Quangoists like to feel as if they are doing something. They can't leave well alone, even when leaving well alone is the best option. Another "initiative", which will achieve nothing, is reported in The Telegraph:

Thirty years after the outlawing of sex discrimination, the Equal Opportunities Commission reports that women remain seriously under-represented in senior positions in both the private and public sectors.

At the current rate of progress, says the EOC, it will be 20 years before women achieve "equality" in the higher echelons of the Civil Service, 60 years before they hit par in the boardrooms of FTSE 100 companies and 200 years before they occupy half the seats in the Commons.

Striking though these figures may be, they are not particularly helpful. The glib assumption that there should be a 50/50 gender split in all occupations is fatuous. Should half of all military personnel be female? Should half of all primary school teachers be male? The real world is too complex to lend itself to EOC quota-setting. While unfairness is never acceptable, trying to enforce equality by law can — as these figures show — be counter-productive. Many employers will hire a less qualified male employee because of the potential costs associated with employing a woman, particularly of child-bearing age. So onerous are the legislative requirements placed on employers that such covert discrimination, though regrettable, is widespread.

The EOC argues that "flexible working" for all employees is the way forward. We would argue that attitudes are more important than legislation.

In a country that has had a female prime minister, where female High Court judges, permanent secretaries and cabinet ministers no longer warrant comment, it is evident that the real breakthrough has already been made.

Young women know that anything is possible as they embark on their careers. Anti-discriminatory legislation can now have the perverse effect of impeding their progress rather than accelerating it, and it is time it was re-assessed.

Regrettably, the opposite is happening. In April this year, all public bodies will be saddled with a costly new "gender equality duty", which requires them not only not to discriminate but also actively to "promote" equality. We fear that this will simply mean more work for the lawyers, male or female.

The case of the Jewish twins, refugees from Kyrgystan got me thinking about asylum. In case I haven’t made myself clear in my earlier posts, of course the twins – hard working, immensely talented, kind, grateful - should be allowed to stay in Britain. (I thought I was being clear, but when I commented generally about asylum, the reaction has been about how blameless and deserving of it these two young women are, something I never disputed for an instant.)

Asylum and immigration are two very different things, although they are often confused in people’s minds. Immigration, if properly managed, benefits a country. Immigrants should be selected on the basis of what they can contribute to a country.

Asylum is another matter. People are generally granted asylum on the basis of need rather than merit. Need will always arise. People are always in danger of being killed, always have been and always will be. No country can take in all those in danger, so there have to be rules.

Population density is not the only factor to take into account, but surely it is one factor. Here are some population densities, starting with the most dense:

Do all those people really live in Monaco? I doubt it. And how would you get a quorum for a meeting in Greenland, when you need to go on a big round trip to get even one person?

Yes, I know it’s more complicated, but I think it’s fair to say that some places are more crowded than others. The UK is very crowded. It’s nearly as crowded as Japan, but everyone knows Japan is crowded. There’s a widespread belief, too, that “Palestinians” are all huddled together without room to swing a cat (this despite Israel’s “genocidal” policies.) But the territories are just over twice as densely populated as the UK. Australia, which is not very crowded at all, has a very strict refugee and asylum policy, for which it is often criticised. The US does not allow unlimited asylum, and nor should it. But it has more room than we have, that’s for sure.

On grounds of population density, therefore, the UK more than most countries should be allowed to limit the number of refugees it takes in. So what criteria should be used to set limits? Here are my ideas – no doubt hard, but not impossible, to put into practice.

1. No asylum for Muslims. This will cut down numbers and danger/nuisance factors considerably and ease resentment.
2. A rebuttable presumption that any Jews are fleeing persecution, so Jews qualify unless criminal.
3. A rebuttable presumption that any non-Muslims from Muslim countries are fleeing persecution.
4. Automatic asylum for apostates from Islam.
5. All other cases considered on merit, as now. Those who have passed through a safe country where they could have claimed asylum should be returned to that safe country and their application should be rejected.
6. Those who do not qualify under the above but enter the country as minors should have their case reviewed at 18, and assessed, as immigrants would be, on their potential contribution to this country.

No doubt there are potential flaws in this system, but how can it be worse than what we have at present, where the asylum system is exploited by those wishing to jump the immigration queue? 

DUBAI (Reuters) - A purported audio tape message by al Qaeda's deputy leader [Ayman al-Zawahri] urged Somali Islamists on Friday to launch an Iraq-style guerrilla campaign of suicide and other forms of attacks against Ethiopian forces in Somalia.--from this news item

Waiting for John Scowcroft to offer up his explanation for this Jihad against Ethiopia. I know the answer of course -- that pesky Arab-Israeli dispute that needs to be settled "once and for all" so "our friends" in the Gulf and elsewhere in the Middle East will be willing -- to oppose Iranian expansionism directed at them. For some reason they apparently need a bribe to defend themselves, or to accept our defending them by attacking Iran.

I just want to hear Scowcroft say it aloud. And then I want him to be arrested as a Foreign Agent, and all of his take over the past twenty years from Arab governments listed on the front page of every major paper, and seized by the government, and then I want him tried for working, treasonously, on behalf of the forces of Jihad. And then I want a thousand others, all over official Washington, of both parties, given similar treatment, including not a few former Presidents of both parties.

Anyone else share that feeling, or want to second that motion?

"We tell the taxi drivers, if you don't want to do this, change your job," he said. "You are living in a country where alcohol is not viewed the way it is in your country." -- from this news item

Not alcohol. Not free speech. Not the treatment of women. Not the treatment of Non-Muslims. Not free inquiry. Not the right to mock. Not the right of the individual to jettison a faith without enduring the possibility of severe punishment, or even death.

And anyone who has had a particularly chatty Somali driver can find out a lot, as he cheerfully describes, in expansive fashion, just how he and his friends have managed to fool the authorities, with their 15 or 20 children, by several wives, and every single one of them receiving the unwitting support of American taxpayers.

This can't go on.

Douglas Davis writes in the UK Spectator (subscription req.)

From a report on antisemitism in Kyrgystan, noting that while things had been calm, changes have occurred in the last few years, clearly as a result of the influence of outsiders, i.e. Arabs, influencing some impressionable audiences at local mosques, and of  Hizb-ut-Tahrir:

Statements hostile to the Jews, which have "increased since the beginning of the second intifada in 2000, were an extremely striking contrast to the quiet of preceding years. In particular, at the beginning of 2002 parliamentarian Omurbek Tekebaev, a member of the Upper House of Parliament, claimed from the parliamentary tribune that Jews "tried to destroy the country in the 20-ies, and then repeated the attempt in the beginning of the 90-ies". He also said that Jews, headed by the Soros Fund, carried out subversive activities in Kyrgyzstan. A number of deputies and journalists criticized the statements. Mr.Tekebaev later suggested that one of the newspapers, which had criticized him, should "be issued in Tel Aviv".

On April 26, 2002 a broadcast appeal to the faithful assembled in a Bishkek mosque was overhead from nearby Kemal Ataturk Park. The appeal was a tape-recording, in Arabic, Kyrgyz and Russian, which claimed that the Israelis was taunting the Muslims of Palestine and killing them in a cruel manner beastly; that the Israelis undressed men and women and disemboweled pregnant women, killing their fetuses by chopping off their head. It also appealed to listeners to struggle against Jews. The appeal contained the following words: "we are obliged to help our brothers – Muslims of Palestine – as they die of starvation and cold because of Jews".

On August 8, 2002 the opposition newspaper Kyrgyz Ordo published an anonymous article called "Who influences the Kyrgyz authorities?", which accused the Jews of a global conspiracy. The author (or authors?) used The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - a notorious forgery – to substantiate his point of view. The publication ended with the accusations against the leaders of Kyrgyzstan, who, it claimed, carry out a policy favorable to the conspiracy. The article has been heavily criticized not only in Kyrgyzstan, but also abroad.

In May - October, 2003 antisemitic undertones accompanied legal proceedings concerning a book for schoolteachers, called A Healthy Way of Life, written by a group of authors under Boris Shapiro, chairman of Menorah and director of the country’s Anti AIDS Centre. 22,000 copies of which had been produced, with the assistance of international organizations, in Kyrgyz, Russian and Uzbek. Akin Toktaliev and Aziz Abdrasulov, acting on behalf of the "Committee for the protection of the honor and dignity of the Kirghiz people ", accused the authors of the book of inciting moral decay among the nation’s youth and claimed one million US dollars from Mr Shapiro in damages. Oppositional newspapers published statements critical of the book, for example an article by Aziz Abdrasulov which claimed that the book "runs contrary to the traditions of the Kirghiz people… consists of appeals to debauch, approves of drug use and tobacco, should not be tolerated, and should not have been given to children". The antisemitic attitudes of some of the figures in the affair were apparent in the details of the hostile newspaper articles. The articles did not include any openly hostile statements, for which the author could have been prosecuted for inciting interethnic enmity; however, every article presented Mr Shapiro first of all as a Jew and chairman of the Jewish community, and then as a doctor. An article named "What does Shapiro want?" by Myktybek Arstanbek, is typical: "very nimbly, without permission from appropriate departments, [Mr Shapiro] somehow printed thousands of books… and disseminated them in the schools of the republic (!!!)". If one expands a little, it is possible to see the stereotyped image of the crafty and immoral Jew-enemy."

No drawbridges have been drawn up by the United States. The Atlantic and Pacific do, however, continue to exist, and are adequate, at least for the moment, moats. The porous border to the south can and will be rendered less porous. Europe's more advanced state of islamization will now be watched, and lessons learned, closely by Americans, and it may be that yet again, for the third time in less than a century, the United States will be the lucky recipient, the unintended beneficiary, of the folly of European elites, of their miscalculation and ignorance, and the general political desarroi, expressed in that hideous enemy of national literatures, languages, histories, identities, the crude and rude Big Market of dynamic Homo Economicus, the soi-disant European Union. Were I now a citizen of a country in Western Europe, and possessed enough money to buy real estate anywhere, I would buy it in North America. Just in case. And I know exactly where, too.

Of course the United States would admit these girls. And if they did have any trouble it would be an obvious cause celebre, and on a television show John Stossel would hold them up as an example of all that is wrong with the INS, admitting the wrong people, making trouble for those we should welcome.

There are no pots or kettles in this story.

BBC: A British Muslim has been found guilty of soliciting murder during a London rally against cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.

Umran Javed 27, of Birmingham, was also convicted of stirring up racial hatred by a jury at the Old Bailey.

Javed told a crowd of hundreds at the February 2006 protest: "Bomb, bomb Denmark, bomb, bomb USA."...

The Crown Prosecution Service's Sue Hemming said she was mindful of the rights to free speech when considering cases such as this.

"However, when we examined the content of Mr Javed's speech it was explicit that there was direct encouragement to those present and those watching via the media to commit acts of murder against the Danish and Americans."

She said the law was also clear that free speech "should not be misused to insult, abuse or threaten people in such a way that it will stir up racial hatred".

From New Duranty:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 4 — President Bush intends to name Zalmay Khalilzad, the Afghan-born diplomat who has been ambassador to Iraq for the past 21 months, to be the new envoy to the United Nations, part of a diplomatic shakeup as Mr. Bush prepares to announce a new strategy for the war.

A senior administration official, who had been briefed on the decision but had to discuss it anonymously because the change had not been formally announced, confirmed Thursday that the president had decided to nominate Mr. Khalilzad to the United Nations post.

The official said Mr. Bush intended to name Ryan C. Crocker, the ambassador to Pakistan, to replace Mr. Khalilzad in Baghdad.

If confirmed by the Senate, the appointments would put seasoned, respected diplomats into two of the State Department’s most challenging posts. Mr. Khalilzad would replace John R. Bolton, who served temporarily as United Nations ambassador but resigned late last year after concluding he could not win Senate confirmation.

Mr. Bush’s decision to transfer Mr. Khalilzad, among the most visible Americans working in Iraq, would effectively accomplish two goals for the administration. As a Sunni Muslim, Mr. Khalilzad has been perceived by some Iraqi Shiites as not sympathetic enough to their views; removing him from Baghdad would help Mr. Bush make a fresh start there. And Mr. Khalilzad had told colleagues that he was ready to leave.

New Duranty: JERUSALEM, Jan. 5 — The Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniya, called today for an end to the internecine violence in Gaza, a day after members of his own Hamas militia surrounded the house of a Fatah commander, killed the man and his bodyguards and seriously wounded his wife and brother.

Before he died, the commander, Col. Muhammad Gharib, begged for help in a telephone call to Palestinian television that was broadcast live. He said in the call that he was being attacked by the Executive Force, a parallel security force under the command of the Hamas-run Interior Ministry, but Fatah leaders and fighters apparently did not respond to his plea...

Fatah issued a statement today suggesting another round of retaliation. “All killers are legitimate targets,” the statement said, adding: “What is called the Executive Force is an enemy.”

The statement, confirmed by a Fatah official, Abdel-Hakim Awad, also said that negotiations with Hamas over forming a joint government were impossible in the present atmosphere...

There's no fool like a government department, with a blank cheque from the taxpayer, that pays a management consultant £7m to tell its workers where to stick their bananas. Public sector lunacy from The Times:

If you are a well-helled European...(Hugh)

Stilettos can be hellishly painful, but perhaps you know that.

LifeSiteNews.com (h/t DW which reports her status as "acting chair" may now be in doubt):

FREDERICTON, January 4, 2007 – LifeSiteNews.com has learned that Dr. Alexandra Bain, the formerly Catholic turned-Muslim who mocked the doctrine of the Trinity at a Catholic Women’s League convention last year, is a professor and acting chairman of the Religious Studies department at Fredericton’s St. Thomas University. (see University website confirmation: http://w3.stu.ca/stu/academic/departments/religious_studies/... )

LifeSiteNews.com was tipped by a leader of the CWL that Dr. Bain, even though she was an apostate Catholic, was the keynote speaker at a Catholic Women’s League Ontario convention.  Asked why she left the Catholic faith, Bain told Catholic Women’s League members at their 2006 Provincial Convention on July 11, that simple arithmetic had told her the doctrine of the Trinity, the central tenet of Christianity, was nonsense. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jul/06071809.html )

St. Thomas University still bills itself as a Catholic liberal arts school, “whose roots are in the faith and tradition of the Roman Catholic Church.”

The President of St. Thomas University is Dr. Michael Higgins who recently won fame among Canadian Catholics in an article in MacLean’s Magazine when he scolded Pope Benedict XVI for his alleged negligence in his comments on Islam at Regensburg in mid-September. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/sep/06092505.html )

"Iran: Reports supreme leader dead false" - headline from this news item

These all sound like those word-magnets for the refrigerator, which one is invited to rearrange so that they deviate into sense.

"Supreme reports false leader dead."

"Dead false leader reports supreme."

"Dead supreme leader reports false."

Mix-n'-match. And assign a semi-plausible meaning to each.

Many now write about the future "islamization of Europe" which will indeed occur, unless counter-measures are taken on immigration and possibly on expulsion of potentially dangerous groups (see the Benes Decree, 1946). But no one seems to worry about what will happen to the military arsenals, including the nuclear arsenals, of those European states now threatened. And long before Muslims are a majority they will, as a cohesive group, have risen in the police and the military -- indeed are being encouraged in Britain and elsewhere to join the police and the military. This policy has to stop, and military men, and NATO officials, must start talking about this security threat not in ten years, or five, but now. And those who fail to understand the menace, even when it ought to have been apparent or foreseen, such as the last ten National Security Advisors of the American government (such people as Condoleeza Rice and Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, not one of whom appears to know a thing about Islam), should be pushed out of the way, no longer to be asked for advice, no longer to be paid attention to in the slightest. And the same goes for all others who, in this important matter, refuse to show they have studied, learned, assimilated, understood.

ABC NEWS blog (h/t JW):

A senior official in the Somali government's new Ministry of the Interior told ABC News government forces had recovered "dozens of foreign passports," including several American passports, on the bodies of al Qaeda fighters killed in combat between forces affiliated with the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) and Ethiopian forces in Somalia.

According to the same source, most of the foreign passports were Sudanese, Pakistani and Yemeni, but several American, British and Australian passports were also recovered.

("al Qaeda" has become an all-purpose term meaning: those fighting for the imposition of Islamic law on the land)

As usual, this turns out to be a tempest in a teapot — notwithstanding the tut-tutting from Senators Susan Collins, Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, as well as NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

To reiterate, the Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches, not warrantless searches.  Consequently, the courts have recognized for years that exigent circumstances justify agents in conducting a search without a judicial warrant. 

Furthermore, the president has inherent authority under Article II of the constitution to conduct warrantless searches for national security purposes — at least when the nation is threatened by a foreign power.  Thus, for example, did Clinton administration Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick quite correctly insist, in 1994 testimony before Congress, that the president maintained the power to conduct warrantless national security searches even though Congress was then expanding FISA (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which governs national security wiretaps) to cover physical searches.

There is, as White House spokesman Tony Snow explained, absolutely nothing new about this. 

From a political standpoint, it's certainly worth asking why the White House thought it would be a good idea for the president to issue a signing statement claiming the power to open mail without a warrant in exigent circumstances.  After all, if he has the power he has it, whether he talks about it in a signing statement or not — so all the signing statement has accomplished is a few days of media attacks and maybe some subpoenas from and indignant hearings by the Democratic congress in the coming weeks.  But this is, or at least it should be, much ado about nothing.

Rebecca reports here that British US and Australian passports have been found on on the bodies of al Qaeda fighters killed in combat between forces affiliated with the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) and Ethiopian forces in Somalia.

The Australian reports that . . The Melbourne man, 25, is thought to have died late last month during skirmishes with Ethiopian troops.  The Department of Foreign Affairs confirmed the death yesterday. "Consular officials have been in touch with the man's family in Australia who confirm that the man was killed fighting in Somalia, but the circumstances are unclear," a spokesman said.  "Australia has no diplomatic mission in Somalia and it is difficult to provide consular services."

Christian-led Ethiopia invaded Somalia last month to drive fundamentalist Islamists from power. The Islamists have since urged foreign Muslim fighters to join their "holy war".

So far as British passport holders are concerned I have already said what I think.

Why I Deserve to Be Your President: First in a Series of Position Papers

1. No American  should ever have to take “No” for an answer. How often have you heard that? . The same tired old rhetoric year after year that you've come to expect from  my opponents.  It's just not enough  that no one in this country should ever have to take "No" for an answer. You deserve better. I don’t think that.any citizen of these  United States should ever have to take “Yes” for an answer, either. That's right. Never again should any American ever have to take either “Yes” or “No” for an answer. The only thing the American people should ever have to take for an answer is --  “Absolutely.” 

2. Politicians keep telling the public that they intend to redouble their efforts. But what does that really mean? I’m not a politician, so I'm not in the business of fooling you, the American people. So whatever it is I manage to accomplish during my first one hundred days, just after I hit the ground running, whether it be to end world poverty, or to bring about world peace, or perhaps to solve some other similar problem that right now isn’t even on the radar screen, I want to make one thing clear, want to give it to you straight. I will not merely re-double my efforts, as my opponents like to say. I intend to quadruple my efforts,  and to keep them quadrupled.

3. When saying  the phrase “Man’s inhumanity to man” I promise not to sound the first syllable but to keep the "in" out. I just don't think it's necessary. “Man’s humanity to man” is enough.

4. I promise to make sure that all men are created equal.