and Ahmadinejad HERE. And check out the video at Hot Air - LINKED TO IN THE PHOTO.

OLMERT'S BIG MOUTH

Ehud Olmert continues to show everybody just how stupid and incompetant he is. Whether or not Israel has nuclear weapons, what he blurted out could be as harmful to Israel as the New York Times' tippings to terrorists could be to America. Here's more from the Jerusalem Post on this latest blunder of his (via Yid with Lid). He's already taken flak from local politicians as well, and rightfully so.

He needs to be replaced, and soon.

FLYING WHILE MUSLIM

Just in time for the Hajj, which begins on December 29, CAIR, (now the legal representative of five of the six praying imams and pursuing an out-of-court settlement), is stirring the pot:

American Muslims making a religious pilgrimage to Mecca are being encouraged to file civil rights complaints if they feel discriminated against by airlines.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), citing what it called the "airport profiling" of six imams removed from a recent flight, yesterday said Muslims traveling this month to the holy site in Saudi Arabia need to be aware of their rights.

"Given the increase in the number of complaints CAIR has received alleging airport profiling of American Muslims, we believe it is important that all those taking part in this year's hajj be aware of their legal and civil rights," said Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR spokesman. [emphasis added - AOW]

Apparently CAIR has distributed materials specifically delineating how to promote this flying-while-Muslim agenda.

Read the rest at Always On Watch.

UPDATE: Two hours after TAB, POWER LINE weighs in on the story.

Proving once again that TAB is the place to be!

HOLOCAUST STORY SAVES MILLIONS OF MUSLIMS

Everyone should be aware of the Holocaust Conference being sponsored by Iran, and of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's numerous declarations that Israel will be wiped of the map etc.

Without wading into that debate I would like to examine the Holocaust in the context of the current situation. And where are we today? After thousands of years of bloody history, capped by a century which included death and destruction on a horrendous scale, we live in an era that is on the brink...of what? Probably on the brink of something even more horrendous.

It's ironic that now, in many ways, the Islamic Fundamentalist Jihad actually fufills many of the attributes which anti-Semites ascribed to Jews in the various conspiracy theories which enabled the Holocaust: that Jews conspired to control the world, that Jews had all the money, that Jews had a clandestine network etc. etc.

Today the oil producing nations have the money! Today the Muslim Brotherhood, the Arab League, and al Qaeda are the visible parts of a clandestine network bent on destroying the USA, Israel, and western civilisation! And the Jihadists openly proclaim that they intend to resurrect the Caliphate and subdue the non-believers!

The disease of Islamic-Fascism will not be defeated unless it is eliminated. We have waited 5 years since 9/11, and we have seen that the Islamic world is unable to rid itself of this cancer. Sooner or later we will have to face the enemy and decimate their ranks.

Until then - Ahmadinejad and al Qaeda and the rest of the terrorists can be comforted by the fact that the story of the Holocaust - because this crime weighs so heavily upon the West - hinders the Western leaders from taking the kind of terrible action necessary to eliminate the threat they pose to the West.

We know what terrible deeds mankind is capable of. We know how terrible war and murder is - and our enemy celebrates murder in the name of Jihad. Some of us are ashamed of our past glories - nor accept the burdens of our power. Our enemies interpret this trepidation as a sign of weakness.

THE ULTIMATE ROOT CAUSE OF THE GWOT

What's the ultimate root cause of the GWOT? It ain't Israel or Bush or Iraq or Rove or Halliburton or 9/11. It is this (hat-tip Hot Air/Robert Spencer - in a must see video):

Qualities of the Believers

[Koran - 48:29] Muhammad - the messenger of GOD - and those with him are harsh and stern against the disbelievers, but kind and compassionate amongst themselves.

The enemy hates us because of who we are and what we believe, NOT because of our foreign policy. The enemy hates us because we are not Muslims. The enemy wants us to convert or become dhimmis. Or die. This is what THEIR religion tells them they MUST do. If we want to remain free and modern, then we must defeat them. Utterly. Then we will be free and at peace. Until then, we will be at war - a war they started 1400 years ago. (This enemy has also been killing other "lesser" Muslims since then, too: Shias; Sufis et al.)

EARLY ALLY - THEN LIFELONG CRITIC - OF CASTRO DIES

NYTIMES:

Mario Llerena, a Cuban intellectual who was an early representative of Fidel Castro in the United States but who broke with him before he took power because of Mr. Castro’s shift toward Communism, died Sunday in Miami. He was 93.

He wrote a book about Castro. May Llerena Rest in Peace. (I have a feeling that he's going somewhere Fidel will never step foot in!)

12/13/06 UPDATE: 14 hours later and BABALU BLOG - rightly regarded as the PREMIER "free Cuba" blog - cites the same obit. YUP: TAB beat the best! Proving once again that TAB is the place to be for the best in news bloggin' with unsurpassed analysis and commentary!

HOW BAKER, HAMILTON AND THE ISG WEAKEN AMERICA

Even if the President rejects the worst of the 79 prescriptions for appeasement in the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group's senile and solipsistic soliloquy, the widespread publication of the report and the mood of despair that it has engendered seriously weaken America's security. In today's Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens gets it pretty nearly perfectly right:

The operative word in the ISG report is "should," which is what grammarians call a defective verb.

The report easily contains more than 100 shoulds, varying tonally from hectoring to plaintive to nitpicking. The report's ninth recommendation, for instance, stresses that "Iran should be asked to assume its responsibility to participate in the Support Group" while the 23rd says "the President should restate that the United States does not seek to control Iraq's oil." Only rarely do the ISG authors employ different language, such as when they say "there must be a renewed and sustained commitment by the United States to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace." Like an editorial in the New York Times, this is an exercise in homiletics, not persuasion.

By contrast, the word "honor" appears just once: "We also honor the many Iraqis who have sacrificed on behalf of their country," write ISG co-chairmen James Baker and Lee Hamilton, who also put in a kind word for our Coalition allies.

But honor isn't simply a sentimental verb. It is a decisive principle of action in all foreign policy, never more so than in the honor-obsessed Middle East. It is not about good intentions, wisdom or virtue, but about appearances and perception: "Honor acts solely for the public eye," wrote Tocqueville. In practice, it means standing by one's friends and defying one's enemies, whatever the price. During the 1973 Yom Kippur War Richard Nixon ordered the military resupply of Israel in its hour of need not because he was sympathetic to Jews -- he wasn't -- but because he understood that the U.S. could not be seen to let a client down. Nine months later, he was accorded a ticker-tape parade through the streets of Cairo.

How does the ISG report meet the test of honor? Mainly by failing it. The report is chiefly notable for declaring in its first sentence that "the situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating." This statement of fact is being celebrated by sundry commentators as a bold and necessary act of speaking truth to power. This may be true in Washington, but what does it actually achieve in Iraq? The invaluable translation service Memri offers a clue in the form of a response to the ISG report on Islamist Web sites connected to the Iraqi insurgents: "Now that its wager on the Shi'ite government [of Iraq] has failed [to pay off]," goes the message, "the American administration [is striving] to foil . . . any attempt to [establish] . . . an Islamic State in the form of a Caliphate in Iraq . . . "

To counter the "realists" who wish upon us the prospect of a defeated and dishonored America as the panacea for all of the problems in Iraq, I would like once again to offer these words from President John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address:

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to ensure the survival and the success of liberty."

Don't you think that following Kennedy's simple prescription will lead to a better America and a better world?

APPEASEMENT NEVER WORKS

The AP Reports (Hat tip: Charles Johnson) that Spanish authorities have derailed a terror plot potentially as devastating as the 3-11-2004 train attack; [191 murdered; pictured at left]:

The men — 10 Spaniards and a Moroccan — were detained in pre-dawn raids and included two brothers of a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Police said the operation was ongoing, and more arrests were expected.

The suspects were believed to be aligned with the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, according to Spanish news reports. Members of the extremist organization have been linked to the 2004 train attacks in Madrid and bombings in Casablanca in 2003. Two other suspected members of the group were arrested in November in Melilla, another Spanish enclave on the African coast.

The Ceuta cell had recently begun discussing taking action to launch an attack, although they were in the early stages and are not believed to have selected a target, said Interior Minister Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba, who was traveling in Algeria.

The lesson to be drawn from the ongoing clandestine war in Spain is that appeasement does not work: Appeasement does not deter the enemy; rather, appeasement encourages the enemy to lash out again. The only way to end the enemy's terror is to defeat the enemy.

Reliapundit asks: When will Leftist appeasers like Zapatero learn this lesson?

IS SOMEBODY AT THE WASHINGTON POST READING THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS?

The Washington Post has an interesting editorial today comparing the reigns of Augusto Pinochet and Fidel Castro. The highlight:

It's hard not to notice, however, that the evil dictator leaves behind the most successful country in Latin America. In the past 15 years, Chile's economy has grown at twice the regional average, and its poverty rate has been halved. It's leaving behind the developing world, where all of its neighbors remain mired. It also has a vibrant democracy. Earlier this year it elected another socialist president, Michelle Bachelet, who suffered persecution during the Pinochet years.

Like it or not, Mr. Pinochet had something to do with this success. To the dismay of every economic minister in Latin America, he introduced the free-market policies that produced the Chilean economic miracle -- and that not even Allende's socialist successors have dared reverse. He also accepted a transition to democracy, stepping down peacefully in 1990 after losing a referendum.

By way of contrast, Fidel Castro -- Mr. Pinochet's nemesis and a hero to many in Latin America and beyond -- will leave behind an economically ruined and freedomless country with his approaching death. Mr. Castro also killed and exiled thousands. But even when it became obvious that his communist economic system had impoverished his country, he refused to abandon that system: He spent the last years of his rule reversing a partial liberalization. To the end he also imprisoned or persecuted anyone who suggested Cubans could benefit from freedom of speech or the right to vote.

The contrast between Cuba and Chile more than 30 years after Mr. Pinochet's coup is a reminder of a famous essay written by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, the provocative and energetic scholar and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who died Thursday.

In "Dictatorships and Double Standards," a work that caught the eye of President Ronald Reagan, Ms. Kirkpatrick argued that right-wing dictators such as Mr. Pinochet were ultimately less malign than communist rulers, in part because their regimes were more likely to pave the way for liberal democracies. She, too, was vilified by the left. Yet by now it should be obvious: She was right.

Reliapundit made a similar comparison of these two Latin American leaders way back on Saturday.

Reliapundit adds: And I proudly wrote it while Pinochet lived.

HAJJ 2006-7: IS SOMETHING UP?

This year's Hajj takes place between December 29 and January 3, (next year).

Do you think the enemy will plan something big during that time? Or during Hanukah or Christmas? I dunno. Maybe. Maybe not. They ALWAYS want to whack us; during a holiday'd just be icing on the cake for these genocidal-maniacs!

In a perhaps unrelated matter... the Saudi Ambassador to the USA abruptly quit and went home this week. He used to run the Saudi CIA. Maybe he knows something's up? It seems odd to most observers that he left so abrubtly. Some guess that there's trouble back home in the ruling family. Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe the Saudi's are expecting a jihaditerror attack there - during hajj -- by the Iranians, or (al Qaeda) --- THE IRANIANS'VE DONE IT BEFORE! (Scroll down.)

Anyway, I hope the NSA is listening-in now, realll REALLY closely ... WHILE THE DEMS IN CONGRESS LET THEM! They just might discover something before it's too late!

ASIDE: Around 3,000 people have died in incidents on the hajj in the last 20 years. Previous disasters in recent years include:

February 1 2004

244 pilgrims killed and a similar number injured at al-Jamarat

March 5 2001

35 people killed in stampede at al-Jamarat

April 9 1998

Around 180 pilgrims trampled to death when panic erupted after several fell off an overpass at al-Jamarat

April 15 1997

Fires driven by high winds tear through a sprawling, overcrowded tent city at Mina, trapping and killing more than 340 pilgrims and injuring 1,500

May 23 1994

270 pilgrims, most of them Indonesian, killed at al-Jamarat

July 2 1990

1,426 pilgrims, many of them Malaysians, Indonesian and Pakistanis, killed in stampede in overcrowded pedestrian tunnel leading to holy sites in Mecca in the worst hajj tragedy of modern times

July 9 1989

Two bombs explode in Mecca, killing one pilgrim, and wounding 16 others. Saudi authorities blame Iranian-inspired terrorists and later behead 16 Kuwaiti Shia Muslims for bombings. Iran denied involvement.

July 31 1987

402 people, mostly Iranian pilgrims, killed and 649 wounded in Mecca when security forces clash with Iranians staging illegal anti-US demonstration

This record of mayhem is pretty bad. It seems to me that the only time other religions have deadly pilgrimmages it's when there're Muslims involved. FACTS: here and here and here and here and so on... and of course who could forget the daily headlines from Iraq: Shias and Sunni MUSLIMS killing each other by the truckload! For those who follow the koran, killing and faith sure seem to go hand-in-hand.

PUTIN'S OPPONENT'S OFFICES RAIDED

Gary Kasparov - the former world chess champion and a political opponent of Outin's because unlike Putin he supports democracy, liberty and private property - had his offices (or rather the office of his fledgling political party, the United Civil Front) raided today.

I GUESS THIS PROVES THAT PUTIN DOESN'T HAVE TO ALWAYS RESORT TO MURDER. THERE ARE, AFTER ALL, OTHER FORMS OF INTIMIDATION.

This also proves, once again, that Putin learned well during his years as a KGB agent.

KONSIDERING KOFI

The indispensable National Review Online has put up a Symposium on Kofi's aKomplishments. Go and Read the Whole Thing NOW. Here are some highlights:

Norm Coleman: Annan’s legacy will be one of missed opportunity and failed leadership at a time when the U.N. needed to play a critical role in the developing global community.

Niles Gardiner: His ten years in power have been a monumental failure, and he leaves behind an institution whose standing could barely be lower and a legacy that is a testament to mismanagement, corruption, and anti-Americanism. He is probably the worst secretary-general in the history of the United Nations, a staggering achievement considering the intense competition.

Pedro Sanjuan: Annan bribed the Volker commission with $34 million of Iraqi money to whitewash his complicity in the Oil-for-Food scandal, the largest robbery in the annals of the U.N.

Brett Schaefer: Indeed, after years of talk and multiple reports on reform, the U.N. is little changed from the organization that allowed the Iraq Oil-for-Food scandal, the despicable peacekeeping abuses in the Congo, and the extensive cases of fraud and abuse in pro­curement to occur.

Meanwhile, Anne Bayefsky has this:

Kofi Annan will forever be remembered as the secretary-general who presided over the biggest and most insidious hijacking of the global agenda which has ever occurred. With the defeat of Communism, there was a chance that the U.N. could come to be not the tool for developed to triumph over developing, — but the instrument that permitted democratization and the protection of human rights to step out from behind the shadows as the sine qua non of progress in our time. Instead, over a decade with Kofi Annan at the helm, the U.N. has become an instrument of terror. A place which has no definition of terrorism because the terrorists and their allies run it, while democracies pay the bill.

And let's close with what Claudia Rosett thinks should have been in Kofi's Soliloquy:

During my decade as secretary-general, and indeed for some time before that, I have indulged in more than my share of half-truths, quarter-truths, cover-ups, immoral inanities and staggering hypocrisies. I have shuffled paperwork while ignoring genocides, I have rushed to shake hands with tyrants while deriding democrats; I have suffered from memory gaps while adroitly recalling just enough to know what needs covering up.

I took office promising to reform the U.N., and instead produced a record that deserves to be summed up by such phrases as peacekeeper rape, procurement bribery, and Oil-for-Food.I have praised a “reformed” Human Rights Council that functions as a complete farce. I have demanded “peace” deals and pushed for a brand of morally blind diplomacy that has paved the way for a terrorist takeover of Lebanon, worsening turmoil in the Middle East, and a nuclear-armed Iran.

In contradiction of the U.N. charter, which describes my role as the U.N.’s “chief administrative officer,” I have styled myself, in my own phrase, as “chief diplomat of the world,” setting up a vast array of opaque trusts, projects, partnerships, and programs which have massively expanded the U.N. beyond any provisions for oversight, while providing me with opportunities for patronage, and places to park my cronies. At the same time, while entrusted with a budget of billions, and a world stage, I have shirked all responsibility for my own failures, shifting blame especially to the United States.

Truly, Kofi's appearance at the Truman Library defiled that monument to a great American President, and defiled the memory of what the United Nations might have become.

IF KOFI WAS BRAVE, THEN HE'D CRITICIZE THE ENEMY

BUT KOFI IS A COWARD WHO BASHES THE USA. Just once I'd like to see one of these so-called "progressives" - like Sheehan and Kofi and Kucinich - attack the vicious jihadists who murder children in Gaza and the unemployed in Baghdad. THEY NEVER HAVE. In fact, these so-called "progressives" compared the enemy to our founding fathers! If they were really brave, then these so-called "progressives" would speak truth to the evil and powerful enemy, (and not the USA which hey know is a safe target to attack).

Why do so many so-called "progressives" insist on bashing the USA and Bush while the West is under attack by jihadoterror?!? And why do they fail to attack the enemy in the same manner?!? Why do they brown-nose the enemy?

SHORT ANSWER: Post modernism has disarmed much of the West and made them self-loathing cowards incapable of defending modernity.

FULL ANSWER: From VDH, HERE.

JIHADOTERRORIST SUICIDE BOMBERS TARGET IRAQ'S UNEMPLOYED

JIHADOTERRORIST SUICIDE BOMBERS TARGET IRAQ'S UNEMPLOYED.

Proving once again that these jihadists are vicious scum.

INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH: They do this exactly one day after the US military announces that helping the unemployed would be a good way to reduce terror there.

I guess this also proves that the enemy is listening. And adapting their tactics accordingly.

THE ANTI-IRAQ WAR CROWD HAS SOME EXPLAINING TO DO

CLIFF MAY/NRO:

Latest Bombing in Baghdad ... targeted “day laborers looking for work.” At least 57 murdered.

Would someone in Europe or on the Left (do I repeat myself?) please explain how slaughtering innocent working men can be seen as “resistance to foreign occupation”?

Would someone explain why these mass murders elicit no outrage against those responsible: those ordering the killings and supplying the weapons?

Does someone want to explain why stopping such Muslim-on-Muslim killings is not as imperative as, say, stopping the Muslim-on-Muslim killings in Dafur?

Does someone want to explain how the withdrawal of American forces would do anything other than empower those dispatching the suicide-bombers and make it more likely that they will fulfill their ambitions?

Reliapundit: Obviously the anti-war crowd has NO GOOD ANSWER for any of these questions. The fact is that US presence in Iraq is right and good and noble - and according to UNSC Mandate, too. Abandoning Iraq's nascent democracy would be WRONG. And it woiuld make the West less safe.

This might not stop the Leftie dove dominated Democrat Party in Congres from attempting to abandon them, though - as they did the South Vietnamese and the Contras.

SIX-PARTY TALKS WITH NORTH KOREA TO RECONVENE

Well, the charade continues as the Six Party Talks reconvene to chat about the situation vis a vis North Korea's nuclear program.

BTW, does anyone know how many times they have met already? I believe it is the 8th time, although it may be referred to as the second phase of the 5th round.

Is it me? or does it feel like we're cruising towards an iceberg? Hey Jimmy boy, pass the peanuts.

KOFI'S KONTENTIONS

Kofi Annan used the opportunity of a farewell speech to lambaste the United States, the ultimate source of most of the lucre he and his henchman have undoubtedly skimmed from the UN's "Koffers" during his tenure.

He published an op-ed version of his speech in the Washington Post.

Meanwhile, let us reflect on some of his other accomplishments at the UN:

1) Facilitating the Rwandan Genocide in 1994 when as UN official in charge of peacekeeping, he ordered General Dallaire's "peacekeepers" to stand down.

2) Serial episodes of rape and pedophilia by UN peacekeepers in Africa and Asia.

3) A well-orchestrated orgy of anti-Semitism at the Durban Conference on Racism.

4) Arranging the Oil-for-Food scam ("UNSCAM") which may very well be the most extensive and lucrative act of official corruption in the world's entire history. Not to mention the corrupt involvement of his son, Kojo.

5) Facilitating the Srebrenica massacre in 1995.

6) Facilitating genocide in Darfur by appeasing the Sudanese jihadi government and janjaweed militias.

7) Helping Hezbollah terrorists during the 2006 fighting in Lebanon.

That's a mere "magnificent seven" for a start. I'm sure that the other Astute Bloggers and our Astute Readers can add to this hasty list.

It amazes me that Kofi Annan is invited to speak anywhere other than from the defendant's table in court.

SARKOZY UNAMBIGUOUS ABOUT DEALING WITH JIHADISTS AT HOME AND ABROAD

YNET:

... Sarkozy, told Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres in Paris on Monday that he views Hizbullah as a terror organization with which he has no intention of dealing of. Sarkozy also said that he would not deal with Hamas as long as the organization refuses to recognize Israel...

He said this as the Police Chief of Paris warned that the threat of terror in Paris is still quite high:

IHT: PARIS: The Paris police chief said Monday that the threat of a terror attack on the French capital remains high, requiring continued intelligence and surveillance efforts. Pierre Mutz, speaking at a city council meeting considering the police budget for 2007, did not name any specific new dangers, but said "The threat remains high."

The government ordered extra military patrols on public transport before the Christmas and New Year's holidays, when visitors and tourists pack Paris.

Instead of coddling and appeasing islamothugs, Sarkozy will counterattack them and he won't undercut Israel for doing the same - as Chirac is doing right now in Lebanon! (More on why Sarkozy is good HERE.)

THE REAL REASON ISLAMOFASCISTS DEMAND THE VEIL BE WORN BY WOMEN

What is the specific reason Islamofascists have for demanding that women wear the Islamic veil? Though the Quran itself doesn't say it's required, Oliver Guitta at the Weekly Standard may have some answers why the worshipers of Islam want it to be worn:

For Islamists, the imperative to veil women justifies almost any means. Sometimes they try to buy off resistance. Some French Muslim families, for instance, are paid 500 euros (around $600) per quarter by extremist Muslim organizations just to have their daughters wear the hijab. This has also happened in the United States. Indeed, the famous and brave Syrian-American psychiatrist Wafa Sultan recently told the Jerusalem Post that after she moved to the United States in 1991, Saudis offered her $1,500 a month to cover her head and attend a mosque.

But what Islamists use most is intimidation. A survey conducted in France in May 2003 found that 77 percent of girls wearing the hijab said they did so because of physical threats from Islamist groups. A series in the newspaper Libération in 2003 documented how Muslim women and girls in France who refuse to wear the hijab are insulted, rejected, and often physically threatened by Muslim males. One of the teenage girls interviewed said, "Every day, bearded men come to me and advise me strongly on wearing the veil. It is a war. For now, there are no dead, but there are looks and words that do kill."

In light of this, wearing the hijab may or may not be a manifestation of the free exercise of religion. For any individual, it may reflect the very opposite--religious coercion. In fact, millions of women are forced to wear the veil for fear of physical retribution. And the fear is well founded. According to Cheryl Benard of RAND, every year hundreds of women in Pakistan and Afghanistan alone are killed, have acid thrown in their faces, or are otherwise maimed by male fanatics.

Given the Islamists' ferocious determination on this point, it is worth asking: Why exactly is covering the female so important to them? The obvious answer is that it is a means of social control. Not coincidentally, it is one of the only issues on which Sunni and Shia extremists agree. It's not by chance that use of the hijab really took off after Iran's Islamic regime came to power in 1979. Some Shiite militias in Iraq have actually started forcing women--Muslim or not--to wear the veil or face the consequences.

And there we have an answer: because they see it as a way of controlling women and ensuring that they are slaves. That's what the veil/burka/niqab symbolizes, and that's one of the reasons why it needs to be banned.

It's amazing that the country most opposed to the niqab today happens to be Tunisia. One thing for sure is that all countries taking steps to ban the veil in public are doing women a lot of good, and for Muslim women, a very big favor and kindness.

RELIAPUNDT ASKS: Does anyone out there know the recent history of the hijab? Please answer in the comments sections...

A PREVIOUS "DRY RUN" BY A BUDDY OF THE LEADER OF THE "MINNESOTA IMAMS"

The Astute Bloggers were among the first in the blogosphere to describe the pre-flight activities of Omar Shahin and the other 5 Minnesota Imams as a deliberate attempt to wear down America West's anti-terror defenses:

By engaging in patterns of behavior which they evidently knew were considered by airlines and federal air marshals to indicate an imminent terrorist operation, the imams were inviting their removal from the flight. Their purpose in then claiming discrimination is to make it impossible, or at least much more difficult, for the airlines to remove Muslim passengers who do the things that terrorists are expected to do. In other words, the imams took an action calculated to make it more difficult for the airlines and the TSA to prevent another terrorist attack on American airliners.

Now Katherine Kersten reports in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that an associate of Omar Shahin participated in a similar escapade way back in 1999:

Another incident of interest occurred during Shahin's tenure at ITC. On June 13, 2003, the FBI arrested Muhammad Al-Qudhai'een, who was active at the mosque, and transported him to Virginia to testify as a material witness before a federal grand jury investigating 9/11.

Earlier, the FBI had investigated Al-Qudhai'een's involvement in a 1999 incident. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, Al-Qudhai'een and Hamdan al Shalawi, a fellow Saudi, were removed from an America West flight after engaging in what the flight crew considered suspicious activity. The crew asserted that Al-Qudhai'een had twice attempted to open the plane's cockpit door. After 9/11, FBI agents in Phoenix considered whether the incident had been a "dry run" for the attacks. The 9/11 Commission noted that Al Shalawi had reportedly trained in Afghan terrorist camps in November 2000, learning how to conduct "Khobar Towers"-type bombing attacks.

The America West incident attracted national attention in 1999. In 2000, the two Saudis filed a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination by the airline. "What happened to us was based on racial and religious discrimination," al Shalawi told the Arizona Republic. CAIR hired the Saudis' attorney for them, and urged a boycott of the airline. America West won the lawsuit. Al-Qudhai'een was later deported to Saudi Arabia.

At this point, let me just add that deportation of the Minnesota Six would be entirely appropriate today.

UPDATE: Welcome RCP/FOX Buzztracker readers. NOTE: 12 hours later and LGF notes the story, too. Proving once again that if you want to most current links to the hottest news with the sharpest analysis and commentary, that TAB is the place to be!